Hacker News Reader

Comment by jleader | Hacker News Reader

I know a few people who do neuropsychological testing (testing IQ, various kinds of memory, spatial reasoning, attention, and so on). Some college athletes are now getting "before" tests, as a baseline to evaluate the severity of damage after any subsequent concussion. One tester says she's seen players attempt to do poorly on the "before" tests, so they'll be able to keep playing even after a concussion impairs their cognitive abilities.

This horrifies me more than I can describe.

View on HN

Why can't one sell their the cognitive ability if they choose to? If the player is "smart" enough to cheat the test then ultimately it is their choice. Society has deemed their muscles more valuable then their intelligence and I don't think we would be turning towards them for their thoughts on optimizations for database wrappers.

I agreed with your moral position that it's the players right despite the fact that it's wasteful.

Your last sentence is out there though. We're talking about kids in college, no one has put a price on their intelligence yet. Also unnecessary to imply that football players wouldn't be able to do anything useful with their intelligence.

I didn't say they don't have the right to choose (though there's a discussion to be had about how informed their consent really is), I just said that their choice horrifies me.

Coincidentally, I've worked with a former Pac-12 football player (who left the game after I think freshman year), and in fact I have sought out his opinions on optimizations for database wrappers (among other subjects). Beware of who you write off with your stereotypes!

Well, it depends. If you believe that Armin Meiwes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armin_Meiwes is wrongly imprisoned and must be released, then sure; you also win the who's-the-most-consistent-libertarian contest. On the other hand, if you believe that humans possess certain unalienable (which means not revokable, and not relinquishable, even voluntarily) rights, then the fact that the football players are volunteering for brain damage is not necessarily enough to make it okay.

Not ranting:

I don't want to live in a society where people are told it's okay to have their bodies destroyed to get a living (or a scholarship) or to satisfy the market (for a prestigious football team that sell tickets). We shouldn't strive for that.

Ranting:

> Why can't one sell their the cognitive ability if they choose to? If the player is "smart" enough to cheat the test then ultimately it is their choice.

That's a catch-22. If they were smart, they wouldn't sell their cognitive ability.

> Society has deemed their muscles more valuable then their intelligence and I don't think we would be turning towards them for their thoughts on optimizations for database wrappers.

So when the economy isn't good we should sell our organs because society deemed our body parts more valuable than our well being ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com