Does a prime Jack Dempsey beat the Joshua of today?

Lulz Hey, I tried to return to the primary topic several posts back, but people seem to find my ruminations on logic and epistemology as irresistible as they do irksome.

 

Not necessarily a bad thing.

 

No no, I'm happy that we "Classicists" have a Philosophy PhD on our side.
Some of these guys like to get tricky with abstract rationale (not McGrain btw)
Your presence here is just the ultimate karmaic justice.

 

It's definitely fashion.
These days the interval training of someone like Joshua or Froch can fill space mainstream magazine space, sell products, etc., than at any other time. The training/fitness industry is huge and only grows, and "what the athletes do" is always a good sell. Interval training and high intensity training is especially appealing, getting fit in shorter work-outs.
In turn, a professional guru or S&C coach, consultant/ 'expert' can appear to soup-it-up and sell it back to the athletes and take responsibility for getting them in shape.
It's all crossed over now. Everyone feeds of each other.

I've seen things come out re-packaged as "NEW" on regular cycles, in my lifetime. Diets, methods, concepts. Just the same things repeating and repeating. And it pre-dates my lifetime by decades.
It's all more mainstream and discussed now and packaged in civilized or sophisticated terminology.

 

There is acceptable criteria for what can or cannot be proven.
For instance, metaphysical claims cannot be proven (Do angels exist?)
Neither can certain abstract ideas.

I could be wrong, but I believe strings point of contention, to put it ever so eloquently, *pulls up sock to knee level while crossing legs,* is that you made a claim about physical training which can be materially proven, while you're asking him to prove an abstraction with no demonstrable tangibility.

 

Does anyone else find it ironic that the most popular modern nutritional trend is the "Paleo Diet?"
I think god is pulling a practical joke on us.

 

This dude crossfits
https://ka-perseus-images.s3.amazonaws.com/d3f665b7103e12b7d0d71d3fca784490cd0c4a0d.jpg

 

Chiseled athletes in ancient times.
http://www.bodybuildingreviews.net/ClassicallyBuilt.htm

 

It's a good think they didn't use steroids.

 

You:
https://d2gg9evh47fn9z.cloudfront.net/800px_COLOURBOX2915643.jpg

Vs.

The guy she tells you not to worry about:
http://www.bodybuildingreviews.net/ClassicallyBuilt/Caracalla4.jpg

 

Well, I'm not a PhD yet and philosophy isn't my primary discipline. (I won't say what it is because I've already mentioned where I live and too much info could be used to dox me.)

McGrain's an excellent poster even if it looks like I was giving him ****.

I try to be as even handed as possible. For instance in that thread I posted on the video showing modern fighters hitting psi machines I expressed extreme skepticism even though those results would seem to strongly support us "classicists" if taken at face value.

I wonder how many of the "modernists" would be similarly cautious if that machine showed Joshua punching 1300 psi instead of slightly under 900? Some would to be fair, but I can imagine there would be no small amount of unwarranted gloating too.