top of page
Search

16 - CALLING STRIKES

  • Writer: Jim Williams
    Jim Williams
  • Nov 23, 2024
  • 4 min read

Updated: Dec 17, 2024

November 23, 2024


You get in trouble following yourself around.

Billy Martin (Baseball celebrity)


Billy Martin is/was a baseball legend – perhaps not in quite the way that Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle are baseball legends – yet Billy made his mark on “America’s pastime” from the 1950’s through the early 1980’s. 

 

Although he was a good baseball player, Martin is best remembered as a successful and, shall we say, volatile Manager who became famous (infamous?) for his histrionic arguments with umpires over strike calls with which he disagreed – clashes which sometimes led to his ejection from games – and even to at least one suspension for kicking dirt on an ump.  This is our entry point into the theme of this post…


To call a pitch a ball or a strike is to make a truth claim, and it is to make a truth claim which inevitably includes some element of subjectivity.  An umpire must subjectively interpret the borders of the strike zone according to how he/she sees them, and those borders are not visible in a way that makes it clear to all observers where the boundary (horizon line, as I have been calling such things) is that separates a ball from a strike.

 

So, while baseball is just a game, the ball vs. strike issue – and the controversies associated with it – follows the same pattern as a multitude of other controversies: abortion, euthanasia, crime, poverty, drug abuse, immigration, pandemic restrictions and so on.  (Please note that each of these issues has an opposite that parallels ball vs. strike.)

 

Observant souls will note, “Truth is not always clear-cut. Social and political issues “coloured” with shades of gray!”  Having set these as their premises, the argument continues:  “We must be tolerant and allow for diversity and disagreement, and that requires that we forego objective Truth.” 

 

This is a fairly typical argument in support of relativism, and it sounds good, but let us examine the baseball strike zone as a template for the reasoned way to approach and resolve disputed truth claims that does not end in anarchy or tyranny.

 

This probably my favourite illustration of the Principle of Non-Contradiction:  the strike zone is a wonderful example of something that upholds the objective nature of Truth while also recognizing that our subjective experience and interpretation of reality is also in play (forgive the pun!!).  Note the following:


  • The strike zone has an objective definition (see the MLB Rulebook for the definition).  Hence, the strike zone is an object!

  • The strike zone’s definition allows for variation (it varies from batter to batter).

  • Regardless of the batter, every pitch is either a ball or a strike (just like the light is either “On” or “Off.”)

  • People will disagree over whether a given pitch is a ball or a strike.  However, disagreement does not overrule this: every pitch is, at the end of the argument, either a ball or a strike.  No pitch is ever both a ball and a strike (i.e. a ball for me and a strike for thee/my truth AND your truth).  As well, no pitch is ever neither a ball nor a strike. (The Principle of Non-Contradiction is fully applied.)

The Strike Zone
The Strike Zone

 

  • The strike zone has an objective definition (see the MLB Rulebook for the definition).  Hence, the strike zone is an object!

  • The strike zone’s definition allows for variation (it varies from batter to batter).

  • Regardless of the batter, every pitch is either a ball or a strike (just like the light is either “On” or “Off.”)

  • People will disagree over whether a given pitch is a ball or a strike.  However, disagreement does not overrule this: every pitch is, at the end of the argument, either a ball or a strike.  No pitch is ever both a ball and a strike (i.e. a ball for me and a strike for thee/my truth AND your truth).  As well, no pitch is ever neither a ball nor a strike. (The Principle of Non-Contradiction is fully revealed.)

  • Again, the strike zone illustrates how Truth may, in some sense, be unclear to us – as in “variable” or “comparative” – but it is never “relative.” Any lack of clarity results from our limits, not the "limits" of Truth itself.

 

Given the quote that begins this post, I don’t think Billy Martin was nearly as good a philosopher as he was a baseball player and manager.  However, I am confident that he understood the strike zone in precisely the way I have described it.  And, despite his antics on the diamond, Martin knew that the game could not tolerate his temper tantrums about missed calls.

 

Finally, think about what happens to the game of baseball if the truth about balls and strikes is treated as “relative.”  What will inevitably result is confusion, escalating tempers, violence and chaos, making the game uncivilized and unplayable!!  The same requirement exists for living in a free and orderly society!


Next post: Worthless Words


 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
28 - SOME REFLECTIONS

God writes the Gospel not in the Bible alone, but also on trees, and in the flowers and clouds and stars.                                ...

 
 
 
27 - CELEBRITY SCIENTISTS & ERROR

Nonsense is nonsense, even when spoken by famous scientists.                                                                             ...

 
 
 
26 – SUPPRESSING SCIENTIFIC TRUTH

No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.                                            ...

 
 
 

Comments


Elijah's Cave

©2022 by Elijah's Cave. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page