On Exactitude in Punditry

In a short apercu ‘On Exactitude in Science’ Jorge Luis Borges imagined the possibility (and worthlessness) of a map to the scale of 1:1. Every single point of the territory would correspond to a point on the map. But a map should be detailed enough to enable us to apprehend the area to which it pertains, but not so detailed that it becomes excessively complex and unwieldy. This highlights that a model should be an abstraction derived from a phenomenon; the model is not the same thing as the phenomenon.

When considering an external physical reality we can conceive a useless 1:1 map. But in the endeavour to understand human action, our theories and models are arguably more dense and complicated than this 1:1 scale. The biological world, of which human cognition is a part, has a greater order of complexity than the non-biological physical world. Therefore, models relating social reality are not so well served by the hard angles of geometry. A 1:1 map proves too detailed to assist us with the navigation of our physical surroundings; but a 10,000:1 expostulation of a human mind would still lack sufficient detail for us to understand it adequately, as we are not actually sure to what the ontological ’1′ pertains.

Football punditry provides a clear example of theories and models exceeding the breadth and complexity of a 1:1 map. Major incidents are considered from psychological and sociological angles but even when we’ve layered mounds of theories and speculation upon the incident, difficult questions still remain. For example, Thierry Henry generated international attention when his handball led to the goal which put France into the 2010 Finals, at the expense of the Republic of Ireland. This incident even prompted consideration of the ethical underpinnings of sport and whether it is up to a player to admit they have cheated, or whether it is merely the prerogative of the officials to establish wrongdoing. Did Henry act instinctively or with intent, and does it make a difference either way? Was Henry’s main obligation to support his team and nation to qualify for the World Cup, or to higher principles of fair play and honesty?

At the World Cup every game will also be scrutinized in painstaking detail, but sometimes the punditry does little to illuminate the action and a flat description on TV from an ex-player is often deemed to be a useful supplement to the viewing experience. Lewis Carroll almost scribed the following when considering his own fictional version of a 1:1 map: “we now use the country game itself, as its own map, and I assure you it does nearly as well.”

After being delivered to the rigours of sun and rain, Borges’s vast map ends in tattered fragments in western deserts. For all the fun of speculating and pontificating over football, let’s hope that at least some of the punditry in South Africa this summer experiences the same fate - and that this includes anything and everything stated by Alan Shearer.