2017 EFT: Specific Question Discussion

Elaborate on the merits of specific tournaments or have general theoretical discussion here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

2017 EFT: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:31 am

Discuss specific questions here
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
What do you do with a dead chemist?
Lulu
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2015 3:27 pm
Location: UK

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by What do you do with a dead chemist? » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:14 am

Could you post the text of the consuls question? Recall it having a lead in about them getting governorships at the end of their term which also would apply to Praetors. It then went on (later) to discuss them being the highest on the cursus which I've at various points seen applied to censors instead.

There was a bonus part on the four humors, which asks for you to name two of them (IIRC) and doesn't accept anything related to black bile etc, or at least explain why those shouldn't be acceptable.

The other quibbles I remember are:

I wrote a note saying that part 2 of bonus 6 in packet 4 is wrong, not sure if that's the 4 humors one.

Lyrics from jerusalem came up really early in the lamb question, though that might just be a UK issue

Having horse kick deaths in power for poisson felt very generous compared to some of the other power marks in the set
Christopher Stern
Oxford 2014-18
Real life 2018-?

User avatar
Progcon
Rikku
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:24 pm

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Progcon » Mon Oct 09, 2017 6:39 am

Yeah I agree with Chris that Poisson was really transparent. I figured on the first line it was either normal or Poisson because it said "this distribution" and it was obviously not uniform or binomial. The second clue should have given it away, but we were winning by I think 50 or something and we wanted to be conservative, so I didn't buzz and Joey Goldman powered it. The tossup on the US Constitution was a buzzer race in my room on the word "pragmatic" so that was kind of annoying. Maybe that should be moved down?

I also thought the tossup on Mauss was kind of annoying because I was sitting on Mallinowski versus Mauss for 2 lines and then I went with Mallinowski because I thought Mauss would be too hard for this tournament even though it sounded less like Coral Gardens and more like The Gift.

I was very happy to 30 the standard Alston-econometrics bonus in this set, but I didn't feel like the description of what a time series was was particularly succinct. My Wooldridge book says "data collected over time on one or more variables", so I think the definition is more general than was given in the set because I think something like "periodic cross samples" made sense as answer.

Can I see the Schopenhauer tossup? I want to know where power ended. I'd also like to see the bonus with the cross product answerline it in. I said product and I wasn't prompted; is there a reason for this? I think I would have been wrong and said Cartesian product anyway. The bonus where the first part was "coefficint of friction" caused us to say "frictional force" because we heard "this phenomenon". Can I see what it actually said? My team was really confused with the pronoun there. Finally, I'd like to see the tossup on "the text". It felt really weird and I liked to see where some of the clues came from.

Overall, I thought the set was really good. I didn't really think it was too hard or too easy overall. Science seemed really hard though especially on computer science and physics. The tossup on hyper conjugation seemed hard to parse until it said stuff about steric hindrance so you could eliminate that answer. I might give my thoughts on it overall later, but thanks for putting this together Will Alston et. al!
Harris Bunker
Grosse Pointe North High School '15
Michigan State University 2015-

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:55 am

Addressing the questions in my areas:
Progcon wrote:The tossup on the US Constitution was a buzzer race in my room on the word "pragmatic" so that was kind of annoying. Maybe that should be moved down?

...

I also thought the tossup on Mauss was kind of annoying because I was sitting on Mallinowski versus Mauss for 2 lines and then I went with Mallinowski because I thought Mauss would be too hard for this tournament even though it sounded less like Coral Gardens and more like The Gift.

I was very happy to 30 the standard Alston-econometrics bonus in this set, but I didn't feel like the description of what a time series was was particularly succinct. My Wooldridge book says "data collected over time on one or more variables", so I think the definition is more general than was given in the set because I think something like "periodic cross samples" made sense as answer.

...

Finally, I'd like to see the tossup on "the text". It felt really weird and I liked to see where some of the clues came from.
By the data we have, the Constitution tossup was not powered at the WUSTL site and that word wasn't the first buzz at Yale. It seems to me that British folks tend to receive more philosophy in their education than Americans, and I don't intend to make the philosophy harder for this reason.

Honestly I am not sure why quizbowl considers Malinowski much easier than Mauss, who I've actually encountered just about as quently (if not more) in my independent reading, etc. (though I suppose he is less prolific). As with last year, we weren't afraid to toss up some slightly tougher important material, because this is an introduction to college quizbowl and people will need to deal with these things in later questions. I don't think this is even that egregious. (EDIT: to be fair the tossup seems to be getting negged a lot - maybe people are making this same reasoning?)

If you could suggest an improvement to this wording, that would be helpful:
Packet 5 wrote: [10] Seasonal dummy variables may be used to account for changes during the year when performing analysis on this kind of panel data. A list of daily closing values of a stock exchange is an example of data in this form.
ANSWER: time series <WA, Math>
Schopenhauer:
Finals 1 wrote:19. This philosopher denounced the “stupefying influence of Hegel’s sham wisdom” and thought nobody under 40 should read Hegel to avoid corruption. He praised homosexuality for preventing ill-begotten children in the chapter “The Metaphysics of Love,” added to the third edition of a book which built on his thesis that phenomena are the way our minds perceive noumena. An essay from [emphasize] another man’s Untimely Meditations praises this philosopher (*) “as Educator,” as this man was one of the few philosophers Nietzsche respected. This German asserted the main tenets of his philosophy were reflected in Buddhism and drew on the Upanishads in a work praising asceticism as a way to confront life’s essential awfulness. For 10 points, name this author of The World as Will and Idea.

ANSWER: Arthur Schopenhauer <WA, PhilO>
Texts:
Packet 8 wrote: A tract defending these things states that “good” examples of these things are “the precious life – blood of a master spirit” and equates harming them with killing “the Image of God.” An essay whose title puns on the name of a work by Sir Thomas Malory argues against understanding these things in context of their creators. In a book partly titled for “desire,” Julia Kristeva coined a term for how these things influence each other through methods such as pastiche [pass-TEESH]. A key thesis of (*) deconstructionism is summarized as “there is nothing outside” [these things]. These things are interpreted in the practices of hermeneutics and exegesis. Many of them were destroyed in the Bonfire of the Vanities. For 10 points, identify these things, “banned” examples of which may include Huckleberry Finn.

ANSWER: books [or texts; or writings; or works of literature; or scriptures; prompt on works] (the first quotes are from Areopagitica by John Milton) <WA, PhilO>
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
Progcon
Rikku
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:24 pm

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Progcon » Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:35 pm

Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote:Addressing the questions in my areas:

By the data we have, the Constitution tossup was not powered at the WUSTL site and that word wasn't the first buzz at Yale. It seems to me that British folks tend to receive more philosophy in their education than Americans, and I don't intend to make the philosophy harder for this reason.

Honestly I am not sure why quizbowl considers Malinowski much easier than Mauss, who I've actually encountered just about as quently (if not more) in my independent reading, etc. (though I suppose he is less prolific). As with last year, we weren't afraid to toss up some slightly tougher important material, because this is an introduction to college quizbowl and people will need to deal with these things in later questions. I don't think this is even that egregious.
The British in general are much better at philosophy compared to Americans I felt, but I was also buzzing on that clue too and some of the players and I felt it was kind of fraudable because we weren't sure what other documents have different approaches except for maybe the Bible but I don't think the Bible is a "document" unless you wanted to tossup the Q source or something. It's a fine idea for a tossup though, and if your data says that it was harder than what I thought, then okay.

I heard of Mallinowski in high school and I hadn't heard of Mauss till college so that is why. You are correct in that they really should be just as easy but cannon trends die hard. I don't have a personal problem with Mauss or any of the answerlines in this tournament. I just goofed and changed my answer like a dummy. Though one player did say "The Open Window" was really hard for this difficulty, I didn't feel like that was true. I said American teams should have no problem, but I was kinda upset I got beat to a short story I had read.
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote: If you could suggest an improvement to this wording, that would be helpful:
Packet 5 wrote: [10] Seasonal dummy variables may be used to account for changes during the year when performing analysis on this kind of panel data. A list of daily closing values of a stock exchange is an example of data in this form.
ANSWER: time series <WA, Math>
It's actually really hard to accurately clue this without using the word "time" here. I would not gotten it without the stock market example. I would omit the part about seasonable dummies, which are definitely used, but I would mention something about concerns about serial correlation, or auto regressive processes, etc. Also, Wooldridge says "Formally, a sequence of random variables indexed by time is called a stochastic process or a time series process". So you need to avoid saying the variables are randomly sequenced in that case. Other good example of time series, according to Wooldridge, are "employment", "the minimun wage", etc. If you just mention serial correlation, and keep that last sentence, you should be fine. Time Series analysis is just a huge field, and it's what I'm researching this semester.
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote:Schopenhauer:
Finals 1 wrote:19. This philosopher denounced the “stupefying influence of Hegel’s sham wisdom” and thought nobody under 40 should read Hegel to avoid corruption. He praised homosexuality for preventing ill-begotten children in the chapter “The Metaphysics of Love,” added to the third edition of a book which built on his thesis that phenomena are the way our minds perceive noumena. An essay from [emphasize] another man’s Untimely Meditations praises this philosopher (*) “as Educator,” as this man was one of the few philosophers Nietzsche respected. This German asserted the main tenets of his philosophy were reflected in Buddhism and drew on the Upanishads in a work praising asceticism as a way to confront life’s essential awfulness. For 10 points, name this author of The World as Will and Idea.

ANSWER: Arthur Schopenhauer <WA, PhilO>
Texts:
Packet 8 wrote: A tract defending these things states that “good” examples of these things are “the precious life – blood of a master spirit” and equates harming them with killing “the Image of God.” An essay whose title puns on the name of a work by Sir Thomas Malory argues against understanding these things in context of their creators. In a book partly titled for “desire,” Julia Kristeva coined a term for how these things influence each other through methods such as pastiche [pass-TEESH]. A key thesis of (*) deconstructionism is summarized as “there is nothing outside” [these things]. These things are interpreted in the practices of hermeneutics and exegesis. Many of them were destroyed in the Bonfire of the Vanities. For 10 points, identify these things, “banned” examples of which may include Huckleberry Finn.

ANSWER: books [or texts; or writings; or works of literature; or scriptures; prompt on works] (the first quotes are from Areopagitica by John Milton) <WA, PhilO>
Thanks for posting these. I guess I was tired in the second last to round, because I really should have powered that if I remember the anecdote about Schopenhauer calling Hegel a "charlatan" and lecturing to empty rooms during Hegel's lectures. I still beat Joey Goldman to that tossup so I was pretty happy at getting at the Nietzsche description.
Harris Bunker
Grosse Pointe North High School '15
Michigan State University 2015-

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:47 pm

Progcon wrote:The British in general are much better at philosophy compared to Americans I felt, but I was also buzzing on that clue too and some of the players and I felt it was kind of fraudable because we weren't sure what other documents have different approaches except for maybe the Bible but I don't think the Bible is a "document" unless you wanted to tossup the Q source or something. It's a fine idea for a tossup though, and if your data says that it was harder than what I thought, then okay.
I feel like I could change it to "this work" and it would be fine still? But perhaps that would be too much quizbowlese. A third voice here would be much appreciated :)
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
Kasper Kaijanen
Lulu
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:00 pm

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Kasper Kaijanen » Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:22 am

Can you post the text of the tossup about the updated translation of the Roman Missal (which, by the way, I enjoyed as a bonus idea quite a bit)? I had a lot of trouble following what exactly was being asked for in the first part and thought it wanted consubstantial.
Finn Bender
Edmond Memorial '15
OU '19

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Tue Oct 10, 2017 1:43 am

It originally asked for consubstantial, but I figured that was too hard.
Packet 2 wrote:1. Answer the following about the retranslation of the English version of the Roman Catholic mass, which took effect in 2011. For 10 points each:

[10] In the Nicene Creed, the relationship between God and the Father is no longer described by this word, but rather one starting with the prefix “con.” This doctrine refers to the literal presence of divine essence in the Eucharist.

ANSWER: transubstantial [accept word forms like transubstantiation]

[10] One of the most noted, and most mistaken changes, is the replacement of “and also with you” with this four word English phrase. It is the response to “The Lord be with you.”

ANSWER: And with your spirit [do not accept or prompt on any other answer. Direct all protests to the Vatican]

[10] Despite the new translation taking effect in 2011, Liturgiam Authenticam, the directive ordering it, was written by this Polish Pope who reigned from 1978 until his death in 2005 when Benedict XVI took the throne.

ANSWER: Pope Saint John Paul II [or Iohannes Paulus II; accept JP2; accept Saint Karol Józef Wojtyła; prompt on John Paul or Iohannes Paulus] <JL, Rel>
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
Kasper Kaijanen
Lulu
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 7:00 pm

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Kasper Kaijanen » Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:25 pm

Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote:It originally asked for consubstantial, but I figured that was too hard.
Packet 2 wrote:1. Answer the following about the retranslation of the English version of the Roman Catholic mass, which took effect in 2011. For 10 points each:

[10] In the Nicene Creed, the relationship between God and the Father is no longer described by this word, but rather one starting with the prefix “con.” This doctrine refers to the literal presence of divine essence in the Eucharist.

ANSWER: transubstantial [accept word forms like transubstantiation]

[10] One of the most noted, and most mistaken changes, is the replacement of “and also with you” with this four word English phrase. It is the response to “The Lord be with you.”

ANSWER: And with your spirit [do not accept or prompt on any other answer. Direct all protests to the Vatican]


[10] Despite the new translation taking effect in 2011, Liturgiam Authenticam, the directive ordering it, was written by this Polish Pope who reigned from 1978 until his death in 2005 when Benedict XVI took the throne.

ANSWER: Pope Saint John Paul II [or Iohannes Paulus II; accept JP2; accept Saint Karol Józef Wojtyła; prompt on John Paul or Iohannes Paulus] <JL, Rel>
Yeah that first part is wrong. The new translation of the Roman Missal changed the Nicene Creed from "one in being with the Father" to "consubstantial with the Father." As far as I am aware, the word transubstantial was never in the Nicene Creed.
Finn Bender
Edmond Memorial '15
OU '19

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Tue Oct 10, 2017 3:20 pm

That's a good point and I will fix that since I introduced the error. I thought consubstantual would make for two hard parts.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Sat Oct 14, 2017 10:05 pm

As a note - the Goldberg Variations tossup was replaced after previous mirrors. The J.S. Bach question may have been written too easy, though, so it's been slightly modified after today.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
Muriel Axon
Tidus
Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Muriel Axon » Sat Oct 14, 2017 11:19 pm

Bonus 4 in Packet 7 mentions economic anthropologist "Doug Graeber." Oof!
3. J. P. Grime noted that this process occurs at a very high level for the species labeled “C” and “R” in the CSR triangle of plant strategies. David Tilman described how this process depends on a quantity labeled R* [R-star], which is ideally as low as possible for a given species. This process is described by the dominant eigenvalue of a transition matrix named after Patrick Leslie. This is the value symbolized by the “r” in r-selection. Pierre-François (*) Verhulst described how this process follows the logistic equation, until reaching a carrying capacity. Thomas Malthus argued that, for 10 points, what process will continue geometrically and eventually outstrip humanity’s food supply?
ANSWER: population growth (rate) [prompt on any answer related to reproduction, like birth (rate) or fecundity or fertility; accept relative growth rate, which is a term specifically describing growth in plant size] <RY, Biology>
I admire the effort at finding fresh, important clues that went into this tossup. Both Grime and Tilman are very important ecologists and absolutely deserve to be asked about -- and the question also successfully picked out their most famous ideas (C-S-R and R*). But I think the first two clues are ambiguous to the point of being kind of useless, even to people who know what they mean.

I think the Tilman clue comes out worse; reading the clue as written, I might say something like "resource competition" or something, but I think it's not accurate to say that R* is a theory about growth except in the trivial sense that all of community ecology is about fitness and demographic rates in some sense. (R* is the lowest possible level of a resource for which a population experiences non-negative growth rates, but its main use is in predicting outcomes of resource competition.) The Grime clue isn't wrong, but as a plant ecologist, I just don't think it's something where "growth" readily comes to mind. This is more subjective, so I don't think it's worth belaboring. I also find it strange that the answer line blurs the distinction between population growth rate and individual growth rate (e.g. relative growth rate) -- where does the latter come from in the question?
Shan Kothari

Plymouth High School '10
Michigan State University '14
University of Minnesota '19 (hopefully!)

User avatar
armitage
Wakka
Posts: 194
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:52 pm

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by armitage » Sun Oct 15, 2017 12:02 am

Thanks for the comments; I think I was just overly ambitious in using those clues. For now I will replace R* with a late-middle clue. Any comment on rewording the Grime clue is appreciated too. I'm sorry if this swung any games or otherwise gave you a worse experience.
Richard Yu

User avatar
a bird
Wakka
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:50 pm
Location: College Park, MD

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by a bird » Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:14 pm

Hey, could I see the Coulomb tossup from packet 1? Maybe the science editors were aware of this already, but the vapor pressure (chem) tossup from packet 6 and the diffusion (phys) tossup for packet 10 reference Knudsen cells and Knudsen diffusion respectively. This isn't literally a repeat, but I think the two clue are similar enough that it might be worth changing.

Thanks for a the hard work on the set, I really enjoyed it.
Graham Reid
Kenyon 2017
Maryland Physics 20??

User avatar
Kouign Amann
Forums Staff: Moderator
Posts: 1126
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 12:44 am
Location: Charlottesville

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Kouign Amann » Sun Oct 15, 2017 1:55 pm

Hey, whatever the first creed bonus part got "fixed" to is still wrong. I can't remember exactly what it said yesterday, but it still was claiming the line in question had something to do with Eucharistic theology, which just isn't what's been talked about there at all.
Aidan Mehigan
St. Anselm's Abbey School '12
Columbia University '16 | University of Oxford '17 | UPenn GSE '19

User avatar
Pablo Picasso 2
Lulu
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 3:43 am

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Pablo Picasso 2 » Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:57 pm

I was told that an earlier iteration apparently had a tossup on noodles? I am very curious to hear about this.
Jeremy "JJ" Tsai
Rutgers 2018
President

User avatar
Sygyt/Kargyraa
Lulu
Posts: 23
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 12:21 am

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Sygyt/Kargyraa » Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:07 am

I found the bel canto bonus part rather confusing - I've mostly only seen it used in the context of the Italians of the "long 19th century" (Rossini, Mercadante, Bellini, Donizetti, etc.), whose works generally demanded a fairly wide range. I'm taking the liberty of linking here several particularly notable and enjoyable examples - https://youtu.be/dvsdiX_lSR4?t=219(soprano) from Donizetti's Lucrezia Borgia, https://youtu.be/8jpOeSWjEJw?t=101(contralto) from Rossini's Cenerentola, and https://youtu.be/nuWHd6EaVfE?t=220(tenor) from Rossini's Barbiere.
Zhenglin Liu
University of Toronto MechEng 1T9, Engineering Science dropout

User avatar
Muriel Axon
Tidus
Posts: 669
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 12:19 am

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Muriel Axon » Mon Oct 16, 2017 12:55 am

armitage wrote:Thanks for the comments; I think I was just overly ambitious in using those clues. For now I will replace R* with a late-middle clue. Any comment on rewording the Grime clue is appreciated too. I'm sorry if this swung any games or otherwise gave you a worse experience.
I was reading, so no worries! I think one simple way to alter the R* clue would be just to write something like "In Tilman's resource-ratio theory, R* is the minimum resource level for which a species has a non-negative rate of this process."

I don't really know what to do with the Grime clue. As a plant ecologist, my inclination (if I thought in terms of CSR at all, which -- like most American ecologists -- I don't) would be to say that any of the strategies could have a very low growth rate in the wrong environment. Competitors would fail in stressful environments, and ruderals (despite their high seed production) would fail in late-successional environments. But that's probably overthinking for quiz bowl, so maybe you should just leave this clue as is.

In any case, I do want to emphasize that these are both good things to ask about, and I'm glad that someone did! I don't mean to gripe too much about this, because mostly, it's just good to see someone trying when writing ecology questions.
Shan Kothari

Plymouth High School '10
Michigan State University '14
University of Minnesota '19 (hopefully!)

User avatar
tiwonge
Tidus
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Boise (City of Trees), Idaho

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by tiwonge » Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:42 am

Kouign Amann wrote:Hey, whatever the first creed bonus part got "fixed" to is still wrong. I can't remember exactly what it said yesterday, but it still was claiming the line in question had something to do with Eucharistic theology, which just isn't what's been talked about there at all.
1. Answer the following about the retranslation of the English version of the Roman Catholic mass, which took effect in 2011. For 10 points each:
[10] In the Nicene Creed, doctrine about this rite is now described as “consubstantial.” John Wycliffe challenged the doctrine about this rite called transubstantiation.
ANSWER: the Eucharist [accept Holy Communion or The Lord’s Supper; prompt on communion; do not accept or prompt on “Last Supper”]
This is incorrect, and really confused me. (Fortunately, I was reading, not playing.)

The Roman Catholic theology on the Eucharist is, and has always been (at least since it was formally defined) as "transubstantiation" (i.e., the elements become the actual Body and Blood of Christ--there is no longer bread or wine present). There are other Christian denominations that are notably not the RCC that hold with consubstantiation (i.e., the elements of bread and wine are present with the Body and Blood).
I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the Only Begotten Son of God,
born of the Father before all ages.
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;
through him all things were made.
In the Creed, the word consubstantial does not refer to the Eucharist. The previous wording of "one in being with the Father" was changed to the more technical "consubstantial with the Father." This is talking about the nature of the Trinity, not Eucharist. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit (in particular, here, the Father and Son) share the same substance--they are made up of the same "divine" "stuff"--and are not two different types of things. (Notably, they're not separate beings, with one divine and the other human or half-human or something.)

This is really a bad mistake to make, and it seems that even a quick reading of the Nicene Creed (above) would show that they're not talking about the Eucharist when the word consubstantial comes up. (If I were playing this, I might have gotten it if I weren't paying attention to the first part and just heard "rite" and "transubstantiation." I don't know what I would have done if I were paying attention to the whole thing.)
Colin McNamara, Boise State University
PACE
Idaho Quiz & Academic Teams

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:54 am

Yeah, I made some changes off the top of my head when I realized it needed to be changed, then did so again (despite this clearly not working the first time). This was dumb and lazy of me.

In any case, the bonus now reads as follows:
1. Answer the following about the retranslation of the English version of the Roman Catholic mass, which took effect in 2011. For 10 points each:
[10] The relationship between God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost is now described with this adjective. It is NOT to be confused with a doctrine about the Eucharist which begins with the prefix “trans-.”
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
tiwonge
Tidus
Posts: 672
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 5:54 pm
Location: Boise (City of Trees), Idaho

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by tiwonge » Mon Oct 16, 2017 2:58 am

Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote:Yeah, I made some changes off the top of my head when I realized it needed to be changed, then did so again (despite this clearly not working the first time). This was dumb and lazy of me.

In any case, the bonus now reads as follows:
1. Answer the following about the retranslation of the English version of the Roman Catholic mass, which took effect in 2011. For 10 points each:
[10] The relationship between God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost is now described with this adjective. It is NOT to be confused with a doctrine about the Eucharist which begins with the prefix “trans-.”
Yeah, that's much better. Certainly harder than Eucharist, but I think that "and with your spirit" is a fine middle part.
Colin McNamara, Boise State University
PACE
Idaho Quiz & Academic Teams

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Mon Oct 16, 2017 9:46 am

tiwonge wrote:
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote:Yeah, I made some changes off the top of my head when I realized it needed to be changed, then did so again (despite this clearly not working the first time). This was dumb and lazy of me.

In any case, the bonus now reads as follows:
1. Answer the following about the retranslation of the English version of the Roman Catholic mass, which took effect in 2011. For 10 points each:
[10] The relationship between God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost is now described with this adjective. It is NOT to be confused with a doctrine about the Eucharist which begins with the prefix “trans-.”
Yeah, that's much better. Certainly harder than Eucharist, but I think that "and with your spirit" is a fine middle part.
It's worth giving credit to James Lasker (who actually has knowledge of this stuff) for getting this correct the first time before I decided to go screw it up! I did think it'd be a bit hard but it looks like this could be a plausible bonus difficulty structure based on conversion rate numbers.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
armitage
Wakka
Posts: 194
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:52 pm

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by armitage » Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:52 am

geremy wrote:I was told that an earlier iteration apparently had a tossup on noodles? I am very curious to hear about this.
This was just a really bad tossup, which rightfully no longer exists
Richard Yu

User avatar
Pablo Picasso 2
Lulu
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed May 25, 2016 3:43 am

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Pablo Picasso 2 » Sun Oct 22, 2017 7:30 pm

armitage wrote:
geremy wrote:I was told that an earlier iteration apparently had a tossup on noodles? I am very curious to hear about this.
This was just a really bad tossup, which rightfully no longer exists
That just makes it even more intriguing

Is there no early iteration of it that even exists? How bad can a tossup about noodles be?
Jeremy "JJ" Tsai
Rutgers 2018
President

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: Specific Question Discussion

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Wed Nov 08, 2017 11:51 am

geremy wrote:
armitage wrote:
geremy wrote:I was told that an earlier iteration apparently had a tossup on noodles? I am very curious to hear about this.
This was just a really bad tossup, which rightfully no longer exists
That just makes it even more intriguing

Is there no early iteration of it that even exists? How bad can a tossup about noodles be?
Never actually responded to this, but it was an illustration why questions on "a X of this type" are generally ill-advised, because you can have a lot of "types" of things.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

Post Reply