Time Unbounded: Can There Ever Be an MMA GOAT?
Guest post from Uncommon Wisdom subscriber Chris M. Kaiser. And my reply.
An Uncommon Wisdom subscriber, and previous Uncommon Wisdom podcast guest, Chris M. Kaiser wrote a short reply to my MMA GOAT post. Reprinted here with his permission — he is in block quotes, I am not.
The MMA GOAT has a name. His name is Charles Oliveira. At least that's my vote for best fighter based on current and past fighters. That is using a thick description of GOAT for sure. I just like his story and history in MMA.
Charles Oliveira is an excellent choice, especially on the thick conception of a GOAT — where what matters for being the greatest of all time is not only a fighter’s performance in the octagon, but also how they conduct themselves outside of it.
In all honesty it seems likely that the MMA GOAT has yet to be born as you allude to in the piece. If time is unbounded though, then it seems we can never definitively bestow such a title. Wouldn't it always be premature to assign GOAT status? Especially when it seems likely the sport will only improve and not regress. Maybe the rate of improvement will vary, but improvement overtime seems like given right?
Would it always be premature to assign GOAT status? Yes and no. Premature comes in degrees. It is probably better to think about how much epistemic confidence we could assign to a GOAT designation, which would also come in degrees, e.g., I may be incredibly confident that Jon Jones is the GOAT, but still not assign total confidence to that designation in light of the evolution of MMA. There are likely several factors, at least, in deciding GOAT confidence levels such as,
The unrealized potential from various areas for improvement, e.g. medical, nutritional, technique. Seeing diminishing marginal returns in one of these areas, if not more, would likely lower my confidence than the GOAT is in the future, all else being equal. For example, if we know scientifically that there isn’t much more that can be done to improve the nutrition of fighters, then all else being equal, that would somewhat diminish my confidence that the GOAT is in the future.
It depends on scope. One might mean by ‘GOAT’ the greatest relative to an era or organization—for example, the Bellator GOAT—in which case determining GOAT status would likely be easier, relative to deciding the MMA GOAT for all of time, especially if the era or organization was no more. This would contain the number of potential GOAT candidates, foreclosing the possibility of a new GOAT contender.
There's a bigger problem with GOAT designations though: people who know a lot about the fighters, history, and techniques in MMA could nevertheless reasonably disagree as to which criteria should count toward GOAT status, and how to weigh those criteria in the final analysis. This problem is especially pronounced if epistemic permissivism holds—this is roughly the view that there can be conflicting, but equally reasonable beliefs and views based on the same body of evidence.
I think most people colloquially use term GOAT as an assignment only given to past and current individuals. Few people seem to consider future prospects at all in the discussion. But to your point, if you take that term literally (i.e. it's denotation) you're forced to consider the potential for future prospects.
That sounds right to me. I think oftentimes people engage in what we might term ‘sloppy’ GOAT talk, where a fighter is designated as the greatest of all time, but the choice is often tainted by factors like recency bias and ignoring what could be. And there is nothing wrong with sloppy GOAT talk, it can be entertaining. However, it isn’t a good guide to who is actually the greatest mixed martial artist of all time.