To Research Proposals

Proposal 1: For the research of the Male Confidence

Though empirical evidence suggests it’s obvious, no controlled studies have been done to determine the exact ratio of the average American male’s confidence-to-skill-set ratio. The researchers understand this is much like testing whether or not grass is green or water is wet, yet assumptions must always be questioned, especially when they are widely held. As a follow up study, because the authors are male, we need to determine if overconfidence is a problem, as the name suggests, or if it is, in fact, an asset. We suspect the former and will suggest that “overconfidence” be labeled, more accurately, “underdeveloped realism.”

Proposal 2: For the research of the Therapeutic Uses of Tequila

Wine, beer and to a certain extent, gin, have been the subject of much research, connecting these to health benefits that extend to pulmonary, nervous and endocrinology systems. However, much more research is needed into the distilled extract of the agave plant. Researchers hypothesize that those who drink tequila will, on average, have improved health in all of the above mentioned areas. However, if the research shows no improvement or even a decline, we will to ask the secondary question: how much the participants care, given the fact that they get to drink tequila? Due to the controversial nature of the study, the researchers have generously agreed to be the subjects of the study. You’re welcome.

Proposal 3: For the research of Dreams Delayed, Denied, Destroyed

Past research has been founded on the belief that delayed, denied and destroyed are all different ways that aspirations and goals may be limited or, in some cases, buried. We suggest this is mere tautology, but recognize the value of controlled subjects to determine the validity of our assumptions. We will take recent college graduates and over the course of six months, systematically and measurably, undermine their beliefs by either: 1) delaying them 2) denying them and 3) destroying them. At the end of six months, subjects will be interviewed to determine qualitative differences in subjective experiences.

We realize this seems cruel. We take no pleasure in this experiment. Our ethics board is urging us not to move forward with this. They will be our control group.