In that spirit, I ran the idea of a Celebrate Sociology! lightbulb joke contest by my friend Kestrel, but she was pretty tapped for ideas:
Q: How many sociologists does it take to change a light bulb?and also
A: One. Moreover, it will be a better bulb than the one before!
Q: How many sociologists does it take to change a light bulb?Nonetheless, to be sensitive to any sociologists out there who may have been insulted by the lightbulb contest, I have decided to award the winner to:
A: All of us share responsibility for that light bulb. But, working together, in communities, we will not just change the bulb, but create the base of understanding on which we can build a better, fairer world!
Q: How many sociologists does it take to change a lightbulb?As no one actually had the foresight to enter this, despite it being the factually correct answer (at least, in modal terms), no prize will be awarded. However, a different and non-sociology-centered contest of considerably more consequence might be announced here soon, so keep your monitors tuned to JFW.
* How many economists does it take to change a light bulb? An economist presumably would point out that the more rational thing would be for the economist to spend that time doing more economics, and then to use part of the extra earnings to pay an unskilled worker the minimum wage s/he'd accept to change the lightbulb instead, thus achieving a changed bulb and additional income. But then the economist would guffaw and say that, of course, this is just a joke, and the transaction costs of finding that unskilled worker would be too high, not to mention the whole agency problem of having to monitor the unskilled worker or else s/he'd probably just steal the light bulb and maybe some cutlery as well, so really the answer is that it would make the most sense for the economist to just do it.