Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 17:09:16 01/15/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2003 at 19:30:51, Bob Durrett wrote: >On January 15, 2003 at 18:36:21, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On January 15, 2003 at 18:03:12, Bob Durrett wrote: >> >>>On January 15, 2003 at 14:50:28, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On January 15, 2003 at 11:09:43, Bob Durrett wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 15, 2003 at 10:14:25, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Sorry, but this is rather insulting to Bob if you put Vincent on his level. >>>>>>Unfortunately you cloud the the whole question. In this case it's solely about >>>>>>science and logic. Now you judge that they both violate the basics. Does science >>>>>>and also logic have no meaning to you, no special value? I can't see where you >>>>>>discovered the "weak" point in Bob here. >>>>>> >>>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>> >>>>>Did science and logic produce a chess engine? >>>>> >>>>>Bob D. >>>> >>>>Bob the Second, what would you think "what" did it? Just human "will"? Methinks >>>>you are confusing it with the question if someone should have studied computer >>>>sciences to be able to program a World Champion. That of course is nonsense. I >>>>think that Frans is no academic and neither Richard was. But that doesn't >>>>matter. The basics of computer chess have been found by academics. And not too >>>>low estimated academics. Another question is if you could well use logic and a >>>>technique that was created by academics, even if you were no academic. Well, >>>>also this question is moote. Of course you can. But - and that is a single >>>>caveat: if you talk like V., and when it's wrong, you might accept that some >>>>expert gives you a correction. What is wrong with that? >>>> >>>>Kind regards, >>>>Rolf Tueschen >>> >>>Well, I enjoy the fruits of the labors of others. Things like electricity and >>>chess engines, for example. But my gut feel is that it is going too far to >>>start worshiping science and logic. As far as logic is concerned, "logical >>>conclusions" are only as good as the unproven assumptions and the validity of >>>the "logical" steps. Many a "logical argument" has been shot down on this >>>basis. This is not to suggest that your logical arguments are flawed, however. >>>Nothing personal. It's just a general observation. >>> >>>: ) >>> >>>Bob D. >>> >>>Bob D. >> >>Your gut feeling is misleading you. We had a lot of debates about the value of >>science in CTF and it's clear that you can find religious beliefs in science as >>well. But that is not the point here. You say you like the products of science. >>But you remain sceptic towards science. Fine. But why rejecting basic truths by >>one of the science experts here? Expert for exactly the field where the so >>beloved engines were created. This doesn't make sense. >> >>As to the logical context you described, you are right, but where do you see >>such a violation in computer chess, meaning the points we were discussing here, >>Vincent against Bob? >> >>Please read the other message where I give two examples. Please show exactly >>where you see just little technical errors and NOT huge violations in logic. >> >>Let me state that I see a huge contradiction in your own presentation. Here you >>make the point of HUGE logical fallacies in science, that are also dangerous. >>While in the Vincent question you want to say that it's all about little >>technical errors. - The truth is that Vincent violates ver basic and highly >>important science and logic laws. - So you have an interesting technique of >>discussion. Let me call it the war on two frontiers. <g> >> >>Kind regards, >>Rolf Tueschen > >Rolf, I owe you an apology. In my warped sense of misguided humor, I was >baiting you in much the same way that Vincent baits Bob Hyatt. I am genuinely >sorry and HATE myself for that. The Devil made me do it!!!! > >I LOVE all scientists [and chess engine programmers]! Really!! > >: ) > >Bob D. So, it's true that I survived hell and devil and all? I love it. I went through hell. Good night then and thanks for the general appreciation, ;-) Rolf Tueschen
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.