Author: Michael Neish
Date: 18:55:37 02/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
>>On February 19, 2000 at 11:02:20, Alvaro Polo wrote: >My view on Adams is damning, but it is the way I see it. Your proposal to wait >for the facts, in theory, is very good, but in practice, it is naive. Do you >think that you have the real facts in every branch of life where someone has an >interest? Do you think you know the facts of Clinton-Lewinsky? Or in chess, do >you know the real facts of the first Kasparov-Karpov match, or the complete and >true facts on Hsu-Kasparov-Williams recent negotiations? It is naive to assume >that we will ever know the true facts, because everyone tells what they want to >tell and we must assume that. I don't think it's naive. It's more naive to go out guns blazing and say "Adams is a coward! Kasparov is afraid!" when you don't know half of what happened on that day. I'm not saying you personally said these things, by the way. I was just responding to your post about it. Of course we don't know the full facts about every political decision taken by those in power, or about every fiasco, and this is precisely WHY we have to put our emotions in check and try to react rationally to whatever happens. What you are saying is that it's correct to think "We can't possible know all the facts, and people aren't telling us the truth, so let's just say Adam's a jerk and that's it." Isn't this naive? You are recommending that we should react strongly to something we've learned that may turn out to be completely wrong. Better to keep a level head. Mike.
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.