Author: Alvaro Polo
Date: 00:12:49 02/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2000 at 21:55:37, Michael Neish wrote: > >>>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. Perhaps I should look in my dictionnary again, but I fail to see how insulting Adams can be considered naive. It can be uncorrect, or wrong, if you want. But, naive? The main point here is that waiting for the facts is an attitude that always favors status quo. And the status quo here is that Junior was forfeited without it being clearly right (you see, nobody here says that it was right, at most they say "let's wait and we'll be able to make a sound judgment). It is not correct, in my opinion, to support the status quo, therefore I view the critics to Adams and even to Mig as reasonable. Alvaro > >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.