@subalias said:
> reasoning in a circle.
>false dichotomy
> The genetic fallacy.
> More circular reasoning.
> Evidence, please.
>completely subjective.
All true and you are not the first (but probably the most thorough) one to point it out. See #22 and #27 of this thread.
But, as Karl Kraus once said, problems of culture can only be discussed once the problem of being house-trained has been solved. My expectations are therefore pretty limited for boorchess giving us any valuable insight into why Fischer-chess is bad, pre-chess is good or why he addresses his audience with "patzers", as he does in #8.
Good luck.
krasnaya
> reasoning in a circle.
>false dichotomy
> The genetic fallacy.
> More circular reasoning.
> Evidence, please.
>completely subjective.
All true and you are not the first (but probably the most thorough) one to point it out. See #22 and #27 of this thread.
But, as Karl Kraus once said, problems of culture can only be discussed once the problem of being house-trained has been solved. My expectations are therefore pretty limited for boorchess giving us any valuable insight into why Fischer-chess is bad, pre-chess is good or why he addresses his audience with "patzers", as he does in #8.
Good luck.
krasnaya