[tpoacher]

Effectively what you're saying is that you cannot possibly entertain the larger point of the article, because you find faults with the specific analogy he chose to illustrate it. Right?

Fair enough. His fault for trying to argue using an analogy I guess. It never works.

[leto_ii]

That's precisely the opposite of what I was saying. I tend to agree with what (I understood as) the larger point of the article, I just see the chess analogy as muddled and inaccurate.