Chess « Questions for America

Think does not = Chess II

June 3rd, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Cognitive Dissonance, Military Ethics

The great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance
as though they were realities,
and are often more influenced by the things that seem than those that are.

Niccolo Machiavelli

If opponents don’t begin with pieces of the same number and value,
and players can think they’re winning when losing ,
can influencing others’ thoughts enhance results,
and [...]

Print This Post

Think does not = Chess

June 2nd, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Politics = Chess

If you can’t necessarily control your pieces,
can you be obliged to move and/or sacrifice when you don’t want to?

If players don’t necessarily follow the same rules,
which can change without everyone knowing,
should you break rules if your opponent does?

Everybody sooner or later
sits down to a banquet of consequences.

Robert Louis Stevenson

Can winning be [...]

Print This Post

Politics is chess

May 30th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Political Ethics

Life is a kind of chess in which we have often points to gain
competitors or adversaries to contend with
and in which there is a vast variety of good and ill events…

By playing at chess…we may learn foresight, circumspection and caution

Benjamin Franklin

If there are 9,183,421,888 ways to play the first [...]

Print This Post

Politics = Chess III

May 29th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Military Ethics

In chess, a fork is a tactic
that uses one piece to attack two or more of the opponent’s pieces
at the same time,
hoping to achieve material gain
(by capturing one of the opponent’s pieces)
because the opponent can only counter one of the two (or more) threats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_(chess)

If big print can give what fine print [...]

Print This Post

On Chess: Are chances better for players who more accurately calculate probabilities the farthest into the future?

May 28th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Military Ethics

Known and unknown
you were, are and will be pieces of varying value
in an infinite number of games

You may or may not be playing the games you think

If opponents don’t begin with pieces of the same number and value
and players can think they’re winning when losing
can influencing others’ thoughts enhance results
and vice versa?

Print This Post

Is chess non-violent war?

May 27th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Military Ethics

Does the player who doesn’t make the last mistake usually win?

After the game
the king and pawn go into the same box

Italian proverb

The more captured opposing pieces the less risk
and vice versa

Do some football running backs fake left and go right
to mislead the defense to commit in the wrong direction?

All [...]

Print This Post

Chess I

May 25th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Military Ethics, Philosophy

The chess board is the world
the pieces are the phenomena of the universe
the rules of the game are what we call the laws of nature
the player on the other side is hidden from us

Thomas Huxley

Are the only two certainties
that there are at least two players
you and everything that’s not?

Print This Post

What does a carnivore look for in the face of its prey and why?

May 24th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Military Ethics, Political Ethics, Politics = Chess, Revolutionary Ethics

If mold continues to multiply after eating half a piece of cheese
what happens when demand exceeds supply?

Are there times when compromise isn’t appropriate?

Should you do what you need to whether you like it or not
sooner than later?

Is the definition of civilized changing again?

I don’t care if I follow your rules, if you can [...]

Print This Post

If an offensive move doesn’t look advantageousshould defenses be reinforced instead?

February 6th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, CPA Continuing Education, Economic Ethics, Military Ethics, Plan, Political Ethics, Risk and Return, Strategy

You can’t start over

If nothing doesn’t change

is not making a move moving?

Print This Post

Think does not = Chess

January 30th, 2010 | Tags: Chess, Politics does not = Chess

If big print can give what fine print takes,

can winning the wrong game lose the right one?

Does complexity increase the likelihood of complication?

Print This Post

Disclaimers

What you may think I'm thinking isn't necessarily what I'm thinking.

Format originally conceived to conform to compliance guidelines for strategic, economic planning and financial ethics courses, for CPAs, attorneys and investors.

If anything can be refined, don't be surprized if some posts read differently later.

Efficacy through understanding could be exponential, as long as most don't know what they could.

Writing style is kind of like poetry only different, with as little punctuation possible.

It's not supposed to be easy.

Many opinions expressed are those of the author as of the date of the post and are subject to change without notice.

Some views do not necessarily represent author opinions or anyone elses.

Information has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but accuracy is not guaranteed.

The material has been prepared solely for information purposes.

The site’s content is provided as general information only and should not be taken as investment or tax advice.

Fine print can take what big print gives.

All site content including advertisements shall not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial instrument, or to participate in any trading or investment strategy.

Any action taken as a result of information, analysis or advertisement on this site, is ultimately reader responsibility.

Consult investment or tax advisers before investment decisions.

Past perfromance is no guarantee of future results.

If you were who you think you were, and you are what you think you are, and some of what will can, can’t or won’t change, you may not be who you think you’ll be.

Some of what was may not have happened the way you think.

The only two certainties, are that you and everything that’s not you exists.

Without written exemptions, sometimes multiple restrictions may not apply, unless they do.

Most information is hypothetical.

What you don’t know you don’t know is more than you think.

If what others think was, is and may might not be what you do, weigh author and self bias.

Author is not liable if observation alters the observed.

Think for yourself and act accordingly.

The actual existence of some information can neither be confirmed nor denied.

Author is not responsible if some hypothetical questions may not be, under alternative interpretations.

Charles Darwin may have been adopted.

Reality may or may not be more than you think.

Time may exist independently of human consciousness.

You may be a robot and not know.

Nothing doesn’t change.

You can’t start over.

Questions for America

Greensboro CPA CPE

$100, 8 Hour CPA CPE

$100, 8 Hour CPA CPE

Think does not = Chess II

Think does not = Chess

Politics is chess

Politics = Chess III

On Chess: Are chances better for players who more accurately calculate probabilities the farthest into the future?

Is chess non-violent war?

Chess I

What does a carnivore look for in the face of its prey and why?

If an offensive move doesn’t look advantageousshould defenses be reinforced instead?

Think does not = Chess

Economic Ethics

Markets

Miscellaneous

News

Piedmont Triad, NC

Research