The Art of Being Right

O.K. First things first. I’m only going to gloat for a minute. I was right. No doubt about it.

I told you that I thought Todd would be named the starting quarterback, many of you sent me messages of disagreement, saying it would Burns or Caudle. In fact, most comments were that it would be Burns. But...I was right. Todd was named the starting quarterback for Auburn. (This is the part where I beat on my chest a little, with a wiley grin, and say "told you so!").

Which for some strange reason reminds me of a philosopher I once studied while in college.

His name was Arthur Schopenhauer. In 1831, he wrote a short treatise entitled “Die Kunst, Recht zu Behalten”. “The Art of Being Right”.

Maybe you are married to someone who practices this philosophy. I don’t know…I’m just saying.

I don’t remember all 38 methods it states can be used to show that you are right, but I remember a few. Let’s see….

Generalize the other person’s specific statements
Yield admissions through questions
Choose metaphors favorable to your propositions
Find one instance to the contrary
Exaggerate your statements
Interrupt, Break and Divert the dispute

Seems like Arthur was trying to teach us how to lie.

But that wasn’t the purpose of his treatise. The purpose was to teach one to debate…Particularly to debate legal issues.

Which brings me to Delaware’s Democratic Governor, Jack Markell. It seems Governor Markell, in an effort to increase his state’s coffers, has proposed legalizing single-game and parlay wagering on sports to help erase their budgets deficit.

Boy, has this ticked off the major sports agencies.

The NFL, NBA, NHL, Major League Baseball and the NCAA putting up strong objections, and have joined forces to legally battle the little state of Delaware on this issue. (I couldn’t find where Ultimate Fighting or World Championship Wrestling gave any sort of objection, or even cared).

Nevertheless, the legal debate has begun, and the joint sports associations have started their media blitz trying to show that widespread legalized gambling would threaten the integrity of their sports by creating incentives for cheating and game-fixing.

In May, Delaware’s Supreme Court ruled that this “sports betting plan” did not violate the state’s constitution “as long as chance is the predominate factor in winning or losing.”

The case is now before the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia, where both sides will get their opportunity to legally debate the issue. There are very strong opinions on both sides of the aisle.

Who will win the debate? I don’t know…..Ask Arthur Schopenhauer.

Now as for who’s right…well…that's another question.

WJLaneSR