On TV today, I saw a tweet, attributed if I recall to a JabJimenez:
“A little knowledge is such a fatal thing.”
Fatal to what? Or to whom? A little knowledge on the identity of a perpetrator of an unsolved crime is fatal to the perpetrator.
It also appears that the tweet was in response to another tweet, from a certain Larrazabal that “It’s a good thing, facts relating to specific cases should not be discussed in Congress” (or something to that effect).
The more sensible interpretation of the two tweets is that if we ask questions, it is fatal to the credibility of the elections.
1984 Conclusion: For there to be credible elections, please do not ask questions. Why? Because a little knowledge is such a fatal thing.
In certain other areas, the knowledge of Nobel Prize winners is indisputably known to be vast. It didn’t prevent a blow-up of a major hedge fund called LTCM, where the losses were in the billions of US dollars.
What is fatal is when the little knowledge is wrong, not when it is little. But who will decide “wrongness”? Apparently, JabJimenez suggests he or somebody he likes will do this deciding. Sounds like a violation of Due Process. But that is just my own “little knowledge.” And I’m dead.
DISCLOSURE: Given the nature of internet-based social commentary, the TV broadcast does not prove that the tweeters were James Jimenez or Gregorio Larrazabal of Comelec.