Re: Pinter's speech

--- [email protected] wrote:

> > I compared it to the Peace one. It's technical
> > compared to that. 
> 
> Is it really that much easier to decide what author
> has most "benefitted all of mankind" than to decide
> what politician has most "benefitted all of
> mankind?"
> 

To chose an artist you rely on subjective factors,
such as personal taste. It's not easy. Not even for
purely scientific areas such as chemistry; how do you
value whose pioneering work is more beneficial to
mankind? I mean, the Curies and the Rutherfords come
once in a lifetime; not all winners are of the same
importance. 

But I'm certain it's easy for a commitee to reach an
understanding and find a common candidate whose work
is of very high quality, even if they don't agree that
their choice is the current #1 in his/her field. 

But for a commitee to award a peace prize? It's less
of a genuine choice and more of a current status quo
decision. The strongest guys dictate the winner. Think
about it: Henry Kissinger has won one of those for
crying out loud! :^) 

Gregory



		
___________________________________________________________ 
NEW Yahoo! Cars - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online! http://uk.cars.yahoo.com/


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/7tRolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->