Nuff said, the more interesting issue was pointed
out in NYT/IHT on Saturday - namely how the new and scrappy teams are beating the shit out of the well funded, well managed old teams. How Brawn and Toro Rosso beats the MacLarens, Williams and Ferraris.
In a way it's an image of how dramatic times changes the rules, in particular how the established and their ways that works like a dream during stable and good times then lets the heretics and sceptics win when the rules changes. And the rules are changing. Big time.
It's happening everywhere, just ask anybody at any big corporations. It's far beyond an issue of cutting costs and realigning, it's about much bigger changes. And for that we need sceptics and heretics.
Heretic - somebody holding an opinion at odds with what is generally accepted.
Sceptic - somebody inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions.
Attitudes, both two sides of the same issue, that are made for times like these. Perhaps they're even instrumental in pushing the rule changes?
But as attitudes goes, attitude comes from the heart. A sceptic reacts instinctively, a heretic has no fear of being rebuffed. Nothing you can add to your personality palette by reading the latest "10 rules to...". A sceptic child is called quarrelsome, a heretic child is a disrespectful one. Some survive the attempts to being conditioned and good is that.
And the results of being a sceptic and heretic are well... eh... results. You cannot be say a contrarian, that would lead nowhere. It's the sceptic that might choose to act in a contrarian fashion and become a heretic. That's contrarianism with meaning. And only meaning gives... eh... meaning.