Empiricism in Matters Big and Little

Getting the facts of the matter straight before making a judgment is a really, really good idea.  Ignoring, altering, making up, or garbling the facts of the matter tends toward creating unsustainable judgments, which is another of saying you'll be wrong.

Today, Jonah Goldberg, whose ability to ignore the facts of the matter in big matters is a matter of record, also ignored them in small matters with the same result.  He watched "Top Chef" last night and is upset by

[t]he real self-indulgence seemed to come from Tom Colicchio. Basically all of his personal preferences trumped other considerations. He thinks risotto must be cooked a certain way (I actually agree with him) and that’s all we need to know. I respect his judgment but, did a dish of steamed mussels really deserve to win? According to Colicchio the dish was great because it reminded him of his childhood. Well, that’s touching. But I think Fabio was absolutely right that it wasn’t even an Italian dish.

So, he's wrong, it seemed to me.  I know that as a matter of fact, Italian risotto is soupy and I was pretty sure that fennel and mussels is an Italian dish. Because the internet is such a marvel for finding things out.  I looked and, sure enough, Italian cooks cook mussels and fennel in Italy. But wait, there's more. Anthony Bourdain writes about TC every week he describes

the aforementioned steamed mussels with white wine and fennel with garlic bread from Antonia that, at very least, got the mood and the expectations of her clients exactly right. A big, steaming bowl of properly cooked mussels, with crusty, strongly-garlicked bread. (Fabio later complained that fennel is "French." I suggest he visit Sicily.).

Eric Ripert goes further and denies the Frenchness of the dish altogether.Colicchio argues that the dish is Italian-American cooking and therefore perfectly okay. And everyone involved agrees that real risotto is soupy.

Because he got his facts wrong, his conclusion concerning Colicchio domination of the judging process is wrong. Colicchio on the judging:

When I was growing up, chicken cacciatore was one of my mother's staples. She made it every two weeks or so and she made a good one. Fabio did, too. The flavors were great. That said, Antonia's dish was simply better. So much so, in fact, that it was the unanimous choice, not just of the judges, but of every single person at the table. Everything about it came together perfectly, and it was great. Truth be told, I don't even care that much for mussels. They're OK, but I have never been a big fan. And yet, that said, I felt definitively that Antonia's dish was the best of the evening. Anyone who writes to challenge the decision clearly did not taste the dish. Not only was Antonia's dish executed beautifully, but it also captured the spirit of the challenge of evoking family at the table in a simple and unforced way.

Why would you want to be factually inaccurate?  Especially when you want to accuse some one or some group of malfeasance, surely the grasp of the facts affects the accuracy of your conclusions.