I like your comment about the eye of beholder. It captures the obstacle I find when trying to form a complete argument why, say, studying chess is a pursuit inf

I like your comment about the eye of beholder. It captures the obstacle I find when trying to form a complete argument why, say, studying chess is a pursuit inferior to studying information theory. Adjusting it closer to your comment, can we say that a chess genius is better than an information theory genius? Counter arguments would question the way I'm using "better".