Can you be a dumb person and still be good at chess?

I consider good to be master and above. I do not really believe a dumb person could reach this level because good chess requires rational, logical decision making, something a stupid person is unlikely to be capable of.

This sounds quite right: but only if you call your alter ego "bobby fischer" for some sick reason, all while looking in the mirror. Kids these days...

Fischer displayed a striking lack of rational, logical decison making in his life outside of chess.

Eccentricity and madness have long been associated with genius level intelligence.

Being bat-shit crazy late in life doesn't mean Fischer was stupid. When combined with his complete domination of chess, if anything, his behavior is proof of his intellect.

If you went to an elite tournament to have some conversations with grandmasters about non-chess topics, you might end up with a more realistic view of grandmasters.

At least though you probably won't find them trying to look intelligent by having year- long numbnut arguments about evolution and global warming, for example like on chess.com.

The gg and "knights v bishops" or "how to use the king in the opening" threads are usually good though.

Except for the fact that he was racist, anti-semitic, and a member of a cult-like radical religious group. Not exactly the epitome of intelligence. Sure geniuses often have outlier personalities due to an outlier intellect, but Fischer's beliefs were extremely illogical, and you can't be an illogical genius.

Been on this site for ~5 years.

Seen maybe one or two topics on global warming and evolution.

Not that it matters. Such topics don't even scratch the surface.

gg vs not gg

bishop vs knight

Kasparov vs Morphy vs Fischer vs Carlsen

Invented openings

Stalemate / 3-fold repetition / en passant are unfair or cheating

ARB system

The list goes on.

Of course you can. People do it all the time. You give too much credit to the human intellect / have a simplistic view of what intelligence is.

To say that a person can be an illogical genius is like saying it's possible to be a stupid genius. Both are just oxymorons.

Colloquially, the words genius, intelligent, and logical are synonyms, and words like illogical, stupid, and idiot are synonyms.

These lazy definitions aren't interesting to me.

Is a genius a genius in every respect or in a few select ways ?

I can't.

I don't use lazy or colloquial definitions. Genius doesn't have an exact definition, but I believe the dictionary definitions of "logical" and "illogical" make it impossible to be an "illogical genius." 

I don't know about all that. Having been to a major Salvador Dali exhibition, some ten years ago, I'd be happy to label him an "illogical genius".

Yes because what dumb people lack in cognitive thought, they can figure out with patterns and just by watching certain moves in certain places and sometimes their creativity can be very close to practical and win even against really intelligent people, sometimes less is more and instinct can sometimes trump logic.

Honestly the smartest person that will ever live will be a dumb person.

(It's a riddle by the way.) (It's to do with being humble and how you understand life.)

Well, you can be dumb in a particular subject and be savant in another. Take this for example, I am good at math, but bad in literature.

But in your question says "Can you be a dumb person and still be good at chess? I will have to say no, because if you are dumb entirely as a person, then you can not be good at any subject, skill, or craft.

Ah but this is a mistake. Just because a person is guided more by emotion (which is the opposite of logic) than logic doesn't necessarily mean the person is illogical. Similarly a person who is intensely logical in his thoughts and actions is not necessarily unemotional.

Intelligence is a variety of traits including personality, executive functions, moral capacity, and what not. Someone with a higher IQ has an easier time doing calculation, pattern recognition, memorization, and problem solving in chess than someone with a lower IQ, that being said, the amount of work invested in the game is what will dictate for the major part the outcome of the player at hand. This includes the amount of money invested (resource), and amount of time and effort into practising and playing, the way you play (qualitative differences in mindset and also in the way you work), and what not. Chess players with greater insight and greater ability are those invested in the game and they want it to be their life, a principle the applies to not only chess but life as well. A personal note: this can lead to idolatrous living however if people do not prioritize things properly, neglecting the rest of who they are like character, faith/spirituality, and the God-given pleasures of this life (smelling the roses and just laughing).

Another point to contemplate related to the earlier; intelligence plays a role in everything since we are cognitive creatures, but simultaneously well directed hard work pays off no matter what you do. Since intelligence is a broad category, it only makes sense that the categories that are correlated with chess in terms of mental activity are the ones that are relevant when it comes to gameplay and performance. So perhaps you may not be skilled or adept verbally, but you have better abilities when it comes to solving problems or riddles. Conversely, you may lack the problem-solving skills that are found in chess, and to recompense for that you will have to work harder and with more skill. Unless you have an impairment, you should be fine, but even then, the power of faith in God and the drive to succeed can take you a long way.

I actually know a guy who is retarded and a chess master. It's unlikely, but possible. Even people who learn very slowly can learn enough to become a master if they keep at it long enough.