Chess and logical thinking?

I like my nemeses to have arms.

lol

It is actually "Owl Woman".  Appropriate, seeing as how her womb is anatomically perfect for reproduction(reproducing half breed owl/human freaks).


she even has an action figure!

I would say this image(below) is more appropriate for an avatar.
  Showing off, and displaying(accenting) a perfect child bearing womb is almost as vital to one's alpha status as a man letting others be aware of his dominant jaw line.

Can you see how Spades jaw line is only 'really' outshadowed by the soldier's beret, and U.S. flag.  I mean, you take all that away, and the soldier would basically look like a girl.

I do think so. There is a lot of logic once you get to the 2000+ level. 

What about intuition?

is this a troll post?

idk. in any case just buy a manual of logic, study logic and see what is suitable for a confrontation.

My guess it's that a lot of people use his chess achievements as a way to show their prowess no more no less then if their **** was a centimeter longer.

Totally disagree Cats. Not many chess players are inclined to study logic or even if it's in their background, it virtually has no part in their play. I truly believe chess is outside of logical thinking. Positional & tactical prowess neither contributes nor confirms logical thinking.

I say, Merry Christmas & Happy New Year.

Let's not twist this conversation towards sexual innuendo.

Batgirl notwithstanding...logic is what it is. Chess is neither logical or a set of predescribed rules.

Ego does play a lot into competition but using chess as an show of strength in character or as the.person in real life?

Nonsense.

Heh.

I would think, if you're a creative person, chess is an great outlet.

It goes without saying, if you're a "logical" thinking person...Chess is a natural fit. A hobby to exercise such assumes notion.

Creativity is by very nature subjective in chess because most imaginative combinations or ideas hardly ever becomes realised OTB/actual play.

Hmm. Duly noted. But again, to clear, I really don't think chess promotes creativity or logical thinking.

Unless you're composing Endgame study or Sacrificial Tactical puzzles. Or a chess author. Designing chess book covers. Work for Parker Bros. Creating Sudoku puzzles.

As I inferred, creative people like playing chess and not the other way around mind you.

8)

3 posts later you wrote:
> "It goes without saying, if you're a "logical" thinking person...Chess is a natural fit."

so it's either that logic and chess are related on that they're unrelated... funny enough this is a matter of logic 

anyway I think you misunderstood most if not all of my post. As far I can tell it's more likely we agree more then it seem.

just take my post and change the word logic, let's say, with the word literature... now does chess improve your literature? well it doese or it does not in measure it is related to literature... how do you know how (how much) is related to literature? is there any universal way ti decude how it's related or it may goes down to personal opinion too? I guess the easiest way to solve the problem it's to study literature (not because I mean you/anyone is an ignorantm it's  just because if you want to talk about somenthing you need to have the knowledge of it, if you're already had a good knowledge of the subject well... no need to buy a manual quite obvious... ), once you have the knowledge of both of the matters you can decide what elements are suitable to be taken in account for making a comparison. Now you can replace back the word literature with logic.

Now I'm going to change my clothes and turn my self into captain obvious... I don't think that logic as you study in a manual it's much related to chess, on the other hand if I have to make a comparison I would say that maths and/or logic are closer to chess than literature...

[/superhero mode off] 

 now let's try to get a little more on topic, I wote wikipedia here:

>"However, agreement on what logic is has remained elusive," 

I'd Like to refer here to logic here as Inference, and I like to refer to proposition only. This is my arbitrary choice but a choice has to be made because we can't all refer to logic using the same word with different meanings.

So finally my guess it's that you may try to compare logic and chess when it comes down to general principles and when it comes down to very forced lines. (obviously similarity or points of contact doesn't end or start here but there are much more grey zones in the other parts so well defined topics are easy to compare).

About general principles you may think you're going to play chess for the first time, and as for a new problem/new game you try to figure out what is (are)  the best strategy in order to achieve positive results. I guess Nimzowitsch it's a good example of what I mean here. You look at the chess board by his geometrical form: it's square there are diagonals with ddifferent lenghts, row and columns, there are few squares which are generally closer to all the other squares called center. Now you can start to figure out knights are short ranged unit so they will be more effective on the center, Bishops will be more effective on long diagonals, more likely controlling the center will give you a good drip on what is going on intho the whole board and so on...  this way of thinking or inference has  patterns which are similar to the patterns to solve other games/problems so once you've recognized this patterns you may be able to use them into the future and I guess we can say this can be counted as improving you logical skills. in the end although we're referring to strategical problems Logic here seems to be working the same way tactics work in chess you recognize familiar patterns and then you apply them. (obviously again recognizing patterns is not everything to solve tactics in chess and the same goes for logic...)

Second calculating forced lines (tecincally speaking all the chess is more or like a forced line, let's say it's just annoying to calculate all the lines. tablebases of 16 pieces... so I refer here to forced mates of 2 or 3 moves. why? to keep it simple.) Let's say we're trying to find a forced mate, so we strat to think if I check here the kings go there or there, it's an inclusive disjunction, so at least conceptually trying to calculate forced lines somehow isn't really so far from calculating proposiotions. Assuming that training your calculation in chess is in someway similar to calculate proposition in logic my guess is that there will be some kind (of maybe low) correlation between your skills of raw calculation in propositional logic and chess lines.

this is just to say that I wasn't trolling...

you also wrote later:

>"Ego does play a lot into competition but using chess as an show of strength in character or as the.person in real life?

Nonsense."

funny enough it's exactly my point but I'm not graphoman enough to write that much as before to answer to this too...

I wuote it again:
>Batgirl notwithstanding...logic is what it is. Chess is neither logical or a set of predescribed rules." 

I was looking for a wittgenstein quote (this one To obey a rule, to make a report, to give an order, to play a game of chess, are customs (uses, institutions)) and I found that someone wrote a blog here... 

http://www.chess.com/blog/anaxagoras/wittgenstein-on-chess

I think this somehow may explain better few of things I meant here... 

P.S.: about sexual's innuendo, I'm usually a polite person, I've spent more time about that part of the post rathen than all the rest, it wasn't a very long post though, so I did intentionally, I won't explain it either now, but I had my reason, peraphs yopu seem to have understood the whole opposite of what I meant so maybe now you can read that part under a different light too.
Merry Xmas and be happy. 

Cats. First off. I apologize for misunderstanding the first part of your brief post. Maybe, yeah, we do agree logic plays no part in Chess. I guess, the second part of it was what encouraged me to disagree.

Your sarcastic observation is what spurred my ego remark although it wasn't directed at you. Nor my other subsequent posts (directed towards yourone biased post).

But your remarks about my observations, that "logical" thinking people play Chess as a natural fit is "logical" thinking, offends me. My observation was simply stereo-typical as I believe that generally people tend to think Chess is a "logical" game. Which I have stated several posts before our confrontation as false. Nonsense.

I don't like your condescending tone, to be honest, as your post (which is in question) neither reflects your true position on the topic but players using their achievements as "________".

For you to come back with soo much fluff really offends me because you'd stated we have more in common initially.

Technically, there is a Chess Logic, as pertains to chess but the OP is stating Chess & Logic go together. Some have commented that chess promotes logical thinking. I have said, "may".

What I have commented on is the perceived notion that logical thinkers gravitate toward the game simply because they think Chess is a Logical game.

Creative people like the game because it involves using strategy, pieces to achieve a goal but in my opinion, it does not promote Creative thinking.

It maybe Logical thinking on my part.

It's just Common sense to me.

Merry Christmas.

8)

oh my gosh! seriously I didn't meant to offend you. I haven't read the whole thread but only the first post, you quoted me and answered to my post so I've replyed reading only your last posts. peraphs I've realized only now that batgirl is another user... I thought you started your sentence with some kind of urban slang, and I was even wondering what you meant with "batgirl notwithstanding" I thought you were somehow mocking at me lol

I'm sorry about my condiscent tone but it's Xmas here and I have to be good, peraphs I'm not really thrilled about starting a quarrel , I'm usually polite so, although I'm ignostic, try to be nice and let me go unscated at least it should be  Xmas also for me if we can decide what does it mean 

about what I've wrote, I try to make it very short for the most I do refer to logical positivism. so what? well they said that if you want to speak about somenthing then you need to fix  the meaning of the subject before otherwise you may find your self running in circles...

so in my first post I simply meant that if you really want to make a comparison with chess and logic then you need to fix what you mean with "logic". 

in my second post I assumed that we were more or less thinking the same:

- chess and logic are not "so much related"

- chess and logic are slightly related as the common sense agree. 

> For you to come back with soo much fluff really offends me because you'd stated we have more in common initially.

eh!? what? offended by the fluff? Cats are fluffy. aren't they? (no, sphynx doesn't count) you can't really say you couldn't expect that. perahs cats are lazy need to sleep up to 16 hours per day.

about my sarcastic yet not so much sarcastic second part. I will give you an hint, the way I choosed to state it it's still related to the philosophy of language: you can paraphrase bad language but the communication won't be equivalent. Explaining clealry will take another long post and I don't feel like it...peraphs I was slightly OT with that.

P.S.: by the way (I've read only the first post...) the OP wrote

>Does chess really makes your logical thinking and reasoning better?

which is not a statement.

P.P.S.: I really loved my first post it was only 5 lines. :'(

Heh. Duly noted. Although, I can ease your mind in that respect in not wanting you to clarify further as it is. Philosophy of language, connotation, especially the symbolism are definitively lucid in the second part of the five lines. You'd stated your opinion and ergo...adding onto it seems painfully redundant (and probably more fluffy anyways) No thank you.

Stay merry!

8)

its all depend on how u play and practice for ex in unknown dynamic position how u move .how much move u calculate ahead. basically how much u are pushing ur mind. everything in life can enhance human abilities just do things in totality