i spend my time searching for a draw. currently i have a 34% draw profile. sometimes i have to take a win when the draw is refused. i like to play chess for the fun of it and try not "to make it hard work". never expect to get over 1199 for i lack the ambition to want to "win alot". let those who have true talent or who have the ability to think well in geometeric fashion or who just have really great memories "work hard" and the titles and awards they then earn for their effort are deserved. not everyone needs to save the world. for some it is enough to have a nice dog or a nice checkmate once in a while.
Chess just make you selfish and reduce your empathy?
i contribute to society with my games and other kind of art like music compositions, philosophy, my blog filosoraptorxxi.blogspot.com ...
Everything free to download. My nature is misanthrope after to see how our specie trade with animals believing that it is a necessary evil for ignorance.
You are wrong if you think the only reason why you study chess is because of satisfy ego . I enjoy studying chess endings, i have not a good memory to remember then in games but i like it. Also i study chess to improve my skills, ¿ why? ¿ only for ego? Well , it´s possible, if i play a game like chess or even poker, i like to understand the game more and more to be competitive, it´s bored always lose with masters, is more entertaining when you can do a piece of art in the board .
Research medication? no thank you, i´m allergic to the pharmafia. They also make a lot of experiments with animals . But Ok, there are many alternative medicines to study if you have the vocation.
Nobel Prize? you must be kidding , they are rigged because of political causes . Anyway, if you win a nobel prize you need to have a big ego!! to collect that farce.

Nobel Prize? you must be kidding , they are rigged because of political causes . Anyway, if you win a nobel prize you need to have a big ego!! to collect that farce.
I just referred to nobel or medication as an example of award or activities that generally given to people with high achievement for society. We can replace nobel or medication with any kind of activities that have real value for society. My point focus on what if chess players use their long time study of chess to study other subjects that have practical value in real life, such as IT, medication or whatever.
But ya, i got your point. I agree that there are a few chess players that can restrict their time for chess and they have other non-chess activities in their life that probably useful for society as well. I also agree that chess can be used as a tool to train our creativity.
However, not all players have the same condition. Most of professional chess players dont have other job, beside chess. And in one interview, Kasparov stated that he viewed chess as a battle between two people. So he implied that he didnt focus too much on artistic value of chess and more viewed it as a war. Generally, war always involves ego.

Hey let's play a game. It's called 'sock puppet or previously banned user'. And for the bonus round name the user.

Hey let's play a game. It's called 'sock puppet or previously banned user'. And for the bonus round name the user.
I don't really know why you're thinking that this is a troll thread. It raises a pretty interesting point. If you're feeling defensive then... I guess get over it?
To answer the original post, I think that Eric makes some plausible points but in the end, they're pretty negligible. It's probably true that chess wastes time that could be used more productively, like volunteering or research. But really, the percent of chess players in the population is so small the overall loss to society is practically non-existant. Instead of eliminating chess, there's a lot of other things (like raising people out of poverty) that would do a lot more good for society regarding scientific and artistic productivity.
And I don't think chess players are any more egotistical than non-chess players. People play chess because it's fun and because they're good at it. Similar to how people don't play football to satisfy their need for inflicting physical violence.

From one Erik to another, I think you are right about the empathy thing, man. Having travelled the globe looking for spectacular chess games to play, it has saddened me to see how many opponents want a fight after they lose.

Sorry for scaring you man, but I'm seeing how difficult it is to be an empathic and a chessie at the same time.

I play to enjoy.
However, I don't find anything wrong in playing to win. It is too much saying that it is ego satisfaction!

All true
Who was it that said
outside of an advertising agency chess is the biggest waste of intellectual effort on Earth
Still play it though

Grandmasters who are selfish or lack empathy bring those qualities to chess, not the other way around
Interesting point , ya probably GMs can be selfish or have lack of empathy but they just focus this behavior around chess, and not spread it to others (so, if the selfish assumption is true, the impact is restricted around chess community and not harmful to oher communities).

And I don't think chess players are any more egotistical than non-chess players. People play chess because it's fun and because they're good at it. Similar to how people don't play football to satisfy their need for inflicting physical violence.
I know we cant be judgmental, and in the end, its all really vary among chess players, depends on their personal attitude, how they raised, their environment, and their personal viewpoint to chess. So indeed, its possible to meet some chess players with easy-going personality and sociable.
But sometimes in real life, we cant ignore the fact that we see some players act immature (as erik-the viking has seen too). These kind of chess players relate their self pride with how many wins they've got and neglect other aspect in chess such as art, creativity, etc.

The accusation that chess is a fetish/obsession/waste-of-time because it distracts us from more beneficial activities (like curing disease, saving the enironment, etc) could be directed towards any recreational activity like watching movies, playing tennis, watching a soccer game, having a drink with a friend, etc.
Clearly the issue is not chess itself, but instead obsessive tendencies in general. Chess has healthy benefits if practiced in moderation. Everything is bad for you if done in excess, obsessively.
We humans need some rest and recreation once in a while. Life is hard enough. We need not feel guilty about goofing off sometimes, enjoying some light-hearted fun.
Most of chess players spend their time in hard training, in order to sharpen their skill in almost every aspect of this game (tactical, positional, ending, etc). It seems the time that required to hone their skill is always unlimited, and the more they study, the more they realize that they are still weak in some area, and more time will be dedicated, and so on.
But whats the point of all of this about? After all the hard work, the main intention just to satisfy their (or our) ego, to feel superior toward their opponent after crush the opponents' defence. In that case, doesnt chess only make us become selfish and reduce our empathy to others?
Imagine if the plenty of time to study chess is being used for other useful study (for society), such as dedicated their time to do serious research about medication. Perhaps these chess players with their high level of intelligence can contribute better to society or win a nobel prize, instead of waste their time to think about crush the opponent and satisfy their ego solely.
What do you think?