Does chess develop "critical thinking" etc. (away from the board)?

He thinks highly of himself because he believes logic is very useful?

he thinks highly of himself because he is delusional and unaware that he sounds border line mentally challenged.

If you can come up with a non-circular way of justifying that, I might just agree with you :)

you must be drinking tonight, because usually your a lot more confrontational!

Yes it does, for me it when I play blitz and when I'm away from the board I have faster reaction times and when something falls I'm able to move fast. That's what I've noticed!

maybe you're really just keanu from the matrix

I never saw chess as moving a bunch of pieces. It is a very complicated game and there is a lot of thought process involved. But in the end it is all its own kind of logic that does not apply to other disciplines. You "can" learn flexibility, goal setting, or critical thinking from walking down the stairs. Doesn't mean it happens very well. In the end, chess is its own game of rules in its own little world, and having certain processes in chess hardly translates to anything off the board.

You can teach a kid to look at a chess position, slow down, carefully analyze, balance choices, etc... that does not mean they are learning to do those things for real world situations. It is completely different. Once they leave the chess board, they haven't learned anything.

It's unfortunate you are letting your logic prevent you from seeing good personal growth potential.

I never said chess can't contribute to personal growth. Chess can be great all by itself, rather than having to justify it with nonsense like "it teaches the students how to make real life decisions and how to think critically about situations."

Ok, but there are probably a few mostly useless yet standard activities at schools anyway.  Chess isn't so bad in comparison.

Hey, I won't disagree with that. A lot of school is useless. I say that as someone who works in schools.

Any subject being justified in a bogus way tends to grind my gears. Not just chess. In fact, the arts in schools are often justified by their "raising math scores" or "development of critical thinking skills." Kinda the same misguided problem there.

Honestly I don't see the problem with taking the general characteristics of something and applying it.

Just logically here, let's ask ourselves how do we get better at x. Well, by getting experience doing x. Ok, and if y activity involves doing x, you are doing x, and you are getting better at x. It's really not convoluted -- if you can find problems with this ok, but as for now it makes for quite a reasonable argument.

You said things like well by that logic monopoly is good for us. Well, monopoly is a pretty simple game -- you're not going to be doing anything special -- that would not be a case of "y activity involves doing x" as alluded to above. In the case of chess though, it's totally different.

"Any subject being justified in a bogus way tends to grind my gears."

I agree. But there are good and bad ways to use any type of argument.

Chess reasoning includes evaluation of pieces and move orders. Chess reasoning does not build general reasoning, it builds chess reasoning. Making choices in chess builds making choices in chess, not making choices in general. You are working in a specific language of reasoning that does not really apply elsewhere, so we are not just taking x and transfering it to y activity.

Just the act of applying that particular system of info in front of you is doing logic, doctor -- it doesn't matter what system. I can get experience eating apples regardless of which particular one I choose to eat. Or maybe a better way to put it -- I can get experience of eating regardless of what food I choose to eat.

I think he has a point that it's not so easily applicable to life.  Chess is very controlled and limited so far reaching plans and logic make a lot of sense.  Life is ridiculously more dynamic.  For example choices involving yourself also require emotional management / maturity.  And some motivations are very difficult to understand even for adults.  e.g. I procrastinate or do drugs or can't maintain relationships with the opposite sex.  It's not obvious how to go about solving these things because often we don't understand why they're difficulties for us in the first place.

In chess it's as simple as "don't do that again."

Eh, but this is where I'd disagree.  Logic is logic.  And although I still believe it's more hidden in chess than in other areas, using logic in chess does exercise that sort of reasoning... as above I don't think it's immediately applicable to life situations, but it's not some kind of esoteric, isolated logic you can't use anywhere else.

From what I understand, you are saying that using logic in chess is tuning the act of being logical, and it becomes easier to be logical in other areas. I do not think that's what it is really like, however.

Post #56: I'm not saying chess is all there is to life. It's not going to solve all of your problems. But yes it, more so than less intellectual activities, will build general (though specifically intellectual) skills. You could have built them without chess sure -- but chess is a legitimate means to that end.

Does chess develop critical thinking or do people who enjoy critical thinking also enjoy chess?

This may simply be a modified chicken and egg question.

This does not mean the question does not deserve further study.  Here is a  possible experiment design.  At the start of a period of chess study with novice players, test logic skills unrelated to chess.  Test again at the end of x number of weeks.  Test a control group as taking a second logic test may simply improve results.  Predict and repeat.