W

Yeah, it does. This is a chess WEBSITE. I'm pretty sure it is real, judging by the fact I play it all the time. Last comment says it has not been proven, what more proof do you need than we play it and chat on a website about it and all? I don't see how it does not exist. That's like going onto YouTube and saying videos are not real.

That would indicate my age, if I existed.

(way way back to #4)....does chess as a thing in itself exist??

As a thing ?....no. 'Cuz you can play it without a board & even teach it w/out a board too !

Here, I feel I chase the dragon tail (I'm that dragon !) and get back to, "Does my brain exist ?"

Homer's physician "thinks" his does....

*awkward silence*

"awkward thread"

and why should it be awkward?? because all you people are brainwashed that you exist in fact nothing exists. 

You opened the gate to ad hominem with your "The power of awesome..."

I'm not sure by what mechanism you can know what will or will not knock me off of my feet (other than being hit by a bus or raging bull etc.).

This thread has more hot air than the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta.

So if chess does not exist, does that mean that the present and former world champions, who devoted themselves to chess, do not or have not existed? And what about the money they make? Is that simply worth less than Monopoly money? If none of these exist, then each time I play chess I enter a black hole... :-D

Its a simple proof by contradiction assume something is not true. only when proving it true it becomes true.

So assume chess doesn't exist. if chess doesn't exist, and chess is in the space of the world, then the space of the world must not exist (here you can argue blah blah blah perhaps the circumference exists but not the area inside blah blah blah) but assume this premisse is valid. If the space of the world doesn't exist then my statement 'chess doesn't exist' doesn't exist and is empty. clearly my words are not empty (again BIG debate) then chess must exist.

However, i say let's negatively demonstrate it the other way - assume chess exists. If chess exists then to judge it exists means something else must not exist. but if it doesnt exist i cannot state that it doesnt exist. but surely i must state if something doesnt exist. therefore my thesis, my assumption is refuted and therefore chess doesn't exist.

So what can one really say? nothing. 

All the world's a stage, all the men and women merely players, they have their entrances and their exits........

chess neither exists nor doesnt exist. it is what it is

Is this your first visit to an internet forum?

It's a flatulance competition in which the contest is quite fierce.The thread is now well over 200 posts with no clear winner;there are at least a dozen competitors in the lead pack,setting the pace,but as yet there is no clear favorite. Anticipation is keen, the crowd expects a thrilling and closely fought contest.Cotton McKnight and Pepper Brooks will be calling the play-by-play,here on ESPN 8,the Ocho.

is it that simple ?....I mean, is it a toggle switch ? Or could it be a dimmer switch ?

....and is that a hot pink elephant w/ a trunk on the left ?....or am I just seeing things ? 

1. Is there a third way between existence and non-existence?
2. If it is, it exists.

there is a third, the indivisible third that divides existence and non-existence. it is the truth, the poetic word. yes only it exists what we clal existence and non-existence both dont exist. if we call it something it must not exist as i proved before. what we cant express in words exists

Chess is 99 % tactics...Chess Discussion is 99 % semantics....

Guys, what are ye smoking ? this thread is like ... far out man.