@jomaje Your idiotic attempts at finding faults contribute nothing. It was clearly explained why appealing to authority is not wrong in this case. We are citing them as the source of definition. Your comprehension skills are abysmal. If you feel attacked then go cry somewhere else, you little boy.
I tried to reason with you but you seem like a school boy who lacks communication skills. From now on you will be treated like optimessed.
Chess is a mind sport.
@Patriot... Why are you even on a Chess forum debating this? Because going by much of what you saying... you appear to loathe Chess and people who play? Why must Chess player be yet again referred to as Nerd in such abusive fashion? If i remember rightly you are a Monopoly fan. Some people will consider Monopoly a Nerd activity... so you will not take offence at being named a Monopoly Nerd? Or maybe you are a casual Chess player and because you cannot get super good... anybody with a higher rating is a Nerd... anybody with similar or less rating is not? Btw... yes, classical Chess is often like watching paint dry... but rapid or blitz has great potential for a show, if they did things right. And as for popularity... only fifa has more member nation than fide? fifa being the world soccer body.
And this debate is a classic example of 24hr Fox style media nonsense. Somebody had to be right... somebody has to be wrong? We have clever people slinging mud at each other... quoting sport authorities, library of congress, one group say yea another say nay. Only reasonable conclusion from that... Chess is a sport AND a game?! A blurred area? Both side are partly right, partly wrong? Lion consider Chess a sport... because feel like a sport? But to many will feel like a game? Either way... is not worth going to war about?! Mind Game i would accept... quite a fair definition?
Btw2... If you ask most of the public to describe a Grandmaster... most would probably describe a fairly ancient, beardy type? Most GM these days are young anf hip, with a designer suit.
Lion has spoken.
Hello Timothy. I think that at Cambridge University they would call it a plaque, you know, which is the correct spelling, at least in Cambridge.
<< a group of participates>> are they almost like participants?
Defining is not spelled with a nervous tick. ...is a nation... and the punctuation after that is without authority. The apropos subject matter is mere projection = defense mechanism--Freud
<<Please allow me to lay this debate to rest finally. Chess is a sport, and I can prove it.>>
I wonder if you actually know what a proof is? First, you have to determine which propositions are needed to logically arrive at the desired conclusion as part of a process of factual and logical necessity. So then, you have to establish the irrevocable truth of each of the required propositions and then show how they interdependently demonstrate the proof. I didn't think you knew that, because according to your post, it doesn't look like you do. In fact, I'd suggest you definitely don't. So your story about Greeks, whom you claim are a nation of philosophers, was pointless.
#1
Is chess a sport?
Please allow me to lay this debate to rest finally. Chess is a sport, and I can prove it.
There is a society of people known as the Greeks they were/are philosophers. One of their better-known members can be quoted as having stated, "Man, Is the measure of all things." Before humankind, there was no beginning, and there was no end. It was saved for a divined entity. However, along came man and as the pack on the wall of the Cambridge University unequivocally states, "It becomes necessary for a scientist to speak in a universal language."That in turn, gives us wide latitude in determining the beginning and the end. And so goes the definining moment for systems of all sorts.
A sport never existed until such beginning was marked. This is true of all games. A sport does not get its start from thin air. It cannot exist contingent upon an imaginary line that is crossed when a certain amount of physical activity is exerted. That goes for sports like fishing, hunting, poker where very little physical wherewith all is required.
A sport becomes a sport when any given activity has attention paid to it coupled with the authors claim that one or a group of participates state they are better than the other. A sport makes a requisite competition.
Any activity that is observed by one or more people who 1) claim I/we can do it better 2) an audience then agrees and adopts rules that become equalizers for fair competition.
End of story.
In sum, it goes as follows; 1) activity 2) audience 3) winner.
So debate too is a sport I claim to have won!
Update: 1) Activity =
#343
The dictionary-based standard definition of sport is: "an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment". Chess is populary defined as a mental, psychological, rational planning activity. But. In the traditional account of mind, that the popular psychology has appropriated, physical activity (exertion/skill) is different from psychological activity. The metaphysical traditional definition, accepted also by the median everday people (athought they doesn´t know that they are influenced by the philosophical-scientific-religious tradition), is that mind (soul) is not identical to body or brain. The imortality doctrine of religious traditions comes from the dichtomoy beteween mind and body. But this dualsitic assumption is empirically wrong. Mind is a type of physical activity implemented by a bodily-neural activity. And also thinking moves in mind has imaginary schemes develped as abstractions of bodily movement schemes. Thinking, rational planning activity is a physical activity, although one that doesn´t involves a large set of muscle mobilization in comparison to other physical activities, like soocer, eg. Then, if physicial activity cannot be seen as a matter of the quantity of sets of muscles mobilized in an neurological-bodily effort, then chess is a physical activity. If chess is a physical activity involving specific game rules and sport is a type of physical activity (exertion/skills) involving specific game rules, then chess is a sport. Such syllogism is clear if the definitions of the terms are correct. In order to refute my argumentation, you can use three strategies: (1) rejects the standard defintion of sport and/or (2) accept the dualistic metaphysics mind/body, and/or (3) use a criteria of physical activity based on the quantity of set of muscles mobilized by neuromusuclar efforts (if a lot of muscles are mobilized, then such and such activity, with specific game rules (not any activity with large groups of muscules mobilized is sport, e.g. wash house), is a sport; to the contrary, it is not). The argument is:
(1) All thinking activity is physical activity.
(2) Chess is thinking activity.
(3) Then chess is physical activity (from 1,2)
(4) All physical activites with specific game rules are sport.
(5) Chess is a physical activity with specific game rules.
Then chess is sport (from 3, 4,5)
2) Audience= Governing authories which make activities sports USCF, FIDE, Identifiers like libraries, sports casters ESPN. Europes' television viewing audience, Twitch.
Point: It does not matter if the activity is boring to some in opinion. If watching the grass grow hit on all points of criterion it too would be a sport. The claim that a sport is too boring is an argument that equals a fallacy of authority.
3) Winner, Trophies monetary capital, cash prizes for each respective rated section USCF 1-10 place. Dear antlers above the fireplace.
Timothy Scott Puente
Hello Timothy. I think that at Cambridge University they would call it a plaque, you know, which is the correct spelling, at least in Cambridge.
<< a group of participates>> are they almost like participants?
Defining is not spelled with a nervous tick. ...is a nation... and the punctuation after that is without authority. The apropos subject matter is mere projection = defense mechanism--Freud
<<Please allow me to lay this debate to rest finally. Chess is a sport, and I can prove it.>>
I wonder if you actually know what a proof is? First, you have to determine which propositions are needed to logically arrive at the desired conclusion as part of a process of factual and logical necessity. So then, you have to establish the irrevocable truth of each of the required propositions and then show how they interdependently demonstrate the proof. I didn't think you knew that, because according to your post, it doesn't look like you do. In fact, I'd suggest you definitely don't. So your story about Greeks, whom you claim are a nation of philosophers, was pointless.
#1
Is chess a sport?
Please allow me to lay this debate to rest finally. Chess is a sport, and I can prove it.
There is a society of people known as the Greeks they were/are philosophers. One of their better-known members can be quoted as having stated, "Man, Is the measure of all things." Before humankind, there was no beginning, and there was no end. It was saved for a divined entity. However, along came man and as the pack on the wall of the Cambridge University unequivocally states, "It becomes necessary for a scientist to speak in a universal language."That in turn, gives us wide latitude in determining the beginning and the end. And so goes the definining moment for systems of all sorts.
A sport never existed until such beginning was marked. This is true of all games. A sport does not get its start from thin air. It cannot exist contingent upon an imaginary line that is crossed when a certain amount of physical activity is exerted. That goes for sports like fishing, hunting, poker where very little physical wherewith all is required.
A sport becomes a sport when any given activity has attention paid to it coupled with the authors claim that one or a group of participates state they are better than the other. A sport makes a requisite competition.
Any activity that is observed by one or more people who 1) claim I/we can do it better 2) an audience then agrees and adopts rules that become equalizers for fair competition.
End of story.
In sum, it goes as follows; 1) activity 2) audience 3) winner.
So debate too is a sport I claim to have won!
Update: 1) Activity =
#343
The dictionary-based standard definition of sport is: "an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment". Chess is populary defined as a mental, psychological, rational planning activity. But. In the traditional account of mind, that the popular psychology has appropriated, physical activity (exertion/skill) is different from psychological activity. The metaphysical traditional definition, accepted also by the median everday people (athought they doesn´t know that they are influenced by the philosophical-scientific-religious tradition), is that mind (soul) is not identical to body or brain. The imortality doctrine of religious traditions comes from the dichtomoy beteween mind and body. But this dualsitic assumption is empirically wrong. Mind is a type of physical activity implemented by a bodily-neural activity. And also thinking moves in mind has imaginary schemes develped as abstractions of bodily movement schemes. Thinking, rational planning activity is a physical activity, although one that doesn´t involves a large set of muscle mobilization in comparison to other physical activities, like soocer, eg. Then, if physicial activity cannot be seen as a matter of the quantity of sets of muscles mobilized in an neurological-bodily effort, then chess is a physical activity. If chess is a physical activity involving specific game rules and sport is a type of physical activity (exertion/skills) involving specific game rules, then chess is a sport. Such syllogism is clear if the definitions of the terms are correct. In order to refute my argumentation, you can use three strategies: (1) rejects the standard defintion of sport and/or (2) accept the dualistic metaphysics mind/body, and/or (3) use a criteria of physical activity based on the quantity of set of muscles mobilized by neuromusuclar efforts (if a lot of muscles are mobilized, then such and such activity, with specific game rules (not any activity with large groups of muscules mobilized is sport, e.g. wash house), is a sport; to the contrary, it is not). The argument is:
(1) All thinking activity is physical activity.
(2) Chess is thinking activity.
(3) Then chess is physical activity (from 1,2)
(4) All physical activites with specific game rules are sport.
(5) Chess is a physical activity with specific game rules.
Then chess is sport (from 3, 4,5)
2) Audience= Governing authories which make activities sports USCF, FIDE, Identifiers like libraries, sports casters ESPN. Europes' television viewing audience, Twitch.
Point: It does not matter if the activity is boring to some in opinion. If watching the grass grow hit on all points of criterion it too would be a sport. The claim that a sport is too boring is an argument that equals a fallacy of authority.
3) Winner, Trophies monetary capital, cash prizes for each respective rated section USCF 1-10 place. Dear antlers above the fireplace.
Timothy Scott Puente
What part is yours Timmy?
I'm not going through the references to compare and my memory ain't what it was twenty years ago.
Yes, chess is a mind sport
@Patriot... Why are you even on a Chess forum debating this? Because going by much of what you saying... you appear to loathe Chess and people who play? Why must Chess player be yet again referred to as Nerd in such abusive fashion? If i remember rightly you are a Monopoly fan. Some people will consider Monopoly a Nerd activity... so you will not take offence at being named a Monopoly Nerd? Or maybe you are a casual Chess player and because you cannot get super good... anybody with a higher rating is a Nerd... anybody with similar or less rating is not? Btw... yes, classical Chess is often like watching paint dry... but rapid or blitz has great potential for a show, if they did things right. And as for popularity... only fifa has more member nation than fide? fifa being the world soccer body.
And this debate is a classic example of 24hr Fox style media nonsense. Somebody had to be right... somebody has to be wrong? We have clever people slinging mud at each other... quoting sport authorities, library of congress, one group say yea another say nay. Only reasonable conclusion from that... Chess is a sport AND a game?! A blurred area? Both side are partly right, partly wrong? Lion consider Chess a sport... because feel like a sport? But to many will feel like a game? Either way... is not worth going to war about?! Mind Game i would accept... quite a fair definition?
Btw2... If you ask most of the public to describe a Grandmaster... most would probably describe a fairly ancient, beardy type? Most GM these days are young anf hip, with a designer suit.
Lion has spoken.
You leave her alone. I'm hoping to marry her and if my wife throws me out, I'll ask her. I like clever people and she's clever.
Chess is just a lifeless piece of wood. Wood moving around wood. So DEAD woox
Chess is a competition.
Sports are a competition.
Chess is a sport.
One of the worst syllogisms I've ever seen. Almost bad enough to send me to the dark side.
Head on over to the dark side, I hear they have cookies.
<<<<Hello Timothy. I think that at Cambridge University they would call it a plaque, you know, which is the correct spelling, at least in Cambridge.
<< a group of participates>> are they almost like participants?
I wonder if you actually know what a proof is? First, you have to determine which propositions are needed to logically arrive at the desired conclusion as part of a process of factual and logical necessity. So then, you have to establish the irrevocable truth of each of the required propositions and then show how they interdependently demonstrate the proof. I didn't think you knew that, because according to your post, it doesn't look like you do. In fact, I'd suggest you definitely don't. So your story about Greeks, whom you claim are a nation of philosophers, was pointless.>>>>>
What part is yours Timmy?
I'm not going through the references to compare and my memory ain't what it was twenty years ago.
Well, those bits were mine. Faced with claims that something had been proven, I thought I'd better do a quick, off the top of my head description of what a proof actually is. Hope you like it. I did unfollow this thread because I felt that some of the proponents of the "chess is a sport" side of things don't know how to debate and were relying on personal attacks and innuendo. I thought I'd check in and see if anything had improved but, apparently, confusion reigneth.
Very good. But this goes back to my earlier point about how common something is. Just as you said one source said chess is a sport, dozens say it isn't.
Chess is an affiliate member, or fully recognized by, National Olympic Committees in 117 countries, and chess as a sport is recognized in 107 countries. These numbers are constantly being revised upwards
Three fallacies in both of you:
You both are using (1) the appeal to authority (argumentum ad verecundiam), (2) appeal to the majority opinion (argumentum ad populum) and (3) wrong inference (non sequitur).>>
No, now that is incorrect. The "chess is a sport" side was certainly doing those things. All Patriotgames was doing was demonstrating what they are doing.
Incidentally, "appeal to authority" isn't a fallacy if the authority is a genuine one. However, too often, all it means is "someone whom I respect says you are wrong, therefore you are wrong" which is obviously a logical fallacy. It really should mean "someone who I claim knows better than either of us says x and therefore I propose that it is reasonable to hold that x may be true, if my claims about them are correct."
Appeal to the majority really just brings in common usage, which always must be at least considered regarding definitions.
I'm always sceptical of people claiming "non sequitur" because, very often on social media, logical steps are simplified and readers are not knowledgeable or focussed enough to determine whether something followed or not.
Finally, bringing assumptions about how Einstein may or may not have thought is little different from doing the same with Hitler. I'm not a great fan of either Einstein or Hitler but they both have their followers.
I am receiving a blank board w/ no pieces. How do I report this to the ChessTempo developer? Note: I never had this problem on the iPhone.
But wait... by that definition stuff like backgammon, checker, domino and scrabble must be considered sport also? But those are game surely?! And what about the phrase Olympic Games? Not sport but games?
There is a thin line distinguishing something from being a leisure activity or a sport.Most important criteria is the spectators/fans.This is generally derived from the popularity of the activity. The games you mentioned do not make the cut according to major sports bodies. Chess and some other sports which are not predominantly physical are included given their rich history and popularity.
As Optimissed pointed out, TV quiz shows are sports now? Certainly FAR more popular and more spectators than chess. How many people watched the recent Jeopardy winner vs. how many people watched the US national chess championship? Or even world championship. It's probably not a good idea to bring up spectators as a requirement for sport. Watching chess is like watching paint dry, which is why so few people watch it.
There is a minimum threshold to be met for one criteria. Popularity is just one among many criteria for something to be a sport.
OK, what's the minimum threshold? You said the "most important criteria is the spectators/fans" If the most important criteria has the least amount going for it, isn't that a pretty big problem?
I think that if at least three spectators and a slightly blind duck watch an activity and there's a winner within a month, it was a sport. They've completely converted me. I cannot argue against them.
A good example of sport is therefore snail-hopping. Badger-baiting is giving up ground almost universally to the knife-edge, critical sport of getting snails to hop over small particles of dust. Kingdoms are being gambled recklessly and won and lost. Wives and children are heading for the workhouse due to the new craze of betting on snail-hopping. It's the betting itself that's the sport since spectators just love to see the domestic calamities unfolding as sporting men bet their entire next year's salary on the rising phenomenon of snail-hopping.
I am receiving a blank board w/ no pieces. How do I report this to the ChessTempo developer? Note: I never had this problem on the iPhone.
I think this is the wrong thread but I would suggest pressing the back button or refresh. It happens on my laptop quite a bit. I just press "back" and try again.
Lion has spoken.
it's better if you don't.