hahahahahahteeejej

Law-followers is Bindungsroman. Contract-Followers are Picaroesque

more correct to think of it as deceived by law, or deceived by contract. 

literature as monstrousity - its either one or the other. otherwise the storyline woudlnt exist

Just to quote wikipedia on cartesian dualism:

René Descartes's illustration of dualism. Inputs are passed on by the sensory organs to the epiphysis in the brain and from there to the immaterial spirit.

In philosophy of mind, dualism is the position that mental phenomena are, in some respects, non-physical,^[1] or that the mind and body are not identical.^[2]

I keep getting the vague impression you guys are in very impartial terms trying to bring sex in the whole "joy of chess".

its an epic fail.  we have trolls every day try to bring up this very subject.  at least though they do it terms that every one can understand.

...

for me, the joy of chess is something , not necessarily philosophical, but lyrical, even artistic.   I like the battle of wits and the clash of ideas.  I like that there is a win, draw and a lose.  I like that the game is simple.

perhaps I am just droll and uneducated.  I am a patzer- its my very username. it implies simple-mindedness.

she's pretty.  but SO sad.  I don't understand her relevance.  is she having deep philsophical thoughts?

Sorry, I misquoted. Obviously it wasn't the drowning man, 'cause he never gasped again.

The correct quote came from a shipwreck survivor "I sunk, before I swam"

If you can, ask the next 10 year old child what to do and they may show you the right way.

Just dont try go though with the logic that they know less.

According to the rules of logic It can be otherwise.

The OP is utter hogwash.

That said, the answer to the subject line is NO!  Just like the Tango, it takes TWO to play chess!  Ba Da Bum!

HA HA

This is the funniest thing ever.

The OP is using Freud and Kant to explain why people play chess.

literature shows the characters being deceived (as descartes said, by one's "law" (kant- added). However id like to add you don't have to be deceived by the "law" (what was thought a divine thing) but also by a "contract"

essentially there are four types of people two under contract/law and two under their self. but within these two are they ETHICALLY acting for self-interest (what kant calls self-conceit) or out of what he calls self-love.

falling from the contract/law is not enough, and often those who obey a law are better ETHICALLY than those who obey nothing but act out of vain sel-fconceit, and are thus evil.

sorry do you know what masturbation is???

It's 91 posts (to date), and still counting ?

@Whip_Kitten got it right, a bit earlier.

One should play chess if one enjoys it.

Or virgorously post in this mindless thread.

As is the wont of both the OP and @Trashy.

Yes... It's when one person spends a lot of effort to get a few seconds of triumph.

Why not have both?

Sounds like two-handed-technique.  Knock yourself out.

I'd be glad to...