People who don't have any problems don't have a clue what is actually happening around them
Talent...or devotion? A discussion of whether genius is made, or born.
Sort:
I was waiting for a resurrection of this. In spite of the long lineage of these topics, the debate has never been settled. I'm glad this one will be different.
CharlesConrad wrote:
Is it better to have talent of devotion?
In that talent section I would place Morphy, recalling the beginnings of Morphy he watched his dad and uncle play then picked up on the manuevers, even telling the loser how they could have won. Played as a kid and young adult but I haven't heard about him endlessly studying.
Fischer; I recall his tale is a sort of obsessed devotion to Chess. He studied, studied, studied.
Is it better to have the obsession, or the talent? Obsession can create the talent. I also recall both players fell out of a liking of Chess.
And how would this all come together with the Polgar sisters, taught and trained at a very early age for Chess skill?
maybe the end of their lives explains why neither really counts.....balance of your hummanity brings satisfaction
-----true u may not be a great chess player but u may find peace w/ your life.
Talent is one thing, but most of all it is hard work.
If someone forced you to learn chess and locked you in a room to do a chess assignment to get food, you would probably be worse than if you actually have a passion and like the game. There are geniuses in chess,like Morphy(who I know the secrets of his play). Devotion is more important than talent,but to be phenomenal you just need talent.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#46
nameno1had wrote:
fissionfowl wrote:
So you honestly believe everyone lives in a edgy, frantic state, constantly trying to change the situations they find themselves in? No one can rise above that?
How very optimistic.
Tell all of the people who don't have any problems that you've been hanging out with, to move out of their parent's place and pay their own way..... then we'll see if you change your mind....
FYI, everyone I know has problems, including myself. But that still doesn't change my opinion. IMO it takes years, maybe even decades of concious, focused (and smart) work to possibly reach a truely contented state. But, it's still possible, even if that person has to face what are to most people life's hardships. Life, like chess is a skill and a damn hard one at that. And something most people (including myself) aren't prepared to work at continuously. So perhaps this is why you and I don't personally know such people who don't have major problems. But similarly I'd like to bet you also don't personally know any top GMs. Doesn't mean there aren't any
Oct 30, 2012
0
#47
DrSpudnik wrote:
People who don't have any problems don't have a clue what is actually happening around them
Or they do but have learned to deal with it.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#48
^Edit (because chess.com isn't letting me actually edit):
Of course I know everyone has problems of some kind. But many are able to limit them to the point where they're insignificant is my point.
Oct 30, 2012
0
#50
CharlesConrad wrote:
Is it better to have talent of devotion?
In that talent section I would place Morphy, recalling the beginnings of Morphy he watched his dad and uncle play then picked up on the manuevers, even telling the loser how they could have won. Played as a kid and young adult but I haven't heard about him endlessly studying.
Fischer; I recall his tale is a sort of obsessed devotion to Chess. He studied, studied, studied.
Is it better to have the obsession, or the talent? Obsession can create the talent. I also recall both players fell out of a liking of Chess.
And how would this all come together with the Polgar sisters, taught and trained at a very early age for Chess skill?
Cannot say I remember hearing that story about Morphy. Perhaps its true though. But I did hear almost the exact same story about Capablanca. Learned the game at the ages of five, by wathcing his father play several games. Then caught his father making an illegal move, and calling him on it. Then beat his father. Went on to become WCC with only minimal effort. Definitly made himself the exception to Edison's "Genius is 1%inspiration, 99%perspiration" statement.
And for all Capa's talent, I would call him the exact opposite of obsessed. He went through his chess career with an "I can't believe they're paying me for this!" attitude. There were times he would come in off the tennis court to quickly route his next victim on the chess board, then go straight back to tennis again.
But you are right that Morphy was indeed a natural talent. And I agree he not come out a better person for having played chess. But in those days, folks lost their sanity for many reasons, including environmental toxins and other factors. Perhaps chess was not the sole reason for his sad decline.
fissionfowl wrote:
^Edit (because chess.com isn't letting me actually edit):
Of course I know everyone has problems of some kind. But many are able to limit them to the point where they're insignificant is my point.
Most "problems' modern folk have ain't shit. A fella' could be livin' the life of Riley and find some problem that he kills himself over.
Nov 1, 2012
0
#52
bigpoison wrote:
fissionfowl wrote:
^Edit (because chess.com isn't letting me actually edit):
Of course I know everyone has problems of some kind. But many are able to limit them to the point where they're insignificant is my point.
Most "problems' modern folk have ain't shit. A fella' could be livin' the life of Riley and find some problem that he kills himself over.
I agree. Which demonstrates the strange power of the mind.
I have apparently a lot of "outer comfort", but last year had a complete psycotic breakdown and had to be sectioned.
An excellent argument would be Aljehine,.the born genius and.The Polgar sisters, a successful experiment.
Aljehine said genius is born. Laszlo has proven that genius can be formed with strict discipline.
In cognitive psychology circles there really isn't a debate about this anymore. Genetics and epigenetics plays a key role in setting potential, but it is hard work and correct practice that acheives the potential. Mastery of anything is both/and rather than either/or.
That said, for everyone who isn't a statistical outlier, hard work and correct practice at an early age are what matter. If you're 40 and a class player dreaming of being a GM, keep dreaming, your window has passed. But if you're 40 and a class player dreaming of moving up a class or two, that is quite possible and you don't have to be a genius to achieve it.
fissionfowl wrote:
So you honestly believe everyone lives in a edgy, frantic state, constantly trying to change the situations they find themselves in? No one can rise above that?
How very optimistic.
Tell all of the people who don't have any problems that you've been hanging out with, to move out of their parent's place and pay their own way..... then we'll see if you change your mind....