Why is chess a sport?

Sort:
Avatar of RichColorado

CHESS It’s just a board game like GO, Checkers . . .

       

 

Avatar of Ziryab
Optimissed wrote:
mpaetz wrote:
MelvinGarvey wrote:
Optimissed a écrit :

I criticise your flimsy dismissal of my magnificent expertise at dismissing expertise on flimsy grounds. It takes more to win an argument on flimsy grounds! 

 

Thing is, by you, it's flimsy only if "nothing" or" void" can be counted flimsy. Cos the custom is to count individual, unsupported opinions for just, plain, nothing. And that's very much what your opinion is, considering the lack of support (your will doesn't count as support) you gave it.

     So as there is no universally accepted authority on the matter and no solid ground upon which to base an argument all opinions are valid and discussion is pointless?


I think it was meant to carry his and Ziryab's opinion that all individual opinion is worthless, compared with the judgement of official, expert bodies, which they happen to agree with.

Someone said something about speaking for others and you keep crediting me with utterances I have not made.

Avatar of Ziryab
Optimissed wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
mpaetz wrote:
MelvinGarvey wrote:
Optimissed a écrit :

I criticise your flimsy dismissal of my magnificent expertise at dismissing expertise on flimsy grounds. It takes more to win an argument on flimsy grounds! 

 

Thing is, by you, it's flimsy only if "nothing" or" void" can be counted flimsy. Cos the custom is to count individual, unsupported opinions for just, plain, nothing. And that's very much what your opinion is, considering the lack of support (your will doesn't count as support) you gave it.

 

Someone said something about speaking for others and you keep crediting me with utterances I have not made.

You made it very clearly indeed. You told me that I had to respect official bodies and go by what they say.

Nope.

Avatar of Ziryab
Optimissed wrote:

Because they are experts and they have invested their lives into learning about it. That's exactly what you told me. So I must accept their decision that chess is a sport.

Maybe if you could read with comprehension. The only thing I said was you should not dismiss all expertise because of some perceived vested interest. Then I mocked your view. The mocking had more to do with your expressed views on other matters, such as medicine.

Ziryab wrote:
Optimissed wrote:


That's such a bad argument it isn't even an argument. Sporting bodies have a vested interest in claiming as much as they can as sports, so their claims or opinions need not be taken seriously.

 

In other words, expertise is of no value. Those who have invested their lives in learning something must be presumed to be biased. To avoid such bias, we must canvass the ignorant.

 

Avatar of AlCzervik
idilis wrote:

How do I get a couch potato flag? Sounds cool and starchy.

i would be all for this, obviously.

Avatar of mpaetz
shangtsung111 wrote:
mpaetz wrote:

     As you have noticed, there are some here that take offense at those who disagree with them. Any time you point out inconsistencies in their arguments or mistakes as to facts, they feel it is a personal insult. Then it is just an escalating series of insults. Usually I don't care, but sometimes I am unwilling to stand by and let the bs pile up. 

what is admins approach to those insults?what happens if you report?or should we mail it(if so where exactly)

    When you point to a post with your cursor some icons will appear. The red circle icon will lead to a way to report the comment to which you object. I'm not sure what the admins' practice might be. For me, everyone is free to say whatever they please so I have never complained about anyone. I have found that profanities have an automatic ban attached whenever the computer recognizes them--you can't write as**ole unless you obscure it like that.

Avatar of Ziryab

@Optimissed What do you think about Battleship Potemkin?

Avatar of Ziryab
Optimissed wrote:

I saw that film (movie) many years ago. At a guess, round about 1990. I thought it was good and a few years later didn't take the chance to watch it again but would do so now. To some extent a glorification of a disaster. Lenin was an evil person. I don't believe Trotsky was evil. Marx rated himself too high. All he did was turn round an excessively simplistic idea by Hegel into its polar opposite and he believed in it. I think genuinely believed. That isn't bright but he had a good beard and so people believed.

Why do you ask??

Your fondness for b/w films.

Wasn’t Lenin in western Europe during the 1905 failed revolution?

Avatar of AlCzervik
MelvinGarvey wrote:
Optimissed a écrit


I believe it's an accidental and unintended effect of changes to the human constitution.

 

I discovered in a French movie (I rarely watch French movies, most of them being just boring), that all foul tricks, manipulations and all, are actually academically taught in universities, for the sake of "winning a debate/argument". The teacher tells his student that truth matter not, winning is what matters, and what matters only.

Avatar of mpaetz

     The "Odessa steps" scene from "Battleship Potemkin" is a classic and created a sensation in its day because it was the first film to use newly-invented film editing technology to frequently and instantly cut from one point of view to another. I prefer Sergei Eisenstein's later works "Alexander Nevsky" and "Ivan the Terrible".

     There are probably three reasons that it seems like "modern" films don't measure up to older movies:

     The vast number of cheap second/third-rate movies of yesteryear have long been relegated to the dustbin, meaning the ones we still see are the cream of the crop while we are exposed to all of today's junk.

     The movie-going audience has changed with the growth of home theater systems and streaming services, leaving the movie theaters (and the film studios that supply them) to the less sophisticated teen/young adult crowd out on a date.

     Those of us commenting here are all old fogies.

Avatar of LukeVelevski

I agree

Avatar of Robotofdeath395

We could call chess a sport maybe because a competitive background and you do exhert the mental aspect instead of the physical aspect so l guess you could call it a sport?

Avatar of Robotofdeath395

Yeh l still don't think chess is a sport

Avatar of magipi
Robotofdeath395 wrote:

Yeh l still don't think chess is a sport

Why is there 3 different topics to debate this? Why did you have to resurrect this old one? Were the other 2 not enough?