A long time ago
-
- Posts: 541
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:03 pm
- Location: Leicester
A long time ago
Plato informed us of something, thousands of years ago, that we must seperate logic from emotion, what thinks or feels you?
-
- Posts: 541
- Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:03 pm
- Location: Leicester
Re: A long time ago
Is logic something we have an opion about?
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
- Location: Croydon
Re: A long time ago
I think or feel that this thread should be in the Not Chess section.PeterTurland wrote:Plato informed us of something, thousands of years ago, that we must seperate logic from emotion, what thinks or feels you?
-
- Posts: 662
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:10 pm
- Location: Abingdon
Re: A long time ago
and maybe in a galaxy far, far away.
-
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:37 pm
Re: A long time ago
And perhaps many billions of years ago, when the galaxies were not so far apart.
There is however a serious point to be made, and going beyond the "footnotes to Plato" idea.
Imagine that you are in a position in a game of chess, in which however hard you try, it is beyond your powers to make the best decision. What now?
Logic is not enough. What next?
Emotion? It can often be of great help, when finding ones way though a battle, but does not cut out mistakes.
A bit of cunning is often extremely useful, and a significant part by payers such as Lasker, Botvinnik, Tal and Carlsen (far less so, perhaps, than Kasparov, who relies heavily on the force of emotional willpower). The idea is that, yes, of course I make mistakes, but I do not know in advance how and when I will mistakes, but I need to develop ways to make it more likely for the opponent to make mistakes.
Perhaps more Darwin than Plato?
There is however a serious point to be made, and going beyond the "footnotes to Plato" idea.
Imagine that you are in a position in a game of chess, in which however hard you try, it is beyond your powers to make the best decision. What now?
Logic is not enough. What next?
Emotion? It can often be of great help, when finding ones way though a battle, but does not cut out mistakes.
A bit of cunning is often extremely useful, and a significant part by payers such as Lasker, Botvinnik, Tal and Carlsen (far less so, perhaps, than Kasparov, who relies heavily on the force of emotional willpower). The idea is that, yes, of course I make mistakes, but I do not know in advance how and when I will mistakes, but I need to develop ways to make it more likely for the opponent to make mistakes.
Perhaps more Darwin than Plato?