Originally posted by kevcvs57 Still harbouring the fantasy that a high chess rating denotes a high I.Q, a low E.Q maybe. But it probably just means you are good at Chess.
are you saying that chess is not an intellectual exercise? hmmm?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie are you saying that chess is not an intellectual exercise? hmmm?
Yes, do not confuse pattern recognition with intellect Robbie, unless you are claiming lab rats have superior intellects to non chess playing Humans Hmmmm.
Originally posted by kevcvs57 Yes, do not confuse pattern recognition with intellect Robbie, unless you are claiming lab rats have superior intellects to non chess playing Humans Hmmmm.
pattern recognition is only one part of the game of chess Kev, there is also intuition,
calculation, application of theory, applied technique, abstract thought, planning and
strategy, beauty and artistry, are you saying that lab rats are also capable of such,
hmmmm? Is it an intellectual exercise or is it not?
Another floor in that little pile of blog is that the term "IT tech" doesn't really mean somebody is qualified and hence is only a real indication of the piss poor hiring ability of the employing companies.
If those companies are dumb enough to employ somebody who doesn't have the basic understanding of security then should those employee's really be classified as techies?
The only true "IT techies" in my book are the self employed, freelancers that face completely new challenges everyday.
Having worked in a stagnant corporate IT department where you do the same rubbish day in and day out, I have found doesn't really educate anybody into being a true master.
A true techie knows a port is not just something ships sail into and if you release that magic blue smoke from a chip, you aint putting it back in.
Another class example of a blogger missing the point and using the wrong title, which should of course have been "Why do companies employ blaggers with certificates to do grown up jobs".
The OSI model should have an 8th layer "fecking moron".
Originally posted by robbie carrobie pattern recognition is only one part of the game of chess Kev, there is also intuition,
calculation, application of theory, applied technique, abstract thought, planning and
strategy, beauty and artistry, are you saying that lab rats are also capable of such,
hmmmm? Is it an intellectual exercise or is it not?
Unfortunately Robbie none of the above are evidence of a superior intellect which is what Sonhouse implied, i.e that there is a positive correlation between a chess rating and someones intellect, or in other words that an 1800 rated player is a third more intelligent than a 1200 rated player. Clearly that is a false premise, or are you trying to argue that it is true?
Tying your shoelaces is an intellectual exercise Robbie, the more you practice the better you get at it, but you have not become more intelligent.
Originally posted by kevcvs57 Unfortunately Robbie none of the above are evidence of a superior intellect which is what Sonhouse implied, i.e that there is a positive correlation between a chess rating and someones intellect, or in other words that an 1800 rated player is a third more intelligent than a 1200 rated player. Clearly that is a false premise, or are you trying to argue that ...[text shortened]... obbie, the more you practice the better you get at it, but you have not become more intelligent.
Chess skill does positively correlate with IQ but it is very loose because of other factors. If everybody played chess seriously it would be a much closer correlation.
However, it is quite hilarious when patzers lord there higher interweb rating over other patzers.
Originally posted by tomtom232 Chess skill does positively correlate with IQ but it is very loose because of other factors. If everybody played chess seriously it would be a much closer correlation.
However, it is quite hilarious when patzers lord there higher interweb rating over other patzers.
As a Patzer of low chess skill and subsequent low chess rating I would not disagree, given the control you mentioned, and I do respect the effort that Patzer's with higher chess ratings/skill levels have applied to their game.
But still I have seen no evidence on this site to confirm a positive correlation between chess ratings and intelligence levels, certainly it is not evident from their forum contributions.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie pattern recognition is only one part of the game of chess Kev, there is also intuition,
calculation, application of theory, applied technique, abstract thought, planning and
strategy, beauty and artistry, are you saying that lab rats are also capable of such,
hmmmm? Is it an intellectual exercise or is it not?
Chess must take it out of you, because you manifest few of those attributes in the spirituality forum.
Originally posted by kevcvs57 As a Patzer of low chess skill and subsequent low chess rating I would not disagree, given the control you mentioned, and I do respect the effort that Patzer's with higher chess ratings/skill levels have applied to their game.
But still I have seen no evidence on this site to confirm a positive correlation between chess ratings and intelligence levels, certainly it is not evident from their forum contributions.
We're all patzers here which is why I get a chuckle everytime someone uses their higher (but still crappy) rating over someone else.
Originally posted by tomtom232 We're all patzers here which is why I get a chuckle everytime someone uses their higher (but still crappy) rating over someone else.
Originally posted by kevcvs57 Unfortunately Robbie none of the above are evidence of a superior intellect which is what Sonhouse implied, i.e that there is a positive correlation between a chess rating and someones intellect, or in other words that an 1800 rated player is a third more intelligent than a 1200 rated player. Clearly that is a false premise, or are you trying to argue that ...[text shortened]... obbie, the more you practice the better you get at it, but you have not become more intelligent.
no you are mistaken, tying ones shoe laces is a skill, chess is an art, there is a difference.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie no you are mistaken, tying ones shoe laces is a skill, chess is an art, there is a difference.
No you are mistaken and that is egotistical bullcrap, so your an artist now, lol, chess is a game of skill that can be learnt, though I doubt that it can be mastered, far to many variables, maybe that is why you perceive it as an art form.
Originally posted by kevcvs57 No you are mistaken and that is egotistical bullcrap, so your an artist now, lol, chess is a game of skill that can be learnt, though I doubt that it can be mastered, far to many variables, maybe that is why you perceive it as an art form.
please tell me what the difference is between a skill and an art form?
Originally posted by kevcvs57 Oh I dunno Robbie, the ability to express/communicate an idea or emotion in abstract.
Done much of that on the boards lately?
It appears to me that skill is an attempt to diminish error as much as possible, whereas
art is essentially experimental and tolerates aberration in the pursuit of some aim.
06 Dec '12 21:34
All you IT pro's out there, read this:
Back to Top