- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

Fear and Greed

They may be the price to pay for imagination, and desirable plan goals. I think being always in the competition mind set might make this one-sided assessment. We can't be systematic all the time, and chess learning or evolution is not about a single damocles game but many games over a long period on ones life. I can't believe is a systematic purely logical human machine, it would get nowhere and slowly (I was going to say nowhere fast, but no, that would be slowly, fast to the slow .. I understand myself at least...).

In hindsight when looking at past chess thinking from most recent chess activity: I agree we can identify how our subconscious might have prevented us from going deeper in one impulsive direction of candidate imagination, but since chess is big, only relying on knowledge prior to the game is not a global-many-games-left-to-explore learning plan.

And why should it be only about one's self-delusions of being a computing "robot" as the virtuous method muse, why not accept that emotions and intuition are part of the whole learning problem or pursuit. That they help discover the logical conclusions that are useful, as exhaustive cranking of the ruleset is not for a single small human brain to keep achieving ever. We need and have been using the other side of fear and greed excesses, that feeds our 2 brains processes.

Then we can get out of the error driven (As the only feedback type) implicit but blatant (like the elephant in some room, but not the porcelain shop) theory of learning that best chess is harassing us from times eternal.

They may be the price to pay for imagination, and desirable plan goals. I think being always in the competition mind set might make this one-sided assessment. We can't be systematic all the time, and chess learning or evolution is not about a single damocles game but many games over a long period on ones life. I can't believe is a systematic purely logical human machine, it would get nowhere and slowly (I was going to say nowhere fast, but no, that would be slowly, fast to the slow .. I understand myself at least...). In hindsight when looking at past chess thinking from most recent chess activity: I agree we can identify how our subconscious might have prevented us from going deeper in one impulsive direction of candidate imagination, but since chess is big, only relying on knowledge prior to the game is not a global-many-games-left-to-explore learning plan. And why should it be only about one's self-delusions of being a computing "robot" as the virtuous method muse, why not accept that emotions and intuition are part of the whole learning problem or pursuit. That they help discover the logical conclusions that are useful, as exhaustive cranking of the ruleset is not for a single small human brain to keep achieving ever. We need and have been using the other side of fear and greed excesses, that feeds our 2 brains processes. Then we can get out of the error driven (As the only feedback type) implicit but blatant (like the elephant in some room, but not the porcelain shop) theory of learning that best chess is harassing us from times eternal.