< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 114 OF 114 ·
|Aug-03-16|| ||truepacifism: <Richard Taylor> One problem with a site like this is that there is no way to send private messages; in other words everything I say is public, and I would rather not get into controversy on this particular site, although I do elsewhere (since this is a chess site, I primarily want to talk chess).|
|Aug-03-16|| ||truepacifism: "So, while you could make it a personal philosophy to love and increase wisdom the problem is defining it...but working wisdom, aside from the theoretical stuff, is what helps us in our daily lives and indeed is more important...it is something like a mathematician studying mathematics for the beauty of the ideas, with no view to solving human problems etc Pure mathematics. (If there is really such a thing). And who plays chess to help anyone! Indirectly perhaps"|
Yes, indirectly... first using one's mind for conflict resolution rather than conflict.. yes, for some chess is about winning, the same way one trys to "win" and argument, but, by definition an "argument" or "debate" should employ the use of logic. By defintion emotions have no place in an argument and when people use emotional tactics, it technically is no longer an argument but a fight. Of course, it's better to use strong language than actual physical threats, nobody is permanently damaged when only words are used, although words can "hurt" you if you let them. Also, I know it sounds unrealistic and naive, and certainly not something that is going to happen any time soon, but wouldn't it be more logical to resolve a conflict if they could be settled by a game of chess where nobody gets killed, than by going to war. Obviously the mind set of humans is bellicose and it all goes back to the problem of evil, which we all know goes back millenia.
|Aug-03-16|| ||truepacifism: problem goes back to when humans first appeared and I suppose even further back than that, since "evil" depending on how you want to define it, goes back in time a lot longer.
Unless one subscribes to religious tenets like original sin and believe that the story of Adam and Eve is to be taken literally, which I don't.|
|Aug-04-16|| ||Wayne Power: <truepacifism> "..Also, I know it sounds unrealistic and naive, and certainly not something that is going to happen any time soon, but wouldn't it be more logical to resolve a conflict if they could be settled by a game of chess where nobody gets killed, than by going to war."|
Hmm, well, some might say that international sport tries to sublimate war. Some sports more than others, perhaps. International cricket might be a pretty good example. India and Pakistan are both passionate cricketing nations and I like to think they would have long since nuked each other were it not for the civilizing and sublimating influence of cricket. Actually, I think it would do the USA no end of good to learn to play cricket and suffer the constructive deflation of its ego to be repeatedly beaten by puny nations like New Zealand before inevitably becoming equally or more competitive at it. That's already happening with soccer - the USA is warming to it - especially its already world champion women's team which beat Zealand's team just today.
I think the USA's passion for gridiron, which no other country can quite understand, together with a similar one for baseball is what contributes to the USA's largely unjustified self image of exceptionalism. Yes, they are world champions at both but that kind of follows, doesn't it?
One of the biggest groaners in recent history was when the Americans, having just taken Iraq, drove their tanks straight into the soccer stadium in Baghdad to use as a handy parking place. The Iraqi's revere soccer (or "football" as the non-American world calls it) so that was almost as bad as setting up a McDonalds in the nearest mosque would have been. Cultural and religious sensitivity is not America's strong point.
(I was going to segue the above into a mention of the "T" word but, out of respect for your genuine, commendable pacifist views, I won't).
|Aug-04-16|| ||truepacifism: <Wayne Power>
"I was going to segue the above into a mention of the "T" word but, out of respect for your genuine, commendable pacifist views, I won't."
Thank you for your respect. I don't mind whatever you want to say. I have tried not to get into heated fights about politics on this site, for a number of reasons, which I can list, but I do have strong opinions about politics, not the least of which is that politics can easily be discussed without all the personal attacks, which I prefer even if it weren't a rule here. People have the ability to discipline themselves, and it is a shame that sites feel that they have to have moderators. I think that it is common knowledge who the troublemakers are and have been, (on this site), so I need not mention any names.
|Aug-04-16|| ||Wayne Power: <truepacifism>
- OK, well the segue was to be to Donald Trump. He reminds me and many others of Senator Joseph McCarthy as in:
I was actually around during the McCarthy era but very young and in far away New Zealand. Even so, his "Reds-under-the-bed" message made it to here as well and NZ became more right wing at that time than anytime since.
I remember it being said in a TV documentary about 20 years ago, on a retrospective look at the McCarthy Era, that he was brought down by he newly arrived phenomenon of network television - that once the American people could actually see him live at the grand jury hearings and read his transparent, phony body language, the game was up.
Yet, up till now at least, Donald Trump has confounded that theory. But, as the article suggests, I think Khizr Khan's straight-from-the-heart speech will go down in history as the moment Donald Trump's dam started to burst. If you ever saw the old black and white war movie of the Dam Busters raid, you may remember how, for what seemed an eternity after the last bouncing bomb had exploded, nothing seemed to happen. Then a tiny crack appeared, then a larger one and finally the whole, huge dam came down.
|Aug-06-16|| ||Richard Taylor: <true pacifism> <Wayne Power> I agree re
Big Pawn. Re Pacifism. Yes, and no. I think we are talking about discussion and negotiation rather than being passive.|
I think that we must try (whether we bat it out or gridiron it etc or play chess, which I think is a kind of sublimated war for sure) I am not sure we can avoid war...but overall I feel that war is something that has to be an absolute last resort these days.
I'm not sure. War is strange thing. People can think about it positively in a kind of abstract thing. This phemomenological aspect of human consciousness interests me. We are not simply one thing, even dubious we are one identity. Also reality and that we have or do not have an actual freedom of choice are dubious...but if you asked me, as a grandfather, what I would do etc etc, my advice would be cooperation...rather than war and conflict.
Nationalism I hate but I realise it exists. That's why I have lost interest in the Olympics or even taking any interest in rugby (I never really was much interested in sport though mainly as I was pretty hopeless at all sports).
I'm not really here to talk about chess! Or not much. I came on here looking for a convenient data base some time ago...For the money it is reasonable. But chess does get discussed.
I see the Sinquefield Cup is on again and later we have the World Champs.
I'll look in here later. All the best to all!
|Aug-06-16|| ||truepacifism: I am watching all five games at once, live. Since I am not a great player, I think that I can learn something by watching them. It is fun to try to guess the moves, but I am not very good at it.|
|Aug-07-16|| ||Richard Taylor: I can work out some of the moves if it's not late at night and I'm not tired. I sometimes run a computer also, but not always.|
Mostly they start in NZ about midnight here. Some international games or tournaments are at a better time.
I just had a quick look at Nakamura's game vs. Giri. He was confidant to go for pawns then swing back for defence or Giri may have won. But they know how to evaluate these things.
I'm playing an opponent I know plays the Semi-Slav and also the Petroff, so I'm wondering what policy to adopt as I usually play 1. e4....playing him tommorrow so you might hear the grisly story by Tuesday here or Wed!
|Aug-21-16|| ||Richard Taylor: Another two of my games has been uploaded. Thanks to chessgames.com |
Here they are:
R Gibbons vs R Taylor, 1980
R Taylor vs M Le Brocq, 2006
|Aug-22-16|| ||Benzol: Those two are good games by you. Looks like your knight got caught offside in this one|
P Kelly vs R Taylor, 1981
Pat Kelly is another strong player who seems to have gone into hiding.
|Aug-23-16|| ||Jonathan Sarfati: <Gregor Samsa Mendel: I think that a major weakness in the Creationist argument that evolution cannot lead to greater complexity, is that they ignore the phenomenon of gene duplication.>|
Not so. Informed creationists have long addressed this very thing. You might not agree with the answers, but it's simply false to claim that it has been ignored. E.g. I wrote this article 15 years ago http://creation.com/refuting-evolut...
Some geneticists have written more detailed articles like:
|Aug-23-16|| ||Jonathan Sarfati: <Wayne Power:
Creationists, as I understand their argument, maintain that one species cannot evolve or mutate into another - or, at least that none yet has.>
No, informed creationists even before Darwin recognized that speciation happens. Blame Aristotle then Darwin's mentor Lyell for "fixity of species". However, there is good evidence that non-information-gaining speciation happens much faster than evolutionists expected. See for example http://creation.com/cosmos-neil-deg...
Some advocates of Intelligent Design, including the non-Christian GM Harold James Plaskett, do believe in fixity of species, but he is mistaken on this issue (not on the issue of Intelligent Design though).
|Aug-23-16|| ||Jonathan Sarfati: <Benzol:
Pat Kelly is another strong player who seems to have gone into hiding.>
Yes, I remember him at the 1982 North Island, returning to active to NZ chess after a long layoff, and I think he tied by beating outplaying the strong player Gollogly in the last round P Kelly vs D Gollogly, 1982 Then he disappeared again. He had a great respect for Arcadios Feneridis.
|Aug-28-16|| ||Richard Taylor: <Benzol><Jonathan Safarti> The debate re evolution continues. My own interest is in knowledge criteria. I think that evolutionary theory for what I call a closed system is good enough. Creationism in my view only prolongs the agony so to speak. That is, as the philosphic problems of say "why there is something rather than nothing" and so on, it doesn't advance it for me...
It seems that if one believes in God or some 'greater power' then it can really only be by revelation. That is one either knows or not. If so, the problem becomes a social one. How do you convince others? This applies to all knowledge. |
For me, one of the fundamental problems with philosophy is language.
However it is a complex discussion.
|Aug-28-16|| ||Richard Taylor: <Benzol><Jonathan Safarti> Re that Pat Kelly game. I cant remember Pat Kelly at all. I can recall that game either...where was it Paul, in one of the magazines? I certainly played badly in that game if it was mine! I might disown it! |
I prefer my nice "catch" of Bob. But we have played quite a number of games with varying results. I think he has the overall edge. I think in our last game I caught him with a tactic to save a game, which upset Bob (in the Qualifiers one year I think it was). I have never seen him quite so angry, as Bob is mostly very equable if that is the word....
|Aug-28-16|| ||Richard Taylor: Did you all see this demolition of Stan Yee when he made what i knew was an error in the opening against White's Tarrasch versus the French...?|
In fact the line is very old but still good for White who needs to swap on d4 before playing f6....
R Taylor vs S Yee, 2006
|Aug-28-16|| ||Richard Taylor: I might have that mixed up, as he did swap on d4. I may have been thinking of another game. Perhaps when I came close to beating Luke Li when he failed to swap on d4. It was a draw, but should really be much better for White... I actually followed a game by <t.p.star> but I analysed it before my game with Luke, I must load that game. I am not sure if Stanley Yee's line is wrong. I will have to check it out. In any case he forgot his theory and I made up a win!|
|Aug-28-16|| ||Richard Taylor: I'm currently reading a book about Hobbes, not as I especially admire him, just curious of (what were or are) his thinking and ideas. It is an interesting book in one of those series about major thinkers etc.|
|Aug-28-16|| ||Benzol: A nice demolition of Stan in R Taylor vs S Yee, 2006 and something that I have never done so good on you.|
<Re that Pat Kelly game. I cant remember Pat Kelly at all. I can recall that game either...where was it Paul, in one of the magazines?>
Yes it was in one of the magazines but please don't ask me which one.
There is a possibility that I might be able to return to club play in the near future but everything is still up in the air at the moment at work so I'll keep you posted. Cheers matey.
|Aug-29-16|| ||Travis Bickle: <Richard Taylor: Richard Taylor: I'm currently reading a book about Hobbes, not as I especially admire him, just curious of (what were or are) his thinking and ideas.> |
Hey Dr. Taylor, they made 'Mr Hobbs Takes a Vacation' into a good film! ; P
|Aug-30-16|| ||Richard Taylor: <Travis Bickle> I thought you had been dethroned by Big Pawn! I see that film on wiki. It does look like a good film. The author looks an interesting chap with quite a few novels. |
Hobbes was a philosopher who lived in the 16th & 17th Centuries. His Leviathan is the book where he talks of human life as being "nasty, brutish, and short" but he has some interesting ideas, although he was accused of being an atheist he wasn't but he didn't share orthodox views...I'm not sure of his religious views, but he combined them with a form of materialism. It is not as hard as it all sounds though as the writer has "translated" Hobbes's work (literally from Latin or the English of those days) and explained the ideas. He disagreed with Descartes the philosopher, mathematician and scientist. Both of them added valuable ideas though.
Hobbes's big mistake though, was to insist he had found a way of "squaring the circle"...He thought that the new maths that had come even then (it was quite sophisticated even before Newton) was full of confusing language: but he was proven wrong very easily. But he wanted it to be that mathematical things represented real things in nature, but that didn't work (except roughly) for circles and so on....
But the movie looks good. I am thinking I should go to a movie. Haven't been to one for ages. My son and I live together and we thought we might go out
to a movie. Doesn't matter what it is...my son likes mafia movies but he will watch other things....lol
|Aug-30-16|| ||Richard Taylor: <Benzol> I see you are under pressure at work etc...I was going to stop chess as I am failing to win won games, or blowing won games altogether, or losing....but at the last rating I went up a bit. I seemed to be too nervous of losing. |
I announced I would give up but Gino said it would improve NZ Chess so, as others encouraged me, I have decided to go to the end of the year.
I'm playing in a Rapid. I won 2 out of three then hit Daniel Gong but it was a fairly elementary error that cost me the game. Three more games next week.
I didn't do well in the Club Champs...It was annoying as the game where I made a nice and in fact a sound sacrifice I went wrong with mate in about 3 coming up so I was bloody annoyed (against Paul Macdonald who was second in the B Grade).
(So this and failing to finish off Simon Lyall, left me feeling rather down and I was going to stop: but I will keep on until Xmas)....
Bruce Watson won the A Grade so he is the Club Champion again.
|Aug-30-16|| ||Richard Taylor: Well the NZ Team is either at or on the way to Baku for the Olympiad. I suspect they will enjoy the place but get slaughtered by most...although NZ usually goes into the lower levels in any case...|
Then the World Champs is coming up. It Bruce Watson watches these events live and it looks as though the Olympiad might start in the morning over here and the World Champs about 9 pm which is do-able sleep wise etc....
But you have to be keen!
I think Karyakin has a chance. We don't know how good he is as a match player. But that said, it seems only a chance...
But who knows, anything can happen in a match or a chess game....Carlsen might get drunk and lose like Alekhine was supposed to have (although I suspect that is just an excuse by the man who kept dodging Capa)....
|Aug-31-16|| ||Richard Taylor: I see the wankers who organised the Olympiad are starting at 1500 which is hopeless. Who organizes these things? You play probably right through your natural meal time. 1 pm would mean we could watch some of it from 9 pm here....|
I'm not interested enough to watch it at 11 pm starting as it will cut through my routine. See how the World Championship goes and see if that is worth watching live....
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 114 OF 114 ·
from the Chessgames Store