- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

How Meditation Can Help Your Chess

#2

dang. good stuff. one of the best blog writers recently. better than that chessmood guy

dang. good stuff. one of the best blog writers recently. better than that chessmood guy
#3

@Unseekedspy said in #2:

dang. good stuff. one of the best blog writers recently. better than that chessmood guy

Thank you, I'm cleaning up his mess lol.

@Unseekedspy said in #2: > dang. good stuff. one of the best blog writers recently. better than that chessmood guy Thank you, I'm cleaning up his mess lol.
#4

Hi IM your friend RV _Kandy it is nice

Hi IM your friend RV _Kandy it is nice
#5

I love the idea of meditation as a tool in chess learning. However I can't agree with the assertion that we have more ego than animals because of a nebulous default network, nor that ego can only be defined in a social context. In fact there are documented cases where ego is breaking the group dynamics in chimp tribes... and a subsequent group punishment so severe that the gene causing that ego flareup is likely to disappear from that gene pool. And anyone who has a cat will know a thing or two about ego.

I love the idea of meditation as a tool in chess learning. However I can't agree with the assertion that we have more ego than animals because of a nebulous default network, nor that ego can only be defined in a social context. In fact there are documented cases where ego is breaking the group dynamics in chimp tribes... and a subsequent group punishment so severe that the gene causing that ego flareup is likely to disappear from that gene pool. And anyone who has a cat will know a thing or two about ego.
#7

I like the idea and the article, but seems mix of mysticism and science. As Ego and mediation are not scientific concepts, and are not useful without a well defined theory of mind.

The opening definition about the ego is not scientific, at best Freudian, as there is no scientific evidence for the ego? Or the claims of competitiveness.

In fact, a more proper Freudian understanding, the Ego is the primal desires of 'murder, rape, steal' (G-d forbid), the natural desires of the animal body, that need to be repressed and mediated.

So from a Freudian terms, there is no intrinsic 'ego' desire for competitiveness, but to reproduce and be physically dominant over others to control resources. So chess is the sublimation of the ego, as the natural ego desire is to in fact kill your opponent, but the natural human desire to kill your opponent is sublimated by beating them at chess. Or losing at chess is a signor for flight as opposed to fight, or to accept beta status to the alpha.

But their is no 'ego' desire to be mentally dominant over others, that is already the superego and sublimation of the ego, that is only primal animal desires.

It would be hard to study, but I would also suggest that many top players are in fact psychopathic / Sadists, that enjoy causing pain in others, and from your Ego / Freudian terms, top chess players are mostly psychopath Sadist that sublimate their desire to win (kill / cause pain in others) by winning at chess, however, winning at chess often is a sign of a Beta, as violence is the sign of the Alpha.

I like the idea and the article, but seems mix of mysticism and science. As Ego and mediation are not scientific concepts, and are not useful without a well defined theory of mind. The opening definition about the ego is not scientific, at best Freudian, as there is no scientific evidence for the ego? Or the claims of competitiveness. In fact, a more proper Freudian understanding, the Ego is the primal desires of 'murder, rape, steal' (G-d forbid), the natural desires of the animal body, that need to be repressed and mediated. So from a Freudian terms, there is no intrinsic 'ego' desire for competitiveness, but to reproduce and be physically dominant over others to control resources. So chess is the sublimation of the ego, as the natural ego desire is to in fact kill your opponent, but the natural human desire to kill your opponent is sublimated by beating them at chess. Or losing at chess is a signor for flight as opposed to fight, or to accept beta status to the alpha. But their is no 'ego' desire to be mentally dominant over others, that is already the superego and sublimation of the ego, that is only primal animal desires. It would be hard to study, but I would also suggest that many top players are in fact psychopathic / Sadists, that enjoy causing pain in others, and from your Ego / Freudian terms, top chess players are mostly psychopath Sadist that sublimate their desire to win (kill / cause pain in others) by winning at chess, however, winning at chess often is a sign of a Beta, as violence is the sign of the Alpha.