MatPlus.Net

 Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006

23:11 UTC
ISC 2024
 
  Forum*
 
 
 
 

Username:

Password:

Remember me

 
Forgot your
password?
Click here!
SIGN IN
to create your account if you don't already have one.
CHESS
SOLVING

Tournaments
Rating lists
1-Oct-2024

B P C F





 
 
MatPlus.Net Forum General Science, arts or sports
 
You can only view this page!
(1) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 08:43]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [07-08-27]

Science, arts or sports


So what exactly are we doing?

Science? Science means that under the same conditions something is reproducable. This is why for example evolution theory can not be considered a science (nobody has created a homo sapiens from a primeval soup yet) but rather a religious belief. There are too many beliefs today, anyway. Chess cvomposition, though, always is reproducable. That's why it should be considered science.

Arts? Arts means that there is an emotional affection, enjoyment, by a certain beauty. It's the result of creativity by humans, by individuals who well understand what they want to show and maybe not always succeed. This is why for example a game of chess can not be considered art. The process of creativity is lacking. It can become art-like as such but it was competition in the first place rendering it ineligible for any rights artists have on their works (see the case Hübner v Deutscher Schachbund). Chess composition, though, is created by an artist who wants to show something the solvers can enjoy, appreciate and love. That's why it should be considered arts.

Sports? Sports needs competition and at least some physical work. This is why running in the forest or such can no be considered sports since the element of competition is lacking. Chess composition, though, lives by being sent to tourneys, participation in tourneys, competition. That's why it should be considered sports.


Now what do you think?
What are we doing?

Science?
Arts?
Sports?



PS: Of course the examples given are debatable. That was intended!
 
(Read Only)pid=1282
(2) Posted by Branislav Djurašević [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 10:03]; edited by Branislav Djurašević [07-08-27]

About same subject I wrote a couple years ago in Serbian. Please visit Internet page:
http://sah.paracin.co.yu/Sta%20je%20sahovska%20kompozicija.pdf

Speaking about chess in global, one more aspect I had included in this article. This new aspect is play or fun. For me, activity of every chess players or chess composers (why not!?) incorporate, all four aspects (art, science, sport and fun) but in different proportion. Usually (not obligatory) chess players are predominantly relying on sport, chess composers on art, corresponding chess players on science, and amateurs on fun in their activity.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=1284
(3) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 10:13]

Thanks! :-)

Sadly I don't speak serbian.

Of course competition - sports - is not only by tourneys but also by tasks (which sometimes may lead to spending your whole life working on something, as Drumare did).
 
 
(Read Only)pid=1285
(4) Posted by Uri Avner [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 10:24]; edited by Uri Avner [07-08-27]

The question of "what we are doing" is very intersting and can touch upon and even contribute to some central dilemmas in philosophy, especially in the field of aesthetics.
I have some thoughts about it myself, but I must find the time to put them in this forum.
I would be intersted to have an English translation of Branko's article. Is it possible, Branko?
 
   
(Read Only)pid=1286
(5) Posted by Branislav Djurašević [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 10:46]; edited by Branislav Djurašević [07-08-27]

Uri, thanks for your interest. I will do my best, but it takes some time, since I have to find out a good translator. My English is on a quite moderate level.
 
 
(Read Only)pid=1287
(6) Posted by [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 17:25]

Not a science: scientific method does not apply at large,
and there's very little here that wasn't created by the
people who are involved in it in the first place. (For the same
reason, I don't believe abstract mathematics to be a science.)
One sine-qua-non of science is a well-defined, unambiguous and
and well-accepted terminology. No, clearly not a science.
Pseudo-science if you like.

The term 'sport' changes so much between different languages that
I'd say it's impossible to pin down. 'Sport' in England is very
much different from 'Sport' in Germany ... (or France).

I share the opinion of that old chess master who once was asked
the same question about 'real' chess: art or science?. He was
enjoyably brutal in his answer: "it's neither: it's a pastime."
 
 
(Read Only)pid=1289
(7) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Monday, Aug 27, 2007 18:25]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [07-08-27]

Maybe it's the ultimate crime:

 QUOTE 
Meat Loaf: Original Sin
I've been looking for the ultimate crime:
Infinite victims, infinitesimal time

 
 
(Read Only)pid=1290

No more posts


MatPlus.Net Forum General Science, arts or sports