Wednesday, August 1, 2007

The Satanic, Miss Rand, and Caissa

Why do I play chess? A deeper question, though, is: why do I keep coming back to it, after long periods of abstinence following a burnout? What profound human need does it satisfy for me? I think the answer lies in a combination of the following two ideas:

1) In Satanism, the way to immortality is through ego fulfillment. And what is a chess game, if not the battle of two egos trying to crush the life out of one another? (This idea, of immortality through ego fulfillment, can also be found in The Fountainhead.) In the Satanic Bible, Anton LaVey writes:

“If a person has been vital throughout his life and has fought to the end for his earthly existence, it is this ego which will refuse to die, even after the expiration of the flesh which housed it. Young children are to be admired for their driving enthusiasm for life. This is exemplified by the small child who refuses to go to bed when there is something exciting going on, and when once put to bed, will sneak down the stairs to peek through the curtain and watch. It is this childlike vitality that will allow the Satanist to peek through the curtain of darkness and death and remain earthbound.” (94)

2) In Ayn Rand’s “Open Letter to Boris Spassky,” she argues that chess, when practiced as an obsession rather than simple recreation, is an escape used by men who cannot deal with the difficulties of the real world:

“You, the chess professionals, live in a special world—a safe, protected, orderly world, in which all the great, fundamental principles of existence are so firmly established and obeyed that you do not even have to e aware of them.”

“The process of thinking is man’s basic means of survival. The pleasure of performing this process successfully—of experiencing the efficacy of one’s own mind—is the most profound pleasure possible to men, and it is their deepest need, on any level of intelligence, great or small. So one can understand what attracts you to chess: you believe that you have found a world in which all irrelevant obstacles have been eliminated, and nothing matters, but the pure, triumphant exercise of your mind’s powers.”

“Unlike algebra, chess does not represent the abstraction—the basic pattern—of mental effort; it represents the opposite: it focuses mental effort on a set of concretes, and demands such complex calculations that a mind has no room for anything else. By creating an illusion of action and struggle, chess reduces the professional player’s mind to an uncritical, unvaluing passivity toward life. Chess removes the motor of intellectual effort—the question ‘What for?’—and leaves a somewhat frightening phenomenon: intellectual effort devoid of purpose.”

“If—for any number of reasons, psychological or existential—a man comes to believe that the living world is closed to him, that he has nothing to seek or to achieve, that no action is possible, then chess becomes his antidote, the means of drugging his own rebellious mind that refuses fully to believe it and to stand still.” (Philosophy: Who Needs It?, 55-6.)

In spite of Ayn Rand’s moralizing tone (which certainly isn’t going to stop me from playing and studying chess as much as I want), I think she has an interesting point. To use myself as an example, I have always felt a sense of alienation from physical reality: I don’t much like to “get my hands dirty”, and the thought of applying my love of mathematics and the sciences to being an engineer doesn’t really excite me (though I do have great respect for those in this profession.) Perhaps I could aspire to be a theoretical physicist; however, these days that largely entails heavy-duty mathematics, and I don’t think that would really satisfy my ego in the same way chess does.

Alright, then: so the world of chess and the world of mathematics/theoretical physics each represent a sort of “closed system”, in which one may find joy and fulfillment independently from the physical world. The latter has the advantage of being more productive, generally applicable, and eternal, while the former has the advantage of directly satisfying the ego and providing the successful individual with a more tangible sense of accomplishment and recognition from his peers.

What to do?

I’ve wrestled with this question on and off for years, and I’ve come to the conclusion that I cannot discover the answer by pure thought and introspection. Instead, I have to just, um, try things out. What I would currently like to do (but have little idea how to begin) is to find a method of approach to mathematics/physics by which I will have no fear that my efforts will go to waste, unnoticed, and whatever aspect of my soul that needed chess will be sated.

12 comments:

transformation said...

as i told you in reply to your comment at my last post, if you get to go back and read it, i left work with nascent flu early tonight, so cannot say too much, right now, but:

nice post.

here, here. totally agree.

i wonder, what is the point of chess, if one is not in the master, gm, or im slot...

is it avoidance. for sure.

at the same time, my guru, first and formost, said, "Always follow your heart". What if i said, 'what could GM Seirawan want with me?' and 'why would he want to know me or see me?' but he did.

fifteen visits and 1,500 emails latter, we are still talking. sometimes, six a day, etc.

you. dont worry where it leads. follow your heart, young man.

remember the guy who solved fermats last theorum? in an attic, not even able to disclose to his best friend he of his pursuit, at once secretive, insecure, and ardently committed and sure.

or columbus, setting foot for the new world, mistaken in what or where it was or what it meant, or where it would lead, but it did lead to SOMETHING.

be the columbus of your own soul, your own activities, share your heart with others, and follow your bliss.

inevitably, you will get to where you are suppost to be.

how could i know that id meet the Great Zen Master, Dae Soen Sa Nim, cum Dropping Ashes on the Buddha, and that great translater Stephen Mitchel would show up on our trip, all over Korea, or we'd climb a hill together, and id tell him of my two acid trips from 1984?

or an architect would become a broker, and hit morgan stanley as few ever did, with force and drive, then be fired, then go work at Home Depot or Lowes, and become and expert in flooring, then become the store trainer in fork lifts, cherry pickers, and reach trucks, certifying all in safety and competency?

...
..
.

your life is its own fractal.

not your moms, or dads, or sisters, or best friends.

cast off doubt. fear and doubt are the worst, as my guru always said.

then, you will and can find all you need, and love the world, love your life, and love others and contribute.

Blue Devil Knight said...

Great letter from Rand. I agree with her to a large degree (I wonder what she would say about professional baseball players and the like).

phorku said...

I don’t agree with Ayn or Anton.
There is no immortality. The best you can hope for is to be remembered for what you accomplished.

Ayn’s statements are interesting and perhaps nearly true except for 3 things:

1. Chess professional <> Person obsessed with chess. Many ‘chess professionals’ have real jobs and other interests.
2. Unlike algebra, chess does not represent the abstraction— it is an abstraction of war and other things. What is chess to you? To me it is simply a recreation and a tool to improve my thinking processes.
3. “If—for any number of reasons, psychological or existential—a man comes to believe that the living world is closed to him, that he has nothing to seek or to achieve, that no action is possible, then chess becomes his antidote, the means of drugging his own rebellious mind that refuses fully to believe it and to stand still.” – It seems that chess is not the problem here but the person. There are many people who have this problem but do not play chess, they escape in other ways.

Underpromoted Knight said...

BDK--She mentions elsewhere in the essay that sports allow us to see some human abilities (i.e. physical) developed to perfection. For intellectual ability, there are many productive careers already available.

phorku--The "immortality" is a metaphor. I think each of them would agree with you, though mostly Rand (have you read The Fountainhead? I think you would really like it, based on your comment.)

1.It's not a matter of the chess professionals' having other jobs or not so much as the fact that they devote so much of their intellectual energy to a "substitute world"--that is what she found so appalling.

2.I agree that chess is a microcosm of life in many ways. We're dealing with various layers of abstraction here, and I don't entirely agree with Rand's simplistic assessment (though I don't entirely disagree either.)

3."It seems that chess is not the problem here but the person."
Precisely.

trans--I'll write you a separate email, especially since I want to know more about your relationship with Seirawan.

transformation said...

et. al.

likesforests said...

I love the quote by Josh Waitzkin. It's very inspiring for those of us seeking to master the endgame.

Chess Dreamer said...

Can you help me please? Take a look at http://damourax.blogspot.com

I'm trying to become a knight!

adam brown said...

Hello I just entered before I have to leave to the airport, it's been very nice to meet you, if you want here is the site I told you about where I type some stuff and make good money (I work from home): here it is

chess addict said...

are you still there? there are so many dead blogs about chess!

chess addict said...

Hi! can we xlink with my chess blog which features daily chess updates and news? just let me know and i'll add you..thank you.

Organic Meatbag said...

Awwwww, I thought this blog was going to be about actual Knights, with the chainmail, and the Excalibur sword, and the chivalry and whatnot... so how about that chess?

wsxwhx713 said...

IS VERY GOOD..............................