Ethics Review: The Game of Chess

 

Ethics Review:  The Game of Chess

 

A full assessment of the symbolisms inherent in the game of chess, as relates to ethics and, more broadly, culture and worldview, is beyond the purview of even the most powerful minds.  If I am certain of anything, it is that I am not in that category, and the following discussion is at best only a starting point.   As with previous reviews on this blog, I dive into contentious waters.  The goal is to catalyze deep thought through controversy; and yet I also intend merit in the substance of my arguments.

 Before proceeding, however, with the hard-hitting critique down below, I’d like to sing the praises of chess.  I am a member of the local club and play avidly.  My father loved the game and instilled a deep appreciation from an early age.  He and I would push old wooden pieces on a warped board while listening to classical music, often the fugues of Bach, which he enjoyed the most.  Chess has been found congenial with music, and is embraced by many as art.  It provides versatile cerebral rewards, and affords the opportunity to develop sports-related virtues, including patience, focus and fortitude. 

 One virtue arising from chess, much lacking in our culture of one-upping and braggadocio, is humility.  All chess players lose many games, except maybe the very best in the world, and even they can’t beat the strongest computers, not even once.  Chess teaches us that failing and stumbling are a normal part of life, something we can learn from to advance our own personal growth.   In this context, losing is valuable and essential to victory.  The song, Try Everything, from the movie Zootopia, comes to mind …

Aside from the virtues it inspires, chess is simply fascinating.  In a recent New York Times article, David Segal and Dylan Loeb McClain write that chess games are “thrilling, cerebral contests that have elegance, aggression, subterfuge, brilliance and suspense.” 

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/04/business/chess-cheating-scandal-magnus-carlsen-hans-niemann.html

 

Needless to say, the following analysis does not detract from the game’s beauty, depth or salutary significance; or its function to build and edify community and mind. 

However, chess should be promoted and played with respect for its limitations, as well as its potential for misuse.  Yes, virtues can arise from playing chess, as they can from any sport or game that is practiced with devotion.  Below, however, I am concerned with the symbolisms inherent in the game itself.

Four ethical worries are presented.  These interrelate through the first, which can serve as a conceptual nexus, namely, the affinity between chess and Machiavelli.

 

I. Chess is Machiavellian

 

Leaving aside the tangential virtues mentioned above, the rules and framing of chess depict a certain form of governance and, by extension, the nature of society.

Let’s look at the New York Times quote again, a slightly longer version:

These games are thrilling, cerebral contests that have elegance, aggression, subterfuge, brilliance and suspense — “Game of Thrones” boiled down to its regicidal essence.

 

"Game of Thrones” boiled down to its regicidal essence--such is the core of chess, a way of thinking in which the power of the king is advanced at all costs.  I use the patriarchal term “king” to match the terminology of the game, in which the king piece has infinite value.  Why infinite?  Because if the king is captured, the player loses.  All other pieces, including the queen, can and should be sacrificed to protect and lead the king to domination. 

The Machiavellian idea, maximize the power of the king, is an example of a power theory.  Power theories stand in stark contrast to ethical theories.  The latter concern themselves with right and wrong, good versus evil, flourishing and freedom.  Power theories, in contrast, valorize the attainment of might, that is, the ability to control other people, groups, and the world. 

Some examples of power theories are:  strict cultural relativism (culture makes right); social contract theory (the contract makes right); and legal positivism (legal makes right).  In all these cases, those who are powerful enough to control culture, contract or law are considered ultimate.

In regard to Plato’s classic question, Do the gods love that which is holy because it is holy? Or is it holy because it is loved by the gods? power theories side with the latter.  They claim that those with power to control determine what is holy, good, and right.   In this sense, power theories are an elaboration on a shared axiomatic assumption:  might makes right.

Importantly, power theories can be one element of a healthy governance.  All of us are concerned with getting or maintaining power in some way or other.  However, when not tempered by ethics, power theories lead to chaos and cruelty.  Vladimir Putin's dictatorial control, effectively a king, has allowed him to wantonly invade Ukraine, committing numerous atrocities.  In pursuit of his obsession to reestablish the old Russian Empire, he has taken all of us to the brink of World War III.

Chess and Machiavelli go hand-in-hand.  The well-known idiom ‘to treat someone as nothing but a pawn’ is an allusion to how chess is played.  Sadly, treating others as mere pawns happens a lot.  History shows that such reductive calculations engender cruelty and ignorance. 

Can chess players dive into the beauty and challenge of the game, without being seduced by its brutal worldview?

The answer is an obvious and clear yes.  Still, there are dangers.  Some individuals overreact to such an enthralling, aesthetic game, equating it with life itself.  There is, as well, a sexist bias built into chess.  Below, I also discuss how dictators can and have weaponized chess for propaganda purposes. 

II. Chess normalizes bellicosity

 Chess symbolizes violence.  As befits a campaign of ruthless regicide, there is no mercy or compassion in the rules.  Nor is there, in the framing, a representation of human rights or equal-justice-under-law. 

Machiavelli’s The Prince, makes space for kindness and mercy, as these often advance the leader’s power.  Chess, though, has none of this gentility.  The game is saturated with literally black-and-white war imagery.    There are two sides, each trying to topple the other’s king.  The names and shapes of the pieces suggest medieval warfare:  knights, bishops, kings, queens, pawns and rooks.  The rook is shaped like a castle turret.  Its etymology hails to the Persian rok, which refers to an armored war chariot.    

Except for rarest of exceptions, play proceeds through the “capture” or “elimination” of pieces on the board.  The white or black pieces, taken as a whole, seem to represent a nation state or an army.  Armies are typically composed of thousands of soldiers, and so it is easy to visualize the loss of a piece as a representation of many deaths.  In a typical endgame, only several pieces are left on the board, portraying a full-scale massacre. 

Many competitive games and sports are unyielding, it is true.  Tennis, for example.  The difference is that chess blatantly incorporates war violence.  When a point is lost in tennis, there is no implication that someone has been slain, or a whole battalion lost. 

Chess players not only freely eliminate their opponent’s pieces, but their own as well.  It is expected that you intentionally march your troops to their end.  Even shooter video games, where death is constant, such as Call of Duty, often weave a narrative of loyalty and mission, one that serves a good end.  In chess there is none of that.  Every piece can and should be sacrificed in service of an all-important king toward a victory that has no moral content.  In the real world, this translates into a brutal nihilism.

III. Chess insinuates egoism and, to some degree, its evil twin egotism 

The all-importance of the king bares similarities to forms of egoism, narcissism, and solipsism.  In general, these are all selfish 'isolated soul' worldviews.

Egoism is the philosophical theory that everyone should act to maximize their own rational self-interest.  This theory is consonant with the symbolisms of chess, especially if the player identifies with the king.  Above, I said "march your troops."  I could just as easily have said, 'march the king's troops.'  If the king falls, the player loses, another blur of the bounds between player and king.  

Egoism, or rational selfishness, in addition to a nod to Machiavelli, also conduces to an unhealthy psychological state.  This state has a similar name, inviting the comparison of a dark twin:  egotism.  Egotism is fundamentally narcissistic, thinking that you are superior to others.  Why are you superior?  Just because.

Although being rationally selfish (egoism) and psychologically selfish (egotism) are supposedly different, egoist philosophers, following the path of Machiavelli, typically argue that humans are base, selfish animals.  Egoists also tend to see the world as one big pie, and that everyone is an isolated individual in constant competition for the finite slices.  On this view, there will be, of necessity, winners and losers.

Chess fits this model well.  It is not hard to envision chess as a competition between selfish actors coldly calculating for dominance of 64 slices of a finite pie (8x8 chessboard). 

Egoism, I want to stress, is just one philosophical perspective among many.  There are numerous others, a spectrum of theories in political science, psychology, sociology, philosophy and other disciplines.  Unlike egoism, many theories point out that life is interconnected and multi-dimensional.  It’s not a zero-sum game as chess depicts.  

Relational psychologists underscore the fact that self-identity is molded by the quality of one's relationships.  The ‘self’ comprises irreducible, holistic interactions.  On this model, society advances through mutually beneficial relationships that normalize equality and respect.  

Chess, however, is a loom for linear win-lose logic.  The complementary picture of the world is narrow:  a quantifiable pie hostage to individualistic power grabs.

IV.  Patriarchy

 

Historically most chess players by far have been male.  The game simulates aggressive combat that lauds the player who ‘knocks over’ the other’s king.  At the same time, the rules of chess don’t even acknowledge traditional feminine values, such as kindness, caring, and mutuality.  This one-side-ism fits an ancient pattern:  lionize male traits and ignore the work that women have done throughout history. 

That said, we live in a time where the traditional two-gender system is starting to yield. Restrained by oppressive gender roles for thousands of years, women and girls are beginning to gain more freedoms and now play more chess.  To the extent that the male-dominated chess world--its organizations, communities and players--welcome women into the game, chess can soar as a vehicle for helping them to break out of traditional restrictions. 

On the other hand, chess has more trouble helping male players break out of traditional masculine roles.  The game involves spatial, logical and mathematical calculations.  It makes no space for ‘emotional work’ -- work that requires perceptive, real-time, quick decisions that involve empathy, psychology and diplomacy.   Nor does it make space for 'emotional intelligence' or 'emotional competence,' skills that concern validation and healthy management of a range of emotions.

In Summary

In a way, the game of chess is in the same boat as the much-analyzed Barbie doll.  Although it is ‘just a game’ or ‘just a doll,’ they both convey cultural messages, and so invite criticism (see the Barbie movie for more on that front). 

Chess is drawing bigger and bigger audiences, which is wonderful.  But the ‘stories’ told through the moves of a chess games, which have been likened to music or poetry in their logical, beautiful steps, can be over-idolized.  When this happens, the game achieves a talismanic status, as when Bobby Fischer declared, “Chess is life.” 

Chess, however, is not life.  The game offers wonderful benefits, but it is not a mandala.  It is not a decipherment in a nutshell for how we should understand the world; or how we should live or treat other people or the environment or, for that matter, how we should see ourselves.

Unfortunately, some dictators have found that chess makes for a useful tool in their propaganda kit [1].  They do see life as chess:  a competition between powerful selfish males who use violence and war to achieve their ends; who treat everyone else as an expendable object to maximize their own power.  Joseph Stalin promoted chess as a national game.  He also intentionally starved 5 million Soviet citizens to death.  This slow mass torture didn’t matter to Stalin.  The millions of people whose bodies withered, eating their own organs bit by bit, were pawns in his political equation. 

A dictator like Stalin centers his life on the control of people to maximize his own aggrandizement.  Such a person, having risen to the top, thereby demonstrating skill at brutal mass control, isn't going to order the dissemination of a game, namely, chess, that isn't consonant with his worldview and methods.

In light of the real-life horrors committed by egotistic dictators, who see the world as one big chessboard, it is vital that responsible players of the game help to prevent the misuse of chess as a tool for propaganda.  A strategy of governance based on the Machiavellian symbols in chess is an evil strategy.  I already mentioned Putin, a dictator who could bring about World War III.  Here is Einstein on what will happen if that occurs:

I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

One way to keep chess in perspective is to branch out.  An example is the cooperative game of Dungeons & Dragons.  D&D players adventure together in a fantasy world of their own mutual creation.  Opportunities for self-expression and ethical dilemma branch as wildly as Hydra necks.  One can, for instance, roleplay as a bard half-orc and write original poems and songs.  As the adventure continues, the characters evolve together, helping each other to flourish. 

One way to put human rights into the game of chess would be to rename the king and the queen.  Non-gendered names for these two pieces would remove a blatant bias. 

Also, get rid of the war imagery. Make the pieces represent animals or insects or molecules or clouds or something. There's no need to give fascist or communist dictators easier access to chess as a propaganda tool by showcasing Machiavelli.  Chess is a canvas for beautiful logical combinations, which are completely separate from its crude, fallacious foray into political science.

If you think the above suggestions are overly intrusive, keep in mind that major chess organizations and players, including Magnus Carlsen, are pressing for radical changes in how the game is played, such as randomizing the opening position (“960 chess”). 

The future of chess is revolution.  The changes to come should include ethical improvements in the symbolisms.  Like the appearance of the Barbie doll, appearances in chess can affect how we see the world, and need to be updated as humanity progresses, struggling toward a better, more democratic future.

 

 

====================

 

 Footnote

(1) https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0s71f0cw#article_main

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Air Force member sets themself on fire to protest the Biden/Netanyahu genocide

 https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/26/air-force-member-fire-death-israeli-embassy-00143269

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/02/27/biden-human-rights-00143379

Excerpt from the second link:

==============

During the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, then-Vice President Biden opposed U.S. military intervention in Libya, despite dictator Moammar Gadhafi’s threats of mass slaughter. He also did not want President Barack Obama to side with protesters against Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak, whom Biden considered a valuable U.S. ally. These past Biden positions still reverberate among Arab American and Muslim American activists now watching Gaza.

When he withdrew U.S. troops from Afghanistan in 2021, Biden knew he’d crush the educational dreams of Afghan women. He nonetheless dismissed the idea that America owed them anything.

==============

Biden did not only "crush the educational dreams of Afghan women."  He allowed both women and girls to be turned into slaves under the Taliban.  And, yes, we did owe the women and girls of Afghanistan further protection--after protecting them for 20 years, giving them a glimpse of what basic freedom can be like.

Biden sickens me.  I may not vote for him.

https://owlwholaughs.blogspot.com/2023/12/op-ed-biden-is-wrong-to-support.html

Poem: Vortex

 

Vortex

 

eyes big as the Earth in a socket of Void,

blue and green

and so much distant cold

for beams of justice to travel a lifetime and not reach.

what matters

takes place in the sparkle of daily treasure,

which surely props up the sky.

and yet, somehow,

so much outside and around--and especially inside--

never gets heard or seen or known.

there is only this fix,  

this label of beauty as value,

and the fight to own it,

carried out by eyes with dilated pits.

better to suck down the blue and green and gold and red and

amber and mahogany of dawn--

to gorge, to devour, to own, to swill--

while days turn to narrower tomorrows,

again to witness whatever crave can be contrived

again.

 

================================

2/21/24 ... sound mod ... 

This poem is inspired by the concept of an "ignorance vortex":  dysfunctional culture transmits ignorance from generation to generation, thereby preventing the collective consciousness of humanity from advancing ethically.  It is not 'human nature' that holds us back and traps us in warfare.  We are, instead, trapped in an ignorance vortex.  Peace is possible, but first we must deal with the vortex (which heavily resists, of course).  More here:

https://owlwholaughs.blogspot.com/2023/11/op-ed-trillions-of-happy-humans-its.html

Poem: What is Done

 

 

What is Done

 

in the smarm-festered upper floors,

servants with big smiles

coil around a tonsilitis of money,

which insures their lack of voice

and bloodless replica of care.

 

elsewhere, across the world,

 a child is punished for the joy of their giggle,

and put to work in a field:

a furrow where hope, good, wonder and dream

can’t endure, pretend, believe or escape.

 

in the latest movie, all the rave,

a druid enspells with rowan

to tame the cruel of an evil prince,

who gleams serpent-toothed of skin;

 

and yet 

there is no tender conscience of sidekick

to abate the world's de facto kings, who proclaim 

off-with-their-heads.

 

what is this endless thirst for lies,

gulped down through the intestines of skyscrapers

and compartmentalized cubicles?

what if this mandate to hide from what is done

is itself an anchor that pulls neckties to drown?

===========================

3/17 ... fixed misspelled words 

2/18/24 ... mods for clarity and flow

It's men (kings) not women (queens) who have led humanity to the brink of doom

Poem: Candenza For a Witch

 

Cadenza For a Witch

 

raven whose feathers are hummingbirds.

whose stride

reconciles butterflies with vultures.

 

her spread wings

a landscape from honeysuckle to bloodroot.

her heart moon-kilned, agile of inner fire,

where dawn and evening kiss.

 

her  crown

around the world births new days,

as she dances wildward,

leaps to gather anise from stars,

or pluck mangos from noon.

 

she chides landslides.

threads brambles to sew petals.

soothes beaches

as sandy fortunes skip away,

whisked into sparks of receding crystal.

 

humans alone

cannot be salved by her spells,

shufflling along with their old fears

to muss the weave of her mandalic tresses. 

 

humans,

they have no conjure anymore,

no cauldron to summon ancestors,

no asphodels to tease

from their avarice of laws.

========================

2/17 -18 ... changed some words for clarity

SE Cupp sums up the raw power of xenophobia

 

On CNN News, political commentator and pundit SE Cupp stepped it up with an unnervingly trenchant statement.  It shows two things.  The first is the sheer power of fear when bottled to fuel an engine of xenophobia.  The second thing Cupp brings out so well, with sharp, layered phrases, is Trump’s skill as a con man.

Here is a paraphrase of what she said:

 

First he [Trump] managed to get conservatives to stop caring about conservatism … then he got Christians to stop caring about scripture, the Bible, ‘what would Jesus do?’, now Jesus is woke … He got Republicans … to stop caring about America and what democracy should mean and … he got the patriotic military-loving far right to stop caring about national security and to stop caring about our servicemen and -women, our troops … I mean, it’s a feat, what Donald Trump has done to the right in a very short period of time.

 

 You can also watch at this link, starting at 5:37:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6AuqJ6aoDw

========================

Poem: Ghosts In the Leaves

 

Ghosts In the Leaves

 

dangles of pirouettes,

shawls strewn over invisible mouths

which once writhed in battle.

 

venules who once were sinews,

the lunged flesh far too young,

fury surged to flutter crimson--

 

legions of them, these waving flag,

acute for a slashing season or two,

before congealing in a garden of rust.

 

silent, then, as rot 

to feed those memorials risen above,

the branches of statuesque oaks.

 

every autumn more lobes drip,

laying their own vanguard colors

across a graveyard of whispers

to testify in the breeze.

====================

7/21/24 ... changed some words, not going to be a sleek poem ... 

2/13 changed some words

2/12 ... changed some words 

Poem: In the Kingdom of Invisible Threats

 

In the Kingdom of Invisible Threats

 

sly anxious heads

scramble in official indecency,

trapped and rough

under a suffice of polite surfaces.

 

such neat, preened miens,

postured to abjure any garland of greed;

as if the world turned on a daily smile,

and gutting the future was rational.

 

when not asked, they say,

yes yes yes,

a freudian slip,

obeisance automatic

if the taste is intense.

lies mean nothing

if pretended not to be had

by those who inflict.

 

better to toe-kiss the haves

than the cesspool of the horde,

peckpeckpeckpeckpeckpeckpeck

on the keys,

lock that rare honest thought

in a prison of bland cruel,

far beneath you.

============================