I call that "quick application of knowledge":)



No, it means that they need to understand their thinking better in order to improve their teaching.



At the moment:)

Tami said:

If people can bear another mention of Kahneman, he refers to Econs and Humans (his caps). Econs are apparently economists obsessed with rational-agent theories and have no time for psychologists who talk about intuition and so on. He makes several snide remarks about Econs - e.g. "Econs and their friends (if they have any)". But he also says it is extraordinarily difficult for people who believe in "rational" theories to unbelieve them even when they are proven to be wrong. He cites a case of Econs doing experiments to discredit psychologists (this was stated as the Econs' purpose in their research paper) but the experiments proved the psychologists right and I gather this result was published. But it seems that in such cases, the believers do not change. Instead they just chalk it up as a trivial anomaly and go on believing their core theory. Of course we see this often among a certain type of religious people, but it seems to be more widespread. Mind you, this anecdote also suggests a degree of hubris among psychologists.

So, it seems, as you say, that we'll have to continue accepting "different strokes". However, I also gather that the constant clashes between the Humans and Econs have eventually led to major inter-disciplinary work, so maybe it is not all in vain.

I really hate coming across people who need, nay beg, to have a rule they can apply to each and every situation in order to divine the next move. It really ticks me off. :p

_________________
North Lecale

In spite of that, we still like you.

_________________
Help make L19 more organized. Make an index: https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=5207

A rant about Kahneman that is irrelevant to the main discussion is in the hidden. Read if you care and skip if you don't.

As an addendum to lemmata's point:

I spent today playing at Hiro Go Club. Hiro is just over the hill from Kure, and I like the go club there because it has a nice atmosphere and friendly players. The building looks like it was put up in the 1960s and seems not to have altered ever since.

My opponent was Mr Waki, who is (I think) Number 1 in Kure. I played with him a few times when I first visited Hiro Go Club five years ago, but playing him at two stones today I could begin to appreciate his strength much better than before. He is very skilful at sabaki, and finding the vital strategic points. I had to resign the first game, but the second was better and I lost by 14 points. I felt a peculiar mixture of frustration and pleasure. There was nothing that I could do against his positions, but I had to admire his flexibility. It will make me try harder to consider less obvious alternatives when reading. He said, quite unprompted, that I have become two stones stronger than last time, so that made me feel very happy. He then treated me to sashimi.

Later I played with Mr Ito, but still can't beat him on 2 stones, either. But he speaks English and gives very instructive reviews. I asked him about some confusing go terms, and this is what he said:

利き (kiki) - forcing moves - these are forcing moves that you have not yet played, like money in your purse

利かし (kikashi) - forcing moves - these are forcing moves that have been used, like money spent

厚み (atsumi) - thickness - according to Mr Ito, atsumi means the strong area (near a wall, etc.)

厚さ (atsusa) - thickness - this means strong stones themselves, and it comes in several grades - a wall with two eyes in top grade thickness; if the wall has no weaknesses, but is not yet 100% alive, it is medium-grade thickness; if the wall has a defect, it is low-grade thickness.

I don't know to what extent Mr Ito was mixing in his own theories and opinions, but at least his remarks indicate that Japanese players

a) differentiate between a thick area (atsumi) and thick stones (atsusa)
b) do not view thickness in black and white (i.e., instead of just "thick" and "thin", there are degrees of thickness)

Point b harmonises with explanations made in Mimura`s Fuseki Bible* (pp. 82-3 if you have it), in which he notes how the strength of an enemy formation can vary according to whether there are weaknesses to aim for, and so on.

*三村流布石の虎の巻 (MyCom)

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

contents here viewtopic.php?p=116863#p116863

There's a balance here. While it may be less informative, it's also easier to understand.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

contents here viewtopic.php?p=116863#p116863

A wall without any territory potential is not thickness so it's pointless to criticise those who use the Japanese definition for something they don't do. Furthermore, -sa and -mi imply a built-in degree indicator. In addition, Atsugi changes its meaning in a regular and predictable way according to the stage of the game, so that is another built-in modifier.

Also, although this may come as a shock, it is possible, and usual, in Japanese to add words like "with territory potential" when talking about thickness.

contents here viewtopic.php?p=116863#p116863

The quest to try to quantify that which is not easily explained is an educational endeavor, but one which I fear can sometimes lead to over-simplification. Sometimes the meaning or feeling of a word can bring about a thought more complex than that which can be explained by words. Ideas such as love, wisdom, and knowledge, for example, can have dictionary definitions, but those definitions are shallow without experience, emotion, and the unique interaction that a person has with those terms in the course of their life.

Fundamentally, this is the problem I have with universal definitions of these terms. The process of defining them can be pedagogical, but seems narrow-minded at best.

_________________
be immersed

In a tiny dictionary of Japanese Go terms, I found three definitions for atsui / types of "thick".

If I understand the definitions right (by translation kanji per kanji), ...

... the first one belongs to "shape", i.e. stones that need not fear their eye shape nor any aji against it.

... the second one belongs to "outside power". i. e. a shape, with this "outside power" being strong and solid, that develops threatening potential into it's environment.

... the third one belongs to "Go", i.e. the overall situation in the game is advantageous.

+ + + + + + + + + +

Further meanings associated with the kanji for "thick" seem to be "tall" and "deep".

+ + + + + + + + + +

In a saying that seems to be similar to a description of "do not advance near to thickness", there is used a combination of the kanji for "thick" and for "aji" to name that what you should not advance near to.

_________________
The really most difficult Go problem ever: https://igohatsuyoron120.de/index.htm
Igo Hatsuyōron #120 (really solved by KataGo)

May I step in here?

As I was curious to know what Japanese people thought about Japanese terms, I thought I would ask a Japanese. Perhaps Mr Ito is not especially strong - maybe 4d or 5d by Hiroshima standards (which are quite severe by Japanese standards, or so I hear), but he is not weak and can speak English too, so it was possible for me to double-check what he was saying.




First, we`re not necessarily talking about walls.

Second, if a wall has two eyes, it has two eyes. If eyeshape can still be taken away, then obviously it does not have two eyes yet, but would have a defect instead, which would make the wall low-grade thickness, if it were thick at all.

Third, I don`t mind Robert sharing his ideas, but I would like to ask him to be more tolerant and respectful of others` opinions. His theory is not necessarily the "proper model", although it may - or may not - have merit.



I admit my own English was a little bit careless here. I meant to use "wall" as an example of something that is usually thick, but not as a synonym for "thickness". Perhaps if I rewrite it like this there will be less chance of misunderstanding:

厚み　(atsumi) - thickness - according to Mr Ito, atsumi means a strong area (the area near a thick group)

厚さ (atsusa) - thickness - this means strong stones themselves, and it can be graded - a powerful, living group (for an example, a wall with two complete eyes) is top-grade thickness; a powerful group with no weakness (for example, a ponnuki), but which might yet die, is medium-grade thickness; a powerful group with a defect is low-grade thickness.

Speaking personally, I think this is a useful foundation to build on. There are all kinds of other considerations to take into account, such a nerai (aims), aji, influence and potential territory, but for a starting point it is simple, reasonable and easy to use.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

Tami, thanks -- off topic, just for fun:
do you happen to have any favorite one-liners (or ones you find interesting)
with these terms: 厚み, 厚さ, 厚い, 熱い, 暑い ? I'm curious about their usage in Japanese literature (Go or otherwise).
(And yes, I know 熱い and 暑い are merely homonyms with 厚い, but I'm still curious to see some sample sentences.)

I thought it might be instructional (at least to me) to see how 厚み, 厚さ, and 厚い are used in Go writings.
Only if you have the time, of course. Thanks.

contents here viewtopic.php?p=116863#p116863

For now, I`d like to confine discussion to Japanese terms.

I`m a 1k closing in on 1d (KGS), 2d on the Hiroshima scale. I`m not strong enough to provide critique of Robert`s ideas, although I do have some views concerning them, which I would prefer to keep to myself. If I choose to learn and apply one or more of his concepts, and it brings me results, then I will delighted to express my gratitude here.

This is my study journal, and it`s about my changing ideas. It could be that at times I`m talking complete rubbish, but I`m not asking anyone to buy books from me or engage me as a teacher or indeed to take me seriously. As I say, Robert, like anybody else, is welcome to share his ideas here if he wishes to. However, if somebody wants to argue earnestly and at length for the primacy of their own theories and definitions, they should kindly use their own thread, not mine.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here:

Tami said:





I think it may be misleading to say a strong area near a thick group. The point is, there is no real thickness there yet. The stones that create atsumi rather have outward influence and have strong potential to become thickness, but they are just a stage on the way towards atsusa.

In fact, I think the single most enlightening comment I have seen on the topic is that the goal of the tick player must be to turn atsumi into atsusa. Apart from highlighting the difference between them, it gives a directionality to one's strategy and makes a topic too often evaluated in static terms into a dynamic one.

The commonest mistake, I think, among weaker players who handle thickness is that they try to use atsumi as atsusa and end up with problems such as their eyeless walls being counter-attacked.

And as I think even this brief comment shows, yes it is perfectly adequate to talk about this simply with Japanese or Japanese-based terms.

Thank you, John. Your comment clarifies your earlier one very well for me, and along with Mr Ito`s help, I feel that I`m moving forward in my understanding.

_________________
Learn the "tea-stealing" tesuji! Cho Chikun demonstrates here: