Asian and Western thinking

[moyoaji]

If this is a thread for pulling theories out of leftfield, I'd like to go ahead and bring back the baseball hypothesis (=

Hopefully football continues to grow in popularity here in the United States so that our baseball leagues begin to weaken some, otherwise I fear the US will never produce strong professionals.

I can even see this effect at the amateur levels. I basically never pay attention to baseball and I play a lot of go - thank goodness my family is a football family. However, I have some friends who watch baseball and they never want to play go with me, even though they know I play it and one of them even knows the basics of how the game works. My grandparents also watch a lot of baseball, and while my grandfather has played chess with me he's never wanted to play go.

I think this is one of, if not the, key cultural difference between the east and west. Europe is lucky that they have kept baseball at bay and, as a direct result, have produced far stronger amateurs.

[Mikebass14]

Interesting question!

Based only on my personal experience living in China for five years, I think that the existence and content of this thread proves that Westerners and--at least Chinese--Easterners think differently. In China it's pretty much taken as a given that Chinese and Western people think differently. I think Tekesta's point that weiqi is a piece of Chinese culture is a good one. Go certainly seems to have more of a focus on relationships than Chess. It seems to almost intentionally stymy pure linear logic. I find it hard to imagine such a game becoming the prestige game of Western culture which is so focused on the scientific method. To me, the growth of chess along with European culture and Go along with East Asian culture makes sense.

I would also say that a figure like RJ--who rejects the mystical masterhood of the masters and searches for his own perfect system of clear definitions--would be less likely to arise in the East.

But, as others have noted, there's a history of mysticism in Europe, too, and reading--often considered the bedrock of go ability--is pretty much about logic. I think a Westerner who learns go learns some Eastern thinking, and if she's serious enough! her Western thinking off the board won't interfere with her play.

It's like my other love, jazz. You don't have to be a black American to play jazz, but it is--or at least was--a piece of black American culture, and if you really study it you inevitably must come to understand and feel black American culture.

[oren]

To me, the growth of chess along with European culture and Go along with East Asian culture makes sense.

What about the growth of Xiangqi in China and Shogi in Japan which both seem to be more popular in their respective countries than Go?

[Monadology]

It's like my other love, jazz. You don't have to be a black American to play jazz, but it is--or at least was--a piece of black American culture, and if you really study it you inevitably must come to understand and feel black American culture.

I'm pretty sure that would take actually living in and experiencing black American culture for an extended period of time.

[cyclops]

It's like my other love, jazz. You don't have to be a black American to play jazz, but it is--or at least was--a piece of black American culture, and if you really study it you inevitably must come to understand and feel black American culture.

I like the analogy. Some 30 years ago I lived in Zambia for two years. There I learned to like African Music esp Zairese. Some 15 years ago I learned to like Jazz a lot. Miles Davies, Herbie Hancock and so on. OC I knew lot of Jazz players are from the Afro American culture. Maybe I heard unconsciously the similarities between the Zairese Music and the Jazz. But it didn't materialize in my brain. I fail to hear Jazz as black American Music. No doubt it is. But for me it is not evident from the sound. Maybe for Americans (USA) it is evident. So I like your analogy very much but for me it applies less. When they sing Jazz, it is different. Billy Holyday, Louis Armstrong etc. sounds clearly black American to me.

[Mikebass14]

Good point, Oren, and cultural differences are probably overstated more than vice-versa. Go is more of a prestige game in Japan and China than Xiangqi and Shogi, though, and as one of the classical four arts was explicitly enshrined as in the center of high culture.

Monadology: yeah, I phrased that badly. I meant that if you study and love jazz you will understand and feel black culture more than you would if you didn't, not that you will have a complete or perfect understanding. My point is that with jazz and go, the culture it comes from is wrapped up in it and at least a little of that culture will rub off on you, whether you want it to or not.

Cyclops, have you ever listened to European jazz? It can be great, too, but it sounds pretty different most of the time.

[goTony]

Does not Chinese Chess and Shogi in Japan have more people playing them than GO? And are not both of these games much more linear, in fact they resemble chess, especially Chinese Chess. Does that affect the hypothesis?

We all know cultures are different as are ways of thinking about things. And while that might give a group of people an interest or an initial edge in an endeavour such as GO. In the end the Asians are strong at GO because they start playing young, have more opportunities to study and play it, and they take it far more seriously.

Either way I am a westerner and deeply appreciate the game and think it is far more interesting than Chess.

[Bill Spight]

Does not Chinese Chess and Shogi in Japan have more people playing them than GO? And are not both of these games much more linear, in fact they resemble chess, especially Chinese Chess. Does that affect the hypothesis?

Chess is linear?

[goTony]

Does not Chinese Chess and Shogi in Japan have more people playing them than GO? And are not both of these games much more linear, in fact they resemble chess, especially Chinese Chess. Does that affect the hypothesis?

Chess is linear?

Not literally, see it used in context of the original question.

[Boidhre]

Chess is linear?

Not literally, see it used in context of the original question.

In the context of the question it doesn't make much sense either. What do you mean by linear?

[skydyr]

Chess is linear?

Not literally, see it used in context of the original question.

In the context of the question it doesn't make much sense either. What do you mean by linear?

I think he meant that there's a much smaller search space, so it's not linear so much as more linear than go.

[Monadology]

In the context of the question it doesn't make much sense either. What do you mean by linear?

I think he meant that there's a much smaller search space, so it's not linear so much as more linear than go.

Given that he said that Go has more of a focus on "relationships" and that it's this feature that makes it much less linear than Chess, I'm not sure that the size of the search-space is at issue.

[leichtloeslich]

My mind autotranslated "chess is more linear" into "chess is more tactical".
Not sure if that's what was intended, but that's what I read.

[Boidhre]

My mind autotranslated "chess is more linear" into "chess is more tactical".
Not sure if that's what was intended, but that's what I read.

Singular goal is the first thing that springs to mind for me. It doesn't really make chess any less interesting a game though. Aesthetically I prefer go but chess is fascinating in its own way.

[goTony]

Perhaps I should open a new topic? Is Chess linear? : )

Actually the choice of linear to describe Chess is inaccurate and a poor choice based on the responses. (Perhaps I should not respond when I get off of work at 01:00) Like I said previously I used it in the sense of how I understood the opening question.

"The Greeks understood things as linear and simple, devoid of context, whereas the Chinese regarded the world as a complex place in constant flux, with objects best understood by their relationship to each other, rather than as separate entities."

Perhaps I should have said Chess has more complicated rules but is less complex and has fewer possible positions. Chess is often mentioned as the great Western intellectual game and is often contrasted to GO as an Eastern game. In the string of posts Chess was mentioned several times. Chess is a strategic and tactical game, with pieces of hierarchal value, and a total winner and loser. It has complex rules but less possibilities than GO. Most GO stones remain on the board influencing the game till the end.

The Eastern mind and the way it thinks was stipulated as a possibility for understanding GO. My point is that games such as Shogi and Chinese Chess that are far more similar to Western Chess are more widely played than GO. How, or does that affect the original question?

"So what do you think? Are people just people, or might there be something like an Asian way of thinking that is advantageous for playing go?"