It is currently Sun May 25, 2025 8:19 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #21 Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2015 3:36 pm 
Judan

Posts: 6270
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 797
I see instinct as a bad word for "very fast initial knowledge application" and not as what the word often seems to be associated with: "mixture of emotion / subconscious thinking without explicit knowledge application". Even my emotion about moves is driven by my knowledge.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #22 Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:21 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 603
Liked others: 43
Was liked: 139
Rank: 6-7k KGS
Quote:
Even though captures are not such a big factor in go as in chess, my experience is that forcing yourself to do a three-ply search on your candidate moves can offer at least two-stones instant improvement for most amateurs, and a five-ply search will get you winning tournaments.

The plies have to be the correct ones, however. I don't know how many times I've read out something that works, only to find out when some of the stones in the sequence I read out have been played that there was an atari I missed. :oops: Or, my opponent plays a move I hadn't considered that scuppers my plans. :mad:

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #23 Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:33 pm 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2777
Location: Seattle, WA
Liked others: 251
Was liked: 549
KGS: oren
Tygem: oren740, orenl
IGS: oren
Wbaduk: oren
RobertJasiek wrote:
I see instinct as a bad word for "very fast initial knowledge application" and not as what the word often seems to be associated with: "mixture of emotion / subconscious thinking without explicit knowledge application". Even my emotion about moves is driven by my knowledge.


So you're misunderstanding what people mean by instinct. Without some instinct, I don't think you could play go very much.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #24 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 5:03 am 
Judan

Posts: 6270
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 797
What then IYO do people think that instinct was? Do they have the same instinct as an absolute beginner without any knowledge of go theory and as a player with some established rank and some (or even much) knowledge? I.e., is IYO instinct independent of go theory knowledge? Depending on what it is that you call instinct, I might or might not have some.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #25 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 6:18 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 558
Location: Carlisle, England
Liked others: 196
Was liked: 342
IGS: Reisei 1d
Online playing schedule: When I can
RobertJasiek wrote:
What then IYO do people think that instinct was? Do they have the same instinct as an absolute beginner without any knowledge of go theory and as a player with some established rank and some (or even much) knowledge? I.e., is IYO instinct independent of go theory knowledge? Depending on what it is that you call instinct, I might or might not have some.


If it's of any help to you, I think most people mean "System One" responses by "instinct", meaning the kind of ideas that come to mind automatically as a result of past experience, study, and so on. I don't think we're talking about instinct in the sense of how animals know what to do in various wildlife scenarios. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow for an overview.

I think daal wants to learn how to overcome his faulty System One responses, and as I said before it may well be a matter of making deliberate attempts to apply different ideas, even when they go against such "instincts".

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

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #26 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:12 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
Tami wrote:
I don't think we're talking about instinct in the sense of how animals know what to do in various wildlife scenarios. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow for an overview..


I thought we were talking about this and how it translates to most people's playing in Go.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #27 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:15 am 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8859
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 349
Was liked: 2076
GD Posts: 312
Hi Robert,
RobertJasiek wrote:
I see instinct as a bad word for "very fast initial knowledge application"
Is there such a word in German for "very fast initial knowledge application" ?
( I'm only curious; I speak zero German. )
RobertJasiek wrote:
What then IYO do people think that instinct was?
Again, I'm only curious what you think about this:
Suppose we label "the best move you come up with under some time period t" as a "t-instinct" move.

Examples: 1-second instinct move; 3-second instinct move; 0.5-second instinct move, etc.

Then, when you say:
RobertJasiek wrote:
I don't believe in instincts
(in terms of Go moves),
maybe we can rephrase it as you "don't trust your t-instinct moves,"
for some given range of t
-- Would this be a fair description ?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #28 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 7:16 am 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
Does playing a tesuji count as instinct if you can correctly identify it in a given shape in 1 second rather than playing what would be considered the "normal" response?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #29 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:52 am 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2777
Location: Seattle, WA
Liked others: 251
Was liked: 549
KGS: oren
Tygem: oren740, orenl
IGS: oren
Wbaduk: oren
I had a recent review which was interesting. I played a fairly slack move. My teacher said when he was back in Korea, his teacher would force him to just play the correct move on the board 100 times before moving on in order to build his instinct on it. When bad moves were made, play the right one a lot just to build up your instinct and get rid of the bad move.


This post by oren was liked by: Kirby
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #30 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:34 am 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2508
Liked others: 1304
Was liked: 1128
RobertJasiek wrote:
What then IYO do people think that instinct was? Do they have the same instinct as an absolute beginner without any knowledge of go theory and as a player with some established rank and some (or even much) knowledge? I.e., is IYO instinct independent of go theory knowledge? Depending on what it is that you call instinct, I might or might not have some.


I think you are right to question the term "instinct." I would say that it would be valid to use the word if we are referring to reactions that one might have in a similar situation that is not a go game. For example, if I am being surrounded by unfriendly people, I want to get out. This is an instinct. A similar situation sometimes occurs in a go game, and if running out seems to be an attractive option, it might be in part due to one's human instinct to get to safety. If this is a factor in one's decision-making process, then there is a problem, because while go situations may resemble real-life situations, the correct plan of action has nothing to do with real life, and everything to do with the particularities of a go game.

Other types of moves that could be influenced by one's instinct are: jealous moves, greedy moves, timid moves etc.

Clearly, there are other reasons for making mistakes that have more to do with misconceptions about the game or misjudgements of the situation, and although instinct may not be the right word, the problem is similar. There is something in our minds influencing us to make a bad decision. In these cases, we may be following principles that do not apply, basing our judgements on bad assessments etc.

Either way, what we are left with is that in go, things are often not what they may seem to be.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re:
Post #31 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:37 am 
Oza
User avatar

Posts: 2508
Liked others: 1304
Was liked: 1128
EdLee wrote:
Hi Robert,
RobertJasiek wrote:
I see instinct as a bad word for "very fast initial knowledge application"
Is there such a word in German for "very fast initial knowledge application" ?
( I'm only curious; I speak zero German. )


There is the word Schnappschuss, one of the meanings of which is to shoot without aiming.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re:
Post #32 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 10:21 am 
Judan

Posts: 6270
Liked others: 0
Was liked: 797
EdLee wrote:
Is there such a word in German for "very fast initial knowledge application" ?


I would express it with similar number of words or word-components because I do not know a sufficiently appropriate word for this.

Quote:
-- Would this be a fair description ?


I would not care for measuring fractions of a second.

Tami wrote:
meaning the kind of ideas that come to mind automatically as a result of past experience, study, and so on.


This comes much closer than the born / animal "instinct" but I would not say "automatically" because I entitle the brain the freedom to intervene:)

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #33 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 11:09 am 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374
Before this discussion gets too far afield, there is a beginner's mistake, called Atari, atari!, in which a player plays atari just because the opponent has to answer it. Now, there is a certain amount of go learning that goes into atari atari, but there is also an unlearned component, which may be called instinctual. Atari, atari is behavior that is mediated unconsciously, and therefore fits one of the definitions of instinct.

Psychologists or biologists may want to have technical definitions of instinct, but the above definition is fine for ordinary parlance. :)

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.


Last edited by Bill Spight on Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #34 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:20 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374
oren wrote:
I had a recent review which was interesting. I played a fairly slack move. My teacher said when he was back in Korea, his teacher would force him to just play the correct move on the board 100 times before moving on in order to build his instinct on it. When bad moves were made, play the right one a lot just to build up your instinct and get rid of the bad move.


The problem with that method is that making the correct play (and then retracting it) alters the stimulus situation. Why? Because the original bad impulse is still inhibited by making the correct play. You have to wait a while for the bad impulse to come back in order to practice overcoming it.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #35 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 1:09 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 9552
Liked others: 1602
Was liked: 1712
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
Bill Spight wrote:
oren wrote:
I had a recent review which was interesting. I played a fairly slack move. My teacher said when he was back in Korea, his teacher would force him to just play the correct move on the board 100 times before moving on in order to build his instinct on it. When bad moves were made, play the right one a lot just to build up your instinct and get rid of the bad move.


The problem with that method is that making the correct play (and then retracting it) alters the stimulus situation. Why? Because the original bad impulse is still inhibited by making the correct play. You have to wait a while for the bad impulse to come back in order to practice overcoming it.


I don't 100% follow. Are you saying that repeating the correct move is not fixing the root of the problem (i.e. the bad impulse)?

_________________
be immersed

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #36 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 2:08 pm 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8859
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 349
Was liked: 2076
GD Posts: 312
Bill Spight wrote:
beginner's mistake, called Atari, atari!
Hi Bill,

That's one example of playing a sente move without deeper analysis ("sente just because").

Other examples include trying to push through a bamboo joint, peeping (without considering whether the cut is better), etc.

Another example:
Click Here To Show Diagram Code
[go]$$B Sente Just Because
$$ | . . . , . . . . . ,
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . X . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . O . . . . . . .
$$ | . X X . . . . . . .
$$ | . O X X X . . . . ,
$$ | . O O O 1 O . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ | . . . . . . . . . .
$$ ---------------------[/go]
Relating to daal's original question,
this kind of instincts ("sente just because")
tends to persist if:
  • The person does not figure it out for herself;
  • There's no external guidance (say, from another person, or any Go literature -- books, videos, etc.)

Over time, these tend to become bad habits.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #37 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 2:11 pm 
Lives in gote
User avatar

Posts: 660
Liked others: 25
Was liked: 124
Rank: Miserable 4k
KGS: STOP STALKING ME
Maybe because it feels good to force your opponent to do something?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #38 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 2:21 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 10905
Liked others: 3651
Was liked: 3374
Kirby wrote:
Bill Spight wrote:
oren wrote:
I had a recent review which was interesting. I played a fairly slack move. My teacher said when he was back in Korea, his teacher would force him to just play the correct move on the board 100 times before moving on in order to build his instinct on it. When bad moves were made, play the right one a lot just to build up your instinct and get rid of the bad move.


The problem with that method is that making the correct play (and then retracting it) alters the stimulus situation. Why? Because the original bad impulse is still inhibited by making the correct play. You have to wait a while for the bad impulse to come back in order to practice overcoming it.


I don't 100% follow. Are you saying that repeating the correct move is not fixing the root of the problem (i.e. the bad impulse)?


Particular cases may be different, but in general, yes.

One way of looking at it is this. Given position, P (or certain features of that position), the correct play is C. Thus, practicing playing C in position P strengthens the connection between P and C.

However, all this is happening in the brain, not on the go board. In the actual game, the player facing P played B, a bad play. B may have been a relatively random play, but in this discussion we are assuming that there is a pre-existing connection in the brain between P and B. We now know that this connection is not eliminated, even when the player plays C. What happens is that it is activated, and that activation is inhibited, so that the connection to C is stronger. At times, particularly under stress, the inhibition fails and the bad play is made.

The problem with the immediate repetition of C a large number of times is that the player is no longer simply playing C in position P, but playing C in that position soon after having played C in that position. The brain is not in the same state that it was in the real game, nor in the state it will be in in the next similar position in which C is correct. It is better, I am reasonably sure, to wait until the effect of playing C recently has subsided. It would be enough, I expect, to finish the review, and then to come back to the problem position. That way the move, C, will not be so fresh in the brain, and the impulse to play B will have a chance to resurface. The situation will be more like the next time the player faces a position like P, and will have to overcome the impulse to make the wrong play. :)

Edit: Note that this is different from the case where the player is confused and finally makes the wrong play. Then there is no bad impulse to overcome. But rapid repetition of the right play still alters the stimulus situation.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject:
Post #39 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:18 pm 
Honinbo
User avatar

Posts: 8859
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Liked others: 349
Was liked: 2076
GD Posts: 312
Bill Spight wrote:
But rapid repetition of the right play still alters the stimulus situation.
Hi Bill,
( Off-topic? )
Interesting.

One wonders if there are similarities to this scenario:

P: Meeting someone. ( Interactions with people, in general ).
C: Greetings ( good feeling ).
B: Some nasty, or at least unpleasant remark. ( Bad feeling ).

Suppose a person has a tendency to express or otherwise project some unpleasant feelings toward others.
Now, rapid repetition of C -- say, "How are you" or at least holding the tongue long enough to think before speaking --
could alter the behavior of this person. But maybe that's only the symptoms, and not the root of the problem.
Which could be some bad experience in childhood, insecurity, anger issues, etc.
Unless and until we dig deep enough to uncover the buried issues, later on, especially under stress, B will likely re-surface.

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Why are our instincts so bad?
Post #40 Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm 
Honinbo

Posts: 9552
Liked others: 1602
Was liked: 1712
KGS: Kirby
Tygem: 커비라고해
Bill Spight wrote:
Particular cases may be different, but in general, yes.

One way of looking at it is this. Given position, P (or certain features of that position), the correct play is C. Thus, practicing playing C in position P strengthens the connection between P and C.

However, all this is happening in the brain, not on the go board. In the actual game, the player facing P played B, a bad play. B may have been a relatively random play, but in this discussion we are assuming that there is a pre-existing connection in the brain between P and B. We now know that this connection is not eliminated, even when the player plays C. What happens is that it is activated, and that activation is inhibited, so that the connection to C is stronger. At times, particularly under stress, the inhibition fails and the bad play is made.

The problem with the immediate repetition of C a large number of times is that the player is no longer simply playing C in position P, but playing C in that position soon after having played C in that position. The brain is not in the same state that it was in the real game, nor in the state it will be in in the next similar position in which C is correct. It is better, I am reasonably sure, to wait until the effect of playing C recently has subsided. It would be enough, I expect, to finish the review, and then to come back to the problem position. That way the move, C, will not be so fresh in the brain, and the impulse to play B will have a chance to resurface. The situation will be more like the next time the player faces a position like P, and will have to overcome the impulse to make the wrong play. :)

Edit: Note that this is different from the case where the player is confused and finally makes the wrong play. Then there is no bad impulse to overcome. But rapid repetition of the right play still alters the stimulus situation.



Interesting.

If repeating 'C' from board position 'P' is not great since 'C' is still fresh in the mind, what about a small modification?

1. Take an ordered set of board positions (P0, P1, ... Pn) where you played a bad move (B0, B1, ... Bn), and know the correct move (C0, C1, ... Cn). That is to say, on position Pi, you played bad move Bi, but the correct move was Ci for all 0 <= i <= n.
2. Select some index j at random, and practice playing Cj on position Pj.
3. Repeat step 2 several times.

This way, you still get practice strengthening the connection between the position and the correct move, but since you keep iterating to a fresh position for each iteration, you give a chance for your bad moves to show up again.

Would that work better?

_________________
be immersed

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 91 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group