tundra wrote:John Fairbairn wrote:...so as to point up the wider (and proven) educational advantages...
(Emphasis mine.)
Please, if you know of any rigorous studies that have found such an effect, please share them.
I admit, I am rather skeptical that go, or any game for that matter, has such effects. I am of the gruff and grumpy sort, who believes that if you want to do better at your school subjects, then, well,
use the time to study your school subjects*. But I would be quite happy to be proved wrong
(* Of course, if a student wants to delve more deeply into a subject outside the classroom, e.g., learning more history or biology on their own, then that can be very useful. It may even come back to help them in their courses. But in my opinion, this sort of extra study is different from studying go, interesting as the latter may be.)
As it stands today, I've literally devised entire philosophical concepts based on 바둑.
It depends on how you learn it.
Most people trying to learn a skill use the method that will take you there as fast as possible, memorisation of patterns. Indeed, this it's why it's dumb for adults to think they're that much wiser or smarter than children. 80% of the difference is simply rote memorisation rather than any increase in the profoundness of their thinking.
However, these days I'm trying to learn 바둑 from a first-principles basis. I don't solve easy problems to memorise they're shapes or study opening patterns in a conscious way, instead just watching lots of 바둑TV, so I am getting the osmosis but I'm not going out of my way to memorise them. And it forces me to use higher level philosophical concepts that apply to wider areas of life, in pretty much every subject I encounter. I'd have to write a moderately sized book to collect everything,
It would take me longer to improve in the short term, but in the long-term, having a foundation of critical thinking has raised my peak ability in not just 바둑 but other things. In fact, if it were not for a type of anxiety making me feel I have ti play poorly, I'd probably be EGF 1d by now, but I tend to have wild swings in performance since I feel guilty about winning. The stronger I ger, the more I will incorporate traditional memerisation-focused approaches, but my higher critical thinkng abilities mean I can do more with the same amount of domain-specific knowledge.
I've written about something alluding to this before in the random ramblings thread, something like there being a bottle representing interdisciplinary knowledge and abilities and you can put different discipline-specific caps on it.
A note on children, if you aren't lucky to have a major tournament. The absolute #1 priority for every mindsport/棋 association is to make it accessable for poor families including the privilege of attending tournaments and getting teaching from the pros that attend. Number two is that while it seems enough people in 棋院's are so normalised to the privilege of having parents quite interested, perhaps even pro parents, to the degree that there seems to be a general blindspots to how difficult it must be for those children and in fact 棋院's do not seem to care or do much to solve specifically that issue or vastly underestimate how difficult or widespread.
I mean I find it absolutely astonishing that people can theorise genetic reasons to the average and peak differences in performance in mindsports between sexes in homosapiens, yet those same people would never be caught dead prescribing genetic reasons to why Japanese igo players could not match Chinese weiqi players cannot match they're Korean counterparts even though that would be a more logically sound opinion at least. I mean, you had debates on L19 about sex differences in playing ability when during that very time, if you just looked at the fact that population of Japanese males is 10 times that of Korean females, then Korean females are stronger, except that Korean women are getting stronger while Japanese players were in decline. See, it's all about what you focus on. Which makes the entire so-called 'debate' a farce, and also the fake neutrality people who can't seem to think of these obvious points a farce, it's highly arrogant and prideful to even be theorising, most humans claim that they care about intelligence and use it as pretty weak reasoning as to why human life is superior to other species, yet in reality they do not care about intelligence itself but only the power that comes with it, otherwise mindsports would be more popular. Yes, western civilization is especially guilty of this. At least run experiments with other simian and bird species to test if there are any actual consistent sex differences, duh, and even then the experiments might be biased by the experimenter towards how the know males in that species likely thinks compared ti females. That being said, my personality type makes me feel that if you decide, you never wanted or deserved to be able to do it in the first place. When things are important to you do it on faith even if there is a 1% chance. I like the book the bell curve, but for me it encourages me, because when I was 8 I didn't want to be smart but instead had ideal of being a person with average intelligence and pretty much average in every other respect who achieves extraordinary things through
PASSION AND INTEREST, and the hardwork that naturally arises from it, more thsn innate abilty. More of a 최정先生 or Naruto and Hinata philosophy. It's a meaning of life, and since my sisters forced me to watch the first 70-something episodes of Naruto I can say it's my 棋道/Kiidou, my 棋士/Kishi way.
My suggestion is that homeschooling groups the ones who would be most forthcoming to any mindsports activity, indeed the parents would themselves relative critical thinkers relative to the general population and having children. In addition, any way to enable socialising isn't taken for granted compared to families with children. Thirdly, they are more skeptical to mainstream approaches to education and more likely to be open to alternative methods of education and see alternative subjects such as mindsports as possibly effective alternatives.
I really want to note that 윤영선先生 really did say 'Master' both the book and the video which to my mind means that seriously and intentionally studied to book and the video at least 3 times or more untily you know the right moves for every singke problem instantaneously. Considering proverbs like mastering the carpenters square makes you one dan pro by 20th century standards, probably EGF 6 dan or so today, I think the two difference between pro opinion and Robert Jas
eiiek is that he is looking at shape and pattern knowledge on a wider scale of points on the board, two shapes Robert Jas
eiiek would classify as different, a pro would classify as shapes with perhaps a shared smaller shape within them, and see that as what's learned. It perhaps could also be a culturally conditioned way to see things; the native speaker of a language that uses chinese characters can see all the shared radicals in the Kanji westerners who don't speak the language think are completely different, and even westerners who are learning may not use the same radicals.
And indeed, you are more likely too consider the smaller shapes the actual units of knowledge if you're idea of knowing a shape means being able to see it instantaneously after sudying it 20 times rather than it coming to mind after a few seconds because you've studied it twice before.
I determined that according to my system based not only on intelligence but also morality and scarcity, that on average bonobo life is most valueble. Perhaps other people's superstitions like living in chosei is more valueble than living triple ko, if by value you don't mean territory but luck outside the board. Again, the bell curve means there will still be many males who are more interested in students than themselves or are low-key–Bill Spight comes to mind? And females who put on a show. And there will also be males more excited about . The cause for why I like festivals and 바둑 tournaments but don't understand parties, and realised I want to be a teacher and is more excited about being a househusband putting all my focus strategically than some corporate or business career which seems dreadfully to me even if it made me a millionare. My social interpretation style of prefontoral cortex, U think being of (the are three types of overall patterns, mine is least common one). Or perhaps it just that Ewe people are naturally interested in raising the next generation, male or female. Actually. In fact, Ewes are quite similar to Chinese and Koreans in that respect, especially Koreans with the similar sounding tonal language and obsession with seniority by age and traditionally counting age from before birth, although the view is different; what's actually seen as rude isn't as much lack of deferrence to elders as much as something like saying 'how are you' to elders as a greeting, since it's seen as almost saying you think the elder is not uo to the obvious task of being the one to be seeing to whether the younger one is fine. A bit weird but hey. Cultural Bell curves. The variety among people who will read the book means that some will actually study it, and you never know, just as a blue moon might occur, some westerners may actually go through the process to master it.
) and at the time the people that made the complaint couldn't pinpoint from whence that idea came from. 
