Hi Lawrence - I know you sent me a message because I saw it through my
internet provider... but I never received it via fidonet.  Oh, well.

Anyways... I don't know how Fine, a chess player himself, could have
been so wrong in 'The Pschology of A Chess Player'.  

I've found that Chess is 'many things to many people' and so, maybe to
him and (IMO) a very few others, that's what Chess is.  I don't think
what he said applies to anyone outside of a very small minority.

Maybe it's a case of Fine not being able to 'see the forest for the trees'.
Maybe he's looking to hard and thereofore missing the obvious?  Maybe he's
seing what he wants to see??  Hmm...  maybe there should be a paper
titled 'The Psychology of the author of The Psychology of A Chess Player'


Though 'many things to many people' if I had to say that it was something,
if I had to define its underlying premis in psychological terms, I'd
say that it's purpose is that of any game... preparation or a sort of
'rehersal' for a certain situation (or situations) in life which we are
expected to encounter, stimulation for the imagination (and therefore also
somewhat of an art form),  and simply enjoyment.

TTYL

(
 )

... Chess is... the "touchstone of the intellect." -Goethe
--- Blue Wave/Max v2.12