Experiments in Chess on Electronic Computing Machines: Some Early Efforts

Abstract

Is chess an art or a science? All devotees of the game know that the great player is one who possesses superior “ insight” — but what, precisely, is its nature? One view is that chess skill is a divine gift; some players seem to possess an intuitive feeling for the pregnant situation, amounting at times to an almost mystical perception. At the other extreme lies the theory that great chess is the result of consistent application of rational principles. Most writers on the game will be found to have taken their stand somewhere in between. They speak, indeed, of “ rational principles,” but when it comes to the question of “ consistent application” they throw up their hands and, at least by implication, support the intuitionists. One suspects that many authorities regard the “ rational principles” of chess as somehow inferior, indispensable but prosaic guides to lead the player through the maze of complications when his intuition is unhappily dormant. Alternatively, one can very well argue in reverse, that chess is basically an exercise in logic and that intuition is only called upon when the process of calculation becomes too difficult or, at least, too time-consuming.*