= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NMJablonski comments on The Amazing Virgin Pregnancy - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (271)
In Italy one can still find older chess players who use an alternative castling rule, from when castling was first being introduced, called "free castling" in which the rook can take any of the squares between itself and the king, or the king's position, rather than the single permitted position (depending on the side) of the more common castling rules we play with today.
Is one of these versions the "correct" way to play chess? Or does it depend entirely on the subjective viewpoint of the chess players?
Which way is the correct way to play "chess" depends on which definition of the word chess you are using. In general, we resolve ambiguities like that by looking at the speaker's intent. (The speaker does not have to be one of the players.)
Yes, I know that. I'm asking rhetorical questions to Peter who is a moral realist.
Chess might be a small and closely related family of rule-sets. That doesn't affect anything.
Alright, this is your analogy, and instead of dancing around and arguing definitions can you explain, in precise terms, what you mean when you say chess?