Help
Sign In
aikido chess
March 2009 
Integral Chess?
Posted on Feb 14th, 2008
by 
profundity
profundity
If two people were BOTH playing truly integral chess then is there any outcome possible other than a draw with only the two kings left on the board?
The, in reference to the concept of Finite and Infinite Games idea of “Infinite Chess” then comes to mind. However, considering the fact that the majority of people in my experience want to “win” and the more chess pieces that they have on the board the more powerful they feel.
I am wondering if a truly integral chess player were considered to be the equivalent of an International Grandmaster Champion (i.e. the best in the world) and it was their choice to systematically remove all of the other player's chess pieces that metaphorically represent various personality factors, defense mechanisms, rationalization schemes, etc. by trading or exchanging the grandmaster's own chess pieces and maintaining a relatively equal score so as to keep the other player in the game and motivated to continue and stay in the game (dialogue) without conceding (cheating, giving up, or messing up the piece positions) until only the two kings were left on the board if this might work out as a useful analogy for and/or goal of the Integral Work?
With nothing blocking or getting in the way of useful dialogue would not the two kings have a better chance of exchanging information that might be valuable on what ever level for the other player and an optimal environment for the exchange of truth whether it be ultimate, relative, or factual?
Some people may call this Aikido Chess…
The, in reference to the concept of Finite and Infinite Games idea of “Infinite Chess” then comes to mind. However, considering the fact that the majority of people in my experience want to “win” and the more chess pieces that they have on the board the more powerful they feel.
I am wondering if a truly integral chess player were considered to be the equivalent of an International Grandmaster Champion (i.e. the best in the world) and it was their choice to systematically remove all of the other player's chess pieces that metaphorically represent various personality factors, defense mechanisms, rationalization schemes, etc. by trading or exchanging the grandmaster's own chess pieces and maintaining a relatively equal score so as to keep the other player in the game and motivated to continue and stay in the game (dialogue) without conceding (cheating, giving up, or messing up the piece positions) until only the two kings were left on the board if this might work out as a useful analogy for and/or goal of the Integral Work?
With nothing blocking or getting in the way of useful dialogue would not the two kings have a better chance of exchanging information that might be valuable on what ever level for the other player and an optimal environment for the exchange of truth whether it be ultimate, relative, or factual?
Some people may call this Aikido Chess…
Access: PublicTagged with: Integral Chess, Integral Work, Finite and Infinite Games, Aikido Chess, dialogue, chess, draw
