The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

is chess a skill that all people should know

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2013 Category: Games
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 742 times Debate No: 39262
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




Chess may be a nerdy card game but it is a skill that is valuable to life. The game teaches to look past the easy move and look forward on anticipated moves. The idea that it really does teach people of all ages how to cope in a changing environment as well. The game makes a person use other parts of the brain and in turn causes higher reading scores, and increase in intelligence.


That's like saying everyone should take painting classes because the act of painting is a skill which forces different parts of the brian to be activated and used.

So should we all take painting classes?
Debate Round No. 1


I understand that using the idea that it uses different parts of the brain can be applied to everything but in chess unlike painting you can take the lessons and apply it to all aspects of your life. The skill of chess really has a meaning of thinking above the one piece but also to a big picture. Teaching not only that but many other lessons like when to sacrifice things for the greater good. Every person should know the skill also does not mean you have too but more on the recommendation to benefit and enrich your life.


Sure, I of course agree with you. But then I could say that when you make a mistake in painting that it helps people let go and not take life too seriously. I could say how perfect painting technique teaches discipline. How using different color paint creates a synergy that nothing else can create and it teaches people a lot about themselves, other people, and that these are important life lessons. But, nevertheless, I will not want others to be forced to paint or say it is a necessary skill, etc. I might consider your idea as training for a vocation as a military commander or surgeon etc. but not especially for a scientist or musician..
Debate Round No. 2


I agree that I would not want to force others to paint because frankly so people just cant paint. Still the skills of chess are universal and not necessary but are beneficial to all people. That is just a recommendation to learn the game and not a required thing. Breathing is a necessary skill that teaches people to fill their lungs with air in order to survive, like chess is not necessary but a skill I would recommend all people learn.


Likewise, actually, contrary to what you have said, just about anyone can paint!

Even elephants paint flowers and self-portraits of themselves:

There are people with no arms who can paint:

You mean that we might not all paint as well. Well maybe but art is expressive and subject too so it depends.

But even still, whether you are good at painting or not, the skills and the therapy from painting are still useful in many ways, similarly in principle as you have suggested chess.

I could go on and on like you have about how some of us can't play chess, are any good at chess, etc., like you are about painting.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by AgentRocks 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con seems to be giving examples of why this and this. But Con should of told why it is not a skill instead of using other examples that don't relate to the debate.
Vote Placed by FourthsCharter 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con clearly proved that "all" people should know chess is problematic because this concept can be applied to anything (Con suggested painting). Pro made a good argument that chess can be beneficial but that was not the original debate.