3 ms·

I feel like we're arguing different things. The full paragraph that I originally quoted from says: > The failure of generalisation of a particular skill, in fa

I feel like we're arguing different things. The full paragraph that I originally quoted from says: > The failure of generalisation of a particular skill, in fact, happens to occur in many other areas beyond chess – such as music training, which has been shown to have no effect on non-music cognitive or academic abilities. The same applies to video game training, brain training, and working memory training, among others. But then, the article they linked to doesn't support that, and you yourself agree that you can train a particular skill through games that will apply to other, non-gaming tasks that use the same skill. Yes, it won't affect other cognitive skills (duh), but it does generalize to other domains that use the same skill.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
You're taking "non-music cognitive or academic abilities" to mean "abilities that will only benefit playing music" when they mean "abilities used playing music that may have some use elsewhere." Keeping time for example. The link fully supports that statement then. The rest of the article makes it clear they realize these skills can be helpful in other areas, they mention chess helps with geometry and math at the end. And you seem to agree with the article as you think it's obvious that they won't affect other cognitive skills.
- TulliusCicero 6y ago
  > You're taking "non-music cognitive or academic abilities" to mean "abilities that will only benefit playing music" when they mean "abilities used playing music that may have some use elsewhere." Lol. "Music-related skills have no benefit for skills that don't benefit from music skills". Very convenient to make your supported outcome a tautology.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    I'm not randomly choosing it, that definition is used throughout the article and the links provided. Providing a minor improvement to common tasks is nothing like the boost to overall general intelligence and academic ability that people say activities like music or chess cause. Aggressive parents don't force their kids to play an instrument to improve their sense of time.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

You're taking "non-music cognitive or academic abilities" to mean "abilities that will only benefit playing music" when they mean "abilities used playing music that may have some use elsewhere." Keeping time for example. The link fully supports that statement then. The rest of the article makes it clear they realize these skills can be helpful in other areas, they mention chess helps with geometry and math at the end. And you seem to agree with the article as you think it's obvious that they won't affect other cognitive skills.

TulliusCicero 6y ago
> You're taking "non-music cognitive or academic abilities" to mean "abilities that will only benefit playing music" when they mean "abilities used playing music that may have some use elsewhere." Lol. "Music-related skills have no benefit for skills that don't benefit from music skills". Very convenient to make your supported outcome a tautology.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  I'm not randomly choosing it, that definition is used throughout the article and the links provided. Providing a minor improvement to common tasks is nothing like the boost to overall general intelligence and academic ability that people say activities like music or chess cause. Aggressive parents don't force their kids to play an instrument to improve their sense of time.