Lex Fridman Podcast #315 Magnus Carlsen

 I’ve always respected chess and chess players. There’s no doubt that this at least partly comes from chess’s overall cultural association with intelligence. But I do have a personal connection to chess that is likely similar to that of many others - in my childhood, my father enjoyed chess and had a small collection of stylish chassboards that were placed in our house like art pieces. We played together a handful of times but I was never an especially strong player. At a few points in my young adulthood I tried to get better at chess or otherwise was more actively interested in it - I went through a phase of watching chess analysis videos, a phase of doing chess exercises, and so on. 

Chess holds particular esteem in the russosphere and in the history of AI and computer science so it is not a surprise that Lex would address the topic in his podcast. I’ve followed Magnus Carlsen since I was in high school - Magnus is a bit older than I am but not that much and he began his streak as the world’s best and world champion around the time I graduated high school. 

The podcast episode was refreshing in that it focused almost solely on the topic for which Magnus is well known, chess, with short dalliances with other topics like poker, politics, and the big ‘accursed questions’ to which Lex always returns. Magnus is an expert so it’s helpful to hear his thoughts on the beauty and uniqueness of chess in its variations, his analysis of other expert players and of significant games, and thoughts on the general organization of tournaments and competition in the chess world. Magnus has a confidence to him - he routinely references how he is the best in the world and possibly the best of all time - but at the same time his personality is likable and he doesn’t come across as cocky. At the end of the podcast, he divulged that he was nervous to join the podcast due to a lifelong imposter syndrome. He told a story about when he was about ten or younger, he felt disadvantaged compared to his peers due to starting later, etc, and did not feel confident in tournaments, so this issue has always been there. But these days, he speaks more about how he knows he should beat everyone because he knows he is better than them, so the nature of his current imposter syndrome would be interesting to examine more. It probably stems from the cultural association of chess excellence with general intelligence - perhaps Magnus worries that he will disappoint in other areas. After all, he hardly attended formal schooling.

What was most interesting about Magnus to me was it became very clear that he represents an example of the natural prodigy or natural genius and is a poor representative of the idea that through hard work one can improve oneself and achieve great things. He admitted that he has almost never conducted intentional chess exercises or puzzles or regimented studying. He loves chess and loves to simply spend his time looking at games and books on chess history, strategy, and other topics. He stated multiple times that he only wants to do work that he likes and finds interesting, which doesn’t include the kind of practice that most coaches say is absolutely necessary to master something. This is proof that he has a natural interest and disposition to chess, and when asked by Lex to give advice to young people about how to improve at chess, Magnus essentially declined since he knew that his path was that of a unique talent and not reproducible. 

This resonated somewhat with me because it does seem like the best course of action in life is to try to pursue that which is most harmonious with one’s nature - if one is naturally interested or capable in doing something, try to do that thing, for one will be good at it and like doing it in a virtuous cycle. There are things in life that one must do other than this, but keep the idea in mind. However, it is also a sad fact that there are natural abilities and orientations that we cannot choose or easily influence that direct us, a serious knock against our freedoms and ideas of free will that are so highlighted in American culture. It also could suggest that some possibilities are simply closed off from us, however hard we work or persistently we try - Magnus’s peers simply cannot beat him, regardless of their effort and preparation, because he was mysteriously born with a vocation for chess, and he may beat his peers despite less effort and less preparation. It’s a knock against “fairness” in the American sense.

Magnus had interesting thoughts on the idea that politicians compare their work to chess or “3D chess.” He said he does see the parallels but suggested that politicians could actually act more like chess players for the benefit of all the people - he described chess as trying to make the best move for short and long term strategy under imperfect information and said that he hates it when people purposefully or otherwise make the wrong move, in politics or in chess, and that sometimes the best move is to not move at all or to let the opponent make a mistake. 

Magnus was clearly intelligent and thoughtful. He claimed that it was clear or obvious that life has no cosmic or divine meaning, but that it is meaningful for us and that there are many things to do that are worthwhile and fun. He also claimed that we should not be stressed about finding romantic love but should always try to do things we love, be with people we love, and let love pervade our life in all its forms. Simply put, the podcast was refreshing and enjoyable as it was focused and insightful on its main subject but also had little insights elsewhere.