RobertJasiek wrote:I encourage everybody to surpass the age of letting joseki determination depend on waiting for general consensus, but develop the skill to recognise josekis by himself and also during a player's own games. During a game, you cannot ask others and wait for their input, but you need to rely on your already existing knowledge and determine josekis / approximate equality on your own.
Joseki doesn't mean equal result... it's closer to established pattern, so it does require general consensus first. That's what badukjr was trying to get at.
RobertJasiek wrote:I encourage everybody to surpass the age of letting joseki determination depend on waiting for general consensus, but develop the skill to recognise josekis by himself and also during a player's own games. During a game, you cannot ask others and wait for their input, but you need to rely on your already existing knowledge and determine josekis / approximate equality on your own.
You're redefining 定 in a way that millions of people would disagree with. It *can* mean 'equal' but really in the sense of equilibrium of a long established practice, not equal point value on the board. Its kind of confusing because these patterns on the board become established due to equilibrium on the board, but this is not how 定 is used.
RobertJasiek wrote:I encourage everybody to surpass the age of letting joseki determination depend on waiting for general consensus, but develop the skill to recognise josekis by himself and also during a player's own games. During a game, you cannot ask others and wait for their input, but you need to rely on your already existing knowledge and determine josekis / approximate equality on your own.
Joseki doesn't mean equal result... it's closer to established pattern, so it does require general consensus first. That's what badukjr was trying to get at.
This is correct. You can have an even result that is not joseki, and you can have joseki that is not even result.
badukJr, if you read my earlier messages, you will see that I speak of approximating equality. Equality is given for the global situation (which includes the komi) in case of perfect play, but a local position need not be exactly equal, in particular because move-sequences can interact with parts outside the local position.
RobertJasiek wrote:badukJr, if you read my earlier messages, you will see that I speak of approximating equality. Equality is given for the global situation (which includes the komi) in case of perfect play, but a local position need not be exactly equal, in particular because move-sequences can interact with parts outside the local position.
OK, and? The issue was you redefining a common baduk vocabulary in the beginners forum. Beginners shouldn't have the idea that joseki is a word open to interpretation otherwise when they invariably meet others outside of this forum there will be unnecessary confusion.
This has gone off the deep end of the original purpose of a specific position so I'll take my leave, I just wanted to make a quick point but I forgot who I was talking to clearly.
RobertJasiek wrote:badukJr, if you read my earlier messages, you will see that I speak of approximating equality. Equality is given for the global situation (which includes the komi) in case of perfect play, but a local position need not be exactly equal, in particular because move-sequences can interact with parts outside the local position.
OK, and? The issue was you redefining a common baduk vocabulary in the beginners forum. Beginners shouldn't have the idea that joseki is a word open to interpretation otherwise when they invariably meet others outside of this forum there will be unnecessary confusion.
The problem is that this thread is in a beginner's forum to start with. Not that it is not a beginner's question, but that the answer is far above beginner's level. Maybe the thread should be moved to a different sub-forum. But the discussion is likely to confuse some beginners. That's just how it is.
As for the interpretation of joseki, it is defined as a standard sequence of play. That is not open to interpretation. What other qualities joseki may have is not defined, and is open to interpretation and discussion.
The Adkins Principle: At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Bill Spight wrote:...joseki... is defined as a standard sequence of play...
Kageyama wrote:A remark overheard one clear morning: ‘I’m going to follow my joseki and take the dog out for a walk.’ … These days the word ‘joseki’ has come into general use to describe any fixed form of behavior… it is defined as ‘stones played in accordance with a fixed formula in the game of go.’
Kageyama wrote:A remark overheard one clear morning: ‘I’m going to follow my joseki and take the dog out for a walk.’ … These days the word ‘joseki’ has come into general use to describe any fixed form of behavior… it is defined as ‘stones played in accordance with a fixed formula in the game of go.’
Kageyama wrote:A remark overheard one clear morning: ‘I’m going to follow my joseki and take the dog out for a walk.’ … These days the word ‘joseki’ has come into general use to describe any fixed form of behavior… it is defined as ‘stones played in accordance with a fixed formula in the game of go.’
Is that even a kosher way to use the word?
I assume so. Kageyama was Japanese.
The point of quoting him was to back up Bill's assertion that it means a standard way of doing something.
Kageyama wrote:A remark overheard one clear morning: ‘I’m going to follow my joseki and take the dog out for a walk.’ … These days the word ‘joseki’ has come into general use to describe any fixed form of behavior… it is defined as ‘stones played in accordance with a fixed formula in the game of go.’
speedchase wrote:Is that even a kosher way to use the word?
Joaz Banbeck wrote:I assume so. Kageyama was Japanese.
The point of quoting him was to back up Bill's assertion that it means a standard way of doing something.
Joseki is not the only go term to be adopted into common Japanese usage. I was unaware of the sense that Kageyama mentions, but following joseki has been translated as doing something by the book.
The Adkins Principle: At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins
Kageyama wrote:A remark overheard one clear morning: ‘I’m going to follow my joseki and take the dog out for a walk.’ … These days the word ‘joseki’ has come into general use to describe any fixed form of behavior… it is defined as ‘stones played in accordance with a fixed formula in the game of go.’
Is that even a kosher way to use the word?
Yes, but it's odd: using kosher that way isn't a kosher use of a word.
