Being told "professional poker doesn't contribute to society."

[yellowjack]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even people who do not object to gambling because of moral or spiritual beliefs often come up with this one. Anyone have a good answer? Shouldn't you quit poker now and run off to become a doctor so that you can "contribute to society?"

Greenstein has obviously decided he doesn't contribute and has decided to give to charity, but I think pro poker contributes by itself -- it's just a little difficult to explain.

Give it a shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just do something else in the rest of your time to "contribute to society".

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

e.g. you have plenty of more time than working people to volunteer

[heater]

[ QUOTE ]
Even people who do not object to gambling because of moral or spiritual beliefs often come up with this one. Anyone have a good answer?

[/ QUOTE ]

"You're right, it doesn't."

[disjunction]

I continue to quote an Italian or maybe Greek cosmologist who gave a talk my first year at Cornell. He said that government types ask him a lot, what good is cosmology? His response (delivered with a Greek accent: "I don't know, get off my back."

The gamblers way of looking at things has a lot to contribute to Economics, Math, Computer Science, and maybe even physics. And any other field where probabilities are involved. I will soon submit a paper to a distinguished conference, and the idea came from a gambling concept. I'll be surprised if the paper is not accepted. I am able to think about these issues particularly clearly, more so than lots of other people in my field, because I am a gambler. So if poker players don't contribute anything, neither do academic theorists.

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
I am able to think about these issues particularly clearly, more so than lots of other people in my field, because I am a gambler. So if poker players don't contribute anything, neither do academic theorists.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm pretty sure they teach courses in logic at cornell. you might want to look into that.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am able to think about these issues particularly clearly, more so than lots of other people in my field, because I am a gambler. So if poker players don't contribute anything, neither do academic theorists.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm pretty sure they teach courses in logic at cornell. you might want to look into that.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't understand the meaning of this sentence or are you deliberately dense?

Be careful stinkypete, it might require a little thing called INFERENCE. I don't know if your deductive logic capabilities can handle it.

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am able to think about these issues particularly clearly, more so than lots of other people in my field, because I am a gambler. So if poker players don't contribute anything, neither do academic theorists.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm pretty sure they teach courses in logic at cornell. you might want to look into that.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't understand the meaning of this sentence or are you deliberately dense?

Be careful stinkypete, it might require a little thing called INFERENCE. I don't know if your deductive logic capabilities can handle it.

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody's suggesting that it's impossible for a poker player to contribute to society. they're just pointing out the simple fact that the act of earning money by playing poker does nothing to contribute to society.

you wrote a paper. you are a poker player. poker players are thus in the same category as academics, because academics also write papers.

to me, that's a pretty retarded argument. but maybe you used some special ivy league logic that the rest of us mere mortals can't comprehend.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am able to think about these issues particularly clearly, more so than lots of other people in my field, because I am a gambler. So if poker players don't contribute anything, neither do academic theorists.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm pretty sure they teach courses in logic at cornell. you might want to look into that.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't understand the meaning of this sentence or are you deliberately dense?

Be careful stinkypete, it might require a little thing called INFERENCE. I don't know if your deductive logic capabilities can handle it.

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody's suggesting that it's impossible for a poker player to contribute to society. they're just pointing out the simple fact that the act of earning money by playing poker does nothing to contribute to society.

you wrote a paper. you are a poker player. poker players are thus in the same category as academics, because academics also write papers.

to me, that's a pretty retarded argument. but maybe you used some special ivy league logic that the rest of us mere mortals can't comprehend.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pete,

Where in this post do I say that I was in the ivy league, or that I would take any pride in it if I were? What is this chip on your shoulder? In life you have a choice: You can instantly attack any statement you hear, or you can try to understand and learn from your fellow human beings.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I've made this argument a lot and so maybe I skipped over a part. I thought it was clear that my paper is essentially a glorified poker concept. I actually wrote that line and deleted it in my last post. Therefore, (oops I have to be careful with you when I use the word "therefore") I think getting some of the poker concepts such as sample size, selection bias, the value of information, etc), out there is a good thing for academia as well as the mainstream. Therefore poker is helpful to academia and others.

Sorry if I was unclear. Also sorry that I am admittedly a little proud of my work right now and I shouldn't let my enthusiasm carry me away.

[mittman84]

Haven't read replies yet, but as a poker pro you don't contribute to society (by playing poker). I was a "pro" (lol) for 3 years in college and love poker, but am fully aware playing poker does not contribute to society. How does society work? People provide goods and services to each other. If that wasn't the case we would all still be living in caves. You go to work to provide a good or service to others for a fee, then use that fee to buy goods and services created by others, and the cycle continues which results in all the goods and services we have in this world now. How can you say playing poker adds anything to this? Almost every profession I can think of contributes to society, people need someone to pick up their garbage, people to entertain them, take their order at the fast food joint, build their house, and everything else. Sitting in your room playing poker does nothing to contribute to this.

[NYplayer]

My playing poker contributes to society because I can earn the same amount of money in less time than I would at another job. Therefore I have X more hours per week. i can spend those hours with my family, doing social work, etc.

People have said that what a poker player does in his extra time may contribute but that the poker itself doesn't. Well i would argue that since playing poker gives me more time then it contributes to society because I am a slice of society and having more hours to put towards whatever i decide is valuable to me is an increase in productivity.

[Jack Ruby]

No one is forced to play anywhere.

I am still confused by the distinction between sports and poker.

Exactly what is Tiger Woods contributing by being able to play 18 holes of golf better than the next guy?