..
Would Edward Lasker have believed that Bobby Fischer's 'chess mastery'
demonstrated that Fischer must have 'a mind capable of scientific thinking
and one gifted at the same time with a flair for artistic creation'?


Edward Lasker seems to have ignored the importance of accurate
*visualisation* (correctly "seeing" the position after mental moves), and his
phrase "scientific thinking" gives a very broad impression, while it is
sufficient to merely calculate variations correctly in order to play strong
tactical chess.
This is more like skill at math (the "language" of science).

As for artistic creation, this gift is nice to have, and comes in handy when
seeking a brilliancy prize or consolation for not placing first overall, but a
pleasing style is not so very important when it comes to merely getting
results. Fischer once called Em. Lasker "a coffeehouse player," but he did not
-- nor could have have -- berate the man's results, only his style. Fischer's
own style was sometimes called into question, for he was something of a
materialist -- snatching pawns and relying upon his superior calculative
ability to survive to the endgame, with his material booty intact. Of course,
the average Joe prefers the sacrificial style, even if it doesn't fit the
position.




"In Great Brittain, we don't take Kings, so."


"We do in America!" -- Ben Franklin