Support NeoGAF

[Vermillion]

Or really, any non-traditional form of intelligence (read: not the sort of intelligence that an IQ test measures).

I've been thinking about this for a while, but a post mentioning street smarts in the BCT reminded me to ask.

So, let's focus on artistic intelligence: what does that mean? Art is usually considered to be subjective, be it in painting, music, etc. Assume that a person creates artistic pieces that resonate with the people of their time, but they are ultimately forgotten. Is that person an artistic genius? How about a person whose work isn't appreciated in their time, but is remembered by future generations? Is he/she an artistic genius?

People constantly say that one of the reasons IQ tests aren't valuable is because they don't test other types of intelligence. But can those types of tests be quantified in any way besides by what other people believe?

Discuss, tell me I'm missing something obvious; whatever you'd like best.

 

[plasmasd]

Its something every die hard Sonic fan is lacking

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Well, at least with regards to figure drawing, I'd say it's knowledge of anatomy, musculature, proportions, perspective and light & shadow

 

[Zeyphersan]

Well, at least with regards to figure drawing, I'd say it's knowledge of anatomy, musculature, proportions, perspective and light & shadow

Pretty much what I was going to say. Yes, as a whole, art is subjective, but there are a LOT of components that go into any work. For drawings and paintings and such it's the above, for music it's knowledge of scales and tones, for writing it's word choice and flow and prose

You don't just "make art"

Well I mean like, you can, but there's a lot of stuff that goes into it.

 

[Aztechnology]

I'd say artistic intelligence refers to someones ability to make tangible their vision of something from the mind. Whether this be drawing, painting, music, sculpting, writing, cooking etc. This includes recreating musical works by ear etc.

 

[Vermillion]

Well, at least with regards to figure drawing, I'd say it's knowledge of anatomy, musculature, proportions, perspective and light & shadow

Pretty much what I was going to say. Yes, as a whole, art is subjective, but there are a LOT of components that go into any work. For drawings and paintings and such it's the above, for music it's knowledge of scales and tones, for writing it's word choice and flow and prose

You don't just "make art"

Right; I don't mean to come off as attacking art or anything.

My issue with your posts is that many people can have "knowledge" of a particular thing. But that's not the sort of intelligence that I'm describing.

What I'm describing is more along the lines of the ability to quickly pick up, understand, and apply certain concepts. There are many scientific discoveries that have been made after the death of famous figures. Knowing these discoveries and the reasoning behind them doesn't make one more intelligent than these famous figures.

Sure, there are specific components that go into any work. But any test of these components would fall back to knowledge rather than intelligence.

 

[CaptainGyro]

Musical intelligence doesn't mean that you can write good music, it means you're good at recognizing pitch, tone, rhythm etc

 

[Surface of Me]

I'd say artistic intelligence refers to someones ability to make tangible their vision of something from the mind. Whether this be drawing, painting, music, sculpting, writing, cooking etc. This includes recreating musical works by ear etc.

That makes a lot of sense.

 

[Ties]

 

[Vermillion]

I'd say artistic intelligence refers to someones ability to make tangible their vision of something from the mind. Whether this be drawing, painting, music, sculpting, writing, cooking etc. This includes recreating musical works by ear etc.

Musical intelligence doesn't mean that you can write good music, it means you're good at recognizing pitch, tone, rhythm etc

These are actually very good answers. I'm going to think about it some more.

 

[HeelPower]

Art is a craft , a skill and there is a lot of workmanship to it.

More often than not its not inborn gift or luck as popular media portrays it.

Art in the renaissance,baroque,classical era etc was great because this stuff was passed in families who dedicated their whole lives to it.

The greats who excelled at these crafts possessed a lot of artistic intelligence.

 

[Piecake]

Right; I don't mean to come off as attacking art or anything.

My issue with your posts is that many people can have "knowledge" of a particular thing. But that's not the sort of intelligence that I'm describing.

What I'm describing is more along the lines of the ability to quickly pick up, understand, and apply certain concepts. There are many scientific discoveries that have been made after the death of famous figures. Knowing these discoveries and the reasoning behind them doesn't make one more intelligent than these famous figures.

Sure, there are specific components that go into any work. But any test of these components would fall back to knowledge rather than intelligence.

Do you think IQ tests measure intelligence well?

http://www.criticalthinking.com/articles/test-preparation-practice-for-wisc-assessment

Unless you think that intelligence can improve, then any test that you can study and prepare for to get a better score seems like a pretty poor judge of intelligence.

 

[Vermillion]

Do you think IQ tests measure intelligence well?

http://www.criticalthinking.com/articles/test-preparation-practice-for-wisc-assessment

Unless you think that intelligence can improve, then any test that you can study and prepare for to get a better score seems like a pretty poor judge of intelligence.

That wasn't what I was saying. Anticipating other issues with IQ tests, I did note that people cited the disregard of other types of intelligence as one of the reasons that IQ tests were flawed.

No, what I'm saying is that we have a better understanding of what type of intelligence IQ tests set out to measure. Pattern recognition, understanding, application, etc.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

So building on what I said earlier

Well, at least with regards to figure drawing, I'd say it's knowledge of anatomy, musculature, proportions, perspective and light & shadow

And how you defined this as "knowledge", I'd say intelligence is a reference to how well you can actually determine these things and apply them. For instance, a good artist can draw without construction, because they have the knowledge of all the aspects of what they're drawing and know how and when to apply them.

Another analogy is someone memorizing a bunch of mathematical formulas. That person is knowledgeable. Their mathematical intelligence is how well they can apply them, or combine them, or us them to reason through and tackle previously unseen questions

 

[Dr. Buni]

Its something every die hard Sonic fan is lacking

Why can't people leave Sonic fans alone? Damn.

 

[Kai Dracon]

Few months ago I read something about spatial awareness being tied to the ability to create or interpret art, even abstract art. Poor spatial awareness, greater difficulty with art, and vice versa. For example, some people have difficulty accurately estimating perspective and it could effect everyday activities such as driving. Not just art.

However I think it was observed that due to the plasticity of intelligence, practice with art and illustration could sharpen general intelligence related to functions such as spatial recognition.

 

[Vermillion]

So building on what I said earlier



And how you defined this as "knowledge", I'd say intelligence is a reference to how well you can actually determine these things and apply them. For instance, a good artist can draw without construction, because they have the knowledge of all the aspects of what they're drawing and know how and when to apply them.

Another analogy is someone memorizing a bunch of mathematical formulas. That person is knowledgeable. Their mathematical intelligence is how well they can apply them, or combine them, or us them to reason through and tackle previously unseen questions

Okay, I would say that the part about being able to determine certain things is reasonable. But the "how and when to apply them" seems to get back to realm of subjectivity.

 

[Piecake]

That wasn't what I was saying. Anticipating other issues with IQ tests, I did note that people cited the disregard of other types of intelligence as one of the reasons that IQ tests were flawed.

No, what I'm saying is that we have a better understanding of what type of intelligence IQ tests set out to measure. Pattern recognition, understanding, application, etc.

Arent those skills that can be learned and improved though? So how does a test determine what is prior knowledge and what isnt?

Anyway, I think the general theory on creative intelligence is that it has to deal with the interaction between long-term memory and working memory, specifically cognitive disinhibition. The greater knowledge of your field (long-term memory) combined with a high capacity working memory and high cognitive disinhibition might be the guide to understanding creative intelligence. Cognitive disinhibition is also associated with mental illness so it kinda makes some sense

 

[PirateKing]

Its something every die hard Sonic fan is lacking

This made me laugh haha

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Okay, I would say that the part about being able to determine certain things is reasonable. But the "how and when to apply them" seems to get back to realm of subjectivity.

How is that any different from any other definition of intelligence? Wikipedia says

Intelligence has been defined in many different ways such as in terms of one's capacity for logic, abstract thought, understanding, self-awareness, communication, learning, emotional knowledge, memory, planning, creativity and problem solving

Which, summed up, is how and when

 

[gohepcat]

Art is a craft , a skill and there is a lot of workmanship to it.

More often than not its not inborn gift or luck as popular media portrays it.

I'm not saying most great artists dont dedicate their lives to it, but I've seen thousands music school graduates not be able to write a meaningful song, or improvise their way out of a paper bag. Plenty of Salieris and very few Mozarts

There is a some element of magic to it. Something that usually influences the artists outside of willpower, hard work and dedication. The ability to create beauty from whole cloth seems to transcend dedication.

I always think of The Ramones when people say you need to hone your craft for years before you can make anything meaningful.

 

[Dr.Acula]

You're asking about artistic intelligence as if intelligence is well defined and that the definition has nothing to do with art. I haven't heard a definition of intelligence that is satisfactory enough to justify why a high IQ score means high intelligence, or vice versa.

So if artistic intelligence is a thing, what is "default" intelligence?

 

[Vermillion]

How is that any different from any other definition of intelligence? Wikipedia says



Which, summed up, is how and when

Right, but the issue with your example is its extreme subjectivity. Take two programmers working towards the most efficient solution for a given project. They take entirely different routes, but somehow, they manage to make their code just as efficient, and in the same span of time. It would be difficult to determine (from just this project) who has the greater intelligence based on this task alone.

In an art project, on the other hand, applying light/shadow at a particular time or a particular way drastically changes that project. Now all of a sudden, instead of measuring something objective (efficiency, defined as minimal power/space consumption, how well it meets the project specifications, etc.), we are trying to figure out if the person has applied a particular technique in the right way and at the right time.

Note: I'm aware that my programming example isn't perfect; it's meant to illustrate my point.

 

[Laieon]

I'd say artistic intelligence refers to someones ability to make tangible their vision of something from the mind. Whether this be drawing, painting, music, sculpting, writing, cooking etc. This includes recreating musical works by ear etc.

I really like this answer. It's one thing to picture something in your head, it's an entirely other thing to actually be able to create it.

 

[Vermillion]

You're asking about artistic intelligence as if intelligence is well defined and that the definition has nothing to do with art. I haven't heard a definition of intelligence that is satisfactory enough to justify why a high IQ score means high intelligence, or vice versa.

So if artistic intelligence is a thing, what is "default" intelligence?

Well, look at the responses that I personally believe are the closest (Aztechnology and CaptainGyro). I'm not saying that the definition has nothing to do with art. I'm trying to get at a reasonable standard for what could be considered artistic intelligence.

As for your question: allow me to use an example. I've known people that look at fields completely alien to their studies (sports, for example) and accurately pick out how certain things work in that field. These people pick up concepts quickly, and can make connections very easily.

Side note: I notice that some people are focusing heavily on the validity of IQ tests. This is not the purpose of my question; I am not arguing for (or against) IQ tests.

Arent those skills that can be learned and improved though? So how does a test determine what is prior knowledge and what isnt?

Anyway, I think the general theory on creative intelligence is that it has to deal with the interaction between long-term memory and working memory, specifically cognitive disinhibition. The greater knowledge of your field (long-term memory) combined with a high capacity working memory and high cognitive disinhibition might be the guide to understanding creative intelligence. Cognitive disinhibition is also associated with mental illness so it kinda makes some sense

See my response above for the first part.

As for the second part, that's interesting. You may notice that my definitions of intelligence tend to cover the theory that you've given for creative intelligence.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Right, but the issue with your example is its extreme subjectivity. Take two programmers working towards the most efficient solution for a given project. They take entirely different routes, but somehow, they manage to make their code just as efficient, and in the same span of time. It would be difficult to determine (from just this project) who has the greater intelligence based on this task alone.

Then they're equally intelligent when it comes to solving that task

In an art project, on the other hand, applying light/shadow at a particular time or a particular way drastically changes that project. Now all of a sudden, instead of measuring something objective (efficiency, defined as minimal power/space consumption, how well it meets the project specifications, etc.), we are trying to figure out if the person has applied a particular technique in the right way and at the right time.

Note: I'm aware that my programming example isn't perfect; it's meant to illustrate my point.

But there are objective measures. Light and shadow aren't just randomly applied. They're approximations of real life and whether they're in the proper places or not in something that can be assessed. The techniques used to achieve them might differ (such as the type of hatching used for shading) and the art styles might differ, but there are very ways to compare them

 

[Vermillion]

Then they're equally intelligent when it comes to solving that task



But there are objective measures. Light and shadow aren't just randomly applied. They're approximations of real life and whether they're in the proper places or not in something that can be assessed. The techniques used to achieve them might differ (such as the type of hatching used for shading) and the art styles might differ, but there are very ways to compare them

Excellent point, but what about art that doesn't intend to imitate reality?

 

[Vermillion]

Quick bump since people are actually awake now.

 

[Always-honest]

I'd say artistic intelligence refers to someones ability to make tangible their vision of something from the mind. Whether this be drawing, painting, music, sculpting, writing, cooking etc. This includes recreating musical works by ear etc.

Something like that, yes. That's what they mean by that i think.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

Excellent point, but what about art that doesn't intend to imitate reality?

Yeah, I've been thinking about this and I'm not sure. In those cases it is pretty much subjective, but I do feel like there are some underlying objective truths that they share in common that we just don't realize. Kind of like how when assessing beauty, it's been found face symmetry is an aspect that's pretty much universal across ages, gender and culture, I feel like there are some aspects that these works have that these artists realize, even if it's subconsciously, which could totally be the case.

For instance, an example of that last part is how if I told you to draw a street with buildings you'd probably draw the road narrowing the "further" away it was and the buildings "getting shorter" with distance as well. Even if you've had no art training and don't know about horizons, vanishing points or foreshortening, you still subconsciously know these concepts and apply them

 

[Jacksinthe]

I'd say artistic intelligence refers to someones ability to make tangible their vision of something from the mind. Whether this be drawing, painting, music, sculpting, writing, cooking etc. This includes recreating musical works by ear etc.

This is referred to as iteration. The ability to produce your mind's eye is not the same as an artistic intelligence.

AI, if I were to wage a guess, would be the understanding of some type of art, regardless of your ability to iterate. For me, I can "see" music, what each sound makes and understand the math behind it that makes classical and modern pieces what they are. I can't compose nearly as well, though. I understand it, but am unable to iterate on the same level.