Is outstanding musical talent related to intelligence?

[aciddose]

the assertion was made that a person 'with a higher IQ' *will* go farther;

An abstract person, yes.

In fact we have numbers for all sorts of classes of "going" and can very accurately predict the results of a group. For example lets say of the group in a particular area of study belonging to a particular percentile, a specific portion will succeed. Of the group below this percentile a certain lower percentage will succeed. These numbers will remain very well defined.

[nasenmann]

some questions just shouldn't be answered, somethings do not need definitions or labels and imho such talk is counterproductive to artistic growth. I would be every upset if I ever heard another human being say "I'm not intelligent enough to be a musician" or "I'm too intelligent to be a musician" and again imho if the question were to be answered one of the two would happen. Art is without borders or too many definitions or at least (and again imho) should be that way.

All I see is reasons to exclude people from a wonderful gift...note one does not have to be gifted as in being very talented to enjoy the gift of being a musician. I say I am gifted because I have been given the gift of my passion being a musician...it's a gift I enjoy everyday and a gift that helps me make it through everyday.It's not my place to cast judgment on any other persons' expression or art or even what their 'gift' may be. It's also NO ONES place to cast judgment on my art or expression or what my gift is. It's not my place to cast judgment on another persons' intelligence nor is it anyone's place to cast judgment on my intelligence...every time I see people trying to do such things it makes me sad to think that people need to feel superior in any way possible.

I dont care myself, that's why I dont finish a lot of music because I have nothing to prove to anyone on the face of this earth. IF I am the sarmtest me right now that I have ever seen that's all that matters. If I want to say that I am the best at expressing myself through my chosen art I would love to know how someone else came claim they are better at expressing me then I am

I love the internet and places like KvR, great places to grow in ones own desired directions abound everywhere...we all do not grow the same, we all are different and we all should embrace that. But at the same time there is this need to 'prove' something to people when in fact I think people are just looking to prove things to themselves. Worse yet some people are so insecure they need to tear down others to build themselves up...such questions just set the stage for this without serving any purpose.

FTR I will stipulate to the fact that every single person on earth is more intelligent than I and a much better artist than I can ever be. I have no outstanding musical talents nor any intelligence at all. Not having to prove such things allows me far more time to enjoy my passions (my gifts), gain knowledge, gain wisdom and grow...after all at the end of the day I define who I am and what I am...not some IQ test, not by popularity, not by my talents being judged by others...if I can just look in the mirror at then end of each day knowing that I did my best to grow a little more I'm good.

is wisdom related to musicianship?


slightly, i suppose. if you listen long and well

[Hink]

some questions just shouldn't be answered, somethings do not need definitions or labels and imho such talk is counterproductive to artistic growth. I would be every upset if I ever heard another human being say "I'm not intelligent enough to be a musician" or "I'm too intelligent to be a musician" and again imho if the question were to be answered one of the two would happen. Art is without borders or too many definitions or at least (and again imho) should be that way.

All I see is reasons to exclude people from a wonderful gift...note one does not have to be gifted as in being very talented to enjoy the gift of being a musician. I say I am gifted because I have been given the gift of my passion being a musician...it's a gift I enjoy everyday and a gift that helps me make it through everyday.It's not my place to cast judgment on any other persons' expression or art or even what their 'gift' may be. It's also NO ONES place to cast judgment on my art or expression or what my gift is. It's not my place to cast judgment on another persons' intelligence nor is it anyone's place to cast judgment on my intelligence...every time I see people trying to do such things it makes me sad to think that people need to feel superior in any way possible.

I dont care myself, that's why I dont finish a lot of music because I have nothing to prove to anyone on the face of this earth. IF I am the sarmtest me right now that I have ever seen that's all that matters. If I want to say that I am the best at expressing myself through my chosen art I would love to know how someone else came claim they are better at expressing me then I am

I love the internet and places like KvR, great places to grow in ones own desired directions abound everywhere...we all do not grow the same, we all are different and we all should embrace that. But at the same time there is this need to 'prove' something to people when in fact I think people are just looking to prove things to themselves. Worse yet some people are so insecure they need to tear down others to build themselves up...such questions just set the stage for this without serving any purpose.

FTR I will stipulate to the fact that every single person on earth is more intelligent than I and a much better artist than I can ever be. I have no outstanding musical talents nor any intelligence at all. Not having to prove such things allows me far more time to enjoy my passions (my gifts), gain knowledge, gain wisdom and grow...after all at the end of the day I define who I am and what I am...not some IQ test, not by popularity, not by my talents being judged by others...if I can just look in the mirror at then end of each day knowing that I did my best to grow a little more I'm good.

is wisdom related to musicianship?


slightly, i suppose. if you listen long and well

that's an interesting question, I'm no spring chicken (but not over the hill ) but I have been at this thing called life for a while now and most of it music has been my passion and I think there is wisdom is music, sometimes from music comes wisdom and musicianship does indeed have it's own wisdom to be gained by a musician. I mean imo the phrase "if I knew then what I know now" is associated with wisdom...I can't even begin to guess how many times I have had that thought along my own journey...so imo the answer is yes

[nasenmann]

hehe, it was kind of a semi-rhetorical question. i just wrote it cause you shared a good bit of wisdom there.

there's possibly as much wisdom to be discovered in pipe cleaning as there is in music making. it's not about the doing but the being, etc, yaddayadda.
that said, i'm partial to music as a good teacher as well.

i would've endorsed most of what you said 10 years ago from an idealistic kid's viewpoint. now, i'm atleast wise enough to say that i don't really get it yet. but i'll get there...

[jancivil]

the assertion was made that a person 'with a higher IQ' *will* go farther;

An abstract person, yes.

In fact we have numbers for all sorts of classes of "going" and can very accurately predict the results of a group. For example lets say of the group in a particular area of study belonging to a particular percentile, a specific portion will succeed. Of the group below this percentile a certain lower percentage will succeed. These numbers will remain very well defined.

I never knew any abstractions. I have some experience with people. You did more or less specify, 'further' is vis a vis 'academia'.

Originally, before my vigorous objection to terms, the original post had 'is musical genius related to intelligence', and now we have 'outstanding musical talent'.
I have been immersed in people with more precocious talent and substantially higher achievement than I, in an academy setting. So, in lieu of 'research' or received data and outside any appeal to authority, I have some observations I can share.

Some, by their experience, ie., preparation for the career, were well-adjusted for more training, coursework and the socialization that would benefit them in more than one area of 'professional life' vis a vis music. SOME WERE NOT. Some of these probably had pretty high IQs, certain of these I think did not and would seem to be kind of stupid except for the specific tasks of memorizing a piece of music, aping more or less the models before them, producing good tone and being able to deliver the product. The very high IQ example might not be interested in 'music theory' or coursework and there is a venn diagram containing them and the stupid virtuoso in that area.

Beyond this are the prima donnas, whose experience before that prepared them to think of themselves as extremely special and were there being groomed for stardom at the Metropolitan Opera. And this was a weeding out process that determined that this experience and this assessment was actually pretty spot-on! And these people were destined for a certain kind of "success" in life quite apart from the well-rounded, but gifted and accomplished composer that ends up supporting that inside academia, or even on the fringes of it as an outlier, or what-have-you.

Et cetera.

[jancivil]

Moving back to 'genius' which does interest me, an exemplary genius I think is Albert Einstein, who did not fit academia and was considered by some to be quite stupid in school. I think his IQ is not relevant. It might not have been terrifically high, depending on that test that day. I think IQ is not a terribly sound criteria for 'success'. I also have to note that 'success' is another term that was not defined here pre-launch.

[nasenmann]

Moving back to 'genius' which does interest me, an exemplary genius I think is Albert Einstein, who did not fit academia and was considered by some to be quite stupid in school.

even though he didn't excel in everything, i believe that's a bit of a myth...but disregarding that:
school is stupid, everyone knows that. whatever truly valuable you learn there is likely either connected to just coping with the overall experience or outstanding teachers that subtly subvert the system.

in order to find your talents and/or calling, you need freedom above all else. freedom to make mistakes, to experiment, explore, spawn your curiosity, all that stuff. the way most schools are set up, they're generic anti-genius machines.
the static left-brained nature of IQ tests reflects that pretty well.

no clue where brilliant ideas come from, but it's somewhere entirely else.
school education/"intelligence refinement" MIGHT help with articulating those ideas.

[Flandersh]

I'm not sure what the point of repeating yourself over and over in an argumentative manner is when hundreds of studies have been conducted in detail relating to this topic.

Regardless of the concrete cause, or more importantly without care for it as it is ultimately useless to anyone to worry about this (other than yourself, for whatever reason? Lack of an ability to distinguish abstract from concrete?) we know for a fact that high IQ correlates highly with academic achievement, and likewise negatively with religion and fertility.

You might say that it is not that intelligence decreases fertility, but that intelligence increases motivations which reduce fertility by moderation of the actions of an individual due to that individual's awareness of the consequences of ones action. Why does this matter though? This sort of thing is obvious. Did someone say "intelligence causes academic achievement" ? No.

Well, there has been hundred of studies correlating socioeconomic background and academic achievement too, which have concluded that intelligence is not a factor per se in predicting academic achievement, but that family background is.

Further has research on both learning styles and teachning styles showed correlation with academic achievement, also making the correlation between IQ and academic achievement weaker when testing these additional factors. A teacher taking into account that students may learn in different ways may as such strongly influence the future academic achievement of his students.

And there is even studies that show a positive correlation between religiosity and academic achievement. If high IQ is positively correlated with academic achievement but negatively correlated with religion, how does one explain these research findings? To me I have to take into account more factors to understand why.

And to take a personal example. A bus drive past my house each day, and as such is higly correlated with my house. But is the bus directly related to my house? I would have to guess with such little information. Instead I choose to study additional factors, like the fact that there is a way going past my house. If I remove the way, would there still be a correlation between the bus and my house? I find it unlikely, but it is still a guess from my side.

As long as I am aware of many factors that may affect a correlation between two variables, I can only guess upon a relationship between the two when presented with them alone. Without examining the research design, possible bias and all possible influencing factors, I am not able to say anything for sure.

[Doug1978]

'Is outstanding musical talent related to intelligence?'

Not in my case.

[stonestreet]

Here is a quote that I found recently:

Tests test tests - Heinz von Foerster

He talks about sending people to trivialization centers. We start out non-trivial. Then we get sent to the trivialization center (school) to make us trivial so that we are well adjusted and can be set loose on society because we are then predictable.

Have fun

[aciddose]

And there is even studies that show a positive correlation between religiosity and academic achievement. If high IQ is positively correlated with academic achievement but negatively correlated with religion, how does one explain these research findings? To me I have to take into account more factors to understand why.

Those are examples of what is concrete.

For these particular examples though the answer seems obvious to me: allowing oneself to operate based upon faith vs. rational thought and questioning authority.

Rote memorization is likely to benefit from the first.

Here is another Einstein quote: "Information is not knowledge. The only source of knowledge is experience."

So those able to most successfully collect information may have higher religiosity, while those who are capable of understanding in depth the subjects studied may have higher IQ. They may be opposed, however it is still entirely possible for a person to have both significant levels of religiosity and IQ in a balance.

That is all concrete however and much more difficult to test than the abstract. I have read about studies providing evidence for this however and it seems to be known intuitively.

[fmr]

I'm not sure what the point of repeating yourself over and over in an argumentative manner is when hundreds of studies have been conducted in detail relating to this topic.

Regardless of the concrete cause, or more importantly without care for it as it is ultimately useless to anyone to worry about this (other than yourself, for whatever reason? Lack of an ability to distinguish abstract from concrete?) we know for a fact that high IQ correlates highly with academic achievement, and likewise negatively with religion and fertility.

In what way does religion correlates with IQ? Any religion, or a particular one?

I also that correlation with fertility a very imaginative approach, considering how the economical factor influence decisively that subject (and I don't think economy has any correlation with IQ). This IQ thing is highly overrated, IMO.

[aciddose]

In what way does religion correlates with IQ? Which religion?

I also that correlation with fertility a very imaginative approach, considering how the economical factor influence decisively that subject (and I don't think economy has any correlation with IQ). This IQ thing is highly overrated, IMO.

If you honestly want answers to your questions, do some research. Muttering on a music forum about how "this IQ thing is highly overrated" only reveals all sorts of things about yourself.

For example, if you put in the minimum amount of effort you could have found this within a couple seconds and read it, keeping your mouth shut rather than posting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosit ... telligence

[fmr]

In what way does religion correlates with IQ? Which religion?

I also that correlation with fertility a very imaginative approach, considering how the economical factor influence decisively that subject (and I don't think economy has any correlation with IQ). This IQ thing is highly overrated, IMO.

If you honestly want answers to your questions, do some research. Muttering on a music forum about how "this IQ thing is highly overrated" only reveals all sorts of things about yourself.

For example, if you put in the minimum amount of effort you could have found this within a couple seconds and read it, keeping your mouth shut rather than posting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosit ... telligence

Like flandersh pointed very well in his post, there are studies that contradict the studies you quoted. You chose to believe in the ones you quote, which may be seen as a manifestation of faith, and since you chose that path, it reveals much about you in what concerns IQ (in your own terms).
Regarding myself, my assertion reveals that I am very sceptical about IQ and all things "correlated", and I look at these studies with the curiosity of someone that evaluates a possibility, and don't value it more than other possibilities. Since I don't believe (I don't have faith) I may have an high IQ

[Tricky-Loops]

In what way does religion correlates with IQ? Any religion, or a particular one?

From my experience I can say that Buddhists are mostly well educated people with higher IQ, many of them academics.