New study: Musical talent linked to "Open" personality

[Michael L]

In the search for better understanding, correct me I am wrong

OK, you are more wrong, and jancivil is more right. See particularly the section 'Music and Language' in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive ... e_of_music

[Jace-BeOS]

The psychopath reference was mainly joking. But there is truth on some levels. They have no mechanism for a 'superego' conscience, so there`s no ego fragmentation or anxiety. This might appear self-realized to the observer. They will surely try to convince you they are.

Depends on the individual. I tend to rate some sociopaths as "successful" and others as not. My ex boss is a less successful one because he ruins things for himself while screwing the people in his environment. He disrupted his workplace relationships so badly that he had to exit from several of them before it caught up with him. Not very successful in the realm of keeping a career.

He also displayed a curious and short term humane moment after a car accident disrupted his notion of being totally in control. He credited others around him that were formerly competition, and advised them to respect themselves. After his moment of vulnerability ended (about a week), his sociopathic traits got even worse than they were previously and his need to ruin his competition ramped way up into behavior that was no longer as easy to hide and mask. He lost control of himself. Lucky for him, he had found an institution that was perfectly suited to be entrenched and he's still there after numerous people watched him destroy my career there, while seeing his lies and manipulation for themselves.

An asocial personality is not a psychopathic personality or sociopathic personality. Sociopaths are frequently also asocial personality types. The psychopath is not usually violent or asocial.

From the psychiatric reading I've done: Psychopathy and sociopathy are types of antisocial personalities. Also there's narcissistic personality, borderline personality disorder, and maybe a few more I can't remember off the top of my head.

Antisocial does NOT = unsociable. That's a misuse of the word. Antisocial personalities can actually appear VERY sociable. It's part of the need for control to adopt an artificial image of likability, sociability, and, even charisma. It's well documented that numerous notorious psychopaths were regarded as charismatic and likable people on the surface.

EDIT : to avoid confusion, sociopath and psychopath are frequently used interchangeably. It is becoming more comfortable to see the sociopath as the serial killer type and the psychopath as the user.

That's actually the opposite of how I've been seeing it. Yes, the USA's awful DSM rejects the notion of the two being different and just considers sociopathy and psychopathy to be the same. I disagree. The UK's system also disagrees. It recognizes the sociopath and the psychopath individually (unless that has changed in the last few years). The difference is that they're regarded oppositely to what you described above:

Sociopaths do their damage within the bounds of formal social rules. They're the corporate executives that destroy people and parts of society while staying totally within the letter of the law (even though they're defeating its spirit). The successful ones are people in the top economic percentage who decide things like "this defect may kill customers, but the potential litigation is much smaller than the cost of fixing the defect" or "we will buy our competitor's company to acquire their IP licensing, customer database lists, and we will eliminate most of their employees, cut all investments in research and engineering, reduce quality for faster and cheaper production, and then close the business after having squeezed as much pure profit from it as possible". Etc.

Banks were caught out (by whistleblowers) conducting hiring that explicitly sought sociopathic employees, for the purpose of conducting business tasks that are reprehensible to "normal" people. People with empathy find it objectionable to foreclose on home owners, for example, but sociopaths don't. Sociopaths have few limits on what they're willing to do in terms of social order and ethics. So long as it benefits them, and it's an act that can be defended with "it's not illegal", they'll do it. We see this justification very often in official corporate responses to accusations of ethical violations. Also see "malicious compliance".

The psychopath, however, is the type of person that will reject law and violate any formal social conventions they dislike. Psychopaths won't necessarily maintain their outer image of social compliance. They might actually aggressively and publicly reject it. Their behavioral limits are far fewer than the sociopath (willing to get their hands really dirty) and any limits only relate to personal motivation (rather than someone else's judgment). They don't stay as well hidden as a sociopath, because they get caught breaking laws. Violent or not, being caught willfully breaking laws is a serious consequence and keeps them from long term success. They are less dangerous to the long term health of a society because they get filtered out by the society's regulatory functions.

The sociopath does not get filtered out. The sociopath maintains positions of influence and are rarely removed from them. The culture and economy of the USA seems to be such that sociopaths are particularly enabled to rise to the top (on the backs of those they use and abuse). This is where the term "social Darwinism" comes in. Some people actually embrace this as superior humanity, but they fail to see the long view where antisocial behavior is called as such because it damages, and can destroy, society. It's an evolutionary dead end, if it's worthy of being called "Darwinism" at all. While they're more suited to the environment, the environment is fundamentally broken and dying, and their behaviors contribute to accelerating the final outcome (collapse).

In terms of art and creativity, I see no reason why a sociopath or a psychopath couldn't be very accomplished creatives. There are many examples of bands that are destroyed by the antisocial personalities of some of their members. Sometimes bands continue in spite of these conflicts because "business is good". Sometimes the most skilled members are the least socially compliant. Are they sociopaths or psychopaths? Maybe. Maybe not. Depends on the person. Narcissistic personality disorder is probably a lot more common in the arts than those other two antisocial types disorders I talked about above.

Then we have people like Steve Jobs. In various ways, he could seem like he was either a sociopath or a narcissist. Regardless of his personality issues, he was VERY successful. I'd even go so far as to admit, against my preference, that he was exactly the right person that was needed to shake up and change the computer industry. It's a shame he died (which might've been his narcissism: he rejected his doctors' suggested course of action until it was too late).

I hate what I learned about his behavior, but his influence made Apple do things that no other computer industry company was willing to do (except maybe Be, on a WAY smaller scale), and these things were exactly the right things to humanize computing. Tech people hate it but it's actually VERY socially positive (which is why reaching the more profitable consumer focus was even possible at all).

Maybe that's just a side-effect of Jobs picking and choosing things to serve his own ideals, and maybe he wasn't remotely sincere about making computing available to everyone (maybe he hated computers like I do, but had the influence and charisma to get technical people to make it better for HIM and shape things to HIS preferences... and coincidentally made it better for others).

One way or the other, his antisocial behaviors were a part of how he operated. Despite possibly being "antisocial", he acquired a following of dedicated fans, acquired the respect of fellow executives, attained a loving wife and children, caused major positive changes in a stagnant industry, and was always willfully associating himself with creative people (whether for image or sincere interest).

Without some kind of self-actualization, his earlier style of behavior wouldn't have lead to the same success he attained in the second half of his life (the so-called "mellowed Jobs").

TL/DR: I see no reason why these traits would exclude musicians.

[Jace-BeOS]

PS: all those categories could be bunk and bollocks, really. The DSM is shit and I know nothing about the UK version. Maybe it's just as bad. Maybe these categories are entirely artificial and not scientific. But that's the problem with the psychiatric business: it is the opposite of scientific. It is opinion, influence, committees, and deals.

Still, we DO need a language, terms to discuss the very real things we perceive (even if we perceive inaccurately, hence the need for the scientific method), and a framework for said terms to have specific and unique enough meaning to have functional conversation. [shrug]

[Doug1978]

Also, are any of the following untrue:

Right-handed people uses the left hemisphere of their brain more than the right hemisphere.
Left-handed people uses the right hemisphere of their brain more than the left hemisphere.

The left hemisphere of the brain is what does the mathematics.
The right hemisphere of the brain is what does the languages.

All of these are untrue - left hemisphere is significantly responsible for language processing (in particular Broca's area and Wernicke's area), whereas right hemisphere is significantly responsible for spatial recognition.
Have a look at split brain research.

The processing and consolidation functions of the brain operate differently across both hemispheres, depending on the separate tasks.
Normal people (eg people without brain damage), use both hemispheres of brain more or less equally.

As such, it's best to be skeptical about the other assumptions in your post.

More generally, whilst there have been some illuminating insights gained from psychological research in recent years, there is still a lot of sh*te floating around too.
Weren't we all abused as children and members of satanic cults, before space aliens abducted us? Time to see my recovered memory therapist again...

[Jace-BeOS]

Finding out that the brain hemisphere myth was bunk was a lot like finding out the tongue taste bud zones was a myth. I felt betrayed by my public schooling. What did they actually present that wasn't BS?

So yeah, healthy skepticism is healthy.

[annode]

never mind.missed page 3.

[annode]

@ Jace-BeOS
Now that i`ve read your reply post;
- Sorry to hear you became someones meal at the office. I hope you will be able to leave it behind you one day. Betrayal can suck up a lot of ones energy.

[dea-man]

The lesson I draw from this whole thing is that life, rarely fits into a nice, neat box.

[harryupbabble]

Finding out that the brain hemisphere myth was bunk was a lot like finding out the tongue taste bud zones was a myth. I felt betrayed by my public schooling. What did they actually present that wasn't BS?

So yeah, healthy skepticism is healthy.

Yeah, it's like studies on milk and eggs. One year (or even decade) they say it's bad, the next year they say it's not really bad but may in fact be good for you.

Still, the internet is permeated with "facts" about the left-hemisphere of the brain being responsible for imagination and that it is the solver of logic and math and science problems... and that the right-hemisphere being mostly responsible for expressive thoughts manifested in the arts and in language based endeavors.

So, depending on whether the new way is an improvement on and more accurate than the old way, it might be still debatable to say that music is more about math than art or language. I guess a lot of musicians could be seen as dramatic and full of feelings and very expressive but it's usually the singer being that (one example is Kate Bush). No? I look at guitarist Robert Fripp and a lot of bassists and they just seem to be standing there remembering what to play and seemingly having this "computative look" with their guitar and bass patterns and sounding like it too.

But if the new way, using brain scan machines and newer, more accurate technology, is debunking the old conclusions, then yes maybe the old conclusions has to be discarded.

But it's interesting to know that in the case of studies on sociopaths, particularly the McDonald Triad idea, it seems a lot of law agencies and not just crime investigation TV shows still believe (and if they do not now then they did for a long time) and rely on it. Although it might be true that Mr. McDonald's study was actually done on "violent" subjects and not necessarily on sociopaths, law agencies like the FBI may still be relying on Mr. McDonald's findings because who is to say that those "violent" subjects that his study was done on are not actually sociopaths? They could have been.

I guess if you see your neighbor's kid torturing and killing animals it might be still a good idea to let the authorities know about it even if you are not sure that the kid is also a bed-wetter and a firebug. Murder and torture are still crimes right? Just because it's done on animals doesn't mean it should count less.

Anyways, using the search words "brain hemispheres", below are some links (from over a million of them actually) still supporting the "old" way about the functions of the left and right brain hemispheres.

https://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/split.html
http://www.thethinkingbusiness.com/brai ... emispheres
http://www.livescience.com/32935-whats- ... brain.html

[harryupbabble]

Scrabble demands having enough vocabulary, which I can't place with mathematics 'skills' or even aptitude. I suppose counting is important.

In the case of scrabble, "counting" does count as math. Also, "permutation" is a math term, true? The permutation part of scrabble is probably where use of "imagination" is required most.

Let's say you have in your rack the letters AEPRS. Rearrange, in your head, those letters and find all the English words. There are 12 valid words and 75 percent of them are common words, not weird words at all. So, can you find at least 8 words? And can you do it in 10 seconds?

Imagination is supposed to be a function of the brain's left hemisphere along with math. In composing music, I don't know about everybody else, but I just basically do permutations, by way of trial and error, with the notes of the scale, and keep "good-sounding" permutations. I guess it doesn't sound so mathy, but really... it is?

I guess a lot of composers do not like to be player/composer because they become "you are what you play". Tendencies for the fingers to be automatic (muscle memory?) tend to make those kinds of composers to keep making compositions that don't seem to vary.

That is probably why some composers use math to overcome that problem. Therefore, a lot of composers might actually be using math in different degrees of sophistication.

[jancivil]

Also, are any of the following untrue:

Right-handed people uses the left hemisphere of their brain more than the right hemisphere.
Left-handed people uses the right hemisphere of their brain more than the left hemisphere.

The left hemisphere of the brain is what does the mathematics.
The right hemisphere of the brain is what does the languages.

Right-handed musicians would be the math type.
Left-handed musicians would be the language type.

These are popular notions today. AFAIK this whole left/right brain is crap. At base, this is a completely unnecessary dichotomy and the science isn't there for it. More later.

Right-handed musicians would be the math type.
Left-handed musicians would be the language type.

I'm for the most part right-handed. 'Throws right, bats both.' But I'm not all that captured by math. My father taught me what he called 'business math' quite young but neither of us was any whiz. I was interested in drumming really early. Now, there may be some people that consider me coming away with eg., '5 in the time of 3 1/2' as maths-concerned but for me, fractions came pretty early. I think one could be kind of simple in terms of maths and get by in music fine.

[jancivil]

I guess a lot of composers do not like to be player/composer because they become "you are what you play". Tendencies for the fingers to be automatic (muscle memory?) tend to make those kinds of composers to keep making compositions that don't seem to vary.

That is probably why some composers use math to overcome that problem. Therefore, a lot of composers might actually be using math in different degrees of sophistication.

What on earth are you on about. All due respect and all, it looks like you have no exposure to (EDIT: REAL*) composers whatsoever and are just riffing on concepts for the fun of it here. (*: I mean that looks like an imaginary or hypothetical problem for the purposes of advancing this need for maths rhetorically. We're talking about varying degrees of sophistication in simple primary school arithmetic, realistically. Nobody worth a shit is impeded particularly by knowing their instrument.)

There may be some music composed by somebody where they made up for a deficiency by getting cute with maths, but this 'composer' with a tendency to do little better than write finger patterns we'd consider too deficient to consider as up to the task of, or shouldn't present to the world as composer in my assessment.

[jancivil]

As I indicated above, I have some exposure to advanced rhythm in modern, 'avant-garde' musics and to the dodecaphonic serial music area. Higher maths to talk about in music, there's very little of. It's grade school arithmetic. Now, someone that designs music halls will tend to need some physics, but musicians can be quite simple here. I do not have a great aptitude in mathematics, let alone 'skills', and I'm hard-pressed to see why it would do anything to advance me or be a significant feature of musical talent. There is very little to worry about.

[jancivil]

I don't see how this 'psychopath' would be self-realized, with the basic problem of the lack of real empathy. Or that this 'psychopath' as a type poses any big surprise for someone that recognizes Full-Blown Antisocial Personality Disorder. That word's popularity seems to place as much with the prevalence of TV procedural crime drama as with anything.

Anyway, I'm open to read things like that, as I don't really know anything. I tended to trip alone, but the one person I did hang out with on acid was such a jock but his mind was wide open as to music and one of the more intellectually progressive people I knew then.

The psychopath reference was mainly joking. But there is truth on some levels. They have no mechanism for a 'superego' conscience, so there`s no ego fragmentation or anxiety. This might appear self-realized to the observer. They will surely try to convince you they are.

self-realization, which is a state of being in which the person responds to the world with the full depth of his or her spontaneous feelings[drives], rather than with anxiety-driven compulsion

The psychopath fits this enough.

Makes sense to me except for your conclusion. No, self-realized as I read it, the full depth of - let's say the full range of - emotion is just not available to the person lacking essential empathy, I think. The full awareness of one's drives is quite subverted here. I would have to consider that the self-realized person self-critiques, for instance knows when she is purely self-serving and has ignored the ramifications on others' feelings. Seems a basic issue, to me.

[jancivil]

Let's say you have in your rack the letters AEPRS. Rearrange, in your head, those letters and find all the English words. There are 12 valid words and 75 percent of them are common words, not weird words at all. So, can you find at least 8 words? And can you do it in 10 seconds?

Well, I saw <spear> in one or two seconds. No, I'm not likely to get 8 words in 10 seconds and I'm now bored with it. I don't know what this has to do with musical creativity, at all.

In composing music, I don't know about everybody else, but I just basically do permutations, by way of trial and error, with the notes of the scale, and keep "good-sounding" permutations. I guess it doesn't sound so mathy, but really... it is?

That is kinda mathy, but permutation purely through itself does not strike me as musical endeavor to be perfectly honest. So you would be making up for a deficiency by this particular reliance, I think. If music was more like scrabble prowess that would be something (edit: I may be wrong it's just that I don't think thinking is where it's at, ideally), or one's focus was in dodecaphonic serialism that would be useful, but music is typically more like creating sentences I think.