Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Talk about things that are not necessarily related to music or the guitar.
User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Andrew Fryer » Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:53 am

It's about 19th century character-profiling. The rich came from good stock and deserved to be rich, the poor from bad stock and deserved to be poor. Good bred good. Bad bred bad. Whatever you think of science, it has the virtue that it is open to rectifying its past mistakes, of eliminating what is found to have been pseudo-science.
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

Rasputin
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Rasputin » Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:55 pm

PeteJ wrote:
Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:48 am
Rasputin wrote:
Sat Sep 09, 2017 12:43 pm
There have been some scientific experiments which can cast light on why we experience our actions as chosen. I think the concept of free will is incoherent and I don't need an explanation of why it seems otherwise to be convinced of this - but still find the experiments quite interesting, and they would be useful if I was into trying to convert others to my way of thinking.
There has been no scientific research establishing the existence of experience or that examines how or why we experience our actions. For all the empirical sciences will ever know we are philosophical zombies. Indeed, for the most part this is what the natural sciences currently assume.

I also find our usual concept of freewill incoherent, and would suggest that it is wrong to state that we either do or do-not have freewill. But if pushed I'd rather say that we don't. So we can agree on this. This is the perennial view.

But this nothing to do with science. It is people who study consciousness who tell us that freewill is an illusion not people who study brains, or who study behaviour and make guesses about consciousness based on their observations.
Well, you can always argue that there is an unbridgeable gap between observable brain processes and consciousness - still, if you demonstrate that people report specific events as having been willed by them when we can be confident (from the design of the experiment) that they weren't, the fact that we have such a powerful feeling that our actions are freely willed loses a lot of its force.

Obviously, we could also draw the more general conclusion that what seems self-evident to us based on introspection is not necessarily so. That tends to undermine any attempt to explore consciousness through introspective, first-person methods. Even if what you discover through introspection corresponds to what someone else - maybe everyone else - discovers, you will never know whether this means that you have all discovered the truth of the matter, or whether it just means that all creatures with minds like ours are subject to the same illusion. In any case, you will never know whether it really does correspond, because you can't get at the others' experiences except through their words. Now if you are asking whether a person experienced such and such an event as being willed by them, I think words are adequate - but if we are talking about the nature of consciousness, I think that is so hard to capture in words that you can never be sure you are talking about the same thing.

Christopher C.
Posts: 21
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 1:31 pm

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Christopher C. » Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:06 pm

That's a good question. I know there was a study done by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago that found a preference for instrumental music like classical and big band among those who score highly on verbal intelligence tests, but I'm not sure that enjoying or playing classical guitar music would result the same conclusion or not.

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Andrew Fryer » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:06 am

I'm happy to go on record as saying the above Pinker quote doesn't impress me.

What are genes?
I know that there is a gene which makes our tooth enamel soft, and it is DOMINANT.
I know that there is a gene which makes our molars supernumerary, and it is DOMINANT.
I know that there is a gene which makes our jaws too small for our teeth, and it is DOMINANT.
So in a million years time, all humans will be living on soup drunk through a straw.
I know that there is a gene which makes my eyes astigmatic in a pattern that is symmetrical about the vertical axis of my face.
Genes determine endocrine production, eyelash length, colour, number, in-growingness (Trichiasis- there are places in Africa where girls all wear tweezers around their necks because the problem is so bad)!

On that level of detail, 34,000 genes are quickly going to get used up on a human body, and there is no way they can also determine every thought, every feeling, every response to every stimulus. Responses to stimuli are learned. We grow up and discover and learn about our environment, we learn the effects of reacting to it in different ways, whether it's a fire or a cat or other people. That's what nurture is.

(although our varying levels of ability to pick up social skills may be genetically determined)

Or perhaps the point Pinker is missing is that if you sat down with pen and paper and tried to isolate every aspect of a human physiology, you'd end up with 34,000 items?

And at this juncture, I'm sure someone will criticise me on a point of detail, missing the wood for the trees!
Last edited by Andrew Fryer on Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:24 am, edited 2 times in total.
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

Chris
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2017 10:46 am

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Chris » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:15 am

Of course there is a correlation between IQ and playing classical guitar: With the level of appreciation you receive for practicing hundreds of hours on every piece, day after day, year after year, you really have to be a bit of an idiot to keep doing it :D :D
Last edited by Chris on Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Andrew Fryer » Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:23 am

Chris wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:15 am
Of course there is a correlation between IQ and playing classical guitar: With the level of appreciation you receive for practicing hundreds of hours on every piece, day after day, year after year, you really have to be a bit of and idiot to keep doing it :D :D
:bravo:
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

Rasputin
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Rasputin » Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:13 pm

Andrew Fryer wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 11:06 am
I'm happy to go on record as saying the above Pinker quote doesn't impress me.

What are genes?
I know that there is a gene which makes our tooth enamel soft, and it is DOMINANT.
I know that there is a gene which makes our molars supernumerary, and it is DOMINANT.
I know that there is a gene which makes our jaws too small for our teeth, and it is DOMINANT.
So in a million years time, all humans will be living on soup drunk through a straw.
I know that there is a gene which makes my eyes astigmatic in a pattern that is symmetrical about the vertical axis of my face.
Genes determine endocrine production, eyelash length, colour, number, in-growingness (Trichiasis- there are places in Africa where girls all wear tweezers around their necks because the problem is so bad)!

On that level of detail, 34,000 genes are quickly going to get used up on a human body, and there is no way they can also determine every thought, every feeling, every response to every stimulus. Responses to stimuli are learned. We grow up and discover and learn about our environment, we learn the effects of reacting to it in different ways, whether it's a fire or a cat or other people. That's what nurture is.

(although our varying levels of ability to pick up social skills may be genetically determined)

Or perhaps the point Pinker is missing is that if you sat down with pen and paper and tried to isolate every aspect of a human physiology, you'd end up with 34,000 items?

And at this juncture, I'm sure someone will criticise me on a point of detail, missing the wood for the trees!
I wouldn't want to represent Pinker as arguing for hard biological determinism - he is only arguing that it is genes that build brains that can learn and adapt, and that those brains must have some structure in order to do so - if they were just mush, there would be no mechanism for them to change in response to experience. In other words, nature is what makes nurture possible, but at the same time it limits what nuture can do.

I was just quoting the bit above because I thought it was quite funny, but he does go on to say:

... consider the roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans, which has about 18,000 genes. By the logic of the genome editorialists, it should be twice as free... in fact... it eats, mates, approaches and avoids certain smells, and that's about it. This alone should make it obvious that our freedom and diversity of behaviour comes from having a complex biological makeup, not a simple one.

Now, it is a genuine puzzle why humans, with their hundred trillion cells and hundred billion neurons, need only twice as many genes as a humble little worm. Many biologists believe that the human genes have been undercounted...

Most biologists... don't conclude that humans are less complex than we thought. Instead they conclude that the number of genes in a genome has little to do with the complexity of the organism.

Clearly, biologists can only take that view because genes 'for' a certain attribute are the exception not the rule - but if that's right, it takes down the argument '34,000 physiological attributes, 34,000 genes - nothing left over'.

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Andrew Fryer » Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:32 pm

The small contrast between 18,000 and 34,000 is interesting and can be used to suppose that genes don't determine physical attributes, unless of course we under-appreciate how many physical attributes a roundworm has, begging the question, which is perhaps what Pinker is doing in mocking its simple behaviour, although it doesn't follow that his conclusion is necessarily wrong.
Otoh, if we have fewer than twice the genes of a roundworm (it requires 18,000 for its simple behaviour), we can hardly be certain that genes determine all of human personality and moral character and behaviour.
genes 'for' a certain attribute are the exception not the rule
is language that has to be supported by facts and figures, otherwise it can be used for any purpose.
Last edited by Andrew Fryer on Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

Rasputin
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Rasputin » Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:39 pm

Andrew Fryer wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:32 pm
The small contrast between 18,000 and 34,000 is interesting and can be used to suppose that genes don't determine physical attributes, unless of course, we under-appreciate how many physical attributes a roundworm has, but Pinker is instead tending to mock its simple behaviour, although it doesn't follow that his conclusion is necessarily wrong.
Quite - it is just a way of showing that we don't really know what these numbers mean.
Otoh, if we have fewer than twice the genes of a roundworm (it requires 18,000 for its simple behaviour), that seems to me to be an argument that genes can't determine human personality and moral character and behaviour.
The secret, I suppose, lies in our brain structure, of which we know little.
Zigackly
genes 'for' a certain attribute are the exception not the rule
is language that has to be supported by facts and figures, otherwise it can be used for any purpose.
[/quote]
Sure, I am saying that if biologists take the view Pinker ascribes to them, then they must believe that - but while this chimes with various things I've read, and seems compatible with the modest difference between 18,000 and 34,000, I don't claim to know myself.

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Andrew Fryer » Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:41 pm

Rasputin wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:39 pm
if biologists take the view Pinker ascribes to them
are we saying we could be in the land of paper tigers?
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

Rasputin
Posts: 533
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 12:25 pm

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Rasputin » Mon Sep 11, 2017 1:52 pm

I'm just acknowledging that I don't know myself and at least in theory it could be that the consensus Pinker describes does not exist, or that it does but is mistaken.

I'm not sure it's crucial anyway. The original argument that (I think) JA had in mind is that when they sequenced the genome they didn't find as many genes as they expected, which means that everything we are uncomfortable about leaving to the genes must be a product of nurture. In order to knock that argument out, it is only necessary to point out that we don't really know what the numbers mean, or how they relate to complexity. Pinker is not trying to make a positive case in the passages I quoted - that's done in the rest of the book. He is just trying to say that you can't draw any conclusions from the number of genes.

Until we do know just how the numbers relate to complexity, there's no reason to believe in 'twice the genes, twice the complexity'. We know that genes do work together at least some of the time (otherwise the concept of a dominant gene would be meaningless) so if we are after a ratio that expressed relative complexity, it could just as plausibly be n^34000/n^18000 as 34000/18000.

User avatar
Andrew Fryer
Posts: 2547
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:13 pm
Location: London SE5

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Andrew Fryer » Mon Sep 11, 2017 1:58 pm

Rasputin wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 1:52 pm
if we are after a ratio that expressed relative complexity, it could just as plausibly be n^34000/n^18000 as 34000/18000.
it's food for thought, although if you are saying that a gene for soft enamel could work in any combination with any other gene, that seems a bit of a truism to me, and all we'd be talking about is how many physically different people there could possibly be. Or am I losing the thread?
1975 Calatayud y Gisbert, Yamaha CG131S.

PeteJ
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by PeteJ » Mon Sep 11, 2017 2:06 pm

Rasputin wrote:
Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:55 pm

Well, you can always argue that there is an unbridgeable gap between observable brain processes and consciousness...
As you meant it I always will! But I would rather say there is no gap, and that one is the appearance of the other.
still, if you demonstrate that people report specific events as having been willed by them when we can be confident (from the design of the experiment) that they weren't, the fact that we have such a powerful feeling that our actions are freely willed loses a lot of its force.


Hmm. So, the scientific method now relies of first-person reports of ineffable experiences? What possible scientific experiment could establish anything at all about freewill? As you say, our interpretations of our experiences are not reliable. First-person reports are not empirical data about what is being reported.
Obviously, we could also draw the more general conclusion that what seems self-evident to us based on introspection is not necessarily so.
This is true. However, when introspection or apperception becomes identity and self-knowledge there is no longer a need for interpretation, therefore no room for error.
That tends to undermine any attempt to explore consciousness through introspective, first-person methods.
There is no other method. No other method can even establish the existence of consciousness. When you ask your scientific test-subjects to report their experiences you are relying on their introspective investigation of consciousness.
Even if what you discover through introspection corresponds to what someone else - maybe everyone else - discovers, you will never know whether this means that you have all discovered the truth of the matter,...
I don't think you can dismiss the entire Perennial philosophy with such a simple objection. If you can then it is not perennial at all but demonstrably dead-in-the-water. But the issue is too big for a music forum.

...
or whether it just means that all creatures with minds like ours are subject to the same illusion. In any case, you will never know whether it really does correspond, because you can't get at the others' experiences except through their words.
Yes. This would be why it would be necessary to go beyond experience for the truth, which lies in identity and the transcendence of the experience-experiencer distinction. This takes us beyond the need for interpretation and beyond any possibility of doubt.
Now if you are asking whether a person experienced such and such an event as being willed by them, I think words are adequate - but if we are talking about the nature of consciousness, I think that is so hard to capture in words that you can never be sure you are talking about the same thing.
The nature of consciousness is well understood, as is the impossibility of capturing the truth in words. Experiences are contingent so variations are largely irrelevant. There are countless books explaining consciousness and I would highly recommend Rupert Spira's 'Consciousness' or maybe something by Bernardo Kastrup.

We differ because I endorse the non-dual world-view. I don't want to argue but you could explore objections to your view by dipping into that literature. It is becoming increasingly common for scientists and philosophers to conclude that the perennial philosophy is correct, consciousness is prior to everything else. Even the staunch materialist David Chalmers has started to play with Idealism, seeing no option in the face of his 'hard' problem' . We don't have to agree about all this, of course, but we ought to be able to agree that consciousness is not an empirical phenomenon.

StevSmar
Posts: 537
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 2:42 pm
Location: Winnipeg Canada

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by StevSmar » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:05 am

I think that playing CG indicates I have a low IQ...

"Never in the field of CG, has so much effort been exerted, on so many unfinished pieces, for so little progress"
(with apologies to Winston Churchill)
Regards,

Steven from Winnipeg

Jeffrey Armbruster
Posts: 1583
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 3:16 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re: Is there any correlation between IQ scores and CG playing?

Post by Jeffrey Armbruster » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:35 am

Never, never, never, never...(burp)...never!!! give up.

But do put off some pieces until later. But say, I will return!
Paul Weaver spruce 2014
Takamine C132S

Return to “The Café”