/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.6388836]

IQ & art. Is there a correlation?
Would a higher IQ affect the quality of work, or just the rate at which one understands basic fundamentals, e.g. perspective, anatomy, lighting.

[Anonymous No.6388839]

It just makes it easier to learn. The biggest factor is still motivation.

The secret main thing good universities try to teach their students is how to learn. They hammer methods and habits into their students. Get them accustomed to reading a lot. With these tricks an average IQ student can score top grades while a top IQ student who doesn't study will score average grades and then drop out after a year.

Basically high IQ is not the shortcut you might think it is so stop making excuses and start doing fundamentals.

[Anonymous No.6388852]

Yes. If IQ doesn't matter slum kids in shitholes would be producing at least mediocre art, but they don't.

[Anonymous No.6388860]

>>6388852
But great artists have originated from slums. It's just that when they start earning money from westerners they move out of the slum.

[Anonymous No.6388861]

>>6388836
The idea of IQ test were created 1912, more than a hundred years ago, by a bunch of people who were convinced about human Eugenics being a thing and also were supporters of Germans being the supreme human race.

So no, IQ measuring in general is made up bullshit.

[Anonymous No.6388866]

>>6388861
>it was made by le nazis therefore its le wrong, okay?!

[Anonymous No.6388867]

>>6388861
Wtf I love IQ now

[Anonymous No.6388868]

>>6388861
It's not. IQ started getting taken seriously when the US military made a ton of tests during the Vietnam war to figure out the best measurement for when someone was too dumb for military service. Let me point out they really wanted cannon fodder so they had all the motivation in the world to make people pass.

The result was pretty scary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Ur71ZnNVk

83 IQ or less and you are too dumb for the US military. That means 1 out of 10 of all people in the USA are too dumb to serve in the army.

[Anonymous No.6388884]

>>6388866
I see nothing wrong with this idea. Is this supposed to be wrong in some way?

>>6388868
This is still dependent on what was put on the test, and who made it with what purpose. There is not to my knowledge a universal IQ test that measure it for all people.

[Anonymous No.6388893]

/ic/ would have less threads like this if you people liked drawing or just had a brain

[Anonymous No.6388901]

>>6388884
>>6388884
>This is still dependent on what was put on the test, and who made it with what purpose. There is not to my knowledge a universal IQ test that measure it for all people.
But it was general.

The things they measured for was to figure out if someone can understand instructions, have common sense and isn't a danger to other people through sheer stupidity.

The tool they found out was the best for this after many tests and trials (and injured/dead soldiers) was IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.6388908]

>>6388836
A higher IQ would impact the kind of work that's created, as in the style and process in which it's done.
Whether the art that is created ends up being well regarded or not is up in the air though. It's very likely the lack of emotional intelligence/awarness downside that results from an extremely high IQ would end up affecting the product in a way or another. Art is a tool artists use to communicate, if all you're communicating is "I'm a perfect robot" then that's what people will see, and at some point you might as well just use an AI if it's your goal.

Now if you're talking high IQ without going "super top-tier", yeah it would help in conceptualizing what art is as a whole, essence-wise, better and faster than people who fall into the pitfall of definitions. We can apply the same logic here though, a lower IQ person may very well do better simply because they're phyisically and/or emotionally more in tune with themselves and their craft.
I'm just theorizing based on what I've seen and heard from him, and please trust I mean well, but I don't think Kim Jung Gi had a high IQ at all, and yet look at how impressive he was. What he learned and ingrained he did so via concrete experiences, not through mental gymnastics.

In the end your question can be rephrased in many different ways and the answer would always be yes.
>Would [difference] affect the quality of work, or just the rate at which one understands basic fundamentals, e.g. perspective, anatomy, lighting?

[Anonymous No.6389066]

>>6388893
Of course /ic/ would have less threads if everyone was busy drawing.

[Anonymous No.6389079]

>IQ doesn't matter
>Talent doesn't matter
What's the next cope going to be?

[Anonymous No.6389081]

>>6388893
>4chan wouldnt exist if people were smart enough

[Anonymous No.6389082]

>>6389079
aphantasia doesn't matter

[Anonymous No.6389100]

IQ doesn’t matter, just depends if you have talent, that’s it.

[Anonymous No.6389133]

>>6388836
I think it does have an effect. East asians are high iq and have high artistic ability but ashkenazi jews have higher iq yet arent. I think iq is not the right way to think about it, there are different types of intelligence like verbal, spatial, numerical, etc. There should be a specific test for visual intelligence, that would be a better measure for artistic potential

[Anonymous No.6389159]

>>6388836
I doubt it, a lot of artists I come across are not very smart beyond their field

[Anonymous No.6390499]

>>6389079
>>6389082
None of these exist so of course they won't matter.

[Anonymous No.6390510]

>>6389100
talent doesn't matter, just depends if you do effort, that's it.

[Anonymous No.6390525]

>>6388836
Art is probably one of those things were IQ won't be a good predictor for success.
I've met great artists who are incredibly dumb and high IQ mathematicians that were terrible artists.
Of course going to the extremes an incredibly low IQ person will do worse art than an incredibly high IQ person, but I don't think the correlation is as strong in the averages as it is for STEM.
High introspection is the one thing I've consistently seen in good artists, and that's independent of IQ. You can interpret the world around you all you want, if you can't interpret yourself it will show in your art.

[Anonymous No.6390528]

iq does matter
talent does matter
but neither of those matter as much as discipline
ideally you'd have a good mix of all 3

[Anonymous No.6390640]

>>6388836
I'd agree that having a high IQ makes it much easier to both understand and implement the known fundamentals of art....however, many other factors go into play to create something that resonates with other people like in your OP pic.

Anecdotally speaking, i don't think a sociopath could make something like that due to their low emotional IQ, despite many sociopaths having an above average IQ.
There was a fellow I knew in a discord who I was certain was a sociopath and all he ever did was paintings of buildings and streets. He didn't really "get" artwork that expressed a certain mood or visually told a story.

[Anonymous No.6390656]

>>6388884
>I see nothing wrong with this idea. Is this supposed to be wrong in some way?
Yet he benefits from nuclear technology and rocket technology which were both invented by key Nazi scientists

[Anonymous No.6390691]

>>6388836
y iq is 107 and Im low int

take that as you wish

[Anonymous No.6390813]

>>6388836
Ive met absolute retards who are great at drawing. I think work ethic matters far more than iq.

[Anonymous No.6390829]

>>6388836
No, we had this thread before. The midwits dominated

[Anonymous No.6390952]

>>6390510
effort doesnt matter, just depends if you have IQ, that's it.

[Anonymous No.6390958]

>>6390952
>They IQ tests should be painting tests
Are you sure you want that?

[Anonymous No.6390960]

>>6390952
>IQ tests should be painting tests
Are you sure you want that?

[Anonymous No.6391151]

>>6388852
Slum kids dont have the luxury of cheap drawing tablets and time for drawing when their parents kept dogging them to become another coder/doctor/engineer/lawyers and most of their peers are into normie shit. Those turd worlders you see earning from westerners are usually the socially recluse from the upper income class.

[Anonymous No.6391164]

>>6388852
Thats because they dont have access to goos art education, means or a good enviroment where they can focus on doing art

[Anonymous No.6391295]

>>6388861
>Eugenics
Based
>Germans
Cringe
I think the idea therefore must be 50% correct, and we round that up to 100%. Checkmate low-IQ people.

[Anonymous No.6391303]

>>6390960
Unironically kind of. It would filter out the ngmi and undisciplined. Many of the great artist in history received classical education along with their artistic training.

[Anonymous No.6392515]

Fairly high IQ here. (I'm ESL, so my language skills being lower is a consequence of the test not being in my native tongue.)

It doesn't help much.
Yes, I am able to process information and learn things pretty well, but NOTHING can beat mileage.

It's as >>6388839 says. If I drew half as much as my peers who made it, yes, I would be very good, but there are many other distractions getting on my way.

Some of them are related to my "high IQ", I believe - the infamous paralysis by analysis, which I have to fight consciously.
I have a very dumb friend who got very good.

She "just draws" and makes a bunch of mistakes, then LEARN FROM THEM.
I, on the other hand, am very smart, so I choose not to draw at all because I can already foresee all the mistakes that are going to happen.

I am the "told you so" type, she is the "oh shit what have I done" type, yet she DOES it, and I don't.

Such is my curse, I'm too smart to learn how to draw. Poor me, please give me sympathy.

[Anonymous No.6392536]

>>6392515
the age old "smart but lazy" cope

[Anonymous No.6392552]

>>6392536
It's not a cope, retard, it's reality. Being smart makes you lazy, because as a kid you don't need to work hard in order to achieve the same things that your peers have to struggle a lot for.

Then, when life actually becomes challenging, you have wasted years being "ahead" and hasn't learned how to deal with difficult obstacles, whereas the dumb ones are already used to putting in the hours and struggling, so they are able to eventually surmount it, while you're stuck on "woe is me".

The way to prevent this is to keep challenging your smart kids, do not let them get complacent.
But if you're a grown man with already bad habits, fixing it takes a good amount of effort, which I am trying to do.

[Anonymous No.6392616]

>>6392536
this.
ngmi

[Anonymous No.6392672]

>>6388868
Of course the YouTube link was going to be something related to Jordan Peterson lmfao
Can you stop being so embarassing?

[Anonymous No.6392686]

>>6392552
maybe you weren't as smart as you thought?

[Anonymous No.6392723]

>>6388861

[Anonymous No.6392784]

>>6388836
>Would a higher IQ affect the quality of work

Nope, my friend is a dumb gorila albino monkey, and he's still better than 99.9% of /ic/

>His secret?

He draws a lot, around 6 hours per day, and he never read 1 drawing book in his entire life, all he do is look up anatomical references on Pinterest, and try to draw them from memory.

[Anonymous No.6392988]

>>6392686
I accept your concession.

[Anonymous No.6393023]

>>6392723
we need to prosecute this bear

[Anonymous No.6393030]

>>6392784
>my friend
Sure thing buddy

[Anonymous No.6393312]

>>6392988
this is a low iq response

[Anonymous No.6393318]

>>6388861
>more than 100 years ago
>don't use X because it was invented a long time ago
The longer something has been in use the more likely it's actually worth using. Time is a test in itself.

[Anonymous No.6393395]

>>6388836
Yeah, smart people learn way faster and make more creative choices/better decisions

Imagine trying to teach someone with down syndrome about Perspective...

[Anonymous No.6393457]

>>6393318
>Time is a test in itself.
Just like how religion is a thing, the Earth is flat and global warming is not real right?

[Anonymous No.6393506]

>>6393457
People have been trying and failing to 'disprove' the validity of IQ testing because of ideological reasons for generations now. The fact that it persists is because it is actually a pretty robust field backed up by a lot of evidence.

[Anonymous No.6393520]

>>6388861
IQ tests are just the current technology that we use to measure something called g. g = intelligence. We know that IQ tests don't perfectly correlate with g. But it seems like they correlate quite a lot. In the future we may use genetic testing or other more advanced methods to find g.
IQ tests are imperfect but they're still good. They're actually perhaps the most robust social science instrument in existence.

[Anonymous No.6393645]

>>6393395
watch them develop savant syndrome and mog everyone

[Anonymous No.6396617]

>>6392723
Fuck bears. Shoot them on sight.

[Anonymous No.6396625]

>>6392723
Total bear death

[Anonymous No.6398272]

>>6392723
>the bear realizes it almost knocks over the candy stand
>decides to push it back up
>politely walks out of store

[Anonymous No.6398277]

>>6398272
Smarter than da Average Bear.

[Anonymous No.6398281]

>>6398277
nigga shut ur goofy ass up

[Anonymous No.6398283]

>>6388836
There was a japanese artist who was mentally disabled, he ripped colored paper apart and arrange them to replicate memories of places he visited. Does anyone know who I'm talking about? I can't remember his name

[Anonymous No.6398299]

>>6398281
no u

[Anonymous No.6398302]

As long as you're not disabled in the motor skills department I think you should be fine. Anyone with an average IQ can learn how to git gud. High IQ artist that comes to mind is Leonardo Da Vinci. I think high spacial understanding in IQ could be beneficial but really anyone can learn as long as they're not literally retarded.

[Anonymous No.6398313]

>>6398277
>>6398299
Chcechkd doddoublible