Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fresh_Damage1782 t1_itrdyk2 wrote

Reply to comment by zero989 in what is the Difference between fluid intelligence and creativity? by New_Rush4189

You describe intelligence and creativity as opposites? What aspect of intelligence do we even mean by "intelligence" in this regard? Logic/mathematical? Linguistic? Musicality?

I'd put creativity as another intelligence, and rarely do I see any negative correlation between creativity and other types of intelligence. To me, creativity represents the ability to look at things in new ways, or to create something new from known concepts. Be it an abstract tool or a tangible one. Or in the sense of the question, the logical person would find the best way to solve a the pussle, the creative person would realise the pussle isn't square.

What do you mean by creativity?

4

zero989 t1_itrh7th wrote

In the brain, as far as neural pathways go, creative people have less efficient pathways, smart people have mostly efficient pathways.

It's any aspect of intelligence, the brain can generalize, mostly.

Creativity can be the combination of things not ever considered, it can also be how something is viewed or even what is viewed.

For example intelligence can be considered low in dimensions. It's straight forward computation. Creativity ups the dimensions per se. It allows a wider view or more dimensions of what is being looked at. One starts to see what others can't. Hence the quote: "talent hits a target others miss, genius hits a target no one else can see."

High creativity cannot exist without consciousness, and it's amplification and altering thereof.

−6

ShitPostGuy t1_itsknnf wrote

That’s an incredible claim.

Like, so you have any credible sources for the position the creative people have less efficient neural pathways?

5

pondrthis t1_ituckde wrote

They certainly won't. We do not have the technology to measure "neural pathways" to this level of detail. The technology used correlates fMRI activation (which is already suspicious in general due to finding differences of differences in extremely low SNR data, then being analyzed poorly in many cases as pointed out in the famous dead-salmon study) to diffusion fiber tracking MRI to determine how nerve fibers connect activation sites. These are measured at the millimeter scale due to the limitations of both diffusion and functional MRI. In other words, they track whole nerve bundles, not individual neurons.

IIRC, there is some evidence that people with severe neurological disabilities (some kinds of ASD being one example) can have MS-like nerve fiber issues without the decrease in myelination associated with MS.

Source: I was an MR research engineer until about 5 years ago, did my research in one of the largest MRI research institutes in the world. This wasn't my area of expertise, but I worked closely with the people doing this.

1

zero989 t1_itv18ep wrote

"diffusion tensor tractography"

https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000395

"Based on their IQ test scores, all subjects were divided into general and high intelligence groups and significantly higher global efficiencies were found in the networks of the latter group. Moreover, we showed significant correlations between IQ scores and network properties across all subjects while controlling for age and gender. Specifically, higher intelligence scores corresponded to a shorter characteristic path length and a higher global efficiency of the networks, indicating a more efficient parallel information transfer in the brain. The results were consistently observed not only in the binary but also in the weighted networks, which together provide convergent evidence for our hypothesis. Our findings suggest that the efficiency of brain structural organization may be an important biological basis for intelligence."

Fractional anisotropy used for tissue integrity also has the opposite pattern as far as intelligence vs creativity goes.

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2022-45679-001?doi=1

"These findings suggest that Big C creativity is associated with more “random” rather than more “efficient” global network functional architecture, with condition-dependent variations in local clustering and efficiency. Large condition-dependent correlations between global and local clustering measures deserve further examination in exceptionally creative and other groups to more fully characterize the functional topology of brain networks most relevant to creativity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)"

"“Exceptional creativity was associated with more random connectivity at the global scale – a pattern that is less ‘efficient’ but would appear helpful in linking distant brain nodes to each other"

"“In terms of brain connectivity, while everyone else is stuck in a three-hour layover at a major airport, the highly creatives take private planes directly to a distant destination,” Anderson said. “This more random connectivity may be less efficient much of the time, but the architecture enables brain activity to ‘take a road less traveled’ and make novel connections"

There's also:

The Cambridge Handbook of the Neuroscience of Creativity (2018) Rex E. Jung (Editor), Oshin Vartanian (Editor)

Less travel among the network(s) pathway is better for intelligence

More travel among the network(s) path is better for creativity

Don't get why this is so shocking

1