Paying attention to classical music will make a person more intelligent, it is absurd to think it won't.

What is one essentially doing when they pay attention to these sounds? Answer, they are following patters. These patters vary in their complexity, but needless to say, they are generally not simplistic.

The fact is, we have not done the right kind of experiments to prove the benefits of classical music.

In every case, wherein I have introduced a young neophyte to classical music, the results have always ended in an increase of intelligence, but there are more benefits than this...

How have you quantified the increase in intelligence that you have always found when you have introduced the neophytes to classical music? I'd like to know more about your experimental techniques. Have you done double-blind testing?

 

I at no point said these cases were scientific, what I said is: 'we have not done the right kind of experiments to prove the benefits of classical music.' My experience is limited.

I think the real question you seem to be getting at is, how do I measure the increase of intelligence? I think the answer here has something to do with comprehension. And here I am not simply referring to the comprehension of music.

But what do you think my friend? Is classical music neutral, positive, negative, does it impact the intellect?

 

"How do I (you) measure the increase in intelligence?" That is my question to you. I'll await proper experiments to see whether classical music impacts the intellect.

 

Yes, but you're missing the point. One does not have to wait to intelligently speculate on this hypothesis.

 

I shall leave the speculating then to my betters. Carry on.

 

It is seems strange to me that people take offense at this notion. Doesn't reading make us smarter?

 

It's hard to do double blind testing on this :lol:

And as for increasing your intelligence (a very arbitrarily defined thing, beyond some simplistic tests), I think there are more worthwhile things to do than listen to Classical music.

 

I'm sure it does--but what I really want to know is whether playing the Goldberg Variations constantly in the background while I'm doing other things and not really paying attention to the music also makes me smarter.

 

I'm playing the Goldberg Variations as I type, and I'm pretty sure I'm getting smarter by the minute
I'm playingtheGoldbergVariationsasItype
asItype
asItypeandI'm
as I type and I'm pretty sure
etunimehtby terrams gnitteg m'I
g e t t i n g s m a r t
smar
ter
b y t h e
minute

 

How about defining exactly what is and what is not classical music as the rest is meaningless until that is done. Does John Cage count? How about Toru Takemitsu? Hildegard of Bingen? William Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan? Johan Strauss? George Gershwin?

 

It only makes you more intelligent at finding musical patters, and maybe mod12 arithmetic.

 

LOL. It is clear that one needs the various symmetries of the tone row to know why the exact notes were chosen for, say, the flashy kaleidoscopic patterns in the third variation of Webern's op 21 mv 2. This part beginning here

But two things. One, just listening and feeling the patterns is 100% enough to comprehend it fully. And second, and more technically, the point of the op 21 mv 2 is not the various degrees of perfect/imperfect symmetry, palindromes, and whatever in the tone row contrapuntal complexes. This part of the analysis, while it does point out the notes on the page, is only a part of the musical story, and in fact the symmetry of this movement is really overblown.

The point of that movement is how the rate of motion, that is, the linear/harmonic/textural throttle of the variations are all so different and contrasting, and yet the whole ride feels right. Symmetry provides that currency of throttle i.e. it provides beginnings and endings at the micro/macro level, but that's just behind-the-scenes stuff.

More important is the contrast between the extremely quick undulations of that third variation, with say, the complete stasis of the fifth variation with the strings just sitting there playing the same notes and the harp providing its figure on top... while feeling that the harp figure in variation 5 relates to the clarinet/string/horn figures in variation 3, even though the textural throttle is so different. Also important is the contrast between semi-imitative (although that semi-imitation is imperceptible) linear polyphony and percussive ostinato/patterning, and how one realizes over the course of the movement that those feel similar even though in theory those two kinds of textures are so different.

Musical patterns and mod12 arithmetic are so unimportant! Much more important is the extreme contrasts in throttle and texture that go far beyond what triadic tonality can contrast... far beyond at least to those who enjoy Webern. I know you are joking and being cheeky, but a lot of mid/late 20th century academic analysis drowned itself way too much in the symmetries of mod12 arithmetic without seeing the bigger picture, and it is an easy trap to fall into.

 

In every case, wherein I have introduced a young neophyte to classical music, the results have always ended in an increase of intelligence...

Wow, that is a real stretch! You have no way of knowing whether that neophyte would have been just as smart w/o the classical music. Heck, fwiw, the so-called Mozart Effect whereby playing Mozart while pregnant results in a smarter child was debunked some time ago.

 

Paying attention to classical music will make a person more intelligent, it is absurd to think it won't.

What is one essentially doing when they pay attention to these sounds? Answer, they are following patters. These patters vary in their complexity, but needless to say, they are generally not simplistic.

The fact is, we have not done the right kind of experiments to prove the benefits of classical music.

In every case, wherein I have introduced a young neophyte to classical music, the results have always ended in an increase of intelligence, but there are more benefits than this...

I have no proofs, neither do I want to find any, no wish to do it, no need , but I agree with you....

what I think is rather intuitive , perhaps it doesn´t count in our age of science believers

 

Well I have no proof either - but my intuition tells me to doubt Klassic's assertion. What now?

 

Three blind John Cage Mice, Three blind John Cage Mice, Three blind John Cage Mice see how they run...........

Done tested and proven- IQ raised, simple.

 

Some people perhaps think this question doesn't matter, not true, what we pay attention to and how it affects us, always matters.

 

Paying attention to classical music will make a person more intelligent, it is absurd to think it won't.
What is one essentially doing when they pay attention to these sounds? Answer, they are following patters. These patters vary in their complexity, but needless to say, they are generally not simplistic.

The fact is, we have not done the right kind of experiments to prove the benefits of classical music.

In every case, wherein I have introduced a young neophyte to classical music, the results have always ended in an increase of intelligence, but there are more benefits than this...

Perhaps, if you actually listen to the music, with the purpose of trying to make sense of it. In such a scenario, perhaps it will be good practice for the listener's pattern recognition skills. Won't help much to just put up Mozart as background to your dinner though, any more than you will get better at math by having someone read a math textbook at you as background noise.

 

Yes, but that's because Mozart doesn't help much with anything, apart from being a child.

 

In your threads you often make vague pronouncements, preemptively denounce all counterarguments as stupid, and then proceed to speak in yet more vague pronouncements for the rest of the thread, at least when you stick around long enough for conversation to develop. If you were to engage in discussion instead of merely holding court, your threads might actually be worth participating in.

Edit: I know this has nothing to do with the topic, and I know that I'll probably receive an infraction for this, but I feel that it needs to be said.

 

I feel certain that it's listening to classical music that makes us the brilliant geniuses we are. I mean, what else could it be?

 

Maybe it's the odious company we make that relegates us to communing over centuries old music with like-minded souls across the globe as we sit comfortably in darkened rooms with little more swathe than what Adam began with. Or yeah maybe we're brilliant.

 

................................

 

Listening to classical music more than likely develops one's listening sensibilities, making one more refined and discerning to well composed art music.

 

Has it worked for you?

 

Paying attention to classical music will make a person more intelligent, it is absurd to think it won't.

If you want "intelligent speculation" on your statement, this is not the best way to start it. Just saying.

 

Paying attention to classical music will make a person more intelligent, it is absurd to think it won't.

It's playing that makes the difference not listening. See http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun06/iq.aspx or the work on the Harmony Project

 

Further searching for research throws up this, from http://pss.sagepub.com/content/15/8/511.short

The idea that music makes you smarter has received considerable attention from scholars and the media. The present report is the first to test this hypothesis directly with random assignment of a large sample of children (N = 144) to two different types of music lessons (keyboard or voice) or to control groups that received drama lessons or no lessons. IQ was measured before and after the lessons. Compared with children in the control groups, children in the music groups exhibited greater increases in full-scale IQ. The effect was relatively small, but it generalized across IQ subtests, index scores, and a standardized measure of academic achievement. Unexpectedly, children in the drama group exhibited substantial pre- to post-test improvements in adaptive social behavior that were not evident in the music groups.

Now I'm not sure what 'adaptive social behaviour' is, but it sounds as though it might be a desirable thing - at least as desirable as a relatively small increase in measured IQ (itself not an unquestionable 'good').

 

Thank you MacLeod! Now we're getting somewhere--somewhere beyond intelligent speculation, and the whiff of THC.

 

Surely it must be better for your intelligence than watching MTV or TLC.

 

Isn't music, music?

 

I would often listen to Mozart's Canon for 6 Voices in B-flat major, K.231/382c "Leck mich im Arsch" before finals at university and would pass them swimmingly - an obvious proof that classical music makes one more intelligent indeed.

 

I propose an empirical test for ALL the members of TC. Let us switch over to rap for the next 30 days and see where we come out.

If you have children, encourage one of them to listen to rap for the next 30 days, encourage the other to listen to Bach, observe, see what happens.

It is preposterous to think, that the reading of a certain kind of literature, will not increase your intelligence; it is equally preposterous to think the music we listen to has no affect on our intellect.

 

My last comment makes me think. 'Perhaps we all have personality types that are predisposed to classical music from the outset.' If so, this means we share certain personality traits, and indeed we must! How else do we all groove to the bold expressions of Beethoven. Lovely, this is just lovely.

 

Only if the liking of music was some kind of fundamental trait. I have a lot in common with my work colleagues - we're all in the same business of education, and we all have much the same views about the subject. But we have radically different tastes in other things and are quite different personality 'types'.

For me, having a taste in CM in common with others here means nothing more than I have a taste in CM in common with others here. I'll go no further than that.

As for the 'preposterous' ideas, the one that seems to imply that we'll cause a decline in our intellect if we listen to rap for 30 days takes the biscuit.

 

I think there actually is scientific research that proofs that listening to classical music improves cognitive thinking