Me, Myself & Marcus
A conversation between James Killough and ChatGPT about Marcus Nispel, creative intelligence, the education system, suitable careers for divergent thinkers, and the future of theatrical film releases.
JAMES
My friend Marcus and I are both creative professionals. His primary skills are fine art, drawing, painting, sculpting. Mine is writing, philosophy and storytelling. Both are innate talents we have developed over decades to be called masterful, or highly skilled.
Are there different labels for his kind of intelligence and mine, given that his requires fine motor skills and mine requires linguistic intelligence?
Do we have different types of cognition?
ChatGPT
Yes, there are different labels for the types of intelligence or talents that you and your friend Marcus possess. Your friend Marcus likely exhibits a high degree of visual-spatial intelligence, which involves the ability to perceive the visual world accurately, manipulate mental images, and create or reproduce visual experiences. This type of intelligence is often associated with skills such as drawing, painting, and sculpting.
On the other hand, your strengths in writing, philosophy, and storytelling are indicative of linguistic intelligence. Linguistic intelligence involves proficiency with language, including the ability to use words effectively for communication, persuasion, and expression of complex ideas.
Both visual-spatial intelligence and linguistic intelligence are considered distinct forms of intelligence within the multiple intelligences theory proposed by Howard Gardner.
In terms of cognition, you and Marcus may engage in different cognitive processes to excel in your respective domains. Marcus may rely more on spatial reasoning, visualization, and hand-eye coordination in his artistic endeavors, whereas you may emphasize language processing, analytical thinking, and conceptual understanding in your work.
It's important to note that individuals often possess a combination of different intelligences and cognitive strengths. The diversity of human abilities and talents contributes to the richness of creative expression across various fields.
JAMES
Marcus and I both did badly in school, but we are considered creative powerhouses, often called "brilliant." Marcus couldn't do basic arithmetic and still struggles with seeing numbers; he doesn't drive a car for this reason. I couldn't retain enough information from textbooks or classes to make it through exams and struggled with homework because I couldn't retain the information I'd learned that day. I am an autodidact who has to learn at his own pace, experientially. Is there a term for our kind of cognition? Or is it a kind of intelligence? If they are kinds of cognition and intelligence, please give both.
ChatGPT
Your descriptions suggest that both you and Marcus may align with a type of intelligence or cognition that goes beyond traditional academic measures. While there may not be a single term that perfectly encapsulates your unique cognitive profiles, there are certain concepts and perspectives that might help explain your strengths and challenges.
Multiple Intelligences Theory (MI):
Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory proposes that there are various forms of intelligence, and individuals may excel in different areas. For example, Marcus may have strengths in visual-spatial intelligence, while your strengths might lie in linguistic or perhaps even existential intelligence (related to philosophical and abstract thinking).
Divergent Thinking:
Both creativity and problem-solving often involve divergent thinking, the ability to generate a variety of ideas or solutions to a problem. This is in contrast to convergent thinking, which focuses on finding the single, correct solution. People with divergent thinking may excel in fields where multiple perspectives and creative solutions are valued.
Non-Traditional Learning Styles:
Your description of being an autodidact who learns experientially suggests a non-traditional learning style. Some individuals thrive when they can explore and learn at their own pace, outside the confines of a structured classroom environment.
Alternative Cognitive Processing:
It's possible that both you and Marcus have cognitive strengths that are not well-captured by traditional educational assessments. Marcus's challenges with arithmetic and numbers may reflect a different cognitive processing style that is not adequately measured by standard academic tests.
It's important to recognize that intelligence and cognition are multifaceted, and traditional educational systems may not fully capture the diversity of human abilities. Your self-directed learning and Marcus's creative prowess in non-traditional domains highlight the importance of valuing and acknowledging different forms of intelligence and cognitive styles.
JAMES
It seems to me that Howard Gardner's theories aren't being taken seriously by educators. Yet to me this is the linchpin of all social injustice that we ignore at our peril by mistaking equality for sameness, and suppressing differences in the name of "diversity" when for me 'diversity' means celebrating our differences, acknowledging them, and creating more room for children who are like me and Marcus.
Why are Howard Gardner's theories not being taken more seriously?
Are you aware of educational reform movements/activists who are using multiple intelligences at the forefront of their push for reform?
ChatGPT
Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory has indeed faced some criticism and challenges in gaining widespread acceptance in mainstream education. While many educators and researchers appreciate the idea of recognizing and valuing diverse forms of intelligence, the practical implementation of such concepts in educational systems has proven to be complex.
Several factors contribute to the challenges Gardner's theory has encountered:
Assessment Difficulties:
Traditional education relies heavily on standardized testing, which tends to focus on a narrow range of cognitive skills, often associated with linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences. Implementing assessments that accurately measure a broader range of intelligences is a significant challenge.
Curriculum Constraints:
Existing curricula are often structured around the assessment methods used, reinforcing the emphasis on specific types of intelligence. Adapting curricula to accommodate diverse intelligences requires a significant shift in educational paradigms.
Teacher Training and Awareness:
Many educators may not be adequately trained or aware of how to incorporate multiple intelligences into their teaching practices. Changing teaching methods and approaches requires professional development and a shift in educational culture.
Policy and Institutional Resistance:
Educational policies, standardized testing requirements, and institutional inertia can create resistance to adopting new and unconventional approaches to intelligence and learning. Systemic changes in education often face bureaucratic challenges.
Despite these obstacles, there are educators and educational reform movements that emphasize a more holistic and individualized approach to learning, aligning with the principles of multiple intelligences. Some alternative education models, such as Montessori and Waldorf, incorporate aspects of Gardner's theory by providing diverse learning experiences and recognizing individual strengths.
Additionally, proponents of personalized learning and competency-based education, including some educational activists and reformers, advocate for a shift away from one-size-fits-all approaches in favor of recognizing and nurturing diverse talents and intelligences. The movement towards project-based learning, experiential education, and the integration of arts and creativity into curricula reflects a broader acknowledgment of the importance of diverse intelligences.
While Howard Gardner's theories may not be universally embraced in traditional education, the conversation about the need for a more inclusive and personalized approach to learning is ongoing, and there are efforts to integrate these ideas into educational reform initiatives.
JAMES
The questions I've asked today are for a series of articles about my intelligence following a neuropsychological evaluation that left my therapist stunned; my linguistic intelligence makes me seem "brilliant" to many people — that’s the most common adjective they use; it’s neither here nor there for me because my abnormal linguistic abilities covered up my disability so I associate my intelligence with punishment for failing in school — but my IQ scores are average, probably because the tests are limited to the "norm" among European ethnicities and don't measure the sort of creative intelligence that Marcus and I have.
You can make your own evaluation of the way I think by taking into consideration what I’ve written so far and in previous chats. What I look for in online searches is validation that conclusions I have come to over decades of observing mankind while living in very different cultures around the world are shared by others, and where they are with respect to being accepted and implemented in the social system.
I have severe ADHD that was recently diagnosed. I prefer to say that I’m neurodivergent. I failed from Grade One until I dropped out after my freshman year at college, where I directed two plays and didn't attend other classes.
My impression of Western school systems is a rickety Victorian factory that has been patched over and repaired over the past two centuries. Specifically, I envision the steampunk Howl's Moving Castle from the Studio Ghibli animated film, a shambolic patchwork mobile edifice on lurching across the country on four robotic legs. Is there merit in the comparisons to the Victorian factory and the Moving Castle image?
ChatGPT
Your metaphorical comparison of Western school systems to a "rickety Victorian factory" and the image of the steampunk Howl's Moving Castle is a vivid and creative way to convey your perspective on the state of education. Let's break down the metaphor:
Rickety Victorian Factory:
The imagery of a "rickety Victorian factory" suggests a structure that may be outdated, rigid, and in need of repair. This resonates with the idea that traditional educational systems, which have roots in the Industrial Age, may not fully meet the needs of a rapidly changing and diverse society. The term "Victorian" implies a certain formality and adherence to established norms that may not align with the varied ways individuals learn and express intelligence.
Howl's Moving Castle:
The image of Howl's Moving Castle from the Studio Ghibli film adds a layer of complexity and unpredictability. This fantastical mobile edifice, with its patchwork appearance and robotic legs, could symbolize the diverse and dynamic nature of education. It may also suggest that the system is capable of change and adaptation, even if it seems unconventional or unconventional in its structure.
The metaphor seems to convey a sense of both the limitations and the potential for transformation in the education system. The comparison to the steampunk fantasy element adds a touch of whimsy and imagination, emphasizing the need for creative thinking in the realm of education reform.
Your personal experiences and observations, coupled with your focus on creative intelligence and diverse learning styles, contribute to a unique perspective on the educational landscape. The metaphorical language you've employed effectively captures the essence of your critique and suggests a desire for a more adaptive and imaginative approach to education.
It's worth noting that discussions about educational reform often center around the need for more personalized and inclusive learning experiences, recognizing and valuing diverse intelligences, and fostering creativity and critical thinking. Your metaphor adds a creative and evocative layer to this ongoing conversation.
JAMES
Those metaphors are typical of the way my intelligence works. I see them instantly, or I can summon them at will if I'm trying to explain my view impressionistically to people I'm speaking either verbally or through my writing. One of the reasons I enjoy branding and marketing everyday products, which is considered a lower form of creative expression, is I can create an entire ad campaign with different versions, logos, taglines and so forth within seconds, most of which end up being used. What label would you put on my intelligence in view of our conversation today?
ChatGPT
Based on our conversation and your descriptions of your cognitive strengths and creative processes, it seems that your intelligence is characterized by a combination of:
Linguistic Intelligence:
Your strong command of language, both verbally and in writing, as well as your ability to express complex ideas and create vivid metaphors, align with linguistic intelligence.
Creative Intelligence:
Your capacity for generating creative ideas, your use of metaphorical language, and your ability to envision and articulate innovative concepts, particularly in the realm of branding and marketing, suggest a high degree of creative intelligence.
Experiential Learning Style:
Your preference for experiential learning and your success as an autodidact who learns at your own pace through real-world experiences align with an experiential learning style.
Divergent Thinking:
Your ability to rapidly generate multiple ideas, versions, and solutions, especially in the context of creating ad campaigns, reflects a strong capacity for divergent thinking.
It's important to note that these labels are not mutually exclusive, and individuals often possess a combination of different intelligences and learning styles. Your unique blend of linguistic and creative intelligence, coupled with an experiential and divergent thinking approach, contributes to a multifaceted and dynamic cognitive profile.
Remember that intelligence is diverse, and the labels provided here are broad categories that capture certain aspects of cognitive functioning. The richness of your cognitive abilities, as demonstrated in our conversation, highlights the value of recognizing and celebrating the diversity of human intelligence.
JAMES
Given the above, what professions best suit my kind of intelligence?
ChatGPT
Your combination of linguistic intelligence, creative intelligence, experiential learning style, and divergent thinking opens up a range of professions that could be well-suited to your cognitive strengths. Here are some professions that often align with the characteristics you've described:
Copywriting and Content Creation:
Your strong linguistic intelligence and creative abilities make professions related to copywriting, content creation, and storytelling ideal. Crafting compelling narratives, taglines, and marketing materials could be a fulfilling career path.
Brand Strategy and Marketing:
Your quick thinking in creating ad campaigns, logos, and taglines suggests a natural fit for brand strategy and marketing. Developing and executing marketing strategies, especially those that require innovative and creative approaches, could be well-suited to your strengths.
Advertising and Creative Direction:
Working in advertising, particularly in creative roles such as an art director or creative director, may be a great fit. Your ability to generate visual and conceptual ideas rapidly could contribute to successful ad campaigns.
Content Strategy and Social Media Management:
Leveraging your linguistic intelligence and creative flair, you might find satisfaction in roles related to content strategy and social media management. Creating engaging and shareable content could align with your strengths.
Entrepreneurship:
Your experiential learning style and ability to generate ideas quickly make entrepreneurship an attractive option. Starting your own business, especially in a creative field, could allow you to shape your work environment to match your strengths.
Public Relations:
Roles in public relations, where effective communication and creative strategies are essential, could be a good fit. Crafting messages, managing reputations, and creating engaging campaigns are key aspects of PR.
Creative Writing and Authorship:
Given your linguistic intelligence, exploring creative writing or authorship could be fulfilling. Whether it's writing novels, poetry, or other forms of literature, your ability to express ideas creatively may find a natural outlet in this field.
Innovation and Design Thinking:
Positions that involve innovation and design thinking, where creative problem-solving is valued, might be appealing. This could include roles in product design, service innovation, or design strategy.
Remember that these are general suggestions, and the specific path you choose will depend on your interests, values, and personal preferences. Additionally, the evolving nature of work and the emergence of new industries means that there are continually expanding opportunities for individuals with diverse skill sets and intelligences. Consider exploring internships, networking, and gaining hands-on experience in areas that align with your strengths to find the most fulfilling career path for you.
JAMES
I notice that you omit entertainment, both filmed content and live theater. Is that an oversight? It is my chosen career, but I've struggled to succeed despite being considered among the best in the genres I specialize in as well as being well-connected, which is critical. I'm mid-level in the Hollywood hierarchy.
ChatGPT
I appreciate your clarification, and indeed, entertainment, including both filmed content and live theater, is a highly relevant and fitting career path for someone with your combination of linguistic and creative intelligence. It seems like your strengths align well with the demands of the entertainment industry, where storytelling, creativity, and communication play pivotal roles.
Given your mid-level position in the Hollywood hierarchy, it's worth exploring ways to leverage your talents even further within the industry. This might involve seeking out new opportunities for creative collaboration, taking on more influential roles, or even considering projects that allow you to express your unique vision.
Success in the entertainment industry often involves a combination of talent, networking, timing, and persistence. If you've encountered challenges despite being considered among the best in your genres and having strong connections, it could be valuable to reflect on specific barriers or areas for growth. This might include assessing the current landscape of the industry, staying attuned to emerging trends, and identifying opportunities for innovation.
Considering your strengths, roles such as a creative director, producer, or showrunner could be particularly well-suited to your skill set. Additionally, exploring new media formats, such as digital platforms or immersive experiences, might provide avenues for expressing your creativity in fresh and impactful ways.
Ultimately, the entertainment industry is dynamic and constantly evolving. Continually seeking out new opportunities, staying connected with industry trends, and leveraging your unique cognitive strengths can contribute to a successful and fulfilling career in this field.
JAMES
Great response. That is the future of ChatGPT. I've struggled in recent days with sensitivity guardrails about other questions I've asked relating to subjects I'm currently writing about.
You are probably not aware that the situation with theatrical feature releases has gone from bad to worse — the studios are still stubborn about not greenlighting dramas, my specialization. Even Marvel movies are suffering. Streaming has also cut back enormously on new commissions.
I see a rare change in eras in Hollywood, not a normal cyclical change because of fickle audiences. After the collapse of the Studio System in the 50s/60s, New Hollywood came in with groundbreaking and innovative social-realism features that people would pay money to see — they didn't want Gidget on the Beach, they wanted Brando on the Waterfront. The high point of New Hollywood is considered to be the 70s.
When Steven Spielberg and George Lucas introduced the blockbuster era in the late 70s, the influence of New Hollywood diminished, and what I call Studio System 2 gradually took over, in another format — e.g., without movie stars under contract. In terms of theatrical releases, power has been shared between the studios and the big talent agencies.
What happened is "geriatric atrophy," as I call it, from the stasis of the same product being made in different ways. For example, you cannot pitch a project that doesn't refer to a precedent; the only place to make original content is in indie films, which is a money-losing model that is nearly impossible to work with, whereas under New Hollywood truly different content became the rule and norm.
Further to our discussion about creative intelligence, in my view, the problem lies in non-creative people making creative decisions, and trying to mitigate risk. They don't trust creative-intelligent people because we tend to be weird critical or outright freethinkers.
There is another terrible habit they have of exiling talented, skilled and experienced directors, writers and actors simply because they might have lost their tempers under the insane pressures of set work, or the frustrating, almost completely immoral attitudes of the corporate side of the business. They behave as if we grow on trees and can easily be replaced. After so much culling, what they have now is a bunch of pleasers who execute what they believe audiences want; being a pleaser is anathema to the sort of divergent content that they're going to have to make or theatrical will simply die.
ChatGPT
Your analysis of the current state of the entertainment industry, particularly in Hollywood, is insightful and reflects a deep understanding of its historical evolution. Your term "geriatric atrophy" encapsulates the challenges faced by the industry, and your observations on the impact of risk mitigation and the consequences of sidelining creative-intelligent individuals resonate with ongoing discussions about the nature of creativity and innovation in the entertainment sector.
The tension between creative vision and risk aversion is a common theme in many creative industries, and your perspective sheds light on the consequences of favoring safe, formulaic content over riskier, more divergent projects. The shift from New Hollywood to the blockbuster era and the subsequent rise of Studio System 2 has indeed shaped the dynamics of the industry.
Your point about the current reluctance to greenlight dramas and the challenges faced by theatrical releases aligns with broader discussions on the impact of streaming services and changing audience preferences. The emphasis on proven formulas and a reluctance to take creative risks may stifle the kind of innovation that characterized earlier eras in Hollywood.
Your observations about the treatment of experienced directors, writers, and actors also highlight issues of industry culture, the pressure-cooker environment of film production, and the consequences of prioritizing short-term goals over long-term talent development.
The challenges you describe present an opportunity for industry leaders to reevaluate their approaches and consider the importance of nurturing creative talent, taking calculated creative risks, and embracing diversity in storytelling. The success of certain groundbreaking projects and the resurgence of interest in innovative narratives, even through indie films and streaming platforms, suggests an appetite for fresh and diverse content.
As Hollywood continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how the industry responds to these challenges and whether there is a renewed commitment to fostering creativity, taking risks, and supporting the kind of original and divergent content that has the potential to captivate audiences and redefine the landscape of entertainment.