If you were incapable of discerning what my comment inferred, that those with a strong artistic background would naturally perform better than someone who could hardly even sketch out a smiley face without detailed instructions, then you are in no position whatsoever to make judgments about the presumed mental deficiencies of others.

hello the study was about how they drew things not how WELL they drew things, the people telling the truth added more details (for example "oh yeah there were some flowers planted over here") and drew things from a different perspective, none of which has anything to do with artistic ability.  either you're v. dumb or you didn't actually read the study

What I find interesting now is this: despite the fact that the post immediately after my original one in this topic expresses, in part, a similar sentiment, I am the one you selected to rebut. You chose to do so not with an actual counter to the criticism that I offered, but by attacking me for saying it. Well done!

What I find interesting now is this: despite the fact that the post immediately after my original one in this topic expresses, in part, a similar sentiment, I am the one you selected to rebut. You chose to do so not with an actual counter to the criticism that I offered, but by attacking me for saying it. Well done!

I did actually counter it, I just called you stupid at the end of it.  Now quit doing the 15-year-old thing of "I am going to try to discredit your words by attacking your choice of argument instead of realizing I am wrong, and also I am going to talk like a term paper."  You're not looking good by talking like this.  Like I said, it's got NOTHING TO DO WITH ART SKILLS whatsoever.  I have no idea why you brought it up even since you claim to have read the article, you are simply wrong about this and I explained why.  I just chose to rebut your criticism of this fine article via my own particular methodology, which includes calling you dumb at the end of it for saying dumb things.


As per.


Shut your face.  You're not coming off as smart by doing this. (Q.E.D.)

You're internet debating velfarre killerwolf....

vellfire

You're internet debating velfarre killerwolf....

what debate?  he said a dumb things, i called him out for being dumb, conversation over

there is nothing to argue there, sorry to break it to ya pal 

Can you say with 100% certainty that a person's artistic ability (intrinsic, or learned) has no effect whatsoever on how they would perform within the confines of the study? If so, well then I must defer to your eminent wisdom and apologize because I was not aware you were part of the research team.

The point here wasn't to prove the study right or wrong, but to point out that for something to have any value as a tool, instead of being rendered a simple anecdotal curiosity, a wider range of variables should be taken into consideration.

The way I talk, or in this case type, is not an affectation. It is, quite simply, how I am and how I sound.

And for the record I also have a penchant for arguing with vending machines, stop signs, and poly-sci/philosophy split majors. The only difficulty arises when said split major happens to be the girl you're trying to date - in which case any victory is instantly transformed into a pyrrhic one, but I digress.

Can you say with 100% certainty that a person's artistic ability (intrinsic, or learned) has no effect whatsoever on how they would perform within the confines of the study? If so, well then I must defer to your eminent wisdom and apologize because I was not aware you were part of the research team.

'To me it sounds more like the study could be interpreted as "art majors tell the truth, regular people lie."'

it's a pretty big jump from a possible confound to major contributing factor. like way further than from the ground to your high horse

"could be"

And as to the high horse I am apparently astride, I must first don the appropriate garb. I'm thinking perhaps something reminiscent of the full military dress uniform seen on antagonistic characters in certain operas. I could have my own leitmotif. Perhaps a rousing score accompanied by a booming baritone or bass voice reciting the following lyrics - "I must concede I've been perceived as conceited, but I was born to be victorious and I can never be defeated, so yes I will concede I was conceived to be conceited."

Don't bother trying to google that phrase, it wasn't cribbed from anywhere.

Edit - An alternate track, such as Bonecrusher by Soulhat might also suffice.

Edit - More mitigating factors that could effect the study just occurred to me - men and women can have differences in perception of spatial geometry - to the point that some professors had to re-evaluate the method used for their lab practicals because female students felt they were at a disadvantage - if someone has difficulty perceiving space or detail, they would likely have increased difficulty representing objects within that same space, thus an inadvertent embellishment or omission that could be taken to indicate dishonesty. This is to say nothing of differences between right and left handed individuals, or those who may have had a surgical right/left brain split.

It could be that gay men draw more phallic shapes in their drawings.  Could this affect their guilt????? Could be!

You are talking about "could be"s that don't make any sense.  I AM saying that artistic ability has NOTHING to do with this study.  It specifically says that they are looking at whether someone draws in third person or first person (i.e. nothing to do with drawing ability) and how many details they leave in (nothing to do with drawing ability--a poorly drawn rain cloud with a smiley face on it is more convincing than a liar drawing a sunny day when the crime took place in the rain).  You don't have to be part of the research team to read the goddamn article right.

They also suspected that the drawing would seem less plausible overall, and would not include a depiction of the person they allegedly met.

this could be a STICK FIGURE for all anyone cares, you don't have to be any sort of artist to give small details that a liar couldn't give

btw this:

And as to the high horse I am apparently astride, I must first don the appropriate garb. I'm thinking perhaps something reminiscent of the full military dress uniform seen on antagonistic characters in certain operas. I could have my own leitmotif. Perhaps a rousing score accompanied by a booming baritone or bass voice reciting the following lyrics - "I must concede I've been perceived as conceited, but I was born to be victorious and I can never be defeated, so yes I will concede I was conceived to be conceited."

Is what I was talking about when I said "shut your face".  Stop talking like this.  Forever.

btw this:

Is what I was talking about when I said "shut your face".  Stop talking like this.  Forever.

Wow, you were talking about something I was going to post in the future! Scary. I bet you didn't even need a study to see if your hypothesis was correct.

Since your sardonic humor detector seems to be malfunctioning, the statement above was not to be taken seriously.

So, the consensus here is that from now on anything that is published is to be taken as literal and factual, held above criticism or questioning? I'm a bit surprised that the devil's advocate position is so under-staffed. Blindly follow, happily swallow - whatever gets you through the night.

Do you really not see the difference between questioning a study for what it says and questioning a study for something it never at any point implied?  Because that's what you did.  You weren't asking anything of what the study said, you were asking something that wasn't even relevant.  The study's findings suggested NOTHING that would be affected by art skills.  Stop with your bullshit, you're not even arguing the point anymore you're just arguing that the rest of us are somehow inferior to you (hint:  no) for disagreeing with you.  You're wrong, that's all there is to it.  You're not even talking sarcastically you're just talking out of your ass like a freshman who just joined the debate team.

Also let me say that a lot of shitty artists are art majors.  I've seen people who can't art themselves out of a paper bag do senior projects for art majors, all you've gotta do is complete the classes, and they don't fail you for having no talent as long as you do the assignments.

Your argument is DOUBLE fucked.

Calm down, if you all start perspiring you'll upset all the cats in your neighborhoods. (Paraphrased)

My posts had to do with trying to point out that one study, generally, proves nothing. If they are allowed to have a hypothesis, so am I. Mine was that other factors could intrude on the veracity of their results. Something as subjective as "draw something" being used as a test for something as concrete as truth/lie seems a bit arbitrary to me.

One of my professors was fond of saying to his class, "If you find exactly what you are looking for, either you are a bad scientist or you weren't looking for the right thing."

Your arguments/counters (whatever nomenclature you want to use) are more about trying to "bring me down a peg" then they are about being relevant to the initial matter.

And again, to my vocabulary or word usage, earlier I was slightly in error. I do tend to dumb it down a little when I'm online. If being equipped with a moderately expanded vocabulary is a sin, oh well.

Here's one for you, climbtree, an opening for some JKD jokes: Gang up, bring friends... I'm used to defending myself against multiple opponents. =)

...i called him... dumb, conversation over

...

That's the definition of an internet debate

Killer wolf I bet you can't get out of a rnc

Are you seriously 26 years old?  Please tell me your age in your profile is wrong, nobody should reach 26 thinking it's cool to talk like that.

Also uh I'm pretty sure we're only trying to bring you down a peg because you severely need it.  The reason we have so many awful kids (and even some adults) right now is because nobody is telling them to stop it.

I think you are using hipster too liberally aztec. a hipster would use words like that all the time because they sound funny or they're being ironic.

also I would just like to remind you all that the man you are dealing with is not a dog. he's a wolf