Bernabé Mallo
Doctor en Filosofía por la Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU)
Investigador
en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte. / PhD in
Philosophy – University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)
Researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origins of art.
A review of the study by Straffon, Perea-García, den Blaauwen, and Kret (2026): Traces of Intentionality: Balance, Complexity, and Organization in Artworks by Humans and Apes
Introduction: can a chimpanzee be an artist?
In the 1950s, the psychologist Desmond Morris, known for his studies on animal behaviour, taught a chimpanzee named Congo to paint. Congo's works were exhibited in London galleries and even acquired by art collectors. The question raised then, and still open today, is unsettling: can a chimpanzee create art? What differentiates an accidental splatter of pigment from a work with aesthetic intention? And, above all, are we humans able to distinguish between the stroke of a non-human primate and that of a person?
A recent study by Larissa M. Straffon, Juan O. Perea-García, Tijmen den Blaauwen, and Mariska E. Kret (2026), published in the journal Topics in Cognitive Science, addresses precisely this question . The researchers presented participants with images of paintings made by humans without artistic training and by captive chimpanzees. The results are fascinating: participants were able to distinguish between the two with a remarkable degree of accuracy, and attributed higher levels of intentionality, organisation, and balance to human-made paintings.
This finding has profound implications for research on the origin of art. It suggests that the ability to produce and perceive cues of intentionality is not a privilege of great artists, but a ubiquitous feature of human visual production, even among those without artistic training. And that ability, as we shall see, connects directly with our thesis on the S/Y/C model and the Law of Biological Coherence.
The study: how do people distinguish human art from chimpanzee art?
Straffon and colleagues designed two complementary experiments to explore the ability of human beings to distinguish between paintings made by humans without artistic training and paintings made by chimpanzees .
Study 1: the visual discrimination task
In the first study, participants viewed pairs of paintings —one human and one chimpanzee— and had to identify which painting had been made by a human and which by a chimpanzee. The results were clear: participants successfully distinguished between human and chimpanzee paintings at a level significantly above chance .
It is important to note that the humans who made the paintings were not trained artists. They were individuals without specialised artistic training. This rules out the possibility that the distinction is based on mastery of sophisticated techniques or adherence to academic aesthetic canons. Even without training, the human stroke seems to leave an invisible signature that other humans can detect.
Study 2: the assessment of aesthetic criteria
In the second study, participants rated the paintings according to several criteria: perceived intentionality, organisation, balance, and complexity . In addition, they were asked which painting they preferred.
The results were consistent with those of the first study. Participants attributed significantly more intentionality, organisation, and balance to human-made paintings compared to chimpanzee-made paintings. Complexity, on the other hand, showed no systematic differences.
Furthermore, it was found that preference for a painting was directly related to the perception of intentionality. That is, participants preferred works that seemed more intentional, regardless of their origin. Since human paintings were perceived as more intentional, they were also preferred.
The authors identified three key characteristics that influence preference for abstract artwork: balance, complexity, and organisation . These three traits, they suggest, are indicators of the presence of an intentional mind behind the work.
What is intentionality and why do we detect it?
Intentionality is, in philosophical terms, the property of mental states of being directed toward something, of being about something. In the context of art perception, intentionality refers to our ability to infer that behind an object there is an agent who has acted with a purpose, who has wanted to achieve something, who has made decisions.
The study by Straffon and colleagues demonstrates that human beings are extraordinarily sensitive to cues of intentionality in visual production. Even when the works are abstract, even when they do not depict recognisable objects, even when they have been made by people without artistic training, we are able to detect the trace of the human mind.
This ability is not trivial. It has deep evolutionary roots. In the history of our species, the ability to infer the mental states of others —their intentions, their beliefs, their desires— has been crucial for cooperation, communication, and group survival. This ability is called theory of mind or social cognition.
Art, from this perspective, would not be a late cultural luxury, but an expression of this fundamental capacity. By creating art, human beings leave traces of their intentionality that others can read. Art is, in this sense, a means of communication that transcends explicit language.
Why doesn't chimpanzee art deceive?
If chimpanzees can paint —and they do, as Desmond Morris demonstrated with Congo— why are their works not perceived as equally intentional? The answer, the study suggests, has to do with the formal properties of the work.
Chimpanzees, when painting, produce configurations of strokes that, to human eyes, appear less organised and balanced. It is not that they lack patterns; it is that their patterns do not exhibit the same kind of compositional structure that humans generate, even without training.
Straffon and colleagues identified three key dimensions: balance, complexity, and organisation. Human paintings scored higher on these dimensions, and these dimensions predicted aesthetic preference. In other words, humans have an innate or early-acquired sensitivity to certain types of spatial configuration that we consider "well-made" or "harmonious".
This sensitivity is not arbitrary. It is likely grounded in principles of visual perception shared by our species —and perhaps by other primates, though with important differences. A clear example can be found in Gestalt psychology, which has shown how the human brain structures visual stimuli into global, coherent configurations. This is manifested through fundamental principles such as the law of continuity and the law of Prägnanz (or good form). Human art, even the most abstract, tends to satisfy these perceptual expectations more consistently than art generated by chimpanzees.
Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)
This experimental study connects directly with the research we have been developing on the S/Y/C model of neuronal functioning and the Law of Biological Coherence.
The ability to detect intentionality in art is, in essence, the ability to recognise the Y (Symbolon) dimension in action. Symbolon is not only the capacity to create symbols, but also to recognise symbolic activity in others. When we look at a painting and perceive that there is an intentional mind behind it, we are exercising our fundamental symbolic competence: the one that allows us to share meanings, coordinate actions, and build culture.
The three characteristics identified by Straffon and colleagues —balance, complexity, and organisation— can be reinterpreted in light of our dimensions:
Balance refers to the C (Wholeness) dimension. An achieved balance —between lights and shadows, between forms and spaces, between tension and rest— is a form of wholeness. The human brain finds pleasure in configurations that resolve tensions into a coherent totality. Human paintings, even those by untrained artists, tend to satisfy this search for balance more than those of chimpanzees.
Organisation also refers to the C (Wholeness) dimension, but also to Y (Symbolon). Organisation implies that the elements are not arranged by chance, but follow a structuring principle that can be recognised by others. That structure is an implicit symbol: it says "this has been made with a purpose". The ability to generate organisation is, therefore, a manifestation of the symbolic function.
Complexity is the most ambiguous. It showed no systematic differences between humans and chimpanzees, but it did influence aesthetic preference. Complexity is likely related to the S (Survival) dimension: our brain is designed to pay attention to stimuli with an optimal level of complexity —neither too simple (boring) nor too chaotic (overwhelming). Human art navigates this frontier with special skill.
Surgical Philosophy invites us to make a precise analytical cut of these results. It is not about concluding that chimpanzees "have no art" in a derogatory sense. It is about recognising that human visual production, even in its simplest and non-academic forms, bears the mark of an intentionality that distinguishes it from the production of other primates. That mark is, probably, the result of the evolution of our symbolic capacity —the same one that enables language, mathematics, myth, and, of course, art.
Implications for research on the origin of art
The study by Straffon and colleagues has profound implications for research on the origin of art in the Homo species.
First, it suggests that the ability to produce and perceive cues of intentionality is not a trait that appears only with the figurative art of the Upper Palaeolithic. It is already present in present-day humans without artistic training, and it is likely that it was present in our ancestors from very early phases of the evolution of the genus Homo.
Second, the study demonstrates that aesthetic sensitivity to properties such as balance, organisation, and complexity is not a product of culture or artistic education. It is a widespread capacity that manifests even in people without training. This supports the hypothesis that aesthetic experience has deep biological roots, predating the emergence of historical artistic traditions.
Third, the study opens the door to comparative research with other primates. If chimpanzees produce visual configurations that humans distinguish from their own, what about Neanderthals? Could we analyse their symbolic productions —such as the Gorham engravings or the paintings of the Ardales Cave— using these same criteria of intentionality, organisation, and balance? Our research on the origin of art in the Homo species could benefit from applying these analytical tools to archaeological remains.
Final considerations: the invisible signature of the human
The study by Straffon, Perea-García, den Blaauwen, and Kret reminds us that art is not only a matter of objects, but of minds. When we look at a painting —even an abstract painting made by someone without training— we do not only see forms and colours. We see, or intuit, the presence of another mind. We detect its intentionality, its organisation, its search for balance.
That ability to detect the other's mind in the stroke is, perhaps, the deepest origin of art. We are not born with brushes, but we are born with brains designed to leave traces and read the traces of others. Art is, in this sense, an extension of our cognitive sociability: a means of transmitting not only information, but mental states, emotions, intentions.
Chimpanzees can paint, and their paintings may be interesting from a formal point of view. But humans, even without training, paint differently. Their strokes carry an invisible signature that other humans can detect. That signature is that of a mind that seeks to organise the world, that yearns for balance, that leaves traces of its passage. It is the signature of life that knows itself alive and wants to record it.
And that, perhaps, is the true origin of art: the need to say, through the stroke, "I was here, I saw this, I felt this". A need that chimpanzees do not share, or not to the same degree, and that defines what is most human about the human.
References
Mallo, B. (2023). La construcción neuro-simbólica. Una aproximación al funcionamiento del cerebro desde una perspectiva multidisciplinar [Doctoral thesis, University of the Basque Country - Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea]. ADDI Repository. http://hdl.handle.net/10810/62701
Mallo, B. (2026a). De la filosofía quirúrgica a la ley de coherencia biológica S/Y/C: Hacia una investigación sobre el origen del arte en la especie Homo. Lopez Mallo, Javier Bernabé. https://isbn.bibna.gub.uy/catalogo.php?mode=detalle&nt=57196
Mallo, B. (2026a). De la filosofía quirúrgica a la ley de coherencia biológica S/Y/C: Hacia una investigación sobre el origen del arte en la especie Homo [Kindle edition]. Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GYGTJD5C
Mallo, B. (2026b). From surgical philosophy to the law of biological coherence S/Y/C: Toward a study of the origin of art in the Homo lineage. Lopez Mallo, Javier Bernabé. https://isbn.bibna.gub.uy/catalogo.php?mode=detalle&nt=57197
Mallo, B. (2026b). From surgical philosophy to the law of biological coherence S/Y/C: Toward a study of the origin of art in the Homo lineage [Kindle edition]. Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GY89SZS1
Straffon, L. M., Perea-García, J. O., den Blaauwen, T., & Kret, M. E. (2026). Traces of intentionality: Balance, complexity, and organization in artworks by humans and apes. Topics in Cognitive Science, 18(2), e70022. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.70022
Autor / Author
Bernabé Mallo
Doctor en Filosofía – Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Investigador independiente en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte.
Bernabé Mallo
PhD in Philosophy – University of the Basque Country / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Independent researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origin of art.
Enlaces / Links
Página de autor Amazon / Amazon Author Page: https://www.amazon.com/author/bernabemallo
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9002-9728
Plataforma EHUenRed / Link EHUenRed: https://www.ehu.eus/es/web/masterrak-eta-graduondokoak/red-latinoamericana-de-posgrados
Canal YouTube / Channel YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@neuroideas815
Canal YouTube / Channel YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBsf6OZ482NjST6QA-hvYtQ
Publicaciones y proyectos en desarrollo / Publications and projects:
https://www.amazon.com/author/bernabemallo
https://ehuenred.theglocal.network/ideas/el-origen-del-arte-en-el-cerebro-de-makapansgat-al-moma-del-primate-al-sapiens
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario