Many people at all stages of their life are fascinated by video games. Playing games can be long, difficult and challenging, but players find it fun and inspiring. It’s hard not to admit that playing games has social and cultural meaning in our society. According to JP Gee (2003), there are learning principles (LP) that are built into good video games. But these principles do not necessarily drive learning. Several factors are necessary for learning to occur in games and perhaps intelligences are developed in the semiotic domain of everyday life. Gee teaches that there are thirty-six learning principles that can be found and developed in games.

To explain this, Gee defines games as a semiotic domain (SD), which, in turn, is part of the broader SD of everyday life. So to speak, an SD is a certain division of the world (be it a location, practice, field of study, etc.) and can encompass sub-domains. For example, first and third person shooters are a well-defined subdomain of SD games. Introducing the concept of SD to game studios, Gee gives us examples of SD such as rap, modernist paintings, and first-person shooter games. Gee believes that in order to learn from an SD three things are necessary: ​​1) learning to experience the world in different ways, 2) learning to form affiliations with members of the SD, and 3) learning to obtain the necessary resources for future learning. and resolution of problems in the domain, as well as in related domains. As we can see, Gee seeks to approximate games to a broader definition of literacy that involves different types of “visual literacy”. Following this notion of literacy, people are literate in a domain only if they are capable of recognizing and producing meaning in the field. Furthermore, Gee proposes that we think of literacy as inherently connected to social practices. In fact, in contemporary culture, articulated language (spoken, gestural or written) is not the only important communication system. Today, images, symbols, graphs, diagrams, equations, artifacts, and many other visual symbols play a particularly important role in our daily lives. For example, it is important to learn visual literacy to “read” the images in an ad. Furthermore, words and images are juxtaposed or integrated in many ways: in magazines, newspapers, textbooks, software, etc. The images take up more space and have meanings that can be independent of the words in the texts. In this sense, games are multimodal texts. They combine moving images and music with language.

Given the various forms of human activity in the complex society in which we live, it is necessary to develop a new model of intelligence that allows us to adopt a pluralistic view of intelligence. Howard Gardner’s (1983) influential definition of intelligence was developed through a model of seven basic intelligences known as the theory of multiple intelligences (MI). MI represents a broader and pragmatic view of human nature. The eight intelligences are defined as the following abilities:
1) use language competently (linguistics),
2) use logical reasoning in mathematics and science (logical-mathematical),
3) perceive details of the visual-spatial world and manipulate objects in the mind (spatial),
4) understand, create and enjoy music and musical (musical) concepts,
5) use the body skilfully (bodily-kinesthetic);
6) recognize subtle aspects of the behavior of others and respond appropriately to them (interpersonal),
7) understand one’s own feelings (intrapersonal), and
8) recognize patterns and differences in nature (naturalistic).

These categories or intelligences represent elements that can be found in all cultures, namely music, words, logic, paintings, social interaction, physical expression, inner reflection, and appreciation of nature. Thus, unlike a learning style, which is a general approach that the individual can equally apply to any imaginable content, intelligence, for Gardner, is a capacity with its own processes that are oriented to specific content in the world ( for example, musical sounds or spatial patterns).

From this perspective, Gee (2003) and Gardner (1983) assess the interaction between learning and skills present in people’s daily lives (culture). So, when we think about the SD approach, developed by Gee, we realize that the interaction between both theories, the SD of everyday life, the largest set that exists, where intelligences are located, encompasses the SD of games . Note that Gardner points out that one of the goals of his effort is to examine the educational implications of a theory of multiple intelligences. Considering that, Gee listed thirty-six learning principles present in games, and considering the importance and popularity of games in contemporary culture, it seems interesting to start investigating how learning principles can relate to multiple intelligences. So we discuss here some possibilities of association between these theories. To achieve this, the question we want to ask ourselves is this: What can the learning principles embedded in good games do for the development of multiple intelligences, which are so important in everyday life? In other words: What is the relationship between these semiotic domains? To answer this, we have used the following research methodology: literature review, website research, game observation, construction of the interaction model between the two learning proposals, and analysis of the model.

Gee describes thirty-six learning principles that can be found in games. It should be noted that not all of the learning principles listed by the author are necessarily found in a single game: there is the possibility that a game conveys one or more of these principles. The analysis shows that to develop one or more intelligences, the learner must be immersed in one or more semiotic domains that meet the necessary conditions and qualities to facilitate their development. For example: it is useless for an apprentice of a sports modality to have access to a single modality for the full development of his Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence, he needs to have access to several sports, namely several subsemiotic domains that are part of the semiotic domain broader sports. In addition to that, there are other extrinsic and intrinsic factors (motivation, injuries, adequate training material, etc.) that are important to succeed in the entire domain, such as a sport. The examples of various prominent athletes demonstrate this fact: Formula 1 drivers, MMA fighters, and Olympic athletes. In this sense, our research shows the existence of an insurmountable binomial: without learning principles there are no good games, while without the valorization of a domain in the semiotic domain of everyday life there is no way to advance within that domain. Therefore, multiple intelligences cannot be fully developed in certain cultural contexts and learning principles are useless in these contexts.

In addition, interpersonal intelligence is very important in learning. We find that it is associated with thirty of the thirty-six principles of learning. Interpersonal Intelligence clearly emerges from cooperative work, community involvement, large group simulations, dedication to social issues, etc. Precisely the importance of interpersonal intelligence, as Gardner points out, has been reduced in the contemporary educational landscape: sensitivity towards other individuals as individuals and the ability to collaborate with others are less and less important now than in the past. Therefore, we believe that the results of the comparison between these theories question the ways in which we design and manage education in its various fields. For this reason, we believe that deepening the analysis of the intersection of the theories studied here can help us both in the use of games as a pedagogical proposal and in reflection on education.

The association between both theories seemed productive to us to reflect on games and learning in general. First of all, it should be noted that not all games can promote all learning principles. This is because there are many factors in the semiotic domain of everyday life that can hinder the learning and development of multiple intelligences. And this happens even when the game transmits the principle of learning or the basic conditions to develop it, which demonstrates a close association between the principles and the intelligences.

Second, Interpersonal Intelligence is associated with thirty principles of learning. This demonstrates the complexity of learning and, consequently, shows the challenges that contemporary education must face. In fact, the study of the interaction between the theories can help us to think about new ways of teaching and learning inside and outside the school. It seems that Gee’s relevance is in highlighting the importance of games culturally and for learning, while Gardner’s learning theory emphasizes the need for favorable conditions (environment, mentors, cultural appreciation, etc.) for the development of skills. . We must remember that abilities or intelligences are valued differently between cultures.

We believe that good videogames represent, in fact, opportunities for direct and indirect learning of content and skills in the semiotic domain of everyday life, given its close relationship with most intelligences.

Work Cited

Howard Garner. moods. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (New York: Basic Books, 1983).

James P. Gee. What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy (New York: Palgrave, 2003).