Skepticism and The Normal

[sinnikal]

Go ahead, argue how harmony is not an essential feature of music. Argue how harmonies and chords are not IMPLICIT in musical structure, regardless of the arrangment. Argue how you cant hit a tone without hitting a beat (my meaning of 'syncopation' that went over your head).

If you cant argue for the above, THEN YOU HAVE NO FREAKIN' ARGUMENT and your wasting my time.

Try this out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plainsong

Plainsong is monophonic, and is in free rather than measured rhythm

 

[zooterkin]

hey einsten, musical theory is a WESTERNIZED view of music. Please go read about Bach and try to find some interesting arguments that dont inspire me to stick needles in my eyeballs like the rest of yours do.

That was rather my point. What you said was

Music is comprised of 12 notes that can be expressed in multiple harmonies, phrases, octaves, voicings, and rythyms.

I was pointing out the definition of music is rather wider than that. Up to that point, no-one was limiting this to be a discussion of Western music (Chinese opera had specifically been mentioned) or music theory.

 

[WWHP]

The fact that he claims that beauty in music is objective indicates that he considers that anyone who does not share his own perceptions about music (whether those perceptions are personal or cultural) is wrong.

Your poorly considered bivalent thinking still FAILS you in even FRAMING my argument properly in your mind.

The fact the music is FOUND beautiful in and of itself is the proof of it's objective beauty. Consider, there are no CD's topping the charts of people burping, therefore, there must be some distinction in people burping than people singing. I wonder what it could be?

 

[WWHP]

That was rather my point. What you said was


I was pointing out the definition of music is rather wider than that. Up to that point, no-one was limiting this to be a discussion of Western music (Chinese opera had specifically been mentioned) or music theory.

YOU have NOT addressed this:

Go ahead, argue how harmony is not an essential feature of music. Argue how harmonies and chords are not IMPLICIT in musical structure, regardless of the arrangment. Argue how you cant hit a tone without hitting a beat (my meaning of 'syncopation' that went over your head).

If you cant argue for the above, THEN YOU HAVE NO FREAKIN' ARGUMENT and your wasting my time.

I am going to continue to ignore your boring, unconsidered, poorly thought through knee jerk reactions until you SPECIFICALLY address my query. If you cant address my query, THEN YOU HAVE NO FREAKIN' ARGUMENT and your wasting my time.

 

[Hokulele]

hey einsten, musical theory is a WESTERNIZED view of music. Please go read about Bach and try to find some interesting arguments that dont inspire me to stick needles in my eyeballs like the rest of yours do.

Ahem.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2486402#post2486402

YOU have NOT addressed this:

Go ahead, argue how harmony is not an essential feature of music. Argue how harmonies and chords are not IMPLICIT in musical structure, regardless of the arrangment. Argue how you cant hit a tone without hitting a beat (my meaning of 'syncopation' that went over your head).

If you cant argue for the above, THEN YOU HAVE NO FREAKIN' ARGUMENT and your wasting my time.

I am going to continue to ignore your boring, unconsidered, poorly thought through knee jerk reactions until you SPECIFICALLY address my query. If you cant address my query, THEN YOU HAVE NO FREAKIN' ARGUMENT and your wasting my time.

Ahem (again).

 

[zooterkin]

By the way, Rome, I see that (in posts 2569 and 2587, for example) you have once more felt it necessary to resort to unprovoked insults and namecalling, thus once more revealing your claim that you only do so as a "tit for tat" response to others doing the same to be a lie, and yourself to be a hypocrite.

Not to mention posts 2576 and 2597.

 

[WWHP]

I just wanted to point out that F# is only valid in Western music. Most Eastern modalities do not contain the 12-tone scale. F# is not a part of the musical spectrum and is not available as far as many composers outside the western world are concerned. Carry on.

sorry, my statement I miswrote, i mean to say you can have a piece of music 'without' F#, i.e. you confirmed my meaning. There is no F# in Chinese music from what I remember, but that does not mean F# does not exist, or is not implicit in musical structure, and certainly the chinese can still hear it!

 

[Hokulele]

sorry, my statement I miswrote, i mean to say you can have a piece of music 'without' F#, i.e. you confirmed my meaning. There is no F# in Chinese music from what I remember, but that does not mean F# does not exist, or is not implicit in musical structure, and certainly the chinese can still hear it!

But it would not be music to them.

 

[zooterkin]

YOU have NOT addressed this:

Go ahead, argue how harmony is not an essential feature of music. Argue how harmonies and chords are not IMPLICIT in musical structure, regardless of the arrangment.

If you choose not to address the examples you've been given, that's your business, but don't claim they have not been given.

Argue how you cant hit a tone without hitting a beat (my meaning of 'syncopation' that went over your head).

It didn't go over my head, it was wrong. Hitting a beat is not the same as syncopation.

 

[zooterkin]

The fact the music is FOUND beautiful in and of itself is the proof of it's objective beauty.

It proves that music is something which can be found beautiful. It does not prove that the beauty found in a particular piece by a particular person is objective.

 

[WWHP]

By the way, Rome, I see that (in posts 2569 and 2587, for example) you have once more felt it necessary to resort to unprovoked insults and namecalling, thus once more revealing your claim that you only do so as a "tit for tat" response to others doing the same to be a lie, and yourself to be a hypocrite.

oh right, our back and forth just started two pages ago, not close to six months ago.

If you cant handle teasing or confrontations, your in the wrong discussion. If your feelings are hurt, I apologize, I didnt mean to hurt your feelings, I merely am communicating my own feelings at the unbelievalbe DOOFUSNESS of your IDEAS.

Your trying to make me wrong instead of seeing where I may be right, and that's just plain ol elmer fudd thinking.

Consider, when given the option of a win win and a win lose, a rational decision is evidenced in the choice of the win win. SInce NONE of you have considered the win win option SPELLED OUT FOR YOU NUMEROUS TIMES, I assume then your prefer to win lose option for discussion, and that explains how it is your LOSING this discussion.

BF

Good night all.

 

[zooterkin]

sorry, my statement I miswrote, i mean to say you can have a piece of music 'without' F#, i.e. you confirmed my meaning. There is no F# in Chinese music from what I remember, but that does not mean F# does not exist, or is not implicit in musical structure, and certainly the chinese can still hear it!

Classic BF; he will nearly admit to being wrong (note how he hasn't quite done that, and claims he merely forgot that Chinese music has no F#, and then says that it's still implicit even if it's never used (!)) to a new joiner to the discussion, in the hope of getting them on his side, or at least drawing them in to the discussion.

 

[WWHP]

It proves that music is something which can be found beautiful..

A presupposition of this statement is that beauty is discovered IN the music. It supposes that beauty is a quality of it's knowledge for it to be found in the first place. Is that what you mean? If not, then your statement is contradictory at face value.

Found:To establish or set up, especially with provision for continuing existence: The college was founded in 1872.

To establish the foundation or basis of; base: found a theory on firm evidence.

Find:

To come upon, often by accident; meet with.
To come upon or discover by searching or making an effort
To discover or ascertain through observation, experience, or study

Music: (#6)An aesthetically pleasing or harmonious sound or combination of sounds: the music of the wind in the pines.

 

[zooterkin]

Your trying to make me wrong instead of seeing where I may be right,

You made yourself wrong, BF.

and that's just plain ol elmer fudd thinking.

Care to define what you mean by 'Elmer Fudd' thinking?

 

[Mojo]

The fact the music is FOUND beautiful in and of itself is the proof of it's objective beauty. Consider, there are no CD's topping the charts of people burping, therefore, there must be some distinction in people burping than people singing. I wonder what it could be?

Consider, chart topping CDs are produced by a variety of different bands, playing different types of music. If music is objectively beautiful, why does everyone not share the same taste in music? Why is there more than one chart-topping CD?

 

[zooterkin]

A presupposition of this statement is that beauty is discovered IN the music. It supposes that beauty is a quality of it's knowledge for it to be found in the first place. Is that what you mean? If not, then your statement is contradictory at face value.

I don't think there is any dispute that most people (but not all) find at least some music beautiful. If you want to go off on that tangent, you're free to do so, but that's not the issue at hand.

And no, finding something beautiful does not prove the beauty is inherent to the object. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". If you think differently, it's up to you to prove it. You've done a poor job of that so far.

Found:To establish or set up, especially with provision for continuing existence: The college was founded in 1872.

To establish the foundation or basis of; base: found a theory on firm evidence.

Well, the grammar of my sentence should rule those out. I said 'can be found', not 'founded'. I like to think I can usually post in grammatical English.

Find:

To come upon, often by accident; meet with.
To come upon or discover by searching or making an effort
To discover or ascertain through observation, experience, or study

The last would be the closest to what I mean. My dictionary gives the definition:

4. (may take a clause as an object) to consider: I find this wine a little sour

That's the meaning of 'find' I'm using here, in case it was not obvious to you.

Music: (#6)An aesthetically pleasing or harmonious sound or combination of sounds: the music of the wind in the pines.

And your point is? How does any of this substantiate your claim that the beauty of music is objective?

 

[Mojo]

oh right, our back and forth just started two pages ago, not close to six months ago.

Actually, it started nearer two years ago. When you started calling me "Dr Elmer" because I asked questions you didn't want to answer.

ETA: That would be back on this page, I think.

 

[Mojo]

A presupposition of this statement is that beauty is discovered IN the music. It supposes that beauty is a quality of it's knowledge for it to be found in the first place. Is that what you mean? If not, then your statement is contradictory at face value.

Found:To establish or set up, especially with provision for continuing existence: The college was founded in 1872.

And here you go again, introducing a definition of a word other than the one you were using, and therefore completely irrelevant to the discussion.

The verb "to found" is not the same word as the verb "to find", in case you didn't know.

 

[Mojo]

If you cant handle teasing or confrontations, your in the wrong discussion. If your feelings are hurt, I apologize, I didnt mean to hurt your feelings, I merely am communicating my own feelings at the unbelievalbe DOOFUSNESS of your IDEAS.

The fact that you are unable to communicate this in a rational manner is your problem, not mine.

And you haven't hurt my feelings by showing yourself and your wonderful system up in this way. Sorry to disappoint you. I was just pointing out that you have revealed yourself to be a liar and a hypocrite, and providing evidence to back up my assertion.

 

[flimflam_machine]

This is an experiment that in my eyes is going quite succesfully, and I am committed to staying in this discussion until you either agree, leave, or for some reason I am prevented from communicating.
...
At worst, OS 012 is simply incomplete.Where I am mistaken, or appear to be mistaken, is merely a confusion with my communication, as academic presentations are new to me and I am still refining my explainations.

This is interesting. Bubb has explicitly stated what many people already know and has been the reason for their leaving. Namely that Bubb has absoutely no interest in discussing OS012, he is simply here to preach it. He makes it very clear that there is nothing that can be said that would convince him that OS012 is wrong. So why are we still here?

If nothing supports what I am saying, how come after 5 months all of you are still here arguing with me trying to prove where it is wrong and keep coming back out of frustration?

Good question. I think it is beacuse you are such a fascinatingly flawed character. Seriously, your delusional insistence that OS012 is bordering on the pathological. Our frustration is caused by your inability or straightforward refusal to see that many of the points that you have made are unintelligible, trivial or just plain wrong. Honestly Bubb, as far as we can see nothing does support OS012.