Tastes in Music

[PSmith08]

So, then, is it fair to say that this creative act is:

1) A manifestation of the universal thought, and

2) Unconscious, in that it takes place on a sub-quantum level?

 

[Julz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drarthurwells (G**)

Hmmmm now, whatever could this mean ??

Sorry to sabotage your conversation, this just struck me as funny.

 

[drarthurwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fante7 How is this anything more than speculation? Can you define the "non-material universe?" Wrapping a delusion in obfuscating terms does not make it correct. You say that this is somehow related to string theory, which has some kind of supposed mathematical foundation. Science is simply a system of generalizations of observed phenomena, along with appropriate mathematical approximations. There is no true notion of proof in science, and this is a highly debated topic in the philosophy of science. Without observed phenomena, I am skeptical of any scientific basis of your argument. This is why science can often be an exercise in futility. I propose a condensed version of this original post: "Both intellectual and emotional involvement are important aspects of the enjoyment of music. You cannot ignore either one. Don't be afraid to enjoy music that others deride, and always try to expand your tastes in music."

Good condensation.

Separating delusions, from valid inductions from observables, is indeed a problem. Einstein's ideas at one time appeared to be delusional speculation to many. Much of today's knowledge is tomorrow's myth, however.

All untested theory is speculation, but theory is the only way to advance science.

Another problem is that the skeptic refuses to go beyond the known of the material, but that's where reality resides. Those who equate the material of our everyday experience with the whole of reality are not just skeptics, they are fools. This becomes evident quickly in scientifically considering quantum phenomena.

 

[drarthurwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSmith08 So, then, is it fair to say that this creative act is: 1) A manifestation of the universal thought, and 2) Unconscious, in that it takes place on a sub-quantum level?

Yes, at a level of origin.

Creative production becomes meaningful when skillfully and validly integrated with perceptual production at intellectual levels of personality, and this is at an unconscious level. Bits and pieces of such combined products emerge into awareness where this serves to stimulate further unconscious production in sequential processing. We do not think in awareness - we only get the fruits of unconscious thought-sequences in awareness.

A composer creates a sequence of notes ourtside of awareness , expresses these in awareness, and this is fed back into conscious processing to produce a revised or longer sequence, and this emerges into awrenss, is fed back and so on. This gives us the illusion that we compose in awareness but we do not. We only get the product in awareness, bit by bit (but sometimes as a completed whole as Mozart could sometimes do with suddenly becoming aware of a whole symphony and just quickly writing it out).

We, as is everything, are networked computationally with universal mind. We independently compute and input into universal mind, but are also influenced somewhat from our connection to everything else as inputed into us.

 

[s m @]

Based on these new clarifications, I have been able to do some calculations. I have determined that Creed sucks.

 

[saint.panda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by s m @ Based on these new clarifications, I have been able to do some calculations. I have determined that Creed sucks.

Hey, let's be nice.

There's actually quite some information on this topic on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bohm

Art, thanks for the word file although 200+ pages will take some time to digest if at all.

 

[Asterix]

Well this is what I think... the 'better' music is the kind 'I' listen to, because it is superior and I am superior, therefore my I am an all-powerful being capable of ruling the universe, simply due to the fact that the music I listen to is so darn good. That's pretty much it. But sometimes other people also have good taste (rarely) and then they make good recommendations.

But basically I'm a genius and all other people just don't understand me. Me and the aliens have been working on a plan to abuct the human race into slavery for a long time, now is our chance with 'my' music that will take humankind down.

MSG is the mysterious panacea of the next generation, I say as I eat my tabasco slim jim.

And if you're going to bring God into this, well, everything is God, so yea, music is God. And God is energy which is particles which is blah blah blah

Does God really matter to most people though? Not really. Music usually expresses things that are superficial, thoughts and emotions are not absolutely oneness of God, like after reaching nirvana or something. Music expresses the desire for God through thoughts, feelings, and sentiments, but music generally in our culture does not touch a lot on spirituatility. It is more of a distraction than a truth. Wrap your troubles in dreams.

However, I will agree music mimics nature since the human being is a microcosm of the universe. That's why music can be so colorful, detailed, and interesting, just like real life.

 

[drarthurwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asterix Well this is what I think... the 'better' music is the kind 'I' listen to, because it is superior and I am superior, therefore my I am an all-powerful being capable of ruling the universe, simply due to the fact that the music I listen to is so darn good. That's pretty much it. But sometimes other people also have good taste (rarely) and then they make good recommendations.

Aha! You like the same music as I do - bubble-gum rock from the 50s and 60s.

 

[perplex]

i like almost all music, apart from rap

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunnyears So which taste do you prefer, vanilla, chocolate or strawberry? I'm a chocolate bunny myself.

can i eat you?

 

[Kirosia]

What the hell are you guys talking about?

I like boom boom sounds.

 

[EyeAmEye]

Not that I understood a single word of the initial post, but I seriously doubt quantum physics has anything to do with musical preferences.

random street thug - "the new Jay-Z is phat, son" (excuse any use of outdated slang, I lost my street cred long ago). That doesn't seem to be a result of string theory if you ask me.

And psychology, it's bogus. If you don't believe me, ask Tom Cruise. (I really believe it is, but not in the way Cruise does, plus it's a can of worms we won't open).

 

[Bunnyears]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drarthurwells David Bohm and Karl Pribram. Give me your e-mail in PM and I will forward you my Ontology chapter in WORD format. It's everything you ever wanted to know about existence, and then regreted asking for after you got it and started reading it.

Hmmm, ontology related to music... ontology expressed by music.....
The essence of being, the essence of existance expressed as music...

EUREKA! It's just so obvious now!

Given the work of the early great thinkers, we find:
1. to do is to be (Descartes)
2. to be is to do (Sartre)
and then in summation:
DO BE DO BE DO (Sinatra)!!

Clearly Frank Sinatra was the greatest Ontological philosopher of music to ever live.

Quote:

Originally Posted by perplex can i eat you?

 

[Alu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunnyears Hmmm, ontology related to music... ontology expressed by music..... The essence of being, the essence of existance expressed as music... EUREKA! It's just so obvious now! Given the work of the early great thinkers, we find: 1. to do is to be (Descartes) 2. to be is to do (Sartre) and then in summation: DO BE DO BE DO (Sinatra)!! Clearly Frank Sinatra was the greatest Ontological philosopher of music to ever live.

Hahaha

That's really hilarious man.

 

[NiceCans]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunnyears DO BE DO BE DO (Sinatra)!! Clearly Frank Sinatra was the greatest Ontological philosopher of music to ever live.

hey, you forgot Yabba Dabba Do (Flintstone)

 

[drarthurwells]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bunnyears So which taste do you prefer, vanilla, chocolate or strawberry? I'm a chocolate bunny myself.

Pistachio.