Straw Art

[kp*]

If I find something to be "better" I just say better. I am not going to re-word it or add IMO, everytime just to make a few people happy.

strawman. no one is asking you to. if you think that is what we are saying you need to study up on your reading comprehension.

I do understand the difference.

It's not clear to me that you do.

Again, picking away at the language doesn't move things forward at all.
Also, I do think my statement is open to debate, so debating the idea and not the language is what is going to be more interesting.

Wow seriously?

You say debating the position is going to be more interesting, yet, you refuse to do so because it is only your opinion? what?

Several of us tried to contest you on the actual ideas and you just pulled the rug out on us. You were the one unwilling or able to actually support your stated beliefs.

We tried to debate you on the merits of your argument. You bring up some twisted logic (semantics) or diversionary tactic. When we point the flaws in your logic you say you don't want to discuss the logic (semantics).

If you twisted this all up on purpose to frustrate everyone, like some kind of Laurel and Hardy routine, then you win. Otherwise ... seriously read the thread again. You stated something some of us here found to be problematic. We picked at the idea. You refused to support or defend your position and started down some irrelevant and obvious (your specialty) BS line of argument that it was only what you personally believed to be true and then blamed us for calling you on your BS.

Hey if i personally believe that the world is flat and someone calls me out on it don't i have to defend my position? If i just say, well, it's just my opinion, how is that not a copout?

I am done with you. You are not worth talking to. I don't think you even can be talked with and trying to is just too painful.

[mudd]

i think we're all done with this side-track. i'll remove it when i'm on lunch break.

m

[RFKorp]

Hey if i personally believe that the world is flat and someone calls me out on it don't i have to defend my position? If i just say, well, it's just my opinion, how is that not a copout?

http://theflatearthsociety.org/

[faster]

A: Painters who have an understanding of economic and political theory have the upper hand.

B: That's BS. Why are economic and political theory so special?

A: I just think they are.

B: Why?

A: They are to me!

B: Why?

A: That's just how I feel--stop bugging me about it!

B: Saying "My painting is inspired and enriched by economic and political theory" is different from saying "painters who understand economic and political theory are better"

A: That's linguistics, you nerds.

C: You guys cut it out.

[fearandpanic]

What happened to the part where B & D (with some support from E & F), in frustration at not being able to debate A's assertion without having to fall back on an equally monolithic form of extreme individualism that doesn't so much debate the issue of values as conveniently avoid it, and after insistent demands that A abandon his opinion in favour of this (which he doesn't), are reduced to saying that A only holds a different opinion because of limited intelligence?

I suggest the following amendment;

A. My original opinion is unaltered despite having read your counterarguments.
B & D (together): You need to study up on your reading comprehension. You don't understand the difference between the two positions. Seriously, how dense are you?

[faster]

Excellent. But that has to be before C says cut it out. Then after that, we can have G saying I was watching the whole time, here's how it really went down and then we can go back to B trying to summarize (but, of course, being unable to include the very addendum he's writing--but trying against to somehow make up for that by at least being conscious of it, which is, of course, futile).

This is really a blast.

The funny thing is, for a long time (and before I ever really even made music) I really did pay a lot of attention to art and literature (especially poetry), but I don't think that stuff did much to help clarify, direct, or ease my little struggles with music. I think people who have some understanding of 20th century poetry, rugby union, literary theory, and cutting-edge test-prep techniques have the upper hand at internet nerding.

[fearandpanic]

More seriously, and since it's out of the original thread now, I thought there was an element of ganging up there (from "several of us") that seemed designed in part to make one poster feel unwelcome, which is going further than necessary. That's the only reason I commented, since I wasn't otherwise posting.

My own feeling is that Damon's "upper hand" is unfortunately worded (especially used in connection with art, where it has the unfortunate ring of "upper class"); but that it's maybe not very different from the concept of what Faster finds "important." That Damon (as a free individual, freely choosing from all values in a society without shared values) happens to attach a particular value to art is surely just another acceptable "personal opinion" for an outlook that claims to value all knowledge equally, "whether Nigerian video film", Burmese cuisine, double-entry bookkeeping, or the train arrival and departure times from Brussels. It’s odd maybe that "unique tastes and interests" (Faster) can be freely valued and affirmed in relation to music but that an artistic outlook cannot: they could almost be substitute terms.

So maybe it would be more accurate to say that the problem is not Damon stating an opinion as a fact, and that he's forcing it on everyone, but that the particular value he's putting forward, at least in its unreconstructed form, has been devalued by some (and for particular reasons, many of them legitimate) and expanded by others. Why that is and how much the concept can be expanded without losing its coherence would at least be easier things to discuss.

Also, some discussion of specific pieces of music or types of music that have benefitted or suffered from close connections with "the arts" might have shed light on the differenes of opinion (and might warrant being put back in the main forum). It also might have saved the discussion from being doctrinaire.

[RFKorp]

[faster]

More seriously, and since it's out of the original thread now, I thought there was an element of ganging up there (from "several of us") that seemed designed in part to make one poster feel unwelcome, which is going further than necessary. That's the only reason I commented, since I wasn't otherwise posting.

My own feeling is that Damon's "upper hand" is unfortunately worded (especially used in connection with art, where it has the unfortunate ring of "upper class"); but that it's maybe not very different from the concept of what Faster finds "important." That Damon (as a free individual, freely choosing from all values in a society without shared values) happens to attach a particular value to art is surely just another acceptable "personal opinion" for an outlook that claims to value all knowledge equally, "whether Nigerian video film", Burmese cuisine, double-entry bookkeeping, or the train arrival and departure times from Brussels. It’s odd maybe that "unique tastes and interests" (Faster) can be freely valued and affirmed in relation to music but that an artistic outlook cannot: they could almost be substitute terms.

So maybe it would be more accurate to say that the problem is not Damon stating an opinion as a fact, and that he's forcing it on everyone, but that the particular value he's putting forward, at least in its unreconstructed form, has been devalued by some (and for particular reasons, many of them legitimate) and expanded by others. Why that is and how much the concept can be expanded without losing its coherence would at least be easier things to discuss.

Also, some discussion of specific pieces of music or types of music that have benefitted or suffered from close connections with "the arts" might have shed light on the differenes of opinion (and might warrant being put back in the main forum). It also might have saved the discussion from being doctrinaire.

Man, R&P, I wish you'd get more involved in the discussions as they happen. Very thoughtful indeed.

To clarify, what I meant by "unique tastes and interests" didn't have to exclude the arts, but the privileging of art above other uses of our time seems counterproductive to me (partly because of my probably too-frequently mentioned criticisms of the art world and partly because I can't help seeing it as unnecessarily limiting). Now, if I'd suspected that Damon meant something more along the lines of "seeing the world in an artful way" I'd probably have understood a little better (and been a lot less opposed), but I genuinely thought otherwise.