I'm starting to realize music wasn't subjective after all.
I'm starting to realize music wasn't subjective after all
Mason Mitchell
Other urls found in this thread:
Matthew Flores
What do you mean?
You mean like how people like different music because of clear reasons that could be studied scientifically?
Alexander Turner
That's called taste, some taste is objectively better than others though.
Oliver Watson
How do you measure taste objectively?
Brandon Perez
and this is provable how? By the complexity of the music? By the obscurity? The variety?
Hate to break it to you but all this is subjective since listening to music (if we are talking about consumer listening, not studying) is really only about what sounds good to your ears.
Ryan Ross
by comparing it against the rym all time list. the more it matches up the more based you are
Luis Hill
it's an aggregate measure of subjectivity. if a certain number of people find a piece of music to be "beautiful," and it can be proven that such an observation is disinterested and made without any bias (i.e. not for any moral or personal reasons but simply for the art itself), then said music can be considered beautiful
Ryan White
>By the complexity of the music
Yes. This is why prog and classical are the superior music genres and all pop music is shit. It's the only way to objectively determine the quality of music.
Ian Edwards
>The majority of philosophers believe that art is objective
philpapers.org
This is my biggest pet peeve that I see in music circles, the whole claim that music is entirely subjective. Please study aestheticism more before you participate in it. Yas Forums is especially ignorant in this regard.
Samuel Torres
> It's the only way to objectively determine the quality of music.
no it isn't, it's the only way to determine the complexity of music.
complexity does not necessarily equal quality. Besides, there are plenty of types of complexities in music. Classical music certainly explores lots of complexities, harmonic complexities for exmaple, but other genres explore different types like beat focused complexities and polyrhythms and such. Care to explain what sets one above the other? Is it whichever genre combines the most complexities into a single composition?
James Nguyen
>philosophers
lmao
Brayden Bailey
>philosophers
Daniel Wilson
>philosophers
Ethan Foster
I mean, you're making a metaphysical claim by insisting that art is wholly subjective with no room for objectivity. All I did was post a link that demonstrated that trained metaphysicians's opinions are contrary.
Connor Robinson
>philosophers
top jej
Jaxon Torres
the only foundation from which objectivity can arise is from the aggregate of multiple subjectivities.
William Thompson
>with no room for objectivity
only in personal taste. Not claiming objectivity in all aspects
Jace Johnson
Well that's a shame, to be realizing something incorrect. It's ironic, the only objective thing about music is that it's not objective. No matter what you like or dislike or the state of your ego, your opinion of what music is "good" and what music is "bad" simply doesn't matter and holds no more weight than anyone else's. But if you want to make a case, please first tell me what the objectively best color is.
Robert Thompson
Black.
Luis Anderson
I mean, the fact that you're even talking to me right now suggests that you're conveying a universal proposition. If it wasn't a universal, I wouldn't be able to understand it, since it would entirely be a statement subjective to the individual otherwise.
Brandon Adams
Yeah no shit music itself is objective, music taste isn't though.
Luke Thompson
you aren't able to understand it, though. the proposition i'm making to you now can only be conveyed through language, an imprecise system of signifiers and signifieds that can only hope to approximate the meaning i intend to get across
Ryan Rogers
While language is imprecise, I don't see how that's an argument against the potentiality of propositions being conveyed. For instance, a married bachelor is by definition logically impossible. I conveyed that by means of language, but there is no way to interpret "married bachelor" as anything other than logically impossible. Hence propositions follow from language.
Elijah Lee
then why do different people like different music?
John Sanders
This was obvious. You let plebs get to you.
Jaxson Rivera
race, gender, culture, age, iq ect
Ryder Peterson
but the potentiality itself arises a posteriori from the fact of language: you can only conceive of such an oxymoron as "married bachelor" because of the definitions language itself has given to us. the concepts "unmarried" and "bachelor" don't exist a priori of language, and propositions themselves are only the vague wanderings of the mind
Justin Rodriguez
okay? There's nothing objective about these categories
Brandon Young
>free will doesn't exist
Wyatt Morales
>the concepts "unmarried" and "bachelor" don't exist a priori of language, and propositions themselves are only the vague wanderings of the mind
To make this claim you would have to also believe that math is generated from the mind and doesn't exist independent from humanity.
Joseph Young
>implying it does
Mason Sanchez
proposition
of course it does but those things will give you a pretty good clue what an individuals taste will be like......objectively
the purpose of all art is to use an object to appeal to the subjective senses. by nature it is a mix because at once we can agree that x is x but we each have a separate experience of x.