Why do you think that I was derogatory towards you when you try to imply that people having a discussion about criticisms of PPv2 have the same underlying psychology as white supremacists? Your pathology of a social justice warrior sticks out like a sore thumb, it's laughable to think your "ideas" could be constructive in any way.Philosofikal wrote:
Are you seriously so intellectually lazy that you really thought that's what I meant?B1rd wrote:
Here comes social justice warrior to the rescue, to explain to us all that having mapping standards - or standards in general - are, in fact, a result of patriarchy and white nationalists!
My actual point is that the every piece of the underlying logic and reasoning you used to form your opinion is toxic, and that the exact same reasoning you're using very easily leads to stuff way more terrible than being an egotistical douche about art. You have the scary combination of having illusory superiority on a mostly subjective matter, and the simultaneous belief of being a threatened minority. People who think just like the way you are right now are legendary for their ability to cause problems for everyone else.You heard it folks, Vivaldi's Four Seasons is not actually a masterpiece, any more than Justin Bieber's Baby is masterpiece, it's all up to the eye of the beholder :^)You're right, it's not. Please attempt to prove otherwise. I would really love to watch you try to objectify the subjective and slowly come to the realization that your music is only a "masterpiece" for the exact same reasons that Baby is a masterpiece (popularity), except the people who like one or the other have different values. Go ahead, shoulder the impossible task of proving your emotions are objectively superior.
Oh, while I'm here, I can very easily explain why pp maps are fun. They make the objectively difficult subjectively easy.
You like maps that make the objectively easy subjectively difficult.
Now, what are these evil ideas that I have that are so problematic? Well, that's the idea that good is intrinsically good and bad is intrinsically bad. Good could roughly be defined as pleasure - not necessarily pleasure of the hedonistic kind but the kind that is more wholesome - and bad could be defined as pain. Of course you could do a lot more to elaborate on those definitions but simplified terms will do for the sake of the argument. Once you have accepted that simple premise you can use those values to make value judgements of deeds and entities and infer morality. And you really can't dispute that premise, it doesn't matter what your beliefs or values are, no one likes pain and being the recipient of unnecessary suffering. Thus, we can make the conclusion that some emotions and values are superior to others. Those values which are beneficial to yourself and society are good, and vice versa.
Now you might say that "interpretation of music is subjective", and it is to a certain degree, but not infinitely so like you seem to imply. There is only a finite amount of plausible interpretations of a given piece of art, and in the case of music, those variables are things like the harmony and melody, speed and intensity, complexity, the effort and skill required to produce, the historical and cultural context, et cetera. Classical music is more complex, it has more variation in the melodies that compliment each other in an overarching structure. It takes great talent, skill, discipline and sacrifice to create; composers and musicians often dedicate their whole lives to creating music that others will love. And due to the aforementioned traits, it inspires different emotions than that of Justin Bieber's music: it inspires admiration of the beauty of the world and the desire to strive to the ideal of human greatness; that is, spending your whole life doing something truly worthwhile to create something of value to your fellow man. Because classical music is an embodiment of that - it's a reveling of beauty and a celebration of humanity. The same cannot be said about Justin Bieber's music, which inspires vapid teenage girls to worship a horrible role model. It doesn't take great skill to create or produce, often songs like this aren't even written by the artists who supposedly wrote it, the music is all electronically generated according to some general algorithms, and the vocalist is assisted with autotune. Then it is mass-marketed to the masses to ensure popularity. I could elaborate a lot more on what values and emotions different kinds of music invoke, but suffice it to say, Vivaldi's Four Seasons inspire more noble, better, and more worthwhile values than Justin Bieber's songs.
Unlike what you say, I don't have an motivations of "elitism" or a desire to elevate myself over other people. My motivation stems from my love of beauty, of which people like you say don't exist, or would say that a turd has more beauty than a rose if enough people thought that. No, I'd definitely say that post-modernists like you have done far more harm to our society than people like me.
"Songs by Justin Bieber are just as much masterpieces as compositions by Vivaldi, because complexity is an arbitrary criteria and popularity is the only real measurement of quality"Railey2 wrote:
Anyway, I agree with Philisophikal. B1rd would probably argue that complexity means that something must be better, which is a completely arbitrary standard just like popularity or the quality of something being more purple than something else.
-Railey, 2017
It's amazing what intellectual sinkholes one can find themselves in when they let their bigotry and arrogance get in the way of truth and reasoning. Keep on following your friend here and see where it gets you.