Objectivity in Music. · Music Discussion

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by RedAlertv2
Remember this?
Dont lecture me on being civil. You threw an unwaranted insult.

You percieved that as an insult. I didn't mean it as an insult at all, I just gave a response to your statement about my argument being useless.

I just wanted to clarify that it's not necessarily useless, but it's maybe that you just don't undertand it, and therefore just think it's useless.

Victor Von Doom Latverian Diplomat

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You percieved that as an insult. I didn't mean it as an insult at all, I just gave an answer to your question.

Perhaps it was a universally true insult, in spite of what you meant.

EPIIIBITES Restricted

I'm sure some might think so.

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Morgoths_Wrath
We've all read it, and we've already told you why it's wrong.

I didn't see any arguments that tried to challenge..."because through experience, people with informed opinions start to see a trend between the music they consider crap, and the music their peers consider crap. So there is very often a consensus when it comes to crap music. That says something about the music itself...even though what it's saying can't be proven...it still says something"

...haven't heard anything that further discusses this.

People with informed opinions can usually agree if something truly isn't innovative, has substance, has soul, or has good instrumentation, because their impressions of the music they check out are often re-affirmed by others with informed opinions.

How is it that there VERY OFTEN seems to be this mutual understanding of what sucks?

Maybe you can't answer that...because maye you just don't have an informed enough an opinion to even know where to begin?

I very much believe that might be the case for some people here...as you keep pointing to simply your taste as being a measure if something is good or not.

Hey, it might be a hard pill to swallow, and I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings, but maybe this might be the case with some people here.

Alpha Centauri Restricted

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
No. I'm hoping that you'll re-read what I've said above and re-consider what it's presenting against your case regarding so-called proof and "evidence".
AC still hasn't even touched on this point...because he knows how threatening what it's saying is to his argument of supposed "proof".

Don't talk to me of avoiding points. Everyone here has addressed all your posts, entirely, not skipping parts, including me.

You literally dodge entire posts, ignore what you don't like, then perform oral sex on any member who HINTS to understanding you.

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

?

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Is that all you have left AC?
Trying to turn people against me?

It seems so.

Alpha Centauri Restricted

I'm trying to turn people against you?

You have had so many people proving you wrong here, and in the other thread, of no doing but your own.

Accept you're wrong or at the very least accept responsibility.

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

AC...I'd guess this applies to you more than anyone...sorry...

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
How is it that there VERY OFTEN seems to be this mutual understanding of what sucks?
Maybe you can't answer that...because maybe you just don't have an informed enough an opinion to even know where to begin?
I very much believe that might be the case for some people here...as you keep pointing to simply your taste as being a measure if something is good or not. That says a lot.
Hey, it might be a hard pill to swallow, and I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings, but maybe this might be the case with some people here.

The only argument I've heard from you regarding this is that someone like a critic just feels compelled to agree that an artist like Jimi Hendrix or The Beatles are good.

Oh! Well! You figured it out. That must be it.

...not giving these people a lot of credit for having any sort of independant thinking, are ya?

Alpha Centauri Restricted

Because, as Morgoth said, you could argue that it's TRUE and FACTUAL that informed musical critics share the same OPINION of certain types of music.

Them sharing that opinion still does not mean there is any OBJECTIVE good or bad. It means they agree on what they THINK is good or bad.

I have an informed opinion of music, you don't get to decide who's opinion is informed or not, but that IS what you're trying. You're trying to decide who's opinion is informed and who isn't.

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Them sharing that opinion still does not mean there is any OBJECTIVE good or bad. It means they agree on what they THINK is good or bad.

RIGHT! And that alone speaks volumes...and you still haven't argued anything to the contrary of how it doesn't.

Alpha Centauri Restricted

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
RIGHT! And that alone speaks volumes...and you still haven't argued anything to the contrary of how it doesn't.

The hell? Speaks volumes? What are you on about? You've lost yourself.

It speaks volumes...about what? That most critics agree on good and bad, but good and bad is still their opinion, because it's ALWAYS opinion.

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I have an informed opinion of music, you don't get to decide who's opinion is informed or not, but that IS what you're trying. You're trying to decide who's opinion is informed and who isn't.

Nope. I'm just looking at you and saying what I think...I could be wrong.

But when the masses speak, the numbers speak for themselves...it doesn't matter if you and 99 other people were asked to review Lily Allen's latest album...the large consensus would still be that it's not a crap album (regardless if your opinion was truly informed or not).

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It speaks volumes...about what? That most critics agree on good and bad, but good and bad is still their opinion, because it's ALWAYS opinion.

GREAT!!! GET OVER THAT!!!

It's still worth giving a second look because what those OPINIONS point to is often overwhelmingly consensual.

Who cares if they're opinions. We've established that...(although being informed opinions still says something)...from then on, we are looking at the sheer consensus of it all.

Alpha Centauri Restricted

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Nope. I'm just looking at you and saying what I think...I could be wrong.
But when the masses speak, the numbers speak for themselves...it doesn't matter if you and 99 other people were asked to review Lily Allen's latest album...the large consensus would still be that it's not a crap album (regardless if your opinion was truly informed or not).

The consensus would still be opinion, so neither of us would be right or wrong.

Many people agreeing that Lily Allen has a great album does not mean she makes factually good music. It means many people agree that they think it's good music.

Opinion.

Getting it yet?

Numbers do not make something true. It's true lots agree, it's true lots disagree. It's NOT true that either side is right, or that one side is wrong because they are less in number.

YOU simply think they have an informed opinion because they agree with you. YOU don't even have an informed opinion.

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The consensus would still be opinion, so neither of us would be right or wrong.

You just can't get past looking at the "opinion" thing.

Look at the consensus thing and stop blocking it out...because the SIMPLE FACT that there is a consensus SAYS SOMETHING.

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Many people agreeing that Lily Allen has a great album does not mean she makes factually good music. It means many people agree that they think it's good music.

Amazing how many times you resort to using the same arguments...even though I myself have admitted that YES, IT DOESN'T MAKE IT FACT.

Amazing

AMAZING!

I'm done with you.

It seems you're never gonna get it.

See ya!

Alpha Centauri Restricted

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
You just can't get past looking at the "opinion" thing.
Look at the consensus thing and stop blocking it out...because the SIMPLE FACT that there is a consensus SAYS SOMETHING.
I'm done with you.
It seems you're never gonna get it.
See ya!

con·sen·sus

1. majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month.
2. general agreement or concord; harmony.

Consensus means mass opinion, not mass fact. All it says is "Lots agree.", nothing more.

Are you going to shut up now?

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Consensus means mass opinion, not mass fact. All it says is "Lots agree.", nothing more.

Yes that's right AC...it does.

It is INCREDIBLE, truly INCREDIBLE that you're STILL stuck on it not being fact...when I agree it isn't.

Did you not hear that?

Let me try it again...for the billionth time.

I AGREE IT ISN'T!!

But for SOME REASON, you will start to argue and bring up points AGAIN about it not being fact. INCREDIBLE!

My argument is...look at the FACT that there is a consensus.

You're not doing so becasue you're BLOCKING IT OUT.

That's what you do!

Alpha Centauri Restricted

I'm not ignoring the fact there's a consensus, it just doesn't add anything to your debate.

"People agree, that must mean something!". It does, wanna know what? This:

"Many people agreeing that Lily Allen has a great album does not mean she makes factually good music. It means many people agree that they think it's good music.".

But whenever I say that, you say this:

"My argument is...look at the FACT that there is a consensus.".

Because now you are just posting for the sake of it.

You have NOTHING LEFT.

-AC

EPIIIBITES Restricted

Whatever.

We disagree.

I feel ill.