Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Moses

[1] 2 3
1
Metal / Re: Music for the Intellectual Elite
« on: July 02, 2008, 09:23:36 AM »
Then what's the point of trying to assert values at all?

Eg.  To one person work of art A appears to be good

To another person it appears to be bad

Both are right in what they perceive but neither have access to reality

Therefore whether or not it is good or bad is irrelevant, because the reality cannot be accessed, therefore subjective judgements are correct without exception

This can't lead anywhere good surely

Nietzsche only gave ideas of a goal, never a path because he knew the will to power would appear in some things to some, and in others to some. One man prefers Beethoven, the other Bach. They both believe they find the will to power present in both the composers works, but more so in their preferred composer. It is not so much a matter of what is good and bad but as to what creates the most power in man.

The will to power does have common characteristics across all humans thus allowing comparisons and value to exist. A man who self pities, cannot have the will to power for he has grown to hate himself to handle a difficult situation rather then the actual strength to rise above it. Or in the case of Buddhist monks, to remove hardships altogether by removing all external needs and creating an inner peace. Music that has the will of self pity, is therefore, by Nietzsche's definition bad. Great differences in will can easily be assessed and judged.

Its only when both wills are similar in stature that there is real debate of better and worse. so while in the case of comparing Bach and Beethoven a resolution might never be met much stronger comparisons, say Bach and Britney Spears there is an apparent heirechy. That is the beauty of the will to power, a very personal and subjective notion, but still bound collectively by similar principles and subject to external criticism. 

Thus I stick with what I said before. All men impose themselves on the universe without exception. Thus man will never know reality, only appearance. Although I would like to change it to, man will never truly know reality rather then man will never know reality. As so imply that we can be more in tune with reality then others, or less so but man will never actual see reality for what it is.

This is, at least, honest.  However, the acceptance of ignorance is still far worse than actually overcoming it, and you still fail to see that it is absolutely irrelevant whether or not appearance and reality are fundamentally different things.  From your point of view, for all intents and purposes, perception is reality, because nothing else can be known, from another perspective, perception holds no water in the face of knowledge of immutable Principles of existence, not bound by fragmentary pieces of knowledge (perspectives) or cosmic laws of manifestation.  I am quiote happy to continue this discussion through pm (this goes for everyone involved), but this forum need not get cluttered by these arguments (ASBO I'm talking to you  ;))

2
Metal / Re: Music for the Intellectual Elite
« on: July 02, 2008, 07:35:53 AM »
Other than the loose corellation between appearance and physical reality how is this not dualism?  We only know physical reality by how it appears to us, assuming that it has some existence separate to our perception of it is an assumption of massive proportions unless one has knowledge of higher priniples which can satisfactorily define manifestation itself.

To this we can quote Nietzsche, the lie is a condition of life. All men impose themselves on the universe without exception. Thus man will never know reality, only appearance.

Then what's the point of trying to assert values at all?

Eg.  To one person work of art A appears to be good

To another person it appears to be bad

Both are right in what they perceive but neither have access to reality

Therefore whether or not it is good or bad is irrelevant, because the reality cannot be accessed, therefore subjective judgements are correct without exception

This can't lead anywhere good surely

Going back to my table example, as a noumenon, the table cannot really 'feel' like anything. In fact, most solid objects are nothing but empty space, but our bodies are designed to think they're hard. Sure, 'hardness' is somewhat subjective, but this subjective interpretation must still correspond with reality. If I throw a table at you, you're not going to say, "Well, it's mostly empty space, so I'm not going to bother moving," right? Right.

Speaking to dualism: We're obviously not limited to phenomena and noumena; ideals and principles are neither. But even if we were, I think it's time we put an end to using dualism derogatorily. If dualism is false in a specific instance and some alternative is true, then this is adhering to the true/false dichotomy, itself a dualist set which exists all over the place in nature. Sometimes there really are patterns of two.

Everything we perceive through the senses is appearance, just because the table affects me in some way does not somehow prove that it has a reality separate from my perception of it.  I don't see where the assumption is coming from (based on your evidence and those supporting you) that physical reality is anything more than a subjective perception.  What convinces you that you are actually perceiving anything which transcends your perception at all?

3
Metal / Re: Music for the Intellectual Elite
« on: July 01, 2008, 01:18:49 PM »
Other than the loose corellation between appearance and physical reality how is this not dualism?  We only know physical reality by how it appears to us, assuming that it has some existence separate to our perception of it is an assumption of massive proportions unless one has knowledge of higher priniples which can satisfactorily define manifestation itself.

To this we can quote Nietzsche, the lie is a condition of life. All men impose themselves on the universe without exception. Thus man will never know reality, only appearance.

Then what's the point of trying to assert values at all?

Eg.  To one person work of art A appears to be good

To another person it appears to be bad

Both are right in what they perceive but neither have access to reality

Therefore whether or not it is good or bad is irrelevant, because the reality cannot be accessed, therefore subjective judgements are correct without exception

This can't lead anywhere good surely

4
Metal / Re: Music for the Intellectual Elite
« on: July 01, 2008, 06:10:29 AM »
What is the difference between physical reality and appearance?  Spell it out for me.

In addition to Dedrater's insightful commentary:

Appearance -- how things look to a human being

Physical reality -- how they are



Other than the loose corellation between appearance and physical reality how is this not dualism?  We only know physical reality by how it appears to us, assuming that it has some existence separate to our perception of it is an assumption of massive proportions unless one has knowledge of higher priniples which can satisfactorily define manifestation itself.

5
Interzone / Re: religious beliefs of the classical composers???
« on: June 29, 2008, 12:20:04 PM »
now I am wondering - how could they make such an intellectual music while being christians?

Because all of the christian music sucks - death latest albums, church music and unblack metal...

Does that mean christian win? (dont misunderstood me, I am an Antichristian althought I sometimes go into church to have some fun)

I assume you are talking about modern Church music, try listening to Palestrina sometime.  Christianity is able to be the base of intellectual music because at its core it preserves pure spirituality.  The Christian spirit has nothing to do with the sub-human, sentimentality that has penetrated modern Christianity and the creations made in the name of it.  Keep in mind that the modern world represents the polar opposite of a truly Christian society, it therefore had to weaken Christianity to its current state before it could destroy it.  Antichristianity confuses cause with effect.  The current state of Christianity must occur at the end of the lifecycle of any religion.

6
Interzone / Re: religious beliefs of the classical composers???
« on: June 29, 2008, 08:01:49 AM »
Nearly all classical composers were Christian.  Bach was a Lutheran and was known to have said that all his music was intended to revel in the glory of God.  Haydn and Mozart were both Catholic.  Beethoven was raised as a Catholic but his actual faith is questionable, having been said to dabble in deism, pantheism and other theoretical modes of understanding God.  Wagner was also a Christian, although the exact nature of his faith is difficult to determine.

7
Metal / Re: Music for the Intellectual Elite
« on: June 16, 2008, 02:06:56 AM »
Physical reality IS appearance/illusion etc.  There's really no point going on.

@neoclassical

I don't think I have confused reason with intellect, in the examples you cite the sentiment displayed only has value because it is subordinated to intellectuality.  Just as the exoteric aspect of doctrine derives its importance from the esoteric, whereas in serialism what is attempted (though rarely realised) is the stripping away of appearance to reveal the core.

8
Metal / Re: Music for the Intellectual Elite
« on: June 13, 2008, 08:38:42 AM »
Quote

I think there's a difference between sentiment and emotion.

Metal should view the world through a contemplative, structuralist perspective.

It should be logical in the abstract, and connect the human to that.

Modernity is liberalism is utilitarianism is the Crowd rearing its ugly head and demanding individuals right now be more important than interconnected reality.

We can fight that without long, bloviating speeches about The Absolute and its relationship to the sterculean.


Modernity is fundamentally the reduction of man's possibilities to what he can immediately perceive without any concentration or effort, great art recognises that reality is more than appearance.  Every political and ideological failure of the modern world stems from this basic fact.  Communicating this through essays is something I think I do well, if you don't like them, don't read them.

9
Metal / Re: Bands worth hearing thread
« on: June 04, 2008, 04:33:37 AM »
I agree about SVEST.  Urfaust and Averse Sefira's releases mark the highest achievements of post-96 black metal.  Compositionally I found this less chaotic than most people say, despite using intense layering and rather strange melodies the thematic statements lead into epic climactic sections with ease and lasting grandeur before crashing back down on themselves.  Intelligent yet passionate music.

10
Metal / Re: Averse Sefira
« on: June 01, 2008, 09:50:02 PM »
Define: "the world"

11
Interzone / Re: Metal for classical listeners
« on: May 31, 2008, 09:20:38 AM »
Quote
Except that Gorecki's desperation is the fear of an impotent man in the face of modern failure, while Vikernes' is the desperation of a hero seeking to overcome that failure, and so, Burzum is rough-hewn genius and Gorecki's music is just an expertly crafted turd of passive aggression.  Discipline cannot substitute for inspiration, nor a well-made surrender for art.  


We are in agreement here.  What you call inspiration, I would call intellectual intuition, which is nothing other than a clear insight into the nature of reality as conveyed through a work of art.  When these intuitions are pure they will manifest themselves in a suitable form, as with the works of Burzum.  However the lack of intellectual rigour in metal composition allows for a complete degradation of the medium in a very short space of time.  When the compositional method itself possesses something of an intuition then it is more resistant to inferior influences, and has greater possibility.  If metal could capture the intellectual rigour of classical music it would have a much better chance of escaping its current crisis.  It is not surprising that the only bands to have risen above the crowd since 96 are bands that place a strict emphasis on compositional rigour, Gorguts, Averse Sefira, Crimson Massacre, whereas the original greats of metal created much more spontaneous and as you say 'rough-hewn' works of art.

I will not comment on Gorecki as I have not heard him, except to say that many people here are too eager to equate 20th century art with fatalism.  Sometimes the conveying of 'hopelessness' needs to be taken in its proper context, that of modern society.  I also find it surprising that people here are fond of a band like Raison D'etre whilst critising classical composers who did similar things.

12
Metal / Re: Averse Sefira
« on: May 31, 2008, 01:44:45 AM »
Quote
Humans are produced by nature, so many human constructions parallel nature.

It takes a human to have the ability to decide where to spend its energy, and therefore, to have a need for ideology.

If the ideology mirrors what happens in the world, or rather how its order achieves maximal efficiency, why would we ever disparage it?



The word 'ideology' is defined as a human  construction, as you said.  In this context it is nothing more than very subtle fatalism, brought about by a gradual loss of knowledge on the part of mankind, to the point where he assumes that any real knowledge is impossible, and it is better to accept ignorance and work towards reconstruction on the human plane.  With Truth as a starting point, ideology is uneccessary.

13
Interzone / Re: Australia
« on: May 31, 2008, 01:15:22 AM »
It would seem so...  :(

14
Interzone / Re: What is Philosophy?
« on: May 30, 2008, 05:58:55 AM »
Schopenhauer was of course referring almost exclusively to modern western philosophy when he wrote the above passage.

15
Interzone / Re: Metal for classical listeners
« on: May 29, 2008, 09:08:22 PM »
So it is often slavishly sentimental and, despite moments of brilliance, ultimately fails as far as reaching out beyond the human perspective goes?  I'd rather think of metal as being capable of reaching a similar type of intellectuality as Bach, romanticism ultimately fails because it focuses far too much on aesthetic and not enough on composition.  Brahms and later Beethoven are exceptions, the Wagnerian school could hardly be considered as such.

Ultimately 20th century classical music, the dissonant and the minimalist has far more in common with metal than older styles of classical much, not just aesthetically, but also because the art they produce exists in similar circumstances, meaning much of the intent is the same.  It's even possible to trace the heritage,

Minimilism ------> Tangerine Dream + Punk = Burzum

I am studying composition at uni at the moment, and I can gurantee you there is a large focus on 20th century music, also it is foolish to assume that Gorguts could have created Obscura without a fairly wide knowledge of this type of music, the similarites are hardly possible to overlook.  

[1] 2 3