Piano World Home Page Forums Our Most Popular Forums Pianist Corner Video clip for classical music?

You know, there's something I've been missing about this argument. [i]I never made any initial statement.

See my above post.

JoelW is right.

In order for classical music to be objectively superior, you need a mechanism to determine was defines superiority. Since this mechanism is a product of human thought (opinion), it follows that you cannot say classical music is objectively superior to anything.

Anyone who does not see this is living in a fantasy world that does not abide by the rules of logic.

Don't you understand? The "better" isn't out there. It doesn't objectively exist. It's all in your head.

I think this little myth you like to flog about how it works is rubbish. I've never met a single person outside of the classical music community who felt they were too stupid to partake. The music doesn't particularly appeal to them and they just aren't interested - that's all. Just like I'm not particularly interested in country and western, for example.

One can't argue the music itself it not worthy of access if musicians themselves find it worth playing. The specious idea that "lack of accessibility may well be its most attractive attribute" is a classic philistine posture that attempts to explain away that which isn't understood.

I'm not a musical masochist - I and many others actually enjoy the music you apparently dislike, regardless of whether you have any clue about how that might be possible.

The idea that something objectively exists "out there" is all in your head, i.e., it's subjective.

This is a false statement which is probably the root of your obvious...cognitive dissonance.

Why is it false?

I'll give you an example: gravity.

Gravity is an observed phenomena of our universe. It exists outside of the human mind, just like the Moon.

This is really simple stuff.

That's not an example.

Saying that it "is an observed phenomena" just points back to the subjective nature of observation, and you have no way of knowing if it exists outside of the human mind.

are you familiar with the certainty principle Atrys? It's really simple; you can't prove anything, you can't say the moon exists, you can't assert whether other people are conscious or not

It is.


That's not true. You have massive gaps in your thinking. The Moon exists whether or not there are humans to observe it. It doesn't matter if you think it's not there, it is.

wr, you're failing to follow extremely simple lines of logic. One can use this alone as a case against anything you assert.

I follow your lines of logic easily enough

You didn't prove the moon exists whether there are humans to observe it.

Clearly not.


I don't have to. Thinking that the Moon doesn't exist outside of human observation is, quite literally, delusional and psychotic thinking. You're not in touch with reality and the nature of existence outside of the human mind.

This is very surprising to hear. Surely you realize that you're pretty much alone in this thinking? If you're so certain, approach the university nearest to you and assert your claim; no one will take you seriously.

This is borderline hilarious! It's hard to believe you actually think that things don't exist outside of human observation.

I'll give you another example, since you don't seem to have the creative intelligence to work through this problem on your own: if I place a video camera in a forest and walk away, then return and watch the footage on the camera, the footage will contain events and objects that transpired and exist outside of human observation.

Are you 12? How can you possibly think you're correct with your assertion?

Rant and insult to your heart's content, but you still haven't proved that anything exists outside your own mind.

You're failing to realize that I don't have to (even though I did). Others have done the heavy lifting so that when deluded people like you assert psychotic and irrational claims, you can utilize the powers of research to realize that your claims are false.

You are making a claim that is not backed by any evidence whatsoever.

Some members here seem to be afraid of knowledge and reason, and it's obvious you're one of them.

There are only three things one can know.