On 16 Mar 2014, at 16:38, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:
On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Craig Weinberg
<whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sunday, March 16, 2014 11:05:45 AM UTC-4, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, March 14, 2014 5:11:56 AM UTC-4, Kim Jones wrote:
On 14 Mar 2014, at 1:12 pm, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com> wrote:
Information must be made evident through sensory participation, or
it is nothing at all.
Craig, you have just explained to me the basis of my discalculia. No
one else has ever managed to do that in all my 57 years.
Cool! Thanks Kim.
Music was always instantaneously understandable to me because of the
way it gained my deep sensory participation whereas mathematics was
always just a bunch of squiggles on paper that to me were as dry as
dust and as terrifyingly remote as Egyptian hieroglyphs. Math evoked
no sensuous universe of qualia - for me. I have often felt that for
those with a high degree of numeracy, that the hieroglyphs of
mathematics evoke the same sensory participation as music does for
me. Bruno, for example composes and reads mathematical sentences
with the same ease as I have in listening to even quite complex
music and writing it down from ear in standard music notation. I
sometimes refer to myself as a "mathemusician".
Yes, my wife is a musician and I have picked up a little from her
about the different kinds of personalities in an orchestra.
And Craig still appeals to the authority of what his wife has studied,
What are you talking about? I'm appealing to my wife's anecdotes of
how the personalities of some classical musicians are neurotically
tied to their sheet music.
not indicating what/who is doing the sensing in his theory,
I have indicated over and over that when sense is primordial, there
doesn't need to be any additional who or what 'doing' the sensing.
There is nothing but sensing.
just pointing to the irreducible relations of "patterns that are not
even patterns", "computers host meaningless patterns that we find
significant" (like hosts of a dinner party? But then they would
sense things, a host understands his own function etc.) I'll never
understand you on those terms. But on your website, I do find a lot
of Bruno's terminology and formulations of problems.
I don't find much of Bruno's terminology in my website. Sometimes I
discuss threads from here on there, but otherwise I'm not sure what
you mean, other than to insinuate some kind of plagiarism or lack of
originality.
Maybe one day you will have the class to acknowledge that Bruno and
comp have helped you articulate or conceive of certain things in
fresh ways, at least. But I wouldn't count on it. PGC
I do acknowledge that I have used my time talking with Bruno and
others here to help articulate and conceive of things. Maybe not as
much as I have learned from Chalmers, Deleuze, Wilber, etc. but so
what? Why am I being held to some weird standard where I am expected
to give thanks to my influences publicly? Why is this something that
you have a right to an opinion on?
Being able to improvise is a different kind of talent than being
able to read and interpret music written on a page.
By measure of your own theory of sense experience: do YOU have
experience in either?
No, nothing to do with my own sense experience. My wife is a flutist
and a flute instructor. She has students. She talks about their
progress. Some have a natural ability to improvise and others do
not. Those who can improvise often have more difficulty with reading
music. Is that controversial for you? Do you deny it? What is your
accusation about other than the compulsion to attack me personally?
Music theory is different from music performance.
Yes, that's why we use different words, obviously. But from your
theory: explain why both appear necessary and provide some
definition of music (what and who is sensing)
Music theory is not necessary. Music performance is necessary. Music
theory is an optional layer of analytical insights that relate to
the broader, but flatter scientific context that musical structures
fit into. Music theory provides no definition of who is sensing, and
neither does performance. In my view 'who' is a nested event within
sense. Fundamentally, sense is not a matter of who, but of 'which'
experience occurs when.
We all have different ranges of sensitivity and some people are able
to 'hear the music' inside an equation, while others perform
incredible mathematical feats just by swinging a tennis racket.
Some people like to fish in muddy waters and sometimes they find
gold there... They also sometimes tell other people of their "great
catch", without convincing evidence/explanations. PGC
I have no problem with hanging on to the gold myself. If other
people are interested in finding it, I am happy to oblige, but I am
certainly not obligated to give them a piggy back ride.
If there is nothing other than sensing, then why use all the
pronouns and nouns you do? There are no objects... so why would we
need nouns and how would the notion of a theory even work, given
that a theory is a noun/object.
You can't strike gold if sense contradicts its existence. PGC
Exactly. Sense needs reference, not just self-reference. David Nyman
made clear this is lacking in Craig's attempt to found everything on
"sense".
Bruno
Craig
Craig
I'll now watch the clip you posted!
Kim
Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL
Email: kimj...@ozemail.com.au
kmjc...@icloud.com
Mobile: 0450 963 719
Phone: 02 93894239
Web: http://www.eportfolio.kmjcommp.com
"Never let your schooling get in the way of your education" - Mark
Twain
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
