TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- John Cage - 4'33"
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Woow Newton sayed F= M x A. Argumentum as verecumdiam

false, Newton was a valid authority in his field, and many know the logical basis for his statement.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Einstein sayed E= M X C. Argumentum ad verecundiam

false, Einstein was a valid authority in his field, and many know the logical basis for his statement.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Darwin sayed that if you have variety, heredity and limited resources you get selection and evolution Argumentum ad verecundiam.

false, Darwin was a valid authority in his field, and many know the logical basis for his statement.

and btw, it's "Said" not "Sayed", if you had some reading comprehension you might have been able to gather that by now.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Oh, what the fuckkkk, so all scientists who quote other scientists in their journals use argumentum ad verecundiam.

first of all, not all scientists do what you think argumentum ad verecundiam means, second of all not all scientists use argumentum ad verecundiam, since they appeal to valid authority. some scientists do however.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Its not about beliefs. Its about facts YOU cretin. If i state that some scientists found in an experiment a specific result i don't use argumentum ad verecundiam. I would have used it if i stated that a scientist BELIEVED that this is the case and hence due to his/her authority i support him.

not that i recall saying anything directly about beliefs rather than facts, but regardless - all your statements that appeal to authority are in fact regarding scientists who believes x is the case, there's no such thing as absolute certainty about anything, hence beliefs are always required (and i'm 99.9% certain of that 'fact').

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN And what is this bloody "source" you keep stating all the time? What is this trash? Its the same journal FGS. Its fucking scientific its based on experiments. Are you so dumb? I just make a statement for fun after each paragraph.

• it's not a scientific journal, and not a particularily scientific article, it's the boston-fucking-globe.
  
• "source?" means i desire to know the groundings for whatever statement is in question.
  
• they're basing what they're writing on experiments? wow, good for them. i wanna see the experiments in question. something you're obviously too frail-minded to even consider (and to think you claim to be going on facts here )

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T first of all, not all scientists do what you think argumentum ad verecundiam means, second of all not all scientists use argumentum ad verecundiam, since they appeal to valid authority. some scientists do however

Oh and i'm not appealing to valid authority right? Its not about the article you ridiculous transvestite its about the experiments that sites. i can easily find the original papers if you want she-male crackpot.



And i don't give a shit about the aesthetics and the philosophical crack-pot that date from 7000 b.c....



Go at the beginning of page-28 of the "origin of music" book which is based on experimental evidence and hence it is a valid authority..

...In the same way that we DO NOT know of ANY SOCIETY THAT LACKS MUSIC...bla bla bla we do not know of a single human society that lacks dance.


I could find you hundreds of journals about experimental scientific investigations of music, but since i talk to a person who seems to swallow a lot of acid and she-male cum i'll stop it.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Oh and i'm not appealing to valid authority right? Its not about the article you ridiculous transvestite its about the experiments that sites. i can easily find the original papers if you want she-male crackpot. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Psy-T[/i let's just get to know our authorities for a second here first: the boston globe, the most widely circulated daily newspaper in boston, massachusetts, and Christine Kenneally, a freelance writer with a Ph.D in linguistics. lol.

you can find only two of the papers [i]cited neither of which delve into the immense conjecture chritine kenneally does. why? because nothing else is cited there.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN And i don't give a shit about the aesthetics and the philosophical crack-pot that date from 7000 b.c....

then what the fuck are you doing in this thread?
btw, weren't you the one criticising the 'modernists'?

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Go at the beginning of page-28 of the "origin of music" book which is based on experimental evidence and hence it is a valid authority..

something that has not been cited anywhere relevant in this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN I could find you hundreds of journals about experimental scientific investigations of music, but since i talk to a person who seems to swallow a lot of acid and she-male cum i'll stop it.

oh btw, my next reply to you will be purely in capitalized letters, maybe even in a large size font. will surely work better than logic.

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T something that has not been cited anywhere relevant in this thread.

What? It is written before if thats what you mean.

This

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...nguage#PPA29,M1

quote:

you can find only two of the papers [i]cited neither of which delve into the immense conjecture chritine kenneally does. why? because nothing else is cited there.

If i find relevant papers or the same ones, and post them here, are you going to change your sex again? (aka are you going to be man again?)Are you really going to take this sacrifice?


Despite that the article states the source:

And in an article in the August 6 issue of the Journal of Neuroscience, David Schwartz, Catherine Howe, and Dale Purves of Duke University argued that the sounds of music and the sounds of language are intricately connected.

and another one:

Marc Hauser and Josh McDermott of Harvard argued in the July issue of Nature Neuroscience that animals don't create or perceive music the way we do

Mind you, Argumentum ad verecundiam is not based on the criterion of valid authority but on the criterion of empirical evidence. That is, a statement can still be used by valid authority and still be invalid. It must be empirically established. You use phrases that yourself don't know what they mean. From this point of view, the current article as a source doesn't make any difference in relation to nature neuroscience, because they both site the results of empirical investigations.

quote:

then what the fuck are you doing in this thread? btw, weren't you the one criticising the 'modernists'?

Yes thats right criticise modern notions of music and prove "classical notions" of music by means of modern science. If you stopped swallowing you would "see"(clearly through cum).



p.s. Capital letters are used for emphasis and because she-male cum blinds.

Petran, normally I like your posts and you have fairly decent taste in tunes, but right now you just like an idiot-

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN What? It is written before if thats what you mean. This http://books.google.com/books?hl=en...nguage#PPA29,M1

...HAS NOT BEEN CITED ANYWHERE RELEVANT IN THIS THREAD.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN If i find relevant papers or the same ones, and post them here, are you going to change your sex again? (aka are you going to be man again?)Are you really going to take this sacrifice? Despite that the article states the source: And in an article in the August 6 issue of the Journal of Neuroscience, David Schwartz, Catherine Howe, and Dale Purves of Duke University argued that the sounds of music and the sounds of language are intricately connected. and another one: Marc Hauser and Josh McDermott of Harvard argued in the July issue of Nature Neuroscience that animals don't create or perceive music the way we do

SO NOW YOU CAN'T COUNT EITHER?
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, YOU CAN ONLY FIND TWO OF THE PAPERS CITED (FOR THE MAIN ARTICLE YOU PRESENTED ME, YOU KNOW, THE ONE WRITTEN BY CHRISTINE KENNEALLY, DUMMY), NEITHER OF WHICH DELVE INTO THE IMMENSE CONJECTURE SHE DOES.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Mind you, Argumentum ad verecundiam is not based on the criterion of valid authority but on the criterion of empirical evidence. That is, a statement can still be used by valid authority and still be invalid. It must be empirically established. You use phrases that yourself don't know what they mean. From this point of view, the current article as a source doesn't make any difference in relation to nature neuroscience, because they both site the results of empirical investigations.

GO STUDY 'HIGHSCHOOL PHILOSOPHY'.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN Yes thats right criticise modern notions of music and prove "classical notions" of music by means of modern science. If you stopped swallowing you would "see"(clearly through cum).

BUT YOU SAID YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT AESTHETICS AND PHILOSOPHICAL CRACK-POTS THAT DATE FROM '7000 BC'.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN p.s. Capital letters are used for emphasis and because she-male cum blinds.

BOLDED LETTERS ARE USED FOR EMPHASIS, AS ARE UNDERLINED LETTERS AND ITALICIZED LETTERS. CAPITAL LETTERS ARE USED TO DENOTE THE BEGINING OF A SENTENCE, OR A NAME.

quote:

Originally posted by Allied Nations Petran, normally I like your posts and you have fairly decent taste in tunes, but right now you just like an idiot-

Is it because you don't agree with what i'm saying? Cause i wasn't the first one to state a phrase such as "absolutely fucking idiot".

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T

Sometime between 43,000 and 82,000 years ago, a Neanderthal living in a cave in what is now Slovenia fashioned a flute from the femur of a bear. Simpler instruments such as rattles and drums probably preceded it, and singing probably began even earlier - perhaps as long as 250,000 years ago.

Source:

http://www.spiritsound.com/mystery.html


In one experiment, an infant sits in its mother�s lap, watching a puppet show. A simple melody plays from a speaker off to the side. At random points, a single note changes. In most cases the child turns toward the speaker, indicating that it noticed the subtle difference. Experiments like this have shown that babies recognize differences in tone, melody, key and rhythm as well as (and sometimes better than) adults.

Source:

http://www.wildmusic.org/en/research/trehub

The most important aspect of music may be its capacity to facilitate
human movement coordination. All cultures have sound
patterns with repetitive temporal structures, which facilitate
synchronous dancing, clapping, instrument playing, marching,
and chanting (Brown, 2003). These communal activities imply
universal propensities to coordinate movement in time.

http://www.psychologicalscience.org...ythm_nation.pdf




We present the neuropsychological study of a patient, I.R., who sustained bilateral damage to the temporal lobes and to the right frontal lobe as a result of successive brain surgeries that occurred ten years earlier. The patient is 40 years old and right-handed; she had no special training in music or in language, representing, therefore, the large majority of listeners. Her performance is compared to that of four neurologically intact subjects who are closely matched in terms of education, sex and age. In the present study, we report I.R.'s performance on various tests aiming at assessing her general cognitive functioning with a particular focus on auditory aspects. The results show that, despite extensive damage to her auditory cortex, I.R.'s speech abilities are essentially intact (see Tables 1 and 2). The only impairments that are detected in the language domain are related to a short-term memory deficit, to some abnormal sensitivity to retroactive interference in long-term memory (see Table 3) and to articulation. These difficulties do not, however, affect linguistic communication, which is obviously undisturbed I.R. is not aphasic). Similarly, I.R. does not experience any difficulty in the recognition and memorization of familiar sounds such as animal cries, traffic noises and the like (see Tables 5 and 7). In contrast, I.R. is severely impaired in most musical abilities: She can no longer discriminate nor identify melodies that were once highly familiar to her; she can no longer discriminate nor memorize novel melodies (see Table 4). Her pattern of musical losses is compatible with a basic and severe perceptual deficit that compromises access to and registration in memory systems. The observation that the auditory impairment affects music and spares language and environmental sounds refers to a neuropsychological condition that is known as music agnosia. I.R. represents, to our knowledge, the fourth case of music agnosia available in the literature (Peretz et al., 1994; Griffiths et al., 1997). The existence of such cases suggests that music processing is not mediated by a general-purpose auditory architecture but by specialized cortical subsystems. Not only does I.R. suffer from music agnosia, but she is also impaired in the discrimination and recognition of musical instruments and of human voices (see Table 5). These latter two deficits probably do not result from the music agnosic condition. Rather, they seem to reflect damage to adjacent brain areas that are specialized in timbre processing (see Peretz. et al., 1994, for the relevant discussion). It is also worth mentioning that I.R. appears to be impaired in musical expressive abilities as well: I.R. can no longer sing a single note. Thus, her losses are rather general in the musical domain, hence justifying the classification of her case as amusia.


(In case you didn't understand, having selective neurological impairment to music, such as "music agnosia" means that there are specialised brain parts for Music).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...6&dopt=Citation


Music is one of the oldest, and most basic, socio-cognitive
domains of the human species. Primate vocalizations are
mainly determined by music-like features (such as pitch,
amplitude- and frequency- modulations, timbre and
rhythm), and it is assumed that human musical abilities
played a key phylogenetical part in the evolution of
language [1

]. Likewise, it is assumed that, ontogenetically,
infants� first steps into language are based on
prosodic information, and that musical communication
in early childhood (such as maternal music) has a major
role for emotional, cognitive and social development of
children [2]. The music faculty is in some respects unique
to the human species; only humans compose music, learn
to play musical instruments and play instruments cooperatively
together in groups. Playing a musical instrument
in a group is a tremendously demanding task for the
human brain that potentially engages all cognitive processes
that we are aware of. It involves perception, action,
learning, memory, emotion, etc., making music an ideal
tool to investigate human cognition and the underlying
brain mechanisms. The relatively young discipline of
�neurocognition of music� includes a wide field of biopsychological
research, beginning with the investigation
of psychoacoustics and the neural coding of sounds, and
ending with brain functions underlying cognition and
emotion during the perception and production of highly
complex musical information [1

,3

].


http://www.stefan-koelsch.de/papers...x_semantics.pdf


The study of musical abilities and activities in infancy has the potential to shed light on musical biases or dispositions that are rooted in nature rather than nurture. The available evidence indicates that infants are sensitive to a number of sound features that are fundamental to music across cultures. Their discrimination of pitch and timing differences and their perception of equivalence classes are similar, in many respects, to those of listeners who have had many years of exposure to music. Whether these perceptual skills are unique to human listeners is not known. What is unique is the intense human interest in music, which is evident from the early days of life. Also unique is the importance of music in social contexts. Current ideas about musical timing and interpersonal synchrony are considered here, along with proposals for future research.


The music perception skills of prelinguistic infants are surprisingly similar to those of listeners who have had years of informal exposure to music. From the age of about 6 months, the ability to perceive specific changes in a melody can be assessed by providing the infant with a reward (such as a glimpse of a mechanical toy) for responding to the change (by turning toward a laterally displaced loudspeaker)14. By repeating the melody in transposition (that is, at different pitch levels) or at a different tempo (faster or slower), infants must solve the discrimination task on the basis of relative rather than absolute pitch or timing cues. If infants respond more consistently to altered melodies than to functionally equivalent (transposed) melodies, that confirms their detection of the change in question. It also implies that infants remember the relevant features of the original melody or tone sequence. Conditioning procedures such as these have revealed that infants' resolution of pitch15 and timing16 enables them to detect the smallest differences that are musically meaningful in any culture.


Of particular interest for the present review are adult−infant parallels in music processing. For example, infants recognize the invariance of melodies across shifts in pitch level (transpositions) and tempo17. For adults, as for infants, these changes are detectable, but they are irrelevant to the identity of musical pieces. Equally intriguing is the finding that infants are more precise in perceiving diatonic melodies�those conforming to keys of major or minor scales�than melodies that violate the conventions of known musics18. In the context of non-diatonic melodies, for example, infants detect changes in relative pitch only when such changes alter the melodic contour, or the pattern of directional changes in pitch17. Melodic contour is a particularly salient dimension of novel melodies for adults as well as infants. For diatonic melodies, infants detect pitch changes of a semitone or less, even when the melodic contour is unchanged19, 20


http://carlin.lib.ed.ac.uk:2123/neu...ull/nn1084.html


(That was Sandra Trehub's paper in nature neuroscience).



module for music processing
Support for the existence of a music-processing module can be found in reports of selective impairments in music recognition abilities after brain damage (Table 1). Such patients can no longer recognize melodies (presented without words) that were highly familiar to them before the onset of their brain damage. In contrast, they are normal at recognizing spoken lyrics (and spoken words in general), familiar voices and other environmental sounds (such as animal cries, traffic noises and human vocal sounds). This condition is called 'acquired amusia'10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Similarly, in 'congenital amusia'16, individuals suffer from lifelong difficulties with music but can recognize the lyrics of familiar songs even though they are unable to recognize the tune that usually accompanies them17.


http://carlin.lib.ed.ac.uk:2123/neu...ull/nn1083.html


The following is hauser article, featured in nature neuroscience.

Throughout human history, on every part of the globe, in every extinct and extant culture, individuals have played and enjoyed music. Music is a fascinating topic for cognitive scientists because it raises important questions about perception, cognition, emotion, learning and memory. But perhaps the most intriguing question about the music faculty concerns its evolutionary origins: given its omnipresence in human culture, why is there no clear-cut adaptive function? Unlike language, which allows us to communicate our thoughts to others through sounds or signs, music has no readily apparent functional consequence. The origins and adaptive significance of music thus remain deeply mysterious2, 3, 4.

This study by Wright and colleagues19 aptly illustrates the two ways in which comparative data constrain our answers to the questions raised above. Barring the possibility that incidental music exposure affected the monkeys' performance, these results are the strongest evidence yet that there are innate constraints on music perception. Because monkeys do not produce music on their own, the fact that they possess musical sensitivity suggests that at least some aspects of music perception are determined by general properties of the auditory system.


Specifically, these results indicate that there are fundamental differences in the way that tonal and atonal melodies are encoded by the brain20, independent of the role they play in music perception and production in humans. Moreover, the fact that monkeys, but not songbirds, have the capacity for melody transpositions, suggests that this capacity evolved after the divergence of birds and mammals. Whether this particular capacity represents a homology or homoplasy remains an open question, as similar studies have yet to be carried out in other Old World monkeys or, more importantly, in any of the apes.



Recordings were collected from the primary auditory cortex of awake rhesus monkeys during the presentation of chords created from two simultaneously presented, harmonic, complex tones; dissonant chords consisted of minor and major seconds, whereas consonant chords consisted of octaves and perfect fifths.


Results show clear differences in neural responses, with the magnitude of the oscillatory phase-locked activity highly correlated with the extent of dissonance. Specifically, when dissonant chords were played, neural activity was phase-locked to the difference frequencies (that is, the frequency of the beating); consonant chords showed no phase-locked activity, consistent with the relative absence of amplitude modulations in such stimuli. Virtually identical neural signatures were observed in the patient recordings, albeit only from electrodes placed in Heschl's gyrus as opposed to those placed in the planum temporale. Thus, in both humans and rhesus, synchronous, phase-locked activity of neurons in primary auditory cortex signal the degree of sensory dissonance, consistent with the Helmholtzian notion that differences in the peripheral encoding of consonant and dissonant stimuli are perceptually important. It remains to be seen whether consonant and dissonant stimuli will produce different degrees of pleasure/aversive responses in animals, as they do in humans. For example, studies of human infants indicate that by 16 weeks of age, babies turn away from a speaker playing dissonant chords and often fuss and cry; in contrast, they look toward the speaker playing consonant chords and often smile28, 29, 30


Human and nonhuman animals thus encode emotional information in their vocalizations and have perceptual systems that are designed to respond appropriately to such signals. Given its evolutionary ancestry, our music faculty may well have co-opted this mechanism for use in music, even if it did not evolve for this function. One recent cross-cultural study examined whether Westerners perceive the same emotions in North Indian ragas as do native Indians36. They found that Westerners and native Indians often make very similar judgments of emotion, suggesting that at least some of the cues to emotion in music (most obviously tempo, but also perhaps characteristic pitch changes and/or modes) are shared across cultures, providing further evidence that there may be innate mechanisms for perceiving emotion in music that composers and musicians aim to engage. It remains to be seen whether these emotional mechanisms bear any relation to the vocal and perceptual mechanisms that we apparently inherited from our nonhuman ancestors.






http://carlin.lib.ed.ac.uk:2123/neu...ull/nn1080.html


The following is The Schwartz article's introduction obtained by means of my athens account.


All human listeners perceive tones in the presence of regularly repeating patterns of sound pressure fluctuation over a wide range of frequencies. This quality of audition forms the basis of tonal music, a behavioral product characteristic of most if not all human populations. The widely shared features of tonal music that are deemed to be "musical universals" include: (1) a division of the continuous dimension of pitch into iterated sets of 12 intervals that define the chromatic scale (Nettl, 1956; Deutsch, 1973; Kallman and Massaro, 1979; Krumhansl and Shepard, 1979); (2) the preferential use in musical composition and performance of particular subsets of these 12 intervals [e.g., the intervals of the diatonic or (anhemitonic) pentatonic scales] (Budge, 1943; Youngblood, 1958; Knopoff and Hutchinson, 1983); and (3) the similar consonance ordering of chromatic scale tone combinations reported by most listeners (Malmberg, 1918; Krumhansl, 1990). Although the response properties of some auditory neurons to musical tone combinations (Tramo et al., 2001) and other complex time-varying signals (Escabi and Schreiner, 2002) are now known, as are some neuroanatomical correlates of music perception (Peretz et al., 2001; Janata et al., 2002), these perceptual phenomena have no generally accepted explanation in either physiological or psychological terms. Thus, the basis for tonal music, one of the most fascinating and widely appreciated aspects of human audition, remains obscure.

http://carlin.lib.ed.ac.uk:2327/cgi...full/23/18/7160




I expect you to take the surgery soon.Ciao.

Fucking hell...

I can paste 500 pages of nonsense right now as well. Wanna see?

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery I can paste 500 pages of nonsense right now as well. Wanna see?

No if its nonsense.

quote:

Originally posted by PETRAN No if its nonsense.

Indeed.

I wonder how it sounds live?

quote:

Originally posted by Candeeman I wonder how it sounds live?

Depends on the audience, and whether it contains Philistines like Petran.

quote:

Originally posted by thoughtlessjex Depends on the audience, and whether it contains Philistines like Petran.

I'm not a philistine! On the contrary, i tend to like more leftfielf, experimental and avant-garde stuff in "music".

argumentum ad antiquitatem
argumentum ad hominem
argumentum ad nauseam
argumentum ad numerum
argumentum ad populum
argumentum ad verecundiam
circulus in demonstrando
cum hoc ergo propter hoc
dicto simpliciter
naturalistic fallacy
non sequitur
red herring
slippery slope
straw man

that is the list of logical fallacies petran committed in this thread (or rather, the ones i've noticed).

and yes, this post does qualify as ad hominem.

4'33" is not music.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles 4'33" is not music.

la m�sica es subjetiva, s�?



final de.

The definition of it certainly is, just like other definitions.

LOL BUTTSECKS!!!1

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T that is the list of logical fallacies petran committed in this thread (or rather, the ones i've noticed).

Tu Quoque!

quote:

la m�sica es subjetiva, s�?

The mind and the brain canno't listen in different ways...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.