Why do people take metal so seriously?

[byrne]

chasm i assume your comment was aimed at me. i didnt ask for punctuation, correct spelling nor did i ask for grammatically exact paragraphing. its just annoying to read a block of writing thats 10-20 lines long.

simply by pressing the enter key twice makes a post that much easier to read

see ...

 

[lord667]

Fuck, this is a very very interesting argument. I have read that some psychologists, scientists etc, have postulated there is no free will, and we operate in much the same way as Scuplted Cold, and Lord 667 have stated. Yet, i have yet to see any evidence that they are right.

Yet, if you guys are right, this is worse than the lack of a afterlife, than no god etc. IF i do not have free will, my life is totally pointless. I become much worse than the conscious nihilist i am, i become an programmed ant.

I detect a strong socialistic attitude in both your posts. Are you both socialists, marxists, or just scientifically inclined? WHo else would wish to sacrifice the uniqueness of ones life, than a scientist- or communist to the good of science- or th people?

No, I'm not a socialist or particularly a scientist. As I said, I don't "wish to sacrifice" the uniqueness of my life any more than I especially cherish it. I will live my life in the way that best satisfies my will, as far as I can, and if I end up unique or wholly stereotypical, it doesn't matter either way.

I am so concerned because I dont think you know how important such a conclusion is. If there is no free will, then man becomes just another animal, with strong social skills.

I believe that to be true.

Not having free will sanctifies murder, it sanctifies any state to do what it wants, as morality is no longer a consideration- nor is conscience.

No, it doesn't. A man with the will to murder is a dangerous man who any right-thinking society will seek to dispose of, free will or no, and a state that takes undue liberties upon its people and their neighbours will still deserve to be torn down. The loss of "free" will actually changes very little, since most "morals" remain relevant even if you no longer believe in the source they came from.

Hell it sanctifies any kind of behavior- think about it, one can justify any action with an excuse of their genetics and the environment they were brought up in. A killer, or state( the state is the biggest murderer) can thus justify the death of any citizen, as there life would be meaningless because of their poor genetic makeup and social environment. Hell, the whole questions of genetic engineering becomes pivotal, as we could create a human being to lead a preconcevied programmed life. ANd we all know, the powers that be, already try to program our lives.

He will still have to justify to the people why he should be allowed to remain within their society when he is so obviously a danger to them.

And you can't really genetically program a human to lead a certain life, I don't think. Environment is a factor as well. You could imagine a giant "human factory", isolated from the outside world, where both genetics and environment are controlled in an iron grip...sooner or later, to be of use, you would have to release those humans into the outside world, and environmental influences would insantly begin to modify your programming.

Fuck if you guys are right, i would go so far to say, that this truth must be kept from everyone for the good of mankind.

This is one topic, that I will argue forever with you guys on, as i dont know of anything that is more important.

Your just wrong. And if your not, god help us all if these ideas become widespread.

They won't. Most people cherish the idea that they have "free will" and "individuality", particularly in tribalist, mass-produced societies like yours and mine. I don't expect to win any elections from this platform, let me tell you that.

 

[lord667]

You're blowing it out of proportion. You sound like you're about to commit suicide. There is still free will. What you're missing is that we're guided and influenced by our genes and our environment, however, we're not pawns, per se. If we wanted, we have the free will to go against any instinct we have and do just the opposite, just to spite the entire theory that there is no free will. It really depends on your definition, but I would definitely say that there is free will, in one form or another. And by the way, we ARE just another form of animal.

It does indeed depend on your definition, of course. You can choose to go against any one of your impulses or instincts, but the decision to do so is driven by...another one! If you define free will as the ability to choose between your instincts and impulses, I can probably agree that it exists, I simply deny that it is possible to act or think independently of them.

 

[speed]

Ok lord 667 your last post to Dodens Grav I agree with, I suppose either i was too lost in my own ideas to read the essence of yours, or you didnt explain it that clearly.

However when you argue against me in my statements about a loss of free will sanctifies murder, it seems you take the position there is free will. I am not disagreeing with what you stated, just that it is stated as if a conscoious choice of will was made by the murderer.

SO, i supose i agree with you, ones genetic makeup, and the environment thy live in, does influence every action they make- i suppose they form a foundation for every choice. Yet, these factors do not dominate ones life, there still is free will for one to make choices.

Hm, i was thinking of how christian of an argument free will is, and who ever brought up that point of free will needing a soul- well that is highly intereting as well.

 

[speed]

Does anyone know why Priest changed the albums titles in the US? I mean Hell Bent For Leater was Killing Machine in Europe. I know Rob is gay, but I wonder why they openly cultivated a biker/gay image in the US.

 

[speed]

oops last post was to go on the judas priest thread.

 

[lord667]

Ok lord 667 your last post to Dodens Grav I agree with, I suppose either i was too lost in my own ideas to read the essence of yours, or you didnt explain it that clearly.

However when you argue against me in my statements about a loss of free will sanctifies murder, it seems you take the position there is free will. I am not disagreeing with what you stated, just that it is stated as if a conscoious choice of will was made by the murderer.

What I essentially meant by that is this: When you're dealing with a murderer, whether or not he had free will in his actions is not relevant. He is still a danger that needs to be removed.

SO, i supose i agree with you, ones genetic makeup, and the environment thy live in, does influence every action they make- i suppose they form a foundation for every choice. Yet, these factors do not dominate ones life, there still is free will for one to make choices.

And yet they do dominate one's life. You cannot choose to do something if your genetics and environment have not given you the impulse to do it. As I see it, the "freedom" of the will is simply whether or not to act on each impulse, and the "strength" of the will is how much effort or, to use a slightly distasteful phrase, "psychic energy" you are able put towards the satisfaction of each impulse.

Hm, i was thinking of how christian of an argument free will is, and who ever brought up that point of free will needing a soul- well that is highly intereting as well.

Free will in any sense needs something within the self that stands apart from the basic impulse system. I don't think there's any reason not to call it a soul, but it's not necessarily the same soul that the artists and metaphysicists like to talk about.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

Anonymousnick, As for your whole sophisticated side-convo... I think I agree that aesthetically metal will always been unappealing to people. But who cares unless you are one of the preaching types. For the most part I agree with you. I won't touch the part where people are criticizing your choice of words though.

Yeah, that did piss me off. I personally just happen to like In Flames and Godsmack. If that doesn't fit the accepted definition of "metal," fuck off.

I think people are being overly critical of my every comment because they disagree. I guess it was my fault. Assumption will get you every time, I guess...I assumed others felt the same way.

My definion of sophisticated,according to the dictionary in my home:
1. not naive; worldly-wise
2. appealing to cultivated tastes
3. complex; intricate

Hence, why I believe metal is unsophisticated. I can't think of any example in metal that satisfies all three of those qualifications. Perhaps the third is the easiest to each, but the first and second?

By the by, I never intended to say that incorporating acoustic guitars and classical structure made a band sophisticated. I was referring to Opeth and the way they did it. And Opeth occasionally rip out the double bass and the death growls, and Mikael is in Bloodbath, and Lopez used to be in Amon Amarth, so...my bottom line is that Opeth are not sophisticated as a whole. I just said they show elements of wishing to be so.

I don't want Opeth to ditch all their death metal and play Damnation-esque music all the time, because...then they wouldn't be Opeth. I just don't find the music sophisticated.

Another definition of sophisticated? Can you play Opeth, or Atheist, or any such artist as background music to a cocktail party or Thanksgiving dinner? Can you use it as intro music for a college hall lecture? I should think not.

This topic has been bugging me ever since my mother overheard some music off TSOP during a phone conversation with me. I told her it was advanced, ultra-technical, melodic death/thrash metal. She shrugged it off as noise. Even after I paid her a visit, and played some of the utterly gorgeous guitar passages up close, she found the tempo caveman-esque, and the vocals utterly shite.

My mother is the most sophisticated person I know. So I digress...

 

[Ultimate_Symphony]

Another definition of sophisticated? Can you play Opeth, or Atheist, or any such artist as background music to a cocktail party or Thanksgiving dinner? Can you use it as intro music for a college hall lecture? I should think not.

Keep in mind also that music people would play at a cocktail party or thanksgiving dinner would not necessarily be complex; therefore, it wouldn't be sophisticated.

2. appealing to cultivated tastes

This is such a bullshit term. I see a little elitism emanating from that definition. Anyway, everyone can have cultivated tastes and any metalhead that has plenty of knowledge about metal HAS cultivated tastes.

1. not naive; worldly-wise

I fail to see how metal is naive.

Btw, if your mother is not a musician then I certainly don't know why you keep her opinion in such a high regard. You could play her a simple classical piece (hell, you could play her Ode To Joy) and she probably would be impressed.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

She only likes Ode To Joy because of its catchiness.

She loves the ending to Beethoven's 9th.

At every Thanksgiving and cocktail party I've attended, they've played everything from Gustav Mahler to John Coltrane to Vivaldi's Four Seasons.

Ultimate Symphony, I detect a hint of antagonism in your posts towards me. Please let me know if I have said something to offend you.

 

[InFlames101]

To sophisticate means literally to make something less natural. It just has been taken to mean "in a less naive fashion" most of the time. Look it up at www.dictionary.com

With that said, cultivation and refinement are terms that are relative to the person who uses them. There is no innate objectivity in those words, only a collectively subjective connotation. If you're defining sophisticated as something refined or inclusive, then that again is relative to a certain collective group.

Honestly, I would suggest not trying too hard to persuade others into agreeing with your point of view by instilling objectivity in terms that don't have any. If your preferential arguments are convincing enough (not only for others but for yourself), then they should stand on their weight.

 

[Ultimate_Symphony]

She only likes Ode To Joy because of its catchiness.

So does she understand the musicianship aspects of the music?

Ultimate Symphony, I detect a hint of antagonism in your posts towards me. Please let me know if I have said something to offend you.

Not really. We're just at opposite sides of the fence. What i'm thinking is that you give way too much credit to people that are older than you. Then again, you probably don't enjoy metal that much and metal was just a phase in your life.

 

[no country for old wainds]

Speed, you really want to be scared? This is what scares me (but does it only scare me because of the society I've grown up in?), think about this. If we're all products of genetics and environmental experience, having pride in your race is just as valid as having pride in musical talent, or any other achievement.

 

[speed]

But as I understand it, the difference in race is like .001- even between Scandinavians and Africans. Yet, if we are to accept that environment and genetics play a crucial (not supporting role which i think and hope is most likely)then you are right. Hell, I suppose if you look back at history, race has and still is a important issue in deciding the fate and arch of so many lives.

I have first hand experience in matters of race. I am the assitant econ development director for a poor all black village the second oldest incorporated all black village in america. I am the only white guy in the office or who works for the village, and i stick out like a sore thumb. This small village is the poorest in the state ( i am paid through a fed grant- which runs out next month), the communities next to it have cut off the roads- thats right roads stop for no good reason other than a white community lies on the other side. Yet, the community has robbed themselves for years. Mayors have robbed them, council members have robbed them, and black business owners have robbed them. The police give tips to the drug dealers( this happen last month- and apparently is widespread). Yet, despite all these horrible problems, many doctors, lawyers, businessmen, and the Isley Brothers have emerged out of this small village. The problem is, they get the hell out, and stay out. Anyway, my point is, here are people that through their own will power, have escaped poverty and their supposed genetic and environmental disadvantage.

 

[no country for old wainds]

But my point is that will-power is also genetic/environmental. You only have the will to do something because of a combination of your genetic structure and your environment/experience.

 

[no country for old wainds]

You're blowing it out of proportion. You sound like you're about to commit suicide. There is still free will. What you're missing is that we're guided and influenced by our genes and our environment, however, we're not pawns, per se. If we wanted, we have the free will to go against any instinct we have and do just the opposite, just to spite the entire theory that there is no free will. It really depends on your definition, but I would definitely say that there is free will, in one form or another. And by the way, we ARE just another form of animal.

But the only reason you choose to go against an instinct you have is because of your genetic structure and environmental experience, as well.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

Not really. We're just at opposite sides of the fence. What i'm thinking is that you give way too much credit to people that are older than you. Then again, you probably don't enjoy metal that much and metal was just a phase in your life.

Actually, metal's probably my overall fave genre of music. I enjoy it very much. However, I just seem to see it as just noise. To me personally, there is something refined about jazz and classical, and not about metal. However, I can't change who I am and how I feel. And I feel that metal owns. \m/\m/, rock on, ad nauseam, etc.

I just don't see it as sophisticated music. It's more primal. Which is fine. There's nothing wrong with that. I just don't want my kids to see their father as a fan of primal. It's weird, but that's how it is. I decided to share that "revelation" with everyone because this topic seemed to harbor such a discussion. Why do people take metal so seriously? I don't know! I wish they wouldn't. Or maybe the fact that they do has something to do with it.

It just puzzles me that no one else sees the subtle difference I'm talking about. Doesn't metal have a primeval, noisy tendency that music such as jazz and classical don't have? There's noisy jazz, and there's primal classical, but it's not the same. It's hard to describe, but you must concede to at least sort of getting the gist of what I mean.

 

[Ultimate_Symphony]

It just puzzles me that no one else sees the subtle difference I'm talking about. Doesn't metal have a primeval, noisy tendency that music such as jazz and classical don't have? There's noisy jazz, and there's primal classical, but it's not the same. It's hard to describe, but you must concede to at least sort of getting the gist of what I mean.

Yeah, of course I see what you mean, I was just debating your choice of words . Anyway, back to the point. Metal music is meant to emanate anger, so I guess you could see that as ''primal''.

It's funny because I would definitively share my music interests with my kids and I think that if you give them the impression that you're a classical music listener, they would probably think their father is an old and boring fart; although there's nothing wrong with that, since I listen to classical music as well. If I were you I would openly share everything about the music I love (be it metal, classical or whatever) and let them decide.

There's music for everybody, but some people can't relate at all to the anger that metal emanates, but people should at least be open minded and judge the music for what it is.

Btw, check out Arcane Sun. Your mom will probably love it, that should give her an idea that not all metal is like what she thinks it is.

 

[SADUDE]

Actually, metal's probably my overall fave genre of music. I enjoy it very much. However, I just seem to see it as just noise. To me personally, there is something refined about jazz and classical, and not about metal. However, I can't change who I am and how I feel. And I feel that metal owns. \m/\m/, rock on, ad nauseam, etc.

I just don't see it as sophisticated music. It's more primal. Which is fine. There's nothing wrong with that. I just don't want my kids to see their father as a fan of primal. It's weird, but that's how it is. I decided to share that "revelation" with everyone because this topic seemed to harbor such a discussion. Why do people take metal so seriously? I don't know! I wish they wouldn't. Or maybe the fact that they do has something to do with it.

It just puzzles me that no one else sees the subtle difference I'm talking about. Doesn't metal have a primeval, noisy tendency that music such as jazz and classical don't have? There's noisy jazz, and there's primal classical, but it's not the same. It's hard to describe, but you must concede to at least sort of getting the gist of what I mean.

I get what you mean. But if you think about, all great music or just about any music is never accepted initially. At one point certain scales or harmonic structures were considered so unwholesome people would be killed for playing them. You have the modern classical period of dissonance in the 20th century all of those russian composers. Even jazz was jected at first before becoming more prominent than classical.
Im not trying to say metal is ahead of it's time. There is a criteria for social acceptibillity that metal does not follow. That is just the way it is. By no means is society right on most accounts. Just because classical and jazz have been embraced doesn't mean anything more than you let it. People give things meaning. They give a certain type of music meaning as do you. You also give their meaning meaning.

Metal has an engraved negative connotation to the masses. THis is why I do not associate myself with it. I choose to function as efficiently as possible in their society so I do not allow myself to appear as a threat. In other words I don't share metal or other unrelated subjects of interest with these people. We aren't obligated to do so.

 

[anonymousnick2001]

Metal has an engraved negative connotation to the masses. THis is why I do not associate myself with it. I choose to function as efficiently as possible in their society so I do not allow myself to appear as a threat. In other words I don't share metal or other unrelated subjects of interest with these people. We aren't obligated to do so.

I think that's said it. It's that attitude, that mentality...I don't know. Something about it...

You're right Ultimate Symphony. Metal emanates anger, primal instinct, and violence, and stuff like that--and it's not wrong by any means. I love the rush that I get from a truly \m/ riff, but I find no sophistication in it.

I will check out this Arcane Sun, but I guarantee that there is another style of music incorporated that makes them sophisticated in your eyes, or ears.

There's nothing wrong with metal being unsophisticated. I just wish, somehow, that it was.