Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Sporeworks
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: Swami]
    #2157991 -

:lol:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: ]
    #2160939 -

I was thinking about this thread today and I realized that no one has brought up Jimi Hendrix yet.

Lets compare Jimi hendrix to Motzart.

Motzart was a child prodigy- a logistic genius. His father put him through years of complex mathematical music theory. By age five, he was employing these methods and knowledge in his own musical writing. Not only does his music conform to logical, mathematical patterns, it was designed by them as well. Clearly his musical ability was logical, not intuitive.

Jimi Hendrix was a poor kid from the ghetto who barely had any music theory training, other than a few guitar lessons at his local music shop. Rather than studying music theory and math for hours on end, he simply smoked weed and noodled around. Then he went to London and got some acid- and thats when his playing really took off. By his own self report, Jimi never consciously thought about the theory behind what he was playing while he was playing it. Rather than carefully plotting out his works ahead of time, he preferred to improvise within the basic framework of the progression he was playing to. Jimi Hendrix was an intuitive genius.

Being dominantly left brained but woefully unintelligent myself, I find the guitar a pretty difficult instrument to play. Its a 3d matrix of possibility which my feeble mind could never hope to fully understand. I'm a little better with the piano, which is more linear (although the line is filtered through the major scale). The easiest instrument for me to grasp is the synthesizer, because notes on a synthesizer go in order of frequency- so when plot you a sequence of 10 steps where each step is -1 increment from the last step, you get a "bomb dropping" sound effect. The scales have no part in the arrangements of this instrument. Thats still a logical progression- its just very easy to understand.

Jimi Hendrix (and many of the best guitarists in the world) almost completely abandones logic when he approaches the guitar. His playing is pure intuition. He intuits which note should come next in a sequence, and he intuits how to produce that note with his instrument. Other than staying in key, very little logic is involved.

How can a person with very little music theory knowledge write and perform works that many musical experts regard as equal to Mozart or any other classical composer (whose work was solidly based in music theory)? The answer: intuition.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: DoctorJ]
    #2161077 -

So, in essence, you are saying that intuition is another one of those vague catch-all words used to "explain" something that we do not currently understand?

Or were you merely trying to work Hendrix into the conversation? (Alex123 could do that no matter the subject material!)


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: Swami]
    #2161421 -

I don't think he said it's a means of explaining something we can't currently understand. It's a different mechanic than logics, but still a mechanic of the mind that allows us to find a solution to situations we can't grasp the workings of.

There is no way of explaining musical intu?tion, though, one can't explain the workings of an artist's muse. Do you happen to know how logics work at a neurological level? I don't, and however mysterious it may seem, it allows me to interact with my environment, and that's all that matters.


--------------------
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

- Aristotle

Edited by Alan Stone (12/05/03 12:33 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: DoctorJ]
    #2161509 -

Hendrix payed and practiced.

You do not have to understand music theory in order to master an instrument.

Simply becoming familiar with the notes and thier locations through countless hours of playing is enough to become Masterful with any instrument. Assuming you are not an idiot.

I taught my self how to play the piano and I was writing good music long before I ever understood the theory of what I was doing.


--------------------
I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest
-----------

I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: Alan Stone]
    #2161510 -

whats interesting about hendrix's music is that it does conform to accepted mathematical patterns of music theory. (although it does bend a few rules- some of which had never been bent before)

But hendrix didnt intentionally design it that way. His methodology was not mathematical, and only loosely based in logic. So the question is: How did Hendrix come to the right conclusions ("right" meaning "conforming to the standards of music theory") without using logic or mathematics? Its like having a thousand monkeys at a thousand typewriters that eventually produce the greatest literature ever known. Except, in Hendrix's case, the sample size was 1, not 1,000. I speculate that what we call "intuition" had something to do with this.

I am also reminded of Freud. Most of Freud's theories have been debunked- and his methodology was highly unscientific. And yet he did come to a few right conclusions which modern science has recently confirmed.

Example: The Oedipus Complex. Recent studies have shown that women prefer the scent of sweat that comes from males similar to their father's genetics. Considering that sweat and pheremones have a lot to do with sexual selection in humans, one could reach the conclusion that female sexual selection in humans is driven by the female's desire to mate with her father (or someone of similar genetics).

Freud could not have known this- the science of genetics was not around when he was alive. And yet, through highly speculative and non-scientific methodologies, he did come to this conclusion, which we now have hard evidence to support. How did he come to the "right" conclusion by using the "wrong" methods?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: DoctorJ]
    #2161575 -

DoctorJ said:
whats interesting about hendrix's music is that it does conform to accepted mathematical patterns of music theory.



That is because theory is based on the nature of music.

Music theory explains why music sounds good.

Anyone who can play and, especially, write music uses their natural understanding of music to do so. Understanding theory helps in teaching the music, but it is not really what enables the student to play.

It is desire and much practice that allows the student to develop a feel for how the notes go together. Once the natural relationships of the notes are understood ,through hearing enough times, much practice allows for musical expression with an instrument.



--------------------
I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest
-----------

I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: sirreal]
    #2161678 -

sirreal said:
That is because theory is based on the nature of music.

Music theory explains why music sounds good.

Anyone who can play and, especially, write music uses their natural understanding of music to do so. Understanding theory helps in teaching the music, but it is not really what enables the student to play.

It is desire and much practice that allows the student to develop a feel for how the notes go together. Once the natural relationships of the notes are understood ,through hearing enough times, much practice allows for musical expression with an instrument. 
 


:thumbup: Damn, man, that was nice. Sums it up very nicely. :grin:

I need to find a link to these lessons Steve Vai gave, about how to develop your own style on your instrument, and it was all stuff to do with the mind... I will search. hehe
Peace.


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: sirreal]
    #2161717 -

Quote:
That is because theory is based on the nature of music.

Music theory explains why music sounds good.

Anyone who can play and, especially, write music uses their natural understanding of music to do so. Understanding theory helps in teaching the music, but it is not really what enables the student to play.

It is desire and much practice that allows the student to develop a feel for how the notes go together. Once the natural relationships of the notes are understood ,through hearing enough times, much practice allows for musical expression with an instrument.




Dude, you're preachin to the choir :smile:

Music came before music theory.  Everyone knows that (or should).  Music Theory is an observation, not a determinant.  But that doesnt prevent composers from using music theory as a determinant.  Most Bach, for example, is practically right out of a music theory textbook.  The reason it sounds so kickass (IMHO Bach is one of the greatest musicians of all time) Is because Bach had a very deep understanding of music theory and played around with it in very methodical, well articulated ways.  Indeed, many of the Western classical composers saw music as a product of music theory and not the other way around.  Thats one of the reasons why classical music is so technical. 

Anyway, I think its very interesting how so many people agree on what sounds good and what doesn't, tonally speaking anyway.  Rythm is arguably an extrapolation on the heartbeat, but I honestly have no clue where the major scale comes from (other than some sacred geometry speculation thats way too involved to go into here- I'm sure Shroomism has posted something about it).

Also Interesting- Eastern Music and how similar it is to Native American music.  Those people got cut off from eachother for thousands of years, and yet both cultures still use the same scales (which are definitely not western).  So- are our standards of "what sounds good" culturally or genetically based?  I think it goes deeper than both.  But I'm not going to go into that here, like I said. 

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: Swami]
    #2168731 -

Or were you merely trying to work Hendrix into the conversation? (Alex123 could do that no matter the subject material!)

Steady on Swami. I only worked it in when you were off on one of your "drug users are worthless losers" rants.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Intuition fails the reality test [Re: Xlea321]
    #2168751 -

Ah, there you are. Was just checking to see if you were about. :smile:


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Reality Test
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 3,573 34 02/16/02 05:19 PM
by ArCh_TemPlaR
* Women's Intuition
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 2,571 32 01/23/04 02:16 PM
by Frog
* Reality all falls down...
( 1 2 3 all )		 jiva 4,222 47 05/08/14 11:15 AM
by OrgoneConclusion
* ? "Illusion of Reality"
( 1 2 all )		 Sclorch 3,296 22 05/11/02 01:39 PM
by Catalysis
* What IS reality?
( 1 2 all )		 manna_man 4,963 35 10/22/03 10:26 AM
by fireworks_god
* Why did Shamanism fail?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )		 Swami 15,088 134 03/08/11 04:27 PM
by Cactilove
* Reality isn't real
( 1 2 3 all )		 ShroomismM 5,197 43 09/24/06 03:01 PM
by Telepylus
* Creating reality - does God really help?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Swami 3,784 47 03/08/03 01:31 AM
by The_Clash_UK

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,014 topic views. 1 members, 59 guests and 19 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 15 queries.