| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Paravion 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
 Posted: May 24 2010 at 16:45 |
 rod65 wrote:
Paravion wrote:
Rocktopus wrote:
[quote=rocktopus]I believe critical thinking is the best tool against all the world's wrongs, greed and stupidity. |
Not really. Thinking without the action is useless.
|
I don't think Rocktopus meant that critical thinking was the only tool against the world's wrongs. In sating that it is the best tool, I suspect that he meant that, without it, other tools such as action are likely to be misdirected and unfocused, or not to happen at all. I don't think anyone here would suggest that one can fix the world's problems just by thinking about them, but thinking about them is a necessary step toward fixing them.
Not sure how this relates to prog specifically, though. Lot's of music deals with the world's problems, often with considerable intelligence and often not. |
I never meant to say that 'thinking' and 'action' are two seperate entities that can function independent of one another. It's very unusual for people only to think and do absolutely nothing about it. It's also unusual running around engaging yourself in mindless activity not preceded by some mental and/or rational activity. But in theorizing and 'in the process of taking a stand' one can ascribe prominent importance to either to 'doing the thinking' or 'performing the action'. I know what I see as the most fertile - albeit the division is somewhat pointless - especially with regards to what is necessary in order to make the world a better place to live.
Edited by Paravion - May 24 2010 at 16:56
|
 |
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 24 2010 at 16:57 |
Paravion wrote:
It's very unusual for people only to think and do absolutely nothing about it. It's also unusual running around engaging yourself in mindless activity not preceded by some mental and/or rational activity.
|
I disagree on both.
|
|
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
|
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
Posted: May 24 2010 at 16:58 |
Would you provide me with examples?
edit: It should be evident that I talk in general terms. I'm aware that you, for instance, can think about a girl and do nothing about it - that's not that unusual. But generally, to do nothing about what you ever think about doing - your entire life - is unusual.
Edited by Paravion - May 24 2010 at 17:19
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 24 2010 at 17:38 |
Rocktopus wrote:
Paravion wrote:
It's very unusual for people only to think and do absolutely nothing about it. It's also unusual running around engaging yourself in mindless activity not preceded by some mental and/or rational activity.
|
I disagree on both.
|
Paravion wrote:
Would you provide me with examples?
edit: It
should be evident that I talk in general terms. I'm aware that you, for
instance, can think about a girl and do nothing about it - that's not
that unusual. But generally, to do nothing about what you ever think
about doing - your entire life - is unusual.
|
^Ha-ha! What is that? That's nothing like what I disagreed about at all. You wrote this:
-It's very unusual for people only to think and do absolutely nothing about it
Do you really need examples of this? I'ts very common to think and do absolutely nothing about it. I don't know where to start.
I'm speaking in general terms too, of course.
-running around engaging yourself in mindless activity not preceded by some mental and/or rational activity.
How about people taking/following orders without asking questions? Everyone that blindly follows authorities. They frighten me, and there's plenty of them in the world.
|
|
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
|
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
Posted: May 24 2010 at 17:48 |
|
I wouldn't care to discuss this matter further. You seem to have missed my point.
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 24 2010 at 17:49 |
|
^Ok, but that's your own fault.
|
|
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
|
|
UndercoverBoy
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 10 2009
Location: Tulsa, OK, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 5148
|
Posted: May 24 2010 at 17:51 |
octopus-4 wrote:
If prog=IQ, what about Marillion ?  |
Marillion nor IQ are very progressive, so I would say no to either.
|
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
Posted: May 25 2010 at 16:47 |
Paravion wrote:
I wouldn't care to discuss this matter further. |
Im not of a decisive nature.
rocktopus wrote:
paravion wrote:
Would you provide me with examples?
edit: It should be evident that I talk in general terms. I'm aware that you, for instance, can think about a girl and do nothing about it - that's not that unusual. But generally, to do nothing about what you ever think about doing - your entire life - is unusual. |
^Ha-ha! What is that? That's nothing like what I disagreed about at all. |
That's an example of the same sort you provided in explaining mindless acting.
rocktopus wrote:
-It's very unusual for people only to think and do absolutely nothing about it Do you really need examples of this? I'ts very common to think and do absolutely nothing about it. I don't know where to start.
I'm speaking in general terms too, of course.
-running around engaging yourself in mindless activity not preceded by some mental and/or rational activity. How about people taking/following orders without asking questions? Everyone that blindly follows authorities. They frighten me, and there's plenty of them in the world. |
First of all - I wasn't talking about isolated cases where 'doing the thinking' and 'performing the acting' could be said to be seperated entities functioning independent of one another. I was claiming it to be unusual for individuals - in all they ever do - either only to think and do nothing or to act without any mental activity preceding the action. I think that's quite obvious - and not really my point.
You seem to awake the somewhat polemic nature in me, and I can't refrain from discussing the example you provided.
People usually do more than just follow orders, even those who follow orders on a regular basis. Earlier in this discussion you mentioned the communist regime in Cambodia that reigned during the seventies. Let us consider the blind followers of that regime. I understand that you disapprove (and I agree). But - when acting out an order issued by the regime without asking questions, then it would usually be preceded by some sort of conviction or rationale (however irrational or stupid you might consider it) that tells you that the authorities in question are worth taking orders from - and that's a mental activity.
In a lesser scale, I for instance have people that I trust and under normal circumstances don't question - and if they want me to do something, I would rarely ask questions.
paravion wrote:
But in theorizing and 'in the process of taking a stand' one can ascribe prominent importance to either to 'doing the thinking' or 'performing the action'. I know what I see as the most fertile - albeit the division is somewhat pointless - especially with regards to what is necessary in order to make the world a better place to live. |
That was the point.
Edited by Paravion - May 25 2010 at 16:51
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 25 2010 at 17:20 |
Paravion wrote:
Paravion wrote:
I wouldn't care to discuss this matter further. |
Im not of a decisive nature.
rocktopus wrote:
paravion wrote:
Would you provide me with examples?
edit: It should be evident that I talk in general terms. I'm aware that you, for instance, can think about a girl and do nothing about it - that's not that unusual. But generally, to do nothing about what you ever think about doing - your entire life - is unusual. |
^Ha-ha! What is that? That's nothing like what I disagreed about at all. |
That's an example of the same sort you provided in explaining mindless acting. |
The difference here is that you asked me
for an example. I didn't ask you to rephrase what you already had
written (and I had already replied to), into something else.
It s not meant to be rude, but I haven't got time or energy to reply to the rest of your post right now.
|
|
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
|
|
rdtprog
Special Collaborator
Heavy, RPI, Symph, JR/F Canterbury Teams
Joined: April 04 2009
Location: Mtl, QC
Status: Offline
Points: 5356
|
Posted: May 25 2010 at 18:20 |
Yes, I consider myself a intellectual that has failed, a sportsplayer that has failed and that's why i have choosed prog. To fill my life of failure with the most fun compensaton on earth : music. Music is my drug, alcoohol, religion. And the only damage that it cause, is to my ear... About what Nietzche said, i agree in part, to me without music, life would be boring, but how can we be in a world out of music, when the nature produce is own music. Let's say, without music, life would be impossible... And progressive music made by human is what we did to recreate the sound of nature in our cultural world by giving it more complex forms. 
|
|
Music is the refuge of souls ulcerated by happiness.
Emile M. Cioran
|
|
I Love Internet
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 08 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 132
|
Posted: May 26 2010 at 07:01 |
|
I should probably make a poll about how many think this is the most useless discussion ever. Some funny posts here and there, but over all it´s just useless speculation and same points being made over and over again with different words. Besides I´m quite sure we´ve already had this same discussion here a few times before and the discussion back then went along these very same lines.
As for me, a few years back I used to think of myself as a man of (great) intellect, but now - I don´t give a s..t whether or not I´m smart. I have become a social idiot or how did T say it... I can´t really have a conversation about anything (except music) without stating, that I dont give a chit. And more over I´m not really even intrested in spending time with the people I know because they bore me. Erhm.... I think I´m getting too far from the subject so I´ll stop.
Anyway thank you The T and Easy Money, you made laugh.
|
|
I like my eggs boiled and that´s it!
|
|
Rocktopus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 02 2006
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 4202
|
Posted: May 26 2010 at 07:14 |
I Love Internet wrote:
I should probably make a poll about how many think this is the most useless discussion ever.
|
Most useless contribution to a discussion ever.
|
|
Over land and under ashes
In the sunlight, see - it flashes
Find a fly and eat his eye
But don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
Don't believe in me
|
|
WileyMarshall
Forum Newbie
Joined: May 03 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 27
|
Posted: May 26 2010 at 12:32 |
I think one of the main reasons I listen to prog is that is satisfies me intellectually. Other types of music don't seem to do it for me. Of course, there is the other side to this, there are certainly examples of incredibly stupid and lazy music that labels itself as prog (my basement musical career for example  )
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17965
|
Posted: May 26 2010 at 17:27 |
UndercoverBoy wrote:
MuteArchitects wrote:
My momma says I'm special |
You are because you listen to Prog. The most enlightened and complex music in the entire universe. |
Undercover ... we're gonna punish you with Rachmaninoff and Stravinsky and some of the modern composers for a while ... first! We'll figure out a feather punishment after that! Most of prog is just rock music and nothing but rock/pop music! AND you don't even have to be a musician anymore ... just a geek armed with a DAW these days!
Edited by moshkito - May 26 2010 at 17:29
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
shockedjazz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 12 2008
Location: Madrid (spain)
Status: Offline
Points: 169
|
Posted: May 27 2010 at 12:19 |
So it seems that mathematics had an isolated developement.......Yes, dont want to get to reflexive but i think its, lets say, wrong.
First of all, Galileo said " Book of Nature is writen in mathematical signs" in doing that he was following some people that thougth the same before him...pythagoreans, neo-platonics, platon himself against what we may call qualitative vision of aristotelism of nature, that was the authority for scholastics.
This is an ontological view called "mathematical realism", and as you presupose ( i hope) it implicate a determinated epistemology and ontology........ that wouldnt been posible without specific religious, philosophical and conceptual postulates.
Second, mathematicians were philosophers in many cases and au contraire.
Isnt Leibniz a imprescindible mathemathician, at least historicaly?
Isnt the infinitesimal calculus connected with a certain vision or reconceptualization of the infinite based on philosophical concepts?
Moreover isnt Newton ( for going into physics) postulating the absolute space and time as "sensorium dei", and its not connected with particualar religious and methapysical stands?
Isnt he separating the what from the why when formulating the law of gravity from a pure epistemological consideration ( because of course he have theorys about the why)?
Einstein is not basing its cientifical view in ontological considerations as the phrase "God doesnt plays with dices" shows?
Is not Quantums physics principle of indetermination a epistemological , logical, methapisical problem apart from the strictly physical?
So separate science from philosophy, or to be more accurate, to separate the sinthesys of previously separated and so analized segments of experience of the global synthesis wich encircles them all is foolish, because they affect each other, is not merely uniderectional.....because as you know ( i hope) empiric reason and understanding is trascendental, induction doesnt have all the specimens that would allow it to arrive to necesary conclsions, but at long as its a thesis, it postulates ( or wants to) itself as a law ( or lets say "probable explication of all this given phenomena", wich is the same as its a synthesis also) and by necesity it jumps over the given data into a synthetic view...wich is needless to say cannot be offered just by mere data.
The fable of the fox and grapes implies that is not possible for the fox to taste the grape so the question: What if the grapes are sour? is a mere hipotehesis waved by a imposibiltiy, is exactly what the fox would ask whenever it feels the desire of tasting the grapes being impossible to reach them.
Is in psychoanalytical terms a represion of desire.....So this is the point: dont feel bad for being a repressed philosoper.....is natural....you love prog and its plagated of philosophical concepts ( Vand der Graaf, Genesis, Banco...even Hawkwind ja ja, perfect examples) but your cultural paradigma doesnt allow you to give it importance too it...yes i know your fighting with yourself... i know is hard so im not going to overreact to your biased harsh comments.
dont have time for mor well keep on talking...
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: May 27 2010 at 14:26 |
shockedjazz wrote:
So it seems that mathematics had an isolated developement.......Yes, dont want to get to reflexive but i think its, lets say, wrong. |
I don't know where you got that idea from - certainly wasn't from anything I posted here.  Mathematics did not exist as a separate discipline until the Renaissance, Science and scientific discovery are also a "modern" inventions (compared to Classical "philosophy"). During (and before) the Renaissance "science" and "philosophy" were one and the same, so was "alchemy". It was the development of the Scientific Method based on empirical evidence to explain natural phenomena rather than to just "think about them" that brought about actual enlightenment and provable discovery - something that Philosophers and Alchemists had failed (miserably) to do before then.
shockedjazz wrote:
First of all, Galileo said " Book of Nature is writen in mathematical signs" in doing that he was following some people that thougth the same before him...pythagoreans, neo-platonics, platon himself against what we may call qualitative vision of aristotelism of nature, that was the authority for scholastics.
This is an ontological view called "mathematical realism", and as you presupose ( i hope) it implicate a determinated epistemology and ontology........ that wouldnt been posible without specific religious, philosophical and conceptual postulates.
Second, mathematicians were philosophers in many cases and au contraire.
Isnt Leibniz a imprescindible mathemathician, at least historicaly?
Isnt the infinitesimal calculus connected with a certain vision or reconceptualization of the infinite based on philosophical concepts?
Moreover isnt Newton ( for going into physics) postulating the absolute space and time as "sensorium dei", and its not connected with particualar religious and methapysical stands?
Isnt he separating the what from the why when formulating the law of gravity from a pure epistemological consideration ( because of course he have theorys about the why)? |
See above - not denying that all those dead men were both mathematicians and philosophers - however, it is their empirical mathematics that put them in the mathematic text books and in the history books. It was calculus that launched rockets to the moon, not plenitude and monads.
It is only in recent history that there has been a separation of religion from all science - the reconciliation of scientific discovery with religious belief caused philosophical problems for these thinkers - Newton, Galileo, Leibniz, Aristotle, Plato, Darwin, Copernicus and even Einstein had difficulty matching their results to established religious "fact"...
shockedjazz wrote:
Einstein is not basing its cientifical view in ontological considerations as the phrase "God doesnt plays with dices" shows? |
That (mis)quote is out of context - Albert was trying to reconcile the probabalistic nature of quantum physics with the "designed" nature of the Universe (according to his own beliefs).
shockedjazz wrote:
Is not Quantums physics principle of indetermination a epistemological , logical, methapisical problem apart from the strictly physical? |
Quantum physics is not a complete solution and probably never will be due to the physical limitations of measurement, so the problem of the physical impinging on the metaphysical is probably unsolvable and will keep Philosophers in gainful employment for centuries to come. But at that level it's not my field of expertise - as long as quantum effects at the atomic level make transistors and diodes work then I'll get paid for doing the job I was educated and trained to do and I'll be happy.
shockedjazz wrote:
So separate science from philosophy, or to be more accurate, to separate the sinthesys of previously separated and so analized segments of experience of the global synthesis wich encircles them all is foolish, because they affect each other, is not merely uniderectional.....because as you know ( i hope) empiric reason and understanding is trascendental, induction doesnt have all the specimens that would allow it to arrive to necesary conclsions, but at long as its a thesis, it postulates ( or wants to) itself as a law ( or lets say "probable explication of all this given phenomena", wich is the same as its a synthesis also) and by necesity it jumps over the given data into a synthetic view...wich is needless to say cannot be offered just by mere data. |
I have no idea what any of that means - it flies over my head and lands on top of Rob's joke about existentialism. 
You need to find someone with a bigger brain than mine.
shockedjazz wrote:
The fable of the fox and grapes implies that is not possible for the fox to taste the grape so the question: What if the grapes are sour? is a mere hipotehesis waved by a imposibiltiy, is exactly what the fox would ask whenever it feels the desire of tasting the grapes being impossible to reach them.
Is in psychoanalytical terms a represion of desire..... |
It was a joke. Laugh! 
You used the fable as an insult to my understanding of philosophers- claiming that "you dont understand what they say so you automatically think they saying nothing" - my repost was "But what if the grapes really are sour - what then?" ( ie "what if they are saying nothing?"). ... note I replied with a question, not a categorical statement - no one can prove the "truth" of a philosophical statement - the grapes will be both sweet and sour.
(You have now componded that insult by stating that it is impossible for me to "taste those grapes" and I will never "understand" what these exhalted philosophers are saying. Nice. )
I say again - "what if they are saying nothing?"
shockedjazz wrote:
So this is the point: dont feel bad for being a repressed philosoper.....is natural....you love prog and its plagated of philosophical concepts ( Vand der Graaf, Genesis, Banco...even Hawkwind ja ja, perfect examples) but your cultural paradigma doesnt allow you to give it importance too it...yes i know your fighting with yourself... i know is hard so im not going to overreact to your biased harsh comments. |
As you may have gathered by now I love to philosophise (with a small "p") and do not consider myself to be repressing my urge to spout meaningless psychobabble, and will happily do so at the drop of a hat - my comments are not harsh (or at least no less harsh than your own).
shockedjazz wrote:
dont have time for mor well keep on talking... |
Learn to quote previous posts so I know what specific statements you are answering then I may continue.
|
|
What?
|
|
UndercoverBoy
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 10 2009
Location: Tulsa, OK, U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 5148
|
Posted: May 27 2010 at 15:57 |
moshkito wrote:
UndercoverBoy wrote:
MuteArchitects wrote:
My momma says I'm special |
You are because you listen to Prog. The most enlightened and complex music in the entire universe. |
Undercover ... we're gonna punish you with Rachmaninoff and Stravinsky and some of the modern composers for a while ... first! We'll figure out a feather punishment after that! Most of prog is just rock music and nothing but rock/pop music! AND you don't even have to be a musician anymore ... just a geek armed with a DAW these days! |
Ahem, I was parodying some of the opinions here. I actually agree with you completely.
|
|
seventhsojourn
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 11 2009
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 4006
|
Posted: May 28 2010 at 04:23 |
Einstein was not a handsome fellow
Nobody ever called him Al
He had a long moustache to pull on, it was yellow
I don't believe he ever had a girl
One thing he missed out in his theory
Of time, space and relativity
Is something that makes it very clear
He was never gonna score like you and me
(Robert Calvert)
Just my lame attempt at introducing some levity... most of this discussion is going way over my head! Plus... I'm still trying to get over the shock that Dean uses Wikipedia like us mere mortals
|
|
Paravion
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 01 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 470
|
Posted: May 28 2010 at 04:40 |
^ 
Albert is smart, he's a genius
Watch Albert putter, an obvious genius
Someday he will reassess the world
And he'll still have time for lots of girls
When he grows up he'll remember us
When he grows up we are sure that he'll remember us
We made sure that Albert wore his mac
We kept all the strangers off his back
(Go away)
Everything's relative
(Go away Albert's mother say to me)
We are his relatives and he don't need any non- relatives
Talent is an asset
You've got to understand that
Talent is an asset
And little Albert has it
Talent is an asset
And Albert surely has it
:: admin snip ::
(Sparks - Talent is an asset - Kimono My House 1974)
Edited by Dean - May 28 2010 at 05:09
|
|
seventhsojourn
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 11 2009
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 4006
|
Posted: May 28 2010 at 04:55 |
^  Yep, I really should listen to some Sparks!
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Prog and Intellect