[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

@Strange Magic

Is it your claim that there is no objective measure by which we can judge one of the below pictures to be greater than the other? I can claim that the stick man is a better work of art than the Mona Lisa and you'd take this claim seriously?

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

Precisely so! I prefer Rembrandt but am prepared to accept the consequences of my position. I do not share the aroma of desperation that surrounds those opposed to my viewpoint--people are afraid their choices will be destroyed by my iconoclasm.

It is a rather preposterous consequence, though. It has nothing to do with the destruction of anyone's choices but rather with the rejection that there is an intrinsic quality in art.

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

Similarly, a clown has his means of attracting attention and interest from people. Depending on how talented or skilled he is from the perspective of the audience, he can be considered a genius in what he does, ie. his profession. Likewise, music is, in the end, an abstract combination of sounds. Whether or not something is superficially appealing, sentimental, or over the top, or whatnot, belongs in the realm of subjectivity.

I agree. There is an intrinsic quality in music, though, that lives outside the subjective judgment of the listener.

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

All art is created equal except some art is more equal than other art

Any premise that reaches the conclusion that Stick Man is equal to The Mona Lisa or that Beethoven's 5th is equal to a Justin Bieber hit must be discarded for the very fact that it allows for such ludicrous statements.

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

Please do discard it and never let it trouble you again. Understanding is denied you and it's better that we both move on.

It isn't understanding that is denied me - I quite understand your perspective and I see it being very wrong. And I agree that it's better to move on, you're not likely to come around.

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

Completely subjective but hierarchical. Doesn't compute. Well, it does in the sense of having your cake and eating it too.

Here's a question: are Bach and Beethoven "great" in any objective sense, or is it possible given obvious subjectivity to say that they both were hopelessly inept? If one individual, or twenty or a million say that both of those were utterly inept, does that make that statement true?

Bach and Beethoven didn't exist until people heard their music.

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

Just a reminder that it's fallacious that possible differences of opinion disprove the existence of objective values. Well-composed music is well-composed whether any individual can hear that it is or not, and in this universe good composition is a positive value. Mozart's mastery of form and his melodic inventiveness are not up for a vote.

Very much so. Just because someone doesn't recognize Mozart's mastery of form or his melodic inventiveness, it doesn't mean they don't exist objectively. It just means that person is ignornant or for some other reason fails to perceive what is objectively great. Now that person may not care about musical form or melody and that is a completely subjective stance but to deny their existence is to deny reality.

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

So glad I chose to spend my time listening to the music I subjectively like that I know to be objectively great instead of continuing to engage in this discussion

 

[TwoFlutesOneTrumpet]

I wonder, is my subjectivity objectively subjective? Is the objective nature of the physical world only an illusion created by our subjective minds which can only make sense of things when objectifying that which exists only when perceived by the mind? Is my cat alive when I'm not looking at it? If I don't put my socks on, are they actually socks when they just lie in my drawer?