::rap Thread::

[Alex]

As for the comparison to cooking - consider this: one person smells something and thinks "that smells nice". Another smells the same thing, and thinks "someone is baking chocolate cake". THAT is the exact difference I'm referring to, and it is immediate.

 

[Theodorakis]

this is unbearable.

 

[ARIAGA II]

So how about that Lil Wayne album?

 

[Mandieta6]

I didn't say anything about literature. You brought it up, I have largely ignored it because it is irrelevant. You are trying to make this about something that it's not. Of course I can't tell an author's intentions when I first read them. The analogy doesn't work.

I see your point withbthe smelling thing, but it's just an example of what I was saying. The sensory reaction existed first and then experience allowed the second person to become conditioned and able to recognise the smell. Whether he then thunks 'that's a cake and it smells good' is a result of association which is a process. Sensory reactions still precede that association. I've mentioned the McDonalds example before which ia the same thing.

I really don't care if 'everyone else' agrees with me so it doesn't content me or otherwise like it does you.

 

[Zlatan]

You can't know the composer's intentions before reading or hearing about the composer's intentions, so no, although I never suggested that someone like Zlatan couldn't notice things in music that I was unable to. I'm saying that his intellectual reaction to a song cannot precede his sensory reaction.

Did it ever occur to you that you could have an intellectual reaction and a sensory reaction at the same time? If you educate yourself about something you're attracted to that happens almost at the same time.

To take an example: I can listen to a Miles Davis song and be amazed on a sensory level by the emotions he's portraying in his music, and at the same time (while I'm listening) recognize on a rational level that that particular piece he's playing is from the time when he was making modal jazz or fusion jazz or cool jazz or whatever. After listening to the song I can just enjoy the way the music makes me feel or marvel at the fact that Miles Davis is such a brilliant musician in my eyes, but at the same time also think about how this one particular Miles Davis piece fits into his overall development as a musician and what his role was in the changing currents of jazz music. It wouldn't surprise me if a similar simultaneous process of emotion and ration takes place in your mind when you read an Oscar Wilde novel or whatever.

Your idea is grounded in the notion that these two can and in fact are seperated. I believe the contrary. As I said, emotion and ration are in constant interraction with each other.

 

[ShiftyPowers]

Man, Miles Davis is great. His "A Tribute to Carlos Johnson" is one of the best albums ever. I was once at a coffee shop and they started to play the album and right when it started with that awesome bass riff I was like "hell yeah!"

 

[Mandieta6]

You guya keep mixing up emotion and sensation. Your intellectually based rrsponses are all predicated on you being conditiomed by your intellectual response. This means that it can be reconditioned.

I don't get why you keep mentioning literature when I've already said that it's the same thing in both: sensation before emotion or reason.

 

[Mandieta6]

Note that sensation is perception and reason is thought. Reason cannot occur at the same as perception, no matter how muxh you insist or how small the gap brtween the two is. Perception - sensation - reaction. This is how it works, accept it or don't.

 

[Zlatan]

That might be how it works for you, not necessarily for others. Moreover my point still stands. The largely emotional process of perception and sensation is influenced by the way you rationally think or have been conditioned into thinking, the way you rationally think is influenced by what you feel and experience emotionally. At the very least, I can't see them as seperated as you can.

 

[Filipower]

Rap thread

 

[Mandieta6]

Dude, perception isn't influenced by emotion or reason, at least not in terms of what we're talking about. Perception is the body recognising external stimuli which are then relayed to the nervous centres which allow for sensation. That sensation can then be played with and csuse alterable reactiona but the body feels what it feels. Open a goddamn biology book.

 

[Zlatan]

Yeah hold up. You can't change your argument halfway. You said I was making an emotional reaction into a rational argument. Emotion is part of the mind not the body. That has nothing to do with biology, that has to do with psychology. Read a goddamn psychology book instead.

 

[Theodorakis]

zlatan, fake your death.

..hopefully he'll leave arguing with you.

 

[Filipower]

Shut the fuck up Theodorakis.

 

[Theodorakis]

go fap scarlett..

there's nothing in this for you.

 

[Filipower]

 

[Theodorakis]

oink oink

 

[ARIAGA II]

Yeah so Iggy is gonna win the Grammy huh?

 

[Mandieta6]

Yeah hold up. You can't change your argument halfway. You said I was making an emotional reaction into a rational argument. Emotion is part of the mind not the body. That has nothing to do with biology, that has to do with psychology. Read a goddamn psychology book instead.

This has been a long debate and I havent been checkig back, just replying to the post at hand. Which post was this?

 

[Back Door Skip]

zlatan, fake your death.

..hopefully he'll leave arguing with you.

I think it's about time you do your ritualistic turkish disappearance right about now...