|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 16:59:04 GMT -5
Re- let's take this to the messages to not derail the thread. I sent you a message about morality. Did you see it? Yes I had, but chose not to respond lest the fool becomes wise in his own eyes. Such silence i think the best course of action when dealing with childlike arguments. I'm sure grade 1-3 might have difficulty in responding to your points. Now, I'm going to shift and establish a peace treaty between you and I. On the condition you do not directly address me in this one specific topic in this thread. We may come together or distance ourselves further in other areas of the board. Smoke with me? But...you just called me a fool and you want to establish a peace treaty...? I don't have any beef with you personally. So not sure where the beef is coming from (in terms of the morality issue). Perhaps I said something offensive to you and didn't realize it?
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Sept 30, 2020 17:11:21 GMT -5
You want to pay for hardware, or you want to pay for music? Actually, I paid for the hardware so I could PLAY.....the music....as in my Drum 🥁 kit! Did that for years both amateur and professional (Union Musician). That truly helped me to keep the numbers in perspective regarding how much change was needed (realistically) to come up with killer playback capability. Back in 1969 this is what brought beautiful music to my ear . . . . . . . . . . with this, . . . . . while delivering these.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,333
|
Post by DYohn on Sept 30, 2020 17:14:10 GMT -5
It's always sad when a spirited academic discussion gets derailed by racist or arrogant statements.
Hey Boom, I read your review finally. Those speakers sound like they might be interesting to me, although I'm not sure about that enclosure design. It's too bad Covid will keep me from seeking them out somewhere.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2020 17:16:46 GMT -5
Yes I had, but chose not to respond lest the fool becomes wise in his own eyes. Such silence i think the best course of action when dealing with childlike arguments. I'm sure grade 1-3 might have difficulty in responding to your points. Now, I'm going to shift and establish a peace treaty between you and I. On the condition you do not directly address me in this one specific topic in this thread. We may come together or distance ourselves further in other areas of the board. Smoke with me? But...you just called me a fool and you want to establish a peace treaty...? I don't have any beef with you personally. So not sure where the beef is coming from (in terms of the morality issue). Perhaps I said something offensive to you and didn't realize it? I made an allusion to an ancient text you're seemingly convinced is nothing more than myth.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,333
|
Post by DYohn on Sept 30, 2020 17:32:35 GMT -5
Nor do we need perpetuate historical racism. OK, this discussion is done. Have a good one. I didn't mean that in a racist way, DYohn. To clarify, historical treaties clearly identify peoples as Indians. Identity politics aside the documents say Indians. To quote an elder from my wife's tribe, "Don't tell me who you are because who you are speaks louder than any words."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2020 17:35:14 GMT -5
I didn't mean that in a racist way, DYohn. To clarify, historical treaties clearly identify peoples as Indians. Identity politics aside the documents say Indians. To quote an elder from my wife's tribe, "Don't tell me who you are because who you are speaks louder than any words." I guess I'll have to take your word on your wife's elder as a quote.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,333
|
Post by DYohn on Sept 30, 2020 17:38:09 GMT -5
To quote an elder from my wife's tribe, "Don't tell me who you are because who you are speaks louder than any words." I guess I'll have to take your word on your wife's elder as a quote. What?? Dude what is your trip? Yes, yes you will have to take my word for it. It's an Internet forum.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 17:39:02 GMT -5
But...you just called me a fool and you want to establish a peace treaty...? I don't have any beef with you personally. So not sure where the beef is coming from (in terms of the morality issue). Perhaps I said something offensive to you and didn't realize it? I made an allusion to an ancient text you're seemingly convinced is nothing more than myth. I see now.... If you look at it from a religous viewpoint, I could see how morality would be an absolute because it would be dictated from a creator or made to be a real part of the fabric of the universe. I wasn't trying to offend you, but I didn't think the discussion had a spiritual component to it. Or at least I didn't know how to make meaningful discussions from that perspective. If you approach it from that angle, things change a bit. I was looking at it from a scientific or naturalistic viewpoint.
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Norseman on Sept 30, 2020 17:39:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 17:40:43 GMT -5
Yesterday, quite a lot!
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 17:42:04 GMT -5
Actually, I paid for the hardware so I could PLAY.....the music....as in my Drum 🥁 kit! Did that for years both amateur and professional (Union Musician). That truly helped me to keep the numbers in perspective regarding how much change was needed (realistically) to come up with killer playback capability. Back in 1969 this is what brought beautiful music to my ear . . . . . . . . . . with this, . . . . . while delivering these. I had a pocket radio. Sounded like a$$ but it played music!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2020 17:52:44 GMT -5
I made an allusion to an ancient text you're seemingly convinced is nothing more than myth. I see now.... If you look at it from a religous viewpoint, I could see how morality would be an absolute because it would be dictated from a creator or made to be a real part of the fabric of the universe. I wasn't trying to offend you, but I didn't think the discussion had a spiritual component to it. Or at least I didn't know how to make meaningful discussions from that perspective. If you approach it from that angle, things change a bit. I was looking at it from a scientific or naturalistic viewpoint. I have no doubt that was the case. As stated we are all from various schools of thought. I identified myself as belonging to the Cornelius Van Till school of thought. And likewise, DYohn identified himself. As we progressed a more indepth non-superficial identity has surfaced but then soured and seemingly approached the superficial. I am not offended, by the way, if I may call you friend? Being an owner and admin for a debate site I read from tens of thousands of authors every month. At times exchanges may become heated. No doubt, I actually respect people that speak in passion and in conviction regardless if I agree w/ what they say. Says something about someone when a person is compelled to act upon their belief. I do respect even my own theological opponents etc. Our worldviews are comprised of many aspects of life Garbunky. I did recognize your naturalistic viewpoint in your writings early in this thread. Men, that is, those participating in this thread. I hope if we don't continue here we'll continue elsewhere. As for me, I am a lover of truth. Sometimes, such can even been deemed unhealthy or undesirable at times, coming across as a compulsive disorder having spent decades in ancient as well as modern texts. On a personal note, my passion has developed which is to systematically categorize individual's thoughts. Sometimes, others receive such as "labeling". In my mind, however, it is nothing more than identifying the thought w/ respect to entomology, historical context etc., as someone that really wishes to understand ancient authors, that is, what was meant to be conveyed. I figure, following a person's principles and methods of interpretation, I may, come to their conclusion. And if not correct, bridge to a new perspective. Anyhoot, I'm going on a rant. And I hate my own voice. That is, I do not delight in hearing my own thoughts out loud. Peace. P.S. I hope I may love you Garbulky, given enough time and exposure to you I hope an intimate bond occurs....... as much as may over a virtual media. Enjoy
|
|
|
Post by boomzilla on Sept 30, 2020 18:08:52 GMT -5
That's not "truth," that's shared perception and mutual interpretation. It's because we are humans, that's how our brains work. The people in your example have similar frames of reference for music, that's all. It does not mean there is some universal truth buried in that music, only that more than one person perceived it and interpreted it similarly. A much more simple example is a stop sign. Most of us when driving perceive the stop sign and follow those instructions without thinking about it. Does that mean the stop sign represents some universal truth? No, it means the stop sign signifies a concept we as drivers have been trained to understand and to take certain actions based upon that understanding. It's Semiotics in action. Someone who lacks experience and training about stop signs will not perceive it the same way nor give it the same meaning. OK - Objective truth without semiotics: The Earth orbits the Sun due to gravitational force in precessing ellipses. It would do so whether or not anybody was here to observe it. We can use the language of mathematics to describe the relationship, but that's just semiotics. The actual gravitational relationship is independent of our description of it, or even our cognizance of it. That's an objective truth.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 18:12:06 GMT -5
I see now.... If you look at it from a religous viewpoint, I could see how morality would be an absolute because it would be dictated from a creator or made to be a real part of the fabric of the universe. I wasn't trying to offend you, but I didn't think the discussion had a spiritual component to it. Or at least I didn't know how to make meaningful discussions from that perspective. If you approach it from that angle, things change a bit. I was looking at it from a scientific or naturalistic viewpoint. I have no doubt that was the case. As stated we are all from various schools of thought. I identified myself as belonging to the Cornelius Van Till school of thought. And likewise, DYohn identified himself. As we progressed a more indepth non-superficial identity has surfaced but then soured and seemingly approached the superficial. I am not offended, by the way, if I may call you friend? Being an owner and admin for a debate site I read from tens of thousands of authors every month. At times exchanges may become heated. No doubt, I actually respect people that speak in passion and in conviction regardless if I agree w/ what they say. Says something about someone when a person is compelled to act upon their belief. I do respect even my own theological opponents etc. Our worldviews are comprised of many aspects of life Garbunky. I did recognize your naturalistic viewpoint in your writings early in this thread. Men, that is, those participating in this thread. I hope if we don't continue here we'll continue elsewhere. As for me, I am a lover of truth. Sometimes, such can even been deemed unhealthy or undesirable at times, coming across as a compulsive disorder having spent decades in ancient as well as modern texts. On a personal note, my passion has developed which is to systematically categorize individual's thoughts. Sometimes, others receive such as "labeling". In my mind, however, it is nothing more than identifying the thought w/ respect to entomology, historical context etc., as someone that really wishes to understand ancient authors, that is, what was meant to be conveyed. I figure, following a person's principles and methods of interpretation, I may, come to their conclusion. And if not correct, bridge to a new perspective. Anyhoot, I'm going on a rant. And I hate my own voice. That is, I do not delight in hearing my own thoughts out loud. Peace. P.S. I hope I may love you Garbulky, given enough time and exposure to you I hope an intimate bond occurs....... as much as may over a virtual media. Enjoy Well... I'm not sure how to respond to that. The intimate bond and love... I have to decline. But sure we can be on friendly terms on the forum. We all like music right?! (Yes we do!) Just a tip. I try to give respect wherever I can, but I do expect it back as well. Nothing crazy, just things like not calling each other names, respect for me and for other people, that kind of thing. I think you can agree that's a fair expectation.
|
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,333
|
Post by DYohn on Sept 30, 2020 18:13:52 GMT -5
That's not "truth," that's shared perception and mutual interpretation. It's because we are humans, that's how our brains work. The people in your example have similar frames of reference for music, that's all. It does not mean there is some universal truth buried in that music, only that more than one person perceived it and interpreted it similarly. A much more simple example is a stop sign. Most of us when driving perceive the stop sign and follow those instructions without thinking about it. Does that mean the stop sign represents some universal truth? No, it means the stop sign signifies a concept we as drivers have been trained to understand and to take certain actions based upon that understanding. It's Semiotics in action. Someone who lacks experience and training about stop signs will not perceive it the same way nor give it the same meaning. OK - Objective truth without semiotics: The Earth orbits the Sun due to gravitational force in precessing ellipses. It would do so whether or not anybody was here to observe it. We can use the language of mathematics to describe the relationship, but that's just semiotics. The actual gravitational relationship is independent of our description of it, or even our cognizance of it. That's an objective truth. Correct. And there are many similar objective scientific truths. But anything having to do with human perception (audio, for example, where this whole thing started) lacks similar objective truth since it involves interpretation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2020 18:16:02 GMT -5
I have no doubt that was the case. As stated we are all from various schools of thought. I identified myself as belonging to the Cornelius Van Till school of thought. And likewise, DYohn identified himself. As we progressed a more indepth non-superficial identity has surfaced but then soured and seemingly approached the superficial. I am not offended, by the way, if I may call you friend? Being an owner and admin for a debate site I read from tens of thousands of authors every month. At times exchanges may become heated. No doubt, I actually respect people that speak in passion and in conviction regardless if I agree w/ what they say. Says something about someone when a person is compelled to act upon their belief. I do respect even my own theological opponents etc. Our worldviews are comprised of many aspects of life Garbunky. I did recognize your naturalistic viewpoint in your writings early in this thread. Men, that is, those participating in this thread. I hope if we don't continue here we'll continue elsewhere. As for me, I am a lover of truth. Sometimes, such can even been deemed unhealthy or undesirable at times, coming across as a compulsive disorder having spent decades in ancient as well as modern texts. On a personal note, my passion has developed which is to systematically categorize individual's thoughts. Sometimes, others receive such as "labeling". In my mind, however, it is nothing more than identifying the thought w/ respect to entomology, historical context etc., as someone that really wishes to understand ancient authors, that is, what was meant to be conveyed. I figure, following a person's principles and methods of interpretation, I may, come to their conclusion. And if not correct, bridge to a new perspective. Anyhoot, I'm going on a rant. And I hate my own voice. That is, I do not delight in hearing my own thoughts out loud. Peace. P.S. I hope I may love you Garbulky, given enough time and exposure to you I hope an intimate bond occurs....... as much as may over a virtual media. Enjoy Well... I'm not sure how to respond to that. The intimate bond and love well.. I'd have to decline. But sure we can be on friendly terms on the forum. We all like music right?! (Yes we do!) Just a tip. I try to give respect wherever I can, but I do expect it back as well. Nothing crazy, just things like not calling each other names, respect for me and for other people, that kind of thing. I think you can agree that's a fair expectation. I agree, and in likewise mannerism will be more sensitive towards you in your comfort zone with respect to your reactions in our engagements. Enjoy
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 18:22:23 GMT -5
That's not "truth," that's shared perception and mutual interpretation. It's because we are humans, that's how our brains work. The people in your example have similar frames of reference for music, that's all. It does not mean there is some universal truth buried in that music, only that more than one person perceived it and interpreted it similarly. A much more simple example is a stop sign. Most of us when driving perceive the stop sign and follow those instructions without thinking about it. Does that mean the stop sign represents some universal truth? No, it means the stop sign signifies a concept we as drivers have been trained to understand and to take certain actions based upon that understanding. It's Semiotics in action. Someone who lacks experience and training about stop signs will not perceive it the same way nor give it the same meaning. OK - Objective truth without semiotics: The Earth orbits the Sun due to gravitational force in precessing ellipses. It would do so whether or not anybody was here to observe it. We can use the language of mathematics to describe the relationship, but that's just semiotics. The actual gravitational relationship is independent of our description of it, or even our cognizance of it. That's an objective truth. FUN FACT. You know how light takes 8 minutes to reach the earth from the sun? Well if the sun disappears in a single instant - all of the sun all at once - then what would happen to the earth? Would it still orbit the sun or will it fly off in to space? The answer is that it would orbit the sun for 8 minutes around nothing. For eight minutes tremendous forces will keep the earth in orbit around where the sun should be, but there would be nothing there to do so. Then eight minutes later, it would fly off in to space no longer bound by the sun's gravity. Why because changes in space time (the change in gravity) happens at the speed of light. In essence, reality changes at the speed of light. The main limitations, it would be impossible for the sun to instantaneously wink out of existence. Physics would not allow it.
|
|
|
Post by boomzilla on Sept 30, 2020 18:30:35 GMT -5
Correct. And there are many similar objective scientific truths. But anything having to do with human perception (audio, for example, where this whole thing started) lacks similar objective truth since it involves interpretation. OK - I can see that.
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Sept 30, 2020 18:33:07 GMT -5
OK - Objective truth without semiotics: The Earth orbits the Sun due to gravitational force in precessing ellipses. It would do so whether or not anybody was here to observe it. We can use the language of mathematics to describe the relationship, but that's just semiotics. The actual gravitational relationship is independent of our description of it, or even our cognizance of it. That's an objective truth. FUN FACT. You know how light takes 8 minutes to reach the earth from the sun? Well if the sun disappears in a single instant - all of the sun all at once - then what would happen to the earth? Would it still orbit the sun or will it fly off in to space? The answer is that it would orbit the sun for 8 minutes around nothing. For eight minutes tremendous forces will keep the earth in orbit around where the sun should be, but there would be nothing there to do so. Then eight minutes later, it would fly off in to space no longer bound by the sun's gravity. Why because changes in space time (the change in gravity) happens at the speed of light. In essence, reality changes at the speed of light. The main limitations, it would be impossible for the sun to instantaneously wink out of existence. Physics would not allow it. My reality happens in slow motion. As such, I'm not finished reading the first post of this thread. My reality may be in slow motion, but I live in the future.
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Sept 30, 2020 18:39:56 GMT -5
FUN FACT. You know how light takes 8 minutes to reach the earth from the sun? Well if the sun disappears in a single instant - all of the sun all at once - then what would happen to the earth? Would it still orbit the sun or will it fly off in to space? The answer is that it would orbit the sun for 8 minutes around nothing. For eight minutes tremendous forces will keep the earth in orbit around where the sun should be, but there would be nothing there to do so. Then eight minutes later, it would fly off in to space no longer bound by the sun's gravity. Why because changes in space time (the change in gravity) happens at the speed of light. In essence, reality changes at the speed of light. The main limitations, it would be impossible for the sun to instantaneously wink out of existence. Physics would not allow it. My reality happens in slow motion. As such, I'm not finished reading the first post of this thread. My reality may be in slow motion, but I live in the future. Your reality may be slow but if you are in the future, you will always be up to date.
|
|