Is the enjoyment of music sourced from the aural experiences of real life, which become associated with all kinds of emotional states? And music is a re-arrangement of different “conditioned sounds” gained from real life experience?
This would explain why some people cannot appreciate music (their minds have a poor memory of sound as it relates to experiences), why certain musical complexity is appreciated by older adults, why children have a primitive appreciation of music where they only like music that codes for basic happiness. And also why some people who have poor emotional intelligence appear to have a terrible taste in music (the other way is not necessarily the case).
Then I would also wonder:
is the music unsophistication of east asia the result of tonal language (where sound memory is encoded in logic rather than emotion), or the result of an actual mental de-prioritization of emotional states? For this last one, consider how European art and religion and poetry is so dramatic and sympathetic to strong emotional states of all sorts, and East Asian less so (emphasizing transience, stability, equanimity)
is sufficient music-listening necessary to fully appreciate complex music and why? Is there also an element of “learning the language of compositions”? This must be the case but how does it work?
what’s happening when we hear a song (for a lot of people: Satie’s gymnopedie) and it brings us a new emotional state?
is too much music bad because it desensitizes us to the significance of real life sound cues?
Is the enjoyment of music sourced from the aural experiences of real life
Probably not. E.g. what 'aural experiences' would to chords correspond to?
'some people can't appreciate music', 'adults like more complex music', and 'children like simpler music' are explained by most theories of music that attribute any complexity to it. 'poor emotional intelligence ~ bad taste in music' is also just explained by 'smart people like smart things'.
That is a big claim to make. Western music elevates traits of music that they've identified as important, and undermines aspects of music that they've not paid attention to. For ex: western music (pre-20th century) cared a lot about Harmony & melody, but IMO, was little lacking in their understanding of rhythm, jamming and the power of space (silence). More here(I know, ignore the title, it has good substance.)
Now, the 17-21st century were a golden period of prosperity and time for the West in a manner that the east simply couldn't compete. I don't think it is fair to compare the recent exponential flourishing of western music in a couple of the richest places on earth (Vienna, USA) to places that were struggling to make ends meet in the east.
My theory is that just as the west looks to a few locations for their artistic direction (NYC, LA, London, Paris, Vienna), East-Asia largely relied on China and India as the their sources of artistic direction. (especially SEA, Japan, Korea). Indian classical & contemporary music comfortably goes toe-to-toe with anything western classical or contemporary music throws at it, but Indian classical has failed to flourish over the last 400 years for obvious reasons. Chinese classical music on the other hand, stagnated from colonial humiliation and was destroyed like all classical structures due to communism. So now you have this naïve blank slate that appears pretty bad when compared to contemporaries elsewhere. The rest of the continent despite its best efforts could not recover from having its 2 main sources of aesthetic understanding collapse. (Japan was less affected, as 2 centuries of isolation forced it to come up with it's own aesthetic identity separate from Indian-inspired Buddhism or Chinese cultural influence)
is sufficient music-listening necessary to fully appreciate complex music
I believe so. I have had an interesting journey with pop. I used to find it bland and only listening to progressive (almost deliberately complex) music for a decade. Those 10 years made me a discerning listener, listening for atmospheric queues, syncopation, tension-release and the precision of good production. Now that I can discern good pop from bad pop, I've begun to appreciate the magic and the power of simple yet effective tools.
The specific things that took a lot of learning were:
What is a pocket, why do people like dancing ? -> it unlocked my enjoyment of funk & Rap (Only after I learned to play the drums)
What does an odd-time signature actually do emotionally -> Unlocked tension/release and African-style music (After listening to a lot of prog)
What is the "free feeling" & stank-face ? -> unlocked my enjoyment of blues, jazz, Indian-classical(After actually jamming with people in real life)
What is atmosphere ? -> unlocked my enjoyment of western classical. (After brute forcing my way through Black metal and Black gaze. I hated it until I started loving it. Also, attending real life concerts. It just hits different.)
What is production -> unlocked my enjoyment of pop (after trying to get a note to sound just-right when I was tuning my guitars and drums)
That being said, the best works can be enjoyed by noobs and experts alike. Lose yourself, Comfortably Numb, Hotel California, Pavrotti's Nessun Dorma, 10,000 days part 2, All along the watch tower or Certain Ragas are universal experiences.
I have gone through a similar journey with soccer. From being a kid that loved flamboyant tricksters like Ronaldinho, to now appreciating players like Fabregas or Berbatov who use the basics to absolute perfection. I can also finally appreciate players who seemingly stand in the right spot every time. (Busquets, T.Silva, Giroud, Jorginho). That being said, just like great music, even an idiot can see the greatness of Messi.
what’s happening when we hear a song (for a lot of people: Satie’s gymnopedie) and it brings us a new emotional state?
Like all aesthetics, there are some universal cues (symmetry, Height, Clear face) and some that signal higher-level societal phenomenon. (Japanese like crooked teeth, attraction for thin frail sickly-looking women in China and western modelling, attraction towards lighter skin to signal class and not needing to work in fields in India)
is too much music bad because it desensitizes us to the significance of real life sound cues?
I refuse to buy that. If anything, music makes me a more discerning listener towards real life sound cues as well. But yeah, don't wear headphones everywhere and aurally separate yourself from society.
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Is the enjoyment of music sourced from the aural experiences of real life, which become associated with all kinds of emotional states? And music is a re-arrangement of different “conditioned sounds” gained from real life experience?
This would explain why some people cannot appreciate music (their minds have a poor memory of sound as it relates to experiences), why certain musical complexity is appreciated by older adults, why children have a primitive appreciation of music where they only like music that codes for basic happiness. And also why some people who have poor emotional intelligence appear to have a terrible taste in music (the other way is not necessarily the case).
Then I would also wonder:
is the music unsophistication of east asia the result of tonal language (where sound memory is encoded in logic rather than emotion), or the result of an actual mental de-prioritization of emotional states? For this last one, consider how European art and religion and poetry is so dramatic and sympathetic to strong emotional states of all sorts, and East Asian less so (emphasizing transience, stability, equanimity)
is sufficient music-listening necessary to fully appreciate complex music and why? Is there also an element of “learning the language of compositions”? This must be the case but how does it work?
what’s happening when we hear a song (for a lot of people: Satie’s gymnopedie) and it brings us a new emotional state?
is too much music bad because it desensitizes us to the significance of real life sound cues?
Probably not. E.g. what 'aural experiences' would to chords correspond to?
'some people can't appreciate music', 'adults like more complex music', and 'children like simpler music' are explained by most theories of music that attribute any complexity to it. 'poor emotional intelligence ~ bad taste in music' is also just explained by 'smart people like smart things'.
More options
Context Copy link
That is a big claim to make. Western music elevates traits of music that they've identified as important, and undermines aspects of music that they've not paid attention to. For ex: western music (pre-20th century) cared a lot about Harmony & melody, but IMO, was little lacking in their understanding of rhythm, jamming and the power of space (silence). More here(I know, ignore the title, it has good substance.)
Now, the 17-21st century were a golden period of prosperity and time for the West in a manner that the east simply couldn't compete. I don't think it is fair to compare the recent exponential flourishing of western music in a couple of the richest places on earth (Vienna, USA) to places that were struggling to make ends meet in the east.
My theory is that just as the west looks to a few locations for their artistic direction (NYC, LA, London, Paris, Vienna), East-Asia largely relied on China and India as the their sources of artistic direction. (especially SEA, Japan, Korea). Indian classical & contemporary music comfortably goes toe-to-toe with anything western classical or contemporary music throws at it, but Indian classical has failed to flourish over the last 400 years for obvious reasons. Chinese classical music on the other hand, stagnated from colonial humiliation and was destroyed like all classical structures due to communism. So now you have this naïve blank slate that appears pretty bad when compared to contemporaries elsewhere. The rest of the continent despite its best efforts could not recover from having its 2 main sources of aesthetic understanding collapse. (Japan was less affected, as 2 centuries of isolation forced it to come up with it's own aesthetic identity separate from Indian-inspired Buddhism or Chinese cultural influence)
I believe so. I have had an interesting journey with pop. I used to find it bland and only listening to progressive (almost deliberately complex) music for a decade. Those 10 years made me a discerning listener, listening for atmospheric queues, syncopation, tension-release and the precision of good production. Now that I can discern good pop from bad pop, I've begun to appreciate the magic and the power of simple yet effective tools.
The specific things that took a lot of learning were:
What is a pocket, why do people like dancing ? -> it unlocked my enjoyment of funk & Rap (Only after I learned to play the drums)
What does an odd-time signature actually do emotionally -> Unlocked tension/release and African-style music (After listening to a lot of prog)
What is the "free feeling" & stank-face ? -> unlocked my enjoyment of blues, jazz, Indian-classical(After actually jamming with people in real life)
What is atmosphere ? -> unlocked my enjoyment of western classical. (After brute forcing my way through Black metal and Black gaze. I hated it until I started loving it. Also, attending real life concerts. It just hits different.)
What is production -> unlocked my enjoyment of pop (after trying to get a note to sound just-right when I was tuning my guitars and drums)
That being said, the best works can be enjoyed by noobs and experts alike. Lose yourself, Comfortably Numb, Hotel California, Pavrotti's Nessun Dorma, 10,000 days part 2, All along the watch tower or Certain Ragas are universal experiences.
I have gone through a similar journey with soccer. From being a kid that loved flamboyant tricksters like Ronaldinho, to now appreciating players like Fabregas or Berbatov who use the basics to absolute perfection. I can also finally appreciate players who seemingly stand in the right spot every time. (Busquets, T.Silva, Giroud, Jorginho). That being said, just like great music, even an idiot can see the greatness of Messi.
Like all aesthetics, there are some universal cues (symmetry, Height, Clear face) and some that signal higher-level societal phenomenon. (Japanese like crooked teeth, attraction for thin frail sickly-looking women in China and western modelling, attraction towards lighter skin to signal class and not needing to work in fields in India)
I refuse to buy that. If anything, music makes me a more discerning listener towards real life sound cues as well. But yeah, don't wear headphones everywhere and aurally separate yourself from society.
More options
Context Copy link
Excellent topic and set of questions! Like really.
If I cut your question in half:
This is part of one of the most important utilitaristic question,
How and Why some kinds of Environmental Enrichments are much less sensitive to the hedonic treadmill/brain homeostasis?
What are surprising cross-tolerances between environmental enrichment X and Y?
What are surprising cross-tolerances between environmental enrichment Z and drug A?
The one that can answer this has unique key knowledge on how to maximize joy/happiness.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_enrichment
Food for thought: how does the music and amphetamine high differ and similarise?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link