Thread is now about Holist.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Wait... so you're saying authenticity¹ in music is the domain only of the robust, actualised, mature, flexible personality-d artist?


Because there are a shit-ton of viable artists, and entire genres, wherein the artist is a fucking psychological trainwreck.

I am not convinced you even understand my concepts of moral relativity, so perhaps it would be best for you not to approach them.

Newsfeed?

Absolutely.

Done, as an endorsement.

Fame! At last!

Yeah.  You, Ssanf, and Babylon Horuv.   

[Dildo Argentino]

It's not you; it's everyone else in the world.  God forbid you consider otherwise, even for a moment.

But that's the thing, my good man! It's just you, and a few of your cronies, and nobody else.

Well, that's why you're here.  To save everyone from me and my cronies.   

Well nope, Uncle Roger, that's not really why holist is here at all!

I am here because the situation is intriguing and hence a laugh. And because there is good signal here. Some of it due to, some of it despite your best efforts.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

It's not you; it's everyone else in the world.  God forbid you consider otherwise, even for a moment.

But that's the thing, my good man! It's just you, and a few of your cronies, and nobody else.

Well, that's why you're here.  To save everyone from me and my cronies.   

Well nope, Uncle Roger, that's not really why holist is here at all!

I am here because the situation is intriguing and hence a laugh. And because there is good signal here. Some of it due to, some of it despite your best efforts.

I see.  So you're one of those people who view other people solely as a form of entertainment.

I am shocked.  Shocked, I tell you!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

22 pages of holist.

If we get another 98 pages, holist will achieve his dream of topping the drug threads.

Because it's all about holist.  All the time.

[Dildo Argentino]

Oh, and I'd be happy to see a citation that defines "authenticity¹" in the manner you claim. 

If you have one, and I'm wrong, then I'll cop to it.

You could start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authenticity_(philosophy)

or here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authenticity_in_art

Cop to it, then!

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I could be a dick and ask for a thread split, but Cain doesn't deserve THAT.   

Instead, I'm just done with the OP's subject.

[Dildo Argentino]

Holist, I'm gonna take one more crack at this before deciding whether or not to write you off as a last cause:

every time this happens, your position (regardless of the topic) ends up boiling down to "it doesn't matter that every single one of you took what I wrote in a particular way, I'm telling you that's not what I actually meant" and then you get butthurt that everyone won't just take your word that what you meant isn't what you said. And you feel that we treat you unfairly by responding to what we perceive in your communications rather than what you (apparently) actually mean to convey. And yet, you don't seem to grasp the part where it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that people are understanding you the way you wish to be understood.

Think on this before you respond please.

Maybe you'll write me off (you've done it before! ), but I disagree. I think the achievement of understanding in any communication is the shared responsibility of those participating. Understanding can be blatantly or clandestinely prevented by any party to communication. I don't see how you can make it exclusively the burden of the person expressing a view: wilful and hostile simplification, distortion and ridicule are not something that those wishing to be heard need to endure. I am sure you are already aware of this in other contexts (gender, race, class, etc.), but for some reason you are unwilling to apply it to PD.

[Don Coyote]

Holist, I'm gonna take one more crack at this before deciding whether or not to write you off as a last cause:

every time this happens, your position (regardless of the topic) ends up boiling down to "it doesn't matter that every single one of you took what I wrote in a particular way, I'm telling you that's not what I actually meant" and then you get butthurt that everyone won't just take your word that what you meant isn't what you said. And you feel that we treat you unfairly by responding to what we perceive in your communications rather than what you (apparently) actually mean to convey. And yet, you don't seem to grasp the part where it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that people are understanding you the way you wish to be understood.

Think on this before you respond please.

Maybe you'll write me off (you've done it before! ), but I disagree. I think the achievement of understanding in any communication is the shared responsibility of those participating. Understanding can be blatantly or clandestinely prevented by any party to communication. I don't see how you can make it exclusively the burden of the person expressing a view: wilful and hostile simplification, distortion and ridicule are not something that those wishing to be heard need to endure. I am sure you are already aware of this in other contexts (gender, race, class, etc.), but for some reason you are unwilling to apply it to PD.

The onus of being understood is upon the asshole that is saying something. That is kind of how communication actually works.

[LMNO]

BEing reasonably mature and flexible and emotionally robust is not an indispensable requirement, but it certainly helps

Um. You've just said that authentic¹ music doesn't have to be authentic¹.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Holist, I'm gonna take one more crack at this before deciding whether or not to write you off as a last cause:

every time this happens, your position (regardless of the topic) ends up boiling down to "it doesn't matter that every single one of you took what I wrote in a particular way, I'm telling you that's not what I actually meant" and then you get butthurt that everyone won't just take your word that what you meant isn't what you said. And you feel that we treat you unfairly by responding to what we perceive in your communications rather than what you (apparently) actually mean to convey. And yet, you don't seem to grasp the part where it is YOUR responsibility to ensure that people are understanding you the way you wish to be understood.

Think on this before you respond please.

Maybe you'll write me off (you've done it before! ), but I disagree. I think the achievement of understanding in any communication is the shared responsibility of those participating. Understanding can be blatantly or clandestinely prevented by any party to communication. I don't see how you can make it exclusively the burden of the person expressing a view: wilful and hostile simplification, distortion and ridicule are not something that those wishing to be heard need to endure. I am sure you are already aware of this in other contexts (gender, race, class, etc.), but for some reason you are unwilling to apply it to PD.

The onus of being understood is upon the asshole that is saying something. That is kind of how communication actually works.

He isn't attempting to communicate.  This was never about the exchange of ideas.

He's attention-whoring. 

Successfully.

[Dildo Argentino]

I do think that psychologically fucked up people almost always tend to make authentic music when their music is about their psychological imperfections. Which implies that, while they may be a long way away from becoming a robust and mature human being, and indeed some may never make it, the music tends to be authentic when it aids self-knowledge.

What the fuck does that even MEAN?

I'll break it down for you.

Psychologically fucked up (neurotic, self-harming, suicidal or just plain ill-adjusted) people can make authentic music. There are in fact many examples among my very favourites.

It is my observation that when this happens (psychologically fucked up people making authentic, genuine music) their music tends to be mostly about their psychological problems.

So in a way, while not mature or robust or flexible and well-adjusted, they are in many or even most cases using the creative activity (the making of the music) to articulate their feelings, to express their inner experience. Which is the same thing as increasing self-knowledge, a component of personal authenticity.

[LMNO]

Psychologically fucked up (neurotic, self-harming, suicidal or just plain ill-adjusted) people can make authentic music.

You just did it again.

[Dildo Argentino]

I see.  So you're one of those people who view other people solely as a form of entertainment.

Oh no, by no means solely! Here, though, largely.

I am shocked.  Shocked, I tell you!

It's good for the digestion, you see, and keeps you awake without coffee expenditure!

[Dildo Argentino]

22 pages of holist.

If we get another 98 pages, holist will achieve his dream of topping the drug threads.

Because it's all about holist.  All the time.

You are one lame fuck. This is still partially about authenticity in art (and now in psychology), although someone does keep making it about me.

It's not me.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

22 pages of holist.

If we get another 98 pages, holist will achieve his dream of topping the drug threads.

Because it's all about holist.  All the time.

You are one lame fuck. This is still partially about authenticity in art (and now in psychology), although someone does keep making it about me.

It's not me.

Fuck you, hipster. 

You took a thread about music and turned it into a thread about your favorite subject (ie, "holist").  Everything you touch turns to shit.  Get cancer.