Originally posted by PalynkaWe're going in circles, I don't see what use a series of subjectively judged cardinal sets can be if you rank them ordinately as one objective set. Have I missed something in your position?
I already answered that. Because you can plot and aggregate.
Originally posted by darvlayThen you are saying there are no things that can be viewed objectively as to their quality. That is one philosophical view and if you take that stand then I will say ok.
To you, maybe. Not to the Spice girls fanatic.
I take it a bit further down the road and believe that while any individual cannot make a completely 100% objective judgement as to something's quality, that individual CAN come very close given the proper tools and perspective.
Originally posted by PBE6I'd consider neither indicative of the music's inherent quality.
I've always wondered which of the following more people would consider "better": (a) a piece of music that affects many people in a positive way fairly strongly; or (b) a piece that affect a small group of people in a positive way profoundly.
(For the sake of argument, let's say that (a) corresponds to 1,000,000 people giving the piece a 7, and (b) corresponds to 1,000 people giving the piece a 10.)
The spice girls are loved by many but it's garbage and a band like Starland Vocal band are loved by just a few but as Homer Simpson says, "they suck!"
1 edit
Originally posted by uzlessPhilosophers prescribe what ought to be based on a set of assumptions about what is, which are invariably too narrowly selected or just plain wrong. Doubly so on matters of taste. I like Radiohead fine, but I don't want "2+2=5" to be the national anthem.
I think Plato was right. The philosophers should be the Kings of society. Only they can determine what is good and what is not.
Originally posted by PBE6Get thee to the class of guardian!
Philosophers prescribe what ought to be based on a set of assumptions about what is, which are invariably too narrowly selected or just plain wrong. Doubly so on matters of taste. I like Radiohead fine, but I don't want "2+2=5" to be the national anthem.
Originally posted by NordlysIn my example, everyone gives an honest appraisal of the piece on a scale of 1 to 10. They can decide on any grounds they like. BTW, I don't think age and musical education have anything to do with it.
That depends on a lot of things. What does "better" mean here? What reasons did people have to give the number they gave? What number did they give to the other piece? What age are they and what sort of musical education (if any) do they have? For example, if the 1,000 people giving a piece a 10 are all part of a religion worshipping the composer of the piece, I don't think it would say anything about the quality of the piece.
I have one follow-up question too: if no one like a piece of music (even the composer!), can it be good?