ilovefuzz.com

Idiots not exactly pertaining to this forum per se, but the backlash against them in general.

Woolworm wrote: Even sonically, I have a hard time taking you seriously if you try and tell me their albums are bad, because I personally believe theres objectivity in all forms of life, but thats more of an asinine philosophical discussion.

Inconuucl wrote:

Woolworm wrote: Even sonically, I have a hard time taking you seriously if you try and tell me their albums are bad, because I personally believe theres objectivity in all forms of life, but thats more of an asinine philosophical discussion.

I actually studied this in psychology class in school and my argument against the Dunning-Kruger effect is that it assumes only unsure-ness (I'm stretching there but can't think of a word) is the measure of when something is intelligent or pertinent or add synonym here.

EDIT: Like can't it be oscillating back and forth between confidence and ill confidence.

2nd EDIT: Or that me embelishing something with confidence is just that: embelishment for embelishment's sake. Like most philosopher's when writing their stuff talk of things matter of factly e.g. Nietzche, Wittgenstein, Freud. Are you going to tell me then all of them know nothing at all and you should take head of a person who sits and says nothing about the subject? Come on now.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CN-K27yiVrk[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzsGaNRjjFM[/youtube]

Woolworm wrote:

Inconuucl wrote:

Woolworm wrote: Even sonically, I have a hard time taking you seriously if you try and tell me their albums are bad, because I personally believe theres objectivity in all forms of life, but thats more of an asinine philosophical discussion.

I actually studied this in psychology class in school and my argument against the Dunning-Kruger effect is that it assumes only unsure-ness (I'm stretching there but can't think of a word) is the measure of when something is intelligent or pertinent or add synonym here.

EDIT: Like can't it be oscillating back and forth between confidence and ill confidence.

2nd EDIT: Or that me embelishing something with confidence is just that: embelishment for embelishment's sake. Like most philosopher's when writing their stuff talk of things matter of factly e.g. Nietzche, Wittgenstein, Freud. Are you going to tell me then all of them know nothing at all and you should take head of a person who sits and says nothing about the subject? Come on now.

Iommic Pope wrote:

Do yourself a favour, as someone who has "taken a class in psychology and has arguments", don't invoke Freud.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j-wE0Mg0GA[/youtube]

Woolworm wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:I think a better takeaway would be "I should probably go for good analogies next time," but you do you.

You realize that "I think this band is good, and I'm going to rationalize away people who don't think this band is good by saying that they must be 'highschool-izing' music" is not a particularly defensible hill to die on, right?

Let me ask some basic questions.

1. Do you care that Deafheaven's sound isn't conventionally black metal?

2. Do you care that Deafheaven's dress sense isn't conventionally black metal?

3. Do you care that Deafheaven's fans or the critics who like them conventionally do not pay attention to black metal?

If the answer to one of those questions is yes, then you dislike this band for bullshit reasons. Simple as.

Even sonically, I have a hard time taking you seriously if you try and tell me their albums are bad, because I personally believe theres objectivity in all forms of life, but thats more of an asinine philosophical discussion.

I think its actually spelled "Deafhaven"

Woolworm wrote: I actually studied this in psychology class in school and my argument against the Dunning-Kruger effect is that it assumes only unsure-ness (I'm stretching there but can't think of a word) is the measure of when something is intelligent or pertinent or add synonym here.

EDIT: Like can't it be oscillating back and forth between confidence and ill confidence.

2nd EDIT: Or that me embelishing something with confidence is just that: embelishment for embelishment's sake. Like most philosopher's when writing their stuff talk of things matter of factly e.g. Nietzche, Wittgenstein, Freud. Are you going to tell me then all of them know nothing at all and you should take head of a person who sits and says nothing about the subject? Come on now.

Not to repeat the same joke, but this post is an apt demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger effect. The experiment consisted of a testing portion and a self assessment portion, measuring one's own confidence in the subject they were tested in, the test is meant to measure outside knowledge. Or in other words, you're bringing in unrelated arguments. A philosopher's opinion of their own work is a product of their ego and their confidence on their work, and I can assure you that all of the examples you listed come from individuals with vastly inflated egos. You're dragging the Dunning-Kruger effect through the mud of the overly simplistic phrases used to summarize it, bastardizing the actual meaning of the studies in the process.

gnomethrone wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j-wE0Mg0GA[/youtube]

I want to love this band, but I hate their vocalist so much.

Inconuucl wrote:

gnomethrone wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j-wE0Mg0GA[/youtube]

I want to love this band, but I hate their vocalist so much.

BRO ALL YOU NEED TO WORRY ABOUT IS THE SOUND COMING THROUGH YOUR HEADPHONES. THE ONLY WAY TO EVALUATE MUSIC IS OBJECTIVELY. ALSO IF YOU WERE REALLY INTO IT IN HIGHSCHOOL.

ALL MUSIC AFTER THE POINT IN MY LIFE WHERE I WAS THE MOST SUSCEPTIBLE TO POPULAR MUSIC SUCKS.

I, uh, read this whole thread.

I would usually say bands don't really deserve that level of heckling, regardless of whether they're good or bad, but that's because i think that most people attempting to be creative (who are sincere about it) are doing a hard thing and are often failing in catastrophic public ways. And there's a lot more to this, it's hard to speak about.

But then again, straight men who call people faggot for liking the wrong music, or invoke that word with violent language are gigantic piles of shit. Also, fucking look at this piece of shit: I may be a faggot (well, a tranny faggot, but don't get the wrong impression, y'all don't get to say those words) but at least i don't go out into public looking like a poor knock-off of Joe Lo Truglio in his little brother's t-shirt. So fuck this band. Don't call them faggots, but heckle the shit out of their broke-ass Envy knock-off parading as whatever genre is popular enough to sell records these days.

Woolworm, i don't know man, i just don't fucking know.

Inconuucl wrote:

gnomethrone wrote:[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8j-wE0Mg0GA[/youtube]

I want to love this band, but I hate their vocalist so much.

Wait hold the fuck up that cover is legit one of my favorite songs of all time.

STOP NOT LIKING WHAT I LIKE.


But for real Scar Sighted is a great record and you should check it out.

Woolworm wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:I think a better takeaway would be "I should probably go for good analogies next time," but you do you.

You realize that "I think this band is good, and I'm going to rationalize away people who don't think this band is good by saying that they must be 'highschool-izing' music" is not a particularly defensible hill to die on, right?

Let me ask some basic questions.

1. Do you care that Deafheaven's sound isn't conventionally black metal?

2. Do you care that Deafheaven's dress sense isn't conventionally black metal?

3. Do you care that Deafheaven's fans or the critics who like them conventionally do not pay attention to black metal?

If the answer to one of those questions is yes, then you dislike this band for bullshit reasons. Simple as.

Even sonically, I have a hard time taking you seriously if you try and tell me their albums are bad, because I personally believe theres objectivity in all forms of life, but thats more of an asinine philosophical discussion.

How is this meaningfully different from "my sniveling, refuse-drenched opinions are CANONICAL AND I WILL NOT STAND FOR DISOBEDIENCE IN THE RANKS." ?

Alternatively, I said that, having listened to the band, it struck me as "rehashed explosions in the sky leads over third-rate tremolo-picked riffs." So that's why I don't listen to the band, why I don't own their records, why I don't go to see them, whatever. It has fuck all to do with their record collection, it has to do with the quality of their band, which is not so high, in my estimation.

The band, though, is not nearly as insufferable as the people who claim they're paradigm-shifting -- which, actually, you have yet to talk about, instead choosing to merely assert that they are... because you say so, as objective master of music quality, I suppose -- that's for sure.