Someone asked for my raison d'etre for my post, but I can't even find my post: I said that if music is not the object, one might as well be collecting stamps or watches. Let me put it more succinctly: As a psychologist, my highly opinionated reasoning is that some people are so insecure that they are never satisfied, and never will be. Too many of them (US?) who are possessed demononic Audiophilia, could simply listen to the music, and tryd to learn about more music. Then, after many years of this music therapy, they could lose some of their hoarding symptoms and insecurity, and then live a relatively normal life. Unfortunately, from the music list in another post, I believe many of those who are afflicted are neurotically stuck in the 1970's, for example, furiously trying to make their old music sound better, when there is a whole world of music to explore. TeeHee
Why do some think "music" (not gear, trading, etc.) is the ultimate end?
A recent thread spurred a debate about the word "audiophile." Again. It went round and round in the usual ways.
What I don't understand is why so many take for granted that loving music is superior to loving gear. Or that gear is always -- and must be -- a mere *means* to music, which is the (supposedly) true end.
But if you stop and think about it, why do we love music? It gives us enjoyment.
Isn't that why people love gear? The enjoyment?
Or even, to push the question, buying, selling, changing gear? That's for enjoyment, no?
So, it raises the difficult question: Why do some think that "music" as an "enjoyment" is better than "gear" or "shopping, buying, selling, trading"?
Not everyone believes this, but it is the most prevalent assumption in these discussions -- that "love of music" is the end-which-cannot-be-questioned.
So, while music is the largest end I'm personally striving for, I do realize that it's because it brings me enjoyment. But the other facets of the hobby do, too. And I'm starting to realize that ranking them is an exercise but not a revelation of the "one" way everything should sort out. It's all pretty subjective and surely doesn't seem like a basis on which I could criticize someone else's enjoyment, right?
What do you think? On what grounds do you see it argued that "music" is a *superior* or *ultimate* end? Whether you agree or not, what reasons do you think support that conclusion?
What I don't understand is why so many take for granted that loving music is superior to loving gear. Or that gear is always -- and must be -- a mere *means* to music, which is the (supposedly) true end.
But if you stop and think about it, why do we love music? It gives us enjoyment.
Isn't that why people love gear? The enjoyment?
Or even, to push the question, buying, selling, changing gear? That's for enjoyment, no?
So, it raises the difficult question: Why do some think that "music" as an "enjoyment" is better than "gear" or "shopping, buying, selling, trading"?
Not everyone believes this, but it is the most prevalent assumption in these discussions -- that "love of music" is the end-which-cannot-be-questioned.
So, while music is the largest end I'm personally striving for, I do realize that it's because it brings me enjoyment. But the other facets of the hobby do, too. And I'm starting to realize that ranking them is an exercise but not a revelation of the "one" way everything should sort out. It's all pretty subjective and surely doesn't seem like a basis on which I could criticize someone else's enjoyment, right?
What do you think? On what grounds do you see it argued that "music" is a *superior* or *ultimate* end? Whether you agree or not, what reasons do you think support that conclusion?
- ...
- 119 posts total
- 119 posts total