Nietzsche and Runaway Audio Consumption
Came across this today. A lot of posts bring up the issue of "how much is enough?" or "when is audio consumption justified" etc.
Does this Nietzsche aphorism apply to audio buying? You be the judge!
Friedrich Nietzsche: “Danger in riches. — Only he who has spirit ought to have possessions: otherwise possessions are a public danger. For the possessor who does not know how to make use of the free time which his possessions could purchase him will always continue to strive after possessions: this striving will constitute his entertainment, his strategy in his war against boredom.
Thus in the end the moderate possessions that would suffice the man of spirit are transformed into actual riches – riches which are in fact the glittering product of spiritual dependence and poverty. They only appear quite different from what their wretched origin would lead one to expect because they are able to mask themselves with art and culture: for they are, of course, able to purchase masks. By this means they arouse envy in the poorer and the uncultivated – who at bottom are envying culture and fail to recognize the masks as masks – and gradually prepare a social revolution: for gilded vulgarity and histrionic self-inflation in a supposed ‘enjoyment of culture’ instil into the latter the idea ‘it is only a matter of money’ – whereas, while it is to some extent a matter of money, it is much more a matter of spirit.”
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1996. Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits. Cambridge University Press. (p. 283-4, an aphorism no. 310)
I'm pretty sure @mahgister will want to read this one! (Because they speak so artfully about avoiding the diversion that consumption poses to the quest for true aesthetic and acoustic excellence.)
There is more knowledge about humanity to be found in art than philosophy.
If you can't acknowledge that this may be true, then is your mind really inquiring?
|
The more we study the universe the more complex and the more comprehensible it seems the less you can reduce it to a simple unit of understanding... it is then a never ending process to be explanable and an opening IRREDUCIBLE interelated trees of mysteries also AT THE SAME TIMES....The best philosopher who ever explained that was the Greatest romanian thinker in philosophy and the greatest romanian poet...Lucian Blaga...A genius of complete originality and a philosopher of science vastly unrecognized...like Goethe is but for other reasons... why what is more and more explanable without end stay anyway a mystery forever? Because it is like a living system the more you comprehend it the less you can reduce it to be a simplistic isolated unit from the WHOLE to be undestood by itself alone... One thing is sure The universe is not NOISE or Brownian motion but music... By the way if you want to understand Brownian motion study Brown, Einstein, Wiener, Kolmogorov and ESPECIALLY Mandelbrot... All of them give a definition that EXPANDED with time and knowledge, then you will understand that seemingly pointless noise hide sometimes music of its own ... https://www.lukethorburn.com/fBm/ Saying that the universe is pointless is only showing a lack of perceptual imagination...Then a lack of artistic creative intuition...Bad artist only create pointless object...By the way if technological idolatry make people completely stupid most of the times, true science awake spirit ALWAYS... Knowledge is not science and will never be it only and science is not technology and will never be it only ....
You are right about that....One of the greatest thinkers of all times were artists...Goethe is the foremost example with Leonardo da Vinci... Any truly great scientist is also an artist and in most case often very spiritual men...(not religious fanatics )
|
Lonely philandering audiophile seeking adoration about sexual prowess on a HiFi website…. i am guessing you are taking the blue pill for senility @tubebuffer I am a girl from the northcountry kind of robot |
Mahgister, You do simplify things though your posts makes Faulkner a monument of succinctness. Yes, I know English is not your first language. Folks desire to explain things. When things move fast or become very complex simplistic (or convoluted) reactions start to take hold. We are in uncharted territory and to think the bankers or 400 year old intellectuals have a clue as to the future is pie in the sky. Maybe the chaos of the internet will check cynical manipulation. Neither James nor Rick. |
Perhaps you must read my posts before commenting and asking clear questions.. For example you distorted completelky what i said... I never said that Mandeville was a Nostradamus... I said that he was a scientist, a doctor by the way, who figured for himself how the human animals is workable... He did not ever wanted to predict the future...But some very great thinkers and less amicable folks AFTER him takes advantage of his understanding of the animal aspects of humans to control them... It appear only conspiracies for ignorant... It is history written in books to study... Then try to understand clearly before posting...Reading my ideas about Mandeville like if he was Fu-Manchu chinese vilain in a James Bond movie is CHILDISH play...
And my post are badly written but it is impossible to explain more SUCCINTLY than the way i did what i intend to explain ... Take for example my last post above is it not a clear one with even a reference to an underestimated Romanian philosopher and to a doctorate thesis about Brownian motion ? i spoke here to explain why and how universe made sense... By the way the notion of fractal Brownian motion is there to illustrate under the deep apparent noise the LONG RANGE CORRELATION between events in time and some aspect of the cosmic memory... The link to this article refer to the mathematical doctorate thesis about fractal brownian motion...In a word behind or under noise there is some music or some meaningfull movements... Saying that the universe is pointless is popular in atheist fanatic circle... I dont mind about fanatics be them religious or atheist...They partake the same simplistic zeal... And by the way all what i said is absolutely not simplistic... But i must simplify yes ...I cannot wrote a thesis in audio thread....
|
