The only way to develop a scientific knowledge of consciousness is to adopt the experimental method. — David Pearce

Are you familiar with Rudolf Steiner? I have plenty of reservations about him, but would be curious if you have any thoughts. It's interesting to note that, despite his eccentricities, perhaps the main thing he put forth that still is working (arguably) well is biodynamics.

Transhumanism can treat our endogenous opioid addiction by ensuring that gradients of lifelong bliss are genetically hardwired. — David Pearce

I'm admittedly a bit behind on transhumanist thought (so why am I posting here?) but the idea of being able to hardwire gradients of bliss smacks of hubris to me. I think of Owen Barfield's analogy of the scientific method in which he describes "engine knowledge" vs. "driver knowledge". A car mechanic understands how the engine works, and what needs to be fixed in order for the motor to work (scientist). A driver of the car understands why the engine needs to work properly: to take the driver from point A to point B. There are countless reasons why a driver might need to go from point A to point B. The driver is not a scientist, by the way; maybe an artist, or maybe a humble average Joe who just wants to provide for his family. Who is wiser? [can provide reference to this Barfield analogy, will just take a few minutes of digging].

In my mind, you have engine knowledge. I have driver knowledge.

I will persist! I have friends who I respect who love Bartok.

@180 Proof

Not bad:



Still not bowled over yet though.

Got any Bartok recs? I always have trouble getting into him; his music feels very rigid to me. Granted Ravel is possibly my favorite classical composer, so I know it's just a different aesthetic.

fo' real do?

@David Pearce

Thanks for joining us.

My concern with transhumanism is that it's beneficiaries like yourself are either unaware of or downplaying what I (maybe erroneously) refer to as the "human condition"; namely that state we all find ourselves in in which we are unable to achieve the moral ideals we aspire to - I want to not be selfish, and yet I am; I want to not give in to base pleasures, and yet I do; I want to devote my time and energy to higher ideals, and yet I spend hours watching vapid youtube videos (or even doing something slightly more noble like going down wiki rabbit holes or listening to weird music that I'm not sure if I like or not). I worry about the gap between lofty goals such as those that are transhumanistic on one hand, and the cold hard reality of purely human existence on the other. Tie that in to what @darthbarracuda mentioned about Ellul, and I'm wondering if transhumanism isn't just a sort of pubescent lack of understanding about the human situations we all find ourselves in; technology, after all, is simply humans harnessing our (ever-changing understanding of) nature in a very imperfect, and often destructive way. Cryptocurrency itself is detrimental to the environment.

What I'm really worried about is a transhumanistic approach to the human situation that is not based on an accurate understanding of that human situation; an approach that assumes too much and introspects about ourselves far too little.

Somewhat related; how does transhumanism address addiction?

Do you AGREE with h0w go0d this is?????? AGREE?? DISAGREE??? I KNEED 2 NOW

Is the track asking a question?

with what?

For all of my posturing as a music dude, sometimes I listen to this crappy muzak station if I need to zone out with some completely harmless, impotent noise.

I think what we're talking about here is just fetishization. If you "have a thing" for redheaded women, short stocky guys, black men, asian women, asexuals, or insecure white men, whatever, you have a fetish. There's a feature to a certain type of person that gets you going. The question is whether this fetish is healthy or not to your psyche, and I'm not suggesting there's a simple answer.

Also, just admit that you "have a thing". We all do. Or several.

Georges Mathieu - Composition (1986)

You win again. :roll:

I think you're beginning with a false assumption here; "knowledge" as a concept in the 2nd century is not the same concept as "knowledge" in the modern age. It's not that "knowledge" exists ideally, and ancient vs. modern conceptions of that concept are different. They're completely different concepts from the beginning; their goals are completely anathema to each other.

@csalisbury Great thread, I've been meaning to read Thomas for awhile now, and now I have some motivation. Hopefully I'll have some contributions soon.

They look pretty evenly distributed to me :rofl:

Uh, Sauron's aim is pretty clear in the books.

How much of Tolkien's narrative about good and evil, is, basically, just Tolkien's Christian background talking, and how much of it is relevant outside of that context? — baker

So if you want to talk about this, that would be a separate discussion.

Yes exactly; there's a time and place for every artistic/technical decision. And I understand the desire to not have your favorite music recordings messed with. Even as a younger person, there are certain imperfections about my favorite records from bands from the early 00's that I wouldn't want to see altered by a remaster. I get it.

If anything, as someone who didn't grow up with classic 60-80's records, I'm maybe just more curious than anything else to hear that music through a new lens. Rubber Soul is my favorite Beatles record, but hard-panned drums and bass drive me crazy.

On the other hand, I'm slowly but surely doing an entire re-mix of the record I made my freshman year in college and it's a wild experience. I know so much more about mixing now than I did then. It's still the same music, and there are a lot of inherent flaws in the recording that I can't magically fix, but the music has so much more breathing room now. Of course, it's a totally self-indulgent project. But there's something to be learned through the process.

Have you every listened to vinyl records? — Sir2u

Yeah of course. I don't disagree, I'm just saying sometimes a remaster can be legitimate.

Woah I had no idea this existed. I have 10 stalkers. Great.

Sure, but you're still listening to digitized music if you're posting youtube clips (obviously). I agree remasters aren't always necessary, but a lot of the time what they're after is better EQ settings, or or a more modern, musical use of the stereo field. In theory a remaster can bring out musical information that was buried in the original mix; this is especially true of old prog rock records, for instance, where the mixing technology of the time couldn't keep up with all of the musical information a band was trying to cram into the mix.

Climate Of Hunter was released in 1983; off the top of my head there's a small chance it could've been recorded digitally, but highly unlikely. I just meant Scott went from the Walker Brothers to his weird stuff.

And then this happened:

No

Long time no see.

:pray:

From a record by bandleader/drummer Pete La Roca Sims which was later re-issued as a Chick record, incurring a lawsuit:

Sounds more like early Porcupine Tree to me

I need to refresh my memory on them.

Somehow ended up here tonight, but I'm not complaining

Don't "Yo don't be like that" me brah

:groan: :vomit:

One of the best prog tracks of all time

:up:

Have you heard Makaya McCraven's reimagining of that record? Pretty cool

As a layman pianist, I would hazard that it's probably harder to play than it looks, absolutely. But that's now why I like it.

Agree?

I don't know why "agreement" is important to you, but this is pretty bland. All of the typical pressure points are pressed, with nothing new or engaging.

It says the video is unavailable.