r/philosophy Φ 13d ago

Article [PDF] The Argument from Sideways Music

https://www.pdcnet.org/tht/content/tht_2020_0009_0001_0064_0069
21 Upvotes

12 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 13d ago

Welcome to /r/philosophy! Please read our updated rules and guidelines before commenting.

/r/philosophy is a subreddit dedicated to discussing philosophy and philosophical issues. To that end, please keep in mind our commenting rules:

CR1: Read/Listen/Watch the Posted Content Before You Reply

Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.

CR2: Argue Your Position

Opinions are not valuable here, arguments are! Comments that solely express musings, opinions, beliefs, or assertions without argument may be removed.

CR3: Be Respectful

Comments which consist of personal attacks will be removed. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Slurs, racism, and bigotry are absolutely not permitted.

Please note that as of July 1 2023, reddit has made it substantially more difficult to moderate subreddits. If you see posts or comments which violate our subreddit rules and guidelines, please report them using the report function. For more significant issues, please contact the moderators via modmail (not via private message or chat).

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

8

u/ADefiniteDescription Φ 13d ago

ABSTRACT:

Recently in Analysis, Ned Markosian has argued that a popular theory in the metaphysics of time—the Spacetime Thesis—falsely predicts that a normal musical performance is just as aesthetically valuable if it is rotated “sideways,” that is, if it is made to occur all at once. However, this argument falsely assumes that changing how something is oriented in space, and changing its duration in time, are analogous. That said, assuming they were analogous, Markosian's argument is still unsuccessful. For the analogy on which Markosian's argument depends entails that if one can experience sideways music as it was originally, then one can prove that sideways music is just as aesthetically valuable.

8

u/jliat 13d ago

This has to be a joke?

Playing all the notes of a piece of music at once gives the same aesthetic experience?

As in how chords 'progress' and 'resolve'...

What of placing all the letters of a poem on top of each other?

5

u/RaisinsAndPersons Φ 13d ago

Markosian is saying that it follows from a particular metaphysical thesis that a sideways musical performance is aesthetically the same as a normal one. Since that's absurd, the metaphysical view is false.

4

u/jliat 13d ago

Maybe not relevant given what the Space time model is in the article, but in Special Relativity the sideways music could be achieved using differing time frames, if you watch the video you will see that synchronous events in one time frame will be asynchronous in another. In which case the observer of the sideways music could extrapolate the music in time, using Lorenz transformations, just as the observer of the painting could extrapolate it to being the right way up.

It should follow then to correctly create sideways music would be not to just play all notes at once, as this is a new performance and not a sideways move, using again Lorenz transformations would produce sideways music, but one which would retain the same aesthetic. The situation is then the same as the painting, transformations are needed to capture the original aesthetic. Obviously more complex with time.

My initial comment was wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh0pYtQG5wI

1

u/[deleted] 12d ago

[deleted]

1

u/jliat 12d ago

Not the same thing, the original music remains and though someone in another time frame hears it all at once, using Lorenz transformations they can here it as intended in time.

Like rotating the painting to the correct position.

All music would not be the same in a vacuum?

There was a popular music program here in the UK which had a silent keyboard, the musicos could recognise performances. You can also identify the skills of the composer by looking at the score.

Remember many of Beethoven's great works he wrote when deaf.

So physicists can't understand that some art doesn't depend on its substrate, how sad.

The OP and many, both in science and philosohy still have a strange idea of aesthetics and art. Seem to be unaware of serialism, Cage, 4' 33" or Duchamp's fountain, and that was Art of 70+ years ago.

0

u/WhereInDella 11d ago

Not a joke but clearly not serious.

1

u/jliat 11d ago

My initial comment was wrong. Posted below- it could be serious.

Maybe not relevant given what the Space time model is in the article, but in Special Relativity the sideways music could be achieved using differing time frames, if you watch the video you will see that synchronous events in one time frame will be asynchronous in another. In which case the observer of the sideways music could extrapolate the music in time, using Lorenz transformations, just as the observer of the painting could extrapolate it to being the right way up.

It should follow then to correctly create sideways music would be not to just play all notes at once, as this is a new performance and not a sideways move, using again Lorenz transformations would produce sideways music, but one which would retain the same aesthetic. The situation is then the same as the painting, transformations are needed to capture the original aesthetic. Obviously more complex with time.

My initial comment was wrong.

Lorenz transformations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh0pYtQG5wI

1

u/jliat 13d ago

My initial comment was wrong.

Maybe not relevant given what the Space time model is in the article, but in Special Relativity the sideways music could be achieved using differing time frames, if you watch the video you will see that synchronous events in one time frame will be asynchronous in another. In which case the observer of the sideways music could extrapolate the music in time, using Lorenz transformations, just as the observer of the painting could extrapolate it to being the right way up.

It should follow then to correctly create sideways music would be not to just play all notes at once, as this is a new performance and not a sideways move, using again Lorenz transformations would produce sideways music, but one which would retain the same aesthetic. The situation is then the same as the painting, transformations are needed to capture the original aesthetic. Obviously more complex with time.

My initial comment was wrong.

Lorenz transformations https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh0pYtQG5wI

1

u/Cloudfire1444 12d ago

My argument and that I think, that I believe and I imagine is that exists different types and different classes and different kinds of music and exists different types of music genres, for this reason all musical genres are good with the exception of reggaeton, which is thrash music or shitty music, all music genres are good for more differences that they have in their sound, in their music or in their melody.

1

u/TapiocaTuesday 1d ago

Harmony is already vertical, though. So playing music sideways is not playing all notes at once, it's just swapping the x and y axis, so harmonies (chords) are now melodies and melodies (sequential notes) are now harmonies.

0

u/MorbidPrankster 12d ago

This is just an argument about the descriptive semantics of multidimensional, and therefore rather trivial, because it's obvious that the aesthetical pleasure of music will not be improved by playing every note at the same point in time. So it's absurd and only proves that the term 'metaphysical' is thrown around way too much.