nUSEweb.com

>On 04 Jul 2008, "John P." <JohnP@nospam.com> wrote in alt.guitar:
>
>
>That's my point.
>
>
>"It's blue. I don't like blue, so it sucks."
>
>Invalid. That cannot be correct. You're preference is irrelevant to
>anyone but yourself. Your preference says nothing about the music's
>true value.
>
>
>"It's blue. Blue sucks, therefore I don't like it."
>
>Invalid. That cannot be proved. It may "suck" TO YOU PERSONALLY, but
>that doesn't mean it "sucks" in general.
>
>
>Invalid. How can they prove that? They can't. For one thing, the best
>"any number of people" can do is prove that they don't like it. But
>that doesn't prove that it has no value in general, only to them
>personally. If other people find value in it, then the presence of
>value is proved.
>
>
>No, those are all invalid.
>
>
>That's valid. It's very easy to prove the existence of something if you
>can point to it. It's not really possible to prove the NON-existence of
>something because it might where you haven't looked yet. And if it's
>existence has been shown, well, you've lost the argument already. In
>other words, Frank's music has been clearly shown to have interest and
>value. That can't be convincingly argued against. The worst anyone can
>say against it is "I personally don't like it", or "I don't get it."
>
>Personally, I get some of it, and I don't get some of it. Some of the
>stuff I do get I find to be absolutely thrilling and awesome. Some of
>the stuff I don't get makes me want to chuck the record out the window.
>Some of it I used to like but don't so much now, and vice-versa. He's
>made tons of music and it runs that whole spectrum. So, what, I should
>condemn all of his music as "sucking" because some of it is hard to
>take?