Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mascis

battle of the rap/hip-hop acts on the scene since 2000 ROUND 1

Recommended Posts

mark    3105
22 minutes ago, Nelrick said:

 Do you call them all retarded if they disagree with you without even stating why? 

I can answer that one, the answer is yes. And while I see what you're getting at, it's not true that you always need to explain why people are wrong, for example if someone is killing people you're going to expect they know not to, and doing so would be considered 'retarded'. (In before someone mentions 'lol killing people isn't music', examples are supposed to be extreme to show why one thinks something). For example, I could ask you to explain why you want people to explain their thought, yet you don't, because you consider it common sense. So the entirety of what must be explained and what is common sense is subjectively itself, although ironically that fact could be up to debate as well, depending on who you ask. 

 

Also while I do think music is ultimately subjective, because it's made for people to expres themselves, create emotions, having a pleasant time etc, I won't say that people can decide whether one type of music is better than another simply because they prefer it. There are a lot of factors, but the simplest example would be one of someone who watched the latest film and says it's the best ever. 'Yeah it's my opinion and my taste in films'. It will still be objectively wrong though. This concept is philosophically way too difficult to simply explain in a music post but I'll give a few examples as to why it's wrong: 

- has the person watched every movie? 

- does the person like the movie for reasons that tell you more about the person's situation rather than the movie itself? (Think about: falling in love with a hot actress, peer pressure liking something because your friends think it's cool, you not having the time or attention span to view a longer film, etc.). 

- does the person add sentimental value towards something because of memories (such as, a film reminding you of your ex because you used to watch it together, a film reminding you of your childhood, watching a film at a earlier/later point of your life where you have become more or less picky, or look for different things. 

- does the person understand the film, or what makes it so great? Maybe you don't understand something because you're too young, but at some point in your life you will: the film hasn't changed but your thoughts towards it have

 

So ultimately people itself decide what music is good, but that doesn't mean that music can't be good or bad despite people thinking it's the opposite, because someone's taste can differ, and someone can think music A is better than music B, but given equal circumstances, he would actually think B is better than A. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nelrick    2391
3 minutes ago, mark said:

I can answer that one, the answer is yes. And while I see what you're getting at, it's not true that you always need to explain why people are wrong, for example if someone is killing people you're going to expect they know not to, and doing so would be considered 'retarded'. (In before someone mentions 'lol killing people isn't music', examples are supposed to be extreme to show why one thinks something). For example, I could ask you to explain why you want people to explain their thought, yet you don't, because you consider it common sense. So the entirety of what must be explained and what is common sense is subjectively itself, although ironically that fact could be up to debate as well, depending on who you ask. 

 

Also while I do think music is ultimately subjective, because it's made for people to expres themselves, create emotions, having a pleasant time etc, I won't say that people can decide whether one type of music is better than another simply because they prefer it. There are a lot of factors, but the simplest example would be one of someone who watched the latest film and says it's the best ever. 'Yeah it's my opinion and my taste in films'. It will still be objectively wrong though. This concept is philosophically way too difficult to simply explain in a music post but I'll give a few examples as to why it's wrong: 

- has the person watched every movie? 

- does the person like the movie for reasons that tell you more about the person's situation rather than the movie itself? (Think about: falling in love with a hot actress, peer pressure liking something because your friends think it's cool, you not having the time or attention span to view a longer film, etc.). 

- does the person add sentimental value towards something because of memories (such as, a film reminding you of your ex because you used to watch it together, a film reminding you of your childhood, watching a film at a earlier/later point of your life where you have become more or less picky, or look for different things. 

- does the person understand the film, or what makes it so great? Maybe you don't understand something because you're too young, but at some point in your life you will: the film hasn't changed but your thoughts towards it have

 

So ultimately people itself decide what music is good, but that doesn't mean that music can't be good or bad despite people thinking it's the opposite, because someone's taste can differ, and someone can think music A is better than music B, but given equal circumstances, he would actually think B is better than A. 

While music is not something i have studied like some other friends of mine. I could try to come up with an stance of why music is subjective. Music is a combination of diferent factors and i believe that this can be objectively judged. For example, rhythm some things are more rhytmical than others. However when you add all these factors together and ultimately end up with a song you still lack something. The listener. The listener is not something that is objective. Its experience with the song is not measurable even thought the other factors were. Like you said there are multiple variables that can make you decide whether what you experienced is better than the others. 

You can argue that some factors that  are objective that a song is better than the others in such regards. However when you say that a song is objectively better as a whole than another one you are trying to discredit the listeners experience with it.

 

Something that i was trying to point out but i imagine is better with this example:

When hoban was talking about his book and his section of what he considered cheating i could have just called him retarded for not understanding that what is considered cheating depends on the officials made to judge such thing and not upon the players themselves. If we put in terms similar to this topic, he was arguing subjectivity as to what he perceives as cheating may be different than us like rulesharking may vary as to what it encompases. But instead as someone who studied law i could answer this question from a standpoint on wheter what he believes is true or false.

Lets assume that frogman is in this position for whatever reason he has the knowledge of music to argue whether its objective, subjective or even intersubjective. Now lets assume i am hoban and i make a claim that to him is retarded. He "supposedlly" can answer this, i have no idea why but he thinks he does. Im not gonna be a fool and say that my viewpoint is near the truth of the subject matter and i wouldnt even say that if what we were discussing was law-related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nelrick    2391
4 minutes ago, mark said:

I can answer that one, the answer is yes. And while I see what you're getting at, it's not true that you always need to explain why people are wrong, for example if someone is killing people you're going to expect they know not to, and doing so would be considered 'retarded'. (In before someone mentions 'lol killing people isn't music', examples are supposed to be extreme to show why one thinks something). For example, I could ask you to explain why you want people to explain their thought, yet you don't, because you consider it common sense. So the entirety of what must be explained and what is common sense is subjectively itself, although ironically that fact could be up to debate as well, depending on who you ask. 

 

 

You are right, you dont always need to explain why you are wrong, especially in the internet. People tend to stand in a pedestal and express that their viewpoint is better than the rest. I imagine that from his experiences what he came to as a conclusion must rung true, not only to him but to the others involved. But its foolish to accept an stance on the pedestal to call others wrong and never explain way. Regarding killing people, at some point someone had to explain why it was wrong. It didnt naturally come to us that "hey maybe killing scott is not the right thing to do" For something to become common sense it needed people to defend its viewpoint so it would be understood to the point where society accepted it and took it as something that could be viewed as an objective truth.

shit if this happened with music then i need to wake the fuck up because i havent seen it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»JC.    4858

"'Objectively better music' lol" - music major friend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mark    3105

- reader's warning: post below might be considered completely irrelevant - 

 

I agree with you on music being subjective, although for me that doesn't mean someone can think something is good/bad for the wrong reasons, as I've mentioned in my examples why. 

 

For what it's worth, in this specific scenario since I somewhat started this entire discussion, I made it clear that I didn't even knew half of the bracket, don't like 'new skool' hiphop, and literally based my opinion off of listening 2 songs of each artist. While I stay with my opinion on them, although they might be subject to change if I were to listen more of it (for example as I changed my vote from Drake to cres cru after hearing another album of him), people need to realize they're just first impressions. I think that if a first impression is that bad, then it's not worth it to look Into the entire discography of the artist because there are literally 20 albums of 40 artists of 80 genres etc. That I could be listening to, but I'm not going to: I don't have the time for that nor do I want to make that. But if people feel offended because my first impression of something is that it sucks, well, it's only my impression of it anyway, that's based on my experience, so people shouldn't take that much offense in it in my opinion. I clearly didn't go after people because of what they liked, I just went through like 40 songs and gave my quick but honest opinion on them. 

 

About the killing people example I'd disagree, I can imagine a world where murderers are either being murdered, being brainwashed Into thinking they're wrong, or being locked up, only by instinct without anyone ever thinking why it's better. If anything I could argue why violence is a good thing but it would be so counterintuitive that I'm not even going to bother to, people will just assume I'm wrong and there would be no explanation needed or given. In this specific scenario, I do think based on his/her previous posts in the last few years, that mmf is really just a very open-minded and learnhungry person who became dissapointed at people not understanding a bunch of stuff, but sometimes this results Into becoming lazy: after all, there's no point in learning new things if you're going to assume others will know what you know, because if that were true, progression would never be possible. So with that said, I'll admit I lean towards 'explain your thoughts' as well, so I'm kind of playing devil's advocate here. I could even go as far as to say that calling people retarded itself is illogical, because without dumb people there wouldn't be smart people, and human are the most intelligent race, so thinking 90% of human are retarded is just wrong by definition. That said, I'm going complete autism right here because this complete disregards any kind of social context and assumes a logical world with logical forms of communication which is just not how the world is either. Or maybe I'm just ranting here, happy 2017 everyone, and may the (objectively/subjectively) best win. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Mascis    4494
1 hour ago, iSlickz said:

lil dicky

Lil bitch ass from my rival high school fuck that guy he's not funny at all 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nelrick    2391
25 minutes ago, mark said:

 

About the killing people example I'd disagree, I can imagine a world where murderers are either being murdered, being brainwashed Into thinking they're wrong, or being locked up, only by instinct without anyone ever thinking why it's better. If anything I could argue why violence is a good thing but it would be so counterintuitive that I'm not even going to bother to, people will just assume I'm wrong and there would be no explanation needed or given. 

I need to reiterate that my example's point was showing that for "killing to be bad" to become a norm in society, a point of view that is considered objective about human life, someone had to argue for it, they had to explain it, defend it until people understood it and accepted it as sound reasoning (at least the majority).

So with your first counterexample, murderes being murdered it could be that the norm is simply that its ok to kill murderers, its simply a different view on human life but that view too could be considered objective in such a world. The second one doesnt argue against what i said, if people are brainwashed then the point of view about killing being bad hasnt actually changed. There is an external phenomena that is interfering and it made them change their mind. The third one implies that the world doesnt have developed brains on humans to question their selves. Which yeah if we were purely based by instict then we wouldnt worry about whats better and as such, we wouldnt worry about wheter killing is ok or argue that its common sense knowing it is not to the point of calling others retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»canasian    4105

I think lil dicky is absolutely hilarious but I don't think it's fair to compare him with "real" rappers like 21 Savage and lil Uzi, dicky is a pure comedy act and also was established well before this year (even  if you consider $ave dat money his breakout that peaked in 2015)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Satchmo    3220
6 hours ago, Mascis said:

lil uzi is the best outta the xxl freshman class this year but the xxl freshman class is garbo

Denzel Curry/Herbo/Yachty if you don't just consider him an LUV clone

6 hours ago, Mascis said:

i saw a manslaughter and lived with a dude in a rap group ama

post music from that group

were they better than eyedea and ability?

I've never listened to a single song from eyedea and ability, but just give it to them, J.Cole will win a grammy someday, they deserve this win tbh.

6 hours ago, mmf said:

i was so on board with satchs post till he fire shots at MY MAN 21 SAVAGE AKA THE GREATEST RAPPER ALIVE

 

CUS THESE NIGGAS PUSSY AND HE HARD

 

I have confidence he'll improve over time

hopefully exponentially and not at a slow growth rate.

4 hours ago, iSlickz said:

lil dicky

please no

-----------------------------------------
Music is not objective, but general consensus gives you a more objective view of things. If you  are in a crow of 50 and 48 people like Wale and 2 people don't like Wale, who are the weird ones there? that's clearly not applicable here because it's pretty evenly split in this flame war.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Satchmo    3220

"all music is bad in the eyes of objective reasoning" - Offset from the Migos, March 2011

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FVFRYTHFNG    346
9 hours ago, Satchmo said:

2) Any white rapper not named Logic, and Eminem, with a caveat for 2006->2011 Eminem and

 

BOI

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mark    3105
8 hours ago, Nelrick said:

I need to reiterate that my example's point was showing that for "killing to be bad" to become a norm in society, a point of view that is considered objective about human life, someone had to argue for it, they had to explain it, defend it until people understood it and accepted it as sound reasoning (at least the majority).

So with your first counterexample, murderes being murdered it could be that the norm is simply that its ok to kill murderers, its simply a different view on human life but that view too could be considered objective in such a world. The second one doesnt argue against what i said, if people are brainwashed then the point of view about killing being bad hasnt actually changed. There is an external phenomena that is interfering and it made them change their mind. The third one implies that the world doesnt have developed brains on humans to question their selves. Which yeah if we were purely based by instict then we wouldnt worry about whats better and as such, we wouldnt worry about wheter killing is ok or argue that its common sense knowing it is not to the point of calling others retarded.

I'm simply of the opinion that people are based more on emotion and less on reason that you seem to think they do, and things such as violence being bad is something even baby's 'feel' as they will cry when they see violence etc. It's all psychology and a lot of it has been scientifically proven. But let's not derail this thread any further, interesting discussion for another time. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
website is bad    2170

babies also cry if you tell them clipping. sucks

 

MAKES YOU THINK

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+mmf    23481
12 hours ago, JC. said:

"'Objectively better music' lol" - music major friend

"The Killers are objectively shit" - former Loyola student friend

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Satchmo    3220
22 hours ago, PSY-Framelord Kappa said:

 

BOI

my bad, I forgot El-P gets a pass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×