konerko14

I think that Im judging classical music by the wrong standard. Its a much different type of music than what I usually listen to, which is classic rock. Classic rock is much more simple and easy to understand. What do you guys use as the standard when judging classical music(Mozart, Beethoven era)?

My purpose in listening to music is to have it make me feel something. I listen to "We are the Champions" by Queen when I want some extra motivation. I listen to "Turn the Page" by Bob Seger when I want to experience the emotions of his anecdotel lyrics. I listen to "I know" by Fiona Apple when Im blue. Mostly though, I think I enjoy pieces that make me feel an incredible emotional high, where it gets my adrenaline pumping. Preferably, the song will start off subtle, constantly building momentum until the emotions just explode at the time of the chorus. Do you have any suggestions of specific classical music that represents this structure? Also, why is Mozart, Bach or Beethoven considered good? By what standard of judgment? Theyre all of the same era, arent they? How do you determine that with classical music. I have a hard time doing that, especially since there is usually no lyrics. I listen to an online classical music radio station: http://www.xlnc1.org/nuke/iframe.php?file=listen.htm

I enjoy having classical music playing in the background when Im in the house. But how does one judge what is good or bad classical music?

Justice: administering deserved punishment. He is not necessarily receiving pleasure from causing the other person pain, but from the fact that he is serving justice. The other person deserves to be punished. And if its not a situation that can be brought to court, then I think it can be morally right if the person seeks personal justice against the other.

I really like a lot of your artwork. You chose very interesting concepts to portray. As other people mentioned, your use of color is superb too. Personally, I like "safe city" the most right now. The light colors you chose set the mood of serenity well. Also, the woman looks like she enjoys pondering. How much can I buy it for? The woman in "bride" is very enticing. She has a nice butt(thats meant as a constructive compliment). One thing about your characters is that they are all so damn serious. I checked, and there is literally not one piece with a character that is smiling. Why is that? I understand you want to show that your ideal characters are serious to have them portray a sense of strength, but even great heroes feel emotions. A suggestion I want to make to you is to add more emotion to your artwork. Do this with more detailed facial expressions, or certain gestures from the character. I like the characters expression in "naked", and I wish there were more emotionally intense scenes like that.

You dont honestly believe that its a biological fear to be afraid of mice and spiders, do you? I highly doubt spiders and mice were so dangerous to humans(or at all) in the past that the human body had to create an instinct as a way to protect us from these "beasts." The real reason that causes any fear is because the thing causes one to feel uncertain of his safety. A person can probably get over a fear of mice or spiders if he understands completely what he is dealing with;i.e. he gains knowledge.

They have nothing or little to lose when they pursue another person who isnt very much into them. It takes the pressure off a normally very stressful type of situation, and therefore it makes the situation more desirable. They either dont think they can meet the other persons enthusiastic impression of a relationship that they want formed, or (if they do think they can meet their expectations) they dont want to deal with the pressure of fulfilling the others huge excitation. Or maybe they never liked the other person from the get-go. Maybe they dont want to give the impression that anything else matters to them. Its probably just a subconscious prevention to keep the relationship, and cautiousness to try to ensure the other doesnt lose interest in him. If they give the other the impression that their life revolves around them, then maybe the other will do the same thing for him. Not that its necessarily good to do, but they think it is. Whether they have low self-esteem or high self-esteem, it comes down to wanting others to have a certain impression of them. Maybe the depressed guy smiles a lot so others dont see his unhappiness. Maybe another person smiles at others to try to express that they are nice and accepting of them. It obviously offended them and harmed their self-esteem in some way. It might be defense or retaliation that is aimed at getting even with them. Metaphorically speaking, I think its the same thing as when someone gets physically harmed. They act in self-defense or at some point want to hurt them because they hurt him. Im not sure I would call it foolish though, as KDel did. Its therapeutic to get revenge- its a form of justice when the other person cant get charged lawfully.

Oh, I see. I thought you meant that I agreed with the Christians that Christmas is a holiday to celebrate Jesus. Happy Christmas to you too. Now I can say that guilt-free.

What are you talking about?

Right. Emotions form based on the persons values and actions. Pride has no choice to form, however, if a man is productive and he values productive work- pride HAS to form, same with the other emotions. So that means the decisions made by the person can be irrational but emotions always act accordingly to the laws of nature. Thats what I should have said before instead of saying they dont contradict anything in reality. If you chose to evade the facts that a kitten is of very little harm, then that is irrational decision-making, not an error fear made. Fear itself makes no choices and is never wrong. When fear exists it always means that you are uncertain of safety and harm. Is it irrational to fear kittens if you have never seen one or heard of one(but say the person has seen ferocious tigers)? The kitten isnt dangerous, but to the persons knowledge there is a good chance he can be. The basis of his fear formed from looking at facts objectively, he just is very ignorant at this point.

I dont think its correct to say that. Christians dont intend to give presents to a dead Jesus. Jesus is just what they want for the means for the celebration. They want the celebration of Christmas to be only because of Jesus. I agree.

I'll define 'fear' as a desire to want to escape;escape from responsibility, escape from a seemingly harmful event. The fear exists because (at least) your subconscious is not convinced of certainty from harm(emotional or physical harm), and your decision how you handle this fear is what can be irrational. I dont think there are irrational emotions because they are automatic. The actions or values one has choosen voluntarily that caused those emotions may be irrational but not the emotion itself. I cant say its rational or irrational to fear a little kitten, a bunny, or a dog with large sharp teeth. Like I mentioned in this post, the fear will exist if you are having uncertainties of the event. That means it will depend strictly on the specific situation and person involved. How much does the person value life? Does the person have a gun or weapon? Does the person have knowledge of kittens, bunnies, or dogs? Saying that, I think a fear will always be correct. Correct meaning it will always and only exist when you are uncertain of harm, and also what the person thinks is harmful to himself.

I think Ive said already. The real meaning is the purpose the holiday was created. In this case, Saturnalia was started in order to have a celebration during this time of the year. It was to have joy and unbridled enthusiasm in December. Real meaning means purpose. I had to judge the originators actions to get a better understanding of what that purpose was. But over time a holiday may run the risk of moving away from its real purpose because people start adjusting the holiday to their wishes, so thats why I looked upon the originators and not the aftermath. The purpose of Saturnalia was to celebrate and have fun. Its up to the individual how he chooses to have fun though. You dont want to bring a tree inside your house? Fine, you can choose to celebrate how you wish. I think its a celebration in general, so you can choose what should be incorporated into the celebration. But to say its strictly a celebration of Jesus, or strictly a celebration of any particular thing, I think is wrong.

Yeah, youre right. Thanks. Saturnalia seems to have been quite similar to how Christmas is currently celebrated.

Isnt that what I said here: Are you saying "The only value that men can offer me is the work of their mind" is correct grammatically because Ayn Rand implies that its each individual that needs to develop and then offer their mind, not an offer from a collectived group.

Are you saying "The only value that men can offer me is the work of their mind" is correct grammatically because Ayn Rand implies that its each individual that needs to develop and then offer their mind, not an offer from a collectived group.

Is it right to call a fear irrational? The fear itself consists of no contradictions to reality. Lack of knowledge and uncertainty is what causes a fear to form. Therefore it is the persons behavior and actions(or lack of) that should only be deemed irrational, not the actual fear.

I think catching a glimpse of a living creature(or thinking you see a living creature) when you arent expecting one to be there will initially cause a startling reaction, just because its a natural reaction and part of the alarm stage of humans. But when people are afraid of spiders even after they have a clear view of them, its probably because they dont know whether the spider can harm them or not. The average person says "hes probably not dangerous." They dont KNOW though, especially because some species of spiders are dangerous and some arent, and since they dont know exactly which ones are then they are fearful to a degree. People are less afraid of ants though because they are more sure they will cause no harm(they will be more fearful of red colored ants though even if they arent the exact species that are dangerous). The more certain you are that something wont harm you, the less afraid you will be of it. Its like when Austin Stevens(on Animal Planet) spots giant pythons in the wilderness, he is probably a lot more confident and less fearful of the snake than the average person. Thats because Austin Stevens understands snakes, has a comprehensive knowledge on all the species, and mainly because he knows how to handle them without getting hurt. The average person will be in shock if he sees a giant python in the wilderness. A giant python in a secure cage however wont make many people too fearful though since they are more certain it wont harm them.

I forgot to fix this line when I was typing it. I didnt mean free from any rationality(people can always choose to act irrationally). But it was probably more lenient of judgments from most people during Saturnalia because it was expected to act like that. Most probably accepted whimsical behavior more so during that holiday than their typical days.

I wanted to know how Christmas SHOULD be celebrated, and if I should participate in it. And what better place to look than its origins, and its causes? Just because a holiday currently is celebrated a certain way doesnt mean its the right way to celebrate it. In order to know the real reason why Christmas should be celebrated, researching its hirstory was necessary. I wanted to learn if it should be a religous holiday or a secular one- what are we celebrating for?. I wanted to know the meaning so I can have a firm grasp on what should be included in the holiday and what should be omitted. Why omit the religious figures if they are what the holiday was meant to celebrate? Without knowing the origins and history of Christmas, you are omitting it to change the holiday to your desires, not accept the real meaning of it. Everybody else has these traditions during Christmas? Fine, you say, I'll just do what everybody else is doing instead of putting in the effort to know how it should be celebrated. I'd rather celebrate a holiday for its real meaning than to adjust the holiday to my wishes(or everybodys elses wishes). I think you are saying popular consensus makes the holiday. Popular consensus and adjusting the meaning of the holiday to your desires is what it seems youre saying. You are not saying there is one correct meaning to Christmas. You are saying its correct when people say Christmas is the celebration of Jesus, you are saying its correct when people say Christmas is only for consumerism, you are saying its correct when people say its a day of celebration in general. Not that youre personally doing this, but how can one dispute the Christians when they call it their holiday? A person who doesnt have knowledge of the history of Christmas would say, "Not everybody incorportates Jesus into Christmas so therefore Christmas should be celebrated how one wishes." And that would be as far as you can proceed with the conversation.

Then I'll answer it now. I had to look at the peoples actions in order to understand the purpose of the holiday and what it stood for. The meaning of Saturnalia was not necessarily to act like a moron, but it was to celebrate. The means they used for this celebration was the god they worshipped, which was Saturn. But judging by their actions, celebrating the existence of Saturn really wasnt the main focus of the holiday- it was to be free from any type of laws or free from any rationality at all. From the knowledge I have on this subject, I think the reason why Saturnlia was created was to have a day of celebration, a celebration in general. And it was a good idea. I think the main focus of the writing would be on the majority of people who celebrated the new year. That a popular attribute of the holiday(in the US) is to watch the big ball drop in NY. Or they may write that it was popular to kiss someone at midnight that day, or that people counted down the last 10 seconds watching a tv screen. I dont think the main focus of the writing would necessarily be about people getting drunk. More likely what would be written is that it is popular to have wine that day, or something subtle like that. But with Saturnalia, anecdotal stories described the King setting up races with naked Jews going against each other- crazy stuff like that. Im basing my conclusions on the knowledge I currently have on the subject.

I said when Saturnalia was around, the people celebrated it with irrational behavior and drunken wildness. Did I say that was the "true meaning" of Saturnalia? I believe I said that was how the people acted on that day. And I also said: "But I see no reason to object to adjusting that meaning to a better one, which a lot of people have already done." Meaning, there can be a better way to celebrate than the way the people originally did on Saturnalia.

Im changing my stance on Christmas due to new evidence I found. I knew the Christians wanted to overtake other popular December holidays. But it seems their top priority was to convert pagans to Christianity and to change their December holiday called Saturnalia to a predominant Christian meaning, so they changed it to "Christmas". A lot of the traditions of Christmas were taken from Roman pagans, such as bringing trees inside the house and gift-giving- other traditions were picked up along the way. The start of Christmas actually resembled Saturnalia quite a bit, with drunken wildness and whimsical behavior by the masses. I assume Christmas became a much more religious holiday for a time being, even though it doesnt need to be one. So, Christmas appears to be essentially Saturnalia, which was not a religious holiday, but instead a time for irrational behavior and no laws whatsoever. But I see no reason to object to adjusting that meaning to a better one, which a lot of people have already done.

I think theres a true meaning to Christmas. Just because people adjust the holiday to fit their personal needs and desires, doesnt mean there isnt one correct meaning. As for what the true meaning is, I still see no reason why it wouldnt be to celebrate Jesus' birth. I think this is its true meaning because of the origins of Christmas and the purpose of it described by its creators. Its not the name, its the meaning. Im trying to figure out if it should be recognized as a religious holiday or a secular one.

Didnt the Christians create Christmas? Wasnt it created to celebrate Jesus' birth? Yes, there were celebrations for winter solstice and other December holidays before Christmas. But Christmas is a seperate holiday, and non-Christians only want to celebrate it because everyone else does. I understand the Christians wanted Christmas to overtake the already popular winter holiday, but is the true meaning of Christmas not to celebrate Jesus' birth? I agree. I just dont want to celebrate a Christian holiday just because its there and its popular. It seems like a breach of integrity since youre doing it to join with everyone else, not to celebrate the true meaning. I enjoy seeing and doing these things(except the manger thing), but I think it should be a seperate holiday from Christmas. We should go back to celebrating winter solstice, and the meaning of the holiday would be to celebrate the fact that the days will be longer and the sun will shine more on Earth from then on.