Re: Mind's Eye New Google Groups is Dumb,but this not the subject

There might be room to include some influences from Europe as well as
Tin Pan Alley, musicals and the ballad era of the '30's and '40's
which can translate very well. Often- it is just an adjustment of
tempo. There is also a Middle Eastern influence- maybe Arab traders
and Black work songs?

Popular music died with the albums versus singles, some feel.
And...some say vinyl is making a comeback. I still have boxes of
mother's 78's though I think I cracked Nat King Cole. Those records
and radio were my nursery songs.

I was thinking the other day that one can still hear the rhythm of
horses in some passages of classical music- also cowboy/western- so
there is that to consider- the sounds around us.

On Jun 27, 5:10 am, Don Johnson <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Au contraire I insist nothing of the kind. Labeling music is created
> by the industry and, imho, has helped ruin popular music. I mean
> actual popular music not the label "pop."
>
> Rock is the child of the blues. R&B learned it's soulfulness at the
> knee of Godspel. Spirituals, if you will. My favorite guitar and
> singing sound is bluesy. SRV, Billy Gibbons, Eric Clapton, Allman
> bros., etc.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv3RWqFlvJs
>
> No doubt this is the blues.
>
> dj
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 3:37 AM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I do, James... Don will insist that Grateful Dead is rock and he may
> > be right, but I find it is more Blues ... in continuity with what
> > Louis Armstrong blew. Even Jethro Tull, widely known as prog rock, is
> > mostly country in spirit.
>
> > On Jun 27, 5:57 am, James <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Not a fan of country/blues music Vam?
>
> >> On 6/26/2012 8:24 AM, Vam wrote:
>
> >> > I don't enjoy insulting people ... but why shdn't they enjoy insulting
> >> > themselves !
>
> >> > Or do they look forward to some kind of stroking...
>
> >> > On Jun 26, 5:20 pm, Vam<atewari2...@gmail.com>  wrote:
> >> >> On Jun 26, 2:21 pm, malcymo<malc...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >> >>> The 'heart' is difficult to talk about as I believe that it is often used
> >> >>> metaphorically. I, being the coward that I am, tend to avoid reference to
> >> >>> it. It could be confused with love.
>
> >> >> And why kind it be true ?
>
> >> >> The kind of stupid one you are ?
>
> >> >> Building something you are safe with...
>
> >> >>> Malc
>
> >> >>> On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 7:50:30 AM UTC+12, Ash wrote:
> >> >>>> When referring to the tangible object it is within normal operating
> >> >>>> parameters and conventional properties but we could switch it around a
> >> >>>> little, say, what we are referring to is a summation of object
> >> >>>> permanence derived from causal relationships resulting in the idea of a
> >> >>>> thing we call a heart, or perhaps a million other ways like numbers.
>
> >> >>>> But I think Molly was saying a bit more than that, and perhaps you are
> >> >>>> too- you sly fox! :)
>
> >> >>>> _pleease interpret as jovial_
>
> >> >>>> On 6/25/2012 9:23 AM, RP Singh wrote:
> >> >>>>> And where's the heart , Molly ? is it somewhere outside this body ?
>
> >> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Molly<mollyb...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >> >>>>>> The heart also responds to all the things you mention.  Our physical
> >> >>>>>> organs and systems all respond to thoughts, feelings and awareness.
> >> >>>>>> The heartmath institute has done quite a bit of research in this
> >> >>>>>> regard.  Our being (includes physical and all aspects) and experience
> >> >>>>>> are in dynamic relationship.  The become one in paradox.
>
> >> >>>>>> On Jun 24, 11:22 am, RP Singh<123...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >> >>>>>>> It is the brain which is essential for experiencing all feelings ,
> >> >>>>>>> thoughts , and states of awareness. Whatever is experienced has
> >> >>>>>>> physical basis because without the physical organs, whether it be
> >> >>>>>>> brain or sense organs , no experience is possible. God abides in
> >> >>>>>>> matter and guides it by well established laws.
>
> >> >>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Molly<mollyb...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>> brain worship is prevalent, but science can't measure mind, or the
> >> >>>>>>>> effect of thought on experience.  Science can measure brain function
> >> >>>>>>>> as neuro-physical biochemisty, but not the complexity of thought and
> >> >>>>>>>> what it means to overall health.  There is a state in sleep and
> >> >>>>>>>> waking, where thought is not required, and indeed, awareness is
> >> >>>>>>>> enhanced because of it.
>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Jun 23, 2:35 pm, RP Singh<123...@gmail.com>    wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>> Man is a physical creature , the only spiritual aspect in him is
> >> >>>>>>>>> awareness. It is the mind which thinks and mind is physical , cut a
> >> >>>>>>>>> portion of the brain and thinking will stop , cut another portion
> >> >>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>> awareness will be reduced to such a level  as to be insignificant ,
> >> >>>>>>>>> and if you kill the brain even  awareness which is the spiritual
> >> >>>>>>>>> aspect in life will be extinguished. The fact is that Spirit
> >> >>>> pervades
> >> >>>>>>>>> throughout matter and an individuality might cease to be , yet the
> >> >>>> One
> >> >>>>>>>>> Spirit which is eternal and immortal remains unchanged.
>
> >> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Molly<mollyb...@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>   wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Mind is a non physical organ, like ego or our metaphorical heart
> >> >>>> (the
> >> >>>>>>>>>> one what contains our emotions.)  It's kind of like asking if
> >> >>>> people
> >> >>>>>>>>>> in different climates have different gall bladders because of the
> >> >>>>>>>>>> climate.  At some point in our development, because the human being
> >> >>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>> adaptive and resilient, it is possible to find a harmonious life
> >> >>>> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>> all systems communicating and functioning together. We call this
> >> >>>>>>>>>> optimal health.  And, at some point in our development, we may
> >> >>>>>>>>>> discover that the harmony of our being is more a reflection of our
> >> >>>>>>>>>> internal environment than external and that our lives are lived
> >> >>>> from
> >> >>>>>>>>>> inside out.  Of course, not everyone comes to this realization, and
> >> >>>>>>>>>> continue throughout their lives to look for external causes for
> >> >>>> their
> >> >>>>>>>>>> problems or discomfort. Whatever our philosophy, the quality of our
> >> >>>>>>>>>> lives can dramatically change for the better is we look within for
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>> answers.  Our mind thinks.  We can live and breathe without
> >> >>>> thinking.
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Yet thinking is an important aspect of life, and one that directly
> >> >>>>>>>>>> effects the quality of our lives.
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 23, 12:06 pm, "pol.science kid"<r.freeb...@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>   wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I wanted to find out about this Chaz guy you were talking about...
> >> >>>> so
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> i was going through some really old posts.. but couldnt go really
> >> >>>> far
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> back.. only till 2007... when was ME created? who started it? When
> >> >>>> you
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> have a look..there are sooo many topics covered..its so exiting..
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> though i thought i saw some homophobic posts... but seriously..
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> range is so wide.. and there were so many members actively
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> engaging ... my own old posts seemed dumb to me.. i guess they
> >> >>>> still
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> are.. But its remarkable the range of this forum..im gla i joined
> >> >>>> it..
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> one can learn a lot.... also ..do you guys think..different
> >> >>>> climate
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> zones affect the nature of people?..i mean more than the fact that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> environment affects culture which affects to some degree human
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> nature(or at least superficial responses.).. are people in
> >> >>>> temperate
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> areas different in their mind than people from tropical sultry
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> areas...
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 22, 5:02 pm, rigsy03<rigs...@yahoo.com>    wrote:
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> I read Barbara Ward's "The Rich Nations and the Poor Nations" in
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> early '60's when my curiousity led me beyond liberal arts- also
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Carson's "The Silent Spring", and several books on WWII. 60 years
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> later- and where are we?
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 19, 8:44 pm, archytas<nwte...@gmail.com>    wrote:
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My point above, I think, is that what appears very complex may
> >> >>>> have
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> points of simplexity where we can see the moral action.
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 20, 2:41 am, archytas<nwte...@gmail.com>    wrote:
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was attracted in to have a go at new google groups - utterly
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> unspeakable.  These moral issues form the core of my new book
> >> >>>> (80%
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> done).  Underlying the moral maze is the issue of frames of
> >> >>>> reference
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - most famously paradigms, though the Greeks knew.  You can
> >> >>>> usually
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> make several powerful arguments about anything.  You can't
> >> >>>> really
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide between the arguments because the root metaphors are
> >> >>>> different
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and incommensurable.  The following were examples, exhausting
> >> >>>> if not
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> exhaustive:
>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PARADIGM (disciplinary matrices)        KUHN 1970; BURRELL&
> >> >>>>   MORGAN 1979
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PICTURE THEORY OF MEANING       WITTGENSTEIN1922
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> LANGUAGE GAMES  WITTGENSTEIN 1958
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> MULTIPLE REALITIES      JAMES1911
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ALTERNATE REALITIES     CASTANEDA 1970; 1974
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> LANGUAGE STRUCTURES     WHORF 1956
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PROBLEMATICS    ALTHUSSER 1969; BACHELARD 1949
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> INTERNALLY CONFLICTING WORLD VIEWS      PIRSIG 1976
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> WORLD HYPOTHESES        PEPPER 1942; 1966
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> DREAM WORLDS (multiple frameworks)      FEYERABEND 1975
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> EVALUATING THE RATIONALITIES OF SOCIAL ACTION AND ACTION
> >> >>>> SYSTEMS
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (instrumental v life-world rationalities)       HABERMAS 1984
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> AN INSURRECTION OF LOCAL KNOWLEDGES IN A WEB OF POWER KNOWLEDGE
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> FOUCAULT 1977; 1980
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> MODAL LOGICS, RELATIVITIES      LEWIS 1926; 1929; 1946:  MOSER
> >> >>>> 1989
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SPECULATIVE PHILOSOPHY  WHITEHEAD 1969
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> METAPHOR        MORGAN 1986
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> TWO DIRECTIONAL TEXT AND RETRO-VISION   BURRELL
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -