MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

on the topic of not buying any more modules
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Modular Synth General Discussion Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next [all]
Author on the topic of not buying any more modules
Blairio
Fog Door wrote:
Quote:
Maybe Sartre just over thought things a bit


Ha ha ha I don't know if you meant that as a joke, but that's funny lol


Let's face it, there are not many jokes you can make about Sartre..
Funch
Blairio wrote:
Funch wrote:
lisa wrote:
Blairio: And that’s why the ”get a big case from the start” advice is such poison for some beginners.


And quote:
"What irritated me a bit about the "modular community" when I started was all the people kind of lovingly comparing it to drug use, saying that you'll never be done and that you should get a much bigger case than you ever though you'd need. In short, people unable to control their own GAS projecting that onto others."

Hope this makes sense in the context of your quotes


"Conclusion on the quote: “Hell is other people”:

The No Exit play by Sartre perfectly illustrates the difficult coexistence of people: the fact that others – and their gaze – is what alienates and locks me in a particular kind of being, which in turn deprives me of my freedom."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-philosophy.com/sartre-hell-is-oth er-people/amp


Hell may be other people (to Sartre) but we need them - such as this online community and those contributing to it. Maybe Sartre just over thought things a bit. Most folk labour under their own self imposed constraints, They don't need anybody else's.
well that's the point isn't it? You don't need other people to define you or "irritate" you over trivial matters. As Sarte is saying, you limit your freedom when other people are getting into your head such to the point that it alters you in negative ways. Often our conclusions are based upon what our perception of the situation is as it relates to us, not the reality of the situation. We see the world as we are.

Of course we need other people, we are social creatures and participate in Cooperative groups for the benefit of the group and individuals with in that group.
electricanada
Funch wrote:
well that's the point isn't it? You don't need other people to define you or "irritate" you over trivial matters. As Sarte is saying, you limit your freedom when other people are getting into your head such to the point that it alters you in negative ways. Often our conclusions are based upon what our perception of the situation is as it relates to us, not the reality of the situation. We see the world as we are.

Of course we need other people, we are social creatures and participate in Cooperative groups for the benefit of the group and individuals with in that group.


That sounds like Buddhism to me.
Blairio
Funch wrote:
Blairio wrote:
Funch wrote:
lisa wrote:
Blairio: And that’s why the ”get a big case from the start” advice is such poison for some beginners.


And quote:
"What irritated me a bit about the "modular community" when I started was all the people kind of lovingly comparing it to drug use, saying that you'll never be done and that you should get a much bigger case than you ever though you'd need. In short, people unable to control their own GAS projecting that onto others."

Hope this makes sense in the context of your quotes


"Conclusion on the quote: “Hell is other people”:

The No Exit play by Sartre perfectly illustrates the difficult coexistence of people: the fact that others – and their gaze – is what alienates and locks me in a particular kind of being, which in turn deprives me of my freedom."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-philosophy.com/sartre-hell-is-oth er-people/amp


Hell may be other people (to Sartre) but we need them - such as this online community and those contributing to it. Maybe Sartre just over thought things a bit. Most folk labour under their own self imposed constraints, They don't need anybody else's.
well that's the point isn't it? You don't need other people to define you or "irritate" you over trivial matters. As Sarte is saying, you limit your freedom when other people are getting into your head such to the point that it alters you in negative ways. Often our conclusions are based upon what our perception of the situation is as it relates to us, not the reality of the situation. We see the world as we are.


When it comes to Philosophy I favour Paul Simon over Sartre "A man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest" - The Boxer, 1969.

From memory, "Hell is other people" is Sarte's way of proposing that other people do define us - whether we like it or not. So we build knowledge of ourselves based at least in part on other peoples' views of us and responses to us - both positive and negative. This idea crops up later in Social Psychology's Attribution Theory from the late 1950's onwards.
Funch
Blairio wrote:
Funch wrote:
Blairio wrote:
Funch wrote:
lisa wrote:
Blairio: And that’s why the ”get a big case from the start” advice is such poison for some beginners.


And quote:
"What irritated me a bit about the "modular community" when I started was all the people kind of lovingly comparing it to drug use, saying that you'll never be done and that you should get a much bigger case than you ever though you'd need. In short, people unable to control their own GAS projecting that onto others."

Hope this makes sense in the context of your quotes


"Conclusion on the quote: “Hell is other people”:

The No Exit play by Sartre perfectly illustrates the difficult coexistence of people: the fact that others – and their gaze – is what alienates and locks me in a particular kind of being, which in turn deprives me of my freedom."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the-philosophy.com/sartre-hell-is-oth er-people/amp


Hell may be other people (to Sartre) but we need them - such as this online community and those contributing to it. Maybe Sartre just over thought things a bit. Most folk labour under their own self imposed constraints, They don't need anybody else's.
well that's the point isn't it? You don't need other people to define you or "irritate" you over trivial matters. As Sarte is saying, you limit your freedom when other people are getting into your head such to the point that it alters you in negative ways. Often our conclusions are based upon what our perception of the situation is as it relates to us, not the reality of the situation. We see the world as we are.


When it comes to Philosophy I favour Paul Simon over Sartre "A man sees what he wants to see, and disregards the rest" - The Boxer, 1969.

From memory, "Hell is other people" is Sarte's way of proposing that other people do define us - whether we like it or not. So we build knowledge of ourselves based at least in part on other peoples' views of us and responses to us - both positive and negative. This idea crops up later in Social Psychology's Attribution Theory from the late 1950's onwards.


I don't disagree with what you are saying. However, people define others through their own illusionary bias. And as of late, we are more organizing into groups that support (confirm) that bias. A group sees what it wants to see and disregards the rest. So it's logical not to let the illisions of others define you.

And I believe that is part of what Lisa is saying. There is a group within the modular community (she believes) that are "pushing" their own consumptive addiction onto others. If you want to be part of "our" group, buy more modules and be sure to buy a big case from the start.

However, no need to let that group position define you or irritate you.

As Sarte proposes (I think), you give up your freedom of self by doing so.

You may be after all just creating an illusionary rationalization reflective of your own bias possibly to control your own additive tendencies ( in this case) by dismissing another group.

Its logical to break that cycle for the sake of freedom of the self.

Here is another analysis quote from the link I posted. I yield to folks smarter on this subject through their years of dedicated study.

"The only defence left at one’s disposal is to transform others, to turn them into an object for my own consciousness and with my own characterization. We must rid ourselves of others, to escape and to reclaim oneself and the freedom that the Other’s gaze is depriving me of. Consciousness invents this subterfuge to continue to exist as a subject, in what constitutes yet another effort to resist the attempted subordination of the self by the gaze of the Other. This opens a moral dilemma."
Fog Door
Quote:
"The only defence left at one’s disposal is to transform others, to turn them into an object for my own consciousness and with my own characterization. We must rid ourselves of others, to escape and to reclaim oneself and the freedom that the Other’s gaze is depriving me of. Consciousness invents this subterfuge to continue to exist as a subject, in what constitutes yet another effort to resist the attempted subordination of the self by the gaze of the Other. This opens a moral dilemma."


Just shut up and buy some damn modules! very frustrating
Funch
Fog Door wrote:
Quote:
"The only defence left at one’s disposal is to transform others, to turn them into an object for my own consciousness and with my own characterization. We must rid ourselves of others, to escape and to reclaim oneself and the freedom that the Other’s gaze is depriving me of. Consciousness invents this subterfuge to continue to exist as a subject, in what constitutes yet another effort to resist the attempted subordination of the self by the gaze of the Other. This opens a moral dilemma."


Just shut up and buy some damn modules! very frustrating


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube .com/watch%3Fv%3D_C34g5mz1ZQ&ved=2ahUKEwjX69CuxajhAhVErJ4KHSs3AfEQwqsB MAJ6BAgFEBA&usg=AOvVaw13S6gAW-kNPsqhlQith47L

hihi
radin
What the hell is going on here? I thought we were talking about abstaining from buying more modules not whether or not Sartre was a complete fraud whose "original" ideas came from his misunderstanding of Heidegger.
cptnal
radin wrote:
What the hell is going on here? I thought we were talking about abstaining from buying more modules not whether or not Sartre was a complete fraud whose "original" ideas came from his misunderstanding of Heidegger.


Not sure if this was supposed to be a funny, but it made me laugh. applause
electricanada
At least Sartre owned a cat:

MarcelP
electricanada wrote:
At least Sartre owned a cat:



Hell is other peoples cats.
Funch
MarcelP wrote:
electricanada wrote:
At least Sartre owned a cat:



Hell is other peoples cats.
now that's funny. thumbs up

Hell is other peoples forcing me to buy more modular module's by spreading their module addictions here on a modular forum. hihi
lisa
Mmm, yum! My life sure was lacking some half baked, quasi-intellectual opposition to the bleeding obvious. It's peanut butter jelly time! MY ASS IS BLEEDING
notmiserlouagain
Blairio wrote:
Maybe Sartre just over thought things a bit.

Quote of the month! Love it! Homer Simpson

lisa wrote:
Mmm, yum! My life sure was lacking some half baked, quasi-intellectual opposition to the bleeding obvious. It's peanut butter jelly time! MY ASS IS BLEEDING

Mr. Green

As the saying goes: "All the gear, no idea..." (hides)

tl;dr It´s a bit of a mystery to myself but I´m really put off by much of the "modular scene", the too-much-of-everything-hype,
so much raving about modules, so little experimentation in concept or process! So little interest for the musical aspects!
Consumerism kills creativity! Less is more! Just saying**... angry

Something like Jessica Rylan did with her Personal Synth really fascinates me, she only needed like sixteen knobs??
The synth as a means to an end, not the end in itself, and you can still have some fetish fun!

**Yes, it´s entirely my own problem and a matter of taste, and no, Im not that negative, just contradictory,
since I love all you freaks and still click on all your little Soundcloud headers
Miley Cyrus
Fog Door
Less can be more but "all the gear, no idea" is not necessarily a bad place to be if you want to make interesting music.

Quote:
The synth as a means to an end, not the end in itself,


This ultimately reflects my own position, but the sheer depth and complexity of modular systems mean that it is fully justifiable that the synth be the end in itself. We all have the freedom to choose how we wish to spend our time and money after all.

I understand the point the OP was trying to make and that is all I will take away from this thread, although I suspect it may always be around . . . undying, eternal.
cptnal
I'd agree we need more content about patching. We're all right for content about gear. There are corners of this forum where you can find and share ideas about patching, and I always enjoy those threads more. Perhaps if a skewed focus on gear upsets us so much we should all up our game and contribute more on the ideas side. seriously, i just don't get it
notmiserlouagain
Fog Door wrote:
Less can be more but "all the gear, no idea" is not necessarily a bad place to be if you want to make interesting music.

applause Well, to me, it is, but good point! I was just having a rant/fun! There´s no single answer to this thread, but that drug metaphor is telling and not without serious implications for some. A good thing to think about it, again and again?

Fog Door wrote:
I understand the point the OP was trying to make and that is all I will take away from this thread, although I suspect it may always be around . . . undying, eternal.


And that Sartre thingie made my day!
ayruos
cptnal wrote:
I'd agree we need more content about patching. We're all right for content about gear. There are corners of this forum where you can find and share ideas about patching, and I always enjoy those threads more. Perhaps if a skewed focus on gear upsets us so much we should all up our game and contribute more on the ideas side. seriously, i just don't get it


I remember maybe half a decade ago when my primary occupation was working as a video editor, often the conversation that came up between other editors was "what software are you using for xyz..." and never about technique.

Then I read this theory - even though all video editors were editing video, the nature of the productions/videos were so varied, the only common point of discussion would be about the software tools, etc.

I think music, and modular, is similar. Everyone is working on such different kinds of music, or thinks about music differently, often the common point of discussion between two musicians would be "what gear are you using". With modular, there's so many modules and even more ways to patch between them, this problem becomes even more amplified.
Fog Door
Quote:
I was just having a rant/fun! There´s no single answer to this thread


I know, I totally agree with pretty much everything you've said smile
Funch
lisa wrote:
Mmm, yum! My life sure was lacking some half baked, quasi-intellectual opposition to the bleeding obvious. It's peanut butter jelly time! MY ASS IS BLEEDING
So not a Billy Mummy fan? Fully baked would be more accurate. Good thread w00t while it lasted though.
moremagic
ayruos wrote:
cptnal wrote:
I'd agree we need more content about patching. We're all right for content about gear. There are corners of this forum where you can find and share ideas about patching, and I always enjoy those threads more. Perhaps if a skewed focus on gear upsets us so much we should all up our game and contribute more on the ideas side. seriously, i just don't get it


I remember maybe half a decade ago when my primary occupation was working as a video editor, often the conversation that came up between other editors was "what software are you using for xyz..." and never about technique.

Then I read this theory - even though all video editors were editing video, the nature of the productions/videos were so varied, the only common point of discussion would be about the software tools, etc.

I think music, and modular, is similar. Everyone is working on such different kinds of music, or thinks about music differently, often the common point of discussion between two musicians would be "what gear are you using". With modular, there's so many modules and even more ways to patch between them, this problem becomes even more amplified.
critics talk about art
artists talk about paint
lisa
I lasted almost six months but today I ordered my second EP-420. w00t
cptnal
Welcome back. It's peanut butter jelly time!
Keltie
Three months... then a factory peaks came up on the bay, and it seemed like a rational loosener for the post superbooth broke AF fest that is inevitably coming my way.

On the plus side, I’m packing up the ciggies next week. Which will mean more cash for modules. very frustrating
Pelsea
Pelsea wrote:
Surprise! I have already bought my last module. (Although I have materials to build some.)


Not quite, as it turned out. Given an opportunity to make a presentation, I was inspired to fill in all of the gaps in my system--


However, instead of the show, I was treated to an ambulance ride that came very close to being one way. This gave a new twist to the phrase, "last module". So, even though I have the materials for another row squirreled away, it's time to let the iron cool down and make some serious music. I'll never be remembered for owning a nice instrument, but as a composer.. well, who knows.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Modular Synth General Discussion Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next [all]
Page 14 of 15
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group