Bob said "Music is neutral"; Do you agree?
- Thread starter Nimrod
- Start date
- Status
philosophizer
New member
Are you suggesting that some music is inherently evil? How should I answer this?
Culturally:
Many cultures have different musical styles, containing different instruments, rhythms, scales, tonal increments, etc. The merging of cultural styles continually creates many "new" musical styles. Each of these styles express ranges of moods. How would you define a certain style or range within a style as evil? What are your determiners? Be careful or you could slip into a form of musical racism here.
Contextually:
What context is the music in? What are the beliefs of the performer? What are the lyrics, if any, that accompany the music? I think the context is what would give the "music" a good or evil direction. Apart from the context, the music would be neutral. It needs something to point it in a certain direction. What is the conceptual message of the lyrics and/or performer?
Scientifically:
Music is simply an artful arrangment of sound. Sound is simply waveform vibrations of air that reach our ears and we interpret as somthing. Music occurs when these sound waves from instruments are arranged in an appealing pattern or progression with waveforms that compliment each other (or provide dissonance when appropriate). Nothing described here is inherently good or evil. Kind of intreguing and a little amazing, but not good or evil.
Music is neutral. Stripped of the context of a particular conceptual direction given by lyrics or the subcutaneous views of the performer(s), there is neither good nor evil confined within it.
Culturally:
Many cultures have different musical styles, containing different instruments, rhythms, scales, tonal increments, etc. The merging of cultural styles continually creates many "new" musical styles. Each of these styles express ranges of moods. How would you define a certain style or range within a style as evil? What are your determiners? Be careful or you could slip into a form of musical racism here.
Contextually:
What context is the music in? What are the beliefs of the performer? What are the lyrics, if any, that accompany the music? I think the context is what would give the "music" a good or evil direction. Apart from the context, the music would be neutral. It needs something to point it in a certain direction. What is the conceptual message of the lyrics and/or performer?
Scientifically:
Music is simply an artful arrangment of sound. Sound is simply waveform vibrations of air that reach our ears and we interpret as somthing. Music occurs when these sound waves from instruments are arranged in an appealing pattern or progression with waveforms that compliment each other (or provide dissonance when appropriate). Nothing described here is inherently good or evil. Kind of intreguing and a little amazing, but not good or evil.
Music is neutral. Stripped of the context of a particular conceptual direction given by lyrics or the subcutaneous views of the performer(s), there is neither good nor evil confined within it.
Nimrod
Member
Thanks philosophizer for your input. But I would disagree with you. Lets take a closer look at what you said.
Scientifically: Music is simply an artful arrangment of sound.
So by this, art is simply an artful arragement of colors.
Sound is simply waveform vibrations of air that reach our ears and we interpret as somthing.
Color is also simple waveforms(a trillion times faster) that reach our eyes and we interpret as something.
Music occurs when these sound waves from instruments are arranged in an appealing pattern or progression with waveforms that compliment each other (or provide dissonance when appropriate).
"appealing"? what is appealing in music and how do you measure that?
Art can and can't be appealing. (Pornography is a good example).
It is an arragnement of patterns that compliment each other.
Nothing described here is inherently good or evil. Kind of intreguing and a little amazing, but not good or evil.
Therefore art is not inherently good or evil. (Even though someone my paint a nude picture)
Hopefully I'll get more quotes from musicians to show you that even they believe that music is not neutral. In the meantime you can download a MP3 from Frank Garlock at sermonaudio.com
Music
This would be a good start if you are interested in what others says.
Scientifically: Music is simply an artful arrangment of sound.
So by this, art is simply an artful arragement of colors.
Sound is simply waveform vibrations of air that reach our ears and we interpret as somthing.
Color is also simple waveforms(a trillion times faster) that reach our eyes and we interpret as something.
Music occurs when these sound waves from instruments are arranged in an appealing pattern or progression with waveforms that compliment each other (or provide dissonance when appropriate).
"appealing"? what is appealing in music and how do you measure that?
Art can and can't be appealing. (Pornography is a good example).
It is an arragnement of patterns that compliment each other.
Nothing described here is inherently good or evil. Kind of intreguing and a little amazing, but not good or evil.
Therefore art is not inherently good or evil. (Even though someone my paint a nude picture)
Hopefully I'll get more quotes from musicians to show you that even they believe that music is not neutral. In the meantime you can download a MP3 from Frank Garlock at sermonaudio.com
Music
This would be a good start if you are interested in what others says.
philosophizer
New member
I see you picked up on the scientific arguement. So you believe that certain sound vibrations are more evil than others? What makes a vibration good or evil?
You made an analogy to visual forms of art. I think this is a good analogy but I think you connected it at the wrong level.
You made an analogy to visual forms of art. I think this is a good analogy but I think you connected it at the wrong level.
Yes, it could be described as such.
True.
There are certain musical patterns and tonal combinations that I find appealing. You may find some other patterns and combinations appealing. We all have different tastes. I measure how appealing music is by how it makes me feel. There is not concrete quantifiable amount I can give, just a feeling of enjoyment. I enjoy Beethoven's 4th Symphony. I enjoy various cultures of folk music. I enjoy "Carry On Wayward Son" by Kansas. I enjoy "Stairway to Heaven" by Led Zeppelin. All these partly because I am drawn to some of the musical patterns they possess.
Here's where your analogy misses the mark. Music is like the paint of an artist's palatte. It's performance is like each of the artist's brushstrokes. You're confusing the medium with the message. The little dots of printed ink on the pages of porn magazines are not what make porn wrong. Pornography is wrong because of its message. It is wrong because of the actions portrayed and the context they are portrayed in. Your analogy is like if I were to say, "porno videos are bad, so the specific video cassettes themselves must be bad."
Quite right. Art is not inherently good or evil. The quality of good or evil depends on the intent of the artist.
I would like to download it but I don't think I can. My home connection is terrible and I don't want to download it at work. Could you give a little summary of what it says. I would be interested in hearing other points of view.
Nimrod
Member
A single sound. Sure, I believe so. For example if the sound is so loud where it destroys your ears or make you deaf. Would you agree that this is morally wrong to listen to something loud where it destroys your God given ears? God gave us limitations on the volume that our ears could handle. Do you think it is right to go beyond what God has given us? OR how about a screeching sounds that raises the hair on your head?
Now a single note, say for example on a piano, is not evil, but when the notes are put together it could be like pornography to your ears.
Does that make it right before God?
So are you feeding your "flesh" or your "spirit" by these feelings?
As for Led Zeppelin, from my experience, it is feeding my "flesh". It's carnal.
Music is the message being sold. What you see on MTV is really what the music is saying. Lyrics make no difference.
Christians say that they listen to the lyrics of Christian Rock music, then they turn around and say they don't listen to the secular Rock and Roll lyrics.
Frank Garlock has a book and a video series on music, and what is acceptable to God. Buy the book.
All you are engaging in here is speculation. It's one thing to purposefully harm your body, but to say sounds are evil based on raising hairs is quite the stretch.
Again, more speculation. The flatted-5th sounds very "dark" as you would say in the locrian mode. If you play it in the lydian scale, it's tonal qualities seem completely different. Neither implies any sort of inherant morality or immorality. Enough with the speculation.
So far I haven't seen a single speck of evidence that would suggest otherwise.
So your experience is now the measuring stick for what's acceptable?
Music is the message being sold. What you see on MTV is really what the music is saying. Lyrics make no difference. Christians say that they listen to the lyrics of Christian Rock music, then they turn around and say they don't listen to the secular Rock and Roll lyrics.
Notice what you said: What the music is "saying." Lyrics make all the difference in the world. You're confusing the means with the message. Don't sit here and try to suggest that abuse of a medium means the medium is sinful. By your logic CDs and tapes are sinful and worldy as well because of the messages they carry.
I hope you never use a knife to cut your food, do you know how many people are killed every year by knives? The killers just can't help it, the knife is always going to make us sin even if we were just intending on cutting our steak with it.
philosophizer
New member
Okay, it is very dumb to listen to sounds so loud that they damage your ears. And we should not be harming our bodies that are the temple of our spirits. But the sound itself is not what is morally wrong. It is the act of listening to the sound. If someone plays a loud noise that hurts my ears, I don't blame the sound wave or the air for carrying it. I blame the person that played it.
A "screeching sound" could certainly be unpleasant. I find asparagas unpleasant but I don't consider it evil.
Again, refer to what I just said about being "unpleasant."
BTW, do you only listen to music that plays only one note at a time?
Does my judgement of what is appealing make it right before God? No. Doesn't make it wrong either. I've never heard God say anything against chordal music or harmony or much of anything about music theory itself. If you have any scriptural examples, I'd love to take a look.
I am a musician so I certainly enjoy many kinds of music. I do listen to lyrics. I try to stay away from songs that have "bad messages." I am against the idea that some Christians have that only Christian music is good and secular music shouldn't be listened to. I don't think that God is so limited in his means of communicating with us. I believe He can send us messages even through secular music. I have had many moments listening to the radio when a lyric strikes me a certain way and opens my eyes about something. Yes, God can even communicate through secular music.
Music is the message being sold. What you see on MTV is really what the music is saying. Lyrics make no difference.
Christians say that they listen to the lyrics of Christian Rock music, then they turn around and say they don't listen to the secular Rock and Roll lyrics.
What I "see" on MTV has nothing to do with music. I "see" video. Is the picture tube in my television evil because it allows me to see MTV videos? Is my remote control evil because it allows me to go to that channel?
Music videos also have a context and content. Those can be abused. You could view music as a container. It can be filled with good or evil. But that does not change the properties of the container itself. A jar could be filled with water or poison, but it is still just a jar.
If I see the book in the library or see the videos on TV, maybe I'll take a look. But it doesn't sound like something I would wanna buy.
No, music isn't neutral. It effects us psychologically. Dr Paul-Elliot Cobbs of the Everett Symphony told me that each key of the scale invokes a different psychological effect. Changing from C major to D major doesn't just pitch the music higher, it changes the mood. (Don't ask me why)
You're referring to subjective effects. Raising the pitch does make the music seem faster, but that's because technically it is: The wavelengths are shorter.
How would you account for people who are tone-deaf? They can't distinguish between C or D. I'm fairly well-trained in music and I would be hard pressed to tell you the difference in tone between C and D.
philosophizer
New member
Changing moods doesn't necessarily have moral implications or have any affect on "good" or "evil."
.Ant
New member
WTF?
WTF?
And stupidly loud noises / music is not music. And anyway, you decide what volume you want to listen to.
WTF?
Now that's just silly. Porno music? I don't see how that is possible, unless it includes sexual sound clips or lyrics...
And stupidly loud noises / music is not music. And anyway, you decide what volume you want to listen to.
Sure. Eating is carnal. Eating feeds my flesh, and not my spirit. But it's not wrong.
philosophizer
New member
Re: WTF?
Re: WTF?
Well sure. Any music that has that wah-pedal guitar riff that goes: bow-chicka-bow-bow. It has to be porno music and therefore evil.
Right? :kookoo:
Re: WTF?
Well sure. Any music that has that wah-pedal guitar riff that goes: bow-chicka-bow-bow. It has to be porno music and therefore evil.
Right? :kookoo:
Nimrod
Member
Sorry for the delay, I am currently very busy, and I can only reply to certain statements. I want to stay on the topic of neutral. Here are some quotes from Frank Garland's book "Music in the Balance". Very good book.
-----------------------------------
Mike Coyle has been recognized as one of the world's outstanding French horn virtuosos. He has played under the director of such notable conductors as Donald Voorhees, Howard Hanson, and Arthur Fiedler. He is presently a full-time musical ministry evangelist. In the article "Music: Is there an Absolute?" this well-qualified Christian ,musician states a basic syllogism which will serve as the foundation upon which Christians must be "of one mind."
"Not all emotions are good ones. Surely man and his emotions were created in the image of God, but man has fallen, and with him has gone the purity with which he was created. Hate, when directed at sin, is good and acceptable. But when it is directed at a brother in Christ, it is sin. Anger is unacceptable except when the one who is angry is not sinning. An emotion like lust is never right. It is an adulteration of God-given emotions. Since music is an emotional language, and since some emotions are wrong for the child of God, then some music is wrong for the Christian"
"The Music within you" written by Carol Merle-Fishman and Shelly Katsh two practicing certified music therapists and instructors at New York University, states:
"Music is communication and communication is music."
"Music is a form of non-verbal communication."
"Music is not just a special part of life; it represents life itself. From it we receive inspiration, excitement, and emotional enrichment. With it we create, communicate , and express who we are"
"There is surely no doubt that music actually conveys very real and sometimes very specific emotional states from the musician to the listener"
"Like human nature itself, music cannot possibly be neutral in its spiritual direction"
I guess my question for you will be, why are you a more qualified person about music than the people in the music business?
Do you know anyone in the music business (other than CCM) that believes music is neutral?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now lets look at the Word of God.
1 Samuel 16:16 "And it shall be, when the evil spirit from God is on you, then he shall play [with] his hand, and [it shall be] well with you"
1 Samuel 16:23 "And it happened when the spirit from God was on Saul, that David too a harp and played with his hand. And there was relief for Saul, and [it was] well with him, and the evil spirit departed from him.
Music is not neutral, otherwise it would not have "relief" Saul. Music does has an effect on people.
But if music is neutral, then I need you to explain to me these verses from the Word of God.
Thanks.
:think:
Nimrod
Member
Eph: 5:19 "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; "
It seems clear to me that God likes melody. There are over 500 references to music in the Scriptures. I do believe God does have a preference.
Wasn't Satan a musician?:devil:
Something to think about.
This seems to be the cornerstone of your argument so I'll address this.
You're still confusing the medium with the message. Music is simply a way to express those emotions you refer to. There are gestures that can be made with your middle finger that are wholly inappropriate but that still doesn't make the middle finger inherantly moral/immoral. If you move to a different culture, they won't bat an eye over a raised middle finger because they will have some other form of expressing disdain. You're beating the same dead horse over and over. Language is a form of communication. Gestures are a form of communication. Facial expressions are a form of communication. Are you seeing the pattern here? It's not the medium, it's the message that has moral value.
See above.
I'm qualified to discuss this because I've played music for over 10 years. I've studied music theory, music history, musical culture.....the list goes on. Your question is somewhat dishonest because it suggests the issue here is a "music industry" question instead of "music philosophy" one.
I don't have a Bible handy right now, so I would appreciate some context.
So it was the harp and not the spirit of God on David that brought him relief? If the spirit of God hadn't been on David what good do you think the harp playing would have done? Let's give credit where credit is due here. David was using the harp as a tool to comfort, but it wasn't the harp that did the work.
- Status