The Logic Off Topic list

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Gunn" <mightyjohn@...>
To: <logic-ot@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 6:45 AM
Subject: Re: [L-OT] guitar gods


> >Re: [L-OT] guitar gods
> >
> >  >   From: Dennis Gunn <mightyjohn@...>
> >
> >  >You see competition as a negative thing.  Wrong.
> >  >
> >  >Without it we would never get anywhere.
> >
> >  Hogwash...... I've come realize (in my later years :-) that the above
> >  attitude is actually a dead end street. There are many fine places one
can go
> >  sans a competitive outlook.
>
> Sure, but the top of a given field is not usually one of them.
>
>
> >  Yeah, and what a commercial, slick and shallow world it's become.
> >  (generally speaking)
>
> As opposed to...?

ummm, as opposed to not being that way?  while I am fairly pessimistic I'd
rather strive for utopia than accept dystopia.  I think many reasonable
people believe the world has become more commerical, slick, and shallow.
I'm actually not one of them - I think things have gotten better, in large
part because people are free to compete - but I can intuitively grasp his
point - it's a fairly straight-forward one, one could even say
commonly-held.

>
> >    From: Kool Musick <koolmusick@...>
>
> >  >Guitarists are competitive. They strive to inspire each other and
outdo
> >  >each other. 'To compete' -- to strive consciously or unconsciously for
an
> >  >objective.
> >
> >  To outdo each other...? c'mon Kool man, this reads like a bad movie
script.
> >  The type of competition that's based of ego completely destroys the
music
> >  for me. I play in a guitar quartet, when we're competing we generally
> >  suck bad, the idea is to play for something bigger than oneself.
> >
> >  Hmmm.. that sounds like a bad movie script too!
> >
> >  howard
>
>
> You have raised an strong objection but have put forth no logic to
> support it.

I wouldn't say that.  I think he used a real-life example which is a form of
logic in support of his argument.  Before you nit-pick, you didn't seem to
want to take the time to address some of the logic I employed, including a
dictionary definition and such, instead you chose a single thread of my
argument so I'm not sure you should throw around that sort of "dig".  I
don't expect you (or me or Howard) to address everything and create a real
paper on this subject - but as long as people have made some attempt I think
you're being deliberately unfair in attempting to inflict that subtle
insult.

>  You (and Wilson Zorn as well) basically seem to take
> issue with the idea of competition as a productive motivation

No, I don't believe I said that.  What I said was that NOT EVERYONE COMPETES
when playing music.  I went on to say that frequently that sense of
competition is destructive.  And I pointed out that it also can be very
productive.  Being an avowed capitalist, I actually believe it's quite
productive and important.  But it is not for all musicians.  Many do not
compete.  Many people in many fields do not compete and a rare few still
manage to make their mark on the landscape of time.

> and as
> such of no interest to you and yet you have absolutely nothing to
> gain from your objections but the (as of yet un-obtained)
> satisfaction of seeing your ideas prevail over mine.  In other words
> you are taking a position in a debate which you presumably hope to
> win, but who's outcome is of no consequence beyond the mutual
> amusement we share in pitting our ideas against each other, and yet
> the very position you are taking is an attempt to deny your interest
> the concept of competition.
>

Well, oddly enough, I thought we were expressing our viewpoints.  I don't
know how yours or my ideas will "prevail"?  I certainly don't expect that
anyone's minds will change.  I do hope that it will stimulate further
thought but at least I'll have the satisfaction of having expressed myself
against something I think is wrong.  However, even if we're in competition
and my attempt is to gain favor with the audience here, what does this have
to do with talking about the role of competition in music?  You could if you
wanted to demonstrate that every listserv is intrinsically a competitive
forum and if you wish to make that point and draw it as an analogy, fine.
But I would add that I did not say I was non-competitive in all fields - I
am very competitive in some areas.

> Is that irony or what?

I guess it's "or what?"

>
> At 6:54 AM +0000 6/26/01,Wilson Zorn wrote:
> >I don't see Einstein as in competition with
> >Newton - or in his case even his peers, at least in terms of seeking a
prize
> >or seeking something exclusive.  Some scientists have been in competition
> >with others in that fashion, both in ways I see as good and ways I see as
> >bad.  Sagan went out of his way to demerit peers and politic ceaselessly,
in
> >my opinion eroding good science, wasting time, and just plain being a
jerk.
> >On the other hand, while Gallo may have made many mistakes, his clearly
> >competitive spirit has not impaired in my opinion good science and
sharing
> >of information.  And another contemporary scientists, E. O. Wilson, has
not
> >exhibited a competitive spirit in the scientific pursuits, working
closely
> >in all sorts of collaborations and sharing research as freely as academia
> >permits.
>
> Wrong tack to take.  Competition pervades almost every aspect
> scientific endeavor.  For example if someone wants to use a particle
> accelerator or big telescope for something they are working on they
> have to compete in order to earn time on the machine.  The
> competition entails submitting their theories and abstract of the
> experiment to a review board who will then compare it to other
> competing projects and on the basis of relative merit give it a yes
> or no and/or assign it priority.
>

Good point.  However, some scientists are not fueled by a competitive spirit
and instead submit work that, once in a fortunate great while, is reviewed
on its own merit and nearly-miraculously suceeds on that basis.  Gee guess
what - I knew one of them!  In any case competition of course pervades - but
I think we were addressing individual behavior, not systemic mechanisms or
cultural values.

> Even if a scientist somehow completes a paper without ever competing
> for funds to do the research, upon publication the paper is submitted
> to peer review, AKA "the shoot out" in which scientists with
> competing theories attempt to knock it down with their own ideas.  It
> is an intense competition whose ultimate prize is the right to claim
> to posterity to have been the one to have discovered or contributed
> to the discovery of a fundamental truth.  The process whether you
> think it's "good" or not is one of the fundamental building blocks of
> modern science and Einstein was very much a participant.
>

Again, I think that's a good point but there are still those who do not
"compete" in these forums and simply respond.  Failing to compete does
indeed frequently cause well-reasoned essentially correct theses to flounder
although in theory (and only in theory) a sound notion will not fail just
due to being challenged - since in theory it will be evaluated on that
factual basis.  And on rare occassion peer review has savaged scientists
whose ideas it turned out later were in fact correct.  Regardless, some of
these scientists simply aren't competitive but are disciplined enough to
follow a process.  The really smart ones sometimes get heard.

> Furthermore competition does not preclude cooperation with your
> competitors. It's particularly true in the sciences.

Thanks for repeating what I said above, re Gallo.  Strangely it almost
sounds like you're saying I didn't say this and it's your idea, but I must
be misreading.

> It's even true
> in sports.  As I mentioned earlier I play racquetball and one of the
> interesting and more difficult aspects of the sport is the degree of
> high speed cooperation it takes to clear the way for your opponent to
> take his shot and to keep from hurting each other when you are
> hitting a ball 300 kmh inside a 12 X 6 X 6 meter room.   Competitors
> in all fields often train the very people who end up beating them at
> some point and usually they are proud of it.  But then I guess pride
> is supposed to be bad too.

I'm sick of you twisting - I NEVER SAID COMPETITION WAS INHERENTLY BAD.  In
fact I was directly quoted above as saying it can be both good and band.
Since you're replying to my specific thread I can only assume the comment is
aimed towards my comments.

Let me say what I said AGAIN for your benefit:

my first post on competiton - "Hmmm, I think that the whole virtuoso
machismo "I'm-better-than-you" mentality is what has turned me off to a lot
of mainstream guitarists,
particularly the flashy ones."

then second post - "However, I'm not really sure everyone is competing
depending on how broadly or narrowly you define "compete"."

other comments centered around the fact that not everyone is competing in my
opinion - of course unlike you, I don't "know" this

>
>
> Anyway this "sad f***er" ,  because of his destructively competitive
> attitude has been asked to put his pathetically unoriginal and
> derivative guitar on another misguided soul's album for the next few
> days and after that do some sequencing and vocal work for educational
> TV so I guess he is finished with this thread.
>
> It's been fun and thanks y'all.

No, it hasn't.  Primarily due to undue extrapolations, deliberate
misinterpretations, and arrogance ("I *know*").  I usually don't bother with
these threads - as most people know since I'm an unfamiliar quantity despite
having been "lurking" for some time.  This is why.  Unfortunately I've
allowed myself to be provoked into attempting to ensure some accuracy in the
portrayal of my opinions.  Now I'll shut up for real (despite admittedly
having said I would earlier - sorry to the bored/annoyed people).

> --
>
>
>                                  Dennis Gunn
>                                  Mightyjohn@...
>
>                   check out  MIGHTY JOHN HENRY's album "hot air head"
>                                                     info at
>                         http://www.twics.com/~mightyjo/home.html
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>