Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Martian · 06-27-2008, 04:24 PM

I know because I've progressed to a reasonably high level without it. Granted, that's on a different instrument than the one in discussion; I haven't had time to gain an real proficiency with a piano. On the other hand, I don't doubt my ability to do so, given the necessary time.

I have never meant to imply that you specifically are being elitist, and perhaps that's where the misunderstanding arises. I am simply responding to an attitude that I encounter often among the people who consider themselves 'real' musicians. It's not a prevalent attitude amongst guitarists, because a large segment of the guitarist population is self-taught. Among those who study classical or when discussing certain classical instruments (piano being a prominent example), the attitude is widespread that one cannot truly learn how to play an instrument if one lacks the means or drive to study with a tutor who himself has studied with a tutor, etc etc. Your initial posts seemed to uphold that perspective, and while you have moved away from it it's still something that I feel is prevalent enough that it needs to be addressed. There is nothing wrong with self-study and one should not feel that one is inferior or incapable of learning to a higher degree because one prefers to learn in that fashion.

I question your definition of ad hominem. As I'm sure you're aware, ad hominem is Latin and means 'to the man.' It would be more accurately characterized as an attack on the individual, rather than the arguments the individual presents. My attack on your professed belief that instruction is essential or nearly so is ad hominem by definition; I do not deny your reasoning as to why a teacher is useful, but contend that the same effect may be achieved in more than one way. In that fashion I attack your beliefs and attack you as the person through them. I do not deny this, but assert that in a discussion such as this one it is a valid point.

Your definition would seem to be more characteristic of a straw man, which is a different logical fallacy.

If I am misunderstanding your argument, and if you agree that instruction is not necessary to advance through musical proficiency, then I apologize. In that case, we would seem to agree that there are multiple paths to the same end, and I would further question why exactly the last 25 or so posts in this thread exist.

I am in a great deal of pain tonight, and am therefore not as clear as I would otherwise hope to be in either thought or expression. This may be another source of confusion.

06-27-2008, 04:24 PM	#32 (permalink)
Martian Young Crumudgeon Location: Canada	I know because I've progressed to a reasonably high level without it. Granted, that's on a different instrument than the one in discussion; I haven't had time to gain an real proficiency with a piano. On the other hand, I don't doubt my ability to do so, given the necessary time. I have never meant to imply that you specifically are being elitist, and perhaps that's where the misunderstanding arises. I am simply responding to an attitude that I encounter often among the people who consider themselves 'real' musicians. It's not a prevalent attitude amongst guitarists, because a large segment of the guitarist population is self-taught. Among those who study classical or when discussing certain classical instruments (piano being a prominent example), the attitude is widespread that one cannot truly learn how to play an instrument if one lacks the means or drive to study with a tutor who himself has studied with a tutor, etc etc. Your initial posts seemed to uphold that perspective, and while you have moved away from it it's still something that I feel is prevalent enough that it needs to be addressed. There is nothing wrong with self-study and one should not feel that one is inferior or incapable of learning to a higher degree because one prefers to learn in that fashion. I question your definition of ad hominem. As I'm sure you're aware, ad hominem is Latin and means 'to the man.' It would be more accurately characterized as an attack on the individual, rather than the arguments the individual presents. My attack on your professed belief that instruction is essential or nearly so is ad hominem by definition; I do not deny your reasoning as to why a teacher is useful, but contend that the same effect may be achieved in more than one way. In that fashion I attack your beliefs and attack you as the person through them. I do not deny this, but assert that in a discussion such as this one it is a valid point. Your definition would seem to be more characteristic of a straw man, which is a different logical fallacy. If I am misunderstanding your argument, and if you agree that instruction is not necessary to advance through musical proficiency, then I apologize. In that case, we would seem to agree that there are multiple paths to the same end, and I would further question why exactly the last 25 or so posts in this thread exist. I am in a great deal of pain tonight, and am therefore not as clear as I would otherwise hope to be in either thought or expression. This may be another source of confusion. __________________ I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said - Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame