I first thought of putting this in Art/Culture. Than Human Science. But I think it'll be entrenched in enough philosophy to make it worth it posting it here. Anyway.

I truley think music is the highest form of human communication we have. Think about it, we can send out perfect facimiles of our feelings, or give ideas, philosophy and stories to people. It is the one form of communication that can give someone as perfect emotionaly empathy for another as possible without being in that person place.

Any thoughts?

Cactus, u know these words:

"....And earthquakes are to a girl's guitar,
they are just another GOOD vibration

And tidal waves couldn't save the world from californication".

Groove on. :)

Love u all,
Gil Weinstein.

Cactus,

Sorry to burst your bubble but while music can stimulate emotional reactions, it simply doesn't communicate since different people will react differently to different types of music.

IOW you can't select a piece of music that you enjoyed and be sure that everyone else would appreciate it in the same way.

Probably the highest form of communication is mathematics. But like any form of communication all parties must know the same language. Mathematics is ultimate precision. Music is highly subjective and is one of the least precise methods for communication.

So I'd say that anything that appeals directly to emotions is probably among the lowest forms of communication.

But that depends on what is meant by high and low in this context.

Cris

I find it powerful because it communicates emmotions so well, compared to other forms of communication. But if we want a different ideal behind "highest" then I wouldn't pick math. I'd pick the simple written word - from poetry to thesis it explains all in life I suppose.

Music, without words, is indeed one of the highest forms of showing emotions. But then, so to can painting/visual art be. The problem, like Cris said is that everything can be interputed different ways. Perhaps, however, this is the beauty of art.


I once had a girl, Or should I say she once had me, she showed me her room, Isn't it good Norwegian wood?
She asked me to stay, and she told me to sit anywhere, so I looked around, and I noticed there wasn't a chair
I sat on a rug biding my time, drinking her wine, we talked until two and then she said, "it's time for bed"
She told me she worked in the morning and started to laugh, I told her I didn't and crawled off to sleep in the bath
And when I awoke, I was alone, this bird had flown, so I lit a fire, isn't it good Norwegian wood?


The Beatles are without a doubt the greatest group ever. It's funny now how much I believe that. People argue that stuff like Pearl Jam and such are the greatest ever, and I just look and shake my head. I lvoe that kind of stuff, Pearl Jam and Green Day and Nirvana and all that other shit. And I love the Stones and Doors and Who. But these guys have done 10-40(in the Stones case) years worth of THE EXACT SAME STUFF. Not differing from their start.

The Beatles came out with like 9 albums in 6 years and went from being stupid little pop shits (though, the best pop shits ever) to psychadelia, to trippy stuff, to indian music, to light guitar, to romance, to every single type of song imaginable. They are gods.

Ever heard the Godhead version.....pretty cool.

So, does that mean everybody enjoys Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Tibetan, African...etc etc..music eqally well and understands the music basis? If not - music would not work.

Picture. Same problem - understanding comes from pattern recognition. If you never seen a gadget, fruit or animal - how could you tell what it is? Worse, a super civilized intelligent alien may look like a monster...

Smell may work but only so much information.

Stick to math...my vote is with Cris...

Well I think you have to factor in different societies/cultures communicate differently, but I still disagree with math.

May be next time my wife wants to balance the checkbook, I will tell her to play the piano....:D

BTW...in absolute terms, everything is mathematics...that is why we are searching for that one equation to describe the universe...

Although I'm no good at maths, I can see the point some people suggest when they say mathematics is the universal language.

You know......you are right, music is in essence mathmatics, I remeber thinkning that in my Music Theory class. However, I have changed my opinion, the simple written or spoken word is more powerful, I still cannot believe mathmatics are the most powerful form of communication - seriously can we converse in mathmatics in everyday life?

We aren't smart enough to talk in math. Incidentally though, language is a math.


And why in lord's name is written word more powerful?

We aren't smart enough to talk in math. Incidentally though, language is a math.

I think its kinda the other way around.

But I think written word is more powerful cause it can explain things that mathmatical equations are based on.....and human emotions and a variety of other thoughts. But I am not really feircely debating on this, I have a weak opinion.

In my opinion, if word is powerful music must be more powerful. Afterall, music is just words with sound that can even further the emotion.

Yeah Tyler, you deffinetely hit my original point that I posted, I don;t know now though, I guess it really depends on standard.

And good thoughts Evyl I was thinking about what would be cross-cultural.

Music would be the highest form of communication if it wasn't for all the professional musicians mucking it up.

Actually, that's just a potshot at a friend of mine who does think music is the highest form of communication, yet cannot communicate well with anyone, and furthermore, wants to write obscure music that, as a result of his personality, is designed to not communicate. It's people like him that make music snotty, to say the least.

But to be more realistic, how are we defining "highest"?

Rather than splitting hairs, I think it's a critical issue:

• Start with words. Words mean different things. Even with identical dictionaries before us, we can read the same sentence and derive different meanings. This is a result of human perception and comparison. To the other, e.e. cummings' seemingly nonsensical (im)c-a-t(mo) is an apt communique. But we need not venture outside Sciforums to see consistent evidence of what I'm referring to. Should we choose to venture outside Sciforums, I might point to the Bible, the Constitution of the United States, and the US Tax Code as evidence of such.

•*The musical alphabet is not as precise as the verbal alphabet. And here is where we find its value. Working with broader sensations does allow for a certain efficiency in communication, but as with any data transmission, the needs determine the language. I would not, for instance, enjoy presenting a paper on the intricacies of quantum computing by playing a 'cello.

• People perceive music differently than they do words. Most of Beethoven and Bach are meaningless to me, though I have an affection for a couple of Rachmaninoff pieces that my musician friend finds criminal. However, as a writer, my musical weakness is communicative lyrics. It hit me the other day that my favorite albums for over half my life were narrative projects; albums that told stories. Styx, Pink Floyd, King Diamond, the Who, Savatage .... Also communicative songs (e.g. Floater). Pop love songs don't tell us anything. They don't give us anything except flesh and a dirty thrill in lieu of our own imaginations.

Thus, certain music does in fact communicate. But what it communicates is another thing. Instrumental scores (e.g Willie & Lobo, Impala, &c) communicate the ineffable, and are therefore necessarily incomplete. But both instrumental and vocal music can communicate parts of the ineffable more efficiently than speech. How many times do you look at someone and say, "I just can't explain it ... you had to be there to feel it." Well ... that's what good music does. It puts language to those transcendent experiences.

The drawback, however, is what people perceive in the communication. Just like people perceive sentences differently, so do they perceive music differently. Even moreso, I would guess. Imagine three people listening to a tacky song ... say, Poison's I Won't Forget You. One of them likes the song because they always liked those intervals and that arpeggio. One of them likes the song because it was her boyfriend's promise song when he went away to college and, lo and behold, he came back and married her eventually. Me? I like it because it's nostalgic. It's not a good song, really, but I did get my first kiss to it, and she let me put my hand on her ass. And that moment is forever immortalized by a Poison song .... Cats is like that, too. I can't listen to it without a crushing flood of nostalgia from my second kiss. (Well, technically, the second girl I kissed after such things were a good thing.) Sillabub's short bit of Memory in Grizzabella at the end of act one leaves me with a painfully sweet memory of that damn kiss on the floor of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. (Gus, the Theatre Cat can put me to tears if I let it.)

So in the end, I'd say that music is not the best form of communication. However, being one who holds less objective realities as more important, perhaps the greater efficiency of music in communicating such ineffabilities does raise the value of music to the highest form of communication.

But there is one that is generally a higher communicative power. The language of touch. We can look at fear if we want, when someone you don't like has their hand on you, but more of what I'm after can be found in proper lovemaking 'twixt ideally-matched partners. I've attained that level only a few times, so that's how I know that I'm supposed to marry the woman I'm supposed to marry who will never, in her life, marry me. We tried. We've been engaged ... well, I can't count it anymore. Three or four times. But we're already married, as such. She gave me her soul and though I finally gave it back, she would still rather entrust it to me. But ye gods, those electric moments, that state of love and trust, that instant response without verbalization, that communication without words, and, sometimes, without telltale action. In the modern day, we still communicate more by what is not said, and the whole of our communication on all levels is a greater communicative force than the rest of my life put together. There is a form of communication between people that requires no words, no signs, no notes. If I had a proper name for it, I would list it here. But I don't.

I only sing three or so songs to my cat, only one of which I made up. (The other two are "You Are My Liban" (Sunshine) and "Liban" (to Elton John's "Levon"). Of course, she only pays attention to the songs that have her name in it. I could sing "Elderly Woman Behind a Counter in a Small Town" and the cat wouldn't give a damn unless I stuck her name in it and sang it every day for a month. However, there is a sound I can make in my chest, a low pitch, that she will respond to. But she won't respond to it in general. Only if I'm already happy. Given that the cat and I have a full-sentence relationship (I'm testing this for Pavlovian factors), I'd say there's a form of communication taking place in that low pitch. It should be noted, though, that loud music does not, in and of itself, make the cat sketchy. In fact, I'm almost ready to call her a familiar because she is capable of using music to affect my attitude. That is, a song will drive her out of the room if I'm irritable, but draw her to me if I'm happy or sad.

Music communicates in various brain capacities, it seems.

Cactus Jack ... this is a pretty cool topic. I'm curious ... what is the most communicative music you know of in your own experience?

Cris ... I'll say flat out that mathematics is the most precise language, but my criteria for highest is about as vague as the term itself. I will go so far as to note, though, that on my scoresheet (?!) mathematics has a drawback: application. Mathematics is precise because it is limited. Unless, of course, someone would like to transcribe Beowulf quadratically.

Dr Evyl ... if music is mathematics, so is your voice. Dunno how that figures into your scheme, but I thought it worth mentioning.

Tyler ... the written word is more powerful because of its accessibility. Literacy is a social priority. Unfortunately, music and other arts are not.

Example: grab a Gnutella client and search for a Beach Boys' song called "Vegetables". (Good luck ....) Incidentally the recording I have, included in the Smile material, features one Paul McCartney on rhythm carrots. Play the song for someone in your family. I'm thinking of my mother, as non-musical (seemingly) as they get. She would love the song. She would be tickled by the song. It's silly, it's playful. It's .... Now play it for a good musician and you'll see them slip into a slight trance. A lot of Brian Wilson material is like that. When Smile finally comes out, y'all will hear what pop music should have been. But what happens is that the "illiterate" will find the song either ridiculous or irresistible. The "literatti" will be knocked flat by the song. The child is the father of the man? Plymouth rock roll over?

Diversity of opinions is one thing, but with the written word people have more common ground; that is, more of them can read and understand what they're reading.

KMGuru ... an interesting point about culturally diverse music. Sadly, my foremost "international" (for lack of better) albums are the soundtrack to Latcho Drom (Gypsy), Yungchen Lhamo's Coming Home (Tibetan), Willie and Lobo's Between the Waters (German/Spaniard/Gypsy, I believe), and Mari Bone Persen's Gula Gula (Sami). What's sad about that? I picked up Latcho Drom because Boiled in Lead plays good Gypsy music and I happened to work in a video store that rented the movie for a while. Both Lhamo and Persen I found while on a BiL-inspired worldbeat kick; Lhamo I bought because she's on RealWorld (e.g. comes recommended by Peter Gabriel), and Persen (also on RealWorld) includes the English translation of her lyrics. Willie & Lobo are instrumental.

So I say sadly because in the lyrical tradition is much to learn and understand. I can never quite understand the context of Persen's songs--even if I go to Norway to see the culture war she's describing--because I don't natively speak the language.

Then again, as an interesting reflection, it's worth noting that I despise certain music out of Mexico for its inane sound, and could care less what its lyrical content is. I find that interesting because I'm still listening to sound for the music.

Part of what helps, especially in the modern American culture, is to do away with radio trash. Concrete Blonde was the first time I ever noticed that the voice was more of an instrument than a vocal line (rendition of It's a Man's World), and, of course, "grunge" happened and gave us vocalists like Cornell, Lanegan, and Staley ... the idea has become more and more familiar to me over time. But we separate out the music and the voice in the US ... Lhamo and Persen are both political, and moreso I think than Soundgarden or Rage Against the Machine. The voice is part of the music the way it is in Soundgarden and not in Rage. The voice is part of the music the way it is when Johnette Napolitano sings and not when Christina Aguilera whines.

So spoken language might be a barrier of some sort. Music theory is its own issue. One need not understand writing theory in order to understand a newspaper. Of course, it does help.

At this point, I should probably go to bed and stop mumbling.

If we're all hung up on universal communication, what about sign language? (What is sign language for, "Sorry, my hands are busy whacking off"?) ;)

thanx much,
Tiassa :cool:

Originally posted by kmguru


BTW...in absolute terms, everything is mathematics...that is why we are searching for that one equation to describe the universe...


6*9=42

Originally posted by BobG



6*9=42

I thought it was

http://www.mathlab.mtu.edu/~mdoughy/Images/godnb_gr_1.gif

unless you think it is:

L(n) = 1/2 (dn / dt)2 - V(n)

:D

Yeah Cactus I do believe that music one of the highest form of communication, but not through words and to different people. When you are in a band, and you're jamming, you can almost feel that person next to you, it truly is a beautiful thing. I've only had this psychological connection with one person, and it was my drummer. We can "feel" each other, and just know what we're going to play. We can jam and make it sound good, even though we don't talk about any of it before. It's amazing what that communication feels like when it takes place. I do believe that music is one of the highest form of communication, but only between people playing instruments. It's almost like a psychic ability. I also think that love is one of the highest forms of communication. When you love someone, and can feel them and know every single form of their body language and their speech and tone, it's really a great thing.

I think prose is the most powerful form of communication.

Which is why we are all here, posting our thoughts in font, and not sending each other clips of us whistling, or doodling mathematics.

truley think music is the highest form of human communication we have

I'd think that words that we speak and write are a much better and higher form of communication.

An example:

[IF]

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!


--Rudyard Kipling

If it's music, it must suck to be deaf.

What about communication through (or using) things like Love, Compassion, etc.? I would think that one would better understand love through receiving it from another than from reading a bunch of text about it.

I guess it depends on what you're trying to communicate.

6*9=42
in base 13

MUSIC: The Highest Form of Human Communication?

Well most musicians I know certainly seem to qualify as the highest form of human.

How about this: music may not be the highest form of human communication, but it ranks right up there being one of the highest forms of triggering an emotional response.:bugeye: Also, animals use musical sounds for communication? Eh?