Breaking patterns

I've been thinking quite a bit about the issue of 'free will' lately. I recall this Google search on the subject I did a few months back. I didn't save the link I shall refer to along this post. But I was really surprised about my ignorance on the subject. Since most people I've talked about this with seemed to have a similar grasp of free will as me, I suppose this ignorance is shared by the most of us.

One of the first things the article brought up was the fact that in a major way, 'free will' is a matter of semantics. One first needs to understand what it actually means. I feel like I still do not, so I won't go there. I'll just bring up the obvious, which we paradoxically seem to be all aware of and yet ignorant about. What is it really which we can choose?

Nothing. Or so close to nothing that nothing is indeed the best discrete approximation to the nearest "somethingness" multiple of "Planck's constant". The fact of the matter is that what we have control over is so negligible that it's hard to feel like it's actually worth anything. And yet we strive to. We live our lives as if it were. Even those who "choose" to die by committing suicide, whatever is the meaning of that choice, seem to be intentionally pursuing something looking for a certain outcome. Why?

I'm not sure 'why' is really a pertinent question here. So I'll ignore it for a while and move on with what is it that we can choose. Yes. We can choose who we talk to. However we cannot choose them to talk back. We can choose what we say. But we cannot choose how they will react to that. And that's still at such a minute local scale! I won't even bother mention how little control we have over what happens in Andromeda Galaxy. So there.

In the end, if you look close enough, you're just an observer. A defective self-aware arm-robot in an assembly line. Being self-aware is actually part of the defect. You look around and the other robots seem to be working fine. They're doing just what they're supposed to, keeping the line moving forward, putting together whatever it is that they're supposed to put together and passing it on.

If one looks closer there might be more to it. But that's as far as I can see right now. Now please just hand me over those two pieces and tell me how to put them together and pass them on, will you?

You might not get it but someone does

Yesterday I was sharing the following video with a friend and got an interesting reaction.

It came up in the context of double bass pedals. He asked me when I would get one---I'm a beginner/intermediate drummer---and I said I probably wouldn't for a while. I don't want to get distracted by endless possibilities while I still have so much to learn about the very basics. Anyways, he basically said double bass drumming is silly. I find that surprising given how much rhythmic interest one can create using double bass pedals. I showed him that video of Matt Halpern from Periphery as an example.

While listening to it for about a minute he made a few comments of which I retained three, paraphrased as follows: (1) [I would probably have a lot of fun playing that, but it doesn't really speak to me.] (2) [That looks to me as if he's trying to say something like "Hey, look at me! I got to level 14 on this videogame!"] (3) [His cymbals must have so many nice tones I will never hear...]

Why don't WE normally stop at (1)? You acknowledge there is something about it which you don't really get. Excellent. For me it doesn't really matter whether what he is doing is really hard or not, whether he's trying to show off or not. Of course the technical aspects of it interest me as a drummer and that's part of what I value there. But when I'm listening, or appreciating it synesthetically while watching a video, it really comes down to how I react emotionally and physiologically to the rhythmic patters (or lack thereof) in the sonic input.

In summary, I feel like there is a lot being said there, whether or not he is also getting the most he could out of his cymbals. Things can indeed turn out to be pretty bad if we're approaching them looking for something they're not.

Matt Halpern instantly became one of my favorite drummers after I saw him on DrumChannel

His full performance goes well beyond what they show in this short clip, which you can see if you're a subscriber. If you like polyrhythms, his and associated acts are strongly recommended. If you don't like polyrhythms, growling vocals, severely distorted/low pitch guitars and rhythmic mayhem, I'm sure there is a lot out there you can still appreciate without having to be demeaning of what you don't.

A Little Though Experiment

Imagine that all of a sudden human population on Earth has been dramatically reduced as a result of whatever catastrophic event of your choice. We're down to a single small community of people which is, on top of that, struck by an epidemics of blindness.

Nobody can see anymore. Despite the major initial disruption caused by the happening, life goes on and they soon adapt to their new condition, which does not change despite some people's hope they will live to see again. Years have passed and the first baby is about to be born. They've never really understood what caused their blindness but hope is not lacking in this miserable community. Maybe the baby will be able to see. She cannot.

It's been a good number of years now. The last person who could once see just died and the very concept of vision now exists just as orally transmitted memories from the previous generation. This is how things go for an unknown amount of time. Without being able to detect light it's not so easy to keep track of time.

After long enough for the idea of seeing to change status from orally transmitted memories to legends of long before, someone grows up claiming they can see. Discuss the dynamics in this community facing this claim.