[Satan]

Originally Posted by kierkegaarden

for reference, the cannanes' cover: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxpuSACoRgo

NEEDS MORE COWBELL

[infinitemusic]

haha

[narlus]

for all the young 'uns having a laugh @ BöfuckingC because of a bad Will Ferrell skit, have a go @ the 1st three records and their exultant live _on yr feet or on yr knees_....seriously some of the best music ever.

or read what Julian Cope has to say, more eloquently than I can provide
http://www.headheritage.co.uk/unsung...fthemonth/1430

[pbradley]

Originally Posted by Glice

Nonsense. Subconsciousness is a functional superimposition of consciousness, or superego if you must be Freudian. As such, it can only be understood from the perspective of a functioning (Cartesian) consciousness. Any talk of an 'autonomic' subconscious is blighted by the inelecutable (and often obscure, ineffable) machinations of the consciousness. Without consciousness, there is no notion of the 'autonomy' of somatic functions. Just because the notions of consciousness, 'supra-consciousness', 'subconsciousness' or the 'unconscious' are complex and contestable doesn't mean that any discussion of human nature and culture is inherently 'pretentious'. That's just lazy Darwinism, or bad Heideggarianism. Just because music is a troubled topic to talk about, with little in the way of ontological criteria doesn't mean that the 'objective' criteria are unassailable, or worse, white elephants.

tl;dr: what else do people do on the internet if not talk shit?

Well of course it sounds like nonsense if you've missed that I am arguing for defining "pretense" as synonymous with "premise," except whereas the former contains an connotation of falsehood while the latter is qualitatively unspecified. The crime that I see is the substitution of the nature of being premised as being pretentious without any attempt to demonstrate that the premises are unfounded. Would you argue against the statement that human nature and culture are premised? Even a subjective criteria of music is a criteria. My point about autonomic functions was simply to contrast against my understanding that there is little that is not premised in the conscious mind. If I understand your reply correctly, you are saying that consciousness itself is a premise to autonomic functions in identifying those functions to which I do not disagree but that has little baring on what I am arguing. I am rejecting the notion of pretension as criticism (in so far that the falsehood is unjustifiably inherent) so I can't be criticizing any discussion of human nature and culture as pretentious.

[kierkegaarden]

Originally Posted by Satan

NEEDS MORE COWBELL

No one has ever said that before ever. Good one.