Could You Train Yourself To Enjoy...

[glassjester]

Yes, from a humor perspective. Take away the lyrics, the absurdity and the Canadian 'Mountie choir' and there's nothing.

Sure, but the fact is that you enjoy the song, despite it being musically "boring," right?

I don't think songs could get anymore boring than "Jingle Bells," but you better believe when Bing Crosby's singing it on the radio every December, I am truly enjoying that song.

Why? Because it's familiar to me, and I've had numerous positive associations formed with that song.

So now I enjoy it.

Why would this not be possible with other songs as well?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Sure, but the fact is that you enjoy the song, despite it being musically "boring," right?

I don't think songs could get anymore boring than "Jingle Bells," but you better believe when Bing Crosby's singing it on the radio every December, I am truly enjoying that song.

Why? Because it's familiar to me, and I've had numerous positive associations formed with that song.

So now I enjoy it.

Why would this not be possible with other songs as well?

But therein lies the difference. I enjoy the song away from a musical perspective. It's funny and entertaining. With just the music itself it would be anything but.

 

[patrick jane]

I could train myself to enjoy a pizza right now !!!

 

[glassjester]

But therein lies the difference. I enjoy the song away from a musical perspective.

I don't see why that difference matters at all.

Just as earlier, you said you wouldn't enjoy the Lumberjack Song if you took away the lyrics.
You seem to be saying, "If you take away the parts I like, then I won't like what's left."

But that's kind of cheating, you know?
Could you not equally (and just as arbitrarily) say that if you took away the strings from The Rite of Spring, you might not like it?

You've got an example of a song that doesn't fit your musical taste at all, but you're still capable of enjoying. Saying, "Well that doesn't count; I only like it because of the lyrics," doesn't help. It doesn't really matter why you enjoy it. You enjoy it.

It's a bit like saying, "Well sure my team lost the game, but that's only because the other team got more points."

 

[glassjester]

I could train myself to enjoy a pizza right now !!!

Would that take a lot of practice?

 

[ok doser]

Sure, but the fact is that you enjoy the song, despite it being musically "boring," right?

I don't think songs could get anymore boring than "Jingle Bells," but you better believe when Bing Crosby's singing it on the radio every December, I am truly enjoying that song.

Why? Because it's familiar to me, and I've had numerous positive associations formed with that song.

So now I enjoy it.

Why would this not be possible with other songs as well?

of course it would, with songs and with other experiences

but you'll never get artie to admit it

 

[Crucible]

There is a list a mile long of things one can enjoy which are nonetheless not some inherent desire. Nobody is inherently addicted to bath salts, for example, or would even imagine it to be enjoyable before becoming hooked on it.

But lo and behold, guess who the leading group for bath salt abuse is?

Kids you guessed it!

Gay men.

No coincidence there.

 

[glassjester]

of course it would, with songs and with other experiences

but you'll never get artie to admit it

I don't know that he disagrees, necessarily.
Arthur seems to be arguing that that type of enjoyment "doesn't count."

It's sort of a "No True Scotsman" argument.
As long as you dismiss all the counter-examples, your theory's safe.

 

[glassjester]

There is a list a mile long of things one can enjoy which are nonetheless not some inherent desire. Nobody is inherently addicted to bath salts, for example, or would even imagine it to be enjoyable before becoming hooked on it.

Drug use makes for a particularly strong example.

I think I brought that up over a year ago in the thread where we first discussed this topic (of learning to like things).

I didn't like my first cigarette.
It made me feel sick.
My friends told me that my face literally turned a shade of green.

But because I wanted to smoke (typical teenage jackassery), I kept doing it, and eventually began to enjoy the practice.

After about 5 years of that, I decided to quit.

 

[glassjester]

But lo and behold, guess who the leading group for bath salt abuse is?

Kids you guessed it!

Gay men.

No coincidence there.

I'd be interested in reading your explanation of this.

 

[ok doser]

Drug use makes for a particularly strong example.

I think I brought that up over a year ago in the thread where we first discussed this topic (of learning to like things).

I didn't like my first cigarette.
It made me feel sick.
My friends told me that my face literally turned a shade of green.

But because I wanted to smoke (typical teenage jackassery), I kept doing it, and eventually began to enjoy the practice.

After about 5 years of that, I decided to quit.

excellent example :thumb:


i've read that bulemics train themselves to enjoy purging

 

[glassjester]

excellent example :thumb:

i've read that bulemics train themselves to enjoy purging

There's a good chance that we'll soon be told why all these examples "don't count."

 

[Crucible]

I'd be interested in reading your explanation of this.

Bath salt is similar to methamphetamine, and both are linked to illicit sex.
It is a common thing among gay truckers to buy salts from obscure gas stops, and then signal each other over the radio, roadside sex stores, and truck stops.

A lot of these men are married, but their career choice gives them all the privacy and opportunity to commit to their exploits.

There's an entire hidden drug/sex culture there- everybody knows about the bath salts, but the gay agenda is going to conceal the rest of that reality

 

[glassjester]

Bath salt is similar to methamphetamine, and both are linked to illicit sex.

I remember reading a study where lab rats were trained to prefer homosexual activity through use of a cocaine derivative.

Yes, drug use can change behavior - including sexual behavior.


Although the Leftist story is that gay people have to use more illegal drugs because they are stressed out from all the persecution by straight white men.

 

[Crucible]

Although the Leftist story is that gay people have to use more illegal drugs because they are stressed out from all the persecution by straight white men.

:chuckle:

They have an excuse for anything, no matter how utterly ridiculous it would sound to even the most naive person on the planet. They don't believe their own nonsense, they just perpetuate it all because it has proved to be effective- which is hopefully changing now that the Right has finally struck back

 

[Arthur Brain]

I don't see why that difference matters at all.

Just as earlier, you said you wouldn't enjoy the Lumberjack Song if you took away the lyrics.
You seem to be saying, "If you take away the parts I like, then I won't like what's left."

It's the absurdity and humour of the lyrics that make it enjoyable, not the music. The music fits the song but there's nothing interesting about it. I'm really not sure what continually trips you up about this. There's no way I'd listen to an instrumental version by way of if that makes it easier for you to get the point?

But that's kind of cheating, you know?
Could you not equally (and just as arbitrarily) say that if you took away the strings from The Rite of Spring, you might not like it?

How is it? There's nothing arbitrary about admitting it's not the music that appeals. Take away an integral section of the orchestra and it would no longer be 'The Rite' as they're an essential component of the piece, as is every other section of the orchestra. Bad analogy.

You've got an example of a song that doesn't fit your musical taste at all, but you're still capable of enjoying. Saying, "Well that doesn't count; I only like it because of the lyrics," doesn't help. It doesn't really matter why you enjoy it. You enjoy it.

It matters insofar as you've continually argued that I can train myself to like music that is fundamentally bland and boring. Take away the lyrics of the lumberjack song and there's nothing to enjoy, it's not the music that appeals at all. You can say it's "cheating" as much as you like but it isn't. It's simply being honest.

It's a bit like saying, "Well sure my team lost the game, but that's only because the other team got more points."

That's just daft.

 

[glassjester]

It's the absurdity and humour of the lyrics that make it enjoyable, not the music. The music fits the song but there's nothing interesting about it. I'm really not sure what continually trips you up about this. There's no way I'd listen to an instrumental version by way of if that makes it easier for you to get the point?

Would you enjoy listening to a spoken-word, prose version of The Lumberjack Song?

How is it? There's nothing arbitrary about admitting it's not the music that appeals. Take away an integral section of the orchestra and it would no longer be 'The Rite' as they're an essential component of the piece, as is every other section of the orchestra. Bad analogy.

Take away the lyrics, and it would no longer be "The Lumberjack Song."
Good analogy.

That's just daft.

Right.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Would you enjoy listening to a spoken-word, prose version of The Lumberjack Song?

That would probably be funny in it's own way actually. :chuckle:

Take away the lyrics, and it would no longer be "The Lumberjack Song."
Good analogy.

No, it would just be a bland piece of music with nothing amusing or entertaining about it. A bit like a Beyonce song...

Right.

Well, sorry, but it is.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I don't know that he disagrees, necessarily.
Arthur seems to be arguing that that type of enjoyment "doesn't count."

It's sort of a "No True Scotsman" argument.
As long as you dismiss all the counter-examples, your theory's safe.

No, it isn't. Your "counter examples" simply miss the point. Most of your arguments have so far revolved around being able to "train" oneself to enjoy a piece of music through familiarity or that enjoyment or lack of is linked with either positive or negative associations. I'm arguing that the choice to enjoy something is something out of ones control and can't be "willed".

Going back, when I first heard the 'Rite' I was bedridden and ill, it wasn't fun so if anything and by your own logic I should have negative connotations with the piece. I don't. It was simply a stunning piece of music and measles or no measles wasn't going to alter anything, just the same as the regular and irritating familiarity with banal pop at work didn't in any way spark enjoyment of it, anything but.

This analogy you have with sport is bizarre so you need to explain it. If a team gets less points than another then they lose, if they get more they win and if it's equal (if applicable) it's a draw. What that has to do with being able to enjoy or "choose" to enjoy something is baffling.

 

[glassjester]

That would probably be funny in it's own way actually. :chuckle:

You may be right about that.
Like Shatner doing "Rocket Man."

No, it would just be a bland piece of music with nothing amusing or entertaining about it. A bit like a Beyonce song...

But it wouldn't be The Lumberjack Song anymore.
The fact is - you enjoy that song.


Anyway, your Lumberjack Song example proves the point.
You're entirely capable of enjoying a song that you find musically boring, if you can find other enjoyable factors in it.

All I'm saying is that some of those extra-musical factors (like familiarity and positive associations) can be intentionally brought about.