Voxa Inferatus - The Musing

If you read the previous post, "Voxa Inferatus - The Question," then this post should vindicate my point. If you have not read the previous post, please read it before pondering this one.

The key in the last post was that your position was based on your initial reaction. If you thought about it, you may have said that neither is true. Then again, you may have said that both are true. Which is it?

The second statement is true. We tend to think of the Roman Empire as the zenith of the Classical era, and not lasting through the middle ages. When Emperor Constantine took control of the Empire, he divided the land into the Western and Eastern Roman Empire in 324 A.D. The Western Roman Empire established the capitol of Rome, but "fell" over the next few hundred years. The Eastern Roman Empire, whose capitol was the city of Constantinople, survived in the Byzantine Roman Empire until the Ottoman Empire besieged and captured the city in 1453 A.D.


The whole point of this post is to ask: who do we listen to and why? Do we listen to the loudest voice, and the one that we make some automatic connection without giving it much thought? Why do we listen to these voices? Do we listen to and emulate Michael Moore or Bill O'reily because we know the names? Is it not better to listen to the voice that reasons as opposed to the star-studded, syndicated, sensational, or "open" minded voices? Most everyone has heard of Bill O'reily, Michael Moore, or Johnny Depp to name a few. Bill O'reily is the only reporter in this list. But these three names have become more recognized because of partisan praise and discontent, rather than the content of their argument. Michael Moore is a film maker. Having seen a few of his films, I can say an adequate film maker at that. But is he an authority because he attacks the current administration? Johnny Depp is an actor. That one should be obvious. Just because he memorizes lines and takes on various identities (quite well, by the way) does not make him a political authority.

In most of the world, we have come upon our opinions based on the positions of parents, celebrities, prominent figures, and sadly, those who are most attractive. But the one voice that has been speaking in silence is that of reason. We may reach different conclusions from the given evidence, but we may persuade more effectively if we have reason behind an argument. Without reason, all truths are equal. If this is true, it must be false. Can we say that it is true that truth does not exist? We cannot. Therefore, we may conclude that one idea may be greater than another. But it is reason, not popular opinion that determines truth. Even though most of us are not scientists, we should, as a race, be in the constant pursuit of truth. Otherwise, life is meaningless, and thus the race is justified in committing mass suicide.

The above paragraph may seem eclectic and irrelevant. But the question remains: who do we listen to and why? And although truth is not relative, should we not decide our opinion for ourselves?

Voxa Inferatus - The Question

Champagne bottles have an indentation in the bottom to save the company money.

The Ottoman Empire conquered the Roman Empire in 1453 AD when Constantinople was captured.




Based on your first reaction, which do you believe is true? Why do you think so? Should you think this way?

Why Music?

What is the importance of music? Why is it that a series of sounds travelling at different wavelengths can tell a story? This leads to another interesting question that I will post at a later date. In a literal sense, music is nothing more than variations on the frequency of wavelengths. How is it that variations in vibrations are able to tell stories so intricate and beautiful?

I believe that the answer lies in how we perceive these variations. Certain pitch variations may seem more pleasant to an individual because of the association with a pleasant memory from one's childhood. For example, my mother would always call upstairs that dinner was ready. In her phrase, "Dinner's ready," the word dinner was on the 3rd note of the scale, followed by the tonic, or 1st note of the scale. Because of this, I enjoy hearing the interval of the third (in most cases, that is) spoken or sung.

It would, of course, be different for all individuals, or it may also be that they do not have pleasant associations with music or certain aspects of music. Yet another question concerning music is raised by this, of which I will discuss at a later date.

Music is also one of the only truly universal languages. Of course, one might say that music is not a universal language because the lyrics might be in French, or German, or Russian; three unrelated languages. The problem is that classical music is enjoyed around the world by all sorts of people. Classical music does not have lyrics. Similarly, most jazz, new age, and film music lacks lyrics as well. Yet these are also enjoyed in most parts of the world. One might say that music touches our soul. I think that this cliche is true. Music appeals to the brain and to the human person because of the emotion that it embodies. Very few human creations are as emotionally charged as music is.