MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > I see music as proof of a creator

I see music as proof of a creator

posted 5 years ago by [deleted]
48 replies | jump to latest

Isn't it weird that we interpret music like a form of language? We can tell the difference between soft, smoothing music and scary, horror-movie music? How is it that "scary music" scares a child and happy music doesn't? They haven't been exposed to enough "learning" of music/context to form that opinion, but we instinctively can interpret music as either pleasant, smoothing, scary, edgy etc?

Or why is it that the song Chopin - Nocturne op.9 No.2, has the ability to move people of all nations and languages regardless of language? It is universally considered a beautiful and moving song? Why is that? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E6b3swbnWg

We also instinctively know that some notes harmonise with others and some not. If someone hits the wrong key on a piano we hear it. We don't need to have studied music to know when a note seems out of place.

I don't see how evolution could ever explain why humans, universally, seem to understand music at a deep level. We are programmed to understand music.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

[deleted]

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

Music evolved even before language. Some animals, like birds, regularly use music to communicate.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Animals have calls and squeaks etc, but composed music? Hardly. Evolution is a theory of absolute random mutations and those with better mutations somehow had an advantage and the older iterations died off. It's an absurd theory that struggles when dealing with the reality of DNA and the barriers that each species has.

For example, dogs can interbreed and create new variations, but birds can't. So where did the huge variety of birds come from? Did one mutate into another bird? So how'd it mate with itself to create offspring? The theory of evolution is still taught as nobody has come up with a better way to explain these things.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

God is even more absurd. Don't take me wrong. I am a Christian myself, but some things that look absurd or beyond our understanding does not always mean they're not true.

[–] slimone (7996) 5 years ago

I don't believe in a god. I was raised Catholic but gave it up in my teens. Faith works for some people, but I prefer logic and reasoning.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

Well, different strokes for different people. Religion, of course, needs faith. Therefore, I don't get why some people, like OP, is always trying to prove God using (weak, at best) logic and reasoning. It only bounds to fail.

Or thinking that by undermining / ridiculing the theory of evolution would automatically proves that God exists, let alone Jesus and Mary and everything else in the Bible. This is nonsense.

Only the weakest of faith would crumble in front of the theory of evolution. It was already proven again and again, and it fits with all the geological and biological evidences. Do you want to deny all of that too? But even denying everything scientific would still not make the Bible true. God always needs faith. And if you don't believe even a little bit, then why would you follow Him? This is what I don't get.

Even the Bible said that we shouldn't be lukewarm, be either hot or be cold. If you believe, just believe. If you don't, just don't. Trying to prove God doesn't make sense. That's why I respect more people like you. You prefer logic and reasoning so you gave up your Catholic faith. Respect.

But yeah, you're definitely going to hell.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

dogs, as much variation as exists within that species, are still a distinct species.

the variation that exists within birds has evolved over time to the extent that the 1000s of species of birds that exist cannot interbreed - that's contained within the definition of species. that happens through some means of separation. see the variation that shows up in darwin's finches, for example. so when species get separated geographically, or when they evolve subtle differences that lead them to exploit different terrain, this will send them down a path where they will no longer interact with variations within their own species, and at some point mutations and naturally selected differences will accumulate to the extent they can no longer interbreed, & they are a new species.

this is taught because it aligns with all the evidence we see in the world around us - paleontology, genetics, all of it.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

Well music is created so yes, it has a creator. Humans are created, we have creators, who are our predecessors.

Successive generations created all we enjoy, including language and art and agriculture and tech and a reason to exist: So that we can become part of life and advancement if we wish and if we've got what it takes!

With these great powers come great responsibilities!

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

Okay, uncle Ben. We get it.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

Want some Rice? I got lots.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

😂

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

Forget Uncle Ben though, seriously... We just need a Marisa Tomei as Aunt May spinoff movie. Rated R.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

Just because I'm an Asian so you offer me rice? That's racist!

Btw, I'll consficate your rice.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

Racist is a racist word and I take offense at it!

Ooh that might be the greatest comeback ever! It's axiomatic and cyclical, crazy...

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

Offense is even more offensive!!!

[–] Frogarama (12942) 5 years ago

Hoisted on my own petard.... You've won this round, chilone! Maybe not lucky next time, I know your angle now!

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

I'm a riceist! ;)

[–] snepts (11123) 5 years ago

Is Brown Rice even more racist?

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

Black rice is the racistest.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Do you honestly expect that to be taken seriously as 'evidence' of the existence of God? People understand music, therefore Allah!

You must be trolling or something.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

So why is everyone born, preloaded with an understanding of musical genres? These aren't learned. A preloaded understanding of notes that harmonize and others that sound off?

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I don't know, but as evidence for the existence of God, it's just not compelling enough.

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

I'm constantly amazed by all the compelling evidence.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 5 years ago

The fact that you're amazed is proof that Jesus is the one and only God! Q.E.D.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I'm amazed by the compelling evidence of science.

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

Science and God are not mutually exclusive. I love science too.

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 5 years ago

That is true, but organized religions and science don't jive.

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

Kind of a broad statement. Some do, some don't. We generally only hear about the ones that don't. There are literally millions of enlightened people of faith. I will say this, though: Nothing turns people away from God, better than "religion".

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 5 years ago

I guess I should have clarified the major organized religions. I agree, some smaller religions have found a practical link to nature and a higher power.

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

Yes and there are also millions of enlightened Christians and well as other faiths. Just thought that should be mentioned, as I'm one. :)

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 5 years ago

No offense, but a lot of the Christian belief does not align with science.

[–] chilone (17251) 5 years ago

None taken. There are varying degrees of "not aligning with science". "Science" leaves more questions unanswered than answered and a lot of answers have been proven false and a lot of theories that were thought to be false have been proven true. Science is awesome but it's not infallible and very little has complete consensus.

[–] Burk48917 (10966) 5 years ago

Agreed. The scientific method is sound, but not always adhered to even by scientists. I have more of an issue with religion posing belief as facts while making no attempt to abide by the scientific process.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

at its core, your question is not a bad one, & it's one that's been debated & speculated on.

where i think you're going astray is in repurposing an interesting question to make a case for a creator & against evolution. that seems to me to be a straight 'god of the gaps' argument - i don't understand how evolution could do this, therefore god. that's just not a good case, because even if we don't understand how it could be done, that doesn't mean it can't be done. it just means that we don't understand it, and we shouldn't allow ourselves to let in any kind of argument for superstition or religion into a scientific question when we may not know the answer. that is a path to madness, to giving equal weight to every possible speculation.

i could just sit here and say 'a wizard did it!'

& i think there are good answers for this question anyway, certainly interesting speculative ones, in that art recreates an emotional rush akin to the feelings & world of emotions we've evolved over the years - love & hatred & jealousy & awe. it may seem that there ought to be no evolutionary selection to be able to play the piano or write a play like shakespeare, but i think when you look into how human emotion evolved to aid in kin selection & parenting & pair bonding, it seems like it may be an interesting & fun convergent characteristic.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

anyway, there are interesting articles & books on art & evolution. it's been some years since i did any serious reading on it myself, but if you're sincere & really want to know the answers to such things, and not a locked in creationist, i'd suggest going to something like this.

CARTA: Evolutionary Origins of Art and Aesthetics: Neurobiology, Neurology and Art and Aesthetics

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1311&v=X0TKYxAYGGA

[–] Stratego (29192) 5 years ago

Have you been to primitive tribes in the Amazon to ask them what they think of Chopin? You need to do some scientific research first and back it up with evidence before drawing conclusions like that.

[–] ShogunofYonkers (71429) 5 years ago

I think it was aliens...thousands of years ago they landed here to give us heavy metal
And they probably slapped those pyramids together before bouncing...it's the only theory that makes sense🤘

[–] Stratego (29192) 5 years ago

Only aliens could explain something like this:

https://youtu.be/cqWsmiL-aao

[–] ShogunofYonkers (71429) 5 years ago

Jeez...I watched the whole thing...you do realize that no guys outside of South Korea look like that... That lead singer guy looked like Joan Jett:/ but he is using way more hairspray...

Is the tiny-man thing not a big turnoff?
I find your taste in men completely confusing, I must admit

[–] Stratego (29192) 5 years ago

They don't look like that in South Korea either, because they're from Vietnam...😑

Yes, I'm totally hot for tiny men who look like Joan Jett!

[–] ShogunofYonkers (71429) 5 years ago

Well, I guess that's hot..:/

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBRwZbAKMpU

[–] ShogunofYonkers (71429) 5 years ago

No hotter rock babe ever existed!

[–] McQualude (4231) 5 years ago

Music is mathematics and math is the language of the universe. It's more elegant than you think but no mythology required.

[–] NVF (851) 5 years ago

Why are nails across a blackboard so hard to listen to?

Because the creator doesn't like school, of course.

[–] ShogunofYonkers (71429) 5 years ago

Ugghh!
I must side with the creator on this one...school was awful!