Dear Chris, (01)
See below. (02)
> > > > ...
> > > > > Your questions betray a radically extensionalist view
> of music,
> > > > > Jay -- you seem to be suggesting that a performance of Cage's
> > > > > piece is identical with any 4'33" interval of silence.
> > > > >
> > > > > > What is the sound of one hand clapping?
> > > > >
> > > > > Obviously you don't watch The Simpsons. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > > "No entity without identity."
> > > > >
> > > > > Ah, confirmation of your extensionalism!
> > > >
> > > > What Jay had actually missed was the intentional nature of a
> > > > performance.
> > >
> > > Er, uh...huh? I chided Jay about his apparently
> extensional view of
> > > musical performances, i.e., the view that they are
> identical with the
> > > sound produced.
> >
> > MW: Well then perhaps I should be asking what you mean by
> > extensionalism, since it seems to be different from my
> understanding.
>
> I explained my meaning clearly and explicitly -- see the "i.e." above.
>
> > MW: My understanding would be that under extensionalism, the
> > identity of an object (that it is a distinct object) is
> defined by its
> > extension. So a performance of 4'33" is a particular piece
> of space time
> > including temporal parts of the performers and listeners and some
> > instrument(s).
>
> Ok, that's sort of a richer notion of extensionalism vis-a-vis musical
> performance, as it brings the performers into play as well.
> Seems to me
> a legitimate alternative. But again, I said what I meant.
>
> > It would not be any peice of silent 4'33", because it needs to be an
> > intentional silent performance of 4'33" to qualify.
>
> As was exactly my point in categorizing the view that seemed
> implicit in
> Jay's question as extensional (not that that was necessarily his own
> view).
>
> > > Obviously, what is missing from such a view are the intentional
> > > elements of a performance (as I even illustrated; see below).
> >
> > MW: Yes, we are agreed on this. It is the leap to a problem with
> > extensionalism that I do not follow.
>
> Leap? I used a term traditionally contrasted with the intentional to
> characterize a view of musical performance that seemed to be
> missing the
> intentional element. Seems exactly the right choice, if I do say so
> myself. (03)
MW: There is a problem with this, because there are two ways that
intentional can get in on the act. What you seem to be drawing on here
is the distinction between intentionally defined and extensionally
defined sets. (04)
MW: A key distinction to make is between something that is intentionally
defined, and something that is intentionally constructed. A performance
is intentionally constructed, rather than intentionally defined.
Indeed, it is quite possible to be intentionally constructed but
extensionally defined. For example, Shell's product list is intentionally
constructed (Shell decides what is in it) but it is an enumerated list
of products, so extensionally defined. (05)
MW: The opposite of intentionally constructed would be naturally occuring, so
you could have chided Jay for his naturalist tendencies. (06)
Regards (07)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Registered in England and Wales
Registered number: 621148
Registered office: Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (08)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (010)
|