Today FluCoMa is making a double release that might interest readers of this group:
To be true, what I like on this platform (supercollider), is that technical people tend to be less religious in the quit specific sense. Those ambitious statements I heard in that video “totally random in principle”, “energy shaping around the system” and other rhetoric make me sceptical, because it smells like metaphysics.
No doubt they make great music, but the conceptualization is kind of advertisement for exaggerated value - loud lies that should serve as motivation, strengthen the faith and trust of something thay takes as meaning of life.
thanks @tedmoore very interesting indeed!
@Deathscription maybe give metaphysics another look! →
check out Kant’s “Prolegomena to any future metaphysics” before trash talk
I think Kant is a kind of random pointer here, because “Metaphysics” most likely comes from Aristotle as “something behind physics”. About Kant, I remember just warning with respect to our speculations when we enter the realm of metaphysics. Thought I don’t think most of the artists make a distinction between reasonable metaphysics in this very specific sense and fantastic religious beliefs of self created fairy tales.
From my side, I would suggest you more pragmatic contemporary authors who suggests that we can explain things without necessary talk to metaphysics. For example Patricia Smith Churchland and Daniel C. Dennett.
Lectures here:
https://www.fil.lu.se/pufendorf/lectures/2007-patricia-smith-churchland/