If anyone can explain what the below text means, I’ll pay him/her $10,000
Sure, I’ll hook you up.
They meant to say- We could equate language with music, and say music is identical to language. So, does our mind speak music?
You got the typo version.
This person also realized that we would not necessarily equate speaking and language with music; then proceeded to exspress some humorous banter to lighten it up further.
Pay me.
You haven’t explained all the aspects of the quote. Explain line by line.
Damnit!
So I guess that means you’ll not pay me yet.
Alright, this is going to take some time.
Oh! So, when it is explained, does it have to make sense?
of course! If it doesn’t make sense, how do I know what it means? which is a precondition for payment.
it means some “grunts” have more meaning than other “grunts”…
but this is fun…
"2) The arational or emotional is not adequately expressed by words, but by feelings, which can be expressed in classical music. "
but it is more often expressed in classical violence…
which means of course “Is it fair to say, since we express our Mind by means of Music, that Mind is Music?” becomes “Is it fair to say, since we express our Mind by means of Murder, that Mind is Murder?”
“Our mind is not bound by words, because our mind can also be expressed using classical music”
actually, our mind is bound by our meninges…
and it is never expressed, only interpreted by other minds…
-Imp
donate the $10,000 to the society of cynics…
-Imp
Sure PoR, I’ll “explain” the below text. Get your money ready.
This is stating that the human voice is in itself a musical instrument and that by projecting sound we are in fact making a form of music that is taken as “spoken word.”
This line is basically following up what I just said and the answer to the question is “yes,” if you believe in the theory of the “spoken word” being a form of music as I explained.
I think this line isn’t using the right words to explain the point being made. It makes more sense to say that “since we express our thought by means of music, does that mean our thought is music?” This line is basically stating the same thing as the second line. The answer, in theory, is yes. So what’s the point?
What is the point of saying this anyway? “Arational” isn’t even a word, but it’s a nice try in the attempt to explain the emotional processes of the brain as opposed to the cognitive.
This is reiterating the truth that music is the universal language. People can speak in words, but the expression and meaning of those words could be misunderstood whereas through music, you can instantly know what is on someone’s mind. Music is the language that speaks to the intuition of the mind, which is more easily understood.
Does this help you PoR? If so, I’m waiting to be paid.
Subject of a post in the Psychology Forum at ILovePhilosophy.com: Want $10,000?
It seems naive to expect payment when Pinnacle of Reason will be the judge of whether the explanation was adequate.
The text begins by limiting the meanings of some common words, so that language is considered merely verbal speech, neglecting for example sign language and all other non-verbal symbol systems like this writing, too. Furthermore, communication takes place only through the medium of sound, which is defined as music. Within this restricted vocabulary a tautology is now introduced that to set language equal to music is the same as making music identical to language. Now within this set of narrow definitions and the logic that L = M is the same as M = L there follows this syllogism: If language equals music and music is identical to language, then (our) mind speaks music. Of course this follows within the vocabulary wherein language is only by speech that communicates only by the sound of music. Q.E.D. So much for the logical meaning of this text.
Next follows a moot ethical consideration of the “fairness” of saying what’s just been said, i.e., “The medium is the messenger.” Since mind is expressed through the medium of music; therefore, mind is music.
A further set of definitions is imperfectly presented with the mind being divided between rational (logical) and arational (emotional) sides reminiscent of so many other dualities like right brain and left brain, body and soul, God and Satan, and so on.
Within this imperfectly focused set of definitions, meanings are considered as attached to words used either logically or illogically whereas emotions cannot be fully shown by words and are expressed by music.
Now returning to the beginning, just like the Biblical logos which was with God and was God, mind precedes that division of mind into the rational, logical, verbal left brain versus the arational, emotional, musical right brain. Thus it follows that mind is not merely language, a mere component thereof (Just shown, by definition, to be half or less.) and, of course, then not the entire circumference. Mind, or its emotional side anyway, is also expressed through (classical) music. Again Q.E.D. if one accepts the second, somewhat blurry definitional set.
You can pay me at long.zhenzhu@gmail.com, but I’m not expecting that anytime soon.
I want more posts in this thread before I reveal the irony.
I am sticking to my promise also. and that I swear by God.
So, Pinnacle of Reason, by “reveal the irony”? May we take you to be saying that nobody is likely to be paid even though you will, of course, stick by your promise, which somehow also entails that there is no way what-so-ever for aspirants to answer is such a manner as to be worthy of winning your $10,000 prize? 
That just seems the most likely meaning of “irony” here because it also automatically lets you off the hook for quite an expensive offer, right? 
Pretty much as I expected, though. 
deleted
…and when a philosopher passes… 
They rudely hold their noses! 
They politely ignore it. 
You’re not getting paid either, Dr. Krankhead, so put your hands back in your pockets.
First, my pious PoR, lets not swear lightly. Do you even have $10,000?
It’s interesting in Plato’s Timaeus how the world-soul is constructed of harmonic ratios. So not only are souls made to play music (PoR), but the world is of music as well (Plato).
So, I await the big irony. Was this your own idea, Pinnacle? I, for one, find it interestiing.
my real name
You are thinking that money is music to our ears? I dunno… I don’t need no stinking money, give it to somebody who needs it.
Isn’t that where the irony is? If that were true, it could not have been written… right? Well… there’s a difference between expressing something adequately, and just talking about it, I guess. Nevermind.
When we speak a language, we speak using voices. We communicate by means of sound, which is music.
Not all sound is music. One man’s car horn is another man’s music, I suppose, though.
If we equate language with music, and say music is identical to language. Then doesn’t our mind speak music?
Only if the speaker meant to speak musically… and/or only if the ‘hearer’ interpreted the ‘spoken’ as musical.
Is it fair to say, since we express our Mind by means of Music, that Mind is Music?
Hm… I don’t think so. Music is the vehicle through which the mind expresses itself, whether or not the ‘hearer’ interprets the expression as it was meant. If the mind never expresses itself, if it is never ‘heard’ – doesn’t it still exist? Maybe this is saying that… however we can express ourselves is how we will perceive ourselves. However I experience the expression of anger – that is how I will perceive my angry mind. When my mind is angry, it is frowning, it is loud, it is feverish, it is stomping away… etcetera. I think it’s an interesting thing to consider… the whole “embodied mind” idea. Thanks for bringing it up.
The human mind has two distinct faculties. 1)Rational & Irrational, 2)Arational
I don’t get right-off-the-bat how someone could be irrational or illogical on-purpose (could you explain that?). To me it seems more accurate to say 1) rational/cognitive, 2) arrational/emotional – and I totally disagree that they are distinct. We do them together.
- The rational & Irrational is expressed by means of a combination of logical or illogical structure and words (signifiers) with meaning attached.
there are a bunch of different ways to communicate what we are thinking, which is never entirely separate from what we are feeling. The spoken word is merely one way.
- The arational or emotional is not adequately expressed by words, but by feelings, which can be expressed in classical music.
there are a bunch of different ways to communicate what we are feeling – we are made aware of how we feel and the many ways to express it due to our ability for abstract thought. Classical music is merely one way we can utilize to express our feelings. Also, it (classical music) is more cerebral (possibly wrong word) than you make it out to be.
So, in the beginning. The mind preceeds language and music. Mind is not language. Language is a component of the mind. Our mind is not bound by words, because our mind can also be expressed using classical music.
this is a weird conclusion – 'cause if the mind preceeds language and music (which I agree) – then it isn’t those things – the opposite was suggested earlier. Words and classical music both (together with many other ways of communication) express how we think/feel, which are not separate.
That was buggin’ me… now I feel better. 
deleted
mrn
I have $10,000 and I am sticking by my promise
The Christian’s integrity shows…
PoR–
Also – I don’t think emotions are purely alogical (or illogical), either. They don’t strike at random – there is some ‘reason’ / inner logic behind responding with one emotion and not another, in any given situation. We can effect our emotions through our cognitive processes, and they can likewise shape how we think – if they were distinct (although I can’t help talking about it as if they were separate and acting on eachother… maybe that’s what you… or whoever wrote the copy/pasted text… meant by ‘distinct’), this would not be possible.
But essentially what the “below text” is saying is that “words” are not the only way to communicate (make music), and may not even be “adequate” for what we are trying to express. But it sure did use a lot of words to say it!
Did you think you could show how triggering our emotional side (want to win $10,000? – “money talks”) would trick us into expressing it with our cognitive side (explain the below text), which would contradict the ‘meaning’ of the ‘below text’ you requested we explain (arational or emotional is not adequately expressed by words) – hence, irony. Ha ha, very funny. Now – if money is music to our emotional/arational ears – then why doesn’t it make a sound – is the $10,000 “fictional” if the “meaning” of the “below text” is taken as granted? Or does it stand for a song titled or making you feel like $10,000? lol
My mind is “humor” apparently, because I only clicked on your thread to see what the joke was all about… Turned out to be sort of interesting.