A Laboratory for Feeling and Time: Pioneering Philosopher Susanne Langer on What Gives Music Its Power and How It Illuminates the Other Arts

The Gnomes: "He played until the room was entirely filled with gnomes."

“Music is ‘significant form,’ and its significance is that of a symbol, a highly articulated sensuous object… Feeling, life, motion and emotion constitute its import.”

“Music is at once the most wonderful, the most alive of all the arts… and the most sensual,” Susan Sontag wrote in one of the most beautiful meditations on the power of music. Aldous Huxley, in his immensely poetic reflection on why music moves us so, recounted “some exquisite soft harmony apprehended by another sense” as he listened to Beethoven in the dark. This sensorial splendor of music is what Helen Keller, deaf and blind, articulated in her exultation upon “hearing” Beethoven’s Ode to Joy with her hand.

I thought about all of this recently — or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that I felt about it — as I listened, with my whole being, to a friend perform music that seemed to emanate from her whole being. I wondered what it is about music that we feel in our marrow, that invites us into some other dimension of time, magnetizing us to the present yet containing within itself all that ever was and ever will be — a place where the symbolic and the real, the abstract and the acutely alive, converge into something larger.

That peculiar property of music may have been what prompted Susanne Langer (December 20, 1895–July 17, 1985), one of the first professional women philosophers, to call music an “unconsummated symbol” in her trailblazing 1942 book Philosophy in a New Key: A Study in the Symbolism of Reason, Rite, and Art. Langer revisited the subject a quarter century later in her final work, Mind: An Essay on Human Feeling(public library), exploring what makes music different from all other forms of creative expression and how, paradoxically, understanding the source of its power illuminates the other arts.

Langer writes:

Music, like language, is an articulate form. Its parts not only fuse together to yield a greater entity, but in so doing they maintain some degree of separate existence, and the sensuous character of each element is affected by its function in the complex whole. This means that the greater entity we call a composition is not merely produced by mixture, like a new color made by mixing paints, but is articulated, i.e. its internal structure is given to our perception.

And yet music, Langer argues, is not quite a language, as it has frequently been called (although the two worked in tandem to help us evolve.) Unlike language, where words function as its primary forms of fixed meaning and association, music allows us to fill its forms with our own meaning. She considers this singular role of meaning in music:

Music has import, and this import is the pattern of sentience — the pattern of life itself, as it is felt and directly known.

Let us therefore call the significance of music its “vital import” instead of “meaning,” using “vital” not as a vague laudatory term, but as a qualifying adjective restricting the relevance of “import” to the dynamism of subjective experience.

With this lens, Langer offers a sublimely compact and insightful definition of what music is, how it differs from language, and what it does in and for us:

Music is “significant form,” and its significance is that of a symbol, a highly articulated sensuous object, which by virtue of its dynamic structure can express the forms of vital experience which language is peculiarly unfit to convey. Feeling, life, motion and emotion constitute its import…

more…

https://www.brainpickings.org/

WIKK WEB GURU

Magazine Headline: ‘You Don’t Have To Be Racist To Be Racist’

There may be no limit to the all the ways Social Justice Warriors think human beings suck. I’ve long hoped we would eventually reach Peak SJW, a point beyond parody when even SJWs can’t take themselves seriously anymore, but now I’m not sure such a thing is possible.

For example, here’s an article from Affinity Magazine titled “You Don’t Have To Be Racist To Be Racist.”

Yeah, let’s let that stew just a bit:

Whether you experience it or not, the issue of racism is still very prevalent in a diversified country like America. And whether you believe it or not, there are many actions that are considered to be racist even though being racist was not the intent. It is called “Color-blind Racism”, a type of racial discrimination where people of color are unintentionally disregarded when someone is selecting individuals to participate in an activity or service. Not only is this very prevalent in our current society, but it is very harmful as color-blind racism often stems from cultural racism and predisposed stereotypes.

American Sociologist and Professor of Sociology at Duke University, Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, has discussed his views on systemic racism in America even despite the lack of people doing or saying things that are not overly racist. Bonilla-Silva has discussed the four different central frames of racial colorblindness in his book Racism Without Racist that was published in 2013, stating that abstract liberalism, naturalism, cultural racism, and minimization of racism are at the core of color-blind racism.

What little support for this nonsense that exists in the article are some research studies into bias and prejudice, in no way supporting writer Evin Zendejas’ thesis in this piece. Much less the headline.

You see, being a racist is rather binary. You either are, or you’re not.

Of course, this article is the Left attempting to keep racism alive so as to prove their own worth to society, and to propagate more “social justice” policies. Racism turned into “micro-aggressions” and “structural racism” when the Left couldn’t find enough examples anymore.

Now, we’ve got the lunacy of “color-blind racism.”

While the whole thing elicits laughter from rational folks, the Left is, of course, seriously trying to figure out how to combat this nonsense right now.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/05/23/magazine-headline-you-dont-have-to-be-racist-to-be-racist/

WIKK WEB GURU

ARIANA GRANDE AND THE ILLUMINATI BETA KITTENS OF POP CULTURE

by Buck Rogers, Staff Writer Waking Times

Terrorism is part of the new zeitgeist, and it serves a litany of political and social objectives for government, as does occult symbolism which is introduced to our culture by Hollywood and the beta kittens of the Illuminati-controlled music industry.

Symbolism and Sacrifice

In the case of the recent Manchester attack, the intriguing matter of Illuminati sybolism is overtly present, given the fact that the attack took place at an Ariana Grande concert, a performance artist who is unquestionably part of the Hollywood/Illuminati cult of mind control and social engineering.

This is the segment of pop culture which includes the network of over-sexualized young celebrity women trained to perform self-demeaning and occultish acts for enormous audiences. These are the ‘artists’ who receive the most support from the music industry, the greatest production budgets, the most airplay, the most press and the most gossip. These are the artists who are often seen adorned in Illuminati symbolism and often photographed with one eye covered in homage to the ubiquitous image of the all-seeing eye at the top of the pyramid.

The term ‘beta kitten’ refers to the ‘kitten programming’ applied to young females who’ve been selected to serve as mind controlled slaves by members of the occult elite, as outlined in MK Ultra and Project Monarch. Their role in pop culture today is to normalize occult symbolism and teach subservience to darkness. Watch this Lil’ Wayne video to see what a Beta Kitten is all about.

 

Grande was in Manchester for the UK performance of her ‘Dangerous Woman’ tour when an alleged suicide bomber blew himself up in a crowd of young Grande fans as they exited the show, killing 22 people on May 22nd. Grande herself was not harmed.

She is very much a part of the entertainment industry’s arsenal of cultural programming weapons. While she may very well be talented and beautiful, her career is the product of her handlers. In 2014, it received a boost from the major players in the music industry, at which time she began being photographed with one eye covered.

She is seen here covering one eye with a cookie.

And a few more examples:

 

 

 

 

 

The one eye photo is a very common sign of allegiance to the powers for whom these pop stars work for.

Several of Grande’s music videos also demonstrate her connection and service to the Illuminati and to their predictive programming and occult symbolism. In her popular video, ‘One Last Time,’ an apocalyptic scene unfolds as the entire planet is bombed with giant meteors.

 

In Grande’s video, ‘Let Me Love You,’ Ariana gives herself up to Lil’ Wayne, who is a top male performer for the Illuminati. Watch for yourself:

There are other numerous Beta Kittens in pop culture today, including Miley Cyrus…

 

Lady Gaga…

 

Katy Perry…

 

Taylor Swift…

 

Beyoncé…

 

The list goes on and on…

 

 

 

Final Thoughts

The symbolic imagery of the Illuminati is everywhere in today’s culture. Targeted especially at the youth, it traumatizes and numbs their psyches with the symbols of domination, slavery, fear, and death.

Having become so desensitized to these symbols for so many years, however, their intensity must be increased in order for them to keep having shock value, and now actual terrorism is connected, becoming a form of ritual sacrifice under the banner of occult symbols.

Actress Roseanne Barr explains the MK Ultra mind control program, which rules Hollywood:

About the Author

Buck Rogers is the earth-bound incarnation of that familiar part of our timeless cosmic selves, the rebel within. He is a surfer of ideals and meditates often on the promise of happiness in a world battered by the angry seas of human thoughtlessness. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com.

This article (Ariana Grande and the Illuminati Beta Kittens of Pop Culture) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Buck Rogers and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

WIKK WEB GURU
likeshare

Who names diseases?

Resultado de imagem para Bird flu: a worker feeds chickens at a poultry farm on 24 October 2005 in Beijing, China. Photo by China Photos/Getty

Bird flu: a worker feeds chickens at a poultry farm on 24 October 2005 in Beijing, China. Photo by China Photos/Getty

Swine Flu, Naples Soldier, Ebola. Disease names express fear, create stigma and distract attention. Can they be improved?

Laura Spinney is a science writer whose work has been published in The Economist, National Geographic, Nature, New Scientist and The Telegraph, among others. Her latest book is Pale Rider: The Spanish Flu of 1918 and How it Changed the World (2017). She lives in Paris, France.

Remember the Naples Soldier, the vicious flu pandemic that swept the globe almost 100 years ago, infecting one in three people and killing up to 50 million? You probably don’t, but you might remember the Spanish flu, the name by which that pandemic is better known. ‘Naples Soldier’ was what the Spanish called it, after a catchy tune that was being played in local music halls at the time. They knew the origins of the disaster lay beyond their borders and, understandably, refused to take the blame.

The Spanish flu stands as a monument to the ugly history of disease naming. The world was at war in 1918, and the belligerent nations censored their press, not wanting to damage their populations’ morale. Spain, however, was neutral in that war, and when the first cases of flu occurred there, they were widely reported. The disease had been in the United States for two months already, and in France for several weeks at least, but that information was kept out of their newspapers. The world came to see the disease as pulsing out from Spain, a belief that was encouraged by propagandists in other countries whom it suited to shift the blame.

The naming of diseases has always been as much about politics and the human need to identify a scapegoat, as it has been about accurately labelling a new threat to life. Periodic attempts have been made to remove the subjective from the process. Three United Nations agencies – the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization, and the World Organisation for Animal Health – play a particularly important role when it comes to infectious diseases, which don’t respect borders. WHO hosts the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), which has long assigned the final name to any human disease. And in 2015, WHO came up with an updated set of guidelines for labelling infectious diseases, which account for the vast majority of threats to human life.

Prior to 2015, the naming system was fraught. One issue was that very little might be known about a disease early on; nonetheless, some kind of name is required, because it’s hard to fight a nameless menace. The first case of Middle East respiratory syndrome was identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012, but three years later there was an outbreak in South Korea. Lyme disease, which was named for the town in Connecticut where it was first identified in 1976, is now a problem throughout North America, as well as in Europe and Asia. Time turned these nomers into misnomers, but by then, they had stuck.

The advent of the internet has made things only worse, because the name can potentially travel farther and faster than the disease – especially given that the person assigning that first name is more likely to be a government minister, bureaucrat or journalist than an expert in disease. Given such constraints, the WHO came up with its 2015 guidelines with the modest goal of preventing the worst naming sins, before the ICD could assign a name based on more knowledge and deeper reflection. Then it circulated them far and wide.

Under the 2015 guidelines, infectious disease names would no longer single out places, species or human groups defined by their sexual, religious or cultural identity. Nor would they include alarming terms such as ‘unknown’ or ‘fatal’. Such monikers as Rift Valley fever or Legionnaires’ disease would never fly, though disease names already ensconced would not be changed.

Instead, according to the WHO, disease names would thenceforth make use of generic descriptive terms. These could include symptoms – respiratory disease, for instance, or watery diarrhoea. The name might designate an affected group, but in neutral terms – juvenile for a childhood disease, say, or maternal when mothers are involved. It might refer to a season of the year or a bodily system – cardiac or nervous, to name but two. And it would include the name of the agent – streptococcus A, coronavirus, influenza virus and salmonella come to mind. Diseases that lay equal claim to a set of terms might be differentiated by numbers…

more..

https://aeon.co/essays/disease-naming-must-change-to-avoid-scapegoating-and-politics

WIKK WEB GURU

There’s No Safe Way to Tan

We spoke to four different dermatologists: Not one of them would tell us that sunbathing is okay

In the interest of looking beach-ready, you may well be thinking about embarking upon a regular plan of at least the G (gym) and T (tan) in GTL. But if you’re vaguely aware that the sun is bad for your bare skin and wondering, “How can I safely roast myself like a butter-rubbed Thanksgiving turkey this weekend?” we have some bad news: You can’t. Just as there’s no healthy way to smoke cigarettes, there’s absolutely no safe way to get a tan. And if you don’t believe us, ask a dermatologist. Better yet, ask four of them, which we went ahead and did for you.

“A tan is basically your skin trying to protect itself from the harmful effects of ultraviolet rays,” says Anthony M. Rossi, a dermatologist in New York City. “These UV wavelengths cause DNA damage, so your cells produce pigment [i.e., they darken the color of the skin] to protect itself from further DNA damage.”

Robert T. Brodel, a dermatologist at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, agrees. “About 95 percent of dermatologists think about this the same way. We see patients that have yellowing of their skin, wrinkles, brown spots, pre-cancers and skin cancers every day, and the one modifiable cause of these things is the sun.”

But what if we tried to cheat nature and brown ourselves in a tanning bed?

“Tanning using a bed isn’t considered safe, ever,” says Adriana Schmidt, a dermatologist in Southern California. “Not only are you exposing yourself to UV radiation, but there may even be other forms of radiation you’re exposing yourself to as well.”

Um, can we get a fourth opinion?

“Please don’t use tanning beds,” says Lisa Chipps, a dermatologist in Beverly Hills. “There’s no ‘safe’ level of ultraviolet radiation.”

But what if you absolutely have to get a little color?

“For those who insist on darkening their skin, I advise them to use lotion or spray tans,” says Chipps. “However, with spray tans, be sure to cover your eyes, mouth and nose, to avoid inhaling or ingesting the DHA chemicals.” Rossi agrees: “I recommend using a self-tanner. But you still need to use sun block daily afterwards, because self-tanners don’t protect you against UV.”

But isn’t the sun our primary source of Vitamin D? So won’t terrible things happen to us if we don’t expose a little bit of skin?

“If you’re worried about Vitamin D, you can take it orally,” explains Brodell. “The second thing is that some sun gets through the sunscreen and through the clouds on a day that you didn’t wear a hat [which provides ample amounts of Vitamin D].”

What if we’re otherwise young and healthy? Won’t that protect us?

“No,” says Brodell. “What I find is that most of my patients aren’t scared of skin cancer because they don’t think they can get it. So I tell them that if they want to keep looking young, they need to protect themselves from the sun.”

So there you have it: If you want to go outside, wear sunscreen and a big floppy hat. Better yet, just spend the summer on your couch, under a blanket. After all, you can’t be too careful.

https://melmagazine.com/theres-no-safe-way-to-tan-8807074a9f9c

WIKK WEB GURU

In Their Lives: Great Writers on Great Beatles Songs

“The garden of life is strewn with such dormant seeds and so much of art blossoms from their unwilled and unwillable awakenings.”

And now for something a bit out of the ordinary: When editor Andrew Blauner invited me to contribute to an anthology of essays by some of his favorite writers about their favorite Beatles songs, I did something I rarely do — I accepted, because a particular Beatles song happens to be a significant animating force in my family story.

The anthology is now out as In Their Lives: Great Writers on Great Beatles Songs (public library), featuring contributions from wonderful writers like Pico Iyer (“Yesterday”), Rosanne Cash (“No Reply”), Rick Moody (“The End”), Rebecca Mead (“Eleanor Rigby”), Roz Chast (“She Loves You”), Jane Smiley (“I Want to Hold Your Hand”), and Adam Gopnik (“Strawberry Fields Forever” / “Penny Field”).

Here my essay, as it appears in the book.

YELLOW SUBMARINE
by Maria Popova

My parents fell in love on a train. It was the middle of the Cold War and they were both traveling from their native Bulgaria to Saint Petersburg in Russia, where they were to attend different universities — my father, an introvert of formidable intelligence, was studying computer science; my mother, a poetry-writing (bordering-on-bossy) extrovert , library science.

An otherwise rational man, my father describes the train encounter as love at first sight. Upon arrival, he began courting my mother with such subtlety that it took her two years to realize she was being courted.

One spring morning, having finally begun to feel like a couple, they were walking across the lawn between the two dorms and decided it was time for them to have a whistle-call. At the time, Bulgarian couples customarily had whistle-calls — distinctive tunes they came up with, usually borrowed from the melody of a favorite song, by which they could find each other in a crowd or summon one another from across the street.

Partway between the primitive and the poetic, between the mating calls of mammals and the sonnets by which Romeo and Juliet beckoned one another, these signals were part of a couple’s shared language, a private code to be performed in public. Both sets of my grandparents had one. My mother’s parents, elementary schoolteachers in rural Bulgaria who tended to an orchard and the occasional farm animal, used a melody of unclear origin but aurally evocative of a Bulgarian folk song; my father’s parents, both civil engineers and city intellectuals, used a fragment from a Schumann waltz.

That spring morning, knowing that my mother was a Beatles fan, my father suggested “Yellow Submarine.” There was no deliberation, no getting mired in the paradox of choice — just an instinctive offering fetched from some mysterious mental library.

Eventually, my parents got pregnant, got married, had this child. They continued to summon each other, and eventually me, by whistling “Yellow Submarine.” Although I didn’t know at the time that it was originally written as a children’s song, it came to color my childhood. I had always wondered why, of all possible songs saturating their youth, my parents had chosen “Yellow Submarine” — a song released long before they met. My father wasn’t much of a Beatles fan himself, and yet that spring morning, he was able to open the cabinet of his semi-conscious memory, fetch a melody he had heard almost twenty years earlier, and effortlessly whistle it to his beloved. The familial whistle-call became a given in my childhood, like math homework and Beef Stroganoff Sundays, so it wasn’t until I was in my early thirties that it occurred to me to inquire about how “Yellow Submarine” wove itself into the family fabric. The story of how that seemingly random song had implanted itself in my father’s mind is the archetypal story of how popular music, and perhaps all popular art, is metabolized in the body of culture. Once it has entered the crucible of consciousness, a song becomes subject to a peculiar alchemy — the particularities of the listener’s life at that particular moment transmute its objective meaning, if there ever was one at all, into a subjective impression. That impression is what we encode into memory, what we retrieve to whistle twenty years later. The artist’s original intent is melded with the listener’s personal context into an amorphous mass of inexpressible yet unforgettable unity — a dormant seed whose blossoming depends on the myriad factors fertilizing the surrounding soil. That the seed was planted at all may remain unheralded until the moment of its blossoming…

more…

https://www.brainpickings.org/

WIKK WEB GURU

GYNECOLOGIST GIVES 10 REASONS WOMEN SHOULD QUIT TAKING BIRTH CONTROL PILLS

 

by Christina Sarich, Staff Writer Waking Times

Millions of women are prescribed birth control pills every day to prevent pregnancy or to control a hormonal imbalance, but Dr. Sara Gottfried, a practicing gynecologist, is convinced women have been sold a pack of lies when it comes to these top-selling pharmaceutical drugs. Here’s why.

First, you should know that this article is about supporting women completely in having full choice of when to conceive or not to conceive. However, it is also about informing them (and the men who love them) what happens to their bodies and minds when they take birth control pills year after year.

As Elizabeth Siegel, another medical expert reveals in her study, marketing decisions rather than scientific innovations, have guided the development and positioning of contraceptive products in recent years. What’s even more disturbing is that though there are hundreds of birth control brand names to choose from, there are only a handful of actual formulations, all based on science that is more than 50 years old (and dare I say, based on the tired, patriarchal notion of female sexuality).

Considering that there are forces which would like to sterilize the entire population, this topic deserves a little extra inspection. Compulsory sterilization is no joke. Its’ been happening for several decades now. The recent realization of Kenyan doctors that a UN tetanus vaccine was a “mass sterilization exercise,” and other telling attempts reiterate this truth.

Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh once said, “If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

Paul Ehrlich, a former science adviser to president George W. Bush and the author of The Population Bomb has stated:

“To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of the Earth is obvious but much neglected or denied.”

If they can’t lower our numbers with chemtrails, forced vaccinations, GMO food, carcinogens in our air, water, and soil, endocrine disrupting pesticides, nuclear weapons, endless wars, manufactured AIDS and other viruses, etc., then the New World Order attempts to just sterilize us like cattle.

HBO host, Bill Maher has stated, “I’m pro-choice, I’m for assisted suicide, I’m for regular suicide, I’m for whatever gets the freeway moving – that’s what I’m for. It’s too crowded, the planet is too crowded and we need to promote death.”

Moreover, more than 3 million unwanted pregnancies happen every year, just in the U.S. even with contraceptive use – so once we throw in the health harming hazards that go with these drugs, it seems it is time that women had a 360-degree view of their birth control choices, before plowing ahead.

So, as offered by a practicing gynecologist who sees hundreds of women every year, here are some reasons why you (or your wife or girlfriend) may want to stop taking the Pill (Birth Control Pills – BCPs).

  1. The Pill dramatically increase a woman’s testosterone levels which can cause a low sex drive, vaginal dryness, and painful intercourse. Up to 40% of women may be experiencing this problem but not talking about it.
  2. The reason the Pill is famous for helping to clear up acne is that it overwhelms natural estrogen with testosterone. While this may be a temporary benefit to taking the Pill, long-term, your natural “female” hormones don’t return to normal. This means your hormones stay whacked for decades. Dr. Kelly Brogan tells the same tale of disturbed hormonal balance in women who have been taking the pill, with no clear sign of the body returning to normal hormone levels.
  3. The gut is negatively affected by BCPs. Another thing that gets “whacked” when you take the pill is your gut health. Ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease (both linked to chronic gut inflammation) is more common among women who use oral contraceptives.
  4. The Pill decreases the bio-availability of key vitamins and minerals your body needs. Doctors still don’t know how, but BCPs lower the body’s absorption of vitamins B1, B2, B5, B6, B9 (folate), B12, vitamins C and E, copper, magnesium, selenium, and zinc.
  5. The Pill causes blood clots. If certain types of oral birth control are used, the tendency to develop deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolus increases three-fold.
  6. The Pill makes PMS worse. Those containing drosperinone, a synthetic version of progestin, are the worst.
  7. The Pill lowers your thyroid hormones. Hashimoto’s disease isn’t just from Fukushima radiation.
  8. The Pill can make you gain weight, retain fluid, and feel bloated. The mainstream will tell you that the Pill isn’t the reason for your eight gain, but just in case you think it is, don’t worry – it will go away in a month or two.
  9. The Pill increases the risk of breast cancer and cervical cancers. No brainer there.
  10. The Pill, as opposed to other contraceptive methods can cause permanent delayed conception. Maybe you don’t want kids now, but what about the future?

Fertility is a very personal choice, but women and men alike should at least be aware of what chemical birth control pills do to the body and possible reasons why they are so heavily prescribed.

Dr. Gottfried advises,

“For some women, the BCP is the easiest or most convenient choice, and above all else, I support a woman’s right to choose. I prefer non-hormonal forms of contraception like the copper intrauterine device (IUD), cervical caps, diaphragms, and condoms, but I understand they are not always possible, affordable, or appropriately effective.

If you choose to stay on the Pill despite my precautions, take note of any symptoms of hormone imbalance.”

About the Author

Christina Sarich is a staff writer for Waking Times. She is a writer, musician, yogi, and humanitarian with an expansive repertoire. Her thousands of articles can be found all over the Internet, and her insights also appear in magazines as diverse as Weston A. Price, NexusAtlantis Rising, and the Cuyamungue Institute, among others…

This article (Gynecologist Gives 10 Reasons Women Should Quit Taking Birth Control Pills) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Christina Sarich and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement. Please contact WakingTimes@gmail.com for more info.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/05/22/gynecologist-gives-10-reasons-women-quit-taking-birth-control-pills/

 

WIKK WEB GURU