Classical music: Psychopath energy before a massacre!

The way "gay" is defined online, using English—

* cheery: bright and pleasant; uplifting one's mood; "a cheery hello"; "a gay sunny room"; "a sunny smile"
* brimming with high-spirited merriment; "when hearts were young and gay"; "a poet could not but be gay, in such a jocund company"—Wordsworth; "the jolly crowd at the reunion"; "Santa Claus"; "a jovial old gentleman"; "have a merry Christmas"; "peals of merry laughter"; "a mirthful...
* inclined toward social pleasures, often involving a bit of debauchery; "led a gay Bohemian Life"; "a gay old rogue with an eye for the ladies"
* bold: brightly colored and flashy; "girls decked out in brave new dresses"; "brave banners flying"; "‘braw’ is a Scottish term"; "a dress a bit too gay for her years"; "birds with gay plumage"
* providing fun and gaiety; "a festive (or festal) occasion"; "gay and exciting nightlife"; "a merry evening"
* homosexual or arousing homosexual desires

🤣😂

redlynx11, you're doing fine 👍

Anyway, like Kyle Jackson54 pointed out so elegantly, the word gay carries two distinct meanings, and I've been using it in both senses. So the real question is: is Mozart gay because he's gay, or is he gay because he's gay? 😕

P. S. redlynx11 - psychopaths are psychopaths because classical music drove them insane. GAME OVER.

Look, placidlynx23, Mozart had more children than you ever will, and he certainly slept with more women. I am still waiting for you to provide a single credible source for this claim that only psychopaths listen to classical music, or that listening to it turns someone into a psychopath.

redlynx11 said:Look, placidlynx23, Mozart had more kids than you ever will and slept with way more women.

Real classy. Exactly the kind of thing I’d expect from someone obsessed with the classics. Just another frustrated wannabe aristocrat. 😛

BTW. Unless someone means "gay" in the sense of being lighthearted and joyful, to me it implies a certain vibe or presence—it isn't about sexual orientation. If we were talking about orientation, that would be a whole different, much worse conversation. 😉

redlynx11 said:Look, placidlynx23—Mozart had more kids than you ever will, and he certainly slept with more women.

When did it arrive? 🤔

Gregory Harris8 said:Just because you listen to serious music doesn't mean you have to be a serious person.

You can't just jump to conclusions based on a couple of sentences I wrote...
And for the record, I don't just listen to "serious" stuff either..☕

My eccentric mother read somewhere that playing Mozart during pregnancy helps develop an unborn baby's sense of hearing—not just the physical ability to hear, mind you, but that intuitive musicality. Personally, I play four different instruments now, haha! Though, if I’m being honest, I suspect that’s more a result of having two incredibly talented parents rather than whatever playlist was blasting in the womb 😁
. Similarly, I’d argue that psychopaths simply listen to whatever they feel like—or perhaps whatever a director decides fits their vibe—rather than it being some deep psychological compulsion. 🙂 There are plenty of other characters in movies or TV shows who enjoy classical music without being psychopaths; take House, for example. Actually, okay, maybe he isn't the best example of a non-psychopath... 😁

Look, placidlynx23,
You haven't addressed a single one of my questions regarding Mozart. My tendency to swear isn't some reflection of my appreciation for classical music. People listen to country or rock and they swear just as much.

I expect answers.

redlynx11 & Linda Kim30: honestly, you all seriously need to enroll in a masterclass titled "How to Spot an Internet Troll While Simultaneously Developing a Sense of Humor" 😛

placidlynx23 said:Any structure that incorporates elements of chaos is fundamentally flawed—it simply doesn't work. It feels like everything is being set up against both God and the country.
What exactly does one mean when they throw around the word "genius"? It’s a term that gets tossed around so casually these days—often used as a bit of hyperbole or even a sarcastic jab—that I think we really ought to pause and consider its true weight. To me, calling someone a genius isn't just about being smart or having a high IQ; it’s about that rare, almost transcendent ability to see patterns where everyone else sees chaos. It’s that spark of insight that changes the entire way we approach a problem—think of how someone like Steve Jobs could look at a piece of technology and see an extension of the human spirit rather than just a gadget. So, when we use that word, are we talking about raw intellect, or are we talking about that unique, creative leap that defines greatness? I’d love to hear how everyone else defines it.
Thirdly—and I say this with all due respect—you still haven't actually proven that point to me.

.

I honestly don't see the downside here—really. Why would anyone choose to live life in shackles when you have the chance to be truly free? ☕

redlynx11 said:Furthermore, where on earth did this data come from claiming that all—or most—psychopaths listen to classical music? And then there's this comparison suggesting that "intelligent" psychopaths favor the classics while gangs listen to rap, implying they're somehow smarter and more worthy of admiration. A psychopath is a psychopath regardless of their playlist, and they certainly don't deserve any special respect. Besides, what even was people listening to before the twentieth century?
If you're going to spout nonsense, maybe try actually listening to some classical pieces (and not just Requiems or Beethoven's Ninth) before you comment...

Come on, be reasonable and read the original post.
And by the way, pay closer attention to the word film. ☕

Brandon Kim96 said:I don't see the downside. Why stay shackled when you can just be free? ☕

What does freedom actually mean, though? (I’m being serious here. I want a real answer).

feraltrucker5 said:Gelu & Linda Kim30: you guys seriously need to enroll in a seminar on "how to spot an internet troll while simultaneously developing a sense of humor" 😛

Look, I’ve got plenty of humor. It just doesn't show up in this particular mess. 🤣

placidlynx23 said:What even is freedom? (I'm being serious here, looking for a real answer).

Look, freedom is just having options. Simplest way to put it.

Linda Kim30 said:Simply put, freedom is the ability to choose.

But if you're forced to make a choice—and let's face it, we always are—then you aren't actually free. Which means freedom doesn't even exist.
Some philosopher said that—can't recall which one, I didn't come up with it myself.😉

fadedcanyon482 said:but if you have to choose (and we always have to choose) then you aren't actually free... basically, freedom is a myth.
some philosopher said that or whatever, i didn't make it up myself😉

Look, you don't *have* to pick. You just have the opportunity to choose... that’s what being free actually means.
What part of my definition is tripping you up?!

This thread belongs in the philosophy sub...🤣

Linda Kim30 said:Simply put, freedom is just having the option to choose.

Anyway, let's move past the naive assumptions and get into it:

1. Is freedom an infinite range of choices, or is it finite?
2. If it’s finite, what actually dictates which options are on the table and which aren't?

fadedcanyon482 said:but if you're forced to choose (and we always have to choose), then you aren't actually free... which means freedom doesn't exist.
some philosopher said this once, though I can't recall which one. Not my own thought.😉

Whoever said that, if they weren't talking strictly about practical or pragmatic matters, they haven't a clue. If they were, then they aren't even discussing the concept of freedom anymore—just some utilitarian, crippled version of it.

Absolute freedom? Yeah, right. It’s a total myth.