How so?
Explain

A subset of a does not equal a.

Yes and no. A subset of a <= A.
Therefore if a contains all of elements of A, and it does because that's the definition of a subset, then certainly we can say a = A. Which is the point I was trying to make.
It is like saying a square is a rectangle.
However A = a if and only if for every element in A there is an element in a. But a rectangle is not a square.
You are forgetting in logic = is a bi conditional operator. :p

What my point was that you say that rap has at most two elements of what you called music. But if it has two elements of what you call music then rap is most certainly music. A subset of a set most certainly is within the bounds of said set.

And if you make the counterclaim that rap contains some elements not found in music then we get into probability. However again rap has at least 2 out of 4 elements of what you said are required for music; then at most you can say rap is 50% likely to be music. However you can not say rap is not music, because that is 0% assumption (meaning that rap must have no elements in set of all music); which is impossible in the logic that you presented to us.

My sir your logic is flawed.

I know that I may not dissuade your opinion of rap not being music, but my point is that you can not certainly go around making false statements and using logic to back up an opinion.

Logic used for defining music? Wonderful.

What's next I wonder - musical logic or logical music? :rolleyes:

i thought it was analogical or digital ?

I thought it was D J LOGIC

http://www.djouls.com/jambands/image...Of_Logic_b.jpg

Nope. It's your logic which is flawed. If it takes 4 elements to make music, anything which has less than 4 does not equal music. And it's not MY opinion- I didn't make up the definition. You'll find it taught in any music theory class in the world.

so next thing you'll be telling me is that you also believe in the pythagorean theory, the theory of relativity, and the theory of evolution ?

pshhhhh - theory boy

Lol.............

Apparently they missed quite a few. Its laughable when one thinks of logic and music in the same sentence. Better still, in the same sense.

Try explaining that to the Apaches who beat on logs and wardrums any which way they can. :rolleyes:

If you can read carefully, I have not used the word logic in reference to music itself- only in relation to people's arguments about it.

Whatever, I'm tired of arguing the issue, it's just your opinion man... not fact. Now I think I'll go to the music store and buy a rap cd, or maybe in the music section of iTunes, or possibly peruse the "Bestsellers in Music" section on Amazon... oh look "T.I." is number 22, not a big fan. There's not only one definition of music but you go ahead and stick to the only one you've read, I showed you the whole definition because you were stuck on defining it and then you accused me of being the one that needed validation from such definition. Fucking ridiculous, and ignorant to boot. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

You can buy plenty of spoken word offerings at music stores, Amazon & iTunes.

Not in the bestselling in music section, that's in a different section.


For instance, The Roots - Rising Down is sorted under:


#18 in Music > Rap & Hip-Hop > Experimental Rap
#72 in Music > Pop > Pop Rap

Omg.....that was amazing. I fathom and agree with this totally. I feel like reading a math text on Stats and Logistics right now.

Exactly it is riduculous to assume so otherwise. We can not define such an amorphous subject such as music. Which is my point for making such a logical argument.

Leprucky Cougar Lol, thanks those Discrete Mathematics classes had to be used somewhere. In matter of fact you can have my books they hurt my head. :D

neverending Look up Sets and see that my argument is solid. Also my point is basically this. Rap may not meet all your requirements for music, but since it fulfills two requiremnts, rap is most certainly not "not music".

And your point is invalid. Doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same thing, your point will still be invalid.

Your opinion is not shared by everybody but there are some who agree.

ya know



The Bird.......is the word




Papa-oom-oom-oom-oom-ooma-mow-mow
Oom-oom-oom-oom-ooma-mow-mow
Ooma-mow-mow, papa-ooma-mow-mow
Papa-ooma-mow-mow, ooma-mow-mow
Well, don't you know about the bird
Well, everybody knows that the bird is the word
A-well-a, bird, bird, b-bird's the word

Awww it shows up for me... damn angelfire... damn photobucket for blocking it. BAH.

I'll edit my post so you don't look foolish.




wait....but then I will have to edit this one

Damn I do sound like a broken record don't I? Well then disprove it.

But like I said before, I made such an absurd argument to convey how ridiculous this argument is. And if you read my argument carefully it is a "reductio ad absurdum." I was not try to prove you wrong, but merely the negative (of your argument) is impossible :p

This pissing contest is getting tired. Does it really matter that much?

LOL... no, it doesn't matter AT ALL.

Whatever Mongo

Pfft I totally jacked this thread. You know it.

No thanks buddy. I don't do guys, but you can totally go swallow some man meat if you want, thats your life choice not mine. :) I CONTINUE TO DESTROY THIS THREAD HAHA!!

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n...eenhornet1.jpg

Um.....that would be the little guy on the left my Dear ;) :D

:D Yes......I guess I'm one of the only people here old enough to have seen it when it first came out. I have it in my Vampire dvd collection also. You have to admit William Marshall was one suave, cool Brother pimp'in around with that Eddie Munster hairdo and that polyester cape!!!!!!! :cool:

You would guess wrong.

Thanks alot ya old bastard.....that just reminded me of a Family Guy ep I watched a couple of weeks ago where Peter spent the whole episode singing that song.....that song will be stuck in my head all night!!!!!:mad: :D