Hi

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Afmmjr@... wrote:

> It seems silly that Bradley's work was published. Musicologists
> have been failing music and the people making music for a very
> long time. There are so many examples to name. However, there
> are plenty of other fields that have been as bad, or worse.

Of course there have been musicologists who have also made wrong
claims etc. etc. Happens in all science and scholarship. No big deal,
I'd think. Sh... happens
One should not forget, however, that musicology has provided us with a
significantly growing body of knowledge. And that is by far the larger
part.


> That said, the real scandal is not Bradley's attempt to get legs
> for his autochtonous deduction(s), but that an "august" body
> deigned to print them...in England.

> A thank you to Ibo Ortgies for leading a charge, though damage
> has already been done. There were so many holes in Lehman's
> assertions that one must wonder "why" it was published, and
> under peer review!

> One thing that has become clear is that musicologists are the ones
> that believe Johann Sebastian Bach is in equal temperament,

No, in general the musicologist in the field are of the opinion that
nothing precise can be said about Bach's temperament preferences,
except that he from a relative early age seems to have preferred some
(unspecifiable) well-temperament.
Equal temperament (in fact, the practical approach of the theoretical
modal) might have been among the options, and if so, may be later in
his life - we don't know for sure.

A problem is, however, when musicians try to be scholars or
scientists, without sufficiently being trained in using thee proper
"tools", without being critical to speculation and hypothesis, and
often giving in to the fallacy of sentimens, that emotional value can
serve as an argument, as evidence, more than a argument from reason

"Sentimens is a clever fallacy. Its idiotic claim, that emotion
is a better guide, is most alluring to an intelligent audience.
Intelligent people are often afraid of being thought rather
cold because they use reason so much. They do not want to appear
to be emotionally deficient, and are easy prey to a speaker
who assures them that they are just as sensitive, loving
and compassionate as the next person, who is also a bit of a
bore. This permits them the delusion that they are welcome into
the common fold, instead of remaining aloof from it. They happily
abandon reason as the price of their admission ticket to the
human race.

An individual can be ensnared with sentimens, and led to drop
a carefully thought-out position after being assured that he or
she cares just as much about humanity as the rest of us. A denial
would hardly count as a good response. A crowd is even easier
to lead by the nose on a sentimental string. I have rarely seen
an international gathering which did not give a standing ovation
to any gaga idiot who urged them to forget reason and
concentrate on loving each other."

From: Madsen Pirie: "How to Win Every Argument: The Use and
Abuse of Logic" ISBN: 0826490069


> based on the plentitude of such writers. Players are different,
> going by our ears, when said ears are plugged into logic.

It is "cold" reason, logic and application of scholarly methods which
tells us, that Lehman's claim is an unsubstantiated speculation -
whether we like his temperament, regard it as useful, or not.


> Bradley is really a player who dabbled and got caught in the
> creative territory, but who severed his logic.


Kind regards

Ibo Ortgies