The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra will be performing this work as well as Colina's The Unbearable Lightness of Being and Three Cabinets of Wonder with Anastasia Khitruk (violin) on 29 Nov. 2011 at Cadogan Hall in London at 19.30 - I'll be there!
When you will catch the fist of the earth in this Country to the hand and you will crush... the most expensive Blood will be dripping!!! These are neighbours.... from the east and from west bought Poland it!!!
When you will catch the fist of the earth in this Country to the hand and you will crush... the most expensive Blood will be dripping!!! These are neighbours.... from the east and from west bought Poland it!!!
When weżmiesz fist of the earth in this Country to the hand and you will squeeze.... from it the most expensive Blood will sail!!! "we owe" it our for "friends" neighbouring.... from the east and of west!
This is my favorite movement in the symphony. Its orchestration is just so cathartic, even after the soloist is done. There is so much emotion in every part of this piece.
@MissInformati0n What you are saying is weard because I said the same thing when I heard it the first time, I sang alone like that before hearing it !!
In my opinion, God is the scapegoat for all our mistakes. Some call it "human nature", others the "universal consciousness"... truth is, we hunt, we kill, we degrade everything and everyone. It is US who are responsible for all the atrocities we have committed, and this is the only thing we can't stand. We have created laws to govern us, borders to divide us, gods to dictate us, only in order for us not to realize that WE ARE THE RESPONSIBLE ONES.
@NPBaudelaire I agree with you, but I would suggest that what you describe is described accurately by the doctrine of The Fall. We create laws to govern us precisely because we hunt, kill, degrade everything, etc. Christ put flight to the myths that found all societies---that the innocent are guilty, the scapegoat is to blame. But as you say, we are all responsible. In this way we are a church, all convicted. You have condemned man, Christ transcended and redeemed man. There is a way out. Best.
First of all, thank you for sharing your opinion. Not many people do...
I still look at things in a non-religious view, with man as the centre of the universe. I'm not saying there aren't any lifeforms other than man in the universe, in fact I'm sure there are, it's just that everything we know we know from "our" perspective. Man's perspective. And from man's perspective, with nothing else getting in the way, man is both the best and the worst. Man is the infinity and nothing.
@Bcutter I don't disagree. But, in my opinion, the universe, let alone "everything" and "nothing", are all terms and symbols that exist only in man's consciousness. Therefore, the entire universe exists only in your consciousness and is a matter of your perception.
So, the word "pathetic" means what you know, feel and think it does. It depends on who you are.
Thanks for this interesting conversation, by the way.
@NPBaudelaire I think you pretty much gave the perfect answer. Very much in accordance with my own thoughts and philosophies. However, these kinds of discussions always leads me to the "things are as they are, why care" mentality which usually numbs my interest to even discuss or think about the given matter anymore. Sure, we are responsible, but on the other hand, what does that "matter" (define matter hehe)? Evolution made us the way we are. We are what we are.
Evolution doesn't stop, it still continues. It is a dynamic concept, not a stale one. I don't think we can;t change, in fact I believe that we change every day. So, no matter how much is lost, there is, at least, still hope.
There is no status quo, neither political, social nor biological. Everything is flowing. (Herakletus).
The innocent children we ms educate with our self-righteous dogma and so called worldly wisdom are the ones who suffer... resulting in judgmental intolerant young people. were every color. creed, disability has a stigma attached to it.....
In dedication to the fallen sons, and daughters of Poland....
@MrLjgroove that's a complicated topic because I wouldn't call myself an atheist but my idea of G-d is not anthropomorphic. The only reason I singled you out to comment was because you seemed quite intelligent and would be able to respond appropriately.
@olsztyn44 thru !!!.......... The life on the earth is a moment, the death is a moment..like a door to go into another moment, another dimention of living. The Spirit never dies......it just go on..........<3
Maestro... you were blessed with a mind wonderfully sculpted by nature to compose such beautiful compositions of music. Your skill is fully credited to you, and is a tremendous human accomplish. Now, your works fill earth with the grace of beautiful humanity.
@Rotwang49 Wow, thanks for finally settling the question of God's existence -- a question that's piqued man's curiosity for milennia. You are either a genius -- or an arrogant atheist putz. Now, let's see which one you are. Your proof, please, lol? IOW, SEZ YOU PAL. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
@MrLjgroove If you must talk proof, understand that common logic dictates that the burden of proof actually falls upon the party that insists upon the existence of that an entity with which they've never had physical concert. So if you dare to talk proof, prove to US that God exists, sir.
@stevetadworkz Thank you for the reply. Nice try Steveadworkz, but I'm afraid you've undermined your own position. I never "insisted" on anything. All I'm saying is that I believe in God, and that philosophical, scientific, and historical evidence largely supports that view. Also, you make presumptions about whether or not individuals have had "physical concert" with God or not, hence, drawing conclusions prior to investigation. How do you know they haven't? Best, LJG
@IAMSPARKE LOL, you must not be very bright. There is NO philosophical, historical, or scientific evidence or basis for Santa Claus (I said evidence -- STRONG evidence, not "proof"). There IS, however, for God. I LOVE it when less intelligent atheists (like you, lol) bring up Santa Claus or Flying Spaghetti Monsters! Sucks to be you, chump. Your insult that our theistic beliefs are analogous to belief in Santa Claus just couldn't go unanswered :).
@MrLjgroove I'm gonna have to give you a first in ill conceived assumptions. I am agnostic. We could get into this, but what's the point? It's really quite simple. You're wrong. Your binary world saddens me.
@IAMSPARKE Sorry, you beat me to it in the ill conceived assumptions department. Also, empty assertions that I"m wrong (without a lick of evidence to back them up, how convenient) don't cut it, I'm afraid. Sad? Aw. Your world, on the other hand, amuses me. Just as well. I don't "get into it" with people who use the Santa Claus "argument". A stupid, obnoxious, and insulting tactic used by unthinking morons. Goodbye.
10@IAMSPARKE What I mean is, it's your notions about theism that are ill-conceived. And you are NOT an agnostic. You're a liar and an atheist, otherwise you wouldn't have gone out of your way to compare belief in God to belief in Santa Claus. You started this by that stupid insult, remember that.
@EliteDoomer If I'm a "fool", I'm in good company: Aquinas, Belloq, Lemaitre, Pasteur, Dr. Collins, Plantinga, Augustine, Dr. Flew, Einstein, every single one of the Founding Fathers, etc. I mean, the list of these brilliant theists just goes on and on, doesn't it. Not to mention most people, statistically speaking. Now ... who's the "utter fool" again? Projection, unfortunately, is a hallmark of atheist dumbasses like you, Lol.
@MrLjgroove You are a fool because you don't understand basic logic. Due to such you are infected by a mind virus which tells you that you will live after you die, you won't.
@EliteDoomer Still projecting, eh? You're a slow learner, aren't you, lol! You made the pronouncement that there is no life after death. Now back it up. I'm supposed to believe this just because an atheist idiot like YOU says so, lol. Also, I suppose those brilliant scientists and others I mentioned are also affected by this "mind virus" of yours (thanks for the diagnosis, btw ;^)-- but you're just sooooo superior to them, huh? You know more, haha. You are amusing as hell. Thanks for the laugh.
@EliteDoomer Basic logic, btw, stipulates that all things have a cause. Only an Uncaused Cause could bring this about, consistent with logic, various philosophical principles, and Big Bang Theory. Atheism, on the other hand, is illogical in that the atheist dumbasses like you attempt to positively argue a negative (e.g., "God does not exist"). So much for your "logic", you arrogant dumbass. You don't know a much, do you lol. Go piss on someone else's leg now, I'm done schooling you.
@MrLjgroove Atheists are also in good company. Just because some select group of people believe something doesn't make it more likely. Metaphysical arguments exceed the range of logical and/or physical tools. Hence, no conclusion can be attained by way of conventional methods used and respected in modern times.
@ccaruvana Thanks for your reply. However, I offer a humble correction: "(In ccaruvana's opinion) Metaphysical arguments exceed the range of logical and/or physical tools." I remind you that "no conclusions" using "conventional methods" can disprove God's existence, either. Best, LJA
@MrLjgroove Yes, of course. It was meant for both directions. That's why I didn't insert any assertions either way. I would be the fool if I were to make claims such as the one I did and proceed to argue or defend either side. Thank you for understanding and making that important point.
@ccaruvana You are welcome, and point taken. Also, thank you for arguing your points reasonably and courteously. We will agree to disagree. Regards, LJG
@MrLjgroove Einstein? All of the founding fathers? Theists? Take a history class friend. Einstein was a pantheist quite possibly a deist. And Thomas Jefferson was a deist along with Thomas Paine. In fact I think almost every founding father was a deist. But either way the Atheist you are talking to is certainly an idiot and I commend you for putting up with him. But it's safe to say that there have been extremely smart people who were Christians and very smart people who were Atheists.
@afluffymango Thank you for your reply. I know my history, and only a few of the Founding Fathers were Deists. However, the vast majority of were practicing Christians.This is established fact. I must point out that Deists are theistic in their outlook. Einstein bounced back and forth from agnosticism to theism/deism, if memory serves. Dr. Anthony Flew was also a Deist, strictly speaking, when he converted from his former atheism. Your point about intelligent Christians/Atheists is well taken.
@afluffymango That is, almost all of the Founding Fathers were practicing Christians except for those you mentioned, Benjamin Franklin, Washington, and that's about it as far as documentation I've seen. Paine was originally an atheist who became a Deist.
Much of your argument seems derived from the fallacious insistence of disproof and other religious debating gimmicks offered up by William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga etc. The philosophical debate has been a back and forth mostly set straight by David Hume, although if we still resided in an era where philosophy still held standing in discussion as much as science it may have been more fitting in regards to religion...
@billhicks8 You've merely asserted that "insistence of disproof" is a "gimmick". Please show me how it is, in fact, a gimmick. God's existence has yet to be disproven, correct? David Hume was an atheist philosopher (and was from the age of 16 -- before, presumably, he came to any philosophical conclusions re: theism. Plantinga is also a philosopher -- who is a theist. Hume didn't "set (anything) straight" re: God's existence. I consider that a dishonest pseudo-argument.
Well that's convenient because I consider the need for disproof a dishonest pseudo-argument. I've already had a conversation with an apologist demonstrating the parallel with evidence analysis in the justice system. Any theory requires evidence that then requires debunking. This does *not* mean that a theory that sounds like it would make sense due to some appeal to causal logic is sufficient. Remember which of us is introducing the idea for assessment here.
@billhicks8 No it isn't dishonest. Many atheists claim God doesn't exist with nothing to back their claims. Your protests ring hollow and still don't change the facts pertaining your inherent dilemma as, presumably, an atheist: positively proving a negative assertion. You're better off being intellectually honest and humble and stating that you don't believe God exists, rather than stating flat out that "there is no God", as a case in point. I"m not charging you with this, just making a point.
The reason it's a negative assertion is because I need not remain undecided on any subject that I don't feel is sufficiently proven or explained, simple. This view of evidence I explained with the parallel in my previous comment. One could introduce me to the theory reincarnation, and I would dismiss it with the same argument. Your arguments from history require further and separate debate, but on this issue, I am perfectly entitled to take this stance until circumstances change.
@billhicks8 At least you're open-minded. I applaud that. I now refer you to a youtube video describing a scientific investigation of a recent Eucharistic miracle in Buenos Aires. It's called Milagro Eucaristico Buenos Aires Argentina (subtitled). AMAZING. Also, the appearance of Our Lady in Fatima, Portugal on Oct. 13, 1917. The Miracle of the Sun was seen by 70,00 people that day and converted many people. I encourage you to look into these things, and realize that faith isn't blind. Best, LJ
All of what I mentioned constitute VERY convincing evidence as to the existence of God -- as does Big Bang Theory, the Amorphic Principle, and Intelligent Design Theory. Good luck to you in your research. I'm sure you'll find it HIGHLY stimulating and enjoyable. Best, LJ
As for historical evidence, such reliance has remained focussed on 'eyewitness testimony' of a resurrection and again philosophical fallacy via deducive arguments. Having said that, I tend to avoid bothering with any closer analysis in regards to the historical existence of Christ, whether a true miracle making son of god or a once-impaled crackpot false messiah existed remains as vague as just stated through the eye of historical revision...
Your final claim was to science, which is by far the most absurd of your allegations. Religion has and always will reside on the fringe of the academic scientific community. It will no doubt always have a stake with some, since the yearning for an emotional connection with a creator seems desirable for many. But all calls for scientific evidence in regards to a god's existence have remained unanswered. It is religion's achilles heel, and it has worsened with the passage of time.
@billhicks8 I claim science from the standpoint of archeological discoveries which bolster biblical claims, documented cases of unexplainable medical ("miraculous", if you wll) healings following intercessory prayer (scientifically unexplainable except for a theological foundation),the Shroud of Turin (new findings/evidence falsifying the 1988 data), the Guadalupe Tilma, and documented medical examinations of the Host and wine, which corroborate the previous findings I mentioned.Sorry if unclear
A quick browse on Google brings up a damning assessment of a book by a Catholic physicist Frank Tipler that defends the validity of the Shroud of Turin even in light of the 1988 data. The uncertainty that sets in when I see even renowned physicist Lawrence Krauss has something negative to say about it (let alone the amount of sites antagonised against the claim) rings alarm bells. The 'miraculous medical healings' I'll just set aside, to save space and time here.
@billhicks8 I find it instructive that the scientific evidence which supports the existence of God (documented sudden, unexplainable medical healings) are something you prefer to gloss over, and attempted to marginalize this phenomena. Re: "alarm bells", I presume your mean your own. I recommend the 2005, 1978 STURP, and 1981 findings on the Shroud. They all corroborate each other. The 1988 results were an anomaly based on faulty data (patches sewn on were erroneously tested). Thx for your reply
Well I would suggest that it is a bit cheap and easy to harangue me for sheer self-denial simply because I don't want to file through and separate eyewitness testimonies from proper experiments and track down dozens of sources for legitimacy regarding medical miracles that definitely prove spiritual influence as opposed to merely anomaly. You'd be better to challenge someone interested in the field like James Randi, he'd offer you a million dollars if you can prove it.
@billhicks8 Yes, it would be a cheap harangue, but you're above that, I think. I mean this sincerely. Please investigate these things on your own. I have many of these materials in CA (in AZ now). Take your time and research them. YOu'll find much on the net: miraculous healings, St. Padre Pio's (died 1968) medically examined stigmata and other phenomena associated with him, coagulating hosts (same blood type as the Shroud and Oviedo veil), the Lanciano phenomenon, etc., etc., etc.
In regards to your insistence on the accuracy and consistency of your info on the Shroud. I will no doubt endeavour to take a further look, precisely because it would be one of the better arguments pointing directly to the existence at least of something biblically true rather than the vaguery of what you have basically explained to be medical miracle enigma. Perhaps you should examine the easily searched article I referred to here and have your rebuttal for it.
@billhicks8 I appreciate your willingness to investigate the Shroud, and will endeavor to investigate the article you mentioned. However, I no longer find these types of dialogues to be of much use when dealing with atheists. I'm sure the studies I mentioned will do their own rebutting. I really don't have the time or desire to keep doing this. Perhaps you're more open minded, I don't know. But in my experience, a waste of time. Regards, LJ.
No worries, once again you echo my sentiments from the other side of the spectrum. I have to admit I too am tired of the religious debate, I haven't yet exhausted myself on the historical angle so I am thankful for the references. Since my arguments are mainly to do with the trap of definition and existential issues, I'm not neccesarily expecting a conversion, but perhaps a further education that can only help which is worthwhile enough I'm sure.
@billhicks8 The 8th century Lanciano, Italy Eucharistic miracle, when the Host had turned into human myocardium, and the consecrated wine into human blood. BOTH ARE STILL FRESH, VIABLE SPECIMENS and match the blood type AB as found on the Shroud. Scientifically studied in 1970-'71 and taken up again partly in 1981. By Prof. Odoardo Linoli, Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy. Assisted by Prof. Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena.
@billhicks8 By the way, I looked at your channel. I'm also an admirer of Pat Condell and Christopher Hitchens. Too bad Hitchens has blind spots in the areas of theology, philosophy, and religion. Brilliant, though. I consider him a modern day Saul who is too smart not to convert, though. I hope. You also like Steve Albini too, as I do. Loved Big Black in the 1980's. Never really checked out Rape Man, etc. Great producer now.
I certainly agree with your summary of Christopher Hitchens, although I would sum up his shortcomings at least in the domain of religion to be mainly shortcomings in the field of philosophy. As popular as atheism has been in the last few years, it's modern representatives tend to glaze over the epistemological depths that should form the core of the arguments. Many of the exchanges I've had with 'Appletree' here nod to these oft neglected discussions.
@billhicks8 Actually, both Condell and Hitchens have blind spots in those areas. Mr. Condell erroneously equates Christianity with Islam in what he postulates to be a corrosive societal influence. I sent you many messages just now, sorry for the inundation. AGain, best to you in your pursuits and your discoveries. LJG
I actually now find Condell to be a bit of a hack to be honest. His political ideas also reveal a slightly arcane bigotry. But nonetheless he brings many topical issues to full attention I suppose. PS: Definitely big on the Albini, Shellac are excellent.
@billhicks8 My claims, therefore, aren't "absurd". Nor are they based on emotionalism, but solid evidence. Documented evidence. Does it all prove God's existence? No. Does it indicate a strong likelihood that God exists -- as most people seem to be able to grasp ? -- Yes. "Desirable" or not, the evidence is pretty strong in God's favor. Unmerited condescension on atheists' part just doesn't cut it. Your statement that this is somehow a "Achilles heel" for religion is, again, mere assertion.
The cry of condescension is an old stereotype equally fitting with modern apologist scholars, your claims regarding scientific coherence regarding history would require more than the research encouraged for a YT comment, but the short work that seems to be made of said evidence and the sheer fact that it hasn't caused a eureka moment amongst the scientific community nor the world draws suspicions regardless your also irrelevant point of the faith of a philosopher vs their ideas.
@billhicks8 I said unmerited condescension. Your merely calling it "an old stereotype" fails to prove this charge isn't warranted in your case. In addition, you seem to have intentionally obscured the evidence I presented without so much as a comment. I don't think you speak for the "scientific community", sorry. Unmerited indeed.
Well I can't see why I have been any more condescending than yourself. Perhaps this that difference between us again where one makes the assertion before analysis, than vice versa, but I don't know. As for your evidence, I looked up a site debunking it. Whether it's an unfair obscurity for you is better taken up with the author of said article. As for whom I speak for, it would at least be honest for you to concur that your info is not common knowledge of fact. Regardless its value
@billhicks8 Yes, I readily admit that the data I mentioned is not common knowledge. I blame this on media complicity in a biased, liberal agenda that permeates what used to be known as objective journalism. If it was reported at all, probably buried on p. 25. Look, I appreciate your basic civility in this. I'm sure I've also been guilty of retaliatory word-smithing, as it were. I mentioned some phenomena to you -- and am VERY pleasantly surprised to find you open minded and investigative.Cheers!
I appreciate your comprehensive response and sourcing. As far as I'm concerned, atheistic belief is not an excuse for a 'shut off' switch. New information and challenges appear all the time, it is true to science and truth to constantly expose our beliefs to threats or allegations and test their worth otherwise we're all just kidding ourselves. Take care, and keep on hunting!
"So if you dare to talk proof, prove to US that God exists, sir."
Sorry, but this is the kind of comment that a philosophically-illiterate and scientifically uninformed layman would make.
Both naturalism and theism are unfalsifiable. Both are empirically unprovable foundational beliefs by virtue of the fact that they differentially influence the mechanics by which we perceive, interpret and derive evidentiary feedback from phenomenal observations.
Atheists are wrong to automatically assume a singular burden of proof upon the theist.
This is because, at the foundational level, the rules of proof operate differently to the rules of proof assumed within the precepts of empiricism.
Due to a quirk of perception, an -absence- of belief regarding a metaphysical/physical dichotomy cannot be maintained as an empirically neutral 'default' position from which to consider and formalise empirical proof of metaphysical causation.
I don't agree with this at all. That which exists can be measured and analysed in motion or activity, and in most cases dependable repeat experiments can be performed in order to establish patterns to argue validity. Now arguably, in lesser understood realms of concept patterns can not always be demanded wholly. But Theistic belief struggles to solidify any observable influence on reality, which is all too convenient and yet sorely lacking in substance.
"But Theistic belief struggles to solidify any observable influence on reality, which is all too convenient and yet sorely lacking in substance."
I don't think you quite understand what foundational beliefs actually are. There is no way to validate one's foundational epistemic system empirically, simply because this foundational basis formalises the very methodology by which an observer interprets and organises conclusions from phenomenal observations.
Your assertions on this are a different subject in regards to perception. The same arguments have been discussed in the realm of philosophy from Descarte to Camus, to Satre. Considering that the argument as a whole basically reduced *itself* to another unfalsifiable brand of circular reasoning, it is important to understand that unfalsifiable arguments are not the sign of a strong argument, nor an open question for agnosticism to ally itself with.
@Appletree34 Hello. I found your replies to be most instructive, and I am in agreement with you re: theism. I was wondering if your background was in philosophy and if you are a professor. You seem to have a specialized knowledge in this area. Best, LJG
Key examples of foundational beliefs include the axioms of logic and mathematics - the so-called neurobiological axioms.
The metaphysical doctrines, which include both theism and naturalism, are foundational beliefs compelled upon an observer by neurobiological restrictions inherent within perception. We are compelled by neurobiology to have some form of basic belief regarding the presence, absence and/or nature of insensible agencies and causal mechanisms.
But both mathematics and logic *can* be tested beyond the axiomatic, the genesis of their consistency throughout the physical world may be enigmatic due to various perceptive and neurological restrictions but the essence of the empirical consistency of logic and mathematics is played out in the physical world. The concept of god is notoriously unstable in any regard to the material world, thus why it's need to beg the question in the metaphysical.
If empirical feedback cannot apply to foundational beliefs, at the risk of tautology, the only way to justify their presence or absence in one's foundational creedal system is through comparison with other axiomatic precepts - through rational arguments.
That would be assume that there are rational arguments to be had, and that to derive a lack of an answer from a fallacy of unfalsifiability is sufficient to affirm an argument for proof. A metaphysical world that can not reveal itself to take measurable effect beyond our limitations of deductive philosophical analysis is as confined as philosophy itself has shown itself to be when ideas have been usurped through innovations in science. There is no way around this level of doubt.
To illustrate this idea further: A philosophically inept naturalist will claim that an absence of belief regarding the metaphysical is a neutral basis from which to formulate an empirical argument for the existence of the metaphysical.
An arbitrary understanding of epistemology clearly shows this to be impossible. As soon as an observer commits to a belief in naturalism, his perception is immediately framed to exclude metaphysical considerations at every turn.
Both naturalism and theism are therefore unfalsifiable. Both are empirically unprovable foundational beliefs by virtue of the fact that they differentially influence the mechanics by which we perceive, interpret and derive evidentiary feedback from phenomenal observations.
An absence of belief regarding a metaphysical/physical dichotomy cannot be maintained as an empirically neutral 'default' position from which to consider and formalise empirical proof of metaphysical causes.
If the spiritual world truly is confined to the metaphysical and completely incongruent to the laws of physical measurement and observations of the physically tangible then the metaphysical is excluded from all forms of comprehension apart from what seems philosophically satisfying. But for what is claimed as a consistently physically intervening force this is not enough, since science routinely overcomes speculation.
To even discover that the physical world is commonly not in beat with philosophical concepts we ascribe to it then threatens the concept of defining the metaphysical further, since the tools are woefully inadequate, and therefore the proof of any substantial presence that can be named, felt and worshipped, and the point of doing so is clearly neutralised to inanity. There is nothing tangible to believe in furthermore forcing definitions with dubious connotations like 'god' to err.
@Rotwang49 What exactly is it that makes you so certain that there is no God? There is no evidence either way to prove or to disprove him definitively and that's why I query your certainty.
Although i live in this world and am a mere human, i have hate for humanity and this world. I can't get over this stupid kind of life that's forever cursed. The curse is greed, sadness, anger, weakness and the need for conflict that humans need to survive. If there is a god out there, then that God has left us long ago.
God IS speaking,.... through this beautiful composer, and his gorgeous music.
God gave us love, but, also gave us the gift of free will,.... the freedom to do as is.
It is this freedom, that annihilates us. Our gift of freedom, our ability to reason, is what is freely available to us to use as we wish, and to destroy us, if we let it happen.
@Wariorera if we are the root of this sickness, the center of this discord, then we also posses its cure. everyone is afraid and that fear causes to due unspeakable harm to one another everyday. still, in spite of that fear we can seek to find our own answers. the world is not a cold dead place.
Death is beutifull, it's living thats hard and ugly in the world we live in. We become human when on the werge of death. This music is beutifull because sadness comes from the hell inside of us.
Rest in Peace,Henryk.In life we can take moments and you have given something that allows me every now and then to enter a place where nothing else matters only the absolute intensity of every emotion that I can possibly comprehend.Thank you,thank you.
I was terribly disturbed, yet entranced. Caught up in a celestial realm of heaven, yet with some sort of romantic darkness. This is the soundtrack to my life. I am proud to be Polish. Thank you Henryk. You passed this earth but not before you composed the sounds of other worlds. RIP.
Wow, powerful music, I didn't even know classical music was still being composed, I thought it was all from 100's of years ago. Nice to know.
Looked him up on wikipedia and saw he recently died, and I can see the sadness many of you express. May the worms that burrow have a special feast for this guy.
Comme je ne regarde plus la télé depuis déja trés longtemps,que j'ai du passer entre les gouttes des flashs info,j'apprends par vos commentaires le décés de cet immense qu'était Henryk Górecki que je rangerai au côté des plus grands (Part,Mahler,Bach...)
Une oeuvre ou baigne le sacré et l'humain dans une relation égale ...
Longtemps encore "tes chants plaintifs" perdureront ! C'en est fait le 21ème siècle sera (peut-être) enfin spirituel ... s'il ne l'est pas, c'est que quelque part, on n'aura peut-être pas su écouter PÄRT et GORECKI ... alors tant pis et gloire à ceux qui les écoutent
@olsztyn44 thru !!!.......... The life on the earth is a moment, the death is a moment..like a door to go into another moment, another dimention of living. The Spirit never dies......it just go on..........<3
All victims of the Nazis, Jews, Poles, Gypsies, etc., have lost a truly gifted composer who captured the horror of the Holocaust in music. He will be missed, but not forgotten.
WE MUST REMEMBER JESUS ON THE CROSS,HIS MOTHER HAD SEEN HER SON DYING
ON THE CROSS, BLOOD, BLOOD BLOOD, JUST POURED DOWN THE CROSS.EXORCIST
ANDREW. LOVELY SOUND, SAD BUT COMPELLING.
BOGUSLAW28 6 days ago
Comment removed
huszczaaa 2 weeks ago
to kristuneBB, it sounds like Zofia Kilanowicz, but another name pops up at me, Isabel Bayrakdarian
flossy12518 1 month ago
Hi,
Who is the singer and which orchestra is performing this peace?
Thanks a lot!
kristuneBB 1 month ago
Back on topic- absolutely beautiful song.
TheWeirdPlant 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra will be performing this work as well as Colina's The Unbearable Lightness of Being and Three Cabinets of Wonder with Anastasia Khitruk (violin) on 29 Nov. 2011 at Cadogan Hall in London at 19.30 - I'll be there!
MarelizedeBeurs 2 months ago
chills, no?
TheDealNoDeal 2 months ago
Fearless...
MinikomicwebReturns 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When you will catch the fist of the earth in this Country to the hand and you will crush... the most expensive Blood will be dripping!!! These are neighbours.... from the east and from west bought Poland it!!!
romo1610 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When you will catch the fist of the earth in this Country to the hand and you will crush... the most expensive Blood will be dripping!!! These are neighbours.... from the east and from west bought Poland it!!!
romo1610 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When weżmiesz fist of the earth in this Country to the hand and you will squeeze.... from it the most expensive Blood will sail!!! "we owe" it our for "friends" neighbouring.... from the east and of west!
romo1610 3 months ago
4:07 begins the musical orgasm.
babblebah321 3 months ago
Beyond powerfull
RIP
Henryk Gorecki
JONNOG88 3 months ago
I think my ears are about to bust in, and my eyes about to water. This song is more epic, it deserves "Legendary" masterpiece.
Noobkilla99786 4 months ago
This is my favorite movement in the symphony. Its orchestration is just so cathartic, even after the soloist is done. There is so much emotion in every part of this piece.
blossom246810 4 months ago
i seem to have accidentally plagiarised the very beginning of this :O
MissInformati0n 4 months ago
@MissInformati0n What you are saying is weard because I said the same thing when I heard it the first time, I sang alone like that before hearing it !!
jameshamza 3 months ago
you can find always some beauty..that is life
naughtymachinegun 6 months ago
Moya by Godspeed You! Black Emperor was inspired by this :)
glimlicht 6 months ago in playlist Classic
7 people without emotions or true feelings out f 634... not bad at all!
No way to forget this iconic work from Gorecki.
More than brilliant... it is what is does to man.
smit0932 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
not believing in a god does not mean he does not exist.
but believing in one does not mean he does.
savannahwilliams0 7 months ago
He was a man of God. A true Catholic.
agvis1 7 months ago
In my opinion, God is the scapegoat for all our mistakes. Some call it "human nature", others the "universal consciousness"... truth is, we hunt, we kill, we degrade everything and everyone. It is US who are responsible for all the atrocities we have committed, and this is the only thing we can't stand. We have created laws to govern us, borders to divide us, gods to dictate us, only in order for us not to realize that WE ARE THE RESPONSIBLE ONES.
Humans are so pathetic after all. I know I am.
NPBaudelaire 7 months ago 24
@NPBaudelaire Don't forget the non-consensual genital mutilation of infants.
EliteDoomer 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EliteDoomer I really don't want to think about that.
NPBaudelaire 2 months ago
@NPBaudelaire I agree with you, but I would suggest that what you describe is described accurately by the doctrine of The Fall. We create laws to govern us precisely because we hunt, kill, degrade everything, etc. Christ put flight to the myths that found all societies---that the innocent are guilty, the scapegoat is to blame. But as you say, we are all responsible. In this way we are a church, all convicted. You have condemned man, Christ transcended and redeemed man. There is a way out. Best.
EC66OK 2 months ago
First of all, thank you for sharing your opinion. Not many people do...
I still look at things in a non-religious view, with man as the centre of the universe. I'm not saying there aren't any lifeforms other than man in the universe, in fact I'm sure there are, it's just that everything we know we know from "our" perspective. Man's perspective. And from man's perspective, with nothing else getting in the way, man is both the best and the worst. Man is the infinity and nothing.
NPBaudelaire 2 months ago
@NPBaudelaire Define "pathetic" in the context of the universe...
Bcutter 2 months ago
@Bcutter Define "universe"...
NPBaudelaire 2 months ago
@NPBaudelaire The universe is commonly defined as the totality of everything that exists
Bcutter 2 months ago
@Bcutter I don't disagree. But, in my opinion, the universe, let alone "everything" and "nothing", are all terms and symbols that exist only in man's consciousness. Therefore, the entire universe exists only in your consciousness and is a matter of your perception.
So, the word "pathetic" means what you know, feel and think it does. It depends on who you are.
Thanks for this interesting conversation, by the way.
NPBaudelaire 2 months ago
@NPBaudelaire I think you pretty much gave the perfect answer. Very much in accordance with my own thoughts and philosophies. However, these kinds of discussions always leads me to the "things are as they are, why care" mentality which usually numbs my interest to even discuss or think about the given matter anymore. Sure, we are responsible, but on the other hand, what does that "matter" (define matter hehe)? Evolution made us the way we are. We are what we are.
Bcutter 2 months ago
@Bcutter Thank you for your kind words.
Evolution doesn't stop, it still continues. It is a dynamic concept, not a stale one. I don't think we can;t change, in fact I believe that we change every day. So, no matter how much is lost, there is, at least, still hope.
There is no status quo, neither political, social nor biological. Everything is flowing. (Herakletus).
NPBaudelaire 2 months ago
@NPBaudelaire Define "define"
qazeebo 2 months ago
The innocent children we ms educate with our self-righteous dogma and so called worldly wisdom are the ones who suffer... resulting in judgmental intolerant young people. were every color. creed, disability has a stigma attached to it.....
In dedication to the fallen sons, and daughters of Poland....
marcow1970 2 months ago
Killing of innocents requires that one believes there is no God, for if one believed in his existence then how could this crime happen?
romfordjohn 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove that's a complicated topic because I wouldn't call myself an atheist but my idea of G-d is not anthropomorphic. The only reason I singled you out to comment was because you seemed quite intelligent and would be able to respond appropriately.
ccaruvana 7 months ago
you gimp Epicurus is a greek philosopher!
sbbor2001 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@olsztyn44 thru !!!.......... The life on the earth is a moment, the death is a moment..like a door to go into another moment, another dimention of living. The Spirit never dies......it just go on..........<3
ApolideDora 7 months ago
Definitely one of the most beautiful piece in the history of music.
evitaercx 7 months ago
Haunting music.
johnm28med 8 months ago
I absolutely LOVE the transition at 4:07!
deeluve22 8 months ago
@deeluve22 agreed!
griffa94 8 months ago
Maestro... you were blessed with a mind wonderfully sculpted by nature to compose such beautiful compositions of music. Your skill is fully credited to you, and is a tremendous human accomplish. Now, your works fill earth with the grace of beautiful humanity.
chessmeister 8 months ago
Cant get it out of my head.
dionaea2008 8 months ago
mükemmel...
MathPi 8 months ago
T_T
jamesaellis 9 months ago
Thanks for this masterpice of music!
fronkn 10 months ago
forever in my heart...from Greece
ANTon1nARTaud 10 months ago
This music is divine!
cherubijn100 10 months ago
There is no God. Your peasant fictions demean this great work.
Rotwang49 10 months ago 3
@Rotwang49 Wow, thanks for finally settling the question of God's existence -- a question that's piqued man's curiosity for milennia. You are either a genius -- or an arrogant atheist putz. Now, let's see which one you are. Your proof, please, lol? IOW, SEZ YOU PAL. PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
MrLjgroove 8 months ago in playlist classical wonders
@MrLjgroove If you must talk proof, understand that common logic dictates that the burden of proof actually falls upon the party that insists upon the existence of that an entity with which they've never had physical concert. So if you dare to talk proof, prove to US that God exists, sir.
stevetadworkz 7 months ago
@stevetadworkz Thank you for the reply. Nice try Steveadworkz, but I'm afraid you've undermined your own position. I never "insisted" on anything. All I'm saying is that I believe in God, and that philosophical, scientific, and historical evidence largely supports that view. Also, you make presumptions about whether or not individuals have had "physical concert" with God or not, hence, drawing conclusions prior to investigation. How do you know they haven't? Best, LJG
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLgroove I believe in Santa and believe when I was younger I had physical concert with him.
IAMSPARKE 7 months ago
@IAMSPARKE LOL, you must not be very bright. There is NO philosophical, historical, or scientific evidence or basis for Santa Claus (I said evidence -- STRONG evidence, not "proof"). There IS, however, for God. I LOVE it when less intelligent atheists (like you, lol) bring up Santa Claus or Flying Spaghetti Monsters! Sucks to be you, chump. Your insult that our theistic beliefs are analogous to belief in Santa Claus just couldn't go unanswered :).
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove I'm gonna have to give you a first in ill conceived assumptions. I am agnostic. We could get into this, but what's the point? It's really quite simple. You're wrong. Your binary world saddens me.
IAMSPARKE 7 months ago
@IAMSPARKE Sorry, you beat me to it in the ill conceived assumptions department. Also, empty assertions that I"m wrong (without a lick of evidence to back them up, how convenient) don't cut it, I'm afraid. Sad? Aw. Your world, on the other hand, amuses me. Just as well. I don't "get into it" with people who use the Santa Claus "argument". A stupid, obnoxious, and insulting tactic used by unthinking morons. Goodbye.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
10@IAMSPARKE What I mean is, it's your notions about theism that are ill-conceived. And you are NOT an agnostic. You're a liar and an atheist, otherwise you wouldn't have gone out of your way to compare belief in God to belief in Santa Claus. You started this by that stupid insult, remember that.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove Children die in front of their parents every day. You are an utter fool for believing in a loving controller.
EliteDoomer 7 months ago
@EliteDoomer If I'm a "fool", I'm in good company: Aquinas, Belloq, Lemaitre, Pasteur, Dr. Collins, Plantinga, Augustine, Dr. Flew, Einstein, every single one of the Founding Fathers, etc. I mean, the list of these brilliant theists just goes on and on, doesn't it. Not to mention most people, statistically speaking. Now ... who's the "utter fool" again? Projection, unfortunately, is a hallmark of atheist dumbasses like you, Lol.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove You are a fool because you don't understand basic logic. Due to such you are infected by a mind virus which tells you that you will live after you die, you won't.
EliteDoomer 7 months ago
@EliteDoomer Still projecting, eh? You're a slow learner, aren't you, lol! You made the pronouncement that there is no life after death. Now back it up. I'm supposed to believe this just because an atheist idiot like YOU says so, lol. Also, I suppose those brilliant scientists and others I mentioned are also affected by this "mind virus" of yours (thanks for the diagnosis, btw ;^)-- but you're just sooooo superior to them, huh? You know more, haha. You are amusing as hell. Thanks for the laugh.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@EliteDoomer Basic logic, btw, stipulates that all things have a cause. Only an Uncaused Cause could bring this about, consistent with logic, various philosophical principles, and Big Bang Theory. Atheism, on the other hand, is illogical in that the atheist dumbasses like you attempt to positively argue a negative (e.g., "God does not exist"). So much for your "logic", you arrogant dumbass. You don't know a much, do you lol. Go piss on someone else's leg now, I'm done schooling you.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrLjgroove You assume that I am an atheist, because you are narrow minded and like to group people. You deserve to be the slave that you are.
EliteDoomer 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove Atheists are also in good company. Just because some select group of people believe something doesn't make it more likely. Metaphysical arguments exceed the range of logical and/or physical tools. Hence, no conclusion can be attained by way of conventional methods used and respected in modern times.
ccaruvana 7 months ago
@ccaruvana Thanks for your reply. However, I offer a humble correction: "(In ccaruvana's opinion) Metaphysical arguments exceed the range of logical and/or physical tools." I remind you that "no conclusions" using "conventional methods" can disprove God's existence, either. Best, LJA
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove Yes, of course. It was meant for both directions. That's why I didn't insert any assertions either way. I would be the fool if I were to make claims such as the one I did and proceed to argue or defend either side. Thank you for understanding and making that important point.
ccaruvana 7 months ago
@ccaruvana You are welcome, and point taken. Also, thank you for arguing your points reasonably and courteously. We will agree to disagree. Regards, LJG
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@ccaruvana Agree to disagree, that is, if, in fact, you are an atheist. Best, LJG
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove Einstein? All of the founding fathers? Theists? Take a history class friend. Einstein was a pantheist quite possibly a deist. And Thomas Jefferson was a deist along with Thomas Paine. In fact I think almost every founding father was a deist. But either way the Atheist you are talking to is certainly an idiot and I commend you for putting up with him. But it's safe to say that there have been extremely smart people who were Christians and very smart people who were Atheists.
afluffymango 7 months ago
@afluffymango Thank you for your reply. I know my history, and only a few of the Founding Fathers were Deists. However, the vast majority of were practicing Christians.This is established fact. I must point out that Deists are theistic in their outlook. Einstein bounced back and forth from agnosticism to theism/deism, if memory serves. Dr. Anthony Flew was also a Deist, strictly speaking, when he converted from his former atheism. Your point about intelligent Christians/Atheists is well taken.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@afluffymango That is, almost all of the Founding Fathers were practicing Christians except for those you mentioned, Benjamin Franklin, Washington, and that's about it as far as documentation I've seen. Paine was originally an atheist who became a Deist.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@IAMSPARKE I forgot, historical evidence, too. Sayonara, junior.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove Ya know, you should probably stop drinking the coffe. You're off the chart man.
IAMSPARKE 7 months ago
@MrLjgroove
Much of your argument seems derived from the fallacious insistence of disproof and other religious debating gimmicks offered up by William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga etc. The philosophical debate has been a back and forth mostly set straight by David Hume, although if we still resided in an era where philosophy still held standing in discussion as much as science it may have been more fitting in regards to religion...
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 You've merely asserted that "insistence of disproof" is a "gimmick". Please show me how it is, in fact, a gimmick. God's existence has yet to be disproven, correct? David Hume was an atheist philosopher (and was from the age of 16 -- before, presumably, he came to any philosophical conclusions re: theism. Plantinga is also a philosopher -- who is a theist. Hume didn't "set (anything) straight" re: God's existence. I consider that a dishonest pseudo-argument.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
Well that's convenient because I consider the need for disproof a dishonest pseudo-argument. I've already had a conversation with an apologist demonstrating the parallel with evidence analysis in the justice system. Any theory requires evidence that then requires debunking. This does *not* mean that a theory that sounds like it would make sense due to some appeal to causal logic is sufficient. Remember which of us is introducing the idea for assessment here.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 No it isn't dishonest. Many atheists claim God doesn't exist with nothing to back their claims. Your protests ring hollow and still don't change the facts pertaining your inherent dilemma as, presumably, an atheist: positively proving a negative assertion. You're better off being intellectually honest and humble and stating that you don't believe God exists, rather than stating flat out that "there is no God", as a case in point. I"m not charging you with this, just making a point.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
The reason it's a negative assertion is because I need not remain undecided on any subject that I don't feel is sufficiently proven or explained, simple. This view of evidence I explained with the parallel in my previous comment. One could introduce me to the theory reincarnation, and I would dismiss it with the same argument. Your arguments from history require further and separate debate, but on this issue, I am perfectly entitled to take this stance until circumstances change.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 At least you're open-minded. I applaud that. I now refer you to a youtube video describing a scientific investigation of a recent Eucharistic miracle in Buenos Aires. It's called Milagro Eucaristico Buenos Aires Argentina (subtitled). AMAZING. Also, the appearance of Our Lady in Fatima, Portugal on Oct. 13, 1917. The Miracle of the Sun was seen by 70,00 people that day and converted many people. I encourage you to look into these things, and realize that faith isn't blind. Best, LJ
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
Okay, noted. Will refer back to our exchanges in the future so thanks for the references.
billhicks8 5 months ago
All of what I mentioned constitute VERY convincing evidence as to the existence of God -- as does Big Bang Theory, the Amorphic Principle, and Intelligent Design Theory. Good luck to you in your research. I'm sure you'll find it HIGHLY stimulating and enjoyable. Best, LJ
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@Mrl cont...
As for historical evidence, such reliance has remained focussed on 'eyewitness testimony' of a resurrection and again philosophical fallacy via deducive arguments. Having said that, I tend to avoid bothering with any closer analysis in regards to the historical existence of Christ, whether a true miracle making son of god or a once-impaled crackpot false messiah existed remains as vague as just stated through the eye of historical revision...
billhicks8 5 months ago
@MrLj...final
Your final claim was to science, which is by far the most absurd of your allegations. Religion has and always will reside on the fringe of the academic scientific community. It will no doubt always have a stake with some, since the yearning for an emotional connection with a creator seems desirable for many. But all calls for scientific evidence in regards to a god's existence have remained unanswered. It is religion's achilles heel, and it has worsened with the passage of time.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 I claim science from the standpoint of archeological discoveries which bolster biblical claims, documented cases of unexplainable medical ("miraculous", if you wll) healings following intercessory prayer (scientifically unexplainable except for a theological foundation),the Shroud of Turin (new findings/evidence falsifying the 1988 data), the Guadalupe Tilma, and documented medical examinations of the Host and wine, which corroborate the previous findings I mentioned.Sorry if unclear
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
A quick browse on Google brings up a damning assessment of a book by a Catholic physicist Frank Tipler that defends the validity of the Shroud of Turin even in light of the 1988 data. The uncertainty that sets in when I see even renowned physicist Lawrence Krauss has something negative to say about it (let alone the amount of sites antagonised against the claim) rings alarm bells. The 'miraculous medical healings' I'll just set aside, to save space and time here.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 I find it instructive that the scientific evidence which supports the existence of God (documented sudden, unexplainable medical healings) are something you prefer to gloss over, and attempted to marginalize this phenomena. Re: "alarm bells", I presume your mean your own. I recommend the 2005, 1978 STURP, and 1981 findings on the Shroud. They all corroborate each other. The 1988 results were an anomaly based on faulty data (patches sewn on were erroneously tested). Thx for your reply
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
Well I would suggest that it is a bit cheap and easy to harangue me for sheer self-denial simply because I don't want to file through and separate eyewitness testimonies from proper experiments and track down dozens of sources for legitimacy regarding medical miracles that definitely prove spiritual influence as opposed to merely anomaly. You'd be better to challenge someone interested in the field like James Randi, he'd offer you a million dollars if you can prove it.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 Yes, it would be a cheap harangue, but you're above that, I think. I mean this sincerely. Please investigate these things on your own. I have many of these materials in CA (in AZ now). Take your time and research them. YOu'll find much on the net: miraculous healings, St. Padre Pio's (died 1968) medically examined stigmata and other phenomena associated with him, coagulating hosts (same blood type as the Shroud and Oviedo veil), the Lanciano phenomenon, etc., etc., etc.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
In regards to your insistence on the accuracy and consistency of your info on the Shroud. I will no doubt endeavour to take a further look, precisely because it would be one of the better arguments pointing directly to the existence at least of something biblically true rather than the vaguery of what you have basically explained to be medical miracle enigma. Perhaps you should examine the easily searched article I referred to here and have your rebuttal for it.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 I appreciate your willingness to investigate the Shroud, and will endeavor to investigate the article you mentioned. However, I no longer find these types of dialogues to be of much use when dealing with atheists. I'm sure the studies I mentioned will do their own rebutting. I really don't have the time or desire to keep doing this. Perhaps you're more open minded, I don't know. But in my experience, a waste of time. Regards, LJ.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
No worries, once again you echo my sentiments from the other side of the spectrum. I have to admit I too am tired of the religious debate, I haven't yet exhausted myself on the historical angle so I am thankful for the references. Since my arguments are mainly to do with the trap of definition and existential issues, I'm not neccesarily expecting a conversion, but perhaps a further education that can only help which is worthwhile enough I'm sure.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 The 8th century Lanciano, Italy Eucharistic miracle, when the Host had turned into human myocardium, and the consecrated wine into human blood. BOTH ARE STILL FRESH, VIABLE SPECIMENS and match the blood type AB as found on the Shroud. Scientifically studied in 1970-'71 and taken up again partly in 1981. By Prof. Odoardo Linoli, Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy. Assisted by Prof. Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@billhicks8 By the way, I looked at your channel. I'm also an admirer of Pat Condell and Christopher Hitchens. Too bad Hitchens has blind spots in the areas of theology, philosophy, and religion. Brilliant, though. I consider him a modern day Saul who is too smart not to convert, though. I hope. You also like Steve Albini too, as I do. Loved Big Black in the 1980's. Never really checked out Rape Man, etc. Great producer now.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
I certainly agree with your summary of Christopher Hitchens, although I would sum up his shortcomings at least in the domain of religion to be mainly shortcomings in the field of philosophy. As popular as atheism has been in the last few years, it's modern representatives tend to glaze over the epistemological depths that should form the core of the arguments. Many of the exchanges I've had with 'Appletree' here nod to these oft neglected discussions.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 Actually, both Condell and Hitchens have blind spots in those areas. Mr. Condell erroneously equates Christianity with Islam in what he postulates to be a corrosive societal influence. I sent you many messages just now, sorry for the inundation. AGain, best to you in your pursuits and your discoveries. LJG
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
I actually now find Condell to be a bit of a hack to be honest. His political ideas also reveal a slightly arcane bigotry. But nonetheless he brings many topical issues to full attention I suppose. PS: Definitely big on the Albini, Shellac are excellent.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 My claims, therefore, aren't "absurd". Nor are they based on emotionalism, but solid evidence. Documented evidence. Does it all prove God's existence? No. Does it indicate a strong likelihood that God exists -- as most people seem to be able to grasp ? -- Yes. "Desirable" or not, the evidence is pretty strong in God's favor. Unmerited condescension on atheists' part just doesn't cut it. Your statement that this is somehow a "Achilles heel" for religion is, again, mere assertion.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
The cry of condescension is an old stereotype equally fitting with modern apologist scholars, your claims regarding scientific coherence regarding history would require more than the research encouraged for a YT comment, but the short work that seems to be made of said evidence and the sheer fact that it hasn't caused a eureka moment amongst the scientific community nor the world draws suspicions regardless your also irrelevant point of the faith of a philosopher vs their ideas.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 I said unmerited condescension. Your merely calling it "an old stereotype" fails to prove this charge isn't warranted in your case. In addition, you seem to have intentionally obscured the evidence I presented without so much as a comment. I don't think you speak for the "scientific community", sorry. Unmerited indeed.
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
Well I can't see why I have been any more condescending than yourself. Perhaps this that difference between us again where one makes the assertion before analysis, than vice versa, but I don't know. As for your evidence, I looked up a site debunking it. Whether it's an unfair obscurity for you is better taken up with the author of said article. As for whom I speak for, it would at least be honest for you to concur that your info is not common knowledge of fact. Regardless its value
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 Yes, I readily admit that the data I mentioned is not common knowledge. I blame this on media complicity in a biased, liberal agenda that permeates what used to be known as objective journalism. If it was reported at all, probably buried on p. 25. Look, I appreciate your basic civility in this. I'm sure I've also been guilty of retaliatory word-smithing, as it were. I mentioned some phenomena to you -- and am VERY pleasantly surprised to find you open minded and investigative.Cheers!
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@MrLjgroove
I appreciate your comprehensive response and sourcing. As far as I'm concerned, atheistic belief is not an excuse for a 'shut off' switch. New information and challenges appear all the time, it is true to science and truth to constantly expose our beliefs to threats or allegations and test their worth otherwise we're all just kidding ourselves. Take care, and keep on hunting!
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8 Thanks. Best wishes to you, too. LJG
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@stevetadworkz
"So if you dare to talk proof, prove to US that God exists, sir."
Sorry, but this is the kind of comment that a philosophically-illiterate and scientifically uninformed layman would make.
Both naturalism and theism are unfalsifiable. Both are empirically unprovable foundational beliefs by virtue of the fact that they differentially influence the mechanics by which we perceive, interpret and derive evidentiary feedback from phenomenal observations.
Appletree34 7 months ago
@Appletree34 Outstanding reply, thank you. Nice to have people with a brain on Youtube. Best, LJG
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
Comment removed
Appletree34 7 months ago
Comment removed
Appletree34 7 months ago
@stevetadworkz
Atheists are wrong to automatically assume a singular burden of proof upon the theist.
This is because, at the foundational level, the rules of proof operate differently to the rules of proof assumed within the precepts of empiricism.
Due to a quirk of perception, an -absence- of belief regarding a metaphysical/physical dichotomy cannot be maintained as an empirically neutral 'default' position from which to consider and formalise empirical proof of metaphysical causation.
Appletree34 7 months ago
@Appletree34
I don't agree with this at all. That which exists can be measured and analysed in motion or activity, and in most cases dependable repeat experiments can be performed in order to establish patterns to argue validity. Now arguably, in lesser understood realms of concept patterns can not always be demanded wholly. But Theistic belief struggles to solidify any observable influence on reality, which is all too convenient and yet sorely lacking in substance.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8
"But Theistic belief struggles to solidify any observable influence on reality, which is all too convenient and yet sorely lacking in substance."
I don't think you quite understand what foundational beliefs actually are. There is no way to validate one's foundational epistemic system empirically, simply because this foundational basis formalises the very methodology by which an observer interprets and organises conclusions from phenomenal observations.
Appletree34 5 months ago
@Appletree34
Your assertions on this are a different subject in regards to perception. The same arguments have been discussed in the realm of philosophy from Descarte to Camus, to Satre. Considering that the argument as a whole basically reduced *itself* to another unfalsifiable brand of circular reasoning, it is important to understand that unfalsifiable arguments are not the sign of a strong argument, nor an open question for agnosticism to ally itself with.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@Appletree34 Hello. I found your replies to be most instructive, and I am in agreement with you re: theism. I was wondering if your background was in philosophy and if you are a professor. You seem to have a specialized knowledge in this area. Best, LJG
MrLjgroove 5 months ago
@billhicks8
Key examples of foundational beliefs include the axioms of logic and mathematics - the so-called neurobiological axioms.
The metaphysical doctrines, which include both theism and naturalism, are foundational beliefs compelled upon an observer by neurobiological restrictions inherent within perception. We are compelled by neurobiology to have some form of basic belief regarding the presence, absence and/or nature of insensible agencies and causal mechanisms.
Appletree34 5 months ago
@Appletree34
But both mathematics and logic *can* be tested beyond the axiomatic, the genesis of their consistency throughout the physical world may be enigmatic due to various perceptive and neurological restrictions but the essence of the empirical consistency of logic and mathematics is played out in the physical world. The concept of god is notoriously unstable in any regard to the material world, thus why it's need to beg the question in the metaphysical.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8
If empirical feedback cannot apply to foundational beliefs, at the risk of tautology, the only way to justify their presence or absence in one's foundational creedal system is through comparison with other axiomatic precepts - through rational arguments.
Appletree34 5 months ago
@Appletree34
That would be assume that there are rational arguments to be had, and that to derive a lack of an answer from a fallacy of unfalsifiability is sufficient to affirm an argument for proof. A metaphysical world that can not reveal itself to take measurable effect beyond our limitations of deductive philosophical analysis is as confined as philosophy itself has shown itself to be when ideas have been usurped through innovations in science. There is no way around this level of doubt.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@billhicks8
To illustrate this idea further: A philosophically inept naturalist will claim that an absence of belief regarding the metaphysical is a neutral basis from which to formulate an empirical argument for the existence of the metaphysical.
An arbitrary understanding of epistemology clearly shows this to be impossible. As soon as an observer commits to a belief in naturalism, his perception is immediately framed to exclude metaphysical considerations at every turn.
Appletree34 5 months ago
@billhicks8
Both naturalism and theism are therefore unfalsifiable. Both are empirically unprovable foundational beliefs by virtue of the fact that they differentially influence the mechanics by which we perceive, interpret and derive evidentiary feedback from phenomenal observations.
An absence of belief regarding a metaphysical/physical dichotomy cannot be maintained as an empirically neutral 'default' position from which to consider and formalise empirical proof of metaphysical causes.
Appletree34 5 months ago
@Appletree34
If the spiritual world truly is confined to the metaphysical and completely incongruent to the laws of physical measurement and observations of the physically tangible then the metaphysical is excluded from all forms of comprehension apart from what seems philosophically satisfying. But for what is claimed as a consistently physically intervening force this is not enough, since science routinely overcomes speculation.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@Applecont...
To even discover that the physical world is commonly not in beat with philosophical concepts we ascribe to it then threatens the concept of defining the metaphysical further, since the tools are woefully inadequate, and therefore the proof of any substantial presence that can be named, felt and worshipped, and the point of doing so is clearly neutralised to inanity. There is nothing tangible to believe in furthermore forcing definitions with dubious connotations like 'god' to err.
billhicks8 5 months ago
@Rotwang49 You do know this is a lament of the mother of Jesus, Mary...
geothetwo 8 months ago
@Rotwang49 No God, eh? Should be easy to prove, then ... right?? PUT UP OR SHUT UP. Let's see who the real "peasant" is here, lol.
MrLjgroove 7 months ago
@Rotwang49 What exactly is it that makes you so certain that there is no God? There is no evidence either way to prove or to disprove him definitively and that's why I query your certainty.
sirenlyfox 7 months ago
CANCIÓN BELLÍSIMA!!!!
airvarios 10 months ago
No "2nd movement?
malcolmcolemann 11 months ago
It is the human soul. It is what we feel, though we can ignore it and suppress it. The wickedness, the pain, the grief.
The grain of our being.
And the hope, that God sees.
hagstromman345 11 months ago 4
Where can i download this?
carlosortegap 11 months ago
I never believed music like this, so simple and yet so amazingly powerful and moving, was ever possible...
Vlessgorian 11 months ago
MATT DAMON
passionspit 11 months ago
Dziekuje...dziekuje bardzo, Panie Gorecki. Jest fantastyczny...
Gottisczandza1 11 months ago
You will be in our hearts always. R.I.P.
biteme762003 11 months ago
Although i live in this world and am a mere human, i have hate for humanity and this world. I can't get over this stupid kind of life that's forever cursed. The curse is greed, sadness, anger, weakness and the need for conflict that humans need to survive. If there is a god out there, then that God has left us long ago.
Wariorera 1 year ago
God IS speaking,.... through this beautiful composer, and his gorgeous music.
God gave us love, but, also gave us the gift of free will,.... the freedom to do as is.
It is this freedom, that annihilates us. Our gift of freedom, our ability to reason, is what is freely available to us to use as we wish, and to destroy us, if we let it happen.
….God is here in this song….
....Don't give up....
SMCGSXR 1 year ago
@Wariorera if we are the root of this sickness, the center of this discord, then we also posses its cure. everyone is afraid and that fear causes to due unspeakable harm to one another everyday. still, in spite of that fear we can seek to find our own answers. the world is not a cold dead place.
savagerockman 10 months ago 9
Death is beutifull, it's living thats hard and ugly in the world we live in. We become human when on the werge of death. This music is beutifull because sadness comes from the hell inside of us.
Wariorera 1 year ago 2
Wonderful piece of music...
Rest in Peace from Turkey
aobaykal 1 year ago
The world has lost a composer with music in his heart. R.I.P. Henryk Gorecki
azzbo51 1 year ago
Rest in Peace,Henryk.In life we can take moments and you have given something that allows me every now and then to enter a place where nothing else matters only the absolute intensity of every emotion that I can possibly comprehend.Thank you,thank you.
DONAL914 1 year ago 2
Thank you for blessing my ears with such music.
FrigginAsian 1 year ago
love from portugal!
diogotomediogo 1 year ago
I was terribly disturbed, yet entranced. Caught up in a celestial realm of heaven, yet with some sort of romantic darkness. This is the soundtrack to my life. I am proud to be Polish. Thank you Henryk. You passed this earth but not before you composed the sounds of other worlds. RIP.
cyclops1092 1 year ago 12
Is no one else deeply disturbed by Gorecki's music?
barrypotter09 1 year ago
i falled in love with this. unbeliveable
pontiuspd 1 year ago
@pontiuspd Fell*
VOLcOmgurl365 1 year ago
@VOLcOmgurl365 who cares
pontiuspd 1 year ago
Wow, powerful music, I didn't even know classical music was still being composed, I thought it was all from 100's of years ago. Nice to know.
Looked him up on wikipedia and saw he recently died, and I can see the sadness many of you express. May the worms that burrow have a special feast for this guy.
charpel 1 year ago
@charpel
look up arvo part. still kickin, writing classical
willoftheancients 1 year ago
@charpel
Look up Arvo Part, he's still kicking, and writing beautiful things.
willoftheancients 1 year ago
@willoftheancients Who else besides Arvo writes this type of music, just wondering.
RealEros1 1 year ago
@RealEros1 john tavener, peteris vasks
Varjele 1 year ago
What's up with all the gay ass comments guys? Seriously, get a grip! Oh and to @hussar2007 what's up with the video picture dude?
milch7man 1 year ago
@milch7man Being a sociopath isn't healthy. I'd suggest some introspective evaluation.
That said, this is a lovely composition.
takgosky 1 year ago
Comme je ne regarde plus la télé depuis déja trés longtemps,que j'ai du passer entre les gouttes des flashs info,j'apprends par vos commentaires le décés de cet immense qu'était Henryk Górecki que je rangerai au côté des plus grands (Part,Mahler,Bach...)
Une oeuvre ou baigne le sacré et l'humain dans une relation égale ...
Au revoir à vous,M. Górecki
gregbodprod 1 year ago
Wspaniala muzyka Goreckiego... Niech odpoczywa w pokoju.
1airam 1 year ago
Rest in Peace. God leaves us some comfort here on earth, and you my friend were a special comfort.
opferte 1 year ago
Thank you Henryk for being here. For centuries your name will be on many lips and your work in many hearts. Even in grateful thanks to your critics.
joachim640 1 year ago
Longtemps encore "tes chants plaintifs" perdureront ! C'en est fait le 21ème siècle sera (peut-être) enfin spirituel ... s'il ne l'est pas, c'est que quelque part, on n'aura peut-être pas su écouter PÄRT et GORECKI ... alors tant pis et gloire à ceux qui les écoutent
Gloria Maestro
marc230465 1 year ago
Thank you for leaving this beautiful work to humanity. R.I.P.
zachiase55 1 year ago 2
See you on the other side...
Bagas 1 year ago
RIP..master of music
islespatrick 1 year ago
RIP master Gorecki
MrHilc 1 year ago
Thank you for your remarkable music, may you rest for ever in peace and remain in our hearts and souls till the end of time.
1stQueenOfHearts 1 year ago 2
D.E.P
bukkakeforever 1 year ago
Death is nothing to us, since when we are, death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.
Epicurus (341 BC - 270 BC), from Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers
olsztyn44 1 year ago 22
@olsztyn44 Thanks for sharing this thought with us !!
aeudemonia 1 year ago
@olsztyn44 thru !!!.......... The life on the earth is a moment, the death is a moment..like a door to go into another moment, another dimention of living. The Spirit never dies......it just go on..........<3
ApolideDora 7 months ago
we lost next great composer....
olsztyn44 1 year ago
R.I.P.
antenka66 1 year ago
May he rest in peace.
Gorecki, Penderecki and Lutoslawski enriched the world of art music in every possible way, Poland can be proud of its musical innovators.
And just to end the silly "dissonance"-discussions:
If Goreckis consonance makes you weep in respect, if Pendereckis dissonance makes you shiver in fear-they have both achieved what they wanted.
Embrace music in ALL variations and ALL emotions. Do not be afraid to feel negative emotions for you can then truly appreciate the good.
playingmusiconmars 1 year ago 5
All victims of the Nazis, Jews, Poles, Gypsies, etc., have lost a truly gifted composer who captured the horror of the Holocaust in music. He will be missed, but not forgotten.
The first movement is very moving.