Ted
Gold Meritorious Patron
Steve published my comment:
# Dictionary definition — Paul Adams 2010-08-22 06:30And Jim responded. No-one else of the faithful there commented on the matter. Jim said:
Jim, you quote: The American Heritage Dictionary online defines “rhythm” as: Movement or variation characterized by the regular recurrence or alternation of different quantities or conditions.
I think that definition means exactly and only the same as "Movement or variation characterized by the regular recurrence or [regular] alternation of different quantities or conditions." Thus I disagree with your opinion in this area, which depends on "alternation" and not "regular alternation."
Paul
# RE: Dictionary definition — Jim Logan 2010-08-22 16:58I'll just toss in the beginning of Wikipedia's article on Rhythm, not that it's likely to make any difference over there.
Paul,
Rhythmic has been interpreted according to some sort of musical definition in the 'three swing' arbitrary. I'm a musician and have studied rhythm. I play drums, it's my thing.
I can tell you from a musical perspective there is 'regular', as in metronomic and there is 'regular' as in say, rubato. Music, if it's alive, 'breaths'. Just like the FN.
What would constitute regular? Is two enough to be a pattern? It certainly is musically if you know anything about music. You've missed the whole point if you are going to quibble over the meaning of 'regular'. Read the LRH refs again, especially Arbitraries.
# RE: Dictionary definition — Jim Logan 2010-08-22 17:03
Paul,
What constitutes 'regular'? How many swings establish a 'pattern'?
As a musician, I can play a bar of two, three, four or eighty seven. It's still 'rhythm', no matter the duration and 'regularity' of alternation.
Excerpted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhythm:
Rhythm (from Greek ῥυθμός – rhythmos, "any regular recurring motion, symmetry"[1]) is a "movement marked by the regulated succession of strong and weak elements, or of opposite or different conditions." [2] While rhythm most commonly applies to sound, such as music and spoken language, it may also refer to visual presentation, as "timed movement through space."[3]EDIT: I've said this before in this thread, but I'll repeat it. I think a lot of the trouble stems from Hubbard's silly use of the word "rhythmic" in his "definitive" 1978 definition, and all the conniptions people go through to try and match reality to that arbitrary of his rather than simply note it's a stupid definition.
Paul
F/N was called, also, a "free needle."
Free. Try that definition to see how it fits.