Why is based and cringe in your vocabulary? can't you describe music?

yes

ok

pretty oof thread desu lad lole

i saw that pic when i was in high school and it made no difference
t. zoomer

your self awareness is kill at that age user

shut the up desu retad lole
cringe!! origngialail

I'm a redditor and I miss the up / down-vote function so I just reply with based and cringe instead.

music is subjective people who try to justify their opinions on anything subjective are faggots

>Never realized of this before

Attached: 1561139976364.jpg (368x285, 18K)

Was about to post the daily reminder:
Based=upcummy
Cringe=downcunmy

Based

what does?

I remember in high school I took my friends to see Napoleon Dynamite and they laughed in the theater the whole time but then it got a second release and blew up in popularity and all the worst people started quoting it and suddenly all my friends were like “what we always hated it we never even laughed at all” but I remember, I remember Scott you were eating popcorn with chopsticks like a faggot (which you also deny), laughing at “build her a cake,” I remember. I have always had disdain for people who just HAVE to be apart from the bandwagon. “Ugh people I don’t like like that? Eugh! No way can I be objective now ha ha.” Fags! Make up your own minds!

>why is based and cringe in your vocabulary?

because Yea Forums put it there. feels cringe tbqh.

I say based and cringe because I’m not a pretentious reviewer and I can say what I think about an album without saying a lot of meaningless adjectives.

Attached: FB_IMG_15625081880862007.jpg (712x769, 168K)

>i don’t have any legitimate reasons for disliking popular thing, but the people who like it are the people I don’t like, so, yeah, that’s a yikes from me
cringe

yes it does

>legitimate reasons for disliking
There is no such thing as a legitimate reason for liking or disliking anything. Its validity hangs on absolutely nothing. You're allowed to hate an album because you don't like the name of one of the studio musicians.

oof

I agree OP comes across as very insecure but I think his point was that disliking something solely because it's popular is stupid, not that you can't have your own opinions about popular things.

these posts sum up my opinion

hating moo jannies who cant play drums does tho!

Got a point

Ok? And i’m allowed to think that is an infantile point of view. If you can’t articulate why something is bad, your opinion is of low worth compared to someone who can.

>I DONT LIKE THE HAIRCUTS
>but the music is quite inventive and what they do for the genre is-
>MY IPINION IS AS GOOD AS YOUS
>ok

I'm not It's not about how well you can articulate yourself though. If you could find a fancy sounding way of justifying why you like something, someone else could probably use the same reasoning to justify why they dislike it. Then who's opinion is of higher worth? It's all just apples and oranges bro. The opinion of someone who tries to justify their views on something subjective using adjectives with either positive or negative connotations isn't worth anymore than someone who just expresses what they think by saying cringe or based. Sorry that last sentence was really badly written.

bump

>but the music is quite inventive
That's just another opinion. All it comes down to is >I like this because I like this thing about it.
Which is fine, because that's what discussion on subjective things is, but you can't pretend that a person is mature because they lay out multiple opinions instead of one.

>If you can’t articulate why something is bad
Same thing applies here. Nothing is objectively bad. You're not doing a mathematical proof. It's just more layers of "I like..." dressed up in different language. If you're impressed by that, that's fine too, but it's not more valid than a simple statement.

based
cringe
cringe
pic

Attached: 1412058519945.jpg (1280x720, 181K)

Basé

When you give your opinion you can assist it with an argument to assert its validity. That is the whole point of critique. I don’t agree with your premise that all opinions are equally valid, because some are nuanced and well-argued, while others are shallow. You are basically advocating for “there’s no point in sharing opinions because all are correct since they are subjective,” which is silly. It’s enjoyable to read effective arguments—especially when they convince you of something you wouldn’t have otherwise believed.

I'm not saying there's no point in sharing opinions, but I am saying there's no point in stating your opinions as fact. I think your issue is stemming from
>well-argued
It's not an argument. It's a simple discussion. You just seem to want to pretend it something more than it is.

>Thelonious Monk is a better than Charles Mingus
translates to
>I like Thelonious Monk more than Charles Mingus
And you know it does. It's just that it's accepted and more provocative to state the first, especially without any sort of metric by which to judge that. You'd have to define what makes a musician better than another, which is in itself completely subjective. That just devolves into arguing which metrics are more valid than another, which gets real fucking silly real fast.

People value different things, and letting others know what you value can be part of a discussion without trying to convince someone your opinion holds more weight than another's. It doesn't.

>I don’t agree with your premise that all opinions are equally valid, because some are nuanced and well-argued, while others are shallow
There's no such thing as a nuanced opinion or a shallow opinion. There's only the person's ability to justify their opinion, and that doesn't come down to whether their opinion is actually closer to being objectively correct. The effectiveness of their argument is only determined by their vocabulary and how many impressive adjectives they use to justify their opinion. That doesn't affect the validity of the opinion because someone could use an equally impressive range of adjectives to argue the complete opposite point. I'm sorry I said opinion so many times.

>that doesn't come down to
sorry that doesn't make sense, replace with "that doesn't relate to"

Whadda fag. Clearly people who hate popular things are interesting enough to warrant threads like this to be made regularly.

If you feel compelled to point something out, I am under the impression that you find it interesting.

Don't feel like wasting real thought and effort on these Twitter/Reddit retards that infest board.
Wow congrats you found out what subjectivity and perspective are. Big smarto

>found out
Not found out, trying to explain it to OP.

>The effectiveness of their argument is only determined by their vocabulary and how many impressive adjectives they use to justify their opinion. That doesn't affect the validity of the opinion because someone could use an equally impressive range of adjectives to argue the complete opposite point. I'm sorry I said opinion so many times.
A good argument is more than “vocab and adjectives,” because a good argument has logic. I can’t believe you think the difference is only in rhetoric, because that betrays the underlying basis of the argument, which is a position derived from some form of logic. Socrates and Plato would kindly disagree with you, sir.

This fuck OP

>a good argument has logic
You can't use logic in an argument about your preferences in music because that isn't decided by logic. You don't even have any control over what music you like or dislike, the only thing that determines that is neurochemistry and the uniqueness of your brain. You can then try to justify your preferences but I can't see how you would use logic to do that.

yes it does

Sorry I wanted to add something. If your argument could arrive at a logical conclusion the thing you're arguing about wouldn't be subjective it would be objective. Like math and science and whatnot where there's only one correct answer.

yes it does