ThirdEye

What is the point of calling "illusion" something that is essentially metaphor?

I agree with the reviewer, more about the author and his thoughts than about this single work that I haven't read. Dawkins, like many other scholars known to the public (I think of Odifreddi for example), is an excellent communicator and a great scientist, but when they speak of extra-scientific issues, particularly of a religious-metaphysical nature, they leave much to be desired.... they give rise to prejudices and preconceived ideas that do not make them so different from the many zealots and fervent defenders of one faith or another, in my opinion. They simply create a wall against a wall, causing ever deeper divisions in consciousness and culture; an attitude that, in my view, has nothing scientific about it, precisely because it is closed-minded. Fortunately, today there is a faction of science and religion that is less radical and more open to discussions, especially capable of admitting each other's limits.... but as we know, that wouldn't sell as much as Dawkins..... (all this said absolutely as a non-Christian or believer in any other religion)

Great Acid Bath, great Agents of Oblivion, and great Dax Riggs with his acoustic folk project, great the slagg, the review, and whoever has more can throw it in the dump.

@Santalessio: go for it, it’s money well spent. You could start right from *Metallo Urlante* where, besides getting a general overview of the themes explored by Evangelisti, you have both of his main characters, Eymerich and Pantera, and then you can choose whether to begin with the Inquisitor cycle or continue with the metal one. @Bartle: *Antracite*, while not that great, I find it good... and sometimes I find Pantera’s character more captivating than Eymerich’s; it depends a bit on my mood :D I haven’t read the pirate novels or those about American history, but they didn’t really appeal to me. For more info go here: www.eymerich.com/default.htm Thanks for stopping by.

Editors, thank you for the publication. Like a fool, I forgot to link the artist's name to the debaser database... can you do it? Thanks.

No bullshit: disco!

...so you say that the choice of the setlist corresponds to a specific reason? to a logic that is not merely musical? Knowing Meshuggah, it could indeed be... otherwise, I really wouldn't know how to explain the absence of so many other tracks and the decision to prioritize Nothing and Obzen (there's even no future breed machine!). To confirm this, I might go read some of their recent interviews on the DVD in question; which in any case MUST BE TAKEN ;)

....the cyberpunk trash? Well...

mmmmm I understand what you mean, and perhaps the presence of all those different singers in terms of style could be quite disorienting; even if they haven't really called more than usual compared to other albums, Massive Attack have always been fundamentally a collective, that's how they were born. In my opinion, what is most surprising on the first listen is the complete change of atmosphere: less urban, much less nocturnal and more "psychedelic," dreamlike, almost minimalist in sound... I think this might disappoint the most dedicated fans, but the M.A. are great precisely because they never remain stagnant in their identity ;) Punisher, I suggest you give Heligoland more chances, it might seem like a bland and boring album but it needs time and patience to fully reveal itself (and anyway, the Gorillaz have popped into my mind a few times too!)

@Punisher: it seems to me that they have kept their personality even in Heligoland. I think it's quite normal today in 2000 for an album to sound similar to others; being completely original is an utopia..... it would have been worse, in my opinion, if Heligoland had been THE SAME as many other albums of that kind; in that case, the discussion would change and you would also be right. Anyway, what would it actually be similar to?