Larrok

Great group. This album is very, very nice, sounding significantly more alternative, noisier, and probably more inspired in terms of compositions than "Where you been," which, to be honest, I don't mind at all. There are moments that are among the most brilliant of the '90s. Take that, Lord, Duane, and sheep like them who stick to the '70s.

Anyway, I want to take my example even further: if one were to conduct a (cruel) experiment by raising 2 or 3 children in an isolated place away from the rest of the world or, in any case, devoid of contact with any civilized society or otherwise (obviously providing them with means of subsistence), do you think that growing up together they couldn't develop a common sense such that, if one of them were in danger, another would feel the duty to help him? As for pagan cults, in my opinion, they are the result of ignorance stemming from the power dynamics within less advanced civilizations, in which the current shamans or witch doctors, or whoever, exploit humanity's innate terror of death to their advantage, crushing the subjective wills of individuals through extortionate tricks. In the major confessions, the mechanism is similar.

It was a simplification to make it clear that if someone is not born in an environment influenced by the Catholic Church or Islam, it doesn't mean they lack their own internal morality that transcends the precepts of sacred texts. All of this, then, to say that if a man uses his brain without succumbing to fears and frustrations and, above all, if he is free from conditioning imposed by the usual "confessional" societies, he does not need to invent a supernatural entity whose existence is truly improbable.

Damn! "Nice album" and then you give it 2...difficult flavors?

don't confuse the lowbrow culture of the average metalhead with metal music, which is largely mediocre but has some representatives of great value.

They may be "brutal, bestial, and various bullshit," those are genres that 90% of the time are useless records, but not the artists I mentioned and hundreds of others, most of whom you've probably never heard of, who are part of the metal genre.

you cannot exclude an entire genre a priori

In the meantime, Tool do fall into metal, but in a broad sense, and the influence they’ve had is mostly within the history of rock, albeit a recent one. And then, what would be the criteria to establish "music that matters" and "music that doesn’t"? A band like Neurosis is incredibly important for all the experimentation they've undertaken and has had a huge influence on thousands of artists. Metal is not just Manowar or similar nonsense; there are also great artists within it, like "Today Is the Day"—I challenge anyone to say that their music lacks artistic purpose—or "Red Sparowes," etc. The fact that you consider jazz and classical music to be superior is an entirely shareable idea; what I don’t agree with is the total and a priori annihilation of everything else.

Pretazzo, I wasn't referring to the album; it was a more general discussion. Instead of stopping to decontextualize, argue your opinion. Don't you agree that there is a morality in man that transcends any religious affiliation? And then explain why it would be nonsense, come on.

You tell me what the hell does Sonny Rollins have to do with this? And anyway, if we want to make value judgments, it’s worth noting that Sonny, as far as jazz goes, was formally one of the greatest saxophonists of the '50s/'60s, even though he took a beating left and right from giants like Coltrane, Ayler, Coleman, or Shorter. Tool is a seminal band of the last 10 years in their field, alternative-post-metal. It’s profoundly unfair to bring up incomparable artists just for the sake of feeling superior. Then I could compare anything to Chopin, and everything would seem subpar, but that’s not how you evaluate. You need to know and contextualize.