Don't play into this red herring.
ninja6485 wrote:Ok, so which is it? You said no album was as terrible as modern indie bands, but now it seems like it's not enough for the album to just be terrible, it has to terrible in that it's boring and narcissistic? And now if it's terrible but somehow funny, it doesn't count as being terrible. What new ad hoc criteria will we have to wheel in after we point out a bunch of albums that are just as boring and narcissistic, but also not funny? I suspect there will be no satisfying answer.
It's not a new or ad-hoc criteria - I've always held that something that is terrible in an entertaining way is much preferable to something that's merely terrible in a boring way, and I'm not at all alone in that view. Mystery Science Theater 3000
on that notion.
"It" is ad hoc criteria, since you wheeled in the criteria of being 'boring and narcissistic, but not funny,' in order to save your point after it was made clear that you were wrong in asserting that no album from the 70's is as terrible as modern indie music. But the criteria is irrelevant: something can be just as terrible as something else, even if only one of those things is terrible in that it's boring and narcissistic. Both can be funny, neither can be funny, or any combination of one being funny and the other not, can occur while maintaining that each is as terrible as the other. If we start to play games where now things have to conform to additional ways of being terrible to specifically save one type of thing, these additions are ad hoc. The new criteria is thus clearly ad hoc criteria.
furthermore, the proceeding discussion of whether terrible things are funny is an irrelevant red herring, meant to shift the focus of the discussion off this another topic. Although the criteria was introduced only after your initial assertion was challenged, and perhaps "new," I clearly asked: "What new ad hoc criteria will we have to wheel in after we point out a bunch of albums that are just as boring and narcissistic, but also not funny?" This is not calling
the ad hoc criteria new, it's asking
what further ad hoc criteria will you wheel out to save this dying point? to which I suggested that "I suspect there will be no satisfying answer." Though you quoted my post, you clearly did not read it, or comprehend anything that I wrote.
This looks like a psychotropic reaction. No wonder it's so popular...