Common opinions--what's at work?

Social influence is not so definitive in its outcomes. You have not been forced or coerced into an opinion, however, you may have been steered (often without realising) towards such an opinion.

The first six albums is a good study in social infuence.
The opinion that they are Black Sabbaths best albums is extremely common. Many are insistent that they are their only good albums. A lot of people have only listened to those album ignoring their later releases because it is common knowledge that those 6 albums are the only good ones. (social influence). If someone new to Black Sabbath asked you to recommend an album you would make positive statements about those 6 albums. (social influence). Should that person behave in a manner consistent with the norm (humans usually do) he will ignore their other albums & continue to perpetuate the common opinion.

Are those 6 albums really their best. IMO (& again it is only my opnion) the first 2 albums with Ronnie James Dio would be in my top 6. As to their other albums I, like a lot of other people, have not listened to them enough to form an honest & independent opinion on them. The reason I haven't listened to them is social influence. Most people will tell you that they are not as good as the first 6, hence I have been steered away from them.

 

Social Influence may seem like a newish discovery but it's been around for a while

I can't get no satisfaction, I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm drivin' in my car, and the man come on the radio
He's tellin' me more and more about some useless information
Supposed to fire my imagination

I can't get no, oh, no, no, no, hey, hey, hey
That's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction, I can't get no satisfaction
'Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can't get no, I can't get no

When I'm watchin' my tv and a man comes on and tell me
How white my shirts can be
But, he can't be a man 'cause he doesn't smoke
The same cigarettes as me

I can't get no, oh, no, no, no, hey, hey, hey
That's what I say
I can't get no satisfaction, I can't get girl reaction
'Cause I…

 

Social influence and common sense are close parents, especially when it comes to any artistic work evaluation.

 

As we know, many (most?) people tend, either knowingly or unknowingly, to conflate "best" with "my personal favorite". I know that you believe (as I do) that taste or preference is either entirely or, at the very least, primarily subjective, and that therefore there is, in any kind of objective, non-relativistic sense, no "best" when it comes to music. Given all this, how can the question that you asked, which depends on the concept of "best", be sensibly answered? Doesn't your question, for all practical purposes, really concern the way in which taste and preferences in music are formed?

 

How could I have been steered toward that opinion when my only exposure to Black Sabbath in my teen years was my own? I was literally the only Black Sabbath fan I knew in high school. Black Sabbath was almost never wrote about in the few music magazines I read, and they were only slammed outright in most reviews. When I bought Never Say Die on the day it was released, I knew I did not enjoy it as much as the earlier albums. If anything, my opinion of it has been heightened now by listening to other people extol it. I find it really odd, though not unexpected, that you seem to assume that your concept of social influence is correct and universal without regard to circumstances. My position is that sometimes people reach opinions by influence, but others may reach the same opinions independently.

I don't insist that their first six are their only good albums, but I do believe they are their best. This opinion was arrived at through listening to the albums. There was no group of friends and certainly no critical community making such a statement in the late 70's, at least not that I came in contact with.

 

No emoji will ever replace better writing.

 

Fine, just be aware that should I become Emperor of the Universe, there will be an accounting for taste. Consider this advance warning.

 

Social Influence is not always positive.

An example would be cigarette smoking. In the early days smoking was socially regarded as indicator of charm, glamour & sophistication. Advertising targeted these things in a positive manner. Now in our more enlightened days smoking is no longer socially regarded in a positve manner. Sales advertising has been banned and smoking advertising is targetting the negative consequences.

I'm not sure that common sense has any part to play at all in my apprasal of albums. I either like them or I don't. Sometimes I sit somewhere in between

 

Another problem with this general "nature vs. nurture" type of question is that behavioral genetics is really only in its infancy, and we're only just now beginning to get the kind of good, empirical evidence that allows us a glimpse into how important genetic factors might be in psychological and behavioral traits. Anyone who's really interested in this topic might want to look at Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate. He points to and discusses data that strongly suggest that we've been drastically underestimating how powerful genetic factors are. Needless to say, the book has been controversial, but it covers a lot of territory and cites supporting studies and data. It also devotes quite a bit of space to discussing why people really hate, hate, hate the very idea of behavioral genetics and the inheritability of behavioral traits.

For example, he points out that there is some interesting data that indicates that when you look at measurable behavioral and psychological traits, identical twins who are separated at birth and raised in completely separate households tend to be more similar than biological siblings raised in the same household (who obviously share some genetic inheritance, but are not genetically identical). But what about identical twins who are raised in the same household? If identical twins raised in completely different households wind up very similar as adults, then ones who are raised in the same household would have to be even more similar, right? That's what we would expect, but the studies indicate that they're not; they are no more similar than those raised in completely different households. This is pretty shocking, but the studies seem to bear it out. At the very least, it suggests that there's the distinct possibility that we have been underestimating the power of genetics, and the actual mechanisms by which they operate are a mystery to us.

For example, there's this TED talk: Human nature and the blank slate (e.g., see at about 20 minutes in)

Or there's this (but it's much longer)


Also a New York Times article: My Genome, My Self - Steven Pinker Gets to the Bottom of his own Genetic Code

 

Genetics. The ultimate visceral impact.

 

You will notice that I stated that you may have been steered

This another form of social influence. Your opinion, which you reached honestly & independently, has been confirmed by popular concensus thus reinforcing you that your opinion is correct.
Note that it is an opinion as a such can not be incorrect. Opinions aren't right or wrong they are just opinions.

Yes

 

You should be equally aware that we rebel forces are gathering in readyness to defend our bad tastes.

We shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our bad tastes, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.

And may the Force be with us.

 

I was talking about one's tendency to follow the common sense about what's good and what's bad to try, be it music or whatever.

 

I have noticed that people are really defensive if they believe that their thoughts & opinions have been influenced by outside factors.

 

I do some work in business management. I often say that mostly business management is common sense however common sense is not always that common in business.

The use of the wording one's tendency to follow in your statement is interesting as this is the essence of social influence. People tend to follow common censensus in the formation of opinions & decisions

example
We have room with 50 people in line & pose the question "what is the strongest colour". We would expect to get a wide range of answers.
however if we got the people to call out their answer as we move down the line and we had instructed the first 25 people in the line to answer "Blue" as we proceeded further down the line, due to social influence, we would expect a much higher number of the remaining people to give "Blue" as the answer.

 

http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threa...nizable-by-people-across-all-cultures.727116/

It depends. According to (very preliminary) results from the study referenced above "people interpret the music of other cultures in similar ways" when it comes to "songs that are used for dancing [and] to calm babies down" so that would indicate that their appreciation of those song types is biologically based.

But people don't recognize love songs and spiritual songs from different cultures as such - indicating that appreciation of the musical elements that make up those songs is culturally determined.

It's science.

 

Whoa. I guess I better get more familiar with my Rundgren albums....

 

I am not interested in whether my opinion is "correct" or not, it remains my opinion whether or not other people affirm it. My opinion would not change if it were largely rejected.

I don't need to be told that an opinion cannot be incorrect, that's not an idea that I have ever challenged. I've made many comments here over the years about the nature of opinion and I've never asserted that there is really such a thing as a "correct" opinion. I do seek to support my opinions when they are challenged, but not with a view to insisting that others adopt my opinions. There's a great many people who are eager to tell me my opinions are wrong, and I haste to refute them, not so that they will adopt my opinions, but that they may respect them as my opinions and not insist that I am wrong or mistaken to hold them.

 

It's interesting that you chose "Blue" as the strong color instead of, say, Pink. Socially influenced choice perhaps?

 

People resist being told who and what they are and why they think the way they do by strangers. That ought not be surprising.

 

My Legions of Darkness will crush you. Tastefully. (Black goes with everything.)

As for nature versus nurture, I look at how much animals know by "instinct" and am not such a species egocentric that I doubt that humans don't have at least some level of instinct as well. Nature doesn't generally throw away something that works.

 

Ah yes I like that, great response.

It wasn't something I thought about at all at the time I was tossing up between blue & red. So even in my random choice of a colour I had not even considered Pink nor Green.
This is a great example of social influence at work without my awareness.

 

I can see that you very much consider yourself to be an individual. Note that I haven't said that you ARE an individual because you would resist my notion.

 

And there you expose your weakness. It is obvious that you work in cover of darkness thus avoiding the sunlight.
We shall attack during the day. We shall announce our arrival by the playing of Sunshine Pop. Oh those sweet but tasteless sounds.

I mentioned the concept of 2 levels of thought.
The first being immediate, intuative, instinctive.
The second reflective, less reactionary, considered, developed.

Everybody has the 2 levels. We jump between the 2 however 1 level tends to usually dominate the other depending on the person & the situation

 

And living things tend not to work particularly well unless they come with a variety of rather beneficial, pre-installed software programs.