Philosophy Now Forum

I'm new to this forum and I wanted to bring up a question.

This came up in an argument I had with a friend regarding music. While the question itself does not involve music, this discussion is what spawned it. He believes that the following statements hold logical equivalence:

1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

For context, he thinks that someone who has a more limited taste in music necessarily enjoys music less than someone who has a broad taste in music. Now, it's true that the latter individual may enjoy more music than the former individual, but that should not imply that he therefore enjoys music more, as it's entirely possible that the former person could possess a much greater passion for the music that he does listen to whereas the latter person may listen to music only on occasion. The two simply do not equate.

So I'm looking for people to dissect the two statements above and show just how they are not equivalent in a technical manner.

Mortician wrote:I'm new to this forum and I wanted to bring up a question.

This came up in an argument I had with a friend regarding music. While the question itself does not involve music, this discussion is what spawned it. He believes that the following statements hold logical equivalence:

1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

For context, he thinks that someone who has a more limited taste in music necessarily enjoys music less than someone who has a broad taste in music. Now, it's true that the latter individual may enjoy more music than the former individual, but that should not imply that he therefore enjoys music more, as it's entirely possible that the former person could possess a much greater passion for the music that he does listen to whereas the latter person may listen to music only on occasion. The two simply do not equate.

So I'm looking for people to dissect the two statements above and show just how they are not equivalent in a technical manner.

With the first statement it normally means you don't have a passion for any music you happen to like. The second statement normally means you enjoy less varieties of music. That's my interpretation.

PhilX

Scarcity of anything (music, food etc.) can sharpen your appetite so when it is there you enjoy it more intensly.

Mortician wrote:I'm new to this forum and I wanted to bring up a question.

This came up in an argument I had with a friend regarding music. While the question itself does not involve music, this discussion is what spawned it. He believes that the following statements hold logical equivalence:

1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

For context, he thinks that someone who has a more limited taste in music necessarily enjoys music less than someone who has a broad taste in music. Now, it's true that the latter individual may enjoy more music than the former individual, but that should not imply that he therefore enjoys music more, as it's entirely possible that the former person could possess a much greater passion for the music that he does listen to whereas the latter person may listen to music only on occasion. The two simply do not equate.

So I'm looking for people to dissect the two statements above and show just how they are not equivalent in a technical manner.

1 Spend less time enjoying music
2 Restrict the number of tunes, songs or genres of music that you enjoy.

Scarcity of anything (music, food etc.) can sharpen your appetite so when it is there you enjoy it more intensly.

Sometimes it can, but that would not change the meaning of the instruction; only the difficultly with complying with it.

Mortician wrote:
1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

1. Try to become more indifferent to music. Don´t be so passionate about music.

2. Cut down on the time that you spend listening to music.

I am not a native-speaker of English so it could be that I misunderstand 1. or 2.

one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp

Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp

This would be my interpretation also. They are not logically equivalent because they address questions of a different nature.

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
With the first statement it normally means you don't have a passion for any music you happen to like. The second statement normally means you enjoy less varieties of music. That's my interpretation.

PhilX

This has been my interpretation as well. Such an interpretation seems to be obvious prima facie. Furthermore, wouldn't the statement "enjoys music less" be universally quantitative, as in referring to a person's attitude for all music? The statement "enjoys less music" does not seem to share that property, as such a statement's informational content can be adjusted in a myriad of ways. It need not be universal at all. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

duszek wrote:

Mortician wrote:
1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

1. Try to become more indifferent to music. Don´t be so passionate about music.

2. Cut down on the time that you spend listening to music.

I am not a native-speaker of English so it could be that I misunderstand 1. or 2.

Hmm, you don't have that quite right. Your take on S1 isn't entirely wrong headed, though I'd dispense with your first sentence. It's not so much how you're trying to make yourself respond to music as much as it's how you already do. Take a look at the context that I provided. Someone who enjoys music less would be a person who may only listen to it on occasion, or perhaps rarely. They don't feel much passion for it, so your second sentence is the closest.

Your take on S2, however, is wrong. S2 has nothing to do with time spent listening to music but the variety of the music that is listened to. For instance, some person 1 that enjoys ten genres of music vs. some person 2 that may like only, say, five. Though person 2 can be said to "enjoy less music", he could very easily listen to and enjoy his music just as much as, or even more so than person 1, and so need not necessarily "enjoy music less".

That's been my point.

Obvious Leo wrote:

Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp

This would be my interpretation also. They are not logically equivalent because they address questions of a different nature.

Good observation. This has been my general outlook on it, though I haven't had the best of luck with articulating the way I've wanted to. Like I said above, the two statements seem completely different prima facie, even regarding informational content.

duszek wrote:
Scarcity of anything (music, food etc.) can sharpen your appetite so when it is there you enjoy it more intensly.

That's a great point, actually. I hadn't thought of that. Thanks.

Thanks for the responses, guys. My position all along has been that they're not equivalent, I've just been looking for a way of exposing their differences in a technical manner.

The word "less", in both sentences, signifies a relationship. Without knowing what the relationship is, the question can't be answered. Or, to put it another way, both sentences are incomplete. Or, to put it yet onother way, less than what?

Harbal wrote:The word "less", in both sentences, signifies a relationship. Without knowing what the relationship is, the question can't be answered. Or, to put it another way, both sentences are incomplete. Or, to put it yet onother way, less than what?

Doesn't matter.
It's always less that the current amount of music. relatively. The only problem would be when a person did not already enjoy any music already.

But enjoying less music, and enjoying music less are logically distinct.

The second hints at specific cases of music (such as album, genres, songs etc), whilst the latter talks about music in general terms of all music.

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Doesn't matter.
It's always less that the current amount of music. relatively. The only problem would be when a person did not already enjoy any music already.

But enjoying less music, and enjoying music less are logically distinct.

The second hints at specific cases of music (such as album, genres, songs etc), whilst the latter talks about music in general terms of all music.

I think it certainly does matter.

Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp

...they are equivalent insofar as frequency responds to degree.

Dubious wrote:

Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp

...they are equivalent insofar as frequency responds to degree.

This is not relevant.
The two statements are grammatically distinct and mean different things.

Listening to less music would not effect the amount of time spend listening to music; whilst listening to music less means exactly that - to spend less time listening.
Listening to less music means less variety of music, not less time engaged in music listening.

Mortician wrote: 1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

Neither is a proposition. That is, neither one of those is a statement capable of bearing a truth value. Therefore they can't "have the same truth value" since they have no truth values at all. So the answer is no, they are not logically equivalent.

Are you perhaps asking if they have the same meaning in everyday English? Maybe. They're both ambiguous. Does one mean "Listen to as much music as you always do, but derive less pleasure from it?" Or "Spend less time listening to music than you usually do?" And which would be which?

They're not propositions, they haven't got truth values, and even their everyday meanings are ambiguous.

1. Enjoy music less
2. Enjoy less music

Number 1 reads to me as qualitative. For example, to someone who goes bananas when he hears something by Beethoven, we might say: "Calm down, dude, it's just music."

Number 2 reads to me as quantitative. For example, to someone who listens to music 8 hours a day, we might say: "Dude, you need to cut back to 2 or 3 hours a day."

I'm not sure what you're asking for in asking to be shown how they're different "in a technical matter".