Quote by Fassa Albrecht
Therein is the issue. Many people, particularly in school, find it easier to simply keep quiet rather than stand up for themselves and do something along the lines of what you did. Maybe it's because they're scared. I dunno...
I find it partly the school system. They advise you to tell admin about a bully problem, at most suspend them for a week or so, then they are back. They are trying to help but its only temporary... they could go to the length of moving the person's classes but thats just too much work for most schools. Unless, however, a parent complains a lot or threatens to sue thats when the school jumps off their ass to do something.
Redline, other energy drinks I don't feel unless I chug a bunch of them and feel like shit afterwords.
Quote by tubatom868686

Its fortunate that the quotes are taken from this link,, which is entitled "Karma"
'nuff said.
Quote by tubatom868686
"Karma is not punishment or retribution but simply an extended expression or consequence of natural acts. Karma means "deed" or "act" and more broadly names the universal principle of cause and effect, action and reaction that governs all life. The effects experienced are also able to be mitigated by actions and are not necessarily fated. That is to say, a particular action now is not binding to some particular, pre-determined future experience or reaction; it is not a simple, one-to-one correspondence of reward or punishment.

Karma is not fate, for humans act with free will creating their own destiny. According to the Vedas, if one sows goodness, one will reap goodness; if one sows evil, one will reap evil. Karma refers to the totality of our actions and their concomitant reactions in this and previous lives, all of which determines our future. The conquest of karma lies in intelligent action and dispassionate response."

"According to Paramhans Swami Maheshwarananda, one begets Karma in four ways:

* through thoughts
* through words
* through one's actions
* through actions others do under one's instructions"

"Actions performed consciously are weighted more heavily than those done unconsciously. But just as poison affects us if taken unknowingly, suffering caused unintentionally will also give appropriate karmic effect."

Read up friends. Your freshman global issues class didnt teach you everything there is to know about Karma

Also, what is the difference between an unconscious thought and a conscious one? Why is it that we can train our bodies not to flinch right before someone hits us? Why is it that for some people, no matter how many times you hit their knee with a hammer, they will never kick their leg? Truth is, no matter what it is we do, that "idea" of it happening still has to pass through some part of our mind in some way shape or form, and is therefore influenced by our mind

As subjective as my definition of a person is, I think its naive to think that you can completely exclude the body or the mind from any definition of it

EDIT: Whoops, forgot the most important part of those quotes

"Until recently, the scholarly consensus was that reincarnation is absent from the earliest strata of Brahminical literature"

"The idea that the moral quality of one's actions influences one's rebirth is absent from India until the period of the shramana religions"
Its also pleasant if you site sources, so instead of giving the part of a quote you wish to give we could actually read the entire article.

You contradict yourself often, then move away from those points onto new ones. I might as well be trying to have a logical debate with a brick wall because this is going nowhere.
Quote by tubatom868686
you need to read more about karma.
Oh the irony...
Quote by TheBurningFish
But a dead person can still twitch. Cats can jump in the air hours after they're dead.

No, that's what psychologists would say. Karma has shit ass to say on this subject at all.
I'm just going to say that our arguments are probably in vain; trolls gonna troll.
Quote by tubatom868686
Im confused about what part of what I said doesnt align with karma Once again, youll find the underlying concept that good reinforces good and bad reinforces bad. Which is the main idea of Karma, is it not?
*brain explodes causing body to convulse violently*
Quote by tubatom868686
Three people read the story of adam and eve, and they have three interpretations, according to this thread. Three people read stories about karma, and it seems only right that there are three interpretations. Why is that idea unacceptable?

Its unacceptable to you, because your trying to answer a spiritual question scientifically
Actually I answered it literary. There is a difference between interpreting an piece of writing and understand a concept of what is. Literature often has several meanings, some of which contain Greek Mythology, biblical, Shakespearean, and many more ideas.

Karma on the other hand is simply a straight forward idea created by the Upanishads stating what is. I think you are confusing Karma with the Dharma, but even so that is a doctrine governing Karma in Hinduism.
Quote by tubatom868686
Long story short, I believe in both. The reincarnation part is the religious part of the conversation and I chose to leave it out because of who Im talking to. I instead, just took the parts that can hold true for everyone and chose to talk about those in a way people can realistically apply it to their everyday life.

You dont believe that Eve convinced Adam to take the apple from the tree, and that god cast them out of the garden of Eden, but you believe that ignorance can be bliss and knowledge will show you the evil that was always there

To the guy above, if Buddhism and Hinduism have different definitions of Karma, but get to call it the same thing, why cant I?
Do your research. They both have the exact same definitions of Karma but the religions are composed of many things more that that just of karma. Buddhism has different beliefs in the afterlife... and other things such as an individuals soul "Atman" (not mistaken with Karma), but they are both the same.

And the Adam and Eve idea is simply an archetype.

Quote by DaddyTwoFoot
In the original Hindu sense of karma, it has shit all to do with how other people act towards you. If you live a strictly righteous life, you are not reincarnated and instead are sort of "dissolved" into the universe with Brahman. If you don't live up to the "standards" so to speak, you're reincarnated until you get it right. Karma is not something that comes back to you during your lifetime, it affects you between lifetimes.

This is all pretty loose explanations from that I'm pulling from two-year-old memory, but it should be pretty accurate.
This is correct. Karma takes effect between lifetimes during reincarnation and if greatest Karma is achieved then you enter Brahman. Buddhism is exactly the same but Brahman is slightly different and named Nirvana.
Quote by tubatom868686
Thats where I disagree.

Actually, my ideas about karma are a lot larger and more complex than anything Im going to take the time to type on UG. But it actually does involve reincarnation and the likes, and actually is very comparable to Hinduism.

However, usually you have to strip down an idea to its most naked scientific form before anyone on UG will even entertain the thought of it. As youve demonstrated yourselves
Lets put this out there.

Buddhism is based off of Hinduism and share many similar beliefs, but because Buddhism has different beliefs it becomes a new religion.

It doesn't matter what you disagree about, because you beliefs ARE NOT THAT OF KARMA. Your ideas of karma are not karma, so why call it karma if its not karma? Make your own denomination of karma and at least call it something else.

It would be like saying I'm Catholic but don't believe in Mary... it simply isn't Catholicism anymore.
Quote by tubatom868686
Karma in its purest form, is good for good and bad for bad. Is it not? In fact, while the definition changes drastically through religions, the one thing that remains is good for good and bad for bad. Seeing as my definition revolves around that idea, how is it then any less valid than any established religions ideology
In Hinduism the goal is that good karma will allow you to raise in the caste system and eventually become in a state of the Brahman.

On the other hand Karma is often portrayed in an individuals sense as all acts of good and band will affect later events, whether they be relative or not.
Quote by tubatom868686
To say that karma is about morals means you have to conform to the idea that there is a definitive good and bad. It doesnt matter where you draw the line, but you have to draw it somewhere. Right? Something either has to be good, or bad. It cant be both. Unfortunately, that line is different for every person. Which means that karma becomes less about the extroverted sense of the word (the universe attempting to find this balance) and becomes much more about the introverted sense of the world (your mind seeking balance). So karma is about morals, but not in the way you guys are using the word. Its about a unique set of individual morals
At least this paragraph makes some sense; this is part of the reason why karma cannot exist. Good and Bad is not necessarily determined by a single individual but rather as society as a whole. With the rise of civilization came the inferiority of women, is that wrong? Nowadays it may appear so, but travel back to Classical Greece and it was ideal then. Because society made it ok then means it was ok to discriminate women? Athenian women didn't even have a say in any political matters and was mainly used for procreation, which nowadays is seen as sexism and makes one argument not credible.

This fact enforces my statement of consequences to actions.
Quote by tubatom868686
Except, people do completely terrible things and get away with it all the time... I think its partially do to the fact that they dont think its terrible
And your point is? Plus some people DO realize the fact some things are wrong but its still done. I've stolen a dollar from the tip jar, knowing it was wrong, and got away with it.
Quote by tubatom868686
The best way I can explain karma is by comparing it to that disney movie, luck of the irish. The black kid does all that crazy cool shit when he has the token the old guy gave him because he thinks its magic and will give him those super cool powers. Then later, he finds out the token was about as magical as the dump Im taking as I post this. It turns out that everything he did was just because he had programmed his mind to think he could.

When you do lots of good things, it reinforces that positive thinking and programs your mind to start believing the world is those good things. Then you start to be able to do things you couldnt have done with a different mindset. Bad karma is the opposite

Is that really so hard to believe?

Do it burningfish. Explode. Im shaking in fear of the nasty things youll say to me over the internet
I honestly don't find that the big picture of karma... thats more of positive reinforcement or negative. You pretty much described optimists and pessimists. People can do completely terrible things and see that its alright...

That is what I'm getting from your paragraph at least, correct me if I'm wrong.
Quote by Todd Hart
...I was replying to a post that mentioned reincarnation. And karma is just a limb of causality. However, causality is flawed in that good things don't always happen to good people and vice versa.
In Hinduism, karma is everything to reincarnation. One try and reaches such a good Karma in a period of lifetimes so they can enter the world of the Brahman, some blissful reality of some sort. I'm not the most knowledgeable of Hinduism but thats the basic principle of it.

EDIT: I'd rather stay away from the religion and more into the concept of Karma in this thread lol.
Quote by TheBurningFish
Major flaw in "karma" is that it makes no sense without the existence of objective of morality.

So it's a gigantic pile of shit. every time something shit happens to someone who deserved it, it's "karma". Every time something bad happens to a good person or vice versa no one mentions it. It's like how winning sportsmen thank Jesus but don't mention him when they lose.
I often think of Edgar Allan Poe; his entire life was a tragedy. His work is honored after his death, but something tells me he would have preferred to have an easier lifestyle when he was alive.
Quote by SlayingDragons
I don't believe in Karma as a religious thing, but more as a social theory. In that sense, I believe it a bit. If you piss off someone really bad, it could come back around and **** you up badly in the future.

Thats called consequences of actions. Some are more immediate than others... for example swatting at a bee hive just might have bees fly and sting you. Thats pretty quick. Telling someone off has the consequence of a bad relationship with that person, in which something bad may or may not happen in the future. That may be quick or slowly come back over time.

Karma often goes into the fact that ALL things you do effect EVERYTHING you will ever do. You piss off your friend then your ipod breaks because you dropped it are not related whatsoever, but to Karma thats because you are simply balancing out your good and bad.
Quote by Will Swanson
I'd rather not be bias and strike down a part of a religion.
Is there a balance between good and evil? Do good and receive good, do bad and receive bad?

I don't believe in it, I find most things going by the principle of "every action has a reaction" sort of deal. True most of the time good deeds reward you nicely and bad deeds can come to a catastrophic conclusion but that doesn't explain every case. Lets say I stole something from a store, the only bad thing stealing will get me is the consequences that RELATE to stealing. Getting in trouble with my parents, trouble with the law, etc. For some reason Karma goes past that into the "bad karma" will stay with you and eventually cause a bad event to happen. I just find that BS...

Anyways I respect those who believe in Karma, since it did originate from Hinduism, but whats your opinion on this force of the balance of good and evil?
Women will always be deemed inferior to men as long as we are a civilization in my opinion. Not saying its right or wrong, but with the rise of civilization came the inferiority of women. Earlier in one of the ancient river valley civilizations some kingdoms were matriarchal, but overall most dominance was given to the man. Not much else has changed today, you can look around the world and see this.

And the reason for this taboo is probably that the US is a Christianity based nation (In one nation under God... sound familiar?). Thats why men are often given the role of nurturing the women as the women bear children and raise them, its simply the modern aspect of Christianity. That is I assume you are from America that is, I'm not sure in England. Also the Middle East has a dominant Islam religion which has lesser women rights than we do, and men can simply dictate their wives there with little consequence.

Thats my two cents.
Quote by Eastwinn
What I found to parallel music really well was with formulas. Memorizing a bunch of formulas and calling it math is like memorizing a bunch of scales and calling it music!
Yeah I feel discouraged learning lots scales and all of that D:
Quote by 3rdWardSoldier


but if you're really looking for something that's not very intense and long. Check out 2c-i.
Very mellow but really cool sometimes.
I was hoping for something along the lines of less than an hour, but it looks like I can't get much shorter than that lol. I looked up 2c-i and it looks nice, I'll ask a certain person if he has it.
Quote by bobthebum16
Salvia I hear is much more intense even though it's short.

You should be more scared of salvia then acid or shrooms.
... Any hallucinogenic thats not too intense and short?
Quote by Shpongled
I hope you aren't looking to salvia as a short preview of say acid or mushrooms. The effects are extremely different. Many people, including myself, don't enjoy salvia but still take other psychedelics. It isn't toxic, but there is a potential for getting hurt if you don't smoke it sitting down with a person with you to take the pipe after you hit it.
I'm not going to try acid or shrooms... that scares me

I just want a short trip and nothing like hours lasting effects. Salvia lasts a short time so I assumed it wouldn't be too bad to try. Yes I did plan on having a sitter with me for I wouldn't know the side effects of it.

My questions was more around the health risks of using it, besides hurting yourself or others while tripping that is.
I want to try Salvia but am not to knowledgeable of the risks involved. I'm aware of the effects, but will it make me drop dead or something like that? I'd much rather not hurt myself entirely. I am fine with weed and alchohol, but I just want to try Salvia once to see what hallucinating is like.
I honestly believe "Complete Originality" doesn't exist. You have already been influenced by the artists you have listened to, whether you liked them or not (more so on the ones you listen to often). So my advice would be to put the guitar down and relax, listen to some new artists or some new inspiration for your work. If you aren't interested in philosophical reasons that is, I'd do this.
I've dreamed about a riff once, in which I did create it. I still love how I wrote it but I have no idea what key I'm in or what scale I'm basing it off of lmao. Other than that I dream more of my life than guitar (perhaps if I made my life guitar?).
I'm a good guinea pig for testing I've been using Fretboard Warrior but its going somewhat slowly so maybe this method will help out. Sure I will try this, I'll begin tonight, I hope your method works well.
Joe Satriani's Chrome Boy guitar (on the left) makes me jizz in my pants. At least the looks do that is...
If its Music Theory you are looking for The Crusade is a great guide to start.
Quote by griffRG7321
Anymore entries? I'll be uploading mine later today.
Yeah I gave up Seems I still have some things to learn.
Quote by 12345abcd3
Learn the notes of the fretboard + learn the notes each key.

Not the easiest way but by far the most useful.
I would suggest this. Once you learn all the notes on the fretboard by heart you will see a gateway of music theory and applying it to your guitar. It doesn't just help with scales, it helps with chords as well (probably more but I don't feel like looking it up).

Say the notes as you play them, go up and down the scale saying the notes. Once you are comfortable with that key start breaking out of the "boxes" if you are using that manner of learning scales that is. If you feel you have that scale downpat move on to the next key and repeat. This is how I'm currently learning scales and its effective, in my opinion that is. Find which ever way you believe is best for you though.

Quote by AxeThrowingCow
I know the notes on the fretboard, in a split second I can say what note it is. But isnt it better to just see what notes there are in a D major scale for instance and just remember them and play. I mean I know where the notes are and if I just remember the notes of the D major I should be able to play it. I'll try.

Thanks for helping by the way.
You can learn it that way as well. Memorize the notes of each key in the Major Scale. Surprisingly its not too difficult since its a heptonic scale and uses 7 notes per octave. Anyways this is more of the pianist approach to learning scales, but you can apply it to guitar as well.
I don't exactly think you can cross those... are you sure you aren't just hearing someone soling in a Blues progression with Mixolydian?

EDIT: Ignore this post and read the one above me
Quote by food1010
Creating a specific flavor to your music/solos actually has very little to do with what scales you use. No scale will single-handedly make your solos sound jazzy.

Solution to your problem: Listen to and study jazz, try to look at why it sounds the way it does.
I myself have been wondering how to solo in Jazz. From what I have been learning of Jazz I'm pretty sure it has to do with emphasizing the current chord progression you are soloing in. So far thats the most I have gotten out of my studies for Jazz soloing :/
Quote by Pillo114
See there you go, now you're getting it.

When people tell you to learn the major scale they don't mean just the scale from C to C but the chords that the scale forms diatonically and the things you can do with the scale.

you know how the chords for C Major go

C E G B - I Major
D F A C - ii minor
E G B D - iii minor
F A C E - IV Major
G B D F - V7 Dominant (because of the b7)
A C E G - vi Minor
B D F A - vii Half Diminished

When you look at that you can tell there's that pattern C E G B D F A (It repeats over and over) that you can get all the chords out from. You dont particularly have to "memorize" it but you'll see where the chords are coming from and how they relate to each other. so if you're playing a solo and you come across a Dmin7 (D F A C), you'd know the notes surrounding that chord ( B (D F A C) E G). And that's how you start building proper non scale sounding melodies off of the major scale. You are playing the notes of the other chords, like if you want to start a phrase off of the 3rd of Dmin 7, F; you could use F maj 7 (F A C E) or F maj 9 (F A C E G) and so on to use melodically. You're not using just dmin7 but expanding and using the whole scale. The actual tensions land were they're supposed to be and you get the real intervals of the chord.

I think the main people a lot of beginners are turned off from the major scale and go on to the modes and other exotic scales is because they can't make it musical yet. They try to use it but it sounds like an exercise. Trying out while I told you above is going to help you big time in terms of using and visualizing the major scale in a way you might haven't seen before. You're going to find tons and tons of things you can do with it and once you start using the actual scale to glue things together you'll be set.

Once you have that down and start working on the chord substitutions and so on, you should have tons and tons of stuff to play over a chord that maybe 1 bar or half a bar isn't enough for you to explore it as much as you'd like.

That's where Miles came in, playing dorian over Dminor isn't the only thing you're supposed to do. You're supposed to expand on the above but instead of sticking to the major scale, you're expanding the melodic vocabulary to other modes and scales to play over that Dminor 7. These vamps like So What came in out of the necessity to go deeper and deeper within the chord. As the modal jazz evolved into the 60s there was no need to have a progression of chords that resolved; the chords became like doors to rooms with different atmospheres and you'd go through them changing your colors (i.e notes) with modes and other scales that you could explore that segment of the song with. As you can see it's a next step towards more and more freedom and exploration.

Eventually you had no chords at all and you just relied on the melody and developing your music freely from its ideas with the entire chromatic scale at your disposal.

So yeah start working on the major scale, don't really focus too much on memorizing every note on every single key for now. Start with one and figure out how it moves along the neck and look for patterns and things that you'll then bring on to the other keys. Find a chord progression in a key that you're comfortable in and start working all the different things you can do to each chord. In time you'll be amazed that after a few songs in different keys, you'll know all of them.
I think you just pieced together things I somewhat knew so it makes sense on a whole larger degree thanks is an understatement.
Quote by DiminishedFifth
Yeah, that was an experiment haha. That's my least favorite part.

I just listened to yours by the way, I really liked the melody at bar 9 once it gets to A Major.
I enjoyed your song quite a bit, but sadly trying to read sheet music at the rate of the song was too much for me I better brush up on my musical staff reading skillz.
Quote by Pillo114
No one writes in modern modality because by now you might as well play fully chromatic.

Modal Jazz was the last ordered step before full freedom. The same thing happened in Classical with Debussy and Ravel, they were the last before everything went completely chromatic.

It's also wrong that Satch was influenced by classical modes when his teacher, Lennie Tristano who's responsible for teaching him all of this, was a pretty radical jazz composer. Check out Lennie Tristano's pieces and check their harmonies out.

And like Eastwinn said, you could use C anything. Modern modality isnt based on just the 7 modes, you can use any scale or pitch collection you want.

I've said this before but you have to understand why modality came to jazz again. Before in jazz, music was always improvised with chords and chord subs and never scales. You'd be playing the chord tones and tensions of the current chord you were at and you would think in chords and not scales. Miles and others adopted scales because it gave you the freedom of fully exploring a chord without directly bound to it. Thats why a lot of bebop solos were really arpeggiated with passing tones, while further on it was much more scalar up until the point it was completely free and just based on motivic development.

Thats why the chord scale theory is completely useless and pretty much any musician worth his salt says it's bogus. While thinking Dmin7 and using a dorian for that will yield you the Dmin7 with all it's tensions, it's not the same thing. D E F G A B C is not the same a D F A C E G B when you are thinking chordally.

So learn you major scale and how all the chords relate to each other, and apply that to your music. I guarantee you you'll get better in no time. Leave the scales and modes for later when you can apply them to what you are doing.
Tristano's music sounds great, I'll continue listening to him. As for the brief history of Jazz, I can tell the difference between Jazz that Miles Davis made based upon previous Jazz songs I have heard.

And I wouldn't think D E F G A B would sound the same as D F A C E G B, those are all harmonic notes either by major or minor thirds I believe. D to F would be a minor 3rd, F to A is a major third. If this is thinking chordally, I think I have a start somewhere.

Nonetheless I shall work hard on the Major Scale, although all I can think of working with it would be to memorize all the notes in each key, each of the basic triads, and be able to play it well on the fretboard of the guitar :/
Quote by food1010
Yeah I think you've got the right idea. Although C ionian and C dorian would be pretty difficult to fit together in the same song, since one is a major mode and the other is a minor mode. C ionian and C lydian would be a much better combination.
I was using that for a quick example, I'd typically try sticking with a major or minor mode(s) most of a song.

Quote by hockeyplayer168
You've been digesting a lot here. The biggest thing to learn is the intervals and steps that make up each mode. Once you learn the flavor and characteristic intervals of each mode, they will be like new friends who each have a slightly different personality that you can talk to whenever you want. Some of them like to talk about happy things, some like the dark side of life, some just can't make up their mind...
(But first, you should be familiar with the ins and outs of the major scale though, since that is where the modes come from. Don't worry it just takes a bit of jamming!)
I'll be sure to get the Major Scale downpat before attempting to use modes
The US has no interest in North Korea. They have poor soil conditions, not good ore in the ground, and it has no oil. The US is more than likely not going to go to war with something that that gives no profit to themselves. Of course if the crazy North Koreans send a few missiles our way I'm sure the US would be happy to send a few back.

Also nuking North Korea, while pretty damn easy, would kill civilians and would look very bad for the US, so thats a big no-no.
Quote by crzysnowborder
there are different levels of depression. and it's different for different people.

i used to be really depressed but thankfully i've been feeling much better lately. however, when i was feeling depressed, i basically felt that i was alone and that nothing was going to go right for me. i also didn't want to feel better when i was feeling depressed. almost like i enjoyed it. so because of that, it was really hard to get better.

edit: though if you're feeling depressed, in my opinion, the best thing to do is talk about it. to friends, family, psychiatrist...just talk to someone. it really helps. and if you're feeling how i was and don't want to get better, you still need to. because there are other people who want you to get better.

edit2: haha i wrote a lot more than i thought...
Sounds about what I think when I'm depressed :/ The long summer vacations often depress me after a while.