THE CLASSICAL COMPOSER AND MUSICOLOGIST PETER HÜBNER
on his International Project of the INTEGRATION OF SCIENCES & ARTS
 
NATURAL
MUSIC HEARING


OUVERTURE
CONVEYING TRUTH IN MUSIC


TEIL I
THE OBJECT OF GAINING KNOWLEDGE IN MUSIC


TEIL II
THE LOGIC OF THE MUSICAL FIELDS OF COGNITION


TEIL III
IMMORTAL AND MORTAL TRADITION OF MUSIC


TEIL IV
THE LIVING EXAMPLE OF THE MUSICAL COGNITION OF TRUTH


TEIL V
THE THREE GREAT STEPS OF THE MUSICAL PROCESS OF GAINING KNOWLEDGE


TEIL VI
THE SYSTEM OF INTELLECTUAL DISCUSSION IN MUSIC


TEIL VII
ERRORS IN GAINING KNOWLEDGE IN MUSIC


TEIL VIII
EQUIVOCATION


TEIL IX
THE SECRET OF MUSIC


TEIL X
THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF GAINING KNOWLEDGE IN MUSIC


TEIL XI
INDIRECT AND DIRECT GAINING KNOWLEDGE IN MUSIC


TEIL XII
THE PATH OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE GOAL OF TRUTH


Five Types of Errors


Now, in the field of experience of pure self-awareness, the crea­tive music listener, with his natural insight into the world of the harmony, considers solved five types of errors from his past relative musical experiences:

    1. the fallacy in the musical gaining knowledge,
    2. the contradictory in the musical gaining knowledge,
    3. the answer being equivalent to the question in music,
    4. the unproved in the musical gaining knowledge,
    5. the belated.


 

The Fallacy in
Gaining Knowledge in Music


 
In the rela­tive proc­ess of our lis­ten­ing to and ex­peri­enc­ing mu­sic, in the flow of time, we con­cluded from one spe­cific knowl­edge to a higher, equally spe­cific knowl­edge.
We trav­elled through the worlds of mu­si­cal or­ders, and strove from the mu­si­cal strata of knowl­edge of a in­fe­rior or­der to the mu­si­cal strata of knowl­edge of a su­pe­rior or­der.

 
Logical Conclusions in the Musical Process of Knowing
At each step, our feel­ing in­ferred a state of greater ful­fil­ment, be­cause each field of higher knowl­edge re­leased more en­ergy within it. And then our feel­ing reg­is­tered this in­crease in en­ergy as an in­crease of the po­ten­tial of power and of the ex­peri­ence of hap­pi­ness.

 
Our un­der­stand­ing, how­ever, con­cluded a de­crease in di­ver­sity on the higher lev­els of mu­si­cal knowl­edge, and purely by habit kept its cog­ni­zant eye di­rected pre­domi­nantly to­wards the su­per­fi­cially rec­og­niz­able di­ver­sity in the lower worlds of mu­sic.

 
The in­er­tia of our un­der­stand­ing, which re­sulted from its struc­tural ad­ap­ta­tion to the lower fields of mu­si­cal en­ergy, disal­lowed it to per­ceive the di­ver­sity in the sub­tler and denser fields of greater mu­si­cal unity with the same dis­tinctness as in the lower worlds of mu­sic.
Thus, our un­der­stand­ing kept its eye of cog­ni­tion di­rected pre­domi­nantly to­wards fields of lower mu­si­cal en­ergy, and due to their outer dis­tinctness it could not be con­vinced to re­lease greater, in­ner in­tel­li­gence in or­der to gain higher knowl­edge.

 
How­ever, once the un­der­stand­ing – con­stantly spurred by our feel­ing – had reached the field of the har­mony and was able to draw there from the unlim­ited realm of in­tel­li­gence of pure self-aware­ness, it dis­cov­ered that in re­al­ity, as unity in­creases, di­ver­sity does not de­crease, but that at first the di­ver­sity was not dis­tin­guishable enough due to the un­der­stand­ing’s ini­tial lack of in­tel­li­gence.

 
The Fallacy of the Understanding in the Musical Process of Knowing