Non-ETs; more organic than ET?

[A440A@aol.com]

Greetings, 
I wrote: 
>   For some, (myself included), music is a spiritual activity and we pursue 
>ways of making it more so.  It is a small step from the emotional to the 
>spiritual world, and the spiritual world is a world which,  by definition,
the 
>scientist is barred from entering.   >>

Don replies: 

<< Please repeat that to Einstein? Hogwash Ed. 

"After a certain high level of technical skill is achieved, science and art
tend to coalesce in esthetics, plasticity, and form. The greatest
scientists are always artists as well."
Albert Einstein

    Well, exactly what is the point here??   I don't see Einstein even 
addressing spirituality in this quote!   It seems that Don is regarding spirituality 
and art as interchangable terms.  I don't.  While I firmly believe that 
craftsmanship can be taken to the level of art,(though some of my Fine Art 
instructors vehemently disagreed with this in college) I do not automatically consider 
an artist as a spiritual being.  
    Even when Einstein states, 
    "I assert that the cosmic religious experience is the strongest and the 
noblest driving force behind scientific research."  we don't know what he means 
by "cosmic religious experience".  However, if this is his take on 
spirituality,  he is still not saying that science is able to enter the spiritual world. 
 (and for the record, I don't think being religious automatically confers 
spirituality...)   

Since we have been treated to Einstein's words as a source, let us consider 
these gems:

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.
"
(In cruder terms, it has been asked "why do the heathen rage"?)

and in regard to science vs. spirituality:

"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our 
humanity."

Further quotes from Einstein: 

     "Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which 
differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even 
incapable of forming such opinions."

      Any of us that have trumpeted the value of using a wide range of 
temperaments have become accustomed to the "prejudices of our social environment".  
However, my opinion is that it is valuable to become familiar with the 
developement of temperament and the music that was composed with the various 
permutations along the way.  Slings and arrows?  sure,  but I expected that.  
 
  Albert again: 
   "All that is valuable in human society depends upon the opportunity for 
development accorded the individual."
     How much "opportuninty for development" is being encouraged by limiting 
temperment use to one single form?  Does the young, growing musician get the 
greatest opportunity for growth from a single tonal perspective?  I don't think 
so.  

I suppose my favorite on the list that Don posted links to is this one; 

"It gives me great pleasure indeed to see the stubbornness of an incorrigible 
nonconformist warmly acclaimed. " 

   I don't mind being a nonconformist.  I can tune ET anytime I need to and 
the whenever the $ituation calls for it.  I can also offer new perspectives to 
musicians with the alternatives, and my experience has, so far, been a 
rewarding one.  There is a tremendous sense of accomplishment when a piano owner 
looks up from their newly well-tempered instrument and says "I have never heard 
this piano sound so good!".   I no longer keep track of these epiphanies, but 
they are a continuing source of joy in my work, and I am not alone in this.  
Regards,
   
Ed Foote RPT 
http://www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/index.html
www.uk-piano.org/edfoote/well_tempered_piano.html