Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
Comments
No no, the main thing is the lack of evidence and the totally conflicting views of different religions, must of which claim that their version of things is right. It just then becomes hard not to suspect that they're all deluded.
Deluded for sure!
The rules and judgement taint the whole operation.
Us church people typically spend more time pleasing our congregation than helping the community. At my church, I saw a young girl turned away for anger issues, 13 years old - broke my heart.
The part of faith that has really made a difference to me is related to listening and helping others - being selfless. Sometimes helping someone seems a bit much, but then the situation blesses other people, unrelated, in the process. Then I look back and see all that happened from one decision and marvel at what faith led to.
But you could do all of those things simply because of a desire to do good and without the carrot on a stick of entry into a paradise after death.
I think you completely missed the point of the comment about delusion if you think it was applied to anything you do to help others.
With all due respect: The part missing from your perspective is my intention and the “opportunity” I feel, the same opportunity I feel engaging in this conversation. The road ahead seems unclear, but I decided to take it anyways. I feel someone, maybe you maybe not you, but someone feels inclined to explore more about their spiritual life and it may even save a life, possibly my own.
I don’t doubt your good intentions socially, but you have framed them more than once as driven by your beliefs. It just doesn’t seem to need the religious beliefs to be in place for anyone to just step up and help someone.
If there is one song that aligns flawlessly with my personal beliefs, it's this anthem.
I make it a point to play it at least once when I'm at my regular piano gig. Also if I'm ever stuck going to karaoke with friends, this is the song I sing (as it's the only one I can belt out without needing autotune 🤣).
I agree. Listening and helping, these are great things, but you don't have to be religious to do them. Absolutely not. That said, there's an interesting discussion to he had about to what extent secular western society is still shaped by the religious worldview. Although we may have lost our pious beliefs, we're still products of societies in which religion was deeply engrained for thousands of years. But yes @Stuntman_mike, I felt you missed the point of my 'deluded' comment, because I wasn't saying that Christians etc were practising wrongly, I was saying they're believing in worldviews etc that simply aren't true, from my perspective
Beliefs are highly cultural. We are a social animal. An animal whose critical adaptation is sharing knowledge and beliefs both laterally (i.e. with contemporaries) and vertically (to the next generation). These beliefs and knowledge are culture. By necessity culture is sticky and doesn't dissipate easily (forget the wisdom of your ancestors about which berries are safe to eat or when the seasonal floods happen and you are in trouble). Vestiges of old beliefs can persist for hundreds of years or longer. And attempts to pass ideas laterally outside our culture is like a game of telephone. Our culture influences how we interpret the information we take away from our exchanges with the other cultures with which we come in contact with.
When our religion changes or disappears, there are still vestiges of its belief systems.
As hard as we might try to be independent of our culture aspects of it get imprinted and influence in ways we can't ourselves recognize.
There is a story about Jean-Paul Sartre. Something like:
Sartre retorted flippantly to someone: "Well, of course. That's become I'm Catholic"
The person was puzzled. "Catholic? You are the world's most respected Atheist!"
Sartre: "And yet I'm a Catholic atheist. I can't escape the Church."
this just popped in my X feed, sharing, hooe nobody will take it too much seriously, it’s just atheistic areogant joke 🤣
Exactly
I lolled 😂
The same could be said of many different aspects of life for instance Scientists, Politicians and so on, do we apply your same logical conclusion?
Science has many answers, but the choice of how we use it, is more where, love and compassion lay.
Love and compassion are also impossible to quantify.
Scientists do not base their authority on claims of divine revelation etc - sorry, this equivalence is completely false
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Are you kidding ? You can’t be serious here :-)))) I mean regarding science (scientists). Politicians are different beasts, actually lot of religious leaders are technically politicians, what they do is form of politics wich clear intention to control people and hold power in their hands.
But please do not put into same bag with those two groups of people scientists. Science has zero in common with dogmas or unconditional faith in something what somebody said or is written in some book without even known author.
Science is exact opposite. First and major pre-requisite for science is all the time to questioning what was said. Every scientific theory must be falsifiable, otherwise it’s not scientific theory.
In religion, trying to question or falsify what was written/said is heresy and in some of them can be even punished by death.
Scientists speculate, form hypothesis which have to be falsified or proven, lots of theories are ‘working models’.
Some scientists have claimed they have received their ‘knowledge’ from divine sources, which have previously been mentioned in this thread.
Same old, same old, please.
You did make a straw man argument though.
Use of analogy isn’t a straw man argument.
sorry dude but if you think the science scene is perfect you are mistaken. There is a hierarchy and also funding by powerful businesses involved with science projects and hiring of new talent. Many scientific findings are dismissed if it doesn't fit into the current agenda. It been like that forever, even Sir Isacc newton was hush up on his Alchemy (which he spent 80 percent of his time on) the scientific community were horrified that one of the greatest minds in history was messing with such so called unscientific endeavours. Then there is the insanely intelligent genius Kurt Godel (Einstein's good friend) who was a full-on mystic, and the list goes on.
I didn't said it is perfect ... i just said that very basic foundation how science work is exact opposite of how religion works. Not judging, just said how it is.
Those two things cannot be compared. Water and fire, both in principle works in absolutely different ways. One builds on questioning and falsifying of what was said, other on unconditional accepting of general truths and dogmas, without right to question them. Just pure fact. Every one may have small minor anomalies, but in general - this is what it is.
Not going to discuss here conspiracy theories, that is really different topic .. If this is reaction on my comment how religious leaders works more like politicians - that's just fact, Vatican is state, Pope is leader of this state, Cardinals are his employees, technically they are politicians and that is how they work on global scale when interacting with representatives of other states.
Of course it's not their only job, but in many aspects what they do is basically same type of work (politics) what representatives of other states do.
One more thing about dismissed scientific findings. Carl Sagan said "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" - this is something widely accepted in scientific community. So when somebody comes with finding which is in very much contradiction with some previously accepted theory in given area, it is expected he provides extraordinary evidences supporting his new finding. This is usually problem, and scientists who aren't able to provide such evidences for their claims then sometimes slip into spreading conspiracies and untruths how they were dismissed by mainstream scientific community because they said something different.
Again - not saying this is always the case, world is not monochromatic.
Which alchemy actually really is, so no wonder about that.
Another very common thing in science - If scientist brings something new into one area, doesn't mean everything he say should be taken as dogma. Many scientists who discovered something important in one area, were completely wrong in other area. This is beauty of science - there are not authorities which word should be taken as written to stone. There are just theories which are not proven to be wrong yet.
Example: Einstein. He was convinced during his entire life that "spooky action at distance" how he called quantum entanglement is just wrong, it cannot be real. Yet he was wrong, as was experimentally proven many years after his dead.
What are beliefs and faiths of individual scientists are really their personal thing and it has nothing to do with how science works, what is scientific method, wow scientific hypothesis and theory works (many people wrongly things it's something what just some weird dude in lab decided to claim and other may or may not believe in that - but this is really NOT what scientific theory is).
Very true, science has an orthodoxy very similar to religion, if you venture too far from the prevailing narrative, you can face its wrath. Recent events should serve as an example of this as to political and financial interference within scientific debate.
All encompassing this is the control of information, of which there are two powers, each vying for supremacy, my overwhelming fear is that this battle may actually result in chaos and possibly war.
those scientists wouldn't even have come up with those scientific ideas without their beliefs, also they were more interested and concerned with their believes than the so-called science elements they developed from them.
you can't split the spiritualty of a person from their scientific ideas, or you miss the very source of inspiration from where this science came from... The fact is most of the greatest minds in history if not all are spiritual.
Back to the point i made, the scientific community dismisses many ideas due the hierarchy and funding in place, it far from scientific in many ways, it is 'in the same bag as politics' which you dismissed.
It's a weird form of evolution in itself.
That is strong claim, you can for sure provide multiple strong evidences this is often the case, enought that it can be geneneralized on science in wider context.
Again i am not arguing what motivates spnebody to develop some theory, that is his personal thing.
But when is theory finished, to have it accepted by scientific community it must fulfill certain criteria and those criteria have nothing to do with process what inspired scientist to build that theory, and definitely nothing to do with spiritualutx, beliefs and religions.
Maybe you can provide concrete examples of those scientists ?
Unless the analogy is a straw man…
>
if you wish for reply please don't bunch me in with other people, its get messy.
i already gave examples and my point of view is already made.
Oh sorry, i need to look back, probably overlooked something, saw just mentioned Newton and alchemy which has really nothing to do with science and that Godel was mystic (which really don’t getting what is supposed to prove, plus he was also philosopher and philosophy is often on the edge between science and spirituslity/religion, so yeah obviously philosophic materials are often deeply interconnected with beliefs - regarding me i am all the time talking about pure science, like physics for example, which is build on facts and proofs not beliefs and opinions).
Dr Brian Keating covered the matter some time ago, regarding orthodoxy within the scientific community.
will try find it ..
anyway, yes as i said scientific community is not perfect, nut just because few individuals in community have orthodox approach doesn’t mean science == religion