respecting your defense hard aziz
might actually bump rating this is p good

"I wasn’t comparing Dot to Kant to illustrate how inaccessible his music is, but simply to make the point that he had done some original work (CIA=Sing
About Me)."
OK, so here we have a nice case study? Sing About Me, you contend, is epitomic of Logic’s plagiarism (I.e. he has appropriated (commercialized?) a song that is original). Care to elaborate? Why is this song so original? What instances can you point to in which Logic has substantially plagiarized this exact song?

"Nevertheless, I happen to use the idea of CIA to some degree (I might not even use the entire idea of CIA, maybe just some of the reasoning that happens to justify it) without ever mentioning Kant, thinking something along the lines of well I’m barely talking about CIA, and I’m paraphrasing it anyway so. As benign as my intentions are here (and they might not be so benign, maybe I meant to do it – who cares though), I’ve still plagiarized. And I’ll still get the 0."

I suggest you re-evaluate this analogy because this is really not adequate enough, I’m sorry. I often like to think of philosophy as a science (hell – up until late modernity it was considered a science). Hence, in the academic world using a philosophical theory to ground your argument is entirely as appropriate as positing a substantiated scientific theory to ground your argument. If—lets be careful not to get too tangential here—we actually scale this back to Kdot’s music vs. Logic’s ‘plagiarism’, I simply cannot see the similarities or substance in your analogy. Kdot was first – no one disputes that (it's the fault of Logic’s fans fault – not Logic’s – if their ignorance blinds them from seeing that) – but just because Kdot was undisputedly first, doesn’t mean NO ONE can use this ‘patented’ theory (is that what you’re trying to say – that his musically thematic cornerstones are stylistically/creatively untouchable?). Kant’s theories (ideas) are open to legitimate or illegitimate reinterpretation – hell, you can spout them verbatim if you want but that won’t earn you any money. Similarly, if Logic had come out and re-created a Kdot song verbatim (instrumentally verbatim, lyrically verbatim or perhaps even thematically verbatim) he would earn no money – regardless of whether he earns the plaudits (even this, I believe is extremely unlikely due to the magnitude of musical exposure) of ignorant fans, he would have a law suit on his hands.

If Logic was taking some sort of ‘musical test’ – from an academic, even logical standpoint – there is no way he would receive a 0, I hope you can appreciate that

“This is true, but I’m not saying that it is though. I’m not talking about plagiarism from a legal or even semantics standpoint really, but more so as a point of pride.”

Sorry, but I refuse to argue about something as vague, semantically dissonant and unsubstantial as ‘pride’. If you’re going to write a review and apportion it 1, please, PLEASE don’t fall back onto something so imprecise. Give me some genuine examples of GENUINE plagiarism because I really can’t put up with a plurality of standards. It’s not fair that in the majority of societal, civil, economic – even MUSICAL – cases, artists are subject to one standard of artistic merit, but when it comes to the hip hop game they serve another master.

Similarly you’re argument that “Pride is so important in hip hop” seems like nothing more than hyperbole for mine. In fact, I feel I could mount a pretty substantial argument for these vigorous creative standards producing the majority of fruitless hip hop ‘beef’ that permeates what should – I think we’d all contend – remain a strictly musically-focused, professionally artistic genre.

"Furthermore, we don’t know yet that if Kendrick has a problem with Logic’s album. It’s very possible that we might hear a Logic dis or two on forthcoming songs/albums, or he might let it slide."

He may or he may not, but frankly as it currently stands he has raised no issue whatsoever with the LP. I guess we’ll cross that bridge if he (it’s highly unlikely) does raise issue with the recording.

"That brings up another thing, I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything here. I don’t want the whole world to 1 this album unless that’s how they really feel. I’m just pointing out something that I think should be noted (and surprisingly has not been noted elsewhere in reviews – that I’ve seen anyway) and expressing my opinion on it."

Whilst I agree the album is unoriginal – I wouldn’t go so far as to attribute it a 1. I’m more inclined to side with the review Fantano did on it a week ago – that whilst it is unoriginal (he, like you, sites Kdot etc. as overly influential) that flaw is surmountable, albeit musically detractive.

"This is all I’m saying. The analogy I put forth was to show that Logic used Kendrick’s idea (Kantian theory) and never mentioned that he was using it. That’s all. That’s why I call it plagiarism."

But I said either a) OR b) – yes he hasn’t ‘referenced’ KDot, but he also hasn’t copied the work verbatim. Logic has added numerous artistic, stylistic flourishes – even if they are (in your opinion) inconsequential.

"This doesn’t seem relevant to me. I don’t care if he adds anything to what he took, I’m just concerned with him taking it in the first place."

This is ENTIRELY relevant; it is a significant part of my argument – and what I believe is considered logical process too. The whole point of creative, linear progression is taking ideas and building upon them. We could return to various thinkers who have shamelessly taken Kantian theory and (in many cases inconsequentially) built upon it, but you seem tired of that analogy. The same goes here. Unless Logic steals verbatim, it is almost impossible to argue that he isn’t – at least to some degree – building upon the work of his already ‘in-vogue’ predecessor. That’s just the way progression works. Look at any theory of universal knowledge accumulation (Kuhnian paradigmatic theory, linear progression theory) and that’s just the way things work. Ideas build upon each other. They’re not always revolutionary, they’re not always consequential and they’re certainly not conceived in an artistic vacuum.

Read the whole review, something I rarely ever do on Sputnik. And I gotta say it was really good. And as someone who seems to have a firm understanding of hip hop culture just by looking at this dude's name Logic, I can infer similar conclusions from what you wrote.

Now that wouldnt make me ever know that he was biting of Kendrick. But even so, what kind of rapper calls theyselves Logic.

Wow guys im Logical. I abide my Logic. Im smart hehe and im in the rap game. Rappin about Logical shit, I got mad Logicz

MrMatt nobody cares about linear progression in the rap game. This isnt middle school where you learn about sharing and caring of ideas and building upon them. This is a cutthroat music industry that leaves no space for hacks or swagger jackers.

Basically the only reason why Logic is using Kendriks style is because Kendrick has made it work for himself. Hes managed to capitalize on his personal style. Logic's "homage" if you will to Kendrick is only due to the fact that Kendrick is big right now. In actuallity Logic doesnt give a fuck about Kendrick as a rapper, or of his personal style. He just sees that its makin money so hey why not call it my own. People like this guy are rap game cancer.

So keep defending cancer with your really smart and educated comparisons of historiographical examples. its really Logical, bro.

Yikes this ish is about to get heated

review is laughably retarded

Is it though? Listen to this song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Vlsj1n9wW8


First word out his mouth sound like Kendrick, nigga is reppin triple six like hes about it, hes not. Wow hes undereducated but.. his names Logic? The devils following him damn his lyfe must be gangster. Oh shit he be sippin dat purple lean dammm , lifes hard as fuck man

so this album is a 1/5 because he's unoriginal and uneducated? i just dont understand how lack of authenticity and similarities to other, better rap artists makes your album an automatic 1/5. Reviewer even starts off by saying its a pretty good album or whatever and then still gives it a 1/5 album rating which makes no sense

Album Rating: 2.0

yes.

It makes total sense.

Album Rating: 4.0

Negator - Check out more of his music. Most of the album sounds nothing like Kendrick. Also I'm not sure why I even want to argue with this point but can you honestly say the song below sounds like somebody uneducated? At least the author of the review took the time to listen to the entire album and wasn't forming an opinion off of his name. You are clearly trolling but you might actually like the music since you clearly know nothing about the artist.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozIdmHtTJMs

Album Rating: 4.0

Also, the author of this review might be interested in reading this.



http://uproxx.com/smokingsection/2014/11/ogic-under-pressure-album-review/#respond



Who ever wrote the review of the album on that site copied almost every single specific example used by you - for an album that doesn't have many published reviews this being coincidental is unlikely.

holy fuck that's ironic lol

Album Rating: 4.0

Yeah when I read this paragraph my jaw dropped.



"But Logic goes so far as to lift even some of the more intricate, nuanced details from Kendrick’s debut:

entire flows (“I’m Gone”), beats (“Metropolis”), skits (“Growing Pains III”); on Under Pressure‘s title

track, Logic flat-out copies the concept behind Kendrick’s brilliant “Sing About Me,” mimicking everything

except the empathy that makes that song so striking. On “Soul Food” he raps: “I pay homage to the greats, to

the Gods, never stolen.” Guilty conscience, perhaps."



Dude didn't even bother to change the order the original author brought those criticisms up in.

Why are you dick riding so hard

Album Rating: 4.0

Cause you were dick riding the original review pretty hard.

thats not even logical bro