Thus, mu­sic de­picts the range of knowl­edge of our ecol­ogy in the force-field of the mu­si­cal tone-space, the field of in­di­vid­ual knowl­edge it dis­plays in the motif-space, and the world of so­cial knowl­edge it il­lus­trates in the mu­si­cal force-field of the se­quence-space; but the per­fect func­tion­ing of na­ture in its en­tirety is dis­played, in a su­pe­rior or bet­ter in a “su­per-natu­ral” sense, too, by mu­sic in the space of the har­mony.

The motif-tech­nique de­scribes in­di­vid­ual un­fold­ment, and the ex­pres­sion of this de­scrip­tion is the melody.
So, the melody dis­plays the very in­di­vid­ual course of life, and when in the po­lyph­ony many melo­dies are brought to un­fold­ment si­mul­ta­ne­ously and mingle with each other, then it may occur that the lis­tener iden­ti­fies his per­sonal course of life with the in­di­vid­ual motif un­fold­ments be­cause he finds his own in­ner po­ten­tial of un­fold­ment de­scribed in them.

Then, in the proc­ess of lis­ten­ing to mu­sic, he treads in­di­vid­ual, maybe uni­ver­sal or even cos­mic ways of un­fold­ment which he might – with­out the stimu­lus from out­side through the clas­si­cal mu­sic – not so read­ily set foot on for fear of rous­ing sus­pi­cion, with him­self or even with oth­ers, of be­ing insane.

The con­ven­tional sci­en­tific sys­tem of phi­loso­phy keeps clear off and at the great­est posssible dis­tance from any sort of unac­cus­tomed specu­la­tion and con­sid­era­tion.
For on the flat level of verbal rea­son­ing, incon­clu­sive non­sense is eas­ily iden­ti­fied.

Clas­si­cal mu­sic com­pletely ig­nores con­clu­siveness in terms of sim­ple logic; it fully con­cen­trates on the goal to be reached and be­haves, if nec­es­sary, com­pletely uncon­ven­tional or ir­ra­tional on the way.