Canada - discussion on closures

Someone who genuinely seeks clarification doesn't argue that it's wrong.

This is crucial, because he appears to understand what they're saying but is trying to argue that they're wrong. This is completely backwards: he sought clarification. He asked multiple follow up questions, heard multiple examples, multiple explanations, etc. all tailored to the specific things he wasn't understanding. And upon reaching that understanding, he argued that it was wrong.

instead, if people could actually dig into the language of the rules and make them a bit more robust, they'd speak for themselves. Less to-and-fro needed.

That's what someone does when he thinks he already understands.

The only question I can see is: "can Xenakis be enjoyed without understanding the math behind the music?" This is opinion-based because you're asking about what someone personally enjoys. Personal enjoyment = opinion.