Out of context, this sounds like an OBOE (off by one error). You typically wouldn’t count the origin: the two notes are four (semitones) away from one another. That becomes quite useful when you think about all of this as sets and, perhaps, start doing some computation with these. In context, it might simplify things for the moment. It’s just a bit strange to keep all of these in mind. The major third (so, the third note in the scale) is “five pitches” away from the root. The perfect fourth would be “six pitches” away. The perfect fifth “eight pitches away”. Major sixth “10 pitches away”. And the major seventh “12 pitches away”. Which means the octave is “13 pitches away”. Could lead to interesting confusion.

This part is defensible. Without getting into the details, it addresses an actual phenomenon (with the assumption that listeners are part of the “our” in this statement).

Soooo much has been said about the problems with happy/sad referring to major/minor. Bright/dark? Not quite as problematic. In this case, bright=happy. Darker is “almost sadder”. There are ways to make this all more obvious.

Hmm? Again, it makes some sense in context. Yet it could lead to quite a bit of confusion. I honestly thought it was going to be about actual tonality. Yet it’s about mode, calling it tonality. Disconnecting mode and mood. It’s nice to use simple language. This isn’t that. It’s using jargon and shifting it. The technical term for that might be… obfuscation. Strange

Hmm… Strongly stated, with a bit of backtracking later on. Without getting into microtonality (or even just intonation), it’d be quite useful to start with that conditioning mentioned later.

That’s an unusual way to put it. While it makes sense in context, it can create some confusion.