Subjectivity is an integral part of the human condition so we ALL have it.
But being aware of bias and gullibility and accept that makes a huge difference, even if you can't fully fool it.
I've a nice little book here, by the title of 'The unnatural nature of science'. The author argues that science and the scientific method are quite unnatural for people.
Think about it. As a (good) scientist, you are expected to put in an effort to try to proof you are wrong. It doesn't get much more unnatural than that. Yet is is the basis of the astonishing technological and medical progress we've made.
Jan
Evenharmonics
You've been around here long enough. You've seen vitriolic threads that go nowhere until the mods have to shut them down. They largely have the flavour of barnyard crowing, mooing and snorting. Clearly none understanding the other nor caring to. I started out with an interest in this thread's OP's original question and then got to wondering about the apparent divide between members when it comes to discussing the limits of sensory accuracy. I'm not spoiling for a fight, I'm interested in the dividing line that appears real enough to fight over.
You've been around here long enough. You've seen vitriolic threads that go nowhere until the mods have to shut them down. They largely have the flavour of barnyard crowing, mooing and snorting. Clearly none understanding the other nor caring to. I started out with an interest in this thread's OP's original question and then got to wondering about the apparent divide between members when it comes to discussing the limits of sensory accuracy. I'm not spoiling for a fight, I'm interested in the dividing line that appears real enough to fight over.
Last edited:
As the saying goes, devil is in the details. Your assessment that "those who insist they're being objective and those who feel their stated direct experience is being dismissed as subjective and therefore invalid." is a bit far fetched. I've seen posters who ask for objectivity when extraordinary claims are posted unaccompanied by extraordinary evidence. As for calling something invalid, it matters what it is invalid as. Invalid as evidence, anecdote, perception or something else? Details matter.
Jan. I need to check on a turn of phrase I'm not sure of . It's ". . . . . . even if you can't fully fool it." Thanks
Yes, positive and negative controls, and the more solid the evidence looks for one direction or other, the more important it is to figure our where the caveats lie. But at least my experience in academic and R&D biotech is that it's still a whole lot of human beings being subjective about their pet projects. Somehow we keep moving the needle forward.
If activated, the default first "experience point" is awarded for successfully making your first post, IIRC. In practice it's able to cover more things than just post counts.
A "Like" or "Thank You" raises the reaction score. (Refresh the page to see it incremented.)
Gerardv has 27 reaction score. AllenB's chart #132 shows "79 XP to reach level 2". Which seems to get a silver belt. Or are these two different points systems?
If it took a week to accumulate 27 score, it will be about two more weeks to make 79 XP.
They are different point systems.... reactions are only the likes and the thanks per post.
In any case I don't think anyone wanted to let this system be gamed. Keeping score of reactions and reacting to a post are two different things.
In any case I don't think anyone wanted to let this system be gamed. Keeping score of reactions and reacting to a post are two different things.
I forgot one comma, apologies ...
But being aware of bias and gullibility and accept that, makes a huge difference, even if you can't fully fool it.
Jan
Since awareness is always a construct of the mind based on earlier experiences, even the word "objective" is subjective. Each and every one of us will have a different understanding of the word "objective".
Therefore, I think the real difference is between knowledge based on personal assumptions and convictions, and knowledge based on facts. Since all facts are subjective, see above, we need to agree on epistemological rules to determine which facts we judge to be true and proven, or true with some degree of probability, or false.
So, there is no debate between subjectivists and objectivists on this site, there is debate between schools of epistemology. Where do you get your audio truths from?
For some, a difference in sound is true when the wife in the kitchen, friend on the couch, Stereophile "listening" or salesman notices or agrees that there is a difference in sound. Let's give them the name assumptionists.
Others insist on a more scientific method to determine the validity of statements on sound quality. For them, a different in sound is true if an ABX is statistically significant, science reports, or Stereophile measures. Let's call them cerebralists.
I am a cerebrassumptionist myself.
Therefore, I think the real difference is between knowledge based on personal assumptions and convictions, and knowledge based on facts. Since all facts are subjective, see above, we need to agree on epistemological rules to determine which facts we judge to be true and proven, or true with some degree of probability, or false.
So, there is no debate between subjectivists and objectivists on this site, there is debate between schools of epistemology. Where do you get your audio truths from?
For some, a difference in sound is true when the wife in the kitchen, friend on the couch, Stereophile "listening" or salesman notices or agrees that there is a difference in sound. Let's give them the name assumptionists.
Others insist on a more scientific method to determine the validity of statements on sound quality. For them, a different in sound is true if an ABX is statistically significant, science reports, or Stereophile measures. Let's call them cerebralists.
I am a cerebrassumptionist myself.
Jan, I wa
Hi Jan, No, I wasn't nit picking punctuation. I didn't understand what it was that who was trying to fool. No worries though . Thanks.
Maybe we can make a graph of this stuff and play a game - where do you sit on the '[ER vs SO' Audio plane?
The trick is to ask others how they see you. I place NP, JC, Mark4W in the bottom LHS, BC bottom RHS, Syn08 top RHS etc