I think this had to do with Auntie Enid Lumley, which was very scared abouth the sound influence of digital clocks, so George Tice had a solution for her.
Actually and factually - Enid was a trained clinical phychologist and a keen observer..... when applied to music she noticed that the music system she used sounded better at night than at day time and wondered why that was. She speculated. That is what got her into trouble with technologist. But, as it turned out, when the ac line noise in her apartment complex died down (at night), tests and measurments correlated with her observations.
-RNM
(in disgust, she gave away her fine music system to my friend and I had it stored until a couple years ago and I gave it away to a record producer in LA).
Last edited:
I know that not believing in truth is not the same as disbelief in the truth of something. The problem for the postmodernist is that disbelief in the truth of something is itself a truth statement, so they end being unable to believe or disbelieve anything. This means that there is little point in arguing with them. "Truth is irrelevant" is itself a truth statement; as I said, you have to be inconsistent to be a postmodernist. I guess you regard inconsistency as a virtue?abraxalito said:
I'll pass on the reading list. I agree that we should not clog up the thread so I will say no more on this subject here, however much I am provoked!
Yes, that affair was an excellent illustration of the state of the emperor's wardrobe. Even funnier was the damage limitation exercises afterwards, when people who had been suckered by the hoax tried to pretend that being suckered was part of their reality (or something like that - I don't take too seriously what any of that lot say because I know they don't believe it themselves).SY said:
I did, actually. I even called PG&E and complained that after they installed their new counter my light on garage with motion sensor started turning on periodically. They refused to do anything about it. Also, fellow ham operators called FCC about broadband over power lines, the same result. You are lucky with your personal power station in your post-modern reality.
Last edited:
To me 'disbelief in X' is 'belief-in-not-X'. I see no problem for the postmodernist who is characterised by 'absence of belief and/or disbelief in X', only for the self-confessed monotheist who misunderstands the postmodernist condition. Absence of belief is by no means evidence for inability to believe so you've assumed too far (once again).
You lost me. I'm speaking for myself here - I find truth irrelevant to me. I am not making a statement that you find it irrelevant, or indeed that you should find it irrelevant. Your guess doesn't correspond to my own reality - I find consistency desirable, for myself.
Any reason for passing on the reading list? You have no desire to educate yourself as regards the truth of postmodernism? (I use the word 'truth' in the manner the apostle Paul said he 'became all things to all men, so that by all means he might save some' - slgiht paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 9:22).
Last edited:
For a trained clinical psychologist she was easily fooled. Dan Siefert told me the story of testing her, I forget what the particular purported changes were (possibly cables --- I'll have to ask him) that he was making. Lumley began to describe detailed differences between the different presentations. Finally Dan revealed that he had only been pretending to make the changes, but that in fact all of the trials were identical.
She was understandably upset, as I would have been. Once many years ago, someone with whom I no longer associate waited until two of us at a little soiree had had a surfeit of wine, then produced two bottles each about half-full and asked us to compare them. Of course we tasted differences, until AA triumphantly revealed that he had decanted the same wine into a rinsed-out bottle.
What was also interesting is the wine was lousy, one of those Windsor ones with the gimmick of personalized labels, but I was too nice to criticize.
The same way a clinical psychologist could be trained to be too nice to criticize differences in electronic devices. She in order to be effective has to establish rapport with patient, i.e. accept his reality, in order to drive him to desired changes, speaking the language of his beliefs.
Good point Brad, thank you.
Having done a little training in therapy that's quite the opposite direction to the way therapists are trained. Being 'nice' is a handicap, being empathic and congruent is the aim. Being 'nice' means caring about what the client thinks, that's undesirable.
Not sure which therapeutic school you're citing here, but 'driving him to change' is not at all the way I was trained. Rather the aim is to reflect the client's dysfunctional mindset back to him or herself so that he/she gains insight which empowers change from within.
Being a trained clinical psychologist doesn't make you immune to the way your brain operates and that "ears-only" is the only valid way to confirm perceived differences. Experimental psychologists tend to be more familiar with these issues, but are no more immune to (for example) placebo effects than anyone else.
I mean modern most productive school modeled by NLP from Milton Erickson, Virginia Satir, Fritz Perls and other successful psychotherapists. All of them used very similar patterns and strategies. Nothing common with theoretical-speculative schools based on assumptions made by Freud and similar thinkers...
Edit: this schools are less known because they are extremely effective. How many hours are needed for a shrink to remove phobic reaction? Many sessions covered by insurance. If to do this work in half an hour which insurance company can pay adequate for the end result? Can psychotherapist survive if he/she does not have a reliable schedule of sessions, like shrinks do? So, they are limited now to patients who can afford cash payments for end results.
Last edited:
Without taking measurements, using only my technical common sense, I installed 4 isolation transformers to my stereo setup, fed from a dedicated in-wall power line. The transformers were wound to my specifications by a local workshop, the secondary of each transformer is balanced (a center tap connected to the mains ground), with simple PI RF filter at either the secondary or both the primary and secondary. (The power cords and AC outlets connected to the transformers do matter, or make a difference).
One transformer feeds the power amp, another feeds the analogue section (pre-amp with phono stage), another feeds the digital sources (CDP and DAC) and fourth one feeds all gear with switching PSUs: universal player, home theater receiver and HTPC.
All power cords to the stereos setup gear pieces and to the power splitter are shielded.
The turntable motor is hooked to a separate in-wall power line.
The TV set is hooked via a shielded power cord and a mains filter to a separate in-wall power line.
The benefit to the sound of the isolation transformers and the entire configuration is notable.
It may be not very scientific, though practical, beneficial and reasonably economical.
I don't think that characterizes the postmodernist at all. The postmodernist
is the guy who understands that many of our theories will fall short when
confronted by human behavior.
According to modern research in fields of psycho-neuro-endocrinology placebo effect is the major factor in healing. It reflects complex common bounds between receptors, neuropeptides, nervous system, and emotions that can't be separated. Hence, perception and emotions can't be separated. And they can't be separated from cognitive functions, even in double-triple-... blind-deaf-... tests.
Learning one ancient mystical school, I found that ancient mystics shared belief that all our knowledge is subjective, set of models that are "true" while they work, but no model can reflect the absolute reality completely.
Oh I wasn't speaking of psycho-the-rapists, I was describing the 'client centred' approach of Carl Rogers. He was certainly a successful therapist, not though a psycho. My trainer was though of the Freudian school and one reason I quit was I didn't fancy drinking the Freudian koolaid.
"Most productive" means more productive than which others? And how was productivity measured?
I see a different episodes Richard and you presented. Ok.
And how do you know Dan was not lying?? Did you see her upset, or was you told? (One tends to believe what one wishes to when it reinforces one's own beliefs. So it is just heresay?)
Just asking and making an observation.
Cheers.
Last edited:
You then misunderstood - its not a belief, its an observation and hence experience that its so. Back to ancient mystical school for you
One of the purposes of mysticism is to dispense with beliefs - as I was explaining to DF96 before he wimped out.- Status
- Not open for further replies.