Blind tests, science, etc.

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
Prune

Prune

Disabled Account
Joined 2003
First I should like to point out that I would have posted this in the Off Topic forum, but the system would not let me for whatever reason, saying I'm not allowed to access the page after I tried to start a new thread. Yet I felt compelled enough to post this, despite the risk of embarassment (and deletion) by a misunderstanding and overzealous moderator. I do however welcome a moderator moving the thread to the Off Topic forum.

Now, rather than reinvent the wheel by presenting an argument of my own, I quote a more eloquent source, one W. K. Clifford, a mathematician and philosopher, who in 1879 wrote an essay named The Ethics of Belief (those interested should be able to find it online; that is where I'm quoting from). To the reader unable to see what the point is and what relevance this has to the issue of blind testing in audio, I suggest ignoring this post.

In the two supposed cases which have been considered, it has been judged wrong to believe on insufficient evidence, or to nourish belief by suppressing doubts and avoiding investigation. The reason of this judgment is not far to seek: it is that in both these cases the belief held by one man was of great importance to other men. But forasmuch as no belief held by one man, however seemingly trivial the belief, and however obscure the believer, is ever actually insignificant or without its effect on the fate of mankind, we have no choice but to extend our judgment to all cases of belief whatever.
...
We all suffer severely enough from the maintenance and support of false beliefs and the fatally wrong actions which they lead to, and the evil born when one such belief is entertained is great and wide. But a greater and wider evil arises when the credulous character is maintained and supported, when a habit of believing for unworthy reasons is fostered and made permanent. If I steal money from any person, there may be no harm done from the mere transfer of possession; he may not feel the loss, or it may prevent him from using the money badly. But I cannot help doing this great wrong towards Man, that I make myself dishonest. What hurts society is not that it should lose its property, but that it should become a den of thieves, for then it must cease to be society. This is why we ought not to do evil, that good may come; for at any rate this great evil has come, that we have done evil and are made wicked thereby. In like manner, if I let myself believe anything on insufficient evidence, there may be no great harm done by the mere belief; it may be true after all, or I may never have occasion to exhibit it in outward acts. But I cannot help doing this great wrong towards Man, that I make myself credulous. The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things, though that is great enough; but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them; for then it must sink back into savagery.
The harm which is done by credulity in a man is not confined to the fostering of a credulous character in others, and consequent support of false beliefs. Habitual want of care about what I believe leads to habitual want of care in others about the truth of what is told to me. Men speak the truth of one another when each reveres the truth in his own mind and in the other's mind; but how shall my friend revere the truth in my mind when I myself am careless about it, when I believe thing because I want to believe them, and because they are comforting and pleasant?...It may matter little to me, in my cloud-castle of sweet illusions and darling lies; but it matters much to Man that I have made my neighbours ready to deceive.
...
To sum up: it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.
If a man, holding a belief which he was taught in childhood or persuaded of afterwards, keeps down and pushes away any doubts which arise about it in his mind, purposely avoids the reading of books and the company of men that call into question or discuss it, and regards as impious those questions which cannot easily be asked without disturbing it--the life of that man is one long sin against mankind.
Click to expand...
 
K

KBK

Member
Joined 2003
The logic in that quote is fine and all... but only within reason.

Without venturing into the darkness..we have complete stangation and lack of newness or innovation and change.

Balance is the key.

I find the quote having quite a religious nature to it....and not suitable for all situations.

I find it slightly self affected and nearly spurious in nature.

If we lived by much of that quote we'd still be banging rocks together.

All things that have ever been new.. have at first been seen as 'evil'

And here, in this venue.. there is -no- place for words like 'evil'. Logic and religion don't mix.

It is still a good quote but ....BALANCE is key. And the quote comes down way to hard on the side of 'proof'... for who decides what proof is? Does society? Do the masses? And then... is that even -remotely- correct?

Read by the wrong people, that quote on it's own... is practically a flag asking to be waved, and that ain't right.
 
Prune

Prune

Disabled Account
Joined 2003
Good counterpoint. Of course, this kind of writing most appeals to those that already agree with it, but won't convert anyone else.
Kind of like Bill O'Reilly...but let's not go there... :yuck:

Now, what I find strange is that before when I tried to reply to this thread, the damn system wouldn't let me, saying I had no access or something like that. WTF? And now it works. :confused: :scratch:
 
wintermute

wintermute

Just another Moderator
Joined 2003
Paid Member
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom