Article: Guest Editorial: Why did audio stop being about audio?

[DuckToller]

Dear Joel,
Audio and Religion, can you compare the antagonism of Religious and Agnostic (science?) with Subjectivists and Objectivists?
I think not, here is why:

I feel that the discussion about Religion has far more dimensions in its fabric than science does know as of today.
It has a dark history of power, mobster mentality, betrayal, domination, influence, revenge, racism and genocide, just to name a view and a pleasant reality of forgiveness, self-empowerment, solidarity, love, determination, education and hope on the other side of the balance. Nearly everyone has been touched by presence or absence of Religion in one way or another, and it may have been different for any two person in a room.
The reality is, the administrators of Religion are still in the game for power, influence and money, and the name of God is used in so many different languages and Religions to punish the agnostics or the ones to be dominated/repressed due to ethnicity, skin color, gender or sexual orientation, that it (imho) cannot be held as antithesis of science or be compared with dualism of objective/subjective. Belief, maybe, Religion not.
I respect everyone who has profited personally from his/her beliefs to any kind of Religion, as long as they accept that Religion with its peculiarity in society is a monster in need to be tamed (for most), as the benefits have never been globally or socially evenly distributed, but offered gains only for individuals or for some hierarchical structured organizations like churches. And that his/her experience are personal and may be different for me and others. That is what I call tolerance.
I am personally convinced (I believe) that science relies on some fundamental principles that are valid for (almost) everyone. And as a person, I may have the right to subjectively dislike that or feel different, which just doesn't make me immune to the existence of gravity when I am standing on a mountain top ...

Where I totally agree with you Joel, is that even I know that I am correct in a "scientific" way, I need to acknowledge that my opponent does not criticize me personally because he has a different way of regarding/hearing the things (under which bias ever). This works in the other direction as well. So far for the communication I'd wish for in our forums.
In recent times we undoubtedly are in need to grow more skin to resist the impact of often unfounded critic that targets us only for just having found a target.

I see as well that we are acting members of a changing industry, where investment interest often play an important role, which to a certain extent impacts the behavior of company representatives and their strategic decisions concerning their products. May it be half baked products, fake marketing promises and quality issues packed in nice promises about an update that never arrives.

With the distribution channels changing from the decried old and personal HiFi shop experience, places we visited to talk with other enthusiasts and experts, towards online marketplaces and big electronic stores with just the same range of goods in every other city, be it Pacific or Atlantic division, the marketing activities have changed their character and faces.

Imagine you have received a bad product and the company behind starts playing the game improperly, decries unfair treatment, bad testing scenarios or let you feel its industry related power if you want to publish a less than mediocre experience about one of their products, then you know that this is a hobby, where lots of people hold different kind of stakes in. And a serious business. We usually say then, we pay with our customer satisfaction and vote with our wallets, though it might cost us a bit more than we wish for - especially in the high end sector.
Even this picture is not really a desirable development, it is far away from the mobster mentality of the Religion business.

Stay tuned, Tom

[DuckToller]

11 minutes ago, wgscott said:

As someone else mentioned, it sure beats TV.

Hey,  Liverpool is playing now ... that is real Religion live on TV
Cheers, Tom

[DuckToller]

One a more serious note,

this discussion shows in a special way why the supporter of "objectivism" and scientific approach are thinnly skinned when they feel further pushed away from the silver bullet to be just another option of opinion, maybe to be respected, maybe not - but definately to be critisized for their unfriendly bad manners in responding. Such is society in 2020.
I feel that respecting some rules of good communication may include sometimes to reflect our own beliefs as beliefs and facts as facts.
You don't need to like facts but there is no need to shoot messengers, and nowadays there is no need to burn witches for their beliefs.
It is sure an important discussion, thanks to Joel, Chris and most of the others, though we need to acknowledge that reacting repeatedly extremely calm not generally defends well again snarky sarcasm. And it feels weak, somehow.
OTOH, responding only calm to a cold push from the throne build on the fundamentals of science doesn't generate you another throne. Maybe the picture does not work well for some, it is about understanding the opposite opinion in a community and live with it rather than destroy it for our own rightfulness. I had the top of a mountain already as a picture, another picture is that you will build & plunge only once a submarine only on beliefs (in case you can get it down to 3000 feet).
The personal comfort zone of beliefs just ends where the facts kick in.
The scientist may accept people's belief and may try to establish rules of thumbs on his knowledge about it. In my ideal community beliefs and science can co-exits, based on accepting that the fabric of understanding the world has its home on the side of facts. Without that a split by incompatibility approaches.

another 5 cents  ... Tom

[DuckToller]

4 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

what brand of video cable are you using?

Amazon basics for HDMI, but Liverpool uses WiFi and Miracast to be adored in a immortal and dematerialized sense ...

[DuckToller]

55 minutes ago, tmtomh said:

But it must be noted that one of the major differences we appear to have is over your claim that "scientific approach" is "just another option of opinion." That stretches the meaning of the word "opinion" to the point where the term becomes meaningless, and obscures important differences between different kinds of claims and knowledge.

Hi Tom,

thank you for reading and responding to my posting.
Pls excuse my language skills, it's obviouisly not my mother tongue and not only once Chris was completely puzzled about my phrasing 😉
... I feel the need to correctly adress the point ...

" why the supporter of "objectivism" and scientific approach are thinnly skinned when they feel further pushed away from the silver bullet to be just another option of opinion,"

This was not at all meant as personal opinion, but as an example how science is pushed aside in modern times (in my perception), which allows me to think of it as a more than understandbale reason for being thinnly skinned as a proponent of science.
I feel, when facts are announced to be just "another opinion" (i.e. in politics or public disscussions) we lose ad-hoc the quality of discurs, and the meaning of a factual world (for which I used the pictures of the mountain top and the submarine) is de-valued by (bad) intent.
That is utterly wrong in my opinion, but obviously an accepted discussion technique for "winners" about which I need to prepare my teenage son (to analyse and how to defend), because it has found its entrée in everyday life ...

 

you wrote:
"That's why confirmation bias, humans' poor auditory memory of fine details, and other subjective factors come into play - not because objectivists think subjectivists are idiots or because objectivists cannot tolerate different views, but rather because those factors rise in probability when no other possible factors are apparent. "
+1 for that
 

"In my ideal community beliefs and science can co-exits, based on accepting that the fabric of understanding the world has its home on the side of facts."

Best, Tom