Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The Objectivist Audio Forum
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Objectivist Audio Forum - Page 11

post #151 of 180
8/14/08 at 1:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbriant View Post
However, since the whole reason we're introducing the new forum is to allow subjective discussion to proceed without derailment and interuption, I hope everyone understands we do not expect to see every second post in the discussion being a link to the same counter-point thread or a specific rebuttle post.
The way to handle that would be to only post the cross link when you're creating a new parallel thread. From then on, all responses to posts in the original thread can just be posted to the new parallel thread. We can come up with some sort of format for doing that. It would help if there was an objectivist moderator willing to go in and tidy that sort of thing up.

As long as the people in the original thread don't object to their comments being discussed and dissected in another forum without their presence, we're OK. It's going to take considerable self control for them not to charge angrily into the objectivist forum every time they're contradicted and end up in the exact same place they're in now. To be honest, I'm not sure they're capable of that kind of restraint, but perhaps when they find out what happens when they're on an equal playing field with reasoned arguments, they'll stay clear.

See ya
Steve
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #152 of 180
8/14/08 at 1:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
As long as the people in the original thread don't object to their comments being discussed and dissected in another forum without their presence, we're OK. It's going to take considerable self control for them not to charge angrily into the objectivist forum every time they're contradicted and end up in the exact same place they're in now. To be honest, I'm not sure they're capable of that kind of restraint, but perhaps when they find out what happens when they're on an equal playing field with reasoned arguments, they'll stay clear.

See ya
Steve
They are posting on a public forum. All posts are fair game. If they are unaware, no harm to foul. If they become aware, they, like anyone else, must behave according the standard Head-fi expects. Decency, courtesy etc. If anyone charges in angrily and starts blasting away, they will receive a warning and if they continue a ban. It's as simple as that.
Reply
post #153 of 180
8/14/08 at 2:10pm
I guess I wasn't clear... My point isn't about posting outside the guidelines. It's about posting within the guidelines... The whole point of this division is to allow people to post subjective impressions without having to answer to people asking for proof. They're being protected from being contradicted. But if the the proof is just being demanded in a different forum, they're not really being protected... it's more just like a buffer. For me, I wouldn't like that at all. I prefer to engage in discussion face to face. I'd just end up participating in both discussions. I suspect a lot of subjectivists are going to end up doing that too.

See ya
Steve
Reply
post #154 of 180
8/14/08 at 2:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
I guess I wasn't clear... My point isn't about posting outside the guidelines. It's about posting within the guidelines... The whole point of this division is to allow people to post subjective impressions without having to answer to people asking for proof. They're being protected from being contradicted. But if the the proof is just being demanded in a different forum, they're not really being protected... it's more just like a buffer. For me, I wouldn't like that at all. I prefer to engage in discussion face to face. I'd just end up participating in both discussions. I suspect a lot of subjectivists are going to end up doing that too.

See ya
Steve
I assume they will as well. The problem historically has been that a subjective opinion regarding a cable would be posted, a zealous objectivist would chime in refuting any claims of sonic differences and possibly include or end with a snide remark about religion, snake oil, hocus pocus, low IQ, low wisdom etc., etc. We all know this adds nothing and it causes people to avoid posting impressions. There is no doubt that a good number of people believe there are sonic differences between cables for instance. This being a hobby site, they ought to feel free to post such opinions without being berated. This new forum isn't a platform for open insults, but it will contain certain themes, obviously objectivity being the paramount one. It allows people who are truly searching for an answer to discuss whether this is possible, how it might be possible to determine and whether there have been studies for or against etc. It also leaves the other forum to its own themes, namely discussing the sonic differences between amps, front-ends, cables, tweaks etc.

It may not be the ideal structure, but given the past, not just on this forum but all audio forums, it is the one we feel will work out the best.
Reply
post #155 of 180
8/14/08 at 3:33pm
This thread has been interesting.

I like the way things are being handled...not only can subjectivists discuss their opinions without repeated empirical questioning, but objectivists may find that their discussion quality improves also. The objectivist forum is more likely to have people involved who want to discuss whether there are differences, instead of being dragged into doing so.
Reply
post #156 of 180
8/14/08 at 3:43pm
This has been a great discussion to read.

I'm looking forward to the new forum, even if it isn't ideal and even if it uses the word "objectivist" which I think is the wrong term to use.

I've stated this in other threads before, but "objectivism" versus "subjectivism" suggests that one is against the other when in reality the two are entirely different ideas that can't be contrasted. It's the difference between the statements "Perlman on violin sounds better than AC/DC on guitar" versus "Perlman and AC/DC can both play an E#."

Rationalists and empiricists both make up the "objectivist" camp, yet I think the better term for the group is "rationalist" (not because "subjectivists" aren't rational, that would be mistaking the meaning) but because the former believe in the primacy of reason/analysis while the latter believe more strongly in pure perception.

Although I support blind testing, and don't believe in most audio tweaks or cables, I'm fervently not an objectivist. I believe that the subject (our perception) is the limit of understanding the world. A cup only exists in so much as I use it to drink. But that is a totally different idea than claiming things exist merely because I perceive them.

--Chris
Reply
post #157 of 180
8/14/08 at 4:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zanth View Post
I assume they will as well. The problem historically has been that a subjective opinion regarding a cable would be posted, a zealous objectivist would chime in refuting any claims of sonic differences and possibly include or end with a snide remark about religion, snake oil, hocus pocus, low IQ, low wisdom etc., etc.
There is a big difference between saying "your opinion sucks" and "you're stupid". The first one is totally pertinent to the discussion, and would be followed up with a logical argument backing up the blunt statement. The second is a logical fallacy- an ad hominem attack against the person instead of addressing the argument.

A person can say "your opinion sucks" bluntly, or politely- it really doesn't matter. They're saying the same thing with just a different sort of tone. If the problem here is tone, a division of groups isn't going to solve the problem at all. All sides are guilty of being blunt in their replies. The internet is chock full of bluntness.

As Madge used to say about Palmolive, "You're soakin' in it!"

See ya
Steve
Reply
post #158 of 180
8/14/08 at 4:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hempcamp View Post
I've stated this in other threads before, but "objectivism" versus "subjectivism" suggests that one is against the other when in reality the two are entirely different ideas that can't be contrasted.
I agree. They're both important. Perhaps the new forum would be better defined as strictly following the rules of logic and fair debate. Obviously, limiting the discussion of scientific testing doesn't fall into that definition.

See ya
Steve
Reply
post #159 of 180
8/14/08 at 4:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
There is a big difference between saying "your opinion sucks" and "you're stupid". The first one is totally pertinent to the discussion, and would be followed up with a logical argument backing up the blunt statement. The second is a logical fallacy- an ad hominem attack against the person instead of addressing the argument.

A person can say "your opinion sucks" bluntly, or politely- it really doesn't matter. They're saying the same thing with just a different sort of tone. If the problem here is tone, a division of groups isn't going to solve the problem at all. All sides are guilty of being blunt in their replies. The internet is chock full of bluntness.

As Madge used to say about Palmolive, "You're soakin' in it!"

See ya
Steve
Right, I didn't indicate any differently than you. Everything I listed is nothing but an ad hominem, which we as we agree, adds nothing positive to the discussion and will result in a warning or a ban. The entire point of the forum is specifically the "your opinion sucks" or more diplomatically "I don't agree with you, and here is why..."

The advantage ideally, will be that people who feel they know something is or isn't will provide some serious reading for those that want to learn or think about something new. Again, as hobbiest, generally, one wants to know as much about the hobby as possible.
Reply
post #160 of 180
8/14/08 at 4:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zanth View Post
Again, as hobbiest, generally, one wants to know as much about the hobby as possible.
I cannot help but believe that most here feel the same way. I can do my own little tests at home with cables and braids and whatnot but how interesting it would be to take our hobby to the next level with a dedicated thread for discussion, comparison and measurement.
Reply
post #161 of 180
8/14/08 at 6:43pm
Quote:
As long as the people in the original thread don't object to their comments being discussed and dissected in another forum without their presence, we're OK. It's going to take considerable self control for them not to charge angrily into the objectivist forum every time they're contradicted and end up in the exact same place they're in now. To be honest, I'm not sure they're capable of that kind of restraint, but perhaps when they find out what happens when they're on an equal playing field with reasoned arguments, they'll stay clear.
IMO, most of the anger coming from the subjectivist side has been caused by the frustration of having their discussions regularly sidetracked. This won't be an issue under the new arrangement. Again however, we will expect civility and respect from both sides. Ridiculing, insulting, taunting, etc., even from a distance in a separate forum, will not be allowed.
Reply
post #162 of 180
8/15/08 at 2:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
As long as the people in the original thread don't object to their comments being discussed and dissected in another forum without their presence, we're OK. It's going to take considerable self control for them not to charge angrily into the objectivist forum every time they're contradicted.
i don't see that happening (ever).

the people who are more inclined toward a subjective/impressionist view won't care what the "objective" people think or say about their comments or if their comments and posts are evaluated "scientifically." that's the whole point. that kind of discussion doesn't interest them (or at least much). they will be more than happy to see that type of discussion elsewhere - i.e., out of their thread.

i think this new forum is interesting, but i'm not so sure how well it's going to work in practice. i see it working reasonably well to keep impression driven threads on topic - esp in the cable forum, which is the genesis of its creation - but as a workable forum in its own right, that remains to be seen.
Reply
post #163 of 180
8/15/08 at 1:54pm
Well, since I posted that, the concept of the forum seems to have changed. It looks like the division is types of discussion (general theoretical/specific practical) rather than types of opinion (subjective/objective). It looks like the cable forum will end up being pretty much the same, with just the drifting semi-off topic discussions of testing procedures moved elsewhere.

See ya
Steve
Reply
post #164 of 180
8/15/08 at 2:04pm
What do you think subjective and objective opinions are based on?
Reply
post #165 of 180
8/15/08 at 2:25pm
Hopefully, research and experience, I guess.

See ya
Steve
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › The Objectivist Audio Forum