Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Sound is NOT a subjective "Thing" ! .
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sound is NOT a subjective "Thing" ! . - Page 4

post #46 of 64

my opinion

 

nothing is subjective = things are the result of past-things

u like that formation of frequencies, because of some reason in the past.

post #47 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDreamthinker View Post

my opinion

 

nothing is subjective = things are the result of past-things

u like that formation of frequencies, because of some reason in the past.



That doesn't make sense my dear friend.

post #48 of 64

So I've spent some time reading through this particular thread and all the suppositions proposed.

 

I had a gut feeling this would turn out exactly as I had foreseen it. That is, a pointless debate.

 

Half of you guys/gals are just stating issues you know quite well cannot be agreed upon. It's

 

just encouraging other posters to come in here and nitpick/poke flaws at others' posts. From

 

what I can conclude, this whole thread is subjective in the first place. Personal

 

beliefs/philosophy shapes our ideologies anyways. As for the rest, it's getting more into the

 

theory of entanglement with something as mundane as cable testing being led into a

 

metaphysical debacle on existentialism/perception/religion. Sadly enough, most of you

 

hotheads have been using definite examples on relative subjects. It can be said you've missed

 

the whole point. Who are you really trying to convince? Why bother spending time on a forum

 

trying to dispel some stranger's notions that you normally wouldn't give a rat's ass about.

 

Unless in your subconscious you're really questioning yourself. So even if someone comes on

 

here stating sound is _ because resonance and patterns exist in even subatomic isospin

 

interactions. Or sensitivity dependance under intitial conditions is biased through and through.

 

etc. What does this really prove? Absolutely nothing! More brilliant people then said headfi

 

members have tried to simplify/quantify the truth by a grand unification theory and abysmally

 

failed. So please quit trolling this thread and close it before this really becomes a bloodbath.

 

And please keep in mind sometimes it takes an inkling of disbelief in order to fully place your

 

faith in something.

post #49 of 64

Quote:

Originally Posted by ib1dance View Post

Science is a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically.Thus science is  adequate at measuring and calculating the system of existence.

 

This system is founded on reoccuring pattens of mass/matter .

 

A few examples of "timed mass" are the earth's Orbit of the sun  every 365.256363 mean solar days and planet earth's rotation every 24 hours .

 

Every part of existence can be seen to have these attributes - Mass & timing .

 


The mass of a photon is what?

 

I've no idea where you got that idea.

post #50 of 64

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post

What does this really prove? Absolutely nothing!


This is especially true of post #48.

post #51 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDreamthinker View Post

my opinion

 

nothing is subjective = things are the result of past-things

u like that formation of frequencies, because of some reason in the past.



That doesn't make sense my dear friend.



there is a reason for everything, everything u do, hear, say, is has a origin.

The same with music.

U like a song because of your genes, friends, family, etc. 

All these factors play a role in an opinion, which u call your own.

 

 

I think this is supposed to be a philosophical discussion.

post #52 of 64
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
 

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDreamthinker View Post

lol

 

toothpaste = chemistry = science

 

big bang = physics = science

 

science and religion go hand in hand .....something turns from religion (believe) into science (proof).

science tries to find proof for belief.


 

Glad your having fun :-)

 

Though your replies do suggest you are only interpreting what I write with a narrow perspective .

 

I don't think anything = science .

 

"Science tries to find proof for belief" is a very unusual sentence . It's easy to focus your attention on "belief" . Though belief is a very variable thought process and is usually also extremely subject to conformity in human cultures .

 

"Science and religion go hand in hand " ????? A true  Scientific process should involve building on proved evidence & does not require followers or believers  . I could start a new Religion today and if I convinced enough followers to Believe in whatever I was Preaching it could become a acknowledge religion .

 

The very fact that there are so many religions or such diverse beliefs would logically explain that religion is merely man's own fabrication . It's method of hierarchy is often used to control and manipulate people.

 

Correct Science on the other hand no matter which part of the world it is from or whom is using it should be based on proved knowledge ( If only) .

 

Of course Religion tries over and over gain to discredit science has it proves many  "beliefs" to be simply not true .

 

And some "Theory" of science has fallen trap into building theory upon theory .

 

Though Religious people trying to group science in the label of just another religion shows a complete lack of awareness on the process of scientific understanding .

 

 Anyone  who disputes Evolution has simply not looked into the evidence clearly  .Some people will even dispute that they are made from flesh and bones. Instead they must use a imaginary image of "spirituality" which of course can not be proved nor disproved .You can only Disprove "Theory's" based on physical reality  . I presume they use some vague concept of there Bodies being built upon a Soul to deflect the image of a Mammal when they Glance in a Mirror .

 

Probably for the same reason why they choose or were taught religion in the first place .

 

 

 

So Science ,being a Objective based system that helps us understand ourselves and how we are part of nature.

 

Religion Being a entirely human Belief system that teachers parameters/laws in order to shape  morality's .

 

Though I do have to admit sometimes I do think "Sigh, wouldn't it be nice and simple if we lived on a world made my a God like creator whom liked humans and wanted them to be happy and live forever in a eternal kingdom.And all the terrible things that happen to human beings was just some weird test that this deity had created in order to....? test us. " . 

 

But TheDreamthinker  we can't live forever in our dreams . we live on a physical world where only physical actions make any difference  .

 

A thought or belief being no more than a passing thought unless it is put into some kind of action using physics, or the manipulation of matter, or moving your body  .

post #53 of 64

I think we should first figure out: Definition of  Religion (opinion)

                                               Defintion of  Science (opinion)

 

For ME science goes hand i hand with religion and vice versa (at least most of them should).

 

Are u an atheist, if i may ask?

You do sound a bit like one.

 

post #54 of 64
Im certainly done here. Once again this thread is completely off topic. And some people just can't seem to understand. @thedreamthinker watch what you ask... It's completely irrelevant and can be considered a situational bias. Apparently amounting to a personal attack by the moderator's definition. Friendly reminder.
post #55 of 64

But isn't it true that music evokes memories, thoughts, etc....   The music affects the person, so then do they listen different?

 

If music was science a noise then maybe we could use it to fall asleep like a white noise.  I think music moves people.

post #56 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post

Im certainly done here. Once again this thread is completely off topic. And some people just can't seem to understand. @thedreamthinker watch what you ask... It's completely irrelevant and can be considered a situational bias. Apparently amounting to a personal attack by the moderator's definition. Friendly reminder.


the question was simply to restart that dialogue.....and put it into an order/structure.

 

a question: why do u visit this thread, if u are of the opinion that THIS is a complete waste of time.

                 Just leave if u don't like it.

 

Friendly Remindertongue_smile.gif

 

 

 

@beachgeek: Why haven't i thought of it in that way? Songs sound different, because of the memories to link it with.

                     Your are right.....

  

 

post #57 of 64

This seems to have wondered out of the science part of sound science into philosophy. 

 

Fine with me, but I'm just saying.

post #58 of 64

We should open up a Philosophy-Fi thread.

 

Bur really why do people get so stressed so quickly, stay calm, drink tea (preferably Green Tea).

post #59 of 64

Sound is objective. The sound a person hears is also objective (even though it differs from individual to individual). The way a person reacts, feels, likes a particular sound is subjective. This isn't up for debate. Tonal accuracy is technically objective, though no one likes to admit it (and obviously there's differing opinions - but someone has to be wrong about this because accuracy IS accuracy). Of course, there's many types of accuracy, but anyway.

 

This is a nitpicking thread.

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDreamthinker View Post

We should open up a Philosophy-Fi thread.

 

Bur really why do people get so stressed so quickly, stay calm, drink tea (preferably Green Tea).



Try the cable forum.

post #60 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGreen View Post

Sound is objective. The sound a person hears is also objective (even though it differs from individual to individual). The way a person reacts, feels, likes a particular sound is subjective. This isn't up for debate. Tonal accuracy is technically objective, though no one likes to admit it (and obviously there's differing opinions - but someone has to be wrong about this because accuracy IS accuracy). Of course, there's many types of accuracy, but anyway.

 

This is a nitpicking thread.

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDreamthinker View Post

We should open up a Philosophy-Fi thread.

 

Bur really why do people get so stressed so quickly, stay calm, drink tea (preferably Green Tea).



Try the cable forum.


x2

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Sound is NOT a subjective "Thing" ! .