Gilmai
New Head-Fier
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Posts
- 21
- Likes
- 14
I thought the article was an interesting read, but my issue with it is along the lines of what Currawong alluded to. It is hard for me to appreciate the presented data as proof because I have verified neither the data nor the principals of science applied to obtain it. I must take both on faith. Unless I personally validate every principle applied with instruments I personally validate using principles and instruments I personally validate etc. and then personally apply those principles in the given test to obtain the data, I must take his word for it. The problem with science then is that it is far too complex for any given person to personally verify it all; consequently, science relies greatly on faith. This is especially true for those like me who study literature and such rather than physics and chemistry. This doesn't make science useless, but it does make it hard to use, and virtually impossibly so in regard to verifying truth claims.
Perhaps it’s just my existential bent, but this is why I more readily trust my experience. After all, subjective as it may be, it is no more so than the faith I might place in data on a graph or the reading of an instrument. In other words, if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and tastes like a duck, I am likely to call it a duck even if Dr. Genius Scientist publishes a study of its DNA that claims otherwise. It makes me think of Cypher's steak in The Matrix.
My practical application of this in the context of audiophile gear is meets. I am extremely new to this game and have been overwhelmed by the variety of claims made about all kinds of gear. I have absolutely no idea who is right. Therefore, I have determined to make every effort to attend some local meets in order to experience or not experiences the differences or lack thereof between gear for myself before I invest my money. Since for me this is a hedonistic hobby more than a cerebral one, if I enjoy what I hear, then the reasons or absolute lack of them be damned!
Perhaps it’s just my existential bent, but this is why I more readily trust my experience. After all, subjective as it may be, it is no more so than the faith I might place in data on a graph or the reading of an instrument. In other words, if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and tastes like a duck, I am likely to call it a duck even if Dr. Genius Scientist publishes a study of its DNA that claims otherwise. It makes me think of Cypher's steak in The Matrix.
My practical application of this in the context of audiophile gear is meets. I am extremely new to this game and have been overwhelmed by the variety of claims made about all kinds of gear. I have absolutely no idea who is right. Therefore, I have determined to make every effort to attend some local meets in order to experience or not experiences the differences or lack thereof between gear for myself before I invest my money. Since for me this is a hedonistic hobby more than a cerebral one, if I enjoy what I hear, then the reasons or absolute lack of them be damned!