2. I don't think my opinions contradict facts/science.
[2a] Science doesn't say who to respect.
[2b] Science tells us how we hear and I am trying to apply that to headphone listening.
4a. I only know what I perceive. That's what matter. So much for flawed reasoning.
4c. My reasoning contradicts science because it agrees with science? What?
[4c1] I know very well I can't trust my perception, but I can trust my reason.
[4c2] You think I am some kind of idiot who hasn't thought about crossfeed for one second?
2. It’s clear you think that, it’s also clear (to everyone except you) why and how you think that. Namely, by ignoring/dismissing those parts of science/the facts that you’re contradicting, perfect circular reasoning!! How many times?
2a. Correct, science doesn’t tell us who to respect, common sense does! Again, if I buy an album by say Bjork, whose artistic intents/preferences do I want to hear, mine, Mozart’s, Bjork’s or yours? Duh, your argument is ridiculous!
2b. Science does tell us how we hear (broadly speaking) but YOU ARE NOT applying that to headphone listening! Even by YOUR OWN admission you are only applying certain bits of science, which ISN’T science, it’s pseudoscience. Furthermore, the science you don’t apply/account for, you dismiss on the basis that you don’t/can’t perceive the negative effects. This contradicts science because they do exist, we can measure them and science demonstrates they are audible. So STOP saying science supports your opinions because it does the opposite!
4a. So much flawed reasoning indeed! Your perception is what matters to you BUT it doesn’t matter to me or to science!! Excellent example of flawed reasoning, thanks for demonstrating!!
4c. Your reasoning contradicts science because although it agrees with certain parts of science, it dismisses and contradicts the demonstrated science that perception/preferences will vary from person to person! How many times???
4c1. Which is an OBVIOUS FALLACY because you are basing your reasoning on perception you admit you “can’t trust”, duh!
4c2. No, I think you’re “some kind of idiot” for basing your reasoning on only part of the facts, ignoring and contradicting others and then trying to ram your fallacies down everyone’s throat, in a science forum of all places!!!
The rest of you post is just more of the same ridiculous nonsense, self contradictions and ego massaging. Round and round you go, bla bla bla!
G