Tech Square Technical and speculative discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Tech Square ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Drive by shooting

Posted by Thorsten (M) on August 6, 2003 at 17:03:38

In Reply to: Re: This forum posted by Steve Eddy on August 5, 2003 at 22:02:43:

Hi Folks,

Been a long time and I promise not to repeat offend....

> In the subjective realm, everything is relative.

Yup.

> Now, on objective issues, such as physics, measurement, actual
> audibility, DBTs, etc., I'm just as objectivist here as I am
> subjectivist in the subjective realm.

You mean THERE IS SUCH A THING as objectivity? Have you yet applied for the Nobel prize in Philosophy and have you (posthumously) informed (among others) Bishop Berkley, David Hume and Emmanuel Kant of your findings?

COME ON, for at least 300 Years we have had sufficient evidence which has yet to be disproven that the very concept of objectivity and objective observation is an oxymoron. Any observation (never mind interpretation) remains subjective, unless you admit the existence of reals supra-sensual and of higher order and you claim having ready access to these realms, from which you may with a reasonable degree of objectivity may observe subjective reality.

> In the objective realm,

Pigs fly, together with already plucked, coated in KFC crumbs and already fried fowls, straight into your mouth too. Or at least they may very well do so, for all we know about the "objective realm".

Certainly and with all due respect to you Steve, you have not even had the slightest sniff of OBJECTIVE REALITY. You merely insist upon that you particular brand of delusion is absolutely true, which is absolutely loblocks, as they on planet anagramia.

> There are only truths and untruths. No matters of opinion.
> Someting either is the way it is or it isn't.

Damn it. You finally have found Kant's "thing in itself". One wonders why you failed to make the rest of us miserable philosophers aware of this.

> And whether it is or it isn't, it applies to all of us.
> Ohm's Law is Ohm's Law. It applies to you, to me, to everyone
> else.

Except of course, when it don't.

> So the objective realm involves getting at the truth of a matter.

ROTFLMFAO.

OBJECTIVE, REALM, TRUTH - in one sentence.... I love it. Please, lie down before you really hurt yourself....

> And over the years we've developed a systematic way of
> getting at the truth. A set of rules if you will.

You mean you developed a set of criterias by which you can distinguish your particular brand of illusion from all others. ANd a consistent one at that. Great, well done. Why have we not been told of such a major achievement?

> Generally speaking, the scientific method, which involves certain
> standards of proof before something is accepted as being the truth.

You mean the methode which regulary violates Occams Razor and promotes the most preposterous theories as fact, as long as they are in agreement with the particular illusion promoted? I call that the pollitical method.

> Many of the problems that arise on forums such as this

Stem from the fact that some people are deluded enough by their ego to believe that they observe objective reality and cannot possibly agree that their position may be very relative and based on learned responses and interpretations, instead of FACT.

> Sorry, but that's just not how things work in the objective realm.

You are right. Where humans (or indeed any other non-omnicient intelligences) are involved NOTHING works in the objective realm, simply because it may or may not exist, there is no access to objective reality while relying on our subjective senses.

> The way I see it, if one isn't willing to have their objective
> claims held to the same standard of proof as all other objective
> claims,

Which means I may propose anything agreeable with that particular delusion, but nothing contradicting it..

> then don't make any objective claims in the first place.

Given that there is no objectivity as such, surely there are no objective claims?

> I still fail to understand why such a simple concept as
> this is so difficult for some to come to grips with.

Perhaps because it is completely, utterly and irreconcilably UNREALISTIC and SUBJECTIVE?

> If more people would, these forums would be much more
> productive and enjoyable for all.

I sincerely beg to differ. If we all strated to buy the chemically pure horse excrement you have been promoting so far, ANY productivity and progressability would cease.

Please consider "Nosce te ipsum"....

L.V.X. Thorsten

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---