In Reply to: Re: Ha Ha Ha posted by geoffkait on June 17, 2005 at 08:55:11:
Often, you seem like a reasonable guy. But I'd like to see/hear/read you acknowledge something I think is pretty obvious; otherwise I might change my mind about that: that listening isn't necessarily "the test," because our ears/mind can deceive us. Hearing is fallible. Don't you agree? It's pretty obvious I think.As one trained in experimental science, I've got great response for empiricism. But people get it wrong even when it's quantitative, even when rigorous methods are employed. And you must admit that in this case the methods aren't especially rigorous, at least in most cases.
Clearly you think the chip works; that's a different issue. What I'm questioning is your claim that listening is THE TEST. It isn't. Listening is fallible. Wouldn't you agree?
Jim Austin
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Hey Geoff... - Jim Austin 12:07:51 06/17/05 (8)
- Re: Jim, it's a Catch-22... - geoffkait 13:02:00 06/17/05 (3)
- Works both ways I guess... - Jim Austin 13:29:48 06/17/05 (2)
- Re: I see your point... - geoffkait 06:10:58 06/18/05 (1)
- I haven't seen this assertion either... - Wellfed 08:18:10 06/19/05 (0)
- It's like the emperor's new clothes - Blues_man 13:13:00 06/17/05 (3)
- Re: It's like the emperor's new clothes - Par Time Punk 13:44:04 06/17/05 (2)
- I will continue to enjoy the REALITY of improved performance nonetheless... - Wellfed 17:13:16 06/17/05 (1)
- land of nod - Par Time Punk 23:57:11 06/17/05 (0)