|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.116.186.171
In Reply to: Proof? Who needs that? We'll just believe it because it sounds good (NT) posted by tunenut on March 23, 2007 at 12:24:16:
'Sounds good' being all the 'proof' I need.
Follow Ups:
d
I'll take sound great and measures ok over sounds ok and measures great everyday...Thetubeguy1954
"If you thought that science was certain - well, that is just an error on your part.” Richard Feynman theoretical physicist, 1918-1988
and I have no problem with anything anyone believes...but people believe many strange things. I like some sort of proof. But people can argue a lot about the nature of what constitutes proof as well. I tend to go with the traditional scientific notion of independently repeatable test results.
...is at the crux of the turmoil we experience around here on an all too regular basis. Your 'live and let live' attitude is the only solution that I'm able to see.
I believe you have hit the crux of the problem. We all have various levels of proof that we accept. For example, I take a multivitamin every day. I have no proof at all that it actually helps me, sometimes I think it does. And that's enough to justify the cost for me.When it comes to hobbies and personal enjoyment, I don't think there is a real necessity for rigorous proof. If I move my speakers to a location that sounds better to my ears, that's proof enough.
On the other hand, when a product is offered for sale, I generally demand more than testimonial evidence of its efficacy. The TV channels are awash with infomercials where supposedly normal people attest to the efficacy of a stock trading scheme or a hair growing pill or something else. I don't trust "it works" as proof enough.
At least not from someone unknown. If someone I trust says "it works", that's different.
As far as scientific theories, those are made to be proven, not to be accepted on faith. For a non-audio example, consider string theory. It is elegant, but completely untestable. Nobody has thought of any way to verify it experimentally so far. Without such verification, scientists do not accept it on faith. Some scientists do not even consider this science at all, since nobody can think of a way to test it- there have been a couple recent books on this subject. For anyone to really believe this kind of theory, it will require real experimental proof.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: