In article , Chung
wrote:

wrote:
Steven Sullivan wrote:
wrote:

To clarify, I think that the perception of right-brain differences is
more obvious in a "beginner's mind" state, in which one hears something
for the first time. They are also more obvious in living with a
component.

And how would you go about proving these claims, in such a way as
to strongly rule out other explanations?


Well, this is where we will never agree, of course, but I don't feel a
need to *prove* these claims. This is because the need to prove, the
need itself, can lead one astray. Every listening test I've ever read
about, that attempted to establish something on an objective level,
seemed to be designed in ignorance of how subtle subjective experiences
operate.

Mike


This reminds me of a post I made on March 24, 2004:
***
Objectivist: Saying that the elephant can fly is an extraordinary claim.
Prove it.

Subjectivist: Proof? This is only an hobby. There is a problem with
objectively proving, because every time you really sit down, bring in
your cameras and recorders, and carefully observe an elephant, you can't
see it flying. The process of trying to catch it flying and that of
observing elephants in nature are two really different tasks. No one has
ever proven that anything could not fly this way.
***

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...5c9b8c?dmode=s
ource

Interesting. I see it more this way:
Subjectivist: On a certain recording through various audio systems, the
trumpets sound nothing like trumpets I've ever heard live.

Objectivist: There is no indication from my measuring devices that
indicate that those trumpets sound less like real trumpets, therefore
there is no proof of your statement, therefore your statement is false.