Robert Morein wrote:

Thank you for your comment. It is natural for the various
denizens of
r.a.o. to characterize them as the "true humans". Tribes
have been
doing this for thousands of years. "Us" vs. "them."

In reality, the Middius clique has a near-total monopoly on
characterising themselves as being the true humans, and
their opponents as either subhumans or alien superhumans. It
would take a compleat idiot to miss this fact. You know
Morien its ever so clear why you got blown off from two
different PhD programs - you lack even a vestigial ability
to think critically and accurately.

Those who claim to be objectivists put forth facts, and
they
frequently have their pants pulled down.

That would be yet another gross mistake on your part,
Morein. I've always characterized myself as being a
scientific subjectivist, an informed subjectivist or a
reliable subjectivist. I guess my opening comments on the
HE2005 debate recording passed completely over your head.

Those who claim to be subjectivists put forth "facts", but
there is a
difference.

You've just contradicted what you said yesterday about
subjectivists wanting to share opinions, Morein. I guess I
did too good of a job of deconstructing you yesterday, so
today you have changed your story around 180 degrees. So
much for any of your pretenses of intellectual honesty.

The subjectivists don't claim that their observations or
feelings are universally applicable.

That's why subjectivists like Morein never say things like
all QSC amplifiers suck. ;-)

It is the nature of the
subjectivist to make the comment relevant to himself.

If its only relevant to you, why bother sharing it with
anybody else? Why suggest that it might be the basis for a
buying recommendation for someone else?

If not expressed, this is implied.

Well in fact that's the nature of subjectivism at the
extreme - it relates to just one person.

This is why, though I personally believe
there are some objective truths to be found in audio, I do
not
believe the self proclaimed "objectivists" are the best
custodians of
objective truth.

This would be due to the fact that they tend to disagree
with you Morien. The disagreement has a lot to do with how
error-prone your claims are, such as your claim that all QSC
amps sound bad because they all have variable power
supplies. This is of course verifiable, and the facts say
otherwise. Nevertheless, you've never admitted that you made
this gross error, did you Morein?

For to claim to be objective requires a very high
standard of scientific scrutiny, which can only be
accomplished by a
dispassionate nature, not by someone who claims half a
dozen people
are trying to "destroy" him.

Again Morien you completely missed the point. My sales pitch
has always been listen for yourself and reach whatever
conclusion you wish to reach. Hence the existence of
www.pcabx.com which is completely based on people listening
for themselves. I guess that just like you missed that I
have a BSE and served in the Army, you also missed that my
www.pcabx.com web site is about people listening and
reaching their own conclusions based on just listening.

I understand that you are outraged at what you consider
flagrant
disregard by the subjectivists for "scientific truth".
However, even
in classical physics, new surprises come to light. Here
are two
examples:


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0524225845.htm

This is all fine and dandy, but what does it have to do with
the fact that Morien still holds fast to outdated sighted
evaluations like a security blanket?


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0403072949.htm

This is also all fine and dandy, but what does it have to do
with the fact that Morien still holds fast to outdated
sighted evaluations like a security blanket?

I see here yet another Harry Lavo-like confusion between
audio and rocket science. Does anybody think that we would
have successfully sent men to the moon if we held closely to
Stereophile/TAS/Monster Cable-type faith-based technology?

One need not take the position that all kinds of magical,
unknown
things happen to audio signals.

See Moren's more direct faith-based comments on the "Monster
Cable alternatives" thread.

However, there is the well known
occurence called the "second order effect", which results
when a
practical engineering approximation deletes a term later
found to be
important.

Problem is, we understand cables through the tertiary or
quaternary level of effects, or more.

No extreme revolution in thinking is required to
accomodate such occurences. All one has to do is have an
open mind.

Trouble is, Morein's idea of being open-minded corresponds
to a practical understanding of holes in the head.

I understand that to you, the subjectivists appear to
distain the
"scientific tradition", which is perhaps something you
think should be
revered.

It would neat to find a so-called subjectivist that
understands science well.

There really isn't anything the objectivist can, or should,
do about this. The important thing for objectivists is to
keep their
own house in order, which means to behave like scientists.
Listen,
and be open-minded for the unexpected.

This would contrast with the Morien of just yesterday who
wanted me to stop talking about reliable listening tests.

All science begins with an observation, or anecdote.

There are big differences between observations and
anecdotes, but why should I expect a self-admitted 2-time
academic failure like Morien to know a simple thing like
this?

snip remaining blather