Can useful knowledge be gained via subjectivity?

[krabapple]

I hope this thread isn't responsible for your distaste? I made it clear in post #1 that it was aimed at a subject that more or less doomed it to become a dumpster fire. As in: Be cautious when entering, and prepare to take some flak.

I guess I want to know at this point what purpose this dumpster fire serves that isn't served by the other one, started by Amir a bit after yours:

Master Thread: “Objectivism versus Subjectivism” debate and is there a middle ground?​

 

[MattHooper]

It didn't actually have to be a dumpster fire.

There were plenty of earnest, good-faith attempts at grappling with the subject.

 

[Killingbeans]

I guess I want to know at this point what purpose this dumpster fire serves that isn't served by the other one, started by Amir a bit after yours:

Master Thread: “Objectivism versus Subjectivism” debate and is there a middle ground?​

I linked to it in post #250

I was never really sure about the purpose of this thread. Ultimately it was the same as Amir's thread. Rhetorical question?

 

[MattHooper]

Perhaps these subjects get posted here sometimes too because this part of the forum, being more active, tends to get more engagement in a topic. I wasn't even aware of the Master Thread on objectivism/subjectivism for a long time since I don't visit the newbie forum very often.

 

[ROOSKIE]

Yes. A lot of psychoacoustics is based on subject reports. Most of our most useful data finds its source there.

Plus, you have to learn a lot about acoustics, etc., to understand what you're hearing and the phenomena around you.

Like Krishnamurti said: "Clarity of perception is its own action."

out of curiosity what part of psychoacoustic is not based on subjective reporting?
I mean there is no other way right?

I think sometimes people forget the entire piece of meat of Harman's and Olive/Toole and others similar research is based on an accumulation of subjective experiences distilled into a format that allows for accurate prediction of typical user preference.
by the way I love,
Krishamurti.

“Every intelligent individual wants to know what makes him tick, and yet is at once fascinated and frustrated by the fact that oneself is the most difficult of all things to know.”

― Alan Watts

 

[pozz]

out of curiosity what part of psychoacoustic is not based on subjective reporting?
I mean there is no other way right?

Anatomical studies, including stuff that's mostly neuroscience, modelling (physical, mathematical, computational, electrical), philosophy of science (i.e., conceptual pieces about hearing in relation to phenomenology), and lots of other relations to other fields. The history of the subject is expansive rather than narrow. It'd be nice to have the time and means to write a history of the subject in relation to audio.

Edit: Typo.