You and I agree. I guess you are quoting me as representative of 'some people', but I do not agree with the interpretation you attribute to those words, so here I am. Irrational, passionate and un-scientific in no way equate with 'bad'. That seems to be what you are stating those words mean. No.
Thanks I don’t think we are far apart on this.
But to clarify my position:
I get the feeling you are using the term “irrational” where I would want to use the “arational” or “non-rational” (or in the appropriate case - “emotional”).
That’s because irrational tends to mean: “not based on, or not using, clear logical thought or reason
. It describes beliefs, actions, or decisions that go against logic, sound judgment, or evidence.”
Which is why people generally don’t want to be irrational.
That’s different from arational / nonrational in which a desire may not arise from a process of reason, but it doesn’t entail that it is unreasonable or irrational or against good judgement.
So I might prefer chocolate ice cream over vanilla in a way that I did not arrive at through a process of reason. Which is fine. There’s nothing irrational about liking chocolate ice cream. Whereas if I desire the taste of chocolate ice cream and I order vanilla expecting to have the same chocolate taste experience, that would be irrational.
Very often irrational is when you’re not acting coherently within your own sense of beliefs and desires.
You mentioned “un-scientific” which would go in the same category as arational - nothing inherently wrong about doing something un-scientifically - reasonable pragmatism demands it since, practically, we can’t subject our every belief and choice to scientific controls. Most of what we’re doing through the day is not scientific. But it’s often rational.
Which is all to say that, for instance, purchasing some chocolate ice cream because you love chocolate ice cream is not irrational - it is a rational act. “ I want X and Y action will fulfil that goal…” Same with purchasing speakers that you “ just happen to find yourself preferring” or whatever.
I own and enjoy some of the very snob gear the OP dislikes, and it sounds awesome in my home. However, it seems to me that the OP was looking for is something that was all together different. He seems to have wanted assurance from this community that economical purchases of audio equipment, 'that are just as good' as the expensive stuff, are rational, scientific, and - here is the important part- therefore they are somehow justified. I see this assumption here often. The +50% of the world's population living on less than $7/day would find that line of reasoning absurd, unless your DAC also kills mosquitoes.
OK, I believe I see where you’re going with that. But I would put it differently: you seem to be telling people here not to throw stones in glass houses because their audio pursuits are no more rational than the “snob’s” choices. “ both are irrational, and you are no more rational than the snob.” And also that people here are still stuck justifying prices that plenty of non audiophiles would see as unreasonable or obscene.
I would prefer to put it: both the pursuit of low cost high performance gear OR the pursuit of high cost high profile, even worse performing gear, can be rational.
So I think the approach of many in this forum IS well justified! For their own goals. Same for some of what the OP may think of as an audio snob.
Ask to your other point about comparing to the world’s poor…. On one hand, I can see that as a slightly irrelevant slippery slope argument were virtually no hobby can be justified. On the other… depending on the argument being made by a specific audiophile your point could apply.
Cheers
