Take it on faith: A cease-and-desist letter to those who only believe in measurements


Faith is a firm belief in something for which there is no proof (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith). Faith is often considered to be distinct from and even contrary to science. I argue science is based on faith. Specifically, it is faith in the belief that measurements are always correct, and they alone can reveal the world around us. However, there is no evidence that this approach will always provide a correct and complete depiction of our environment.

I am not anti-science. In fact, I am all about science. I was a science major in college. I taught high school biology and chemistry. I employ science every day in my current career. I also use it to make decisions when it comes to audio, and I can point to a scientific basis behind my equipment decisions, speaker/listener locations and room treatment. I believe John Locke’s scientific method is a wonderful boon to mankind.  But although data may rule my life, I know that science has its limitations.

The scientific method is an empirical approach and relies on our eight senses or extensions thereof to measure phenomena, enabling us to better understand and control our environment. People who embrace this approach believe if something cannot be measured, it cannot exist. They have total faith in this approach and deny the credibility of others whose senses do not or cannot yield something in units. In essence, these disciples take it on faith that measurements are the only true way to make sense of the world. However, we just may not have developed the instrument that enables us to measure the event. Early digital is a good example of our senses superseding the limitations of our understanding of the technology and hence, our measurements. Other examples of this include our past beliefs that we could destroy mass, that the earth is flat, and the universe is not expanding. And cables and amplifiers all sound the same.

Others find their senses can reveal events that are not apparent to some and may not even be measurable. Some people can smell faint odors or feel a slight breeze that others cannot.  My wife can find a Petoskey stone on a beach out of thousands of rocks; I cannot see it even when I am standing over it. Different cables, fuses, amplifier topology, or cartridge design may or may not result in the same or even any data points and may or may not sound alike. But just because you cannot hear a difference nor measure a difference does not mean there is no difference. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, just as good sound may be in their ear.

Some of us have at least as much faith in our ears as we do in our REW software and associated hardware. I start room setup with acoustic theory and then confirm with measurements, but the final placement is always a result of what sounds most pleasing. I would not know how to determine speaker toe-in using a microphone.

While I will always have to trust my senses, I am not handicapped by relying solely on those that are associated with a number.

 “…not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.” William Bruce Cameron, 1963

tcutter

Perhaps, but without your clear explanation, most will miss the Goethe point.

Then thanks to you from Goethe, summoned from the dead by me ...

smiley

 

@mahgister+1

Goethe is way more eloquent and succinct than I. 

@tcutter 

I argue science is based on faith. 

That is a perverse argument. Science is based on evidence. Faith isn’t and has no place in discussions here.

I am not handicapped by relying solely on those that are associated with a number.

Neither is science. Data is not always quantitative and may often be qualitatitve.

 

I guess this would be a "straw man" argument?

"I argue science is based on faith. Specifically, it is faith in the belief that measurements are always correct, and they alone can reveal the world around us."

I consider this a mischaracterization of science.  Anyone who has studied the history of science knows the results of contemporary measurement capabilities are often not correct.

"People who embrace [the scientific method] believe if something cannot be measured, it cannot exist."

Do you really believe that people who use measurements think this way?  Scientists who use measurements are typically very aware of the limitations of their measuring devices and procedures.

I agree that measurements of audio equipment performance are inadequate for identifying what will sound "good."  But I appreciate measurements as a way to screen out equipment that I won’t like.

I generally agree with your conclusion- I am not an objectivist. I am, however, skeptical of the excuses we make to avoid blind testing, something routinely used in far more important endeavors than selecting audio gear. I understand that blind testing has its limitations, but without it conclusions are inherently suspect because expectation bias is a real thing. So, i’m firmly in the trust your ears camp. No help needed from the eyes. 
i have gear that i perceive as making a positive difference. Could that opinion be jaded by expectation bias? Of course it could. It’s not always feasible for consumers to set up properly conducted blind testing, but that wouldn’t necessarily be a problem for some of these vendors and manufacturers that make big claims. none of them seem to do it. I find that interesting.