What is the Silliest Accessory You Have Ever Seen.

@mahgister,

"But dont forget that all ordinary humans are mostly trustful...."


Apparently experiments from the first part of the last century have shown that some 20% of the population are highly suggestible.

These are the kind of folk a hypnotist will usually seek out to join them on stage for the entertainment of everyone else.

More disturbingly it seems to also indicate that at least 1 in 5 of us is constantly ready and willing to believe virtually anything we are told.

Especially  when it's by a person with some conferred authority.

Funnily enough there also seems to some 20% of folk who are not suggestible and unlikely to change their minds in any eventuality. I'm sure most of us have known the odd family member that was like that.

Of course I'd like to see myself as someone that's not so suggestible and only prepared to rely upon reason and data (ie in the middle group of 60%) but I know I'm not.

Not when it comes to audio (and certainly not when it comes to judging people but that's another story).

I've had my fair share of cognitive dissonance when it came to purchasing various bits and bobs over the years.

Every CD player that I bought was progressively more expensive and more worshipped by the audio press than its predecessor, and yet for some reason my mind recently has been going back to that cheap machine my friend borrowed me back in the late 90s when I was in-between decks.

I've WhatsApped him to see if he still has it - he might have as he's a bit of a hoarder.

If so I'd love to hear it again and compare it to my current player (Marantz CD6000ki) just to see how the two compare.

Everything tells me that the Marantz simply must be better and yet....I still remember, some 20 years later, of having being pleasantly surprised every time I'd put that machine on.

I seem to think it was an Aiwa (I hardly paid any attention to it at the time as I was then in the search for something far far better - or so I thought) but hopefully my friend will be able to find it and confirm it.

Apparently experiments from the first part of the last century have shown that some 20% of the population are highly suggestible.

This is an underestimation...

Most human more than half, are very suggestible, it is a characteristic of human being..Socialization of the entity in the herd ask for that...(for sure my estimation is anecdotal)

Hypnosis is not all there is about suggestibility and the way to assess it....Political gatherings illustrate very much the way the herd mentality, with his target scapegoats, the mass suggestibility are the rule...

Funnily enough there also seems to some 20% of folk who are not suggestible and unlikely to change their minds in any eventuality

And this phenomenon of a mind closed to suggestion and appearing unmoveable is also an illusion.... People in a cult, scientific one or religious one, are unmoveable and apparently non suggestible anymore...They seems non suggestible but it is an illusion that is created after a deep conditioning of their brain in the past....Often being the most conditioned they neede a deprogramming but they cannot be awaken without risk like the sleepwalkers....

Of course I’d like to see myself as someone that’s not so suggestible and only prepared to rely upon reason and data

Relying on reason and data is way more difficult than people think generally...

What is a data? What is reason?

When Goethe contradicted the metaphysical corpuscular and mathematical theory of colors and light of Newton , he was relying on concrete phenomena and reason... Newton has his own nore ambitious goal tough: a complete optic theory...Except Newton theory was abstract and not founded in the biological and natural phenemonomogy and physiology of the experience... Newton and Goethe were rational and the 2 vouch for datas....Goethe was without the mathematical conditioning of Newton... He foundeed the physiology of perception and another perspective about what is science...He was the Faraday of life phenomenon, but the Maxwell of biology never emerge after him, we gain Darwin a genius in his own way... it is only today that Goethe is vindicated after the death of some aspects of the Darwinian paradigm..... 😊


In audio like you, i was not rational at all.... I only wanted my Hi-Fi experience at all cost.... But without money... 😁 This is not rational, this is an obsessive dream...

I succeeded with a 500 bucks audio system to create a S.Q. on par or better than all i have known to this day....It is not the best, but so good that i dont give a damn about the best anymore...

I discovered in the last years of my audio journey that audiophiles are very suggestible group , not because they are insensitive to science facts like said the "scientism" of some engineer, but because they think that Hi-Fi experience is linked to PRICE and HYPE....

But the suggestibility of mass consumerism put blinders on the thinking brain, they chase their tail instead of learning HOW to listen not only music but sound and HOW to embed what they already own... Not knowing how to install their own system in his 3 working dimensions, they are frustrated and go on upgrading forever...

The engineer who create the design sells and market them like a perfect gear that we only have to connect to reach paradise... 😁

I know for sure that all that is half truth worst than a lie....Without embedding controls in their mechanical,electrical and acoustical dimensions, any Hi-Fi product work way under his S.Q. potential, unbeknownst to the customers who will wanted to upgrade sooner than later....


It is not data or reason that give me this experience and belief.... It was poverty and the impossibility to upgrade much....

My only 2 ressources was my listening ears and creativity.... Here creativity was better than reason and superior to it, and my listening ears way better than the so called given "data"....


My best to you and thanks for your patience with my lenghty post....

@mahgister, I am not disagreeing with your statements. Based on the current political situation I would estimate that at least 50% of the population is highly suggestible. But, on what basis are you making these statements, as a matter of experience and opinion or do you have a degree in sociology or psychology? 
Stop apologizing, your posts are always....lenghty. We are use to it.
Social Darwinism is a travesty, the evolution of a species is not.

mijostyn"Based on the current political situation I would estimate that at least 50% of the population is highly suggestible. But, on what basis are you making these statements, as a matter of experience and opinion or do you have a degree in sociology or psychology?

So you are saying the 50% of the population who disagrees with your political choice are "highly suggestible" but that you have somehow avoided falling "victim" to this suggestibility???

@mahgister, I am not disagreeing with your statements. Based on the current political situation I would estimate that at least 50% of the population is highly suggestible. But, on what basis are you making these statements, as a matter of experience and opinion or do you have a degree in sociology or psychology?

My post was an answer to a friend here :

Apparently experiments from the first part of the last century have shown that some 20% of the population are highly suggestible.

This is an underestimation...

Most human more than half, are very suggestible, it is a characteristic of human being..Socialization of the entity in the herd ask for that...(for sure my estimation is anecdotal)

Then this is"anecdotal"....In reality ALL humans are suggestible at children age, and  some only "waited" a variable amount of time to be programmed completely or to partially chose their program (scientism,religions, sects, political parties)Humans CANNOT live without answers that are most of the time not the truth at best and half truth at worst... 😁 Truth ask for a work about OURSELF....Not only about  nature or about number theory....

Truth is like freedom, nobody wanted it, save few great human spirits...It is a too heavy load on the back of each of us....

But, on what basis are you making these statements, as a matter of experience and opinion or do you have a degree in sociology or psychology?

Like in audio i did not have any competence at all in anything... My life job was counselling of students of all fields about reading in philosophy, linguistics, science, mathematics,poetry, psychology, even astrology and other studies😁...

The only think i learned to was chosing my books......These books were so interesting that it was not necessary to like reading to read them.... I was very good to move people to read books they dont like... For example i instructed mathematicians to read some specific poet for their specific character , and to poets to read about natural phenomena or number theory....😊I was very good to seeds enthusiasm and to make synthesis....

But i am totally incompetent....Like i am incompetent in audio, but i can learn by myself ....

All i say, all i can say, is my opinion....

Social Darwinism is a travesty, the evolution of a species is not.

Evolution is the central feature of biology for the last 2 centuries....But Evolution is not reducible to Darwin concepts, and is a way more complex concept than imagined by most....Proponent of intelligent design for example has mark some good points....

This article is an introduction to the Goethean concepts....They are clear but very, very deep....Dont be fooled by the simplicity of the description at first sight....One of the best books about Goethe vision in English had be written by a physicist who studied and worked with David Bohm, Henry Bortoft....

https://www.natureinstitute.org/article/craig-holdrege/goethe-and-the-evolution-of-science

Goethe is not understood easily..... He was the " holder of the largest private collection of minerals of his time in Europe—with almost 18,000 specimens" and many thousands plants specimens.....Dont think a minute that Goethe was a lazy poet....

It is very easy to miss his ideas even today ....They are too deep to be understood on the spot....Bortoft explain very well why and how... It take him 20 years to do so.... Then dont execute Goethe ideas with "scientism" in few minutes....It is like for audio phenomena , there is more than meet the eyes of anyone....
😊😊


My best to you.....