why do we argue?

Communication is essential to understanding, and arguments are just another form of communicating. The trick is to know when the person you are arguing with is sincere in his posits.

All the best,
Nonoise

Bryon is clearly a lawyer.

Lacee,

Appreciate this thread. Very thoughtful. Has in turn brought excellent responses.

Thank you all.

Best,

Dave

As should come as no surprise to anyone who knows me, I have a different perspective on arguments. I would like to share it, and hopefully you will forgive me if it sounds like an... well, like you-know-what.

1. Not all arguments are the same.

There is no answer to the question “Why do we argue?” because the number of reasons is literally infinite. Here’s a list of people with whom you might argue: your business partner, your wife, your insurance company, your mother, your neighbor, your neighbor’s kid, your own kid, your teacher, your student, your… You get the point. Arguments are as variable as the people who participate in them.

2. Not all arguments are destructive.

Two obvious examples are legal arguments and scientific arguments. Here is a list of court cases pivotal to Civil Rights in America. Every one of those cases was won or lost on the basis of an argument.

Scientists argue with each other all the time. In fact, their arguments are absolutely essential to the vitality, integrity, and progress of science. And science is one of the most culturally constructive forces in existence.

3. Not all arguments are argumentative.

Here’s what I said about this in another thread… "It may sound odd, but the great majority of the time, I don't intend arguments to be argumentative. Non-argumentative arguments are an effective way to explore an idea in depth, and I very much enjoy exploring ideas in depth, even when I turn out to be wrong. I'm aware that arguments, argumentative or not, put some people off, so I usually try to soften them with a dose of humility or humor."

As another poster said, we can disagree without being disagreeable. I have had many “arguments” like that on Audiogon.

4. Not all arguments are an exercise in vanity.

Admittedly, a great many are. But a considerable fraction of arguments are made for good reasons, like the ones for Civil Rights. And a considerable number of the people who made those arguments risked life and limb to do so. The same could be said for scientific arguments in the face of religious or political persecution, like the famous case of Galileo. Those were not exercises in vanity. They were exercises in integrity.

5. Not all arguments can be supplanted by turning the other cheek.

IME, turning the other cheek, while an admirable philosophy, can only accomplish so much. Turning the other cheek cannot exonerate innocent people in prison, it cannot debunk pseudo-science, it cannot uncover the people behind the criminally negligent behavior of the recent financial crisis. Turning the other cheek rarely even stops a bully on a playground.

IMO, while turning the other cheek is a great force for tolerance, it is not a great force for progress. So if you believe in the need for social, economical, or political change, you must also avail yourself of other methods.

6. People have the right to argue, especially in response to aggression or deception.

I am now referring to Audiogon. Many of Audiogon’s participants are kind, generous, honest people. But Audiogon sees its fair share of questionable characters… bullies, pedants, hucksters… the list is long. While I respect any members’ decision to avoid confrontations with these people, I believe they should respect my decision not to, particularly when the argument is in response to aggressive or deceptive behavior.

When conducted with thoughtfulness, sincerity, and good reason, arguments are not a thing to be shunned. They are a way of standing up for yourself, for other people, and for the things you believe in.

Like the argument I just made.

Bryon

Good one Tpreaves. Thats the same one I use on my kids. I don't recall anyone else ever using it but me. Someone must have, cause I heard it somewhere.

Just kidding.

What a load of *%$#!

I thought I was wrong once but, I was just mistaken.

Just like any group of people, with diverse perspectives, experience and objectives, you will get disagreements. How those disagreements are handled may reveal more about the person than the merit of whatever it is that they are arguing about. Today, for some reason, I thought about Enid Lumley. Remember her? She used to write a column for the Absolute Sound back in the 80's, i think it was, and some of her ideas at the time, seemed pretty wacky. (She was obsessed with AC polarity, a controversial issue, but not something that was completely crazy, and some of her ideas about tweaking had merit). (Sadly, she passed away a few years ago).
I've learned a hell of alot here, when I've asked questions about electrical issues, experience in component matching and sound, etc.
There is no doubt ego at work here for all of us- who doesn't think, after doing this, right or wrong, for however many years, that they know something?
But, i'm always learning, and always willing to contribute. And I think the majority of people here are well-intentioned, even when they are entirely misguided. :)

Drive on over to Cable Asylum and hint that cables and snake-oil belong in the same sentence, or that more money spent on cables is not a religious necessity and the moderator god threatens to ban you from the site. Disagreement (especially using science-based questions) with cable extremists and their subjective observations is an absolute NO-NO.

The 'Fuses that matter' thread's a pretty good example.

We of course do not need to argue about anything

Many people though do and rather enjoy it.

That is both a part of this forum and life in general and occasionally all to specific, especially when aimed at us.

Good post; good question.

I would make several points in response.

First, debates about seemingly implausible tweaks are generally not attempts to save the tweaker from him or herself, and sometimes (although perhaps all too infrequently) do not even question that the tweaker heard what he or she claims to have heard.

Most of us are here to talk about a subject of mutual interest, and to help each other chart courses of action that stand the greatest chance of maximizing the sonic returns we get on our investments of both time and money. Reports of benefits from various tweaks come from people having a wide range of backgrounds, experience, technical knowledge, thoroughness of approach, philosophical viewpoints, and intellects.

Also, it seems very clear that there are a huge number of subtle variables, both known and unknown, that can significantly affect the sonic presentation that is heard. Considering the complexity of it all, and the fact that many parts of a system require significant breakin, and that breakin or aging of parts of a system can be ongoing (with or without our knowledge) while unrelated changes are being assessed or breaking in, and that things like AC line voltages and noise conditions can change at any time, it can be very easy to attribute a perceived change to the wrong variable.

Also, if there is not a good technical understanding of how a controversial tweak works, it may be incorrectly assumed that the reported benefit has general applicability across different systems, when in fact the effect may the result of an interaction with the particular system, that would not occur in some or many other systems

Therefore, as I see it, while indeed many debates about controversial tweaks degenerate into pointless and unpleasant arguments, it does not mean that all or even most such debates are necessarily worthless, and it seems to me that without them one of the fundamental benefits of a forum such as this would be lost.

It is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

As I see it, it should be (and sometimes is) possible to have debates about controversial tweaks that:

(a)Do not turn ugly.
(b)Give the benefit of the doubt to those reporting a difference that their perceptions were correct.
(c)Explore whether or not unrecognized extraneous variables might have caused the difference to be attributed to the wrong thing.
(d)Explore possible theories of why the effect may be occurring, that would provide insight into the likelihood that the effect will be applicable to differing systems.

Regards,
-- Al

At the moment we have a thread with Disappointing Albums of 2012, and another something like Best Rock Album of 2012. There are several albums that appear on both lists. It doesn't seem to make sense that we could be as far apart on the technical stuff as we are on the artistic front but it sure seems that way. Most entertaining is the latest fuse upgrade "conversation". Even most supporters would admit the effects are not the most dramatic results of upgrades they have made but the thread itself has more life than most other recent ones.

Great thread, well said! ...win if you can lose if you must...but always cheat. It's all about a sense of humor.

Less emphasis on wisdom, more on experience.

To this day I can't understand why an enthusiastic post by someone with first hand knowledge of an upgrade has to be quizzed about his experience and provide "proof" of any kind.

In my case, whenever I post about something improving my system,it's just that, an observation of something that improved my system.

Then it's up to who ever is curious to check it out.

The act of which may or may not lead to the same conclusion that the OP posted.

People for the most part want to share positive experiences.
They don't spout the praises of things that can damage you or your gear.If they did I would understand the backlash.

So I just never could understand why some folks seem to find it their mission in life to bring rain down on the parade.

And almost always,those same individuals have no experience with the practise or device in question.

Somehow they have the "voodoo" that can spot the voodoo without even knowing much about what's going on.

Perhaps it's a jaded mind set.

Maybe they were burned years ago, and did buy snake oil.

It is out there, but to some folks it's the magic remedy and makes them happy.

What's the point in spoiling that?

If you've tried it and it didn't work in your system I would much rather hear about that then just a generalization like " I just know it can't make a difference".

I would think that all those who demand pure scientific evidence about upgrades in this hobby, should first take the empirical approach.
Do the experiment yourself and then draw your conclusion.

So am I trying to provoke an argument here?

That's not my intention.

I want less bickering and more appreciation for the folks who try things and are brave enough to come forward inspite of the attacks that will come their way.

Unwarranted and unjustified attacks, most often in packs of like minded folks on a mission to clean up the hobby rid us of snake oil and get back to the basics that "it's all about the music" and nothing else.

Well if you want just the music, then go see live events.
But even there you will be dealing with electronics and wires and who knows what kind of behind the scenes snake oil.

I've gotten to a point where I am very pleased with the fruits of my labour.My system sounds great, inspite of or because of the overpriced snake oil products and practises that I use.

Had I never been exposed to such, I doubt my system would sound so good.
Although I can't provide scientific proof thereof, I do have a number of friends who would back me up on my results.

I also have to thank the few audio mentors that helped me along the way.They weren't reluctant to share some of their findings and tips about improving my sound.
Positive, not negative re-inforcement.
If your ears like what you hear, then you're on the right track.
I can't find anything to argue about that.
This grasshopper learned much.

And the most important lesson I have learned in this journey is that exposure to as many different systems at all price points is a key to understanding what it takes to make you satisfied.

If you never know that there is better than good enough,you'll be like the person who only reads part way through a novel.
Never knowing how great the book is, because you've never gone far enough to find out.

I started in this hobby a long time ago,before it became fashionable to knock everything that costs more than what you can find at the pawn shop.

Back when audiophiles all had the same common denominator, the desire to improve the sound of the music they were listening to.

I would hazard a guess that the escalating cost of the gear created this divide.

But really, do we need to argue about the small cost upgrades that we can all afford?

My question would be more along the lines of why don't moderators simply stay out of it? I can understand not wanting vulgarity but beyond objectionable language, I say let the boys be boys!;)

Quotes about what matters

There is wisdom in there somewhere (I think).

Nice thread and an interesting read. Thanks

And we'd all be richer for it and buy tube equipment.