Opinions - The Absolute Sound

Mrtennis, I am sorry I upset your sensibilities; sensibilities seemingly rooted in political correctness. Beyond that, I offer no apology for what I wrote. Moreover, I believe you could not be more mistaken in your characterization of what I wrote, or the issue at hand; certainly, as concerns the issue of logic, or it's absence. And yes, even mathematics, or it's absence; issues that you raise in your own disagreeable comment about what I wrote. Why don't we start by practicing what we preach?

On the issue of disagreeability: Kindly explain to me how making an arguably disagreeable comment in response to someone else's, likewise, disagreeable comment about a publication's worth is more deserving of your scrutiny and lecturing than the original offense. Particularly when the publication in question is one which has been, faults aside, unquestionably influential in a positive way. (And yes, IMO anyone who refuses to acknowledge this is a curmudgeon with his head in the sand). Notice that I said IMO; just as I did when I made my original comments. Comments that you found so troublesome.

So, the basis of your argument is that the views which I "attacked" are opinions, and thus not provable. I made it clear that my comments are my opinion. So, what exactly is the problem? Additionally, my comments were an attempt to encourage someone with no knowledge about this publication to explore what it has to offer; a positive endeavor, I think. More positive than the unfounded, knee-jerk negativity expressed by many. That, to me, is logic of the highest order.

Now, on to the subject of mathematics: $14.95?

Peace.

The cost of reading these advertisement controlled magazines is NOT the price of the subscription, but the cost of purchasing one of there world's best components and finding out it isn't. That is costly.They are paid for by the advertisers and will not give a negative review for fear they would pull the advertising.
Have Stereophile or TAS ever given a less then glowing review to a product whose company is running a full page colour advertisement?
Not recently.
This may be of interest to some

http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html

Regards,

Seems kind of ridiculous to get this serious about what is basically IMO entertainment. Yes, for me, there are entertaining moments in the magazine that are worth the reasonable cost of admission.
Not earth shattering by any means, not meant to be. Maybe we should all lighten up a bit.
And of course if the magazine is not to ones liking, no one is forcing anyone to read it.
Personally, I've never bought audio equipment based on a review although reviews have tweaked my curiosity enough to investigate. But I frequently buy music based on reviews.

empirical observations and so called empirical knowledge is based upon induction. so called empirical knowledge is usually synthetetic posteriori.

that is a collection of corroborating facts leads to knowledge of an evnt.

for example. the sun has risen evry day for a long time. i suupose you might say that one knows that the sun will shine the next day. such knowledge is based upon induction.

the problem with induction is that the exception disproves the rule, and it will take an infinite number of occurrences to rpove with certain (, i.e., to know) that something is true.

that which is considered knowledge must be true and provable.

mathematics or logic based upon the analytic a priori principle is necessary to establish knowledge.

therefore, empirical knowledge is an oxymoron. if a conclusion is based upon empirical observation it does not constitute knowledge.

knowledge is tautological.

that is given axioms, and definitions proofs are possible.

euclidian geometry is a fertile field from which analytical proofs are possible.

hi frogman:

i reread your post in which you commented on statements you believe are held by some cynical audiophiles. while i agree your statements are opinions. to suggest that that knowledge is relevant is something with which i don't agree.

accusing someone of not knowing what he/she is talking about is an ad hominem remark,in my opinion.

my comemnts did not insult you personally.

i would be willing to debate the principles of philosophy , knowledge and mathematics if you wish.

the appropriate context would be e mails or by phone.

the ball is in your court.