The new Synergistic Research BLUE fuses ....

^Read. And you're correct, it is sad. 

If religious discussions were allowed here, I'd ask the question: Is "religion" and "spirituality" the same thing? But, its not allowed, so I won't ask the question. 

 Frank

This has been a revealing thread! I don’t think I’ve ever before seen some audiophiles make such an explicit association between the adherence to subjectivity in this hobby and religious belief.

The hymns have been sung, the hands clasped, the wagons of Faith circled.

So I offer a view from the other side.

Ivan’s post was simply ludicrous.

It was, as is so often the case, a feigned pious humility leveraged to disparage the character of other people. As if simply intoning one is a Christian is a sign of humility, while in fact the whole thrust of the post puts himself on a pedestal above the poor lost souls he’s slagging.

I have voiced some skepticism about tweaks like the fuses, and have given my reasons. But nowhere have I made any close-minded absolutist claims like "they don’t or can’t make a difference," nor have I told anyone to go blind testing whatever they buy, as I don’t do that myself. As I’ve said to each his own. I’ve explained that I come to my skepticism also based on acquaintance with the fallibility of my own perception (as revealed when I’ve done blind tests). Which mirrors the fallibility well documented by scientific studies of human bias. I’m of course willing to drop my doubts with better evidence.

This is about as anti absolutist or dogmatic as one could get.

But for giving the reasons for my own doubts...the response has been so often to cast aspersion on my character, rather than directly interact with my arguments.

Ivan’s post was simply a ridiculous strawman dragged through the mud.
People who voice their skepticism about the things he believes are depicted, from his enlightened perch, as being childish, lost souls, wallowing in the mud, raging and demanding, selfish (with even thinly veiled allusions to the damned).

Get over yourself, Ivan.

I’m not selfishly "demanding" anyone do anything. Asking for good evidence for a claim isn’t selfish or a sin (except perhaps in your faith)...in normal life, it’s being sensible and adult, rather than just believing any claim that comes along no matter how much enthusiasm is behind it.

You claim that you are open to seeking the truth. What exactly have I said that was not consonant with seeking the truth? I have said the sonic benefits of fuses (and AC cords) were a subject of controversy, vs a widely accepted phenomenon. That’s true. When the inevitable anecdotes are given - "I heard a difference" - I have pointed out that there are variables in there. We humans have all sorts of biases that can influence the results, which means we can, and often are, mistaken in our subjective assessments (e.g. in audio, hear changes when no changes are there). This is a well documented TRUTH about human perception. Testable by anyone here.

If you are, as you claim, about seeking truth...exactly how are you accounting for the truths about human bias in your own assessments? If you reject the data on human bias, please don’t tell me you are about truth. But if you accept it, then my bringing it in to the discussion IS caring about truth. If you KNOW the ways you may be mistaken due to bias effects but don’t care...why would YOU get to portray yourself as more interested in truth than the "skeptic" who worries about his own and other’s bias? For my part, to the degree I don’t bother controlling for bias in my own assessments, I at least mitigate my own claims and confidence about the results. How is that NOT being careful about the truth?

But instead of actually dealing with the reasoning I’ve given, you make it easy on yourself using religious analogy to paint a completely false characterization and slag folks like me as lost, selfish children.

This isn’t "beautiful" or insightful. It’s cowardly and uncharitable, and should be beneath any mature adult.

Those of us who have voiced skepticism about certain elements of high end audio are just as passionate about this hobby as you are. We just happen to have our own viewpoint to express.

Those of you patting Ivan and yourselves on the back for his complete strawmanning and fake pious humility - with "amens," - I hope you can pause for a moment and re-consider the wisdom of falling in line with that type of lazy character attack. Wrapping insults in the warm quilt of "faith-talk" shouldn’t so easily blind you to what was actually going on.

prof ...

Interesting that you took Ivan's post personally. I don't believe he was attacking you. I read through his post and didn't find your name mentioned even once. Please reread Ivan's post. 

For what its worth, I value both your's and Ivan's posts. You both have a beautiful way with words.  As an avid reader, I admire that talent. greatly. 

What Ivan called a "road," I always referred to as a narrow pathway.  

"What is hidden from the most learned is revealed to mere children."  

Frank

Hi oregonpap.

The thing is I've obviously been one of the more prominent skeptics in the last part of this thread.   If ivan did not mean to impune me as well, he could have been gracious enough to do so. 

Instead he produced a lazy post that splattered mud everywhere.

A lot of people who produce those type of insulting posts use and excuse like "Hey, I wasn't naming anyone...and if YOU responded I guess you must think it's about yourself, so that's on you!"

(I would not be surprised to see this follow up...)

But that is essentially extending an already trolling style of posting.

It's like walking in to a party and saying "I just want to everyone here to know I think *some* of you have appalling taste in clothing!"

It of course leaves people wondering if they are being targeted.  The idea that "well, you'd know if you were the target of the insult if you fit the description" is of course a silly counter reply, because OF COURSE no one thinks they fit the description of the insult.  So you still have to wonder WHO EXACTLY the person has in mind.  Essentially the person making this type of insult couches it as not directed at anyone in particular as if he's not being confrontational, but what he's doing is actually just splattering the mud of insult in every direction to see what sticks.  And that is actually trollish. 

So even if ivan didn't have me in mind, he's nonetheless taking the same tact in insulting others who voice skepticism - lazily characterizing them without directly engaging in anyone's argument to justify his claims.