Critical listening and altered states

Good points.

@mastering92

To listen critically - We need to put our energy into the power of objective reasoning and honest observations.

Here’s where you and I may see things differently. I am in the field of philosophy. Every argument which is offered, and every counter-argument claims "objective reasoning." The issue becomes, what is selected as relevant to the objective argument? What is left out? What is emphasized? The history of thought (not just philosophy) is full of people who try to claim their argument is ultimate because it is objective. But that word, objective, is just stone soup. What else is in there? That’s where the interesting stuff happens. The word objective is not a trump card among people who know how to argue.

@mikelavigne

OTOH in the particular audiophile journey i am on, i am as interested in how some change makes me feel emotionally in a right brain context, as objectively what my left brain thinks it hears. am i being drawn into the music? is my body happy?

This identifies the exact way in which objectivity hits the shoals, for me. Mike is right -- this is about mind-and-body, and since listening is also done with our body, the detachment necessary for rational objectivity is insufficient if not downright destructive of what some of us consider the experience of music.

Equally important it is not a zero sum game.

Objective reasoning can be thought of as thinking like a machine.

A machine...
Designed by a human.
With metrics set by humans and human science.
With output defined by humans.
With output interpreted by humans.

The trail of the human serpent is over everything. Nothing is objective. It’s just that some results are easier to agree upon and are more easily repeated.

What science accomplishes is intersubjective agreement that is based on *stipulated* standards -- which were invented and stipulated to accomplish a purpose.

The kind of objectivity you’re representing here is hardly defended any longer. It relies on a correspondence to an independent reality which is, by definition, inaccessible. That kind of reality may have a place in religion, but not in science.

P.S. Because any sound is only a part of an interactive circuit involving music-gear-ears-brain-interpretation, then the very division into subjective and objective is impossible. Even medical researchers (let alone philosophers) are suspicious of the idea. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/theres-no-such-thing-as-an-objective-view-of-something