Dear R.
Now that you have clarified a bit your posts i can concur with almost of all you just said ...
I will only add that what you call "taste" is in my understanding a set of biases mostly acquired by our own audio,acoustic,musical personal history ...But acuired by the haphazard of our own history they are not completely informed ...
These "tastes" which are uninformed biases or untrained biases mostly must be educated by acoustics and psycho-acoustic concepts and experiments not by gear buyings upgrades collections ...That is my point ...
You are right also about this :
The fully operation of the whole human being is truly unknow, we know maybe more from the study of Universe that our organism/brain.
But this does not means that we are stuck with our innate or acquired "taste" as they are in audio experience, because as audiophile we must train ourself replacing uninformed biases by more educated one ...
You are right about hearing science , which is technologically more and more spectacular but we dont know yet how we hear audible Qualia or sounds ... There is many hearing competing theories ... The Fourier mapping of sound so powerful it is must not to be confused with the real territory...
Then we will end our divergence of opinion if you understand that by : "taste" i understand myself uninformed biases; then i reject them as a basis in audio design and acoustic experience ... I myself can read your defense of "taste" rights then as the defense of informed biases ... If so we could begin to understand each other ...
My deepest respect and i apologized for being opinionated .... 😊