The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Gear changing it's Sonic Footprint
Old 11th February 2020
  #61
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushman View Post
Popper was a philosopher who wrote about science. His awards are almost entirely in the realm of philosophy, not science. The concept that scientific proof is meaningless (my simplification) may be of interest to philosophers, but it is anti-science in any practical sense.
In my opinion, Popper's work remains relevant and influential largely because it gives such clarity between the logical foundations of mathematics and science, and avoids the nebulous classifications of what is truly not-science from the Kuhnian paradigm view. But methinks that your view of science is really that of a Positivist . . . and again, some brilliant minds, Popper included, have covered this ground very well since Bacon and Kant. If you have an appetite for the foundations of logical thought, there's indeed much to study.

And FWIW, the mathematical derivation that we use to show the transfer function of this passive EQ we're discussing is a Laplace Transform . . . from Pierre-Simon Laplace . . . you know, one of those philosopher guys.
Old 11th February 2020
  #62
Lives for gear
This has so little to do with audio that my care meter isn’t getting off the low stop at all.
Old 12th February 2020
  #63
Gear Maniac
 
jontornblom's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirkus View Post
In my opinion, Popper's work remains relevant and influential largely because it gives such clarity between the logical foundations of mathematics and science, and avoids the nebulous classifications of what is truly not-science from the Kuhnian paradigm view. But methinks that your view of science is really that of a Positivist . . . and again, some brilliant minds, Popper included, have covered this ground very well since Bacon and Kant. If you have an appetite for the foundations of logical thought, there's indeed much to study.

And FWIW, the mathematical derivation that we use to show the transfer function of this passive EQ we're discussing is a Laplace Transform . . . from Pierre-Simon Laplace . . . you know, one of those philosopher guys.
Agreed, Kirkus. If we can’t name our fundamental assumptions, we don’t really know what we believe. If we don’t name them, we will have disagreements that we can’t sort out. And most importantly of all, if we don’t realize they are assumptions, arrogance and error slip in unnoticed. Looking deeper into what we believe, why we believe it, and how those beliefs shape our thinking is very helpful - if not only to realize there are totally different ways of approaching the same topic.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump