Q Looses the 3-D of the M?

Started Jul 23, 2014 | Discussions thread
Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,728
Re: what's 3-D?

Lin Evans wrote:

I really have problems when scientists try to bend their own rules to fit a square peg into a round hole. So it is with subjectivism. It seems that some of us simply can't admit that there are things in this world which do not fall under the domain of science. In order to quantify we must be able to measure. Subjective things simply are not amenable to any form of incremental measurement which can accurately mimic reality. We use terms like good, better and best to describe levels of acceptance, but these terms have little meaning outside of some standard arbitrarily set. We can't measure the amount of good, better or best with microjoules or megahertz or any other incrementally known values thus they are beyond quantification in any relevant sense. Rather than just admit this and get on with what we can quantify, attempts are made which may create illusions of grandeur among scientists, but upon careful analysis are only yet more subjectivism veiled as "science."

So it is with subjective terms such as "like, enjoy, prefer," etc. One can say they "like" the "Foveon Look" compared with the "Bayer Look." and rather than just accept this, there is the inclination to argue that one must present some "data" to justify the subjectivism. There is no need to do so, nor is there any necessity of justifying the subjective opinion. To say that one is preferred over the other should be sufficient into itself. Just because another or multitudes of others might not share that subjective opinion doesn't invalidate it in any way. I like strawberry ice cream rather than chocolate ice cream. Perhaps more people in the world prefer chocolate ice cream but that in no way invalidates my opinion and preference.

It's a foolish waste of time in my opinion to argue that something doesn't exist because it can't be quantified or argue that it (a subjective item) could be quantified if only the sample size were larger or whatever.

Of course, you can measure subjectivism. You just have to understand what you measure. You can e.g. measure how people answer to subjective questions. Then you can try to interpret the result. Maybe not as easy.

Regarding the existence of a singular subjective opinion. Yes, of course the opinion exists. The question is only what weight it shall have on my own opinion.

One example here is Foveon and DR. Several people have (subjectively) claimed that Foveon cameras have extra ordinary dynamic range. It happens now and then. But - all measures shows that it is quite ordinary. So - what gives?

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow