Subject: Re: [AUDITORY] Silence from leaders in auditory science From: Douglas Scott <jdmusictuition@xxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 08:21:29 -0400--000000000000b163d10631167ee0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alain If you want to talk politics we can do so. I understand the apprehension you feel, but have you considered the fact that it is precisely a result of the low quality of the information on the matter you are consuming? I'm not trying to be condescending, I'm just pointing out that media organisations take in the same sources of funding that many researchers have come to rely on for very nefarious purposes from less than salubrious sources. Otherwise thoughtful and intelligent people who only dip their toes in the water and react emotionally to an endless stream of manipulative propaganda are exactly the target market. As a general rule, if you are told you should feel bad for holding certain opinions or questioning others, there is a very high chance that you are a target of information warfare. Eco's often misunderstood essay on Ur-Fascism provides a really useful sanity check that is particularly apt in the present time: *"On the morning of July 27, 1943, I was told that, according to radio reports, fascism had collapsed and Mussolini was under arrest. When my mother sent me out to buy the newspaper, I saw that the papers at the nearest newsstand had different titles. Moreover, after seeing the headlines, I realized that each newspaper said different things. I bought one of them, blindly, and read a message on the first page signed by five or six political parties =E2=80=94 among them the Democrazia Cristiana, the Communist Party, the Socialist Party, the Partito d=E2=80=99Azione, and the= Liberal Party.* *Until then, I had believed that there was a single party in every country and that in Italy it was the Partito Nazionale Fascista. Now I was discovering that in my country several parties could exist at the same time. Since I was a clever boy, I immediately realized that so many parties could not have been born overnight, and they must have existed for some time as clandestine organizations."* I personally find that applying this test to every political panic to be a useful balm. It's a much broader discussion that extends well beyond the current era to larger currents of the global social and economic order basically since WW2, long-past the point where it should have rightly collapsed. Current events are the continued unresolved fallout of what happened in 2007. Don't look to journalists, wikipedia (which, on political matters, is just basically just the opinions of the sponsor of editors' cocktail parties), or AI (which, on political matters, is basically just repackaged wikipedia) for insight into matters like this. As Mark Twain noted: "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're mis-informed". Better to be uninformed, but unfortunately the system has become so all-pervasive that it is impossible to remain free from its influence unless you actually devote some serious thought to it. Long story short: Science cannot save itself by becoming a cloying mouthpiece for the local the cocktail party circuit. Those days are, be it fortunately or unfortunately, well passed. Doug On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 04:47, Alain de Cheveigne < alain.de.cheveigne@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Scott, > > I followed your advice, and read what you had to say with empathy and an > open mind. Sadly, it does not make good sense. You complain that the lis= t > 'devolves into a political battleground,' but then wade in wholeheartedly= . > You defend a pristine channel of scientific debate, but defend the notion > of science itself being sacrificed to fix the debt. > > As an accomplished engineer, you should feel that something is wrong. For > one thing, the cost of science is a minor factor in the debt. We usually > attend to major factors before minor. For another, science (like other > elements of society funded collectively) creates the platform on which yo= u > and others create wealth. It seems strange that the richest country on th= e > planet suddenly thinks that such basics are not worth paying for. A > reluctance to pay tax is the major factor in the debt. > > An apt metaphor is an apple tree. All we care for is the apples, but we > would not get rid of leaves, branches, roots, soil and water because they > appear wasteful. A tree might benefit from pruning to remove dead wood a= nd > superfluous branches, but you do not go at it with a chainsaw. > > What is happening to the US reminds me of the zombie ants who suddenly > figure that it is a good idea to latch on to a leaf and die. In the ant, > this behavior results from the hijacking of neural circuits that process > information and control action. Those circuits normally ensure > homeostasis, keeping the ant (and its colony and species) alive, much lik= e > the controls of a plane keep it in the air. Hijacking those controls migh= t > allow the hijacker to influence the trajectory to their benefit, at the > expense of the plane and its pilot. > > You single out 'polarization' of the (US) electorate and 'modern media' a= s > causes. Why is it that I, who am not part of that electorate and partake > sparingly of social or even written media, am so apprehensive of the > current trajectory? > > To answer the original question about the 'silence of senior leaders', > those 'leaders' are confused and scared. Confused because their usual > levers of action no longer work and they do they fully understand why and > how to fix them, and scared because of recent examples of retribution and > bullying, in scientific spheres or elsewhere. > > This is why politics might seep into the scientific debate from time to > time. Regrettable? Yes. > > Alain > > > > > > > On 22 Mar 2025, at 17:05, J. Scott Merritt <alsauser@xxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > I am saddened to see the Auditory List devolving into a political > battleground. If additional political "discourse" is needed, there is > certainly no shortage of other places on the web where it can be found. > > > > From my perspective, the -central- problem with US politics is the > increasing polarization of the electorate. Gone are the moderate > statesmen/women that seek a fair compromise acceptable to most. I put th= e > blame for this situation firmly at the feet of modern media - where all o= f > the incentives are singularly aligned with increased "engagement" of thei= r > viewers. > > > > Given that view point, I disagree with the premise that each side shoul= d > put as much effort as possible into organizing their resistance and furth= er > arguing their points. Instead, I believe we need more people to listen > carefully, with patience and empathy, to the grievances of all sides in > hopes of finding a middle ground that works for all. > > > > I would venture to say that the majority of the US electorate would > agree that the massive debt that US has run up is a significant problem, > and would further agree that reduced scientific research funding is an > appropriate (albeit small) step to address that problem. As such, it wou= ld > be hard to argue that reduced scientific research funding, by itself, is = an > assault on American democracy. > > > > It can certainly be argued that the methods apparently being used to > reduce funding are crude and not well prioritized, with an emphasis on > haste rather than wisdom. Unfortunately, I fear that this will remain th= e > case while the electorate is so heavily polarized and we careen viciously > to the left or right after each election. > > > > So ... my suggestions is NOT to "put as much effort as possible into > organising resistance to this coup" ... but rather to engage -individuall= y- > with those of differing viewpoints, with patience and empathy, in hopes o= f > reaching a better shared vision and understanding. > > > > > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 08:25:25 +0000 > > Petter Kallioinen <000001c5645d28b7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > >> I am writing from Stockholm following what I take to be the fall of > American democracy. My advice is to not the resist the urgency of this > situation and not hope for the best. What I would suggest is for everyone > to minimize their ordinary work on a stable level and put as much effort = as > possible into organising resistance to this coup. Everyone! > --000000000000b163d10631167ee0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Alain<div><br></div><div>If you want to talk politics=C2= =A0we can do so.<br><br>I understand the apprehension you feel, but have yo= u considered the fact that it is precisely a result of the low quality of t= he information on the matter you are consuming? I'm not trying to be co= ndescending, I'm just pointing out that media organisations take in the= same sources of funding that many researchers have come to rely on for ver= y nefarious purposes from less than salubrious sources. Otherwise thoughtfu= l and intelligent people who only dip their toes in the water and react emo= tionally to an endless stream of manipulative propaganda are exactly the ta= rget market.<br><br>As a general rule, if you are told you should feel bad = for holding certain opinions or questioning others, there is a very high ch= ance that you are a target of information warfare. Eco's often misunder= stood essay on Ur-Fascism=C2=A0provides a really useful sanity check that i= s particularly apt in the present time:=C2=A0</div><div><i><br></i></div><d= iv><i>"<span style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Helvetica = Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:14px;text-align:justify">On= the morning of July 27, 1943, I was told that, according to radio reports,= fascism had collapsed and Mussolini was under arrest. When my mother sent = me out to buy the newspaper, I saw that the papers at the nearest newsstand= had different titles. Moreover, after seeing the headlines, I realized tha= t each newspaper said different things. I bought one of them, blindly, and = read a message on the first page signed by five or six political parties = =E2=80=94 among them the Democrazia Cristiana, the Communist Party, the Soc= ialist Party, the Partito d=E2=80=99Azione, and the Liberal Party.</span></= i></div><div><div style=3D"text-align:justify"><font color=3D"#333333" face= =3D"Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:= 14px"><i><br></i></span></font></div><p class=3D"gmail-text-justify" style= =3D"box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 10px;text-align:justify;color:rgb(= 51,51,51);font-family:"Helvetica Neue",Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif= ;font-size:14px"><i>Until then, I had believed that there was a single part= y in every country and that in Italy it was the Partito Nazionale Fascista.= Now I was discovering that in my country several parties could exist at th= e same time. Since I was a clever boy, I immediately realized that so many = parties could not have been born overnight, and they must have existed for = some time as clandestine organizations."</i><br><br>I personally find = that applying this test to every political panic to be a useful=C2=A0balm.<= /p>It's a much broader discussion that extends well beyond the current = era to larger currents of the global social and economic order basically si= nce WW2, long-past the point where it should have rightly collapsed. Curren= t events are the continued=C2=A0unresolved fallout of what happened in 2007= . Don't look to journalists, wikipedia (which, on political matters, is= just basically just the opinions of the sponsor of editors' cocktail p= arties), or AI (which, on political matters, is basically just repackaged w= ikipedia) for insight into matters like this. As Mark Twain noted: "If= you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the n= ewspaper, you're mis-informed". Better to be uninformed, but unfor= tunately the system has become so all-pervasive that it is impossible to re= main free from its influence unless you actually devote some serious though= t to it.<br><br>Long story short: Science cannot save itself by becoming a = cloying mouthpiece for the local the cocktail party circuit. Those days are= , be it fortunately or unfortunately, well passed.<br><br>Doug<br><br><br><= /div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir=3D= "ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 at 04:47, Alain de Cheveigne= <<a href=3D"mailto:alain.de.cheveigne@xxxxxxxx">alain.de.cheveigne@xxxxxxxx= s.psl.eu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D= "margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-le= ft:1ex">Scott, <br> <br> I followed your advice, and read what you had to say with empathy and an op= en mind.=C2=A0 Sadly, it does not make good sense. You complain that the li= st 'devolves into a political battleground,' but then wade in whole= heartedly. You defend a pristine channel of scientific debate, but defend t= he notion of science itself being sacrificed to fix the debt. <br> <br> As an accomplished engineer, you should feel that something is wrong. For o= ne thing, the cost of science is a minor factor in the debt. We usually att= end to major factors before minor. For another, science (like other element= s of society funded collectively) creates the platform on which you and oth= ers create wealth. It seems strange that the richest country on the planet = suddenly thinks that such basics are not worth paying for. A reluctance to = pay tax is the major factor in the debt.<br> <br> An apt metaphor is an apple tree. All we care for is the apples, but we wou= ld not get rid of leaves, branches, roots, soil and water because they appe= ar wasteful.=C2=A0 A tree might benefit from pruning to remove dead wood an= d superfluous branches, but you do not go at it with a chainsaw.<br> <br> What is happening to the US reminds me of the zombie ants who suddenly figu= re that it is a good idea to latch on to a leaf and die. In the ant, this b= ehavior results from the hijacking of neural circuits that process informat= ion and control action.=C2=A0 Those circuits normally ensure homeostasis, k= eeping the ant (and its colony and species) alive, much like the controls o= f a plane keep it in the air. Hijacking those controls might allow the hija= cker to influence the trajectory to their benefit, at the expense of the pl= ane and its pilot.=C2=A0 <br> <br> You single out 'polarization' of the (US) electorate and 'moder= n media' as causes. Why is it that I, who am not part of that electorat= e and partake sparingly of social or even written media, am so apprehensive= of the current trajectory?<br> <br> To answer the original question about the 'silence of senior leaders= 9;, those 'leaders' are confused and scared. Confused because their= usual levers of action no longer work and they do they fully understand wh= y and how to fix them, and scared because of recent examples of retribution= and bullying, in scientific spheres or elsewhere.<br> <br> This is why politics might seep into the scientific debate from time to tim= e. Regrettable? Yes.<br> <br> Alain<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> > On 22 Mar 2025, at 17:05, J. Scott Merritt <<a href=3D"mailto:alsau= ser@xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">alsauser@xxxxxxxx</a>> wrote= :<br> > <br> > I am saddened to see the Auditory List devolving into a political batt= leground.=C2=A0 If additional political "discourse" is needed, th= ere is certainly no shortage of other places on the web where it can be fou= nd.<br> > <br> > From my perspective, the -central- problem with US politics is the inc= reasing polarization of the electorate.=C2=A0 Gone are the moderate statesm= en/women that seek a fair compromise acceptable to most.=C2=A0 I put the bl= ame for this situation firmly at the feet of modern media - where all of th= e incentives are singularly aligned with increased "engagement" o= f their viewers.<br> > <br> > Given that view point, I disagree with the premise that each side shou= ld put as much effort as possible into organizing their resistance and furt= her arguing their points.=C2=A0 Instead, I believe we need more people to l= isten carefully, with patience and empathy, to the grievances of all sides = in hopes of finding a middle ground that works for all.<br> > <br> > I would venture to say that the majority of the US electorate would ag= ree that the massive debt that US has run up is a significant problem, and = would further agree that reduced scientific research funding is an appropri= ate (albeit small) step to address that problem.=C2=A0 As such, it would be= hard to argue that reduced scientific research funding, by itself, is an a= ssault on American democracy.<br> > <br> > It can certainly be argued that the methods apparently being used to r= educe funding are crude and not well prioritized, with an emphasis on haste= rather than wisdom.=C2=A0 Unfortunately, I fear that this will remain the = case while the electorate is so heavily polarized and we careen viciously t= o the left or right after each election.<br> > <br> > So ... my suggestions is NOT to "put as much effort as possible i= nto organising resistance to this coup" ... but rather to engage -indi= vidually- with those of differing viewpoints, with patience and empathy, in= hopes of reaching a better shared vision and understanding.<br> > <br> > <br> > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 08:25:25 +0000<br> > Petter Kallioinen <<a href=3D"mailto:000001c5645d28b7-dmarc-request= @xxxxxxxx" target=3D"_blank">000001c5645d28b7-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxx= GILL.CA</a>> wrote:<br> > <br> >> I am writing from Stockholm following what I take to be the fall o= f American democracy. My advice is to not the resist the urgency of this si= tuation and not hope for the best. What I would suggest is for everyone to = minimize their ordinary work on a stable level and put as much effort as po= ssible into organising resistance to this coup. Everyone!<br> </blockquote></div> --000000000000b163d10631167ee0--