Do you take this Logic, to be your lawful, wedded......

[John Duncan]

But, rather than explain it's relevance here (it has very little if any), you'd rather just be snide with it.

Snide towards whom?

 

[CnoEvil]

It's not logic that took us to the moon, but aspiration and passion.

And thousands of scientists, technicians, engineers, computers, missile designers, materials specialists, the might of the American Industrial Military machine, some very dodgy Germans, gazillions of dollars and the ever present Cold War imperative to beat the Russians to just about the only space 'landmark'/record the Russians hadn't got to first.

Oh, and some extremely 'heavy duty' logicians and mathematicians (like John Von Neumann and Alan Turing amongst others) without whom the computers - essential for getting to the moon and back - might never have been developed.

Correct, but the idea of even trying to get to the moon back then, given all the problems and obstacles, was illogical. There was more computing power in a Firby than there was in mission control.

Even spending all those millions of dollars on something that had such a high chance of failure, just to beat the Russions in the "space race," is not logical.

@All...and before you all get your knickers in a twist, the post had a point to make, but with the tongue squarely planted in the cheek.

 

[chebby]

Even spending all those millions of dollars on something that had such a high chance of failure, just to beat the Russions in the "space race," is not logical.

But it was.

The American public of the early 1960s were generally dismayed - and scared witless - about Russia's prowess in the space-race up until then. It demonstrated a Russian capability to plant an H-Bomb, absolutely anywhere on their continent, at any time, with no warning and implied the US had an inability to retaliate like-for-like and so had a weakened deterrent.

If you doubt this feeling of national insecurity, read Tom Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff' (rather than watch the film). He documents these sentiments very well. NASA (and the American missile program) were perceived as incompetent (everything just seemed to blow up on the launch pad) whereas the Russians (due mainly to the successes of Sputnik and Yuri Gargarin) were seen as being cool, efficient masters of the technology, taunting the hapless Yanks with ever increasing numbers of men, women, chimps, dogs, satellites, fish fingers etc. orbitting completely unchallenged (and seemingly unchallengable) above their country.

The truth was somewhat different (on both sides*) but Kennedy, the US military and NASA knew in the early 1960s that they had to score the biggest prize (people on the moon) before the Russians to inspire trust in the American Government, American technological prowess and the American military. (This was all before Vietnam, Watergate and Three Mile Island dented such trust.)

*The Russians probably c###ed up even more launches but no-one ever got to hear about that.

 

[Ravey Gravey Davy]

It's not logic that took us to the moon, but aspiration and passion.

And thousands of scientists, technicians, engineers, computers, missile designers, materials specialists, the might of the American Industrial Military machine, some very dodgy Germans, gazillions of dollars and the ever present Cold War imperative to beat the Russians to just about the only space 'landmark'/record the Russians hadn't got to first.

Oh, and some extremely 'heavy duty' logicians and mathematicians (like John Von Neumann and Alan Turing amongst others) without whom the computers - essential for getting to the moon and back - might never have been developed.

Yes, but *apart* from that... I prefer Bertrand Russel's quote from that Dunning-Kruger thingie: "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision".

But, rather than explain it's relevance here (it has very little if any), you'd rather just be snide with it.

QED

 

[6th.replicant]

 

[chebby]

Bless you.

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

... that took us to the moon,

prove it!

Logic Schmogic.

I really like this one.

 

[CnoEvil]

... that took us to the moon,

prove it!

Nothing like a good conspiracy theory!

 

[Alec]

Yeah yeah, yeah yeah...

 

[busb]

It's not logic that took us to the moon, but aspiration and passion.

And thousands of scientists, technicians, engineers, computers, missile designers, materials specialists, the might of the American Industrial Military machine, some very dodgy Germans, gazillions of dollars and the ever present Cold War imperative to beat the Russians to just about the only space 'landmark'/record the Russians hadn't got to first.

Oh, and some extremely 'heavy duty' logicians and mathematicians (like John Von Neumann and Alan Turing amongst others) without whom the computers - essential for getting to the moon and back - might never have been developed.

Yes, but *apart* from that... I prefer Bertrand Russel's quote from that Dunning-Kruger thingie: "One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision".

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true"

 

[CnoEvil]

But it was.

The American public of the early 1960s were generally dismayed - and scared witless - about Russia's prowess in the space-race up until then. It demonstrated an ability to plant an H-Bomb absolutely anywhere on their continent at any time, with no warning and with a drastically reduced ability to retaliate.

If you doubt this national insecurity, read Tom Wolfe's 'The Right Stuff' (rather than watch the film). He documents these sentiments very well. NASA (and the American missile program) were perceived as incompetent (everything just seemed to blow up on the launch pad) whereas the Russians (due mainly to the successes of Sputnik and Yuri Gargarin) were seen as being cool, efficient masters of the technology, taunting the hapless Yanks with ever increasing numbers of men, women, chimps, dogs, satellites, fish fingers etc. orbitting completely unchallenged (and seemingly unchallengable) above their country.

The truth was somewhat different (on both sides*) but Kennedy, the US military and NASA knew in the early 1960s that they had to score the biggest prize (people on the moon) before the Russians to inspire trust in the American Government, American technological prowess and the American military. (This was all before Vietnam, Watergate and Three Mile Island dented such trust.)

*The Russians probably c###ed up even more launches but no-one ever got to hear about that.

I suppose logic is as subjective as everything else.

I understand the reasoning that the Americans had, but given the odds of success, this doesn't make it logical. In fact the Russians were ahead on technology, which made the Americans more foolhardy, pressing on faster than they otherwise would have done (and I would argue, before they were properly ready).

The fact that the Lunar Module was almost unflyable, the Van Allen belt has more radiation than you can shake a stick at, there were fatal accidents of the crew leading up to the launch and the average school calculator is more sophisticated than the on-board computer, means that the whole project was (logically) sheer madness. IMO. It wasn't logic that made it a success, but luck and mans' ingenuity and determination.

Anyway, I've made my argument, and I'm very happy to agree to disagree....as usual you put up a well thought out case, its just that IMO if you pull back from the whole thing, it made little sense (technologically speaking) as the chance of failure was so high back in 1969.

 

[Ajani]

Is it logical for us to pay hundreds, thousands, ten of thousands and even hundreds of thousands on HiFi? Especially considering that most persons are content with the sound of an iPod.

 

[John Duncan]

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true"

I like this Bertrand Russell chap. I like most the fact that he sounds very much like a 'chap'.

 

[6th.replicant]

Not only 'sounded like'...

 

[John Duncan]

Not only 'sounded like'...

Hoo CHA

 

[the record spot]

Enemy? When it comes to Hifi..

If so, why? It's one of the most fundamental thought processes, we use logic all the time in our daily lives, it's vitally important, yet when one uses logic on a forum in the context of Hifi, and poses questions as to why this should/could sound different/better than that, there are many people that either don't welcome the questions, are suspicious of the motives of the person asking them, or state that they're only asking/posing the questions because they've been brainwashed on another forum.

Why does using logic in Hifi cause such a stir? When it's used all the time in other areas of life by everyone here. It doesn't make sense to me.

People use the logic that best fits their needs really; for many it's a hobby that needs no more than that. Others will apply their own take based on the information they have to hand and decide accordingly. Others will get involved in DIY projects and come up with their designs and some just want to hear some music.

There is no harm in asking a question.

 

[busb]

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true"

I like this Bertrand Russell chap. I like most the fact that he sounds very much like a 'chap'.

Sorry, I forgot to say I was quoting James Branch Cabbell, the early C20 American novelist - from The Silver Stallion. Nothing against Mr Russell - he was a pretty ace geezer & fine thoughtsmith to boot 8)

 

[John Duncan]

Odd, I thought I found it to be Russell, but it seems not. I stand corrected.

 

[fr0g]

Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.Laurence J. Peter

Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.

Laurence J. Peter

An action doesn't have to be wrong just because it is not logical. It doesn't have to be right just because it has its logic.

Lion Feuchtwanger

Take your pick (The illogical guy could win it on coolness of name alone!)

 

[John Duncan]

I think I'm more of a Feuchtwanger.

 

[gregvet]

I think I'm more of a Feuchtwanger.

Im pretty sure you keep getting called a Feuchtwanger, but it seems to get **** out for some reason

My middle names Lyon, so you can guess which side I'm on

 

[Anonymous]

I think people here are confusing logic for reason. Everyone does things for a reason, reasons are not necessarily logical.

Most purchases are in fact emotionally driven, and emotional reasons are certainly not logical.

I certainly see nothing logical about wanting to satisfy my own auditory desires with music. And there is nothing logical about wanting to own the latest technology, or drool over the sexiest looking bit of kit.

 

[BenLaw]

I think people here are confusing logic for reason. Everyone does things for a reason, reasons are not necessarily logical.

Most purchases are in fact emotionally driven, and emotional reasons are certainly not logical.

I certainly see nothing logical about wanting to satisfy my own auditory desires with music. And there is nothing logical about wanting to own the latest technology, or drool over the sexiest looking bit of kit.

Absolutely right.

 

[Ravey Gravey Davy]

and emotional reasons are certainly not logical.

Oooh- discuss.

 

[fr0g]

I think people here are confusing logic for reason. Everyone does things for a reason, reasons are not necessarily logical.

Most purchases are in fact emotionally driven, and emotional reasons are certainly not logical.

I certainly see nothing logical about wanting to satisfy my own auditory desires with music. And there is nothing logical about wanting to own the latest technology, or drool over the sexiest looking bit of kit.

Nope.

You listen to music for the "reason" you enjoy it. It's logical to listen to music if you enjoy it.

Even when purchases are made emotionally, I bet you use logic to hunt for a good price. And if the purchase makes you happier (for a while at least) then making the purchase has a certain logic.

"my reasons" may not be logical to you, but they are always logical in one way or another to me (or vice versa). They might not be "the most logical" reasons, or "most logical" decisions, but there is always some form of logical analysis involved.