In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
[snip]


OK. This is where it hangs. If someone says he 'perceives' (can see,
discern, determine, tell &c.) a difference, then I take it that he is
under the impression there is a difference - effectively the same
thing, IOW...

[snip]


Sure. The fact that someone says he perceives a difference in no way
means there is one. The proof of that pudding is in testing, as you
say. Until disproved, his belief is based on his apparent perception.

[snip]

While you are not wrong *per se* to persue a high degree of accuracy in
the words used by people to say that they can [any of the above]
differences between bits of kit, or before and after
tweaks/substitutions I do think the context in which the phrases are
used should be be borne in mind.

I agree. (And with what I snipped above.)

Understanding the concept is more important than understanding the
question (sign language?) and provided that the word used/misused is
generally understood by all others concerned, I have no problem with the
use of the word 'perceive' in the context we have discussed here - for
instance,

Overall, yes, that seems fine to me. However the snag is that some people
may have not followed the context. What you said above makes sense to me,
but we have the situation where we may have to re-explain this context to
avoid confusions. Plus my impression that the use of 'perceive' in
situations like this has more than once led to arguments at cross-purposes.
Indeed, once people start to get 'emotional' about this they may become
unwilling to accept this has happened once the fuse has been lit. :-)

Hence my reaction to pop up a 'warning flag' that this can occur. I'd agree
though that my wish for more 'precise' language can, itself, get in the way
of some discussions. With 'fuzzy' real languages like English you can't
always get clarity without some fuss first...

I may be more sensitive than usual to this as I am currently reading the
'answers' perhaps sic in exam papers. Noting how some people seem to
misunderstand what most have found perfectly clear!

I suppose that the reality is that whatever words or explanations you use,
the diversity of human minds, and the fuzzness of language, means that some
will not understand what was actually meant. All you can do then is to try
alternative approaches until sufficient pennies have dropped. :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html