Sarah Fox wrote: >AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRGH! > >Ric, > >You're a good friend, but sometimes..... Geeeesh! > > Grin... I know how you feel... still... I have no problems whatso ever keeping the acent very heavily on the first part of your sentence myself. Hope that stands up for you too... >A little bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing. The less there is, the >more dangerous it is. > > Tell me about it... :)... I am quite sure we feel very much the same about each other right now Sarah. But as far as your attempt to write off my comments about neurotics... (thats a joke... chuckle chuckle) ...... the basic area I commented on is one that applies generally to science, is as much philosophical in nature, and has like tons and tons of evidence (equally general) to back it up. Besides... your arguementation specifically has a couple self contradictories contained... so what can I say.. you cant have it both ways. 500 years ago EVERY scientist just KNEW the world was flat. 150 years ago every medical doctor just KNEW dirty hands had nothing to do with barsel fever...and you just KNOW that motorary functions are simple biological programs. God help us what people will just KNOW tommorrow.... >I've long been trying to educate myself about pianos, so we're talking >pianos. I fully admit that I'm a novice in this arena, and I have much to >learn. > > > You do just great if you ask me. Seem to have a better grasp of a lot of stuff then many folks out there making money working on pianos. >After you take a course or two (MINIMUM) in the neurosciences, then I'll >listen to your thoughts about brain function, motor control, and what we >know and do not know. Deal? > > nope... I didnt comment on the specifics of neuroscience.. only the generallyoverstated claim of authority science twirl tops seem to have this nasty habit of making often as not. I just noticed in the paper today that science ONCE again... for the 87th time in my memory... has changed its mind as to whether or not coffee is healthy or not... all kinds of <<knowledge>> behind the study I am sure... :) >My insights into motor control aren't the best in the world. It's not >really my field of specialty. It's a bit like a cardiologist discussing >liver function. However, I do know a few things in this area and am >contributing them where I feel they are relevant. I'm sorry these thoughts >aren't better received. > > Grin... I got no problem with them... except that I disagree with your assesment and application. Its like this Sarah.. we take the same bulk of observations that clearly point in the direction that pianists feel they have more control when there is a bit more friction then less (reasonable parameters assumed yes.. ? ) Your reaction to them is that they must be faulty because your grasp of the science you think is involved doesnt provide you with an answer consitant with those observations. Myself... I'd rather be less willing to question those observations and more willing to question whether there is something wrong with the science. >Peace, >Sarah > > > Cheers RicB
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC