Re: Cochlear mechanics and public discussions

[Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Although I would hate to be disrespectful of my friend and colleague Al
Bregman, I would like to keep the discussion "public". After all, the
hearing community is pretty small as is. Why fracture a family into
minuscule sub-families? Even if one does not understand everything in a
given argument, the gist and the trust do transpire and, in some
idiosyncratic manner, they end up bettering our imperfect understanding of
the mysteries of hearing.

Pierre Divenyi

 At 06:37 PM 7/11/00 +1000, you wrote:
> I agree that the subject is important, for if we don't understand how the
> ear works at a fundamental level, how can we formulate adequate models of
> higher level percepts?
>
> However, I believe that circumscribing the range of discussions on this list
> probably isn't necessary. People who aren't interested in a certain subject
> heading can just push the Delete button, as they always have (that's what
> subject headers are for). However, if enough people thought a second list
> was a good idea, I would go along with the majority's wishes.
>
> What do other list members think?
>
>
> Andrew.