Subject: Re: Cochlear mechanics and public discussions From: Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi(at)MARVA4.NCSC.MED.VA.GOV> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:11:28 -0700
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.