Perhaps they would. I believe some things n this thread have mentioned that measurements would be what would help change their minds.
Instead of becoming angry though (I sense anger, in hope I'm wrong ) why don't you tell us what would change your mind ?
Whatmore said:I agree that proof means different things to different people or cultures or in different fields of endeavour.
All I'm asking is what would satisfy each individual. I'm specifically, explicitly, not requiring that anyone needs to satisfy anyone else that their proof is adequate
Hi Whatmore,
The problem I allude to in my post above is that "changing one's (own) mind" is fraught with difficulty because the subject is just as likely to move from a false positive to a false negative (or vice versa) unless the conditions of what constitutes a "change" are able to be robustly defined with regard to one's perception. Like I say, it's too easy to under- and/or over-estimate any change via subjective listening alone, and too easy to exaggerate the level of confidence and/or the level of estimation of any objective analysis under DBT conditions, especially when dealing with non-significant sample populations.
Unless we can answer the question: "How can we know definitively the subject has changed their mind in line with an actual change or non-change?", simply reporting one has changed their mind is no better than one reporting they have not.
Or, if proof is indeed something that will simply "satisfy each individual", then again we are really asking, "can the individual define change for themselves beyond the limits of their own perception?" If not, again, we only reinforce the problem.
853guy