Great stuff, Oz. I agree that it's human nature to defend one's purchases. However, that only becomes imperative when someone finds it necessary to attack someone else's purchase. I'm sure we can all agree that speaker preference is a VERY subjective decision. The one I like is the one you may loath. What I resent is the need to objectify that decision by running down the preferences of others - the old "I can't be right unless you are wrong" thing. How do I make you wrong? Easy, I just demonstrate that the product you like is a "bad" product. Cuz, if the product you like is a "good" product, then maybe I'M wrong
. People who find this necessary just don't get the concept that two opposing opinions can each be "right."
Simple example. It is generally considered that Citizen Kane is the "best" motion picture ever made. I've never liked it. For whatever reason, it has never caught my imagination, or my heart, or whatever. However, objectively, it probably IS the "best" movie ever made. Subjectively, I don't like it. Both of those positions are accurate and "correct." I feel no need to justify my subjective opinion by telling you, or anyone, that it is a bad movie, or make others feel stupid for liking it.
When you separate "good" and "bad," from "like" and "dislike," it can be quite liberating. I no longer feel the need to "like" things that others feel are "good," nor dislike things others feel are "bad." Now THAT'S freedom!
Pretty sneaky Randy!!!!!!!
