3 ms·
Orchestral skill isn't anywhere near as quantifiable as the time taken to sprint a given distance, so this comparison is irrelevant as far as I can see, though
by EForEndeavour 7y ago
Orchestral skill isn't anywhere near as quantifiable as the time taken to sprint a given distance, so this comparison is irrelevant as far as I can see, though I welcome clarification.
The entire point is that there is no objective measure of playing ability, which allows conscious and subconscious biases to affect audition decisions, which is why blind auditions make sense for choosing orchestra performers, but is not required (let alone practical) for choosing sprinters.
- d0mine 7y agoIt precisely the point that when we can easily measure results, it clear that the adhoc excuses in the grandparent comment are just that.
- EForEndeavour 7y agoNo, the point is that sprint times are judged by well-validated and understood instrumentation whose results are easily replicable. Conversely, the outcome of an orchestra audition is decided by human judges, and we know that humans are subject to conscious and unconscious biases that affect their ultimate decision. We can easily measure the eventual decision of the audition, but the audition process itself is much more difficult to scrutinize, unlike your example of a sprint race. That's why your original challenge to compare this audition situation to a sprint race does not apply.
- d0mine 7y agoYou've missed the point. Perhaps, I've expressed it poorly. People see what they want to see.