4 ms·
The article says this explores mysophobia which covers a wide variety of sounds, like fork on plate, nails on chalkboard, ASMR sounds of all kinds of nature (no
by slver 5y ago
The article says this explores mysophobia which covers a wide variety of sounds, like fork on plate, nails on chalkboard, ASMR sounds of all kinds of nature (not related to eating sounds) and also eating sounds, but also any similar sounds produced when playing with sticky gooey substances and so on (which our saliva is an example of).
To suggest all of this is because I struggle not to move my mouth and throat and feel "intruded upon" is honestly bizarre.
Their study only attempts to satisfy their own VERY SELECTIVE definition of mysophobia without attempting to explain how this "hyper-mirroring" explains the same exact effect non-eating mysophobic sounds cause.
All in all, someone writing a quick paper is all.
- wpietri 5y agoSomething being "honestly bizarre" to one reader is not a valid critique of a scientific paper. Many validated scientific concepts were seen as bizarre when introduced; many invalidated ones seemed broadly reasonable. (E.g., relativity and luminiferous aether respectively). If you'd gotten as far as reading the abstract of the paper, you'd see that they focus on this because "most trigger sounds are generated by orofacial movements". Assuming they're correct, it seems reasonable to me to start with the dominant case. If you'd like claim they're wrong about what constitutes misophonia you're welcome to do it; I look forward to your evidence. But as somebody who can't stand fork-on-plate and nails-on-chalkboard sounds, this all sounds pretty plausible to me. I experience those as a jolt that includes my dominant hand and arm. So it seems to me that they could be on to something. They may not have all the details right; early scientific papers often don't. But I don't think that's a reason to claim that you can read their minds from this remove.
- slver 5y ago> relativity and luminiferous aether We may get a bit off-topic, but I believe the aether was an unfortunate casualty of Einstein's work. First of all Einstein didn't disprove the aether, he just made it unnecessary. But relativity makes lots of things unnecessary at this macro level, like the quantum mechanics it contradicted later on. I think relativity is extremely valuable. But there's no such thing as a wave of nothing. And we'll eventually come back to that at some point. Knowledge sometimes swings from one end to another like a pendulum, as long as we advance overall I'm good. I'm not sure that throat mirroring is advancing our knowledge on why some sounds are terrible to us. > you'd see that they focus on this because "most trigger sounds are generated by orofacial movements". Assuming they're correct But that's not even close to correct by mere observation. Not to mention that your orofacial movements would bother no one if you eat with your mouth closed. Am I being crazy here? The feeling of cringe and disgust is not just the fact someone is eating around us. We eat together socially with great pleasure. But if you step into something gooey, and as you remove your shoe, you hear the resulting sounds, it's instantly disgusting. Was my throat mirroring your foot? I mean, come on :)
- wpietri 5y agoI'm not going to rabbit-hole with you on either your novel theories about physics or your notions about the basis for misophonia. That does not look productive to me. My point is that if you're going to make sweeping accusations like this, you should back them up with actual facts and analysis. Otherwise you are just committing the same sin you're accusing these authors of.