Data points to a feature which is assumed to be an indicator of comfort, however, again - and until the end of all time - this is not universal and never will be.
Let me re-quote it for you because you may have missed it:
prendrefeu wrote:But - and this is important - sensory perception of experience which is solely upon the individual at that time and place DO NOT have quantitative data.
While one person may disagree with another person's perception of experience, no matter which perspective is agreed upon by others who have also attempted to replicate the experience (which is actually an impossibility, no experience ever in the history of this universe can ever be exactly replicated for more than one being), in no way is any one person's perspective deemed invalid.
And guess what you did? You stated that another person's sensory perception
of experience is invalid even though that person stated explicitly that is their own perception and in no way authoritative.
prendrefeu wrote:To deem another person's perspective based on their own sensory experience invalid is beyond insane. The only persons who do that are psychopaths and total narcissists (neither of which is mutually exclusive to the other).
Yet you keep pointing to things which do not refute another person's own individual experience.
As for your original drawing of a parallel to the 'earth being round' - well, that is a cherry-picked comparison. The earth's shape (a spheroid) is known because of calculation. A person's individual perception
of it being flat is valid. That's their perception
not a reality. A person can perfectly recognize that the earth is not flat yet still have the sensory experience at some point in their lives that the earth feels
flat. Does that invalidate their perception? Not at all. That person is not refuting the data, they are not even talking about the data. They are simply pointing at their own individual experience.
You would have been better off using an example such as temperature....
For example, the several scientists, institutions, meteorologists and attractively-dressed news persons will tell you that the temperature is hot today. The thermometer will also indicate this. People sweating profusely with little-to-no physical exertion will also reinforce this. It is, factually, a day with high temperatures. On this same day you encounter someone who states that they are feeling cold and chooses to wear a sweater. Are they saying "no, the temperature is not high" ?? No, they are not. They are only speaking of their own perception of the day - which, by the way, is their perception
, not yours. You are not them. You can never be them. They could be feeling sick (influenza), or perhaps they have a hereditary issue that causes body temperatures to drop quickly. You have no clue, and that's fine. That is their own perception
. There is nothing wrong with their own individual perception
There you go, an example where 'data' points to something, a crowd of 'experts' points to the same thing, yet someone feels differently without refuting the data, and that someone isn't "wrong" (your words) at all.
Your argument, twice, committed the following logical fallacies:
Where you assume that because paid journalists report their perceptions and then show a data which they state correlates to said perceptions it is then factual and the same perception for all persons.
A lot of other people feel a certain way about something, someone doesn't... well... shun the non-believer...Shun! Shun! Shunnnnnn!
This isn't your fault, the people reviewing bikes also do this too. It has [X] data-showing [Y] (let's say flex) therefore it's more comfortable.
Fairwheel Bikes' reviews are intelligent: they do not make claims of comfort, that's up to you. If something is more flexible than another... is it good? is it bad? That's up to you, they just show data.