Would this not introduce a bias into any evaluation? Perhaps for the sake of testing, it would be wise to take precautions against injury, as catastrophic failure can happen to any knife. There is a certain amount of risk involved in testing sharp metal, even if that risk is small.
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is available! Price is $250 ea (shipped within CONUS).
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/
no hype reviews/evaluations
- Thread starter Cliff Stamp
- Start date
Would this not introduce a bias into any evaluation? Perhaps for the sake of testing, it would be wise to take precautions against injury, as catastrophic failure can happen to any knife. There is a certain amount of risk involved in testing sharp metal, even if that risk is small.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
My argument has not been shown to be illogical. In fact, your counter argument is illogical. You commit the fallacy of attacking strawmen.
The argument you have in quotes, from me, has this form:
1: Knives are not merely tools
2: Things that are not merely tools should not be judged as if merely tools
3: In evaluating things that are not tools, other considerations should be made, such as aesthetics
4: Sometimes, performance is compromised for form (beauty, comfort, etc)
5(conclusion): To only see the performance of steels (etc) overlooks some of the most important features of a knife
I support my argument by analogy to cars. Almost no car fan would claim that only objective performance matterseven racecars are designed to be pretty.
So my argument IS logical and the conclusion follows from the premises. If you want to attack my argument, Id go after 1 and try and demonstrate that knives are merely tools. Be careful, you cant say theyre merely tools for you without implementing something like my truth is subjectivity claim, so youre going to have to argue that theyre only tools for everyone ever (said another way, to claim theyre merely tools for you would just be saying that objective performance is subjectively relevant, and then why are you talking about it to me? I cant possible argue against whats important subjectively).
Of course, this is only one of several of my arguments.
The argument you have in quotes, from me, has this form:
1: Knives are not merely tools
2: Things that are not merely tools should not be judged as if merely tools
3: In evaluating things that are not tools, other considerations should be made, such as aesthetics
4: Sometimes, performance is compromised for form (beauty, comfort, etc)
5(conclusion): To only see the performance of steels (etc) overlooks some of the most important features of a knife
I support my argument by analogy to cars. Almost no car fan would claim that only objective performance matterseven racecars are designed to be pretty.
So my argument IS logical and the conclusion follows from the premises. If you want to attack my argument, Id go after 1 and try and demonstrate that knives are merely tools. Be careful, you cant say theyre merely tools for you without implementing something like my truth is subjectivity claim, so youre going to have to argue that theyre only tools for everyone ever (said another way, to claim theyre merely tools for you would just be saying that objective performance is subjectively relevant, and then why are you talking about it to me? I cant possible argue against whats important subjectively).
Of course, this is only one of several of my arguments.
Aesthetics are important, but utterly subjective. Such variables are not conducive to scientific methods.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2006
- Messages
- 2,642
I always thought knives were used to cut things.
Just a thought though. I'll go back to cooking now.
Just a thought though. I'll go back to cooking now.
hara-kiri-yogi
Gold Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2006
- Messages
- 345
Well I sent in my email. I am looking forward to exposing my own bias as much as learning about the steel. I guess that after the fact I want to know how my impressions alligned with the material properties. I'm afraid that I'm not half as smart as I think I am.
Same here. I'm probably going to prefer the "wrong" one, and look dumb... but hey, i already know i'm dumb, so i might as well have a knife/ some knives to play with... sounds like fun. Thanks Cliff...
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,106
If you use it and didnt break it or chip it and you like it... its not the wrong one
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Those types of ad hominem attacks are common simply because the enviroments permits them. If a maker/manufacturer took the same approach to work done as noted in the above, quite frankly, they would look idiotic. It would be absurd to imply that a large group of individuals were involved in a mass conspiracy to defame them when the individuals didn't even know the details of the knife evaluated.
I can't stop misinformation and hype from manufacturers/makers and quite frankly I would not argue that any individual should have that authority. However what I can do is try to create a source of objective information for people who are so interested.
Yes, once the evaluations were completed for exactly the reasons you noted.
There isn't a limit, not everyone will be interested in every knife and many knives will be evaluated at the same time. No there is no cost to you besides the small shipping cost.
Individuals are free to set their preference on criteria, if aesthetics are yours then that is fine. Each reviewer is likely to have his own.
Shipping isn't a concern as long as it is legal for you to recieve/own the knives. Your english isn't a concern either, I can understand what you say and I am sure we can work out any details.
[post]
I have had one package lost, folders are a real issue because any inertial opening can be seized if the inspector decides he like it because the law is really vague.
In general you should always take care when using a knife,as it is never known when a steel could have a hidden defect that the maker didn't even know about. However the type of problems I am talking about are not of that class and they are inherent on a random basis in all knives.
The main reason I will be intentionally having less than optimal knives is to prevent the universal glowing reviews where everything is excellent. You should go into this with a critical eye and be looking for problems. This is in fact how you should approach any evaluation.
As noted, the purpose here is not to promote some knife or steel, which is a common problem with many reviews. The purpose here is to learn, not only about knives and steels but how to evaluate them in a meaningful manner.
Yes. There are some issues with this but they will be worked out in process. I am also looking into getting specifical materials testing done on the blades at the end of the review. But as with any experiment, perfection isn't the goal of the first iteration.
-Cliff
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2005
- Messages
- 4,761
But wasn't the point of your initial article that conventional reviews are inadequate and propagate hype? I might have merely misinterpreted you.
As per what knives are if not tools, they've taken on characteristics of art. Consider cars--originally tools to get places from here to there, now practically worshipped (think Ferrari) and museums are built around them. Or swords, armor. Architecture wwas first required to give us shelter, and now people will pay a million dollars to get the "pretty" house.
These things have important aspects in terms of use, but no Ferrari afficionado or studier of English castles would dare reduce their objects of desire to merely functional instruments.
In regards to aesthetics being subjective and thus failing to be encompassed by science, you're right, and that's my entire point. A purely scientific account will fail to tell us what knives are good or bad. A knife is more than sophisticated steel and grind angles.
As per what knives are if not tools, they've taken on characteristics of art. Consider cars--originally tools to get places from here to there, now practically worshipped (think Ferrari) and museums are built around them. Or swords, armor. Architecture wwas first required to give us shelter, and now people will pay a million dollars to get the "pretty" house.
These things have important aspects in terms of use, but no Ferrari afficionado or studier of English castles would dare reduce their objects of desire to merely functional instruments.
In regards to aesthetics being subjective and thus failing to be encompassed by science, you're right, and that's my entire point. A purely scientific account will fail to tell us what knives are good or bad. A knife is more than sophisticated steel and grind angles.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,957
This is a valid point but also its probably possible for many to be able to guess the maker by certain signiture things seen in the knives too. Not that this matters because even then it will still be just a guess and details of the steel and heat treatment would still be unknown. You use the word conspiracy and I don't think anyone said that here but I have not read all the posts just yet either. Attacks happen sometimes regardless. My main concerns were mostly regarding the attitude going into this. I don't know that I agree with your assertion that a lot of hype exists in the industry. I'm sure it exists because its everywhere but a lot? I don't know about that. Most of the errors I see are those printed innocently by the web sites or misprints by the printers or web masters in the adds. I cannot say I consider those to be hype though but simple mistakes like the often mis quoted blade lengths, Rc hardness rating, and sometimes even listing the wrong steel for the blade or wrong information for the pocket clip mounting positions.
That word, "objective": Had that appeared in your first paragraph I probably would have left out much of what I said eariler; as that would have alleviated much of the concern I expressed for the motives behind this idea expressed in that first couple of sentences. It sounded very subjective like conclusions were already made based on the certainty that a lot of hype is going on in the reviews, sales, specs and what not regarding knives, steels, heat treatments and whatever else you listed. Saying later in the second paragraph that your ideas would create an 'unbiased' format almost sounded funny to me based on the assertions of the first paragraph.
Objective is good. The idea will allow you to do the work and create a situation to give a good rounded out test group of real world users the chance to see some steel, grinds, and edge profiles and perhaps unique heat treatments they may not have seen otherwise and even compare what they do themselves in some cases with what others are doing in the industry.
I hope it goes as you hope. Again best of luck to you all.
STR
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
I would not use such a description, I have learned much from what individuals have written in existing reviews. There are some reviews which are obviously intentionally promotional but in general this isn't a significant issue.
Some knives are intended to be purely works of art (Hibben's fantasy knives), some are intended to have significant artistic worth (Cashen's), some are focused purely on performance (Johnston).
I am interested in learning about the performance attributes. The purposes of the reviews that I have written was never to convince people to buy knives. It was to learn about knives and share that information.
How the information is used is up to the reader.
Contention indicates misinformation. No one can argue there is little contention in the cutlery industry. As one of the most basic points, ask Cashen and Fowler about the influence of hammer forging on the performance on steel or just read what they have written.
When one argues for a many to one performance benefit and the other says at most you can not make it worse, it is clear that only one of them can be right. Now that isn't a popular thing to say (in public) but it is a logical reality and this kind of extreme divergence is very common.
There are literally dozens of examples which are just this strong, those two makers alone actually disagree just as strongly on far more than that one issue and they are hardly the only makers which don't agree on steels or geometry.
Now some issues are not going to be possible to investigate in the complete unknown such as aspects of balance or geometry in general. These will also be done later and the initial work will be very "blind" in nature to serve as a means for the individuals to refine their technique.
I have as of right now replied to everyone who has responded, however several messages have failed because of "mailbox full" and other issues. If you have not recieved a responce in a day then make sure there is not an error on your end and send a note asking for confirmation.
-Cliff
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
MSCantrell
Knifemaker / Craftsman / Service Provider
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2005
- Messages
- 1,213
Wow, 54 posts between yesterday at 7pm and today at 10:30pm.
Off to a exciting start already!
This plan might not be perfect, but it's certainly clever, out of the ordinary, and seems to me like it might just add some real valuable information to the body of knowledge around here.
I'd be delighted to participate.
Mike
Off to a exciting start already!
This plan might not be perfect, but it's certainly clever, out of the ordinary, and seems to me like it might just add some real valuable information to the body of knowledge around here.
I'd be delighted to participate.
Mike
FoxholeAtheist
Basic Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2003
- Messages
- 2,329
It would introduce a bias if you warned people on specific biases, but a known bias that applies evenly to the entire test group doesn't matter as much as biases for or against specific blades.
Yes, you should take precautions any time you are testing sharp metal, but I would be more likely to take precautions in a bending test of, say, a high-RC stainless than I would a tough tool steel. All I was trying to suggest was that people might be used to a certain level of performance from blades, and might not normally expect a blade to fracture with a given level of bending, impact, etc. If you know that one of the three knives you have might have a shoddy heat treat, you're likely to be more careful with your protective gear.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2002
- Messages
- 9,948
Jewelry; talismans; nicking knick knacks nuzzled in knickers or around necks below noggins.
Cliff Stamp
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 5, 1998
- Messages
- 17,562
Generally this isn't the immediate goal, it is more like initial sharpness, ease of sharpening, responce to grit, limitations of abrasives, corrosion resistance, edge thickness/angle limitations, edge retention in general, scope of work issues etc. .
Large scale structural failures would not be practical to demonstrate on such a scale due to the number of samples required. I might look at that later on using Rangnar depending on the price I can obtain a bunch of blanks.
Again though I am not talking about shoddy heat treatment but simply not optimal, so for example 4 production blades are bought. They are HRC tested and they are 57, 50,58, 54 HRC. The 58 and 50 are left as is to represent the range of bevavior the other other two are rehardened to 61/62 HRC.
[that is a real range and optimal procedure for a common production steel]
The point I am trying to make clear is that not everything is going to be excellent so you should be prepared to have some harsh criticism along with hopefully some high praise. Just be honest and we will sort out what is fact and what is fiction.
We can also look at other issues, some which are not blind in the sense that you can see there are differences such as handle shapes, but out of four grips only two are supposed to be functional and the other two are actually benchmarks on problems.
-Cliff
