I think you've misused Newcomb's quote. Newcomb (let's use the correct spelling of his last name) was railing against some tool and die makers and against some self-taught mechanically inclined people and against some in the academic community of his day who'd been closed-minded about the potential for powered flight, and who also refused to look at the science behind theories of powered flight and who rejected such theories outright without first applying scientific methods for peer review and experimentation. What some members have done in this thread is ask questions of other members who've rejected all rational science. That rejection has amount to, more or less, "I think the product does something, so it must be doing something, and any suggestion that confirmation of my expectations, in the absence of even the slightest shred of science that even vaguely supports what the product makers claim, is driven by uncontrolled biases and powerful or persuasive marketing and egregious rumor is either stupid or doesn't apply to me." In no way does inductivism apply to the people who report hearing differences or improvements after using provably nonsensical electronic accessory devices. They have not, as any old-time inductivist would have, challenged what they think they've heard by narrowing the listening parameters and reducing the number of variables in order, through concomitant repetition, to gradually eliminate variables to which differences might be attributed instead of the device. As well, nowhere in this thread have I read any of the scholastic attitudes of the kind you describe. Quite the contrary, a number of members have suggested that any sort of repeatable, controlled testing that clearly demonstrated a positive difference attributable to something other than chance would be welcome from any of the scam product makers. But they have no reproducible tests, their touted testing or proof is non-falsifiable because their products are utter nonsense, and their marketing jacks into the pervasively well-known desire that many people have to rely on the product makers' psuedo-technology for its own sake without even asking the most basic questions.