Slay Your Driving Dragon
Leon James
Our society is celebrating the annual Christmas season and spirit. This
may be a good time therefore to call on all lovers of driving, as are
most contributors to these postings, to slay their driving dragon inside
-- as Turkish drivers are urged by highway signs all year round.
How do we know we have a Driving Dragon inside? Here are symptoms -- if
you experience any one of them, you've got the dragon!
** You get mad at this call for slaying the dragon. You think it's
stupid.
** You enjoy thinking of some drivers as stupid, or moronic, or idiotic
or fools or (other words I wouldn't want to type here).
** You're convinced you should be trying to teach some drivers a lesson
or coerce them to drive better or force them to do something
differently.
** You think you can be a good driver even though you think it's all
right to harbor hostile feelings towards some drivers and that these
negative feelings don't necessarily make you a bad driver.
As long as you deny having a driving dragon you're going to contribute
to road rage. Come on, be good, be strong, be noble -- declare war on
your hostile feelings on the road.
leon
*****************************************************
Dr. Leon James, Professor, University of Hawaii
http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/~leonj/leonj/leonpsy/leon.html
Dr. Driving Says...Drive With Aloha Spirit
http://www.aloha.net/~dyc
*****************************************************
Ron Katona
Leon James wrote:
>
> Our society is celebrating the annual Christmas season and spirit. This
> may be a good time therefore to call on all lovers of driving, as are
> most contributors to these postings, to slay their driving dragon inside
> -- as Turkish drivers are urged by highway signs all year round.
So... by telling us that we have a dragon inside, and that we need to
slay it, aren't you really saying that we need to learn a lesson. Or are
you trying to coerce us to drive better or force us to do something
differently?
> ** You're convinced you should be trying to teach some drivers a lesson
> or coerce them to drive better or force them to do something
> differently.
--
Ron Katona ro...@cris.com
Ryan Rahim
Leon James (d...@aloha.net) wrote:
I like my dragon. I think it's cute.
Ryan
--
Speeding never killed anyone. . .stopping did.
John Weir
Now, Ron, don't try to apply any type of rationale to this.
You will just screw up his whole theory!
Ya know, Dr. James, you should go into tele-evangelism.
The reason being that when you preach, there are some that will
actually believe you, and you can also turn a nice profit from
these idiots too! They will send you money! Much more profitable,
no one here is going to give you any money, because when they get
some, it goes right back into their cars.
:]
But really, Dr. why do you post as you do here? I can't see where
what you have written has had any inpact on me at all, but then again,
I tend to avoid the 'save the world' threads here anyhow. Do you
really feel that this is a effective medium?
Just wondering.
John
John Weir
IanLawden wrote:
>
> The thing about evangalism is that you can take it or leave it.
> The thing about people driving safely on the road is that it affects you
> whether you want it to or not.
No one was debating the fact that bad driving affects you. I
was saying that the truly bad drivers won't know that they are
doing something wrong that if everyone that they affect with
their bad/dangerous habits drives around with a cute little smile
like they are on demerol (sp?) instead of showing that there is
something wrong with the way the bad driver drives, they and won't
make a attempt to change their ways.
> Personally, I feel that the more people who contribute positively to the
> safe driving debate, the better. Being critical is easy.
> One last thing .. In view of the amount of good drivers who contribute to
> these groups, I'm surprised we have any problem at all!
The being critical part is doing a service to all the other
drivers on the road. It's easy to sit back and ignore the
situation by being "positive".
You do a disservice to the rest of us by being "positive", IMO.
John
IanLawden
The thing about evangalism is that you can take it or leave it.
The thing about people driving safely on the road is that it affects you
whether you want it to or not.
Chuck Tomlinson
On Sun, 22 Dec 1996 17:30:56 -0600, John Weir wrote...
>
>I was saying that the truly bad drivers won't know that they are
>doing something wrong that if everyone that they affect with
>their bad/dangerous habits drives around with a cute little smile
>like they are on demerol (sp?) instead of showing that there is
>something wrong with the way the bad driver drives, they and won't
>make a attempt to change their ways.
I totally agree.
--
Chuck Tomlinson
Leon James
> > Leon James wrote:
> > > Our society is celebrating the annual Christmas season and spirit. This
> > > may be a good time therefore to call on all lovers of driving, as are
> > > most contributors to these postings, to slay their driving dragon inside
> > > -- as Turkish drivers are urged by highway signs all year round.
On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, John Weir wrote:
> But really, Dr. why do you post as you do here? I can't see where
> what you have written has had any inpact on me at all, but then again,
> I tend to avoid the 'save the world' threads here anyhow. Do you
> really feel that this is a effective medium?
> Just wondering.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
We don't know what impact these posts have. The study has not been done.
However note that these postings are archived and come up in search
engines. If someone types in "road rage" or "dragon" they'll get your
messages and mine. The whole world is looking over our shoulder, which is
why I'm amazed at how many of you don't mind using hostile expressions to
refer to other drivers on the road.
I've been in the media news for the past few weeks (see sample interviews
at: http://www.aloha.net/~dyc/interview.html). Everybody is worried
about the hostility factor and you're it!!!! We've found the enemy, said
Pogo, and it is us. This is the driving dragon we've got to get rid of so
we may remain humanoid not animaloid.
Leon
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
** Dr. Leon James, Prof. of Psychology, Univ. of Hawaii
** http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/~leonj/leonj/leonpsy/leon.html
** Visit Dr. Driving Says...at http://www.aloha.net/~dyc
** "Thoughts are from affections." E. Swedenborg AE1146
*******************************************************
Leon James
> IanLawden wrote:
> > The thing about evangalism is that you can take it or leave it.
> > The thing about people driving safely on the road is that it affects you
> > whether you want it to or not.
On Sun, 22 Dec 1996, John Weir wrote:
> The being critical part is doing a service to all the other
> drivers on the road. It's easy to sit back and ignore the
> situation by being "positive".
> You do a disservice to the rest of us by being "positive", IMO.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here we have displayed a major error in reasoning about driving behavior.
It is the delusion that drivers on the road have an additional task
besides driving their vehicle, namely, coercing, forcing or coaching other
drivers to change their way of driving. First, this is not your job.
Second, this does not increase safety on the road. Third, it does not
work, is ineffective, dangerous, offensive, hostile.
Instead: work on yourself; slay your dragon; be positive; the highest
form of driving, in my view, is "facilitative driving" (not "defensive"),
which means let drivers do what they want. Anticipate their actions, then
get out of their way and let them do it. They want to cut in? Make room.
They cut you off? Stay behind and smile. They're following too close?
Move over (if you can). This takes courage and guts. But you can't do it
unless you slay your driving dragon!! Merry Christmas!
leon
John Weir
Leon James wrote:
>
> On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, John Weir wrote:
> > But really, Dr. why do you post as you do here? I can't see where
> > what you have written has had any inpact on me at all, but then again,
> > I tend to avoid the 'save the world' threads here anyhow. Do you
> > really feel that this is a effective medium?
> > Just wondering.
> +++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> We don't know what impact these posts have. The study has not been done.
> However note that these postings are archived and come up in search
> engines. If someone types in "road rage" or "dragon" they'll get your
> messages and mine. The whole world is looking over our shoulder, which is
> why I'm amazed at how many of you don't mind using hostile expressions to
> refer to other drivers on the road.
I'm sure that we are responsible for igniting the situation in Bosnia,
or Indonesia. The world is a cruel and hostile place, and I fail to
see the impact we are going to see with our 'holier than thou', love
love love facade.
This ng is not by any means a benchmark for how the world studies
driving in general. It is a world forum for people to voice their
opinions, for whatever cause they see fit. Maybe you should be out
working for better driver education, which I think would eliminate
a lot of these situations. I would imagine that you do work for
better driver education, but I don't see you trumpeting that here
in the articles that I have read. Most people are amazed at the
lack of driver's education that we provide here in the US, from
what I have seen posted here - and I don't blame them. We provide
a pathetic example to the world when we let 16yr old drivers take
control of a lethal weapon with so little training, especially the
emergency situation training. There aren't too many outside of our
country that will look upon our driving institutions with any
respect until this is changed.
It just doesn't look good at all.
John
John Weir
Leon James wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, 22 Dec 1996, John Weir wrote:
> > drivers on the road. It's easy to sit back and ignore the
> > situation by being "positive".
> > You do a disservice to the rest of us by being "positive", IMO.
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Here we have displayed a major error in reasoning about driving behavior.
> It is the delusion that drivers on the road have an additional task
> besides driving their vehicle, namely, coercing, forcing or coaching other
> drivers to change their way of driving.
No, no delusions, I prefer to be a responsible, courteous driver
when I am out on the road, and let people know that they are either
non-courteous, or in plain violation of the law. Generally this
is only when it places me in a realistically dangerous position.
> First, this is not your job.
> Second, this does not increase safety on the road. Third, it does not
> work, is ineffective, dangerous, offensive, hostile.
>
Not my job? I guess that is true, but it is my civic responsibility
to try to better our society if I see someone in violation of certain
laws or priciples. That sounds like a cop out if there was one.
Why does it not increase safety on the road? People that don't voice
an objection to these violations, in their silence, are indirectly
condoning these actions.
Doesn't work, eh? This is your opinion.
> Instead: work on yourself; slay your dragon; be positive; the highest
> form of driving, in my view, is "facilitative driving" (not "defensive"),
> which means let drivers do what they want. Anticipate their actions, then
> get out of their way and let them do it. They want to cut in? Make room.
> They cut you off? Stay behind and smile. They're following too close?
> Move over (if you can). This takes courage and guts. But you can't do it
> unless you slay your driving dragon!! Merry Christmas!
>
> leon
This form of driving you have coined a "facilitative driving" is
not a responsible form of vehicular control. You will have more
problems with people cutting others off trying to get out of the
way of a person that they feel someone is about to cut them off.
I can't believe you are trying to push this off as a driving style.
You are just telling people to let others do whatever they want, right?
This means that you as well have created a driving environment that
has has virtually no check against the very offensive drivers. They
can do exactly as they want, when they want, how they want. Just
how do you plan on dealing with them, law enforcement? There just
aren't enough cops to do the job you would require of them.
Your theory in my opinion is purely ludicrious.
John
Chuck Tomlinson
On Mon, 23 Dec 1996 23:56:07 -1000, Leon James wrote...
>
>On Sun, 22 Dec 1996, John Weir wrote:
>> You do a disservice to the rest of us by being "positive", IMO.
>
>It is the delusion that drivers on the road have an additional task
>besides driving their vehicle, namely, coercing, forcing or coaching other
>
>Instead: work on yourself; slay your dragon; be positive; the highest
>form of driving, in my view, is "facilitative driving" (not "defensive"),
>which means let drivers do what they want. Anticipate their actions, then
>get out of their way and let them do it. They want to cut in? Make room.
>They cut you off? Stay behind and smile. They're following too close?
>Move over (if you can). This takes courage and guts. But you can't do it
>unless you slay your driving dragon!! Merry Christmas!
It seems to me that "facilitative driving" means smiling as you allow
obnoxious and/or clueless drivers to endanger other drivers with their
recklessness! No, thanks. I'll continue to practice "courteous driving",
where my courtesy does *not* extend to the people who are endangering my
well-being (and others').
I am utterly amazed that you continue to dismiss the value of negative
feedback to bad drivers. It's perfectly obvious to me that your
"facilitative driving" serves as *positive* feedback to bad drivers, and
further reinforces their dangerous habits.
"Oooh! You mean I can change lanes without looking, and other drivers will
just smile and move out of my way?" That's absolutely preposterous!
--
__
___| |____ Chuck Tomlinson <toml...@ix.netcom.com>
/___LT-1___/ Dragon Power!
|__| '94 Vette Z07/ZF6, '89 Mustang LX5.0L/T5
Leon James
On Mon, 23 Dec 1996, John Weir wrote:
> Most people are amazed at the
> lack of driver's education that we provide here in the US, from
> what I have seen posted here - and I don't blame them. We provide
> a pathetic example to the world when we let 16yr old drivers take
> control of a lethal weapon with so little training, especially the
> emergency situation training. There aren't too many outside of our
> country that will look upon our driving institutions with any
> respect until this is changed.
> It just doesn't look good at all.
Yes, I totally agree. Yes I advocate more serious education in driving
and road behavior. In fact I think it should start in Kindergarten with
Affective Road Skills (proper respect for rules, desire to obey,
compassion for others and their rights, etc.); then starting in later
grades, they move on to Cognitive Road Skills (appropriate reasoning
about cars and pedestrian and road situations); finally the drivers
license preparation for Sensorimotor Road Skills (handling a vehicle
properly under all conditions of road and traffic). See this section of
my article on Developing Driving Expertise at:
http://
www.soc.hawaii.edu/~leonj/leonj/leonpsy/instructor/driving1.html#expertise
So I agree it's time (at the end of the first century of mass production
of automobiles and starting with the one hundred and tenth millionth
licensed driver) -- it's high time we:
1) Acknowledge that our drivers are out of control and need training
2) Witness ourselves acting hostile and risky and erroneously in traffic
3) Modify our habits and skills one step at a time for lifelong driver
improvement.
Note that this program of driver reformation and improvement is not for
others out there, it is for us: each of us needs to confess (to yourself
mostly) what we do as drivers that is bad in ALL THREE DOMAINS of driver
behavior:
affective) how am I out of control in my feelings and urges?
cognitive) what are my erroneous reasonings about other drivers?
sensorimotor) what mistakes do I make in operating my vehicle?
Leon James
On 24 Dec 1996, Chuck Tomlinson wrote:
> It seems to me that "facilitative driving" means smiling as you allow
> obnoxious and/or clueless drivers to endanger other drivers with their
> recklessness! No, thanks. I'll continue to practice "courteous driving",
> where my courtesy does *not* extend to the people who are endangering my
> well-being (and others').
No. Facilitative driving means that you don't stand in the way of other
drivers whatever they want to do. It's the law. Your job or license as a
driver does not include teaching "bad" drivers how to drive better by
doing something illegal or offensive to them. Recognize this and you won
a big battle over your inner driving dragon!!!!!
Chuck Tomlinson continues:
> I am utterly amazed that you continue to dismiss the value of negative
> feedback to bad drivers. It's perfectly obvious to me that your
> "facilitative driving" serves as *positive* feedback to bad drivers, and
> further reinforces their dangerous habits.
> "Oooh! You mean I can change lanes without looking, and other drivers will
> just smile and move out of my way?" That's absolutely preposterous!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Facilitative driving is an expression of compassion and sympathy and
caring. Yes it will affect other drivers POSITIVELY. "Bad" drivers will
learn to drive better if they experience tolerance and sympathy from
others. Whereas if you express hostility towards drivers who make
mistakes or otherwise drive unwisely and dangerously, you compound the
problem by either getting them to be afraid or panic, or by getting them
offended and mad at you, thus losing control even more.
Ask yourself what I asked myself and what many of my students in traffic
psychology have asked themselves: Why am I opposed to being nice? Why am
I opposed to the idea of positive treatment of bad drivers? And you'll
see that the answer is: Because my driving dragon is opposed and I am a
slave of my dragon.
Leon
darkstar
Leon James <le...@hawaii.edu> wrote:
>> > Everybody is worried
>about the hostility factor and you're it!!!! We've found the enemy, said
>Pogo, and it is us. This is the driving dragon we've got to get rid of so
>we may remain humanoid not animaloid.
>
>Leon
>
>
movie..
<man, im just fulla smartass comments tonight! must have been somthing i
ate:)>
darkstar
John Weir <jc...@execpc.com> wrote:Most people are amazed at the
>lack of driver's education that we provide here in the US, from
>what I have seen posted here - and I don't blame them. We provide
>a pathetic example to the world when we let 16yr old drivers take
>control of a lethal weapon with so little training, especially the
>emergency situation training. There aren't too many outside of our
>country that will look upon our driving institutions with any
>respect until this is changed.
>
>It just doesn't look good at all.
>
baha yeah..this reminds me of back when i was that age, <ok not all that
long ago> when i was in high school taking the drivers ed classes..what a
pathetic waste..they would have done just as well to just let us loose
with the keys to the car for 2 hours on a closed track for all the good
it really did..a few things really stand out from that class..
there was this one kid..a SENIOR, the total stereotypical geek, i mean he
was just unbeliveable..anyeay, his parents were just now letting him get
his license..but anyway, me, him, anuther kid and the teacher were out
doing one of the driving tests, and the teachers some mean as hell old
retired osmthing or other that liked to yell..well, the geeky kid was
behind the wheel, and nervous as hell..the teacher was jamming on the
brake that was mounted in the passenger footwell all the time, and
actually Grabbed the wheel outa the kids hands, jerking the car
about..the kid couldnt even drive anymore, he was so scared, so teach had
him pull over and one of us go. <later, on the closed in driving range,
that same kid managed to stall one of the cars, an automatic <no i dont
know how> and coast into anuther parked car:)>
anuther one was when i was driving...it was supposed to be the emergency
stopping test..i had to stop the car from like 40 without locking up the
tires..ok, easy enough, i do it, and he gets mad and says 'NO, do it
again' so i say 'What was wrong with that?' he goes on to explane that i
had just locked up the tires, and the way he explaned it was that when i
came to a stop, it was too quick <id done it so that the tires never lost
traction, but the car stopped hard, you know, front end diving, rearend
skyward, passengers trying not to hit dash/back of seat..> so i did it
again, this time real gentle like, and came to a nice peacefull stop. i
passed the emergency stop test:o..
C.R. Krieger
Leon James <le...@hawaii.edu> managed to type:
"doing something illegal or offensive to them. Recognize this and you won
"a big battle over your inner driving dragon!!!!!
"see that the answer is: Because my driving dragon is opposed and I am a
"slave of my dragon.
"Leon
OH, JESUS, LEON! Now there's DRAGONS? What the hell have you been SMOKING out
there? Why don't you just get into your car, pick a compass direction, and take
a 100-mile trip? [GLUB!] It's not like the Pacific isn't polluted enough, but
at least it'll keep your insipid kind from ever polluting the Midwest.
C.R. Krieger
"Ignore 'em m'dear, they're beneath your dignity." - W.C. Fields
Leon James
On Thu, 2 Jan 1997, C.R. Krieger wrote:
> OH, JESUS, LEON! Now there's DRAGONS? What the hell have you been SMOKING out
> there? Why don't you just get into your car, pick a compass direction, and take
> a 100-mile trip? [GLUB!] It's not like the Pacific isn't polluted enough, but
> at least it'll keep your insipid kind from ever polluting the Midwest.
There is a Turkish highway sign that says "Kill your dragon inside" and I
was borrowing the idea. I'm wondering what you find so offensive or
amazing about the idea that getting mad at other drivers is being
emotionally out of control. Anger kills the body and injures the spirit.
There is a dragon if ever there was one, no?
leon
Noah
wa...@lakefield.net (C.R. Krieger) wrote:
>Leon James <le...@hawaii.edu> managed to type:
>
>
>"doing something illegal or offensive to them. Recognize this and you won
>"a big battle over your inner driving dragon!!!!!
>
>
>"see that the answer is: Because my driving dragon is opposed and I am a
>"slave of my dragon.
>
>"Leon
>
>there? Why don't you just get into your car, pick a compass direction, and take
>a 100-mile trip? [GLUB!] It's not like the Pacific isn't polluted enough, but
>at least it'll keep your insipid kind from ever polluting the Midwest.
>
>
>"Ignore 'em m'dear, they're beneath your dignity." - W.C. Fields
>
LOL!
Yes, Leon has definitely been puffing on his own magic dragons!
You still need to chill Leon!
Frank
Geoff Miller
Leon James <le...@hawaii.edu> writes:
> I'm wondering what you find so offensive or amazing about
> the idea that getting mad at other drivers is being
> emotionally out of control.
What I find more than a little preposterous is the idea that
to be angry (at other drivers or whomever) is _necessarily_
to be emotionally out of control. Don't you feel that anger
is ever justified? Anger is just one of a range of emotions.
Why should anyone deny it to himself?
Leon, I get the impression that yours is the zeal of the convert;
did you have some sort of emotional problems involving anger at
some point in your life? You remind me of the recovering alcoholic
who's become such a zealot that he equates any drinking at all
with alcohol abuse.
> Anger kills the body and injures the spirit.
Not if you emerge victorious, gnawing on your foe's skull, it
doesn't.
Geoff
--
"Mabye your too stupid" -- Dept.237980
Ellen Prince
In article <Pine.GSO.3.93.970102164838.3472G-100000@uhunix3>,
>> there? Why don't you just get into your car, pick a compass direction, and take
>> a 100-mile trip? [GLUB!] It's not like the Pacific isn't polluted enough, but
>> at least it'll keep your insipid kind from ever polluting the Midwest.
>
>There is a Turkish highway sign that says "Kill your dragon inside" and I
>amazing about the idea that getting mad at other drivers is being
>There is a dragon if ever there was one, no?
>
>leon
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ** Dr. Leon James, Prof. of Psychology, Univ. of Hawaii
> ** http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/~leonj/leonj/leonpsy/leon.html
> ** Visit Dr. Driving Says...at http://www.aloha.net/~dyc
> ** "Thoughts are from affections." E. Swedenborg AE1146
> *******************************************************
For someone who purports to be an expert on anger and its potential danger, you
sure have a knack for making people angry...
Do your department colleagues really not mind your calling yourself 'Dr.
Driving'? I don't think it would go over well at the University of
Pennsylvania... :)
Btw, what MOST people mean by 'thoughts' is related to cognition, not affect.
Do they not do cognitive psychology at your institution?
(No overblown sig file but I'm Prof and Chair of Linguistics at Penn, in case
you find that relevant.)
Leon James
On 8 Jan 1997, Ellen Prince (<el...@central.cis.upenn.edu>) wrote about
Leon James (<d...@aloha.net>):
> For someone who purports to be an expert on anger and its potential danger, you
> sure have a knack for making people angry...
I've been explaining that people don't make you angry -- that would turn
you into a robot! Instead, you make yourself angry by what you're telling
yourself. This way you retain freedom -- and responsibility for your
anger. If others made you angry, you would not be responsible for the
anger. So my message to drivers has been: if you're getting angry at
other drivers, you're making yourself angry and here's how you can deal
with it (see my articles on the inner power tools... at:
http://http://www.aloha.net/~dyc/booktoc.html
> Do your department colleagues really not mind your calling yourself 'Dr.
> Driving'? I don't think it would go over well at the University of
> Pennsylvania... :)
OK, I'll bite -- why not??
> Btw, what MOST people mean by 'thoughts' is related to cognition, not affect.
> Do they not do cognitive psychology at your institution?
Yes, I teach it. See my article at:
http://http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/~leonj/leonj/leonpsy/instructor/driving1.html
> (No overblown sig file but I'm Prof and Chair of Linguistics at Penn, in case
> you find that relevant.)
Yes, fascinating! thank you.
Leon James
Ellen Prince
In article <Pine.GSO.3.93.970111161839.7550A-100000@uhunix3>,
Leon James <le...@hawaii.edu> wrote:
>On 8 Jan 1997, Ellen Prince (<el...@central.cis.upenn.edu>) wrote about
>Leon James (<d...@aloha.net>):
>> Do your department colleagues really not mind your calling yourself 'Dr.
>> Driving'? I don't think it would go over well at the University of
>> Pennsylvania... :)
>
>OK, I'll bite -- why not??
Not knowing why it wouldn't go over well would go over even more poorly.
Hope this helps. :-)