Epistemology
Robert Cooper
There are three ways of knowing the truth:
1--Emotion: I don’t feel safe in traffic, therefore, riding is traffic is not safe. I am afraid of being rear-ended by a motorist, therefore, I ride only on paths.
2--Logic: My bike weighs 25 pounds and your car weighs 2500 pounds, therefore, in any crash, you win and I lose. Variation on this: I’m going 12 mph, and you are behind me in your car going 62 mph, therefore, you will rear-end me … and I still lose.
3--Science: Half of all fatal rear-end collisions involving a motorist and an adult cyclist happen at night when the cyclist is riding without lights, therefore, I choose to use lights when riding at night. Variation on this: I choose to only ride in daylight.
Science trumps Logic.
Logic (if it’s not flawed logic like my example) trumps Emotion.
Emotion, though powerful, is not reliable.
Okay, I’ll quit now (for a while),
Bob
Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles.
Donald Brown
-hot off my pad
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fast-Friends" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fast-friends...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to fast-f...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Robert Cooper
Epistemology...Mr. Cooper, I'm gonna need a whole class for this one.
The short course, paraphrased from Wikipedia.org:
Epistemology: The branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of knowledge and how it can be acquired.
From Bob, applied to cycling:
We believe what we feel; we believe what’s logical (common sense); and we believe what we see evidence of.
If you get buzzed by a semi while cycling on your way to work, you feel that the roads are unsafe for cycling. The event is frightening.
Common sense -- logic -- says th
Science offers evidence that an hour of motoring is about twice as likely to result in a fatal injury as an hour of cycling.