Interesting generalization of the connection between tool technology and human flourishing. In this connection, I recall reading a very interesting book some 10 or so years ago about a MIT master's student who spent a year or so with a very technology-conservative (no black bumper cars, no gasoline engines on horse-drawn reapers) Amish or Mennonite community, with the goal of finding out how much leisure and consequent contentment they had compared to use ordinary cubicle folk. He found that, because they did things slowly by hand in family and communal groups, then by a generous definition of leisure time -- time spent drinking lemonade and chatting while shelling peas would be leisure for example -- they actually had far more leisur time than we'uns.
Back to regular programming. Me, I do like the effort, challenge, difficulty, skill, and autonomy required by, for example, shifting friction, making bread by hand (actually, it's easier and quicker -- far less cleanup -- for me than with a processor or bread machine and you get better results), food prep (good knife instead of machine), etc. because it makes these activities into fun, or at least, "more-fun") pastimes instead of just another damned chore. Likewise driving -- the most fun car I ever owned, even in traffic -- hell, especially in traffic! -- had a 4-on-the-dash with 29 hp engine and, thank God, a torquey power band. On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 8:09 PM Mark Roland <absolutegal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Interesting. While it would still be necessary to market friction shifting > and long chainstays and rim brakes in contrast to what is on most other > bicycles, you would really focus on the skills and the connection between > the rider and the bicycle and the environment. I've long been interested in > technology and energy, and how these forces affect economic and social > structures. In the past, over on IBob, I've referred to Ivan Illich's *Tools > For Conviviality*. to make a few different points about bicycles. In > relation to the most recent Blagh post, the first chapter, Two Watersheds, > is relevant. > > The institution of health care/medicine is used as an example (and has > only gained in its prescience and accuracy, unfortunately!), but the > example of the development of the slant parallelogram in the early 70s > (watershed 1, solving a real issue and greatly improving the performance of > the bicycle drive train) and the onslaught of indexing systems in the > early-mid 80s (watershed 2, where the "improvements" are minimal, and the > benefit mainly goes to the purveyor of the more complex, more > interdependent system, not the user) By the mid nineties, with the advent > of suspension systems, disc brakes, carbon fiber, increasing specialization > of equipment, clothing, etc., watershed 2 for bicycle design was definitely > reached. Anyone interested in reading this chapter, or the whole book, can > find it here: > https://arl.human.cornell.edu/linked%20docs/Illich_Tools_for_Conviviality.pdf > > A quote from *Tools For Conviviality* that seems apropos to Grant's > current blog: > > "Tools are intrinsic to social relationships. An individual relates > himself in action to his society through the use of tools that he actively > masters, or by which he is passively acted upon. To the degree that he masters > his tools, he can invest the world with his meaning; to the degree that he > is mastered by his tools, the shape of the tool determines his own > self-image.Convivial tools are those which give each person who uses them the > greatest opportunity to enrich the environment with the fruits of his or her > vision. Industrial tools deny this possibility to those who use them and they > allow their designers to determine the meaning and expectations of > others. Most tools today cannot be used in a convivial fashion." > > While I'm hogging bandwidth with lengthy quotes and little original > thought, here is another take on the matter, from another big thinker: > > "Our souls as well as our bodies are composed of individual elements which > were all already present in the ranks of our ancestors. The “newness” in > the individual psyche is an endlessly varied recombination of age-old > components. Body and soul therefore have an intensely historical character > and find no proper place in what is new , in things that have just come > into being. That is to say, our ancestral components are only partly at > home in such things. We are very far from having finished completely with > the Middle Ages, classical antiquity, and primitivity, as our modern > psyches pretend. > > > Nevertheless, we have plunged down a cataract of progress, which sweeps us > on into the future with ever wilder violence the farther it takes us from > our roots. Once the past has been breached, it is usually annihilated, and > there is no stopping the forward motion. But it is precisely the loss of > connection with the past, our uprootedness, which has given rise to the > “discontents” of civilisation and to such a flurry and haste that we live > more in the future and its chimerical promises of a golden age than in the > present, with which our whole evolutionary background has not yet caught up. > > > > > > > * We rush impetuously into novelty, driven by a mounting sense of > insufficiency, dissatisfaction, and restlessness. We no longer live on what > we have, but on promises, no longer in the light of the present day, but in > the darkness of the future, which, we expect, will at last bring the proper > sunrise. We refuse to recognise that everything better is purchased at the > price of something worse; that, for example, the hope of greater freedom is > cancelled out by increased enslavement to the state, not to speak of the > terrible perils to which the most brilliant discoveries of science expose > us. The less we understand of what our fathers and forefathers sought, the > less we understand ourselves, and thus we help with all our might to rob > the individual of his roots and his guiding instincts, so that he becomes a > particle in the mass, ruled only by what Nietzsche called the spirit of > gravity. Reforms by advances, that is, by new methods or gadgets, are of > course impressive at first, but in the long run they are dubious and in any > case dearly paid for. They by no means increase the contentment or > happiness of people on the whole. Mostly, they are deceptive sweetenings of > existence, like speedier communications, which unpleasantly accelerate the > tempo of life and leave us with less time than ever before. Omnis > festinatio ex parte diaboli est – all haste is of the devil, as the old > masters used to say. Reforms by retrogressions, on the other hand, are as a > rule less expensive and in addition more lasting, for they return to the > simpler, tried and tested ways of the past and make the sparsest use of > newspapers, radio, television, and all supposedly timesaving innovations. > In this book I have devoted considerable space to my subjective view of the > world, which, however, is not a product of rational thinking. It is rather > a vision such as will come to one who undertakes, deliberately, with > half-closed eyes and somewhat closed ears, to see and hear the form and > voice of being. If our impressions are too distinct, we are held to the > hour and minute of the present and have no way of knowing how our ancestral > psyches listen to and understand the present – in other words, how our > unconscious is responding to it. Thus we remain ignorant of whether our > ancestral components find elementary gratification in our lives, or whether > they are repelled. Inner peace and contentment depend in large measure upon > whether or not the historical family, which is inherent in the individual, > can be harmonised with the ephemeral conditions of the present.* > > Carl Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections (published posthumously, 1963) > > On Thursday, January 2, 2020 at 2:44:00 PM UTC-5, Patrick Moore wrote: >> >> As usual, fun, miscellaneous, non-organized content. Much on slant >> parallels and indexing and the power of Shimano and the smallness of >> SunTour. But, perhaps this is worth a breath: sure, everyone nowadays wants >> 13 in back and trouble-free electric, indexed shifting. BUT! I would not be >> surprised if there is a market "out there" for honorable consumers who >> *like* to develop the skills required to do things for themselves. After >> all, there was the fixie craze during the 10 speed indexing period, and -- >> I am no expert on current culture, but is there not a trend toward >> self-reliance, authenticity (not sure how to define this, but at least, >> don't buy what you can't do), simplicity, and durability? The sorts of >> people who use knives instead of processors, and knead bread dough instead >> of using bread makers? (Both for me, tho' I'm no gourmet chef.) >> >> The same from another angle: every time you gain with a machine that >> makes it easier for you to do something, and for neophytes to get into the >> action, you also *pari passu* lose skill and expertise, which itself is >> very often a large part of the pleasure and self-affirmation of practicing >> some craft, be it only shifting a derailleur system. >> >> Now, if you perfect -- as Rivendell's Silvers do --"do-it-yourself manual >> shifting, might there not be a small but sustainable market for >> well-meaning, earnest, honest people who'd like to aquire these minimal >> self-sufficient skills with tools perfected for the purpose? >> >> It seems to me that Rivendell ought to actively market to this audience; >> not the theme, "We're diehard holdouts for old-fashioned skills," but "You >> want the pleasure and self respect of learning how to do things for >> yourself; we can equip you with tools perfected for this" -- whether >> shifters, axes, bags, clothing, what have you. IOW, not "we're holdouts" >> but "you don't want to be subordinate to the machine; we are on your side >> with the right stuff." >> >> Those new Silver shifters might well be a design that entices me away >> from beloved SunTour barcons.I didn't like the older, long-levered Silver >> bar end shifters, but the new ones may make me change my mind. >> >> Casting back to the last blahg, with Archie Bunker: I never watched All >> in the Family until just a week or so ago when I looked it up. I have to >> say that, from the very few episodes I fast forwarded through, it was well >> done, and I usually hate TV. That is, it portrayed a bigot well as a bigot >> in a humorous way. >> >> What I have watched what may be BBC's antecedent to the show which, as an >> Anglophile, I like quite a bit. As usual, as with anything literary or >> dramatic, the Brits just do it better. >> >> Grant, this one's for you: >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0-leRNxhmg >> >> >> *Today when you're picking out baby and toddler toys, the groovy thing to >> look for is a toy that requires the human to do 90+ percent of the work. A >> book versus an audio book or video game, Tinker Toys versus online building >> things or whatever. Adult toys used to be that way, but bicycles, more than >> most, have eliminated the need to make mechanisms perform. All riders have >> to do it push to the click, or share the task with a motor. It's no skin >> off anybody's nose, who even cares?, except that I think everybody should >> have at least one bike that is more manual than automatic. It's not a >> matter of trying to make simple things harder; it's more like not seeking >> out the easiest, most brainless way to perform a function that formerly >> required a little skill, and then feeling puffed up for your "smart >> shopping."* >> >> *SILVER shifters and any modern slant parallelogram rear derailer >> (Shimano makes good ones) is a good way to go. A little practice and you'll >> be fine in a week!* >> >> -- >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Patrick Moore >> Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum >> >> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f545675d-5845-476e-9e7e-2882133ab2c2%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/f545675d-5845-476e-9e7e-2882133ab2c2%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Patrick Moore Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgs_kUGOGpE2Z3A54HPdMHJFNmmbSqw%2BWBGO6azWQKLS6w%40mail.gmail.com.
