|
|
|
November 20, 2005
Twin evils of power
Is this a hybrid bike?
 (Via Glenn Reynolds' recent discussion of hybrids.) The yellow "juice guzzler" above (rapidly being banned in China) appears to be powered by electricity alone -- unless the ability to pedal the thing is considered an additional form of power. If so, then this (a bike with an attached small gasoline engine) would have to be at least as much a hybrid. (Unless the word "hybrid" countenances only the inclusion of electricity -- which would be illogical.) I suppose there could be a three way hybrid if someone developed a bike which could run on electricity and gasoline, and could alternatively be pedaled. I'm curious. Is there any standard industry definition of the word "hybrid"? Does it have to be gasoline and electric? How about a horse and buggy assisted by a small gas engine? A lightweight car with a gasoline-plus-electric engine which could also be pedal-powered? Today is Sunday, so I don't want to omit morality from this hybrid dilemma. As we all know, oil is a profoundly evil thing. But aren't we also forgetting that batteries are evil too? And under certain circumstances, we also know that bicycle riding can be very evil, even in the absence of oil or batteries. Seen this way, might not hybridization simply involve the mixing of evils? Since when does mixing evil with evil dilute evil? While one evil may be greater than another, aren't we kidding oursleves if we imagine that any good will come from hybridizing a Great Satan with a Little Satan?
I'm afraid "hybrid" might be another one of those words without any clear meaning. posted by Eric on 11.20.05 at 10:19 AM
Comments
"Hybrid" reminds me of Thomas Sowell's term for those ideologies or "visions" which combine elements of the "constrained vision" and the "unconstrained vision". Hybrid visions he lists are John Stuart Mill's utilitarian liberalism, Marxism, fascism, libertarianism, and Ayn Rand's Objectivism. G. K. Chesterton's Christian democracy seems to be a hybrid vision as well, as does Nietzsche's Classical-style aristocracy. Wanda's is a hybrid vision in that she agrees with Sowell that the things she advocates will destroy all law and order, and she likes it that way. Dawn's is a hybrid vision in that she sees both a downward tendency (Original Sin) leading to Communism vs. a countervailing upward striving toward the Divine within the soul. A pure unconstrained vision is that of Rousseau, Godwin, or modern social blueprinters who believe that, by sweeping away archaic institutions and restraints and through enlightened social planning, all men, women, children, and animals can be made free and equal, healthy, wealthy, and wise. A pure constrained vision is that of Hobbes, Burke, or most modern conservatives who believe that man is by nature fallen, limited in reason and corrupt in will, and that he must rely on the accumulated experience of all the generations that have gone before for wisdom, guidance, and restraint. I must note that, for me, the terms "constrained vision" and "unconstrained vision" have certain other connotations as well. When I think of "unconstrained vision" I think of Wanda's licentious libertinism. When I think of "constrained vision" I think of Dawn's disciplined captivity. A friend once asked me: "Can you show restraint?" I replied: "I can show Dawn in restraints." Wanda enjoys her free existence. Dawn struggles toward her paradigm of ideal essences. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · November 20, 2005 02:04 PM Steven, you're wonderful! That comment was so good it really should have been part of the post. Eric Scheie · November 20, 2005 02:23 PM Dear Eric: Thank you! Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · November 20, 2005 05:20 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
A nuclear-powered motor-bicycle would be interesting. If you want "hybrid", you could combine it with solar power. But solar power is itself nuclear (a fact often forgotten), as our Sun draws its power from nuclear fusion. The Sun is a giant H-Bomb.