[Closed] Thinking Allowed - the morality of cycling

I'm not a cyclist, just someone who rides bikes - and drives too. I don't get this idea that we are "different" people.

I think some cyclists do think that, yes.

And some cyclists would be entitled to it, I think - the ones that choose to leave their cars at home and cycle. You've done us all a favour, good job, feel pleased with yourself.

I don't get this idea that we are "different" people.

Are we supposed to ride them, they look so pretty and innocent I'd hate to get them dirty. If they are good I take them for a drive in the car.

I don't get this idea that we are "different" people.

WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT!

Not at liberty to watch the show just now so I don't know what's said there. Are we talking about environmental ethics?

Seems an odd premise to me though; I have a bike and a car, am I 'better' than myself? I don't ride a bike to feel superior and save the bunnyrabbits, I ride a bike because it's fun. The main differential I feel between bike and car isn't one of superiority, it's one of vulnerability.

Cougar - Member
WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT!

Are we supposed to ride them, they look so pretty and innocent I'd hate to get them dirty. If they are good I take them for a drive in the car.

We're still talking about bikes? Just checking.

I don't get this idea that we are "different" people.

If you cycle for utilitarian purpose of course you're different. The majority of the population would never consider cycling as a transport option.

Druidh, +1

Only the sanctimonious holier-than-thou arrogant idiot cyclists somehow think they are "better" than anyone else.

do cyclists feel they are 'better' than drivers and have drivers conceded the ethical high ground?

I think most non cycling drivers believe they have a higher moral right to be on the roads.

I'M NOT

You've been considering the gourd again, haven't you. I've told you about that.

Only the sanctimonious holier-than-thou arrogant idiot cyclists [b]and motorists[/b] somehow think they are "better" than anyone else.

FTFY.

Cougar - Member

Are we supposed to ride them, they look so pretty and innocent I'd hate to get them dirty. If they are good I take them for a drive in the car.

We're still talking about bikes? Just checking

Definately nothing is innocent in wrexham

flash in Vox populi shocka 😉

Ok so is taking the bike instead of a car not a better thing to have done?

Is it still a better thing if you didn't intend it to be better, but it was anyway?

If you habitually do better things, are you not better in that respect than those who don't?

Cougar, a valid point. This may have been a better way to put it...

Only the sanctimonious holier-than-thou arrogant idiots somehow think they are "better" than anyone else.

😉

So is buying a bike on the cycle2work scheme and never cycling to work immoral?

Doesn't "better" depend very much on your own viewpoint.

I think the way mountain biking has developed in this country, maybe elsewhere, and the move away from XC towards bigger, less versatile bikes has produced a situation where mountain biking in the UK is almost totally dependant on motorised transport.

Doesn't "better" depend very much on your own viewpoint.

Ofcourse, everything depends on the metric but we are on about choice of transport here so what can we judge that on? Comparing two identical journey were there is a choice between bike and car, not comparing 100 mile car trip with a 5 mile bike trip.

Pollution?, safety, Effect on the rest of society? Congestion effects?

I think the way mountain biking has developed in this country, maybe elsewhere, and the move away from XC towards bigger, less versatile bikes has produced a situation where mountain biking in the UK is almost totally dependant on motorised transport.

pfft! yours maybe, not mine.

Comparing two identical journey were there is a choice between bike and car, not comparing 100 mile car trip with a 5 mile bike trip.

Cougar, a valid point. This may have been a better way to put it...

Indeed, point conceded. (-:

Sorry, I'll be more pedantic. All things being equal comparing the two choices. The 5 vs 100 mile point was because I knew some one would say, "well I can't ride 100 mile to work" e.t.c.

Doesn't "better" depend very much on your own viewpoint.

Well as above - it'd be hard to argue that a 5 mile car trip into town was in any way better than taking the bike instead. I suppose it raises more tax revenue for the govt, and contributes more to the local economy of car servicing and tyres etc.

And it keeps me drier when it's raining. That feels a lot better to me.

I suppose it raises more tax revenue for the govt, and contributes more to the local economy of car servicing and tyres etc.

[i]pfft! yours maybe, not mine.[/i]

Not mine either, but my observation of mountain biking seems to suggest that the majority of the 'leisure activity' is undertaken by driving to places to ride.

I don't drive to ride locally; I've no need, but I have driven to visit areas like the Lakes, and to use trail centres in the UK and Scotland.

I suggest that the distinction between mountain bikers and drivers is not great.

Not mine either, but my observation of mountain biking seems to suggest that the majority of the 'leisure activity' is undertaken by driving to places to ride.

I think the way mountain biking has developed in this country, maybe elsewhere, and the move away from XC towards bigger, less versatile bikes has produced a situation where mountain biking in the UK is almost totally dependant on motorised transport.

See, I tend to agree. I can cycle XC all day in Wiltshire - riding from home - and not see another cyclist. Lots more off road bikes being sold these days, where are they all?

I drive 00s of miles a week, but am glad to be a cyclist and occasional pillion rider as it clearly increases my awareness as a car driver. It's all still me though, whatever I'm in/on.

So is buying a bike on the cycle2work scheme and never cycling to work immoral?

It's a tax dodge, don't know about immoral though.

[quote=cycle to work scheme]Can I use my bike during my leisure time?

Yes, but the equipment must mainly be used for travelling to and from the employee's place of work. The government guidelines recommend that at least 50% of the time using the equipment should be for work related journeys.

It's a tax dodge, don't know about immoral though.

Tax [i]break [/i]ITYF.

I think I am a better and more considerate driver because I cycle.

I think I am a better and more considerate cyclist because I use a motorbike and car .
😉

If you're cycling in a car and driving on a bicycle, you're almost certainly doing something wrong.

(-:

I think you're right though, TBH. I think that learning to ride a motorbike improved my driving considerably; certainly with regards to my awareness of the behaviour of other dissimilar traffic. A mile in another man's shoes, and all that.

Not mine either, but my observation of mountain biking seems to suggest that the majority of the 'leisure activity' is undertaken by driving to places to ride.

I never said anyone who rides a bike was better!

There are lots of people on here who do much more cycling than just driving to trail centres.

There are even more people that do much more driving than just driving to trail centres.

I like riding bikes and dislike driving on the public road. My life is organised to take this into account which means roughly twice as many kms ridden as driven.

I feel a little guilty driving around filling the air with CO2 and carcinogens whist intimidading pedestrians and cyclists (this is a white van so no matter how I drive it people will feel frightened). On my bike I feel no guilt but very vulnerable.

Tax break ITYF.

Only if you use it as the scheme requires surely ?

Otherwise you are lying to get reduced tax.

Surely that classes as tax dodging, not using a permitted tax break 😉

(I did my own Cycle to work scheme anyway as I'm self employed, I bought a bike for..... Errr..... Delivering leaflets ?
Claimed the 20% Vat back, and wrote the rest off as a business expense against my tax bill)

Sorted.

I wouldn't say cyclists are morally superior, but IMO certainly commuters and roadies, from bitter experience, have a broader perspective and awareness than your average joe, about the dangers of a car-dominated society (pollution, congestion, obesity, unpunished agression/bullying).

A broader perspective generally brings wisdom... so maybe we're wiser rather than morally superior.

I do think including cycling in the driving test would do a lot of people a lot of good in terms of helping them understand the myth that car driving is some kind of entitlement without external costs on the rest of society, and in helping people be more thoughtful, could do a lot of good generally...

Haven't viewed the thingy but I don't think I'm "better" than drivers - I KNOW I'm more vulnerable though, so i get very pissed off when shit drivers put me in danger.
Not sure if this is relevant. But it does make me "different" from drivers.

This whole them n us thing pisses me right off; I cycle to work and get out on the mountain bike as often as possible - don't do it to make a point or feel part of something, I cycle to work to save on train fares (around £50 a week) and to get frequent cardio in and i go mountain biking as a hobby. It's a lifestyle choice that makes a load of sense....

I'm sick of hearing drivers ranting about cyclists but I can understand it as I frequently see cyclists who take the piss (skipping red lights oblivious to moving traffic etc) but on the flip side there are so many fannies driving cars (harsh acceleration from lights, high speeds in built up areas, inadequate distance between them and the car / bike in front etc). I think some people just need to realise that there are tits out there who'll be inconsiderate and ****ish whether they are cycling or driving.

As posted above I'm totally with the point that most people are likely to drive their cars (with their inefficient bike racks) to trail centres linking mtbing and motoring.... Its hard to be a mountain biker without driving or using alternate means of transport to get to the trail centres - especially the really good ones I.e. wolftrax, Innerleithen v.few people will live within cycling distance to either.

It's worth a listen and isn't about "us and them" and more about an internalised discourse that is emerging around transport in the built environment. Although they do enter into a discussion around an emerging moral hierarchy with the car at the bottom, it is only in reference to movement within London (ie a large urban environment). More interesting is the discussion about the understood difference between the (positive) moral value of cycling vs the (perceived) immorality of cyclists (Taylor quoting Howard Jacobson is worth a chuckle).

Only the sanctimonious holier-than-thou arrogant idiots somehow think they are "better" than anyone else.

Mind you what are the other options?
You think yourself the same as everyone else? - Have you seen some of the people out there?
You think yourself worse than anyone else? - Again have you seen the basic standard?
So we're then struck with what percentage of people can you think that you are better than and not be sanctimonous.

P.S I'm just back from the pub, and thus at the stage where I think I'm saying some profound truism, but in reality am sluring my words and picking bits of crisps off my belly.

P.P.S Haven't actually listen to the link, but I'm looking foreward to it.

I don't see how all these titles are mutually exclusive. I'm a cyclist, a driver, a mountain biker, a scuba diver, a professional, a traveller, a husband etc. None of these titles makes me superior to anyone else, it just what I like to do.
If somebody asks me who I am however I use my occupation, but that doesn't mean I'm not anything else.

I frequently see cyclists who take the piss (skipping red lights oblivious to moving traffic etc)

Where's the victim here?

Cyclists who do it recklessly are subject to natural selection. Ie, do it blindly once too often and you're a smear of strawberry jam and a statistic.

The ones who do it cautiously, carefully avoiding traffic and pedestrians, what exactly is the beef beyond jealously whilst you're stranded waiting in the car?

I've never intentionally run a red light, on two wheels or four, ever. But I do think that the whole "none shall pass, evar" idea or red lights is a bit silly; far too often I've been sat on red at a crossroads at 2am with perfect visibility and not a car in sight. There must be an argument for "red = stop and give way, proceed only when absolutely clear"? Maybe we need to jam some of the signals on four-way amber in off-peak hours?

I'm just back from the pub, and thus at the stage where I think I'm saying some profound truism

I think you did very well.. a brave effort..

I'm a cyclist, a driver, a mountain biker, a scuba diver, a professional, a traveller, a husband

Sorry, my brain segued into Karel Fialka for a second there.

whatever label, cyclist or motorist, I always take the moral high ground as I am so pure of soul and character like everyone else on here! I also cannot be bothered to watch the vid,( and also my sound card don't work) life's too short to watch every link on stw. There are good people and bad people and all the grey shades in between, it don't matter if they ride a ****in bike or drive a car or not! riding a bike doesn't cleanse your soul or make you some kind of righteous moral ****! and neither does eating organic food for that matter or shitting a perfect turd 🙂

There must be an argument for "red = stop and give way, proceed only when absolutely clear"? Maybe we need to jam some of the signals on four-way amber in off-peak hours?

That's a great idea.
I also think that cyclists should be able to go through reds to turn left, or go straight ahead where there is no left, providing the coast is clear. Crossroads and right turns are a bit trickier.

whatever label, cyclist or motorist, I always take the moral high ground as I am so pure of soul and character like everyone else on here!

haha yeah, I'm fighting for my right to cycle the prom. through doing nothing but cycling, on the prom 😉 although Don, the council has recinded and allowed cyclists on there [i]for now[/i], I just ride my bike on there anyway and so should any right thinking person!

Hang on! I thought there was a cylce path along most of the coast. I was in Colwyn Bay/Rhos a while back,it's fine for a bimble, less so for training. Is there nothing in Llandudno?

Don - there is a big kerfuffle with the local council and landowner about the right of way on the hugely wide prom in Llandudno as to putting a cycle path on there, but unfortunately it's all about being "Victorian" and keeping with tradition etc (at least in thinking). The local CTC bloke fair, do's to him, keeps banging on to the council and local papers to get the prom a cycle route. the only other way sustrans route 5 can go is a stupid way through the back arse of town avoiding the best of the area and down the bumhole of town (I think that's how the argument goes). It's all totally stupid and the morally correct person who likes a good view will just ride the massively wide prom anyway and take care not to kill small children etc. When I get really old and so bored that I don't even com on here, I will take more interest in this stuff, right now I just ride my bike where I think it is perfectly safe - along the prom. I cycled and skateboarded up n down that place when I was a teen all the time and I do the same now never got bothered mostly apart from the odd official looking bloke saying you can't, It's more that in the local society that it's "wrong" but most people round here that use the prom are really old or tourists.

There is room for everybody, and that is the real argument here.

Laws are for idiots and criminals. Intelligent moral people do the right thing regardless of the law. I ride on the footpath, run red lights on my bicycle, but drive at appropriate speeds which are often less than the prescribed speed limit, I pay my taxes and act considerately to my fellow man.
The law serves a similar purpose to what the bible did many years ago. It provides a set of rules of how to appropriately conduct yourself, if you are incapable of making that decision yourself.

[i]Laws are for idiots and criminals. [/i]

Very good. Do you work for the conservative party?

we are all capable of making that decision for ourselves but there are two problems
1,sometimes a set of agreed rules helps us all do things safely
why not decide to drive in the right tomorrow and let us know how that works out for example
2. We do not all agree on rules. I think it is reasonable to play music at full blast at 3 am in the morning...my neighbours seem to object.....they need some sort of rules to follow unlike me I can decide for myself

I just went on my bike for a spin to 24hr tescos, in the dark, with loads of lights on my bike, still got suspicious slowed down looks from bored cop car, despite empty lit street all the way, but I could've looked pikey or bad cos I'm n a cheap bike? I'm ****in shopping in the dark on a bike filling up my panniers completely legally. Plenty of people in tesco filling up the boots of their cars at this hour and driving about without a cop on their tail! It's intersesting to stroke beards and wonder how cyclng is viewed by society etc, but it has a long way to go as far as I'm concerned.

Laws are for idiots and criminals. Intelligent moral people do the right thing regardless of the law. I ride on the footpath, run red lights on my bicycle, but drive at appropriate speeds which are often less than the prescribed speed limit, I pay my taxes and act considerately to my fellow man.
The law serves a similar purpose to what the bible did many years ago. It provides a set of rules of how to appropriately conduct yourself, if you are incapable of making that decision yourself.

This makes a lot of sense, providing that we unfailingly "act considerately to [our] fellow man". Hugor's right in that it's only people who fail to understand the reason for a law that need to be restrained by that law. There are grey areas, admittedly, but if you always think about the consequences, or potential consequences, of your actions then you won't break many laws, and the ones you do will impact on nobody.

EDIT: ...unless you're breaking a law to make a point, but that's a whole new discussion...

I don't see how all these titles are mutually exclusive

They are.

If you are on a bike, you are a cyclist. If you are in a car, you are a motorist. You can't do both at the same time, so they are exclusive.

I am a motorist when driving, and a cyclist when cycling.

If I choose to cycle to work in the rain instead of driving, it could well be a moral decision in that I don't want to be contributing to pollution or congestion any more than I do already.

if you always think about the consequences, or potential consequences, of your actions then you won't break many laws, and the ones you do will impact on nobody.

Only if you fully understand the consequences. A lot of people do bad things without realising they are bad.

Just listened to the programme. Interesting point they made about cars not actually delivering on the 'personal freedom' dream cos there's now just too many, but that bikes actually do.
I know I feel envious of cyclists who pass me when I'm sitting in a traffic jam.
Although the presenter didn't use the word the point made at the end seemed me to be that car drivers are envious of the freedom that cyclists have, it's what they want themselves.
Explains a lot of the leaning on horns, not waiting to pass when there's space/get out of my way-type activity which we seem to be on the receiving end of so often...

Some time i ride to work some times I drive.
Average speed by bike 14mph, average speed in the car 16mph.
Last set of traffic lights is half way, on the bike average speed to that point is still 14mph, and in the car 11mph.
the fact that i ride to work gives me very big kudos amoung my work colleges.

Having read this thread, I think cyclists and roadies especially would be wise to develop a stronger link with the motorcycle community having recently found out a lorry driver was allowed to get away with driving over the white line causing a motorcyclist to lose his leg. The judge deemed that making it the responsibility of the lorry driver to drive on his side of the road was placing to high a burden on the driver and that the motorcyclist should have been completely central in his lane.

With motorbikes and scooters doing up to 100 mpg I think it's about time we let them into our "green snobbery" ranks! They get treated just as badly as us by car drivers!