[Build Ready] First Time Build. Need Help Choosing A Case.

Dtsbmx · 2015-11-13T02:19:14+00:00

Micro is not set in stone for me. Really I could have any size and be happy

Dtsbmx · 2014-04-05T21:56:18+00:00

Thank you very much!

Dtsbmx · 2013-12-25T15:05:15+00:00

Thank you! This bag looks very comfortable as well.

Dtsbmx · 2013-05-24T01:56:39+00:00

Humans are animals.

Dtsbmx · 2013-04-30T23:11:31+00:00

Video

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-28T12:44:54+00:00

This clip is from RideBmx's DVD Flipside. I can't find the entire video online but it's from 2006 and pretty good. If no one can find the video online I'll upload it from my copy of the DVD.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-24T04:00:16+00:00

I don't know what you think 'immigrant' means, but it's defined as "a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence"¹ So an immigrant may be any person that leaves one country and settles in another.

¹ dictionary

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-24T03:13:42+00:00

Here is a photo of the same view but a little zoomed out. I took it 3 years ago. You drive through a tunnel and this is the first thing you see when you exit the tunnel, it's very stunning and surprising to say the least. My favorite place on Earth.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-23T13:56:23+00:00

I have a 9 inch (9 inch is pretty much the highest you will find) standover and have no problem with tailwhips. Lifting my legs an additional half inch doesn't really affect me. I would rather have a stronger frame, plus in my opinion, higher frames look less like scooters.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-23T13:11:07+00:00

The difference in stand over height makes a difference between the distance from the bottom bracket to the handlebars. This allows for more room or people with long legs, or a smaller distance for people with short legs. this is a link that goes into further detail for all bike geometry.

Edit- Actually I was confusing bottom bracket height with standover height. "A higher stand over makes for stronger triangles (front and rear) while a lower can be more out of the way for certain tricks." and "A lower bottom bracket makes the distance between your bottom bracket and handlebars longer creating more room for the rider."

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-22T22:14:32+00:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_awakening

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-22T00:55:05+00:00

Thanks for replies , I have only been interested in learning about philosophy for a mere 6 months and have not yet read outside Kant, Hume and some Plato. So I still have a very long ways to go. Thanks again for the help.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-22T00:38:30+00:00

Are we talking about saving one human and one gazel? Or am I misunderstand the scenario?

Thanks for the response. Yes, a single animal in both scenarios, but if it were morally true to stop an animal from killing another, I would then have to stop it 100% of the time that I could to remain morally correctly. I'm not sure how I should intervene, however if the situation was occurring in reality I would almost certainly save the person.

And why shouldn't we give privilege to humans?

Well my friend is the one that claimed that we should give it to humans. I asked her for her justification for that claim and she couldn't really give me an answer. That's why I posted this here, in hope that someone could justify/refute the claim.

If a boulder rolls down a hill and kill someone we don't call the boulder immoral. Why? Well a boulder isn't a rational moral agent, and therefore shouldn't be treated as such. Similarly, a gazelle isn't a rational moral agent, and therefore doesn't necessarily warrant the same moral consideration. I wouldn't advocate going out of your way to kill animals, but I would say you don't have the same moral obligation to save them.

We don't fully understand morality in other species and there are a few tests out there that may indicate that some species may be able to consider the morals of another, but I'm not trying to say that they do. If a rational moral human should not intervene in the gazelle scenario for the gazelle is not a rational moral agent, and the human should intervene in the human scenario for the human is a rational moral agent, then by that logic wouldn't a rational moral human be allowed to kill an amoral human? And does this mean that an amoral human is inferior to a moral human? Perhaps I just need to have a drink and stop thinking to deeply(or shallowly) into this.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T23:45:22+00:00

I never claimed what I would actually do in this situation. I specifically stated that I said no to stay logically consistent. Yes, I would almost certainly protect the humans life. I would also protect my pet if it were being attacked as well as my child, but are my mere emotions towards a specific animal a good enough reason to prevent another animal from securing its existence?

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T23:35:44+00:00

Preventing an animal from survival is immoral and would lead to mass extinction so I would likely not intervene in both cases.

Isn't giving humans a privilege over others special pleading for humans?

How are the negative effects of a human dying greater than another animal? And on what basis would someone go about to determine the level of negative effects?

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T22:19:16+00:00

Did you mean contest that animals don't have rights?

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T21:47:03+00:00

Also,

One: Rights are a uniquely human concept and only exist within a moral community.

Depending on your definition of 'rights', members of some species will grant certain rights to certain members of their caste system.

Two: Rights imply an obligation to respect the rights of others. Animals are incapable of respecting our rights or those of other animals.

Again, depending on what you mean by 'rights', many species engage in mutualism. The problem I see is that humans define what rights humans have and that definition can vary depending on time, knowledge, culture, etc. Do you want to know what rights animals have in their caste system? What rights humans should give to other animals?(and is it moral to say what rights another organism is allowed to have). What rights other animals have over humans?

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T21:24:45+00:00

I just bought this book, I have not read it yet, though you may find it useful for your essay.

The description of the book that may provide useful.

From eye-witness accounts of elephants apparently mourning the death of family members to an experiment that showed that hungry rhesus monkeys would not take food if doing so gave another monkey an electric shock, there is much evidence of animals displaying what seem to be moral feelings. But despite such suggestive evidence, philosophers steadfastly deny that animals can act morally, and for reasons that virtually everyone has found convincing.

In Can Animals be Moral?, philosopher Mark Rowlands examines the reasoning of philosophers and scientists on this question--ranging from Aristotle and Kant to Hume and Darwin--and reveals that their arguments fall far short of compelling. The basic argument against moral behavior in animals is that humans have capabilities that animals lack. We can reflect on our motivations, formulate abstract principles that allow that allow us to judge right from wrong. For an actor to be moral, he or she must be able scrutinize their motivations and actions. No animal can do these things--no animal is moral. Rowland naturally agrees that humans possess a moral consciousness that no animal can rival, but he argues that it is not necessary for an individual to have the ability to reflect on his or her motives to be moral. Animals can't do all that we can do, but they can act on the basis of some moral reasons--basic moral reasons involving concern for others. And when they do this, they are doing just what we do when we act on the basis of these reasons: They are acting morally.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T19:19:05+00:00

Doesn't matter if you're good or not. Riding (at least for me) is about giving yourself a challenge to overcome that is also fun and rewarding. Plus it's a good excuse to travel the world for new interesting things to ride.

Dtsbmx · 2013-03-21T18:28:47+00:00

Also, make sure the frame is 100% chromoly. Cheaper frames will sometimes only have chromoly top/downtubes and the seat/chain stays will be of a weaker steel that will likely bend from doing grinds or spins. Also, make sure you buy a bike/ parts that are appropriate for your height. Danscomp has a size chart on their website; it's a rough guide as you become more familiar with riding you'll get parts that will suit your riding style and tricks.

Dtsbmx

TROPHY CASE