The parable of the three Bicycles

[Sdaeriji]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. Are you done with that cross?

cross? I dont "DO" crosses.

Another lost metaphor? Oh well.

If I have a manual, and following its instructions I build this:



And you have a manual, and following its instructions you build this:



And Rifle Brigade has a manual, and following its instructions he builds this:



And Allbeama has a manual, and following its instructions he/she builds this:



Which of us has build the objectively correct bicycle?

[Kashindahar]

Much like the three men and the elephant, none of you. You've all just touched aspects of bicycledom.

[Otagia]

With the careful application of science, we have created this:



Fuck yo bike.

[Forsakia]

Just buy a bike that doesn't require assembly.

[Cabra West]

The moral of the story is that even though some manuals are not the greatest, we can get close to the intended product by following them. When we think we can do something all by ourselves without consulting the manual, all we get is junk.

Only if you don't know what you're doing...

[KiloMikeAlpha]

As I have stated previously, I want to ask: What if your bicycle doesn't look like what I think a bicycle is but mine works fine and it wasn't built with your manual?

Good question. If your bicycle does not look like mine, but works fine, and wasnt built with the manual, I say, HUZZAH, good for you. It is the working fine part.

One part I was thinking about tonight was if you grew up in an isolated area where people didnt know that you had to pump up the tires, or use the chain for mechanical advantage rather than as a security device, you would assume your bike worked fine, but it was not working as intended. this is how they did it for centuries, they didnt have a manual, and they did the best with what they had. Fine, it is a bike, it works, but not as efficiently as possible.

Well, to return to my question, it is entirely possible that I built a better bike than you without your manual. Our bikes our basically very similar, but mine is tweaked to be more efficient and faster, and aesthetically more appealing. We have the same parts as far as basic design is concerned, but yours doesn't run as well as mine or maybe has some severe technical issues. What then?

Again, fine. You built a better bike. Great! If it is truly a better bike. If the Engineer who knows bikes better than us all will agree it is a better bike, then more power to you.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

"Do you know anything about the manufacture of bicycles?" Is that not a hostile tone?

No. Are you done with that cross?

cross? I dont "DO" crosses.

Another lost metaphor? Oh well.

If I have a manual, and following its instructions I build this:

And you have a manual, and following its instructions you build this:

And Rifle Brigade has a manual, and following its instructions he builds this:

And Allbeama has a manual, and following its instructions he/she builds this:

Which of us has build the objectively correct bicycle?

I knew what you meant. I was being... whats the word... "snarky".

Not for me to say. I know nothing about bikes, but the Engineer who designs ALL bikes does. He will be able to tell you which is the objectively correct bicycle. I think if all 3 used thier manuals and built the best bike they could, the Engineer would say, VERY NICE BIKE.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

The moral of the story is that even though some manuals are not the greatest, we can get close to the intended product by following them. When we think we can do something all by ourselves without consulting the manual, all we get is junk.

Only if you don't know what you're doing...

yep. the great fallacy of life.

[Tagmatium]

This is a hell of a car-crash of a thread.

Or should that be bicycle crash?

[Cabra West]

The moral of the story is that even though some manuals are not the greatest, we can get close to the intended product by following them. When we think we can do something all by ourselves without consulting the manual, all we get is junk.

Only if you don't know what you're doing...

yep. the great fallacy of life.

Let me ask you this : Where do the people who WRITE the manuals get their knowledge from? Hm?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

The moral of the story is that even though some manuals are not the greatest, we can get close to the intended product by following them. When we think we can do something all by ourselves without consulting the manual, all we get is junk.

Only if you don't know what you're doing...

yep. the great fallacy of life.

Let me ask you this : Where do the people who WRITE the manuals get their knowledge from? Hm?

They were dictated to by the Engineer who designed and built the bikes.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

This is a hell of a car-crash of a thread.

Or should that be bicycle crash?

Why do we watch NASCAR?

[Neo Art]

They were dictated to by the Engineer who designed and built the bikes.

How do you know that? Did the engineer tell you that? What if there are a lot of writers, who all claim to be told how to build by a lot of different engineers, which one (if any) is telling the truth?

How do you know that the instructions to build a bicycle actually build a bicycle, if you've never seen one? How do you know which is true?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

They were dictated to by the Engineer who designed and built the bikes.

How do you know that? Did the engineer tell you that? What if there are a lot of writers, who all claim to be told how to build by a lot of different engineers, which one (if any) is telling the truth?

How do you know that the instructions to build a bicycle actually build a bicycle, if you've never seen one? How do you know which is true?

I know that because the writers SAID thats where thier information came from. Now, you can dispute the writes of course. But if you pick one, and by using the manual, the bike turns out looking like a bike, the bike that was on the front cover, I'd say that would be a pretty reasonable manual.

Now, did you find my other post with the second half of the story that I made up on a whim, about the Engineer visiting the town and showing them the perfect bike? Now, some people recognized that thier manuals were not quite right and corected them, while others rejected the Engineer and His Bike, because over time, they thought they could build a better bike than Him.

[Neo Art]

I know that because the writers SAID thats where thier information came from. Now, you can dispute the writes of course. But if you pick one, and by using the manual, the bike turns out looking like a bike, the bike that was on the front cover, I'd say that would be a pretty reasonable manual.

And yet, you ignored my question, so I will repeat it.

How do you know that's what a bike is supposed to look like, if you've never seen one before? Why would you trust the manual to build a bike if you don't know what a bike is?

Now, did you find my other post with the second half of the story that I made up on a whim, about the Engineer visiting the town and showing them the perfect bike? Now, some people recognized that thier manuals were not quite right and corected them, while others rejected the Engineer and His Bike, because over time, they thought they could build a better bike than Him.

Or maybe there was no engineer, and everyone claiming to have spoken to the engineer was lying. That works too.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I know that because the writers SAID thats where thier information came from. Now, you can dispute the writes of course. But if you pick one, and by using the manual, the bike turns out looking like a bike, the bike that was on the front cover, I'd say that would be a pretty reasonable manual.

And yet, you ignored my question, so I will repeat it.

How do you know that's what a bike is supposed to look like, if you've never seen one before? Why would you trust the manual to build a bike if you don't know what a bike is?

Now, did you find my other post with the second half of the story that I made up on a whim, about the Engineer visiting the town and showing them the perfect bike? Now, some people recognized that thier manuals were not quite right and corected them, while others rejected the Engineer and His Bike, because over time, they thought they could build a better bike than Him.

Or maybe there was no engineer, and everyone claiming to have spoken to the engineer was lying. That works too.

Are you referring to me as the present day buyer of the bike, or me as the Tech Writer? Why would they lie? What is thier motivation to lie? Ask as a lawyer would.

Why am I buying a Bike and trying to build it if I dont even know what it is? This is a question of basic desire. You want to have a bike. You dont know what a bike is supposed to look like. Rather then trying at random to build it, you consult a manual.

Some people hit the nail on the head when they said, drive a car. They have no desire to build a bike. Fine. Some do.

[Cabra West]

I know that because the writers SAID thats where thier information came from. Now, you can dispute the writes of course. But if you pick one, and by using the manual, the bike turns out looking like a bike, the bike that was on the front cover, I'd say that would be a pretty reasonable manual.

Now, did you find my other post with the second half of the story that I made up on a whim, about the Engineer visiting the town and showing them the perfect bike? Now, some people recognized that thier manuals were not quite right and corected them, while others rejected the Engineer and His Bike, because over time, they thought they could build a better bike than Him.

Actually, no.
Writers for manuals (if reputable) are usually trained in design and some aspects of engineering. They will inspect the product, the parts, and then labourously divide the assembly process into logical steps, which they then put together in the manual. If engineers write manuals, the results tend to be utterly incomprehensible.

So I'm not quite sure why you think only certain people are able to build bikes from scratch?

[Risottia]

They were dictated to by the Engineer who designed and built the bikes.

What about me being the Engineer? I can design and build a functional bike. I also understand the physical principles of bikes.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

I know that because the writers SAID thats where thier information came from. Now, you can dispute the writes of course. But if you pick one, and by using the manual, the bike turns out looking like a bike, the bike that was on the front cover, I'd say that would be a pretty reasonable manual.

Now, did you find my other post with the second half of the story that I made up on a whim, about the Engineer visiting the town and showing them the perfect bike? Now, some people recognized that thier manuals were not quite right and corected them, while others rejected the Engineer and His Bike, because over time, they thought they could build a better bike than Him.

Actually, no.
Writers for manuals (if reputable) are usually trained in design and some aspects of engineering. They will inspect the product, the parts, and then labourously divide the assembly process into logical steps, which they then put together in the manual. If engineers write manuals, the results tend to be utterly incomprehensible.

So I'm not quite sure why you think only certain people are able to build bikes from scratch?

Not in my story. They weren't trained.

Now, as for not being able to build them from scratch, its my story, they can, I suppose, if they had the right tools/resources etc.

[Kashindahar]

Given time and patience and a supply of crash test dummies, you can build a bicycle and rebuild it over and over until you discover the optimal configuration of the parts, with no need for a manual of dubious origin. You can then become rich selling your own manual, and retire in luxury.

Clearly this is what is good in life.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

They were dictated to by the Engineer who designed and built the bikes.

What about me being the Engineer? I can design and build a functional bike. I also understand the physical principles of bikes.

If you were the Engineer, you would BE the Engineer. There is only ONE Engineer and ONLY One universal optimal Bike, Male version and female version, of course, for certain comfort and safety reasons. There are different models of course, and they are all fine models, each though, is patterned after the One Universal Optimal Bike.

[Neo Art]

Are you referring to me as the present day buyer of the bike, or me as the Tech Writer? Why would they lie? What is thier motivation to lie? Ask as a lawyer would.

Let's drop the pretense of this stupid analogy and just do so directly. Why would others lie in order to create, establish, maintain, and control a religion? The answer is simple. Power.

Why am I buying a Bike and trying to build it if I dont even know what it is? This is a question of basic desire. You want to have a bike. You dont know what a bike is supposed to look like. Rather then trying at random to build it, you consult a manual.

You can only want a bike if you have some vague conception of what a bike does, and how it operates. If you've never seen a bike, have no idea its purpose, methods, or function, why would you want one?

Which is exactly what religion does. It promotes having the answers without ever demonstrating the validity of the questions. It's coming up to you with a box of parts, and instructions on how to "build a bike" to someone that doesn't know what a bike is.

Some people hit the nail on the head when they said, drive a car. They have no desire to build a bike. Fine. Some do.

And again, this is where your argument fails. A bike is something tangible. It is something real. We can look at what we created and decide whether that's something real, something true, something that we meant to design.

But let's change this parable to something more applicable, and more true to form. Let's say you find a box, and on that box says "parts to construct one Blarg". You have no idea what a blarg is. You have never seen one, you don't know what it is, what it does, how it functions, or what it's supposed to accomplish. There is no picture of a blarg on the box. You have absolutely no idea what this thing inside the box is supposed to be.

In the box are a bunch of parts, and instructions on how to assemble the blarg. You follow the instructions.

have you built a blarg?

[KiloMikeAlpha]

Given time and patience and a supply of crash test dummies, you can build a bicycle and rebuild it over and over until you discover the optimal configuration of the parts, with no need for a manual of dubious origin. You can then become rich selling your own manual, and retire in luxury.

Clearly this is what is good in life.

Of course. But since it takes a lifetime (ok we are deviating a bit) to build the optimal bike, think you might want a little hint to begin with?

[Cabra West]

Double post.

[Cabra West]

They were dictated to by the Engineer who designed and built the bikes.

What about me being the Engineer? I can design and build a functional bike. I also understand the physical principles of bikes.

If you were the Engineer, you would BE the Engineer. There is only ONE Engineer and ONLY One universal optimal Bike, Male version and female version, of course, for certain comfort and safety reasons. There are different models of course, and they are all fine models, each though, is patterned after the One Universal Optimal Bike.

That's bollocks. There are tons of different models of bikes out there, some you wouldn't even recognise as such.







So what if you end up with the wrong manual for the bike you bought?