5 ms·

> even if they are allowed to break the rule they are still breaking the rule. This is exactly right, I think, and in fact those who are focusing on the "inten

> even if they are allowed to break the rule they are still breaking the rule. This is exactly right, I think, and in fact those who are focusing on the "intent" of the rule or on whether a violation of the rule is justified seem to have missed the clear wording of the instructions: > Again, please answer the question of whether the rule is violated (not whether the violation should be allowed). So the only questions that ever enter into it are (a) is this object a vehicle?, and (b) is the object in the park? > a park sign that says no vehicles also applies to bicycles and skateboards. Interesting, my dividing line was that a bike is a vehicle but a wagon, rowboat, or skateboard are not. The majority seems to think both a bicycle and a memorial tank (??!) are not vehicles under the rule.

sethammons 3y ago
A non functional tank. It is the same as a painting of a tank or a statue.
- bscphil 3y ago
  A broken car is still a car! If I pushed a broken down Honda Civic into the park with the gear shift set to neutral and left it there, surely that would break the rule?
  - chipsa 3y ago
    Is a sculpture of a car a vehicle? The broken car is still a car because the intent of the thing is stop to be a car. A memorial tank is not intended to be a vehicle, but rather be a sculpture. A sculpture is usually not a vehicle, even if it may look like one.
cgriswald 3y ago
In the absence of a definition of vehicle I chose to define it as any device that is a conveyance. Thus a wagon, rowboat, and skateboard are all vehicles in the park (even if not in use). However, the tank was not functional. Since it cannot convey it is therefore not a conveyance and therefore not a vehicle. It’s only shaped like a familiar one. I matched the majority only 11% of the time.
- Tao3300 3y ago
  I can't find any definition of tank that doesn't describe it as an armored fighting vehicle. If it's a tank, it's a vehicle. If it's not a vehicle, don't call it a tank. The scenario said tank. A tank is a vehicle. No vehicles in the park. Edit: I matched 11% as well!
  - HelloMcFly 3y ago
    Does the tank ever become not a vehicle? Rusted to the frame? In my view no matter what the tank originally was, it ceases to be a vehicle when it can no longer act as a conveyance. A tank (and any vehicle) is not just a form, but a function. Is a car with no motor, no tires, no transmission a vehicle? I do not believe so, because it cannot and lacks the possibility of moving without a substantial transformation.
    - Tao3300 3y ago
      Is a bicycle only a vehicle if equipped with a human?
      - HelloMcFly 3y ago
        The bicycle is quite capable of acting as conveyance for a human (or perhaps bicycle peddling robot, or trained animal) in its current form, so that's an easy "no" from me. As I said, if the thing can (i.e., without significant, non-trivial alterations to its current form) act as conveyance then it is a vehicle. It need not be in the act of conveyance, nor must it have an independent means of propulsion. Edit: my simple rule breaks down when thinking about a flat piece of wood attached to rope. My mind says that's only a vehicle if someone chooses to use it as such for pulling objects or people. I'll leave the search for a universal maxim to others, it seems.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - 3y ago
evandale 3y ago
I was similar, a bicycle is a vehicle and I even called the toycar a vehicle because I think they were talking about those cars kids build and race down hills. I was considering more about "how is this typically powered?" and "what is the F=ma if it hit someone?" If it's typically not human powered, a human typically rides it, it's typically heavy, and typically accelerates enough to seriously injure another person with minimal damage to yourself it's a vehicle. That's why skateboards and horses aren't vehicles but the bike and toy car was. Even the bike is dicey but it's fairly unanimous throughout the world that a bike is a vehicle.

sethammons 3y ago

A non functional tank. It is the same as a painting of a tank or a statue.

bscphil 3y ago
A broken car is still a car! If I pushed a broken down Honda Civic into the park with the gear shift set to neutral and left it there, surely that would break the rule?
- chipsa 3y ago
  Is a sculpture of a car a vehicle? The broken car is still a car because the intent of the thing is stop to be a car. A memorial tank is not intended to be a vehicle, but rather be a sculpture. A sculpture is usually not a vehicle, even if it may look like one.

cgriswald 3y ago

In the absence of a definition of vehicle I chose to define it as any device that is a conveyance. Thus a wagon, rowboat, and skateboard are all vehicles in the park (even if not in use). However, the tank was not functional. Since it cannot convey it is therefore not a conveyance and therefore not a vehicle. It’s only shaped like a familiar one. I matched the majority only 11% of the time.

Tao3300 3y ago
I can't find any definition of tank that doesn't describe it as an armored fighting vehicle. If it's a tank, it's a vehicle. If it's not a vehicle, don't call it a tank. The scenario said tank. A tank is a vehicle. No vehicles in the park. Edit: I matched 11% as well!
- HelloMcFly 3y ago
  Does the tank ever become not a vehicle? Rusted to the frame? In my view no matter what the tank originally was, it ceases to be a vehicle when it can no longer act as a conveyance. A tank (and any vehicle) is not just a form, but a function. Is a car with no motor, no tires, no transmission a vehicle? I do not believe so, because it cannot and lacks the possibility of moving without a substantial transformation.
  - Tao3300 3y ago
    Is a bicycle only a vehicle if equipped with a human?
    - HelloMcFly 3y ago
      The bicycle is quite capable of acting as conveyance for a human (or perhaps bicycle peddling robot, or trained animal) in its current form, so that's an easy "no" from me. As I said, if the thing can (i.e., without significant, non-trivial alterations to its current form) act as conveyance then it is a vehicle. It need not be in the act of conveyance, nor must it have an independent means of propulsion. Edit: my simple rule breaks down when thinking about a flat piece of wood attached to rope. My mind says that's only a vehicle if someone chooses to use it as such for pulling objects or people. I'll leave the search for a universal maxim to others, it seems.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - 3y ago

evandale 3y ago

I was similar, a bicycle is a vehicle and I even called the toycar a vehicle because I think they were talking about those cars kids build and race down hills. I was considering more about "how is this typically powered?" and "what is the F=ma if it hit someone?" If it's typically not human powered, a human typically rides it, it's typically heavy, and typically accelerates enough to seriously injure another person with minimal damage to yourself it's a vehicle. That's why skateboards and horses aren't vehicles but the bike and toy car was. Even the bike is dicey but it's fairly unanimous throughout the world that a bike is a vehicle.