3 ms·
> driving and riding all sorts of vehicles in all sorts of wild places blessed by Natural beauty. Others likely view this as making those places no longer wild
by geophph 3y ago
> driving and riding all sorts of vehicles in all sorts of wild places blessed by Natural beauty.
Others likely view this as making those places no longer wild nor Natural.
> going into the wild with enough means (vehicles, equipment etc.) to conquer it.
> the marginal utility of a human has never been lower than it is today, thanks to automation, mechanization etc.
I'm not sure I see how these two statements don't directly contradict each other? I read this as 1) try to amass all the things you can to conquer nature but 2) a reliance on things makes humans less useful?
- JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago> > Others likely view this as making those places no longer wild nor Natural. When I say conquering it I don't mean pouring concrete or going there with RVs. I mean a small helicopter, a deltawing, a dirt bike, an ATV, a MTB etc. Stuff that is easily movable and nimble and that doesn't necessary require a road and would leave no trace of its passage. > > a reliance on things makes humans less useful? Absolutely, once upon a time every place was wild and dominated by Nature, hence those who wanted to measure themselves against Her only had to come out of their cave and it would be game on. Nowadays you need vehicles to reach wild areas because everywhere is populated by humans who have domesticated everything including themselves.