Those of you who know me well are familiar with my rants against the highway laws of this nation, specifically the ludicrous nature of our particular speed limit laws. As a result of my rebellious attitude, I have been caught, and convicted of a class I misdemeanor, and will most likely see jail time. Prior to this occasion, I was attempting with all my intellectual might (which isn’t much), to weasel out of my responsibility towards the law, and find some justification for driving in a manner I found aesthetically pleasing.
At first I was infuriated that divine providence would allow such a conviction to come against me, but I quickly realized that in His wisdom it was allowed; I needed an abrupt awakening from my ethical slumbers.
As part of an attempt to find mercy in the eyes of the civil state, I signed up for a driving class. In the first session, our instructor, Mr. Art. Von Herbulis discussed the nature of a “good driver.” His conclusion was that a “good driver” had three characteristics. He is kind, caring, and considerate. Mr. Herbulis then tasked us all with a homework assignment. We were to come up with a better definition (if at all possible).
Initially, I saw Mr. Herbulis’ definition as arbitrary, and attempted to approach the problem from a different angle; however after much consideration, I can see that (in essence) he was right, although, I think that I have come up with a description that will better fit this situation.
The terms “kind, caring, and considerate,” while encompassing some of what a good driver is, never-the-less leave out some subtle character traits that I feel of necessity must be included. In light of this, I have come up with a single word, that I think pins down a true “good driver” while also including the spirit articulated by Mr. Herbulis in his three words.
Love him or hate him, Christian philosopher Gordon H. Clark has taught me at least one thing; always define your terms! In light of Mr. Clarks advice, my discussion will proceed as follows:
I will first seek to define the terms that will be discussed. Before we can know what a good driver is, we must know what driving itself is. Any elementary study into philosophical matters will show that defining the term “good” will have particular difficulties, and that being so, I will begin by defining the term “driving,” and will save the definition of the term “good” for last (in what will turn out to be nothing more than a simple assertion.)
Once I have defined the terms, I will in section two, examine what a good driver is in light of these definitions. I’ll show that in essence, a “good driver” is “responsible.” I believe the term “responsible” adequately sums up all the nuances and subtle character traits involved in being a good driver.
Finally, I will conclude with a confession of my own wrong doing, and ask my friends and family to forgive me for sinning against our God, and our state.
PART I - Narrowing the Scope
A: What is “Driving?”
To begin with, I was going to define the term “driving” thus:
“Working towards a particular end.”
After careful consideration however, I decided that such a definition was far too broad, and tried narrowing it down to a more reasonable level.
“Manipulating affairs towards a particular end.”
This seems better to me, in that it describes a particular manner of work. We hear the term used like this in the course of our everyday conversations. He or she was “driving at a particular point during the lecture!.” Or, in a discussion with a friend, “the point I’m driving at is”. In a more physical sense, we speak of cowboys driving herds across the plains, or kids who like philosophy, driving their instructors insane!
Despite these common usages, the danger of too broad a definition still exists. I could technically say that washing dishes is “driving” in that I am manipulating my dishes towards the particular end of “cleanness.” In fact, despite my narrowing of the definition, the term is still on the brink of incoherence. Any action at all could be seen as a manipulation of events towards a particular end.
I can only see one way out of this dilemma, and that is by alluding to the particular end in the definition. While the term “driving” itself may be too broad to allow for application to particular instances, we can never-the-less, utilize it within the context of narrower situations.
Given this, it is impossible to coherently utilize the term “driving” without also simultaneously listing the particular end being driven to. Once that is accepted, then we can easily make distinctions between particular situations.
I thought of a great illustration, that will perhaps shed some light on what I mean here. Consider that in today’s society, most men are literate. For the most part, we can all read and write. Consider, for example, the state trooper who stopped me, and wrote my ticket. I’m sure he is a very skilled writer as far as it goes. His writings convey a sense of power, and importance, especially to his victim, err, umm, I mean, his fellow citizen.
However, we could not compare his writing to that of Shakespeare. While both may be “writing” both are engaging in a completely different task. Both have completely different particular ends. The student in school who as a punishment must write the phrase “I will not annoy the teacher” one hundred times on the chalk board is “writing” just the same as C.S. Lewis or Patrick Henry! But we cannot compare the two!
In this same way, we can look at driving! The great debater Daniel Webster, in his famous 1830 Senate debate with Robert Hayne of SC, drove his point home with an incredible display of dazzling oratory skill. His success however, cannot be compared with that of Richard Petty, who has also won races with equal flare. The two men were both driving, but towards completely different ends, and as such, cannot be compared. The particular end being driven to, must, of necessity be taken into consideration when talking about “driving.”
But what of the other aspect of the definition. What of the object being driven? It is this particular question, that will specifically help us narrow the scope of the discussion to a reasonable level.
Simply put, the question here is, what “type” of driving are we to discuss. As in the discussion above, the particular ends being driven to, will help determine the type of driving being done, but it is more important for now to note the object being driven. Driving cattle, and driving speed boats, are two very different things. Driving speed boats, and driving air planes, are more closely related, but still different.
It is at this point, that the scope can officially be narrowed. However, to do so, a very important fact has to be recognized. We cannot divorce the meaning of the term from the individual context in which we wish to discuss it. If I am no racer, then I cannot discuss my own driving in terms of the racer. If I am no cowboy, I cannot discuss my driving in terms of cattle. If I am no debater, I cannot discuss my driving in terms of a point.
I am no air plane captain, nor am I a cowboy, or racer. I was caught speeding in my car, and it is in the context of driving my car on a normal highway, in a normal situation, (striving to get from point A to point B) that I was apprehended, and it is in light of all this, that Mr. Von Herbulis has asked us to focus our discussion.
So the “driving” from this point on being discussed, will be the manipulation of physical vehicles (cars) in the attempt to get from point A to point B.
In addition to this conclusion, one more thing must be said. The object has been defined as a car. The particular end, has been established, and stated as, “getting from point A to point B.” This however, is still lacking. Many people utilize their vehicles to get from point A to point B. Jeff Gordon, Kyle Petty, and Dale (bless his heart) all strive to get from point A to point B, but their “particular destination” is still different from mine. Indeed, every person, every single time they utilize their vehicle as a tool, has a different purpose in mind.
You can’t very well get in your car and drive to the same store that you went to yesterday! You can only drive to the particular store, as it exists TODAY! Your purpose will be to drive to this particular store as it exists in the present! This may be a little abstract, and beside the point, but I feel that it is important to note that every single time you utilize your vehicle as a tool, it is to drive to a different end.
So, something more has to be said, in order to narrow the scope down to particular ends. The desire, or intent of the individual doing the driving, has to also be taken into account. Once we do this, then I think all the obstacles to defining what a “driver” is, will be met.
The intent of Dale Jr, is completely different than the intent of the mail man! Both are utilizing their vehicles as tools to get from point A to point B, but, both are doing so for different reasons!
So, now, I can finally describe a “driver” in my particular context, as being someone with the intent to solely get from point A to point B in the context of normal highway conditions.
B: What is “Good?”
Now that the scope of “driver” has been narrowed down to that class of people striving to get from point A to point B under normal highway conditions, I can finally consider applying to term “good” to specific members of this class. But before I do, I have to keep Mr. Clark in mind, and again, attempt to define my terms.
What is “good?” It is beyond the scope of this article to establish an answer to this question with any real coherence. This is especially true for me, since I don’t consider myself to be anything more than a novice in the art of philosophy, and as such, I will gladly defer this question to some of the greats who have gone before me.
As a Christian, I will have to appeal to the doctrine of the divine attributes of God. All that we know as “good” is a realization of Gods nature. I’ll have to simply assert this here for now, and continue my case leaving this point un-argued. (1)
Suffice it to say, I see all attempts at establishing an ethical system based on utilitarian or humanistic concepts to be arbitrary and inconsistent.
Even given this blatant assertion, I am still left with the problem of defining “good” in terms of my conclusions about driving. Consider what Immanuel Kant concludes about a good will:
“A good will is good not because of what it performs or effects, not by its aptness for the attainment of some proposed end, but simply by virtue of the volition, that is, it is good in itself, and considered by itself is to be esteemed much higher than all that can be brought about by it in favor of any inclination, nay, even of the sum total of all inclinations.” (2)
What Kant is saying here, is that, even given an objective moral standard, (such as the nature of God that I alluded to) we still must decide how to apply this objective standard to particular situations. The act we perform, in and of itself is good, not because of the effects brought about by the particular act in and of itself, but, rather, by (as Kant says) the “good in itself.” Is the act performed in agreement with the objective moral standard, (in this case Gods nature.)
With all this pointed out, I think I can finally go on to consider with some certainty, what a good driver is.
Part II - What is a Good Driver?
A good driver, is that individual, who strives to get from point A to point B under normal highway circumstances, by manipulating his or her vehicle in a manner that conforms as closely as possible to the revealed moral nature of God.
This obviously includes a great many particular things, certainly Mr. Herbulis’ suggestions: kindness, consideration of others, and caring are included. But beyond those specific traits, we are also to be loving, gentle, meek, patient, longsuffering, and display all the fruits of the spirit in our dealings with the external world. We are also to obey the laws of the land to a specific degree. (3)
All of these things can be summed up in the one word, “responsible.” When man was given the dominion mandate by God, in the book of Genesis, to “subdue the world,” we were given responsibility. We are responsible for dealing with the world in a moral way.
When we are responsible before God, we are of necessity, responsible before the state, responsible before ourselves, and our fellow man! Specifically as drivers, we are responsible for ourselves, those in the vehicle with us, those on (or near) the road around us, and we are responsible to the state that has been established over us!
I conclude that all of the traits that define a good driver can be summed up in the term: “responsible.”
Part III - In Conclusion: A Confession and Apology
Rebellion will never cease to be a sinful thing. I was seeking to rebel against laws of the land that I see as ludicrous(4). While traveling a given speed is not in and of itself a sin, the blatant disregard for my responsibility before the law of the land, was a sin, and it is one that I tried to justify before my family and my friends.
While there is a time to disregard certain laws (see footnote 3) it is never to be done in an unlawful rebellious manner. I, in my youthful foolishness didn’t realize this.
In such a way America became an Independent nation! Not by an act of rebellion on the part of the colonists, but rather, an act of injustice on the part of the King.
“The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” (5)
The colonies did not rebel against the law, but rather, the king did. The law itself was upheld by the colonies. Our responsibility before God is to always be maintained.
I apologize to everyone concerned, that I, like Adam and Eve, desired to abolish my responsibility before God, in order to establish my own rebellious autonomy over my surroundings.
My conscious is clear before God, and other men. Now, I just need to park somewhere, so I can print this out! (Just kidding, I wasn’t driving while typing! Or, was I?)
(I) For great arguments upholding the Christian doctrine of morality over and against a more utilitarian “naturalistic” view, see C.S. Lewis’ book “Miracles” chapter 5. Also, see Cornelius Van Til’s “Defense of the Faith.” Many more great critiques of normative systems of ethics like those of Ayn Rand, can be found by great Christian apologists and philosophers. I recommend the website monergism.com in addition to the books I’ve already listed, as a great place to begin reading about the subject, if you are unfamiliar.
(2) Immanuel Kant: “Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of Morals” page 18. (T.K. Abbott translation.)
(3) I’ll not here dive into a discussion about proper times to obey or disobey the law. I could however cite a few specific examples that will perhaps fit the context of our discussion. Suppose the “law” says that, stopping on the side of the road is illegal. But, you see someone on the side of the road, being attacked by a bear. In such a case, disobeying the law would be called for in order to adhere to the objective moral nature of God. Or, a more common example, suppose it starts pouring down rain, and you are driving on a road with a 75 mph speed limit. By slowing down to 45 mph, you would be totally within your rights. Or, perhaps your child is dying, and you are driving 100 mph in a 55 mph zone, to get to the hospital. Such cases, I would debate, the breaking of the law would be justified while the responsibility before God and state, is still maintained.
(4) I do think that the specific speeding laws in Fairfax county, and America, are preemptive in nature, and unfairly restrict the rights of citizens. Not only that, but the penalties for breaking these laws are unduly harsh, and in-acted inconsistently. For my own crime, the maximum penalty is 12 months in jail, and a hefty fine. It is not likely that I’ll spend more than five days in jail however, and the amount I’ll have to pay, is anyone’s guess as well. While I disagree strongly with these laws and their inconsistent enforcement, I am still responsible for obeying them. For a further case against tyrannical driving laws, or to join the fight for a just motorist “bill of rights” see the National Motorists associations website here: motorists.org/
(5) Excerpt from the Declaration of Independence.