Why We Drive: Toward a Philosophy of the Open Road
- Downloads：3391
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-06-16 17:30:57
- Update Date：2025-09-07
- Status：finish
- Author：Matthew B. Crawford
- ISBN：0062741977
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
From "one of the most influential thinkers of our time" （Sunday Times）， a brilliant and defiant celebration of driving as a unique pathway of human freedom， one now critically threatened by automation。
"A thoughtful， entertaining， and substantive work about the joys of driving。" —Wall Street Journal
"Why We Drive weaves philosophers， thinkers， and scientific research with shade-tree mechanics and racers to defend our right to independence， making the case that freedom of motion is essential to who we are as a species。 。。。 We hope you'll read it。" —Road & Track
Once we were drivers， the open road alive with autonomy， adventure， danger， trust， and speed。 Today we are as likely to be in the back seat of an Uber as behind the wheel ourselves。 Tech giants are hurling us toward a shiny， happy “self-driving” future， selling utopia but equally keen to advertise to a captive audience strapped into another expensive device。 Are we destined， then， to become passengers， not drivers？ Why We Drive reveals that much more may be at stake than we might think。
Ten years ago， in the New York Times-bestselling Shop Class as Soulcraft， philosopher-mechanic Matthew B。 Crawford—a University of Chicago PhD who owned his own motorcycle shop—made a revolutionary case for manual labor， one that ran headlong against the pretentions of white-collar office work。 Now， using driving as a window through which to view the broader changes wrought by technology on all aspects of contemporary life， Crawford investigates the driver’s seat as one of the few remaining domains of skill， exploration， play—and freedom。
Blending philosophy and hands-on storytelling， Crawford grounds the narrative in his own experience in the garage and behind the wheel， recounting his decade-long restoration of a vintage Volkswagen as well as his journeys to thriving automotive subcultures across the country。 Crawford leads us on an irreverent but deeply considered inquiry into the power of faceless bureaucracies， the importance of questioning mindless rules， and the battle for democratic self-determination against the surveillance capitalists。 A meditation on the competence of ordinary people， Why We Drive explores the genius of our everyday practices on the road， the rewards of “folk engineering，” and the existential value of occasionally being scared shitless。
Witty and ingenious throughout， Why We Drive is a rebellious and daring celebration of the irrepressible human spirit。
"A thoughtful， entertaining， and substantive work about the joys of driving。" —Wall Street Journal
"Why We Drive weaves philosophers， thinkers， and scientific research with shade-tree mechanics and racers to defend our right to independence， making the case that freedom of motion is essential to who we are as a species。 。。。 We hope you'll read it。" —Road & Track
Once we were drivers， the open road alive with autonomy， adventure， danger， trust， and speed。 Today we are as likely to be in the back seat of an Uber as behind the wheel ourselves。 Tech giants are hurling us toward a shiny， happy “self-driving” future， selling utopia but equally keen to advertise to a captive audience strapped into another expensive device。 Are we destined， then， to become passengers， not drivers？ Why We Drive reveals that much more may be at stake than we might think。
Ten years ago， in the New York Times-bestselling Shop Class as Soulcraft， philosopher-mechanic Matthew B。 Crawford—a University of Chicago PhD who owned his own motorcycle shop—made a revolutionary case for manual labor， one that ran headlong against the pretentions of white-collar office work。 Now， using driving as a window through which to view the broader changes wrought by technology on all aspects of contemporary life， Crawford investigates the driver’s seat as one of the few remaining domains of skill， exploration， play—and freedom。
Blending philosophy and hands-on storytelling， Crawford grounds the narrative in his own experience in the garage and behind the wheel， recounting his decade-long restoration of a vintage Volkswagen as well as his journeys to thriving automotive subcultures across the country。 Crawford leads us on an irreverent but deeply considered inquiry into the power of faceless bureaucracies， the importance of questioning mindless rules， and the battle for democratic self-determination against the surveillance capitalists。 A meditation on the competence of ordinary people， Why We Drive explores the genius of our everyday practices on the road， the rewards of “folk engineering，” and the existential value of occasionally being scared shitless。
Witty and ingenious throughout， Why We Drive is a rebellious and daring celebration of the irrepressible human spirit。
Reviews
Cole
，
I feel like this book deserves a written review。 This book explains the philosophy behind a lot of things about old cars and simply classic mechanical processes I already preferred but couldn’t explain besides the overused explanation of tradition and descriptor of having an “old soul”。 The premise of this book that the automation of driving and other technology takes away more from us the connivence we gain is expertly driven home。 The freedom， privacy， and skills we are willingly and unknowing I feel like this book deserves a written review。 This book explains the philosophy behind a lot of things about old cars and simply classic mechanical processes I already preferred but couldn’t explain besides the overused explanation of tradition and descriptor of having an “old soul”。 The premise of this book that the automation of driving and other technology takes away more from us the connivence we gain is expertly driven home。 The freedom， privacy， and skills we are willingly and unknowingly giving away paints a scary picture。 Warning this book will make you reevaluate a lot of technology you are currently using。 It may even make you question what was in all those “Read and Accept these terms” we most certainly didn’t read。 。。。more
Zach Taras
，
While I think there are areas of considerable political disagreement between Crawford and myself， I was nonetheless impressed with this book， and appreciated his arguments。 I think his overall thesis is somewhat misplaced: the likelihood of a fully automated， driverless city - made possible by a dystopian world of high-tech supremacy - is really quite remote。 A far more desirable （and likely） development would be the massive ramping-up of public transit， an obvious net benefit from virtually any While I think there are areas of considerable political disagreement between Crawford and myself， I was nonetheless impressed with this book， and appreciated his arguments。 I think his overall thesis is somewhat misplaced: the likelihood of a fully automated， driverless city - made possible by a dystopian world of high-tech supremacy - is really quite remote。 A far more desirable （and likely） development would be the massive ramping-up of public transit， an obvious net benefit from virtually any perspective。 Cars and cities， aside from some very marginal cases， just don't mix， and this fundamental modern insight is missing from Crawford's central thesis。 However， he's right to decry the creeping overreach of Big Tech， and the resulting loss of mystery and mastery from everyday life。 He's on far better ground when he's talking about racing， or motorcycle riding， or really any kind of locomotion that doesn't entail the kinds of disastrous trade-off endemic to the centrality of modern car culture: clotted， dangerous cities， unsustainable suburban sprawl， carbon extraction and air pollution。 His complaints are therefore only intermittently compelling， and his paeans are far more interesting。 In any case， a fine writer and an original thinker， even if his perspective can be frustratingly limited at times。 。。。more
Gaetano Venezia
，
Ode to the Joys of Driving: Toward a Rejection of the Self-Driving FutureCrawford eloquently explores the underdeveloped "philosophy of the open road。" He organizes the book's essays loosely around the joys of automotive culture and experience， frequently contrasting the heyday of automotive freedom with our increasingly technologically-intermediated experiences; self-driving cars may not be fully here， but carmakers have long been distancing us from the mechanics of driving through proliferatin Ode to the Joys of Driving: Toward a Rejection of the Self-Driving FutureCrawford eloquently explores the underdeveloped "philosophy of the open road。" He organizes the book's essays loosely around the joys of automotive culture and experience， frequently contrasting the heyday of automotive freedom with our increasingly technologically-intermediated experiences; self-driving cars may not be fully here， but carmakers have long been distancing us from the mechanics of driving through proliferating sensors， digitalization， safety alarms， and assistive features。 Most of the essays are punchy and easy to get through， taking us from the visceral energy of hot rods and dirt bikes to the latest， tech-filled sports car to the unusual skill of drifting to the unlikely success of a jerry-rigged fix。 Several essays even bring in interdisciplinary research and theory—like embodied cognition and political philosophy—in order to strengthen Crawford's claims about the deep sense of control， autonomy， and democratic freedom that automobiles enable。 I myself have had a similar positive， expansive experience with automobiles and so I resonated with much of Crawford’s praise。Unfortunately， Crawford’s sentiments sour and his arguments weaken when turning his eye toward our self-driving future。 Towards the end of the book， it becomes apparent that Crawford is orienting each essays towards the ills of self-driving as an experience and as an industry。 While he raises interesting objections considering the tradeoffs of safetyism， reveals the shady business practices of would-be self-driving tech giants like Uber， and brings some under-reported conservative insights to the discussion， his wariness of the tech world doesn’t pair well with the other essays。 His arguments for the benefits of the automobile are enough to make his case against an all-encompassing， self-driving future。 His case for the negatives of the tech world are far less convincing and reveal Crawford's shortcomings。Anyone who has spent time in the tech world will notice interesting parallels to the automotive world。 Like automobiles， computers and software have enabled new control over the environment， created new social networks and opportunities， and even fostered transcendent experiences。 Crawford has no eye for such parallels。 Crawford instead hones in on the ills of Big Tech as representative of the ills of the digital world， contrasting this technocracy with all the positives he has relayed about automotive culture。 Thus， Crawford fails to acknowledge the informal tech world or realistically consider the ills of the automotive world。In framing his objections to self-driving cars being developed by large tech companies， he makes a distinction between the accessibility and DIY culture of cars versus computers。 He argues that computers are much more arcane and don’t have the same kind of openness to revision and customization。 Hence we are moving from a freewheeling， democratic world to a sterile， Big-Tech-Bro technocracy。 But the digital world has been far more democratic and the vehicular world far more technocratic than Crawford admits。Crawford's examples of computer’s failings focus on things like long， circuitous customer service phone calls and the proprietary control of important software like Microsoft Word。 These frustrating features of the tech world contrast with Crawford’s own ability to weave deftly through the world of motor vehicles—meeting various experts and talking shop with them， making unique fixes on his cars by jerry-rigging technology from several unrelated vehicles， and participating in professional racing events。 Crawford knows his subject matter deeply and so it appears very open-ended and democratic to him。 But for those who don’t share Crawford’s gear-headedness， cars more often appear complex conflagrations of complaints。 There’s a whole set of societal norms around avoiding scams at repair shops。 Fuel-injection services and regular transmission fluid replacement sound great until you realize your service manual never mentions fuel-injection and recommends only one transmission flush every 100，000 miles。 And these are just top-level maintenance services。 Even more complicated are engine failures and partial rebuilds of components。 Crawford himself notes the byzantine， unintuitive system that OEM manufacturers use for parts。 Crawford is of course able to bypass this system because of his years of experience， knowledgeable gear-head network， and extensive free time。 But most people cannot or will not devote this much time to the endeavor （and they may still find much of the vehicular world unintuitive）。As for the democratic digital world， computers and software can be extremely accessible once one has learned the basics （like Crawford has with motor vehicles）。 DIY tech culture is strong （and one of the fastest growing subcultures as tech invades basically every industry）。 Open Source （free and unrestricted） software makes up a huge portion of software that everyone uses。 Even software that one buys is likely using mostly open source software under the hood。 （In my industry of web development， recent estimates put 97% of the code as being open source。） Hobbyists and large corporations alike contribute to open source projects。 There are thriving subcultures for various technologies， computer languages， experimental tech， competitions， research， etc。 There’s not an easy way to quantify the breadth of digital or automotive subcultures， but I think it fair to say that both are healthy， thriving， and create important democratic outlets that technocracy has a hard time colonizing。（As an unsurprising and probably damning aside， Crawford nowhere acknowledges the affect of automobiles on climate change and how that could literally decimate the notion of freedom and democracy he claims automobiles engender）。In sum， Crawford's academic sympathy for conservative philosophy and contrarian love of gas-guzzling leads to a provocative and insightful series of essays。 But ultimately he relies too much on his own predilections and fails to fairly depict the tech world versus the automotive world—let alone climate change。 Regardless， I’ve seen few serious essays exploring these topics and so I still highly recommend this book， especially to the gearhead and tech bro。 。。。more
Peter Harrington
，
A good read for anyone who wishes to know what and how a mechanic thinks。。。while I am not a mechanic， I have found that life has also taken me down the road of building a classic car， therefore often I could relate with the writer about many of his points and arguments。 This read provided me with a few good laughs， several hours of enjoyment and another book to be cherished in my library。
Michael Clemens
，
Acerbic and timely。
Rafa Willisch
，
An entertaining and witty book somehow contradictory from time to time in its arguments。
Jesse
，
This is a fantastic book。 For anyone who enjoys driving。 For anyone who is exasperated with the growing insanity of the popular political landscape。Crawford does not criticize anyone except on the basis of their own choices， and in a spirit of human solidarity。 Anyone who is offended by this has either misunderstood the argument or is perhaps themselves a sore subject of critique。
Jo
，
A great book on an alarming subject。 Key ideas include overdetermination， totalizing logic， the safety-industrial complex， and surveillance capitalism， represented by the campaign toward a driverless future。 But it's also thoroughly enjoyable - well-written and full of earthy， intelligent， sometimes irreverent commentary。 I like this guy as much as I like Steven Pinker！ A great book on an alarming subject。 Key ideas include overdetermination， totalizing logic， the safety-industrial complex， and surveillance capitalism， represented by the campaign toward a driverless future。 But it's also thoroughly enjoyable - well-written and full of earthy， intelligent， sometimes irreverent commentary。 I like this guy as much as I like Steven Pinker！ 。。。more
Susen
，
While there were several redeeming qualities to this book， one could not miss the little political digs this author slipped in。 Tiring and unnecessary。 The best part of the book was about the driving rats。
Chris
，
Very disjointed。 One could argue the entire book is a digression as he goes off on tangents and down gear head rabbit holes。 He has a lot to say and he’s passionate with some good insights。 However， he’s a voice crying out to a world that has been hypnotized by high tech。
Aaron
，
Fun to read。 A book in which the author has a clear political philosophy but doesn't beat the reader over the head with it deserve to be treasured。 Crawford shows and tells in a way that honors the American traditions of locomotion in a thoughtful and irreverent fashion that should appeal to anyone who still thinks self-government （in the smallest sense） is still ok。 Fun to read。 A book in which the author has a clear political philosophy but doesn't beat the reader over the head with it deserve to be treasured。 Crawford shows and tells in a way that honors the American traditions of locomotion in a thoughtful and irreverent fashion that should appeal to anyone who still thinks self-government （in the smallest sense） is still ok。 。。。more
Jack Clark
，
A fantastic book which not only makes you think about the act of driving， but also considers the Liberty which we have， or do not have， in modern society。 It uses driving as an analogy for life and freedom which is slowly being eroded by surveillance capitalism
Jared Smith
，
Crawford has a tendency to slip into current affairs territory。 And a contrarian streak that is arguably conservative and might turn some readers off。 But the detours into political commentary are made up for by the philosophy。 An insightful work， I hope it gets the attention it deserves。
Karl Nehring
，
I wanted to like this book but just could not get through it。 After reading about 15 pages or so， I found that something about the writing style or authorial voice just put me off。 I put it in the "back to the library" stack and picked up another book。 I do not often do this。 I wanted to like this book but just could not get through it。 After reading about 15 pages or so， I found that something about the writing style or authorial voice just put me off。 I put it in the "back to the library" stack and picked up another book。 I do not often do this。 。。。more
Michel Lamblin
，
Possibly mistitled。 Unlike Crawford's first book， whose subheading for the UK version is "Why Office Work is Bad for Us， and Fixing Things Feels Good，" his latest doesn't directly answer the question posited but rather addresses the darker side of automation and corporate techdom's push for self-driving cars， all in the name of convenience and safety。 The final chapter， 'If Google Built Cars'， is particularly harrowing in its prognosis of our declining grip on sovereignty over our selves， our mo Possibly mistitled。 Unlike Crawford's first book， whose subheading for the UK version is "Why Office Work is Bad for Us， and Fixing Things Feels Good，" his latest doesn't directly answer the question posited but rather addresses the darker side of automation and corporate techdom's push for self-driving cars， all in the name of convenience and safety。 The final chapter， 'If Google Built Cars'， is particularly harrowing in its prognosis of our declining grip on sovereignty over our selves， our moving bodies through our world， and our overall autonomy。 It's a shame—or sobering—that he ends his genre jumping and self-admittedly disparate and slightly schizoid discourse （a mix of personal stories of his biking and driving adventures， his neverending project to soup up an old VW Beetle with his own mostly self-built air-cooled engine， the subcultures of various racing and driving enthusiast communities， and much more） on such a dark note。 Because the whole book is a joy to read and will make even the regular Joes and Judies out there （who， like myself， would seriously hesitate to label themselves as car aficionados of any sort） appreciate their own mastery of driving whatever they drive as a skill that affords a much needed sense of freedom and independence in an ever-controlling and micro-managing society that sees AI and Big Data as an assured and settled （is it？） path to progress。 The book has again reminded me of these dangers， and the source for much of the discussion on surveillance capitalism in the last chapter， Shoshanna Zuboff's The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power， will probably be my next avenue of inquiry。。。 。。。more
David
，
Philosophy meets the open road。 Read it over the summer and loved it。 Driving is so much more than going to and from。 Plus， automated cars， GPS， and so much more is limiting our brains ability to tap into space and place。 Read at your own risk。 The future is not as bright as some will think if automation takes away our one true freedom - the open road， the wind in our hair， and the wheel in our hands。
Bill Zawrotny
，
Really good book！ Great writing about driving and being a car enthusiast （real cars， not appliances） from a somewhat libertarian perspective。
Robert Vincent
，
Anyone who knows me well， knows that I love to be on the road。 So， when I discovered “Why We Drive” from reading another book referencing author Crawford’s book， I jumped at the opportunity to read it。 I was not disappointed。 He covered all and more of what I love and hate， and everything in between about vehicles， the road， and even the philosophy of the whole experience。 The subtitle: “Toward a PHILOSOPHY of the Open Road” held true in my reader’s eye。I fully agree with the author that our soc Anyone who knows me well， knows that I love to be on the road。 So， when I discovered “Why We Drive” from reading another book referencing author Crawford’s book， I jumped at the opportunity to read it。 I was not disappointed。 He covered all and more of what I love and hate， and everything in between about vehicles， the road， and even the philosophy of the whole experience。 The subtitle: “Toward a PHILOSOPHY of the Open Road” held true in my reader’s eye。I fully agree with the author that our society， people should not “try to duplicate the efficiency of their driving practices with computers， that we instead look to such practices to remind ourselves what human beings are capable of， when left to their own devices。” You see， driving is an experience and opportunity for self-reliance and the thrill of the road。 “The pleasure of driving is the pleasure of DOING something， of being actively and skillfully engaged with a reality that pushes back against us。 Only then do we feel the progress of our own mastery。 In skilled activities， we sometimes recover the joy of childhood play， that period in life when we were discovering new powers in our own bodies…What we have currently is a dysfunctional hybrid of human control that makes little use of the exquisite connections between mind and body， plus a crude interface of symbols。” My sense of driving is being on the road and enjoying the handling of my car; Crawford hit me squarely where I find great satisfaction， behind the wheel on the road and in control。 （This is all spelled out in the chapter titled， “Feeling the Road”; how appropriate）。The reader finds out fast that Crawford cares little for the “self-driving car”， automation of basic driving human responsibilities， and the so-called “smart-city” that controls all aspects of traffic using every tech innovation lead by google gathering information to be used against the individual， the driver。 But what I enjoyed so much in this read was the completeness of the descriptions of the car and driving package。 Crawford gives a comprehensive yet straight forward and simple narrative outline of the workings of the internal combustion engine， the wealth of the wrecking yard （the wrecking yard “is a deposit of cultural ore to be mined and enjoyed today”）， the joy of building an old VW （“restoring an old car becomes a metaphysical obsession that defies any honest cost-benefit analysis”）， the management of traffic， the experience of racing cars and motorcycles （“who races with broken bones， demonstrates that one can come back from injury to continue to breathe the intoxication of a dream”）， and the beauty of observing the environment from behind the wheel， and much more…Some salient quotes from the book:When restoring an old car: “Measure everything， trust nobody， and make it from scratch if need be。”Concerning the letter of the law and the spirit of the law: “There is a conflict between what feels natural and reasonable in the particular circumstances—the emptiness of the intersection invites movement—and the law， which is indifferent to these circumstances。 You feel this as an arbitrary restriction on the movement of your body， like an animal trapped in a Plexiglas enclosure: the barrier has no earthly features， and doesn’t make sense to your body。” “…rule following becomes its own justification， and it fills…with a lust for enforcement even when there probably isn’t， in fact， any rule to cover…” the so called offense。The author’s final statement closing the book: “But on a sports bike on a canyon road， for a brief spell I feel raised up from my God-given mediocrity。 By a machine！ What a miracle。” 。。。more
Mark Seeley
，
Fabulous book on several levels。 It's a call to trust not in machines or technology。 They present unintended consequences against our humanity。 Crawford's brief concluding remarks are worth the price of the book。 I borrowed my copy from the library， but I will buy it （or ask for it as an X-Mas gift） for a second go-around。 You can't mark up library books。 Fabulous book on several levels。 It's a call to trust not in machines or technology。 They present unintended consequences against our humanity。 Crawford's brief concluding remarks are worth the price of the book。 I borrowed my copy from the library， but I will buy it （or ask for it as an X-Mas gift） for a second go-around。 You can't mark up library books。 。。。more
Lesbianfunworld Online
，
Disappointing。 It's like the author himself said， when asked where he was going。 "Nowhere， fast。" Disappointing。 It's like the author himself said， when asked where he was going。 "Nowhere， fast。" 。。。more
Iancu S。
，
Ever wonder why， to prove we're not robots， we have to select the cars and traffic signs that are training Google's self-driving alorithms - thus narrowing the distance between us and the robots？ 'Why We Drive' is an attempt to sound the alarm against the seemingly relentless march of 'connectivity' and 'smart' devices supplanting dumb （or at least 'biased'） humans。With my admiration for Crawford's work matched only by a deep loathing of 'Top Gear' and macho motor narcissism， I approached this b Ever wonder why， to prove we're not robots， we have to select the cars and traffic signs that are training Google's self-driving alorithms - thus narrowing the distance between us and the robots？ 'Why We Drive' is an attempt to sound the alarm against the seemingly relentless march of 'connectivity' and 'smart' devices supplanting dumb （or at least 'biased'） humans。With my admiration for Crawford's work matched only by a deep loathing of 'Top Gear' and macho motor narcissism， I approached this book like some kind of Schrödinger's car with devils and angels trapped inside。 'The World Beyond Your Head'， his previous volume， was a masterful investigation of one downside of the Enlightenment enthroning the individual as self-legislator - that it engenders a kind of isolation， or disengagement from the world。 Yes， in an essential political sense， we should live under and act by laws of our own making， but there are other kinds of freedom which *require* constraints - to freely improvise， a jazz musician must first learn his scales; a carpenter （or sculptor） must work 'with the grain' of the wood。 The individual is not always the ultimate arbiter， particularly in domains - the trades， the arts - where there are external standards of excellence。 'Plumbers don't plumb to impress other plumbers'， as Nassim Taleb put it; a shoddy， leaky repair is visible to all。 Crawford's first book （'Shop Class as Soulcraft'） explored this in more depth， looking at how the trades （and manual labour） are all but depleted of cultural capital in 'the service economy' and 'the information age'; at how our use of tools and gadgets has become more frequent， but much more superficial: we've become less capable of repairing things - and in an age of products designed for 'planned obsolescence'， that was bad for business anyway。 One important upshot of his past investigations was that the more society fosters self-sufficient individuals with a trigger-happy disposition for 'says who？' as the knock-down response to critique， the more we open up a marketplace for our unique， sovereign preferences to be sold to the highest bidder。 That one of the most common social manifestation of individualism is consumerism is not really news。 But there are other manifestations which increasingly come to resemble rebellion， or at least resistance。 This is where this book comes in。 On Crawford's reading， driving is an activity that illustrates important features of a humanistic outlook worth preserving: the ability to exercise skill and judgment， to balance prudence and risk - more broadly， to negotiate one's individual freedom within the *collaborative* give-and-take of the road。 No doubt， such a view may strike many as a romantic idealisation far removed from the fumes， emissions， accidents， roadkill and gridlock of the modern roads。 A simplification it may be， yet it is itself a reaction to a different kind of simplification， ushered in by the marriage between behavioural economics - with its emphasis on our supposed irrationality - and Big Tech - colonising increasing parts of the public sphere and our private thoughts whilst portraying itself as a value-neutral provider of 'solutions'。 On this view， we are hopelessly biased creatures （https://www。bloomberg。com/news/articl。。。） who fail to act in accordance with our own best interests， thus ushering the need for the kind of 'libertarian paternalism' made famous by the authors of best-selling 'Nudge'， and increasingly used to put a 'scientific' spin on corporate and bureaucratic interventions。 We eat too much， save too little， play the lottery despite the odds， and， of course， drive too fast。 Crawford quotes a senior executive's conclusions after heading Google's self-driving car project: drivers need to be "less idiotic"。 But the solution is not the education of drivers to higher planes of enlightenment; it is to wrest control altogether， through the magic of self-driving cars。 As Crawford notes， 'automation has a kind of totalizing logic to it。 At each stage， remaining pockets of human judgment and discretion appear as bugs that need to be solved。 Put more neutrally， human intelligence and machine intelligence have a hard time sharing control'。 And although some might find this to be a demeaning view of our faculties， we are told it is an insult added to avoid injury: 'the logic of automation is joined， in the public mind， to the moral logic of safety， which similarly admits no limit to its expansion。 [。。。] to question Team Progress is to invite being labeled pro-death'。 To be clear - Crawford is not indulging in some simplistic rant against seatbelts and helmets and the nanny state。 There is smoke aplenty in his descriptions of drifting and demolition derbies， but his moral sensibilities are not those of pick-up drivers 'rolling coal' to own the libs。 Which is not to deny that Crawford's dismissive remarks of 'carbon tee-totallers' may well attract unsavoury fellow-travellers。 I am usually of the view that books and works of art should be interpreted for what they are， not what they aren't - but with SUVs and trucks being the second and fourth largest contributor to the growth of carbon emissions over the past decade （https://www。theguardian。com/us-news/2。。。） I found the relative absence of the environmental costs of our driving culture to be glaring。Crawford may legitimately question if the effectiveness of 'cash for clunkers' scrappage schemes may have been exaggerated， and he may be right that there are potential fuel- and emission-saving benefits from restoring， rather than discarding vehicles。 But it was dispiriting not to see the case for better stewardship of our shared natural world from an author that makes such an eloquent case for better stewardship of our objects。 Coming back to safety， Craword points out that not everything done in its name lives up to scrutiny - for example， studies have shown speed cameras are often placed not in the most dangerous， but the most *profitable* intersections （with high traffic flow and short yellow lights）。 Indeed， Crawford makes a very plausible argument that what explains the intense interest in self-driving cars by companies like Google is the possibility of tapping into hiterto inaccessible reservoirs of our attention。 Although increasingly distracted by our phones， when we drive we remain， for the most part， agents - in control， behind the wheel and focused on the road。 How profitable it would be if that hour spent on the average commute could be better *monetised* by turning drivers into consumers of content？ To be sure， some of this transfer in control is already happening - software which automatically limits speed is to be installed in new cars sold in the EU after 2022 （https://www。bbc。co。uk/news/business-4。。。） - and Crawford contemplates cars that *eventually* take you to your destination， but only after you agree to watch a few commercials， or take a detour past a store which had a promotion that you might enjoy。 Dismiss such scenarios as fanciful， if you will， but there is a deeper point here which we ought to take seriously。 Crawford warns that growing areas of society are falling under 'algorithmic governance' that is in tension with democractic accountability: there is no *account* that can be given when the outcomes of machine-learning algorithms are becoming inscrutable *even to their programmers*。 As our health， sleep and travel patterns， and social interactions get mapped out in ever more detail by projects to make our cities and homes 'smart'， it is by recourse to the logic of efficiency， convenience， 'cutting-edge' science and analytics - but not to democratic norms of transparency and distributed power。 Which is no coincidence - the book ends with a discussion of 'surveillance capitalism' whose ultimate goal is not just to predict users' actions， but to help *direct* those actions。 In a world where driverless cars are programmed to protect their passengers， our bodily safety might be higher， but it may come at the cost of growing social engineering。 Depriving children of unsupervised play and adults of unsupervised driving （which， as our love for singing behind the wheel shows， may turn to be much the same） is oblivious to the fact that testing our will against an uncertain world helps us find our limits and grow to surpass them。 Crawford is right to remind us that between the feeling of safety that comes from self-mastery and the safety that comes from knowing there is a benevolent guardian watching on stand-by， there is a world of a difference。 。。。more
Ted
，
Not too long ago， I was driving， on some errand， with my brother in law in the passenger seat of my 2010 Subaru Forester。 He asked me why I drove a car with a manual transmission。 Answer: “Because I enjoy it。” Why We Drive is a book for those of us who deliberately seek out cars with a manual transmission （an increasingly difficult task these days） simply because we enjoy driving them。 It is for those who are skeptical of the profusion of “safety features” that may have the perverse effect of al Not too long ago， I was driving， on some errand， with my brother in law in the passenger seat of my 2010 Subaru Forester。 He asked me why I drove a car with a manual transmission。 Answer: “Because I enjoy it。” Why We Drive is a book for those of us who deliberately seek out cars with a manual transmission （an increasingly difficult task these days） simply because we enjoy driving them。 It is for those who are skeptical of the profusion of “safety features” that may have the perverse effect of allowing us to be less attentive on the road。 It is for those of us who， when planning a route， will not just follow the instructions of the synthesized voice emanating from somewhere within the dashboard， but will actually look at map ahead of time （perhaps even a printed map） to understand where we are going。 Not all of us aspire to be the radical gearheads described in some of the book’s chapters， but we can sympathize with， and even admire， the impulse that motivates some to seriously muck around with vehicles， to try and make them perform in just a certain way。 Crawford develops some of the themes in his earlier books， placing them in the specific context of our cars （and motorcycles）， and they ways in which we use them。 He argues for the retention of agency in era in which big government and big tech seem determined to treat us as infants。 He argues for the mediation of experience through the senses， instead of through a digital interface。 He argues for the development of mastery， which in turns requires an acceptance of risk， in an era in which we often crave “curated experiences” （perhaps out of a fear of， or impatience with， the possibility that an experience might suck （forgetting that an experience that sucks can teach us something for the next time））。 Many of Crawford’s statements have the quality of aphorisms， statements that should prompt us to think hard about the world that is developing around us， and prompt some serious debate about whether we are in fact on a desirable path。 Some would be splendid topics for a spirited debate， for example:•tUber is not so much a tech company as an “especially aggressive practitioner of labor and financial arbitrage，”•tThe effort to develop driverless cares is not a response to public demand， but a top down project that has to be sold to the public •tThe technocrats and optimizers seek to make everything idiot proof， and pursue this by treating us like idiots 。 。 。 •t。 。 。 a people worthy of democracy must be made up of individuals capable of governing their own behavior in the first place 。 。 。 OK， folks， discuss。 I would do so， but rather than write more， will urge this book on as wide a readership as possible。 If I had to summarize Crawford’s main points， this might do it: Humans are mobile animals。 Mobility implies choice and freedom。 Driving extends and expands our ability to exercise mobility。 And the effort to systematize our driving， to reduce it to universal algorithms， and to eventually have the algorithms themselves do the driving may just be designed to undermine the choice and freedom mobility implies。 So， we need to make ourselves aware of how technology affects us， and the motives of those offering certain “conveniences，” in order to exercise prudent choices about how， when， and on what terms we accept the offer。 。。。more
Michael Schuermann
，
Another phenomenal and very readable treatise from Matthew Crawford。 He here explores the idea of sovereignty through a varied look at driving， drivers， cars， and where it’s all headed。 Two short passages suffice for whetting your appetite to pick this up and read it:“We seem to be entering a new dispensation。 Qualities once prized， such as spiritedness and a capacity for independent judgment， are starting to appear dysfunctional。 If they are to operate optimally， our machines require deference。 Another phenomenal and very readable treatise from Matthew Crawford。 He here explores the idea of sovereignty through a varied look at driving， drivers， cars， and where it’s all headed。 Two short passages suffice for whetting your appetite to pick this up and read it:“We seem to be entering a new dispensation。 Qualities once prized， such as spiritedness and a capacity for independent judgment， are starting to appear dysfunctional。 If they are to operate optimally， our machines require deference。 Perhaps what is required is an adaptation of the human spirit， to make it more smoothly compatible with a world that is to be run by a bureaucracy of machines。 Or maybe we need to burn that house down。”“To drive is to exercise one’s skill at being free， and one can’t help but feel this when one gets behind the wheel。 It seems a skill worth preserving。” 。。。more
Charles Haywood
，
Philosopher Matthew Crawford’s third book is ostensibly a book about driving， but as with all Crawford’s works， that is merely the jumping-off point。 Crawford expands our minds by exploring a range of related ideas， usually through concretizing abstractions， tying them to work done by real people in the real world。 Why We Drive uses this structure， as did his first two books， Shop Class as Soulcraft and The World Beyond Your Head。 Such writing is not for everyone; the payoff can take some time t Philosopher Matthew Crawford’s third book is ostensibly a book about driving， but as with all Crawford’s works， that is merely the jumping-off point。 Crawford expands our minds by exploring a range of related ideas， usually through concretizing abstractions， tying them to work done by real people in the real world。 Why We Drive uses this structure， as did his first two books， Shop Class as Soulcraft and The World Beyond Your Head。 Such writing is not for everyone; the payoff can take some time to arrive。 But it’s worth the modest effort required， and offers insights into critical modern problems， most of all the pernicious vice of safetyism。Why We Drive revolves around what driving tells us about human capabilities and limitations。 Crawford， as a philosopher， is very， very interested in human capacities， and how modernity affects such capacities， in particular how it often limits， or even cripples， them when appearing to enhance them。 All of his published thought revolves ultimately around the creation of agency through learned skill， and of its erosion in modern life， “a creeping colonization of the space for skilled human activity。” This is not a discussion about economic efficiency or productivity， however。 Rather， Crawford talks a great deal of man’s quest internally for meaning， and externally for status and honor， both earned through the works of his own hands。 The focus is the individual—but through the individual， society as a whole。 So why do we drive？ The question implies we drive for reasons other than to get somewhere。 We drive because driving， like other learned skills， satisfies crucial human needs。 In doing so， it improves us in a wide range of ways， many not obvious。 And taking driving away from us is therefore a problem。The backbone of this book is a view of driving machines as “a kind of prosthetic that amplifies our embodied capacities。” Crawford begins by explaining how we got to the present time， when self-driving cars， which we by definition do not drive， are imminent。 （We can ignore that I， at least， am very certain self-driving cars will never actually arrive。） Crawford considers the history of cars in urban life， good and bad （citing Jane Jacobs’ plus/minus thoughts on cars）， noting that the prevalence of cars was a deliberate choice by central authorities。 Who are today’s central authorities for most purposes？ Our tech overlords。 What do they want？ Self-driving cars。 Why？ So we can be more creative in our increased free time， as they say？ No。 “Self-driving cars must be understood as one more escalation in the war to claim and monetize every moment of life that might otherwise offer a bit of private head space。” Driverless cars are not driven by consumer demand; they are “a top-down project that has to be sold to the public。” Inevitability is asserted by the Narrative and all must bow; you will be required to use a driverless car， the infrastructure and technology of which will not be held in common， but owned by our tech overlords， walled off in secret vaults for their benefit， not ours。 And this will come with many， and massive， hidden costs。One of the charms of Crawford’s books is how he prevents reader fatigue at philosophy by frequently turning to stories that are concrete， interesting， and relevant。 For example， he recounts a story of his broken-down Jeep failing in rural California， sometime in the 1980s。 Later in the book we get a lengthy discussion of metalworking in the context of rebuilding a Volkswagen to be something more than a Volkswagen。 Crawford warns this discussion is not for everyone （though with my interest in metalworking， I found it fascinating）， but “To go deep into any technical field is to make progress in independence of mind， and feel a freedom to maneuver that grows in proportion with one’s powers。” This focus on “one’s powers” is perhaps the overriding theme of all Crawford’s work。In the 1980s， he was young， and he was learning about physical things in the world， engaging with his Jeep， which was somewhat of a Frankenstein’s monster he had himself built， which he understood at a visceral level。 Such engagement is rare in modern cars， where what the drivers sees and feels is a mediated representation， not （for the most part） the physical reality of the car。 New cars today are largely disengaged， disintermediated—paradoxically， whereas in older cars， the car becomes an extension of the body， “a transparent two-way conduit of information and intention，” modern technology makes this impossible， making the car even more apparent to the driver， rather than less apparent， when it relieves the driver of tasks。 But excessive disengagement not only reduces the ability to learn and improve; it also erodes psychological resilience， in cars and in anything else that can be a learned skill， and may in fact be responsible for increases in depression and anxiety， by breaking the connection between effort and consequence。 No mental engagement means limited flourishing。 Driverless cars are thus even worse than merely modern cars。 They are billed as convenient and safe; maybe they are （and maybe not） but they have deleterious consequences。The problem isn’t just the control on our lives exerted by Elon Musk’s machines， much more so it is the passivity created by any substantial automation。 Specifically， Crawford talks about Audis; I drive an A7， and although I am not a “car guy，” and rarely if ever use the vehicle’s capabilities， I can see what he means。 （I also learned that “Nardo Grey” is a paint， a matte non-metallic light grey， used by Audi on their high-end models。 I need to get that paint on my next car to look cool。） All driving becomes analogous to the “created experiences” without agency that pass for most entertainment。 “The pleasure of driving is the pleasure of doing something; of being actively and skillfully engaged with a reality that pushes back against us。” This is vanishing in today’s world， not just in cars， but everywhere。 We are not becoming sexy， creative individuals writing poetry in our self-driving cars; we are becoming the fat people on floating automated scooters from the movie WALL-E。Crawford then shifts somewhat， to the “spirit of play。” Here he talks a good deal about Johan Huizenga， who wrote a classic study of “the play element in culture，” Homo Ludens。 Play is hostility mixed with friendship， part of the “human need to fight，” and this has been found in every human culture。 But in ours， it is disfavored。 “[I]t expresses a part of the soul that sits uncomfortably with the contemporary taste for order， and is therefore subject to censure as irresponsible （on safety grounds） or， because it is competitive， as a threat to the ethic of equal esteem。” Everyday driving is （except for road rage） not part of this type of play， for the most part， but driving machines are often used in this type of play， in various forms of racing and in other competitive activities that revolve around driving， such as car modification。This introduces Crawford’s highly negative thoughts on safetyism。 Safetyism has received a fair bit of ridicule as it has inexorably heightened over the past thirty years， but it has always seemed more silly than pernicious， a matter of removing the jungle gyms so little Johnny doesn’t cry when he scrapes his knee。 That was a wrong judgment， as we have seen in the incredibly destructive， unhinged， hysterical reactions to the Wuhan Plague， the logical end result， or perhaps only intermediate result， of unbridled safetyism。 Crawford wrote before the Plague， so it is absent here， but much of what he says is exemplified by what has happened in our country in the past six months。Crawford points out that safetyism is primarily a symptom of declining societal trust。 “Rules become more necessary as trust and solidarity decline in society。 And reciprocally， the proliferation of rules， and the disposition of rule following that they encourage， further erode our readiness to extend to our fellow citizens a presumption of competence and good will。” Self-governance of a polity is rooted in activities that demand cooperation not mediated by government action。 Driving is precisely such an activity， though only one of many。 Automation is a response to lack of trust—if we cannot trust each other on the road， automation will fill the gap。 Yet automation itself increases lack of trust in other drivers; each driver becomes “spiritless” and less capable （a problem also found in automated airplane cockpits）， especially in an emergency， when trust in others needs to be at a maximum。 We become incompetent as a result。 Thus， we hand over our agency， our human capacities， to those who make the rules， the lords of tech or the state， which are increasingly the same thing。 And they take action to keep us safe， since we are no longer capable of cooperating to balance safety with other needs。 This process has no logical end。Not just activity， but the rules themselves， are automated in the name of safety。 “Left to its own internal logic， the regime of public safety must find ways to justify its own growing payroll， and its colonization of ever more domains of life。 This can always be accomplished through further infantilization of its clients; under the banner of good democratic values。” The result is very bad。 “Infrastructure predicted on too rigid an ideal of control fails to accommodate the exercise of our human capacities， or to exploit the social efficiencies they offer， leading instead to the atrophy of the human。” This is true for automated cars; it is also true for society as a whole， Crawford says， citing James C。 Scott’s Seeing Like A State。 Shared norms， on the other hand， such as those developed during driving， create trust and allow mutual prediction of others’ action （which is why diversity is not our strength， totally aside from driving， and Crawford cites Robert Putnam’s study proving this obvious truth）。 They are the solution; we should go back to them。 Organic growth， whether of towns or driving， may look disordered， but it is resilient and far more efficient than it appears to outsiders。 We give up the common law， which provided legitimacy， and we allow it to be replaced by rules issued by faceless men， or by computers， based on opaque Big Data， which we must not question， because the experts tell us this is the Right Thing To Do。Pushing back against this is very difficult （particularly， though Crawford does not say so， in a social media-dominated environment filled with shrieking Karens）， and safetyism is then used by people for their own purposes， large and small。 “Those who invoke safety enjoy a nearly nonrebuttable presumption of public-spiritedness， so a stated concern for safety becomes a curtain behind which various entities can collect rents from perfectly reasonable behavior。” Crawford’s focus is on speed cameras and the like， but the preening self-regard earned by those demanding safety is a much broader phenomenon （yesterday， in my semi-rural area， a woman posted on Nextdoor congratulations to two small boys riding their bikes wearing masks， “for keeping us all safe，” causing me to vomit all over the screen）。 This is not only dumb， but “[T]he pursuit of risk reduction tends to create a society based on an unrealistically low view of human capacities，” which frequently exacerbates the very problems safetyism supposedly is meant to solve。 With respect to cars， while some safety devices such as traction control no doubt save lives， drivers in modern cars lose embodied cognition， making driver incompetence， and thus ever-increasing reliance on semi-automated systems， a self-fulfilling prophecy—thereby decreasing safety。 Thus， any driverless car that is only semi-automated may increase， rather than reduce， danger—especially with the herd mentality in favor of such cars， which has led to manipulation of data that understates their risks。 Yet “the logic of automation is joined， in the public mind， to the moral logic of safety， which similarly admits no limit to its expansion。”Crawford never comes out and says it exactly， but safetyism is tied to a society excessively skewed toward the feminine。 With all of Crawford’s books， men are the focus， something he does not specifically advert to， but which is entirely obvious。 Nearly all his discussion， both practical and philosophical， revolves around primarily male talents， traits， and interests: risk， justification through endeavor， competition， combat， the desire to feel fear and overcome it， the creation of things with one’s hands。 As far as safetyism being the feminization of society， this comes through in Crawford’s talk about play， which in the sense Crawford discusses it means societally-organized and recognized competition。 Crawford notes that for the player， almost always distinction is the goal， not domination。 “[I]t is the aspect of the contest， the thirst for distinction， that Huizenga identifies as the crucial， civilizing element of play。” This thirst is an essential building block of society; Crawford cites Huizenga for the proposition that “The contest for honor gives rise to deference and trust among players，” in part because “[u]nlike the simple lust for power， [games] require that participants recognize the legitimacy of standards that aren’t simply emanations of their own will。”But the quest for honor and distinction is far more a male instinct than a female instinct; thus men are the crucial players， and a society run wholly by women would entirely lack both this quest and its benefits。 Why a particularly defective brand of feminine thought， of ways of feminine thinking， has come to dominate the ruling classes of the West is a topic for another time （soon！）， but one symptom of this disease is that competitive play is today strongly discouraged by those who rule society。 Sometimes this is demanded obliquely， under the guise of increased safety （for the children！）， but now is often demanded openly， to end “toxic masculinity，” meaning all masculinity。 The result of eliminating competitive play is therefore feminization， but not one where the feminine virtues are amplified—rather one where equal esteem is forced through eliminating the quest for honor， thereby harming society， and most of all eroding trust， without any benefit。 Crawford says forbidding competitive games leads to infantilism， to a failure to understand reality and its limitations， which “guarantees arrested development on a mass scale。” Games， especially risky games， build societies and civilizations。 Lack of games， the reverse。 Moreover， when equal esteem is forced， people become easier to control—which is why those in charge of our schools hate and fear traditional competitive games。 They want feminine-type compliance and agreeableness， little boys marching quietly in a line。There are some places where this is still not true 。 。 。 [Review completes as first comment。] 。。。more
Mike Lutz
，
Here's one sentence from the book:Between the quiet smoothness， the passivity， and the sense of being cared for by some surrounding entity you can’t quite identify， driving a modern car is a bit like returning to the womb。The essence of Crawford's book is that autonomous cars， rather than freeing us， will be another step on the path to deskilling us， making us subservient to what should be tools。 He earns against the ways in which such tools can be used by "totalitarian capitalism" to reduce ris Here's one sentence from the book:Between the quiet smoothness， the passivity， and the sense of being cared for by some surrounding entity you can’t quite identify， driving a modern car is a bit like returning to the womb。The essence of Crawford's book is that autonomous cars， rather than freeing us， will be another step on the path to deskilling us， making us subservient to what should be tools。 He earns against the ways in which such tools can be used by "totalitarian capitalism" to reduce risk by （a） learning our ways and preferences then （b） using this as a not-so-subtle mechanism to nudge us to make predefined "decisions"。 Think Google Ads on steroids （Google figures prominently in Crawford's analysis）。Highly recommended。 。。。more
Fish
，
Enjoyed the book a great deal。 I really like Matthew Crawford's stuff。 He's a crucial thinker/writer for our age。 Enjoyed the book a great deal。 I really like Matthew Crawford's stuff。 He's a crucial thinker/writer for our age。 。。。more
Justin Matthews
，
Cultural commentary meets political philosophy meets memoir meets Car and Driver。 It's fun to read a book about a thing you do nearly every day but likely take for granted; Crawford pops the hood and allows us to take a closer look inside。 Well-written， funny， and insightful: a great addition to the Crawford corpus。 Cultural commentary meets political philosophy meets memoir meets Car and Driver。 It's fun to read a book about a thing you do nearly every day but likely take for granted; Crawford pops the hood and allows us to take a closer look inside。 Well-written， funny， and insightful: a great addition to the Crawford corpus。 。。。more
Dennis Maione
，
A really brilliant book about driving and what it means。
Joshua
，
It’s not really about driving than it is about being human seen through the lens of driving。 For this reason， the book is for folks who want to think about community， social structures， personhood， virtues， technology， technocrats， etc。 You may get bored or turned off by the length of time he spends on his cars and the depth he goes。 I know I started。 But then I thought， “Wait， my response is the epitome of the sort of circumstance he shares we’ve found ourselves in after giving over our control It’s not really about driving than it is about being human seen through the lens of driving。 For this reason， the book is for folks who want to think about community， social structures， personhood， virtues， technology， technocrats， etc。 You may get bored or turned off by the length of time he spends on his cars and the depth he goes。 I know I started。 But then I thought， “Wait， my response is the epitome of the sort of circumstance he shares we’ve found ourselves in after giving over our control and responsibilities to private parties。 I should at least appreciate the art and performance and virtues Crawford is displaying。 The best the rest of us can do is say， “Hey， look what I bought。” “ 。。。more
Mary Jo
，