Philosophical question

[doogs]

A lot of discussion on this forum is about new gear, which has led me to think about everyones reasons behind their bushwalking..

Do people use the latest technology in gear to go bushwalking or do they go bushwalking to use the latest technologies??

Not as easy as it sounds as I have found myself on the last couple of trips talking up my latest gear acquisitions rather than talking up the trip. Perhaps it's a reflection on our consumerism driven by discusions on this site, or it may just be my mindset at this time of year with limited overnight walks throughout the winter months.

[Nuts]

I'm amazed by gear, I could never afford it back when i went walking...

[justacouch]

Do people use the latest technology in gear to go bushwalking or do they go bushwalking to use the latest technologies??

People do different things for different reasons, but if you're not at all interested in walking and the bush, doing it just to use the toys seems like a hard way to tickle your fancy.

Gear is interesting because of the capabilities and therefore possibilities that it can bring. A four season tent lets you safely go above the snow line in winter, a significantly lighter pack lets you go faster, further or easier. From this perspective it would be excessive to own gear that overlapped too much in its capabilities (two one man winter tents, or three light led head torches).

Gear is also nice to think about during the week when you're not walking and it's interesting to discuss with mates. Ultimately though, gear is easier to talk about than the transcendental experiences it enables us to have.

Meanwhile, if you're after some more gear I'm selling some in the marketplace

[sim1oz]

+1 justacouch

People do different things for different reasons, but if you're not at all interested in walking and the bush, doing it just to use the toys seems like a hard way to tickle your fancy.

It's an interesting philosophical question! We are of the first type (undoubtably because I detest shopping), and probably won't replace gear until it dies so over time it won't even be the latest technology anymore.

When we started bushwalking again (once we got over the early years of kids) I didn't get any gear at all, just walked in sneakers and a track suit. I did regret clearing out my old boots, but generally just used what we had around the house. Once we moved to overnight and longer trips we needed camping and cooking gear. I spent hours reading on the web to work out what 'style' would suit us and hence what gear. I found all the gear discussions on this and other websites really helpful when I was in the 'kitting out phase'. Now that our gear is all sorted I mainly read the trip reports and questions about different walk areas for information and inspiration. We are not set up for snow or really hot environments, so I'd need to look at our gear again if we head in those directions. I do glance at the gear topics now and then and contribute if I have something to add to help out other people, just as I was helped by by people sharing their experiences and opinions.

We were in the Grampians last weekend and I'd say 90% of the conversation with others was about interesting walks we had done, and less than 10% about gear (from memory, gear topics included trangias, goretex socks, and titanium wood-burning stoves). It is kind of natural, though, to talk about gear if you see someone using something you haven't seen before or you are trying out something new for the first time.

[Ent]

For me gear is a means to a safer and more comfortable trip. What I am finding is old faithfuls come back once the new love has worn off and the realisation that not everything is as good as it is cracked up to be. A good tent is a wonderful thing when the weather turns and an outer-shell that keeps you warm and dry wonderful. Also nice to navigate by maps that you have created yourself. Suppose gear is important to me as I tend to walk more in winter months than summer so poor gear choice can make for a very unpleasant trip, and time pressures means that I have set weekends so go regardless of the weather, so need to be prepared for whatever comes along. Lost track of the number walks done during "bushwalker weather alerts".

On warm evenings not much thought is given to gear. Also I probably enjoy camping out more than "distance covered, things bagged, record set, etc". One of the great joys is setting up camp in a lovely spot and just ambling around watching the sun go down chatting with peoples who's company I enjoy. I see people head down expressing over a circuit ticking of peaks and such things, and see that as a sign of insanity, but then again they probably think the same about my style. For many a walk in the bush results in hours of research back home on identifying the fauna that they encountered, while for me it is mapping the area, so each to their own. My mapping is gradually drawing me more into the history of a place as name choices often explain a lot about the trail blazers of old.

Main thing is people stay safe and enjoy themselves with each to their own.

Cheers

[blacksheep]

Technology tempts. After many years of being a dedicated single-speeder , my MTB is now suddenly rocking an 11speed internal gear hub. From single speed to blingle speed in one acquistion. I still love biking, but having a new toy has kinda revitalised this activity. It's new and shiney, and makes me want to go play...isn't that kinda the point

[justacouch]

After many years of being a dedicated single-speeder, my MTB is now suddenly rocking an 11speed internal gear hub.

More gears and fewer beers?

sounding serious....

Alfines are great though, you'll love it.

[ILUVSWTAS]

Do people use the latest technology in gear to go bushwalking or do they go bushwalking to use the latest technologies??

Hmmm not sure about this... If I didnt go bushwalking, I wouldnt have the gear.

[Moondog55]

I go to get away and awaken my soul from slumber but new toys are nice. So the toys are simply a means to an end and new toys are not needed,m so the environmental response is to only buy new toys when old toys die.

[blacksheep]

After many years of being a dedicated single-speeder, my MTB is now suddenly rocking an 11speed internal gear hub.

More gears and fewer beers?

sounding serious....

Alfines are great though, you'll love it.

Who said anything about less beer

[madmacca]

or do they go bushwalking to use the latest technologies??[/b][/i]

I will admit to deliberately going on weekenders to test new gear before I take it on a week-long expedition.

But generally for me, gear is just an enabler.

[wayno]

bit of both... new gear is another excuse to get out and use it and see how or if it changes your walking experience...
and how it measures up to how you thought it might affect your experience
and whether it was really worth buying it or paying as much as you did for it....
and how long the effect of using the new item lasts,
trying to work out whether its your enthusiasm for the new item that is driving your experience with it or whether the experience is actually from the item driving the experience , or how much its a matter of your enthusiasm versus the item itself...
then working out under what circumstances you will use the device based on your experience with it,
and how often you will use it,
where does it fit in in amongst similar items in your gear....
does it fit in,
is it worthy to fit in amongst your other gear that has prove worthy?

[stepbystep]

I had and have a lot of wants gearwise but I've come to realise the kit will never be complete so now I extend the life of what I do have even if I do that by buying a secondary piece of gear. I'm really happy with what I've got and feel really privileged to be able to take it to some awesome places

[north-north-west]

I had and have a lot of wants gearwise but I've come to realise the kit will never be complete so now I extend the life of what I do have even if I do that by buying a secondary piece of gear. I'm really happy with what I've got and feel really privileged to be able to take it to some awesome places

+1
New stuff is nice, but it serves no purpose in itself.

[andrewbish]

Hmmm I would really like to see the response to this question from a certain Himalaya-bound member....

For me, the walking's the thing. I acquire new gear to increase safety and/or comfort, but ultimately the gear is just a means to the end.

[mikethepike]

a significantly lighter pack lets you go faster, further or easier.

I was considering this the other day and I'm beginning to think that, despite the lighter gear, people are taking no less weight into the bush than they did 40 years ago - in general that is and the ultra lighters aside. Changes in pack harness design lets you carry more - a lot more - for an equivalent amount of discomfort (and shoulders will never suffer as they once did no matter the weight.) so we now see up to 70-80 litre packs. But like sheds, no matter the size, the more space you have to fill, the more likely you are to fill it.
A lot of technical innovations can change the way we do things but as in most fields, they can change the way we do things things but they don't necessarily improve the overall experience. But then you are making comparisons. Change is relative but before change you have no measure. I.E. You don't miss what you don't know. Change is not always beneficial despite what you might be told and benefits can be illusory! Well this thread's title did invite philosophical comment!

[mikethepike]

And just while I'm being philosophical, this question is just a small variation of the planet's most important question and one that still requires a response. Would you prefer to live in a cold house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a warm house but have no butterflies?

[maddog]

And just while I'm being philosophical, this question is just a small variation of the planet's most important question and one that still requires a response. Would you prefer to live in a cold house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a warm house but have no butterflies?

If the question requires response, it may not be the one you were after. From the Abstract of a 2007 study:

'the number of species of migratory Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) reported each year at a site in the south of the UK has been rising steadily. This number is very strongly linked to rising temperatures in SW Europe. It is anticipated that further climate warming within Europe will increase the numbers of...Lepidoptera'.

http://www.eje.cz/pdfarticles/1207/eje_ ... Sparks.pdf

As biodiversity increases with temperature, the question requires just a small variation, but one that requires a response. Would you prefer to live in a warm house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a cold house but have few butterflies?

Cheers

[ollster]

Doogs, I wish you guys would just STFU about gear and let me get on with swearing at the scrub.

[geoskid]

G'day Maddog,
The missing parts of the quoted abstract significantly changes the intended meaning of the abstract, and does'nt support this:

As biodiversity increases with temperature,

In fact the paper suggests quite the opposite. The concern is for the competitive threat imposed by migratory species to resident species and that the
"potentially serious consequences for health, agriculture & conservation of resident taxa requires immediate attention"

[couscousman]

Bob Dylan - dressed like a bum was taking a walk though some ritzy LA streets when he got arrested for suspicious activities. Obviously he does not value gear as an integral part of the walk. When he was so much older in the 60's he sang:

Advertising signs they con
You into thinking you’re the one
That can do what’s never been done
That can win what’s never been won
Meantime life outside goes on
All around you


Now, this is where I find life gets interesting! Siren calls greet me every time I open Wild magazine, enter an outdoor shop or see an internet deal. I think it is fun to be chained to a mast and watch all of this go by. Some times I manage to break free and indulge in the good feelings of these deals. For I once liked to walk amongst my friends wearing my newly acquired Arcteryx windproof, life proof jacket with that logo dagling over my heart like a medal. Boy I felt special! Part of some higher order. Then I saw what a wank it all really was...and started realising that experiences in the outdoors last far longer and contain far more meaning than an article of clothing.

I live in a city and do love transition from the city limits into the surrounding wildernesses. That transitions grinds down the hard edges that have build up and makes me feel more human again - (Im working on being more human more of the time, this wilderness is just my start!) Further more I look not at nature but for the faces that the natural world inspire in me. The faces of fear, anxiety of confidence but mostly of love. I am starting to think that I go into the outdoors to experience love. For it is a true kind of love. A love that I can give with out expecting anything in return. I feel that the people I love, the places I love all tend to become like a mirror; they reveal the contours of my heart, which enables me to learn, to grow, to become more human and finally - to become closer to god. Surely all this becoming must lead towards an end point. Is this end point that we become god? There is a very famous saying among Tibetan Buddhists: "If the student is not better than the teacher, then the teacher is a failure."

[wayno]

i wouldnt write of new gear as a bad thing,
new gear meant i could dump old uncomfortable heavy gear for lighter comfortable gear that did as good or better a job. i walk with a lighter pack. i enjoy walking more.... go further more easily. arrive at he end of my day earlier, relax more, have more energy...

[maddog]

G'day Geoskid,

G'day Maddog,
The missing parts of the quoted abstract significantly changes the intended meaning of the abstract,

I'm not convinced the missing parts really change the meaning Geoskid. The Abstract was was abbreviated for relevance, not manipulation, as can be clearly seen below (Abstract reproduced in verbatim).

' The number of species of migratory Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) reported each year at a site in the south of the UK has been rising steadily. This number is very strongly linked to rising temperatures in SW Europe. It is anticipated that further climate warming within Europe will increase the numbers of migratory Lepidoptera reaching the UK and the consequences of this invasion need urgent attention. '

That is, the warm house has more butterflies.

does'nt support this:

As biodiversity increases with temperature,

The observation that biodiversity increases with temperature is a very well accepted one. Compare the number of species in Tropical North Queensland with the number in Tasmania. You will find that the results are mirrored around the world, where tropical and temperate latitudes are compared. When all else is equal, the tropics have more life and greater variation of species.

In fact the paper suggests quite the opposite. The concern is for the competitive threat imposed by migratory species to resident species and that the
"potentially serious consequences for health, agriculture & conservation of resident taxa requires immediate attention"

Your assertion is a little strong Geoskid. The paper does claim warmer temperatures have caused an increase in the number of moths, butterflies, and mobile insects generally. The Authors then go on to speculate, amongst other things, that the ' possible consequences ' of which ' may ' have ' potential ' impacts on current species, and this subject requires further ' attention '.

None of which changes the legitimacy of the planet's most important question and one that still requires a response (as it is clear that the warm house will have many more butterflies). Would you prefer to live in a warm house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a cold house but have few butterflies?

Cheers

[geoskid]

G'day Geoskid,

G'day Maddog,
The missing parts of the quoted abstract significantly changes the intended meaning of the abstract,

I'm not convinced the missing parts really change the meaning Geoskid. The Abstract was was abbreviated for relevance, not manipulation, as can be clearly seen below (Abstract reproduced in verbatim).

' The number of species of migratory Lepidoptera (moths and butterflies) reported each year at a site in the south of the UK has been rising steadily. This number is very strongly linked to rising temperatures in SW Europe. It is anticipated that further climate warming within Europe will increase the numbers of migratory Lepidoptera reaching the UK and the consequences of this invasion need urgent attention. '

That is, the warm house has more butterflies.

does'nt support this:

As biodiversity increases with temperature,

The observation that biodiversity increases with temperature is a very well accepted one. Compare the number of species in Tropical North Queensland with the number in Tasmania. You will find that the results are mirrored around the world, where tropical and temperate latitudes are compared. When all else is equal, the tropics have more life and greater variation of species.

In fact the paper suggests quite the opposite. The concern is for the competitive threat imposed by migratory species to resident species and that the
"potentially serious consequences for health, agriculture & conservation of resident taxa requires immediate attention"

Your assertion is a little strong Geoskid. The paper does claim warmer temperatures have caused an increase in the number of moths, butterflies, and mobile insects generally. The Authors then go on to speculate, amongst other things, that the ' possible consequences ' of which ' may ' have ' potential ' impacts on current species, and this subject requires further ' attention '.

None of which changes the legitimacy of the planet's most important question and one that still requires a response (as it is clear that the warm house will have many more butterflies). Would you prefer to live in a warm house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a cold house but have few butterflies?

Cheers

Hi Maddog,
I've just spent about 3 hrs trying to understand your position on this, before the penny dropped.

This is what I understand you to be saying, in a nutshell, please correct me if i'm wrong:

Because increased Biodiversity generally exists in areas of higher temperatures now, a rise in temperature due to climate change in the future will cause an increase in Biodiversity, and that the paper you linked to supports that.

BTW - I understood Mikes Question to be asking something along the lines of "As individuals, what are we personally prepared to go without to ensure a healthy planet?", where the Butterfly was a Metaphor.
What was your interpretation?

Cheers

[Strider]

This is what I understand you to be saying, in a nutshell, please correct me if i'm wrong:

Because increased Biodiversity generally exists in areas of higher temperatures now, a rise in temperature due to climate change in the future will cause an increase in Biodiversity, and that the paper you linked to supports that.

Except where biota is forced to cope at temperatures above their thermal optimum...

[Peaksnik]

I can't help but jump in about the butterflies. Biodiversity in some areas might increase due to climate change (increased temp) but biodiversity overall might decrease. That is, as species from one ecosystem crowd out (by migration) the local species in another ecosystem those local species may become endangered. Put simply, if Tassie became like north Qld there would be more species in Tassie (increased biodiversity there) but they would be the same as in NQ and we would lose the present day species endemic to Tassie (therefore, decreased biodiversity overall).

As for the philosophy question: the first step to a saner life is to be gently self-critical. Doogs is doing that in recognising and questioning the conventions of consumerism. The trouble is, one person's conventions are another's morality. And moralities are notoriously resistant to critique.

[maddog]

G'day Geoskid,

Maddog,
I've just spent about 3 hrs trying to understand your position on this, before the penny dropped.

This is what I understand you to be saying, in a nutshell, please correct me if i'm wrong:

Because increased Biodiversity generally exists in areas of higher temperatures now, a rise in temperature due to climate change in the future will cause an increase in Biodiversity, and that the paper you linked to supports that.

That the metaphorical question 'Would you prefer to live in a cold house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a warm house but have no butterflies' is a flawed metaphor, as we would expect the very opposite to be the case. Such a metaphor is designed to appeal to emotion not fact.

- I understood Mikes Question to be asking something along the lines of "As individuals, what are we personally prepared to go without to ensure a healthy planet?", where the Butterfly was a Metaphor.
What was your interpretation?

Mikes question was that the acquisition of material objects is damaging to the planet, and that we need to choose between the two (as the planet's most important question).

This is a proposition with its origins in 'deep green' political philosophy and emotional imaginings, that I do not accept as correct.

Cheers

[geoskid]

G'day maddog,
Thank you, I now understand your position and where the problem lies.

That the metaphorical question 'Would you prefer to live in a cold house and have a garden full of butterflies or live in a warm house but have no butterflies' is a flawed metaphor, as we would expect the very opposite to be the case. Such a metaphor is designed to appeal to emotion not fact.

No, we would'nt expect the opposite to be the case, and you certainly hav'nt demonstrated it here. You have wrongly used a study that looks at the effect of climate change on a narrow range of migratory species, and attempted to claim that it says something about the effect of climate change on Biodiversity as a whole. - it does not.

Denial of the facts about the effect of climate change on Biodiversity will not change them, it will simply delay facing up to them.

Cheers.

[geoskid]

G'day Maddog,

Just had a thought ...
If my metaphorical cold house was in SW Europe, and I metaphorically heat it causing a rise in temperature (through global warming) of my metaphorical backyard, all of my metaphorical butterflies are going to clear off to the south of England.
Therefore, because I like real butterflies, I would choose to live in a cold house (in SW Europe).

Can we agree that metaphorical questions should'nt be taken literally, and that at best, they prompt us to further our evidence based understanding of the nature of reality?

Cheers

[Pteropus]

What came first? The walking or the gear?

Walking of course. So to answer the original question by doogs, I do use gear/technology for my walking, but I never walk so I can use gear/technology. However, people have said to me, “I have just bought this new tent and now want to go on a walk with it!” or “I have a new hiking stove, so lets go for a walk so I can use it!”. So sometimes gear prompts the walking...

But for me, walking is about the journey and destination. My favourite part about bushwalking is the “bush” and the “walking” is just a means to an end...

Talking of gear though, I recall when I was younger I was happy with simple gear, a map, compass, a jumper and rain jacket, and perhaps a compact camera. Now I have more gadgets I can poke a stick at, including many electronic things that need batteries, such as GPS, Steripen and giant f-off sized DSLR....sometimes it is liberating just walking around the bush near my home with just a waterbottle in my hand (and clothes of course )

Anyhow, I have skimmed this thread and not sure how the talk shifted from use of gear for walking to butterflies, biodiversity, climate etc came about...unless people were talking about carrying a weather station with them....which some friends and I did on the South Coast Track when we took a hand held Kestrel Weather Station