What is a tractor?

[Libertine]

Yankee:

<font color="blue">Too much Peikoff, perhaps? </font>

I am familiar with Peikoff, but never met him. Did meet Rand once though - mind like a steel trap. Since you are familiar with them, and presumably their philosophy, I will tell you that I am not an objectivist due to my disagreement with certain mystical elements in Objectivism. Also, regarding another one of your posts, the Libertine has no association with Libertarian but derives from its lifestyle implications (although I am getting too old and jaded any more - I probably should pick another handle).

Your last post has some interesting thoughts in it. I would respond now, but want to mull it over. There have been some interesting comments in this thread (aside from some ad hominem) - I started it because of a disagreement in another thread over what a "tractor" was. Though it might be of some interest to define what we are talking about. Based on some of the comments I can see my original definition was incomplete.

JEH

PS Epistemology is not a monopoly of the Objectivists.

 

[Libertine]

Henro:

<font color="blue">wondering . . . if he had a tutor helping him write more like the rest of us! </font>

No, Henro, no tutor. But I must admit that I often have to deliberately change mental gears - after all, the purpose of words is to communicate (trigger certain neural events in the brain of someone else). By selecting the words more carefully it is sometimes easier to do that. So I often have to "translate" from the way I think to the best way to communicate. Unfortunately, among my many failings in life I do not always do that very well. Sorry.

But regardless of my failings, don't you think it worthwhile to know what we are talking about when we use the symbol "tractor" - after all, this is a tractor site? So, why don't you go out and look at your tractor, sit in the seat and have a cold one, and ask yourself, what are the essential characteristics about this thing that makes it a tractor?

JEH

 

[Libertine]

MicroPilot:

<font color="blue">How about a Skid Steer? I would definatley not call this a tractor, yet it is used as power source for many different tools, and is commonly used in the Ag world. </font>

Good point. As I mentioned above, because of some of the posts it is obvious that my original definition needs improvement.

JEH

MossRoad & others - I am not responding to all the comments but I have read them all and am reflecting on them. Thanks to you.

 

[KiotiJohn]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( But regardless of my failings, don't you think it worthwhile to know what we are talking about when we use the symbol "tractor" - after all, this is a tractor site? )</font>
I hope I don't seem to be insensitive to your feelings about this, but NO. I don't ever have to think about that at all. My tractor does what it's supposed to, and what I want it to, and I don't have to ask a thing about what a tractor is. I know what it is and have for most of my 51 years. My great grandfather, who I was lucky enough to know until I was 19yo, would say it has four legs and you have to talk to it saying GEE and HAW to get it to work. John

 

[BRIGUY]

I could only read half of this thread before posting. (Brain Overload)!!!!

All the tractors described above AG, Tractor beam, Printer wheels, Semi truck, Mechanical mule, etc, etc, etc...........
All

1) Can be used to pull something.
2) Can be used to power something (PTO on many Semi trucks)
3) Origionally Intended to be used for work of some kind)
4) Are mechanical.

So what we have here is a mechanical worker.

This brings me to a more important point. Based on the definition of tractor, What is a TBNer??? Refering to a person.

1) a person who likes doing work with tractors???
2) a person who lokes working on tractors???
3) a person who likes woking on the internet???
4) a person who likes thinking about tractors and playing on the internet instead of working while they are at work. (this is what my wife and my boss both think??? /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

 

[Yankee]

"Epistemology is not a monopoly of the Objectivists. "

Nope, but they do love the word.

"the Libertine has no association with Libertarian"

Oh, too bad! I thought it was a particularly good handle for a Libertarian.

"but derives from its lifestyle implications (although I am getting too old and jaded any more - I probably should pick another handle). "

Perhaps you're more an Epicurean? How about "Epicynic" or "Jadacurean"?

 

[BRIGUY]

WHAT??????? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Man I feel stupid maybe I need to go back to college again!!!

 

[Yankee]

"How about a Skid Steer"

I would not call a skid steer even a special case of tractor. It's a good example of why a definition of tractor should include not just traction in the "tires gotta grab" sense (which would include skid steers), but in the drawing, or pulling sense (which would not). A tractor must fundamentally be designed to work around drawing a working load.

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue"> don't you think it worthwhile to know what we are talking about when we use the symbol "tractor" - after all, this is a tractor site? </font>

JEH,

Your question triggered a flashback...

I was young...a world traveller of sorts...been on the road a year and a half...sitting in a small inn in Tokyo...

There was a guy there who was also American...he was into Taoism...I questioned him...we debated...he often said..."they are just words your using man, think about it..."

I thought about it....

Sometimes words just get in the way...

Most people do pretty much know what a tractor is.

THat being said, I have to applaud you. Wonder if I spelled that right... /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

Because I never really considered those two-wheelled thingees tractors...but now do...

 

[bgott]

"but derives from its lifestyle implications (although I am getting too old and jaded any more - I probably should pick another handle). "

The last I heard was that they sell pills to fix that! /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Libertine]

Henro:

<font color="blue">I never really considered those two-wheelled thingees tractors...but now do... </font>

Well, good. I just posted a couple pics in the thread on 2 wheel tractors buying/using of the seed bed produced in one pass by a rotary plow on a 2 wheeler. You asked (if I recall) in another post about the difference between the so-called "garden tractors" and 2 wheel tractors. The pic isn't very good quality (I took it from literature), but you can see a nice raised bed, all fluffed up and ready to seed. There's another photo of a 2 wheel tractor baling hay on a 20% slope (and it can do it on much steeper slopes). For a person with smaller acreage who needs a do anything (except heavy lifting, although I guess you could put a scoop on one - Gravely had scoops) these are real tractors.

<font color="blue">Most people do pretty much know what a tractor is. </font>

But if they disagree on what a tractor is, it helps to have a definition, doesn't it? (Remember the bet thread?)

I repeat my challenge. Most people like sitting on their tractors (I do anyway). Go out, sit on your tractor, have a cig, or coffee, or whatever, and reflect on what makes your machine just like the old steam traction engines from the late 1800s, the Happy Farmer tractor from the 1910s, the Fordson or Waterloo Boy from the early 1920s, the Farmalls of the late 1920s, the 9ns of the late 1930s, etc, etc. Your machine is a direct descentant of those machines. What makes them unique? What traits do they have in common that other machines do not?

JEH

 

[Libertine]

Yankee:

<font color="blue">Oh, too bad! I thought it was a particularly good handle for a Libertarian. </font>

Actually was involved in late 1970s. Three types: ex-American party folks, flower children and a smattering of objectivist types. After a meet with the Libertarian presidential candidate in 1979 decided either he wasn't one, or, I wasn't one. Talked to the guy who owned the party here in Mo & he disolved it.

<font color="blue">Perhaps you're more an Epicurean? </font>

Someplace I have a file on the platform of the "Epicurean Party" I did 10 years ago for grins. Cute. Can't post it here though - family site and all. Actually, seriously, Democritus (Epicurus's mentor) was the greatest thinker of the time - far out stripping Aristotle. Too bad his stuff was destroyed by the (you know who - just like they're destroyiing western civilization today).

JEH

PS this is really getting off topic, but, I've printed out the thread to read some of the comments again and will try to come up with a better definition - unless I can get Henro (and others) to do it for me - see my suggestion in my reply to him above.

 

[AMP762]

Libertine,did you go to the same school as Bill Clinton? What is is,*** ain't ***. When I ask for a part for my Mitsu. tractor they don't try to give me a part for a Mitsu. car,even the kids at Advance Auto parts seem to know what a tractor is /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif Is there a point to this question I'm missing /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Paul

Don't worry, nothing is going to be alrite

 

[755inNY]

<font color="blue"> Is there a point to this question I'm missing </font>

Paul,
Yes there is a point. It is another attempt by Libertine to define a "tractor" as he sees it so that he can prove that the 2 wheel version he promotes fits the definition and that the Sears GT5000, et al so called "lawn tractors" do not.

Libertine,
I think your definition is too focused on a universal power source used to power other tools or implements. It ignores the equally significant factor of just pulling something such as a plow, disc, rake, wagon etc. without powering anything else. I suspect that the "pulling" part is more the basis of the the word tractor than transmitting power to something else. After all, the tractor started as a mechanized replacement for the horse, ox, etc. pulling a plow or other heavy work not in transmitting power to something else.

I don't think we need some sort of precise definition of the word "tractor" to have meaningful discusions on this forum. We all have a common interest to get work done in an agricultural, rural, or home setting using the labor saving benefits of mechanization. This includes a broad set of tractors and other types of self propelled and non self propelled items.

A precise definition of the word "tractor" will only serve to restrict discussion and, in this case, is very self serving. In reading through hundreds, if not thousands, of posts, I have found only one were the definition of a tractor was important. All of the others seem to have allowed for a meaningful exchange of ideas, comments and information without a precise definition.

Jeff

 

[slowrev]

hmm, All this and I am still wondering about the legal definition of tractor as for requiring ROPS. My thought is all "real" tractors sold now require ROPS. Not knocking the broader definitions of a tractor, just wondering what the legal definition is.

A riding lawnmower obviously does not fall under this definition even if it's marketers call it a lawn tractor, otherwise ROPS would be required on them.

A 2 wheel walk behind again obviously does not require ROPS because you don't ride on them, maybe FOPS ( Fall Over Protection System).

Maybe someone linked to the legal definition and I missed it, sorry if that is the case.