But what goals have this essence of meaning, then? Aren't all goals by nature meaningful only from a subjective standpoint?

Also, that examination will have absolutely nothing to do with the outcome. His crime is a hit-and-run. It's not a hit-an-annual-Seattle-to-Portland-Bicycle-Classic-and-run.

Also, in this town, having the driver be in an SUV adds fuel to the fire. The only way it could have been worse is if he had a spotted owl nailed to the hood and a Dino Rossi bumpersticker on the back bumper.

That said, the freedom is tightly circumscribed. An badly injured cyclist can't report back to work on Monday. If it were deemed "unsafe" (rather than a temporary escape that reinforces the worklife structure), the STP might become off-limits to the responsible worker, personal time or not.

It's similar to a vacationer falling into a crevasse while climbing Mt. Rainier -- entirely predictable, but upsetting because each time it happens it increases the social assessment that mountain-climbing is the kind of "risky" behavior that responsible workers don't engage in. So it becomes important to brand the climber inexperienced. Or to play up the fact the drunk driver is an ex-felon.

If you do some kind of conversion of these wasted hours into human lifetimes, etc., the 'death toll' far exceeds Bush's war in total cost.

Ultimately this kind of thought process amounts to a complex form of intellectual masturbation.

Right up Charles' alley, I'd say.

In the STP case, a fuckhead drove recklessly and clipped a biker in what should have been a safe environment. No comparison.

Here, try again. Do what Charles asked you to do: "[Examine] why one way of wasting your time is registered as noble and another way as ignoble."

Make an honest effort. Once you've done that work, if no "political/economic results ... emerge," flame on, haters.

You seem to think comparing means equating, which was not my point at all.

Just to be clear, I'm speaking specifically to Charles's point about whether there's a difference in getting run over doing STP vs. getting run over while cycling to work. Mountain climbing is another "noble" endeavor but is considered riskier than biking, so I mentioned that for context.

A drunk guy ran over a cyclist. The only expression being made is, the driver is a fuck - hope the guy on the bike is alright.

But if riding bikes on the weekend isn't noble, how is rugby noble? You posted last week that some sports were manly and others less so.

Have you ever played sports? Beer pong isn't technically a sport.

Okay, Charles, we get it. This is the point of pretty much everything you ever post. No matter what anyone does, it's because they're an asshole. If I put air in my tires, it's probably because I'm a capitalist pig that wants to save money on gas to buy more Nike shoes to support baby rape in third-world countries because I despise the poor. If I lock my doors at night, it's most likely because I'm afraid of black people raping my wife and killing my cats and stealing my food. If I watch a movie, it's clearly because I'm insensitive to the plight of Eastern European refugees. If I pick my nose, it's obviously because I hate gays.

In a way, it's almost nice of you. I can just assume I'm a douche no matter what I do, and leave the over-analyzing to you.