What Kind of Driver Should I Be?


I should drive aggressively so that I am not taken advantage of.

Q1 Analysis

If you believe that taking advantage of others is wrong, then this is a Q1 violation if your aggressive driving takes advantage of those who do not drive aggressively.

Q2 Analysis

If you don’t like it when others drive aggressively, this is a Q2 violation.


This is one of the few common beliefs that almost always fails both elements of 2Q. Aggressive driving often includes such practices as assuming others will get out of your way when you change lanes, not using turn signals, jumping green lights, accelerating through yellow lights, passing on the right, not completely stopping at stop signs, tailgating, etc. It is a rare person who practices any of these and does not also become irritated at other drivers who practice them.

Some drivers become irritated when other drivers do not drive aggressively. For example, they tailgate and will honk at a car in front of them in traffic if that car is maintaining a reasonable distance between itself and the car in front if it. These drivers are likely Q1 violators in that they would probably say that safe driving is a virtue, and Q2 violators in that they would hold responsible a driver whose car rear ended theirs because it was tailgating.

Which of these practices do you think would pass 2Q?

You are encouraged to leave your answers to the questions posed in this post in the comments section. This post is based on an excerpt from Ask Yourself to be Moral, by D. Cancilla, available at LuLu.com and Amazon.com. See the 2Q system page for details of the philosophical system mentioned in this post.

Posted on June 2, 2010 at 10:13 am by ideclare · Permalink
In: 2Q

One Response

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by Kmuz
    on June 3, 2010 at 5:46 am
    Reply · Permalink

    I think the problem is not about being aggressive, but externalizing frustration and anxiety. “Aggressive” drivers tend to think that other drivers are personally trying to screw them over.

    Instead of: I should drive aggressively so that I am not taken advantage of.

    I think it should be:

    Drivers should drive to my standards and should believe in my concept of fairness. People should live by my rules.

    Q1 – If I believe taking of advantage of others is wrong then Q1 is a violation if:

    I break my own set of standards to take advantage of others – people should give me a break for violating my rules this time because of my own personal needs.

    Example: I need to get my child to school on time. So, I drive down the left turn lane then cut in front of a line of drivers. It’s okay to do this because it was a personal need.

    Q2 – I should have compassion for those who need to break my rules in an emergency. This is a violation of Q2 if I get mad or punish someone who is breaking my standards.

    Example: I’m on the freeway. I can see the car beside me has a sick child. The car is trying to cut in front of me to get off at an exit to a hospital. I block the car because cutting in line is a violation of my standards.

    Emotions I place on other drivers actions:

    Talking on cell phone or texting:

    Externalization – I’m smarter and better than she is. She is putting me in danger. She is purposely trying to harm me.

    Internalization – I don’t know who’s she talking to or what it’s about. Maybe she’s talking to her doctor. I should be extra careful until she gets off the phone.

    I design slot machines and have delved quite a bit in behaviorism – just getting into cognitive existentialism.

    I’m going to purchase, Ask Yourself to be Moral, by D. Cancilla. Thanks for the post.

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply