If you had to lose a limb or a sense...

[hbelkins]

(Inspired by some of the answers in the "what would cause you to lose interest in roadgeeking" thread.)

If you had to lose one of the major senses, would you prefer to lose your sight or your hearing? (I'm not counting, touch, taste or smell, as I think I could comfortably live if I lost one of those senses.)

If you had to lose a limb, would you prefer to lose an arm/hand or a leg/foot?

I don't know about the senses, but if I had to lose a limb, I'd definitely choose to lose a leg as opposed to an arm. You can live a much more normal life with an artificial leg than with an artificial arm. My dad lost a leg in Korea but lived a full and rewarding life. Up until about 10 years before he died, he could outwork me. I also had a newspaper owner boss who lost a leg while I worked for him, and he was able to walk and drive after that happened.

[Roadgeekteen]

Obviously hearing. I would also rather lose a leg. I don't really play any sports so a leg wouldn't be as much of a loss.

[kphoger]

I'd rather lose a leg than an arm, because I make a huge mess in the kitchen when I try to cook one-handed.

[Max Rockatansky]

Left arm would be my preference.  I was hit by a car out running about a decade ago and had to face the prospect of losing most of the use of my left arm.  So long as I can do the things I like doing (which require use of my legs more often than not) I think that I could work around it.  Definitelty would prefer deafness to blindness.  I probably could go without a sense of smell given how many sinus infections I had the first two decades of my life. 

[abefroman329]

Hearing and leg, respectively.

I was wondering how many people would say they'd rather lose an arm than a leg because you can't drive a car with a manual transmission if you only have one leg, but you can't with one arm, either.

[NE2]

I'd like to lose my sense of thinking. Then I might not mind Mr. Dump.

[SCtoKC]

I'd rather lose my sense of taste.  Eating has always been something I only do because I have to.  Although I would miss the taste of a good beer.

I guess if I had to lose a limb, it'd be a leg.  Prosthetics have come a long way.

Edit: Per the special rule I completely missed, I suppose losing hearing would be easier than losing my sight.  But damn, I would miss listening to my record collection.

[Roadgeekteen]

Counting touch, taste and smell, I'm going with smell. I like food to much to give up taste.

[abefroman329]

Taste, touch, and smell aren't valid responses per the OP.

[Roadgeekteen]

Taste, touch, and smell aren't valid responses per the OP.

I already made my selection for the valid one, I was just sharing my thoughts on the other 3.

[sparker]

So far nobody's mentioned losing a sense of humor!

[kevinb1994]

So far nobody's mentioned losing a sense of humor!

LOL I would hate to lose mine!

[Road Hog]

Leg below the knee. I know people who have lost limbs who have full mobility and you would never know (until they wore shorts).

[adventurernumber1]

I would rather lose hearing as opposed to vision. The ability to see is key to so many parts of my life, including the many different aspects of roadgeekery. Losing it would be a severe hit to much of what I would be able to do. Losing hearing would absolutely suck as well, because I am huge into music, and obviously the ability to hear is also incredibly important for day-to-day life. But if I had to choose, I would rather retain my vision than my hearing.

I would rather lose the use of my legs than my arms. Losing either would be horrible, but I feel that losing my arms would be more debilitating for me than losing my legs. If I lost my legs, I could still get around in a wheelchair (or with prosthetic legs) - but if I lost my arms, I would lose even more. I use my arms for so much, such as eating, drinking, grooming, using the computer or my phone, maneuvering maps and books, taking photos and videos, and more - and while I am personally unable to drive, for those who do, the ability to use the arms is very important to facilitate that task. Legs are obviously extremely important, but I feel that it would be easier to adjust to a life without legs than a life without arms.

While deemed invalid per the OP, when mentioning the other three senses, I would want to lose smell when compared to the others. It is obviously still important, but less so than taste and touch.

[hbelkins]

So far nobody's mentioned losing a sense of humor!

Oh, we've got plenty of people who've lost that.

Hearing and leg, respectively.

I was wondering how many people would say they'd rather lose an arm than a leg because you can't drive a car with a manual transmission if you only have one leg, but you can't with one arm, either.

Sure you can. My dad was an above-the-knee amputee, and he drove my mom's old '57 Chevy Two-Ten that had three-on-the-tree.

[kphoger]

Hearing and leg, respectively.

I was wondering how many people would say they'd rather lose an arm than a leg because you can't drive a car with a manual transmission if you only have one leg, but you can't with one arm, either.

I've driven stick one-handed plenty of times.  Back in the puppy love days of college, I didn't want to let go of my girlfriend's hand to shift.  Turning the corner coming off a red light is tricky that way, but it's certainly doable.

Years and years ago, my dad knew a one-legged guy who drove stick, at least for a brief while.  He always had to park on a downhill, or else he couldn't get going again.

[abefroman329]

I guess I don't know enough about driving stick to understand how you can drive stick with one leg.

[kphoger]

I guess I don't know enough about driving stick to understand how you can drive stick with one leg.

It wouldn't be easy going, that's for sure.  On an uphill you couldn't get going, but on a downhill you could coast to start and then merely shift into gear using the clutch pedal.  A level start would be quite trickier, requiring gradually engaging the clutch without stalling the engine.  But, once you got going (say, from a downhill), clutchless shifting would be in order, which was an easier prospect in older cars and still reasonably easy to do in many pickups still on the road.

[abefroman329]

I guess I don't know enough about driving stick to understand how you can drive stick with one leg.

It wouldn't be easy going, that's for sure.  On an uphill you couldn't get going, but on a downhill you could coast to start and then merely shift into gear using the clutch pedal.  A level start would be quite trickier, requiring gradually engaging the clutch without stalling the engine.  But, once you got going (say, from a downhill), clutchless shifting would be in order, which was an easier prospect in older cars and still reasonably easy to do in many pickups still on the road.

Isn't there a point during shifting where you need to hold down both the clutch pedal and the accelerator pedal, if only for a fraction of a second?

[kphoger]

Isn't there a point during shifting where you need to hold down both the clutch pedal and the accelerator pedal, if only for a fraction of a second?

If you want to be kind to your car, yes.  Shifting without the clutch pedal is sort of like shifting with unmeshed gears:  at a certain RPM range, you can shift out of the current gear smoothly; then, at a certain RPM range, you can shift into the desired gear smoothly.  The trick to not doing damage to the gears is to know approximately what those ranges are.  In older cars and especially pickups, it's easier to do than in modern cars.  Large trucks utilize this method of shifting extensively.  However, modern passenger cars have a much narrower range where doing this is possible, so damage is more likely.

[abefroman329]

If you want to be kind to your car, yes.

So if you own a modern car with a manual transmission and lose your leg (but no one will help you find it), you should trade it in for a car with an automatic transmission.

[hbelkins]

I guess I don't know enough about driving stick to understand how you can drive stick with one leg.

Two words: Artificial limb.

[Buck87]

Hearing and left leg. As you mentioned in the OP, a prosthetic leg could do much better job replacing the functionality of the limb than a prosthetic arm.

Though if the other senses would included, I'd go with taste. I love food, but a little too much, so losing my sense of taste would make it much easier to lose weight. Come to think of it, losing a leg would shed quite a few pounds as well.

[kphoger]

If you want to be kind to your car, yes.

So if you own a modern car with a manual transmission and lose your leg (but no one will help you find it), you should trade it in for a car with an automatic transmission.

If you own ANY car with a manual transmission and you lose your leg, you should trade it in (the car, not the leg) for one with an automatic.  Driving any stick shift–old, new, car, truck–with one leg is so close to impossible that most people assume it can't be done.  Even those few who've been able to actually do it would be exhibiting pretty risky behavior on the road:  think about having to slam on your brakes, for example, with no other leg available to disengage the clutch.

[vdeane]

I would think it would depend on how well you could control a prosthetic limb and where you lost the leg.  If the leg was lost below the knee, I could see a manual still being viable after a period of adjustment.  All the way to the hip, though, and it would be a lot harder.