And I would respectfully disagree. The specific plastic used for the cage which surrounds the hardened steel ball bearing allows it to be made in one piece and provides natural lubricity. I doubt any alternative material would offer both. The cage is just a cover for the ball, nothing more. It's sole purpose is to aid in releasing the lock, it is not under stress at any time.
I already addressed this fact with my assertion on the potential superiority of the material over an alternative in the particular sense of manufacturing.
As for your other argument, I'd be willing to bet the windshield on a Formula I Ferrari is not made of glass.
It took me awhile to construct what your potential counterargument might be, as exampled by your counterpoint. I think this is what you had in mind (although I may be wrong):
While the hand-sewn interior might be preferable in a street driven Ferrari, in the race Ferrari, aesthetics gave way to function. So, as I have you, you don't claim the aesthetic is irrelevant, just that it's outweighed by the requisite function of the part.
I think that's a good argument, generally speaking.
Of course, in arguments by analogy, it needs to be shown that the point of concern is relevantly similar to the subject of the analogy.
Therefore, I would need to be shown that the plastic outweighs its metal or G10 alternatives adequately to recommend it on top of them, given plastic's admitted aesthetic deficiency (which has been inferred from your argument--please correct me if I haven't articulated your point adequately).
I don't believe that plastic does have the superior function. Benchmade, as far as I can tell, hasn't used any plastic components to its highly successful axis-lock design, and Spyderco thought a metal BB was preferable to a plastic one.
I haven't been able to see the BB-cage design in person yet to evaluate it. Prima facie, I don't really see any advantage to putting a BB in the middle of a plastic cage--why can't the cage just do all the work, like the axis lock's barbell?
But again, I need to see it in person before I make that judgment.
Have to say that I find it kind of amusing to see folks who think G-10 and CF are acceptable handle materials complaining about another type of plastic being used for a thumb-bob.
I see how your point might be intuitive at first, however this distinction makes good sense. When we do aesthetics, we're concerned with the senses and not with function. Sight, taste, feel and so on. That is to say--if you can give me a "cheap plastic" part that feels and looks convincingly like, say, titanium, while giving comparable or better performance, then I'm all for it.
The fact is simply that this plastic cage, by looks at least (haven't felt it yet), does not replicate the superior aesthetic of its competitors, nor does it improve upon it.
But G10 and CF do obtain this aesthetic. This is why they're preferred, from the purely aesthetic standpoint.
There is a very close relationship between the aesthetic and functional, which can be read in my article
A Theory of Art, and hopefully relatively soon to be book.
Anyway, logic aside, it's my preference that it be a different material, and I can afford to buy what I want.
Ultimately though, I like this knife, and the plastic is just a tiny preference. Sorry for the long-winded response, I just enjoy a little philosophizing in between knife discussion.