|
![[F]](../_images/site.gif) New York Times on the Web Forums  Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's
war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars"
defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make
the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an
application of science be successful? Is a militarized space
inevitable, necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a
new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every
Thursday.
 
  (10897 previous messages)
dejaxxvu
- 12:47am Jan 20, 2002 EST (#10898
of 10921)
Does Nuclear Culture have Gender?
Do Bears
feature?
rshow55
- 10:23am Jan 20, 2002 EST (#10899
of 10921) 
Military decisions are serious , and I'd like to quote a poem. I
believe it applies today, and should remembered always, when people
think of military action, and what "ordinary bureacratic evasion and
bungling" can do, when it counts.
Mesopotamia by Rudyard Kipling , . . . . 1917 MD9900 rshowalter
9/29/01 9:28am
It is not "unpatriotic" or "indecent" to expect right answers.
Ones that can work. Not the technical analog of Ponzi schemes.
Enron, it now appears, was one large, ornate, carefully hidden
pyramid scheme. How 287 Turned Into 7 : Lessons in Fuzzy Math
By GRETCHEN MORGENSON http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/20/business/yourmoney/20EARN.html
It appears to me that, from a technical point of view, "Star
Wars" is much like a pyramid scheme - a Ponzi scheme. Escalating
promises. Smoke and mirrors. No substance, at the systems level that
counts. It isn't in the national interest, in any reasonable sense I
can see, to continue the bluff. There were reasons to start the
bluff, years ago, but the cold war ought to be over, and we need to
deal with the problems we face in ways that can work.
MD9901-9903 are interesting, too.
dejaxxvu
- 12:30pm Jan 20, 2002 EST (#10900
of 10921)
Right use of creativity might add value to an economy:
ON CREATIVITY: http://www.rbs0.com/create.htm
1998 by Ronald B. Standler
'Children seem to have an innate sense of curiosity,
enthusiasm, and imagination. Mature adults generally lack these
qualities. Where did these qualities get lost? I believe that ...
industrial managers beat these qualities out of people, in order
to make them easier to control and manage.' Sternberg's
Theory of Creativity
In my reading of psychological literature, there are numerous
hypotheses and theories of creativity that conflict with what I
have observed in creative colleagues and what I have read in
biographies of creative scientists and composers of music.
However, the following theory of creativity, put forth by Prof.
Sternberg at Yale University, makes sense to me.
Sternberg says that all of the following are essential: a lack
of any one item in the list precludes creativity. I think he is
correct, except for the last item: it is not necessary to have a
favorable environment, although such an environment certainly
makes life easier for creative people. Intelligence
synthetic intelligence. The ability to combine existing
information in a new way.
analytic intelligence. The ability to distinguish between new
ideas that have potential, and new ideas that are not worth further
work. This ability is essential to an effective allocation of
resources, by evaluating the quality of new ideas.
practical intelligence. The ability to sell one's ideas to
funding agencies, managers, editors, reviewers, etc. Without
"practical intelligence" the creative person will not be allocated
resources to develop their ideas, and the creative person may
achieve recognition only posthumously.
Knowledge gives the ability to recognize what is genuinely new.
The history of science shows that many good ideas are discovered
independently by more than one person. Scientists and engineers must
be familiar with the technical literature, in order to avoid
"reinventing the wheel". On the other hand, too much knowledge might
block creativity, by immediately providing reasons why a new idea is
not worth pursuing and by encouraging a person to be rigid in their
thinking.
Knowledge is also important to provide skills
necessary to design experiments, to design new products, to analyze
the results of experiments, do computations, etc.
Thinking Styles.
Creative people question conventional wisdom, instead of
passively accepting that wisdom.
Creative people question common assumptions and rules, instead
of mindlessly follow them. This style brings creative people into
conflict with society around them, so it is also essential to have a
personality that tolerates this conflict, as explained in the next
item in this list.
Personality.
Creative people take the risk to defy conventional wisdom and to
be a nonconformist.
Creative people have the courage to persist, even when the
people around them provide objections, criticism, ridicule, and
other obstacles. Most people are too timid to be really creative.
Motivation
intrinsic or personal.
Creative people
genuinely enjoy their work and set their own goals.
extrinsic.
There are a number of extrinsic motivators: money, promotions,
prizes, praise, fame, etc.
Extrinsic motivators mostly focus on
an end result, not the process of discovery or creativity.
In
highly creative people, extrinsic motivators appear to be less
important than intrinsic motivators.
Environmental Context.
Many environments (particularly
managers and bureaucracy) discourage creativity. A creative
individual who could flourish in one environment can become a
routine, ordinary worker in another environment.
The optimum
environment for creative people is where they can be paid to do
their creative work, so creativity is a full-time job, not a
spare-time hobby
dejaxxvu
- 12:48pm Jan 20, 2002 EST (#10901
of 10921)
Would there be any 'creative people' in the Military-techno
environment who are reduced via routinisation to 'ordinary' ...
How are loses of 'potential' measured by an economy - are they
measured?
What might such people have been able to provide for
us had they not been submerged in dead-end routine?
 
(20 following messages)
   
New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Missile Defense
|
