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.
(114 previous messages)
rshow55
- 05:33pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#115
of 132)
One place where the ethical role of media communicators is
crucial.
And where the creative challenges are very large, too. There have
been times in the past where the truth has been somehow, too
weak.
Here is one of the most wrenching ones -- failure to communicate
the Holocaust (part of a larger failure to stop Hitler.)
TURNING
AWAY FROM THE HOLOCAUST by Max Frankel Nov 14, 2001 ..
On nukes, a similar failure could end the world. We need to
better. I think we can.
rshow55
- 05:34pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#116
of 132)
Here are some references, to the Riley-Showalter paradigm thread,
Paradigm Shift .... whose getting there? . . . that I think
describe, in a new and clearer way, how paradigm conflict works.
306-310: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/360
313-317: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/367
166-167: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/209
" In our interactions, both Russians, and
Americans, and others, can have perceptual difficulties that
resemble paradigm conflict impasses -- and they can occur, for
different reasons, on all sides of a controversy -- so that
everybody misunderstands a great deal (and misunderstandings don't
match.)
I think that is the case on crucial issues involving our military
balances, and especially regarding our nuclear balances. I think it
is an issue involved very often when things go badly between us.
Made worse, whenever deception also occurs.
Here are more links to the "paradigm" thread" -- of lower
priority, but perhaps useful:
26: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/33
93-95: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/118
215-217: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/259
221-222: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/265
261-262: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/310
273-274: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/324
and something for academic folk: 295-297: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7726f/349
One point about such problems is basic.
When a lot of change is necessary it takes a lot
of feedback -- and the information being fed back into the
situation had better be understood, and better be true.
lchic
- 05:36pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#117
of 132)
rshow55
- 05:36pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#118
of 132)
Story telling , to touch both the mind and the heart, is
crucial . . and central to human hopes.
rshow55
- 05:39pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#119
of 132)
So is force enough to get facts straight - - and looked at.
lchic
- 05:51pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#120
of 132)
The initial 'stories' read to children most often have a moral
It's a wonder that the 'moral' of the cold war and need to get
nukes down has not been put into STORY form for the very young ---
why not!?!
How would the STORYBOARD run ......
rshow55
- 05:57pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#121
of 132)
The techniques of Gerald Zaltman might be able to help
find some clues - "Mr. Zaltman argues that consumers can't tell you
what they think because they just don't know. Their deepest
thoughts, the ones that account for their behavior in the
marketplace, are unconscious. Not only that, he insists, those
thoughts are primarily visual as well."
Penetrating the Mind by Metaphor by EMILY EAKIN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/23/arts/23ZALT.html?pagewanted=all
We would need stories that fit the fears, feelings, and needs
that people actually have !
lchic
- 06:03pm Mar 2, 2002 EST (#122
of 132)
http://www.fortunecity.com/lavendar/ducksoup/555/storyshape.html
(10
following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|