New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

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.

rshow55 - 08:59am Aug 16, 2002 EST (# 3740 of 3747)

Somewhat more advanced issues, involving both fact and morality, can be condensed, and taught - because they are intensely practical - - even though they are much too complicated to expect people to work them out, clearly and sharply, for themselves.

Here are relations that should be widely known:

People, ideas, and relationships are very flexible. All sorts of arrangements and patterns can be made to work to some extent. But if a pattern is to be stable , for real people in real situations - there are some things that are useful to consider - both to judge if the pattern is good, and if the pattern is stable.

. . . . the golden rule, with thought for the real characteristics of the real people involved.

. . . . Maslow's heirarchy of human needs

. . . . . some basic facts about human organizations set out in Berle's laws of power.

These things are only as complicated as they are -- they are very general -- and I think that when issues of stability are involved, they should be considered, and known, by everyone responsible for judgement or action.

That's the main message I was hoping to work out and give to Bill Casey.

rshow55 - 09:04am Aug 16, 2002 EST (# 3741 of 3747)

These ideas, which focus a lot of human experience, are simple and apply to many basic things. Such ideas may be low status (for the same reasons that the most common words in a language are low status) but they are important for the same reasons that the most common words are important.

3693 rshow55 8/13/02 1:02pm ... 3694 lchic 8/13/02 1:33pm
3695 rshow55 8/13/02 2:16pm ... 3696 rshow55 8/13/02 2:23pm
3697 rshow55 8/13/02 2:27pm ... 3698 rshow55 8/13/02 2:35pm
3700 rshow55 8/13/02 2:45pm ...

In something as simple as the "see-say" drills of 3697 rshow55 8/13/02 2:27pm some of the most basic processes by which we convert from statistical to symbolic processing are on view. These processes are key to our humanity.

Hilary Putnam said this:

" We think because Newton somehow reduced the physical world to order, something similar must be possible in psychology. . . . . as we say in the United States . . . "I'm from Missouri -- show me! "

Maybe no such thing is possible. But we can take steps to do a lot better than we've been doing.

This thread is taking steps in that direction - at the levels that matter for human function - at the level ordinary human beings experience it.

I think if people understood how focusing works - how we "connect the dots" --- and how that process can be defeated -- people could solve many of their own practical and emotional problems, and the world would be much richer. I think this thread has made progress, and is making progress, toward making that clear.

MD3703 rshow55 8/13/02 4:58pm ... MD3658 rshow55 8/12/02 9:06am

We need disciplined hearts. To discipline our hearts, we need empathy and emotional experience - but some of the things we need are technical, too. Lchic and I are trying to focus some of these things - and I think I can speak for her as well as myself here. We think we're making headway.

lchic - 09:44am Aug 16, 2002 EST (# 3742 of 3747)

Headway ...

Threadway ...

Were the CIA to send Showalter 'that' note

Then Breadway ....

|> Almost midnight my way
Nite!

mazza9 - 10:55am Aug 16, 2002 EST (# 3743 of 3747)
"Quae cum ita sunt" Caesar's Gallic Commentaries

Robert: lchic says"Are people, like yourself, who support the nuclear annihilation of the world - 'all there' ? mazza9 8/15/02 10:21am <<<< my comment was clear." Since you are the keeper of the archives, I have a question. Have I ever said that I support nuclear annihilation?

lchic is you "sidekick". You gush over her many contributions. I suppose if the measure is "ad hominem vitriol" then maybe she is the charmer you describe. Is this the truth telling that you espouse?

LouMazza

(4 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense