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 - 09:19pm Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3911 of 3920)
Can we do a better job of finding truth? YES. Click "rshow55" for some things Lchic and I have done and worked for on this thread.

We're getting to a point where society is close to being ready to ask for checking on things that actually matter for our safety. It will take some courage from a few people with status to take us over the top. Perhaps not too many.

I'm off for tonight. I'll be working carefully to set things out tomorrow.

People are GREAT at perceiving (and imposing) order. If we keep at it, and are willing to DISCARD old ideas that PROVE to be wrong -- we could all be safer, and more prosperous, pretty soon.

Often, when we're honest and careful, the truth emerges quickly and surely -- for all to see. The Odds of That are often VERY good - - for basic statistical reasons that need to be understood - - for reasons that ought to be compelling, practically and morally.

If "common people" are routinely expected to know odds in dice games and card games (and they are) we should be able to teach, and expect, some broader understanding of odds that matter for human life, efficiency, and safety, as well.

Intellectually, the job is easier than jobs already casual and routine when we are at play.

lchic - 09:55pm Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3912 of 3920)

Uncommon men Uncommon women - why do some stand out?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=uncommon+men+&btnG=Google+Search
http://www.google.com/search?num=20&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&newwindow=1&q=uncommon+women+&btnG=Google+Search

Science, Ethics, and Moral Status
http://www.phil.vt.edu/Miller/papers/science.html

The scientific status of the labour theory of value / Cockshot Cotterall 1977
http://www.wfu.edu/~cottrell/eea97.pdf

Are people paid what they are worth - per unit of output -
or otherwise ...
Where do Enron Directors sit ?

Or, is GJ worth his salt ... uuhhmmm ... muddle ! ? Should he be paying them rather than they him ... if muddle is used to prevent closure!

:)

lchic - 10:43pm Aug 22, 2002 EST (# 3913 of 3920)

STATUS - 'tag' questions ~ Gender

http://viadrina.euv-frankfurt-o.de/~wjournal/1_00/KUNSMANN.HTM
Conclusion
We have seen that both the dominance and the difference approaches can be employed to explain variation in speech situations. In addition, the personality of the individual and the vitality of the group are also involved in the explanation of variability in language use. There is evidence that the vitality factor in the female subculture is increasing resulting in growing assertiveness. Given such a process, the significance of structures such as tag-questions and of behavioral patterns such as interruptions will diminish for a determination of the differentiation of men and women with respect to language use. Gender and status rather than gender or status will be the determinant categories.
(nb 'paper above also noted that women had better language skills overall than men)

Men use strategies for controlling converstion - eg altering the topic.

Women inobtrusively insert 'tag' questions at the end of a sentence alluding to a new topic
In this way women move from 36% chance of introducing a new topic - 72% chance.

Raises a point regarding status - is it partly the 'bullying' of people into the believe that that their status or contribution is less than first rate. Many instances of this on MD board wrt Monikers/GeorgeJohnston attempting to bully, defame and degrade the contributions of Showalter.

Noted in the Nanobes link above that Scientists who thought they were on a roll with NEW KNOWLEDGE had this STATUS problem hanging over them ... if their follow-through was seen as RIGHT - huge benefits ..... but if the hunch didn't eventuate then, rather than being congratulated for trying, they lost status ... and hopes for funding.

The search for knowledge for knowledge's sake has almost dried up - funding being conditional on the giver's perceived needs. The gap in science discoveries is the failure to fund the curious mind that wants to explore 'ideas and hunches'.

Why do ideas and hunches arise? Must be bases on something?
Showalter might say 'they've seen a pattern worth exploring' !!
He might worry that failure to interpret the significance of patterns could be holding back the progress of science.

Progress in science has a flow-on to all people .... who 'pay' when denied.

(7 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense