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 - 03:51pm Aug 27, 2002 EST (# 4000 of 4003)
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.

When stakes are high, solutions need to be beautiful - and part of that is being practical - practical enough to be graceful.

Things that really DO make sense (technically, aesthetically, and emotionally, too) make good stories.

How a Story is Shaped

Basic Narrative Structure
Is the Pattern Consistent?
Is This Always How It Works?
What Else Follows this Pattern?
. . http://www.fortunecity.com/lavendar/ducksoup/555/storyshape.html

When we work to sort things out, and come to a "solution," what are the odds that it is a good one? What are the odds that there may be a better one - perhaps a solution that would produce a much better outcome?

What are the odds that there may be much better outcomes even in fields that have been "worked to death" -- where a lot of people have tried hard, for a long time, for high stakes? (Reading instruction is an example.)

People need to be able to think about these questions. Not only intellectually, but aesthetically and emotionally, too.

rshow55 - 04:06pm Aug 27, 2002 EST (# 4001 of 4003)
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.

Most problems in the world that are really important - most I can think about anyway - can be explained clearly, in ways that work for almost everybody, once they are fully understood.

Once they are really understood, they can probably be explained, in a clear, intellectually solid, beautiful and entertaining way in a good cartoon using Disney characters - - http://www.whom.co.uk/squelch/world_disney.htm A cartoon that can be understood and enjoyed by everybody involved.

For reading instruction - that would have to include the teachers, the parents, and the kids.

The key issues in missile defense are simple, too - - and ought to be explainable to the same people.

The "Mickey Mouse" test is a very tough standard. One I can't meet, so far. But it is the right one to shoot for, for things that really matter, and are really fundamental.

The reasons why things go wrong would often stand out - if more people looked at what was going on with the sharp eyes it took to make these characters. http://www.whom.co.uk/squelch/world_disney.htm

Why, exactly, is it that problems don't get fixed? Often enough, though the answers are ugly - they are also "obvious."

3794 lchic 8/18/02 9:40am

3796 lchic 8/18/02 10:01am to 3800 rshow55 8/18/02 12:43pm

Does anybody really doubt that N! and N!/2 are concepts that Mickey Mouse could effectively explain? And explain gracefully, at enough mutually consistent levels to work for both kids and adults?

Somebody needs to explain what hope means - - and what hopeless means - - when we face the statistical choices that we often do.

Teenagers who could never learn to read would have something to teach about that. And if we as a culture understood their problems - we'd have something to teach them back.

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense