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 - 08:02pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6685 of 6691)
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.

There are motivations for war, and for peace that are basic to our animal natures.

Primordial motivations for war , cited in lunarchick 12/14/02 7:08am set out cynically but entertainingly by Phillip Adams -- For Men, War is Swell http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,5673211%5E12272,00.html

and primordial motivations for peace , set out beautifully, and with great erudition, too, by Natalie Angier -- Of Altruism, Heroism and Evolution's Gifts in the Face of Terror http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/18/health/psychology/18ALTR.html

Human reason serves both these motivations. But is both better and worse. And astonishingly flexible. Though we're still dealing with problems noticed and talked about by Plato.

I was wonderfully impressed by

Iraq Makes a Philosophically Flawed Effort to Disprove a Negative By EMILY EAKIN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/15/weekinreview/15EAKI.html . . which ends:

"CITING Iraq's past use of weapons of mass destruction and long record of duplicity on the issue, Mr. Tribe argued that "we're acting in a preventative mode where we're not prepared as an international community to take the risk that potential mass destruction will go uncontrolled."

"That's a statement that Hume might have found perfectly reasonable. A practical man, he realized that in the absence of certain knowledge, experience and common sense are often the best guides to judgment. The danger arises when fallible human judgments are confused with truth.

"In the end, Hume argued, the inevitable uncertainty of knowledge requires, in response, a rigorous policy of "mitigated skepticism" — the constant application of "a degree of doubt, and caution, and modesty, which, in all kinds of scrutiny and decision, ought for ever to accompany a just reasoner."

High toned stuff !

The notion of "connecting the dots" didn't make it into the Year in Ideas section of the NYT Magazine http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/ , but that usage has been much discussed on this thread.

(Erica Goode's Finding Answers In Secret Plots http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/10/weekinreview/10GOOD.html seems to have ignited a real change in the meaning and frequency of the phrase "connect the dots" in our language. 4051 rshow55 8/31/02 7:17am )

People have to make judgements - and the New York Times often leads discussion on how judgements are made.

The Odds of That by LISA BELKIN

"In paranoid times like these, people see connections where there aren't any. Why the complex science of coincidence is a conspiracy theorist's worst nightmare. Go to Article http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/magazine/11COINCIDENCE.html

• Links: Web sites devoted to coincidence, including the Sept. 11 theory. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/11/magazine/11COINCIDENCE.html#links

- - -

Just a few simple thoughts:

. Who could hire Eakin, to coordinate a project?

. What would it cost?

. How would this cost compare to the costs we're incurring and risking - from muddle that she, and people she could easily coordinate,

rshow55 - 08:13pm Dec 15, 2002 EST (# 6686 of 6691)
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.

. How would this cost compare to the costs we're incurring and risking - from muddle that she, and people she could easily coordinate, could avoid.

The cost of muddle can be very high - and the cost of clearing it away can be, comparatively - very, very low. But often enough, to get to clarity - - issues of protocol have to be adressed as well.

I spent a lot of time today thinking about this, looking at related material - and will have more to say about Iraq Makes a Philosophically Flawed Effort to Disprove a Negative By EMILY EAKIN http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/15/weekinreview/15EAKI.html and how Eakin's fine piece relates to a detailed answer to the questions set out in gisterme 12/13/02 4:22pm . . . but for now . . . I'm cooking dinner.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense