New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

lunarchick - 09:37pm Apr 20, 2001 EST (#2450 of 2504)
lunarchick@www.com

From above:

4/5ths of women refuges from war zones have suffered rape. Rape has only just begun to be recognises as a WAR CRIME.

War makes NO sense ... there are complexities ... language, negotiation, concepts of 'futures for the common good' need refining to avoid violence being seen as a solution.

Much violence is 'lack of intelligent leadership' .. for wise intelligent leaders would SEE a future vision of possibilites and look to them.

Re Arabs and Jews .. arn't Jews ARABS who went walk-about and integrated with others in European countries before returning.

On Middle East logic: As per computer programming but at what point do these guys step out of the 'revenge' loop? when rather than Do (retaliate) do the move on and Do (better futuristic things that build their nations)?

rshowalter - 10:25pm Apr 20, 2001 EST (#2451 of 2504)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Lunarchick:

" 4/5ths of women refuges from war zones have suffered rape. Rape has only just begun to be recognises as a WAR CRIME.

people ought to read your Rape Camp: http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?13@@.ee79f4e/1512 to see how horrific human behavior can be -- and can see Japanese behavior that the US decided NOT to publicise and NOT to punish .

People ought to consider, very carefully, the data on rape in war -- and women especially, ought to think hard about what it means, and use their powers to argue effectively for themselves as people to be respected and for peace. They should reduce the legitimacy of war.

" War makes NO sense ... there are complexities ... language, negotiation, concepts of 'futures for the common good' need refining to avoid violence being seen as a solution.

The notion of "disciplined beauty" is useful here. If the standard is one of disciplined beauty then the proportion and consistency of practice and doctrine with respect to specific bodies of assumption can be talked about. Then one can figure out if the actions involved make sense -- are proportionate -- are beautiful -- in terms of any assumptions.

rshowalter - 10:30pm Apr 20, 2001 EST (#2452 of 2504)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

In wars, there may be NO "beautiful" justification -- there may be no reasonable proportionality in terms of any assumptions. Or the "justification" may require assumptions that are insane, and unacceptable to all, the instant that they are explicitly stated.

Or at least the assumptions, once stated, can suggest better alternatives than mass mutual murder.

Most often, your statement that war makes NO sense is right enough.

" Much violence is 'lack of intelligent leadership' .. for wise intelligent leaders would SEE a future vision of possibilites and look to them.

That's dead right.

" On Middle East logic: As per computer programming but at what point do these guys step out of the 'revenge' loop? when rather than Do (retaliate) do the move on and Do (better futuristic things that build their nations)?

The notion of "disciplined beauty" helps again rshowalter 2/9/01 1:53pm

rshowalter - 10:36pm Apr 20, 2001 EST (#2453 of 2504)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

To repeat: Dawn Riley and I have worked out An operational definition of Good Theory in real sciences for real people. It applies to good military doctrine (which is military theory, built to use.).

In "Beauty" http://www.everreader.com/beauty.htm Mark Anderson quotes Heisenberg's definition of beauty in the exact sciences:

" Beauty is the proper conformity of the parts to one another and to the whole."

SUGGESTED DEFINITION: Good theory is an attempt to produce beauty in Heisenberg's sense in a SPECIFIC context of assumption and data.

Goodness can be judged in terms of that context, and also the fit with other contexts that, for logical reasons, have to fit together.

The beauty, and ugliness, of a theory can be judged, in terms of the context it was built for, and other contexts, including the context provided by data not previously considered.

( And so a pattern can be "beautiful in terms of one set of assumptions" -- and that can be clear to all concerned -- and yet "ugly in terms of another set of assumptions" -- and this can be clear, as well -- even without agreement about assumtions. So people can not only be "agreed to disagree" -- they can also be "agreed on the details of what they are disagreeing about."

Everything has to fit together (and, I think, be clearly describable in words, pictures, and quantitative descriptions, linked together comfortably and workably, both as far as internal consistency goes, and in terms of fit to what the theory is supposed to apply to in action.

(51 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense