New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
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.
(11114 previous messages)
rshow55
- 05:30am Apr 5, 2003 EST (#
11115 of 11126)
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.
I think, pretty early on, kids would be taught that to
describe anything well enough so that everybody
involved can really know enough about it to do practical
things with it - you need words and pictures and
math together - and with enough views, connected
well enough - so that things are clear.
( By math I means some way, that works well
enough for the purpose, to answer "how much?" questions
where they matter in the situation.)
Not that "full specification" is often worth it - or that
people really need it all the time - but when getting facts
straight about something physical really matters -
words, pictures, and math together is what it takes.
Maybe that would be controversial, for a while. But people
who worked at it would find out that these basic requirements
for description are basic - and they'd come to
understand them well enough so that they could explain them
comfortably to kids.
To adults, too.
rshow55
- 05:33am Apr 5, 2003 EST (#
11116 of 11126)
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.
If people could really communicate about things at
that tangible, factual level - they could sort out enough that
they could cooperate about a lot of things.
Avoid a lot of fights.
And sort out a lot of things in ways they want to.
Without an ability for people to communicate at this basic
physical level - how can you expect perfection - or
adequacy - or safety - about "higher" things?
rshow55
- 05:35am Apr 5, 2003 EST (#
11117 of 11126)
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.
Question.
How many people - and how many groups of people - can
communicate well enough for comfort, by these
elementary standards?
I have my guess.
Wonder what other people would guess, after thinking about
the question.
Seems to me that at this "low down" level - we often do a
lot of stuff wonderfully well, but there's room for
improvement.
In spots.
rshow55
- 05:39am Apr 5, 2003 EST (#
11118 of 11126)
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.
At this "low down" level of description - about
"low down" physical things, and "low status"
logical and physical relations there ARE things people can
be SURE of.
That are "simply true."
Basic.
Worth knowing.
Not too many to teach.
lchic
- 05:45am Apr 5, 2003 EST (#
11119 of 11126) ~~~~ It got understood and exposed
~~~~
No schism - just ism
raising-ism
real-ism
relativ-ism
renewal-ism
revision-ism
revival-ism
(7 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|