New York Times on the Web Forums
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
(16113 previous messages)
- 10:53am Nov 1, 2003 EST (#
16114 of 16228)
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've had a mostly resting time since posting 16040-3 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebXfirstname.lastname@example.orgU6R.803094@.f28e622/17755
- socializing and helping take some preschool age kids
trick-or-treating. Just caught up with the board. If you look
at lchic's postings, they consistently connect to
interesting stuff - vital stuff. As they have for a long time.
She's both sophisticated and quite able to connect things to
basics - said compactly and memorably. Many of the things she
posts are timely and excellent - many other things timeless -
and beautiful. Some issues are lastingly important.
Section on Empathy begins here (16 related posts) :
5086 lchic 10/20/02 7:50pm http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebXemail@example.comU6R.803094@.f28e622/6403
She made a timely, important and eternally important point
with her reference in 16010 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebXfirstname.lastname@example.orgU6R.803094@.f28e622/17725
I'm bolding a few words, and adding a few comments.
"Military Historians might Transpose (below) to thread
" In democratic America it was
considered that during the course of a Ball all
present were on an equal social footing. The host (and/or
hostess) would receive respect due to position and service
and a visiting dignitary might be briefly acknowledged and
honored, but by and large all would be considered as
equals - at least for the evening.
For communication to actually work well - and be a two way
street - the convention of equality ( always a
convention when considered in detail ) is essential. For true
and full human to human interaction - a convention of equality
for the purpose of discourse is required.
Always the convention is fragile - but without it - real
communication - and a full meeting of the minds that is
actually agreed on by the parties - is impossible.
If equality as a convention is not possible, people can
either adress others as inferiors (and that's very close to a
convention that they are clowns, non-humans ) - or as
superiors - ( and there's little but ceremonial discourse - or
the giving of order - under that circumstance. The
.... " interest is in creating an atmosphere
that includes rather than excludes so that all can enjoy,
experience and learn together .... " http://members.aol.com/wemakehistory/etiquette.html
Some of jorian319's postings have a quite different
intent. I found 16067 and 16079 notable examples.
On Oct 30, in an exchange discussed from 15969 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebXemail@example.comU6R.803094@.f28e622/17684
to 15972 http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebXfirstname.lastname@example.orgU6R.803094@.f28e622/17687
" I take full resposibility for my words
and actions, and yet proceed without caution . . . "
and I commented that "I'm not nearly smart enough to
proceed without caution ."
Being so limited, I'm resting and taking my time.
I don't think I've ever posted a single thing on this
thread that I couldn't, if asked, explain to my father and his
acquaintenances. Not that I'd have to - not that they'd be
interested. But I could. I wonder if others could take
responsibility in the same way.
I posted on Psychwarfare, Casablanca -- and terror
I'm back to resting. I enjoyed the chance to catch up on
(114 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums