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 - 10:33am Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3661 of 3667)

Just called Louis Mazza on the phone. So far as I could tell from that conversation - and we discussed the point pretty specifically, Mazza's perception of lchic's rudeness and lack of consideration connects (and so far as I could tell from his words, only connects) - to her mispelling of his name -- a subject on which he is sensitive.

We all have a right to such sensitivities - and I hope that lchic , who I admire - can take care to spell Mazza's name properly from now on. It is a small thing, it seems to me.

I've been concerned with what I've regarded as much larger things. Since June 20 2001 - Mazza has posted something like 700 times - - and from his first posting on - there is case after case where he states - as facts to be relied on -- things that are not correct.

Perhaps I'm counting wrong - but from sampling it seems to me that the "significant facts" that he has argued for that have been factually true have been less frequent than the falsehoods. I've been amazed at the low quality of his notion of truth. Maybe that's a failing of my own. Others can search "Mazza" and "Mazza9" and judge the quality of his postings for themselves.

rshow55 - 10:40am Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3662 of 3667)

In our world, the use of force is widely involved, in the law, in all sorts of sports that require umpires - and force is often informal, as well. There are penalties, informal but often forceful, in being caught in uncorrected falsehoods. Everybody makes mistakes. Most people I know - and everybody I respect - feels responsible to correct them.

I think that mechanisms where force are brought to bear develop when, everything considered, they are thought to be practically necessary. Perhaps some other people agree.

In our conversation, which did not last long, I wasn't able to determine whether Mazza disagrees with the following (the question isn't whether he happens to like me or not.)

" People say and do things.

" What people say and do have consequences, for themselves and for other people.

" People need to deal with and understand these consequences, for all sorts of practical, down to earth reasons.

"Every individual, and every group, has a stake in right answers on questions of fact that they have to use as assumptions for what they say and do.

" Whatever our differences otherwise - I don't think people can reasonably disagree about the points just above.

Do you disagree with the bolded points just above, Mazza?

If so, on what basis?

lchic - 10:41am Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3663 of 3667)

MoralForcing | A couple of years ago I was talking through the concept of paradigms and why they happen and what can be done - (see GU thread sciParadigm).

The concept of

moral_forcing

So when the value of the material that is currently being blocked has vast application that will help and improve the lives of many - then this should enter 'reasoning' 'logic' 'rationalisation' and need for acceptance.

There was talk of a guy whose father was a medic -] I said a person brought up in such an environment, should immediately understand the need to allow new knowledge to enter the culture. Knowledge that can do so many so much good via improved accuracy in engineering and design.

As mAzzA will remember on the previous thread a gif of a goose being 'force fed' was introduced along with the concept of 'moral forcing' -- suggesting it is sometimes necessary to push and press new information into acceptance.
[ nb I neither eat goose liver nor condone the force feeding of these birds ]

mAzzA it's hard for me to express just how disappointed i was - having found your photo on the net - only to see it was so blocked-out it was impossible to tell just who was in the photo; likewise i traced your address and street ... only to wonder ....

:)

rshow55 - 10:45am Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3664 of 3667)

rshowalter - 09:48am Oct 9, 2001 EST (#10201 of 10206) Robert Showalter mrshowalter@thedawn.com

"Americans need to be WORTHY of the GOOD THINGS people associate with this flag - - not just wave it. . . http://www.awolbush.com/usaflag1.gif . Our allies, and people all over the world, should be able to expect that. And able to check that. . . . On missile defense issues, and other issues that matter enough.

_ _ _ _ _

I don't know if Ann Coulter read this post when I made it. -- Perhaps it is a coincidence. Reasons to believe Ann Coulter posted on this thread will be (or have been) reviewed here (will or have been, depending on when this piece, which has a .gif that will hold it up -- posts.)

Ann Coulter's new book does include a passage - that she's had to defend on television - where she asserts that "liberals hate the flag."

It isn't true - and though, by her standards, I'd be a liberal, I love the flag, and am a patriotic American.

rshow55 - 11:06am Aug 12, 2002 EST (#3665 of 3667)

Lchic -- lchic 8/12/02 10:41am .. is a good posting -- but you should fix the spelling of Mazza's name. It seems to me to be a small thing -- but to him, it isn't.

Here are some references, to the Riley-Showalter paradigm thread, Paradigm Shift .... whose getting there? . . that I think describe, in a new and clearer way, how paradigm conflict works. MD116 rshow55 3/2/02 6:34pm

(2 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense