New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Politics
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] 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.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (4013 previous messages)

rshow55 - 07:21pm Aug 29, 2002 EST (# 4014 of 4014) Delete Message
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.

But, given what we know about psychology (from Piaget and many other sources) -- some mistakes will occur with monotonous, wrenching regularity.

If we understood that, we'd stop making the mistakes in the cases that really matter enough for us to be careful about.

That might save millions of lives. Or even the whole world.

Checking is getting to be very important.

MD3998 rshow55 8/27/02 1:20pm includes this:

"If you're a kid, you won't be interested in a lot of philosophy. You'll want to learn to read. How hard is that? Maybe not nearly as hard as people think.. Maybe the phonics advocates can get everything they've wanted, and more. And maybe the "whole language" people can, too.

"I believe that essentially everything that the phonics advocates want can be achieved - much more efficiently - if kids learned drills like this.

3930 rshow55 8/23/02 4:52pm ... 3931 rshow55 8/23/02 4:55pm
3932 rshow55 8/23/02 5:00pm

"And achieved in a way that gives the "whole language" people the things they want - the things everybody involved wants - reading as a comfortable and efficient gateway to pleasure, information and life.

"Key questions involved are discussed in 3970-3971 rshow55 8/24/02 6:44pm

C.P Snow speaks of

“ . . . the prime importance, in any crisis of action, of being positive, and being able to explain it. It is not so relevant whether you are right or wrong. That is a second-order effect. . . " Science and Government , Ch 11.

We can learn some things about induction that make the issue of right and wrong less of a second order effect. On issues of missile defense, and a lot of other issues, too.

MD4000-4001 rshow55 8/27/02 3:51pm

If I were able to get some security problems handled - I could be more effective. Anyone with real power could probably get on the phone and do that for me.

Back tomorrow.

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense


Enter your response, then click the POST MY MESSAGE button below.
See the
quick-edit help for more information.






Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us