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.

lchic - 09:04am Jan 12, 2003 EST (# 7605 of 7612)
~~~~ It got understood and exposed ~~~~

Bucky Fuller envisioned a world game where the players used their own skills and knowledge in conjunction with universal geometry to create new approaches.

A

http://members.tripod.com/~Tetworld/nodea.html

B

http://members.tripod.com/~Tetworld/nodeb.html

rshow55 - 01:09pm Jan 12, 2003 EST (# 7606 of 7612)
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.

Wonderful posts. I've been working a while on these, partner - hope you like them.

rshow55 - 01:10pm Jan 12, 2003 EST (# 7607 of 7612)
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.

The War Against Women http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/opinion/12SUN1.html is a very important editorial on a very important question - and I'd like lunarchick to know that I read it yesterday, and have been trying to respond well ever since.

We are in serious conflicts about reproduction in every sense, and at every level - and the most intractable problems between the United States and the Islamic world are linked to the question. I've also been thinking about canonicity - balance every which way, by workable standards of beauty - and it seems to me that quoting from the back cover of a remarkably canonical book (that I find wrenchingly ugly most often) - one expect Condoleezza Rice knows well, at some very deep levels.

Here is the back cover of the 1991 paperback edition of The University: An Owners Manual by Henry Rosovsky - who was once an arch enemy of Condoleeza Rice in her capacity as Provost of Stanford University - an institution which is, by design, an anti-Harvard in many ways.

"Drawing on eleven years as dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University, Henry Rosovsky offers a wise and witty view of America's colleges and universities, how they run and the challenges they face, with special consideration to each of their "owners" - students, faculty, alumni, trustees, and others. He includes advice for hard-pressed administrators on answering awkward questions, asking for money, and other useful skills.

" An extraordinary gift for discerning major issues ... Mr. Rososvsky tackles the big public issues about postsecondary education today - curriculum and the dread canonicity tenure with its potential stagnation, research versus teaching, the admissions process in elite institutions - in set pieces that are unfailingly informative. - - - Linda Bradlye Salamon, New York Times Book Review

" Superb . . . Rosovsky has written an important book -- probing, wise, shrewd, fair - about the strenth and fragility of American universities. It deserves to be widely read. --- James O. Freedman, Washington Post

" Here is a deeply sympathetic guide to one of America's greatest and least understood resources - its private research universities. To be led through the world of American universities by Henry Rosovsky is like touring the Louvre with Bernard Berenson --- S. Frederick-Starr, President, Oberlin College.

We need much better, more tempered, more workable solutions to the problems of the "battle" of the sexes than we have - so do the Islamic nations. We are very different. The question "what happens to the children" need to be asked - carefully - answered carefully - and then reasked, reanswered readjusted - again and again and again and again and again and again until answers that are workably canonical where they have to be - workably flexible - and not to draconian or strenuous for the people involved - as they are - and as they adapt to the problems they have, step by step.

Pardon me for being unclear - I'm trying to work things out in ways that are stable - and work beautifully in the ways that they have to.

(5 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense