>>That the short-term, logical, linear, instrumental
>> nature of this solution, and the context in which
>> it is embedded, is the root of the problem may
>> never be dealt with by our civilization.
>
>Is that important, Van? Why should "our civilization"
>have to deal with that? The US military are dealing with
>it quite efficiently. The problem itself is short-term,
>logical, linear and instrumental in nature so the
>solution fits.
I'm sorry, Derek, I did not make myself clear. I'll
try again.
This short-term, logical, linear, instrumental
solution is precisely what satisfies the parameters given.
I think the designer has exhibited genius and I would
expect the US military to be nothing less than efficient.
In theory, efficiency is what militaries exist to ensure.
I do not think the parameters are the relevant ones. The
solution given is correct but the question it answers is
wrong. The very blunt end of a solution (and the question
it would hint at) only begins to be formulated by admitting
that might does not make right.
The relevant point of the given problem (and its context),
I stated in the first paragraph of my original post; that
it is not free-standing.
In that light, yes, I think its important. The trouble with
instrumental reason is that its calculated successes are
never measured against its calculable failures. Our
civilization has posited itself on reason. We need to
deal with it.
Perhaps, Anand summarizes my many words saying,
"Flake and chaff, distracting the world's attention while
I wonder what americanities are being committed behind
this mask."
//Van
>> nature of this solution, and the context in which
>> it is embedded, is the root of the problem may
>> never be dealt with by our civilization.
>
>Is that important, Van? Why should "our civilization"
>have to deal with that? The US military are dealing with
>it quite efficiently. The problem itself is short-term,
>logical, linear and instrumental in nature so the
>solution fits.
I'm sorry, Derek, I did not make myself clear. I'll
try again.
This short-term, logical, linear, instrumental
solution is precisely what satisfies the parameters given.
I think the designer has exhibited genius and I would
expect the US military to be nothing less than efficient.
In theory, efficiency is what militaries exist to ensure.
I do not think the parameters are the relevant ones. The
solution given is correct but the question it answers is
wrong. The very blunt end of a solution (and the question
it would hint at) only begins to be formulated by admitting
that might does not make right.
The relevant point of the given problem (and its context),
I stated in the first paragraph of my original post; that
it is not free-standing.
In that light, yes, I think its important. The trouble with
instrumental reason is that its calculated successes are
never measured against its calculable failures. Our
civilization has posited itself on reason. We need to
deal with it.
Perhaps, Anand summarizes my many words saying,
"Flake and chaff, distracting the world's attention while
I wonder what americanities are being committed behind
this mask."
//Van