4 of 4
4
Science of Peace
Posted: 05 February 2016 05:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  383
Joined  2015-11-28
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 05:45 PM
3point14rat - 05 February 2016 03:32 PM

Unless you’re a jihadist or completely deluded (Kim Jong-un style), then MAD is definitely a deterrent. 

Look at animals that can scare off predators by looking bigger and meaner than they are.  Having a giant pile of weapons is the human equivalent of a cat’s fur standing on end or a frilled lizard spreading his neck frill. 

Don’t forget,we are animals, so big brain or not, we have similar survival instincts.  And even if we didn’t have that instinct, it’s the logical conclusion to not attack a more or equally powerful opponent.

Yeah good points. We could substitute “nukes” for the term MAD above.
Obviously weapons are a deterrent.

There’s still more complicated logic equations involved with the concept of MAD, but I suppose you’re right about the basic premise.
I think another separate discussion could be had on this topic about the logic behind MAD…but obviously it’s basic fundamentals
are somewhat sound, though unproven.

That’s one of the logical conundrums of MAD, that it will always be unproven..until it’s proved that it doesn’t work.
That’s what I’m trying to get at.

If people responsible for keeping the peace can’t match or exceed those who want to breach the peace violently then we are in serious trouble. I want every single person to be heard in a way that their voice can contribute to a solution in A PEACEFUL PRESENTATION OF THEIR DISPUTES.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 February 2016 06:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  383
Joined  2015-11-28
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 05:45 PM
3point14rat - 05 February 2016 03:32 PM

Unless you’re a jihadist or completely deluded (Kim Jong-un style), then MAD is definitely a deterrent. 

Look at animals that can scare off predators by looking bigger and meaner than they are.  Having a giant pile of weapons is the human equivalent of a cat’s fur standing on end or a frilled lizard spreading his neck frill. 

Don’t forget,we are animals, so big brain or not, we have similar survival instincts.  And even if we didn’t have that instinct, it’s the logical conclusion to not attack a more or equally powerful opponent.

Yeah good points. We could substitute “nukes” for the term MAD above.
Obviously weapons are a deterrent.

There’s still more complicated logic equations involved with the concept of MAD, but I suppose you’re right about the basic premise.
I think another separate discussion could be had on this topic about the logic behind MAD…but obviously it’s basic fundamentals
are somewhat sound, though unproven.

That’s one of the logical conundrums of MAD, that it will always be unproven..until it’s proved that it doesn’t work.
That’s what I’m trying to get at.

Escalation of weapons reaches a point of diminishing returns when real science is shared that improves the chances of members of our species leading a satisfying life.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 February 2016 06:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5506
Joined  2008-08-14
AMH - 05 February 2016 06:02 PM

Escalation of weapons reaches a point of diminishing returns when real science is shared that improves the chances of members of our species leading a satisfying life.

AMH I’m having trouble following the syntax of your words. I wouldn’t bother, but I’m interested in what you have to say.
I’m just not fully understanding you at the moment.

 Signature 

Now with 20% more surfactants!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 February 2016 06:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  383
Joined  2015-11-28
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 06:08 PM
AMH - 05 February 2016 06:02 PM

Escalation of weapons reaches a point of diminishing returns when real science is shared that improves the chances of members of our species leading a satisfying life.

AMH I’m having trouble following the syntax of your words. I wouldn’t bother, but I’m interested in what you have to say.
I’m just not fully understanding you at the moment.

Understand. We should let it rest. Maybe one of the others in this forum might help us both. This is a difficult subject.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 February 2016 06:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  237
Joined  2012-07-13
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 05:45 PM

That’s one of the logical conundrums of MAD, that it will always be unproven..until it’s proved that it doesn’t work.
That’s what I’m trying to get at.

MAD should always work unless a suicidal/deluded person is controlling one side, or one side can render the other sides weapons useless some how.

MAD is bad.  But it can work.  Better solutions need to be found whenever it’s being used. Hopefully humanity can come to a point in our cultural evolution where excessive tactics like that don’t need to be used (I’m not holding my breath ).

 Signature 

It is morally as bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it.  Edmund Way Teale, Circle of the Seasons

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 February 2016 07:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5506
Joined  2008-08-14
3point14rat - 05 February 2016 06:51 PM
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 05:45 PM

That’s one of the logical conundrums of MAD, that it will always be unproven..until it’s proved that it doesn’t work.
That’s what I’m trying to get at.

MAD should always work unless a suicidal/deluded person is controlling one side, or one side can render the other sides weapons useless some how.

MAD is bad.  But it can work.  Better solutions need to be found whenever it’s being used. Hopefully humanity can come to a point in our cultural evolution where excessive tactics like that don’t need to be used (I’m not holding my breath ).

Yeah…roger that.

 Signature 

Now with 20% more surfactants!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2016 01:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5257
Joined  2011-11-04
AMH - 05 February 2016 06:20 PM
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 06:08 PM
AMH - 05 February 2016 06:02 PM

Escalation of weapons reaches a point of diminishing returns when real science is shared that improves the chances of members of our species leading a satisfying life.

AMH I’m having trouble following the syntax of your words. I wouldn’t bother, but I’m interested in what you have to say.
I’m just not fully understanding you at the moment.

Understand. We should let it rest. Maybe one of the others in this forum might help us both. This is a difficult subject.

Perhaps AMH’s point is that:  To the extent that the positive outcomes of science, (the discoveries that make our lives better), are available to and experienced by all, then the impetus for groups to prepare for mutual destruction is diminished.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2016 01:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  383
Joined  2015-11-28
TimB - 06 February 2016 01:29 PM
AMH - 05 February 2016 06:20 PM
VYAZMA - 05 February 2016 06:08 PM
AMH - 05 February 2016 06:02 PM

Escalation of weapons reaches a point of diminishing returns when real science is shared that improves the chances of members of our species leading a satisfying life.

AMH I’m having trouble following the syntax of your words. I wouldn’t bother, but I’m interested in what you have to say.
I’m just not fully understanding you at the moment.

Understand. We should let it rest. Maybe one of the others in this forum might help us both. This is a difficult subject.

Perhaps AMH’s point is that:  To the extent that the positive outcomes of science, (the discoveries that make our lives better), are available to and experienced by all, then the impetus for groups to prepare for mutual destruction is diminished.

Thanks TimB. That is my point.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2016 11:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4181
Joined  2009-10-21
AMH - 06 February 2016 01:47 PM

Thanks TimB. That is my point.

And a great point it is. I kinda slid by it, probably because I saw it on Super Sunday.

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 4
4
 
‹‹ Detachment      Not a debate ››