Aucbvax.6009
fa.space
utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!space
Sun Jan 31 03:38:08 1982
SPACE Digest V2 #93
>From OTA@S1-A Sun Jan 31 03:32:48 1982
SPACE Digest Volume 2 : Issue 93
Today's Topics:
ARPANET Withholding Tax?
Technologists vs Humanists
Technologists and Humanists
Technologists "vs." Humanists
Re: Government Funding of Space
Re: Technologists and Humanists
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 30 January 1982 16:18 est
From: Tavares.Multics at MIT-Multics
Subject: ARPANET Withholding Tax?
To: Space-Enthusiasts at MIT-MC
In-Reply-To: Message of 30 January 1982 06:02 est from Ted Anderson
The first part of almost every message I have gotten over the past three
or so days has been missing (where "message" means each individual note
in each digest shipment). Whas hoppnin.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 1982 2322-PST
From: Jim McGrath <JPM SU-AI AT>
Subject: Technologists vs Humanists
To: space at MIT-MC
First, apoligies to everyone on SPACE for discussing what is probably
not an appropiate topic for this list. But since the subject came up...
Saying technology is more important than the humanities is stupid, since
technology, the APPLICATION of scientific knowledge, has to be directed
by social goals determined by the study of the humanities (and social
"sciences"). However, saying humanities is more important than
technology is equally stupid, since man is, above all else, a TECHNOLOGICAL
animal. Our use of tools, more than anything else, has contributed to
our current state of civilization. Trying to understand Man without his
tools (please, no comments on sexist language!) is a fruitless endevour
that will ultimately lead to failure.
One problem we face is that there are significant numbers of people who
believe that technology, in and of itself, can solve all problems. This
is wrong, since those very problems CANNOT be defined or specified by
a strict examination of technological alternatives (although some constraints
as to what is physically possible can be supplied by technology) - one
MUST appeal to the knowledge lodged in the study of Man, the humanities.
Another problem we face is the presence of a large number of people who
believe that Man's tools and his tool making capacity should be
ignored when examining the proper role of our race in the universal
scheme of things. One cannot make ANY decisions about what Man should
do or should become without examining how Man interacts with the
physical Universe - and this is the domain of Science and Technology.
Frankly, I have no doubts that there are far more people causing the
second problem than the first. At least most technologists believe
that they SHOULD be aware of the Humanities, while many poeple
in the Humanities feel no obligation to understand the first
principles of Science and Technology. So while we need more people
knowledgable in both areas, the lack of technological understanding
among the people studying the Humanities seems to be the most
severe problem we are currently facing.
Jim
------------------------------
Date: 31 January 1982 03:39-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE MIT-MC AT>
Subject: Technologists and Humanists
To: TAW at S1-A
cc: SPACE at MIT-MC
If you burned all the art, people would be miserable but alive.
If you burned all the technology, about 75% of the population
would starve.
Which should we do?
(Maybe neither?)
------------------------------
Date: 31 January 1982 03:45-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE MIT-MC AT>
Subject: Technologists "vs." Humanists
To: LRC.SLOCUM at UTEXAS-20
cc: space at MIT-AI
Which Nobel Peace Prize winners have really advanced the cause
of Peace?
As opposed to those who have managed to impress the right
people?
Indeed: how DOES one advance the cause of peace? Did Pacifist in
WWII advance the cause of peace? Or did Joe and Willy (and
General Patton)? Is Jane Fonda, or a US Army paratrooper lieutenant,
more likely to advance the cause of peace today?
Was Appius Claudius the Blind right when he said "If thou
wouldst have peace, be thou then prepared for war," or is paying
Danegeld a better approach (oops: don't needlessly irritate the
totalitarians, they MEAN it...)
------------------------------
Date: 31 January 1982 03:52-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE MIT-MC AT>
Subject: Re: Government Funding of Space
To: ucbvax!decvax!watmath!jcwinterton at UCB-C70
cc: SPACE at MIT-MC
If a private company SUCCESSFULLY manages to make
profits in space, it will instantly be broken up as a monopoly...
------------------------------
Date: 31 January 1982 03:56-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE MIT-MC AT>
Subject: Re: Technologists and Humanists
To: ucbvax!ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!chico!duke!decvax!watmath!jcwinterton at UCB-C70
cc: SPACE at MIT-MC
Sir: you ought to come to some of my parties at AAAS meetings
and MEET some REAL techologists; a more diversified group I
don't know. Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that Kantrowitz,
Dyson, Minsky, Forward, Anderson, Ruffini, Benford (Benford**2,
actually), Bussard, etc. have no "humanistic" interests?
------------------------------
End of SPACE Digest
*******************
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <
[email protected]>
of
http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
