Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!limbo!taylor From: jane@aipna.ed.ac.uk (Jane Hesketh) Newsgroups: comp.society Subject: Re: Questions about censorship in comp.society Message-ID: <1806@limbo.Intuitive.Com> Date: 27 Feb 91 22:42:06 GMT Sender: taylor@limbo.Intuitive.Com Organization: Dept of AI, University of Edinburgh Lines: 46 Approved: taylor@Limbo.Intuitive.Com Thom Gillespie writes, in response to a note from Dave Taylor: > As you note, clearly, there's a lot that's war-related that is right > on topic with computers and society, including the whole issue of > "right employment" (a topic that's come up before in this forum). But, > again, it's a fine line between talking about that and talking about the > larger question of whether war is an appropriate way to solve problems > that should be resolved diplomatically, which is *not* a topic for a > group talking about computers and society. There is a philosophical difference here between - those who prefer to reduce topics into their components for analysis and get a view on some uncluttered problems, which they can bolt back together again (some people even believe the components are absolutely separable) and - those who believe that the analysis of the combined whole cannot be achieved like this, since it is inseparable, and any attempt to address isolated bits will be flawed. I support the second view. In this case, it's not just a question of whether war is an appropriate way to tackle diplomatic problems - who said "war is just diplomacy by another means"? The whole apparatus enabling conducting a war got there by design. Weapons and command systems all selected to suit possible wars, threats and support for the military-economic infrastructure. It's not as if the politicians sit around minding their own business and get a surprise one day when someone mentions they just happen to have amassed the Armed Forces with a spare several billion they found in a bit of the budget no-one was using. And the whatever the military and associated scientists and companies are able to come up with affects the diplomatic options. I expect comp.society to be a forum for discussion for all the inter-relations of computers and society. As far as I am concerned problems influence technology, and technology influences problems in complex ways, they are different aspects of some entity and I want to consider it whole. I am happy to focus on some areas more than others for the sake of a coherent discussion, but I never want to deny essential connectedness. Jane Hesketh