J.JPM@EPIC (Jim McGrath) (02/22/86)
From: J.JPM@EPIC
But it never will. One of the reasons I think SDI is a good
idea is that it is an excellent way to get funds for space
activities...
From: brahms!weemba@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Matthew P. Wiener)
This is one of the reasons I think SDI is a sick idea. It reduces
NASA (along with much university research) to moral prostitution
for its funding.
Your logic here is missing a couple of steps. You can only make a
case for moral prostitution if you somehow think that defense research
is immoral (or you think that the law is neat and tidy - in which case
I don't think you know much about the law). I happen to think defense
research is vital. Furthermore, I disagree with the philosophy of the
current law, which forbids the military from sponsoring research
unless it is directly related to its mission. I have no problem with
the military supporting, through research, fields that contribute to
the general health of science, technology, and industry, and thus
indirectly to defense.
You are perfectly entitled to you own feelings (a more accurate term
than thoughts) on this matter, but given this fundamental divergence
in beliefs you should be ready to recognize why other (indeed, most)
people will disagree.
Jim
-------weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener) (02/23/86)
>>>But it never will. One of the reasons I think SDI is a good >>>idea is that it is an excellent way to get funds for space >>>activities... [J.JPM@EPIC] >>This is one of the reasons I think SDI is a sick idea. It reduces >>NASA (along with much university research) to moral prostitution >>for its funding. [Me] >Your logic here is missing a couple of steps. You can only make a >case for moral prostitution if you somehow think that defense research >is immoral (or you think that the law is neat and tidy - in which case >I don't think you know much about the law). I happen to think defense >research is vital. Furthermore, I disagree with the philosophy of the >current law, which forbids the military from sponsoring research >unless it is directly related to its mission. I have no problem with >the military supporting, through research, fields that contribute to >the general health of science, technology, and industry, and thus >indirectly to defense. > >You are perfectly entitled to you own feelings (a more accurate term >than thoughts) on this matter, but given this fundamental divergence >in beliefs you should be ready to recognize why other (indeed, most) >people will disagree. [J.JPM@EPIC] I do not think that defense research is immoral or that the law is neat and tidy. I am all in favor of the military supporting basic and even not-so-basic research. My objection is in tying NASA to SDI in any serious way. NASA has been non-partisan all these years, and I fear that SDI could damage that. In particular, SDI has numerous intelligent foes--in contrast with anti-NASA idiots like W Mondale--and I do not want to see them turn their sights on NASA. Nor would I like to see NASA become a guinea pig in future arms control talks. And if xx% of NASA's budget ends up coming from SDI money, and our next president kills SDI, xx% of NASA's budget disappears. I should point out that SDI is damaging the coziness of past defense/ academia relations very seriously. If we can't support the space program for the sake of space itself, then why bother? ucbvax!brahms!weemba Matthew P Wiener/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720
al@vger.UUCP ( Informatix) (02/25/86)
In article <12185272326.7.J.JPM@EPIC>, J.JPM@EPIC (Jim McGrath) writes: > > From: J.JPM@EPIC > But it never will. One of the reasons I think SDI is a good > idea is that it is an excellent way to get funds for space > activities... You should note that SDI not only contributes to the budget crunch (SDI's budget is about 10 times that of space station this year) but also drains talent from NASA. For example, Abrahamson left shuttle to run SDI - did this turnover contribute to Challenger's accident? Hard to say, but possible. Another example, newly minted knowledge engineers can get $40K/year or so working for DOD or $25K/year from NASA - guess who gets the pick of the crop? > I happen to think defense research is vital. 'Defense' research is a driving force in the US/USSR arms race. This race has two credible outcomes - mutual nuclear disaster and mutual economic exhaustion (while Japan laughs all the way to the bank). I place defense in quotes since, according to Aviation Week, very little of these funds are spent on defense of the states of the union. As reseach funding is increasingly dominated by the military, the militarization of our society is increased. Unfortunately, the qualities essential to a military society are directly antithetical to freedom. You must obey orders, control is from the top down in a strict hierarchy, and little personal choice is allowed. This, even if necessary, eats away at the foundation of our democracy.