Skip to main content

Impossible Problems - a classic conflict


An eternal impossible problem/situation of the conflict variety

Suppose there is an ascending, aggressive appearing, nation emerging and building military might. Their threat is ominous though they assert no claims for territory are in their plans. The developments are only for defense. What is the response of the other nations? There are two.
  • Type A. We should fortify this location or making alliances with nearby nations thereby hedging in this imminent threat, making clear our intent to delimit any strategies they may have, and demonstrating the severe cost to territorial ventures. Let us negotiate from strength.
  • Type B. We should not fortify because it will anger and possibly even enhance their build-up making them more dangerous. It may even trigger a venture for territorial gain. Let us accept their word that they do not seek aggression with other nations. Let us negotiate from good will
It is remarkable how consistent these strategies with variations have sustained over most of history. Of course, history sometimes shows which is the wrong course in particular cases, but there seems to be no general principle. Indeed, history is interpretive and cannot be relied upon as it is often difficult to see what would have been the other outcomes to the alternate approach. Despite this, there is no end in sight of hindsight interpretations responding to "What might have been," for almost every tactical or strategic decision.

The variations are what make this an impossible situation of unending proportions. Not unnoticed until now, knowledge of this historical dilemma is clearly implicit in calls to form federations and international organizations of nations. This impossible situation is of the multiple solutions variety, involving a conflict between often implacable players.

Related and leading to impossible situations are several methods by which Type A and Type B players come to their positions.
  • To view the situation as it is wished to be, not as it is.
  • To avoid making necessary decisions that are against foundational beliefs.
  • To simplify a situation by the exclusion of information or because of inherent complexity.
  • Over reliance on a single approach even when not appropriate.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behavioral Science and Problem-Solving

I.                                       I.                 Introduction.                Concerning our general behavior, it’s high about time we all had some understanding of how we operate on ourselves, and it is just as important how we are operated on by others. This is the wheelhouse of behavioral sciences. It is a vast subject. It touches our lives constantly. It’s influence is pervasive and can be so subtle we never notice it. Behavioral sciences profoundly affect our ability and success at problem-solving, from the elementary level to highly complex wicked problems. This is discussed in Section IV. We begin with the basics of behavioral sciences, Section II, and then through the lens of multiple categories and examples, Section III. II.     ...

Where is AI (Artificial Intelligence) Going?

  How to view Artificial Intelligence (AI).  Imagine you go to the store to buy a TV, but all they have are 1950s models, black and white, circular screens, picture rolls, and picture imperfect, no remote. You’d say no thanks. Back in the day, they sold wildly. The TV was a must-have for everyone with $250 to spend* (about $3000 today). Compared to where AI is today, this is more or less where TVs were 70 years ago. In only a few decades AI will be advanced beyond comprehension, just like TVs today are from the 50s viewpoint. Just like we could not imagine where the video concept was going back then, we cannot really imagine where AI is going. Buckle up. But it will be spectacular.    *Back then minimum wage was $0.75/hr. Thus, a TV cost more than eight weeks' wages. ------------------------- 

Fake News

If you've been following the news the last couple of days, you will note the flurry of copy devoted to fake news.  Both sides are blaming whatever has befallen them the consequence of fake news.  Let's look at this phenomenon a bit.    When I was a student years ago, a friend climbed some mountain in Peru.   A article was written in the local newspaper about the event.   In only three column inches, the newspaper made about six errors.   An easy article to write you say?   Just interview and reproduce.   Yet so many errors?   The question is this: was this fake news or bad reporting?   The idea here is that fake news comes in various flavors. Bad reporting – errors made by the author or editor Opinion presented as news     Deliberate creation of falsehoods to favor a point of view       The reporting of selected truths to favor a particular point of view Now we have the big social media ...