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.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Please Comment.

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03
Post a Comment
Read more

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of
Post a Comment
Read more

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view
Post a Comment
Read more