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

Human Simulation is Possible - by Humans

  Human Simulation: Agent-Based Modeling and the Computational Case for Our Reality   1.       Introduction In the essay, we introduce the notion that humanity could be a deliberate simulation based on an extremely simple single-celled organism, hardly anything more complex than that. This will allow an (apparently) new interpretation of the notion that humanity is simulated, but that there is no master engineer at a massive number of dials and switches, responsible for every twist and turn of our universe and lives. We begin with the notion that the universe exists and operates under its own laws. So, given the Earth [2] , when and where life first began, it was infused with a living agent, self-actualized, reproductive, and with other basic rules for its operations, interactions, and much of what single-celled organisms do today. The idea from this occurred some years back when writing code in ActionScript (formerly Flash), I was able to create...
2 comments
Read more

The Calculus of Ideas and Patterns

  Introduction. When dealing with ideas, patterns, intuition, and brainstorming, we need operations or rules not unlike those of arithmetic. The goal is not proof, a finished device, or a fait accompli , but rather a foundation for further investigation and study. In some cases, these operations may yield a proposition, that is, something capable of being proved. In this sense, they form a practical logic of intuition. The article concludes with a few select examples from a variety of venues. Setting. We are working with a given idea, problem, or project, or simply just thinking. Our aim is to discover pathways, patterns, or conceptual connections that may be useful. The following operations describe ways in which ideas and patterns can be generated, transformed, or refined. These also work toward understanding the imagination. Yet, this framework is distinguished from formal logic and proof. We are tempted to call them as “soft logic” because while nothing is proved, reasons...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Double-Down Syndrome

The "Double-Down Syndrome" describes a pattern in which leaders, organizations, and individuals become increasingly committed to a position precisely when evidence suggests they should reconsider it. Rather than revising a mistaken judgment, they reinforce it. They repeat the original claim, defend it more vigorously, and invest additional resources in proving they were right all along. One explanation for this tendency is political survival. Public life rewards consistency far more than it rewards intellectual flexibility. Voters often say they want leaders who are willing to change their minds when presented with new evidence. Yet they frequently interpret such changes as weakness, indecision, opportunism, or dishonesty. As a result, politicians learn an important lesson early in their careers: changing course may be rational, but it can also be politically costly. The experience of President George H. W. Bush is often cited as a prominent example. His famous campaign pledg...
Post a Comment
Read more