3 ms·

Nuclear weapons and MAD provide the best examples of double-think that I can appreciate, and that I even partially buy into. Reading articles like this, I want

Nuclear weapons and MAD provide the best examples of double-think that I can appreciate, and that I even partially buy into. Reading articles like this, I want to jump to judgement and outrage over the physicists and engineers who, I imagine, spend many more hours considering incremental technical improvements than contemplating the reality of these devices. But if I could press a button to relinquish my country's entire nuclear arsenal, would I? Would I rather live in a more morally pure country in that respect, but one which no longer has the safety benefits of mutually assured destruction? If not, then am I just a hypocrite for criticising those with direct involvement? The logic of nuclear deterrence depends on having an amoral chain of command. Nuclear retaliation against Russia, China, or the United States is suicide, and serves no beneficial purpose in the moment it is carried out. But there is no way to fool an adversary into believing that we are capable of total retaliation without actually putting the command structures and individuals in place which are somewhat likely to follow through. Every time I seriously ponder nuclear war, these questions enter my mind and I can't make headway. Much of it boils down to utilitarianism versus more idealistic thinking.

gdubs 7y ago
You might appreciate this panel discussion featuring Carl Sagan and Henry Kissinger: https://physicsworld.com/a/the-day-after-35-years-later-carl-sagan-and-henry-kissinger-on-nuclear-war/ https://physicsworld.com/a/the-day-after-35-years-later-carl... I’ve always been struck by the caliber of this broadcast and the audience engagement and questions. From a different time when public discourse on nuclear weapons was common. Perhaps part of the rising anxiety in society over the past decades is the suppression of the knowledge that the we live with loaded guns pointed at our heads. Sounds like an almost unhinged thing to say — but then again, the policy is called MAD after all.

gdubs 7y ago

You might appreciate this panel discussion featuring Carl Sagan and Henry Kissinger: https://physicsworld.com/a/the-day-after-35-years-later-carl-sagan-and-henry-kissinger-on-nuclear-war/ https://physicsworld.com/a/the-day-after-35-years-later-carl... I’ve always been struck by the caliber of this broadcast and the audience engagement and questions. From a different time when public discourse on nuclear weapons was common. Perhaps part of the rising anxiety in society over the past decades is the suppression of the knowledge that the we live with loaded guns pointed at our heads. Sounds like an almost unhinged thing to say — but then again, the policy is called MAD after all.