Do we know what we "need" anymore?

Absent

The Cold War? Well, I haven't got a few thousand pages! But it seems to me that the word 'usefulness' cannot properly be used as a descriptor.

It led to a huge expenditure on on arms instead of using those resources to benefit the populations of the countries engaged in the build up of weapons.

Today we still have nuclear weapons in the hands of some very unstable and unsavoury regimes.

It led to a lot macho politicking between the major power blocks, in which the USA eventually emerged as the top nation. We are now seeing shifts in the balance of power(s) and it remains to be seen if nations such as China are able to reign in states like North Korea and if extreme Islamicism can be contained.

It also led to insularity and fearfulness of 'the other' to an extent which I feel is much greater than would otherwise have been.

Some have argued that that there has not been a major war between huge power blocks since '45 but that has not prevented hundreds of smaller wars and thousands of deaths.

So - very, very briefly, I would say not much.

Aka I think I have also seen pictures of Mongol hordes – they're always hordes like Catholics are always devout – with leather stirrups. Still, there wasn't a lot of trade between northern France and Mongolia in 1066.

The thing is, people need a good education to make the most of their inventiveness, and most of it does benefit humanity.

No, not really, aka. I think that good societies do not repress imagination and I think that's a good thing.

What the scientists proposed, mice, was rejected. What is your historian's view of the usefulness, in the end, of the cold war?

Sort of 'light the blue touch paper and retire' philosophy Bags

As I said, war generates inventiveness. From which, when the wars are over, the rest of us benefit.

Of course inventors of all descriptions will continue to invent and to push the boundaries of knowledge as far as they can.

But there seem to be two strands of discussion here. The first is about unnecessary consumption which individual people must make their minds up about.

The second is about the rapid escalation of technology which is driven by war and conflict.

I'm reading at the moment a brilliant biography of Robert Oppenheimer and have reached the months after the end of WWII. The scientists proposed that nuclear weapons be under the tight control of an international body and that uranium should not be allowed to be sold for weapons. This would have prevented the arms race as, of course, once knowledge is 'out of the box' it cannot be put back in. This was vetoed by Trueman who described Oppenheimer as a 'cry baby scientist' and said that the blood would be upon his hands.

So, while invention should and must continue it seems to me that it should never be in a morally neutral context and that if only political and moral development in the human brain developed in parallel with the inventiveness then we'd all be in a better place.

True, oh Queen, but almost all of it's still military because they are the only ones with the budgets. Do you remember Ronald Reagan and his ridiculous Star Wars Program? And don't overlook that maniac in North Korea.

Is explore their environment

and try experiments.

The "What happens if i do this?" approach to life is a GOOD THING.

Not Wiki'd but yes Googled! Knew it wasn't the Norman's invention 'cos I've seen pictures of Chinese horsemen with leather stirrups somewhere.

Like most other kinds of exploration.

It's what imaginative intelligent animals do.

Space exploration is brilliant.

jings, we have a new frying pan that has an even better coating than Teflon. It is orders of magnitude better as it can't wear out. Teflon does.

Aka But it was much later getting to Europe and it was the Norman's secret weapon.

durhamjen Urban myth alert. Teflon wasn't invented by NASA, although they have used it.

Of course, space exploration was entirely a military exercise in the days of the Cold War and has continued to be a power play ever since.

You Wiki'd that.

The stirrup was invented for war use. By 415 AD the use of two riding stirrups was popular throughout China. And with them, heavy armor, horse bardings (armor) and mounted archery came into use. The stirrup spread quickly through Asia, all the way to Korea and into Japan. It evolved from large toe loops on the side of a saddle to the flat, oval bronze or iron designs recognizable today. The face of warfare had changed forever.

Sorry! Hate frying pans that stick.

Teflon is bloody good!

Would the West be quite so quick to enter into wars if it was a level playing field though?

Don't get me wrong. I think that, very sadly, some wars have to be fought. But sometimes it seems much less fair than it used to be. If wars can ever be fair.

Nuclear power and nuclear warfare go hand in hand. Wish they didn't.
Wouldn't have Teflon if it wasn't for space exploration. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?

On the other hand things get invented quicker during wartime, necessity being the mother of invention and all that. I bet more things were invented round about the two world wars than at any other time in history. Problem with inventing things is that they're invented most of the time to make money. If only mankind would put it's intelligence into just making the world a better place instead of finding ways to repair the damage being caused .

Worrying about the mining and mobile phones. Son smashed his screen last week. Glad he got a repair only.