Monday, September 8, 2025

Miscellaneous

 For your Amusement

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think there are a lot of reasons why guns are so easy to obtain. Discussing them, I suggest, is a diversion from the problem which is that too many people are the victims of gun violence. I think eliminating gun violence shoul==Hird be the priority and that we should leave the discussion of causation to the academics.--Hiram

John said...

Unfortunately the first step in solving a problem is identfying the root cause(s). Otherwise you may change things and not improve the situation... Or you may make it worse... :-O

Anonymous said...

Is that really what we think? VladimWhat ir Putin when it is suggested that he should stop murdering Ukrainians, says that we must all address the root causes of the conflict first. Does that make sense? Recently, there was flooding in Texas. What was the order of priority in addressing this problem? Did we do a study on what the root causes of floods might be? Or did we try to save the people in danger. And we didn't seem to worry whether our attempts to save those people made the problem of flooding worse. I don't know what causes the sun to rise in the morning, but I do know that sometimes I need sunscreen.==HIram

Anonymous said...

I suggest the "root cause" thing is an unexamined cliche that doesn't hold up well when examined. Root causes are notoriously difficult to determine, and are often complex in the sense that there are multiple root causes. It doesn't seem to me to make sense that those issues must be sorted out assuming they ever can be to anyone's satisfaction before addressing what it is they are causing. Too often, "root causes must be addressed first" proponents are simply using that stratagem to delay action on the problem.--Hiram

John said...

If you do not like this... What method do you recommend?
How do you get enough support to implement a change?
https://asq.org/quality-resources/problem-solving

Anonymous said...

Root causism is often used as a tactic to avoid doing something. Putin uses in his war with Ukraine. Root cause arguments are commonly used to avoid doing anything about guns and gun violence. Root causism is divisive, because no one ever agrees on what the root causes are, and that lack of agreement prevents the consensus we need to get things done.--Hiram

Anonymous said...

Root cause vs. core issue. Let's say a house is on fire. Are root cause and core issue the same? The fact is, when a house is on fire, we don't know what the root cause is. It might be faulty wiring, it might be smoking in bed. Whatever. But is the "root cause" the "core issue" when the house is in flames Putin uses the term "root cause" in explaining his war on Ukraine. But let's consider it in the context of that article. Was there really an objective root cause? Or did he do what the article seemed to suggest, the defining of a cause he could plausibly describe as root. Something people would buy. Something that would divert them from actually doing something.==Hiram

John said...

So, back to my question... How would you solve the immediate issues and longer term problem?

Anonymous said...

You address the immediate issue. You put out the fire. "Root cause" is often irrelevant to any part of the solution. The root cause of the two world wars of the 20th century was the sudden emergence of Germany as a military and industrial power in the 19th century. But the problem of war in Europe wasn't solved by the getting rid of Germany. It's still there and doing quite nicely, although it is still a factor in why Putin attacked Ukraine.--Hiram

John said...

"Put out the fire"... How?
"pervent future fires" How?

Anonymous said...

Maybe we should start by addressing the root cause of fire.--Hiram