That's not a problem of the science, but of the politics. After all, the Royal Air Force bombed Baghdad with Phosphorous Bombs before they had rockets, back in the 1920s.
Jim heartfield
------------------------
Now Jim,
are you saying that rockets don't kill people for patriotic, nationalistic and imperialistic reasons, the people who fire them off with such motives do? Hmm, sounds familiar. Wouldn't it be more insightful to ask what is the teleos of rocket science--which is what I am stumbling towards in the above?
So, if we re-configure this silly discussion into a question about the teleos of rockets and nylon, or more explicitly still, question the teleology of physical science, then I think we end up in more interesting place. For one thing, the problems with science and scientific knowledge and the threads of these in the socio-economic matrix become clearer--or at least more distinct.
Where I want to take this is that the social, political, and economic context along with the motivations of the people involved create and impart a teleos to ideas and practices. How could this not be the case? The sciences as such historical configurations are no different in this respect and the knowledge produced is tainted with or configured about a variety of teleologies. But furthermore, for each such teleology which is also like a literary theme, we re-capitulate, re-enact and reproduce roles in what amounts to a drama that seems to surround our apparently unrelated and theoretically pure intellectual endeavors.
So, while natural science and analytical thought were purportedly established to root out all forms of meta-physical teleology in the natural cosmos, generations of scientists have, because of that metaphysical conviction, managed to carry out a differently configured teleos nonetheless.
The most intimately bound example I can think of at the moment can be seen in classical mechanics. Begin with Newton's parallelogram law for the composition of forces where force is a vector and is equal to a combination of mass and acceleration, F = MA. The composition of such vectors is presented as the algebraic rule for vector addition and is illustrated as a parallelogram. So, if we consider what this means beyond the mere mathematical operation, which of course Newton assured us was all that was worth considering (and I never take Newton's word on these matters), then something else becomes evident.
A vector is formally a set of numbers taken from two or more disjoint sets. In classical mechanics, these sets represent lengths and orientations or magnitudes and angles. Yet with just a touch of imagination it is pretty easy to see this vector form is nothing more than a re-working of a metaphysical teleology. Here is the association or correspondence. Magnitude and orientation can be matched to intentionality and purpose. Together they compose an abstraction of teleos. This sounds like a silly sort of animation of otherwise vacuous mathematical symbols, but the mind seems to always carry on in multiple voices, multiple themes and associations whether we wish it or confess it or not. Even the humble arrow takens on more than the coordinates that define it. And pretty soon, the abstractions give way to discussions of purpose, intent, design, free will, determinism, and of course that new fangled thingey, agency. In other words, a teleology is unveiled.
So, I'll bet you didn't think it was possible to come even close to demonstrating the patriotism of molecules, did you? Well, I didn't quite get there, but can we settle for the projection of intentionality onto the laws of motion instead?
I have to ask why goose down sleeping bags should be hellhound?
Chuck Grimes