Musings on cause and effect

I've thought a bit about how we all work on a couple of different levels when we're problem solving. We can either work on the causal level or the effect level. That may seem obvious but I don't think it is all that obvious. For example: When we talk about issues around the military such as how it should be structured, what kind of power military leaders should have, how our military should interact with other nations, etc...all that discussion is premised on the fact that we need a military.

What if the argument changed? If we shifted the discussion to whether or not we need a military at all, that would be a big change of direction. I find that somewhat intriguing but here's something I find even more interesting - what is leading us to the belief that we need a military at all? So instead of asking about how to implement a military state or whether or not we need a standing military, what if we were to begin asking ourselves why we feel we need a military? Why do we feel the need to be a military superpower?

That's what I'm talking about when I say cause and effect. The cause is America feeling a need to protect itself from aggressive nations - the effect is America becoming a military state/superpower. So if you feel drawn to work on the effect level, you might be interested in things like how to best integrate the military mindset with the general populace, how to train military personnel to interact diplomatically, etc. This is what is happening on many levels throughout our country. This line of reasoning leads to hosts of other questions around how the military should interact with the general public, exactly what their duties as diplomats should be, their role as peacekeepers, etc.

Working on the causal level means addressing a much broader and higher level set of issues. Issues around national interactions and relationships, the use of force as a method of gaining compliance and the constant threat of force as a result of noncompliance, national intolerance, and the general 'my way is the only/right way' attitude exhibited by so many of the nations in the world today. It would be easy to assume that the causal level is 'more important' than the effect level but I disagree completely.

Take the example of illness: Researchers work on finding the cure and eliminating the disease altogether, but doctors work daily to treat the symptoms and aid people who are suffering from the disease. Which is more important? Neither - both are necessary for humanity to grow and move forward. People can't function if they are incapacitated by sickness and disease and cures aren't found overnight. Thus, the need for work on both levels.

My thought on the basic cause for all conflict (this is *very* broad and extremely generic) - people don't feel safe in their world. That sounds terribly simplistic and naive but I believe it to be true in the most basic sense. If we think of conflict in the context of change and the unknown, it becomes easier to see how people could feel unsafe and resist change. Resistance to change is what leads to conflict.