What is Big Think?  

We are Big Idea Hunters…

We live in a time of information abundance, which far too many of us see as information overload. With the sum total of human knowledge, past and present, at our fingertips, we’re faced with a crisis of attention: which ideas should we engage with, and why? Big Think is an evolving roadmap to the best thinking on the planet — the ideas that can help you think flexibly and act decisively in a multivariate world.

A word about Big Ideas and Themes — The architecture of Big Think

Big ideas are lenses for envisioning the future. Every article and video on bigthink.com and on our learning platforms is based on an emerging “big idea” that is significant, widely relevant, and actionable. We’re sifting the noise for the questions and insights that have the power to change all of our lives, for decades to come. For example, reverse-engineering is a big idea in that the concept is increasingly useful across multiple disciplines, from education to nanotechnology.

Themes are the seven broad umbrellas under which we organize the hundreds of big ideas that populate Big Think. They include New World Order, Earth and Beyond, 21st Century Living, Going Mental, Extreme Biology, Power and Influence, and Inventing the Future.

Big Think Features:

12,000+ Expert Videos

1

Browse videos featuring experts across a wide range of disciplines, from personal health to business leadership to neuroscience.

Watch videos

World Renowned Bloggers

2

Big Think’s contributors offer expert analysis of the big ideas behind the news.

Go to blogs

Big Think Edge

3

Big Think’s Edge learning platform for career mentorship and professional development provides engaging and actionable courses delivered by the people who are shaping our future.

Find out more
Close
With rendition switcher

Transcript

And I fear that one consequence of the Iraqi debacle is that we are much less likely to intervene. On the one hand there’s just a shortage of troops. You know everybody’s preoccupied in Iraq, or to some extent with Afghanistan. On the other hand there is a . . . no more stomach for military action. I think people have just had it with . . . with these adventures overseas, want the troops home, and are not about to launch into another one. And . . . and . . . And in a third respect, the Bush administration has discredited the concept of humanitarian intervention by trying to justify the Iraqi war after the fact as a humanitarian intervention, when we all knew at the time it was supposedly to find the non-existent weapons of mass destruction. Or it was to attack the non-existent links with international terrorism. But if . . . if we knew that there were no weapons of mass destruction; if it was clear there was no Al Qaeda connection, Bush would not have gone in just because Saddam was a tyrant. But after the fact by trying to justify the Iraq war as a humanitarian intervention, one that I don’t think is justified; because bad as a tyrant Saddam was, there was not the mass slaughter at the time that would have justified humanitarian intervention. Bush has given the term . . . given the concept a bad name. He’s really tarred what is, I think, a very high-minded concept with his fairly base political needs. And in the process, I think it’s people say like the people in Darfur who are paying the price. Because, you know, why is the international community only willing to go into Darfur with the consent of the Sudanese government? You know consent that has been withheld for a very long time. It’s because there is no more, you know, stomach. There is no more capacity to . . . to use military force; but also because people are now skeptical of this concept of humanitarian intervention. And so in that sense, the people of Darfur, or of Eastern Congo, or of others facing mass atrocities are very much paying the price of this . . . this cheap resort to war in an effort to justify it after the fact as a humanitarian intervention.

Recorded on: 8/14/07

 

Re: What is the legacy of t...

Newsletter: Share: