About the nuclear arsenal

[guille101]

Can you check this, please



Nowadays, the nuclear arsenal counts on thousands of nuclear warheads. The power of one of these bombs, comparatively, is equivalent to the destructive capacity that showed all the conventional weapons in all wars combined that have happened throughout history. Man has the capacity of burst the crust of the earth with the armament that possesses, and the explosion of several nuclear bombs jointly could create, eventually, the so-called nuclear winter, which would return to Earth to the ice age. To all this, the current situation adds a serious problem: the nuclear weapons are not in possession of a single country as it was at the end of the World War Two, neither we live in a bipolar world, like was in the decades of the fifty nor sixty -where United States and the former Soviet Union disputed the hegemony, but that several countries have them. And some countries, with poorer economies, have developed chemical weapons and biological comparable with the previous in their destructive power. All this type of weapons could well destroy the complete population of the Earth more than forty times.

Before this panorama, the philosophical status of man in our time has no major difference in comparison to the times of Descartes, the bridge between the subject and the object is not set yet. This signifies that the contemporary man not even is convinced of the existence of his own feet; less persuaded he has to be of the existence of the other.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by guille101

Can you check this, please?

Nowadays, the nuclear arsenal consists of thousands of nuclear warheads. The power of one of these bombs, comparatively, is equivalent to the destructive capacity demonstrated/shown by all the conventional weapons of all wars combined that have happened throughout history. Man has the capability/potential of bursting the crust of the earth with the armament he possesses, and the explosion of several nuclear bombs jointly could eventually create the so-called nuclear winter, which would return the Earth to the Ice Age. The current situation adds a serious problem to all this: the nuclear weapons are not in possession of a single country as they were at the end of the World War II. Nor do we live in a bipolar world, like we did in the 50's or the 60's -where the United States and the former Soviet Union disputed the hegemony; several countries have them. And some countries, with poorer economies, have developed chemical and biological weapons comparable with the nuclear weapons in their destructive power. All these types of weapons could very well destroy/wipe out the entire population of the Earth forty times over (more than forty times).

Facing this panorama, there is no major difference in the philosophical status of man in our time in comparison to the times of Descartes - the bridge between the subject and the object is not yet set. This means that the contemporary man is not even convinced of the existence of his own feet; much less persuaded that he has to be aware of the existence of the other.

Suggestions above.

[guille101]

Hola Rusty.

Ante este panorama, el estado filosófico del hombre en nuestro tiempo no tiene mayor diferencia comparado con el de los tiempos de Descartes; el puente entre el sujeto y el objeto aún no se establece. Esto significa que el hombre contemporáneo ni siquiera está convencido de la existencia de sus propios pies; menos persuadido tiene que estar de la existencia de los demás.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by guille101

Hola Rusty.

Ante este panorama, el estado filosófico del hombre en nuestro tiempo no tiene mayor diferencia comparado con el de los tiempos de Descartes; el puente entre el sujeto y el objeto aún no se establece. Esto significa que el hombre contemporáneo ni siquiera está convencido de la existencia de sus propios pies; menos persuadido tiene que estar de la existencia de los demás.

Gracias por incluir el fuente.

Faced with this scenario, there is no major difference between the philosophical state of man in our times versus the times of Descartes; the bridge between the subject and the object hasn't been established yet. This means that contemporary man is not even convinced of the existence of his own (two) feet; much less having to be persuaded that other people exist/much less convinced that other people exist.

[CrOtALiTo]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Gracias por incluir la fuente.

Faced with this scenario, there is no major difference between the philosophical state of man in our times versus the times of Descartes; the bridge between the subject and the object hasn't been established yet. This means that contemporary man is not even convinced of the existence of his own (two) feet; much less having to be persuaded that other people exist/much less convinced that other people exist.

I made some corrections.


Suggestions above.

[Rusty]

Oops! Thanks, Crotalito, for the correction.

[CrOtALiTo]

Don't worry.

You're welcome.

[guille101]

Gracias Rusty por todas tus correcciones.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by guille101

Gracias Rusty por todas tus correcciones.

De nada.