Secretary of State Tillerson said today there is no current, actual threat from N. Korea. Nonetheless, the threat is real.
The useful value of a nuclear weapon (its currency) is its existential threat (its deterrence value). The threat is actually so bad it has the natural effect (knowing the “natural obligation,” Kant said) of doing the real good now (which is to actually use its real value, existing on demand, thus really knowing it without actually knowing it).
Again we have the scenario of the good deriving from the bad, and it is the realm of risk management to predict how it plays out.
Predicting the probable outcome, which is the occupation of space over time, is (like I’ve been telling you) a function of momentum. How fast things occur affects the decision path, so it is necessary for risk management models to predict the unpredictable path of momentum by structuring the progression of the threat in the form of response — which is the behavioralist model of stimulus-response.
Shaping the probable risk into a logical expression, like an algebraic equation, requires deontologizing the risk identity. (See articles by griffithlighton on deontology of the risk on demand.)
In the realm of military strategy there is graduated and flexible response. If the objective is for the momentum to be gradual, then there needs to be a structural incentive that operates on demand. President Trump, however, suggests that the response can be flexible based on actionable intelligence to “predict” the outcome of the threat in the futures now, which is to actualize (or deontologize) the risk on demand (having a logical, structured, temporal sequence that formulates a likely decisional path, in the future, to govern, or condition, behavior at current value — which is always now).
Again, keep in mind, there is a vanishing point suggested by how the picture looks now, framed within four corners. (See, for example, graphic images by griffith lighton depicting the notional, aesthetic value of “using” the vanishing point to express the occupation of space over time, extending into the realm of knowing without actually knowing, which is Immanuel Kant’s notion of objective reality, and being “obliged” to doing the right thing, no matter what decision is made at any particular time.)
Nature does not care if we actually know what reality is. It is going to happen anyway. We know, for example, that a solar eclipse is going to happen, and knowing why it happens has changed its attributive value. It is neither a good or bad omen of the future to be currently applied now. Instead, it is a predictable event, over time, that we naturally aspire to structure on demand to control for the probable risk, thus having current, useful value now. The “natural condition” (the Skinner Box) is always there, but we determine how it will play out, and in doing so, philosophy matters.