Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 86

Thread: What tribal societies can tell us about justice and liberty

  1. #41
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Easy for you to say Tyrrell....

    Looks like 150+ pages to look through - it might be interesting.

    My concerns (besides the accuracy via "fact checking" of more formal documents used by our troops - e.g., RAND monographs, etc.) also were with (what I suspect) might be a much less formal process used in the field in non-secure areas - as to which, MikeF and Schmelap have had more recent experience. What do they (if they are still reading this) suggest re: "fact checking" of folks who give them narratives and of those folks' informants ?

    Regards

    Mike

  2. #42
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    11

    Default To Dayuhan-- thanks for link!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayuhan View Post
    This does not surprise me at all, and it's not uncommon. One of my favorite recent cases is the one discussed in this thread: http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=2165
    Thanks for posting this link. Very interesting!

    -Rhonda

  3. #43
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    11

    Default To Mike, thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    Rhonda, I'll look at the legal memo and get back (possibly by PM cuz the focus of this thread should be on the Diamond article and your people's reports, not the law of the case).
    Thank you, Mike.

    -Rhonda

  4. #44
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RhondaRShearer View Post
    Facts do exist.
    Yes, they do, and some can be adequately verified, just as some others may always be in doubt. It's rare, though, that we can assemble facts into a coherent narrative without treading in more subjective territory. Opportunities for distortion abound. Sometimes it's intentional: direct self-interest, an ideological agenda, a reporter or editor's desire for a salable story. It may be less intentional: an ideological, sentimental, or culturally driven predisposition to perceive facts and connections in certain ways. Distortion may be pure accident at times.

    It's also entirely possible (and common) to assemble a grotesquely distorted narrative from impeccably verified facts, something generally accomplished by cherrypicking facts and pulling them out of context. That works particularly well in video presentations, where shots can be slammed together in MTV-style edits culminating in a breathless announcement that everything you've seen is absolute verified fact. Guess we could call that the Michael Moore syndrome.

    You're a journalist, Mike's a lawyer, Marc's an anthropologist, I'm just a guy who's done this and that here and there and come away with a perhaps excessively cynical view of certainty. We all have our own ideas about what constitutes fact or truth, and of course as Mike points out you're in the issue and the rest of us are curious onlookers. All of that has an impact on the way we perceive and discuss. Not all bad to have an injection of idealism, though, not the most common commodity around here
    Last edited by Dayuhan; 05-05-2010 at 08:11 AM.

  5. #45
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RhondaRShearer View Post
    I have been in Egypt at least 30 times the past 10 years and am working on finishing a book on the true story of the crash of EgyptAir Flight 990, Oct 31 1999. If you recall its the fatal accident off the Atlantic coast of the US where the first officer was accused by NTSB of downing the plane while committing suicide.
    Did the report explicitly say suicide, or just the actions were cause by his handling of the aircraft?
    Facts do exist.
    Well according to many Egyptians, it is a fact, that the British Royal Family murdered Princess Diana. Evidence and proof are not concepts universally accepted.
    Prediction of certain facts are possible too. Step front and center in front of van moving 60mph and that will be another fact
    Only because you can demonstrate it and repeat it, and even then the outcome is not a certainty.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  6. #46
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    11

    Default

    @William F. Owen,
    You write, "Did the report explicitly say suicide, or just the actions were cause by his handling of the aircraft?"

    NTSB made an embarrassing error and quickly announced to the press that it was suicide after a bad translation of the cockpit voice recording (CVR). After retracting this mistake, the NTSB tried their best--and failed--during the entire investigation to prove it was true.

    They ended up in the final report to state that (I paraphrase) that it was the copilot's inputs into the first officer's column that by intent or accident caused the crash.

    This statement has the false appearance of objectively and rigor. One assumes that the flight data recording measured these inputs and that their statement is objective and factual --not an opinion. However, even industry experts often fail to know that in this particular model of the Boeing 767 does not include recording data from the columns! NTSB has no idea what inputs were made that fatal day. It is pure speculation.

    Besides all this is moot. Boeing's insurers recently settled and made pay-outs to Egyptian crew members and passengers of the doomed EA 990 flight. Needless to say perhaps but Boeing and insurers don't want the true story to come out that the plane's bell crank bolts in the tail went into failure causing the split in the flaps (one side up the other down), not a manual struggle where one pilot fought to pull up while the co-pilot was fighting to push down. I heard the cockpit voice recording (CVR) firsthand. There was no fight.

    This is about Boeing sales and stock prices and maintaining American financial interests IMO. It is so much cheaper and easier to blame the pilot --especially if they are Muslim.

    Regarding Facts. Yes some people here and in Egypt, do cite "facts" when what they have cited are, in fact, opinions. This is a common confusion and error.

    You also write a response to my statement -"Prediction of certain facts are possible too. Step front and center in front of van moving 60mph and that will be another fact." You state: "Only because you can demonstrate it and repeat it, and even then the outcome is not a certainty."

    I carefully worded my statement --"front and center" of van moving at 60 mph. The details may not be a certainty but stepping front and center of a van moving 60 miles a hour would be no doubt prove fatal in every trial. The laws of physics that are predictable and measurable in this Newtonian example. Bone, tissue and organs can only take so much force before damage. There are "rupture stress" numbers for all sorts of tissue types and materials where one can accurately calculate and predict with scientific certainly at what speed certain tissue/materiel will get damaged.

    If facts were so unreliable and unpredictable as you and others may be suggesting here, science and technology as we know it would be impossible.

  7. #47
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Facts are reliable

    Quote Originally Posted by RhondaRShearer View Post
    If facts were so unreliable and unpredictable as you and others may be suggesting here, science and technology as we know it would be impossible.
    but can be manipulated and seen or interpreted differently by various observers, usually perspective dependent.

    People, OTOH, are pretty much unreliable and unpredictable...

  8. #48
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default Quite so, Ken

    Everything is subject to human interpretation, and thus human manipulation and error. Anyone who studies history at a deeper level than the last History Channel special soon begins to understand and appreciate this.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  9. #49
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Rhonda,

    Quote Originally Posted by RhondaRShearer View Post
    If facts were so unreliable and unpredictable as you and others may be suggesting here, science and technology as we know it would be impossible.
    Just a couple of quick notes on this point.

    First, Newtonian (and most other "natural laws") are based on a Baconian understanding of science, i.e. a probabilistic stance. All this means is that the results are not 100% certain, although they may be 99.99999% based on previous observations. The reliability of a process is the latter number.

    Second, "facts" should be distinguished between observations and processes. Individual observations may be categorized using a crisp set typology - "Did it (the event) happen? Yes / No" - while processes require a more subtle question - "Did it (the process as we predicted) happen in this case? Yes / No / Maybe".

    Third, the English word "fact" comes from the Latin "factum"; "made" or "constructed". "Facts" are constructed by our consciousness by a process of abstraction of sensory input from objective reality and always include a component of limited understanding. As our understanding, our models of objective reality and the languages (including mathematics) that we use to describe these models alter, so does their predictive validity. You mentioned Newtonian Laws; well, don't forget that they start to break down at ~.3C.

    Fourth, "facts", in the sense of individual observations, can and should be used to establish both plausibilities and probabilities (they tend to be asserted in some other systems). It all depends on which logical system(s) a science is using in any particular case, and there are often problems with confusing systems of logic, what "facts" should be associated with each, and how those "facts" may/can/should be used.

    This may sound like I'm picking on you, but there are some pretty serious, real world implications. For example, if we assume a (nomonological-)deductive logic system that states, as a fact, that insurgencies arise from poor governance, then counter-insurgency operations will focus their efforts on building governance structures. If we assume an inductive (probabilistic) logical system that states that governance is a factor in insurgencies, then the emphasis will be different. BTW, I chose this example in particular because it related back to the article I linked from your site initially.

    Cheers,

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  10. #50
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Tyrrell, now, you've gone and done it....

    by mentioning "good governance". We'll soon be joined by COL Bob Jones who will explain his theories of "good governance" in terms of "a (nomonological-)deductive logic system", and in terms of "an inductive (probabilistic) logical system", to boot. At which point, this country lawyer will really be lost in the fog of words.

    Some points in this discussion exemplify the problem of expressing "facts" in words. I thought Rhonda was doing pretty well with her 60 mph van until this:

    from RRS
    The details may not be a certainty but stepping front and center of a van moving 60 miles a hour would be no doubt prove fatal in every trial.
    The problem is with "every". People have survived direct hits from motor vehicles traveling 60 mph or more; just as people have survived free falls from thousands of feet. Those are admittedly outliers, but they do exist. So, "almost every" is more precise wording in that particular case.

    Now, excuse me while I go and look up "nomonological-deduction".

    Regards

    Mike

  11. #51
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hey Mike,

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    by mentioning "good governance". We'll soon be joined by COL Bob Jones who will explain his theories of "good governance" in terms of "a (nomonological-)deductive logic system", and in terms of "an inductive (probabilistic) logical system", to boot. At which point, this country lawyer will really be lost in the fog of words.
    LOL - okay, okay!

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    Some points in this discussion exemplify the problem of expressing "facts" in words. I thought Rhonda was doing pretty well with her 60 mph van until this:

    ....

    The problem is with "every". People have survived direct hits from motor vehicles traveling 60 mph or more; just as people have survived free falls from thousands of feet. Those are admittedly outliers, but they do exist. So, "almost every" is more precise wording in that particular case.
    Yup, that's it exactly. "Outliers" is a nice synonym for those nasty facts that disprove ones "perfect" theory, since they both lie outside of what is predicted and, therefore, are liars (to quote an old sociology prof of mine)

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    Now, excuse me while I go and look up "nomonological-deduction".
    http://wapedia.mobi/en/Deductive-nomological_model (I use the older version of the name ).
    Last edited by marct; 05-05-2010 at 05:16 PM. Reason: fixed wonky added code....
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  12. #52
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default Levity

    As y'all hash out truth, justice, liberty,good governance and bad, y'all may want to take a moment and listen to Stephen Colbert's Difference Maker Robert Eckas.

    Robert Ekas ensures the freedom of American society by giving the middle finger to every police officer he sees.
    v/r

    Mike

  13. #53
    Council Member Dayuhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
    Posts
    3,137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    Everything is subject to human interpretation, and thus human manipulation and error.
    True, and I think in this age of the conspiracy theory we often underestimate the impact of error. Personally, given a choice between conspiracy and ####up I'll default to ####up almost every time, unless the evidence to the contrary is overwhelming. What's the rule... never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity?

    That rule has some relevance to the case Rhonda was discussing earlier. It is to me at least superficially plausible that NTSB could make a premature announcement based on a faulty translation and then try to cover their ass. The contention that

    This is about Boeing sales and stock prices and maintaining American financial interests
    is a bit harder to sustain, for the following reasons:

    1. High probability of exposure. The number of people involved in these investigations is enormous, and too many people would have to know that the game was being fixed. Very hard to keep a secret at that level.

    2. Extremely high penalty for exposure. If NTSB were caught covering up a mechanical failure on behalf of Boeing the consequences for both the agency and the company would far exceed the consequences of simply admitting mechanical failure.

    3. Low necessity. Looking at previous examples where the company was clearly at fault (eg Japan Airlines flight 123) there's nothing to suggest that the impact of a single crash due to mechanical failure would be catastrophic to BA sales or share price.

    Any company in that industry has a procedure for dealing with crashes, and the normal attitude is to eat it and move on. Unless there was something really extraordinarily damning about this case it's hard to see why a coverup would be necessary.

    Or possibly I am ideologically predisposed (assuming that the investigation was compromised, which I don't know to be the case) to think a bureaucratic ####up and a scramble to cover is a more likely scenario than an organized conspiracy to protect a company... or perhaps Rhonda has the opposite predisposition, or both. Even where data are consistent and unquestioned, the narratives we frame from data will invariably reflect our experience and prejudices.

  14. #54
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RhondaRShearer View Post
    Needless to say perhaps but Boeing and insurers don't want the true story to come out that the plane's bell crank bolts in the tail went into failure causing the split in the flaps (one side up the other down), not a manual struggle where one pilot fought to pull up while the co-pilot was fighting to push down.
    Interesting.
    Do you mean elevators and not flaps? If a control run fails, elevators normally reverts to neutral, and they would really have to have jammed very hard to remain displaced, once the dive began.
    What about the auto-pilot disconnect? If that was a trip out, why didn't the Co-pilot just engage it again. Are you saying the failure caused the disconnect?
    ...and pulling back on the throttles?
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  15. #55
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Interesting stuff hear.......anybody ever looked at Thorstein Veblen? and his Anthropology based Economic Theory?

  16. #56
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hey Slap,

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Interesting stuff hear.......anybody ever looked at Thorstein Veblen? and his Anthropology based Economic Theory?

    Theory of the Leisure class
    stuff? Yup. Actually, economics and Anthropology have a lot of crosses over the past 100 or so years (and I had to read too much of it! ).
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  17. #57
    Council Member M-A Lagrange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    In Barsoom, as a fact!
    Posts
    976

    Default

    Hello the Mikes, Slap, Marc and all others

    I do believe that leisure and the search for the easiest and less costly (Time, energy, money, danger…) solution is THE KEY for any human activities.
    This is the base of development of “stuff” as internet: the best and easiest and smoothest way to discuss with people on the other side of the world.

    Joke apart, the leisure theory as such is too “raw” and not enough explicative to look at people’s choices. This being said; this is, from my personal point of view, the best way to look at “traditional societies”.

    To come back to traditional societies and justice, I would recommend giving a look on the British Army stabilization handbook (post by Wilf few months ago in SWJ). Their analyses of traditional societies judicial system participation to Sierra Leone civil war is extremely interesting. It is one of the rare document from DFID or USAID or Eu I read pointing out the bad points of the “traditional societies myth” in stabilization operations.

  18. #58
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Hi MA, to this day I don't think anybody has figured out what to call Veblen, he is neither a pure economists or anthropologist, he was one of the first people to look at an economy as a society as opposed to a simple economic production unit, much to his credit IMO.

  19. #59
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Hey Marc - from Barsoom

    As to this:

    from MA Lagrange
    To come back to traditional societies and justice, I would recommend giving a look on the British Army stabilization handbook (post by Wilf few months ago in SWJ). Their analyses of traditional societies judicial system participation to Sierra Leone civil war is extremely interesting. It is one of the rare document from DFID or USAID or Eu I read pointing out the bad points of the “traditional societies myth” in stabilization operations.
    a couple of questions: (1) a link or at least a title for what Wilf posted (he posts a lot ); and (2) what do you mean by the “traditional societies myth” ?

    Finally, how do you as a field practitioner (as opposed to being a member of the Parisian academy ) separate the true from the false, the accurate from the inaccurate, etc., generated by indigenous narrators and informants; thereby avoiding the "Diamond Trap".

    Regards (colonialment)

    Mike

  20. #60
    Council Member MikeF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    As to this:

    Finally, how do you as a field practitioner (as opposed to being a member of the Parisian academy ) separate the true from the false, the accurate from the inaccurate, etc., generated by indigenous narrators and informants; thereby avoiding the "Diamond Trap".

    Regards (colonialment)

    Mike
    Hi Mike. First a dumb question. Is a barsroom a bar? Lol. I've started the conversation on one component of breaking down the facts and truth in this thread on aerial reconnaissance. Additionally, I remembered something that my dad taught me.

    Military doctrine defines an aerial reconnaissance as denoting a preliminary survey conducted to gain or collect information. This technique is not solely owned by the military, and I learned of its advantage early on in my youth. My father is a commercial developer. We moved towards new areas of prospective growth. In 1985, during first grade, we moved from Charlotte to Cary in his pursuit of the American Dream. He would rent helicopters to survey potential properties prior to purchase. In his office, I would stare at the overhead images taken during the flight and ask him why he took them.

    “Michael, you have to be able to see the land and visualize its use. If I’m going to build a medical park there, then I need to gain a snapshot of its proximity to the city, to the schools, and to the neighborhoods. Additionally, I must try to imagine where the future growth will go. If I don’t look at it from every possible angle, then I could build in the wrong place.”
    One key difference to remember with the practisioners is the motive- military, entrepeneur, and anthropologist. One is trying to execute and enforce policy, one strives towards profit, and the final is supposed to observed and analyze.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •