Glossary - Rational Argument: An Impossible Dream?
Copyright Notice: This material was
written and published in Wales by Derek J. Smith (Chartered Engineer). It forms
part of a multifile e-learning resource, and subject
only to acknowledging Derek J. Smith's rights under international copyright law
to be identified as author may be freely downloaded and printed off in single
complete copies solely for the purposes of private study and/or review.
Commercial exploitation rights are reserved. The remote hyperlinks have been
selected for the academic appropriacy of their
contents; they were free of offensive and litigious content when selected, and
will be periodically checked to have remained so. Copyright
© 2010-2011, High Tower Consultants Limited.
|
|
First published online 17:00 GMT 9th December 2004, Copyright Derek J.
Smith (Chartered Engineer). This version [HT.1 - transfer of copyright] dated 09:00 GMT 14th March
2011
BUT UNDER CONSTANT EXTENSION AND CORRECTION, SO CHECK AGAIN SOON
1 - Introduction
This glossary is an alphabetically sorted concept
cluster dealing in general terms with the individual pursuit of aletheia [= discovered truth] in a very imperfect
world; a through-the-looking-glass world of hallucinogenic inconstancy, where
to keep people ignorant is to control them, where deception is the key to
advancement, and where facts long cherished as certainties can suddenly
dissolve before your eyes. The individual entries are cross-indexed in such a
way that if loaded into a semantic network they would produce a navigable
three-dimensional encyclopaedia on the chosen
subject. Note, however, that although the body of material is reasonably
self-contained, it often overlaps in terms of content with companion glossaries
in (a) Research
Methods (where we deal with the technicalities of scientific truth), and
(b) Psycholinguistics
(where we deal with the philosophy of meaning and the science of its
communication). It also overlaps in terms of general thrust with our e-paper on
"Systems Thinking" (where we profile seven root skills for
understanding how the world really turns). Where necessary, hyperlinks will
transfer you to the appropriate companion glossary. Illustrations are drawn
from the issues exercising the nation in Autumn 2004, namely the Iraq War, the
US presidential election, the proposed UK Gambling Bill, the UK pensions system
meltdown, and so on.
2 - The Glossary Entries
Abductive Reasoning: [See firstly reasoning.]
Abductive reasoning, or simply "abduction",
is reasoning which follows the format that given a RESULT and a RULE we can
arrive at a CASE. Example: If (1) my car is not where it
is supposed to be, and (2) when someone steals a car then it will not be where
it is supposed to be, then (3) someone has stolen my car (after Skemp, 2002/2004 online;
care is needed nonetheless, because the RULE in this instance is less than
watertight, so it would be fallacious argument to rely on the particular
conclusion - I might, for example, have forgotten where I left my car).
[Compare deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning.]
Acceptability
Principle: The seventh of Damer's (1995) 12 basic
principles of rational argument. The principle that you should begin a
debate by finding an initial position of mutual agreement, before moving
forward into the area of disagreement.
Account: Within
psycholinguistics, an account is an important subcategory of speech act,
in which one explains one's motivation for an action. [See, for example, appeal
to higher loyalties.]
Ad Hominem: [Latin = "at the
man"]. A type of fallacious argument in which the proposer of an
argument is personally belittled, rather than the proposal itself (akin to
playing the player rather than the ball on the sports field). The attack may be
explicit, as in a direct personal insult [abusive ad hominem], or
implicit, as with belittling phrases such as "that's what you'd expect him
to say" (Curtis, 2004
online). Often used when attackers have little else of substance to offer
to support their case. Example: "President Bush is
what his father once called a 'voodoo' economist; his ignorance is equalled only by his self-confidence" (The Mail on
Sunday, 5th December 2004; forms an impression beyond the two brief
statistics then presented). [Compare character assassination and smear
tactics, and note especially the operations of 527 groups in US
electioneering.]
Admissible
Evidence: [See firstly evidence.] Those categories of testimony and
physical evidence accepted as evidence under a nation's legal system. [Contrast
inadmissible evidence.]
Aletheia: [Greek = "that which is no longer hidden or
forgotten", hence "truth, frankness, sincerity".] Martin Heidegger's
conceptualisation of truth as something needing to be
systematically "unconcealed" (Inwoord,
1999/2004 online).
Ambiguity: A type of fallacious
argument in which a word or phrase is deliberately left less than perfectly
defined (Damer, 1995). Example:
TO FOLLOW.
American Dream: "The American
dream is the concept widely held in the United States of America,
that through hard work, courage and determination one can achieve prosperity
(often associated with the Protestant work ethic). These were the values of the
original pioneers who crossed the American plains when Europeans first came to
America. What the American dream has become is a question under constant
discussion." (Wikipedia.)
[See now more on
the dream, myth, convenient and Wister, Owen.]
Anecdote: [See firstly levels
of evidence.] "The narrative of a detailed incident, or of a single
event, told as being in itself interesting or striking" (OED). Impromptu evidence
from a single case from a single authority. Often impressively vivid, and
widely used in journalism and politics, but not validated by peer review
and lacking the formal structure of a purpose-written case study.
Frequently deployed in fallacious argument. Avoid/distrust, except if
the anecdote in question can reasonably be reclassified as professional
opinion. Example: TO FOLLOW.
Appeal to
Authority: A type of fallacious argument in which undue reliance is placed
upon evidence from presumed, and possibly even divine, experts. An
attempt to sway an argument by force of personality, reputation, or just plain
fear, rather than by objective fact. Human religious belief systems are
invariably based upon arguments from authority, delivered as fact by
self-proclaimed "chosen ones" known as "priests", and
accepted by the rest of us as a matter of faith. Example:
" 'And I promise that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt;
to the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, a land flowing with milk and honey' " (Exodus,
3:17; note the double quotation marks, since Moses is at this point reporting
the promise at second hand). [Map showing
the locations mentioned; Story
of how those on the receiving end of this heavenly eviction notice had it
coming to them anyway.] [Compare hearsay evidence.]
Appeal to Fatuous
Sentiment: A type of fallacious argument in which doubting parties are
showered with good news in an attempt to create a "feel-good factor".
Example: "Earlier this year Australian electors were
inundated with cheerful statistics showing that '93 percent of voters in
marginal constituencies associate living in Australia with happiness' " (Private
Eye, November 2004; in an article predicting more of this sort of argument
from the Conservative Party in the impending British elections).
Appeal to Higher
Loyalties: A subclass of account, identified by Cohen (2001) in his
discussion of denial. The rejection of a particular line of argument
concerning an alleged misdemeanour, not on factual
grounds, but because in the final analysis "you/they had no choice but
to do it". Examples: (1) "I love them [=
Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty - homepage].
They're my friends. Obviously they have some over-the-top members, but most are
absolutely lovely and so brave. [.....] The good they do outweighs the bad so
much that I'll go on supporting them. [.....] The little hit on [victim's
name]'s head was nothing like the cuts he puts in the heads of primates."
(The Times, 13th November 2004). (2) In much the same vein, we
have the "Befehl ist Befehl" defence [German =
"I was only obeying orders"] commonly used by concentration camp
junior personnel to abrogate responsibility for their part in the Holocaust.
Appeal to
Ignorance: A type of fallacious argument in which an assertion is upheld
solely because there is no immediate evidence against it. Example:
TO FOLLOW. [Compare sheer imbecility.]
Appeal to
Solidarity: A type of fallacious argument in which doubting parties are told
to toe the party line upon pain of social ostracism or other punishment. One of
the saddest facets of primate life. Example: The US appeal
for international solidarity against Iraq in the run-up to the Second Iraq War
[click here to
see the price the French are now paying for daring to defy that appeal - sad].
Appeal to
Tradition: A type of fallacious argument in which there is undue reliance
on "the way things have always been done". Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Argument (1): In science and
everyday educated debate, the process of offering "a set of reasons or evidence
in support of a conclusion" (Weston, 2000, xi). An attempt
"to support certain views with reasons" (ibid.). "A means
of inquiry" (ibid., xii). A means of working from existing
knowledge to better knowledge by developing known facts, known as "premises"
or "propositions", in new ways. "A claim supported by
other claims" (Damer, 1995, p4).
"A group of statements, one or more of which (the premises) support
or provide evidence for another (the conclusion)" (ibid.). [Compare
argument (2), and do your best to learn the differences between rational
argument and fallacious argument.]
Argument (2): In politics and
religion, the use of persuasive communication and/or special
operations in the struggle to promote or impose one or other desired set of
beliefs or way of behaving.
Argument by
Adjective: To select adjectives [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] for gratuitous inclusion in a written or verbal argument
in such a way as to create a deliberately prejudicial impression of the
opposing position, and/or its supporters, beyond that justified by the evidence
presented. Examples: (1) "..... after a botched
military operation in April ....." (The Sunday Times, 14th November
2004; unnecessarily emotive choice of negative qualifier). (2) ".....
there to begin his infamous betrayal of ....." (Hoffman, 2004
online; unnecessary use of clear derogation). (3) "..... and was
greeted with howling scepticism ....." (The
Times, 2nd November 2004; unnecessarily colourful).
(4) "Isolated and humiliated, Tessa Jowell
saw her plans for a casino boom torn to shreds ....." (The Daily Mail,
2nd November 2004; unnecessarily colourful). [To find
out why adjectives commonly exist in positive-negative opposed pairs, see semantic
differential.]
Argument by Adverb: To select adverbs
[Psycholinguistics
Glossary] for gratuitous inclusion in a written or verbal argument
in such a way as to create a deliberately prejudicial impression of the
opposing position, and/or its supporters, beyond that justified by the evidence
presented. Examples: (1) "..... John Kerry shamelessly
invoked an obscure Navy directive ....." (Hoffman, 2004
online; unnecessary use of clear derogation). [To find out why adverbs
commonly exist in positive-negative opposed pairs, see semantic differential.]
Argument by
Analogy: [See firstly argument.] To argue by analogy is to focus on
metaphorical similarities between the issue or phenomenon at hand, and one
already deemed solved. Since this is in effect deriving general principles from
specific observations, argument by analogy is a type of inductive reasoning.
Example: TO FOLLOW.
Argument by
Example: [See firstly argument.] To argue by example is to offer
"one or more specific examples in support of a generalisation"
(Weston, 2000, p10). Single examples, of course, are illustrations
only, and are weak because they lack force of numbers [although large sample
studies can be just as weak (and often a lot more misleading) if in any way
confounded or biased]. The examples chosen should above all be
"representative", that is to say, they should sample the subject area
fairly and without intent to conceal, especially if there are a number of
conflicting viewpoints. Then, as a test of their own strength, they should also
specifically include, and go out of their way to dismiss, counterexamples.
Example: "The vast expansion of addictive slot
machines [.....] spells an almost certain rise in young gambling addicts. In
Australia, where a similar deregulation has taken place, the effects have been
disastrous." (The Daily Mail, 25th October 2004; italics added;
no counterexamples were volunteered, however, rendering this an intrinsically
unsafe argument.)
Argument by
Metaphor: To select metaphors [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] for gratuitous inclusion in a written or verbal argument
in such a way as to create a deliberately prejudicial impression of the
opposing position, and/or its supporters, beyond that justified by the evidence
presented. Example: "The Gambling Bill is rapidly
turning into a train wreck" (The Daily Mail, 25th October 2004).
Argument by Mot Juste: To select one's words of criticism with such
linguistic finesse as to create a deliberately prejudicial impression of
the opposing position, and/or its supporters, beyond that justified by the evidence
presented. To argue by "put down" or clever jibe. Example:
Of the US Defence Department's management of the Abu Ghraib prison: "Abuse of detainees was not
aberrational" (The Daily Mail, 16th December 2004; memorable,
but not in itself evidence).
Argument by Noun: To select nouns or
noun phrases [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] for gratuitous inclusion in a written or verbal argument
in such a way as to create a deliberately prejudicial impression of the
opposing position, and/or its supporters, beyond that justified by the evidence
presented. Examples: (1) "An organisation set up with National Lottery money provides
fake documents to help the relatives of henchmen for Zimbabwean
president Robert Mugabe enter Britain" (The Mail on Sunday, 20th
June 2004; calculated derogation - why select the word "henchmen",
rather than "affiliates" or "employees"?). (2) The use of
the term "insurgent" in the entry for Dirty Tricks, Department of.
This word carries the clear implication of foreign involvement in what was in
fact an indigenous resistance guerrilla force, with no more foreign advisors,
either on- or off-stage, than the government they were trying to overthrow. (3)
Ditto with the use of the term "insurgent" in reports from the Second
Iraq War, such as: "Lieutenant-General David Petraeus,
the US commander responsible for training Iraqi security forces, conceded that
up to a third of Iraq's 18 provinces were affected by the insurgency
....." (The Times, 8th December 2004).
Argument by Verb: To select verbs or
verb phrases [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] for gratuitous inclusion in a written or verbal argument
in such a way as to create a deliberately prejudicial impression of the
opposing position, and/or its supporters, beyond that justified by the evidence
presented. Example: "Mr. Blair's toadying to
America over Iraq has humiliated Britain and endangered British lives, without
advancing any definable national interest" (The Times, 16th
December 2004; calculated insult and therefore subjective - "unconditional
support" is more objective).
Arm's Length: The defining
principle of probity in a commercial or legal agency relationship. The notion
that such people as business agents, executors, proxy holders, trustees,
brokers, and solicitors should act in uberrimae
fides in the interests of their clients, and thus automatically,
voluntarily, immediately, and without regret, steer clear of dealings from
which either they themselves, or covertly favoured
third parties, might benefit. Example: TO FOLLOW. Counterexample:
The following is most definitely NOT at arm's length: "It has been
revealed that a property developer donated £5,000 to the [name of city] Labour Party weeks before winning a contract for a £260
million casino in the city" (The Daily Mail, 4th November 2004). [See
now declaration of interest.]
Assumption: "An
assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted" (Watson and
Glaser, 1991, p4). Properly managed, assumption is a
major critical thinking skill; mismanaged, it is a source of fallacious
argument. It follows that recognition of assumption skills are a
major component of rational argument.
Asymptote: The mathematical
notion of a straight line in two-dimensional Cartesian space, towards which a
particular curvilinear function "tends", but which it will never
finally reach until they both get to infinity. The hyperbola [picture] and the
Gaussian curve [picture]
are both asymptotic in this way. The concept of asymptotes becomes centrally
relevant to the present topic whenever an argument starts to hinge on
low-probability issues (e.g. the chance of a nuclear terrorist strike in the
next 24 hours). This is because those who have not grasped the concept of
infinity have dangerously simplistic minds, and instantly judge low probability
situations as impossible rather than as highly improbable [that is to say, they
have no conception of the difference between a probability of zero and
one which is merely very close to zero, and err accordingly].
Atrocity: "An act of
extreme cruelty and heinousness" (OED), usually involving an armed attack
on civilians or disarmed military, perhaps as a reprisal, perhaps in the indisciplined heat of the moment, but always providing a
focus for the righteous indignation of the aggrieved side. It is of course
difficult to maintain an objective definition with a topic as sensitive as
this, but the critical factor seems to be that atrocities are deemed
over-the-top and unacceptable even within one's own ranks. This is what
distinguishes an atrocity from a massacre, say, where it tends to be body count
alone which is remarkable, rather than the manner in which that body count was
achieved. Thus the Boston Massacre [details]
would be an atrocity, because unarmed civilians were on the receiving end,
whilst the "Marianas Turkey Shoot" [details]
would be a massacre but not an atrocity, because it was basically a fair -
albeit somewhat uneven - fight. [The Marianas "whuppin'"
was the logical outcome of some excellent generalship, and that is what wars
are all about.] Examples: Nanking, Bloody Sunday, Omagh, My Lai, Nine-Eleven, Srebrenica, etc., etc., and as
many again without memento. The irony is that atrocities are usually
self-defeating, because they stiffen the resolve of the surviving enemy not to
surrender [as happened, for example, in the Battle of Bastogne, December 1944,
following the infamous "Massacre at Malmedy"].
[See now false atrocity and atrocity gap.]
Atrocity Gap: [See firstly atrocity.]
In time of war, declared or otherwise, an "atrocity gap" is any
mismatch between the number of atrocities factually being committed by a
nation's own armed forces and the number factually being committed by one's
enemy's. For maximum public support, that ratio must always be about 1000:1 in
your favour, and, should it ever fall below that,
must immediately be adjusted (a) by covering up your own misdemeanours
that much more effectively, and (b) by the invention of false atrocities
on the part of the enemy.
Attitude/Attitude
of Mind: In everyday usage, an "attitude" is a disposition or posture
of a person or thing, and hence also a "settled behaviour
or manner of acting, as representative of feeling or opinion" (OED), and
an "attitude of mind" is a "deliberately adopted, or habitual,
mode of regarding the object of thought" (OED). In philosophy and
cognitive psychology, the basic definition is the same but there is greater
emphasis on the approach-avoidance side of attitudes, that is to say, their
"emotional" aspect. Thus while Katz and Stotland
(1959, p428) define attitude as "a tendency or
disposition to evaluate an object or the symbol of that object in a certain
way", Insko (1967, p12)
defines attitudes as "implicit responses oriented toward approaching or
avoiding, reacting favourably or unfavourably
toward, an object or symbol". So we need to consider several mental
factors simultaneously, namely (1) the cognitive aspects (or beliefs),
(2) the evaluative aspects (or judgements),
(3) the "affective" aspects (or emotions), (4) the behavioural aspects (the approach-avoidance attitudes),
and (5) the verbalisable aspects (the opinions).
The formal literature on attitudes goes back to Allport
(1935), and includes many papers from the period 1945-1955 summarising
public information operations during the Second World War. [Compare opinions
and beliefs, and then see attitude change.]
Attitude Certainty: [See firstly metacognition.] A "metacognitive
perspective" on one's own attitudes (Tormala
and Petty (2004/2004
online), enabling them to be assessed on perceived certainty. Example:
To be 90% convinced, perhaps, that it is reasonable to despise liars.
Attitude Change: Changes in the
cognitive, evaluative, and approach-avoidance aspects of an attitude, either
(a) spontaneously, (b) as the result of rational argument, (c) as the
result of fallacious argument and/or propaganda, or (d) as the
result of thought reform or indoctrination. Fortunately [and we
use that word very advisedly, for it would be a weapon of mass mental
destruction if it did exist], there is no final agreed theory of attitude
change, merely the accumulated practical experience of those who make an
(extremely rich) living at it. This is because attitude change is one of the
areas where the half dozen or so classic "perspectives" (or
"schools") of psychological explanation all come up with their own
view on what cognition is and how it interacts with our more emotional inner
selves. [See now the separate entries following (non-psychologists will need to
review the perspectives
first).]
Attitude Change
Theory (Behaviourist Perspective): The textbook behaviourist approach to understanding attitude
change is Hovland, Janis, and Kelley's (1953)
"Reinforcement Theory". These authors class both opinions and
attitudes as "intervening variables" (p7)
[Research
Methods Glossary], and see them as being determined initially by many years
of both direct and indirect reward. The art of changing them, therefore, is a
matter of further manipulating that reward system.
Attitude Change
Theory (Cognitive Dissonance Theory): The cognitivist
approach to attitude has evolved markedly over the last half century. One of
the earliest theories was by Festinger (1957), who
saw the need for what we know about one thing to be consistent with what we
know about all other things as well. Where there was inconsistency - or
"dissonance" - between any two knowledges,
there is a pressure to reduce that dissonance, and one way of doing this is to
change the attitudinal content of one of the contenders (typically the weaker
of the two). [See now metacognition as a
possible vehicle for the resolution of such dissonance.]
Attitude Change
Theory (Group Theory): As troop animals, it is not surprising that our attitudes
are largely determined by the processes of socialisation,
firstly into our immediate family circle, and subsequently into our peer and
occupational groups. It follows that counter-attitudinal influences ought to be
more effective if they are group-approved, and less effective if not. Much of
the pioneer work here was carried out by Kurt Lewin
at the MIT Research Centre for Group Dynamics which he helped found in 1944.
Attitude Change
Theory (Psychodynamic Theory): The psychodynamic approach to attitude
change looks for its explanations in the psychosexual unconscious. The whole
point of Freud's psychoanalytical analysis was that attitudinal cognitions are invariably
locked into a certain pattern because they have been attached to deeper
emotional forces within the unconscious. This makes them difficult to change
without first resolving those underlying tensions. The key works here are
Sarnoff (1951, 1960, 1962) and Sarnoff and Zimbardo
(1961), and the key concepts are (a) ego defences
such as repression, projection, denial, and identification,
and (b) the notion that attitudes can arise from consciously unacceptable
motives such as lust, hatred, and greed.
Attitude Change
Theory (Semantic Differential Theory): Another early cognitivist theory of attitude change invoked Osgood's
notion of the "semantic differential". This method of analysis was
developed by Charles E. Osgood at the University of Illinois (Osgood, 1952;
Osgood, Suci, and Tannenbaum,
1958), and presumed that a mental stance on any subject consisted of a number
of simultaneous bipolar evaluations. Each dimension of evaluation set two
adjectival opposites against each other, and something between half a dozen and
a dozen simultaneous evaluations could create a powerful multidimensional
profile of the given subject. If we want to change an attitude which has been
put together in this way, then we have to know how to reset one or more of
these dimensions, and Osgood sees this as what happens (or fails to happen)
whenever a counter-attitudinal claim is received. This induces a momentary
state of disequilibrium, which is then reflected upon until it resolves. Example:
Intellectual and moral affiliation to a political party might result in
evaluations as underlined on the following dimensional profile: GOOD-BAD
BEAUTIFUL-UGLY VALUABLE-WORTHLESS HONOURABLE-DISHONOURABLE KIND-CRUEL,
etc. If the object of that affiliation is then caught cynically lying to you,
then the HONOURABLE evaluation might reasonably flip
to DISHONOURABLE, which is then
inconsistent with all the others. This tension can be resolved in two ways,
namely (a) flipping all evaluations to their negatives, or (b) rationalising the dishonourable
behaviour back into an honourable
one, perhaps by one of the forms of psychological denial. [See now metacognition as a possible vehicle for the
resolution of such tensions.]
Aura of Sacredness:
[See
firstly totalism.] One of the eight factors
identified by Lifton (1961) as making for an
effective system of thought reform. Totalism,
according to Lifton, "maintains an aura of
sacredness around its basic dogma, holding it out as an ultimate moral vision
for the ordering of human existence" (p486).
Bacon, Sir Francis: [See firstly scientific
method.] Sir
Francis Bacon (1561-1626) was the Elizabethan author of "The
Advancement of Learning", one of the earliest expositions of how to use inductive
reasoning in the pursuit of new knowledge.
Barnum Effect: [See firstly flattery.]
Concept from Forer (1949) and term from O'Dell (1972)
and Snyder and Shenkel (1975) to describe the gullibility
of people in accepting vague generalisations such as
horoscope predictions and personality profile descriptions as more uniquely
applicable to them than can possibly be the case. So named after Phineas T. Barnum, whose circus prided itself on
having something for everybody, no matter how discerning they thought
themselves. [For more on this, see Dickson and Kelly (1985).]
Barnum, Phineas T. (1810-1891): [Selected Internet
biography] American showman.
Begging the Question: [See
firstly argument.] A type of fallacious argument in which the
answer is, upon alert inspection, seen to be avoiding the question by simply
restating it. "Any form of argument in which the conclusion occurs as one
of the premises, or a chain or arguments in which the final conclusion
is a premise of one of the earlier arguments in the chain" (Curtis, 2004 online), or in which
"you assume to be true what you are supposed to be proving" (source).
An assertion upheld by what is in reality a "circular argument"; in
effect that "A equals A". Example: "I like
vanilla ice cream because it's my favourite
kind" (source). [Compare
tautology.]
Belief: In everyday usage, a belief
is the "mental acceptance of a proposition, statement, or fact, as true,
on the ground of authority or evidence; assent of the mind to a statement, or
to the truth of a fact beyond observation, on the testimony of another"
(OED). It is that which gives "strength and solidarity" to a related
idea. Within psychology, a belief "is a representational mental state that
takes the form of a propositional attitude" (Wikipedia), or "the
recognition of existence" (Spencer 1885/1970, p14).
Beliefs are thus the cognitive component of an attitude. Within modern
cognitive science, beliefs are dealt with in the language of propositions
[Psycholinguistics
Glossary] and propositional memory [Memory Glossary].
They are the conceptual structures which generate subject-predicate [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] statements of the form "I believe that .....". [See now
believe, to.]
Belief System: [See firstly belief
and attitude.] A belief system [more properly, an attitude
system] is a body of coherently interrelated beliefs or attitudes, bound
together by a common relation to an issue of concern within that society. Thus
a society which earned its living from the sea would have at its disposal an
accumulation of knowledge relating to boats, fishing, navigation, etc. As such,
this would constitute an epistemology, or to use a more modern term, a knowledge
base. It would not rank as a belief system, however, because the individual
beliefs would lack the emotional cathexis
needed to qualify them as attitudes. The knowledge base would only be elevated
to the status of a formal belief system when it started to offer solace and
specious explanation to death and other sad circumstances of life. In short, a
belief system is a knowledge base with a few superstitions and myths
thrown in.
Believe, To: In everyday usage,
to believe is "to have confidence or faith in (a person), and consequently
to rely upon, trust to" (OED; italics original). Within psychology, it is
an important example of a "mental verb" [Psycholinguistics
Glossary], one of a small subset of verbs we use (a) to describe our own
mental states, and (b) to understand the mental states of those around us. [See
now believe in.]
Believe In, To: [See firstly believe.]
The verb "to believe in" is even more psychologically
complicated than the verb "to believe", carrying as it does the
connotation of votive faith. To believe in is to accept "the truth of a
statement or doctrine" (OED). [See now belief system.]
Bias (1): In everyday usage,
to bias is "to influence or incline (one) to do anything" and a bias
is "a preponderating disposition or propensity" (OED). In psychology,
"a bias is a prejudice in a general or specific sense, usually in
the sense for having a predilection to one particular point of view or
ideology" (Wikipedia).
Bias (2): For the problems
associated with the technical concept of bias in research, see the
corresponding entry in our Research
Methods Glossary.
Black Propaganda: [See firstly special
operations and Department of Dirty Tricks.] "Black propaganda
is propaganda that purports to be from a source on one side of a
conflict, but is actually from the opposing side" (Wikipedia). In
peacetime, black propaganda is one of the tools of undeclared war; in wartime,
it becomes one of the most powerful tools of psychological warfare. Examples:
Included in the Wikipedia definition.
Blog: [Abbreviation of
the Internet technical term "web log".] [See firstly pamphleteer
and Tom Paine.] "An online diary, an internet soapbox from which a
blogger can pour down a varied flood of commentary, confession, and
contemporaneous reporting [.....] a return of pamphleteering as a political
force, and the revival of the citizen-journalist" (Macintyre, 2004, p30). Example: Iraq
War blogs.
Bluster: [Old German blustern = "to flutter or flap the wings in
alarm like a frightened dove, etc." (OED).] Words a-plenty, but largely
devoid of coherence or meaning; in the spotlights, but with nothing substantive
to say. Example: TO FOLLOW. Many species of bird bluster
when under threat from a predator, the net effect of which is to divert said
predator's attention from their nest. Indeed, the topic of tactical deception
of this sort in animal behaviour was reviewed by
Byrne and Whiten (1988) and is now a very popular area of comparative
psychology [key
points]. [See also "Machiavellian Intelligence".]
Brainwashing: [Chinese hsi nao =
"wash brain"] A specific historical instance of forcible indoctrination,
and a sub-technique of the broader practice of Communist Chinese thought
reform. Term coined in the mid-20th century to describe the forcible
"re-education" both of indigenous intellectuals and UN prisoners of
war by the North Koreans and Chinese during the Korean War. The ultimate
purpose was to have individual prisoners genuinely reverse their political
allegiance, and occasional successes were deployed either openly for propaganda
purposes or covertly for espionage purposes. Nevertheless, it has always been
somewhere between very difficult and impossible to achieve the sort of total mind
control popularised in Richard Condon's 1959
novel "The Manchurian Candidate" (filmed 1962 and 2004).
Briefing Against: Covert ad
hominem argument within what is nominally the same team.
Secretive, rather than public, character assassination, typically by
planting derogatory rumours with media contacts.
Furtive and malicious whispering intended to undermine a rival's credibility
and reputation. Standard practice in UK politics, and, presumably, world wide. Examples: (1) Click here for the story
of Tony Blair's briefings against his colleague Clare Short, told from the
latter's point of view. (2) Then there are David Blunkett's
briefings against the Metropolitan Police's SO13
anti-terrorist squad. "Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens
demanded an apology from the Home Secretary after Mr. Blunkett
blamed the SO13 squad for leaking details of a
planned gas attack on the London Underground [original 2002 story].
The two men had a blazing row when Mr. Blunkett
admitted that he knew the allegation was false" (The Mail on Sunday,
12th December 2004).
Browbeat, To: "To bear
down, discourage, or oppose, with stern, arrogant, or insolent looks or words;
to snub, to bully" (OED). A type of fallacious argument in
which one party is bullied into submission by the force of another's personality.
Example: TO FOLLOW.
Bryce Commission: [See firstly false
atrocity and public information operations.] British government
propaganda committee created in late 1914 under Lord Bryce, on the
pretext of documenting German war crimes, but responsible in fact for conjuring
atrocity stories more or less out of thin air, in an effort to maintain the
necessary British-German atrocity gap. Of the 1200 depositions taken,
none were made under oath and when their accuracy was challenged after the war
the paperwork "had mysteriously disappeared" (Knightley,
1982, p68). Perhaps significantly, a Belgian
commission of enquiry in 1922 "failed markedly to corroborate a single
major allegation" (Ibid.). "One of the triumphs of the war, on
the propaganda front" (Lasswell, 1927/1971, p19).
Bryce, Viscount
James (1838-1922): [selected
Internet biography] Author of the Bryce Commission Report.
Buchan, Colonel
John (1875-1940): [selected Internet
biography] British author (notably of "The 39 Steps", 1914),
recruited in 1916 into the British Army's Intelligence Corps, and promoted in
February 1917 to be Director of the newly established Department of
Information, there to continue to exercise his literary imagination on
behalf of British public information operations.
Burden of Proof
Principle: The third of Damer's (1995) 12 basic
principles of rational argument. The principle that it is the duty of the
person making a controversial claim "to provide an appropriate argument in
support of it" (p176).
Bury, To: In the present
context, to "bury" is to report bad news about topic X in the midst
of a major ongoing news story about topic Y, and - being totally legal - is one
of the neatest dirty tricks available to politicians. There is no
attempt at rational argument, in other words, merely a cynical attempt
to avoid one. Example: Before the dust had cleared from
the ruins of the World Trade Centre on 11th September 2001, those in charge of
British public information operations were seeing it as an opportunity
to slip out a few negative pieces of news [story].
Bystander Denial: The third
subcategory of denial of agency, as proposed by Cohen (2001).
Denial by the witnesses, actual and remote, to an atrocity.
Cabal: [From the initials
of the five members of Charles II's "Cabal
Ministry", so named then, and so remembered now, because
serendipitously similar to Kabbalah and the
latter's undertones of secrecy.] "A cabal is a number of persons united in
some close design, usually to promote their private views and interests in
church or state by intrigue; a secret association ....." (Wikipedia).
Carbonari: [Italian = "charcoal-burners"] A Italian secret
society, responsible in the early-19th century for political intrigue
initially in the Kingdom of Naples, and later, as the organisation
grew in size and influence, throughout Europe [more].
Case History: [Alternatively
"case notes".] The notes maintained by healthcare professionals of
their dealings with their patients, thus providing a time-extensive record of
each patient's signs and symptoms, test results, treatments given, progress,
and prognosis, and, in turn, an accepted basis of both scientific and legal evidence.
[See now case study.]
Case Study: [See firstly case
history.] Evidence from a single case history, condensed and
formally structured for peer review and publication. Case studies will
usually contain an abbreviated case history, supplemented by observations and
speculations on the background theory. Example: To see a
typical neuropsychological case study, try Wheatley and McGrath (1997/2004 online).
Case studies are extremely good science in their own way, but suffer
nonetheless from the problems inherent to all "n-of-one"
research, not the least of which is that they tend, by their very nature,
to encourage argument by example.
Cathexis: In psychodynamic theory, cathexis
is the process of investing libidinal [= emotionally loaded]
"energies" in cognitive structures such as object concepts [whence
fetishes], person concepts [whence fixations], propositions [whence attitudes],
or schemas [whence belief systems]. [See now the Bartleby.Com
definition]
Causal Line: Bertrand Russell's
concept of "a temporal series of events so related that, given some of
them, something can be inferred about the others whatever may be happening
elsewhere" (Russell, 1948, p459). [For a more
detailed introduction to this topic, see the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.]
Causal
Oversimplification: A type of fallacy identified by Damer (1995), and characterised
to a greater or lesser extent by oversimplification of the "causal
antecedents of an event" (p188). This is
arguably the single most useful fallacy if the intention is to sway public
opinion on some subject, because the majority of those addressed have
neither the time nor the intelligence to appreciate more complex material. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Causal Rule: A specific and
fallacy-free explanation of one or more event-pairs in a causal line.
An explanation for which the observed correlations are high, for which
no confounding [Research
Methods Glossary] can be detected even after sustained inspection, and
which has high levels of predictive validity [Research
Methods Glossary].
Causality: "The
operation or relation of cause and effect" (OED). A perceptually
compelling judgement that one event has resulted in
the occurrence of another, which persists even when knowing that it did not.
The problem is basically one of reality vs illusion,
and may be illustrated by considering the "stage punch", where actors
feign fisticuffs without actually getting hurt. Actors throwing a blow, for
example, deliberately swing an inch or so short, while actors being
"hit" co-operate in the illusion by jerking the appropriate part of
their body away at just the right time, and by crying out in pain. Carefully synchronised Batman thwacks can be added as appropriate to
intensify the illusion. Many theatrical special effects, conjuring
tricks, and perceptual illusions work in similar ways. The effective variables
were discussed more than half a century ago by the Belgian psychologist Albert Michotte (1881-1965), and some demonstrations from Michotte (1946/1963) are now available in online simulation
[click
for example]. [For a more penetrating introduction to this topic, see The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.]
Causation: One of the
fundamental notions of science. The idea that there is regularity, reliability,
and order in the natural world, and that the resulting predictability gives us
at least a semblance of control over that world. Hence the human species'
ability to control chemical reactions, calculate the positions of the planets
many hundreds of years in advance, and generally bend the physical world to our
will. The philosopher David
Hume (1711-1776) is one of many to have cautioned that the sense of
causation which comes with detecting a correlation between two types of
event is often deceptive and counterproductive. [See now scientific method.]
Cause and Effect: See causation.
Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA): US government agency founded in 1947, and responsible
for "coordinating the nation's intelligence activities and correlating,
evaluating and disseminating intelligence which affects national security"
(CIA website) [see
also the agency's current Vision, Mission, and
Values]. These duties included (and still include) waging a highly
assertive peace with carefully planned and targeted special operations,
which, because secrecy can never be totally guaranteed, soon generated enough rumours to earn the agency a reputation as the
class-defining example of a Department of Dirty Tricks.
Character
Assassination: The deliberate, but of the essence unactionable,
defamation of a rival. One of the classic dirty tricks of commercial or
public life. Examples: (1) A good modern example of
character assassination comes from the Texan politician (later President)
Lyndon B. Johnson, who reputedly instructed his aides to spread the word that a
political rival was rather partial to having sex with pigs, not because this
was necessarily true, but because it was going to be extremely difficult for
the victim to deny [fuller
story]. (2) "In hindsight, his [= US Democratic candidate John
Kerry's] obvious objective was to emulate his idol, John Fitzgerald Kennedy,
serve as short a time as possible, and escape Vietnam unscathed but with
sufficient credentials and decorations to portray himself in heroic terms"
(Hoffman, 2004 online).
[See now 527 group.]
Charity Principle: The fourth of Damer's (1995) 12 basic principles of rational argument.
The principle that you should go out of your way to understand your opponent's
argument by reformulating it for open discussion and presenting it in the best
possible light. Charity is important, Damer points
out, because it is actually in your own interests: "if we are really
interested in the truth or the best answer to a problem, then we will want to
evaluate the best version of any argument set forth in support of one of the
options. Hence, if we don't deal with the best version now, we will
eventually have to do so ....." (p178;
italics added).
CIA: See Central
Intelligence Agency.
Cinematic Illusion:
The
illusion of smooth movement which comes when the separate frames making up
a cinematic film are projected faster than a certain threshold speed.
Circular Argument: See begging the
question.
Civilian
Casualties: The sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, neighbours, etc. of enemy servicemen, who, by not running
far and fast enough, have chosen to put themselves in harm's way and
accordingly only have themselves to blame if they get hurt. Although protected
since 1950 by the "Fourth Geneva Convention" (the Geneva Convention
relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons [full text]), civilians have
always been deemed a legitimate target in times of war. Examples:
(1) The estimate for civilian casualties in the Second World War is over
30 million [breakdown].
(2) The estimate for civilian casualties in the Korean War is around two
million (Knightley, 1982). (3) The estimate
for civilian casualties in the Vietnam War is anything up to four million. (4)
The estimate for civilian casualties in the Second Iraq War to date is 100,000
[breakdown]
(The Independent, 29th October 2004, citing a report by Dr. Les Roberts
of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health).
Clarity Principle: The fifth of Damer's (1995) 12 basic principles of rational argument.
The principle that "any successful discussion of an issue must be carried
on in language that is understood by all the parties involved" (p178). Linguistic clarity is important, Damer
stresses, because "confusion is not the place to stop a discussion [but
rather] the starting place" (p179). In
other words, it is wrong for an argument to be dropped simply because the
participants have become bored with it and have "agreed to differ";
they differ because they have been unclear and they owe it to the ideal of aletheia to remedy that lack of clarity and carry on
arguing. [But carefully contrast suspension of judgement
principle.]
Cliché: A type of fallacy
identified by Damer (1995), and characterised
by the use of well worn, but, upon inspection, far from proven, assertions. Example:
"There's a whiff of snobbery in some of the opposition to new
casinos" (Tessa Jowell, quoted in The
Daily Mail, 25th October 2004).
"Cock-Up"
or Conspiracy: Polar opposite habitual stances in how individuals prefer to explain
unexplained historical events to themselves, usually as a reflection of one's
own personality and personal attitudes. [See separately "cock-up"
theory and conspiracy theory.]
"Cock-Up"
Theory: An explanation from the "cock-up" end of the "cock-up"
or conspiracy dimension. The notion that most major events in history
either just happened, or (at worst) happened thanks to the sheer incompetence
of the politicians and civil servants who ought to have been preventing them. Example:
To conclude that the death of Lady Diana Spencer, Princess of Wales, was a
straightforward road traffic accident is to side with the "cock-up"
theorists in this instance, and may be contrasted with Example #2 in the entry
for conspiracy theory.
Coincidence: "A notable
concurrence of events or circumstances having no apparent causal
connection" (OED). The real issue is how many coincidences make a causal
rule, and that question has been exercising statisticians for over a
century. [The answer, incidentally, is that it depends how strong a rule you
want, but never less than eight, this being the shortest "run" of
identical results in a "heads-or-tails" situation to return a 5% significance
value in the binomial sign test - see these entries in our Research
Methods Glossary.]
Committee on Public
Information: US governmental agency created in 1917 under George Creel to
oversee public information operations in America during World War
One.
Conclusion: The objective of reasoning.
Confession: [See firstly totalism.] One of the eight factors identified by Lifton (1961) as making for an effective system of thought
reform. Totalism, according to Lifton, is "obsessed" with getting its opponents
to confess their transgressions (one of which, needless to say, is being
opposed to the regime in question in the first place).
Conspiracy Theory: An explanation
from the conspiracy end of the "cock-up" or conspiracy
dimension. The notion that most major events in history were plotted in advance
either by cabal or secret service. Examples:
(1) See the hyperlinks in the entry for freemason. (2)
To conclude that the death of Lady Diana Spencer, Princess of Wales, was
occasioned by the British secret service at the instigation of an exasperated
father-in-law is to side with the conspiracy theorists in this instance, and
may be contrasted with Example #1 in the entry for "cock-up"
theory. (3) "After the secrecy surrounding Mr. Arafat's final
days, Ramallah is rife with rumours about his [having
been poisoned]" (The Times, 17th November 2004).
Contemporary
Denial: The second subcategory of denial (historical or contemporary),
as proposed by Cohen (2001). Denial of an ongoing atrocity,
assisted by "a perceptual filter placed over reality" (p13). Example: The "compassion fatigure" which comes from seeing yet another news
report of starving children.
Convenient Myth: See myth,
convenient.
Conventional
Wisdom: [See firstly causation.] The popular interpretation of a
phenomenon or event; an established, but in the final analysis unproven,
explanation of some phenomenon. Uneducated opinion; public consensus; presumed,
rather than proven, cause. Example: That the British are
better at discharging the duties of occupation force in Iraq than are the
Americans, as per the following from one Black Watch squaddie:
"..... we have controlled the situation down here [the Basra sector] while
the Americans seem to have ruined it up there [around Baghdad]" (The
Independent, 29th October 2004). [Compare counterfeit wisdom.]
Correlation: "Mutual
relation of two or more things (implying intimate or necessary
connection)" (OED). Of variables, to vary as though mutually contingent,
increasing and decreasing either (a) together, or (b) in opposition [see the
entries for positive correlation and negative correlation
respectively in our Research
Methods Glossary]. The ability to detect correlations in everyday life from
the perceived commonalities of a number of instances, appears to be a basic
property of the neural tissue with which we have been endowed, and is generally
a good thing. However, the mind can just as easily be tricked into the
conclusion that two occurrences are related by a causal rule when in
truth they merely share an as-yet-undetected common cause, and this alluring misjudgement is at the heart of many a fallacious
argument. [See now cum hoc ergo propter hoc, and the examples
therein.]
Counterfeit Wisdom: A sub-variety of persuasive
communication, in which this or that convenient over-simplification is
dressed up for political or similar purposes. A glib or populist explanation
which is (a) couched as wisdom, (b) "fronted" by a celebrity of some
sort, and (c) pleases the public viscera rather than taxes the public mind.
Intellectual pap. Superficiality incarnate. The wisdom of the "shallow
minded" as seen from the standpoint of those too uncritical to notice the
myriad inconsistencies and contradictions concealed therein (after Habermehl, 1994). Example: Habermehl is particularly scathing about the late Ronald
Reagan's contribution to the history of informed and critical debate.
Cover Story: A deliberately
falsified official explanation, put about with the intention of concealing an
unpleasant or operationally sensitive truth. Example:
See the story of the Dahran Scud Attack,
1991, in our online
database of "Aerospace Disasters".
Credit Boom
(Systems View): A systems approach to the UK consumer credit boom of the last decade
would attempt to provide hard data on such embarrassing issues as (1) the
likely net export of GDP where the creditor institutions are offshore, (2) the
likely impact of personal debt on consumer spending and employment in general,
and on the housing market in particular, (3) the likely cost to the taxpayer of
the resulting increased load on social services, and (4) the likely cost to the
banking system of any consequent rise in bad debt. Example:
"A woman who borrowed £10,800 to install a new kitchen is having to sell
her home after her loan spiralled to more than
£220,000. [.....] When [name] failed to keep up with the £240-a-month repayments
the debt rapidly grew. Each time she missed a payment it was added back to the
total with compound interest" (The Daily Mail, 25th November 2004;
attempts to enforce usurous contracts like this are
now being thrown out of British courts of law under unfair trading
legislation).
Creel, George
(1876-1953): [selected Internet
biography] American journalist selected in 1917 as Director of the Committee
on Public Information. Published his memoirs under the title "How We
Advertised America" (Creel, 1920) [review of contents by www.historytools.org/sources].
Critical
Evaluation: The skill of spotting fallacy in academic argument, and
accordingly one of the principal ingredients of "graduateness".
Critical Thinking: One of the two
main constituent skills of effective reasoning (the other being inference). That
which is measured by the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal - see the
separate entries for deductive reasoning, inference, interpretation,
and recognition of assumptions.
Cultural Denial: The third
subcategory of denial (individual or shared), as proposed by
Cohen (2001). Denial which involves "unwritten agreements" (p11) about what a society ought to believe, and,
accordingly, ought to deny. Example: "Brutalities
against indigenous peoples" (p11).
Cum Hoc ergo
Propter Hoc: [Latin = "with this therefore because of
this".] A type of fallacious argument in which a simple coincidence
is confused with causation. A correlation by confounding
variable [Research
Methods Glossary] or coincidence, rather than by a causal rule.
Example: It may be taken as a fact that ice cream sales
are strongly correlated with crime rates, but it is nevertheless wholly
fallacious to conclude either (a) that ice cream causes crime, or (b) that
crime creates an appetite for ice cream. So what is to blame, then? Check
it out. [Compare post hoc ergo propter hoc.]
Damer's Twelve Principles: Damer's
(1995) analysis and summary of the separate mental disciplines which make for
"effective rational discussion" (p172).
[See now the separate entries for acceptability principle, burden of
proof principle, charity principle, clarity principle, fallibility
principle, rebuttal principle, reconsideration principle, relevance
principle, resolution principle, sufficient grounds principle,
suspension of judgement principle, truth-seeking
principle.]
Damned by Faint
Praise: [See firstly argument by adjective.] A figure of speech [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] in which one's real opinion on a given issue or of a given person
or group becomes clear by a refusal to allocate a highly positive adjectival
qualifier. To make one's reservations apparent by what one cannot bring oneself
to say. Example: TO FOLLOW.
Damned by High
Praise: [See firstly argument by adjective.] A figure of speech [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] in which one's real opinion on a given issue or of a given person
or group is concealed by gratuitous and condescending flattery. Example:
"President Bush, asked if he shared some critics' view of Mr. Blair as his
'poodle', said: 'He is a strong capable man and I admire him ... When he says
something he means it. He is deep thinking and has clear vision'". (The
Times, 13th November 2004.) [See now patting the poodle.]
Deception (1): "That which
deceives; a piece of trickery; a cheat, sham" (OED). Of animals and humans
alike, to conceal as to physical presence, identity, or intention. To
dissemble. The use of deception techniques in the animal world became a major
study area within comparative psychology after a keynote paper by Byrne and
Whiten (1988). Its development in children has been studied by Vasek (1986). Example: See under
bluster above. [The potential of animal tactical deception methods as models
for improving human military effectiveness has recently been publicly summarised by the Rand Corporation (2004 online).
See also Machiavellian intelligence.]
Deception (2): See the entries
for ethics and deception in our Research
Methods Glossary.
Decision Making: One of the
standard stages of problem solving. The selection of a particular course of action
from a choice of several courses of action, each already thoroughly evaluated
and costed against evidence presented.
[Compare medical decision making.]
Declaration of
Interest: [See firstly arm's length.] The formal recording of a personal
interest, actual or potential, by such people as business agents, executors,
proxy holders, trustees, brokers, and solicitors. "Coming clean"
in advance. Being "up front".
Deductive
Reasoning: [See firstly reasoning.] Deductive reasoning, or simply
"deduction", is what you might call "Sherlock Holmes
reasoning", and involves deriving a specific conclusion from the
available observations, given the prevailing understanding of the world. Thus
if X has taken place and you know that X will causally induce Y, then you can
deduce that Y is about to take place also. Alternatively, given a RULE (the
first premise) and a CASE (the second premise), we reach a CONCLUSION
(after Skemp, 2002/2004 online).
The issue hinges, however, on whether the conclusion necessarily follows
the given facts, and, since the ability to make such fine judgements
is not distributed uniformly throughout the population, deductive reasoning
powers are accordingly commonly seen in psychometric tests portfolios. Example:
Test #3 of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal is a test of
deductive reasoning, and is structured as follows [correct answers shown in
square brackets]. You are presented with the following scenario: "Some
holidays are rainy. All rainy days are boring. Therefore .....": (1) No
clear days are boring [NO]. (2) Some holidays are boring [YES]. (3) Some
holidays are not boring [NO]. Weston (2000) points out that deductive arguments
can sometimes field many true premises, but derive a false conclusion
nonetheless. An important subclass of two-premise deductions is called syllogisms.
[Compare abductive reasoning and
inductive reasoning.]
Democracy: [Greek =
"rule by the people"] "That form of government in which the
sovereign power resides in the people as a whole, and is exercised either
directly by them [or] by officers elected by them" (OED). The Greek ideal
is cited as the inspiration for today's party-dominated,
elected-representative, parliamentary democracies, but there is ample room for
criticism. The elected representative aspect of the system is particularly
important in the present context, because not only does it set the people and
their chosen government in a state of eternal confrontation, but it also blurs
the allocation of responsibility. For example, it gives an elected government
the mandate to slaughter in their nation's name rather than in their own
[whence the illocutionary power of the "NOT IN MY NAME" tee-shorts
popular with opponents of the Iraq War], and - perhaps more worryingly - it
also gives your enemy the perceived right to inflict civilian casualties
upon you in return (because you voted the real perpetrators in).
Denial: An important
psychodynamic defence mechanism, in which your
attitudinal structures are protected from descending into emotional turmoil by
voluntarily distorting unpleasant incoming facts. Rejection of the truth
by denying the underlying propositions in some way. Believing what your
viscera want to believe, rather than the evidence of your eyes
and ears. Cohen (2001) identifies five "elementary forms" of denial,
some with a number of subcategories. These five forms are denial of content,
denial (individual or shared), denial (historical or contemporary),
denial of agency, and denial by remoteness in space and time.
Denial by
Remoteness in Space and Time: The fifth of Cohen's (2001) five
"elementary forms" of denial. Denial justified by remoteness
in space and time.
Denial (Historical
or Contemporary): The third of Cohen's (2001) five "elementary
forms" of denial. Denial placed on a continuum of historical time.
Further subdivided into two subcategories, namely historical denial and contemporary
denial - see separate entries.
Denial (Individual
or Shared): The second of Cohen's (2001) five "elementary forms" of denial.
Denial placed on a continuum of personal involvement, from private to
collective. Further subdivided into three subcategories, namely personal
denial, official denial, and cultural denial - see separate
entries.
Denial of Agency: The fourth of
Cohen's (2001) five "elementary forms" of denial. Denial
placed within the "atrocity triangle" (p14)
of victim, perpetrator, and bystander, that is to say, denial of victim,
denial of perpetrator, and bystander denial - see separate
entries.
Denial of Content: The first of
Cohen's (2001) five "elementary forms" of denial. Denial of what.
Further subdivided into three subcategories, namely literal denial, interpretive
denial, and implicatory denial -
see separate entries.
Denial of
Perpetrator: The second subcategory of denial of agency, as proposed by
Cohen (2001). Denial by the active participants in an atrocity. Examples:
(1) "You can't call this torture" (p77).
(2) The use of euphemisms such as Endlösung
[= "final solution"]. <<AUTHOR'S NOTE: Cohen
points out that the Reichbahn - the Nazi
German railway system - was managed by some half a million civil servants and
had some 900,000 people on the payroll. We have ourselves walked the final kilometre of their branch line from Auschwitz to Birkenau [pictures], and
have to agree that the majority of these people had to have known what was
going on.>>
Denial of Victim: The first
subcategory of denial of agency, as proposed by Cohen (2001).
Denial from the receiving end of an ongoing atrocity. Example:
"Even when the warning signs were clear, Jewish communities in Germany and
the rest of Europe refused to believe what was about to happen to them" (p14).
Department of Dirty
Tricks: See Dirty Tricks, Department of and Central Intelligence
Agency.
Department of
Information: British governmental agency created in 1917 under Colonel John Buchan
to oversee public information operations in the UK during World War
One.
Diagnosis:
"Identification of a disease by careful investigation of its symptoms and
history; also, the opinion (formally stated) [= professional opinion]
resulting from such investigation" (OED).
Dirty Tricks: Foul play in
general, and the stock-in-trade of a Department of Dirty Tricks in
particular. Of the population at large, anything underhand.
Dirty Tricks, Department
of: Of
governments and large corporations, departments whose true purpose is to pursue
undeclared war, using the full armoury of peacetime special
operations, that is to say, black propaganda, selective
assassination, psychological warfare, and economic warfare. As
far as we have been able to establish, the term was first publicly coined by
Bohannon (1961/2004
online) when discussing (CIA-coordinated) Philippines government
operations against "insurgents" in the late 1940s,
but only became popular as a synonym for the CIA in the later 1960s.
Dispensed
Existence: [See firstly totalism.] One of the
eight factors identified by Lifton (1961) as making
for an effective system of thought reform. Totalism,
according to Lifton, "draws a sharp line between
those whose right to existence can be recognised, and
those who possess no such right", between "the 'people'" and the
"'lackeys of imperialism'" who oppress them (p492).
The point is that being "outside the people" automatically makes you
"nonpeople" devoid of normal human
rights and protections [this powerful idea resurfaced in human ethology two decades later in the notion of
"in-group" and "out-group" - see Section 3.3 of our e-handout on
"Communication and the Naked Ape", and has been at the heart of public
information operations in time of war ever since the words "us and
them" were first invented].
Doctrine over
Person: [See firstly totalism.] One of the
eight factors identified by Lifton (1961) as making
for an effective system of thought reform. Totalism,
according to Lifton, "subordinates" human
experience to "the claims of doctrine" (p490).
As part of this process, "past historical events are retrospectively
altered, wholly rewritten, or ignored" (p490).
Dogma: [Greek =
"that which seems to one; opinion; tenet".] "That which is held
as an opinion; a belief, principle, tenet; esp. a tenet or doctrine
authoritatively laid down by a particular church, sect, or school of
thought" (OED).
Economic Warfare: Attacks directed
against the economic stability of an enemy. Examples: (1)
The blockading of enemy ports or the interception of their shipping [common
British practice in the American Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars]. (2) Trade
boycotts and the like [as when French wine was poured down drains across the
USA when France voted "the wrong way" on the Iraq issue - click here to join the
anti-French boycott]. (3) Currency forgery. (4) Cyberwarfare
directed against a nation's e-banking and e-commerce systems.
Epistemology: "The branch of
philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge, its presuppositions and
foundations, and its extent and validity" [TheFreeDictionary].
Equivocation: A type of fallacious
argument in which imprecise and shifting definitions are used to convey an
illusion of continuous argument or explanation. Deception by loose definition. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Evidence: "An
appearance from which inferences may be drawn [] Grounds for belief; testimony
or facts tending to prove or disprove any conclusion" (OED). [See now evidence-based
practice.]
Evidence-Based
Practice (EBP): [See firstly evidence.]
Evidence-based practice is properly informed medical decision making
in healthcare or, by extension, the professions as a whole. It is "the
conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making
decisions about the care of individual patients" (Sackett
et al, 1996). "It is a systematic approach to integrating current
scientific evidence" (source).
EBP is, however, only as good as the available evidence,
and that is usually less than conclusive. In practice, therefore, the EBP philosophy requires that practitioners be sensitive to
the relative merits of the different levels of evidence and keep
themselves fully up-to-date with the latest research in their chosen
specialism.
Expert Witness: [See firstly levels
of evidence.] Scientists are frequently called upon to present expert
opinion as evidence in the courts. "The main difference between an expert
witness and an ordinary witness (i.e. a witness to fact), is that the former is
able to give an opinion, whereas ordinary witnesses can only give factual
evidence. The expert witness has a duty to provide the court with the necessary
scientific criteria for the judge and jury to be able to evaluate the basis of
the expert's opinion and conclusions." (British Psychological Society,
"Psychologists as Expert Witnesses", 1999.)
Explanation: "A mutual
declaration of the sense of spoken words, motives of action, etc., with a view to
adjust a misunderstanding and reconcile differences" (OED).
"Eye of
God" Technique: The personalised targeting
of morale operations, originally and usually by referring to enemy
servicemen by name and/or unit in either confrontational or broadcast propaganda.
Extremely off-putting to those on the receiving end, (a) because it re-personalises an issue which your military training will
have gone out of its way to depersonalise, and (b)
because it shakes your faith in the superiority of your own side's intelligence
services over your enemy's. Examples: (1) See
Elliston (2004 online). (2)
Any "We know where you live" pressure group activity.
Fabrication of
Evidence: The planting of false evidence as part of a dirty trick.
"Framing", or "fitting up".
Fair Play, Sense
of:
See sense of fair play.
Faith: [See firstly believe
in, to.] In everyday usage, "faith" is
generally "belief, trust, confidence" (OED). However, the word
also has specific uses for "belief in the truths of religion"
(OED). Within psychology, this makes faiths an important subclass of belief,
and hence a major component of belief systems. With formalised
belief systems such as religions and political parties, expressions of faith are
typically called for as demonstrations of continued affiliation to the
particular dogma on offer, in which respect it may serve the same
function as in any other ideologically totalist
system. The techniques of aura of sacredness and mystical manipulation
are particularly noteworthy in this respect. Robert J. Lifton,
in his analysis of the processes of thought reform, described it as
follows: "..... he [= the affiliate] may adopt a complex pattern of inner
division, and dutifully produce the expected clichés in public
performances" (Lifton, 1961, pp489-490).
Fake Precision: A type of fallacious
argument in which apparently precise numerical claims are made to impress
the gullible. Cheap, but surprisingly effective. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Fallacious
Argument: [See firstly argument and fallacy.] An argument which
sets out from unreliable premises and fails to detect that
unreliability, or which draws unjustified conclusions. Fallacious arguments can only be exposed by
skilled critical evaluation, and Weston (2000) argues that to
understand fallacies "you need to understand what rules they break" (p71). We recommend the Gary N. Curtis "Fallacy
Files" website for its detailed treatment of the subject. See the
separate entries as follows .....
|
ad hominem |
ambiguity |
appeal
to authority |
|
appeal
to fatuous sentiment |
appeal
to ignorance |
appeal
to solidarity |
|
appeal
to tradition |
begging
the question |
causal
simplification |
|
cliché |
cum hoc ergo propter hoc |
equivocation |
|
fake
precision |
false
dilemma |
faulty
analogy |
|
flattery |
gambler's
fallacy |
hasty
generalisation |
|
illicit
contrast |
intimidation |
loaded
language |
|
non sequitur |
omission
of key evidence |
slippery
slope |
|
straw
man |
|
|
Fallacy: "Deception,
guile, trickery; a deception, trick; a false statement, a lie [.....] a
deceptive or misleading argument, a sophism. In Logic esp. a flaw,
material or formal, which vitiates a syllogism ....." (OED; italics
original).
Fallibility
Principle: The first of Damer's (1995) 12 basic
principles of rational argument. The principle that "when
alternative positions on any disputed issue are under review, each participant
in the discussion should acknowledge that possibly none of the positions
presented is deserving of acceptance and that, at best, only one of them is
true or the most defensible position. Therefore, it is possible that thorough
examination of the issue will reveal that one's own initial position is a false
or indefensible one." (p173.) [But see false
fallibility.]
False Atrocity: [See firstly atrocity.]
An attempt to motivate one's armed forces and stiffen public opinion
using deliberately placed falsified or exaggerated reports of bestiality by
enemy forces, typically involving the raping of nuns, the bayoneting of women
and babies, and the murderous execution of unarmed prisoners of war; and made
all the more believable - sad to relate - by the (rapidly denied)
suspicion that one's own armed forces have been doing precisely the same
things. Example: Knightly (1999/2004 online)
profiles the insidious power of this commonly used technique - note the story
of the Bryce Commission.
False Dilemma: A type of fallacious
argument in which too few optional ways forward are presented for
consideration, in an attempt to put across a "black or white" choice
where such a choice is not strictly speaking justified. To ignore options,
either through lack of due forethought or Machiavellian intention. Both
forms are in widespread use, and both are surprisingly effective [depressingly
so, indeed, for it says a lot about the critical faculties of the public at
large]. Example: TO FOLLOW.
False Fallibility: [See firstly fallibility
principle.] A less-than-heartfelt declaration of fallibility. Apparent
humility. Humbug. Playing to the gallery. Example: TO
FOLLOW.
Falsification: See principle of
falsification.
Faulty Analogy: [See firstly argument
by analogy.] A type of fallacious argument in which it is assumed
"that because two things are alike in one or more respects, they
necessarily are alike in some other respect" (Damer,
1995, p189). Example: TO
FOLLOW.
Fidentia: [Latin = "confidence"] One of the two
principles of behaviour within the Lloyds of London
insurance market [the other being uberrimae
fides]. The notion that the customer need not fear fraud or abandonment.
527 Group: [After Section 527
of the US Taxation Code, which allowed their formation; usually heard as
"five two seven group" or "five twenty-seven group".] The
pinnacle of ad hominem argument in political debate. A tax-exempt
political pressure group in US electioneering, intended to be funded covertly by
those likely to benefit from their intervention, but, being a private organisation, not subject to the rules of electioneering
which constrain the main political parties [more history]. Example:
The most talked about example of a 527 group in the 2004 US presidential
elections was Roy Hoffman's Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth.
The argument as the Swift Vets' own website [click here] tells it is that Democratic
candidate John Kerry's campaign team had created a less than totally factual
story about his war service record in Vietnam, and had published a lot of old
comrades photographs to support that story. Unfortunately for the Democrats,
not all of those depicted in these photographs were Kerry supporters, and they
duly (and not unreasonably) took exception to the pictorial implication that
they were. By thus motivating the Swift Vets to set the record straight from
the Republican point of view, Kerry succeeded in polarising
the influential veterans community.
Flattery: A type of fallacious
argument in which mere praise doubles as evidence. Unsophisticated,
but surprisingly effective, aided on many occasions by the "Barnum
effect". Example: TO FOLLOW. [Compare damned
by high praise.]
Freemason: "A member of
the fraternity called more fully, Free and Accepted Masons" (OED;
italics original). Perhaps the most famous secret society of all. There
is considerable public debate on the Internet as to the role of masonic lodges in many of the major decisions of history. Example:
Click here to see the view that
masons fomented and organised the American
Revolution, and here for
some of the counterarguments; we have no data on the subject either way (but
then we wouldn't have, would we - either way).
Fundamentalism: Religious or
political belief systems characterised by a
deliberately reactionary dogma and strictly enforced rules of
membership, and enforced by the methods of thought reform.
Gambler's Fallacy: A type of fallacious
argument in which different positions are regarded as being "hot"
or "cold" in terms of probability of occurrence, because they have or
have not been "running to luck" in the recent past. So named after
the notion that a particular number, colour, or card
is "due to come up" in casino gambling.
Gambling Bill,
2004: Proposed UK legislation, enabling and encouraging the establishment of
"Las Vegas style" casinos in Britain ("already the world's third
biggest gambling nation after America and Japan" - The Times, 27th
October 2004). [See now Jowell, Tessa, Hain, Peter, level playing field, and spin.]
Gambling Bill
(Systems View): A systems approach to the Labour Party's 2004
Gambling Bill would attempt (a) to identify and (b) to quantify flow changes
within the UK economy following the introduction of the US casino style culture
proposed in said Bill. This would provide hard data on such embarrassing issues
as (1) the likely net export of GDP in terms of house take, (2) the
likely impact of personal debt on consumer spending and employment in general,
and the housing market in particular, (3) the likely cost to the taxpayer of
the resulting increased load on social services, and (4) the likely cost to the
banking system of any consequent rise in bad debt.
Generalisation: In scientific explanation, the act of
deriving a causal rule from a sample of cases [see induction] and
then applying it to a wider population. Done properly, this has the
intellectual purity of a law of nature; done carelessly or with
malicious intent it makes for false analogy or hasty generalisation. Generalisations
are not always bad things in research, providing they are adequately defended
(Weston, 2000).
Gullible: "Capable of
being gulled or duped; easily cheated, befooled" (OED). Incapable of rational
argument due to generally unhoned critical
thinking skills. Immediately accepting of all cover stories, public
information announcements, and spin doctorings,
and generally incapable of spotting fallacious arguments.
Hain, Peter: UK Labour Party
politician and Leader of the House of Commons, occasionally earnest in support
of the Gambling Bill, and quoted in the entry for spin.
Hasty Generalisation: A type of fallacious
argument in which a general conclusion is unsafely drawn from what upon
fuller analysis would turn out to be one-sided data. This makes for incomplete
reasoning, and creates a grossly oversimplified picture of the world. It is
lazy thinking, and appeals to those who like their truths to be conveniently
bite-sized, or, worse, to match their deeper prejudices. Hence racial
and political prejudices are frequently justified by generalisations
of this sort. Example: TO FOLLOW.
Hearsay: "Founded or
depending upon what one has heard said, but not within one's direct
knowledge" (OED). [See now hearsay evidence.]
Hearsay Evidence: [See firstly hearsay
and evidence.] "Evidence consisting in what the witness has heard
others say, or what is commonly said, as to facts of which he has himself no
original or personal knowledge" (OED). Example: See appeal
to authority.
Heidegger, Martin
(1889-1976): [selected Internet
biography]
Heuristic: In science, logic, or
mathematics, a procedure or rule which aids the discovery of a hidden truth or
scientific unknown. In computing, a program or procedure which uses
"common-sense rules drawn from experience" (Webopedia).
Hidden Agenda: Motivations not
declared when entering an argument. The cards not on the table. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Historical Denial: The first
subcategory of denial (historical or contemporary), as proposed by
Cohen (2001). Denial of past suffering - "social amnesia" (p12) - supported by appropriately censored histories. Example
of Things Which Never Happened: French collaboration with the
Nazis, dissenters against the Bolsheviks, atrocities by British troops, etc.
House Take: The casino's free
bet [a.k.a. "gross profit", "cut", "rake off", or
"piece of the action"]. Cup zero on a roulette wheel, for example,
which comes up one time in 37, on average (on an undoctored
wheel, at least), whereupon every bet is forfeit.
Hume, David
(1711-1776): [selected
Internet biography]
Identification: An important
psychodynamic defence mechanism, in which your
attitudinal structures shift within themselves so as to engage differently with
your theory of mind structures. To model your own self subconsciously on an
external self. Freud himself described identification this way: "The
assimilation of one ego to another one, as a result of which the first ego
behaves like the second in certain respects, imitates it, and in a sense takes
it up into itself" (Freud, 1933/1991. p94.)
Sarnoff (1951) writes forcefully on this subject under the self-explanatory
title "Identification with the Aggressor: Some Personality Correlates of
Anti-Semitism among Jews". Having noted "the fact that some
[concentration camp prisoners] do absorb the behaviours
of their oppressors while others resist this absorption" (p200), he sought an explanation in personality differences
between the two groups. His conclusion was that high levels of anti-Semitism
tended to be associated with negative attitudes towards parents, lower
self-esteem, and lower likelihood to retaliate actively against
aggressors.
Illicit Contrast: A type of fallacious
argument in which one of the parties places "improper or unusual
emphasis" (Damer, 1995, p190)
on selected fragments of the other's argument, deliberately to divert its
overall thrust. Example: TO FOLLOW.
Illusion: "A deceptive
or illusive appearance, statement, belief, etc." (OED).
Implicatory Denial: [See firstly interpretive denial.] The
third subcategory of denial of content, as proposed by Cohen (2001).
Acceptance of the essential facts and the conventional interpretation, but
denial of "the psychological, political, or moral implications that
conventionally follow" (p8).
Impression (1): In everyday usage,
"an effect, especially a strong effect, produced on the intellect,
conscience, or feelings" (OED). Impressions are relevant to the current
context because they are created in the first instance by the psychological
process known as impression formation. [Compare impression (2).]
Impression (2): [See firstly impression
(1).] Apart from its everyday usage, the term impression has a specific
meaning within healthcare as a statement of best clinical judgement,
given the available data. An attempt at medical diagnosis, but one which
allows for an element of necessary residual uncertainty. How a patient
"looks" (or, more formally, "presents"), rather than
"what they have got".
Impression
Formation: See firstly impression (1).] A long-standing and important study
area within social psychology, dealing with the mental life history of
impressions in social perception and opinion formation. The process by which we
come to like/dislike, trust/distrust, etc., people, and therefore the ideas and
opinions emanating from them.
Inadmissible
Evidence: [See firstly evidence.] Those categories of testimony and
physical evidence not accepted as evidence under a nation's legal
system. [Contrast admissible evidence.]
Inanity: "Mental
vacuity; lack of ideas or sense; frivolity, senselessness, silliness" (OED).
In the present context, any fallacious argument of exceptional weakness,
but still a shade short of sheer imbecility. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Indoctrination: The process of
converting a target population to a particular belief system, typically religious
or political by explicit technique rather than gradual evolution. Examples:
(1) The Jesuits on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. (2) The
commissar system on behalf of Stalinist Russia. (3) The cadre system on
behalf of Maoist China. (4) Dr. Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry on behalf
of Nazi Germany. (5) George Orwell's (fictional) "thought
police". (6) The Committee on Public Information on behalf
of World War One America. (7) The Department of Information on
behalf of World War One Britain. (8) The Ministry of Information
on behalf of World War Two Britain.
Inductive
Reasoning: [See firstly reasoning.] Inductive reasoning, or simply
"induction", means deriving general principles from specific observations.
We see this sort of reasoning in many guises, from argument by analogy
to the sort of reasoning seen in rule-guessing experiments where subjects have
to study a series of stimuli and work out what the underlying rule or pattern
is. Alternatively, "inductive reasoning works with a CASE and a RESULT, to
determine a RULE" (Skemp, 2002/2004
online). Since structured observation is at the heart of the correlational philosophy [Research
Methods Glossary] of research, it follows that induction is an important
part of the cycle of reasoning and observation by which the scientific method
makes it advances. [Compare abductive
reasoning, deductive reasoning, and law of nature.]
Inference: One of the two
main constituent skills of effective reasoning (the other being critical
thinking). "An inference is a conclusion that a person can draw from
certain observed or supposed facts" (Watson and Glaser, 1991, p6). The process by which this takes place is known as reasoning.
Example: It would normally be safe to suppose that
attendance at a conference implies interest in the advertised subject matter
[see now inference (psychometric tests of) and the fuller entry in our Psycholinguistics
Glossary].
Inference
(Psychometric Tests of): The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal treats
inference as a major aspect of critical thinking. It presents subjects
with a number of brief scenarios and requires that they pick one of five
optional answers, ranked as True, Probably True, Insufficient Data, Probably
False, and False: Example: You are given the following
scenario (from Watson and Glaser, 1991, p2):
"Two hundred school pupils in their early teens voluntarily attended a
recent weekend student conference in Leeds. At this conference, the topics of
race relations and means of achieving lasting world peace were discussed, since
these were the problems that the pupils selected as being most vital in today's
world." The optional answers are then [in True to False order]: (1)
"Some teenage pupils felt it worthwhile to discuss problems of race
relations and ways of achieving world peace" (2) "[the pupils] showed
a keener interest in broad social problems than do most other people in their
early teens", (3) "the pupils came from all over the country",
(4) "The majority of the pupils had not previously discussed the
conference topics in the schools", and (5) "the pupils discussed
mainly industrial relations problems".
Inoculation: In everyday usage,
inoculation is "the act or practice of communicating a disease to a person
in health by inserting contagious matter in his skin or flesh, usually for the
purpose of inducing immunity to the disease" (Webster's Dictionary). In
the present context, it a method of increasing a population's capacity to
resist metaphorically "infective" propaganda. In its simplest
form, inoculation involves the dissemination of mildly negative ideas about a belief
held dear, in order to cultivate some level of "resistance" to attack
by a full-blown "infective" idea. Attention was first drawn to this
phenomenon by McGuire (1962, 1964), who identified three variables controlling
how effective a given anticipatory defence (the
inoculation) would be against a given future counter-attitudinal attack (the
propaganda). These were (1) the amount of threat in the inoculation, (2) the
extent to which the person in question has actively to participate in the defence, and (3) the time delay between the inoculation and
the infection. Example: TO FOLLOW.
Insider Dealing: The covert use for
personal financial gain of information-in-trade by such people as business
agents, executors, proxy holders, trustees, brokers, and
solicitors. Globally improper, and more often than not illegal.
Interpretation: The mental act of
decoding a complex proposition, in which a proposed conclusion is
judged as following beyond reasonable doubt from the given facts.
Example: Test #4 of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking
Appraisal is a test of interpretation, and is structured as follows [correct
answers shown in square brackets]. You are presented with the following
scenario: "A study of vocabulary growth in children from eight months to
six year old shows that the size of spoken vocabulary increases from 0 words at
age eight months to 2,562 words at age six years" and then asked to choose
which of two "proposed conclusions" follow beyond reasonable doubt.
These are "(1) None of the children in this study had learned to talk by
the age of six months" [YES], and "(2) Vocabulary growth is slowest
during the period when children are learning to talk" [NO].
Interpretive
Denial: [See firstly literal denial.] The second subcategory of denial
of content, as proposed by Cohen (2001). Acceptance of the essential facts,
but denial of their interpretation. Example: Yes we had
penetrative sex, but it was not really rape.
Intimidation: A type of fallacious
argument in which one party is told what to think, upon pain of physical,
financial, emotional, or other penalty, or by simple browbeating and
force of personality.
Investigative
Journalism: [Russian самоубийство.]
The honourable, but often fatal, pursuit of the
darker truths of life, either against organised
crime, secret service, or cabal.
Jingoism: In-your-face patriotism
[detailed etymology].
Jowell, Tessa: UK Labour Party politician
and Culture Secretary, responsible for introducing the 2004 Gambling Bill to
Parliament, and mentioned in the entries for argument by adjective, cliché,
and waffle. Ms Jowell is also noted by both
fellow-politicians and commentators for her skilled use of the confrontational
eye stare during debate [for some of the hard science here, see Section 3.2 of
our e-handout on
"Communication and the Naked Ape", noting especially the possible
pathological effect of such staring in the aetiology
of autism and stuttering.]
Judgement: "Any formal or authoritative decision, as of an
umpire or arbiter" (OED). The end result of the process of decision
making, itself the end result of a critical evaluation of evidence
presented.
Kabbalah: See Colin Low's Kabbalah FAQ on this.
Lansdale, General
Edward G. (1909-1987): [selected
Internet biography] [See firstly psychological warfare.] Maestro of morale
operations on behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency in their
role as advisors to the Philippines government in the latter's struggle against
the "Huk" communist insurgents, 1950-1953.
[See Elliston (1996/2004
online) for some of General Lansdale's highly entertaining exploits (we
especially liked the story of the asuang).]
Last Refuge of a
Scoundrel: Patriotism, according to Samuel Johnson's dictionary. The use as evidence
of emotive appeals such as "My country, right or wrong", especially
when perpetuating a particular dogma or bolstering a particular
political belief system. Xenophobia. Baboon troop politics. Jingoism.
Crude, but as a substitute for rational argument it works every time. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Law of Nature: [See firstly science.]
"A physical law or a law of nature is a scientific generalisation
based on empirical observations. Laws of nature are conclusions drawn from, or
hypotheses confirmed by, scientific experiments. The production of a summary
description of nature in the form of such laws is the fundamental aim of
science. Laws of nature are distinct from legal code and religious law
....." (Wikipedia.)
Examples: The Law of Gravity, Boyle's Law, the Laws of
Thermodynamics, the Law of Requisite Variety [details], Parkinson's Law
[details],
etc. [For a more penetrating introduction to this topic, see The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.]
Level of Evidence: [See firstly evidence-based
practice.] A scheme for summarising the extent to
which a particular theoretical proposition has been empirically supported, and
therefore of the extent to which it can safely be relied upon in professional
practice. Here, in paragraphs I to V, are the officially endorsed
levels of evidence for the British medical profession as summarised
by a Bandolier editorial in 1994 (2003 online),
followed in paragraph VI by what the rest of us have to put up with
.....
I - Multiple Randomised Controlled Trials, Well Designed and
Systematically Reviewed: This is recognised as the
strongest form of evidence of all, in that it obeys all the rules of good
research design and scientific inference, and all key findings have been widely
replicated. The assertion in question has been scientifically proven, so to
speak, and may be taken as truth. [There is actually no such thing as
"proven fact" in the medical or social sciences. Instead, blocks of
objective data are assessed against a formally expressed hypothesis for their "statistical
significance" [Research
Methods Glossary], that is to say, the mathematically objective odds
against that hypothesis being wrong.]
II - At Least One Multiple Randomised Controlled Trial, Well Designed and Under
Review: This is identified as the second strongest form of evidence. The
assertion in question has evidence in favour of it,
but not yet enough to prove it beyond reasonable scientific doubt.
III - Lesser Studies, Loosely
Coordinated: This is identified as the third strongest form of evidence. It lacks
the formal strength of the RCT studies, but there is
some coordination of effort. Moreover, due to the time it takes to conduct
research to Level I or II standard, this may be the only level of evidence
available.
IV - Lesser Studies,
Uncoordinated but Well Designed: This is identified as the second weakest
form of evidence. It attempts empirical support for a hypothesis, product, or
treatment, but not enough studies have yet been done, and those which have been
done lack coordination.
V - Professional Opinion,
Consensus, and Anecdote: These are the weakest forms of evidence of all, in
that they lack formally reviewed and published empirical support. Nevertheless,
they are (a) not totally without heuristic value, and (b) frequently all
you have available. Note that professional opinion, professional
consensus, and professional anecdote are genuinely empirical, since they arose
originally from clinical observation. They also qualify you to serve as an expert
witness in your field, and need to be carefully distinguished from their
political, journalistic, and everyday equivalents [see next]. And beware:
lack of evidence does not in itself make a theoretical possibility wrong, it
merely leaves it as-yet-unproven.
VI - Public and Personal
Opinion, Consensus, and Anecdote: These are not evidence at all in the
scientific sense, and reflect only the everyday experience of the
non-professional, that is to say, of the population at large. They are
nevertheless the content matter of most everyday arguments, and may be
elevated to the status of evidence if given as testimony in a court of
law.
Level Playing
Field: An everyday metaphor for an equal and fair contest. Allowing anything
less than a level playing field in political or scientific debate is to
encourage unfairness, and achieves its victory at the expense of enlightenment.
Example: In the Autumn 2004 "casinos debate", it
was at least a poorly managed decision making process which gave the gaming
industry a (reputedly £100 million) political lobbying opportunity and yet
shunned the views of the Salvation Army, who have been sweeping up after this
and related industries for more than a century.
Lewin, Kurt (1890-1947): [selected
Internet biography] German psychologist who emigrated to the US in 1933 and
there helped import selected Gestaltist traditions
into American psychology. His work is relevant in the current context as
the derivation of attitude change theory (group theory).
Lifton, Robert J. (1926-): [selected
Internet biography] Academic theorist on the topic of thought reform
and its methods.
Literal Denial: The first
subcategory of denial of content, as proposed by Cohen (2001).
Denial of "the fact or knowledge of the fact" (p7).
Example: My husband would never have done that to our
daughter, so the social worker must be making it up.
Loaded Language
(1):
A type of fallacious argument in which a proposition or question is
phrased in such a way that it "presupposes that a definite answer has
already been given to some other unasked question" (Damer,
1995, p190). Example: TO FOLLOW.
Loaded Language
(2): [See firstly totalism.] One of the
eight factors identified by Lifton (1961) as making
for an effective system of thought reform. Totalism,
according to Lifton, is "characterised
by the though-terminating cliché", the sort of "brief, highly
reductive, definitive-sounding phrases" which are easy to convey to a
suitably prepared audience (p488).
Machiavelli, Niccolo (1469-1527): [selected Internet biography]
Machiavellian: In the style of Niccolo Machiavelli. "..... preferring
expediency to morality; practising duplicity in
statecraft or in general conduct; astute, cunning, intriguing" (OED).
Machiavellianism in the business world was first explicitly analysed
by Jay (1967), who saw modern corporations as so similar to mediaeval nation
states that managers needed as many of the skills of "princehood"
as they could get their hands on. Machiavellian intelligence in the
animal kingdom was first explicitly analysed by Byrne
and Whiten (1988).
Machiavellian
Intelligence: In the present context, the title of a collection of papers on intraspecific tactical deception in primates published by
Byrne and Whiten (1988). "Social intelligence" as opposed to
"object intelligence". The willingness to use one's fellows as
"social tools", and the capacity for "mind reading" which
this demands.
Medical Decision
Making: A tightly co-engineered cluster of concepts and supporting mathematical
procedures developed over the centuries by healthcare professionals for making
life-or-death decisions in conditions of imperfect evidence. [See, for
starters, sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value
in our Research
Methods Glossary.]
Meme: This is Dawkins' (1976) term for a unit of cultural ideation or folklore,
transmittable as such from person to person more more or less effortless
exposure, thus .....
"Most
of what is unusual about man can be summed up in one word: 'culture'. I use the
word not in its snobbish sense, but as a scientist uses it. Cultural
transmission is analogous to genetic transmission in that, although basically
conservative, it can give rise to a form of evolution" (Dawkins, 1976, p189).
Thus
a meme is what suddenly arrives in your mind when you look at a recipe, or a
patio arrangement, or some such, and say "Now that's a good idea".
Dawkins, a geneticist, coined the term to give a psychological parallel to the
gene. For further examples of memes, see the Wikipedia
entry.
Mental Verbs: See this entry in
our Psycholinguistics
Glossary.
Metacognition: In its broadest sense, "metacognition" is the act of turning one's mental
faculties onto the mental faculties themselves. It is thus "thinking about
thinking", or "knowing about knowing". The term was popularised by Flavell (1979),
and is relevant to the current context because many theories of attitude
change require reflective adjustment of attitudes in the light of
ongoing counter-attitudinal experience [see, for example, attitude change
theory (semantic differential theory), attitude certainty, and resistance
to persuasion]. [For more on the cognitive science of metacognition,
see the parallel entry in our Psycholinguistics
Glossary.]
Milieu Control: [See firstly totalism.] One of the eight factors identified by Lifton (1961) as making for an effective system of thought
reform. Totalism, according to Lifton, "seeks to establish domain over not only the
individual's communication with the outside [.....] but also - in its
penetration of his inner life - over what we may speak of as his communication
with himself" (p478). [Psychology reserves the
phrase "inner speech" to describe the process(es)
of holding private conversations with oneself. Surprisingly, however, given
that inner speech is automatically central to communication, reasoning, and
consciousness studies, there is not a lot of theory and even less hard fact
about it. For a quick introduction to the subject, see Section 4.4 of our e-paper on
"Dyslexia".]
Mind Control: [See firstly brainwashing.]
An extreme form of indoctrination in which subjects allow their behaviour to be bent to the will of others, and may even
surrender volition entirely, as in the (we hope) fictional accounts of
"programmed assassins" such as seen in Richard Condon's 1959 novel
"The Manchurian Candidate" (filmed 1962 and 2004). [For more on
this topic, see the Skeptic's
Dictionary entry.]
Ministry of
Information: British governmental agency created in January 1940 under John Reith,
to oversee public information operations in the UK during World War Two.
Morale Operations: A type of special
operations, designed to sap an enemy's will to fight, increase desertions
from and lower the panic threshold in their armed forces, and the like. By
extension, the same in corporate and interpersonal confrontation. Precise
methods vary, and include propaganda at both tactical and strategic
level. Example: "It is recorded that handbills were
circulated among the British troops on Bunker Hill, offering them seven dollars
a month, fresh provisions in plenty, health, freedom, ease, affluence, and a
good farm, should they desert and join the American Army" (Lasswell, 1927/1972, p167) [buy a
facsimile].
Mystical
Manipulation: [See firstly totalism.] One of the
eight factors identified by Lifton (1961) as making
for an effective system of thought reform. Totalism,
according to Lifton, insists on "personal
manipulation" (p480). "Initiated from above,
it seeks to provoke specific patterns of behaviour
and emotion in such a way that these will appear to have arisen spontaneously
from within the environment. This element of planned spontaneity, directed as
it is by an ostensibly omniscient group, must assume for the manipulated, a
near-mystical quality [and] any thought or action which questions the higher
purpose is considered to be stimulated by a lower purpose, to be backward,
selfish, and petty in the face of the great overriding mission." (p480.)
Myth: [See firstly
belief system.] "A purely fictitious narrative usually involving
supernatural persons, actions, or events, and embodying some popular idea
concerning natural or historical phenomena" (OED). [Compare myth,
convenient and urban myth.]
Myth, Convenient: [See firstly myth.]
A sanitised version of the way things are or were.
History for five-year-olds of any age. The way we like to see things, rather
than the objective truth, especially if this involves a doppelgänger self-delusional world of good guys and
bad guys, a black-and-white morality, and no little syrupy sentimentality.
Psychologically speaking, convenient myths are evidence of the
"schematic" nature of human memory. Specifically, a memory "schema"
[Memory Glossary]
is formed from initially factual material boiled down into what can readily be
remembered, but shaped also by what you would like to be the case. Example:
One could argue that the American dream was itself a convenient myth,
given the fact that the US is currently living beyond its means to the tune of
£2 billion a day (The Times, 22nd November 2004), borrowed
ultimately from other countries in the world economy less well off than they are.
[We should explain for the benefit of any non-Christian readers that
"living beyond one's means" would have been little short of anathema
to the highly ascetic Pilgrim Fathers, who sowed the seeds of the American
dream in the early 17th century.] We can even trace the "noble
cowboy" part of the myth to Owen Wister's 1902 novel "The
Virginian" (Macintyre, 2004).
"Nobble", To: [Racetrack slang] Originally,
to overfeed or sedate a racehorse in order to decrease its chances in a
forthcoming race. Nobbling one's own horses is easier
than nobbling someone else's since one has better
access, but the exercise can be highly profitable either way (and is, needless
to say, highly illegal). By extension, to cause rival entries in any form of
race or competition to underperform.
Non-Sequitur: [Latin =
"does not follow".] A class of fallacious argument in which
the evidence presented to support a particular proposition does not, upon close
inspection, relate directly enough to the debate to carry true weight. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Observation: The flame front of
the scientific method, and the ultimate source of all data and evidence.
Ray (1967) explains the pivotal role of observation in this way:
"Observation exists at the beginning and again at the end of the process:
at the beginning, to determine more definitely and precisely the nature of the
difficulty to be dealt with; at the end, to test the value of [the action
taken]. Between those two termini of observation, we find the more
distinctively mental aspects of the entire thought cycle: (i) inference, the suggestion of an explanation
or solution; and (ii) reasoning, the development [of] the suggestion. Reasoning
requires some experimental observation to confirm it, while experiment can be
economically and fruitfully conducted only on the basis of an idea that has
been tentatively developed by reasoning. [.....] The disciplined, or logically
trained, mind - the aim of the educative process - is the mind able to judge
how far each of these steps needs to be carried out in any particular
situation. No cast iron rules can be laid down. Each case has to be dealt with
as it arises [.....]. The trained mind is the one that best grasps the degree
of observation, forming of ideas, reasoning, and experimental testing required
in any special case, and that profits the most, in future thinking, by mistakes
made in the past. What is important is that the mind should be sensitive to
problems and skilled in methods of attack and solution." (p157; italics original; bold highlighting added.)
Official Denial: The second
subcategory of denial (individual or shared), as proposed by
Cohen (2001). Denials "that are initiated, structured, and sustained by
the massive resources of the modern state" p10).
Example: See the news any day, because "the entire
rhetoric of government responses to allegations about atrocities
consists of denial" (p10).
Omission of Key
Evidence: A type of fallacious argument in which whole blocks of evidence
are deliberately overlooked in order to weaken, or indeed alter, a conclusion.
Example: Lord Levy, the Labour
Party's unofficial lead fundraiser and Tony Blair's personal envy to the Middle East, was recently challenged whether a
meeting he had had with Lloyd Nathan, a representative of the US casino
industry, had been part of a drive to purchase UK government favours with Labour Party
donations. His reply, delivered through a spokesman, stated only that
"that at no stage in the meeting with Mr. Nathan did either man mention a
financial contribution to Labour" (The Daily
Mail, 25th October 2004). This was a seriously useless statement for the
spokesman concerned [or the newspaper, indeed, if they have simply edited down
a longer statement] to have put across, because it neither convicts nor
discharges. It is, in short, almost totally irrelevant, and in direct
contravention of the rebuttal principle of rational argument.
This is because it does not address the substantive accusation, namely that the
message had somehow got across to the casino industry (a) that
"sweeteners" were in order, and (b) that the appropriate channel for
these sweeteners would be through Labour Party funds.
Far better to have phrased a fuller and more specific denial along the following
lines [suggested insertions thus]: "At no stage in the meeting [or
other meetings] with Mr. Nathan [or anyone else on his behalf] did either man [or
woman]
mention [or silently exchange papers relating to] a financial
contribution [or actually deliver said contribution] to Labour [or any funds handling nominee on their
behalf], etc., etc." [This may sound petty and seriously Pythonesque,
but the art of courtroom defence is actually to tell
as little of "the whole truth" as possible and leave it to the
prosecution to wheedle it out of you; and vagueness, in this war of syntax and
semantics, is your most powerful weapon. Ironically, Lord Levy went on
to complain (6th March 2007) about the "partial, confused, and
inaccurate" treatment he was getting from the press during the "cash
for honours" scandal. If you are not already
convinced of the need for total precision in your use of language, then check
out the entries for indexicals in our Psycholinguistics
Glossary.]
Opinion: [See firstly
level of evidence.] In everyday usage, an opinion is "what one thinks
about a particular thing, subject, or point; a judgement
formed or a conclusion reached; a belief, view, notion" (OED). In
psychology, "opinions are considered to be verbalisable,
while attitudes are sometimes 'unconscious'" (Hovland,
Janis, and Kelley, 1953, p7). Relevant here because
the opinion of non-professionals (or of professionals speaking outside their area
of expertise) should be treated as questionable authority rather than as
professional opinion.
Orders of
Representation: [See firstly Theory of Mind.] Dennett's (1978) notion (a) that
each of us maintains within their mind a mental model of the real world,
complete with representations of all the objects and people within it,
including yourself, (b) that part of this representational structure has to do
with what we/they are all thinking, and (c) that this representation of mental
state has degrees of complexity - "orders" - to it. Thus if one of my
"first-order beliefs" was that <Snow is white>, then one of my
"second-order beliefs" might be that <Tom believes that snow is
white>, and one of my "third order beliefs" might be that <Tom
believes that Jim believes that snow is white>, and so on until the
complexity of the proposition exceeds our momentary mental capacity.
Oversimplification:
See
causal oversimplification.
Paine, Tom
(1737-1809): [See firstly pamphleteer.] English artisan whose repulsion for
the monarchy of George III led him to emigrate to the American colonies, there
to become a pamphleteer in support of American independence. His 1791
"The Rights of Man" is nevertheless one of the classics of
sociopolitical theory. [See now the selected Internet
biography.}
Pamphleteer: Small-scale
author/publisher of political propaganda on behalf of a pressure
group. Example: Tom Paine. [See also blog.]
Patting the Poodle: A reward for
sycophancy.
Peer Review: To submit one's
research and/or arguments to the critical evaluation of others in
one's field of work. One of the fundamental aspects of the scientific method.
Pensions Crisis
(Systems View): A systems approach to the pensions problem facing Britain over the
coming decades would attempt (a) to identify and (b) to quantify flow changes
within the UK economy following the chronic underprovisioning
now known to exist in both state and private pension sectors. This would
provide hard data on such embarrassing issues as (1) just how little of our
savings was ever put safely away in the first place, (2) just how little is
left, (3) where did the rest of it actually go, and (4) to what age are we now
going to have to work before retiring? In the case of the state pension, first
introduced by the Old Age Pensions Act, 1908, none of it is left, because there
never was an underlying investment pool. The pensions of the old have always
been paid out the taxes paid by the young. In other words, state pension
contributions have never been anything "more than disguised income tax.
The payments, like tax revenues, go into general government funds to pay for
all manner of services. They bear little relationship to future state pensions."
(The Daily Mail, 8th September 2004.) In the case of private pensions,
the man in the street was foolish enough to trust in the fidentia
of the private savings industry. In this case, there is an underlying
investment fund, but no requirement to provision it adequately. In addition,
all investments are milked by the taxation system and subjected to regular
management fees and commissions, and many are milked by the very trustees who
ought to be guarding them! The Pensions Protection Fund (or "pensions
lifeboat") - due to begin operations in April 2005 - will cost healthy
businesses some £300-£600 million per year covering the pensions liability of
failed companies (The Times, 2nd December 2004). Example:
"[Name] worked for the same company for 26 years, safe in the knowledge
that his company pension promised him a comfortable retirement. A year ago, he
was made redundant and told that the company pension was effectively worthless.
[.....] The workers' pensions were lost because the law does not require schemes
to hold 100 per cent of the assets that are needed to secure the promised
pensions. As long as the employer is a going concern, this does not matter. But
if an employer behind a scheme goes bankrupt, and the pension is wound up,
there may not be sufficient assets to pay out all the pensions. The problem has
been worsened by the three-year bear market, which hit the equity investments
of many schemes, leaving them in the red." (The Times, 27th
November 2004).
Personal Denial: The first subcategory
of denial (individual or shared), as proposed by Cohen (2001).
Denial at a "wholly individual" (p10)
level. Example: Suppressed suspicion of a partner's
marital infidelity.
Persuasion: In everyday usage,
persuasion is "the presenting of inducements or winning arguments"
(OED). In scientific psychology, it is a topic area dealing with the variables
which determine whether and to what extent a given persuasive communication
is likely to succeed in altering a recipient's beliefs, attitudes,
opinions, and intentions. It is the science of the art of propaganda.
Persuasive
Communication: [See firstly persuasion.] Propaganda great or small, good
or bad. [We have to allow for good persuasive communication, since this is the
nature of health promotion literature, and the like.]
Philosophies of
Science: (1) Title of book (Harré, 1972). (2) Ways of
looking at the world in general, and at the development of human scientific
knowledge in particular. Epistemologies. [See now scientific method.]
Post Hoc ergo
Propter Hoc: [Latin = "after this therefore because of
this".] A type of fallacious argument in which a simple sequence of
events is confused with causation. Examples: (1)
Consider the following news report: "Two Britons were killed by suspect Al
Qaeda gunmen in Saudi Arabia yesterday - just hours after Middle East
broadcasters aired reports that British troops had been photographed torturing
an Iraqi prisoner" (The Mail on Sunday, 2nd May 2004). To say that the
one event caused the other is to be arguing post-propter, and is unjustified
and unproven. The attack may well have been a reprisal, but could just
as easily have been coincidence. (2) Similarly, the fact
that Yasser Arafat's death was followed a few days later by a plague of locusts
across Israel (The Times, 22nd November 2004) should not be
over-interpreted. [Compare cum hoc ergo propter hoc, and see the
entry for "confounding" in our Research
Methods Glossary.]
Prejudice: "To
prepossess with an opinion; to give a bias or bent to, influence
the mind or judgement of beforehand (often
unfairly)" (OED). In the present context, prejudice implies a status
quo ante disinclination to be persuaded by persuasive communication
from, or evidence presented by, the disapproved source. Examples:
Racial hatreds, social class hatreds, religious intolerances, and the
like. A summative
position came in Gordon Allport's monograph on
"The Nature of Prejudice" (Allport,
1954/1979) .....
"Perhaps the briefest
of all definitions of prejudice is: thinking
ill of others without sufficient warrant. This crisp phrasing contains the
two essential ingredients of all definitions - reference to unfounded judgment
and to a feeling-tone. [.....] While it is important to bear in mind that
biases may be pro as well as con, it is none the less true that ethnic prejudice is mostly
negative" (Allport, 1954/1979, p6).
Premise: [Sometimes "premiss".] A statement of accepted propositional
truth. A fact. "The starting point of reasoning" (Harré, 1972, p35).
Pressure Group: An association of
like-minded lobbyists, pamphleteers, and fundraisers, on behalf of a certain
cause, and not infrequently a front for direct action teams working close to or
beyond the limits of legality. Examples: Gay rights
groups, animal rights groups, the pro- and anti- foxhunting groups (UK), MigrationWatch UK, the National Rifle
Association (US), etc. Many of the fundraising groups are clearly
charitable organisations rather than lobbyists, for
example, the British Friends of Israel War Disabled Trust [homepage]
whereas the Palestine Solidarity Campaign [homepage]
and NORAID [homepage]
are more uniquely political.
Principle of
Falsification: Popper's (1934/1959) slightly counterintuitive assertion that the scientific
method is ultimately based on our ability to prove that an assertion is
false by finding a counterexample to it. Popper looks down with disdain on evidence
which supports a given position, preferring to regard it as "the failure
of an attempt to falsify the hypothesis under test" (Harré,
1972, p48).
Probability: "The amount
of antecedent likelihood of a particular event as measured by the relative
frequency of occurrence of events of the same kind in the whole course of
experience" (OED). For present purposes, probability becomes most
interesting when there is not a lot of it about, because small probabilities
present serious problems in the heads of those who wish to paint simplistic truths.
Example: Included in the entry for asymptote. [For
more on the technicalities of probability in research, see the cluster of
entries in our Research
Methods Glossary.]
Professional
Opinion: [See firstly levels of evidence.] "The formal statement by
a member of an advisory body, an expert, or professional man, or the like, of
what he thinks, judges, or advises upon a question or matter submitted to and
considered by him" (OED). Accepted in law from a recognised
expert witness. The beauty of this arrangement lies in the rights it
gives you to "ask for a second opinion".
Projection: An important
psychodynamic defence mechanism in which your
attitudinal structures adjust themselves in the direction of blaming other
people - typically one's own leaders or convenient out-groups - for your
perceived troubles. Small surprise, therefore, that projection has been
regularly identified as one of the "lethal triad" of "basic
social forces common to radical groups" (Gilmartin,
1996/2004
online).
Propaganda: Originally
"any association, systematic scheme, or concerted movement for the
propagation of a particular doctrine or practice" (OED), but now also the
persuasive material itself. Lasswell (1927/1971)
identifies the following general objectives: to maintain an illusion of
victory, to preserve friendships, and to demoralise
the enemy. For a thorough introductory history of this subject, see Jowett and
O'Donnell (1992/2004
online).
Proposition: See the entries
for proposition and propositional network in our Psycholinguistics
Glossary.
Propositional
Truth: [See firstly proposition and truth.] A declaration of a
truth, expressed as a proposition in subject-predicate form [Psycholinguistics
Glossary] (i.e. in the format "my cat is black"), critically
evaluated by due process, but, in the end, accepted by all parties and thus
fulfilling the acceptability principle of rational argument.
Psychological
Warfare: [Alternatively "PsyWar", "PsyOps", or "Psywar
Ops".] The battle for the "hearts and minds" of an enemy, either
in its own right or as an aid to the taking of territory or the elimination of
military assets. Warfare which targets an enemy's will to resist. Morale
operations or propaganda. Example: See
Elliston (1996/2004 online)
for some specific techniques. [See now the Psywarrior.Com
briefing on this subject.]
Public Information
Operations: State persuasion. The control of public opinion by the
control of information flow in terms of timing, content, accuracy, and
implication. Example: See the entry for Bryce
Commission.
Public Opinion: [See firstly opinion
and persuasion.] The balance of opinion of the population as a whole on
a particular issue, as determined by such instruments as public opinion polls.
As a topic for academic study, the story begins with Lippmann (1922). The point
about public opinion is that it (a) evolves over time, and (b) only loosely
predicts actual behaviour. Here, for example, are the
monthly percentages for UK opposition to the Iraqi War: April 2003 24%, June
2003 34%, November 2003 49%, June 2004 53%, and November 2004 57% (The Times,
9th November 2004).
Questionable
Authority: [See firstly appeal to authority.] A type of fallacious
argument in which an opinion is presented as evidence but turns
out upon inspection to be either (a) not that of a recognised
expert at all [hence not a professional opinion], or (b) that of a prejudiced
expert [hence not objective]. Example: TO FOLLOW.
Rational Argument: The "Holy
Grail" of intelligent debate. An argument which cannot upon
sustained inspection and analysis be faulted for any form of fallacious
argument (and which might not be possible upon this planet at all). [Caution:
Unfortunately, the adjective "rational" implies only "good"
or "pure", and in itself makes no claims of success. Many perfectly
rational arguments are bulldozed out of the way by this or that fallacious, but
more heavily supported, alternative.]
Rationalisation: In its general everyday usage, "to rationalise" has drifted from its original sense
"to render conformable to reason; to explain on a rational basis"
(OED), and now carries the additional negative connotation of explaining
away things you cannot otherwise explain at all. Indeed, the human capacity
for rationalisation - be it before, during, or after
the event itself is at least partly responsible for every single one of the
perhaps 160 million war deaths in the 20th century, and totally responsible for
the atrocities element thereof. Example: To claim
that victims "had it coming to them" [regardless of what
"it" actually is on a particular occasion] is to rationalise
the original act. [See now denial and its subtypes.]
Reasoning: According to the
Scottish philosopher Thomas Reid, reasoning is the process by which we pass
from one judgement to another (Reid, 1863,
cited in Thomson, 1892). Alternatively, it the process by which humans
"draw explicit conclusions from evidence" (Wason
and Johnson-Laird, 1972, p1). Most authorities
identify two fundamentally different ways to do this, namely inductive
and deductive, but some recent ones have added a third way, namely abductive. [See now abductive
reasoning, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning.]
Reasoning calls for a number of basic cognitive skills, including inference,
and sustained effort at detecting fallacious argument.
Rebuttal Principle: The ninth of Damer's (1995) 12 basic principles of rational argument.
The principle that "one who presents an argument for or attacks a position
should attempt to provide effective responses to all serious challenges or
rebuttals to the argument or position at issue" (p182).
Damer sees this as "perhaps the most
difficult" aspect of rational argument, and suggests that "the
rebuttal should be the primary driving force behind the formulation of every
argument [so that] one will have a constant reminder that an argument is not
finished until one has finished off the counterarguments" (p182).
Recognition of
Assumptions: [See firstly reasoning.] The ability to use assumptions
wisely is one of the component skills of critical thinking. Example:
Test #2 of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal is a test of
assumption spotting, and is structured as follows. You are given the following
statement (from Watson and Glaser, 1991, p4):
"We need to save time in getting there so we'd better go by plane".
There are then a number of proposed assumptions which need to be judged as necessarily
made in the given statement. The optional answers are (1) that going by plane
will take less time than other means of transport [YES], (2) that there is a
plane service available [YES], and (3) that travel by plane is more convenient
than travel by train [NO].
Reconsideration
Principle: The twelfth of Damer's (1995) 12 basic
principles of rational argument. The principle that if a closed argument
is subsequently found to have been flawed in some way "one is obliged to
reopen the issue for further consideration and resolution" (p185).
Reference Group: "A group of
people or organisation of which an individual
respects, identifies with, or aspires to join, e.g. membership or associative
groups" (Source).
Reflective
Practice: Of healthcare and similar professions, a state of perpetual critical
self-appraisal which attempts to enhance a practitioner's clinical autonomy.
Reflective practitioners are seen as preventers who constantly question their
means of prevention, as assessors who constantly question their methods of
assessment, as interveners who constantly question their proposed point of
intervention, and so on.
Resistance to
Persuasion: [See firstly the various entries for attitude change.] Of both
individuals and groups, the ability to maintain the coherence and integrity of
one's initial attitudinal structures - the schemas, the convenient
myths, the traditions, the belief systems, etc. - in the face
of counter-attitudinal attack. Tormala and Petty
(2004/2004 online)
have analysed some of the issues here, and emphasise the importance of metacognitive
factors in determining how resistant a given person is going to be. [See now inoculation.]
Resolution
Principle: The tenth of Damer's (1995) 12 basic
principles of rational argument. The principle that we ought to be able
to resolve arguments "much more frequently than we do" (p184). There are a number of perfectly innocent reasons for
failure, as when the suspension of judgement
principle is invoked, but normally you would suspect over-involvement
emotionally, lack of knowledge or basic argumentation skill, or the existence
of a hidden agenda.
Sacred Science: [See firstly thought
reform and aura of sacredness.] The tendency on the part of totalist regimes to frame their fundamental beliefs
with "absolute 'scientific' precision" (Lifton,
1961, p487).
SAUFOCOM: Contraction of Saucer Force Command. [See now visiting
Martians.]
Schema: See this entry in
our Memory Glossary.
Science: "A branch of
study which is concerned either with a connected body of demonstrated truths or
with observed facts systematically classified and [.....] brought under general
laws" (OED). "A leap frog process of fact accumulation and
theoretical advance" (Harré, 1972, p43). [See now law of nature.]
Scientific Method: [See firstly causation
and philosophies of science.] The use of inductive reasoning in the
pursuit of new knowledge. The roots of the scientific method go back to Sir
Francis Bacon, and are based upon the repeated, published, and
peer-reviewed empirical testing of hypotheses. [For more on what this involves
in practice, just start at hypothetico-deductive
method in our Research
Methods Glossary, and work outwards from there.]
Secret Service: The clandestine
military intelligence and special operations arms of government, which -
sometimes in conjunction with, and sometimes despite, assistance from non-governmental
secret societies - steer our respective vessels of state through the
mists of history. Example: See our three-part e-paper on "Codes
and Cyphers in History", which, whilst not
totally on topic, makes frequent enough mention of secret service operations to
be of use.
Secret Society: [See firstly secret
service.] The term "secret society" encompasses such things as
the lodges, cabals, and pressure groups, which - sometimes in
conjunction with, and sometimes despite, assistance from governmental secret
services - steer our respective vessels of state in particular
directions through the mists of history.
Self-Sanctification:
[See
firstly totalism.] One of the eight factors
identified by Lifton (1961) as making for an
effective system of thought reform. A demand for "absolute
purity" (p482) of affiliation by a system which
induces feelings of guilt and then uses them as instruments of control.
Semantic
Differential: A "semantic differential" is an hypothetical continuum
between an adjective and its semantic opposite [e.g. GOOD-BAD]. Semantic
differentials are believed by followers of Osgood, Suci,
and Tannenbaum (1957) to be important building blocks
for attitudes. Here, for example, is a tabular array of an
eight-adjective rating of "the ideal automobile" .....
|
stylish |
X |
|
|
|
|
ugly |
|
fast |
|
X |
|
|
|
slow |
|
expensive |
|
|
|
X |
|
cheap |
|
secure |
X |
|
|
|
|
insecure |
|
safe |
X |
|
|
|
|
dangerous |
|
big |
|
|
|
X |
|
small |
|
large boot |
|
|
X |
|
|
small boot |
|
saloon |
|
|
|
|
X |
cabriolet |
Osgood et al's
particular development of the differential array [which may, of course, be
several thousands of items deep if the researchers so wish] was to allocate
each specific dimension to one of three superordinate
categories, as follows .....
E-
The Evaluative Factor: This subsumes all adjectives implying some sense of
goodness-badness [e.g., stylish, expensive, secure, safe].
P-
The Potency Factor: This subsumes all adjectives implying some sense of
strength-weakness [e.g., big].
E-
The Activity Factor: This subsumes all adjectives implying some sense of
activity-inertia [e.g., fast].
[See now attitude change theory (semantic
differential theory).]
Sense of Fair Play: One of the
principles of natural justice. The notion that one of the duties of a society is
to implement a rule of law for the settling of disputes.
Sheer Imbecility: [See firstly imbecile.]
Breathtaking simple-mindedness or lack of forethought. Example:
"Tony Blair yesterday promised Black Watch troops they will be 'home by
Christmas' " (The Daily Mail, 21st October 2004). <<AUTHOR'S
NOTE: The point at issue here is not whether this may or may not happen [it
eventually did], but rather that the armies of both world wars were promised
precisely this, only to be retained in theatre for considerably longer and
slaughtered for their troubles. The phrase "home by Christmas"
therefore has ominous overtones for service personnel and these appear to have
been completely overlooked on this occasion: indeed, were one to set out
deliberately to find a calculated insult or to show one's ignorance this would
be the perfect way of doing it.>>
Slippery Slope: A type of fallacious
argument in which - with or without intention to deceive - there is loose
use of a series of "if-then" arguments, one or more of which does NOT
upon proper inspection follow the one before, but is actually quite difficult
to detect. [Alternative Wikipedia
definition.] Example: TO FOLLOW.
Smear Tactics: Ad
hominem argument supported by briefing against, character
assassination, or the like, in political campaigning.
Socialisation: "The process by which children and others
adopt the behaviour patterns of the culture that
surrounds them" (Wikipedia).
[See now political socialisation.]
Sophistry: "Specious but fallacious
reasoning; employment of arguments which are intentionally deceptive"
(OED).
Special Effects (SFX): Conjuring tricks and sleights of hand in the context
of theatre and cinema [more].
Special Operations:
Of
the military and secret services, operations of especial tactical or
strategic value, usually undertaken by a small force of highly trained and
specially equipped personnel, and typically coordinated by a Department of
Dirty Tricks. In time of war, this includes activities such as sabotage,
assassination, kidnappings, diversionary attacks, the organisation
of resistance groups, and the general pursuit of psychological warfare.
In time of peace it includes - er - much the
same.
Speech Act: See this entry in
our Psycholinguistics
Glossary.
Spin: [See firstly spin
doctor.] Propaganda directed by a government against its own people
as though they were the enemy. State or corporate sophistry. The
deliberate manipulation of public opinion by the calculated
misrepresentation of an underlying truth. Example:
The received view on casino gambling in the UK is that such establishments
exist to make profits for their owners at the expense of the majority of their
customers and to the downright ruin of a not inconsiderable minority thereof.
This more or less propositional truth then gets corrupted by the mouths
of politicians as follows: "Casinos provide a modern opportunity for
people and their families to go and either have some entertainment or be able
to indulge in leisure gambling in an adult fashion." (Leader of the House,
Peter Hain, The Daily Mail, 27th
October 2004; considered as a locutionary
act [Psycholinguistics
Glossary], this statement is not untrue as such, but as an attempt to
advance a serious ongoing debate it is execrable.)
Spin Doctor: (1) Originally,
one who interfered with the free and random operation of any wheel of
fortune device, in order to increase the house take. A fraudster,
therefore, in the general category of insider dealers and racetrack "nobblers". Hence (2) one who interferes with any
commercial mechanism or procedure in order to separate the working man from his
money. Hence (3) one who interferes with the natural presentation of truth
in order to influence public opinion.
Stating the
Bleeding Obvious: To be guilty of uttering so blatant a truism
as to exasperate one's audience.
Stone, Isidor Feinstein (1907-1989): US investigative
journalist and self-proclaimed awkward SOB. Famous for his exposé of the
workings of the US Departments of Dirty Tricks during the run-up to, and
early years of, the Korean War (Stone, 1952) (and thereafter for more of the
same).
Stonewalling: Giving nothing
away. Standing solid and true despite constant attack. Obstructing or
hindering. So named after General
Thomas J. ("Stonewall") Jackson (1824-1863), Confederate Army,
whose troops at the First Battle of Bull Run "stood like a stone
wall". A positive descriptor if your side is the one doing the
stonewalling, but a negative one if you are on the receiving end of it.
Straw Man: A type of fallacious
argument in which the attention of one party is deliberately diverted from
the issue at point onto a contrived but ultimately irrelevant non-issue. Example:
TO FOLLOW.
Sufficient Grounds
Principle: The 8th of Damer's (1995) 12 basic principles
of rational argument. The principle that "one who presents an
argument for or attacks a position should attempt to provide reasons that are
sufficient in number, kind, and weight to support the acceptance of the
conclusion" (p181).
Superstition: "An
irrational religious belief or practice" (OED).
Suspension of Judgement Principle: The 11th of Damer's (1995) 12 basic principles of rational argument.
The principle that "if no position comes close to being successfully defended,
or if two or more positions seem to be defended with equal strength, on should,
in most cases, suspend judgement about the
issue" (p185). [But carefully contrast clarity
principle.]
Swift Vets: [In full, Swift
Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth.] See the entry for 527 groups.
Sycophant: "A mean,
servile, cringing, or abject flatterer; a parasite, toady,
lickspittle" (OED).
Sycophancy: The natural behaviours of a sycophant. A subtype of flattery,
in which the flattered party is usually one's own immediate superior.
Syllogism: [See firstly deductive
reasoning.] A form of deduction in which there are two premises, one
primary and one secondary, and a conclusion [longer
definition]. Example: Here, from Cohen and Manion (1989, p3) is an unflawed
syllogism [note the flow from general rule to particular example]: First
Premise: All planets orbit the sun. Second Premise: The Earth is a
planet. Conclusion: Therefore the Earth orbits the sun.
Systems View: A dispassionate
analysis of an otherwise politically sensitive and partisan area. A search for
natural truth and justice, involving the identification of underlying flow
patterns (of money, people, or other commodities). Examples:
See the separate entries for the credit boom, Gambling Bill, and pensions
crisis. [For a detailed analysis of the cognitive science at work
here, see our e-paper
on "Systems Thinking".]
Tautology: "The
repetition [of] the same idea or statement in other words; usually as a fault
of style" (OED). Example: TO FOLLOW.
Teleology: [Greek telos = "far" or "distant", as
in "television", seeing at a distance] "The doctrine or study of
ends or final causes" (OED). Teleologies are
usually assertions of voluntary prior purpose, as in "I'm studying for my
exams". Teleological explanations are severely frowned upon by science,
because prior purpose is never objectively observable. The philosophical point
at issue is that the agent of this possible volition - known popularly as
"the will" - is a poorly defined concept, and in practice it is all
too easy to impute will where none actually exists. Example: The
observation that a fruit fly flew from A to B and drank ought not to be
described as "That fruit fly flew from A to B to get a drink".
The fly in question was at A, it took off, it flew to B, it landed, it drank -
a chain of simple reflexes could achieve the same (and does). Similarly, animals
do not mate in order to continue their blood line, they just
exist and respond when programmed to respond.
Theory: "A scheme or
system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of
facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by
observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the
known facts" (OED).
Theory of Mind: One of the most
promising research areas in modern cognitive science. The term itself comes originally
from Premack and Woodruff (1978), who used it to
describe an individual's ability to "impute mental states to himself and
others" (p515). The idea was then developed by
Dennett (1978), who popularised the notion of "orders
of representation", again by Wimmer and Perner (1983), who described the phenomenon in entirely metacognitive terms as having "beliefs
about beliefs", and again by Baron-Cohen (1989), who devised a
particularly powerful "false-belief" experimental paradigm for
testing the theory of mind capabilities of children with special educational
needs such as autism.
Thought Reform: [Chinese hsiang kai-tsao =
"ideological remoulding"] The Chinese
Communist system of indoctrination during the 1940s
and 1950s, which gave rise to more focused techniques
such as brainwashing when high value subjects presented themselves. The
techniques of thought reform were thoroughly analysed
by Lifton (1961). [See now totalism.]
Totalism: [Short for "ideological totalism".]
[See firstly thought reform.] Lifton's (1961)
term for "the coming together of immoderate ideology with equally
immoderate individual character traits - an extremist meeting ground between
people and ideas" (p477). "Human
zealotry" (Ibid.). The psychological power house for "those
ideologies which are most sweeping in their content and most ambitious - or
messianic - in their claims, whether religious, political, or scientific"
(Ibid.). In Lifton's analysis, eight separate
factors - "psychological themes" (Ibid.) - need to be
addressed, dealt with separately as milieu control, mystical
manipulation, confession, self-sanctification, aura of
sacredness, loaded language, doctrine over person, and dispensed
existence. [Carefully contrast totalitarianism.]
Totalitarianism: "a system of
rule, driven by an ideology, that seeks direction of all aspects of public
activity, political, economic and social, and uses to that end, at least to a
degree, propaganda and terror" (Pleuger, 2004
online). [Carefully contrast totalism.]
Tradition: The way things
have always been done. The essence of a particular culture, both as overt behaviours and belief systems. Emotionally anchored habit.
[See now appeal to tradition.]
Truism: "A
self-evident truth" (OED). [Compare stating the bleeding obvious.]
Truth: In everyday usage,
truth means "conformity with fact; agreement with reality; accuracy,
correctness, verity (of statement or thought)" (OED). In philosophy, it is
the broader issue of the nature and limits of human thinking, and is thus as
old as reflective thought itself [see now truth, essence of and truth,
scientific]. In a court of law, it is the construction - the schema
- put upon the evidence and expert opinion produced. In public
information operations, it is the belief system being promoted by
the agency picking up the tab. And in times of war, it is invariably "the
first casualty" (Senator Hiram Johnson, 1917).
Truth, Essence of: [See firstly aletheia and truth.] Title of a classic paper
["Vom Wesen der Wahrheit"
(Heidegger, 1930)] by the philosopher Martin Heidegger.
Truth, Scientific: [See firstly truth.]
A propositional truth established using the scientific method.
Truth-Seeking
Principle: The second of Damer's twelve
principles of effective rational discussion. The notion that "each
participant [in a rational discussion] should be committed to the task of
earnestly searching for the truth or at least the most defensible position on
the issue at stake" (Damer, 1995, p175).
Uberrimae Fides: [Latin = "utmost good faith".] One
of the two principles of behaviour within the Lloyds
of London insurance market [the other being fidentia].
The notion that "one's word is one's bond".
Urban Myth: [See firstly myth.]
A vivid and typically ungrounded rumour, so
frequently mentioned as to be taken as true. Examples: We
have nothing to add to those already well documented at Uncle Ken's Urban Myth
Page.
Value: In everyday usage,
a "value" is an "estimate or opinion of, liking for,
a person or thing" (OED; italics original). The word retains much the same
sense when used as a technical term in social psychology, where it refers to
the behaviour traits we hold dear, either personally,
or in those we look up to. Values are thus beliefs about how one ought
to behave.
Visiting Martians: Devil's advocates.
In the present context, a hypothetical band of truth-curious aliens who
- thanks to their larger brains and lack of any side but their own - habitually
see through the lies, confabulations [Memory Glossary], rationalisations, and cover stories put
forward by Earthlings. This leads them to ask penetrating and at times
extremely uncomfortable questions which we ourselves had either overlooked or
suppressed. The gold standard for the critical evaluation of one's own
arguments is therefore to do a thought experiment in which you take the role of
a visiting Martian and see how uncomfortable you can make yourself. Example
of Usage: "Visiting Martians would not be alone in wondering
why parliament has spent so much of the last five years debating hunting.
Plenty of Earthlings are mystified too." (The Guardian, 4th
December 2002.) Examples of Uncomfortable Questions: (1)
Why do you Earthlings call it peace when there is so much fighting going on? (2)
Why are not all UN resolutions enforced by coalition action? (3) Why are
some popular militias referred to as "partisans" or "resistance
fighters" and praised for the mayhem they cause, whilst others are called
"terrorists" or "insurgents"? (4) Give it to us
again about how producing such a lot of heroin in those mountains over there
fits in with this "democracy" thing you're always on about [background]. (5)
We've just been watching this video called "The Magnificent Seven",
and there's this bunch of bandidos crashing
about on some sort of four-legged humvees, generally
kicking butt. This is clearly some earlier form of coalition. So how come they
get to lose? (6) One other thing while we're on - we like the way
you deploy these "combat chaplains" real close to the action, so as
to keep the guys on message. We'll be implementing this in SAUFOCOM
shortly.
Waffle, To: [Mild English
slang.] To expatiate upon a topic of discussion without actually addressing any
of the substantive issues. Example: This from Tessa Jowell, defending her position on the Gambling Bill
before Parliament: "'I, er, didn't refer to
people as snobs', she said. 'I referred to a whiff of snobbery, which is quite
different'." (The Daily Mail, 2nd November 2004; the defence is factually true, but factual truth is irrelevant
here because the waffle-factor comes in making fine points of semantics in
defence of the inherently indefensible.)
Wheel of Fortune: A generic name for
a class of fairground and casino attractions in which money is staked on the
various sectors of a rotating circular platten or
pointer, the winning selection being determined by the position of the moving
part when coming to rest. Fairground attractions of this type include
"Crown and Anchor" [detail/picture] and the
"Big Wheel" [detail],
whilst the principal casino example is the roulette wheel. The wheel of fortune
concept becomes relevant to the present discussion thanks to the understandable
(but nonetheless reprehensible) temptation to "doctor" [= interfere
with] the spin thereof using a hidden braking device - hence spin doctor,
hence spin.
Wister, Owen
(1860-1938): [Selected Internet
biography.] American novelist, whose 1902 best-seller "The
Virginian" became the principal sourcework for
the modern myth of the Hollywood cowboy.
3 - References
See the
Master References List
[Home]