“Probability neglect”: why policy-makers are constitutionally incapable of formulating evidence-based anti-terrorism policy
This can be extended to all things, of course. An the it would become obvious that paying much attention to errorists is stupid anyway - even without acknowledging that getting attention is their business.
Why poor people support tax breaks for the rich?
Sociology/psychology experiments and research results are often very interesting and illuminating.
In the military context,t his article reminded me of what I read about Vietnamese guerrillas:
Their infantry was not the lowest social rank, the least deserved occupation. Instead, the Ho Chi Minh trail porters and other porters were considered to be more lowly than the infantry guerrillas. This did apparently push the latter's morale and recruiting a bit.
Infantry and engineers compete in our Western forces for the reputation of the least desirable wartime occupation. Infantry does so because of its traditionally high casualty rate (mildly covered up by the decentralised glorification of "operators" etc in entertainment since the 90's). Engineers do so because of their hard work - and in countries such as Germany because of their high casualty rate as well (some, but not all, armies employ engineers as combat troops for deliberate attacks and emergencies).
This can be extended to all things, of course. An the it would become obvious that paying much attention to errorists is stupid anyway - even without acknowledging that getting attention is their business.
Why poor people support tax breaks for the rich?
Sociology/psychology experiments and research results are often very interesting and illuminating.
In the military context,t his article reminded me of what I read about Vietnamese guerrillas:
Their infantry was not the lowest social rank, the least deserved occupation. Instead, the Ho Chi Minh trail porters and other porters were considered to be more lowly than the infantry guerrillas. This did apparently push the latter's morale and recruiting a bit.
Infantry and engineers compete in our Western forces for the reputation of the least desirable wartime occupation. Infantry does so because of its traditionally high casualty rate (mildly covered up by the decentralised glorification of "operators" etc in entertainment since the 90's). Engineers do so because of their hard work - and in countries such as Germany because of their high casualty rate as well (some, but not all, armies employ engineers as combat troops for deliberate attacks and emergencies).
S O
edit: related Defence and Freedom text
.
David Graeber gave a lecture at LSE that deals with this issue. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/LSEPublicLecturesAndEvents/pdf/20060525-Graeber.pdf
ReplyDelete