FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Discussions About Orson Scott Card » "Empire" parallel

   
Author Topic: "Empire" parallel
lynn johnson
Member
Member # 9620

 - posted      Profile for lynn johnson   Email lynn johnson         Edit/Delete Post 
This is an account by Philip Mead, who is a Ph.D. candidate at Ha'avad.
http://www.common-place.org/vol-08/no-01/talk/

He was asked to talk to a group of Army officers about why Thomas Gage failed to establish order and nip the revolution in the bud. I liked the fact that he learned from the officers. They appear to have more cognitive flexibility than he expected. In fact, reading between the lines, they are more flexible than Mead's professors. They seem both sincerely interested in learning and very sophisticated in their level of understanding.

I recommend it.

Posts: 121 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dkw
Member
Member # 3264

 - posted      Profile for dkw   Email dkw         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by lynn johnson:
In fact, reading between the lines, they are more flexible than Mead's professors.


You'd have to read pretty far between the lines to get that, since he doesn't mention his professors at all. The only line I can see that you might be refering to is when he says that some of his colleagues "have expressed frustration and even anger at the comparison between the Sons of Liberty and terrorist cells." Which I can believe, since any time I've seen or heard such a comparison made the writer/speaker is immediately accused of being "on the side of the terrorists."

It is a good article, though, thanks for posting it.

Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not sure I get the Empire parallel. Could you explain?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Nikisknight
Member
Member # 8918

 - posted      Profile for Nikisknight   Email Nikisknight         Edit/Delete Post 
In Empire there was a professor who influenced the smart young army officer at the beginning of the book.
Forgive my lack of names, I only read that one once.

Posts: 105 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lynn johnson
Member
Member # 9620

 - posted      Profile for lynn johnson   Email lynn johnson         Edit/Delete Post 
Well, it is a bit of a turnaround, but here U.S. Army officers influence a smart young grad student at Harvard. And it speaks to the cross-fertilization that should go on.

There is currently a little debate going on about whether psychologists and anthropologists should "help" the Army. Psychologists try to create interrogation techniques that break down defenses but not people. Anti-torture, if you will. The antis say we shrinks should never have anything to do with the military because it all leads to torture.

Anthropologists are helping the Army in Afghanistan to communicate more meaningfully with the locals. So I enjoy seeing reports of cooperation between social science and the military. I have experience with both.

lj

Posts: 121 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
antis say we shrinks should never have anything to do with the military because it all leads to torture.
That doesn't sound like the statements I have been hearing from that side. Where are you getting that from?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lynn johnson
Member
Member # 9620

 - posted      Profile for lynn johnson   Email lynn johnson         Edit/Delete Post 
Ken Pope has been sending me (via a subscription, not me personally) stuff, he has a huge vault of the pro-cons of psychologists helping interrogation. The pros say shrinks help rein in the idiots who torture and won't use the persuasive methods. The cons seem to say we cannot have anything to do with these interrogations, that Guantanamo is a place where we are torturing the prisoners and we must boycott the military because of it. They wanted APA to pass a resolution that psychologists could not serve in a military setting where there would be interrogation.

At least that is how I am misreading it, as the po-mos would say.
lj

Posts: 121 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
lynn,
Here's a quote from the resolution (full text here) - which is similar to ones passed by the AMA and American Psychiatric Association:
quote:
Whereas, the American Psychological Association (APA), as an accredited NGO at the UN, is
committed to the spirit, purposes, and principles of the UN and other relevant UN instruments;

Whereas, in 2006, the APA Resolution Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment reaffirmed the APA's long-standing commitment to basic human rights
including its position against torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or cruel,
inhuman, or degrading punishment;

Whereas, in 2006, the APA Resolution Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
Treatment affirmed that psychologists regardless of their roles, shall not knowingly engage in,
tolerate, direct, support, advise, or offer training in torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment; that psychologists shall not provide knowingly any research, instruments, or knowledge that facilitates the practice of torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment; that psychologists shall not knowingly participate in any procedure in which torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment is used or threatened;

Whereas, in 2006, the APA Resolution Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading
Treatment affirmed that should torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or cruel,
inhuman, or degrading punishment evolve during a procedure where a psychologist is present,
the psychologist shall attempt to intervene to stop such behavior, and failing that exit the
procedure; and that psychologists shall be alert to acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment or cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment and have an ethical
responsibility to report these acts to the appropriate authorities;.
Whereas, the US government in the Military Commissions Bill of 2006 has declared that certain
people held at detention centers are “enemy combatants” and as such may not be guaranteed
human rights protections, particularly in relation to due process, and humane interrogation
techniques, as established under the Geneva Conventions and other UN documents, treaties,
conventions, and protocols that protect the human rights of people without exception.
Whereas, current interrogation methods at U.S. centers holding “enemy combatants” may
include techniques defined as torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or
punishment under the 2006 APA Resolution Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
Whereas, psychologists working in U.S. detention centers for foreign detainees are placed at risk
(ethically and psychologically), particularly in relation to involvement in interrogations
interpreted as legal under U.S. law but inclusive of torture and other cruel, inhuman, or
degrading treatment or punishment as defined under international law and the 2006 APA
Resolution Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;

Therefore, Be it resolved that APA adopts this resolution calling for a moratorium on all
psychologist involvement, either direct or indirect, in any interrogations at U.S. detention centers for foreign detainees. This moratorium is necessary as detainees may be currently denied protections outlined under the Geneva Conventions and interrogations techniques in violation of the 2006 APA Resolution Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment may be considered acceptable practice according to the Military Commissions Bill of 2006;

The reasoning, as I understand it, is not that anything the military does is going to lead to torture, but rather that there exists a very strong likelihood and no real safeguards against that we currently are torturing people based on the definition that the APA accepts. It is not a general condemnation, but rather an objection to a specific situation.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lynn johnson
Member
Member # 9620

 - posted      Profile for lynn johnson   Email lynn johnson         Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, MrSquicky. Here is something Ken Pope sent out today, an article by Mary Pipher, who represents the "don't have anything to do with it" school. Note that she is opposing the APA with this business of returning the award.

Pope's archive is here:
http://kspope.com/interrogation/index.php

She seems to take the position that anything we do to make interrogation more effective (and more humane) is wrong, since it is not in the terrorist's interests to tell us what he knows.

I am very suspicious of Dr. Pipher's position. I think that psychologists can contribute and that the APA resolution that you kindly provided goes too far.

DR Pipher says:
I am a psychologist and writer in Lincoln, Nebraska. All of my adult life, I have worked for human rights organizations. In 1965, when I was
17-years-old, I marched for de-segregation in Kansas City. As a therapist, I have spent my career repairing the psychic damage of traumatized people, whether they be rape or assault victims, family members of murder victims, or refugees and asylum seekers. I have worked with torture victims since the 1980's and I know that many of
them are innocent of any crime whatsoever and all of them suffer irreparable damage to their lives.

In August of 2007 I made the difficult decision to return my 2006 Presidential Citation, awarded to me by then President of the American Psychological Association, Dr. Gerald Koocher. I was deeply
appreciative of this honor and proud to be a member of the APA. Over the years I have enjoyed an excellent relationship with this organization.
I received my first Presidential Citation in 1998 from Dr. Martin Seligman and have been the keynote speaker at the APA's national convention. With this action, I feel as if I am betraying a good friend.

For the past few years, I have been troubled by various media and Department of Defense reports that psychologists have designed protocols and trained and supervised interrogators in the use of sophisticated methods for breaking the human spirit and destroying mental functioning.
When this August, at the APA's annual convention, members passed Substitute Motion Three instead of a ban on psychologists' involvement in military interrogations, I felt I needed to act.

Substitute Motion Three looks fine on the surface, but the devil is in the details, and the devil always dresses in the tuxedo of lofty rhetoric. While it has been argued that this resolution bars
psychologists' participation in the CIA's enhanced interrogation program, the motion did not place a moratorium on psychologists' involvement in all national security facilities that operate outside the law. This lack of firmness puts our profession at odds with the Geneva Conventions, Red Cross standards, Department of Defense guidelines, The
U. N. Declaration of Human Rights, and the ethical codes of the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association. In ratifying this document, the APA has made a terrible mistake.

With sorrow, I have concluded that the United States government is committing war crimes with the help of individual psychologists and our
professional organization. Without psychologists' presence to lend legitimacy to these interrogations, our government would find its
position utterly indefensible. The behavior of psychologists on interrogation teams violates our own Code of Ethics, in which we pledge to respect the humanity of all people. As psychologists, we vow to do no harm.

I learned this lesson from my mother, Dr. Avis, who was a small town doctor in rural Nebraska in the 1950's. She often quoted Hippocrates
remark, "Make a habit of two things, to help, or at least, to do no harm." She took her Hippocratic vows seriously. Two of them I remember specifically, "Never do anyone harm for someone else's interest." And, "Keep the welfare of your patient as your highest priority." My mother
gave free medical care to any one who showed up at our house or her office. Sometimes she was paid in smoked hams and sweet corn. She also taught me this, "Morality isn't pretty words; morality is action." I hope I am honoring my mother's values with my decision.

When any of us are degraded, all of human life is degraded. This is not just about the prisoners; it is about who we are as people. Once we decide certain people are beyond the pale and give them less respect than we would want for ourselves if our situations were reversed, we make we ourselves vulnerable to also being treated as less than human.

I know that the return of my Presidential Citation is of small import, but it is what I can do to disassociate myself from what I consider to
be a heinous policy. My belief is that psychology should be solely a helping profession. When we become anything else, we destroy ourselves.

I acted as a matter of conscience and in the hopes that the APA will reconsider its current position. We have long been an organization that respects human rights and promotes tolerance, kindness, and peace. It is my deepest hope that the APA will reclaim its reputation as a beacon of integrity and compassion.

END of quote

Posts: 121 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
She seems to take the position that anything we do to make interrogation more effective (and more humane) is wrong, since it is not in the terrorist's interests to tell us what he knows.
Could you show me where you are getting this from? I don't see that anywhere in her statements.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
String
Member
Member # 6435

 - posted      Profile for String   Email String         Edit/Delete Post 
Gotta agree with MrSquicky.

Don't you just love how the only media attention 'torture' gets is water-boarding. I don't know about you but I'm scared that whats being called interrogation may actually just be experiments on how best to break the human mind.

I don't throw words like this around, but, man, i don't want to sound like a loony, but, be careful. "gird up the loins of your mind". who knows what might be learned from those experiments and how they might be used.

OK I'm getting myself all worked up,lol I'm going to go watch something on T.V.


!!!!!!!

Posts: 278 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lynn johnson
Member
Member # 9620

 - posted      Profile for lynn johnson   Email lynn johnson         Edit/Delete Post 
Mr Squicky, she says "For the past few years, I have been troubled by various media and Department of Defense reports that psychologists have designed protocols and trained and supervised interrogators in the use of sophisticated methods for breaking the human spirit and destroying mental functioning." When I asked what those were, another psychologist said it was the SERE training at Ft. Bragg, where they innoculate pilots and special forces soldiers who might get captured. It is an evasion / escape school, and at one point, they capture you and put you through moke interrogation. I had a long discussion once with a SERE psychologist. What she says is simply nonsense. She feels strongly, but that doesn't redeem her. It is still nonsense.

In another document (I don't have on this computer) Pipher specifically said psychologists who worked on SERE were unethical. She said that the Army was breaking the spirits and minds of those in SERE. Of course, I had to reply: There are few people in the Army who would be so stupid as to try to damage some of our best troops.

Interrogation is a vital military activity. We need to know how to do it ethically and effectively. Torture is not useful because you get unreliable data, and it corrupts the people who do it. Bad all around. But sophisticated techniques increase our safety and do not harm those who are interrogated. I am not an expert on this, just a bystander, but it seems passing strange that people like Pipher and others that Ken Pope references are so worked up about this.

String, the point is not to "break the human mind" whatever that might mean. In fact, it doesn't mean anything. Read Geoff Norman's _Bouncing Back_. The NVA tried to break the human mind and failed. Effective interrogation means to enlighten the enemy so they wish to tell you. Maybe you have watched too much TV.

Other than that, I have no strong opinions.

Posts: 121 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
String
Member
Member # 6435

 - posted      Profile for String   Email String         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by lynn johnson:

String, the point is not to "break the human mind" whatever that might mean. In fact, it doesn't mean anything. Read Geoff Norman's _Bouncing Back_. The NVA tried to break the human mind and failed. Effective interrogation means to enlighten the enemy so they wish to tell you. Maybe you have watched too much TV.


Really? It doesn't mean anything? really? Psychological damage occurring from abuse doesn't exist? Stockholm's syndrome is a myth?

brainwashing?

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-19920301-000034.html

How about having memories planted in your head that you actually believe are yours?

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/pto-19930701-000006.html

I'll read that book, but I'm fairly certain that the human mind is not invincible. Maybe your mind can't be broken. It's clear it already doesn't really want to work.

Posts: 278 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
lynn johnson
Member
Member # 9620

 - posted      Profile for lynn johnson   Email lynn johnson         Edit/Delete Post 
During Viet Nam, Special Forces troops in the worst fighting had very low incidence of PTSD, whereas less well prepared soldiers under far less stress had higher rates. What that means is that it is quite possible to innoculate people against damage. That's what the SERE training accomplishes, and I am distressed that Dr. Pipher couldn't see that.

String, you still miss the point. Effective interrogation doesn't use torture. And people who have been tortured - I have met them - aren't necessarily "broken." It is disrespectful to human potential to see them as so. It is important to not conflate interrogation and torture. To fail to do so cheapens discourse. For that matter, so do gratituous insults, betraying a thinking style that is controlled not by infomation but by emotion.

False memories are a different thread. New research on brain scan actually yields differences in brain processing between real and false memories. Interesting but not relevant to interrogation. After all, what the interrogator wants is valid information. Why would any rational person inculcate false memories? Irrelevant.

Stockholm syndrome is also a different thread, and quite irrelevant. And in neither case is a person's mind "broken." All people believe irrational and dysfunctional things at times. Their minds aren't broken, and they function fairly well in many areas of life.

For an interesting take on this business of broken minds:
http://www.ulmus.net/ace/csmith/behindjetcouch.html

Posts: 121 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
lynn,
Before I address your latest posts, can you tell me if you think what you posted substantiated what you claimed before:
quote:
She seems to take the position that anything we do to make interrogation more effective (and more humane) is wrong, since it is not in the terrorist's interests to tell us what he knows.
It doesn't appear to me that they do and are instead new accusations.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
String
Member
Member # 6435

 - posted      Profile for String   Email String         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by lynn johnson:
During Viet Nam, Special Forces troops in the worst fighting had very low incidence of PTSD, whereas less well prepared soldiers under far less stress had higher rates. What that means is that it is quite possible to innoculate people against damage. That's what the SERE training accomplishes, and I am distressed that Dr. Pipher couldn't see that.

String, you still miss the point. Effective interrogation doesn't use torture. And people who have been tortured - I have met them - aren't necessarily "broken." It is disrespectful to human potential to see them as so. It is important to not conflate interrogation and torture. To fail to do so cheapens discourse. For that matter, so do gratituous insults, betraying a thinking style that is controlled not by infomation but by emotion.

False memories are a different thread. New research on brain scan actually yields differences in brain processing between real and false memories. Interesting but not relevant to interrogation. After all, what the interrogator wants is valid information. Why would any rational person inculcate false memories? Irrelevant.

Stockholm syndrome is also a different thread, and quite irrelevant. And in neither case is a person's mind "broken." All people believe irrational and dysfunctional things at times. Their minds aren't broken, and they function fairly well in many areas of life.

For an interesting take on this business of broken minds:
http://www.ulmus.net/ace/csmith/behindjetcouch.html

Sorry to jump at ya like that, I've been kind of edgy lately, got a lot going on.

What I'm trying to say though is that I think that saying that breaking the human mind doesn't mean anything, seemed to me like you said it was impossible, or very improbable. All I'm saying is that that might be a little hasty, there's alot more data to be compiled on that, and that human brain can probably be cracked if enough research was done to figure out how. again, sorry for being crabby. [Smile]

Posts: 278 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MrSquicky
Member
Member # 1802

 - posted      Profile for MrSquicky   Email MrSquicky         Edit/Delete Post 
*bump* because it seems like lynn is back.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2