Langley stripped bare ...or how they get it so wrong so often
"Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some dead economist."John Maynard Keynes
Just published by the CIA the 1999 edition of ...
"How many times have we encountered situations in which completely plausible premises, based on solid expertise, have been used to construct a logically valid forecast--with virtually unanimous agreement--that turned out to be dead wrong?" is what it says in the preface.
Elsewhere it says ...
"A central focus of this book is to illuminate the role of the observer in determining what is observed and how it is interpreted. People construct their own version of "reality" on the basis of information provided by the senses, but this sensory input is mediated by complex mental processes that determine which information is attended to, how it is organized, and the meaning attributed to it. What people perceive, how readily they perceive it, and how they process this information after receiving it are all strongly influenced by past experience, education, cultural values, role requirements, and organizational norms, as well as by the specifics of the information received. "
If you seek understanding look elsewhere .... based on their recent record .....
Strong possibility John Prescott was involved in writing it.
2 comments:
Look out for Heuer's "analysis of competing hypotheses" (chapter 8 last time I looked) and, perhaps, ask yourself what were the competing hypotheses around, say, the 7th July bombing?
Do you really imagine the Sphincter of the Yard can cope with analysing competing hypotheses?
His idea of a competing hypothesis is prolly, "Should I have chips with this ?" ... "But then those gherkins look ....."
Post a Comment