Asking appropriate strategic questions


Strategic Implications of 12 Unasked Questions in Response to Disaster (Part #5)


[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]


One possibility is by "question substitution", as argued by Daniel Kahneman (Answering An Easier Question, In: Thinking Fast and Slow, 2011). In response to a complex "hard" question regarding difficult problems, this involves finding a related question which it is easier to solve. He describes the substitute as a "heuristic question". He addresses to some degree whether this substituted question offers useful insights into the difficult question. A concern is obviously whether the substitution obscures the original question, which then remains "unasked", whilst giving some measure of satisfaction through addressing the easier one

The art of interrogation -- notably as applied to any terrorist suspect --  then elicits a semblance of orderly "explanation" to the satisfaction of the interrogators, who may well feel no need to question their own methodology and the framing of reality it ensures. As with science more generally, however, its methods are vulnerable to arguments such as the following articulated by Norman Campbell:

... we accomplish the apparently miraculous feat of reducing a chaotic world to order because we carefully confine our attention and our efforts only to those portions which we find can be ordered (The Foundations of Science, 1920)

For Elaine Scarr (Thinking in an Emergency, 2011):

The seduction against thinking in an emergency comes... from two sources: first, from a false opposition between thinking and acting; second, from a plausible (but in the end, false) opposition between thinking and rapid action. Now a third, equally potent, form of seduction becomes visible: the acts of thinking that go on in emergencies are not recognized by us as acts of thinking. We misrecognize them More precisely, we correctly recognize the presence of habits in these mental acts but incorrectly conclude that habit is incompatible with, or empty of, thought. We are therefore willing to set these mental acts aside. Our derisive attitude toward habit prevents us from seeing the form of thinking embedded in these cognitive acts and hence makes us willing to give up, or set aside, the most powerful mental tools that stand ready to assist us. (pp. 14-15)

It could be argued that a disaster is effectively a natural memorial to an asked question. This condition of systemic neglect is likely to be compounded by the process famously identified by George Santayana: Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Better questions: Curiously Scarr, in her focus on habit, fails to discuss the role of questioning, and asking the right question. This is a theme increasingly evoked as a means of eliciting a fruitful mode of action (Stephen Wunker, Asking the Right Question, Forbes, 15 December 2012; Michael Hyatt, The Power of Asking the Right Question, 18 January 2012; Hal Gregersen, How to Ask the Right Question, 3 April 2013; Irene Leonard, The Art of Effective Questioning: asking the right question for the desired result; Chris Legard, Asking the Right Question, BBC Word of Mouth, 17 July 2012; M. Neil Browne and Stuart M. Keeley, Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking, 2011).

What then are "better questions", as variously asked (Norah Morgan and Juliana Saxton, Asking Better Questions, 2006; William F. McComas and Linda Abraham, Asking More Effective Questions, CET; Jeremy Statton, How to Ask Better Questions; Steven Heller, The Quest to Ask Better Questions, The Atlantic, 3 May 2012; Warren Berger, A More Beautiful Question; Mary Thomas Farrar, Asking Better Questions, The Reading Teacher, 1984). How does this process recognize any "unasked question"?

It could then be asked how such insights could have been better applied with respect to the strategy of intervention in Afghanistan. A perceptive question was asked in that connection by Ziauddin Sardar and Merryl Wyn Davies (Why Do People Hate America? 2002) -- an approach explored by others (Donald Cuccioletta, Why do they hate US? Unilateralism and the rise of anti-Americanism, Inroads: A Journal of Opinion, 1 January 2004). The challenge for the individual or group concerned, in asking such perceptive questions, can be usefully compared to the challenge of body odour. Put bluntly: One "stinks" more than one thinks. This can even be clearly observed in the relationships between leaders of the most progressive movements, as separately discussed (Epistemological Challenge of Cognitive Body Odour: exploring the underside of dialogue, 2006).

Public relations consultants have long responded to recognition that any "body corporate" may well suffer from an odour problem -- however the distinction is to be made metaphorically between "body odour", "halitosis", and "flatulence" (Obama's Economic Spin: a new pony or manure stink? Conservative Read, 2012; The stench of tobacco industry dirty linen, Tobacco Control, 2000; Greed, spin and bonuses: why our banks stink, The Times, 14 March 2013; By Any Other Name, Goldman's Spin of the Revolving Door Would Still Stink, CBS News, 19 August 2011). The metaphor may be fruitfully associated with current issues (Sins of Hot Air Emission, Omission, Commission and Promission: the political challenge of responding to global crises, 2009).

A contrasting challenge to perceptiveness is that associated with happiness -- the much-cited preoccupation with "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" in the United States Declaration of Independence, and that of Bhutan with respect to gross national happiness. There is increasing concern that the quality of happiness experienced is not what might be hoped. Much effort is put into public relations and "spin" to disguise both how one's initiatives "stink" to others and to disguise the unease with regard to the sense of happiness. The associated dilemma is well explored with respect to the USA in a book variously titled by Barbara Ehrenreich (Bright-sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America, 2009; Smile Or Die: How Positive Thinking Fooled America and the World, 2010).

The array of so-called "WH-questions" might then be applied to both cases as follows:

Contrasting "stinkiness" with "happiness"
"Stinkiness"
(think: Guantanamo Bay, targetted assassination,
and innocent civilians killed by drone strikes)
"Happiness"
(think: Life, Liberty,
and the Pursuit of Happiness)
  • To whom does one stink?
  • When does one stink?
  • Where does one stink?
  • What is it that stinks?
  • Which stink bothers others most?
  • Why does one stink -- and does it matter?
  • How to discover the nature of the stink
    with which one is associated in the eyes of so many?
  • With whom is one happy?
  • When is one happy?
  • Where is one happy?
  • What is it that makes one happy?
  • Which form of happiness is most attractive?
  • Why does achieving happiness matter?
  • How to discover the nature of the happiness
    to which so many aspire?
Does the Statue of Liberty have a body odour problem?
Or, as with garlic eating cultures, is it just a question of getting used to it,
growing to like it, and ignoring the effect on others?

Why do web facilities and encyclopedias focus on providing answers -- precluding recognition of questions? Why is there no open source equivalent to Wikipedia -- for questions held to be as yet unanswered? The World Question Center of the Edge Foundation offers one approach -- through questioning its members. Another has been the generation of questions implicit in the focus of international constituencies (Generating a Million Questions from UIA Databases: Problems, Strategies, Values, 2006).


[Parts: First | Prev | Next | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]