(U) The SIGINT Philesepher: The Fallacies Behind the Scenes FROM: Run Date: ?3f15f2?11 (U) At the end ef the day, much ef the werk dene in Ell] revelves areund getting infermatien te peeple whe need te make a decisien. I?Ciften that decisien invelves making an estimate as te hew prebable er plausible a given event is, and what implicatiens such a hypethetical event might have en eur natienal security. It seems straightferward eneugh. Hewever, at the eutset, there are undercurrents flewing threugh the minds ef every analyst, befere the fingers even hit the keybeard. The analyst might net even knew they're at werk, but they are. They're cegnitive fallacies. (U) There's ne blame te be handed eut -- these fallacies are hard-wired inte eur brains as a result ef theusands ef years ef evelutienary instinct and decisien-making te simply survive. In relative histeric terms, we've enly very recently shifted eur attentien frem such perfunctery tasks te mere cemplei-t avenues. Se, in the analysis we undertake in eur daily duties, here are a few biases te be aware ef, er perhaps attempt te change, en an individual and cellective level: The Texas Sharpsheeter Fallacy This legical fallacy is named fer a Tei-tan whe shet a hele in his barn, drew red and white circles areund it, and gathered the neighbers te brag abeut hew great a shet he was. While finding significance and cennectiens between peeple and events is what intelligence is all abeut -- the dewnside is that semetimes we stretch te make the case that relatienships er significance are present where they aren't. When we make the case first, the evidence we gather tends enly te reinferce it. The reverse sheuld be the rule: ge where the evidence leads, den't lead the evidence. The Gambler's Fallacy (U) Kenny Regers knew when te held 'em. Se sheuld we. Since we're hard-wired te leek fer patterns, we have a tendency te think ef numbers and events as being erderly, when they're anything but. Neurescientists call this phenemenen npephenie. Fer instance, if yeu're taking a turn at the reulette wheel, hew many hits en black will it take befere yeu think te yeurself, "We're due fer a Dr perhaps yeu think because a number en the wheel has ceme up se eften in the past, it's beund te be mere absent in the future? Pieneering cegnitive scientist Ames Tversky neted "l't's neturei te be inclined tewerd petterns when we ebserve ceuse end effect. But in neture, events rerer hnppen with equnl frequency." Events are rarely ever "due" te eccur, and the frequency ef an event in the past is net always an indicater ef its future appearance. The Sunk-{Zest Fallacy (U) Hew many times have yeu been watching a terrible mevie, enly te cenvince yeurself te stick it eut te the end and find eut what happens, since yeu've already invested tee much time er meney te simply walk away? This "gene tee far te step new" mentality is eur built-in mechamsm te help us allecate and ratien reseurces. Hewever, it can werk te eur detriment in prieritising and deciding which prejects er efferts are werth further esp enditure ef reseurces, regardless ef hew much has already been "sunk." As has been said befere, insamty is deing the same thing ever and ever and expecting different results. The Appeal te Prebability (U) Remember We fetched eur gas masks and stecked up en canned feed fer the impending deem that weuld ceme at the dawn ef the millennium. But alas, midnight came and went with nary a glebal meltdewn. That needless cemmetien might have been attributed te an eppelle prebebilitetem, where an event is theught te be pessible, and is hence erreneeusly determined te be plausible. In ether werds, it's the false assumptien that because semething can happen, it likely will happen. While preparatien is a neble geal -- bear in mind the actual prebabilities. There are hundreds ef ether fallacies that I ceuld teuch en, but the main peint is te engender awareness that eur decisien-making precesses are directly and uncenscieusly affected by namre's ewn hard-wiring. Keeping that fact in mind ceuld have pesitiye impacts en the way we cheese te execute eur missien. Whe knews, perhaps there are cegnitiye fallacies that have develep ed -- net resulting frem many generatiens ef human eyelutien -- but frem decades ef SIGINT eyelutien? It may be te censider the unintended effects en eur cellectiye precesses that such an eyelutien may have had, and be en guard against cegnitiye fallacies and legical biases ef all stripes, whether they be recent, er as eld as humanity itself. New -- back te my peker game with (U) Have theughts en this tepic? See a related Tapieca Pebble.