<<
The Ubiquity of Dishonesty
Dr Karl H. Wolf
[The following article first appeared in four parts of Wolf's Anti-Entropy Column in the AGSO News of the Australian Geological Survey Organisation, Canberra, ACT, during May to November 1993. Inasmuch as dishonesty is very much related to whistleblowing, it is offered here in totality although slightly modified form.]
Dishonesty, cheating, lying, perks, pilfering, manipulation, fraud, dis/misinformation, verballing, propaganda, deceit, falsehood, hypocrisy, smear campaign, vilification, hoax, bluff, half-truth, whitewashing, inexactitude – whatever term is preferred – they are all-pervasive, ever present, everywhere: used by the highly-and lowly-placed in society and potentially in all job environments. Don’t let the word "ubiquity" mislead or fool you: certainly the majority of people are honest, but it is the small dishonest percentage that can cause havoc to any individual and the institution; this conclusion is based on hard facts, not paranoia! There is a "rotten apple" in just about every barrel, sorry to say. Much research information is available to support this, as illustrated below.
Emotionally blunted people accept this debilitating situation without much fuss, and join the "group" or "system" for self-preservation and self-defence – or to enjoy the power game. Like death and taxes, the above phenomena are unavoidable, so it seems. Many of us don’t even fight for honesty any longer – "we don’t want to or are scared to get involved"! Of course, there are honest people, perhaps even in the majority, but just like the news media (with exceptions increasing) we are not interested in honesty for the moment; thus, let the dishonest have the stage in this article so we can better understand their milieux of operation.
All the above human deleterious personalities or social traits – yes, they may even be psychological characteristics – have been extensively studied, recorded, and debated throughout history. Consequently, many books and articles are available, which can serve as guidelines and as background material, because the above negative phenomena ought to be deliberated early in everyone’s education to either prevent them, or to make them obvious, easy to identify, and easy to counterbalance by positive measures or, when necessary, "brutally" expose them. Whistleblowers come in!
The human cost – not to mention the financial one – to both the younger and older generations, of a seemingly pervasive dishonesty in business, politics, religion (look at the past and present wars), and private life is really immeasurable. What role-models or heroes do the young girls and boys (or teenagers, let alone the above-30 years olds) have to emulate?! The general feeling is that one has to "join the cheats and manipulators" to survive, not to stand out, flow with the trend, to be one of the group, support the status quo. The so-called "unions" don’t help in many instances either, as too often they look after their "boys" while other members are bypassed (I know from several personal experiences).
Here are some highly recommended publications by philosophers, historians, sociologists, and psychologists for the ordinary citizen, politician, diplomat, businessperson, manager, among others, to get a feeling for this ubiquity of dishonesty.
The Penguin Book of Lies by P. Kerr is a historical anthology of cases or anecdotes of lies, disinformation, inexactitudes, etc., starting several centuries ago with Samson and Delilah, and Plato’s, Cicero’s and St. Augustine’s untruth; considering dozens of lies pertaining to the Jewish Talmund, the Bible, King Canute, Duke Williams of Normandy, Thomas Aquinas, Christopher Columbus, Machiavelli, Henry VIII, Martin Luther, Francis Bacon, Aldous Huxley, Casanova, Voltaire, Sigmund Freud; to modern dishonesties of various types, intensities, and consequences in many social settings as, for example, perpetrated or deliberated by Mark Twain, Kipling, T. E. Lawrence, Hitler, G. B. Shaw, Churchill, George Orwell, Kim Philby, and many others. A new anthology no doubt is required to include the lies of many "celebrities". Each nation, country, culture, race, or religion could write its own anthology of lies.
The two books by S. Bok, Lying – Moral Choice in Public and Private Life, 1978, Vintage Books/Random House, New York; and Secrets – On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation, 1982, Pantheon Books, New York, must be read by every seriously minded person when dealing with the many potential negative issues, including whitewashing or withholding information on government spending, pollution, fraud, illegal financial dealings, etc.
The classical (over 20 reprints since 1930) Straight and Crooked Thinking by R. H. Thouless is one of numerous books offering methods to identify and overcome thirty-eight dishonest tricks encountered in all walks of life. Every whistleblower must be familiar with the d
Every whistleblower must be familiar with the dirty illogical twists of the mind – classical rhetoric ought to be taught to all secondary and tertiary students!
Dishonesty of various persuasions of many intellectuals (academics, psychologists, sociologists, scientists, economists, writers/authors, journalists, historians, etc.) as well as politicians, executives, bureaucrats, (no one has a monopoly on lying) has been discussed in some of the following exemplary books: Intellectuals by J. Johnson, 1988, Penguin Books; The Trial of the Expert by I. R. Freckelton, 1987, Oxford University Press; The Subjective Side of Science – a Philosophical Inquiry into the Psychology of the Apollo Moon Scientists by I. I. Mitroff, 1974, Elsevier; A Difficult Balance – Editorial Peer-Review by S. Lock, 1985, Nuffield Trust, London; The Corrupted Sciences – Challenging the Myths of Modern Science by A. Arnold, 1992, Paladin, London;
Betrayers of the Truth by W. Broad and N. Wade, 1985, Oxford University Press; The Bias of Science by B. Martin, 1979, SSRS, Canberra, ACT; Intellectual Suppression edited by B. Martin et al., 1986, Angus and Robertson, Sydney; Telling Lies For God: Reason v Creationism by I. Plimer, 1994, Random House Australia; The Peter Pyramid by L. J. Peter, 1986, Unwin, London; The First Casualty – the War Correspondent as Hero, Propagandist, and Myth Maker by P. Knightly, 1975/89, Pan Books; Cheats at Work – an Anthropology of Workplace Crime by G. Mars, 1982, Unwin Paperbacks, London; Sabotage in Industry by P. Dubois, 1979, Penguin, England; Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics and Marriage by P. Ekman, 1992, W. W. Norton and Company, New York, London; three books by Noam Chomsky: Deterring Democracy, 1992, Vintage London; Necessary Illusions – Thought Control in Democratic Societies, Pluto Press, London;
and Manufacturing Consent – Political Economy of Mass Media (co-authored by Edward S. Herman), 1988, Pantheon Books, New York; Orwell’s Message – 1984 and the Present by G. Woodcock, 1984, Harbour Publishing, Canada; Brave New World Revisited by A. Huxley, 1958/83, Triad/Panther, London; and The Invention of Tradition by E. Hobsbawm and T. Ranger, 1983/92, Cambridge University Press; Dangerous Persuaders: An Expose of Gurus, by L. Samways, 1994, Penguin Books; among numerous others.
Closer to our home base, several news media articles have discussed lying; among them "Integrity and ruined lives – whistleblowers!" by Bill Mellor, Time Australia, Oct. 21, 1991, No. 42, 46-51; "Why pollies have to tell porkies" by B. Crouch, Sunday Telegraph, June 9, 1991, p. 42; and "Lying – the unpleasant truth" by Bob Beale, Good Weekend in Sydney Morning Herald, July 15, 1988, 20-24.
The above publications seem to refer to a number of professional groups, but only infrequently to managers,
executives, supervisors, and such. Although literally hundreds of books exist on how to become and be effective as one of these so-called "elite" members of society, there are in contrast only a relatively few publications available on their "calculated and/or inadvertent misdeeds, misconducts and malpractices" (indeed, one seldom sees the latter term applied, except to medical practitioners, and then unfairly in many cases!). (However, not to forget, anyone can make an honest, genuine error; but then the question arises as to whether s/he is willing to admit it and rectify the situation.)
Considering the many "know-how" books available to the various professions: when deleterious practices are nearly always systematically ignored, all one has to do is imagine just the opposite of the advice given and rules suggested to be a successful professional, and a picture is obtained as to what a "leader" can do to cause damage and wreck the work environment. In this context, one absolutely
must read at least Managers and Magic by G. Cleverley, 1971, Penguin, England; Management and Machiavelli – Power and Authority in Business Life by A. Jay, 1967/87, Hutchinson, London; and The Rise and Fall of the British Manager by A. Mant, 1977, Pan, London.
The provocative book on Intellectuals by Johnson (1988) examined the moral and judgemental credentials of academics, researchers, and other "thinkers" as to their respective truths; how they apply publicly-declared principles to their private lives (e.g. attitude to money; treatment of spouses, children, friends, colleagues) – it’s a rogues’ gallery! Considered are only those from the humanities (e.g. Shelley, Ibsen, Tolstoy, Hemingway, Russell, Mailer), so that other books of similar incisive analyses are required of all other disciplines or professions.
If some of the "educated" are such self-deceiving liars/cheats and manipulators, what hope is there that the "uneducated proletarians" will stick to facts/truths, assuming
that they can think properly in the first place?! (Before you, dear reader, develop froth of outrage on your lips, remember again: we are speaking of the minority in society – it may exclude you.)
For example, the relationships among associates in universities can indeed be "deadly". One professor shot dead four of his colleagues, because for years he was unsuccessful in attempts to expose corruption; he said killing them was the only way to finally get results! (See "Concordia’s Trials" and "Death in a classroom", in Canada’s McClean Magazine, Sept. 7 and Nov. 9, 1992.) His motto, no doubt: "Beware the fury of a patient man" by John Dryden. Below, just a few details on some of the books listed above.
Freckelton’s (an Australian) (1987) The Trial of Experts, in the forensic context, ought to be studied by every educated person: he considered numerous scientific and non-scientific disciplines’ experts who have provided "interpretations" in court. Many case histories demonstrate
that truth is too frequently damaged or shelved for more immediate personal gratifications, e.g. power, money, success. See the Lindy Chamberlain case, among others.
Mitroff’s (1974) Subjective Side of Science is a philosophical inquiry into the psychology of one group of researchers; a real eye opener! (Other books and articles on the same topic are available.) The results of this detailed (with statistical data) sociological investigation are applicable, I dare say, to any group. (Having worked/lived in several countries in numerous types of professional, academic, etc., environments, I speak with authority!) You ought to read the opinions scientists have of their associates, when asked during the sociological interviews! For example: "He/she is nothing but a f…g bastard/bitch", "incompetent SOB", etc. The scientific method is not applicable to emotional thinking, it is clearly apparent! Likewise, you ought to have listened to the occasional crap when a university group
discusses tenure and promotions of colleagues or the hiring of new staff! Younger staff are denied tenure merely because "we don’t give tenure to first-applicants independent of their success in teaching and research because that would spoil them"! In two cases I personally know of, it was decided that a prospective new scientist was unwelcome, because he had published too much (i.e. being a highly motivated eager beaver), and thus would upset the status quo of the "older tenured staff".
The Myths of the Corrupted Sciences is dealt with by Arnold (1992) (I reviewed the book in the Department of Primary Industry and Energy’s [DPIE] The Bulletin, No. 22/93, June 1993, p. 5). Of course, many scientists may not agree with his analyses, but I have not seen a refutation. Arnold quite harshly analysed claims made by researchers in regard to numerous theories (read "hypotheses"), methods, and techniques utilised to solve problems and in predicting (and postdating in geology) future and past
events. (The "predictive business" is big business, and is being studied by numerous experts/specialists to determine limitations as well as applicabilities. See Predicting the Future: an Introduction to the Theory of Forecasting by N. Rescher, 1998, State University of New York Press, among several recent books. I, too, have analysed prediction in several publications to identify misjudgments and wrong claims, to put it euphemistically.)
The big-bang scenario, chaos theory, fractals, uncertainty principle, expert systems, etc., are debunked by Arnold’s revolutionary method. I believe that he is correct in many instances, but should have toned down his attack a bit in others, because some of these concepts and hypotheses have unequivocally positively assisted in the understanding of numerous natural phenomena. Arnold pointed out that expert systems have not found one ore deposit or oil pool! Correct. Long-time weather forecasting is impossible. Correct – but depends on many
variables and the degree of accuracy demanded; "probability" will get us out of any dilemma! And so forth. Arnold is not a crackpot or pseudo-or anti-scientist (not like the creationists), so read his argumentation on time, randomness, chance, order, cause-effect, computer modelling, creativity, determinism, feedback, geometry/mathematics/statistics and probability, information theory, learning, logic, objectivity/subjectivity, etc. His scepticism is refreshing for any whistleblower – especially highly educated/trained ones in science/technology who attempt to analyse futurology, for example. In this context, one should read also his book Winners and Other Losers in Peace and War (a bit of a misnomer as the book is broadly applicable).
Arnold does not deal with deliberate dishonesty in most instances, as did Martin’s (1979) The Bias of Science – that is taken care of by, among many others, Broad and Wade (1985) in Betrayers of Truth, i.e. Fraud or Deceit.
What about the
"human/humanitarian" aspects of science and scientists as well as of those who claim to "lead", "guide" or "managerially administer" them (whether they were former scientists or other bods transferred into bureaucracies)? Let me briefly consider only two (one specific, the other more general) of the dozens of books applicable here: Martin et al’s (eds, 1986) Intellectual Suppression and Peter’s (1986) famous The Peter Pyramid.
I must repeat here: those who really wish to know about the research or "professional" world’s dark side (and you may become a victim, if you live merely by sticking your neck into the proverbial sand of ignorance) absolutely must read Martin’s summary on suppression in many social environments: government bureaucracies, universities, research institutions, grant-providing bodies, industry/companies. It reads like a good thriller (but is factual). Some cases are more like horror stories: the "intellectuals" (pseudo-?) do know how to commit "mental murder"
sometimes. This expression was used in one of the Canadian University Professors Association’s publications in which harassment was described – some leading to suicides, for instance. Although there may be only one-in-a-thousand rotten apples, it’s that lone dishonest person who can cause sufficient damage to the reputation of the rest.
Any potential or active whistleblower – as well as those fighting harassment, bullying, wrongful dismissal, and the likes (see Quentin Dempster’s Whistleblower, ABC Book, reviewed in The Whistle Newsletter of March 1998, p 6-7) – must read Martin’s book and his other publications, because of the special or expert language (and thus terminology/nomenclature) involved in combating suppression and other deleterious phenomena. So much written material passes between the opposing parties during disputes, that one must be familiar with the special language developed over the years.
Peter is world-renowned for several books, among which The Peter
Principal deals with the individual eventually reaching a "level of incompetence". However, The Peter Pyramid describes the institution, bureaucracy, company, etc. (i.e. groups) reaching this level. Examining the past and recent history of our government’s institutions, there are many that unequivocally had/have reached this level of non-performance. Thanks to certain politicians, at least some of these institutions have been forced to pull up their proverbial socks, although "improvement" has sometimes gone too far, so that the employees are now overworked and the supporting "streamlined" infrastructures is ineffective. There are not enough whistleblowers in the government! Media ought to have ways to encourage and tap potential whistleblowers by offering special telephone numbers, for instance. Yet, the recent Sunday two-part program on the Australian Tax System indicates that many latent whistleblowers (sleepers?) do exist, waiting to have a chance to rectify the ill doings of their
institution.
The First Casualty by Knightly offers many instances from earlier and recent wars where correspondents were heroes, but too frequently had to act as propagandists and myth makers (i.e. were compelled to concoct dis/misinformation for their governments, or simply could write nothing about specific events, even if the enemy did not gain a strategic advantage; e.g. when disasters seem to be unpalatable to one’s own home-based population). Thus, their professional vows or ethical conducts were tempered with or compromised, often voluntarily. Under hot-war conditions, this seems "reasonable", but there are many so-called "undeclared civil wars" of the past and at present, where correspondents/journalists’ lies would be unforgivable and could even prolong the miseries. Just to be sure: even under normal democratic conditions, as here in Australia, some so-called journalists employed by institutions have withheld vital information and/or lied.
The books by Mars (1982)
Cheats at Work and by Dubois (1979) Sabotage in Industry deal with work-place crime (see my book-reviews in the DPIE’s The Bulletin, Nos 23/93 and 25/93 of 10 and 24 June 1993) that ranges from one extreme (merely unethical) to the other in "degree of criminality", exemplified by hidden perks (like so many in our governments), absenteeism, indifference, carelessness, go-slows (like those at the Bureau of Mineral Resources/Australian Geological Survey Organisation in the past, when I worked there), misrepresentations (like at universities I worked for), fiddles, cheating, pilfering, skimming, moonlighting, scape-goating, to stealing and even wilful destruction (e.g. of computers at one overseas university). And in another university, as mentioned above, even multiple murder was the result when a whistleblower was ignored for years! The cheats and saboteurs (a strong word indeed) involved range from rank-and-file workers to managers/executives/directors throughout society, in all
situations; reasons or excuses are many, usually selfish in nature, many unfounded/unacceptable/illogical, of course; occasionally unions even protected the perpetrators of crime. Our Public Service has taken the situation seriously, as indicated by workshops like "Fraud and Corruption Detection" offered a few years ago. Whistleblowers would find a useful place here. Sociologists have established theories and classification schemes of types of dishonesties by proffering models, explanations, and remedies (cf. above two books) to bring some order to the complexities of dishonesty.
The three books by Chomsky (1988-1992) on Deterring Democracy, Thought Control, and Manufacturing Consent, in combination with Orwell’s 1984 (did you see the film Animal Farm based on his book?) and Huxley’s Brave New World (see the more-recent Woodcock’s and Huxley’s analyses, respectively, of 1984 and the Present and Brave New World Revisited) demonstrate that the power struggle underlying so much in
"political" (using this word in its broadest sense) life continues unabated in even the greatest democracies. Persuasion can be via brainwashing and coercion (peer pressure, as all high school students know), threats, lying, and so forth, as well as by brutal mental or physical force exemplified by bullying techniques (see Bullying: From Backyard to Boardroom by P. McCarthy, M. Sheenan and W. Wilkie – Editors, 1996, Millennium Books of Australia). Subtler methods can be based on Invention of Tradition (see book by Hobsbawn and Ranger, 1983/92) that distort past and recent histories; i.e. "traditions" are concocted to maintain artificially the status quo or identity or politically correct preferences of a group, religion, party, culture, or whatever. The Japanese still resist admitting their war crimes. So, what’s new?! (See M. and R. Friedman, 1984. Tyranny of the Status Quo. Penguin Books.)
Lying has been discussed by psychologists and others in many publications. For example, one
popular article by Beale (1988, for reference see above) described five types of lies linked to five personality problems: manipulative, melodramatic, grandiose, evasive, and guilty lies. This is too simplistic, for in business and politics, among others, one encounters many personality types and even more situations requiring a variety of styles of communication, so that in reality many more varieties of dishonesties and types of lies exist. In politics, and diplomacy, it is argued by some, like Graham Richardson, that porkies/fibs (nice euphemisms for cheating/lying!) are even downright necessary (see article on misinformation by Crouch, 1991, mentioned earlier). With "examples" like that, our youths (nay, the whole population) have no "heroes" to emulate! Indeed, why shouldn’t you and your neighbour not have the same "civil right" to lie like any politician?! Who is going to break this vicious cycle? The whistleblowers must! Any person, in any capacity, ought to study E. F. McKenna,
1987, Psychology in Business – Theory and Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, London (see my book-review in DPIE’s The Bulletin No. 21/93, 28. May ‘93, p. 5).
There are many more books on lying and related phenomena available, in addition to those listed here; anyone involved in whistleblowing must be familiar with them in order to make a case. Linguists ought to study dishonesty. The two books by Bok (see above) and H. Weinrich’s, 1974. Linguistics of Lies: Can Language Hide Truth?, Lambert Schneider Publishers, Heidelberg, certainly imply explicitly and implicitly that there is an open academic and applied discipline here!
Dishonesty (and all its synonyms – or near-synonyms or analogous words, as the Webster Dictionary of Synonyms, 1984, carefully points out) are part of the classical rhetoric (i.e. argumentation, critical analysis, logic, . . .) so fundamental in any oral or written debate. Here too, numerous books are available to hone your abilities in
analysing information in order to get your "analysis-cum-argumentation" right! Just one superb reference: E. P. J. Corbett, 1971. Classical Rhetoric for the modern student, Oxford University Press, New York, with several tables of all-important "types of arguments" important in conducting a logical, foolproof debate. A test: list all types of "fallacies" commonly utilised to bamboozle people. It’s not enough to be well trained in your chosen profession; you also must be capable of "logical, critical reasoning"!
___________________________________________________________
Karl H. Wolf is a retired Professor of Geology and researcher, explorationist, and consultant; since about 1965 former editor of twenty books and four international journals, and author of many articles, essays, book-reviews, letters, and commentaries. He was, and still is, a broadly involved researcher and writer. He gained invaluable experience in several cultural settings (Canada, Mexico, Portuguese Timor,
Saudi Arabia, aside from Australia, of course; not to mention the many countries visited en route). He is also a member of The Independent Scholars of Australia, The Skeptics Association, and Beyond Bullying Association Inc, aside from geological associations. Together with his earlier "liberal" education (owing to compulsory humanity courses for all science students at his undergraduate university in Canada) and lifelong studies of several of the humanities, he is quite capable of analysing society and its individuals! Numerous deleterious events in universities and one government institution compelled him to do a bit of whistleblowing too. (Copies of all his writings are available on request.)
>>
It took me a while to paste the question.
He mentions Machiavelli.
I agree with you on Machiavelli. It should be there and it is.
Well he mentions Machiavelli.
Amongst your list of works on matters reprehensible I note a glaring omission: the seminal work, the eternal ultimate reference!
"The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli.
Was there a reason for the non-inclusion of this mandatory bedside reading?
February 14th, 2010 at 5:55 am
Amongst your list of works on matters reprehensible I note a glaring omission: the seminal work, the eternal ultimate reference!
"The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli.
Was there a reason for the non-inclusion of this mandatory bedside reading?
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 6:31 am
Can phoniness be triple-distilled ?
That seems to be implied.
Unless your team is hand picked, it may and therefore will, contain some phonies. These will carve up the organization for their own base purposes.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 7:11 am
On Wolf’s analysis there will likely be some people posturing as contributing to organization objectives but doing nothing of the kind.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 7:18 am
A building has blueprints. If the construction company contained people such as Wolf is alluding to, you might discover this by comparing the blueprints to what was actually built.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 7:33 am
A safety-critical system has blueprints.
The blueprints say how to create the system.
If the organizations involved contained some people such as Wolf is alluding to, you might discover this by comparing the blueprints to what was actually built.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 8:11 am
A safety-critical system would need to be built to contain the same version numbers of the algorithms as stated in the design documents.
So if you wanted to take on the persona of one of the people Wolf is talking about, you’d possibly fabricate test results, and issue the wrong version numbers of key software.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 8:23 am
So to fix the system you simply generate accurate test results, and ensure correct version numbers of key software have been issued.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 9:12 am
The people Wolf is talking about will try to ensure that you can’t generate accurate test results, and that you can’t ensure correct version numbers of software have been issued or can be issued.
References :
February 14th, 2010 at 9:24 am
Secret_schizoid,
You’re overlooking the fact that key algorithms still exist.
To set the system to work you simply dig out the algorithms
(probably running on legacy systems somewhere) and compare results with the system under test.
References :