‘Intelligence without analysis is only information’. Critically assess this claim.
Introduction
Part 1 – Understanding Semantics
Part 2 - Part of the system
Part 4 - Analysis as part of the Organisation, a member the community
Conclusion
Introduction
Analysis is important. The statement assessed impresses that fact upon the reader. Without it, the speaker implies, Intelligence is inefficient. It is merely ‘information’. For the intelligence community, it seems that information alone is not enough to be presented as a finished product to a policy maker. Information alone is also not enough to represent the ‘reality’ of the world. Especially, in terms of finding possible threats to national security. The statement implies that each key word, when looked at individually, means different things. They do not represent one another. Therefore, semantics is important. In part two of this assessment we observe how Analysis is an essential step of the Intelligence Cycle. While there remains debate regarding the effectiveness of the Cycle in a practical environment, what should be noted is the importance of Analysis as a part of the system. This is the step known as Analysis and Production. The third assessment of the statement looks at the act of Analysis as a critical tool in Intelligence activity. It is useful because it can provide meaning, priority and possible predictions of important national security issues. Finally, the speaker of the statement being assessed is emphasizing its importance as a part of the Intelligence Community. Analysts are important. Supporting Analysis as more than just a function of the intelligence cycle means that policy makers should ensure appropriate funding and management of the Analysi...
... middle of paper ...
...raphy
1. Webster’s Dictionary Online, Web. 11 March 2015,
2. “The Intelligence Process” The U.S. Intelligence Community Website, Web. 15 July 2015,
3. Agrell, Wilhelm, “When Everything is intelligence – nothing is intelligence”. The Sherman Kent Centre for Intelligence Analysis Occasional Papers: Vol. 1, No. 4.
4. Lahneman, William J, “The Future of Intelligence Analysis Volume 1, Final Report”. University of Maryland, March 10, 2006.
5. Baartz, Debra, “Information Management Process and the Intelligence Cycle”, Journal of Australian Institute of Professional Intelligence Officers. Vol 4, No 1, 2005.
6. Lowenthal, Mark, Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy, Washington DC Congressional Quarterly Press, 2006, Chapter 5, “Collection and the Collection Disciplines”
General intelligence tends to relate to various degrees with each other (Cohen 2012). An example of this is that if an individual is good in math, they may also be good in spelling. In this weeks reading we reviewed several different models of measurement of intelligence. In regard to these theories and general intelligence (g), the theories are various but have commonality and overlap. The Spearman's two-factor theory is if a test has high correlation with other test than the measurement of g is highly saturated (Cohen, 2012). The greater the importance of g on a test, the better the test is believed to predict intelligence
Nedzi (D-Mich.), Luclen N. “Oversight or Overlook: Congress and the US Intelligence Agency.” A Congressman talk to the CIA senior seminar, November 14, 1979, https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol18no2/pdf/v18i2a02p.pdf (accessed January 7, 2014).
Intelligence tests have been developed by scientists as a tool to categorize army recruits or analyze school children. But still discussing what intelligence is, academics have a difficult time defining what intelligence tests should measure. According to the American researcher Thorndike, intelligence is only that what intelligence tests claim it is (Comer, Gould, & Furnham, 2013). Thus, depending on what is being researched in the test and depending on the scientist’s definition of intelligence the meaning of the word intelligence may vary a lot. This essay will discuss what intelligence is in order to be able to understand the intelligence theories and aims of intelligence tests.
3. Seymour W. Itzkoff, 1994, The Decline of Intelligence in America. London: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
Since, as he establishes, leadership’s political priorities were critical to the ultimate decision in the CIA’s actions, the degree to which the CIA actually concentrated on this mission of collection and analysis depended on the perceived threats from the top. Consequently, the actual level of reliable analysis deteriorated as demonstrated by the example of ORE analysists who were “normatively risk averse” and trying to “get it right,” and provide analysis that fit into the view of their leadership. Lacking trust in their analysists’ conclusions, the CIA proved unable to supply reliable intelligence and forge “collaboration and integration.” Rather than addressing institutional problems the CIA developed a pattern that continued throughout its entire history. Even though it refers to the Reagan era, Immerman’s conclusion that in a time of crisis the CIA deemed that they “required a change in leadership more than an institutional adjustment,” could easily apply to any other period. This application of psychology to history while enlightening does detract from the reader’s understanding of a formation of a CIA “culture” that limited its intelligence analysis efficiency. Without this fundamental comprehension of a CIA “culture,” some of Immerman’s later
Tidd, J. M. (2008). From revolution to reform: A brief history of U.S. intelligence. The SAIS
Probabilistic reasoning is difficult. People prefer to reject ambiguity and demand that concrete predictions be made. However, intelligence is inherently ambiguous. In intelligence forecasting, it is difficult to determine what information constitutes a signal, and what constitutes noise. In “Connecting the Dots: The Paradoxes of Intelligence Reform”, Malcolm Gladwell analyzes several high-profile “intelligence failures”, such as the Yom Kippur War, September 11th, Pearl Harbor, and the Bay of Pigs fiasco, as well as several psychological studies, and comes to the conclusion that: (1) there is no such thing as a perfect intelligence system - all systems require tradeoffs; (2) failures do not constitute the limitations of the intelligence community,
Counterintelligence (CI) is defined as, “information gathered and activities conducted to identify, deceive, exploit, disrupt, or protected against espionage, other intelligence activities, sabotage, or assassination conducted for or on behalf of foreign powers, organizations or persons, or their agents, or international terrorist organizations or activities. ” The citizenry of the United States on the U.S. Government is the focus of the examination of counter intelligence of citizenry on its national government. Data collected and research performed by James Riedel seeks to establish the citizens as a network of spies on the U.S. Government. The spying of citizens on the government is referred to as “espionage” . Counter Intelligence as acts of espionage committed by U.S. citizens is described by Riedel as short in duration and “poorly paid” .
The true nature of intelligence has been debated more intensely then ever over the last century. As the science of psychology has developed one of the biggest questions it had to answer concerned the nature of Intelligence. Some of the definitions that have been given for intelligence have been the ability to adjust to one’s environment. Of course by such a definition even a person who is generally considered to be dull can be regarded as being intelligent if he can take care of himself. Other definition is such as having the tendency to analyze things around yourself. However it can be argued that such behavior can lead to over-analyzing things and not reacting to one’s environment and dealing with it in an intelligent manner.
Lohman, D. F. (1998). Fluid intelligence, inductive reasoning, and working memory: Where the theory of Multiple Intelligences falls short. Talent development IV: Proceedings from the
This paper will highlight the development of human intelligence (HUMINT) and the importance of it in intelligence operations. HUMINT can provide information in areas that technical intelligence cannot and also drive the collection requirements of these disciplines when additional evidence is needed. HUMINT is critical in espionage efforts and has undergone the greatest changes from the start of the Cold War to the launch of the War on Terrorism.
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligence focuses more on how numerical expressions of human intelligence are not a full and accurate depiction of people’s abilities (McFarlane, 2011). He includes and describes eight intelligences that are based on skills and abilities that are valued within different cultures. The eight intelligences include visual-spatial (e.g. sailor navigating with no navigational systems), verbal-linguistic (e.g. poets, writers, orators, and communicators), bodily-kinesthetic (e.g. dancers, athletes, surgeons, craftspeople), logical-mathematical (e.g. mathematicians and logicians), interpersonal(e.g. salespeople, teachers, clinicians, politicians, and religious leaders), musical (e.g. musicians and
It is often difficult to remember that intelligence is purely a social construct, and as such is limited to operational definitions. Binet & Simon (1905, as cited in Mackintosh) defined it purely in terms of mental ability: "the ability to judge well, to comprehend well, to reason well." Wechsler (1944, as cited in Mackintosh) added behavioral factors: "the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with the environment." Sternberg (1985) synthesizes the previous definitions, defining intelligence as "the mental capacity of emitting contextually appropriate behavior at those regions in the experiential continuum that involve response to novelty or automatization of information processing as a function of metacomponents, performance components, and knowledge acquisition components." Gardner (1993) took the definition to a societal level, as "the ability or skill to solve problems or to fashion products which...
There are basically two camps on the theory of intelligence, how exactly to define intelligence is still debated. There are, however, two major schools of thought on its nature and properties. This paper examines and evaluates the two opposing theories on the nature of intelligence. The two opposing theories of intelligence are the one general intelligence school of thought and the multiple intelligence school of thought. The general intelligence proponents believe that there is one factor from which all intelligence is derived; the multiple intelligence proponents believe that there are different kinds of intelligence.
When a person utters the word “intelligence,” people tend to think of a genius like Albert Einstein developing some obscure equation that the great majority of the population will never understand. The problem with the definition of intelligence is that people relate intelligence to words like “genius” which require intelligence but do not have the same definition as intelligence. Often, people try to use related words to define intelligence, but these words are unable to define intelligence since many are only different levels of intelligence. While many definitions try to encompass the meaning of intelligence and various definitions describe a small part of intelligence, no definition completely explains intelligence, because intelligence is a concept that is understood only after realizing that intelligence is based on three basic concepts: logic, growth, and emotion. Although many people believe that humans are the only creatures capable of intelligence, other animals exhibit intelligence and are capable of further demonstrate the complex concept of intelligence.