We must discern the nature of the conflicts we are in, and whether or not we fight with effective weapons.
Aristotle
argued that there is a sense in which poetry has greater truth value than
history. He meant that while history refers to specifics, poetry refers to the
nature of the topic (or, as Plato said, its Form). Where history refers to the
details of a war, poetry refers to the nature of War. While history may
reference the details and consequences of a particular love affair, poetry
refers to the nature of Love itself. While history may trace the impacts of a
major decision, poetry addresses the universal human experience of approaching
a fork in the road.
History
is about particular things while poetry is about the nature of particular
things. Poetry speaks to larger truths. It is in the Aristotelean sense that
what philosophers call the “truth value” of poetry is greater than that of
history.
A
correlative claim that can be made of the Aristotelean distinction is that one
can claim that a history is inaccurate or false, but one cannot make a sensible
similar accusation about a poem. A poem may fall flat. It may not resonate. But
to claim that it is non-factual is to misunderstand the nature of poetry
itself. It is to misunderstand its power.
Poetry
does not strive for factual coherence; it strives to touch the deep meaning of
human experience. Its target is the heart, not the mind.
Narrative
is poetic. It is not historical.
Why
should NATO participants and national defense professionals care about the
distinctions that an ancient philosopher made hundreds of years before the
birth of Christ? Because understanding that distinction may mean the difference
between containing Russian aggression or not. The distinction may determine
whether or not nation states can hold themselves together in the face of
strategies seeded to collapse them from within.
Understanding
this classical philosophical distinction between history and poetry will
determine whether or not we are able to discern the nature of the conflicts we
are in, and whether or not we fight with effective weapons. Using history as a
weapon against poetry is to use the wrong tools in a misidentified battle
space.
“Disinformation”
is an incorrect label for a narrative that influences public opinion. If it was
non-information or wrong information, then it could simply be countered with
correct information. It would be in the category of history, the facts of which
could legitimately be disputed.
When
“Disinformation” is effective it is because it is told in poetic, narrative
form and cannot be countered with recourse to “truth” or “facts.” It can only
be countered in poetic form – that is, the deeper resonance with human
experience is what has to be addressed. Information is unarmed against a poetic
narrative. As is history. The “facts” of history can be retold, and be given
any variety of resonate meaning.
What the
facts mean is what matters to the human heart more than what the facts are.
Influential
narratives give we human beings that thing we crave: meaning. When
disinformation is influential it is because it means more to the target
audience than the truth or the facts or verified information. Information is
just raw data and we do not crave raw data. Raw data has no inherent appeal.
Homer’s
Illiad, for example, has had profound influence in western cultures even though
it is not a factual historical account. It is in the category of the poetic. It
speaks to the nature of a heroic quest therefore gives its audience a way to
frame their own challenges. It enables the audience to view their own battles
with obstacles and hurdles in a heroic light. The lack of truth value is
irrelevant to the meaning it imparts to our experiences. The lack of truth
value does not negatively affect its meaning value.
The gods
and goddesses of ancient Greece, Rome, and India are archetypes. We recognize
them. As types they refer to something beyond actual individual persons. The
Muse speaks to us about the nature of inspiration. Sirens are not “real”; they
strike a chord in us regarding the nature of temptation.
Rather
than continuing to be dumbfounded by the influence of disinformation, we need
to get a grip of this ancient distinction and get our categories straight.
Technological advances have not altered the nature of the beast. And they
cannot help us fight it if we cannot even identify what it is we are up
against.
To the
extent that truth-telling is part of our narrative strategy, it cannot be
reactive; we cannot chase our adversaries around matching their lies with the
truth because, as recent cognitive science has demonstrated, countering lies by
repeating them with the word “no” (or some other negative) attached actually
has the opposite effect. It strengthens the false statement in the mind of the
audience (“Don’t Think of an Elephant” is George Lakoff’s challenge). Truth and
facts should be a part of our narrative, but it is in determining the meaning
of the truth and lies that we must dominate. That is the heart of
influence.
***Ajit
Maan, Ph.D. writes the Narrative & National Security column for Homeland
Security Today featuring her original work and work by guest experts in
narrative strategy focused on identifying active narratives, who is behind
them, and what strategies they are deploying to manipulate and muddy facts to
the detriment of America.
She is
founder and CEO of the award-winning think-and-do-tank, Narrative Strategies
LLC, Adjunct Professor at Joint Special Operations University, Professor of
Politics and Global Security, Faculty at the Center for the Future of War, and
member of the Brain Trust of the Weaponized Narrative Initiative at Arizona
State University.
She is
also author of seven books including Internarrative Identity: Placing the Self,
Counter-Terrorism: Narrative Strategies, Narrative Warfare, and Plato’s Fear.
Maan's breakthrough theory of internarrative identity came in 1997; she
published a book by the same name in 1999 which was released in its second
edition in 2010 (with the addition of the subtitle Placing the Self).
Internarrative identity deals with one’s sense of identity as expressed in
personal narrative, connecting the formation of identity with one assigns
meaning to one’s life experiences. Maan’s theories are influenced by Paul
Ricoeur’s writings in narrative identity theory, and she cites several of his
works in her book (Maan, Internarrative Identity: Placing the Self 90). The
connection between the interpretation of personal narrative in relation to the
larger social group seems to be a key factor in the work of both Maan and
Ricoeur. She states that “Following Ricoeur, I’ve argued that who one is and
what one will do will be determined by the story one sees oneself as a part of.
Going further than Ricoeur, I have suggested that a genuinely imaginative
theory of narrative identity would be inclusive of alternatively structured
narratives” (Maan, Internarrative Identity: Placing the Self 71-72). This seems
to indicate that Maan believes that identity influences behavior, but she also
recognizes that one can be constrained by society to accept a self-narrative
that fits within existing cultural norms. After establishing herself through
her work on Internarrative Identity, Maan has now turned her attention to the
analysis of narrative as a means of understanding (and combating) terrorist
recruitment tactics. Her 2014 book, Counter-Terrorism: Narrative Strategies,
examines the scripts perpetuated by a wide range of terrorist organizations
while also making important interdisciplinary connections between studies in
the humanities and current world events (a workbook companion to the text was
published in 2018).
She
collaborated with the late Brigadier General Amar Cheema on the edited volume
titled Soft Power on Hard Problems: Strategic Influence in Irregular Warfare,
published in 2016. Maan's 2018 book, titled Narrative Warfare, is a collection
of articles examining the topic of weaponized narrative; her 2020 book, Plato's
Fear, examines the relationship between narrative and power.
Her work was the
focus of Representations of Internarrative Identity, a 2014 multi-authored
scholarly monograph dedicated to the exploration of Internarrative Identity
through diverse fields of study and from international perspectives. In
addition to her contributions to academia, Maan has been active in sharing her
knowledge with a wider audience thereby uniting military and academic experts
in the cause of eradicating violent extremism around the world.