Dare spazio a tutti coloro che hanno voglia e facoltà.
Fornire risposte per ogni segnalazione ricevuta.
Creare un buon portale di filosofia analitica.
Il Nostro ideale è quello di proporre una libera diffusione di materiali scelti e di fornire un punto di contatto tra persone interessate alla discussione delle proprie idee e opinioni, in piena libertà e in linea con la responsabilità che ogni intervento richiede. Il nostro Ideale impone tale responsabilità, ed è sostenuta nella convinzione che Conoscenza e Democrazia debbano passare anche attraverso portali liberi da Istituzioni e da qualunque barriera che non favorisca il libero accesso ai contenuti della Ragione.
It is with special pleasure to host Dr. Alexander Moseley in Intelligence & Interview to cover a topic which interested me for a long time now: Philosophy of war. Yes, exactly. Many of you are familiar with Just War Theory and the moral and political philosophy discussed by JWT philosophers. JWT is so influential that actually is probably the only philosophical area to be spilled over even beyond its first intentional research, as now there is also what is called “Just Intelligence Theory”. However, many arguments can be made for a philosophy of war that is not related to morals or even political philosophy. This is what I’ve called “pure philosophy of war.” Since I started exploring the topic almost ten years ago, I come up with Alexander Moseley’s book A Philosophy of War (2001), which I immediately found inspiring for the different angle he tackled the problem. After having read his book, I wrote an article freely available in this blog for the Italian readership (Alexander Moseley – A philosophy of war (una filosofia della guerra) Then, I got in touch with Alexander, and I invited him to write a piece for a collective book I was editing on the philosophy of war and piece (Socrate va in guerra: Socrate goes to war), where Dr Moseley covered the crucial topic of the causes of war. It is then with my distinct pleasure to publish the interview on Scuola Filosofica – for those who don’t know it yet; it is one of the leading cultural blogs in Italy. In the name of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Giangiuseppe Pili, Alex: thank you!
1# Dr. Alexander Moseley, let’s start from the basics. How would you like to present yourself to the International readers and Philosophical School (Scuola Filosofica)?
A good question! Although I have worked in the university sector, most of my research and writings after my doctorate were done while running a private educational company as ‘an independent academic.’ I have been commissioned to write several articles on the ethics of war and the nature of ‘the warrior’ after publishing my first book, A Philosophy of War in 2001. I continue to research broadly and in turn my thinking has evolved to some extent from those early researches (see notes below on consciousness).
I wanted to include a chapter to cover the International Association for Intelligence Education from the start of this series. I started being part of IAFIE in 2019, when I participated in the last pre-pandemic conference in New York (as I have already stated, one of the most interesting conferences in which I took part insofar). IAFIE always offered interesting updates, insights on the intelligence profession, and the opportunity to discover more about intelligence education. As one of the series’ missions is to bring as much as different experiences and visions as possible, IAFIE was always in my mind. As now the series has to end soon and the processes of translation and editing for the next two collective books for the Italian Society of Intelligence (SOCINT), it was the right time to invite Professor Barry Zulauf to join the conversation for covering IAFIE, which will hopefully have a news conference in Italy in 2022 (in Pordenone). There is a specific IAFIE chapter (for more on IAFIE’s chapters, see #6), IAFIE Europe. We already invited and interview other IAFIE members during the course of the series, but this time the interview is dedicated to IAFIE itself. Professor Zulauf doesn’t need any introduction for all intelligence educators and intelligence scholars. With more than 40 years as an educator and extensive direct experience in the intelligence profession, Professor Zulauf is the president of IAFIE and is an inspiration for all intelligence educators. This interview covers IAFIE’s mission, practices, and vision, and much more. Its history and evolution give a glimpse into the world of intelligence education. As a part of other interviews dedicated to substantially national societies and associations relevant for intelligence and security, this interview is instead devoted to bringing the eminently international case. I take the chance to all our readers to follow IAFIE, join it, and have a look at its website (recently renewed): https://www.iafie.org/. It is then with my distinct pleasure to publish the interview on Scuola Filosofica – for those who don’t know it yet; it is one of the leading cultural blogs in Italy. In the name of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Giangiuseppe Pili, Barry: thank you!
1# Professor Barry Zulauf, let’s start from the basics. How would you like to present yourself to the national and international readers?
I have been an educator at the undergraduate and graduate level for 40 years, and a professional all-source intelligence analyst for nearly 35 of those years. I have also been a Naval Officer, with a combat tour in Afghanistan, retiring after 22 years. There is no more satisfying job than teaching. I have been able to touch thousands of young lives over the years, I have been a part of hundreds of them choosing careers in public service, national security, and intelligence. I continue to be a friend and mentor to dozens of them – some who have risen to high positions in the Intelligence Community – Generals, Admirals, agency leaders. There is no more important function for intelligence professionals than to prepare the next generation of intelligence leaders, and to make sure all intelligence professionals are aware of the requirements and have the intellectual tools needed to carry out objective analysis and perform ethical intelligence activities.
I know few people who are better suited to cover the recent (tragic) events in Afghanistan than Fabrizio Minniti. Fabrizio is an expert in the region, and he stationed there for some time. I had the pleasure to listen to him talking about it, and I realized that he was the perfect person to address the new Afghan context, and helping us in understanding the unfolding events. All the people selected and interviewed for Intelligence and Interview are outstanding experts and researchers, and some of them I know personally. However, Fabrizio is uniquely positioned as he is my first co-author’s paper in an international journal: What Happened? After-Effects of the 2007 Reform Legislation of the Italian Intelligence Community! Thank to his deep knowledge of the intelligence realm, especially at the national level, we issued a paper on the history of Italian intelligence for the International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence, which is still substantially a unique piece of research considering the Italian case. It was a great honor and experience working with him on this project and, please, don’t ask: We will work on follow-ups very soon! Then, I invite you to follow Fabrizio and his work, starting from this interview. It is then with my distinct pleasure to publish the interview on Scuola Filosofica – for those who don’t know it yet; it is one of the leading cultural blogs in Italy. In the name of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Giangiuseppe Pili, Fabrizio: thank you!
1# Fabrizio, let’s start from the basics. How would you like to present yourself to the international readers, and Philosophical School (Scuola Filosofica)?
I am Fabrizio Minniti, a former researcher at the Military Centre for Strategic Studies (Italian MoD), international security expert, analyst, consultant, and political advisor to international organizations. I am the author of numerous publications on terrorism, intelligence, and nuclear non-proliferation.
L’indispensabile processo di definizione, con la migliore precisione possibile, dell’oggetto dell’indagine è particolarmente difficile quando si debbano prendere in considerazione gli sviluppi della tecnologia che da sempre accompagnano, in forma pressocché simbiotica, l’evolversi della storia umana. Quando poi la tecnologia è quella militare, le cose si complicano ulteriormente perché le armi nascono dalla cultura tecnica generale di una società, nel contempo però la influenzano e la condizionano; sono strumenti per distruggere una realtà ritenuta inaccettabile e costruirne una nuova, e ciò facendo spargono sangue umano. Non vi è da stupirsi quindi che, dalle origini dell’uomo, all’attrezzo “arma” sia stata dedicata una attenzione particolare e che la loro evoluzione sia stata in molti casi più accelerata di quella dei manufatti non adatti ad uccidere.
In questo lavoro presentiamo Una guida alla pubblicazione internazionale. Questa analisi intende guidare il lettore alla comprensione del meccanismo di pubblicazione della ricerca internazionale nelle principali riviste di settore che costituiscono il benchmark universale della ricerca scientifica.
Introduzione
Scrivo questo articolo in lingua italiana, perché so molto bene che un testo simile può avere uno scopo principalmente per persone come me, ovvero che hanno iniziato a studiare in Italia completamente all’oscuro di come funziona il sistema editoriale scientifico che è alla base di ogni carriera universitaria e simil-universitaria (think tank etc.) all’estero, dove con ‘estero’ intendo un limitato numero di stati che fanno capo principalmente (ma non esclusivamente) al sistema anglo-americano (USA, UK etc.) o europeo-continentale (Germania, Olanda, Polonia etc.). Infatti, un preciso percorso meritocratico, ovvero fondato principalmente su fatti misurabili, è appannaggio di pochi Paesi. Non starò qui a sostenere in quale contesto l’Italia si situi e lascio decidere al lettore da che parte stare. Ma quale che sia la sua parte, sarà potenzialmente interessato a scoprire come funziona il meccanismo scientifico di pubblicazione, che è fatto di regole precise e misurabili.
Da Heidegger, il Destino della Metafisica Occidentale non sembra tanto l’aver “ridotto” l’Essere ad un ente particolare. Questo identificherà l’idea di Platone, il motore immobile di Aristotele, la res cogitans di Cartesio ecc… Piuttosto, il Destino della Metafisica Occidentale si compirebbe avendo “esagerato” l’Essere. Servirà “caricarvi” il potere d’un ente particolare, ed essenzialmente per lo strutturalismo in politica. Heidegger menziona il “mistero” d’un cammino verso il linguaggio. Forse egli ci chiede di rimpiazzare la politica, e mediante l’estetologia. Solo quest’ultima è percepibile mettendo la creatività prima della libertà. Precisamente, l’estetologia vale nella sua formatività. La creatività presuppone il potremmo, per cui uno si limita da solo, verso un servizio agli Altri, senza la necessità dell’autogiustificazione (mediante la “banalità” d’un potere).
Da Heidegger, ci ricordiamo la dialettica fra il Welt e la Erde. Il primo identificherà il Mondo (per il concettualismo del potere); la seconda rinvierà alla Terra (da un “lirismo” del potremmo)[1]. Forse, l’ontologismo di Heidegger va filtrato tramite il vitalismo di Deleuze. Se la filosofia è creazione di concettualismi “muscolari”, alla “misteriosa” e “lirica” Erde s’allaccia una “non più meccanica” de-territorializzazione[2]. Il cammino verso il linguaggio di Heidegger diventa la perdita del presupposto plato-hobbesiano per cui l’uomo deve governarsi solo tramite la politica. Qualcosa da percepire in chiave estet-ontologica. Se i concetti per Deleuze sono agonistici, giacché quelli “s’allargano” gli uni sugli altri, allora bisognerebbe “svelare” un Destino della Generazione Metafisica, tramite dei “parti” concettuali(stici).
Dopo più di dieci anni di esperienza nella scrittura di recensioni, ho pensato di scrivere una guida essenziale. Il lettore scoprirà innanzitutto cosa significa scrivere una recensione, perché è importante sapere cos’è e come scriverne di diversi tipi. Per coloro che non amano i tecnicismi, la filosofia analitica, o semplicemente non hanno tempo, beh, è possibile saltare la sessione successiva andando direttamente alla terza. Ma come si può, di questi tempi, incoraggiare la pigrizia mentale?
Come verrà mostrato, una recensione è un mezzo tra un dato contenuto di partenza e un lettore mirato. Pertanto, una recensione è principalmente un mezzo per un fine. Iconoclasticamente, una recensione si può intendere come un pezzo di tecnologia dell’informazione molto specifico (per così dire) il cui obiettivo è guidato da una particolare necessità di informazioni da affrontare. Di conseguenza, la struttura, il contenuto e la coerenza di una recensione dipendono intrinsecamente dal suo ultimo requisito informativo. Una recensione scientifica sarà diversa dall’analisi critica di un romanzo. Con tutte queste considerazioni preliminari in mente, tuffiamoci nel vasto mare delle recensioni!
Pili, G., (2021), “Be coherent with yourself! A pluralistic approach to objectivity for intelligence analysis”, American Intelligence Journal, 38:1, 96-103.
Is objectivity possible in intelligence analysis? This long-lasting question can be answered by a new and pluralistic approach to objectivity within the s objectivity possible in intelligence analysis? This intelligence studies literature. If objectivity is possible, first, it must be defined. Second, it must be understood in terms of its attainability—in what way, how, and to what extent. A systematic analysis is offered to tackle the issue through the different angle offered by the philosophy of science, which already engaged in close issues such as politicization in science. Ultimately, the challenge is to fix the analyst’s duty in the face of his/her goal, which requires unfolding the implicit intelligence analyst’s worldview. Finally, balancing reality and ideals, the slogan of intelligence should be: “Be coherent with yourself; be coherent with what you know,” instead of “Speak truth to power.” A conceptual defense of this very idea will be explored systematically. Interested? Write me at scuolafilosofica_AT_gmail.com!
Di recente, parlando con il Master Chief di ScuolaFilosofica.it, Giangiuseppe Pili, è emerso che nel sito scarseggiano recensioni di libri scritti da russi. Indagando su questa curiosità, la conversazione si è defilata facilmente sulle idee personali circa la caratura delle varie letterature continentali, e da ambe le parti, ogni tanto, son partite scorribande di convinzioni individuali volte ad arrembare la solida nave delle convinzioni dell’altro.
The very notion of intelligence is nuanced and broad. An entire branch of intelligence studies is devolved to exploring what intelligence is. This is what Mark Phythian and Peter Gill called “definitional project” in their taxonomy. Several scholars tackled the definition of intelligence, starting with Michael Warner’s pioneering paper Wanted: A definition of intelligence published in 2002 (almost achieving the twenty years anniversary). After him, many more tackled it (be kind if I advertise that I also proposed a philosophical definition of intelligence in 2019). But another crucial topic is the exploration of intelligence analysis functions such as strategic intelligence and tactical intelligence. Interestingly, strategic intelligence is still a difficult nut to be cracked. Probably because of its dependency on theory. Basically, strategic intelligence allows the identification of the enemy’s intentions to avoid surprises at the strategic level. Easy to say, but very difficult to achieve. Indeed, at least in the public debate, there is a sense that the Cold War was a predictable confrontation from a strategic perspective. Unfortunately, strategic intelligence was pursued with risk and uncertainty as everything else in intelligence. Although it is so important, it is still an underexplored topic. When I first read Itai Shapira’s paper, published by Intelligence and National Security (2019, Strategic Intelligence as an Art and a Science), I hoped we could have covered this topic, and now I am even more persuaded of this choice. Sure, the fact that he tackles the issue from theoretical and philosophical perspectives allured me even more. But, as you will see, there is a good reason for tackling strategic intelligence from this angle. Itai helps us understand the nature of strategic intelligence and tactical intelligence with a very innovative (fresh, I would venture to say) approach. It is then with my distinct pleasure to publish the interview on Scuola Filosofica – for those who don’t know it yet; it is one of the leading cultural blogs in Italy. In the name of Scuola Filosofica Team, our readers, and myself, Giangiuseppe Pili, Itai: thank you!
1# Itai Shapira, let’s start from the basics. How would you like to present yourself to the International readers and Philosophical School (Scuola Filosofica)?
I am currently a PhD candidate at the University of Leicester, studying Israeli national intelligence culture. I am a retired Colonel from the Israeli Defense Intelligence (IDI), where I have served for more than 25 years in various intelligence analysis and management roles – on the tactical, operational, and strategic levels. As a great believer in the dialectic of practice and theory, and after such a long period in the practice of intelligence, I am devoting the current period to a more theoretical perspective, trying to develop some theoretical concepts which in turn could influence practice.
