Hello, first of, thanks for the good work you're doing. Maybe this is a stupid question, but can a person use torture for 15-20 years as a "discipline" measure and ignore/deny the fact that it doesn't work? How would this character justify his methods in this case? If extra info helps, the character uses only "mild" torture i.e. things that both he himself and a lot of people on the streets would consider "deserved" and "no big deal". Sorry if this's been asked before, I'm new to your blog.
Iget a lot of repeat asks and it’s OK. :)
Atover 900 posts the blog is an intimidating size to search through andwhile I try my best my tagging system is not always…. great.
Thetruth is I’m a lot worse at the whole ‘social media’ thing andthe whole ‘self promotion’ thing then ScriptMedic was (and a lotof the rest of the Script Family are). As the errr viewing figuresfor the Wordpress blog are illustrating. (Any suggestions forboosting either blog and building a bigger platform for this messageare gratefully received- No seriously, please help me.)
Theshort answer to your question is yes that’s perfectly possible. I’ddescribe it as a pretty common justification for torture in some realworld settings. It’s due to a statistical effect and the fact thatwe (as humans) tend to remember short term gains/losses overyear-long patterns.
Nowum after playing Dungeons and Dragons for the first time over theholidays I think a DnD metaphor may actually be the most accessibleway to explain this.
Soactions in a DnD game often rely on the score you roll from a 20sided dice. This number is random.
Thestatistics from a character provide a modifier that adds to thisnumber. So if a character has an exceptionally high number for-strength, then a portion of that number gets added to the random 1-20number from the dice, artificially boosting the score. This alsoworks in reverse so that an exceptionally low score results in alower overall number.
Theidea is that even though the numbers are random there’s a degree towhich a character's skill and training is accounted for.
WhatI’m getting at here is that there’s a degree to which performanceon a given day is random, however well trained or skillful we are.
Theway ‘disciplinary’ torturers justify what they do over years isdown to a short term statistical effect.
Imaginethat 20 sided dice from DnD. The chances of rolling 18-20 are roughly15%. So is the chance of rolling 1-3.
Thatmeans that statisticallyspeaking,all other things being equal, the chances are that if someone rolls a1-3 it’s incredibly likely they’ll get a higher number the nexttime they roll.
Ourperformance at tasks is always going to be a slightly random spreadof better or worse performances around a sort of base line. Andstatistically speaking, if we perform particularly badly one day thechances are we will improve the next regardlessof what those around us do.
Torturers(and some disciplinarians who don’t torture) see this improvementand argue that it’s because the person was punished. They didbadly. They were punished. The next day they improved. Clearly theimprovement was because of the punishment.
Thetruth is they could have danced widdershins around the person in afeather boa and still seen the same improvement.
Peoplealsouse this effect to argue against praise. Because if someone didunusually well the chances are the next day they’ll do a littleworse.
Notethat this effect is very much about the short term. It’s aboutperformance the next day, not the next month. And that focus on theshort term means that people miss things like delays in learning,longer training periods and gradual decline in ability.
Ifthe victims are all young trainees who only spend a relatively briefperiod of time with the torturer it’s also perfectly possible forthe torturer to be unaware of the long term lasting damage theycause.
That’swhy people can continue doing something like that for decades andbelieve it ‘works’.
Theirjustifications can go a little beyond that observation. Ideas aboutsocial hierarchy and ‘respect’ often form a part of the argumentin these situations. Tradition is also often misused to justifyabuse.
Thekinds of real world settings that seem to have this kind of set upand justification more often are- well facilities that involvetraining children or young people. Army cadet camps. Universities.Schools. Boarding facilities for children.
Inthe UK children have died during forced exercises in militarytraining facilities. It’s an issue that’s had a lot of press inthe last few years.
Butthe basic ideas underlying it are still pretty common globally. A lotof people do believe that physical punishment some how improvesobedience and learning. Despite the growing body of scientificevidence to the contrary.
Peoplecanstill learn in this sort of environment. But it’s learning despitethe abusive set up not because of it.
Andreturning to the DnD metaphor- in the long term this kind of‘training’ can end up acting like a negative modifier. It canmake someone that little bit worse at the task in the long run.
Ihope that helps. :)
Availableon Wordpress.
Disclaimer
