Skip to main content

Critical Belief Analysis Text: Chapter 6 Conducting A Critical Belief Analysis: A User's Manual

Critical Belief Analysis Text
Chapter 6 Conducting A Critical Belief Analysis: A User's Manual
    • Notifications
    • Privacy

“Chapter 6 Conducting A Critical Belief Analysis: A User's Manual” in “Critical Belief Analysis Text”

Chapter 6

Conducting a Critical Belief Analysis:

A User’s Manual

Checklists for Conducting a Critical Belief Analysis

This chapter leads the reader through a systematic process for conducting a Critical Belief Analysis (CBA). Chapter 7 provides an example analysis. Before conducting a CBA, the analyst must thoroughly understand the conceptual material in Chapters 2 through 5. If the analyst is uncertain about the basic concepts of CBA, they should seek to resolve their concerns. Those who wish to enhance their understanding of these concepts may find it helpful to read these articles and complete the exercises at the end of each article.

The analytic process is easier and more informative if conducted with the aid of The Periodic Table of the Beliefs (Figure 6.1). A larger, easier-to-read, scalable and printable version of “The Periodic Table of the Beliefs” is available as a Resource below the Table of Contents on the Projects page. The Periodic Table is designed to help analysts visualize the nature and limitations of the guidance beliefs provide, the relationships between beliefs, and the implications of disparities between agents’ and objective observers’ views of those beliefs. Analysts are encouraged to refer frequently to Figure 6.1 when conducting CBAs.

Each cell of The Periodic Table of the Beliefs is home to beliefs with a specific combination of fundamental need (motivation), precision/ambiguity, and viewpoint. Informative beliefs occupy the left half of the table while reassuring beliefs occupy the right. More precise informative beliefs can be found toward the left edge of the table while more precise reassuring beliefs can be found toward the right edge. More ambiguous beliefs can be found closer to the center. Lower-viewpoint beliefs are toward the bottom of the table; higher-viewpoint beliefs are toward the top.

The cells of The Periodic Table of the Beliefs are color-coded. Black cells share a distinctive combination of attributes: (a) agents may assume that beliefs possess combinations of characteristics that render them proper to those cells, but (b) those cells are actually vacant because their defining characteristics are incompatible. Light gray cells are home to beliefs that function as informative catalytic narratives, while dark gray cells are home to beliefs that function as reassuring catalytic narratives. White cells are home to those rare beliefs whose guidance will likely help agents achieve their goals.

Three additional checklists are also employed in conducting a CBA:

  • Figure 6.2, Critical Belief Analysis Procedure, offers a detailed, systematic process that analysts can use to identify differences between the guidance agents assume their beliefs provide and the guidance their beliefs actually provide. It also helps analysts understand and, where appropriate, predict the consequences of those differences.
  • Figure 6.3, Critical Belief Analysis Worksheet, is designed to help analysts document their progress and record their findings as they carry out a CBA in accordance with Figure 6.2.
  • Figure 6.4, Identifying the Desires Motivating Beliefs, is a 23-item questionnaire designed to help analysts determine whether an agent’s attitude toward and treatment of an actual (observed) belief renders the belief informative, reassuring, or both.
This table was designed to help analysts visualize the nature and limitations of the guidance beliefs provide, the relationships between beliefs, and the implications of disparities between agents’ and objective observers’ views of those beliefs.

Figure 6.2

Critical Belief Analysis Procedure

Critical Belief Analysis (CBA) is devoted to answering the question, “How closely does the guidance a belief actually provides resemble the guidance the actor/believer/decision-maker (hereafter agent) assumes it provides?” This step-by-step procedure is designed to help the analyst find this answer. This procedure is intended to be used in conjunction with Figure 6.1, The Periodic Table of the Beliefs; Figure 6.3, Critical Belief Analysis Worksheet; and Figure 6.4, Identifying the Desires Motivating Beliefs. Figure 6.3, Critical Belief Analysis Worksheet, provides spaces in which to record both your analytic findings and the processes by which you reached them.

Step 1: Orient Yourself to the Project.

1. Record the research purpose and research question on Figure 6.3, the Critical Belief Analysis Worksheet. [1]

2. Identify the agent and the agent’s to-be-evaluated (target) belief(s). (Note: Each target belief requires a separate analysis.)

3. Collect and document requisite sources of information and context. [2]

4. Describe the circumstances in which the target belief developed if this description contributes to understanding the belief.

5. Complete a psychobiography of the agent(s). [3]

6. Specify the target belief’s second-order precepts (i.e., the rules determining how agents — and, if the agent is powerful, the agent’s subjects — are expected to think about, defend, criticize, and communicate about the target belief.)

7. List situations in which the target belief strongly influenced the agent’s past thoughts, feelings, policies, or actions. Describe (a) the results of policies, etc., shaped by the target belief(s) and (b) the agent’s responses to failures or unexpected consequences of those policies, etc.

8. List situations in which the target belief seems likely to influence the agent’s future thoughts, feelings, policies, or actions.

Step 2: Locate the Belief on Figure 6.1, The Periodic Table of the Beliefs.

Note: Locating the target belief on the Periodic Table requires the analyst to determine what the agent perceived, assumed, thought, or knew. However, the analyst is unlikely to have access to specific information about these matters. As such, the analyst may need to use the results of the information and context search (Step 1, #3), the psychobiography (Step 1, #5), and the agent’s writings, speeches, conversations, and actions (Step 1, #7) to “see the world through the agent’s eyes.”

1. Using the guidelines below, identify the cell of Figure 6.1 that the agent assumes the target belief to occupy. (Note: This approach to determining the agent’s assumptions about the target belief presumes those assumptions to have been consistent. If those assumptions have varied, more weight should be given to the agent’s recent assumptions about that belief in situations that, from the agent’s point of view, are similar to the situation(s) of interest.)

a. Determine whether the agent assumes the belief to be informative or reassuring. Choose the option best describing what the agent expected the belief to do in the situations listed in Step 1, #7. (Note: Agents may look to a belief to assist them in multiple ways in a particular situation.) Determine if the agent expected the belief to:

  • Provide information that helps them understand the situation, decide what to expect, figure out how to get things done, evaluate the virtues and vices of a situation, or establish goals. (If so, the agent assumed that the belief was informative.)
  • Enhance their commitment to openness and objectivity, their ability to deal effectively with reality (including the situation in question), or their devotion to promulgating an ethos supporting openness and objectivity. (If so, the agent assumed that the belief was informative.)
  • Help them feel more comfortable or confident (e.g., help them feel more informed, competent, powerful, righteous, safe, secure, connected, or valued). (If so, the agent assumed that the belief was reassuring.)
  • Contribute to creating, sustaining, or promulgating an ethos, political group, religious group, or social group devoted to beliefs they find comforting or reassuring, or help them see themselves as doing so. (If so, the agent assumed that the belief was reassuring.)

Tally the number of times the agent looked to the belief for information (i.e., assumed the belief to be informative) or for reassurance (i.e., assumed the belief to be reassuring). Using this tally, determine whether the agent typically assumed that the belief offered information, reassurance, or both. (Note: If, in recent situations similar to the situation of interest, the agent assumed that the target belief was informative, the analyst is advised to presume the agent continues to consider it informative..)

b. Determine the viewpoint of the issue the agent assumed the belief addressed. Viewpoints are hierarchically arranged on Figure 6.1, The Periodic Table of the Beliefs, from Existential (lowest) to Realist, Ethical, Visionary, and Quest and Commitment (highest).

Identify the viewpoint of the issue the agent assumed the belief addressed in each situation listed in Step 1, #7 (see Figure 6.1). Determine if the agent’s words described or their actions manifested:

  • Fundamental commitments, values, or ideals. (If so, the agent most likely assumed the belief was proper to the Existential Viewpoint.)
  • Faith in an alleged reality. (If so, the agent most likely assumed the belief was proper to the Realist Viewpoint.)
  • Faith in the goodness of a particular state of affairs. (If so, the agent most likely assumed the belief was proper to the Ethical Viewpoint.)
  • Faith in the goodness of a fantasized altered state of affairs. (If so, the agent most likely assumed the belief was proper to the Visionary Viewpoint.)
  • A perceived obligation to realize the imagined improvement. (If so, the agent most likely assumed the belief was proper to the Quest and Commitment Viewpoint.)

Tally the number of times the agent’s words or actions indicated they assumed the target belief addressed issues proper to each viewpoint. Identify the most influential viewpoint the agent assumed the target belief to occupy. (Note: If, in recent situations similar to the situation of interest, the agent assumed that the target belief addressed issues in diverse viewpoints, the lowest of those viewpoints is likely to be the most relevant for the purposes of this analysis.)

c. Determine whether the agent assumed the target belief to be precise, imprecise, a rule of thumb, or a catalytic narrative. In each situation identified in Step 1, #7, identify the confidence the agent assumed the belief’s guidance merited. Determine if the agent’s words and actions suggest that they:

  • Relied on the belief to alert them to what was going to happen, tell them how to achieve their goals, or provide a readily falsified, data-sensitive framework that helped them explain events. (If so, the agent’s behavior suggests they assumed the belief to be precise.)
  • Expected the belief’s guidance to increase their odds of success — but not necessarily to make success likely. (If so, the agent’s behavior suggests they assumed the belief to be imprecise.)
  • Expected the belief to provide nothing more than encouragement to think about issues that may matter. (If so, the agent’s behavior suggests they assumed the belief to be a rule of thumb.)
  • Saw the belief as transforming them in ways that led them to see it as true even though they realized the belief in question failed to provide authentic information about reality. (If so, the agent’s behavior suggests they assumed the belief to be a catalytic narrative.)

Tally the number of times the agent arguably assumed the target belief to possess each degree of precision. Specify the degree of precision that, for the purposes of this analysis, the agent is most appropriately viewed as assuming the belief to possess. (Note: If, in recent situations similar to the situation of interest, the agent assumed the target belief possessed diverse degrees of precision, the most precise of those is likely to be the most relevant to this analysis.)

d. Summarize the agent’s assumptions about the target belief by circling or bolding the appropriate fundamental need, viewpoint, and degree of precision/ambiguity on the Figure 6.3 worksheet.

e. Designate the cell of Figure 6.1 corresponding to the agent’s assumptions about the target belief with an “A” (for assumed).

2. Using the guidelines below, determine the cell of Figure 6.1 that the target belief actually occupies. (Notes: (1) Successful completion of this section requires an accurate and comprehensive understanding of CBA. (2) This approach to determining the nature of the guidance the target belief actually provides assumes the nature of that guidance has been consistent. If it has been inconsistent, more weight should be given to the guidance the target belief provided recently, in situations that, from the agent’s point of view, are similar to the situation(s) of interest.)

a. Using the procedure specified in Figure 6.4 and other relevant information, determine whether the agent’s overall treatment of the belief facilitates the provision of information, reassurance, or both. If the belief is:

  • Informative, circle or bold “Information (In)” on the Figure 6.3 worksheet and proceed to b., immediately below.
  • Reassuring, circle or bold “Reassurance (Reas)” on the Figure 6.3 worksheet, classify the belief as a reassuring Existential Viewpoint catalytic narrative, and proceed to Step 3.
  • Both reassuring and informative, circle “Both” on the Figure 6.3 worksheet and rephrase the belief as two or more statements, each of which is either reassuring or informative (but not both). Analyze each statement separately.

b. Identify the viewpoint of the issue(s) the target belief actually addresses.

  • The belief is proper to the Existential Viewpoint if it answers such fundamental questions as “What kind of person do I (the agent) wish to be?” or “In the interest of becoming that kind of person, what institutions, laws, regulations, assumptions, values, relationships, standards of discourse, or approaches to evaluating beliefs do I wish to embrace or champion?”
  • The belief is also proper to the Existential Viewpoint if it significantly biases the lower-viewpoint beliefs grounding it. Note: If the belief is proper to the Existential Viewpoint in even a single case, the analyst should treat the belief as proper to the Existential Viewpoint.
  • The belief is tentatively proper to the Realist Viewpoint if it answers the question, “What is?”
  • The belief is tentatively proper to the Ethical Viewpoint if it answers the question, “Is ‘what is’ good?”
  • The belief is tentatively proper to the Visionary Viewpoint if it answers the question, “What might improvement or perfection look like?”
  • The belief is tentatively proper to the Quest and Commitment Viewpoint if it answers questions like, “What does my (i.e., the agent’s) vision of improvement or perfection demand of me?” or “What constraints does the possibility of achieving such improvement or perfection free me from?”

Note: If, in recent situations similar to the situation of interest, the target belief addressed issues proper to the Existential Viewpoint, it should be treated as an Existential Viewpoint belief for the purposes of this analysis. If the belief addressed issues proper to a single non-Existential viewpoint, it should be treated as proper to that viewpoint. If it addressed issues proper to diverse viewpoints (other than the Existential Viewpoint), it should be treated as proper to the highest of those viewpoints.

  • Circle or bold the appropriate viewpoint on the Figure 6.3 worksheet and proceed to c., below.

c. Determine the precision of the target belief. First, identify the maximum possible precision of the target belief by considering the two constraints discussed below:

Constraint #1: Viewpoint-imposed limitations on precision:

  • Existential Viewpoint beliefs are no more precise than catalytic narratives.
  • Realist Viewpoint beliefs may be precise, imprecise, rules of thumb, or catalytic narratives.
  • Ethical Viewpoint beliefs may be imprecise, rules of thumb, or catalytic narratives.
  • Visionary Viewpoint beliefs may be rules of thumb or catalytic narratives.
  • Quest and Commitment Viewpoint beliefs can be no more precise than catalytic narratives.

Constraint #2: Limitations on the precision of target beliefs imposed by the viewpoints of underlying beliefs:

First, identify lower-viewpoint beliefs that the agent has explicitly cited (or that you [the analyst] can confidently specify) as providing crucial support for the target belief. The target belief cannot be more precise than the least precise of those beliefs.

Next, using the guidelines below, identify the maximum precision of the target belief in each of the situations identified in Step 1, #6, and Step 1, #7 above.

  • The belief may be classified as precise if the above constraints do not preclude such a classification and if, as used by the agent, it:
    • Is proper to the Realist Viewpoint. (Only Realist Viewpoint beliefs can be precise.)
    • Clearly describes the phenomena it addresses or enables the agent to generate specific predictions.
    • Incorporates second-order precepts that:
      • Encourage the agent to seek, generate, acknowledge, and honestly grapple with challenging arguments and information.
      • Encourage the use of increasingly stringent tests as more sensitive instruments or revealing procedures become available.
      • Encourage the agent to promulgate and discuss challenging data and experiences.
  • The belief may be classified as imprecise if the above constraints do not preclude such a classification and if, as used by the agent, it:
    • Is proper to the Ethical or Realist Viewpoints. (Only beliefs proper to those viewpoints can be imprecise.)
    • Makes directional prediction(s) regarding relationships between phenomena.
    • Describes the general nature of those phenomena.
    • Broadly (or only implicitly) describes the conditions under which relationships between phenomena are alleged to occur.
    • Leads the agent to expect predicted relationships between phenomena to hold most of the time.
    • Incorporates second-order precepts that:
      • Encourage the agent to balance advocacy with openness to challenge and refinement.
      • Permit the agent to accept speculative post hoc explanations for predictive failures and other challenging observations.
      • Fail to encourage the agent to seek, generate, acknowledge, or promulgate challenging facts and arguments.
      • Inspire a laissez-faire attitude toward reexamining claims when more sensitive instruments or meticulous investigative procedures become available.
  • The belief may be classified as a rule of thumb if the above constraints do not preclude such a classification and if, as used by the agent:
    • It is proper to the Visionary, Ethical, or Realist Viewpoint.
    • It provides only colloquial descriptions of the phenomena it deals with.
    • It makes unclear claims regarding relationships between those phenomena.
    • It is vague or silent about the conditions under which those claims hold.
    • The above ambiguities allow it to account, after the fact, for a wide range of observations.
    • It has little effect on the agent’s experience or understanding of the issues it addresses.
    • Failures of the predictions and strategies it inspires have little impact on the agent’s confidence.
  • The belief may be classified as a catalytic narrative if, as used by the agent, it:
    • Provides a “lens” through which the agent experiences or interprets reality.
    • Satisfies the agent’s need to see themselves as knowledgeable, wise, or powerful.
    • Makes no falsifiable predictions, either by making no predictions or by encouraging the agent to “explain away” predictive failures.
    • Can account, after the fact, for a wide range of events.
    • Incorporates second-order precepts that:
      • Fail to encourage seeking, generating, or promulgating challenging facts and arguments.
      • Discourage serious consideration of challenging ideas, logic, or events.

d. Summarize your findings regarding the guidance the target belief actually provides by circling the appropriate fundamental need, viewpoint, and degree of precision/ambiguity on the Figure 6.3 worksheet.

e. Designate the appropriate cell on Figure 6.1 with an “O” (for observed, actual) and check the appropriate circle on the Figure 6.3 worksheet.

Step 3: Assess Existential Viewpoint Issues.

1. If the target belief is either actually or assumed to be reassuring, an informative catalytic narrative, or an informative Existential Viewpoint belief, investigate the issues below. Record your answers to the questions below in the allotted spaces on the Figure 6.3 worksheet. If the target belief engenders no Existential Viewpoint expectations and has no effect on Existential Viewpoint functioning, proceed to Step 4. 1.

2. Determine the target belief’s impact on Existential Viewpoint functioning.

a. How does the target belief affect the agent’s genuineness? Does it encourage or discourage (see Figure 5.1):

  • Attentiveness (openness and curiosity)?
  • Intelligence (the desire to understand and communicate one’s understanding and the effectiveness with which one does so)?
  • Reasonableness (willingness to consider the possibility one’s understanding may be erroneous or of limited relevance)?
  • Responsibility (commitment to acting lovingly, responsibly, and cautiously, guided by one’s best understanding and open to the possibility one’s actions may be ineffective, harmful, or both)?

b. How does the target belief affect the quality of the agent’s noetic relationships? Does it encourage the agent to:

  • Craft, conceptualize, and participate in activities that bring out the best in themselves and others?
    • Inspire others to do so?
  • Root for their own success and the success of their collaborators?
  • Accept support with gratitude?
  • Root for good faith efforts to experience, know, master, and love?
  • Root for the genuineness that is essential to experience, knowledge, mastery, and love?

c. How does the target belief affect the quality of the agent’s communication? Does it encourage or discourage commitments to:

  • Being consistent?
  • Meaning what one says?
  • Defending one’s positions or justifying one’s refusal to do so?
  • Minimizing the influence of coercion on what is said and how it is understood?
  • Ensuring that arguments used to support one’s positions are valid, and that data used to support one’s positions are unbiased?
  • Stating one’s positions in ways that render them subject to falsification or meaningful discussion and criticism?
  • Refusing to buttress one’s positions by manipulating the terms or rules of debate?

d. What is the overall impact of the agent’s genuineness, noetic relationships, and communication style/discourse ethics on the: (Record the assessments in the designated space on the Figure 6.3 worksheet.)

  • Objectivity with which the agent treats the target belief?
  • Belief-relevant data reaching the agent?
  • Nature of belief-relevant discourse to which the agent is exposed?
  • Agent’s responses to belief-relevant data and discourse?

Step 4: Assumption-Reality Disparities and their Implications.

1. Identifying the target belief’s assumption-reality disparities requires reflecting on the disparity between (a) the agent’s assumptions about the fundamental needs that motivate their acceptance of the target belief and the fundamental need(s) that actually motivate the belief’s acceptance, (b) the agent’s assumptions about the viewpoint of the issue the belief addresses and the viewpoint of the issue the belief actually addresses, and (c) the agent’s assumptions about the precision of the belief’s guidance and the actual precision of that guidance. The Figure 6.3 worksheet provides space to record insights into those disparities.

a. Assumption-reality disparities regarding motivation. Identify the disparities between the agent’s assumed and actual motives for holding the target belief. Complete the following sentences:

“The agent assumes they accept this belief because it satisfies their desire for . . .”

“The agent actually accepts this belief because it satisfies their desire for . . .”

If the agent’s assumed and actual motives differ, describe the likely consequences of this error by completing the statement:

“This misapprehension matters because . . .”

b. Assumption-Reality Disparities Regarding Viewpoint. Identify the disparity between the viewpoint of the issue the agent assumes the target belief addresses and the viewpoint of the issue the target belief actually addresses. Complete the following statements:

“The agent assumes the target belief is concerned with . . .” (Complete this statement in a way that highlights the target belief’s assumed viewpoint.)

“In fact, the target belief is concerned with . . .” (Complete this statement in a way that highlights the target belief’s actual viewpoint.)

If the assumed and actual viewpoints of the target belief differ, complete the statement below:

“The agent’s misapprehensions about the viewpoint of the target belief matter because (Specify likely errors.) . . .”

Note: If the agent accurately assumes the target belief to be informative, see the Chapter 4 section, “The Value of Attention to Viewpoint and Viewpoint-Precision/Ambiguity Interaction in Security Analysis.

If the target belief — whether informative or reassuring — is proper to the Existential Viewpoint or the agent assumes it to be, complete the following statements:

“The agent assumes this belief will help them become someone who . . .”

“However, it actually encourages the agent to become someone who . . .”

If the agent’s expectations regarding the existential impact of the target belief conflict with reality, complete the statement below:

“The ways this belief falls short of the agent’s expectations about its impact matter because . . .”

c. Assumption-Reality Disparities Regarding Precision/Ambiguity. Identify the disparities between the precision of the guidance the agent assumes the belief provides and the precision of the guidance the belief actually provides by completing the following statements:

“The agent assumes the guidance the target belief provides is . . .” (Describe the guidance the agent views the belief as providing, highlighting its assumed precision.)

“In fact, the guidance the target belief provides is . . .” (Describe the guidance the belief actually provides, highlighting its precision.)

If the agent’s assumption regarding the precision of the target belief’s guidance is inaccurate, specify the probable consequences of this misapprehension by completing the statement:

“This misapprehension matters because . . .”

Ensure all insights generated by Step 4 are recorded on the Figure 6.3 worksheet.

Step 5: Consequences, Self-Critique, Analytic Narrative.

1. Describe the major consequences of the agent’s false assumptions about the target belief by completing the statement below. Where relevant, describe the effects of the agent’s belief-relevant second-order precepts and Existential Viewpoint functioning.

“The most important consequences of the agent’s false assumptions regarding the target belief appear to be . . .”

Note: Be sure to consider the likely impact of the belief’s second-order precepts and the agent’s Existential Viewpoint functioning [assessed in Step 3] on each of the identified implications or consequences.

2. Critique the agent-focused CBA.

Upon completing a CBA of an agent’s belief, the analyst should conduct a self-critique of that CBA. While such self-critiques address the same factors as agent-focused CBAs — fundamental need, viewpoint, and precision/ambiguity — they are significantly easier to carry out. That’s because analyst-focused CBAs need only compare the analyst’s CBA of the agent’s belief with the standards by which such products are judged. Thus, the statement that analysts’ self-critiques should address is, “My CBA of the agent’s target belief meets the standards such analyses are expected to satisfy.” There are three such standards.

First, security analysts are expected to strive for objectivity. In the language of CBA, security analysts are expected to do their best to ensure their reports are shaped by the desire for information rather than the desire for reassurance. Analysts are therefore advised to reflect on their thoughts and feelings about the agent-focused CBA and to review Figure 6.4, Identifying the Desires Motivating Beliefs, to sensitize themselves to any attitudes, beliefs, or practices that may have compromised their objectivity. Specifically, analysts should identify and document the potential impact of every Figure 6.4 “A” statement with which they agreed or strongly agreed. The products of their self-examination should be documented by completing the sentence stem, “Self-examination (including the use of Figure 6.4 to help uncover my possible biases) suggests the following attitudes, beliefs, or penchants, motivated by the need for reassurance, may have biased my conclusions:” Analysts should consider revising their agent-focused CBA if a review of Figure 6.4 raises the possibility of significant bias. If a review of Figure 6.4 suggests the possibility of mild bias, analysts should acknowledge that bias and discuss its possible impact on their conclusions.

Second, the conclusions of competent, ethical security analysts are expected to be proper to the Realist Viewpoint. Analysts should strive to provide decision-makers with objective descriptions of the substantive and structural characteristics of agents’ beliefs and the implications of those characteristics. They should refrain from opining about the goodness of those characteristics or other issues that are not proper to the Realist Viewpoint. Analysts who discover that the conclusions of their CBAs are proper to the Existential, Ethical, Visionary, or Quest and Commitment viewpoints are advised to consider revising their reports.

Finally, analysts are expected to be sensitive to the ambiguity of the explanations and predictions their conclusions inspire. Suppose such explanations and predictions are unfalsifiable. In that case, analysts should acknowledge that their conclusions are catalytic narratives, i.e., assertions that create the illusion of truth while failing to offer meaningful guidance to those tasked with making consequential decisions. Suppose the report’s conclusions about agents’ target beliefs have the characteristics of rules of thumb. In that case, analysts should acknowledge that those conclusions do little more than encourage attention to issues that may matter and that those tasked with making consequential decisions cannot assume the guidance of those conclusions will improve their odds of success. Suppose the report’s conclusions about agents’ target beliefs have the characteristics of imprecise beliefs. In that case, analysts should acknowledge that the guidance of those conclusions can do nothing more than increase one’s odds of success and that one cannot assume the guidance of those conclusions will make it likely that one will succeed. Finally, suppose the report’s conclusions about agents’ target beliefs have the characteristics of precise beliefs. Since the complexities of human behavior and institutional functioning make this degree of precision unlikely, analysts are advised to subject the processes that shaped their conclusions to a comprehensive critique. Only conclusions that survive such critiques should be offered as reliable insights into the future.

Determine the likelihood/probability that the conclusions of your agent-focused CBA are correct. [4] Justify your estimate.

Specify your degree of confidence that your agent-focused CBA is a “quality analytic product.” [5] Explain your view.

3. Document all analytic work on the Figure 6.3 worksheet and prepare the analytic narrative (written report, verbal briefing, etc.). Chapter 11 of Security Analysis: A Critical-Thinking Approach provides guidance on preparing the analytic narrative. [6]

Figure 6.3

Critical Belief Analysis Worksheet

This worksheet is to be used in conjunction with Figure 6.1, The Periodic Table of the Beliefs; Figure 6.2, Critical Belief Analysis Procedure; and Figure 6.4, Identifying the Desires Motivating Beliefs. Complete each task as directed, using additional sheets if necessary. Mark each step bracket ([ √ ]) upon completing all subordinate tasks.

[ ] Step 1: Orient Yourself to the Project.

  • Research purpose (specify):
  • Research question (specify):
  • To-be-evaluated agent and target belief (specify):
  • Sources of information utilized (specify):
  • Circumstances in which the target belief developed, if relevant (specify):
  • Psychobiography (specify relevant history and characteristics):
  • Target belief’s second-order precepts (specify):
  • Situations in which the target belief strongly influenced the agent’s past thoughts, feelings, or actions (specify):
    • Results of policies, etc., shaped by the target belief (specify):
    • Agent’s responses to failures or unanticipated consequences of the above policies (specify):
  • Situations in which the target belief seems likely to influence the agent’s future thoughts, feelings, policies, or actions (specify):

[ ] Step 2: Locate the Belief on Figure 6.1, The Periodic Table of the Beliefs.

1. Determine the nature of the guidance the agent assumes the belief provides.

  • The agent’s history suggests the agent assumes the target belief satisfies their desire for (Circle or bold one and, if necessary, justify or explain your choice.):

Information (In)

Reassurance (Reas)

Both

Justification/Explanation (optional):

  • The agent’s history suggests the agent assumes the belief is primarily concerned with (Circle or bold one and, if necessary, justify or explain your choice.):

Existential Viewpoint issues (Ex)

Realist Viewpoint issues (Real)

Ethical Viewpoint issues (Eth)

Visionary Viewpoint issues (Vi)

Quest and Commitment Viewpoint issues (QC)

Justification/Explanation (optional):

  • The agent’s history suggests the agent assumes the belief offers the guidance of (Circle or bold one and, if necessary, justify or explain your choice.):

A precise belief (P)

An imprecise belief (I)

A rule of thumb (RoT)

A catalytic narrative (CN)

Justification/Explanation (optional):

  • Based on the above, the agent likely assumes the belief is proper to the cell of Figure 6.1 specified below (Circle or bold one in each row.):

In Reas

Ex Real Eth Vi QC

P I RoT CN

  • Designate the appropriate cell of Figure 6.1 with an “A” for assumed.

2. Determine the nature of the guidance the target belief actually provides.

  • The procedure specified in Figure 6.4 and other relevant information suggests the agent’s overall treatment of the belief facilitates the provision of (Circle or bold information (In), reassurance (Reas), or both. If necessary, justify or explain your choice.):

Information (In)

Reassurance (Reas)

Both

Justification/Explanation (optional):

  • The belief is actually concerned with (Circle or bold one and, if necessary, justify or explain your choice.):

Existential Viewpoint issues (Ex)

Realist Viewpoint issues (Real)

Ethical Viewpoint issues (Eth)

Visionary Viewpoint issues (Vi)

Quest and Commitment Viewpoint issues (QC)

Justification/Explanation (optional):

  • The belief actually offers the guidance of (Circle or bold one and, if necessary, justify or explain your choice.):

A precise belief (P)

An imprecise belief (I)

A rule of thumb (RoT)

A catalytic narrative (CN)

Justification/Explanation (optional):

  • Based on the above, the belief is actually proper to the Figure 6.1 cell specified below (Circle or bold one in each row.):

In Reas

Ex Real Eth Vi QC

P I RoT CN

  • Designate the appropriate cell of Figure 6.1 with an “O” for observed or actual.

[ ]Step 3: Assess Existential Viewpoint Issues.

  • The target belief affects the agent’s genuineness by (Specify those aspects of genuineness the target belief encourages and those it discourages.) . . .





  • The target belief’s effects on the (noetic) quality of the agent’s relationships include . . .





  • The target belief’s effects on the quality of the agent’s communication style/discourse ethics include . . .





  • The target belief’s impact on the agent’s genuineness, the (noetic) quality of the agent’s relationships, and the agent’s communication style/discourse ethics seems likely to affect (Choose those effects that apply. Justify or explain your choices.):
    • The objectivity with which the agent treats the target belief.
    • The belief-relevant data to which the agent is exposed.
    • The belief-relevant discourse to which the agent is exposed.
    • The agent’s responses to belief-relevant data and discourse.

[ ] Step 4: Assumption-Reality Disparities and Their Implications.

1. [ ] Assumption-Reality Disparities Regarding Motivation.

  • (Complete the following sentence. Elaborate if appropriate.) The agent assumes they accept this belief because it satisfies their desire for . . .





  • (Complete the following sentence. Elaborate if appropriate.) The agent actually accepts this belief because it satisfies their desire for . . .





If the agent’s assumed and actual motives differ, complete the statement below:

  • This misapprehension matters because (Specify likely errors.) . . .





2. [ ] Assumption-Reality Disparities Regarding Viewpoint.

  • (Complete the following sentence, highlighting the target belief’s assumed viewpoint. Elaborate if appropriate.) The agent assumes the target belief is concerned with . . .





  • (Complete the following sentence, highlighting the target belief’s actual viewpoint. Elaborate if appropriate.) In fact, the target belief is actually concerned with . . .





If the assumed and actual viewpoints of the target belief differ, complete the statement below:

  • The agent’s misapprehensions about the viewpoint of the target belief matter because (Specify likely errors.) . . .





If the target belief — whether informative or reassuring — is proper to the Existential Viewpoint or the agent assumes it to be, complete the following statements:

  • The agent assumes this belief will help them become someone who . . .





  • However, it actually encourages the agent to become someone who . . .





If the agent’s expectations regarding the existential impact of the target belief conflict with reality, complete the statement below:

  • The ways this belief falls short of the agent’s expectations about its impact matter because . . .





3. [ ] Assumption-Reality Disparities Regarding Precision/Ambiguity.

  • The agent assumes the guidance the target belief provides is (Describe the guidance the agent views the belief as providing, highlighting its assumed precision.) . . .





  • In fact, the guidance the target belief actually provides is . . . (Describe the guidance the belief provides, highlighting its precision.)





If the agent’s assumption about the precision of the belief’s guidance was in error, complete the statement below:

  • This misapprehension matters because . . .





[ ]Step 5: Consequences, Analyst Self-Critique, Analytic Narrative.

1. [ ] Consequences.

Complete the statement below. Where relevant, describe the effects of the agent’s belief-relevant second-order precepts and Existential Viewpoint functioning on each identified consequence.

  • The most important consequences of the agent’s false assumptions regarding the target belief appear to be . . .





2. [ ] Critique the agent-focused CBA

a. Critique the claim, “My CBA of the agent’s target belief meets the standards such analyses are expected to satisfy” by responding to the prompts below as appropriate:

Complete the following sentence, making sure to identify and describe the potential impact of every Figure 6.4 “A” statement with which you agreed or strongly agreed:

  • Self-examination (including the use of Figure 6.4 to help uncover my possible biases) suggests the following attitudes, beliefs, or penchants, motivated by the need for reassurance, may have biased my conclusions:

  • If you neither agreed nor strongly agreed with any Figure 6.4 “A” statements, say so.

  • If appropriate, include the following sentence (or something similar) in your report: Since, despite my best efforts to be objective, it is possible the desire for reassurance biased the conclusions of my agent-focused CBA, I suggest those who read this report keep the following caveats in mind:

○ Review and, if necessary, revise your report to ensure the following statement is accurate: “I have reviewed and, if necessary, revised my agent-focused CBA to ensure its conclusions address factual (i.e., Realist Viewpoint) concerns.” Include a statement to that effect in your report.

○ Review and, if necessary, revise your report to ensure the following statement is accurate: “I have reviewed and, if necessary, revised my agent-focused CBA to ensure its conclusions (a) are no more precise than the most ambiguous beliefs or observations that provide those conclusions with crucial support and (b) do not bias those supportive beliefs or observations. If indicated, I have dialed back the exactitude of my conclusions.” Include a statement to that effect in your report.

  • Include one of the two statements below (and, if indicated, your response to that statement) in your report:

a. “Having completed the above critique and all indicated corrective actions, I feel justified in describing my CBA of the agent’s target belief as satisfying all expected standards.”

b. “I am concerned that my analysis of the agent’s target belief may (a) fail to meet the following standards (specify), (b) those failures may have compromised my understanding of the agent’s target belief, and (c) such compromised understanding may have contributed to the following flaws in my analytic narrative” (specify):

  • Estimate the likelihood/probability the conclusions of the analyst’s agent-focused CBA are correct. Justify or explain your estimate.
  • Specify your degree of confidence that your agent-focused CBA is a “quality analytic product.” Explain your view.
  • Prepare caveats for the analytic narrative provoked by both the agent’s self-critique and limitations in the CBA of the agent’s target belief.

3. [ ] Analytic Narrative

  • Prepare the analytic narrative (written report, verbal briefing, etc.).

Figure 6.4

Identifying the Desires Motivating Beliefs[7]

This questionnaire can be used to reveal the fundamental need(s) actually motivating the beliefs of agents and analysts. If the analyst responds to each item pair as they believe the agent would if they (the agent) were self-aware, insightful, and honest, this questionnaire can reveal what motivates the agent’s target beliefs. If, when critiquing their own beliefs, the analyst responds to each item pair with similar self-awareness, insight, and honesty, this questionnaire can reveal what motivates the analyst’s beliefs about their conclusions, including their beliefs about the agent.

Belief to be examined (specify):

Keeping the to-be-examined (target) belief in mind, ask how the person holding the belief (whether agent or analyst) actually feels about each of the issues addressed by the pairs of contrasting statements below. In each case, the believer may agree or strongly agree with Statement “A,” agree or strongly agree with Statement “B,” or agree with neither statement. Concurrence with Statement “A” reflects a desire for reassurance, while concurrence with Statement “B” reflects a desire for competence (information).

RESPOND TO EACH PAIR OF CONTRASTING STATEMENTS BELOW BY:
  • CIRCLING OR BOLDING “1” FOR STRONG AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT A
  • CIRCLING OR BOLDING “2” FOR AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT A
  • CIRCLING OR BOLDING “3” FOR AGREEMENT WITH NEITHER STATEMENT
  • CIRCLING OR BOLDING “4” FOR AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT B
  • CIRCLING OR BOLDING “5” FOR STRONG AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT B
  • PAIR #1
    a. I want this belief to be true.
    b. I don’t care whether this belief is true.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #2
    a. This belief makes me feel good about myself.
    b. This belief doesn’t make me feel good about myself.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #3
    a. Believing this makes me a better person.
    b. Believing this has no effect on my goodness.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #4
    a. This belief helps make me who I am.
    b. I would be the same person if I didn’t hold this belief.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #5
    a. I would see myself differently if I didn’t hold this belief.
    b. I wouldn’t see myself any differently if I didn’t hold this belief.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #6
    a. Affirming this belief renders me morally superior to those who are blind to its truth.
    b. Affirming this belief has no effect on my moral standing.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #7
    a. Affirming this belief renders me intellectually superior to those who are blind to its truth.
    b. Affirming this belief has no effect on my intellectual standing.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #8
    a. Believing this makes me feel comfortable.
    b. This belief has no effect on how comfortable I feel.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #9
    a. Information that appeared to raise serious questions about this belief would upset me.
    b. Information that appeared to raise serious questions about this belief wouldn’t faze me.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #10
    a. I do my best to avoid information that might challenge this belief.
    b. I don’t try to avoid information that might challenge this belief.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #11
    a. I believe that, when properly implemented, strategies this belief inspires always work.
    b. I’m open to the possibility that strategies this belief inspires may fail, even if properly implemented.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #12
    a. Strategies this belief inspires only fail when those implementing them lack skill or commitment.
    b. Strategies this belief inspires may not work, even in the hands of skilled, committed believers.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #13
    a. Careful examination of data or arguments that challenge this belief is a waste of time.
    b. Careful examination of data or arguments that challenge this belief may be worthwhile.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #14
    a. If I encountered information that appeared to challenge this belief, I’d do my best to explain it away.
    b. If I encountered information that appeared to challenge this belief, I’d consider the possibility the belief may be flawed.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #15
    a. Any argument challenging this belief must employ inaccurate information or faulty logic.
    b. Some of the arguments casting doubt on this belief may be sound.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #16
    a. I’m distressed if others don’t share this belief.
    b. It’s OK with me if others don’t share this belief.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #17
    a. There’s probably something wrong with those who don’t accept this belief.
    b. Even those who are worthy of my respect and admiration may find it hard to accept this belief.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #18
    a. I have no trouble dismissing challenges to this belief if my fellow believers consider the sources of those challenges biased.
    b. I feel obliged to investigate challenges to this belief for myself.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #19
    a. Those who challenge this belief should be silenced.
    b. Those who challenge this belief should be free to express their views.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #20
    a. There’s no point in trying to understand the values or perspectives of those who don’t share this belief.
    b. Efforts to understand the values or perspectives of those who don’t share this belief may be worthwhile.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #21
    a. I avoid questioning this belief or considering incompatible beliefs because those I care about would be upset if I did so.
    b. The feelings and opinions of those I care about have no effect on what I allow myself to think, say, or believe.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #22
    a. I would respond to information that could be considered threatening to my belief by rephrasing my belief to make it harder to challenge.
    b. I would respond to information that could be considered threatening to my belief by reflecting thoughtfully on that information.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    PAIR #23

    a.I feel obliged to champion my belief, even if doing so requires me to portray biased information, falsehoods, or irrational arguments as unquestionable truths.

    b.I feel obliged to present my belief fairly and accurately,   even if doing so creates doubts about its truth, its goodness, or the trustworthiness of its guidance.

    1  2  3  4  5  

    Assessing the Fundamental Needs Motivating the Target Belief.

    TOTAL #1s CIRCLED OR BOLDED (STRONG AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT “A”):

    TOTAL #2s CIRCLED OR BOLDED (AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT “A”):

    TOTAL #3s CIRCLED OR BOLDED (AGREEMENT WITH NEITHER STATEMENT “A” NOR STATEMENT “B”):

    TOTAL #4s CIRCLED OR BOLDED (AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT “B”):

    TOTAL #5s CIRCLED OR BOLDED (STRONG AGREEMENT WITH STATEMENT “B”):

    Beware of the temptation to interpret the results of this questionnaire mechanically. For example, one might assume believers (whether agents or analysts) look to a particular belief to inform them about reality if, upon examining their feelings about that belief, they find they agree or strongly agree with the majority of “B” statements. However, reflection on the paired statements comprising this questionnaire reveals that endorsing an “A” statement generally indicates the believer is passionate about the belief in question while endorsing a “B” statement generally indicates the believer views the belief with a degree of detachment. For this reason alone, those interpreting this questionnaire should weigh endorsements of “A” statements more heavily than endorsements of “B” statements.

    But there is an even more compelling reason for weighing endorsements of “A” statements more heavily than endorsements of “B” statements. Objectivity is inherently fragile; a single flaw in an otherwise valid argument can invalidate that argument. Bias, by contrast, is inherently durable. Adding a valid argument or observation to a flawed argument adds little or nothing to its validity.

    Thus, interpreting responses to this questionnaire requires imagining how the attitudes reflected in the endorsements are likely to impact objectivity. If those responses suggest the believer has the requisite commitment and discipline to treat the target belief objectively, the interpreter should classify the belief as informative. If those responses suggest the believer lacks such commitment and discipline, the interpreter should classify the belief as reassuring. And if those responses suggest the believer’s treatment of the belief vacillates, the analyst should evaluate the belief in question as two distinct beliefs — one informative and one reassuring.

    Conclusion (circle or bold one):
    THIS BELIEF IS BEST CONSIDERED (AND EVALUATED AS):
    REASSURING
    INFORMATIVE
    TWO BELIEFS: ONE REASSURING AND ONE INFORMATIVE (rephrase and re-evaluate each separately)

    Justification/Evaluation (optional):

      NOTES

    1. Michael W.Collier, Security Analysis: A Critical Thinking Approach. (Richmond, KY: Eastern Kentucky University Libraries, Encompass Digital Archive, 2023), free download at htttp://encompass.eku.edu/ekuopen/6/ (accessed June 1, 2023), chap 4.↑
    2. Ibid, chap 5.↑
    3. Ibid, chap 6. ↑
    4. Ibid, chap 11. ↑
    5. Ibid. ↑
    6. Ibid. ↑
    7. Barnet D. Feingold, "Barney’s Place, A new look at beliefs," http://barneysplace.net/site/ (accessed December 19, 2020), art. 7. ↑
    Next Chapter
    Chapter 7 Critical Belief Analysis Example
    PreviousNext
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).
    Powered by Manifold Scholarship. Learn more at
    Opens in new tab or windowmanifoldapp.org
    Manifold uses cookies

    We use cookies to analyze our traffic. Please decide if you are willing to accept cookies from our website. You can change this setting anytime in Privacy Settings.