Centerreview 1988 Vol 2 No 2, Spring

Vol 2 No.2. A Publication of the Center for Psychological Studies in the Nuclear Age Spring, 1988 NEW THINKING IN THE NUCLEAR AGE: DESPERATELY SEEKING IMPLICATIONS FOR PEACEMAKING THE SINGULAR The Corliss Lamont Lecture on International Security Nuclear Weapons Decision presented at Harvard's JFK School of Government, March 9, 1988 Making and the by Milton Schwebe4 PhD, Rutgers University Dominant Political Culture Milton Schwebel's Lamont lecture By Kenneth Resnik reflected a long and thoughtful career in a field which has recently come to be known On the face of it, decisions surrounding as "nuclear psychology." He began his nuclear weapons procurement are confus lecture by presenting a review of the ing. This is true for several reasons: first, literature in one area of nuclear psychology, secrecy surrounds almost any action which that concerned with children's and ado allegedly involves "the national defense." lescents' concerns about nuclear war. He While the necessity of this secrecy is placed the information gleaned from this debatable, it is clear that such secrecy serves area of study into the context of one of the to undermine public knowledge of defense t .... major theoretical advances in 20th century :·,'-.. / decisions and thus lessen military and :,:· ~ psychology: the idea that meaning is not political accountability. Further, the formal inherent in the external world, but is processes for making these decisions are constructed through activity in a social remarkably complex and not open to Milton Schwebel, PhD context The "realities of the nuclear age," casual understanding. Moreover, the he said, are not definable simply in language surrounding such decisions, the deliberate putting out of one's mind "objective" terms, but are defined and replete with acronyms, jargon, and pseudo that which cannot be helped at the evolve developmentally, socially, historic technical terms, tends to confuse the casual moment, so that one can get on with life's ally, and culturally. In recent years, out of observer. business." The 80% of the American the evolving "nuclear reality" has arisen a This being the case, one would expect people who support the freeze, Schwebel general recognition that nuclear war that a researcher could gain a more reasoned, are not numb, they are frustrated, threatens the survival of the species and complete understanding of these decisions they feel powerless, and they are habituated that nuclear weapons ought not to be used through determined study of the mechan to daily life in troubling times. If we need to as a tool of diplomacy. Such are the isms for such decisions. When these assign blame for the inaction of the elements of "new thinking." mechanisms are understood, we should be majority we should look to the system that In presenting his overview of research able to analyze the process which shaped a frustrates the public's desires. Moreover, he findings, Schwebel claimed that children's decision, and thus explain the decision argued, we should look to the peace concerns about nuclear war are rea4 to itself. movement, which has persisted to some suggest that eleven year olds, for example, continued on page 9 are unconcerned "is to demean (them) ... degree or another throughout the nuclear to make them out to be idiots unable to age, for new means to reach and mobilize comprehend meanings and consequences, the public. INSIDE or otherwise, to view them as automatons T award that end, Schwebel offered four who are programmed to know but not to recommendations to peacemakers, parti feel" Given this very real concern, on the cularly to those of the "nuclear psychology" Peace Activists and part of children and adults alike, he asked, stripe. First, he urged us to resist self Defense Analysts • • . • • • • • • . • p. 2 i why do so few people do anything about it? censorship. We should be bold, creative, and vocal Second, we should avoid ego His answer to this question reflected a Corporate Leadership • • • • . • p. 4 departure from some of his colleagues in centric thinking and show sensitivity for nuclear psychology, most notably, Robert the perspectives of our adversaries. Third, Looking into the Future • • • • p. 5 we should avoid faulty attributions of the Jay Lifton. Lifton attributes inaction to Enemy Images • • • • • • • • • . • p. 6 "psychic numbing." This, Schwebel said, is sort: My behavior is shaped by my situation; akin to blaming the victim The more likely yours is attributable to a personal disposi- Ongoing Projects • • . • • • . • • p. 10 mechanism, Schwebel said, is "suppression: continued on page 8 An Affiliate of Harvard Medical School at Cambridge Hospital Spring 1988 CENTER REVIEW BREAKING THE PEACE ACTIVIST-DEFENSE ANALYST IMPASSE ... WITH A UTILE HELP FROM DOWN UNDER A Report from the Project on Assumptions and Perceptions that Fuel the Arms Race by Richard Chasin, MD. and Margaret Herzig An adolescent with a habit of lying and the Center. The "real problems" of the terms. The defense analysts' model, one stealing sits between his worried parents. nuclear age, they had argued, were political psychologist said, "leaves out a million He is "problem-saturated"- in deep and strategic, not psychological. They felt things about human knowledge and trouble with a grim future. Australian that when psychological factors were interactions." One defense analyst said that family therapist, Michael White, poses relevant at all, they often played a minor, he has a very difficult time, intellectually, numerous questions to the boy to help him and usually unpredictable role. The with the sort of distortions of fact that he stand back from his problems and consider psychologists had argued that the "techno has heard from some activists. The styles of the impact of those problems on his life. He strategic approach" was dangerously nar thinking of each group (or at least asks not about how and why the boy row, and, in fact, incapable of framing stereotypes of it) were distasteful to the misbehaves, but about how the boy's crucial questions about human values and other. problems oppress him in daily life and limit capabilities. These perceptions of inade Such blaming exchanges, however, did his future. During the session, White is on quacy- not lying, stealing, fears, or not typify the conversation that the five the look-out for exceptions to the boy's depression - served as the initial focal participants had about their previous troubled behavior- occasions when the point of Michael White's most unusual conversations. Almost immediately, an boy might have misbehaved but didn't. By interventive interview. "exception" occurred, an exception to the the end of the session, the boy has begun to "problem-saturated description" of two take responsibility for his conduct. He and groups each believing their own model to his parents see exceptions to the problem "You can move from being an insider be adequate and the other's model to be saturated description with which they to being an outsider but you can't lie inadequate. The defense analysts critiqued began, not the least of which is the boy's on the railroad tracks, then expect to their own approach as narrow and "likely honesty with the therapist. become Secretary of State." to miss something." They portrayed it A young housewife feels inadequate and as inappropriately emulating the hard depressed. She cannot perform her drudg sciences, as if human interactions could be ery with a smile. Michael White helps her described with the theoretical simplicity of to see her strengths - exceptions to her When White entered the consulting physics. They did not say what the self-description- and to understand that room, no one, not even White, knew what psychologists may have wanted to hear she has been "subjugated to cultural would happen. But White clearly had a about the contributions that psychologists specifications for personhood," specifica plan. As in the cases described above, he could make to correct this tendency. In tions that include oppressive expectations would externalize the problem, help the fact, they questioned the "practical applic and roles for women. She no longer feels participants become aware of how it oppressed ability" of psychology to issues of national inadequate, but joins the battle against this them, search out exceptions to the "problem security. Perhaps because of this, one of the subjugation and begins to experience saturated" description, use these excep psychologists failed to hear the self victory. tions to launch and nurture a new criticism, and said that the defense analysts What do these cases have to do with description, then help the participants begin needed someone from the "outside" to dialogue between peace activists and to develop new ideas about themselves and point out the limitations of their approach. defense analysts in Cambridge, Massachu their future. She, in effect, re-entered the problematic setts? Dr. Richard Chasin, director of the White showed little concern for the behavior by presuming that the defense Center's Project on Assumptions and content of the debate between the two analysts were seeking the "correct" view of Perceptions that Fuel the Arms Race, groups. Their unproductive and ritualized the psychologists. Another psychologist invited Michael White to interview five debate was the problem that needed to be heard the defense analysts' self-criticism as adults concerned with avoiding nuclear externalized. They needed to explore the an "exception" and became self- critical war: two representatives of the Center for impact of this frustrating dialogue on their himself. Science and International Affairs at Harvard lives. White did not presume that they had One psychologist raised the question of University's Kennedy School of Govern any solid motivation to solve this problem. power." You may feel at times insecure and ment, both defense analysts trained in He began the interview with the question, limited," she said, "but in fact you have the physics, and three representatives of our "What are the advantages of your having power.

Load more