Military Intuition and Military Analysis

Military Intuition and Military Analysis

Nearly all American books on war are linear. They describe facts in a progression, over time. All actors in their stories of history are also described as emitting described behaviors, linearally. The military expert, military intellectual or military professional, is neither understood nor described by such writers. Nearly all American military writers or "historians,"are not military experts, but researchers, who in the main, have no military frame of reference. In fact many of them seek to convey only their anti-military bias superimposed on the superstructure of the subject at hand. Most military writers and "historians" are analytical, not intutive. Intuition is expert knowledge gained by experience and continuous study.The military expert is intutive, which I will describe in later posts. The military bureacrat is a creature of analysis. Analysis is linear thinging and is the amateur's approach to problem solving. It is plodding, slow and the results are frequently mediocre when a general's thinking is guided by such a checklist mind set. Intuitive experts move far more rapidly and perceive reality as patterns underpinned by frames of reference. A frame of reference is a blueprint for correctly looking at a subject which clarifies the relative importance of competing variables.There are two basic methods of military decision making, analysis and intuition, or coup d' oeil. According to British Colonel Charles Rogers, western military officers are frequently paralyzed by analysis. "...On the one hand, we have decisions based on an exhaustive analysis of factors. On the other hand, we have intuition, which emphasizes decisions based on the ability of a commander to rapidly process information gained from knowledge and experience. With technology providing an endless flow of information on the modern battlefield, it would be logical to suggest that analysis would be the stronger form of decision-making. However, the demand for 'certainty' on the battlefield leads to a demand for more information, much of which will be incorrect and misleading. The danger with this process is that commanders believe they never have sufficient information to make a decision, and so they either delay their decision or reach a situation where they never make a decision...this is a state of 'paralysis by analysis' that is a common failing of leaders who have not learned to be decisive..."