Posted in Prose

Reflections on credulity and credibility

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

The incidence of celebrities, authority figures and eminent persons making commentaries on social affairs, the state of the economy and governance etc. is on the rise. We are now assailed from every corner by judgments of, and commentaries on people, places, periods and events by such celebrities and eminent persons. Not all of these judgments and commentaries are however backed by evidence. What should be our reactions before such claims, commentaries and judgements? Is there not a difference between an opinion and a fact? Are the opinions of a celebrity always right? Should we always believe them? Must we suspend criticality when processing the views of such persons?

The reflections below on credibility and credulity were prompted precisely by these questions. My hope is that by the time you have gone through these reflections, you would have come up with your own personal strategy and processes for sieving statements, claims and commentaries for facticity and accuracy, and are thus more able to separate facts from opinions, no matter their sources. Enjoy the reading. Let me also have the benefit of your comments on these reflections.

  1. The chances of a claim being believed as true are largely a function of two things – How credible the source is or judged to be & how credulous the receiver is!
  2. It is so easy for a credible source or a source that is judged credible to deceive a credulous audience.
  3. That deception will continue to happen until the “ahaa” moment.
  4. Wisdom is discovering that even your long trusted, infallible and credible source can sometimes be economical with the truth!
  5. Credulousness/credulity exposes us to massive manipulation and exploitation.
  6. Credulity comes with huge social, emotional & economic costs.
  7. Not all that that your credible source puts forward is true!
  8. Do not mistake capacity for linguistic elegance with capacity for telling the truth. Lies are often packaged in beautiful prose.
  9. Raise your credulity threshold. Be more critical! “Shine your eyes”!
  10. The more critical you are, the more you are likely to discover flaws in the “perfect” logic of that credible source.
  11. Once you begin to discover flaws, inaccuracies, distortions and lies in your credible source, his/her credibility starts to wane.
  12. Healthy skepticism is one useful remedy to problems of credulity.
  13. In our attitudes/receptivity to statements from others, we are constantly exposed to two types of errors called Type I and Type II errors.
  14. Remember your research methods course from tertiary education? Type I versus Type II errors? A bit similar but not the same!
  15. Type I error in belief is known as erroneous incredulity- refusing to believe something that is true because of quarrels with the source!
  16. Type II – erroneous credulity – believing something that is false to be true because of your infatuation with the source!
  17. The challenge in life is how to avoid type 1 belief errors – erroneous incredulity whilst still being critical & “sieving” all statements.
  18. For type II belief errors, we simply have to shine our eyes. There are powerful people who would not brook any challenge to their views. All they desire is to hold people captive to their views and go to every length to ensure that such mental captivity perdures.
  19. One of the most difficult things to do is to maintain the right level of critical distance enough to evaluate and to challenge, where necessary, the views of someone who has distinguished herself/himself.
  20. Healthy skepticism towards the views and opinions of such a person is usually considered as indicative of either jealousy or outright incivility or impetuosity.
  21. And yet such persons have been known to exploit their credibility and to stretch it beyond limits.
  22. They have been known to exploit their credibility to call people names, to smear people, to ridicule others and to march boldly on spaces where even angels tremble to tiptoe over.
  23. All this they can do because they have been successful in one field of human endeavour or the other.
  24. Someone who has distinguished herself/himself in any given field invariably builds up some credibility as a result of success in that specific field of pursuit.
  25. It is not unusual for such a person to make commentaries in other fields of pursuit.
  26. Danger starts to loom when such a person begins to feel that credibility built up in one area immediately confers omniscience on her/him and elevates her/him to a pansophist.
  27. Unless checked, such a person may begin to use credibility gained in one field to become the supreme arbiter on every social issue under the universe.
  28. I call this tendency to use credibility in one field to seek credibility in another the transfer of credibility. Humans engage frequently in such transfer of credibility.
  29. Let me try to illustrate. We may have a case where we find a geophysicist making comments in the area of rock music.
  30. Where such comments are made on the basis of solid evidence, our respect for the person making the comments should grow.
  31. Where, however, the person making the comments is simply appealing, either explicitly or implicitly, to his/her established credibility in one field and building his/her right to be believed on that alone, then we should be on our guards.
  32. For example, that V.S. Naipaul said something on “Azonto” dance steps does make it true or false. Check his sources. Check his logic. Distinguish opinions from facts. Become more critical. If Naipul is simply transferring his credibility as winner of a Nobel prize for literature and using this to get you to an uncritical acceptance of his opinion, then sack that opinion. The opinions of a Nobel prize are not beyond falsification.
  33. Also that Niels Bohr said something, say on race and intercultural dialogue, does not make it true or false. Check his sources. Check his facts. Check his logic. Recognize his contributions to atomic physics but also recognize that expertise in atomic physics does not immediately confer competence in race and culture. Raise your credulity threshold.
  34. Equally, that Einstein said something on politics does not make it true or false. Check the facts. Question his sources. Raise your own criticality
  35. These three examples are chosen to invite us all to be more critical.
  36. They are also intended to show that human beings can and do try to transfer their credibility from areas where they are authorities to others where they are not or may not be!
  37. In these areas where they are not authorities, such persons would still want to impose their views on others and present their opinions as if they were revealed truths.
  38. We are often victims of such people and suffer mind control by them for a number of reasons.
  39. One reason for our credulity before such people emerges from the interaction of herd feeling, laziness and inertia. Everybody believes them, so why should I not? And If I have believed them up till now, why should I start doubting them now?
  40. Another reason is that most of us have been socialized into uncritical acceptance of views by any authority figure. Such persons thus exercise a strong stranglehold on public opinion.
  41. The stranglehold these persons exercise on public opinion and thinking is aided by our culture of idolization of the successful.
  42. Such idolization soon morphs into “person idolatory” such that any attempt to examine this person’s views critically soon amounts to heresy!
  43. Anything this type/class of people says soon amounts to “cast in diamonds truths”.
  44. But such idolized persons soon over-reach themselves. Their formerly enraptured audiences soon begin to discover that they have feet of clay. People soon discover that not only are such people fallible, but they do tell lies and can be very petty and partisan.
  45. So, let me sum up –
  46. Credibility is a plus for the source; credulity is a negative for any audience.
  47. Credibility is a bit like virginity. Lose it and you have lost it!
  48. Credibility is an asset. Draw down recklessly on it without any replenishing and soon it runs out.
  49. Credibility is optimized in environments of high credulity.
  50. A celebrity uses her/his credibility to exploit the credulity of an uncritical public.
  51. Erroneous credulity is bad for any society.
  52. Losing one’s credulity is one key milestone in cognitive and emotional development.
  53. Celebrities are entitled to their personal opinions, but not all opinions are true!
  54. Name calling has a certain appeal but it still does not amount to a proof. Ask any lawyer!
  55. Concluding comment – let your speaker earn your confidence. Do not let him/her take advantage of or abuse your credulity.
Posted in Prose

Jottings on Credibility and credulity

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

  1. Credibility is a positive for the source; credulity is a negative for any audience.
  2. Credibility is a bit like virginity. Lose it and you have lost it!
  3. Credibility is asset. Draw down recklessly on it without replenishing and soon it runs out.
  4. Credibility is optimized in environments of high credulity.
  5. A celebrity uses her/his credibility to exploit the credulity of an uncritical public.
  6. Erroneous credulity is bad for any society.
  7. Losing one’s credulity is one key milestone in cognitive and emotional development.
  8. Celebrities are entitled to their personal opinions, but not all opinions are true!
  9. Name calling has a certain appeal but it still does not amount to a proof. Ask any lawyer!
Posted in Prose

The First Casualty in Any War is ….

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

Aeschylus said that truth is the first casualty in any war. I disagree. Truths do not tell themselves. Truths are told by human beings. Lies, the antonym of truth, are also told by human beings. To tell a lie, a human being makes a first choice. That choice involves stilling the voice of conscience. It involves a deliberate choice to conceal the truth. It involves a deliberate choice to be dishonest. A deliberate choice to be dishonest implies the death of the human conscience. In any war, and at any of its phases, when men decide to tell lies and to raise the stature of lying, they are signaling that something – the human conscience – has already fallen casualty within them. The death of conscience then accelerates other deaths.

The first casualty in any war, indeed in any conflict, is therefore not the truth but the human conscience. The death of conscience then accelerates other deaths. Once the conscience dies, other deaths follow in quick succession and with depressing geometric progression. Conscience, ndo!

I look at Nigeria and marvel at the death of conscience in a number of persons who seek political offices. For such, democracy and elections are nothing else but conflict and war.  I marvel at the same death in their agents and their supporters. I marvel at the volume of lies that are churned out and hurled in the direction of the public, all meant to deceive and to confuse…and I am filled with a strong sense of dread. God save us

Posted in Uncategorized

Situation Critical: Defeating Boko Haram 3a – Rationale for ACTION NOW!

My aburo and personal person, Ier, saying it and saying it well!

ierjonathan's avatarIer Jonathan

I must apologise. My tomorrow became three days after tomorrow – I can only say I had writer’s overload…when there is so much to say that you need to actually figure out how you are going to put it without overwhelming and boring your readers. Please bear with me. This is going to take longer than usual but this matter could mean life and death for you, me, our children and our very future. So I will build up to what we must do. You will forgive me as I split this up into Parts 3a, 3b and maybe even 3c (for publishing later this week). I hope you agree with me that this is too too important. Our lives and our very future depends on this.

First, a summary of Parts 1 & 2:

To defeat Boko Haram, we must first acknowledge that we have an intensely dangerous problem…

View original post 1,440 more words

Posted in Uncategorized

Between Criticism, Correction and Condemnation (The 3 Identical C’s)

A very positive contribution – strongly Rx.

Nonye (Theperegrine)'s avatarThe Peregrine Reads

criticism3
“Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain – and most fools do”. – Dale Carnegie

Criticism, Condemnation and Correction happen to seem identical because they are most often misused, misconstrued and misread so much so that they end up carrying huge emotional aggravation when they are meant to be treated lightly and also get taken for granted when meant to be paid more attention to. However, the problem lies more with the first two– Criticism and Condemnation because Correction will most often stem out of the two. Knowing when and how to distinguish between the 3 identical C’s will help you see things from a different perspective and gear you towards the positive direction, using all 3 C’s as tools of motivation!

View original post 897 more words

Posted in Prose

Section 68, a Speaker’s Defection and the Depreciation of Honor

By

Noel A. Ihebuzor

Aminu-Tambuwal-2

Last week came the long expected announcement. The Speaker of the Federal House of Representatives had defected to the APC. At the extraordinary convention to welcome Tambuwal and celebrate the “catch”, the national chairman of the APC John Odigie Oyegun was exultant, and for very good reason. The fourth citizen of the realm, he kept repeating, was now with the “progressives”. It was celebrations galore as the brooms came out to sweep in a new member, a clean democrat from the “People Undemocratic Party”.

Errors and self revelations are not uncommon in such moments of celebration. When they do happen, the errors should be forgiven whilst special note should be made of the revealed character flaw. Odigie-Oyegun’s betrayal of gross partisanship in his claim that the containment of Ebola in Lagos and Rivers states was proof and example of the efficiency of APC led states falls into a special category of errors. But he should be forgiven for the tastelessness in his choice of exemplar whilst we note this penchant for making deceptive claims. The wine of “success” does at times impair proper functioning, and the APC drank quite some as it celebrated that day and into the night.

The country woke up the next day to learn that Mr Tambuwal’s security detail had been withdrawn on instruction of the IGP. That move was totally unnecessary. It made Tambuwal look like the innocent victim of police high-handedness. The withdrawal of the police detail also earned him a sizeable chunk of public sympathy, a large part of it completely unmerited when one considers what Mr Tambuwal did, failed to do and has not done till date. The withdrawal of the security detail was based on a hasty reading and interpretation of section 68 of the 1999 constitution.

The provisions of the said constitution on the implications of defection by an elected member to another party are quite clear. Section 68, sub 1 quoted in full below spell these out.

  1. (1)A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if –

(a) he becomes a member of another legislative house.

(b) any other circumstances arise that, if he were not a member of the Senate or the House of Representatives, would cause him to be disqualified for election as a member;

(c) he ceases to be a citizen of Nigeria;

(d) he becomes President, Vice-President, Governor, Deputy Governor or a Minister of the Government of the Federation or a Commissioner of the Government of a State or a Special Adviser.

(e) save as otherwise prescribed by this Constitution, he becomes a member of a commission or other body established by this Constitution or by any other law.

(f) without just cause he is absent from meetings of the House of which he is a member for a period amounting in the aggregate to more than one-third of the total number of days during which the House meets in any one year;

(g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected;

Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored; or

(h) the President of the Senate or, as the case may be, the Speaker of the House of Representatives receives a certificate under the hand of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission stating that the provisions of section 69 of this Constitution have been complied with in respect of the recall of that member.

The withdrawal of the detail was based on reading 68 (1) (g) in isolation! If the IGP had read 68 (2) which details the process and necessary actions to be taken in the event of such a member defection, the withdrawal of the detail would not have been so precipitate. Section 68, sub 2 is reproduced below. That section clearly indicates the person to take action to give the defector the very well deserved red card!

(2) The President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, as the case may be, shall give effect to the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, so however that the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives or a member shall first present evidence satisfactory to the House concerned that any of the provisions of that subsection has become applicable in respect of that member.

Mr. Tambuwal was fully aware of these provisions at the moment of his defection. The only person who could declare his loss of his membership of the house and by implication the immediate cessation of his status as Speaker is the Speaker, that is Mr Tambuwal himself! And Aminu Tambuwal is in no hurry to do just that. Mr Tambuwal is currently content to eat his cake and still have it. The best way to visualize this situation is to imagine a game of football where an elected referee suddenly abandons his supposed neutrality, signs up for one side and immediately commits a red card offense by that act. But nobody except the offending referee can issue a red card in the short and medium terms after the offense. Only a judge can cause a red card to be issued to the erring referee. Until this is done, the mayhem which the referee created will persist and its ripple effects may widen in scope and strength as the game is now played with feverish tempo and red hot tempers. Spectators would either be cheering or screaming, depending on which of the teams they support.

Such is the mess that we are in. Such is the mess Aminu Tambuwal has put us the country in all because he and his handlers were clever enough to see this gap in our constitution and to exploit it. Clearly, Mr Tambuwal must be enjoying himself due to this peculiarity in our constitution. But why would our constitution contain clauses and sub-sections that make for the type of messy situation that Tambuwal’s defection has created, one may ask? It is so easy to blame the constitution writers for situations like these. But truth be told, which constitution writer would ever suspect that a speaker of a house would ever defect and still want to hold on to his/her position? A John Andrew Boehner dumps the Republican Party and defects to the Democratic Party in the US and still wants to remain speaker? This is neither feasible nor imaginable!

In sane polities, elected members of houses who wish to defect to another party first resign the elected positions they hold, then defect and thereafter seek re-election (in a bye election) on the platform of their new parties. We saw this happen recently in the UK when a member elected on the Conservative Party platform resigned from the party, resigned his seat and signed up with UKIP. He then took part in the bye election as the UKIP candidate and won! That is the path of honor. But not so in this country where honor is now so depreciated that persons who choose to act with honor are now scorned and pooh-poohed. The honorable path for Tambuwal is to resign as member of the house and seek re-election on the platform of the APC. The honorable thing for Mr. Tambuwal to do is not to hold the country hostage by clinging to constitutional and legal technicalities. Not all that is legal is necessarily honorable. Aminu Tambuwal’s decision brings to a point in his political journey where the road now forks into two paths. One path leads to honor even though its surface in its initial stretch is littered with difficulties. But that path holds immense rewards in the long term. That path beckons to Aminu Tambuwal. We hope he takes it. Whilst waiting for Tambuwal to act with honor, his security detail should be restored.

This present crisis is one caused by the gross depreciation of honor in this country. However, unless controlled now, the current crisis may scale up and spiral out of control. In the long term, Section 68 of our constitution should be amended. All defections to another political party by elected representatives must be preceded by a resignation of membership of the house the person was elected into. The same principle should be extended to state governors who cross carpet. This is one way we can begin to check the irritant of political prostitution that is now invading our land.

Posted in Uncategorized

Oak Maple & Willow

Beautiful! Autumn so beautifully captured.

A Barefooted Blog's avatarBarefoot Baroness

Dear Fall leaves from my Oaks, Maples, and willows,

  I love your glorious colors and textures in my yard.

When the sun reappears I promise to create huge piles of your collective beauty….

and then invite the entire neighborhood to your party  

  We’ll embrace the wonder of you with giggles as we inhale Mother Nature’s earthiness….

…..all while we wait for your bare branches to silhouette our skies.

copyright_edit

ttaylor2014

View original post

Posted in Uncategorized

She Might Have Ebola: 5 Questions

I would have laughed if the situation and attitudes described were not so so sad!

Author's avatarUntold Stories

IMG-20141027-WA0001

By now you know about Ebola. You know it is probably more feared than terrorism.  So, really, if you are going to travel for any reason to areas where Ebola is/was prevalent, you should be prepared to endure 21 days of suspicion upon your return (21 days is the maximum Ebola incubation period). All will be fairly well and good if after 21 days you do not show any Ebola symptoms.

Within the last two weeks, I have had to travel to two countries in West Africa. One has had no case of Ebola at all. The other – Nigeria –  was declared Ebola free by WHO last week. Despite that, I am still a suspect of the Ebola virus (slightly understandably). I returned to work in the UK office this morning and within an hour I had been indirectly asked five ‘important’ questions by some of my colleagues. In case…

View original post 441 more words

Posted in Uncategorized

Dr Dele Momodu and his mathematics

By

Noel Ihebuzor

I came across an article written by Dr. Dele Momodu titled Buhari or Jonathan, let’s do some mathematics” two days ago. The title immediately caught my attention and interest. I like mathematics though I am no good at it but the thought that a well known Nigerian columnist was going to use mathematics to make some informed commentary on the possible electoral fortunes of GMB and GEJ, should these two men each win their party presidential nominations, was rather exciting and enticing.

So, I literally jumped on the said article. I refused to let my interest be dampened by content of the first three paragraphs. Indeed, the first two paragraphs were a classic in self indictment and political hara-kiri. In these paragraphs, Dr Momodu unwittingly sells himself as someone who as recently as 2011 formed judgments based on superficial considerations and also as someone who could be very easily brainwashed by propaganda. But let us leave those two troubled early paragraphs alone – it is not for us to tell Dr Momodu that such self presentation, no matter its present motivation, no matter its projected potential rewards and benefits, also produces very grievous and long lasting self damage.  Any sensible cost benefit analysis should have advised Dr. Momodu not to write those early paragraphs the way he did.

Let us return to Dr. Dele Momodu’s election mathematics. It is built largely on the results of 2011 presidential elections upon which projections for voter behavior in 2015 are then insinuated. In making these insinuated projections, Dr Momodu fails to reflect all relevant contexts and developments in Nigeria since 2011 which should inform his “modeling”. The emergence of the APC is one which he correctly identifies, but the rest of the time in this article, Dr Momodu is mainly engaged in wishful thinking conveyed in rather fuzzy sentences at the end of most his paragraphs. Mathematical modeling is based on facts coupled with some reasonable assumptions about the behavior of the subject under analysis.  Such assumptions are usually unpacked and made explicit. When mathematical modeling is used to predict behavior, the predictions are more likely to turn out to be true, the more social developments which have a bearing on the behavior being predicted are recognized as parameters in such modeling.  Relevant social developments which Dr. Momodu’s model should have recognized include the following :

  • In 2011 the GEJ presidency did not have as much successes to show as it has today, yet it could defeat GMB’s challenge in spite of that. Today, it has things to show even in GMB’s home state. Voters are not blind.
  • Recent NOI polls show an incumbent whose popularity and performance ratings are on the increase across the entire country
  • The arrival on the political scene of the APC has not worked the miracle of dramatic whittling of PDP presence and appeal in the “APC” states.
  • The experiences in Ekiti and Osun and the fortunes of the APC and PDP in the recently held Guber elections in those two states are still fresh in our memories for any intelligent student of Nigerian politics to decipher.
  • The rout of the ACN in Ondo state with Mimiko’s re-election is a knock on the myth of regional appeal of the ACN and what it has now morphed into,
  • The recent rejection of the APC in Anambra state is an indication of the unpopularity of GMB in that state,
  • The recent political upheavals in Adamawa state makes a definite statement on the popularity of the political parties, and
  • The political realignments in the North Central geo-political zone, to mention but a few.

Dr. Momodu failed to carry these on board in his electioneering mathematics, a failure that then deeply flaws his projections. Luckily, Dr Momodu informs us that he scored an F9 in mathematics but one needs to remind Dr Momodu that maths is not so much about adding and subtracting, mechanical process for which a calculator would do just fine. No, maths is more about thinking and making justifiable inferences based on logical manipulation of numbers. Persons who demonstrate deficits in such processes do not deserve to be taken seriously. Dr. Momodu’s maths is clearly weak as are his unconvincing efforts at Buhari image laundering. Where he is strongest in this article is in self damage – a man who can say this of himself  “And I actually found him more charismatic than my jaundiced eyes could have permitted” is certainly well set and an expert  in self bashing.