The Power of Secret Knowledge: The RAND Corporation, Ignorance Studies and Sociology

Author:

Griessl LukasORCID

Abstract

AbstractThe following contribution is concerned with the relation of Dayé’s work on the RAND Corporation during the Cold War and the field of ignorance studies. In doing so, I aim to emphasise the interconnection of three central themes that pervade Dayé’s work: secrecy, ignorance, and power. In an era of Cold War insecurity, marked by strategic attempts by both sides to obscure their own capabilities, a largely secretive organization emerged as a reliable source of knowledge, helping to guide decision-making in uncertain times and to generate policy recommendations. This not only raises significant questions about the power of certain groups or individuals to define what counts as policy-guiding knowledge, it also points to a form of ignorance that is highly productive. It not only affords the creation of new knowledge practices, but it becomes a force in itself that mobilizes the creation of further ignorance. While these connections are implicit in Dayé’s work, this study seeks to bring them to the forefront and to explore them in dialogue with classical sociological literature and in the context of seminal contributions to the field of ignorance studies. In order to do so, I will start with a brief elaboration on the secrecy that surrounded the work conducted at the RAND corporation, alongside a brief discussion of the notion of secrecy and elite power in the canon of classical literature in sociology, to then introduce the field of ignorance studies. From this angle, I will explore how a particular form of ignorance lies at the core of the workings at RAND and how ignorance studies might help to better understand the developing influence and rule of experts.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Sociology and Political Science,Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Reference21 articles.

1. Brodie, J. F. (2011). Learning Secrecy in the Early Cold War: The RAND Corporation. Diplomatic History 35(4). Oxford University Press: 643–670.

2. Crossley, A. M. (1937). Straw polls in 1936. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.1086/265035.

3. Dayé, C. (2020). Experts, social scientists, and techniques of prognosis in Cold War America. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32781-1.

4. Ghamari-Tabrizi, S. (2012). Cognitive and Perceptual Training in the Cold War Man-Machine System.Uncertain Empire: American History and the Idea of the Cold War. Edited by Joel Isaac and Duncan Bell:267–293.

5. Goffman, E. (1986). Strategic Interaction. 3. Paperback print. University of Pennsylvania Publications in Conduct and Communication. Philadelphia, Pa: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3