US Airstrike in Pakistan

[gcol]

Philcandless:

 

Tribal loyalty: o.k., start again:

I take tribal to mean "people of the same family or race, or a division of a race. (from printed dictionary). Loyalty ( same source) can be obedience to law (which, in this context, I take to be 'tribal' law) or faithfulness to duty or to friends. ( again, tribal duty or duty to friends).

 

On reflection, tribal appears to have lost its original purity of meaning. It can now include special interest groups, political parties, religious groups, or even street gangs, which move it far outside the original boundaries of family or race. When allied with loyalty, which I think still has its original meaning, I cannot find a single word which carries the nuances of the phrase. However, having so many shades of meaning, the contextual meaning is all important, but may be misconstrued. Given, therefore, all the phrase implies, It ought to be meaningful within the social sciences.

 

Outside the social sciences, which can usefully allow for its effects, It is more difficult to grapple with militarily or politically, although they may try to use it to their advantage. To their cost, they often find it is a lion grabbed by the tail.

 

There. how was that? Perhaps I should have gone fishing instead.

[philcandless]

I can only speculate as to why "tribal loyalty" is a colloquialism rather than a term encoding some sort of meaningful measurement in the social sciences, but I can say the reason you wont find a single term describing what, from superficial study, seems to merit the label "tribal loyalty" is because the actual models are highly conditional. Unifying themes in the social sciences tend to deal with methods rather than models or means of interpretation. Think of it this way, the actual study of GR is a lightweight course in differential geometry (often absent a topological foundation). The same mathematical tools can be applied in quantum physics. GR as scientific theory isn't the Einstein equation, but inferences drawn from solving it with certain principles defining boundary conditions (i.e., the energy conditions). In the social sciences, your models are almost always bounded by any number of variations--geography, language, diet, religiosity, sanitation, etc. So a theory of resistance and rebellion in Eastern Europe is not considered a theory of resistance and rebellion elsewhere. I can't think of any scholarly community that at least in academic discourse is more circumspect about the breadth and depth of their conclusions than the social science field.

[aguy2]

I would contend that they used 'Preditors' because the tribal loyalities of the area in question would preclude trying to serve a search warrant with anything less than a good regiment that was willing to take causualties. Do you want to play social science word games with me?

 

aguy2

[john5746]

Does anyone here happen to know the estimation of what Osama's terms would be?

 

aguy2

 

As Jim said, he isn't in the position to offer terms, but from what was reported, he wants the US to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Well, we were in neither of these countries on 9/11.

[gcol]

I can only speculate as to why "tribal loyalty" is a colloquialism rather than a term encoding some sort of meaningful measurement in the social sciences, but I can say the reason you wont find a single term describing what, from superficial study, seems to merit the label "tribal loyalty" is because the actual models are highly conditional. Unifying themes in the social sciences tend to deal with methods rather than models or means of interpretation. Think of it this way, the actual study of GR is a lightweight course in differential geometry (often absent a topological foundation). The same mathematical tools can be applied in quantum physics. GR as scientific theory isn't the Einstein equation, but inferences drawn from solving it with certain principles defining boundary conditions (i.e., the energy conditions). In the social sciences, your models are almost always bounded by any number of variations--geography, language, diet, religiosity, sanitation, etc. So a theory of resistance and rebellion in Eastern Europe is not considered a theory of resistance and rebellion elsewhere. I can't think of any scholarly community that at least in academic discourse is more circumspect about the breadth and depth of their conclusions than the social science field.

 

I think our little spat about tribal loyalty has now petered out. How about 'clan politics' instead?

 

Can't find anything to disagree with in your post, although I was initially tempted to ask what on earth science has to do with sociology in general. Then I checked up on the real meaning of "science". Surprised to find Many definitions, synonymns, and quasi-synonymns which effectively remove the burden of proof so often assumed by "real" scientiststo belong to the word.

 

I liked this: "Think of it this way, the actual study of GR is a lightweight course in differential geometry (often absent a topological foundation). The same mathematical tools can be applied in quantum physics. GR as scientific theory isn't the Einstein equation, but inferences drawn from solving it with certain principles defining boundary conditions (i.e., the energy conditions)".

 

I have only a laymans overview of this, so make no comment at all, but I would love to see the reaction if you made that statement in the appropriate forum....

[aguy2]

As Jim said, he isn't in the position to offer terms, but from what was reported, he wants the US to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Well, we were in neither of these countries on 9/11.

 

Wasn't his original 'causa bella' something more about non-Muslim military forces being to close to Mecca/Medina?

 

aguy2

[pcs]

I think our little spat about tribal loyalty has now petered out.

 

Same here.

 

How about 'clan politics' instead?

 

Here's the thing. Because these models are so highly conditional, I'm hesitant to attach any meaning to an overarching term. I can't say that groups tend to act this way because of all the initial and boundary conditions on the problem. Subtle differences in network structure result in, for example, large extended family societies with high rates of religiosity like those in Iraq and Palestine responding to similar conditions in chaotically different ways from large extended families in Africa or South America. The model I hinted at was specifically tied to the study of resistance and rebellion; and while Petersen finds community topology significant in determining the reaction of Lithuanians to occupation vis a vis Estonians or Ukrainians, I can't tell if it holds in the Near East absent doing the field work. In fact, there's serious questions as to whether Petersen's model is too general--like Einstein's equations absent energy conditions--to make any meaningful predictions. But at the risk of belaboring the point, I'm just uncomfortable with terms that aspire to even catch meaning across even as minimally varied a subset as Petersen's is geographically and culturally.

 

Can't find anything to disagree with in your post, although I was initially tempted to ask what on earth science has to do with sociology in general. Then I checked up on the real meaning of "science". Surprised to find Many definitions, synonymns, and quasi-synonymns which effectively remove the burden of proof so often assumed by "real" scientiststo belong to the word.

 

I'm an engineer with a minor in political science, so it's not my native field. Second, I have no data to make a more general claim, but at MIT at least I observed no lack of professional respect between the social scientists and their natural counterparts. In fact, I find it difficult to believe that hard scientists are critical of the bonafides of their softer cousins in light of their active participation in a thriving world of interdisciplinary research.

[gcol]

pcs: A quiet and reasonable post. All points well taken.

 

Enjoy your reincarnation.