| Newsletter #8 |
page: 1
The Hutton Enquiry
Web Log, London, 12 August 2003
A BBC journalist, Gilligan, wrote an inflamatory article about the UK government faking the case for the Iraqui War. David Kelly, an intelligence advisor and ex-weapons inspector was exposed (by the Ministry of Defence) as the probable source of some of the intelligence, and who promptly committed suicide. The Hutton enquiry was called in the summer of 2003 to look into the controversy.
I have been analysing personality for so long that perhaps I have lost sight of a basic social etiquette. When the tragedy of Dr. Kelly unfolded in the media and things were said about his state of mind, I thought the papers could do with a personality profile of the man. Perhaps I could reveal whether he was likely to be a Walter Mitty character or whether he was likely to respond to the stress of the position in which he had found himself by committing suicide.
I rang round all the newspapers offering my services. When I reached the newsdesk of the News of the World I was told firmly that 'we wouldn't be interested in that sort of thing; it's far too serious a matter for that'. I was suddenly halted in my tracks. I had been rebuked. I put the phone down and reflected. Was I being cynical and uncaring to ponder the state of mind of someone who has died a tragic death?
It was curious to me that a newspaper like the News of the World, who is no stranger to enquiring after the feelings of the recently bereaved, should have such an opinion. The words echoed in my head, '..it's far too serious a matter for that.'. Ah! They must have rejected my proposal not because it was inappropriate but because it was frivolous. It couldn't have been inappropriate since a week or so after I had made my suggestion to the Press, Lord Hutton called in a psychologist, who had never even talked to Dr. Kelly or known him personally, to give his opinion about Dr. Kelly's state of mind.
For me, who has been analysing and advising people for years, the notion that knowing someone better is a frivolous activity makes me laugh. Everywhere we are anxious to understand what people are thinking and how they are going to behave. Even in the rigorously logically and coolly analytical Law Courts, lawyers and Judges argue remorselessly over the intentions of actions and over the meanings of statements, and witnesses are probed mercilessly about what they witnessed and experts are challenged on the nature of their expertise, truth often ends up being a matter of what you believe about the person who testifies. It is no secret that a jury often decides what to think on the basis of how they perceive the witness, such that barristers in court always try to imply things about a witness's personality - such as sincerity and comportment - that reflect upon what that witness is saying. It shouldn't come as any surprise to us that we like to know what people are like because only then can we understand why they do things.
There is a belief, quite generally held, that that we are unique individuals about which nothing concrete can really be known about our inner selves because our inner selves are truly personal, truly special to us and are just not divinable in anyway that would make sense to others.
But I think the reason behind the News of the World's put down comes from a less generous attitude - a fear that our minds contain rather dubious notions which don't really describe us and may even undermine our best intentions: fantasies and paradoxes which are best left hidden from prying eyes. People want to keep their minds private because they are ashamed of their thoughts or because they want to disguise their intentions. We have built up the principle a man's mind is his castle where he can safely think what he likes.
This belief exposes the confusion we have between what is the structure of personality and the transitory content that fills our self-awareness. Our thoughts are not all of us. The directions in which we act and the attitudes we take on towards facts and beliefs, the trust we have in information and the way we make use of it, the pleasures we can derive from the world around us and the implementation of our basic drives towards fulfilling our needs all have little to do with the run of our daily thoughts and everything to do with the type of personality we are. And these are matters that can be fruitfully discussed without having to speculate on the nature of those undermining inner thoughts that will give us away. Knowing how someone is playing the long game of their lives can kindle friendships and love and make the possibility of a fruitful relationship more likely rather than less. So in the general case The News of the World is wrong: knowing what people are like actually enhances our appreciation of them.
In the particular case of suicide, however, it was probably right. The origins of some suicides are certainly found in physiological states as well as in desperate psychological conditions, but there are many, I believe, that appear in the particular daily patterns of thoughts like rogue waves in a choppy sea. The unusual wave rises up but it doesn't die down. The thoughts they create remain, gaining strength in the mind until they are defeated or they win out. By its nature this event is deeply personal and unpredictable. It might be possible to say something about the fundamental dimensions of personality that could allow a rogue thought to become a resonant wave in the conscious mind, but the particulars of the event might always be beyond our comprehension.
Could the TO8 have done a better job than the psychologist who came to the banal conclusion that people who are unhappy could commit suicide? Since I don't yet have Kelly's birth date, maybe we'll never know. Would anything have been gained if the TO8 could have shown that Kelly was a person unlikely to take his pain and embarrassment as far as suicide? It wouldn't prove a thing but yet... something important would have changed.
©2003ank
Pages in this chapter (document) 1 This page is 1