Kerfluffling the kerfluffle:
I have tried to ask this in meat-space of numerous people who seem to
*need* to condemn Snowden out of hand, generally for not upholding his
oath, and usually painting him with the "grandstanding" or "martyr" brush:
How can you promise to keep a secret absolutely until you have heard it?
Once you have promised to keep a secret with best intentions, honor,
integrity, what kind of discovery would make you dishonor that promise?
Even if he is grandstanding or martyring, was he exposing secrets
that needed/deserved exposing? Would we all be better off if the
(trivial and generally assumed) secret was still held secret?
As I've said before here, this is not academic for me. I have given
oaths of this type and I have been exposed to secrets, some of which
offended me more than mildly. I chose not to let that offense overrule
my promise but can easily imagine an escalation to the point where I
would rather risk torture and death than keep the secret. The same
honor that allowed me to make the promise seriously and to keep it even
when it was uncomfortable would compel me to break it.
Does this make any sense to anyone but me? Or is this just another
example of me having signed up for the School of Hard Knocks? Nobody I
ever worked with who had various high clearances seemed to be able to
acknowledge that their honor might *require* them to break their oath?
Is it that hard of a concept or did they not understand the nature of
"honor" in the first place?
- Steve
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
