Krigsførelsens Kredsløb – en fornuftig hypotesegenerator

Mikkel Storm Jensen

doi:10.31374/sjms.75

Abstract

After a long and – from an analytical and philosophical perspective – relatively dormant existence as an analytical tool taught and used by Danish officers since the early 1960s, the Capability Cycle (the literal translation from Danish, “the Cycle, of Warfare” is somewhat misleading) has been thoroughly analyzed over the last couple of years. Theoreticians as well as practical users of the model have all demonstrated a number of ways in which the model is philosophically and methodically lacking as a proper scientific model. This article reflects the author’s thoughts on the criticism of the model as well as the suggestions to alter and expand it based on his own experiences with practical use of the model as a tool for real-world intelligence analysis through more than a decade. The critics are right to argue that the model is not a proper theory in the social science sense. However, this article finds that the model should remain unmodified with an inner circle representing the examined entity and an outer circle reflecting the society in which the entity originates. In its current format, the model is a simple, but effective tool for organizing the analyst’s available information. Furthermore, it is a means to help him or her focus the search for further information and to generate hypotheses that can then be tested with scientific methods.

Highlights

After a long and – from an analytical and philosophical perspective – relatively dormant existence as an analytical tool taught and used by Danish officers since the early 1960s, the Capability Cycle has been thoroughly analyzed over the last couple of years
Artiklen er både en indrømmelse til kritikerne af modellens videnskabelighed og et forsvar for dens anvendelighed i sin oprindelige, enkle form
Modellen med det misvisende navn Krigsførelsens Kredsløb beskriver ikke et kredsløb og er ikke begrænset til militære forhold; den er et middel til at skabe sig overblik over kompleks empiri og til at generere hypoteser, der så efterfølgende kan efterprøves, fx med samfundsvidenskabelige metoder

Summary

Mikkel Storm Jensen

After a long and – from an analytical and philosophical perspective – relatively dormant existence as an analytical tool taught and used by Danish officers since the early 1960s, the Capability Cycle (the literal translation from Danish, “the Cycle, of Warfare” is somewhat misleading) has been thoroughly analyzed over the last couple of years. Theoreticians as well as practical users of the model have all demonstrated a number of ways in which the model is philosophically and methodically lacking as a proper scientific model. Modellen med det misvisende navn Krigsførelsens Kredsløb beskriver ikke et kredsløb og er ikke begrænset til militære forhold; den er et middel til at skabe sig overblik over kompleks empiri og til at generere hypoteser, der så efterfølgende kan efterprøves, fx med samfundsvidenskabelige metoder. Herefter diskuteres Michaelsens forslag om at udvide modellens indre ring med den undersøgte entitets opgave og Marrups forslag om at udvide den med en ny, yderste ring, der indrammer den undersøgte entitets situation i forhold til det internationale miljø, den befinder sig i (Marrup 2020; Michaelsen 2020). Afslutningsvis argumenterer jeg for, hvorfor Krigførelsens Kredsløb i sin Jensen: Krigsførelsens Kredsløb – en fornuftig hypotesegenerator nuværende, enkle form med en indre og en ydre ring kan løse sin opgave, men godt kunne bruge et mere dækkende navn

Krigsførelsens Kredsløb kan ikke stå alene

Den centrale diskussion om modellens underliggende rationalitet

Skal modellen have flere og mere specifikke variable?