Patricio Mangubat took some issue about what he perceived to be an attack on my part on political punditry. To be fair, what is in fact stated in my footer blurb is that I am a “heckler of the politically passionate”. But the funny thing is that my piece “Attack of the killer shawarmas” was really more about me thinking out loud about how such an abundance of expertise on “Philippine issues” consistently fails to foresee, much less mitigate, actual events that truly impact Filipino lives.
We’re in for an ironic turn of events though, as it was what my pal Patricio said in a recent comment…
BenigNo, my friend, there are still so many insightful things out there in the mainstream media. You just lack the analytical skills to identify these things. In fact, if you just know how to discern and make use of analytical tools, you can definitely arrive at insightful views that, in branding speak, are “not me toos” and totally groundbreaking analysis.
… that inspires me to turn my sights squarely upon the political “experts” themselves.
Specifically (and what follows is in my response to the above comment), I am reminded of an interesting exchange of ideas I had with the eminent Patricio Abinales — political “expert” extraordinaire — back in 2005 on the now-sidelined PCIJ Blog (a tragic outcome of a particularly bad case of Shawarma Topic infestation). Notwithstanding the quintessentially-Pinoy Old Fart way that he conducted himself when he engaged my relatively youthful mind, and a portfolio of argumentum approaches that draw heavily from his expertise-imprisoned “insight” delivery faculties; eg. …
P.N. Abinales: Am in politics, my friend. In fact…been into to it for so long now.
benign0: Hmmm. No wonder you think the way you do.
P.N. Abinales: Need to retire and write that damn novel about illiterate Kanos and hopeless Pinoys.
benign0: Typical Pinoy. Talking about something before actually doing it.
P.N. Abinales: Keep those calories down, my good friend but keep them ripostes coming. But this time, put in some substance.
benign0: I think you better direct that piece of advise to our chicharon-eating and beer-happy compatriots.
(Hardly becoming of a political “expert” extraordinaire, wouldn’t you think? ;) )
… it was really a self-inflicted from-left-field slug that knocked him off his expert pedestal when he quite haughtily declared…
P.N. Abinales: By the way, you never did say anything more about how messed up your country is. Oh well….wala tayong magagawa dyan. Tsk, tsk, typical Kano ka talaga — ayaw tanggapin na sabit din yong bayan mo. Keep have fun with those McDo and check out the latest American idol — baka in that show lies your future. Salud
(my boldface)
… to which I, true to my eternally youthful form, make a simple child-like query:
What makes you think I am American?
Suffice to say, from there, everything goes pear-shaped for our hero, the venerable political “expert”.
P.N. Abinales: Benny boy, Benny boy…now you’re plunging to an all-time low. Denying even your citizenship to try to extricate yourself from a failure to come up with a good riposte on how your president George is messing up your country. I am disappointed.
Nice try, lolo.
You can check out the rest of this sad tale here.
The point I make is revealed when we go back to my response to Patrcio (Mangubat) — [hey, what a coincidental coming together of namesakes!] where I relate to him the nostalgia of not being “overly impressed” with this memorable exchange with the other equally-esteemed Patricio. It highlights these “analysis skills” that Patricio M sees me as not possessing (which I gladly admit I don’t) and bring up the question of how valuable political expertise truly is.
Though Patricio M is still to oblige my query as to what specific “analysis tools” he refers to, I took some liberty to further probe in my earlier response to him:
Not to put too fine a pont to it, but it seems that the countr[y's] best politicial minds (presumably using these “analysis tools” you speak of) have been dissecting down to the little itty-bitty bits the various politicial “issues” that have come and gone over the last 20 years. As I mentioned earlier and as Ben further highlights, we ask the simple question…
Where are the results?
All roads lead back to getrealism folks.
The most be-credentialled formally-trained lawyers and politicians have administered the country’s affairs for decades, and their posturings have been reported on, monitored, and “analysed” by an army of equally if not even more superiorly-educated political “analysts”.
Again:
Where are the results?
The psychologist Philip Tetlock in his insightful book Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? attempts to put a bit more perspective around the concept of “expertise”, asserting that the there is little evidence that the outcomes of an expert’s analysis or prediction is signficantly more effective than that of a non-expert.
Knowing a little might make someone a more reliable forecaster, but Tetlock found that knowing a lot can actually make a person less reliable. “We reach the point of diminishing marginal predictive returns for knowledge disconcertingly quickly,” he reports. “In this age of academic hyperspecialization, there is no reason for supposing that contributors to top journals—distinguished political scientists, area study specialists, economists, and so on—are any better than journalists or attentive readers of the New York Times in ‘reading’ emerging situations.”
[Excerpt from a review of said book in the New Yorker titled "Everybody's An Expert"]
As far as my own personal observation goes, I think he’s right on the money.
Nassim Taleb makes a distinction between two types of “experts”:
:D Experts who know how to (such as brain surgeons and plumbers); and,
:D Experts who know about (such as political analysts and economists, and most consultants)
Suffice to say, we all know which between the two classes of above experts have been truly of value to humanity in general. And as for me, being of a profession that belongs to the latter, am forced to come to terms with my own place in the scheme of things.
But fret not to the other proverbial bato-bato-sa-langit‘s here as I have rationalised this much in light of the above piece of insight (as I am wont to do having posted here a blog article that pretty much is a shot at my own foot):
If we focus more on how we think rather than what we presume to know, then we avoid being imprisoned not only by our own outdated belief systems but by the flawed thinking of other people.
So there you go another piece from moi that hopefully provides some valuable food for thought (hopefully for you too, Patricio M, though it might be a bit too late for the elder Patricio… ;) ).
============
Join us on Facebook!
Popularity: 1% [?]
hi benigno,
been busy with organizing Pinoys here in Singapore for that final push to drive Gloria out of the palace. I’m trying to fulfill the wishes of Juwad that we are all talk here and no action.
now, on the query about using your analytical skills.
First, I don’t know why you used the Patricio Abinales example since it is a self-serving one. Are you,. again, promoting yourself my friend, that you had the chance to get in touch with a political analyst extraordinaire before?
Second, the analytical skills you must acquire should be those called ” content analysis”. You need to always use this skill to draw out the real score behind news stories. It is not the presentation of the news that is essential to note here (take note The Cat); rather what we can glean from these news stories.
Also, we try to use our knowledge on game theory, the chaos theory and the materialist dialectics–theories which we can apply in discerning the truth behind all these news stories.
That skill, my friend, I am sorry to say, you lack. By the way, this is NOT an ad hominem attack. It just appeared so because LIKE AN ORDINARY PINOY, your ego was, uh, pricked Benigno.
I thought that it was simple really? Though I commend you my friend from formulating this simple really theory–one that obfuscates instead of illuminate. This is not ad hominem, okey? Just an observation.
by the way,
on the perceived monopoly of political analysis. no one claims to have it. i don’t. and simply, you also can’t claim. a theory or an analysis can only be confirmed through the exact happening of the event being observed or discussed.
question—what among your highly esteemed analysis of Philippine society has been proved right? the strength of a theory can only be determined if it goes thru what we call the “gold test”. Did your “simple really” (with trademark) analytics already predicted the correct happening of an event? I want to know my friend Benigno. Please tell me. I want to really know if things are indeed, simple really.
Ang isinasara lang nila dito ay ang mga non-performing branches. totoo yan, magkakatabi halos.
I don’t know where you get this info. Did they know how much the water bill cost in commercial districts? Water here in the States are treated and are tested regularly for undesirable chemiclas/elements. I drink tap water. Mas mat fluoride pa yon kaysa bottled water.
Same banana, as long as you do not have the answer.
Another civil society in the making? Who is the annointed leader?
Patricio, by all means, God forbid that I keep you from the important task you are currently engaged in. What did you say it was — organising Pinoys “for that final push to drive Gloria out of the palace”? I wish you well with with that worthwhile endeavour then.
Nevertheless:
Firstly, you know me. I never engage in anything that ain’t self-serving. I don’t really have much of a high regard for people who claim they don’t engage in self-serving activities because it is usually those types who are most likely to disappoint. And, yes, I cite Patricio Abinales because I feel a bit honoured to have exchanged “ideas” with the Eminent One, much the same way as I feel honoured that mlq3 would write an entire blog entry about my book, and much the same way as I feel honoured to be banging heads here with the brightest bulbs in the blogosphere. So if you feel that getting off on being in the company of esteemed people is not a worthwhile endeavour, well, there are 89.9 million other Filipinos who would more than adequately fit your noble criteria.
Second, thanks for the lecture on the tools. Having provided me that, I can now come to the follow up question I had been itching to ask:
Cite evidence please that such tools have been applied in, say, that “punditry of the nationalist kind” that our pal Ding refers to.
And third, actually I still think that it is simple. Really. The illumination comes from an appreciation of the underlying simplicity of what is made out to be a bunch of convoluted issues stitched together with what passes off as “insight” in much of the Pinoy “national debate”.
So as to your question…
… my answer is this:
None of it has been “proven” right any more than a theory on the effectiveness of ocho-ocho “revolutions” can be proven right, or if going extra-constitutional yet again can be proven to be the right or wrong course of action in this instance.
The fact that you look for a proof (as if all this is some kind of mathematical construct) shows that you miss the point entirely about what exchanging ideas is all about. It’s more about being able to demonstrate some form of rigour and structure in regarding and prioritising the “issues”.
So as you can see (then again maybe not, as it seems you are having a bit of a self-important moment over there in Singapore — not to be ad-hoministic, mind you), as always it is, in fact, simple. Really. :D
News can be manufactured, edited and could be hyped. The news content depends on the newspapers and their political leanings. Pag makaArroyo, ang balita ay paborable kay Arroyo. Balanced news is no longer practised in news presentation.
Even blogs could not be believed especially blogs which are very partisan. I want to see a political analysis which presents both sides.
In India now, twitters are being warned of misinformation and disinformation about the Mumbai attacks.
Benny, I dont want Philippine society to be homogenous. We need all kinds. We need Patricio’s patriotic ideas and actions, we need your heckling and reductionism, we need Bencard’s staunch legalism. We need Jon Limjap’s ‘get off your ass, lazy poor people’, we need cvj’s ‘show a little imagination, lazy rich people’, we need DJB’s secular scientism, and blackshama’s focus on science education. We might even need C at’s… whatever it is C at brings to the table.
patricio,
so you have a patron after all who had already been salivating for power and the final push is being cooked up in singapore..
good luck, and i hope your patron is better than gma.
patricio…hindi kayo magtatagumpay
dapat alam mo na kung bakit…kung ibase mo sa mga nakaraang grupo na ilan beses na sinubukan na patalsikin si GMA…ang kanilang adhikain ay iisa lamang..ito ang ¨PATALSIKIN SI GMA¨…hindi sila nagtagumpay dahil ang mayoria ng mamayang pilipino ay nagtatanong..¨SINO ANG IPAPALIT KAY GMA NA HINDI KURAKOT AT MAGNANAKAW???¨ ¨MAY PAGBABAGO BANG MANGYAYARI SA PILIPINAS AT SA PAMUMUHAY NG PILIPINO KUNG MAPATALSIK SI GMA???¨…
simpleng tanong…pero hinding hindi nasagot ninuman..kahit ikaw di mo kayang sagutin…kaya paulit ulit na lang ang sinasabi mo na patalsikin si GMA..para kayong sirang plaka…
para sa karaniwang mamayan na tulad ko..ang masasabi namin ay….¨LOKOHIN NYO ANG LELONG NYO¨
PS.
magkano ba budget sa kilusan mo jan patricio…hhmmm ginagastos mo ba lahat o binubulsa mo ang 50%…baka lugaw lang pinapakain mo sa mga tao mo jan kahit ang budget ay burger ha bwehehehehehehehehe
Cat,
Hinanap ko pa yung article na kung saan ko nakita yung tungkol sa alleged water wastage ng starbucks.
Thanks nga pala sa sagot.
nabasa ko sa phil star pero hinanap ko ang american source. sa ABC News pala
http://abcnews.go.com/International/SmartHome/story?id=5964908&page=1
I am more covinced by your practical answer,as I said I wanted first hand info.
TY again.
==================================
GabbyD
You are welcome,nalimutan lang lagyan ni leytenian ng source.
About that 200:
Just been out with my wife and nag starucks kami.
Ang average ng malaking cup na nakita ko ay +- P145 (madami flavor ako nakitang P145 na large).
So my 200 could be called a hyperbole
benign00
ang tawag dyan sa attitude mo ay HOLIER THAN THOU attitude. PRETENDING TO KNOW IT ALL. Hindi ka ng Pilipino… kaya dapat wala ka dito sa FILIPINO VOICES DOT COM. Marunong ka bang kumain ng tuyo at na sinasawsaw sa suka at pandesal na sinasaw saw sa kape? Hinde. HINDI KA KASI PILIPINO. kaya LUMAYAS KA DITO!!! TSUPI!!! i prove mo muna na Pilipino ka by birth right… IPOST MO ANG BERT CERTIFICATE MO!!!! KUNG saan ka rin bininyagan at tinulian.
As far as your line of reasoning is concerned in the words of CHERRIE GIL in the MOVIE Bukas Luluhod ang mga Ebak…. YOU’RE NOTHING BUT A SECOND RATE TRYING HARD COPY CAT!!!!
Juan D…
Yang si GMA mo kamo…. walang papalit… Pwede mong ipalit si Edu Manzano o si Boy Abunda. Basta merong ipapalit dyan. Nobody is indespense ABOL. o ha. naahabol ko pa ang ABOL. Baka kasi tirahin ako ng mga haypalutin ng inglesero dito. Kung gusto mo si Cachupoy o si Bentot kung buhay pa sila.
anak ka ng tokwa benign00… ingles ka ng ingles… walang laman ang sinasabi mo. nakakahiya ka!!! baka may makabasa na banyaga na katulad mo sabihin mga bobo ang pilipino. GET OUT OF HEAR… CAN YOU HERE ME? GOT OUT!!!!
winnie…
hehehe di ako makikipagtalo sayo…alam ko maka erap ka eh bwahahahahaha
at wag ka magalala…pag may makabasa jan sa mga pinagsusulat mo…di na nila kelangan basahin pa ang sinulat ni benigno…masasabi na nila agad na bobo ang pilipino kung ikaw ang gawing basehan bwahahahahahahaha
benigno
matanong lang kita…bakit ba galit na galit sayo tong si winnie joy…
binasted mo ba to? bwahahahahahahahaha
naks. si juan nag dunong dunungan. mapurol naman ang utak. paano mo namang nasabing bobo ako. e ikaw nga di mo ginagamit ang utak mo. ikaw ang nagsasabi na walang alternatibo. di ba’t kabobohan yan. bwahahahaha hehehehehe… BOBO!!!
Ikaw ang nagsisisgaw dito sa post na ‘to. Ingat ka baka ka mahuli ng amo mo. BOBO!!! HEHEHEHEHE. uy sori… di pala dapat bobo ang itawag sa ‘yo. ENG ENG!!! Tsaka ano ka…. night in shining armor ni BENIGNO? Uy… may crush kay Benign00. Juan D BOBO to the RESCUE… BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA…. TANGA!!!!
The wise when reproved becomes wiser. Reprove a scoffer in his jeering and he will despise you of playing his game. Bitter medicinal herbs are much beneficial than sweet honey.