C00036554
Turning These Around: Implications for Counter-Deception
Though the above principles are framed in terms of what factors are associated with deception success, they have implications for countering deception. Thus, for example, the injunction to capitalize upon a victim's preconceptions (Maxim 1) suggests that it is important to examine one's own "givens" for exploitable weaknesses, a manifestly correct if not altogether pleasant conclusion; witness the unpopularity of the advocatus diaboli. Similarly, Jones' Lemma cautions against overreliance upon one channel of information and suggests the benefits of redundant "sensors" to detect incongruities. A third example is Axelrod's caution to consider the stakes involved when evaluating the historical record of an opponent's choices.
Time and space constraints do not permit a full elaboration of the counter-deception implications of these principles — a work deferred for the future.
A Need to Broaden the Perspective
The above maxims were developed principally in the context of military rather than political cases, though
