6 Comments
User's avatar
Louis M's avatar

Every year or two a debate arises within the US intelligence community and academic observers about the value (or lack thereof) of "intelligence studies." Some corners will bemoan a lack of terminal degree and/or advocate for more support to expand the appeal of intelligence as a topic in academic settings. The practical corners point out that, at best, intelligence studies could perhaps be considered practitioner degree if elevated to terminal status. But even this is hampered by a lack of academic interest (read funding streams). The judicious corners point out that what is preferred in a work force is someone who has brought in other thinking skills - be it in depth knowledge of a culture, a STEM topic, economics, etc. The epistemological base is of greater value than the knowledge in the particular.

Expand full comment
ML Cavanaugh's avatar

Absolutely...we can expand the boundaries of scholarship to fit the whole real world.

Expand full comment
Jer M's avatar

This was great — also highlights the value a diversity of potential sources brings into evaluating a problem. Where one discipline fails, another offers an opportunity. 💡

Expand full comment
ML Cavanaugh's avatar

Muchas gracias...

Expand full comment
Bryan Strawser's avatar

Anytime Dre and Jay-Z get worked into a strategy conversation, I'm in. I successfully cited Kanye once in a paper at King's ;)

Expand full comment
ML Cavanaugh's avatar

I think we can find lessons just about anywhere...so that's where I look!

Expand full comment