IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/johsem/v6y2009i1p27n45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analogical Reasoning and Complexity

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus Alfred A.

    (University of Minnesota Carlson School of Management)

  • Sheaffer Zachary

    (The Open University of Israel and the Ariel University Centre)

Abstract

The article explores the use of analogical reasoning to understand homeland defense and security issues. Analogical reasoning relies on the analysis of historical precedents. While much value can be inferred from examining historical precedents, accelerated change in contemporary societies decrease its relevance for understanding future events. This article considers whether complexity theory can complement the analogical approach. We formulate a theory of global violence and instability based on analogical reasoning and complexity theory to explicate why violent events persist despite countermeasures taken to contain them. This theory elucidates the phenomenon of escalating violence and explains why movements that perpetrate violence do not quickly mellow. We conclude with testable propositions and suggestions about the practical relevance of the theoretical framework for containing contemporary violence.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus Alfred A. & Sheaffer Zachary, 2009. "Analogical Reasoning and Complexity," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-27, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:6:y:2009:i:1:p:27:n:45
    DOI: 10.2202/1547-7355.1583
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1547-7355.1583
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1547-7355.1583?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:johsem:v:6:y:2009:i:1:p:27:n:45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.