Atu XVIII



Blogroll



Atu XVIII
UK Civil Liberties
 RSS Feed      Add to Google   Add to My AOL   Subscribe in Bloglines



Saturday, June 09, 2007  

Non-Conformists Could Be Denied Driving Licences

The BBC reports an idea I find rather worrying: it's apparently been suggested that psychometric personality assessment could be made part of the UK driving test. Those who "fail" the personality test will, presumably, be denied a driving licence. The idea is to improve safety by identifying those who are likely to be dangerous drivers.

Now I can see why the idea appeals, there are many dangerous drivers on the road. I'd certainly approve the use of such tests as part of driving instruction to teach self-control behind the wheel. Better education, including psychological techniques for dealing with stress etc, would definitely be welcome. Psychometric tools could be useful as a method of improving self-awareness.

When it comes to more general psychological analysis as part of the driving test I'm deeply uneasy. For a start such psychometric tests are very crude - people behave differently in different situations. Because someone identifies themselves as a "risk-taker" doesn't necessarily mean they'll take risks behind the wheel. People who indulge in extreme sports are by definition risk-takers yet often some of the most careful people around; their lives depend on it.

More worrying is the suggestion in the BBC report that such tests could be used "to root out drivers prone to breaking rules". Once such non-conformists were identified by "picking up their underlying values", "instructors and examiners would then be able to modify the person's behaviour".

Emergency stop!

Are we saying that a driving licence - which most people need - could be linked to a psychological attitude of submission to authority? That people who refuse to comply and conform will be "rooted out" and psychologically reconditioned?

If such tests become a routine part of the governmental apparatus, how much further could they be extended? Could your psychological profile - adjusted or otherwise - be stored on the DVLA database? To be linked to your National Identity Register Number (NIRN) on your ID Card?

As always, I hope that I'm over-reacting and it would never come to that. Hopefully this is just a silly-season story on a slow news day. But the language being used is extremely worrying. When seen in the context of the Mental Health Bill it all has a nasty psikhushka feel about it.

It says something about our society today that people could even suggest such testing.

And it says a lot about our government that it's reportedly keeping "an open mind" on the idea.


Labels: ,



Post to: Digg del.icio.us Newsvine Reddit

Comments:

Anonymous said:
This should work well when assessing people who are working for the secret services and other official bureaus employing people of that ilk.

They are non-conformist because that is the type of people you need.

What about artists?

What about the absolute perfect conformist who couldn't safely drive a moped on a runway?

How about Jeremy Clarkson who has not exactly built a reputation for conforming to the norm but seems to be able to drive all manner of vehicle with a more than passing amount of talent [love you, J]?

This is political correct bullshit [and I don't use the term to be crass, but to make absolutely sure it's understood correctly]. We need to get rid of political correctness. We can absolutely not afford it.
 


Dave said:
This is worrying but it has nothing to do with "political correctness". PC means, at its best, refraining from offensive desciptions of people - words such as "nigger" - and generally being polite. At its worst, it means stupid euphemisms that only make the speaker (or agency) look stupid.

To paraphrase Jeremy Hardy, the right wing only have two bug-bears: the nanny state and political correctness. They could at least choose the appropriate one to complain about!
 


Trevor said:
Whilst we're discussing terminology I'd like to vote to consign "left wing" and "right wing" to the bit bucket. See:

Political Compass

and in particular

UK Parties

I am, predictably, in the lower left hand quadrant.
 


Dave said:
Yes, I was a little unhappy about using "right wing" in my paraphrase, as it doesn't quite fit this contect, but it was the term that Jerremy Hardy used.

I'd happily use terms other than "left" and "right", but the article you link to is bogus in many ways. In particular, the opening premise is wrong:

"Once you accept that left and right are merely measures of economic position..."

"Left" and "Right" are ill-defined terms with many interpretations - this is why they are so useless in analysis and so useful to demagogues. It is false to say that they mean only measures of economic postion. In many uses today they mean exactly the opposite axis to the one this article says they do. It would be far better to scrap them entirely.

Even then, the two-axis model is not much more help. It grossly oversimplifies things. For example, it fails to distinguish a centralised economy from a redistributive economy, both of which would normally be considered "left wing". It uses graphs with ill-defined axes and places parties by utterly arbitrary and hidden methods. I think it gives an unwarranted air of precision when political analysis is necessarily complicated and imprecise.
 


Post a Comment



<< Home






All material copyright © 2006-2007 Trevor Mendham. Thanks to Judes for the original Atu XVIII card artwork.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?




NO2ID


Take the PledgeNO2ID Pledge




The sites below do not necessarily reflect my own opinion.