Identifying and addressing community vulnerabilities
By Pierre Belhomme
January 24, 2011. Revised January 28, 2011.
Identifying Important Community Vulnerabilities
The fundamental goal of life seems simple: "eat, drink and be merry". More philosophically, perhaps: consume resources, take care of self-perpetuation and the environment and interact with others as they do the same.
Unfortunately, however, some goals in the community seem to undermine community well-being. Beyond the usual suspects of theft, physical violence and property damage, the news seems to report additional threats from some in community-granted public, private, administrative and non-administrative positions of responsibility who use their authority to advance nefarious purposes.
Community Vulnerabilities Exploiters
News reports seem to indicate that some community vulnerability exploiters seek these community positions of trust with the express purpose of implementing nefarious goals. Others seem reported to experience unethical change in goals, perhaps due to misinformation that seems to warrant a goal change. Still others seem reported to follow in good faith inappropriate directions from nefarious higher-level administrators, unaware of the community harm toward which they are being directed.
Identifying Exploited Vulnerabilities
Identifying exploited community vulnerabilities seems both critical and limited as suggested regarding other topics in this blog. Essentially, if identifying exploited community vulnerabilities depends upon human ability, the theorized fallibility of human perception seems to dictate that such vulnerabilities will not be completely identified.
History seems to suggest that enough of the circumstances that would be examined for clues of vulnerability exploitation can be similar enough and manipulatable enough to offer information that can be misinterpreted, yielding conclusions of malevolence where there is none as well as conclusions of innocence where malevolence is rampant.
The Role of Faith in Identifying Vulnerabilities
Based on the theory that humankind is unreliably fallible in ascertaining the thoughts of others, it seems reasonable to suggest that drawing any such conclusion would represent a leap of faith. As in other scenarios discussed in this blog series, an important matter seems to be the subject of that faith. One would seem to choose between faith in God, faith in the accuracy of human perception and faith in chance. Due to the theorized fallibility of human perception, faith in human perception seems to be, in actuality, faith in chance. Once the decision on the foundation of faith is made, the remaining step seems to be to act upon the accepted conclusion in the manner that faith directs.
In summary, the main points of this perspective seem to be that community vulnerabilities extend beyond the vulnerabilities to theft and violence. A community's positions of trust seem also to be points of vulnerability that might be intentionally or unintentionally exposed to nefarious exploitation. Secondly, identification of nefarious exploitations of community vulnerabilities seems to be a matter of faith, seemingly requiring individuals' prior decision on their individual foundation of faith. Once those steps are taken, it seems that the security of community vulnerabilities will depend on the strength of the foundation upon which individuals' faith is placed.