Join TSR now and get all your career questions answeredSign up now
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    They're training could kick in without constant shouting. I don't disagree with the idea of a command structure, pretty much every group in society has one but most don't enforce it with stupid outdated rules like changing your posture when someone comes into a room, what does anyone gain from that.

    Well there are a lot of things that could be done better that aren't done better. I don't agree that the army has tried to be nice, I've never heard of that happening. What evidence is there that constantly shouting at someone means they're less likely to mug off their boss? Personally it would make me more likely because I'd get annoyed by it. Also I think most people would understand the necessity of doing as they're told in a life or death situation, it's a lot different to stacking shelves


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Ok, I'll reiterate. It's all about discipline, innate response. If you can't hack someone shouting at you, how are you going to stand up to people screaming in pain, bullets flying over your head etc? And anyway, the image you have of Army life is not what it's like, the shouting, the 'in-your-face' stuff really only happens now and again through Basic, and then when you bugger up. The British Army is not like something out of Full Metal Jacket.

    I'm sure it would make someone like you more likely, or rather, you think it would.


    (Original post by Mechie)
    It doesn't matter that they're not conscripts - they're still entitled to their basic dignity and standard of care when they join the army. Many people who join the army - especially the infantry - do it because they feel they don't have much else, and the army is an attractive job prospect for them - a reputable employer if they want a job in future, a wage etc. They still deserve a level of respect from everyone, and that includes their superior officers.

    You can have discipline without treating people like ****, you have to make people want to do what their superior officer says, rather than it just being a case of them have to. There can be an effective command structure without treating people like crap.

    What "nice" armies have there been that have failed? Just because we've always used one way doesn't mean it's the best way.



    I fail to see how that's relevant at all, and at any rate I wasn't eligible to vote at the last general election.
    Again, spoken like someone with no experience of the Armed Forces. The fact that you assume there's no respect going back down the ranks just shows how little you know. No offense, but I'm guessing you've what, watched a couple of TV programmes maybe? Bad Lads Army? Seen a couple of films like Full Metal Jacket? Maybe heard a horror story or two in the Mail in the last 15 years?

    I see, so people in a minimum wage job want to mop up sick, stack shelves etc? That's BS and you know it. Wanting to do something very rarely comes into the world of work. In the Army, you often want to do things just as much as you do in any other area of work, although more often, in my experience you do actually want to do things to the best of your ability in the Forces, in order to avoid punishment or embarrasment.

    The early years of the Red Army did away with rank, they were all polite to each other and treated everyone as an equal. Their Army fell apart.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    OP. I'd like to know where you have seen this 'shouting'?


    This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Ok, I'll reiterate. It's all about discipline, innate response. If you can't hack someone shouting at you, how are you going to stand up to people screaming in pain, bullets flying over your head etc? And anyway, the image you have of Army life is not what it's like, the shouting, the 'in-your-face' stuff really only happens now and again through Basic, and then when you bugger up. The British Army is not like something out of Full Metal Jacket.
    Isn't it? I've never seen full metal jacket, war films aren't my thing. My knowledge on what army training is like comes from two people I know who were in the army, one of them actually served in the special forces. They have both said getting shouted at and spoken down to is quite common. Maybe things have been changed since the 80's but that's what my knowledge is based on. I'd love to know what most people telling me I'm wrong are basing their opinions from

    (Original post by gateshipone)
    You seem to think they are just shouting at them and that's it. If the 'hat wearers' are shouting they're probably doing so to raise everyone's stress level WHILE CARRYING OUT A TASK OR ORDER. The point of it, as others have said over and over again, is to get soldiers prepared to do things in high stress situations and keep a cool head. That's the point of it and it clearly works.
    Yes and I over and over again have said how can being shouted at by someone you know is going to do no harm to you prepare you for having bullets and grenades fired at you? It's one thing to keep a cool head when someone is shouting, I can do that. I don't imagine I'd keep a cool head if I was being shot at.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Yes and I over and over again have said how can being shouted at by someone you know is going to do no harm to you prepare you for having bullets and grenades fired at you? It's one thing to keep a cool head when someone is shouting, I can do that. I don't imagine I'd keep a cool head if I was being shot at.
    It's not about fearing the person who's shouting, it's about raising stress levels which shouting certainly does. It's really a simple concept. If you get used to following orders and keeping calm under pressure, you're more likely to do it when your life is at stake.

    It's not about re-creating the exact situation as bullets flying towards you, it's about getting your brain used to functioning when stressed.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gateshipone)
    It's not about fearing the person who's shouting, it's about raising stress levels which shouting certainly does. It's really a simple concept. If you get used to following orders and keeping calm under pressure, you're more likely to do it when your life is at stake.

    It's not about re-creating the exact situation as bullets flying towards you, it's about getting your brain used to functioning when stressed.
    I would hardly call being shouted at stressful, unless it was trying to be intimidating; if someone shouts at me I just find it annoying but not stressful. If some people do find it stressful it's still not even comparable to the level of stress that you would be under with bullets flying at you


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Isn't it? I've never seen full metal jacket, war films aren't my thing. My knowledge on what army training is like comes from two people I know who were in the army, one of them actually served in the special forces. They have both said getting shouted at and spoken down to is quite common. Maybe things have been changed since the 80's but that's what my knowledge is based on. I'd love to know what most people telling me I'm wrong are basing their opinions from



    Yes and I over and over again have said how can being shouted at by someone you know is going to do no harm to you prepare you for having bullets and grenades fired at you? It's one thing to keep a cool head when someone is shouting, I can do that. I don't imagine I'd keep a cool head if I was being shot at.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Well, mine comes from 3-4 people my age who have just gone through basic, in the Army, Royal Marines and the RAF. Also about 15 people I know who have recently come out of the Army, talking having served 4-25 years and having left in the last 2-10 years, who I knew through the Army Cadets. Equally I know 3 people in the UOTC and 3 in the TA. I also know 2 serving soldiers that have been on tours in the last few years. At the level I got to in the Army Cadets I was at points working with the same people that train regular soldiers, although obviously there was a different level of treatment, I talked with and worked with them. I also take a great interest in the Armed Forces so I've seen pretty much every documentary, expose and so forth on them in the last decade.

    So yeah, short of being in the services it would be difficult for me to have heard and know more about it. Also, I have opinions and experiences spanning all 3 services, dozens of regiments and 4 decades. So yeah, forgive me if I feel a little more qualified to comment on such things.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    I've said I don't think it's essential that it's done in the way I believe it is.
    I think this about sums it up - the ultimate straw man argument. You're arguing that your perception, based on very little evidence, is that the military training regime lacks effectiveness. When it's not entirely clear what you think (and you're unwilling to accept that your knowledge is insufficient to make any reasonable judgement) how can anyone counter, unless they happen to be telepathic?

    Just a thought for you though - think about why shouting is, very broadly speaking, considered a sub-optimal approach to training people. It's because it unsettles people, induces stress and makes people more prone to making mistakes. In the Army you will have to deal with being upset, stressed and prone to making mistakes. Better to experience that in training than in battle.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Well, mine comes from 3-4 people my age who have just gone through basic, in the Army, Royal Marines and the RAF. Also about 15 people I know who have recently come out of the Army, talking having served 4-25 years and having left in the last 2-10 years, who I knew through the Army Cadets. Equally I know 3 people in the UOTC and 3 in the TA. I also know 2 serving soldiers that have been on tours in the last few years. At the level I got to in the Army Cadets I was at points working with the same people that train regular soldiers, although obviously there was a different level of treatment, I talked with and worked with them. I also take a great interest in the Armed Forces so I've seen pretty much every documentary, expose and so forth on them in the last decade.

    So yeah, short of being in the services it would be difficult for me to have heard and know more about it. Also, I have opinions and experiences spanning all 3 services, dozens of regiments and 4 decades. So yeah, forgive me if I feel a little more qualified to comment on such things.
    Well at no point did I claim that I know more than you or anyone else. You clearly have a better understanding than me. However that still doesn't mean that my idea of a different approach might work.


    (Original post by CurlyBen)
    I think this about sums it up - the ultimate straw man argument. You're arguing that your perception, based on very little evidence, is that the military training regime lacks effectiveness. When it's not entirely clear what you think (and you're unwilling to accept that your knowledge is insufficient to make any reasonable judgement) how can anyone counter, unless they happen to be telepathic?

    Just a thought for you though - think about why shouting is, very broadly speaking, considered a sub-optimal approach to training people. It's because it unsettles people, induces stress and makes people more prone to making mistakes. In the Army you will have to deal with being upset, stressed and prone to making mistakes. Better to experience that in training than in battle.
    Could you please find where I said military training lacks effectiveness? I've said that the practical training of the army is very good, hence why our forces are renowned throughout the world. I said that I don't think the mental approach is the best one.

    Could you also find a quote where I have claimed to have substantial knowledge? I simply said my opinion is based from two people's experiences (one of those people actually agrees with me that army training can't really prepare you for life or death situations) I also said in my original post that I might be wrong in what I think day to day army training is

    And as I have said several times there's a vast difference between the stress of being shouted at and being shot at



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Well at no point did I claim that I know more than you or anyone else. You clearly have a better understanding than me. However that still doesn't mean that my idea of a different approach might work.



    Perhaps it might, you can think that.

    Though, looking at history, talking to those that train and those that have a hand in writing training procedure and so forth, the ones with the experience and expertise, that is not their opinion.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    Perhaps it might, you can think that.

    Though, looking at history, talking to those that train and those that have a hand in writing training procedure and so forth, the ones with the experience and expertise, that is not their opinion.
    Well I'm sure when the Romans were practicing decimation the experts of the day probably thought that was an effective method


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Well I'm sure when the Romans were practicing decimation the experts of the day probably thought that was an effective method


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's a totally comparable example.

    It's not like in the Modern Army they have panels of experts from Psychologists to teaching professionals to former soldiers advising them on the optimum techniques and they constantly evolve as there is a need for them to do so.

    But no, I'm sure you, someone with no experience or education in the field, know better than all of them based on the fact you don't like being shouted at. Please, tell me more.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Does nobody get put off the army by the crap you have to deal with. Constant, unnecessary shouting from someone with a stupid hat; having to change the way you stand when certain people come into a room, basically being treated like crap until you get reach a decent rank.

    Or do I just have a very bad interpretation on how it works?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Army rubbish should be disposed of in the nearest bin or suitable recycling unit.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Steevee)
    That's a totally comparable example.

    It's not like in the Modern Army they have panels of experts from Psychologists to teaching professionals to former soldiers advising them on the optimum techniques and they constantly evolve as there is a need for them to do so.

    But no, I'm sure you, someone with no experience or education in the field, know better than all of them based on the fact you don't like being shouted at. Please, tell me more.
    Well at the time they thought that their expertise was sufficient, we can see it's not, in 1500 years people will look at military practice and see that it should have been done differently.

    Please find me some evidence about this constant evolution with the help of psychologists


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Could you please find where I said military training lacks effectiveness? I've said that the practical training of the army is very good, hence why our forces are renowned throughout the world. I said that I don't think the mental approach is the best one.

    Could you also find a quote where I have claimed to have substantial knowledge? I simply said my opinion is based from two people's experiences (one of those people actually agrees with me that army training can't really prepare you for life or death situations) I also said in my original post that I might be wrong in what I think day to day army training is

    And as I have said several times there's a vast difference between the stress of being shouted at and being shot at
    You absolutely cannot divorce effective training from mental conditioning. The point is not necessarily that you're being shot at, or shouted at, or any of the other ways stress is inflicted. The point is you're being put under stress and learn to cope with it and can continue to make rational decisions.

    Given your admitted lack of knowledge, why do you continue to question the approach to training the military take? If you're really interested go away and find out more about how training is undertaken and think about why it's done that way. If you still disagree then fair enough but essentially just saying 'shouting = bad' from an admitted position of ignorance is just bloody stupid.

    Also bear in mind that (as one example) the Royal Naval Leadership Academy, which delivers a lot of training, is accredited by the Chartered Management Institute and you will hopefully realise that a lot of thought has been put into how the military is trained and other people, with no connection and who are experts on management, agree that is a very good way of training.

    And as I have said several times there's a vast difference between the stress of being shouted at and being shot at
    As you've apparently not been on the receiving end of either, how can you make such a definitive statement? In any case no one has said being shouted at is the equivalent of being shot at, but it's a progression. You don't walk off the parade square and onto the battlefield, there is a huge amount of training in between (with - you guessed it - a lot more stress) which is designed to progressively condition you into a useful individual who won't lose their head in first contact or when a ship starts sinking.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CurlyBen)
    You absolutely cannot divorce effective training from mental conditioning. The point is not necessarily that you're being shot at, or shouted at, or any of the other ways stress is inflicted. The point is you're being put under stress and learn to cope with it and can continue to make rational decisions.
    You can separate the two; they're two different elements of training. It's the difference in the levels of "stress". Shouting, to me, seems to really not induce much stress if any; I've never been shot at but I would imagine it's quite a stressful experience. You can't just say that because you've been trained under a little bit of stress you're now going to be capable of dealing with one of the most stressful situations imaginable.

    (Original post by CurlyBen)
    Given your admitted lack of knowledge, why do you continue to question the approach to training the military take? If you're really interested go away and find out more about how training is undertaken and think about why it's done that way. If you still disagree then fair enough but essentially just saying 'shouting = bad' from an admitted position of ignorance is just bloody stupid.
    It seems everyone is putting words in my mouth, did I say shouting is bad or did I say I think there is a better alternative?

    (Original post by CurlyBen)
    Also bear in mind that (as one example) the Royal Naval Leadership Academy, which delivers a lot of training, is accredited by the Chartered Management Institute and you will hopefully realise that a lot of thought has been put into how the military is trained and other people, with no connection and who are experts on management, agree that is a very good way of training.
    Leadership academy? Is that not for people who are in the latter stages of their training as the name suggests? I imagine their training would be different from recruits


    (Original post by CurlyBen)
    As you've apparently not been on the receiving end of either, how can you make such a definitive statement? In any case no one has said being shouted at is the equivalent of being shot at, but it's a progression. You don't walk off the parade square and onto the battlefield, there is a huge amount of training in between (with - you guessed it - a lot more stress) which is designed to progressively condition you into a useful individual who won't lose their head in first contact or when a ship starts sinking.
    Well I've been on the receiving end of shouting and I can safely say that doesn't in anyway prepare for being on the receiving end of gunfire. Yes I know there's more training, six months of it I believe? It's very vague to say "a lot more stress" gives the impression that you don't actually know what sort of stress.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    You can separate the two; they're two different elements of training. It's the difference in the levels of "stress". Shouting, to me, seems to really not induce much stress if any; I've never been shot at but I would imagine it's quite a stressful experience. You can't just say that because you've been trained under a little bit of stress you're now going to be capable of dealing with one of the most stressful situations imaginable.
    No, noone can. But being put under a bit of stress and being made to work is better than never having been put under stress and yet still be expected to work.
    Shouting on it's own doesn't do much. But as you've expressed several times, you've no knowledge of how this part of training is actually used, so why do you keep criticising it if you don't know the whole story? Mental stress is only one part of it. The other - and far easier to replicate - element that is added to this is physical stress. Imagine being worked for 20hrs a day for a week, enduring route marches, drills, tests and various extreme tests of fitness at all hours of the day and night in all weathers. And then imagine, when at your absolute physical limit and point of total exhaustion, that your whole team is relying on you to get yourself and your kit to a certain place by a certain time, all the while you've got people shouting at you, imitation explosives going off nearby, various simulations of the battlefield going on...

    I've, fortunately, never been near an actual firefight, but I know that when pushed to my limits I can still rely on myself to perform and rely on the other people around me to do the same. And that's what it comes down to.

    As someone who's never been in the situation - and who hopefully never will be, I wouldn't wish that level of chaos and stress on anyone, whether simulated or real - it's something you're not quite ready or able to understand. That doesn't mean it's wrong, that doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means it's something outside of your comprehension and experience.


    It seems everyone is putting words in my mouth, did I say shouting is bad or did I say I think there is a better alternative?
    Yes, but you've never once explained what you think/know that to be...

    Leadership academy? Is that not for people who are in the latter stages of their training as the name suggests? I imagine their training would be different from recruits
    Nope. They're the people who formulate it for everybody of all levels. There's actually a remarkable degree of similarity between the types of training all entrants get at the very beginning, whether RN, Army or RAF, whether Officer or basic serviceman. The transition from civilian to warfighter is a drastic one and they all use, basically, the same procedure.


    Well I've been on the receiving end of shouting and I can safely say that doesn't in anyway prepare for being on the receiving end of gunfire. Yes I know there's more training, six months of it I believe? It's very vague to say "a lot more stress" gives the impression that you don't actually know what sort of stress.
    Well, no, you can't "safely say" that, because you've not been on the receiving end of the other.

    There's more training than that. It's never ending. Just because you might have finished Basic Recruit training or Initial Officer Training doesnt mean you never train again. Your entire career is training, practising.

    A lot more stress is compound. Things get worse, they escalate, you're given more responsibilities which in turn produce more pressure and stress. You think it's all just shouting. That's your downfall in this entire thing, you don't appreciate it's part of a wider picture incorporating many many levels.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    its all an act, a masquerade. non of that nonsense is real its all psychological, to install discipline and becoming part of a unit and get you all on the same level. you might not realize it but slowly but surely your unconscious is being programmed. trained psychologist's and psycho analyst's are employed to come up with these kinds on instructing techniques, so you don't end up loosing your mind on a battlefield.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    It seems everyone is putting words in my mouth, did I say shouting is bad or did I say I think there is a better alternative?
    Drewski's pretty much covered it, but I'm curious - if you aren't saying shouting is inherently and always counter-productive, and you've admitted (and demonstrated) you know nothing of the existing training regime, how have you come to the conclusion there's a better alternative?

    For what it's worth, I know plenty about the sort of stress you undergo during training. The length of time to get to frontline varies enormously - a matter of months for an infanteer, years for a pilot.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LewisG123)
    Does nobody get put off the army by the crap you have to deal with. Constant, unnecessary shouting from someone with a stupid hat; having to change the way you stand when certain people come into a room, basically being treated like crap until you get reach a decent rank.

    Or do I just have a very bad interpretation on how it works?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Hi LewisG123,

    A lot of these rituals are designed to instill in the mind of the soldier basic tenets that will become subconscious and hopefully still activate when under extreme pressure and when maxed out mentally. I don't know why you think the hats are stupid but hats and especially peaked caps have always been the sign of authority, look at captains of ships and airlines.

    Being shouted at might seem pointless in isolation, however when you mix it in with everything else that happens in basic training it starts to make sense.

    In basic training you cannot do anything right, you live in constant knowledge that nothing you do will ever be good enough and you will receive a harsh telling off and punishment for not performing "adequately". However, you still perform to the best of your ability in spite of constant negative reinforcement and bond together as a team underneath this cloud of oppression. It helps you to compartmentalise things and become more resilient. Because you become used to working at a high level under seemingly unsurmountable conditions you don't break down when things become bleak further down the line.

    A lot of people think that they 'won't put up with the shouting' when they first join. We're all grown-ups and you're not gonna be scared of the guy shouting at you, but when you're sleep deprived and you're trying to impress this guy so you get some time off at the weekend it suddenly all adds up.

    EDIT: In my branch, the negative reinforcement continues throughout my whole career. If you don't get told you're rubbish at something you can pretty much assume that you did it right!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schleigg)
    Hi LewisG123,

    A lot of these rituals are designed to instill in the mind of the soldier basic tenets that will become subconscious and hopefully still activate when under extreme pressure and when maxed out mentally. I don't know why you think the hats are stupid but hats and especially peaked caps have always been the sign of authority, look at captains of ships and airlines.

    Being shouted at might seem pointless in isolation, however when you mix it in with everything else that happens in basic training it starts to make sense.

    In basic training you cannot do anything right, you live in constant knowledge that nothing you do will ever be good enough and you will receive a harsh telling off and punishment for not performing "adequately". However, you still perform to the best of your ability in spite of constant negative reinforcement and bond together as a team underneath this cloud of oppression. It helps you to compartmentalise things and become more resilient. Because you become used to working at a high level under seemingly unsurmountable conditions you don't break down when things become bleak further down the line.

    A lot of people think that they 'won't put up with the shouting' when they first join. We're all grown-ups and you're not gonna be scared of the guy shouting at you, but when you're sleep deprived and you're trying to impress this guy so you get some time off at the weekend it suddenly all adds up.

    EDIT: In my branch, the negative reinforcement continues throughout my whole career. If you don't get told you're rubbish at something you can pretty much assume that you did it right!
    Thank you for a much better answer, do you mind me asking what part of the army you serve as?

    I notice you didn't use the "it creates stress" point everyone else seems to make, the reason you gave makes a lot more sense.

    As for the stupid hats comment I don't mean the peaked caps like the ones pilots wear, I mean the berets with feathers.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
Useful resources

Articles:

Guide to the armed forcesGuide to the Royal Air ForceA job in the Army

Featured recruiter profiles:

Army logo

The Army is recruiting now

"With hundreds of roles available, there’s more than one way to be the best."

Quick Link:

Unanswered Armed Forces Threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.