Information and comments on the essay:
Known knowns and unknown unknowns
From the book: Chum for Thought: Throwing Ideas into Dangerous Waters by David Satterlee
Find out more, including where to buy books and ebooks
Read or download this essay as a PDF file at: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4eNv8KtePyKeTZGNzhhdExsa1E/edit?usp=sharingDonald #Rumsfeld on Known knowns and unknown unknowns
![]() |
Chum For Thought: Throwing Ideas into Dangerous Waters |
Known knowns and unknown unknowns
In 2002, the press took exception to a comment by
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. However, I think he was onto something important…
“…there are known knowns; there are things we know
we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say, we know there
are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones
we don’t know we don’t know.”
Donald Rumsfeld – Defense Department briefing, February 12, 2002 (Federal par. 160)
Donald Rumsfeld – Defense Department briefing, February 12, 2002 (Federal par. 160)
This quotation has been rendered in several minor
variations. They all fall short by one of exhausting the matrix of known and
knowable. But, that is not critical to the point that he was making. The
version (below) that I transcribed from a video of his briefing includes the
sound of an audience starting to laugh. The reporters may have been
anticipating questioning him sharply about unknown knowns:
“… there are known knowns; there are things we know
that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that
we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns; there are
things we do not know we don’t know.”
ibid (transcribed by Satterlee—italics added)
ibid (transcribed by Satterlee—italics added)
Secretary Rumsfeld was nearing the end of a protracted and
confrontational news conference at the time that he made this statement.
Reporters had repeatedly parsed his words and perversely tried to turn them
against him. He had just defended a ludicrous challenge to the Pentagon’s
attentiveness to Iraq. A questioner asserts that, “…there is no evidence of a
direct link between Baghdad and some of these terrorist organizations.”
Rumsfeld, evidently getting testy, introduces