Crunch

Munched, munched in the mouth of a monster
A monsoon of mottled anger, bottled in a mess.
Mayhem to the max!
Mayhem to the max!
Mingling with the masses of measured madness is no fun,
no fun at all.

Facilitate

Poem on my first facilitation experience with PCN:

Round and round, the dancing went
I’m the last, last to be spent.

Spent of ego, spent of face,
spent on numbness–just in case.

Family was fun, family was fair,
fair enough for me to bare/bear.

So smile, young one, without regret!

Otherwise no wisdom you will beget!

So much to learn, so much I need,
the social art must be practiced indeed.

So engrave the feel, engrave it well

engrave it in soul for it to dwell.

Swell, all will be well.

Just keep learning.

Dancing.

Smiling.

Topoi

The topoi is a new term I learned in Rhetoric today, and it’s roots come from the ancient Greek philosopher’s famous canon, “Rhetoric”. Basically, a topoi is a philosophical category that helps delineate ideas. When a topoi is established, it is almost like a certain field is positioned, and all those within that field can begin to find meaning in accordance to the topoi. Political discussions and debate, for instance, follow a kind of expectation in how it is executed. This expectation defines what goes into a successful rendition of the expected topoi of debate, and doing well within those definitions and bounds translates to competence.

Another example would be basketball. Basketball is a very specific field, a particular type of topoi, and there are rules that are governed in the game that make the game what it is. The players are expected to all follow the rules, otherwise no one can judge on who wins (assuming a concensus for winning was already formed). This is very much like the order of discourse in which something is understood. There is a lot of jargon in this writing, and even my typing this passage and utilizing the vocabulary and ideas is a sign of me playing to the “topoi” of pseudo-intellectual blogging. However, my writing about my blogging is not part of the existing “topoi” of blogging, and so it would be considered novel and fresh and interesting. This freshness, however, is maintained by the fact that there is an expectation for certain ways of doing things. Otherwise, if there were no expectations and laws that govern the game, there would be no “rule” that the act of “breaking the rule” can compare to, and no one would know to what extent the event is novel.

What

So What

Now What.

Nurture versus Nature–Nature wins

Bio-enginnering not only has medical implications, it is also fraught with social and psychological implications. For instance, if genetic engineering were possible, that would mean that richer families would be able to afford more “DNA upgrades” for their children and as a result, give their offspring more genetic advantages when it comes to competing with poorer families. (In fact though, a subtler version of this “bequeathing advantages” phenonmenon already exists in society and has dictated much of the inequality that is seen today). With genetic engineering, the subtle and invisible form of unequal competition would be blown to an observable and quantifiable situation, making the process blatant and shameless. This calls into the significance of nature versus nurture, and it puts into question the importance of nature.

Is “nature” really that important? There are those who argue that genetic modifications would destroy the premise of natural birth, creating a more control oriented world that fundamentally changes what it means to be human. However, it seems that the purpose of technology is to change nature. The industrial revolution made production much quicker and brought about dramatic increases in traveling speed. This isn’t “natural”, as when was the last time in the last 3000 years of human existence you see “man” going from one place to another at so quick a speed? But then again, is riding a horse necessarily “more natural” than driving a car? Both are using instruments that were not of our initial, “natural” capacity in order to provide us with some form of “improvement” in skill. Using electricity to power engines, drive machines, light our houses, wash our dishes, clean our clothes, cook and grow our food, produce our products–these too, were not of our “natural” capacity and required the aid of technology. From these, we could see that using technology necessarily changes the “natural” condition for the sake of betterment in one way or another.

But when does using technology cross the line? It seems that when technology begins to tresspass and mess with the human condition that the human mind finally calls for “time out”. The body is the ultimate “sacred”, natural possession we have, and altering its fundamental composition would be unacceptable and unethical. However, there seems to be many “other ways” in which technology is used to temper and work with the human condition but not necessarily change it, and medical technology is a good example. The invention of x-rays, of surgery, of anti-biotics, of transplants–all of these are forms of technology that do not directly “change” who we are but rather assist in our condition and capacity to live as humans. But when this kind of technology that we use to benefit us begins to cross the line in manipulating the “stuff” we are made of, that is when people get very sensitive and touchy. In other words, there becomes this very strong tension between the desire for perfection and the fear for reprecussions in no longer being considered naturally “human”. So would having the capacity to change genes and alter the kinds of offspring we produce be unethical? It is a form of technology that intends to make life better, just as all the inventions we as a race have developed, so what then makes it “more unethical” than other forms of technology?

Perhaps it is because genetic engineering (nurture) would literally try to control and overtake nature. If that is the position, then that would mean that self help, or personal development would also be considered a way of “changing our nature”, just not through technology. Afterall, self help encourages people to restrain from over-indulgence and develop self-discipline in the face of temptation and instant gratification. It is part of our “nature” to simply screw around, do nothing, watch tv, and enjoy relaxing, but the norms of society dictate certain modes of behavior to be more acceptable and valued. In that regard, society is kind of like a form of “cultural technology” that establishes and enforces a more efficient and productive society based in the way it socializes its members. (Interestingly though, ‘culture’ is both at once a “natural” but also “constructed” phenomenon.)

But to bring the discussion back onto genetic engineering, what makes preserving “nature” and “naturalness” so appealing to us so that we would sacrifice the possbility of longevity, increased IQ, better health, etc, in order to protect it from being altered? I think that perhaps the struggle isn’t nature versus nurture, but about different dimensions of nature layered on top of one another and vying for control. The creation of technology and culture may seem to be a product of nurture, but really, these things were created upon the fundamental motivations of “nature”. In other words, what drives nurture is nature, and nurture is only a consequence, a manifestation of something else that is deeply “natural”. For example, the seemingly “nurture-oriented” act of genetic modification is driven by a natural desire for perfection, and this desire for perfection is premised on the even more fundamental, “natural” desire of wanting to be more competitive and successful so one can better reproduce and provide for offspring. As a result of being successful, this resulting “nutured” specimen would be able to better enact its natural tendencies. (AKA, once a person gets rich, he may use this to fulfill “nature driven” activies such as eating fancy, dressing well, getting beautiful women, nice car, etc). All forms of regulating processes (such as culture and social values)  and technology are what are typically considered elements of “nurture”, but ultimately, these are mere manifestations of nature and are  used in such a way as to promote and propogate instinctual drives/motivations.

Oooo! Me Too!

So Obama got inaugurated today, and I’m sure the blogs around the world exploded with people expressing their feelings on the occasion. As a fellow blogger, I feel I must also recount on my experience as well:

I stumble into my apartment after a 6 AM flight, tired, full with carry-ons, and slightly dehydrated and constipated. My roommate and his girlfriend were already up, as was the television, and famous people were marching out of this mysterious entrance and being cheered at. It felt as ordinary as if I had simply come home, and the fact that I had spent a whole month back in my hometown didn’t seem to affect my reception of my college apartment. I was immediately at home and began to watch the inaugural proceed.

I don’t remember most of what I watched, but one interesting thought I had was what if I was in the position of one walking out, waving and shaking hands and kissing cheeks left and right so automatically. With so many important people around to recognize, I don’t think I would know how to greet them all appropriately and with the dignitiy of respecting them as human beings. Mr. Clinton, for instance, gave a woman on the left a kiss, then immediately (quite abruptly too) turned to the gentlemen on the right and shook his hand, etc, etc.

Okay, I’m knocked out. (For context, I fell asleep at this point as I was typing in front of the computer at 12:00 AM )

Okay, I’m back.

For the most part, I remember looking at dishes, as I finished and was washing a bowl  I used for milk and cereal. Even when it was Obama’s turn to deliver his address, I was at the sink washing dishes. I know I should’ve had my nose glued to the screen in an attempt to absorb and digest every word Obama utters, but instead I kind of just did my dishes while listening to his oration loosely, without deep thoughts. That was how I spent my ‘historical moment’.

Meeting up, talking

An old friend came over today, and it was made possible because of a single phone call I made. Before, I hesitated about calling because of my busy schedule and upcoming test, but I decided to meet up with him, as it was rare for both of us to be in such close proximity with me in college and he in Taiwan. I don’t know if I was supposed to have invited him to come in, but we got a quick and good conversation going standing outside. The topic: the working life.

My friend didn’t graduate college before he began his full time work, and his trials and tribulations have been many. For one thing, the company he worked for was in close dealing with China, and so I got to hear many life experiences and personal, moral and ethical decision he had to make there in order to survive. It literally sounded like special-ops politics, and a few of the things he encountered include: being “stabbed” every day by people you know due to the intense competition, seeing people that were good grow more corrupt with power, having to compromise your vow of not drinking for the sake of a business contract, dealing with mobsters and face physical threats, refuse business contracts that result in the unemployment of over 1000 people, waking up at 2 AM to the yelling of “WHAT THE F@*$ ARE YOU DOING? THERE IS A CEO MEETING ROUNDTABLE RIGHT NOW” and staggering to participate, putting up with racism, faking a “Beijing accent” in order to fit in and not be looked down upon, treating employees well only to lose out on 2 million dollars in personal gain, staying loyal to the company only to see the owners sell the company out for quick profit (he got nothing, despite his turning the company around from being in deficit), etc., etc. It’s no wonder he gained a lot of weight and developed ulcers.

From all his pain from rejection, depression, losing friends, not having anyone to talk to, and compromise of self, he told me with weary eyes the reality of the competitive world, how there were doctors and Ph.Ds and Masters students in China who were working for (competing for) jobs that paid 1000-2000 US dollars a month. The only thing protecting us here in the US, he said, were the immigration laws–these professionals from China were more than willing and ready to come over and work for less pay. Even in Taiwan, his company’s offering of 20 secretarial jobs yielded 20,000 applicants (the job pays 1000 US dollars a month). The higher one gets on the business ladder, the tougher the competition gets and the more backstabbing.

The stories my friend told me were exactly the kinds of things I wanted to avoid (“gifting”, being stabbed, dealing with alchol, gangs, etc), and that’s what brought me to resolve not to deal in business. Unfortunately, as I slowly figured out, business is everywhere in the world, in every situation and every interaction, and it isn’t something to be avoided. His advice to me was: get out there to China early and see it. They have a different mentality, and most newbies who go don’t make it because of the pride. “Let go of all ego”, he told me, “and prepare to be very, very flexible”.

Feeling undigested

Eating a lot of food can create the feeling of indigestion; likewise, hearing a lot of ideas being thrown around can also create the same feeling–unless of course, some additional work is put in to aid the digestion (aka thinking about it). So now I want to digest a bit of some of my breakfast “food for thought” I was provided:

1. “Clarity of purpose is important”.

Whole heartedly agreed. The ultimate purpose a person ascribes to determines not only how he creates his present, it also affects how he interprets (re-interprets) his history. What has passed can never be changed; however, how that past is viewed and used in the present can still be altered.

2. “The act of giving and recieving must be equally balanced. Just as a person cannot inhale with out exhaling and vice versa.”

Personally, I think one can give more than one receives, simply because there is more that can be received than ‘physical’ things, such as friendship, compassion, inner joy. Also, I think there is more than options for what can be given, such as a smile, a word of encouragement, an empathetic thought, etc)

3. “If I want something I never had, do something I have never done.”

I liked this quote very much. For instance, if I want to make friends with a stranger (a friendship I never had), I have to do something I have never done (talk to this person). Also, this “doing” can be changing a daily habit, adjusting a train of thought, or learning to listen more. A new action always creates new opportunities, and so tailoring actions/thoughts towards a specific “something you want” (such as more experience, wisdom, companionship, etc) can help you better approach the new things or see old things differently. Either way, “wanting something” is simply a tool for creating personal meaning and developing more focus.

4. If I’m only willing to do what’s easy, life will be hard. But if I’m willing to do what’s hard, life will be easy.”

Very interesting, seemingly paradoxical statement that makes a lot of sense. An example I was given was schooling. If a student want to “take it easy” when it comes to learning math, his level will remain at the point to which he challenged himself. So if he got to Algebra, classes like Calculus and Statistics will remain out of reach and difficult. However, if he continually pushes himself to learn high level math, which each increase, the past math classes will seem easier and easier. This is the same for things like learning how to ride a bike, how to be tech savvy, how to be a great leader or facilitator, etc.

5. “Everything is hard until you learn it”.

This ties very well with the last statement. Before learning about something, the entry barrier jargon filters and lack of understanding makes the subject seem very difficult. Ask any expert in the field, however, and most will find the material they know to be very easy since they’ve already learned it well. A field that is not traversed will always seem foreign, and the more native you get in the field, the less difficult it will seem.

As an offshoot to this, this insight can be used to help people understand one another better: an outsider to a field or endeaver will always perceive things differently than an insider. Likewise, a person from a different background will view similar things differently as well. Coming from a liberal background, it seems only common-sense that I voted for Obama, but today, I met someone who voted for McCain, and although it’s tough for me to understand his point of view, I can appreciate the difference we have through the fact that we come from fundamentally different backgrounds, and so we view the same things differently and assign different degrees of value judgement to each candidate. The important thing is to find common ground and build a relationship of understanding.

6. “Refusing a gift may hurt a person.”

This seemingly simplistic quote is important because of the broad interpretation for the word “gift”. I’m not practiced in the art of physical gift giving, but I know that even speaking to a person is a way of “giving” words, and listening to others is not only a show of respect, but also a display of accepting the gift that is his opinion. In fact, all social interaction is a process of exchange (giving and receiving), and gift or not, it is important and should be carefully considered.

Lastly, I just wanted to end by saying that practice is more important than talk, and that the willingness to put down the ego, be humble, and listen, is a life skill that should be part of the fundamental character of every person. That’s all. I feel much more well digested.

Video on Authenticity

Joseph Pine traces how the business of selling has evolved throughout history and ultimately ends up on the new commodity of the current world: authenticity. It’s interesting because it could not only be applied to the commercial field, but also to the self (refer to the truth matrix being authentic).

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/joseph_pine_on_what_consumers_want.html

The critter

In the world so vast,
a land so wide
an organism writhes.
It is warm and soft pink, glowing slightly,
sitting in the middle of the yard,
wishing the best for the world.
But the world doesn’t accept it.
There are too many big organisms in the yard already,
some tame, some not–all alive, and wanting air.
But this little organism in the middle of the yard is
special.
It wants to do something good for all,
and though it may be quite old-fashioned at times,
it sure dosn’t lack resolve–and heart.
I cannot disown it, just as I can’t disown my own family.
It is an interesting little fella.

“To bring to Life” (活化)

Yesterday, I had a long conversation with my dad about the utility of knowledge. Throughout the discussion, we talked very much about the concept of “bringing knowledge to life”, rather than keeping knowledge as dead weight. Dead knowledge, he tells me, is harmful in that it confounds more than it clarifies, clutters more than it clears the way. While dead information become like obstacles, knowledge that is brought to life can be converted to different forms of energy and used to do many other important things. This is very much like food: accumulate a lot of food in the room for simply storage, it may begin to get in the way and rot; consume the food with each accumulation, then it will give you energy and power to act.

Initially, I thought I was quite clear in the concept and was convinced that I was “bringing the knowledge I learn to life”. After all, isn’t that what my many papers on various topics are about? Didn’t I have to understand and synthesize information (in other words, “bring it to life”) in order to write papers on them? However, my dad was convinced that I have not been “bringing knowledge to life”, and he provided me with various little allegories after–to no avail: I was still convinced I had not been simply accumulating knowledge rigidly and being made immobile by it (僵化).

After a good night’s sleep and a good breakfast, I think I am finally able to comprehend what my dad meant. During our talk, he mentioned the technique to reading opinion articles: although reading an opinion article is fun and stimulating, one must first understand the issue that is being discussed by the columnist in order to have a personal point of view from which to analyze the argument of the columnist. Otherwise, one can be easily mislead or confused by the topic at hand.

It took me a while, but now I can see what it means to “bring knowledge to life”. Like opinion articles, knowledge and its use is also very, very subjective. There are ways of using knowledge, ways of understanding knowledge, ways of presenting knowledge, perspectives from which knowledge is approached that are presented by different individuals with their personal interpretations and limitations. Having many diverse perspectives in analyzing an issue is good for building up a critical framework of seeing an issue, but that’s like reading different opinion articles on an issue. Ultimately, the issue can be pieced together and understood from the different points of view, but what could expedite the process and make it much more rewarding is understanding the issue first.

In this case, the “issue” is the matter knowing oneself with honesty and clarity–living the most natural, non pretentious and candid self. “Bringing knowledge to life” requires living life naturally and understanding where one stands in relation to the information and how the information can and should be used. Since all information is subjective to the human that is behind it, no information is completely impartial or without bias. It makes sense, therefore, to have oneself clearly understood so as to best “incorporate” the information. That way, one is in charge of the information, and not the other way around.

Knowing the self, however, is only the first step to “bringing knowledge to life”. The second step is to depress the pride and ego so as to learn from any and every situation. As Confucius said, “A wise man has no permanent teacher”(聖人無常師), and “any person who is practiced is a teacher to be learned from” (慣／貫者為師). In other words, Confucius has a central view of his values and a sense of his being, but he is always open to hearing the knowledge and experience of other perspectives because he understands that anyone who is practiced in a particular field is his teacher from which he can learn from.

The key to knowledge then, is first being open enough to listen to, interpret, and accept new information (a cup that is already full cannot be filled, so the cup needs to always be empty). The second step is to then have enough wisdom and humility to see the particular talents of others and to be unafraid of learning from them (不恥下問); to have a central view (主見), but not a obstinate view (成見). A wise person had no permanent teacher because he is always learning from those teachers until he becomes just as capable, whether that may be in the field of video games, dance, movie watching, social, writing, sports, etc, etc, ad infinitum.

Another famous Confucius quote is “In three who travel, there must be one who can be my teacher” (三人行必有我師焉). Ultimately, the process of learning being “brought to life” is not simply an act of memorizing information, but an act  that reflects one’s personal philosophy and attitude towards life. A person with enough confidence to have a central view, flexibility to avoid an adamant view, perspicacity to see the talents of others, and humility to learn from every person and situation will be the wise man.  All of this, of course, must be digested by the five steps of learning (learn greatly 博學, question judiciously 審問, consider carefully 慎思, analyze clearly 明辨, follow intently 篤行) Easier said than done. I will end with a quote I was given: Wisdom is not having to pay the price to learn the lesson, but to learn the lesson from someone who has paid the price.