I’m only part way through this so far, but it seems like you think in terms of absolutes -> either the world is entirely random, or it is entirely causal. Why can it not be a mix of both, of coincidence and causal relationships, some of which are intentionally planned.
The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
131–140 of 232 posts
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#132I'm not exactly sure what the point of the article is or what the author is trying to say. It's pretty much an abbreviated biography bookended by some attempts at philosophizing. It is interesting to hear how much easier the author found his British curriculum than his Chinese. I was also amused by how he mocked his Stanford MBA curriculum, and how the career office people were dismissive of his passion to make money…
To be born with the genetics to be smart and hardworking is out of our control. So smart and hardworking can be considered circumstances we are born into as well.
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#133> Her life, up to that point, was very similar to the life that I have been living. And I am sure that, at the time, she was as optimistic about her life as we are today about ours. But she went to the UK in 1935, and she went back to China around the founding of the People’s Republic of China. Her education abroad, in a capitalist country, and her belief in individual rights and freedom often placed her on the wrong…
> (Someone once said that it is necessary to know English in order to learn about China. Important perspectives on China are only available in English and are generally not accessible on the mainland.)
I wonder what other books fall into this category?
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
"post-hoc Just World fallacy wrapped up in those same statements of faith" Not really. We have built a progressively more just world - and it gets a little bit more just and civilized every generation that goes by. It's only possible when most people have some kind of faith, however crude, as the grind away at it. It does not happen by accident - over the long haul, it requires a Will.
It does NOT require any sort of religious will, and I posit that religion will be a steadily larger impediment to further progress if it does not fade. We have better and more nuanced ways of making the universe more just these days.
" that religion will be a steadily larger impediment to further progress if it does not fade"
Religion, which is the application of Spirituality (however crude) was essential to the development of morality in humanity, and hence civilization. Much of it has been codified and secularized, but the underlying metaphysical value remains the same and nothing has replaced it.
Scientific Materialists, who can't even seem to grasp that Religion and Spirituality aren't just about 'believing in random stuff' and that these issues are grounded in an existential metaphysical premise - are the real problem.
The combustion engine and nuclear energy are parlour tricks.
Morality and humanity ... much harder.
Progress is not actually hindered that much by some odd religious people worrying about 'too much adultery or gay marriage' - it's hindered by Scientific Materialism which presumes a universe ordered by a specific set of equations - a philosophy which taken to it's full extent implies we are merely random bags of noise, in a random Universe ... and therefore denies the very fact of life itself, let alone love, creativity, intelligence, knowledge, wisdom etc.. It underlines even our most obvious existential challenge: Global Warming (i.e. technology too advanced for our collective morality).
Materialism is ultimately an empty, nihilist world view.
I'm not worried because those who hold it, directly or indirectly so lack faith (I mean that loosely), don't see themselves as part of a greater whole, so much so that they're much less willing to reproduce, and form a bizarre 'end of the evolutionary trail' cohort. Those with at least an inkling of faith - even if only in their bones and not their hearts, let alone minds - will form the future, write future history, and shape creation going forward. And most people do have some kind of faith, actually.
There's hope in the fact that I find usually in the most ardent materialists, it's just a matter of ego. The ego is usually the thing standing between an individual an their own recognition of 'that which is greater'. The Buddhists put it in pretty good, nearly secular terms when they refer to 'egolessness', which is a good place to start for anyone interested in getting it.
The ancient world has a lot of similar Promethean-type myths (i.e. Lucifer etc.) - who brought us fire/light ... but it's the 'fire' or 'light' in our hearts and souls that matters, not literally 'fire', which useful, but ultimately, missing the point.
Hints - Colombia motto: "In Thy light shall we see light", Yale motto: "Light and Truth", Dartmouth Motto: "A voice crying out in the wilderness", Cambridge Motto: ""From here, light and sacred draughts" ...
EDIT: sorry for the lengthy rant :)
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#135All patterns are post rationalizations.
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#136"... randomness is not merely the noise but the dominant factor. And those reasons we assign to historical events are often just ex post rationalizations. As rising generations are taught the rationalizations, they conclude that things always happen for a reason. " I didn't realize it until contemplating this statement, but this applies to interpersonal relationships as well as nations. It is the root of tolerance an…
"People wind up where they are largely through circumstance, not intention. " There may be a lot of randomness on the way to becoming, or almost becoming a doctor, but you don't get to be a doctor by randomness. See what I mean? You get to be a doctor only with quite a very long term intent and perseverance, by stacking the odds, and rolling the dice a lot. Though I get what you are saying - I also don't think that m…
Well if you really want to maximise your odds of becoming a doctor, the best thing you can do for yourself is choose your parents wisely.
Don't choose to be born in a slum in a third world country, or a trailer park, thats gonna hurt your chances. Make sure you don't pick a family that will abuse you as you grow up. Try to make sure you at least get average genetics for general intelligence and memory (50% of people won't...).
Ideally, choose to have at least one doctor as a parent (increases your odds by more than an order of magnitude). A good mentor or role model at the right time could substitute though.
Of course, people _can_ control their own lives, but most people who succeed at becoming doctors were both lucky AND hard working.
And I'd be willing to be that though they did work like hell to do it, a lot of doctors "sleepwalked into it" because a teacher at school or a parent told them thats what they should do.
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#137Could someone explain the point of this article? All I'm getting are: * Everything is random. * A generic Chinese man, who did really well on one test is smarter than most people in Britain. * Americans, who are capitalists, don't seem to want to focus their lives on the supposed end goal of capitalism. * MBA programs are nuts, especially if you are on the spectrum. I'm probably wrong about most of those, but like th…
* luck has more to do with results than we think * "focus on the process, which we can control, rather than the result" This is also well explained by Scott Adams: "Goals are for losers... try systems that improve your odds of success."
But he learned to focus on the process at GS, where he was rewarded when the process failed in his favor.
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#138"... randomness is not merely the noise but the dominant factor. And those reasons we assign to historical events are often just ex post rationalizations. As rising generations are taught the rationalizations, they conclude that things always happen for a reason. " I didn't realize it until contemplating this statement, but this applies to interpersonal relationships as well as nations. It is the root of tolerance an…
"People wind up where they are largely through circumstance, not intention. " There may be a lot of randomness on the way to becoming, or almost becoming a doctor, but you don't get to be a doctor by randomness. See what I mean? You get to be a doctor only with quite a very long term intent and perseverance, by stacking the odds, and rolling the dice a lot. Though I get what you are saying - I also don't think that m…
> You get to be a doctor only with quite a very long term intent and perseverance, by stacking the odds, and rolling the dice a lot.
So what do you think is the value of P(becoming doctor | intent and perseverance)? If it's only 50%, then I'd argue that whether someone succeeds in becoming a doctor or not is indeed quite random.
And maybe more relevant, but what are the factors that cause someone to have strong willpower and perseverance, and were those under their own control?
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#139Could someone explain the point of this article? All I'm getting are: * Everything is random. * A generic Chinese man, who did really well on one test is smarter than most people in Britain. * Americans, who are capitalists, don't seem to want to focus their lives on the supposed end goal of capitalism. * MBA programs are nuts, especially if you are on the spectrum. I'm probably wrong about most of those, but like th…
I definitely think it was intended that way. From the beginning, the language seemed loaded with judgmental terms and obsessed with status. So the article seemed purposefully not to resolve itself, most likely because the natural conclusion according to the article's tone and content would probably be some asinine assertion like China > USA, Americans/British/people from Western society are silly/irrational/incompete…
> the natural conclusion according to the article's tone and content would probably be some asinine assertion like China > USA, Americans/British/people from Western society are silly/irrational/incompetent, communism > democracy, etc.
i agree that the article was underdeveloped, but im not sure your critique is entirely fair. the author did go on for a while about that girl, nian, and how inhospitable china was to someone very similar to him. he also hints at how warped the party's version of chinese history is. i think its far from clear that the author thinks china is superior to the west, or vice versa.
Re: The Western Elite from a Chinese Perspective
#140"... randomness is not merely the noise but the dominant factor. And those reasons we assign to historical events are often just ex post rationalizations. As rising generations are taught the rationalizations, they conclude that things always happen for a reason. " I didn't realize it until contemplating this statement, but this applies to interpersonal relationships as well as nations. It is the root of tolerance an…
I see the world as a giant lake full of ships going into different directions and sometimes turning around randomly.
As an individual, you can try to get to steer a ship or you can try to jump to ships you cross with that go in other directions.
Both strategies have a random aspect but if you know where you want to go, and act accordingly on the opportunities presented to you, you can progress toward your goal in an uncertain goal.
The main takeaways are that the world does not owe anything to anyone, even to smart kids, and that merit is hard to discern from luck.