Idealism, Pragmatic Idealism, or Realism

Being a first generation immigrant, I do have significantly more sensitivity and interest in US International Relations and Foreign Policy that is usually under-appreciated and does not play a very significant role in U.S. presidential elections. This time around, because of the Iraq war and much discussed Iran issue, it seems to attract a lot more attention than usual, considering the amount of sound bites across the media such as the answers by 10 leading presidential candidates to the question posed by Katie Curic of CBS evening news: What country frightens you the most, and what would you do about it as president?

When I was growing up in Taiwan, I, like many others in the so-called Free World, was awed by American’s wealth, generosity, resources, and achievements, after having witnessed the benefits of receiving various economic and military aids, being an ally (that is, protected) by U.S. As I learned more and more about America (including the Hollywood versions), I was also attracted very much to the ideals of democracy, freedom of speech, free enterprise, not to mention some memorable struggles and heroic triumphs in American history such as the abolishment of slavery.

The first event that made me start thinking beyond the rhetoric and abstraction was the DiaoYu Tai 釣魚台 islands dispute when U.S. and Japan signed the Okinawa Reversion Treaty in June 1970 (end of my sophomore year in college) under which U.S. government handed over the islands to Japan unilaterally despite the long disputes and protests by both Taiwan and Communist China governments. Like many others, I joined an orderly march and demonstration by university students in school uniforms to the American Embassy few miles away. I did not really understand all the issues and history (Internet was in its infancy then). It was simply a nationalistic pride and emotional reaction to an obviously outrageous deal made by US to give away a part of OUR territory to Japan. Truth be told, these tiny uninhabited islands were invisible until ECAFE (United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East) suggested in 1969 that there is possibly large hydrocarbon deposit off them.

This event was the beginning of a watershed: in Oct 1971, UN’s China seat which had been represented by the Nationalist Party led government in Taiwan (as one of the founding members and a permanent member of the Security Council since 1945) was turned over to the Communist China. Then in Feb 1972 Nixon, a long time staunch anti-communist politician, paid the first ever visit to China by an American president that led to eventually the Jan 1979 establishment of full diplomatic relation between US and China and the simultaneous severing of the diplomatic tie with Taiwan and declaration of the “One China policy” till this day. I still remembered vividly the feeling of betrayal and adrenalin flowing as the news broke out and I left my 7 months pregnant wife home in Berkeley to march down, along with some fellow students from Taiwan, the streets of San Francisco in protest and disgust.

This is not just my little personal story. Similar and other experiences have been developed and playing out again and again all over the world for a very long time since US became a dominant and wealthy nation, promoting its values such as free market democracy while exerting its military and economic powers to advance its national interests (what are they?). This is clearly seen as repeated illustrations of double standards as one can see the gaps between what is being done and what is being said. Would you trust a person who behaves that way? Let us pause for a moment and ask why is U.S. government behaving this way and how should we live with our neighbors.

To cite just a few past events for which some reasonable albeit simplistic answers can be found more readily: why is US government so strongly opposing the democratically elected Hamas party led Palestinian government? Why has so little been done about the Sudan’s Darfur crisis since it began 5 years ago when millions of people have been displaced/starved and almost half a million had died? Why was US implicated in almost all coups in Latin America countries for the last 5 decades (including the failed 2002 one to drive out Hugo Chavez in Venezuela)? Why did US limit the prosecution of war crimes and atrocities that Japan committed during WWII, including the biological and chemical warfare and human experiments in China, and remain silent about the continuing denials and revisions of history by Japanese government (Dec 13th marks the 70^th anniversary of Nanking Massacre, a.k.a. Rape of Nanking, when Nanking then capital of China fell to Japan’s invasion force)?

Indeed US foreign policy may be best described as a perpetual human struggle of competing Idealism and Realism. Is it as blatant and relentless as what Noam Chomsky had self-critically portrayed in his book of Hegmony or Survival: America’s Quest for global Dominance? Or is it as romantic and simple-minded as Ronald Regan and George W. Bush had fashioned of Good vs. Evil? Or is it as predictable, intricate, and cold-calculated as Henry Kisinger had shown in his book of Diplomacy? While it may be arguably easy to talk about morals and principles in unconstrained manners at one end, and about exchanges of material support and crushing forces in striking a desired balance and gain at the other end, how and what would one do when he or she needs to make a choice and take a stand? History showed us clearly that, with its infinite memory, man will be judged by the virtue of their decisions at those critical moments.

As I matured and became “wiser”, I found myself wonder more and more what I would do if and when I was put into those circumstances. I do wish we can all be forever young mentally and retain some of our innocence and naivete. How else would we set ourselves apart, strive for a higher goal, and make the right choice when those moments come?

With a heavy heart, Merry Xmas and talk to you after the New Year!

What is Leadership Anyway?

Leadership is a universally and frequently discussed topic of every organization regardless the nature, purpose, size, and structure. The discussions attract a lot of attention and the desire to have a superior leader is most acute especially in times of confusion, uncertainty or crisis.

Vint Cerf (click here to see one of his Youtube appearances), the most recognized father of the Internet and Google’s Chief Internet Evanglist since Sept 2005, once used a cartoon of race to illustrate, in his own humor, what is a leader. He suggested that a leader is someone who sees where people are going and then run the fastest to be ahead of the crowd. Although his remark was aimed at the techy audience, there is a lot of truth to it: a leader needs to be able to see what others don’t and run the fastest (note you don’t have to be the first to see it).

What is leadership anyway? How should we choose our leaders? How could we identify and nurture future leaders? In his April 2007 book “Where have all the leaders gone?” Lee Iacocca offered 9 C’s as critical dimensions of leadership quality. The 9C’s are: Curiosity, Creativity, Communication, Character, Courage, Conviction, Charisma, Competence, Common Sense. As the 2008 presidential race heats up, he also started a Iacocca Meter and invite people to score and evaluate presidential candidates in these 9 dimensions. At a closer examination of the scoreboard that shows the current snapshot of the votes, you will notice that by simple arithmetic average of the 9 scores.

Let us take a closer look of the 9C’s before we score anyone, as they are not of the similar nature and implications as measures. I would consider Curiosity, Creativity, and Competence necessary for any good leaders as they are about the intellectual capacity of a person. Charisma and Communication are good to have as they help move and people more effectively which are important attributes especially for public figures. Courage and Conviction measure the inner strength of an individual. By themselves, they are the most confusing attributes since the words are usually used in positive connotation and yet the eventual results could be very good or very bad. Fortunately, at least one of the C’s - Common sense provides the balance and tells us if the person has a good sense of reality.

The ultimate C though is, in my opinion, Character. Abraham Lincoln had once said “if you want to test a man's character, give him power.” Similarly, Martin Luther King had been quoted to say “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and conveniences, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy”. Thus as a test run to calibrate the meter, let us score from 1 to 5, a few well-known leaders about whom we know more and have some impressions with their track records and accomplishments. Below are my scores.

	G.W. Bush	Clinton	Regan	Nixon	Kennedy	Vint Cerf
Curiosity	1	5	3	3	5	5
Creativity	1	5	3	3	5	5
Communication	1	5	5	1	5	5
Character	3	3	3	1	3	5
Courage	3	3	5	3	5	5
Conviction	5	5	5	5	5	5
Charisma	1	5	5	1	5	5
Competence	1	3	3	3	3	5
Common Sense	1	5	3	3	5	5

In closing, good leadership is badly needed everywhere. We all have it in ourselves in some forms or shapes. Leadership is not about title: title does not manufacture leadership, but demonstration of good leadership does often lead to the recognition of a title. Visionary and great leaders are hard to come by though. To reach that level, I would add 3 H’s – Humanity, Humility and Heart on top of the 9C’s.

Talk to you soon!

How to make a Top XYZ list

U.S. News and World Report published on Nov 29 its first ever America’s best high schools. The result is a rank ordered top 100 schools gold medallists, 405 “silver medallists and 1086 bronze medallists out of almost 19,000 public high schools nation wide based on data from 2005-2006 school year. The High Technology High School of Monmouth county of New Jersey where some of our friends’ kids attended is #7 on that list. Once you look closely to how the list was generated and how some of the schools were set up and run, it should not come as a surprise that many on the list are regional magnet schools like the High Technology High School with programs designed to attract students with track records and aspiration for college studies or particular focused area.

Most of us seem so fascinated and interested in quantitative rankings, benchmarks and metrics of literally every subject with use for ranging from trivia to helping making decisions. Such information are usually reported and summarized in scalars by various for-profit entities with some notable exceptions like Consumer Report with titles such as top 100s, best 20s, most influential 50, the 100 richest, etc. I submit this is partially a result of the non-trivial efforts and resources required to compile such a list. Equally or perhaps more importantly, I suspect this is a result of our limited brain capacity that seems too challenged to process and remember multi-dimensional natures of most subjects and their complex attributes and trades. I bet most of you are like me who can’t remember, off the top of my head, more than top 3 or 5 items of any subject! It must be tough for the contenders to compete for attention for those few spots. This is even worse in politics and sports; people usually only remember the winners. That is why the cliché – winning is everything!

For frogs who are equipped with critical thinking skills, the more interesting and fun question is how and by what formula and procedure does one come up with such a rank ordered list. I did one test case with a little surfing and reading of the Money Magazine’s “Best Places to Live” with self-interest since this frog’s (physical) well is located at Marlboro, New Jersey, which is #33 of the list for the year 2007. I was also curious to find out why we were not on the earlier lists in year 2005 and 2006. Perhaps something of significance happened in last three years? It turns out that Money Magazine used different criteria and procedures in coming up with the “winners” for the last three years! I guess the magazine might have figured out that unless they change the criteria, it would be hard pressed to produce a very different list each year and that would be boring. The good news is there is no need to rush the decision on to where we need to move.

If you google a little bit, you would find many informative lists from which we can learn something. For instance there is a Top 100 Speeches of the 20th Century by American Rhetoric which points us to many defining and moving speeches that left marks on US such as Martin Luther King’s 1963 “I Have a Dream” and John F. Kennedy’s 1961 inaugural speech. Guardian of UK has offered a more worldly but still limited selection of 14 Great Speeches of the 20th Century that includes 3 from US, 1 from USSR, 1 from France, 1 from India, 1 from South Africa, 7 from UK including Virginia Woolf’s “Shakespear’s Sister” and the #1 choice - Winston Churchill’s famous and critical 1940 speech to House of Commons during WWII.

Let us now look at some more entertaining lists: An online men’s magazine AskMen.com has been publishing since year 2001 Top 99 (Most Desirable) Women based on votes from its readers and staffs. As expected, practically all of them are in entertainment business such as fashion models and actress. It appears (as marketed by the magazine itself) that the voters associate desirability of women more with physical attributes, sex appeal, and only to some lesser degree talents and characters despite the explicitly stated considerations. Male readers, be forewarned, AskMen.com did not provide assurance that the awardees never had cosmetic surgery nor that physical beauty will last (the turn-over of the list year to year is left as an exercise for the readers)! By the way, two famous Chinese actresses Zhang Ziyi and Gong Li are #83 and #34, respectively.

Perhaps for not wanting to be accused of missing almost half of the world population and to provide a mirror, AskMen.com started publishing since year 2006 Top 49 (Most Representative) Men. Vast majority of the awardees turned out to be actors and sports stars. To my surprise, only few business tycoons made the list. I wonder if the (male) voters can’t bear to be reminded or admit that most of us just can’t quite get to the very top for the sandboxes we play? Being from the high tech industry, I take comfort that the legendary Steve Jobs, cofounder of Apple Inc. that brought us Mac and iPod, is #7 on the 2007 list. For both men and women lists, no politicians made it. I guess Ronald Regan could have made it if such a survey was done in 1980s. I suspect Hilary Clinton could make the opposite list if it was done.

The answer to the question on “How to make a Top XYZ list” is obvious: figure out the criteria and maximize your scores according to the criteria and weights. I don’t condone such a strategy especially when used blatantly or unethically. We do need to keep in mind however that in real world, carrot-and-stick is used frequently and every one of us is surely on someone's top lists of some sort!

Talk to you soon!

Unnatural Selection

PBS premiered a powerful 2 hour NOVA program on Nov 13, 2007. The program is called Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial that follows the late 2005 landmark US federal court case of Kitzmiller v. Dover School District regarding the inclusion of intelligent design in the Dover high school science/biology curriculum. I learned quite a bit from watching this two-hour program, not to mention that the frog was mentioned more than once as an amphibian that is in between fish and land animals by Darwin’s evolution theory.

As a first generation non-religious immigrant, I was a little surprised to learn the famous 1925 test case Scopes Monkey Trial challenged the Tennessee’s Butler bill, the nation’s first, that banned the teaching of Darwin’s evolution theory. Butler’s act was eventually repealed but not until 1967, my senior year in high school when I thought the most advanced math and science textbook material came from US! While the value and importance of Christianity's teachings should not depend on the narrow and literal interpretation of creationism, I can imagine how difficult it must have been for some to deal with the scientific theories and discovery of supporting data.

It is interesting to note that according to a recent news report, an estimated 40% of US population do not accept the statement: "Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals". This figure is the 2nd highest among 33 European countries and Japan surveyed and has not changed much for the last two decades! Further analysis of findings of this and earlier surveys can be found in an article by Professor Jon Miller et.al in Aug 11, 2006 issue of Science that attributes it in part to the unique non-hierarchical congregational Protestant churches in US who are free to choose their own ministers and espouse their own beliefs.

Indeed the debate of evolution vs. creationism or intelligent design has been going on for a long time and continues to-date. The delicate balance of political and religious forces has been maintained by and large by the judicial branch of the government. The Supreme court has stood up to the tyranny of majority (via legislative branch) each time thus far and ruled such acts violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution that calls for the separation of church and state. One must give credit to the wisdom and critical thinking of the founding fathers’: the implementation, and the willingness to adhere and evolve the laws by most people no matter how imperfect the laws may be at the time of rulings. Nevertheless how could we allow local legislative bodies to decide educational issues such as what can and cannot be taught in science classes? Why not leave those to the professionals where there is more universal knowledge and objective criteria?

Central to Darwin’s theory as described in his groundbreaking 1859 book The Origin of Species is Natural Selection, a process through which the resulting environment appear as if nature had selected the more adaptive species and allowed them to survive and prosper. Such a process and parallel can be found in human organizations and entities as well. I will call it Unnatural Selection since the environment, interaction, and selection process are man-made in this case.

Consider any typical hierarchical business or political organization. Each of us who joined such an organization all went through adaptations to survive and advance by some vague values and selection processes. Those who manage to adapt or align themselves sooner and better tend to thrive more and those who don’t, hopefully have other environment or organization to migrate to.

More interestingly perhaps, you may ask who define and shape the values? In my opinion, it is all stake holders (not SHARE holders!) including every individual in the organization although those closer to the root of the (local) tree in the hierarchy do have more influence through decision-making channels or power (thus more responsibility and accountability!). This may sound too idealistic but there is plenty of evidence for it if you just reflect upon your own experience for a moment.

For example, in the business world we are often a part of a regular communication and data collection process with peers, reports and upper management about ideas, thoughts, progress, accomplishments, etc. There is no secret that we engage in, regardless our ranks and intention, some level of “spin” ranging from what we want to hear (confirmed bias), what we want our upper management to hear (good news only), and what we think they want to hear. This is how perception of values is created, shaped, propagated and amplified, up and down the line. Yes, I firmly believe that each of us can affect the outcome throughout the hierarchy, no matter how invisible the influence might be at the origin. Yes, rotten root of a tree produce rotten fruits and good managers promote good people and values. Each of us must do our part with our hearts as much as we can in order for the organization to be healthy and constantly moving towards to a better place through unnatural selection.

What I am also saying is there is no we vs. they, no company vs. employees, no government vs. people. All these abstract “external” entities such as nation, government, company and management are just creations of our own minds as we all participate in these entities, and knowingly or not, shaped and changed the outcomes. There are no external entity or beings who are ever going to come and save us miraculously. The buck stops with each of us and we are the ones who hold the ultimate power!

Happy Thanksgiving and talk to you soon!

Is There a Better Democratic System?

Only few days ago, we talked about the common but serious issue of confusing correlation and causality that leads to further and undesired distortion of reality. The next day, during the Nov 15 democratic presidential candidates’ debate in Las Vegas, I saw immediately a real life example. When asked about the position for or against issuing drivers’ licenses to un-documented immigrants (yes I agree with candidate congressman Dennis Kusinich's objection to moderator Wolf Blitzer's use of the word "illegal" that has been overused by those who have other agendas), New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson responded affirmatively and elaborated that as governor, he signed such a bill four years ago which had the (positive) effects of: a) lower auto accident rate and a better public safety for the state, b) a much lower un-insured auto rate in the state, dropping from 30% to less than 11%.

Aside from the smaller issue that the actual data did not support the claim (according to the subsequent fact checks by some) Governor Richardson, like many impressive and seasoned politicians, executives, and talk show hosts, managed to squeeze in specifics such as figures/statistics and projected an impression of his leadership, all in about 1 minute time. This is the most common trick by politicians and alike who (mis)use correlated events to make people believe his or her actions had caused something good to happen, that is, a flawed suggestion of causality. The real sad thing is that I would not be surprised such a trick is so prevalent that it could have become the second nature for some who don’t even realize when they are practicing it!

I can think of many reasons why this trick is used so much everyday by so many in political and business worlds alike. To begin with, it probably does work most of the time, but why?

Perhaps the majority of us are too simple-minded and rushed to ask for or listen to more thorough reasoning and discussions of complex issues. Didn’t you see that by giving a qualified yes answer in 190 words (yes, someone actually counted it!) to the very same question, Senator Barack Obama was ridiculed of not being able to give a simple yes/no answer to a question which is extremely complex? Are we all becoming so naïve to believe all questions have multiple choices or yes/no answers, when the right answer is “IT DEPENDS” and requires a well-posed question, deep understanding, and not in the least, critical thinking and good judgment?

Didn’t you also notice that the more important and significant issues are, the more impatient and emotional we are and more lack of depth and due diligence we have? This can be said about the hottest or critical social political issues of this country – health care, immigration, education, and security. Perhaps a part of us is like the frogs in the fable Frogs desiring a King, that can’t resist the temptation of wanting to have a superior being who can lead us? Perhaps we have been disappointed too many times by our own unrealistic expectation and come to distrust enthusiastic politicians such that we amplify and look for any indications that might confirm our suspicion?

It goes without saying that both the problem and solution lie with us. Some parts of it are just human: we are the ones who expect oversimplified explanations and solutions of complex problems; we are the ones who make and encourage politicians, executives, and media to say what we want to hear; we are the ones who convince them whoever give the most consistent and most believable cause-effect spins “win”. However some can be attributed to the balance and reward of the particular democratic system we implemented, evolved, and live by. There are so many learned people out there. Please tell me there is a better democratic system than what we have today!

Talk to you soon!

Living in and Combating Distorted Reality

Last time, we talked about the subjectivity of perception and how it can be influenced easily. While it is impractical nor necessary to have complete objectivity all the time, it is critical that we recognize our own limitation and try to reduce undesirable impacts as a result of it. But, how did we get to be like this in the first place?

In life, we continuously and constantly receive information, make observations and sample the physical and virtual spaces around us, and project from the past and present to the future. Thus to begin with, we have a built-in “biased sampling”, in statisticians' terms. Most people can and have reduced such biases significantly by simply increasing their sampling of space/time and number of samples through first or 2^nd hand means etc.

Further, we shaped our behavior and values from the feedback received with additional experimentation and re-enforcement as we interact with others and the environment. While this is required for learning, the outcome could be a positive or negative one depending on the circumstances and path. Still, for the most, we often fall into the trap of the so-called confirmed bias in psychology and cognitive science as we constantly look for affirmation of our beliefs, a dangerous trait that is likely to bring us towards to the extremes.

Perhaps the most extreme and oldest illustration I can think of was this 1700-year-old story in Chinese history. When Emperor Hui of Jin dynasty 晋惠帝 was surprised to hear the report that countrymen were starving to death due to shortage of grain, he asked “why don’t people eat meat congee?” Granted that Emperor Hui was supposedly a little retarded, but how could he get the his priorities right when he was so out of touch with reality? No wonder the country suffered so much under his rein. Sadly such problems are more prominent and more threatening as more power/influence are gathered around individuals who still have only the same amount of time each day like you or me!

Once my university professor brother told me a story about his encounter with his then university president’s first lunch visit to the faculty cafeteria. While the prix fixe lunch for the faculty included a choice of one vegetable and one meat entree, the cafeteria served three entrees with one additional meat dish to the President. Without knowing the menu, the president commented joyfully that cafeteria food for the faculty is really good. The story could have ended there and the president could have kept his wrong impression for some time. However my brother did not let it go and responded immediately: “Mr. President, with this visit of yours, we will not have meat entrees for dinner tonight”. Embarrassed and realizing what was happening, the President never returned to the cafeteria, although I thought the better thing to do is for him to make sure he is treated the same way as everyone else.

Yes, the least we all can do is to follow the example of that small child in the famous Danish fairy tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes” by Hans Christian Anderson. He spoke the naked truth that the emperor has nothing on! Of course, that particular fairy tale’s ending was a little disappointing but realistic: the emperor did finish his parade as planned despite the incident, and similarly, President G.W. Bush continues to stick with his Iraq policy....

Now back to bias. While the old and popular saying of “Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics” reflects the difficulty in discerning, applying, and interpreting data properly, it is actually not so hard if we can just become aware of, at an intuitive level, one single most fundamental and common problem we have. In more technical terms, it is to recognize the difference between causality and correlation.

Causality refers to the natural concept when one event causes another to happen (at a later time). For example, we all expect if a person doesn’t eat or drink, that person would die within some period of time. Coupled with curiosity and the desire to know why and how things happen, we often hold causality as the natural if not the only model of what is happening around us even when the available data and knowledge do not support it.

This brings us to another model and the concept of correlation that basically states the events considered are not independent of each other. Note it says nothing about if one does or does not cause another, nor assumes the order of events in time. The misuses, intentional or not, and thereby the erroneous and sometimes harmful consequences take place when we take a leap of faith and attributes the causes of an event while there is only evidence of their correlation. When enough of us make similar mistakes and remain unchecked, the results can be irrational customs or practices. One obvious example I can think of is the various forms of superstition in different cultures. Another is the use of herbal and over-the-counter health supplements. While they may be harmless and may even be helpful in some cases, we must be clear that by taking those supplements for whatever the reasons, we must not promote the wrong idea that they WILL cure some problems or lead to better health. This turns out to be hard to do for many especially when some of them stood to gain financially by selling more of those supplements!

In sum, we must be aware of the distinction between causality and correlation in order not to make or propagate significant errors in judgment, and not to be misled and misguided by those who take advantage of our ignorance. This recognition and simple logic is our first line of defense. We must try to have a bit more humility and keep a healthy skepticism. It will go a long way in reducing undesirable biases in our lives.

Talk to you soon!

Truth, and Nothing But Truth

Susan, our young friend in Paris, forwarded us this fascinating and much discussed spinning dancer test on the net that purportedly identifies you as more right-brained or left-brained, depending on if you see the dancer spin clockwise or counter-clockwise (I suppose those who see her spin opposite directions at different times just can’t make up their minds!).

As a thorough and careful reader, I tried but failed to identify the origin of this ingenious test. However I did notice that the posting seemed to appear first on news.com.au of Australia in Sept 26. For those who have been to or reside in southern hemisphere, you surely have noticed that the toilet bowl when flushed, its water goes down in counterclockwise direction, opposite from that of American (or northern hemisphere) experience. I suppose you would not be surprised then that such an idea came from Down Under.

On a more serious note, how could we possibly report different observations and conclusions when watching the same video? Worse, my confidence in myself started to erode as I have always thought that visual experience is most reliable compared to reading and listening. Don’t we all remember the old saying “To see is to believe”, never mind that “faith is to believe the unseen”? Not that long ago, I had learned from Frank Luntz’s book “Words that work – it’s not what you say, it’s what people hear,” that I and others most definitely have been influenced or manipulated by clever use of words by some. Just how fluid and sticky really is our mind?

Of course, such a realization is not new for learned people. One of the all time classic movies Rashomon by Akira Kurosawa, based on the short stories of Ryūnosuke Akutagawa, discussed the ultimate reality of contradicting accounts of the same event by witnesses. The term Rashomon Effect was later named and used in psychology and other fields to describe the subjectivity of perception on recollection by observers. For those who are more science inclined, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle may be considered a rigorous statement and proof of such phenomenon in the framework of quantum physics whereby quantitative characterizations of key attributes in a system can not be achieved with certainty simultaneously.

Considering the non-stop processing of volumes of data and signals received by the brain that shapes, challenges, and reinforces our perceptions, the thought that truth is not absolute could be frightening and liberating at the same time. With social-political satires, comedian Steven Colbert single-handedly captured the attention and imagination of the news media and nation when he created and popularized the word “thruthiness” in his premiere episode of The Colbert Report in Oct 2005. As he later elaborated further: “Truthiness is 'What I say is right, and [nothing] anyone else says could possibly be true.' It's not only that I feel it to be true, but that I feel it to be true.” Clearly this is a reminder to us all that potentially disastrous outcomes could result when we are overwhelmed by the right-half of the brain with intuitions and gut feelings. (You may also want to watch Steven Colbert’s humorous 24 minute speech delivered at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner although many of the audience including President Bush weren’t laughing). Is perception everything? How could we possibly comprehend our own unbounded creativity and wild imaginations? How could we use our limited vocabulary and compositions to relate our infinitely complex and sophisticated experiences?

I am relieved that not everyone saw the spinning dancer rotate in the same direction – diversity is our last line of defense. The revered PBS stated in its Editorial Standards: “PBS recognizes that the producer of informational content deals neither in absolute truth nor in absolute objectivity. Information is by nature fragmentary; the honesty of a program, Web site, or other content can never be measured by a precise, scientifically verifiable formula. Therefore, content quality must depend, at bottom, on the producer's professionalism, independence, honesty, integrity, sound judgment, common sense, open mindedness, and intention to inform, not to propagandize.” That said, don’t you agree that we, the recipients of informational contents, must own even greater responsibility for our independence, sound judgment and open mindedness?

Talk to you soon!

Time will cure all ills, but when?

Associated Press Writer Daniel Woolls reported on Oct 31 (the Halloween day, coincidentally) that the lower house of Spanish Parliament passed a bill called Law of History of Memory which is now proceeding to the Senate for its approval. The bill condemns General Francisco Franco’s fascist regime that ruled Spain from 1936 to late 1975, for its actions during the bloody Civil War 1936-1939. The legislation also orders the removal of all Franco-era symbols such as streets and plazas named after him or generals who fought for him. The driver is the ruling Socialist Party Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero whose grandfather was among those executed by Franco's forces.

This news reminds me of the parallels and similarities/differences with the recent political scene and history in Taiwan. Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek of China, a contemporary of General Franco and key figure of the Nationalist Party since 1920s, ruled China and later Taiwan until his death which was about 7 months earlier than Franco’s. The tragic 228 incident (二二八事件) took place on Feb 28, 1947, less than 2 years after the retrocession of Taiwan to the Nationalist China from Japan’s 50 years occupation. It was triggered by the confiscation of black market cigarettes from a 40-year-old women vendor and subsequent shooting death of an innocent bystander. Widespread unrest, protests, strikes, and riots throughout the island followed. [My parents arrived at Taiwan from the FuJian province shortly before the incident and used to tell us stories how my father escaped into mountains with the help of aboriginal people and that my sister and mother were put into an interne camp briefly but unharmed]. The suppression, prosecutions, jailing, and executions of numerous locals by the Nationalist government lasted for months. A deep scar and resentment remains for decades by some locals towards mainlanders who arrived after the WWII. This highly sensitive and emotional issue was never addressed directly and officially until 1995 when Nationalist Government President Lee Teng-Hui 李登辉 formally apologized on behalf of the government and initiated a number of acts to close this chapter.

It is also interesting to take a look at the Chiang Kai-Shek Memorial Hall that was built in 1980 in Taipei, Taiwan, and recently renamed to National Taiwan Democracy Memorial Hall by the DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) government. The successful erasure of traces of Chiang Kai-Shek in Taiwan is likely to be easier and sooner compared to that of Franco’s as the Memorial Hall itself merely houses Chiang’s statue, collections, and exhibits. In contrast, Franco’s mausoleum is right in The Valley of the Fallen (El Valle de los Caídos), an impressive monument northwest of Madrid which was built and completed in 1959 by Franco in memory of the dead during Spanish Civil War (what a spin!). The site remains a significant symbol of the Spanish right-wingers as is evident from the fact that the Law of History of Memory explicitly bans political rallies at the site. For tourists of time and space, such monuments serve as wonderful reminders of history, albeit mostly sad ones. A lot of resources and commoners' blood and sweat were drawn (often by the will of the few). How many of these monuments and how much of the glories survived the harsh judgment of history and had recognition by generations of people through the changes of value and guards over time?

Talk to you soon!

It is all about ghosts

Now Halloween is finally over; it is time to reflect.

For years I have subscribed to the conspiracy theory that the Halloween trick-or-treat custom, just like the X'mas gift giving, is merchandized by giant corporations like Hershey's to advance their financial interest. [Did you know Hershey makes about 80 varieties of candies and snacks, etc. with almost $5B revenue last year?].

Yesterday afternoon, I put out 320 pieces of candy of all kinds, totaling over 10 pounds, in a large bowl at our doorstep with a sign - "Happy Halloween, Please help yourself". To my surprise, before dark, they were all gone! I swear some kids must have taken many more than 1 piece of candy (since the neighborhood has no more than 100 kids/youngsters) - not very civil behavior as far as I am concerned. Since we can't bear the shame of not having candy for those legitimate night "ghosts" who came late, we pretended we weren't home and didn't answer the doorbells. This definitely made us feel very uncomfortable; after all, this is our castle!

So who got this nasty idea of extorting treats like this from innocent guys such as myself? I started to wonder. I googled and found out something I bet none of these kids, roaming around the neighborhood in costumes with sweet tooth, know nor care! Halloween was originally a pagan holiday over 2000 years ago. It is on the last day of the Celtic calendar and is for honoring the dead. Like many customs that are fed on superstition, a part of the Halloween celebration involves offering gifts and treats to the roaming ghosts. In many ways, this is not all that different from the Chinese Ghost Festival (Zhong Yuan Jie 中元節 ) on 7/15 of the lunar calendar although the Chinese one was much more related to Taoism and Buddhism. Interestingly, Christians apparently have created the All Saints Day following the Hallows Eve in an attempt to convert pagans. I suppose it was not as successful as some had wished!

I already figured out my solution to my dilemma for next Halloween - I will put an empty bowl at the door step with the same sign. Or better yet, I will put a bowl of Chinese "ghost money" to bribe my little ghost friends next time.

Talk to you soon!

Inaugural Notes

When they learned about my decision to retire, many of my family members and friends asked me what I was going to be doing. One of the things I said I would like to do was to blog. So here I am.

I gave some thought about what I would name my blog, etc. Being a humble know-it-all, I thought creating themes around the little harmless and nice FROG would be cool, as there are so many interesting stories and fables about it. In particular, there is this famous Chinese fable about a frog in Qiu Shui (秋水), written over 2300 years ago by Zhuang Zi 莊子, one of the greatest philosophers of all time. Thus I have chosen to call myself iFROG 井底之蛙 (i stands for intelligent and ignorant), after sitting in my comfortable well for a very long time. I will share with you my thoughts as I reflect on my learning and observations of the world, and I shall call my blog froglyspeaking or frog frankly speaking. The Chinese idiom 坐井觀天 following it literally means observing the world from within a well. It came from Yuan Tao 原道,a late 700 or early 800 AD writing by Han Yu 韓愈,one of the most important and influential writers in Chinese history.

I will also share with you travel pointers and planners, among other things, that I am putting together for friends and family under the label fravel which stands for frog travel. The first one being completed is for Paris, France. You can download the latest version from fravel_paris. There will be more to come and new labels as I blog along.

Talk to you soon!