Love & Sex 1 @ HKU

Oh, to be young (i.e. 20s) and in love! The world must seem so simple. Or perhaps that is simply an older person's projection. I actually believe that those entering university now are much more aware of the complexities of life, yet are ill-equipped to deal with them precisely because we as their "elders" presume their innocence (or perhaps we presume it for our own sake as a way to live our idealized versions through them).

I had anticipated having something to blog about out of this orientation talk, but I was hoping for a bit more "messiness". In the end, the session on dating ended up being very flat and one-dimensional, almost sanitized (To be fair, it was delivered by the Health Center. The Psychology department is actually offering a semester-long "broadening course" for the general student body.). 

The talk opened with the presenter asking all 12 of us (many of HKU's freshmen are actually participating in hall orientation activities, so the scheduling is a bit sub-optimal) to list our top three criteria for finding a mate. The assumption being that the end goal for dating is marriage. There was no mention of the diversity of human sexuality, lifestyle or other factors that might influence one's decision to marry or not to marry. Most answered that they looked for someone who shared similar values, who is caring and trustworthy. Such is life that some will fall for the exact opposite of what they have listed. I need only look in my own sphere to see that reality does not mirror stated expectations or ideals. Nor is what we say a true reflection of our unconscious desires.

What I found really memorable, however, was when the presenter spoke about the monogamy. She asked the group if people in Hong Kong have always been monogamous. The answer is that Hong Kong only banned polygamy in 1971. Prior to 1971, men could have more than one wife. Women, on the other hand, could not have more than one husband. What I found disappointing, though, was when she went on to comment that while there may be more than one suitable mate for us, we should be monogamous because that it what the "system" has determined for us. As good citizens, we should act in accordance with the "system" and its laws. That this view gets "taught" to university students in what is supposedly Asia's top university is appalling. There was no discussion whatsoever of the ethical and moral issues within relationships. Rather, what was offered was a meaningless commandment: Thou shalt not cheat because you will be breaking the law. And good people do not break the law. I should have asked: We all aspire to be law-abiding citizens. But given that human nature did not make us monogamous, how should people who find themselves in the very complicated situation of being in love or involved with more than one person cope with the overwhelming emotions and conflicting desires?

Doing the right thing is very different from doing the legal thing. And very often, doing the right thing means acting in opposition to the system. I hope this orientation is not indicative of the kind of education the students can look forward to. And if it is, I hope the students, in their youthful vigor, will struggle against it. I will be teaching a marketing class this semester. In my first class, I intend to share this video on "21st Century Enlightenment" from the RSA:

 

I hope I can engage my students, and vice versa, in a semester-long dialogue that will allow us "to have a relationship with our reactions, rather than to be captive of them; to resist to make right or true that which is merely familiar and wrong or false that which is merely strange." Of course, this is much easier written than done. This blog entry is me being captive to my own reactions.

Development in China: A WEIRD Person’s Questions

I’m WEIRD, and have a WEIRD way of looking at, experiencing, interpreting, analyzing and feeling things. This fact was made even more evident during the nine days I spent in the hinterland of China. Now, before you think this is just a weird post and stop reading, I’d better explain what all this WEIRDness is about.

After more than a week with only intermittent access to emails and the internet, I came back to an overflowing inbox. One of the most recent emails was the Edge newsletter. I clicked and was immediately drawn in by the headline, “The New Science of Morality: An Edge Conference”. You see, on the flight from Hong Kong to Chengdu, I had been reading John Gray’s Straw Dogs: Thoughts on Humans and Other Animals. One of Gray’s polemical points is that human morality is an indulgent vice of the privileged (For example, Gray writes, “It is not only that the good life has very little to do with ‘morality’. It flourishes only because of ‘immorality’.”). On my trip to some of China’s most under-developed rural areas, Gray’s words did not sit comfortably with my perceptions and experiences.

I noted that the Edge conference took place pretty much around the same time I was in China, and wished that I could have been a participant. Better yet, I wished the conference could have been moved to where I was, a remote Tibetan village in the foothills of Mount Genie, 2.5 days’ drive from the international airport of Chengdu. Instead, the conference took place in the very civilized towns of Washington and Bethlehem, Connecticut in the United States.

In fact, at the conference, Jonathan Haidt made a point about the lack of diversity at the conference. Of the nine speakers, dubbed the “Moral Nine”, eight were liberal, white men with Elizabeth Phelps the only female voice. All are WEIRD. As Haidt explains in his talk, the acronym was coined in a paper by Joe Henrich, Steve Heine and Ara Norenzayan published just last month in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. The authors write in, “The Weirdest People in the World”, that WEIRD is a very particular, and as I understand it perhaps even peculiar way of looking at and understanding human psychology and behavior that has been predominantly based on small sample drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic societies.

China, with nearly 20% of the world’s population (compared to the US with less than 5%), is far from being WEIRD. In fact, the two most populous countries in the world – China and India – have a combined population that makes up nearly 37% of the world’s population. Suffice it to say, the WEIRD view of the world simply is not the norm. Haidt summarizes the article’s description of how WEIRD people are different:

“The WEIRDer you are, the more you perceive a world full of separate objects, rather than relationships, and the more you use an analytical thinking style, focusing on categories and laws, rather than a holistic style, focusing on patterns and contexts.”

The point Henrich, Heine and Norenzayan make is that:

“members of WEIRD societies are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Overall, these empirical patterns suggest that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature, on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin and rather unusual slice of humanity.”

In other words, the field of psychology has not really been a field studying human psychology. Rather, its findings only reflect WEIRD psychology. Scientists, Haidt points out, often employ reasoning “to seek justification and not truth” in order to draw conclusions on how the world is.

I had spent nine days traveling around remote and rural areas of Sichuan. The group I had been traveling with are interested in setting up a string of comfortable (i.e. with proper sanitation facilities, clean bedding and a reliable supply of electricity and water) guesthouses along a tourist route that would allow travelers to experience the beauty of China’s as yet untouched nature. We traveled from Chengdu to Kangding, Xinduqiao, Litang, Mount Genie, Doacheng, Yading and back. In Litang and Mount Genie, we were greeted and shown around by the area’s forward-thinking and nature-loving Tourism Bureau Chief, Mr Wangdui. He showed us his favourite spots and highlighted all that the area had to offer visitors, but he also shared with us the obstacles he faced in protecting the area’s incredible natural resources and developing its as-yet non-existent tourism industry.

For our group of four WEIRD women, we had started off our guesthouse idea with grand visions that we could help develop tourism in a sustainable way, preserving nature and culture, providing local Tibetans an opportunity to improve their livelihood without having to migrate to the cities, thereby destroying their traditional way of life. According to our WEIRD view, we would be “helping” less-developed/privileged communities become more WEIRD (i.e. we would educate and introduce proper sanitation, refuse collection and other creature comforts us WEIRD people take for granted. We assume they would want it, because we need it.). We also operate on the assumption that the world and its people would all live happily ever after if everyone became WEIRD.

No Clue Yet: A Question Leading to More Questions

This blog started off with just one question: What does it mean to be human and happy?

I hope you, the reader, will share your questions, answers and viewpoints. As the African concept of ubuntu says: I am because you are.