Shall We Change Our Cultural DNA? |
|
|
Copyright © 2007 Soy-n-Joy® Shall We Change Our Cultural DNA? In October, 2007, The Voice of America reported on a general observation by university professors (European and Australian in particular) about Chinese students studying overseas: most of them work very hard, but they also tend to lack a challenging spirit. A Swedish professor said that the Chinese students impressed him with industriousness, but they also tended to work alone, and not adapted to collective learning techniques like group discussions. Another German professor pointed out that Chinese students were not only industrious, but were also intelligent and courteous. However, they also exhibited an unnecessary "worship" of authority, which would not be conducive to creative thinking. Some experts were saying that the solution could lie in the nurturing of an independent character. Only people with the ability to think critically have the courage to question and challenge, so that the students could throw away their "worship" of authority, and would have the courage to challenge that authority. That had been how philosophy and science had evolved in history, through thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, and will continue to be. That was pretty heavy stuff. But where was that challenging spirit, or lack of it, coming from? The key word appears to be "character", which is the collective expression of our values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits. At the individual level, our character was shaped by our upbringing, schooling, working, and socializing. At the organizational level, the institutional character reflected its culture, the way how things were done. At the national level, that character certainly mirrored its history and cultural tradition. Obviously, the national character pervades every level. Its influence imprints every entity within, and even leaves a permanent residue in its diaspora. No individual or organization is immune. The Confucian societies of E. Asia are an excellent example of that pervasive influence. Contrast some western societies, the Confucian societies of E. Asia are characterized with certain distinct attributes. The Confucian societies are more hierarchical, the governments are more paternalistic, education is more regimented, social mobility is less pronounced, innovation occurs less frequently, democratic traditions are less strong, and the individual more willingly submits to the collective entity. There were few Nobel Laureates among E. Asians. And among the top 100 most valuable commercial brands in the world, fewer than 10 belong to E. Asian companies. Do these facts have anything to do with the cultural influence traceable to Confucius? Did Confucius inspire the current overseas Chinese students not to embrace the challenging spirit that underlies inquisitive curious pursuits and the experimental scientific method? And would that "worship" of authority have anything to do with the individual's conditioned submission to powerful figures? The fact that people group these countries into Confucian societies tells us that they share some common features of national character attributable to common history and culture. But how did history and culture shape national character? Let us examine the American model, which used to be the subject of emulation the world over, and which reflected American "soft power". The walls of the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, D.C. were inscribed the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence, which read as follows: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men. We...solemnly publish and declare that these colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent states...And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honour." If Life is the pre-requisite of all things that matter, Liberty is the enabler, Happiness is the desired end, and Pursuits are the acts to pursue that end. And implicit in the Pursuits is an assumption of fair competition. There is no guarantee that each and every Pursuit will lead to Happiness, only that you have a right of Pursuit like other fellow citizens. Liberty is the critical link between Life and the Pursuit of Happiness. Liberty is the freedom to exercise your own free will to deploy your resources, like time and money, toward the goal of creating Happiness for yourself and for the people you care about. That definition of Happiness is also yours to create, because only you can determine for yourself what can make you happy. Without Liberty, whether individual or national, Happiness resides only in the hands of the master, whether he/she be the slave-owner or colonial overlord (Paradoxically, at the time the United States was founded, slavery was commonplace, and the Declaration evidently did not consider slaves as men of equal. The abolition of slavery did not occur until after the American Civil War.). The fear of God was also evident in the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence. Max Weber had attributed the early establishment of trust among fellow American puritans to common religious influence, a trust so instrumental in the effective working of capital in financing the growth of enterprises and the prosperity of the market economy. Their belief was that if you were doing evil, God would be watching, and come Judgment Day you would pay your dues. The Americans had also borrowed the scientific method from Europe and practiced it religiously. These values of rights, beliefs in the scientific method, and fear of God have pervaded the American culture since the early days of the nation. They have become the American identity. They are their cultural DNAs that underlie decisions they make. They had profound influence on how Americans behaved in history, laying the foundation of their national character, and stimulating scientific and technological innovations. National character is thus largely founded on values, beliefs, and assumptions, and habits derived therefrom. But what factors are determining such components of the national character? And who are responsible for shaping the cultural character of individual members of a family, of individual members of an organization, and of individual citizens of a country? Some may attribute it to the diverse influence of parents, siblings, relatives, schoolmates, teachers, principals, superiors, social figures, entertainment stars, religion, tradition, culture, history, and other sources of influence. However, the strongest determinant is the leader of whatever social entity we subject ourselves to. The authors of the Declaration of Independence are respected as the Founding Fathers of America. They were leaders of the anti-British revolution, and they laid the foundation of the nation. Now in a family, the head is naturally the parent or the grandparent. In a company, that usually is the CEO. And in a country, that has to be the President or the Prime Minister. These figures have disproportionate power to shape the cultural character of the entities they preside over. And it is in their interest to influence the cultural character of such entities so that members of the entities will behave in a way conducive to the entities' and their leaders' well-being. As we have seen, leadership is paramount in shaping the cultural character, or the values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits of a family, an organization, or a country. In fact, when we say that the cultural character of a family, an organization, or a country is attributable to its past history and present leadership, we are in fact saying that the cultural character of a family, an organization, or a country is attributable to its past and present leadership. Leaders lead by authority and example. They have position, status, moral, legal, resource, expert, coercion, and/or penalty and reward powers that can command respect and submission from members of their entities. Like it or not, members always watch their leaders closely on what leaders do or not do, and whether the standards and policies they laid down for members are for real. They want to verify that when their leaders assure them that they won't be penalized for speaking up, they actually will not be penalized for heeding the leaders' advice. Leaders can demonstrate how their decisions align with announced values, and they have the means to enforce compliance and have the resources to pull things back on track if standards and policies are not respected. By actually practicing what they profess, leaders set the standards for emulation by members of their entities. Hence determining the leadership in running a family, an organization, or a country is of paramount importance to the future of that family, organization, or country. The people who will start a family are the future parents, and they had better be well prepared and learn from other people's experience. Of course, they can also plunge right in and learn as they go along, making mistakes and learning their lessons. Unfortunately, there is no opportunity to "undo or delete" the mistakes when you are experimenting with a human being: those mistakes would have left permanent marks on the child, for life. And if they have only one child, they do not have the luxury of applying what they have learned the first time to the second time around. So new parents, it is your responsibility to exercise responsible leadership in the family. And do not blame others for things not turning out right. For an organization, whether you can experiment with its cultural character (trying to modify its values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits) depends on its cultural character as laid down by the past and present leadership. If the leadership is open-minded, and your suggestion makes sense for the long-term well-being of the organization, you may gain buy-in and score points. But if the leadership is not open-minded to suggestions, you may hit a stone wall. One alternative is to start your own company and implement your vision as an entrepreneur. As for a country, the quality of leadership is paramount. That is exactly why a democratic tradition or habit is so important. It is not so much that the democratic process guarantees the election of quality leaders. The only thing that such a process guarantees is that when the leaders elected fail voters' expectations, the voters can get rid of them the next election around. But whether this mechanism works depends on how strong that democratic tradition or habit is. If that democratic tradition or habit is not strong, like in a newly independent country going through the democratic birth pain, and the armed forces have not yet developed a strong respect for the democratic process, the threat of military dictatorship by coup d'état led by military strong men is always real. Remember that soldiers are humans too. They acquire values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits through their families, schools, and disciplined military training, and what they support depends on which values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits prevail. Of course, if the democratic tradition or habit is strong, voters, and even soldiers themselves, will not tolerate a military dictatorship and will fight to defend their values, so that the chance for military dictatorship is low. In America, for example, the President of the United States, by constitution, is the supreme commander of the armed forces, and almost everyone in the country has developed the value and habit of respecting that constitution. In China, the Communist Party has insisted and made sure that the Party controls the People's Liberation Army (PLA) through the Party's Military Commission. As long as the military commanders respect that tradition, it also minimizes the chance of a military dictatorship from coming into being. Here, different values have instilled similar habits, but through different mechanisms founded on different principles and prerequisites. What you advocate depends on whether you put faith in the system or the people in leadership roles. The strength of national character, however, will determine how things will turn out at the time when crisis strikes. If you want a say in shaping the future of the entity you belong to, you need to have a say in determining who the leader(s) of that entity will be. Values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits are powerful stuff. Forbearance, for example, is a Confucian value that pervades all Confucian societies of E. Asia. One of the best-known Japanese cartoon character is the Ninja Turtle. Traditionally, Ninja refers to Japanese mercenary agents trained in martial arts, who were hired to undertake covert operations like sabotage or assassination in the 14th Century. But literally it stands for someone who practices the value of restraint, a virtue of their trade. In China, the value of forbearance also commands much respect. As the Chinese sayings go: "Tolerate the small stuffs so as not to spoil the big plot"; "Endure the bitterest of the bitter, so as to become top men among men"; and "Take a step back to enjoy unrestrained freedom". Mostly, since very young, the Chinese were taught to be patient, and not to take action until everything is thought through. "Think back and forth 3 times before acting," the saying goes, because mistakes are costly. And the system neither encouraged new experimentation nor tolerate mistakes very well. After Confucianism took pre-eminence, scientific and technological explorations were marginalized because they were branded "non-mainstream." Little wonder scientific and technological progress almost came to a halt in pre-modern China, after the "four magnificent inventions" of the compass, silk, paper, and gunpowder. In addition, the stable ruling hierarchy has been order of the day for many centuries. Confucius preached about the right kinds of rituals and relationships between the emperor and his ministers, and between fathers and sons. When knowledge was still a rare commodity, the elderly were respected for their wisdom and experience, in families, businesses, workshops and on the farms. Emperors, of course, stayed above their mandarins and citizens. Students were also taught to respect their teachers and not to question their authority. In China, conventional wisdom says that, "Staying close to the emperor is like staying close to a tiger," which suggests that speaking up against absolute authority (the emperor) is a dangerous act. Only the most far-sighted and open-minded emperors would encourage and reward his ministers for speaking up contrarian views, like Emperor Tai Zong of the Tang Dynasty, who presided over one of the most powerful and prosperous reign in China. No wonder overseas Chinese call themselves the Tang People, and named Chinatowns all over the world "Tang People's Streets." Again, because Confucian values inspired hierarchical stability, Emperor Wu Di of Han Dynasty formalized the supremacy of Confucian teachings in China. These Confucian values, beliefs, and assumptions have become habits and conventional wisdom passed from generation to generation. For many generations, Chinese students have been taught to respect and defer to people of status, not to speak against them in public, and of course not to challenge their authority. Little wonder western professors observed that overseas Chinese students lacked the challenging spirit. Now let us look at how American students will behave under similar circumstances. They are not subject to the same kind of harness that Chinese students are conditioned to. They are taught to challenge authority, because that is the only way to make things better and help society progress. At a young age in school they are taught the art of debate, because they can learn to keep an open mind and respect differences, and how to arrive at convincing, rational conclusions. They are inspired to be biased for action, because they believe they can correct mistakes along the way and learn by doing, rather than suffering paralysis by analysis. Like the Nike advertising says, "Just do it!" They buy into what their 32nd President Franklin D. Roosevelt said, "There is nothing to fear but fear itself!" Of course, we need to differentiate between being daring and being courageous, and take calculated risks. In Asia, people are used to addressing each other as misters and misses, but in America, new acquaintances are usually on first-name basis after the first 10 seconds. In the home, American parents and children, especially grown-up children, are like friends who can joke with each other, while Asian parents often keep their stature as parents. When it comes to independent, critical thinking, people who readily accept authority views as the absolute truth will have a hard time coming up with creative, innovative thoughts. Habits die hard. No wonder inside the lecture hall, American students often verbally challenge their professors, while Asian students stay quiet. If at home they do not question their parents, in school they do not question their teachers, and in society they do not question their leaders, how can we expect Asian students to bring a challenging spirit to the lecture hall or discussion group? In the university where free exploration is encouraged, it is the perfect environment to go beyond our comfort zone and try new approaches, because mistakes will neither be costly nor permanent. Learning should be a growth experience and win-win for all contributors. Sometimes values have become obsolete, but the derived habits stay strong. For example, while the First Amendment to the American Constitution protects individual freedom of speech, the Second Amendment institutes the citizen's right to keep and bear arms. This Second Amendment came into being because at the time the American colony just gained its new independence from the British overlord, and the American Founding Fathers were afraid that the British might be coming back to crush the independence. A right for the citizens to keep and bear arms would ensure that if the British were coming back, the Americans could still wage another war of independence, just like what they just did. But nowadays, time has changed. The British threat is no longer there. Continued American independence is no longer in question. And if the government encroaches upon the rights of its citizens, there are civilized checks and balances in place to curb government excesses (Of course, whether the elected representatives of the people have lived up to expectations is another matter). There is no need for citizens to keep and bear arms except for recreational purposes like hunting or sporting in a shooting range. And in this age when weapons of mass destruction reside solely in the hands of the government, citizens with hand guns, rifles, and even machine guns are no match for a cold-blooded, oppressive government with tanks and missiles. The ready availability of arms in the streets only facilitate violent acts that result in outrageous shooting catastrophes that make headlines around the world. It does not add to America's soft power, only undermines it. Only vested interests and the habit of keeping and bearing arms keep the arms lobby strong. Obviously, there is a need for change. Our values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits determine our decisions and behaviors, and hence determine our fate. Like biological DNAs that determine an organism's phenotype, they are the cultural DNAs that determine our individual and collective expressions and development. Biological DNAs persist until mutation takes place or until the organism dies. Cultural DNAs are also hard to change. When values have become habits, they are almost like permanent imprints, but they are still subject to change. If there is a will, there is a way. Of course, you cannot change who your parents are, but you as parents have a choice to determine what values to instill in your children. Perhaps you are not CEO yet, but you can work your way up to become the CEO of your present company, or your own company. And if you are ambitious enough, you can work to become the president of your country (If you think you can't become president, then you definitely can't!). Failing that, at least make sure you have a say in determining who that leader will be. Changing DNA is a distinct possibility. Professor Sir Martin Evans, the 2007 Nobel Laureate in Medicine, works on "knock-out mice", mice that have specific genes "knocked out" to facilitate medical research for finding cures for cancer, targeted medicine for DNA repair and perhaps work as a model for future gene therapy in humans. Gene therapy is now an attempt to improve on existing biological DNA. Can we also work on the cultural DNAs of the individual and collective entities we belong to, to see if we can help rid their ills, prevent or find cures for their shortcomings and cancers, to help them change for the better? The university professors might have diagnosed a problem for the overseas Chinese students, but it is also an opportunity to go through the thesis, antithesis, and synthesis process to synthesize a new set of cultural DNAs to nurture the challenging spirit, independent critical thinking, and creativity, and to do away with the "worship" of authority. And wouldn't it be nice if we can extract the best values, beliefs, assumptions, and habits of both East and West, find the proper balance, and improve on the cultural DNAs of all mankind? If you have any questions or comments, please e-mail us at contactus@soynjoy.net. |