A Contemporary Significance of Ancient Greece

What is the importance of ancient Greece in the world today? Most would say that we derive little value from learning about Helen of Troy, Athens, and the Peloponnesian War. The answer depends on the meaning of “value” – studying ancient Greece certainly adds little value to the work of engineers or mathematicians; for political scientists, policy makers, and those who wish to understand society, however, at least one defense of the study of ancient Greece can be made.

To understand this, we only have to [look at the modern world]. Two defining features of modernity are the value of individual liberty and the [reliance] placed on science and technology. Liberty for mankind is enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and scientific discoveries bring countless improvements to our lives. People around the world aspire to these values – we want to be free individuals; we hope to benefit from the latest technological advancements. To do so, we have to understand how these ideas came about.

[Yet] these ideas are really Western ideas; they have their roots in the West. Why is it that despite the many inventions made, reason did not come to dominate ancient Chinese society? Why is it that prior to the modern world not much discourse on government or politics could be found in the non-Western world? It is entirely possible that pre-modern China at one point came to value reason, and that Islamic thinkers wrote long treatises on government or politics. But the fact remains that it is difficult to decouple “modernity” from “the West”. “Our universal civilization,” to use Naipaul’s phrase, is very much a Western one.

Therefore, only by identifying the similarities and distinction between the experience of the West and the fabric of our society can we effectively incorporate them as our own. The perils of having the values of one culture imposed on another without due consideration of local context is all too familiar as we look at the Middle East. Even HSBC strives to be global and local. We have to understand the features distinct to the West that triggered the evolution of these ideas. And understanding the West starts with ancient Greece.

The Clash of Civilizations

In reply to Francis Fukuyama’s “End of History”, Samuel P. Huntington wrote [about] his “Clash of Civilization” thesis in the 1993 Summer issue of Foreign Affairs. Both phrases have [penetrated our contemporary vocabulary], and in particular, became conspicuous in the immediate aftermath of September 11. I took a read at Huntington’s article today and was surprised that despite it being written 15 years ago, his observations stay as accurate today as they were in the past.

His central point is that[,] as contrasted to conflicts based on nation-state rivalry in earlier times, “Conflict between civilizations will be the latest phase in the evolution of conflict in the modern world“. The key term in his thesis, “civilization”, is defined before he articulated these six points to support this position:

1. Civilization differs from one another fundamentally. These differences [project across] language, history, culture, and most importantly, religion.
2. Such differences are accentuated by [globalization, putting] different civilizations in close contact.
3. Together with socio-economic progress, traditional nation-state or ideological boundaries are removed and therefore, being replaced by a level of separation much more basic, [that is, according to Huntington, civilizational differences.]
4. This “civilization-consciousness” is amplified two parallel trends: the increased influence of the West and a return to local roots among non-Western countries.
5. Civilizational differences are [virtually] immutable.
6. The trend is towards economic regionalism and this has the effect of bringing nation-states within a civilization closer together. Hence, the boundaries between civilizations will “reinforce civilization-consciousness”.

[Essentially the six points above are merely restatements of the six points in his article.]

Gnothi Seauton

I am taking a class [in which] I have to read ancient Greek classics, so I guess the next few posts will most probably involve ancient Greec.

I finally took the time today to read the article on The Temple of Apollo at Delphi in Wikipedia. Delphi is a place in Greece and the temple was–according to Wikipedia–”the most important oracle in the classical Greek world.” The Oracle plays a central role in ancient Greece; people consulted the oracle for advice on all things, asking whether it is appropriate to initiate a war, or inquiring about the causes of a plague. A priestess is assigned the role as the god’s spokeperson, and the one at Delphi was known as the Pythia. More often than not, the oracle spoke in vague terms, and priests at the temple interpreted the statements. I suppose we can relate the riddles of the oracle to the Forer/Barnum effect?

What strikes me [the] most reading about the temple at Delphi are the inscriptions supposedly carved outside the temple:

• Know thyself (Gnothi Seauton)
• Nothing in excess
• Make a pledge and mischief is nigh

The first two, [as] I believe most [will] agree, are principles to live life with; the third, I am not sure what it means…

The American Academic Model

I’m assigned Philip Altbach’s The American Academic Model in Comparative Perspective as a reading for a course examining [the relationship between universities, public policy, and the common good].

As the title suggests, it is an essay (paper?) about the structure of American higher education today and how it compares with those in other countries, although not much comparative perspective is actually given since it focuses more on the history and evolution of the higher education system, rather than the specific similarities and differences of the model here and in other countries.

American universities stand apart from the universities elsewhere in terms of size, resources, and [flexibility]. They lead in research output and in the number of foreign students they attract. According to the paper (2001 data), “the US accounts for almost half of the world’s research and development expenditures, a significant share of which goes to academic institutions… the country is also host to … about a third of the world’s total of students who study abroad.” Accordingly, American universities have been subject to close scrutiny by their counterparts in the rest of the world. Practices have been adapted, and innovations emulated. The essay attempts to illuminate why it has been so and how the entire system came to be. Below is a summary of the first half of the paper.

From the outset, the author states that the preeminence of American higher education is not pre-planned, but instead [the] consequence of a combination of [necessity] (“historical realities”), scattered innovations, and import of new ideas from abroad. For instance, Harvard and Yale were modeled after Oxford and Cambridge. As the society progressed, the demand for mass education led to a higher education system capable of dealing with [large numbers] of students; new institutions[,] emulated and modified from the English system, were created to provide education for the middle and rural classes; the promise of universal access led to a variety of colleges [that] can meet various demands, through unique innovations such as the community college system.  Concepts such as [universities'] service to society and liberal arts as the foundation of undergraduate education were also introduced.

Therefore, it can be said that there is no single “system” defining American higher education today. It is [diverse]. From state-funded research universities to private for-profit institutions, from religious universities to those carefully planned by the state, all kinds of colleges exist. [The result is that universities can be as good as we can possibly imagine or as bad as they can be.

Other things from the paper:

• It is difficult to export specific models and policies without considering local contexts; Modifications and adaptations to domestic situations are needed. The example given is "the export of American land-grant concept to Nigeria, India, and other countries", where the [outcomes] varied and diverged from their original intention.
• The basic university system in our world today can be traced back to Europe. “[T]he medieval universities of Paris and Bologna” form the precursor to universities elsewhere.

Arrgh!

I’m so sorry!!! I’m sorry I’ll not be able to post daily (maybe not at all) until around September 8 because I’m preparing to get back to school. I’m still packing my luggage and sort out stuff, like rearranging files on my computer.

Me back will be soon! =)

Cards

Today, I learned on Wikipedia:

• Hong Kong Identity Card
• Hong Kong’s Octopus Card
• Singapore’s NRIC
• Singapore’s CashCard
• Taiwan’s National Identity Card
• Taiwan’s EasyCard
• Japan’s Suica
• Malaysia’s MyKad – Do you know that the “Kad” in “MyKad” [can also mean] “Kad Akuan Diri, ie Personal Identity Card?
• Malaysia’s Touch ‘n Go

Sex, More Sex, and Even More Sex

This is overdue. I should have published this two hours ago if I wish to be consistent in keeping to one post a day. =|

I had a most exhaustive discussion with my friend today. Exhaustive discussion, from my experience, often centers around controversial topics. (Obviously! What am I thinking? =\) The one today dealt with the title of this post, on a topic related to sex, more sex, and even more sex. More insightfully, exhuastive discussions often boil down to issues of semantics, formal logic, and factual agreement. (is this insightful?)

We realized towards the end we had shared the same position. The major point of contention was on the precise definition of terms such as “desirability”, “good”, “bad”, and “value”.

I want to keep to my intention of preserving the opinion-free nature of this blog as far as I can. My apologies for not divulging the precise topic of our discussion except that it touched on sex – [and] a purely academic one at that.

It was a 3 hour chat online, on topic with minimal breaks in between, really tiring, but a fruitful discussion nonetheless. Even then, we have yet to settle on the relationship between “rightness” and “desirability”. One implication of our discussion was the discovery – or rather, reminder – that formal logic and linguistics may not be that bad as fields of study. As always, if only all of us have enough time in our lives for these pursuits.

[I leave] you guessing the topic of the discussion. But to the person who had indirectly inspired this discussion, I am really curious what your opinion is. But I can’t ask, can I?

Cloud Computing & Privacy

I looked up the term “cloud computing” on Wikipedia after reading an AFP article on the potential privacy dangers of cloud computing.

Cloud computing means a type of computing whereby computing power [is offered as a service over the internet, rather than relying on a local computing infrastructure]. “Cloud” refers to the internet, referring to the cloud-like diagram whenever a network is depicted. The concept dates back to the 1960s when John McCarthy, a computer scientist, predicted that one day computation may be provided like a utility. As opposed to grid computing (in which computing power is networked like a grid into a virtual supercomputer) or utility computing (which refers to a specific model of computing where computation is metered – much like electrical supply), cloud computing is centralized and [can be either metered or unmetered].

Many current leading technology firms operate under the cloud computing model. Google provides office applications such as word, spreadsheet, and email functions as a web-based service [over Microsoft's traditional software approach]. Facebook as a social utility is also offered as a web-based application in which information is stored [at] a centralized database. The advantages of cloud computing lies essentially in having a centralized computer processing and storage infrastructure that can provide users low capital expenditure in terms of hardware/software deployment; from the provider’s side, the centralized computing power can serve multiple users simultaneously and hence idle computer resources can be better utilized. On top of that, security and reliabilty are more easily maintained.

The advantages of cloud computing points exactly to its dangers. A centralized storage and computing infrastructure increases the likelihood that users data are [used for undesirable purposes]. How can we be sure that our Gmails stored on Google’s servers are adequately protected from prying eyes? And it is not only emails that are involved; our search keywords, webpages viewed, youtube videos watched, blog posts written, maps checked, and many more are recorded on Google’s servers. What happens if, say, Google acquires Facebook? The company will then have in their hands, every single detail of our lives – save perhaps, the most personal thoughts [written only in our minds].

From my observation, it seems that privacy is not a concern for our generation today. “So what if they collect all these information? Not that you do anything wrong. [Afraid for what]?” some tell me. To me, it’s much like letting the government fingerprint and install cameras right outside our homes (if not inside), on every corner within the country, then agreeing with the government’s reply “why are you afraid if you don’t do anything wrong?” Not that the analogy is that valid in the first place; they refer to different issues – one on civil liberties, the other on privacy. But they are both similar in that we don’t need to have done anything wrong to be fearful. It’s about the unease we all get when we are being watched.

Maybe I am paranoid. But aren’t you afraid? That the only reason we believe Google will do the right thing when we need it to is to have faith in its unofficial motto “Don’t be evil”? What about Facebook and many other companies with no such pronouncement of benevolence whatsoever? Do you ever read the privacy policy before you happily click “I agree”? Aren’t you scared?

Then again, maybe I am indeed paranoid. If that is so, =/ =| =\ – I need to see a psychologist. =/ =| =\

“Asian-Americans”

Here is an article I came across when reading a thread on my university’s Facebook group asking incoming Asian-American freshmen to identify themselves. The article talks about a report [which] discredits the stereotype that Asian-Americans are better in science/quantitative subjects.

One important point being made is that the categorization of Asian-Americans is flawed because “Asian-Americans” invariably include non-American Asians coming from ourside the US. Findings that seem to support the stereotype of the “model minority”, such as the large number of PhD degrees awarded to “Asian-Americans”, largely ignores this distinction.

The Pre-Socratics

I learned [yesterday and today] about the Pre-Socratics, a group of philosophers labeled by historians as such because they all [had in common having flourished] before Socrates. From Wikipedia, it is said that the term was popularized by Hermann Diels’ work The Fragments of the Pre-Socratics. These philosophers include the Milesians, the Pythagoreans, the Eleatics, and the Atomists. [How is the world created, where does the world come from, and what the relationship between nature and mathematics are some of the questions they investigate.]

Continue reading for [details that is] very likely to be really boring.