Knowing nationalism, culturism, and racism

You don’t really know nationalism until you’ve lived in a foreign country. People back home often don’t accept/trust things you did in the other country, sometimes even things you did at an embassy, and vice versa. Government officials in the home country ask you questions like, “why would you want to live there?”, and require you to help them spy on you and tax you (e.g., tell them what foreign bank accounts you have). People at foreign company and government offices usually ignore your emails. And locals of the other country often treat you suspiciously. People in other countries are usually nice to paying tourists, but not so nice if you try to live there.

Similarly, you don’t really know culturism and racism until you’ve lived in an area where you are in a cultural or ethnic minority. People constantly stare when you walk down the street, and sometimes comment on how (dis)similar you look to them. Taxis and buses don’t stop maybe half the time, and people are physically pushier with foreigners on buses and in crowds. Customer service people in businesses avoid you unless you confront them, and local customers cut in line ahead of you. It’s harder to get a job and to navigate relationships of all kinds. People often don’t want to hear or see things from your culture. People from both cultures sometimes do mocking/poor impressions of the other culture or ethnicity in front of you, and expect you to find it funny. And people are judgmental and rejecting, if you look or speak in any way that they don’t find beautiful/healthy, humble, thankful, and positive.

In such an interconnected world, it’s amazing to me that many people are still so small-minded.

Advertisements

Changing (how) the world (works)

People don’t really want the world to change; the world changes on its own incessantly, which is the cause of most/all suffering in the world (i.e., whatever one builds or gets attached-to in this world is inevitably destroyed). People want to change *how* the natural, psychological, and social worlds work. For example, the human body and mind are frail, susceptible to disease, and short-lived, so people want to find ways of overcoming those problems. Walking, running, or using carts are too slow/weak and painful, so people invent transportation technologies. Crop yields are too low, so people do genetic and other agricultural engineering. Certain social structures/regimes that are currently in power are destroying the natural environment, causing wars, or allowing prejudiced or unequal treatment of people, so people want to change those regimes. And so forth. Humans rarely want to live in their natural state.

Science is (inter)subjective

Despite scientists’ and popular cultures’ many claims of science’s objectivity and universality, (I have a social science PhD and some natural science training and) I have never seen a scientific study or theory that completely removed human subjectivity — e.g., that was not conceived, conducted, or interpreted by humans working in their everyday states of mind — or that was done from start-to-finish by non-humans. Asian philosophies often claim that everyday consciousness is dominated by either learned or evolved biases and prejudices, and that meditation or psychotropic drugs can break down those biases and allow a more unfiltered view of reality. It might be interesting to study whether, and what, biases can be removed by various types/degrees of meditations or drugs, and whether one could conceive, conduct, or interpret experiments with less subjective bias from within such states. It might not be so different than how people sometimes say that an idea came to them in a dream.