Wednesday, July 27, 2011

“Mind and Spirit”–> Consistency Of Purpose

james-tissot-reehab-and-baanah-bring-the-head-of-ish-boshethThe remarkable thing about the Bible is that it is a book of wisdom and not necessarily an instruction manual.  Those of the faith have understood this, and they have understood that wisdom is something that you mine, not something that you are given.  Unless you are willing to dig in the dirt, you will not find the gems.  This rather harsh picture above (yes that is a head on the ground) is a story that we can all learn from in our modern age.

The two men standing beside a head are Baanah and Rekab, who were the Rimmon the Beerothite from the tribe of Benjamin.  While this picture is found on several websites (and I cannot find the artist), there is a ring of truth about it.  You can see two men who are proudly standing by a severed head.  Although they believe they understand how the story will unfold, they are sadly mistaken in it's outcome.

The story is told in 2 Samuel 4, and because it is very short, we will paste it all here from the NIV:

5 Now Rekab and Baanah, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, set out for the house of Ish-Bosheth, and they arrived there in the heat of the day while he was taking his noonday rest. 6 They went into the inner part of the house as if to get some wheat, and they stabbed him in the stomach. Then Rekab and his brother Baanah slipped away.

7 They had gone into the house while he was lying on the bed in his bedroom. After they stabbed and killed him, they cut off his head. Taking it with them, they traveled all night by way of the Arabah. 8 They brought the head of Ish-Bosheth to David at Hebron and said to the king, “Here is the head of Ish-Bosheth son of Saul, your enemy, who tried to kill you. This day the LORD has avenged my lord the king against Saul and his offspring.”

9 David answered Rekab and his brother Baanah, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, “As surely as the LORD lives, who has delivered me out of every trouble, 10 when someone told me, ‘Saul is dead,’ and thought he was bringing good news, I seized him and put him to death in Ziklag. That was the reward I gave him for his news! 11 How much more—when wicked men have killed an innocent man in his own house and on his own bed—should I not now demand his blood from your hand and rid the earth of you!”

12 So David gave an order to his men, and they killed them. They cut off their hands and feet and hung the bodies by the pool in Hebron. But they took the head of Ish-Bosheth and buried it in Abner’s tomb at Hebron.

David was called a man after God’s own heart.  Now, David did some horrible things, but the general reading of the scripture is that David generally would react to situations as God would have him react.  This story is clear.  David was not the type of person that was about intrigue or plotting.  He had enemies and people that strongly disliked him.  I know in my own life, I also have people that dislike me in my work, although I would say that anything I face is much, much more mild than anything that David ever faced.  I have found that much of this type of strife in the work place is due to jealousy.  While we all have competition in the marketplace, it is easy for people in any job to forget this.  They are concerned about how they are perceived or if they are valued.  Therefore, if somebody else seems to shine more, then they are resentful and try to figure out how to make the other person look worse.

This  was the situation in Israel.  David was obviously the right choice to rule the nation.  He had wisdom and courage, and he could lead the people in a great fashion.  Those who came to him, followed him, and they succeed in their nation because of this.  However, David had a rival.  This rival Ish-Bosheth, who was the son of the previous King of Israel, Saul.  In this situation, there were two guys who thought, “Well I’ll do something under the table to wipe out David’s rival, and thus David will be happy with us.”  So they put together the assassination team, and they wiped this guy out.

The problem is that they didn’t understand that David simply did not like dirty tricks.  Now mind you, David was a horrible violent man.  He wipe out towns and people.  He killed with impunity.  He was so violent, God said “you’re too much of a man of blood, I will not allow you to build a temple (or church) for me.”  David was a very hard man.

However, David had a code of ethics.  He did not participate in under the table dealings.  He was tough, but always tough with rules.

The morals from this can be applied to our country.  Some say that under cover actions are reasonable and necessary in this day and age.  They think that torture and dirty tricks are okay.  To them, we can point to this story and say that being strong does not mean being dirty.  Dirty tricks are really a symptom of a nation that is unwilling to think God can protect.  Therefore, we depend on our own bag of foul items.  However, this is not the message of the Bible.  The message of the Bible is one of consistency of purpose.  We cannot play dirty in one part of our nation, then expect it won't have problems in another part of our nation.  We need to be consistent.  This means that we are not the nation of dirty tricks.

However, it can even be applied to our own life? The answer is yes.  Is there a rival that you have?  Are there others that  are willing to play against this rival with a bag of dirty tricks?  Then the Bible is clear.  You are not to deal with these people. This is so hard, and yet so right.  We are supposed to have a secret clubs, one against another.  All social beings try and do this.  Yet, when we look at the biblical model, it is one of being transparent.

It is simply the right thing to do.

Monday, May 16, 2011

"Mind" -> Back To Narita To Yokohama Part III

As you cross over the bridge, you can look back at the station, or look down the street. The night we came, there was a little bit of rain, which reminded me of Seattle, and was neat. The building with the big billboard has a bunch of electronic shops in it. I didn't go, but Atilla said it was cool.

You'll need to vere to the left to find the entrance. When you enter, it'll be on the second floor. Either take the stairs in the middle, or go to the other side, like this, and jump in and elevator.

Jump in line. Your ready to check in.

With any luck, you'll see this the next day.

"Mind" -> Back To Narita To Yokohama Part II

Now, if you haven't read the first part of this blog entry, you'll need to go and catch up here.

Once down to the ticket office, you can tell the person taking the orders to get you a ticket to Yokohama. You'll need to make sure to call out the right place, otherwise you'll not be able to get through the gate on the other side of the trip when you are done. You'll need to go the the ticket office on the arriving side and pay more money.

The key to the Narita Express or NEX, is to look for the green JR signs. Should say "Narita Airport Station."

Not a really good picture, but if you look ahead, you'll see the ticket turn style. For somebody that doesn't take a lot of trains, this can be a little confusing. If you have a season pass there is one that has a sensor pad. What you want is the turn style with a slot infront. Sorry, I didn't get a picture.

With the printing upwards, slip the ticket into the slot in the front of the turn style. The slot is much bigger than the ticket so you can't miss it. Then walk forward, and you ticket will magically pop up in the middle of the turn style. Take your ticket, as you'll need it on the exit turn style.

Go down the stairs to track 1.

Double check the board, because it'll flash English also. Look for the time it will be leaving.

If you look at the LED boards over the train doors, you'll see that it lists the car number.

You can see that my ticket says car 2, seat 7-B. So this is my car.

There is a really cool luggage lock. You simply put the cable through the handle of your luggage, then place the loop-end of the cable on a peg behind the little door. Then dial in a secret 4 digit number. Then twist the dial to lock and set the numbers to all zero. If you put back the original 4 digit number, it'll open the door. Don't forget the number, or you'll miss your station for sure.

Look there some guy in the seat next to me.

They have improve the monitors. It really shows you where you are at.

The train cars separate at Tokyo station, and because you bought the right ticket, you stay on the same car which goes to Yokohama.

Look the turnstyles are ahead and to the right.

When you put your ticket in the turnstyle this time, it will not give the ticket back. It eats it. This is so people don't use dead tickets.

Unfortunately, we couldn't remember where to go, and we started to go to the east exit. Then we wondered where we were at.

Luckily, they have maps every where, and we saw it was the west exit we wanted.

Even late at night, the subway station is always a buzz. Youl'll need to climb some stairs to get out.

Wind your way outside on the west station.

When you get outside, walk 30 yards to the left, and look up. The Sheraton is above you.

If you walk through the open court yard to the left, you'll see a stairs down (to go under, which I never take), or a stairs up. I normally take the stairs up. This will take you directly to the Sheraton.
Posted by Picasa

"Mind" -> Back To Narita To Yokohama Part I

Time to update my post on how to get from LAX to Japan. Only this time, we are going to the Sheraton in Yokohama.

You start off at LAX, or Los Angeles Airport. In my case, I start at Tom Bradley terminal.

I always suggest that you get some cash before you go so you can catch the subway. In my case, this currency exchange is right after security in LAX and charges a very large charge of $5.95, but what are you going to do once you are at the airport?

If you are fortunately enough to fly business class, they let you sit in the lounge. In my case, this is the Korean air lounge.

This will be my home for the next 12 hours. Buckle up and get ready to fly.

You land at Narita airport. This is my plane.

Get off the plane and up the elevator. Nice that there is no bus ride. I don't think I've ever had a bus ride at Narita, as all the planes land at the terminal.

You'll see a green sign and a yellow sign. The green is for transfers. You want the yellow.

Follow the yellow when it splits. Take the elevator down.

This is passport control. In my case, they asked to see my form before getting to the officer at the desk. I had forgotten to fill in the back of the customs form.

Wait for you baggage if you've check bags. Korean air doesn't have a lot of overhead bin space. I like the 747, which have big closets to store the bags.

Pick up your Santohk, who comes from San Franciso an hour after you do.

Look around, and see the exit for going outside, but you are not going to go there.

Wait in line while your Santohk gets his money exchanged.

Look for the sign that says railways.
Follow the elevator down.
You want the JR Line. 
Big area.  Look around. 
See JR? 
Closer to the office. 

Posted by Picasa

Sunday, May 01, 2011

"Mind" -> Outlier

The picture to the right is Christopher Langan, who is reported to be the smartest man in America.  He is also one of the characters in Malcolm Gladwell's "Outliers." To most of you, the term "Outlier" needs no description, because you know what it means.

An outlier is anything or anybody that separates themselves from the rest of the data.  We have a deep need in our culture for outliers.  These are the great men, the deep thinkers and the leading athletes that everybody in this world aspires to be.  From stories in the Bible to the page of USA Today, our culture and our history is about outliers.  As a parent, most people will want children that are outliers.  Yet, what makes an outlier?

We have examined this idea before in this blog, and I'm happy to announce what I discussed in a very few words, Gladwell has expounded into a rather profound book.  (With my blog posts happening a year before the books publication.  This does not mean that I was in front of Gladwell, but it is to point out that this understanding of outliers is trickling through popular culture.  But what was spoke about in some backroom forums, is now viewable on your Kindle.)

However, it is not just my feeling that he has touched on the same subjects as I have that make this book remarkable, but that it touches on subjects that each one of us should know about before we try and educate ourselves or our children.

After reading "Outliers," I wanted to force every leader in the USA to read (and be tested) on the concepts explained in this book.

Gladwell's work focuses around three main thoughts:

  1. He repeats Anders Ericsson's research on IQ vs practice. In a nutshell, it is better to work hard than to be super bright. 
  2. People are either reinforced or victims of their environment. Related to this idea, and reinforced is that is the idea that being a little better at the beginning can have massive impact later.  So, what looks like a small difference, can have a major impact.
  3. Culture matters, and Asian culture will yield more practice.

I have often wishes that I was super bright. Now mind you, I am not dumb, as my testing would indicate an IQ of around 118 or the upper 10% of the population. Yet, Gladwell makes an excellent argument from the research that much of an IQ above 105 doesn't matter.You can't be deficient, but once you are to a certain level, the brain importance becomes less, and the hard work component becomes dominant.

To return to Langan above.  He is really remarkable, and yet because of a series of misteps and cultural issues, he was not able to finish college.  So, here we have the brightest man in America, and he does not have a college degree.  He was, for many years, a bouncer.  While he is self-studied, there is a profound lack of justice when such a bright person gets dropped from college.  Gladwell does a nice job of exploring what happened with Langan, and the USA is poorer for not spotting his talent, and others like him, and integrating this talent into our culture.

But how did such a bright person get dropped?  What happened?  Why didn't a super high IQ simply pave the way for Langan?

Part of it is because having a super IQ is really neat, but does not generally mean that you will be successful or valued.

Why a super high IQ does not matter lies in the idea of the principle is called "Diminishing Returns" and alternative path learning.  The principle is simple and used in the business world every day. It has a derivative called the 80/20 rule. The idea is that if you need a hole dug, one man might take 8 hours to dig it. Two men might take 6 hours. Three might take 5 hours. Four or five men may not help the time at all.

Basically, as you add more resources, the people get in each others way.  More does not mean better or faster.  Yes, a better IQ allows you to see things faster than the other guy, or it allows you to see relationships that they may not.  However, like that hole that needs to be dug, being 3 times as smart may not allow you to make 3 times the accomplishment, just like 3 times the number of men don't always 3 times faster.  More than this, even if you are not as smart as your peer, you can still put in a few more hours to catch up.

The same is with IQ and success. Just being bright does not mean that the nature of the problems that one may solve every day needs to have brilliant insight.  Often a smart man can solve a problem in about the same time as a brilliant mind.  More than this, devoted time is more important than being bright. As an example, let's say you have two students, with one student learning in 8 hours what the smarter learns in 6.

While both students with have a gap if they study the same time.  However, if the slower student is willing to study twice as long as the faster student, the slower student will always be ahead. Number of hours, can make up for mental horsepower gaps.

Why wouldn't smarter spend as much time as the less smart? There are two reasons that this happens:

a. Lack of desire, which Gladwell goes on to contrast various cultures about this axis
b. Lack of opportunity, which we'll look at next

But why shouldn't somebody have opportunity?  Gladwell points to programs that place children in one category (streaming) or another at a young age to point why we can arbitrarily remove opportunity.   Unfortunately, we will often make choices about children and their "gifts" at such a young age that is then sets the path for them in their life.

To start the proof, he turns to the world of hockey in Canada.  In Canada, your hockey group is decided by your year.  You must play against kids born in the exact same year, January 1st to December 31st.  When you go back and look at the data of hockey players in Canada, you find out that the all the kids born near the beginning of the year fulfill all of the all star slots and best player slots in Canadian hockey.  In other words, you are basically in trouble if you have a child in hockey, and he was born on December 31st, like my Father and my son.

The reason is that some sports put "talented" kids on special teams. Generally, if the kid is a little older (and a little bigger and stronger) they will be placed on special honor teams. Once they get onto this "best of the best" team, they practice a lot more than their peers which were not selected.  Once they got more time to practice, they did better than their previous lower ranked team mates.  This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

This can happen with intellectual pursuits.  There are cut offs for different grades.  We've examined the brain a lot in the blog.  The reality is that the brain is an growing mass of growing neurons, and a gap of a year into school will mean that a young child simply will not be doing as well as an older child in any given year.  Once a child starts to be pegged as the "bright kid," they then strive to keep it up and study more.  Once they study more, they become brighter compared to their peers.

As a personal vignette, my Mother did not think that I was ready for school at a young age.  There was something about the way that I acted that caused her concern.  Rather than pushing me into school (like my Father, who was always young in his grade), she simply held me back one year in preschool.  My father at the time was not all that happy, but there were a couple of things that he didn't fight my Mom, and this was one of them.

I was always big for my age, and in the younger grades there was a couple of teasing moments about the idea that I was held back because they thought that I was older due to my size.  However, I was very sharp, and very quickly I got the reputation for being a brain and smart.  Unfortunately, I did not apply myself as much as I should have, but I never had doubts about my mental capabilities and brights.

This was even helpful years later, when I decided to go back and get my engineering degree.  My wife told me that she never considered me a math brain when we first got together, but when I got my second degree in engineering, she thought that I was a technical geek.  However, the secret was not that I was smart in math and science (I had not studied hard therefore I was not capable), but that I had the reputation of being smart.  Once I thought I was smart, I knew the only thing holding me back from getting good grades was studying hard.

It is a wonder self-delusion that turned out to be true.

But back to Gladwell's book. 

Because the habit of hard work is so incredibly important to being an outlier, Gladwell spends the second half of the book going into some very interesting, and some might say dangerous territory.  In a nutshell, Gladwell suggests that Asians are not intrinsically smarter than the rest of the world.  Now this might seem a little off, because if you look at test results from most standardized tests, generally, the Asians come out ahead of those from the USA. Gladwell really says that this is true because you can see it in Asian math test scores.

It is true that Asian cultures generally test well in math.  Interestingly, Gladwell states that generally the Asian do not generally have super high IQs in general.  He may have something here, as he cites studies that show most of the IQ testing done on Chinese people center around a select group.  However, he states that all Chinese do well on math, regardless of their IQ.

Gladwell says that the secret to the Asian success in math scores is that they eat rice, or more specifically, he says that because they eat rice, they were forced to grow rice, and this habit forced deep learning and hard work into their culture.

Gladwell cites studies that show to work a rice paddy can take up to 3000 hours per year.  This hard work was very different than Europeans. The Europeans did not work rice, but they did do farming.  However, farming did not require the same amount of work to feed the worker. 

Europeans, in the middle of the middle ages, would only put in around 1200 hours per year.  In addition, Gladwell claims that working on a rice paddy requires a lot more learning about the mechanics of growing something.  He simply states that rice farming is harder and more intellectually challenging and precise.  Thus, the rice paddy placed some long term significant cultural bounding around the Asian culture that continues to this day.

On the last point, I think Gladwell stumbles greatly.  He tries to make out in the book that the long work hours of the rice paddy and the concentration required for the unique rice paddy farming taught a special skill.  In my mind, you need to look at the factory acts of England to realize that even if the working of the class of Europe did not put in the heavy hours of the Asian rice paddy worker, once the industrial revolution took off, there were many people that work at least 3000 hours per year.  (This is just 60 hours per week times 50 work weeks during the year.)

Regardless of the vehicle of WHY the Asian culture works longer, I do believe that Gladwell has the right outcome.  Cultures that encourage hard work are going to succeed in the end.  I think the point that Gladwell misses (although he even mentions it in his book) is the idea that constant work stunts the ability to be creative.

There is more than just sheer hard work, otherwise, Germany and France would be extremely poor by now.  Germany is amazing in terms of the work that they do versus other countries in the world.  As in most complex systems, a simplification is simply inadequate to hold true.  Most economies and cultures are much more complex than Gladwell makes them out to be.

As you know, I watch too much anime, and one thing that I am in agreement with is the idea of the centrality of rice to the Asian culture.  I think that Gladwell somehow has become confused with the centrality of a foodstuff and somehow try to wrap this into doing well on math.

If you watch much anime, you'll constantly see images of the rice field. Then again, in Japan, "rice paddy" is literally a part of many names.  The beautifully drawn calligraphy on the left is the symbol for "rice field" or "rice paddy" or commonly called ta.  If you look at rice paddys from the sky, they will often be in nice grids, so the character is a wonder representation.

According to Wikipedia, it was during the Meiji period (1868 to 1912), when all people were to label themselves with a last name.  Because most of the population was farmers, and most farmers would label their geographical areas by virtue of the rice paddy they were near.  When they decided to give themselves a last name, they often said their last name was tied to their area.  Therefore, ta was absorbed into many people's last name.

In my case, I know a Tanaka in my work.  Tanaka means in the middle of the rice paddy, or if you were to see it in Kanji it looks like this 田中.  Rice is central to Japan.  Then as you get to other culture, you will find that rice also is central in China and Korea also.

Yet to make the leap from rice as a cultural phenomenon that is central to China, Japan, and Korea and hard work and translate this into why they are better on math scores completely misses the point that the same can be said of the Filipinos and rice.  While cultivating rice for nearly as long as these other places, filipinos do not nicely fit into Gladwell's rice tracks the ability to work hard which means testing well on math box.

The problem lies with the fact that Filipinos are notoriously bad test takers.  This can be seen in their IQ scores, which rank at the bottom of the pack.  I have my own thoughts on IQ and success, which go beyond the scope of this post.  However, the short of of my beliefs is that fundamental nutrition may also have an extremely important impact on the computational power of people.  As I have posted before, when your brain is 75% fat.  Half of this is Omega-6, which your body can't make, but western culture has in spades.  The other fat of your brain fat is Omega-3, which your body can't make, and western culture often is starving for because fish consumption is much lower than Asian cultures that are coastal based (where most IQ testing is done.)

Gladwell also points to the fact that from a linguist standpoint, the Chinese may have a more number friendly etymology to numbers.  Yet, by this time, he has so badly mangled the data that I have fading hope that he is onto something. 

However, this is a profoundly thought provoking work, and the first half of the book is very, very strong.  And what is clear is that Gladwell has called out a wonderfully written book on the value of hard work and understanding the culture that we work in.

I cannot recommend his book highly enough, if you only read the first half.