Reviews Written By: A2H4EP1JLNM8F1provided by Amazon.com |
 | ||
 | Outliers: The Story of Success (1st Edition) | |
 | "Selecting for Success, One Policy and Culture at a Time" | 2009-11-04 |
| I already was aware that many of the methods by which society selects for "success" are biased towards many under-represented groups. I just didn't realize how many groups were under-represented: culture, language and most surprisingly: birthday.
I appreciated the fact that Gladwell opened the book with a story about Roseto, the small Pennsylvania community of Italian immigrants that lived like Italians. Leading towards abnormally low death rates from "American" health problems. In my own quest for a healthy lifestyle, this story was another level of reinforcement. But did Gladwell completely contradict it by speaking of 24/7/365 work in the book's closing chapters? I was rather aghast at the lifestyle required by children in the KIPP schools, especially after becoming familiar with John Taylor Gatto's Underground History of American Education, the fact that the modern education system was built to create a mass of people accustomed to dull repetitive work. However, the point here is that constant schooling is the only way to allow impoverished students to compete with their affluent counterparts. Frankly, Outliers has led me to summarize that the individual is important to each life's success story but clearly contributes something more like 20% whereas societal context, background, culture, parental influence, etc... results in 80% of our outcomes as "people", and I place people in quotes because I doubt that we truly exist without such context. This may be tough medicine to swallow for a nation like America, devout in its adherence to individualistic ideas like entrepreneur-ship and hard work yielding big results. The philosophies of those around me in a corporate environment often leave little time for relationships and hobbies. The truth is that success is more like a combination of luck and preparation, as demonstrated by the 10,000 hours of practice being the key that set the Beatles and Bill Gates apart when opportunity came knocking. Perhaps the line between genius applied to scientific revelation and isolated anger is all too thin as denoted by Robert Oppenhimer and Chris Langan, respectively. Social background may limit more of our great minds than any other mechanism. As stated above, most surprising to me was the role that birth date played in professional athlete selection. Seemingly a parody, it is sadly a very real demonstration of how our methods of choosing "winners" from little leagues to SATs lop off a huge chunk of talent from the overall talent pool that we can draw on to solve new approaches to human innovation. A "discrimination" that has played out in my own life, achieving acceptance to Stanford University's Graduate School yet being denied by University of San Diego despite the fact that UCSD admissions didn't review my file, they just saw that I didn't have a 700 quantitative GRE and refused to pursue me any further. I wouldn't want to be part of a school that selected merely on the basis of GRE, if my GRE score led to my denial as part of a holistic view of my record then I would gladly accept that outcome. Doubly so, I don't want to be part of a society that chooses people of status based on such ridiculous criteria, the absurdity of which Gladwell excels in exposing. One could argue that the evidence of selection bias is too anecdotal but perhaps that is the crux of the entire argument: the stories we tell ourselves about success are outdated and it is time for some new ones. Outliers is a quick read and an important one. I hope that the architects of society at all levels take the opportunity to read or at least skim this volume. Outliers could very quickly and inexpensively bring equality and innovation to new levels of ubiquity. | ||
 | The Turning Point : Science, Society, and the Rising Culture | |
 | "an antidote for determinism" | 2009-11-03 |
| Like the current era, the United States of the mid-70's and early 80's were tinged with a new batch of thinkers making strong cases for the reorganization of society. Interestingly, this period corresponds to the time when the United States peaked in domestic oil production. Economic growth slowed to a crawl and people were considering social alternatives before the aggressive economic policies and financial deregulation of the 80's and 90's led to the creation of financial accumulation instead of growth in wealth, distracting those seriously considering alternatives to economic growth and the industrial production/consumer infrastructure that had defined modernism in the period after World War II. Fritjof Capra's The Turning Point falls into the aforementioned category of ideas that were ripe at the time they were published and then pushed by the wayside when rampant domestic economic growth supported by global tolerance of the US Dollar allowed massive trade deficits to accumulate, creating the illusion of prosperity.
Now that the economic illusion of the last three decades has started to fade, The Turning Point was an eerie read. Capra's commentary on a number of trends for a future where humanity adhered to the outdated paradigm of prosperity only from growth, a biomedical paradigm centered on eradicating microorganisms and a science based on specialization and determinism are revealing themselves in the headlines. Dr. Capra, a theoretical physicist by training and practice, was wise to integrate a holistic view of humanity and to offer an alternative for society that perhaps we've only now wizened enough to appreciate. Key to his thesis is the idea that our world, our governments and our scientists operate as if the deterministic paradigm of the Enlightenment period hasn't changed. Ignoring the reality of relativity, quantum mechanics, chaos theory, biology and modern science has crippled society from the truth of the natural world. We've forgotten that nature does not guarantee our existence! In providing an all encompassing critique of society, Capra does not seek to denigrate the colleagues in other fields but merely to offer a well reasoned and referenced approach to modernizing the way we choose to organize our species. Starting by providing the background of why we need to change, essentially the problem statement, Capra states the crises of society and defines the importance of the Chinese concept of wu wei, the idea that we must refrain from action contrary to nature. As Chuang Tzu says, "Nonaction does not mean doing nothing and keeping silent. Let everything be allowed to do what it naturally does, so that its nature will be satisfied." "In all these fields the limitations of the classical, Cartesian world view are now becoming apparent. To transcend the classical models, scientists will have to go beyond the mechanistic and reductionist approach as we have done in physics, and develop holistic and ecological views. Although their theories will need to be consistent with those of modern physics, the concepts of physics will generally not be appropriate as a model for the other sciences... Scientists will not need to be reluctant to adopt a holistic framework for fear of being unscientific. Modern physics can show them that such a framework is not only scientific but is in agreement with the most advanced scientific theories of physical reality." (p. 49) Capra continues by describing a history of the old world view, the mechanistic reductionist approach that has led to our current predicament. The history of our materialistic success and the limits to our knowledge of the world is retraced through Copernicus, Descartes, Bacon and Newton. This approach has led to a world where, in the words of R.D. Laing as quoted by Capra, "Out go sight, sound, taste, touch and smell and along with them has since gone aesthetics and ethical sensibility, values, quality, form; all feelings, motives, intentions, soul, consciousness, spirit. Experience as such is cast out of the realm of scientific discourse." (p.55) The Turning Point then follows the development of the new physics that started in 1905 when Einstein published his papers on the photoelectric effect and the theory of General Relativity. The photoelectric effect winning the 1921 Nobel Prize and laying the groundwork for quantum mechanics, leading to Heisenberg's discovery of the Uncertainty Principle, an actual physical concept that there are limits to knowledge. Later, Schrodinger's work in demonstrating the electrons and protons that we visualize as balls on a pool table are actually probability clouds, that the foundation of reality is a probability. This work led to John Bell's discovery that our physical reality is subject to non-local phenomena... that the measurement of the spin of a particle in one location will change the spin of a particle in another location, the "spooky action at a distance" that is beginning to make our world look more like one envisioned by the alchemists (well... maybe alchemists like Isaac Newton). And now we've discovered that these non-local connections may be responsible for many basic actions in biology like memory and even consciousness. While physicists were busy revolutionizing our outlook on the fundamentals of the universe, the mechanistic paradigm of the past had already taken hold on the methods of every other field. Our biologists had taken a mechanistic view of life. From a biology textbook quoted by Capra, "One of the acid tests of understanding an object is the ability to put it together from its component parts. " (Capra p. 102) An approach that ironically is quite opposed to the study of life. We've now realized that the mapping of the human genome has yielded many beautiful computer models but little else. The biomedical model which concentrates on the mechanisms of smaller and smaller fragments of the body has yielded an approach that views disease as, "the malfunctioning of biological organisms which are studied from the point of view of cellular and molecular biology; the doctor's role is to intervene, either physically or chemically, to correct the malfunctioning of a specific mechanism." (p.123) The ingestion of many chemicals and execution of complicated surgeries has resulted in ever rising health care costs, and while saving many lives has primarily served as an excuse for lifestyles that run counter to human nature. "We prefer to talk about our children's hyperactivity or learning disability rather than examine the inadequacy of our schools; we prefer to be told that we suffer from hypertension rather than change our over-competitive business world; we accept ever increasing rates of cancer rather than investigate how the chemical industry poisons our food to increase its profits." (p.163) In psychology, Capra advocated that the rational approach of Freudian analysis would need to be transcended to explore the subtler aspects of the human psyche. The incorporation of altered states of consciousness into mainstream psychological studies could yield insights into our human predicament. I'd like to summarize more here but this is a dense critique of many psychologists. Capra's exception to economics is that we've mechanistically reduced people into rational actors, using our education systems to produce a standardized robot class with predictable consumer society that ignores collective values and the psychological need for community. Key to this chapter is the point that the advantages won by the worker in the modern world is generally to the detriment of workers and citizens in the developing world... the great sleight of hand trick made possible by technology and economy. The automation of daily life through complex technologies reduces employment and centers on a capital based approach which is highly inflationary, an economic reality that can be seen by looking at charts of US Dollar inflation over the last hundred years. This section is the most important of the entire book and highly relevant to our current situation. Capra then follows these critiques with answers for each field through a systems view of life that incorporates feedbacks and recognition of evolution through cooperation. A health model that acknowledges holistic principles and a psychology grown from Jung can provide a basis for this new society. Tackling energy, Capra explains the physics and the economics behind our immediate need for a solar economy. I've tried to summarize all 419 pages but so much has slipped through the cracks. While it is easy to view the predicaments of the current global situation, Capra's writings aren't the least bit outdated and a specifically resonant with its solutions. If you are disheartened by the problems of overpopulation, energy crises, etc... (the list can go on forever) do yourself a favor and read the solutions Capra advocates in The Turning Point. | ||
 | A Dark Muse: A History of the Occult | |
| "Needs about 40 more pages..." | 2009-06-16 |
| While Gary Lachman's A Dark Muse: A History of the Occult tackles many of the important writers that have made these claims, it still falls a bit short of the book I wish it was. And my disappointments aside, this is still an amazing work. Divided into two halves, the first is a series of essays on the specific eras of western esoteric development and the key players that defined it, the second half containing excerpts from important writings by the authors introduced in the first half. This volume is keenly focused on authors and writers, and Lachman admits in the beginning that an equal number of pages should be devoted to musicians and other fields. Within A Dark Muse the esoteric enlightenment is broken into five eras: Enlightenment, Romantic, Satanic, Fin de siécle and Modernist, each highlighting Lachman's penchant to expose under-appreciated contributors to western thought. If you want to find a reading list for the next year and a half, this is the book to pick up. I've discovered quite a few writings that I will explore in depth over the next few months. While the public believes that 'the occult' and 'satanism' are synonymous, a simple survey of the ideas in this book will reveal quite the opposite. Occult studies are truly a deeper look at the hidden wisdom present in many of the holy books, cultures and humans on the planet. Most of the authors featured by Lachman deal with esoteric Christianity, the nature of God, metaphysics and spiritual practice (my areas of interest). The chapter on Satanic Occultism, while the most shocking, is also the shortest, simply because there aren't many writers along those lines. This is a grab bag and a good one at that. Read and find the teasers you'll need to dive further into many deeper ideas. Where the book fell short is in the failure to acknowledge some major influences of the 20th century in their own right. Rudolph Steiner, G.I. Gurdjieff, Israel Regardie, Manly P. Hall, the first two being mentioned and the last two entirely left out. Other important thinkers, such as Krishnamurti, while not being explicitly occult, was still the center of Blavatsky's Theosophical movement and would deserve more than the brief mention he receives. However, omissions make sense, jamming this much into 380 pages requires at least a few to be left aside. | ||
 | The Peter Principle | |
| "A prophet of the most unlikely kind" | 2009-06-13 |
| With this simple phrase on p.15 of my edition of The Peter Principle he explained nearly every problem the human species has faced as we have entered increasingly complex organizations in the development of our civilization, In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence given enough time and enough levels in the hierarchy And the more I've thought about it, internalized it, experienced corporate hierarchy... the more I've realized that it explains everything. A housing bubble caused by artificially low inflation rates? Some blame Greenspan but the reality is that he was just serving above his level of competence. It makes sense. America's colony in Iraq flubbed? Some blame Bush or his subordinates but the reality was that they were serving above their level of competence. We all do from time to time. We all think we are the exception. As acquaintances enter the work force and through my own witness to the mindset of the low level employee, everyone seems to be focused primarily on ascending to the higher levels. Why? I think it is what we do as a species. It is our fate. I don't mean to dissuade blame from individuals, removing responsibility from personal action. I only intened to explain that we shouldn't expect success, we should expect blindingly stupid failure and then be pleasantly surprised when things aren't flubbed up. That's not being cynical or "realist". It is just recognizing human nature. Incompetence knows no boundaries of time or place. The Peter Principle when published in 1969 raised a storm because many did not want to accept that they existed at their level of incompetence. Business people didn't take it seriously because it was written tounge-in-cheek with full blown laugh out loud moments. Far different from the bland, dry language they were used to while obtaining their MBAs. I thoroughly enjoyed the book because it is an opportune time for me to examine if I have already achieved my level of incompetence. While the explanations of the Principle could easily be redundant... (the plot is summarized at the beginning as Dr. Peter states the principle) this book isn't redundant, like a Dilbert cartoon with some acute wisdom. Dr. Peter describes, through various case studies and examples, that every perceived exception to the Principle isn't really an exception at all. Complex hierarchies will see its members achieve the ominous final placement. Someday I too can reach this level.I can get stressed out while making poor decisions. I too can wear the badge of administrative "success": the ulcer. This might all seem a bit pessimistic. A little defeatist. But not at all. The solution is to focus our species on moving forward instead of upwards. We see our cohorts in groups struggling for status on a, "treadmill to oblivion." But Dr. Peter clearly states that we can rescue ourselves by seeing where this unmindful escalation is leading us. If we focus on the quality of our situation we can achieve previously ignored success without obtaining a literal or figurative promotion. By applying this principle to our everyday experience, we witness many byproducts. For example, the applied Peter Principle approximates that employees in a hierarchy, "do not truly object to incompetence, they merely gossip about incompetence to mask their envy of employees who have pull." ... with pull being the ability to develop a relationship with someone above you in the hierarchy who can pull you up with them. How poignant. We decry good `ol boy networks but rarely focus on the one thing that could break them up, changing our focus from output to input. I can put in a 40-50 hour work week but would I be more productive if I worked 30-35 hours? We may never know because a full-time job insists that I work 40-50 crushing and life imbalancing hours. Society has focused on input in this situation. Can we think of a better solution to this situation? I'll apply Peter's Bridge to this question: if you can't think of a better solution you have already reached your level of incompetence. Although the observations made in the Peter Principle are obviously applicable to corporate environments, Laurence Peter made some other candid observations of society in these pages. Such as, exposing our modern caste system on p.64 and p.83 of the 2009 edition: ...we have a class system, it is based not on birth but on the prestige of the university one has attended. The graduate of an obscure college does not have the same opportunity for promotion... but as college degrees become the prerequisite for more jobs, soon everyone will have access to his or her level of incompetence. ...with incompetent handling, the test system is only a disguised form of random placement. The purpose of testing is to place the employee as soon as possible in a job which will utilize the highest competence level on his profile. Obviously, any promotion will be to an area of less competence. Brilliant stuff that has played out over the last 30+ years just as Dr. Peter predicted. | ||
 | PETER PRINCIPLE, THE | |
| "A prophet of the most unlikely kind" | 2009-06-13 |
| With this simple phrase on p.15 of my edition of The Peter Principle he explained nearly every problem the human species has faced as we have entered increasingly complex organizations in the development of our civilization, In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence given enough time and enough levels in the hierarchy And the more I've thought about it, internalized it, experienced corporate hierarchy... the more I've realized that it explains everything. A housing bubble caused by artificially low inflation rates? Some blame Greenspan but the reality is that he was just serving above his level of competence. It makes sense. America's colony in Iraq flubbed? Some blame Bush or his subordinates but the reality was that they were serving above their level of competence. We all do from time to time. We all think we are the exception. As acquaintances enter the work force and through my own witness to the mindset of the low level employee, everyone seems to be focused primarily on ascending to the higher levels. Why? I think it is what we do as a species. It is our fate. I don't mean to dissuade blame from individuals, removing responsibility from personal action. I only intened to explain that we shouldn't expect success, we should expect blindingly stupid failure and then be pleasantly surprised when things aren't flubbed up. That's not being cynical or "realist". It is just recognizing human nature. Incompetence knows no boundaries of time or place. The Peter Principle when published in 1969 raised a storm because many did not want to accept that they existed at their level of incompetence. Business people didn't take it seriously because it was written tounge-in-cheek with full blown laugh out loud moments. Far different from the bland, dry language they were used to while obtaining their MBAs. I thoroughly enjoyed the book because it is an opportune time for me to examine if I have already achieved my level of incompetence. While the explanations of the Principle could easily be redundant... (the plot is summarized at the beginning as Dr. Peter states the principle) this book isn't redundant, like a Dilbert cartoon with some acute wisdom. Dr. Peter describes, through various case studies and examples, that every perceived exception to the Principle isn't really an exception at all. Complex hierarchies will see its members achieve the ominous final placement. Someday I too can reach this level.I can get stressed out while making poor decisions. I too can wear the badge of administrative "success": the ulcer. This might all seem a bit pessimistic. A little defeatist. But not at all. The solution is to focus our species on moving forward instead of upwards. We see our cohorts in groups struggling for status on a, "treadmill to oblivion." But Dr. Peter clearly states that we can rescue ourselves by seeing where this unmindful escalation is leading us. If we focus on the quality of our situation we can achieve previously ignored success without obtaining a literal or figurative promotion. By applying this principle to our everyday experience, we witness many byproducts. For example, the applied Peter Principle approximates that employees in a hierarchy, "do not truly object to incompetence, they merely gossip about incompetence to mask their envy of employees who have pull." ... with pull being the ability to develop a relationship with someone above you in the hierarchy who can pull you up with them. How poignant. We decry good `ol boy networks but rarely focus on the one thing that could break them up, changing our focus from output to input. I can put in a 40-50 hour work week but would I be more productive if I worked 30-35 hours? We may never know because a full-time job insists that I work 40-50 crushing and life imbalancing hours. Society has focused on input in this situation. Can we think of a better solution to this situation? I'll apply Peter's Bridge to this question: if you can't think of a better solution you have already reached your level of incompetence. Although the observations made in the Peter Principle are obviously applicable to corporate environments, Laurence Peter made some other candid observations of society in these pages. Such as, exposing our modern caste system on p.64 and p.83 of the 2009 edition: ...we have a class system, it is based not on birth but on the prestige of the university one has attended. The graduate of an obscure college does not have the same opportunity for promotion... but as college degrees become the prerequisite for more jobs, soon everyone will have access to his or her level of incompetence. ...with incompetent handling, the test system is only a disguised form of random placement. The purpose of testing is to place the employee as soon as possible in a job which will utilize the highest competence level on his profile. Obviously, any promotion will be to an area of less competence. Brilliant stuff that has played out over the last 30+ years just as Dr. Peter predicted. | ||
| © 2009 GoSale.com (S1) |