The Individual Self and the Social Self

There are two kinds of selves : the individual self and the social self.

The individual self is the you that is completely selfish : the you that has interests, ambitions, dreams, interests and pursues those interests accordingly. This could be the you that chooses to join the army, leave your country to pursue a totally different career in some exotic place and the you who spends hours to yourself, envisioning plans and putting action agenda into your plans.

The social self is the you that shares and pools resources with those around you, for whatever motive. This is the you that hangs out with your buddies, play sports together, go shopping, watch a movie, watch sports events, go to the concert etc. At one extreme end, the social self could be the you that is currently sick of the solitaire of the individual you, and wishes to touch base with other human beings.

Somehow today during my afternoon jog around campus, I got to thinking : for a person who grew up in a tight communal culture, how much room is there to explore the individual self?

I have lived most of my life in an environment where a lot of my time within the 24-hours of the day is spent with the members of my community. Groups of friends throughout adolescence, we basically spent our afternoons and also weekends doing communal activities. In school, we decide together what classes to take, which high schools we wanna apply for etc. At work, which is a second family altogether, we compare notes on which graduate schools to apply to, what programs we wanna take and what kind of scholarship schemes are available, and also possible dissertation topics. As a result, a lot of my individual goals, interests and ambitions are shaped by that of my community’s, even though each of us have our own individual action plans.

Is this bad? It could be very bad, every time I enter into a new environment. The stark difference is manifested when the individual self comes before the social self, when my peers would rather invest time in their self-development, rather than hang out and share resources. It is also bad, in the sense that my decision-making process becomes highly dependent on the members of this community, whose better judgment I have trusted and relied upon when I’m faced with difficult situations. When members of this community are no longer near me, you can imagine how lost and crippled I feel….

Whatever the case may be, it has not become clearer to me than today, that I am about to embark on a completely solitary project, and I got lots of adjustment and catching up to do….The individual self needs to take charge and start exercising control, putting plans into actions and what not! Ofcourse that social self within me will always be around…it’s just waiting to find other like-minded kindred spirits who tend to merge the individual self and the social self!

Cities and lovers

Can you name one city in this world to which you would bestow the name 'Most Perfect City to Live in'? Have you ever passed by, travelled in and out, came accross or horsed around a city that just speaks to you from all its corners?

I'm talking about a city that can satisfy every single one of your emotional, intellectual and physical needs. One that gives you a range of entertaiment options from cultural, intellectual, arts, music, sports. One that satisfies your wish for a mind-blowing culinary experience. A city that provides its inhabitants with numerous cozy and inspiring corners, where people meet, talk, interact, debate, discuss and also whine, complain, compare notes on how life's antiques can occasionally throw them off their balances.

A city that is physically beautiful, where you can still feel nature, but you can't miss that buzz, that indistinguishible element of life. Such a city would be surrounded or close by the sea, maybe even a lake ( ok, a river will do as well!), green in all the right places, marked by classical yet eternally beautiful architecture, modern buildings designed with class and filled with just enough public spaces where people can stroll, stretch and enjoy the sunshine. A beautiful city can also be signified by the number and types of animals that you can spot in it. Birds : seagulls, doves or pigeons, dogs, squirrels, deers.....

I'm also talking about a city that knows no mental geographical border--it simply doesn't have an end- the more you explore it, the more you unravel and discover its beauty.

A city with soul. With a capital "S".

Sure, most of you'd say. If I did a quick survey, the following cities will definitely come up : New York, Paris, San Fransisco, Rome. My top three candidates would be New York, Paris and Istanbul. If I'm allowed to list five, I'll add San Fransisco and Vienna to the list. If I can add five more, I'll throw in : Sydney, Rome, Stockholm, Barcelona and Tokyo. I would probably have London up there, if only I've been there....If the size were a bit bigger, I would put Bologna in there, simply because of its classic and unparalelled beauty.

Imaginations and dreams can run pretty wild....but if I were asked the one city in which I would like to grow up, spend a good amount of my mature and wise years, and also grow old, my answer would probably be Jakarta. Yes, the city that has almost zero amount of the qualities I alluded to above. But Jakarta, to me, has a soul. With a capital S ;-). The paradoxical city that is full of controversies, full of assymetries, for some reason has that dwindling anti-climatic effect on me : the more I explore and integrate myself with it, the more I can come to terms with all its imperfections. Including the endless traffic jams, the lack (absence??) of walking spaces, the lack of fresh air and that chaotic and sometimes annoying J-walking of pedestrians...

All of this comparison gets me thinking....between the Perfect city and the city to which I attach partiality to....Wouldn't you say it's parallel to comparing between the perfect lover that simultaneously satisfies your emotional, intellectual and physical needs and one that you've grown so familiar and comfortable with, that all of its imperfection turns into an unconventional yet exceptional beauty to you?

Would YOU rather have a Jakarta lover? or would you constantly pursue a New York/Paris/London/Roman/Viennese lover? ;-)

What makes an economist?

The roots of this question actually originated a few months back. In a conference on regional economic communities held in Beijing, an Australian colleague began his presentation by stating 'I'm actually not an economist.' Somehow, I think this was a warning to the audience (who were mostly economists) that his analysis will not be using any formal models or extensive exploration of data and statisticsl tools. But I thought he had his hands on the ball and was perfectly able to present the economic issues at stake. And then I asked him "what makes an economist anyway?" He and I threw in a couple of thoughts and but didn't come up with a definite reply. ....But today, my brother, again asked the same question. Basically his was "is it profession (training, what you do) or academics (formal educational degree) that makes you an economist?

So...I guess this is a poll : what makes a person an economist? Possible suggestions of mine listed below...

1. A degree (any degree) in economics?
2. A graduate degree in economics?
3. An affinity to numbers?
4. An extensive portfolio of research in economics?
5. The ability to formally express theories in a mathematical equation?
6. A reader of 'The Economist'?;-)
7. A person that favors reliance on self-regulating forces of the market?

I don't know, honestly....I do know that we somehow love to emphasize that our views on almost any matter are seen from 'an economic point of view' ;-)

Why my brother reads Mankiw in his spare time

I belong to the sub-set of people who do not function very well in the morning. I need significant amount of time and caffeine to 'collect my soul' (ngumpulin nyawa would be the slank term in Indonesian) before I can march onwards and brave the day.

My brother, on the other hand, seems to be fully-charged come daylight. He reads the paper religiously and not just the news, also features, commentaries, business, op/eds- and he seems to digest everything in one gulp. A lot of what’s on the news are economic issues. Let’s do a quick inventory of some of them : the politics of import rice bans, the slow pace (or stagnant?) of the real sector recovery, micro-financing, why banks are ‘banking’ on the generous SBI interests instead of giving out lending to businesses, free-trade agreements, etc.

On more than a few occasions, always in the morning, he would greet me with something like this, ” Hey, Puspa, you’re the economist here- can you explain to me what’s meant by this person’s argument? He says that free-trade benefits the country’s citizens more through imports than by exports, what does this mean? What channel and how’s that possible?”
Another one would be something like “Puspa, the papers keep saying that the economy is stagnant, the real sector isn’t moving, but on the other hand, new shopping malls keep sprouting everywhere, is this not a sign of real sector activity???”

His sister must sadly disappoint him as (a) she just cannot deal with these things in the morning (not without that cup of espresso at least), (b) she’s just not good at orally articulating ideas and theoretical explanations without a proper trigger. Each time I try explain something, he poses more and more questions, questioning the assumption behind every explanation or providing counter-examples to the arguments and ideas that I tried to explain.

“Come on , Puspa, you gotta explain these things to me, I am not literate in macroeconomics, help me out here,” he said. Then I had a brilliant idea. One morning I came down to our living room with Greg Mankiw’s Macroeconomics in tow.

“Here you go, Bang—have fun!”

He seemed to appreciate my gesture. So he’s now reading Mankiw in his spare time, claiming to be more and more absorbed and enjoying the well-written book and learning the theories that are explained in a very digestible format. Aaaah, wonderful, I thought. I can enjoy my slow morning soul-collecting activity of leisurely reading the paper while I sip my beautiful home-made espresso…..

But, wait a minute! Now he actually goes on to questioning the theories!!
“Puspa- I just don’t get it, this National Income and Circular Flow thingy. Basically, if what it is earned from the production process of a good is equivalent to what we spend to make it, where’s the room for profit then?”

Yikes! Ok, ok, I get the message. My brother’s got the right approach- don’t be a lazy thinker who takes everything at face value: keep questioning, arguing, reasoning….I’m actually happy that knowledge-enthusiasts like him exist to keep on challenging thoughts.

But can we maybe do this in the afternoons or evenings, brother of mine? ;-)

My Best Friend is an Atheist

My best friend is an atheist, I am a liberal muslim. By liberal, I mean I adhere to the belief in God and stick to practicing the very basic properties of Islam (shalat/daily prayers, fasting and zakat). I care less about the other dos and don’ts. He is a non-believer but has read both the Bible and the Qur’an inside out. I have never even finished reading the Qur’an. His understanding and knowledge on the history of religion surpasses mine significantly. Nevertheless, I think I can safely say that I am a firm believer in the existence of God and Islam, just as he is a firm believer in the absence of God and the power of reason.

Between our meals, coffees and drinks, many hours have been spent debating, arguing and discussing about religion, religiosity and religious behavior. We no longer live in the same city, but bytes and bandwiths still manage carry our thoughts across the ocean and provide us with a medium to exchange our views. So when I read this post from a friend on the internet, my immediate reaction was to forward the link to said best friend.

As expected, another debate ensued. He respects believers, and has never in any way belittles me and my belief, but he has a problem with the indomitable nature of religion. To him, religion does not want to be questioned nor criticized: religion IS, period, and can often drive fanatic believers to do irrational things. Reason on the other hand, is dialectical. It thrives for perfection the more and more you question it. Unlike religion, so he said…

How can I possibly accept that? How can I explain to him that for me, religion has been the exact opposite of that : the more I practice it, the more I feel that I’ve come closer to becoming a better person…. the more I practice it, the closer it brings me to my private dialogue with the Superior Being up there? How can I explain that I could not have survived many dark episodes and extremely low points in my life without my belief in God?

Then suddenly it occurred to me, that perhaps he and I weren’t exactly on the same wave length, perhaps we were comparing apples with bananas. I stumbled upon this post earlier, then it hit me. What kept me going so far was not my religion, but my Faith in God or what we in Indonesia would call iman. My faith in the existence of the Superior Being, above and beyond this universe, is what has helped me to escape some of the darkest episodes of my life. Faith in God has put me at ease, and established my continued assurance that in the very, very, very long run, this will work out for the best. It always has and it always will. What is religion then? Religion is a collection of teachings, a ‘how-to-get-to-know God’ kit. Without religion, without the properties of practicing shalat and fasting, I perhaps would not have found it in me, this faith in God…..

That of course, is my very own understanding of the word religion. But it surely isn’t that of those who plant suicidal bombs that killed hundreds of people. In fact, religion can and has been interpreted in many, many different and conflicting ways. But I think to fully comprehend this behavior, one must understand that in many aspects, religion has become a culture, an identity, one that is guarded carefully. If being a Muslim is what defines you, then yes, you would naturally want your kids to marry other muslims. If certain religious teachings have made what you are today, and the values and norms (i.e. never eat pork, never have pre-marital sex, never drink alcohol) are the values that you were brought up with, then you would naturally want to abide by it and demand that your environment understands that. If one believes that Prophet Mohammad is a noble man, one would naturally be angry at cartoon images that mock him. Sadly, one can also use religion as a justification of ill-behavior (and yes, I am talking about polygamy here!)

So there we have it, I finally admit that he is not entirely wrong ;-). Will we ever stop debating and arguing? I don’t think so. His decision to become an atheist was a conscious one, just as much conscious and aware as mine to become a believer. We’ll always be reading into things through different lenses. Besides, we are both conscious nerds who enjoy bickering and debating and fighting to have the last word in an argument. He usually wins though, and I resort to articulating in a blog, to appeal to other parties ;-)