http://dyske.com A magagzine on philosophy, arts, business, politics, etc.. en-us Copyright 1990-2004 Dyske Suematsu, unless otherwise noted. Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:52:00 GMT http://dyske.com/gfx/rss.gif http://dyske.com 88 31 A magagzine on philosophy, arts, business, politics, etc.. http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/1Pbldv8gf_g/ Recently, I've been thinking a lot about the nature of creativity. It's an elusive concept, like the concept of God. A friend of mine told me about a recent article in New Yorker dealing with the same topic: "Should creative writing be taught?" My view is in line with the "official position" of The University of Iowa Writers' Workshop: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:52:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=917http://dyske.com/?view_id=917 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/SiMNu7F-Zgs/ I've known many people in my life who are smart and talented yet somehow cannot manage their own lives well. I've always been puzzled and fascinated by this phenomenon. I figured there must be some careers perfect for their intelligence and talent. The only problem, I thought, was that they weren't aware of these careers. In fact, most career orientations offered at schools are based on the same premise. It's an encouraging and exciting premise too, like finding a Mr. or Ms. Perfect. Needless to say, I've never succeeded in finding such a career for anyone. This is when I began doubting my own premise. Maybe the problem does not lie in the careers they choose, but in everything else that they have to deal with no matter which careers they choose. In other words, it's not about what they want to do; it's about what they don't want to do but have to. Wed, 27 May 2009 19:38:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=916http://dyske.com/?view_id=916 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/m4g2sOphASI/ The artist Jenny Holzer said in her work: "The abuse of power comes as no surprise." I share the same view. In this essay, I want to persuade you to use search engines other than Google because it could come as no surprise that Google's dominance in the search engine market leads to abuse. Don't get me wrong: I love many of Google's products, and I use them every day. I'm not bashing Google as a company. My argument has to do with their dominance in the search engine market, and why it is in our own interest to help others be competitive with Google. Google essentially has a monopoly in this market and a monopoly can happen even if a company has no intention of monopolizing or have no predatory business practices. English as a language, for instance, has a monopolistic power, because our desire to have a universal language is strong. Nevertheless, a monopoly is a powerful and dangerous force because the abuse of that power can happen almost unconsciously to the holders of the power. Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:09:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=915http://dyske.com/?view_id=915 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/QitwuikVlAY/ I think we often underestimate the value of small talk. I should know, because small talk is something I'm really bad at. When I go to a party, I often start talking about serious issues, business, and/or highly technical things, and within minutes, I'm standing alone in the middle of a crowd. If you intellectually think about the idea of small talk, everyone tends to dismiss it as being superficial and pointless, but it must have a very important social function, otherwise people would not do it so often (and otherwise I should be the life of the party). Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:34:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=914http://dyske.com/?view_id=914 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/UtNehTgpwoc/ I have a 4-year old girl. As a father, the experience of raising a girl has been enlightening to say the least. It has given me an insight into what girls and women experience as they grow up. Firstly, I am now thoroughly convinced that many of the feminist arguments about the environment causing girls to want to be beautiful, be nurturing, love the color pink, etc., are wrong. Those arguments must be coming from feminists who have never had children of their own. If you do have your own, you would have to be blind to think that. Not just my own girl, but her friends too, required no effort, encouragement, nor even introduction for them to love all things pink and glittery. Sun, 22 Feb 2009 06:01:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=913http://dyske.com/?view_id=913 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/HaMZrqxbGkg/ I have never seriously wished to be a rock star, but like everyone else, have occasionally fantasized about being one. In my college days and 20s, rock music was practically a religion. (Here, I'm using the term broadly to mean any styles of music popular among the youth, not the specific genre or style of music called "rock".) Virtually all my friends have, at one point or another, tried to form a band or be somehow associated with one. Rock music is a perfect remedy for the feelings of insecurity, loneliness, and angst that come with being young. To top it all, most parents do not want you to pursue a career in rock music. That makes you want to do it more, so that you can feel you are your own person, not a product designed and programmed by your parents to be a certain way. The unfortunate thing I see now in my 40s is that your parents' warnings have some truth to them, which is being ignored or misunderstood. Most of the parents don't explain it well either. They sound like they are making excuses for their failure to pursue their own dreams. So, in an attempt to avoid becoming a wimp like your parents, you try even harder to be a rock star. It's a vicious cycle. Sun, 31 Aug 2008 05:54:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=912http://dyske.com/?view_id=912 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/xHW-29ZW5sM/ I've always believed that male and female brains were biologically different from the day we were born. Now that I have a child of my own and see many of her friends grow up, it is hard to imagine how anyone could deny the difference. I have been so vocal about the gender differences that many of my friends think I am a sexist. I became so used to it that it doesn't bother me anymore. Given this reputation of mine, one would assume that I would agree with everything stated in the book "The Essential Difference" by Simon Baron-Cohen, which explores the difference between male and female brains. To my surprise, I found myself disagreeing with him in a fundamental way. Fri, 02 May 2008 20:53:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=911http://dyske.com/?view_id=911 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/2RLqtnBxXlU/ In my younger days, I simply assumed that other people were as intelligent as I was. I had no reason to believe otherwise. Nobody came to me with an admission or acceptance that my intelligence was superior to theirs. (Do I sound condescending and full of myself? Bear with me for now.) Compare this with someone who is physically superior. Most professional boxers, for instance, have a reasonable understanding of their own superiority. This understanding is crucial in using their physical strength appropriately. If they did not understand their superiority, they could get into all sorts of trouble. But, this does not hold true for intelligence. Why? Shouldn’t those with high IQs recognize their own intelligence and learn to use it appropriately in our society too? Sun, 16 Dec 2007 09:34:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=910http://dyske.com/?view_id=910 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/F-gtd11jlXQ/ The word "seduction" is not generally perceived positively. There is something dark and negative about the idea of seducing, yet, it is a key factor in achieving happiness. (It is difficult to feel content if nobody likes you.) We humans are social creatures; I believe we've evolved to crave social recognition and to fear isolation. In this sense, seduction has been a critical component of evolution and is an important survival skill. We therefore need to look at it pragmatically. Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:24:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=909http://dyske.com/?view_id=909 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/POR5X6QTwwg/ “Emotional Intelligence” is much talked about these days. Even though I can see its significance in certain areas of our lives (especially in business), I am skeptical of those who are rushing to apply the theory to child development and psychology. The term “Emotional Intelligence” was popularized by Daniel Goleman who was interested in identifying the quality that made people successful in the corporate world. The data of his research are kept private, so we do not know for sure, but I would imagine that his research does not cover successful people in the arts or anyone outside of the corporate world (the likes of, for instance, Woody Allen, Kurt Cobain, Andy Warhol, Noam Chomsky, Bobby Fischer, etc..). Sun, 07 Oct 2007 09:28:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=908http://dyske.com/?view_id=908 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/bhG4-QI4BPY/ In watching the TV commercials where countless starving children from around the world are staring at me in desperation, I cannot help but ask this question: "Why did their parents decide to have children in the first place?" Their dire predicaments are undeniable to anyone. The severe suffering of their children are virtually guaranteed even before their birth. So, why? For many, this is an immoral question to ask. It is an obvious question to everyone, but the desire to have children is so fundamental and deep-rooted that most people can relate to the predicaments of those who have children in abject reality. Sun, 02 Sep 2007 07:21:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=907http://dyske.com/?view_id=907 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/nyi7-VFFSdw/ "Life has no meaning." Most people would project a depressed feeling to this statement. Suppose John paints a big circle on his wall, and Jane asks, "What does the circle mean?" John replies, "No meaning. I just felt like it." The lack of meaning, in this case, does not tempt us to project one. Why then, are we inclined to project a negative emotion to the pronouncement that life has no meaning? Sat, 19 May 2007 13:53:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=906http://dyske.com/?view_id=906 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/hvHg_YJ6Bts/ Since the subtitle of my book is about reconsideration, I believe we should reconsider—and broaden—the list of people who might be called upon to write a review. The list should include the author, who understands the book better than most of its other readers. Consequently, here is my autoreview, my review of my own book. Wed, 09 May 2007 11:25:00 GMT george@jochnowitz.net (George Jochnowitz) http://dyske.com/?view_id=905http://dyske.com/?view_id=905 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/aI2Ys6Jaawg/ In speaking of stereotypes, the emphasis is usually placed on the act of differentiation, but dividing and uniting are two sides of the same coin; in one act, both concepts operate simultaneously. We view the attitude of “us” and “them” as divisive and negative, but without the concept of “them” or “others”, uniting of people would also be impossible. Wed, 13 Dec 2006 13:03:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=904http://dyske.com/?view_id=904 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/WVvspGxZPWk/ This is a text I wrote for the group show curated by Francesco Bonami at the Fondazione Sandretto Re Rebaudengo (Torino, Italy). The show was named after one of my websites, AllLookSame.com. This piece describes my philosophy behind it. Mon, 04 Dec 2006 16:40:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=903http://dyske.com/?view_id=903 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/b5sioavBGRA/ Reading this article in New Scientist reveals to me that scientific study of time is hampered by a language (semantic) problem. Wittgenstein incidentally used the concept of “time” to explain what he called “family resemblance.” The gist of it is that when we try to define what “time” is (or any word for that matter), we tend to look for what is common to all the phenomena we call “time”. This is a mental habit that has no logical basis. There is no reason why there must be something in common to all the phenomena we call “time”. Phenomenon A might share something in common with phenomenon B, and B might share something in common with C, but this does not mean that A must share something in common with C. So any attempt at abstracting a concept until you find something in common to all, is a futile exercise. I think some of the problems associated with time perception fall in this category. Mon, 04 Dec 2006 12:22:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=902http://dyske.com/?view_id=902 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/Z5We30Vgeac/ The amount of stress we endure is increasing because of our focus on efficiency. Stress is caused by uncertainty, more specifically, by doubts in our ability to handle something. As machines and computers handle more things that are predictable and certain, we are pressured to deal with more things that are unpredictable and uncertain. This inevitably leads to more stress. As soon as our tasks become predictable and certain, we automate them using our technology. The result of this process of streamlining is that we are increasingly called upon to use our, what I would call, irrational abilities, such as instincts, sensibilities, creativities, and interpersonal skills. These things are, by nature, unpredictable. Fri, 01 Dec 2006 12:24:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=901http://dyske.com/?view_id=901 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/RErYcflS8SU/ Coming from Japan, the abundance of choice offered in America has always frustrated me, not because I don’t like having choices, but because many of them are meaningless for me. For instance, a typical diner in New York offers hundreds of items on the menu, but none of them are particularly good. Wouldn’t it make more sense to offer a limited number of items, but make them really well? Unfortunately the answer appears to be no. In this country where the concept of individualism is almost sacred, having choice is unequivocally considered as a good thing. No one even questions it, except for a few theorists like Barry Schwartz, the author of “The Paradox of Choice”. Sun, 26 Nov 2006 14:32:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=900http://dyske.com/?view_id=900 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/4gb63cV9pzM/ There is a saying that goes “Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.” This can be extended to our relationship with our TVs. Even if TV is a fool, it should not prevent a wise person from learning something from it. In recent years, I’ve noticed a growing number of people around me who tossed their TVs out of their living rooms, asserting that TV is stupid, superficial, and annoying. Whenever I would mention something on TV, they would proudly announce that they don’t own a TV. I’m sure this is not a national phenomenon, but within my own circle of friends and associates, it is becoming a trend, or even a fad. Sat, 18 Nov 2006 19:31:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=899http://dyske.com/?view_id=899 http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Dyske/~3/fqrPtQrbNqM/ One winter night, one of the few Japanese friends I had in my early 20s was playing a guitar at his company Christmas party. He was an architect and was about 10 years older than I was. Before he decided to study architecture, he was making a living as a guitarist in Japan. This was not the first time I heard him play, but I was still stunned by how good he was. After his performance, I told him that it was a shame that he was no longer pursuing his musical career. He then shared with me his recent realization that life is a process of giving up. At the time, I didn’t think much of what he said. I think I remembered it only because of its unusual reversal of the popularly held beliefs. Especially on this land of dreams, “giving up” is seen almost as sacrilegious. Everyone’s livelihood seems to precariously hinge on holding big, albeit distant dreams. For some people, the more dreams, the better. So, what did my friend mean when he said that life is a process of giving up? Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:29:00 GMT dyske@dyske.com (Dyske Suematsu) http://dyske.com/?view_id=897http://dyske.com/?view_id=897