To be human is a testimony of genius<\/p>\n
By John Phillips<\/p>\n
YOGYAKARTA (JP): A book about Indonesian culture, Culture
\nShock, Indonesia, advised readers to use the word rasa (feel)
\ninstead of the word pikir (think) when talking about ideas in
\nIndonesian. Whether this advice still holds in Indonesian society
\nreflects an older wisdom about people that is a key to
\nunderstanding intelligence.<\/p>\n
Westerners often pride themselves on being logical and
\nanalytical as expressed in the philosophy of Descartes, who
\nwrote: \"I think, therefore I am.\"<\/p>\n
This self-concept is so strong in some Western cultures, in
\nparticular American, that it has become enshrined not only in the
\nlanguage, but more importantly in the expectations Westerners
\nhave about the behavior of others.<\/p>\n
Westerners expect everyone \"to put on their thinking caps\" in
\norder to analyze problems, and come to a decision logically and
\nrationally -- but not emotionally. Asians are seen negatively in
\nthis respect as being too subjective and for basing their
\ndecisions more on relationships among people and the feelings of
\nthe group. Some Westerners may even view Easterners as being
\nunwilling or unable to think logically or to make decisions
\nrationally.<\/p>\n
But I have also heard Asians express similar sentiments about
\nthemselves. They often despair at the ability of the average
\nperson in Indonesian society to \"think\" without being told what
\nor how to think.<\/p>\n
In consequence, there is a phenomenon here in which some
\nintellectuals and scientists are labeled \"geniuses\" because of
\ntheir technical prowess; one such person is Minister of Research
\nand Technology B.J. Habibie. Whether or not he meets the
\ndefinition of a \"genius\" is really not up to me to say.<\/p>\n
This is an example of how some Asians who achieve prominence
\nin intellectual fields are seen as outstanding exceptions to the
\ngeneral belief that average Indonesians are incapable of
\nperforming intellectual tasks, thus echoing the worst prejudices
\nof Westerners. An example of this occurred recently at a seminar
\nwhen an Indonesian educator told this joke:<\/p>\n
Imagine in the future when brain transplants become common and
\npeople begin to \"sell\" brains for transplants. A shopper comes in
\nto select a brain and the salesperson first shows him an American
\nbrain and says \"This one costs $10,000 because its very
\nscientific. Then, he shows a Japanese brain and says, \"This one
\ncosts $20,000; it's very clever. The shopper is still undecided
\nand he points to another newer looking brain that's labeled
\n\"Indonesian\" and asks, \"How much?\" The salesman says, \"Oh! This is
\nour most expensive brain. It's never been used.\"<\/p>\n
This joke was greeted with laughter by the Indonesians present
\nand astonishment by the foreigners. The prevailing attitude among
\nIndonesians seemed to be \"we know what you're talking about\",
\nwhile most foreigners were clearly uncomfortable and surprised.<\/p>\n
The point is that Westerners do not understand the idea that
\nto engage in intellectual behavior is unusual. On the other hand,
\nmany Westerners also mistakenly believe that intelligence is
\nbased solely on ability in the areas of science and technology.<\/p>\n
In contrast, Westerners are seen as being deficient in
\nspirituality and morality by most Asians. It is true that many
\nWesterners embrace secularism and individualistic morality, but
\nmany, if not more, publicly proclaim their faith and rigorously
\nfollow moral precepts that most Indonesian would ascribe to.
\nHowever, Westerners also tend to put a lot more faith into
\nscientific reasoning than it probably deserves.<\/p>\n
My contention is that intelligence and genius come from an
\nindividual's ability to be fully human, which means the ability
\nto think and to create, the ability to integrate spirituality and
\nmorality into a rational life, and the ability to understand and
\nto utilize the full range of your own individual human abilities
\nand to work around your limitations.<\/p>\n
In this sense, Albert Einstein was a \"genius\" not only for his
\nbrilliance as a theoretical scientist, but also for his profound
\nspirituality and even his political morality. In fact, he once
\ntried (albeit erroneously) to dispute a scientific theory on the
\nbasis that \"God does not gamble\", thus in a sense acknowledging
\nhis and our own limitations.<\/p>\n
Similarly, the great Asian nationalist and genius Mahatma
\nGandhi was not only a spiritual leader and profound moral
\nthinker, he was an extremely intelligent man who understood human
\nnature far better than did the British he was fighting, including
\nthe fact that he personally had to marshall all of his inner
\nspiritual strength to overcome his quiet human nature.<\/p>\n
His use of passive resistance and non-cooperation was seen by
\nhim as not only effective moral tools against his adversary, but
\nalso as a means of testing his own human nature with all of its
\nlimitations.<\/p>\n
The point is that true intelligence and genius are much more
\nthan what can be measured by an intelligence test or even by
\ntechnical achievements -- it is in fact the ability to combine
\nthinking, empathy (having a true understanding of others) and
\nspirituality (having a true understanding of God) into a fully
\nhuman being.<\/p>\n
The writer is an education consultant based in Yogyakarta.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/to-be-human-is-a-testimony-of-genius-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }