Grad School Diaries: inward to outward, holding tension

As spring buds and the end of the pandemic draws closer in (hazy yet optimistic) sight, I find myself savoring the days more often than I do reflecting on them. Questions revolving around life and meaning are more playful and grounded than they are personal and existential. I feel light, happy, and engaged.

This is a funny contrast to my panicked state a few weeks ago regarding graduate school. Quitting had suddenly presented itself as a desirable option, and I considered pursuing the clinical psychologist route again. But something pulled me back. It was a gut feeling full of doubts that said I should stay, though I knew if I stayed that I had to reorient the expectations I had set for myself. I had to play to my strengths and stop comparing myself to my professor and others. I had to care much less about my academic performance and focus instead on learning and having fun in the process.

This, thankfully and surprisingly, was a saving grace that came easily. I’m learning much more now and have rediscovered the joy of following your curiosity for its own sake. Social issues, scientific problems, and even personal questions have coalesced into a more interconnected, complicated whole worth most if not all of my attention. I want to better understand these things not just because they’re interesting intellectual exercises (they are), but also because I think they’re important.

In the context of social issues, this means adopting the uncomfortable stance of devil’s advocate. Naturally I tend to do this in conversations I have with my friends, but there’s always some hesitation in playing the role, even if I feel comfortable with the other person. No one likes to be wrong, especially in regard to things like race, sex, religion, and so on. But that shouldn’t hold us back from these touchy conversations. If there’s no willingness to be wrong, how can be ever inch closer to resolving these issues? It’s certainly harder to allow yourself to be wrong these days, for a multitude of reasons, but it doesn’t have to be like this.

To give a more concrete example: race is on everyone’s mind as of late. What I wonder though is why the current conversation surrounding it sounds so divisive. What happened to the more unifying, spiritual, self-transcendent vision of MLK? Of James Baldwin? These are two (of many) activists who are venerated, but largely ignored in the modern conversation. Why?

Is it because King is loftier in his views, and thus they are harder to adopt and implement? Is it because King sought to transcend our basic tribalistic human tendencies with ideals and principles that are impossible to achieve? Yet what makes us capital H human but our ability to make possible what was once thought to be the opposite? Ideals and principles aren’t useful insofar as they’re meant to be achieved; their utility and power lies within their aspirational quality. They lead us to be better than we are.

Still, how did King’s ideas stick and incite the Civil Rights Movement, despite our deeply rooted in-group/out-group tendencies? There are major red flags with many of the propositions and conclusions of the currently popular activists like Ibram Kendi (he doesn’t seem to be willing to debate his ideas either, another red flag), yet these are the views being widely preached and adopted by people in my circle. Again, I’m just pointing and asking: Why?

Bernie Sanders, when announcing his 2019 bid for presidency, mentioned on air that voters should choose candidates “not by the color of their skin but by their abilities and what they stand for”, in response to the widespread criticism that he was just another white guy. Bernie is literally citing almost word for word MLK, yet he was flamed by popular media and the masses not on the merit of what he said, but because, well, because he was just another white guy.

Wait what? Isn’t that super backwards? Isn’t the place we want to be at one in which race isn’t even relevant in what I think of you as a person? It’s impossible to ignore race, e.g. that I am Asian or look Asian or whatever. But that shouldn’t even be considered in the calculus of how you treat me or what you think of me or how capable I am of doing a particular job. Call me an idiot because I have no clue what I’m talking about. Tell me I’m crazy because I’ve done and said many stupid things – I have. Doubt my abilities. But do it because Phil is Phil, not because he happens to be Asian.

On the topic of being Asian, why is no one pointing to the clear racism of college admissions against Asians? Why do they have to work twice as hard to gain the same seat as their non-Asian peers? And what about the Asian kids who are less fortunate who then have to work even harder? There’s probably some deep history here that I’m unaware of, but I remember my Mom talking to me about this when I was much younger. I had no clue why what she was talking about was important, but thinking back to it now, she was onto something. She never went to college, yet she was smart and insightful enough to know that this was blatant discrimination when it came time to consider the education of her children. She knew that if colleges were solely meritocratic, then we’d have a bunch of Asians running around on all campuses across America. But that’s not the case.

Should colleges be pure meritocracies? No. There has to be some degree of acknowledgment of the unquantifiable variability that defines much of our lives, for better and for worse. Test scores and writing ability shouldn’t be everything. But what else should count then? Because there are only a limited number of seats, not just in college, but beyond in life too. And some set of criterion is going to be used to determine what job, resources, positions, or roles we are able to take. Should race matter in these decisions? Knowing that you were chosen for a job because of your race feels as icky as being not chosen because of your race. Knowing that I gained admittance to a college on the basis of my skin color, gender, or some other trait outside my control as opposed to the quality of my character and the expression of my personhood is a deep insult. It’s not what MLK would have wanted, nor does it make any long-term sense.

Around two years ago, I was being dropped off at my parent’s house after having a small reunion with some of my childhood friends. The guy who was dropping me off was someone I had known since elementary school, but I hadn’t seen him since I transferred high schools at the end of Sophomore year – it had been over 5 years since we last spoke. I asked if he had any girls in his life at the moment (he’s a handsome fella), and he casually said “Oh, don’t you know? I’m gay.” I said “Oh sorry, I had no idea,” to which he replied, “Yup, I like big dicks in my butt.” That threw us into a hysterical laughing fit. And then we went on to talk about random shit, like good friends do.

I mention this story because you can swap the word “gay” out for any other inherent trait and get the same portrait of how we should interact with one another. Beyond that, in regards to the policy level, I’m no expert, but it seems like we would make the most progress on the issue of racism by addressing the core issues plaguing America in general: poverty, poor education, access to equal opportunities, mental health, the prison system, and so on. These things aren’t being talked about nearly enough, and yet they are probably the most promising concrete issues with regard to their influence on race and life outcomes. These are the issues that directly affect people’s day to day lives. They’re not sexy and headline worthy, they don’t directly cater to one race or group or agenda, yet their resolution would help everyone, especially those in need, which of course are many people of color, but also those generally less fortunate.

Again, all I’m doing is pointing and asking why? How did we get to this point? I have no clue, only guesses. It’s complicated, and I’m too dumb to know the answer. But then why does everyone else seem to have answers if the issues are so entangled?

So yeah… these are the things I’m thinking about lately. Clearly these are mostly observations without any direct link to many sources, so I’m always open to chatting and learning. Other (more interesting) things on my mind: Friston’s Free Energy Principle and its connection to Bayesian inference; Psychedelics and their therapeutic benefits (go Oregon!); trauma and resilience; music and playing guitar; my parents and getting older; girls and relationships.

Back to the start. It feels like there’s not as big of a Me at the center of my life anymore. I’ve moved on from the soul-searching to soul-building phase (both are entwined ofc), one that involves stepping beyond myself and being wrong about many things.