We ought to remember, important breakthroughs and innovation are not big ideas -- in fact many of the most celebrated innovations in the world are small insignificant ideas -- the Velcro, the paper clip for example.  If people are not driven by curiosity, the stockpile of knowledge in the society will not grow, and society will not progress.
 
 

No growth without curiosity
It is very commonplace to ask a waiter in Kuala Lumpur, what does the name of the restaurant means, and almost always draws a blank.  I had the opportunity to even ask a very senior executive the meaning of the name of the institution of higher learning he works for, and was told "I am not very sure."  The sad thing is, nobody takes your interest seriously, and calls you back later to tell you the answer!

Many people in developing countries just take on what the rest of the world dump on them, copying mindlessly, without realizing some of the copies they are making are already rejects in their societies of origin.  It is perhaps no exaggeration to say that Asia has been developing based on the rational knowledge western societies accumulated in the recent centuries.
 
 

Pride and Prejudice
Professor Chen Zioyi of Tsinghua University in Beijing talked about the "pendulum-swings" of attitudes of Asian societies.  China in particular has a history of very distinct pattern of such swings; when it was open and rational it accelerated reforms, when it was principles-driven, it closed itself up and reject the rest especially things West.

Conceit and the need to defend undermine objectivity and therefore block out more learning and knowledge.  Openness to plurality, to alternative viewpoints, not defending one's idea like a religion -- the truth and the only truth - not leaving room for a possible alternative can be fatal for oneself and for the world.

My journalist friend in Hong Kong calls this type of behavior as "Good man do bad things" -- how sorry the world would be if we allowed one man's confused idea or misguided priorities to lead us, and then generations after generations have to undo the mistakes of that fallacy!

People will only express if they feel free and secure.  They would only exchange ideas, and debate views only in an environment of respect and fair play.  Our attitude towards criticism is pivotal to building a creative society.  If we are very sensitive to criticism, whether directing at our work or our personality, we are only blocking out options that can help us improve.

Very often, a critic's perspective and view throw light at some hidden corners in our inquiry leading us to learn more about the subject, adding depth to our understanding.  For example once the debate of Taiwan independence came out to the open, more Taiwanese can begin to see the point of view of the mainlanders, and people thus become more considerate and rational when contemplating a resolution.

That is why we need free discourses among members in a society, especially between intellectuals. If we are so sensitive to criticism, and like a porcupine, we are all defensive, how on earth can we be enriched by other viewpoints?
 
 

Whose culture is superior?
Some Chinese harbor a lot of pride in the superiority of their culture.  For example a recent writer responded to my article, demonstrating the facts supporting the Mandarin language as a far more efficient and effective language.

There is no dispute about Mandarin being a progressive language, but let's not let this superiority shadows the larger question? Let's ask the brave question why is the world speaking English and Mandarin speakers are learning English?

Many in Asia are unhappy and unaccepting to the US's progress in many fields in their rhetoric's, yet they are sending their kids to the US, keep their wealth in US dollars and buy pirated versions of American movies and use US software!

Asians calling for change and reforms are quick to be labeled as pro-West or pro-American, and in Asia's traditional context, unpatriotic.  Perhaps our societies should look up to recognize that liberalism is not only western or American.

How can we be objective in our worldview? How can we let our head do the talking more than our hearts?  How can we actualize the philosophy of Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiapeng, "seeking the truth from fact"?  Shall we examine closely why some societies deliver such a glowing list of achievements and yet our own list is so short? My frustration is each time I try to draw the society's focus towards the future, some people will try to draw them back to the glory of their past.

Honoring the past is about transforming the past to make it relevant for the future and not hanging on and keep celebrating its bygone greatness. Why can't Asians see? Can Asians think? asked Kishore Mabubani. I believe it is in these answers that we will find the New Asian Way.

But first, are we curious about this state of affairs?  Are we interested in the answers?  Do we want to find them?   If the post war generation of Asians can't break out of such "chains of pride and prejudice" then our children will only despair that the Pacific century was claimed by the Atlantic again!  I can feel the weight of responsibility falling on our shoulders.
 
 

The nation's institution of learning
On two occasions I had the opportunity to attend lectures by visiting scholars to the Malaysian capital.  First lecture by a Russia professor soon after the collapse of the Russian Ruble, and the second by a German professor on globalization and cities.

Sad to say, both these lectures had an audience of less than ten!  Why such pathetic turnout when foreign scholars visit our premier institution of learning? Some blame it on a poor job of getting the word around. Whatever happened to our own intellectual's quest for learning? Whatever happened to our undergraduates and postgraduate students? Aren't they interested in assimilating more knowledge, and curious about another intellectual's work and perspective?

Contrast with the crowd who stampede to shake the hands of the speaker in Beida (University of Peking)  and students and faculty members filled to the rim of lecture rooms in Harvard, this leading Malaysian university campus, even dotted with brand new gleaming buildings, but the quiet corridors and lecture rooms make me shiver at the future of this nation!
 
 

The creative process

There are four critical elements to the creative process:

Openness:  First one has to knock down all prejudices that frames our thinking.  Remember the Zen master's lesson for the student, you can't pour tea into the cup that is full unless you throw away some of its content. Openness is an attitude that will enrich the learner.

Information:  Read as much and as broad as possible, then think and reflect on one's learning.  Information are organized in different perspective according to the writer's experience and bias, one has to therefore understand the why's of a viewpoint.  Thinking and sorting out helps one to make the learning relevant to one's own situation and requirement.

Ask questions and seek debate:  Taipei-based Cartoonist Tsai Shih Chung said, " there can be no wrong answer. Only the wrong question."  A liberal atmosphere encourages inquisition, and bit by bit, the right question will emerge, and hence get us closer to the answer.

Seeking other's people's point of view, especially those that had a successful experience of the matter or issue helps.  Listening carefully for the true message helps one sort out the real issue.  Recognizing and giving credit to viewpoints offered by others encourages more voluntary contribution.  Only where there is fair play would people come forward and contribute to making your ideas better.  Respect for intellectual property and humility is twin conditions for vibrant debate to take place.

We often heard Asian leaders talk about feedback through proper "channels."  We really do have to take a hard look at the state of progress of our society to determine whether the "closed channel" works better than open debates.

Invite others to contribute:  Dr Henrik Roberts, the founder of the Natural Step was contemplating a framework for sustainable development.  He sent out a manuscript to some 100-leading scientists around the world for their comments.  The original 200 pages document became a 2000 pages document.  How enriching it will be if we become open and invite others to help us -- the world's talent and resources will come to you if you ask for them.

The history of human civilization has shown us that if a society does not allow curiosity to breed and these curiosities to find safe and free expressions, its best brains either leave or commit cerebral euthanasia.

When that happens, the beginning of the end is near. It does looks to me many red signs are up in our society, let's do something about them before it is too late.

Kuala Lumpur, February 8, 1999