Archive for the ‘Philosophy’ Category

Listed here are the 21 irrefutable laws of leadership.  From the analysis of each law at https://lynaynle.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post-new.php ,  I found an interesting point about Steve Wozniak’s leadership vs. Steve Jobs’.  Steve Wozniak was the brain behind Apple in the 1970s, but his leadership lid was low.  Steve Jobs’ leadership lid was high, and he built a world-class organization out of Apple.

  • The Law of the Lid – Leadership Ability Determines a Person’s Level of Effectiveness
  • The Law of Influence – The True Measure of leadership Is Influence– Nothing More, Nothing Less
  • The Law of Process – Leadership Develops Daily, Not in a Day
  • The Law of Navigation – Anyone Can Steer the Ship, But It Takes a Leader to Chart the Course
  • The Law of E.F. Hutton – When the Real Leader Speaks, People Listen
  • The Law of Solid Ground – Trust Is the Foundation of Leadership
  • The Law of Respect – People Naturally Follow Leaders Stronger Than Themselves
  • The Law of Intuition – Leaders Evaluate Everything with a Leadership Bias
  • The Law of Magnetism – Who You Are Is Who You Attract
  • The Law of Connection – Leaders Touch a Heart Before The Ask for a Hand
  • The Law of the Inner Circle – A Leader’s Potential Is Determined by Those Closest to Him
  • The Law of Empowerment – Only Secure Leaders Give Powers to Others
  • The Law of Reproduction – It Takes a Leader to Raise Up a Leader
  • The Law of Buy-In – People Buy Into the Leader, Then the Vision
  • The Law of Victory – Leaders Find a Way for the Team to Win
  • The Law of the Big MO – Momentum Is a Leader’s Best Friend
  • The Law of Priorities – Leaders Understand That Activity Is Not Necessarily Accomplishment
  • The Law of Sacrifice – A Leader Must Give Up to Go Up
  • The Law of Timing – When to Lead Is As Important As What to Do and Where to Go
  • The Law of Explosive Growth – To Add Growth, Lead Followers–To Multiply, Lead Leaders
  • The Law of Legacy – A Leader’s Lasting Value Is Measured by Succession

Read Full Post »


An interesting new term for me – Koinonia.  In Greek, it means ‘talking through’.

In a broader and deeper sense, it refers to the “spirit of fellowship” principle.

The Greeks believed that the key to establishing dialogue is to exchange ideas without trying to change the other person’s mind. This is not the same as discussion, which from its Latin root means to “dash to pieces.” The basic rules of dialogue for the Greeks were: “Do nott argue,” “Do not interrupt,” and “Listen carefully.”

To clarify your thinking, you must suspend all untested assumptions. Being aware of your assumptions and suspending them allows thought to flow freely. Free thought is blocked if we are unaware of our assumptions, or unaware that our thoughts and opinions are based on assumptions. For instance, if you believe that certain people are not creative, you are not likely to give their ideas fair consideration. Check your assumptions about everything and try to maintain an unbiased view.

Say what you think, even if your thoughts are controversial.

This practice by Einstein and his colleagues was observed and recorded in “The Spirit of Konoinia”.   During these interactions, they exchanged and dialogued about ideas which later became the foundations of modern physics. They exchanged ideas without trying to change the other’s mind and without bitter argument. They felt free to propose whatever was on their mind.  They always paid attention to each other’s views and established an extraordinary professional fellowship. This freedom to discuss without risk led to the breakthroughs that physicists today take for granted.

It was Alex Osborne’s idea to illustrate this concept in the picture below.   His notion is that it needs a systematic effort and disciplined practice to produce ideas in a group.  Ideas have to be offered by the participants one at a time.   One member records ideas and suggestions on a flip chart or chalk board.  All withhold judgments, regardless of personality differences work on common goal.

Group A represents a group of creative ideas, in an un-inhibiting environment.

Group B also represents a group of creative ideas, in an inhibiting environment.  Which group do you prefer to join?

While circle A looks expanding, circle B is contracting and restricting creative thoughts.  The restrictive nature of the forces (due to trusting issue, fear of having silly questions, reluctance to openly share) in Circle B even make the circle appear smaller than it is (although they are identical in size).


Read Full Post »

In regard to the article at Helium, I would say our ‘modern’ human behavior is a result of both ‘human nature’ and the ‘environment’.
Why do people do certain things they do but others don’t?
In general, this is simply their natural behavior, or their culture. But we are talking about ‘modern’ human behavior, we absolutely are dealing with the culture that we live in today. Human beings develop through three stages: babyhood, young adult, and mature adult. If we have ever observed and wondered why babies behave in such a different way from what any of adults and young adults behave, you would definitely believe nature gives our babies such a different culture of their own. Do babies have behaviors? Of course they do, but are not mature enough and have no knowledge to be aware of their own behavior nor culture. Behaviors therefore are accumulated through a process of being evolved, experienced, and matured. We evolve through cultural adoption and environment adaptation and/or changes, but not necessarily mature at the same time. I would say at young age, we humans tend to behave by the cultural rules, or better said within cultural boundaries. Living in modern society, human behaviors (and therefore lifestyle) can be easily shaped up by environment, by be it where they work, what kind of work they do, or the environment where they live. However, not all humans evolved that way or even in the same pace. Two individuals can show they are both highly-efficient in working environment, but their behaviors are still different.
And then there are human beings who are adaptable and can learn how to adjust their behaviors in different environments. There are also those whose behaviors (and possibly lifestyle) are shaped up by what they do, as who they are. One person can become comfortable with all that his/her career life can offer: stay & eat at luxury hotel, spend extravaganza, have room service at the go and at home. Another person travels with more subconscious set of habits: travel to where there’s a gym and/or a pool or a trail nearby, come and leave the room mostly as untouched, does not request room service everyday, treat and make it home everywhere he/she goes.
A Christian employee may act and think more liberally, eat different foods; whereas a Muslim employee may dress differently, reacts differently, has to pray at noon time and fast on certain days.
So it’s just because it is in their nature. It is still boiling down to the culture that differentiates human beings who display our diverse human behaviors.

Read Full Post »

One month since my last post, I am finding myself in the mood for writing again. April was a busy month with mainly family-related matters, as it turned out.
After finishing up work-related projects, I found myself travelling to California attending my cousin’s funeral. He had passed after 1 year of struggling with lung cancer, was survived by a beautiful wife and three young kids. She (his wife) wore an exhausted look, but was so strong. So were the kids. Parallel to that, re-visiting other relatives in the west coast was a refreshing and renewal event.
Back home in Texas, it was Mom’s birthday and the brother was home. At the same time going on was the community event at Vietnam Temple.
The other relative in town needed help with attending his kids as his wife was in Vietnam visiting her ill father. I was relieved that he’s recovered well after the surgey. Hope the thing in his brain is going away, by some magical power…
It seems that I am a “girl on mission” (someone has viewed me coming across as that).
As always, when May is here, I am nervous as I am afraid of losing summer time. I always have that feeling that summer will run out on me. For years, I have made it a yearly mission for me to celebrate Summer beginning (Memorial weekend) and Summer ending (Labor Day weekend).
Social life-wise, I believed in giving the best shot in whatever I do and while I am at it. I gave it 6 months since I started opening up my horizon… It’s weird that things just started picking up. There are things in life that happen when you least expect. I believe that is also my case, when the timing is right. It could be also some kind of message that I have paid enough attention to and listened to… A powerful message or a strong feeling?
Over the years, with lessons learned and time so precious, I have narrowed down the list of my preferences, at the same time resorted to all possibilities. There are men who impressively reads/understands me well in the very first place without a question in mind, and the number of them is small. Then of whom there are those who communicate their thoughts well, some don’t. Some with fascinating mind. Others with mysteries… for me to discover, hm? It is quite a challenge, but I gain many interesting perspectives indeed. It’s an insanely crazy world when everyone is looking for someone and is so skeptical and/or so cautious at the same time…
A quote has this, “those of us who listen and follow the messages that life offers live closest to our destiny and have the best lives.” How Life’s destiny and purpose merged, what Life offers next – I am curious and excited to see …

Read Full Post »

1. Does a true scientist (or any truly educated person) have the social responsibility to behave a bit more responsibly with more open, logical attitude outside of his/her area of work?
2. If the answer to my previous question is “Yes”, then, can we afford to continue compartmentalizing inquisitiveness and rational thinking?
3. Lastly, is it at all possible to become rational in some issues but not in many others?

Intrigued by this article at Nature Forum, and triggered by the author’s questions, I have now brought this topic out of my belly after holding it in for so long …
Truthfully, the trigger happened three years ago, when I had a conversation with a Vietnamese elderly – a healthy, lovely woman in her late 70s. I always commented how good and young she looked. It was quite pleasant seeing how she loved to dress up and take care of her self, while she was also such an active lady, gardening and doing houswork from inside out. She loved to talk about how she took care of her kids even now they are in grown-up ages, and share her family stories. She loved talking to me ( I think I am good with seniors). How many kids does she have? I think she said 8, older half of whom are girls and the younger half are boys. It was just one sentence she uttered during one of our conversations – “just being a (did she say “good”?) human is enough …” Wow, not all Asian parents can say that, I thought. A Vietnamese traditional mother can expect alot from her kids but to her, she realized that her kids are always hers and do not expect them to be perfect, I guess at some point after all the mundanes of life … She struggled with approving her son’s marriage with a Filippinos girl. She was proud of her son who is a doctor, who and another turned out to be gay men. She admitted having forced her daughter into being married at a young age (in college years) to an older doctor, then her tone changed as she did not feel happy for her daughter’s marriage life. How many more such Vietnamese mothers who could come out of that hard-shell and become so true to themselves. Not that many…
So back to the 3 questions above, here are my answers/comments:
1. Yes and No. First we have to define, what is “open” or “logical”; what or when to be considered outside of work. Traditionally, scientists always strive to be good examples, at least for their children and for their own values, serious and humble at the same time. We can hardly see a scientist who is dressed-down, bikes to school/lab, and has such characters nowadays… There is only one Isăc Newton or one Albert Einstein. Scientists do not make as much earning as their (working) peers do in the same profession. And there are amateur scientists and scientists. The competition and the desire to accomplish more have put more pressure on them and unfortunately, a minority of them has become greedy and dishonest. They are human beings, after all. They don’t call themselves “geniuses”. We the community of admirers praised them “genius”.
Is there such a condition as in “to be a (good) scientist, you have to be a good human being”? Another saying, “does preacher practice what he preaches?”. I notice that scientists do have good analytical thinkings, but sometimes some (but not all) have no common sense out of a life situation. As an adult, we are responsible for our own acts and words. Don’t we teach our kids not to lie, to steal, to kill? Then these are the basic principles. To a higher level, we all should have our own established principles. Practice makes perfect. Knowing that habit is the result of recurring activities, we should learn to train our thoughts, our daily acts and reactions into healthy habits. It would be ideal if we all keep our ethics consistent in all and every aspect of life. Someone, an anlyst or a reporter on a news channel recently broke out that “Humans are the only animal that has or is clearly aware of our own morality…” which then led to my another question, “what moraliti(es) do humans have?” What’s moral for one maybe not for other? We need exception rules here.
A scientist has no choice except to kill one mouse or one rabbit to learn how their brain reacts to certain concentration of saline intake, to help cure the high blood pressure and obesity in humans.
Does that define him/her as immoral or a bad human being?

2. “compartmentalizing” or “acting accordingly” or “multi-faceted”? I agree with another commenter. If a person is rational in true sense, s/he will be that way all the time.

3. Talking about rational again – What are those “some” issues? Define! Well, we’re human beings and sometimes act silly, or goof up a little bit, but have to define a fine line between what’s acceptable and what’s not accpetable. And simply, just being yourself, true self is good enough.
It is ok to be divergent, but keep your own values consistent.

Lastly, how about putting all irrational people in a rooom and hear them talk – it would be hilarious. A comedy show, I think. It was just a funny thought while sitting in a meeting and somebody mentioned having some staff go to a “Rational Thinking ” class.

Read Full Post »

I have gained a new perspective from reading this comment posted at AnswerBag. What led me to this page was a triggering comment by a guy friend yesterday, about “women are complicated” (from his experience, I confirmed). I could analyze on and on, I would or may never get what he had in mind. I could have a bunch of questions for him to answer, but then I would become so aggressive or opinionated. Good or bad?
Well, I am very convinced by this excerpt that sometimes instead of analyzing we’d just accept the facts or be aware of the happenings. A kid in me always wants me to ask why, ponder into the reasons behind certain incidents. But over the years, I’ve learned to accept the answers, to just be aware of the facts to what happened, not to ask why too much. Awareness refers to knowing or finding out the why, the what, it takes some problem solving (again, analytical) skills, I believe, and then we have to understand that is the how of the matter. The final picture is what we hold as a lesson or just an acknowledgment. And now I find the word for this process, “synthesis”.

Complicated and simple are actually two sides of the same coin: in order to see complexity, you have to have the notion of simplicity, and vice-versa. So neither complexity NOR simplicity have any independent reality of their own.

But so what? That’s not really what we humans are concerned about when this question comes up, is it? What we want to really know is “why am I confused, and how can I know what’s important and what to focus on?” There’s an anxiety associated with this sense that life is so complex that it’s pulling us in many directions at once and we can’t get “centered”.

There are two opposite capacities that we have as humans: analysis and synthesis. Analysis is based in the mind’s ability to separate things from each other: to form concepts, draw boundaries, build models of relationships, etc. This discriminative ability is what makes life look complicated: WE chop reality up into lots of little pieces and study them in isolation, and the number of such pieces we can create is actually infinite.

So if we ONLY have analysis running (without any synthesis), we end up with a distressingly LARGE supply of pieces to study.

Synthesis is different: synthesis puts pieces together into larger wholes. Most of us are not nearly as good at synthesis as we are at analysis, but many of us can do it well in specific areas: someone who has really “mastered” an art form, craft, or sport is practicing synthesis — they have “become one” with their chosen discipline, creating a synthesis in which “self and paint”, or “self and instrument”, or “self and ball” have ceased to be two completely separate things, and have merged into a larger whole.

From the outside, such a synthesis may look like magic, and in a way it is. But it’s more valuable to see the deeper process at work: the collecting of bits and pieces and restoring their original wholeness, prior to discrimination / separation — that’s what resolves our anxiety about complexity.

So why does THIS explanation sound so complicated? Because the mind which analyzes wants to cling to thorough explanations, and having such an explanation helps it to relax a bit. What we’re really talking about in practical terms is learning to be aware (synthesis) instead of continuing to focus on thinking (analysis).

Awareness is synthesis: if you want life to be simpler, without going down some strange tunnel like throwing out 90% of your stuff, learn to be more aware. That will solve the life-is-complicated problem where it really matters.

I used to have this saying “Life is complicated already. Simplify it.” Since I’ve practiced awareness and synthesized all that life has offered, yes, “life is short. Life has its own meaningful seasons”.
Next time I would just say “That is so her”. Or, “that is just him”. The choice we make, the life we take. We can choose to accept him/her, but can’t change who he/she is.
On a Christian TV station, the hostess always says bye with “Life is fragile. Take care of each other.”
So, using the opening sentence I can conclude it in this quote: “Complicated and simple are actually two sides of the same coin – the key is you can flip your coin.”

Read Full Post »

Klaus – I called him uncle Nerdy, and now “Uncle Trekky” led me into this metaphysical conversation tonight. He always started the chat with an exciting topic of life-related physics or some math theories.
Here is one of them:
Chaos theory is all about weak causality. Strong causality holds and has not yet been disproven by counter-example. Heisenberg’s uncertainty only applies to observation. Humans seem to be a product of interactions in the universe dictated by strong causality since we didn’t observe our own creation. Now, the question is: Are we the masters of our own fate?

11:53pmLyna Yen-Nhi
Yes we are. Life is good and short. Whatever that is applied, uncertainty or chaos or entropy – life is what we make.

That is really the question. I just answered Monique in the thread.

11:54pmLyna Yen-Nhi
Uh, uh… are we all becoming philosophical?

If strong causality holds and the collapse of the wave function is not random in its results, then quantum states are the result of cause-effect relationships and the state of the universe is pre-determined

No, its mathematical/physical with high impact on philosophie and reloigion

What is your take on this?

11:56pmLyna Yen-Nhi
Metaphysics – I read some. They are so powerful taht can blow my mind

I’d rather like to think its physics.

11:58pmLyna Yen-Nhi
off just thinking or relating to life/work situations

This question has moved me since over 20 years. Don’t even know why I brought it up now.

Another question is if time exists. We are able to measure time and unable to reverse events because of irreversible thermodynamical effects like microscopic particles being rubbed of our brake pads.

12:00amLyna Yen-Nhi
So what was your anser?

But that implies a simple state change. Time may not even exist. Just and enless sequence of state changes, that is linked togther in a causality chain

Whats is my answer?

First, I have to read up on quantum physics and Schroedingers wave equations. Then I will be able to form an opinion.

12:02amLyna Yen-Nhi
Physical Chemistry was my favorite class in college. It was a combo of both thermodynamics and chemical reactions… Some cool stuffs!

Time is more complicated. Einsteins special relativity uses a 4-dimesnional space-time continuum and things hold up pretty nicely in the large scale. In String theory they use 13 dimensions. Things become way more complicated there…


Physics and Chemistry where the only classes were I got A’s. Was too lazy to do anything else :-))

12:04amLyna Yen-Nhi
Wow! 13-D is obviously way complicated.

And its so complicated that unlike the standrad physical theories formed in the past, there are hardly any experiments to prove it.

12:05amLyna Yen-Nhi
are you gonna prove it?

However, if more dimensions are “rolled” into the apparently 4 dimensions that we have, we should be able to measure the gravitational effect since the gravitational force weakens with the square of the distance.

That may be the only experiment that can be done with the current technology.

I am too old and stupid to prove anything.

12:06amLyna Yen-Nhi

All the famous people have finished their major work before their 30 birthday.

12:06amLyna Yen-Nhi

Thats why the Fides medal (the highest price for Mathematicians) is given to people that are <= 30 yrs old

I am serious

Anyway, we neede to chat over this next time we meet face to face. Typing speed not adequate.

12:08amLyna Yen-Nhi
you can beat them, with your pace and age (if you think that way)

Ha! Thanks for the flowers. Anyway, I let you go now… Hope to discuss this some time face to face. Not many people arounf that can hold up a conversation about that stuff. 🙂

12:10amLyna Yen-Nhi
You must like reading this stuff. Okie. Tlk to toyou later.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »