
Why Are Hundreds of Harvard Students Studying Ancient Chinese Philosophy? - w1ntermute
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/why-are-hundreds-of-harvard-students-studying-ancient-chinese-philosophy/280356/
======
objclxt
I can offer you an alternative, rather more cynical, explanation as to why
it's such a popular class: it's rated as one of the easiest.

Not only, as the article mentions, does it fulfill a core requirement, but
it's also rated as one of the easiest courses going in the student
evaluations. It scores a 1.58/5 for workload, and a 2.43/5 for difficulty,
both below the benchmark for the Gen Ed department (which itself is pretty
low).

I'm sure many people taking the class have a genuine interest, but from my
experience a significant number of students spend a lot of time finding
core/gen-ed classes that are light on work (this is especially true if you've
left your requirement to the last minute to complete).

(I'd link to the evaluation data, but you need a harvard.edu login, so you'll
have to take my word for it).

 __Edit __: Turns out the student paper backs this theory up
-[http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/10/9/hey-
atlantic-5-r...](http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/10/9/hey-
atlantic-5-real-reasons-to-take-er-18/)

~~~
cylinder
Why would someone kill themselves in order to get into Harvard only to slack
their way through it doing the easiest rated classes?

~~~
objclxt
Because Harvard awards degrees based on a GPA cut-off that ensures only 50% of
the graduating class get Latin honors.

So if you were a Harvard student who wanted to get Latin honors (...of which
there are more than a few) it's in your best interests to take the _easiest_
general-education (core) courses to ensure you have more breathing space for
studies in your major.

I Head TA'd a core curriculum class at Harvard, and you would be _amazed_ at
the number of seniors who e-mailed me once grades came out begging to be
bumped up as it meant their GPA would be pushed over the honors cut-off.

This was one reason why the Harvard cheating scandal last year was so
widespread: the course fulfilled a core requirement, and it had a reputation
for being very easy, hence hundreds of people took it.

~~~
gcb0
also, answering the grandparent post and expanding on the parent answer... the
fact that person is in Harvard already proves he/she understands how to play
with grade averages to begin with.

gpa is not always directly proportional to hard work.

~~~
judk
Not really, high school GPA means taking all the AP/advanced classes -- not
the easiest ones, ALL the ones.

~~~
gcb0
not saying it is the same rules as university, but it is the same game.
ironically university is easier.

------
austinz
There are different schools of Chinese philosophy that have differing
approaches and conclusions, and even then sub-schools with differing beliefs
within them (e.g. the Confucianist scholars Xun Zi and Mencius on the innate
goodness of human nature). Saying that students should apply something as
broadly and uselessly defined as "Chinese philosophy" into their lives is not
particularly helpful, and sort of implicitly reinforces the stereotype that
Chinese (or East Asian) people all adhere to this rigid, alien way of
thinking.

Also, it's sort of condescending. No Western professor teaches Heidegger or
Schopenhauer by breaking them up into easy-to-digest, feel-good aphorisms for
better living.

~~~
einhverfr
> No Western professor teaches Heidegger or Schopenhauer by breaking them up
> into easy-to-digest, feel-good aphorisms for better living.

This is true, but there is comparable treatment in early Greek and Hellenistic
philosophy, with multiple schools arguing very different things getting lumped
together as if they are the same.

~~~
redthrowaway
Not in my experience. My classical philosophy classes gave a little bit of
mention to the pre-Socratics (with a chuckle at how crazy Pythagoras was) then
it was on to Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. We spent quite some time trying
to suss out where Socrates ended and Plato began, and why he felt it necessary
to use Socrates as his mouthpiece. We then looked at Aristotle's radical
departure from Plato and tried to understand what motivated that.

We spent four months on that. Granted, it was a lower-level course, but I
don't think I could say all Hellenistic philosophy gets lumped together when
we spent so long just trying to pry the Socratics apart.

~~~
abecedarius
Hellenistic philosophy came after those guys; IIRC the biggest schools were
the stoics and epicureans, with the peripatetics (following Aristotle) in
third place. Plato got more influential in the later Roman empire, after
Hellenistic times. So your comment kind of supports the grandparent's point
(your "little bit of pre-Socratics" means the "early Greek" GP mentioned).

A cute bit for us computer nerds: Chrysippus pretty much invented boolean
logic (in the Hellenistic period) and was considered the Father of Logic in
antiquity. My intro philosophy course with a heavy emphasis on formal logic
never mentioned any of this.

------
jhonovich
I don't know why these students are taking it, but reading Zhuangzi in college
was an eye opener, as the philosophy contained within runs almost paradoxical
to traditional Western thought. Those reading are very short and contain many
fascinating insights [http://www.amazon.com/Chuang-Tzu-Writings-Burton-
Watson/dp/0...](http://www.amazon.com/Chuang-Tzu-Writings-Burton-
Watson/dp/0231105959)

------
knappador
I studied the Dao in a Chinese History course only briefly and one of the
statements that I particularly like is wrapped up nicely here:
[http://www.myrkothum.com/the-meaning-of-the-finger-
pointing-...](http://www.myrkothum.com/the-meaning-of-the-finger-pointing-to-
the-moon/)

It's almost obvious when you think about it that abstraction necessitates
containers like memory pointers and that referencing the abstractions is more
efficient, but in the magic of our minds, the underlying truth is not
guaranteed to still be there.

Another quality of what I read in Daodejing is that it basically proclaims
itself to only be such a pointer, and that the truth can't be contained and
still have a word to call it by. How many other philosophies and religions do
you know that try to explain all and -do- claim to have all the answers or
have proponents who claim that every truth can be found within their corpus? I
did come away believing that Laozi had captured the fact that any all-
inclusive truth is ineffable, something that can be logically reinforced by
studying paradoxes such as Russel's paradox and self-reference.

To sum up the paradox. Define a set of all sets. The set itself is a set, so
in order to be the set of all sets, it has to contain itself. Writing a
program to create this set will obviously never terminate because any result
must be put inside the result, so there can be no final result. Cool
resolutions to many problems of natural thought that would otherwise spiral
off into infinity. Teaches you to recognize them and terminate the process,
freeing memory and mental cycles for other things.

~~~
cliffu
I shall now interpret the opening sentence to mean "any Dao whose rules can be
enumerated is either inconsistent or incomplete." Thanks, that's a fun
connection.

------
narrator
I read the Analects of Confucius. It's a good one because like Gilgamesh it
was created outside of the constant necessary glorified warfare world of the
Old Testament and the Iliad and the Odyssey. There's so much conflict and war
culture interwoven into everything in the west it's hard to figure out that
that's not all there is to public life. Eastern religion, even Confucius who
is seen as more conservative and hierarchical, is far more serene.

~~~
forktheif
Ignoring the fact that China was at a near continuous state of war during the
time of Confucius, with many huge and bloody battles as the various Chinese
states tried to conquer each other.

~~~
acqq
Still the warfare in ancient China didn't result in Chinese thinkers creating
"jealous rules-giving God" but something called

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_of_Heaven](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_of_Heaven)

Put that in that western "we invented the resistance to the unjust government"
pipe.

~~~
gwern
> Still the warfare in ancient China didn't result in Chinese thinkers
> creating "jealous rules-giving God"

I would suggest that what they did create to _successfully_ end the constant
warfare (which Confucianism failed to do), Legalism, was even more horrifying
than any monotheism. Have you ever read, say, the Book of Lord Shang?

~~~
acqq
I haven't but I've checked:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalism_(philosophy)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalism_\(philosophy\))

Apparently the times of legalism were around 3rd century BCE, and then "In
later dynasties, Legalism was discredited and ceased to be an independent
school of thought."

I don't claim that it was all rosy afterwards, but let's also not forget that
it were the British that were literally drug dealers to the Chinese, that even
started the war once the Chinese weren't ready to accept it anymore:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars)

~~~
gwern
> Apparently the times of legalism were around 3rd century BCE, and then "In
> later dynasties, Legalism was discredited and ceased to be an independent
> school of thought."

Thankfully. Once the empire was united, there wasn't as much need for Legalism
and it was beaten out by the much nicer Confucianism.

> I don't claim that it was all rosy afterwards, but let's also not forget
> that it were the British that were literally drug dealers to the Chinese

I don't see how that's relevant. The British didn't invent opium because they
were monotheists, they did it for economic reasons.

------
gbog
I can relate, having studied by myself Chinese philosophy. But too points in
the article sounded untrue: Chinese thought is not abstruse, it is often flat
and obvious, once you get it. Also, the things about decision and spontaneity
are just a very small superficial part of it. I would add:

Founding moral rules without recurrences to a god.

The fecundity and importance of emptiness.

The non non contradiction: A and not A, yin and yang, etc.

The refusal to let words drive thoughts.

~~~
Sagat
Could you explain what the importance of emptiness is? It sounds mysterious
and interesting.

~~~
gbog
A bottle is useful because it is empty, no?

------
mknits
If you really want to learn something, learn Ancient Indian culture (not the
one distorted by stupid American professors).

------
arvinjoar
> For one thing, the class fulfills one of Harvard's more challenging core
> requirements, Ethical Reasoning.

According to [http://www.registrar.fas.harvard.edu/courses-
exams/courses-i...](http://www.registrar.fas.harvard.edu/courses-
exams/courses-instruction/ethical-reasoning) so does Michael Sandel's Justice
course, which can be viewed here:
[http://www.justiceharvard.org/](http://www.justiceharvard.org/)

It's one of the most amazing lecture series I've seen. I can't see how the one
given by Puett could possibly be any better... But then again, Harvard is
supposed to be one of the best schools in the world, maybe Puett really offers
a better course...

------
n00shie
Because they are all Chinese?

------
einhverfr
The courses which changed my life the most were those which covered history,
literature, and philosophy. The courses may have been easy in many ways, but
they left a profound mark on me.

------
McUsr
Oh well, it is an easy course.

My few cents is that it helps improve your life, taking such a course. At my
university, we had an "easy" philosophy course, focusing on Sartre and
Kierkegaard, existensialism. The course itself, opened up whole new
perspectives to me, and way of perceptions. Maybe this is the one greatest
enhancement as a person I gained from my years at the University.

I'd say such philosphy courses should really be mandatory for everybody. Not
the usual Examen Philosophicum, but the mind-bending ones.

------
hackernewsguy
I'm from China and lived in the US for years. I think that Chinese people are
way more practical and result driven, and instead Americans tend to follow
their hearts more. I agree that there are many different ways to interpret
ancient Chinsese philosophy that can lead to totally different conclusions. I
disagree that this has anything to do with Chinese government or the
increasing amount of Chinese students.

------
colbyolson
Is there a way to get the reading list for this course?

~~~
gbog
Shameless plug: search wengu, you'll get a site with Chinese texts ands
translations.

~~~
cliffu
Link:
[http://wengu.tartarie.com/wg/wengu.php](http://wengu.tartarie.com/wg/wengu.php)
(right?)

It's fine to link to your stuff especially if it's useful/educational/etc.

~~~
gbog
Yes, thanks.

------
sarreph
If anyone wants access to some of the content, I've found quite a large
collection of notes for the course, here:
[http://karmanotes.org/harvard/ethical-
reasoning-18-classical...](http://karmanotes.org/harvard/ethical-
reasoning-18-classical-chinese-ethical-and-political-theory)

------
kriro
Intro to CS is a top 3 class. Good news and my major takeaway from the
article.

~~~
jacques_chester
Based on my experiences of being an undergrad during the first tech boom, the
reasoning runs as follows:

    
    
        You know what's cool? A billion dollars.

~~~
judk
Google: David j malan cs50.

Cs50 collapsed in the first tech boom, and then Malan reinvented the course in
2007, drastically increasing enrollment (including women, relatively) ahead of
the current/recent boom

~~~
jacques_chester
Thanks, looks like they did some great work.

That said, lots of schools saw enrolments climbing again in the late 2000s as
the boom reached its onramp.

------
nnoitra
Because they have money and want to explore something unique. You don't have
to major in CS and believe it or not not everyone needs to know how to code.

------
Volpe
The word for mind and heart are not the same in Chinese...

~~~
zhemao
Yeah, I was just about to post this. That's some Grade-A orientalist bullshit
there, The Atlantic. In Chinese, heart is used in the same metaphorical sense
as it is in English, as a center of emotional thought, as opposed to the
brain, which is the center of rational thought.

------
hydralist
they want to know what their future boss's next move will be

~~~
Sagat
thanks for the lel

------
Skywing
does anybody actually give a shit?

