Category: harmony

We would like to confide in politicians to spend (our tax) money wisely and effectively. However, without proper economic and financial knowledge on their part, the desire is somewhat naive.

Suppose they can make up for lack of economic knowledge in domain knowledge, specifically the domain(s) the politician is deemed responsible for. Would the knowledge gaps balance themselves out? If all politicians understand their domain through and through, represent it adequately, the “market” could regulate itself.

What happens if one shouts louder than the other, though? The balance becomes skewed.

An all-encompassing economic layer should be spanned on top of all the other layers as a control mechanism. Yet, what’s true of economics is likely also true of health or education, just to name a couple of domains.

Constructive dialogue is the key here. Assuming it’s incredibly challenging to be an expert in all different domains simultaneously, we should defer to enforcing constructive dialogue within a democratic setting.

Harmony is generally perceived as a pleasant sensation. In nature, society, music, just to name a few domains. Arguably, there aren’t many domains where harmony isn’t perceived as pleasant. Why do we deliberately steer away from harmony so often?

Collectivism, for one, contributes to societal harmony. “Hofstede’s cultural dimensions” model points out that Asian countries generally score higher on collectivism than European countries and the United States. Consequently, making it easier for Asian countries to get a grip on a pandemic. Supposedly due to the harmonic attunement of its citizens, among others. Highly individualistic cultures, on the other hand, appear to have a more challenging time.

Culture is like a state of mind, achieved as a side effect from being a product of one’s environment. We can study cultures. We can empathize with them, but it’s hard to learn to behave in a specific cultural way. Harmony is a mentality, influenced by culture.