Public Value and Social Development (The Frontier of Public Administration in China) 981190247X, 9789811902475

Citation preview

The Frontier of Public Administration in China

Bing Wang

Public Value and Social Development

The Frontier of Public Administration in China Series Editors Shukui Tan, College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China Zhixia Chen, College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China Bing Wang, College of Public Administration, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China

The series focuses on the experience and cases of public administration in China, which holds the diversity on topics including land policy, real estate management, urban management, human re-source management. It aims to provide the overview as well as deep insight in this area as reading material and reference for the researchers and students.

More information about this series at https://link.springer.com/bookseries/16572

Bing Wang

Public Value and Social Development

Bing Wang College of Public Administration Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan, Hubei, China

ISSN 2662-9917 ISSN 2662-9925 (electronic) The Frontier of Public Administration in China ISBN 978-981-19-0247-5 ISBN 978-981-19-0248-2 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2 Jointly published with Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press The print edition is not for sale in China (Mainland). Customers from China (Mainland) please order the print book from: Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press. © Huazhong University of Science and Technology Press 2022 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publishers, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publishers nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publishers remain neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Preface

Development means becoming better, but what is development and better are always loosely and ambiguously used. This means that individuals, organizations, and human societies do not definitely develop and become better as they grow, become bigger and more prosperous, considering there are so many cases that individuals commit crimes and dishonesty, that companies pollute environment and sell fake goods and abuse employee and customer, that governments and countries fail for undue power, war, and inequality, and particularly, that human society has become unprecedentedly prosperous and convenient but is also suffering unprecedentedly dangerous climate change, ecological degradation, civilizations clash, and nuclear threat. Yes, we may have achieved development and become better on some aspects such as wealth of nation, science and technology, transportation, and medicine, but meanwhile, have lost many valuable things and become worse in many other aspects. Only when we clarify what is good or bad, i.e., value, we can define and claim whether we have achieved development and on what aspects we have and have not. Development should be strictly defined as the synchronous and orderly enhancement of various values. Without value, we cannot claim a process as development toward better but merely transformation from one state to another. As a controversial and profound philosophical concept, values can be simply understood as those items or concepts that cherished by people, and public values are those cherished by the general public, such as happiness, freedom, democracy, efficiency, equity, and justice, etc., Although money, sexual satisfaction, and various desires are generally disdained and criticized by many people, they may be values, while all the values should be balanced and compromised. We may pursue our values but we should also respect others’ values. Although somebody may doubt the existence of values, their existence is unquestionable, considering the science as truth, benevolence as goodness, and environmental scenery as beauty. Value may be the meaning and significance of personal life, organizational sustainability, and humankind existence. Not only does individual development mean a baby grows stronger, but also means a person grows more wiser and more mature, capable of appreciating and understanding increasingly number of valuable things, such as arts, science, and aesthetics. Social development means that human society has gained v

vi

Preface

progress on most public values, becoming more prosperous, happier, freer, more democratic, and more just. Since we have not sufficiently understood these values and clarify their intricate relationships, an individual may always commit mistakes, while a country may suffer development failure. Arguing and exploring values may help us better understand important issues such as money, life, health, family, career, power, science, environment, economy, and politics, and then, make us happier and healthier personally, make our career more successful, make our counties stronger and healthier, and make human society more harmonious and sustainable. It is because we do not understand values or misplace values that we make various mistakes. Although we always grow elder and the society is always changing, this process cannot be necessarily development, and thus we always need to ponder what we are pursuing and what are truly valuable. Everybody, every culture, every country, and every life have their specific values, and the problem is to discover and identify their values. The process of development may be regarded as the process of discovering and identifying and understanding increasingly number of values, then we are becoming better and more mature, knowing more about this intricate and interesting world. Although there may be some criticisms on the USA, China, and other countries in this book, the author truly hope the USA and China can enhance their friendship, and our world can become increasingly better in the future, with the prerequisite of understanding more about value. The author truly understand that the ideas expressed in this book are rough and controversial, hoping to improve gradually and steadily. The author must express the gratitude to many institutes and people. Firstly, thanks Springer publishing for this unmatured book. Secondly, thanks Huazhong University of Science and Technology and College of Public Administration providing excellent researching and teaching facility and condition. Thirdly, thanks editor Mrs. Song Yan (宋焱) urging and encouraging me to think and write. This book cannot be accomplished without her effort. Last but not least, thanks my beautiful wife Mrs. Gu Yuanfei (顾远飞) and my naughty son Wang Jiakuan (王嘉宽). They and our family are my eternal harbor. Finally, I still want to emphasize that value is the most important thing for us. Only when we understand value, we may understand and appreciate the splendidness of everything in the universe. Yu Garden, China November 2021

Bing Wang

Contents

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 What is development? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Human Society and Social Sphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.1 Human Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.2 Social Sphere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Human Nature and Human Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.1 Homo Economicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.2 Homo Politicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.3 Homo Sociologicus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Individual, Organization, and Institution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.1 Individual and Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.2 Organization and Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4.3 Institution and Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 Natural Science and Social Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5.1 Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5.2 Social Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6 Scientific Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.1 Rationality and Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.2 Thought Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.3 Value Neutrality and Value Irrelevance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.4 Empathy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.5 Mathematics and Mathematic Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.6 Evidence and Evidence-Based Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6.7 Concept Definition and Clarification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 4 4 5 8 9 9 10 12 12 14 16 18 18 20 25 25 26 27 30 32 33 35 36

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Intrinsic Value vs. Extrinsic Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 Intrinsic Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2 Extrinsic Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Human Value vs. Universal Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37 37 38 41 43

vii

viii

Contents

2.2.1 Human Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 Universal Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Objective Value vs. Subjective Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Objective Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.2 Subjective Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Private Value vs. Public Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1 Public Value and Publicness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.2 Private Value and Privateness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 Monetary Value vs. Environmental Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.1 Monetary Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5.2 Environmental Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6 Value Monism vs. Value Pluralism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6.1 Value Pluralism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6.2 Value Monism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6.3 Value Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

43 46 50 51 53 56 57 61 63 63 66 69 71 73 74 75

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.1 Growth and Maturity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.2 Death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.3 Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Career, Income, and Asset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 Career . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Income and Asset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Various Careers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1 Politician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.2 Entrepreneur and Businessman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.3 Scientist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.4 Self-Employed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.5 Ordinary Ones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.6 Illicit Career . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Cognition and Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.1 Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.2 Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.3 Morality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.4 Cognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.5 Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 Happiness, Responsibility, and Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.1 Happiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.2 Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.3 Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.4 Virtue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6 Meaning of Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

77 77 77 81 86 89 89 91 92 92 94 97 99 100 102 104 105 107 109 111 114 117 117 120 122 124 126 129

Contents

ix

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility . . . . . . . . 4.1 Family Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.1 Family as Institution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.2 Love and Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.3 Family Violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.4 Family as Public Space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1.5 Homosexual Family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Company Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1 Company as Institution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.2 Legal Entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.3 Profits as Goodness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.4 Entrepreneurs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.5 Profit as Badness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.6 Social Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 NPO Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1 Benevolence and Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.2 No Surplus Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.3 Board of Overseer and Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.4 Tax-Exemption and Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Government Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.1 Anarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.2 Diverse Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.3 US Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.4 Chinese Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 Illicit Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.1 Terrorist Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.2 Criminal Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

131 131 131 132 134 135 136 137 137 138 140 141 143 146 147 147 148 149 153 154 154 156 157 160 163 163 164 166

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Quality and Quantity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.1 Understanding Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.2 Doctor vs. Politician . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Economic Best . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1 From Agriculture to Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.2 Wealth of National and GDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.3 Capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.4 Essence of Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.5 GDP and Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.6 GDP After 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.7 Competitiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 Political Best . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1 Economics and Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.2 Politics and Good Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.3 Political Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

167 167 167 170 172 172 173 176 177 177 179 184 185 185 186 190

x

Contents

5.4 Social Best . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.1 Broad Human Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.2 Life Expectancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.3 Human Development Index (HDI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.4 Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.5 Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.6 Happiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 Good Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5.1 Good Country Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5.2 Best Country Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

194 194 194 196 197 201 202 205 205 207 208 218

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.1 The United States Exceptionalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.2 The Biggest and Strongest Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.3 Industry Hollowing and Inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.4 Racism, Drug Abuse, and Gun Violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.5 Liberty, Democracy, and Capitalism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 China: The Rising Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.1 Long and Splendid History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2 Autocracy, Totalism, Authoritarianism, or Meritocracy . . . . 6.2.3 Reform and Open . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 United Kingdom: The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets . . . . . . 6.3.1 The First Country to Enter Modern Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2 The British Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.3 Modern United Kingdom and Brexit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4 Russia: Once Superpower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.1 Brief Early History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.2 Soviet and Socialism Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.3 Putin’s Era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

219 220 220 222 224 227 231 234 234 239 241 244 244 247 249 252 252 253 255 258

7 Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 Development as Globalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 Development as Knowledge Accumulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3 Deterioration as Environment Degradation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

259 259 264 266 267

Chapter 1

Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

Development, as becoming better, is, and should be, pursued by all the people, organizations, countries, and the whole human society. However, what is developing is still blurred and always misunderstood, and individuals, organizations, countries, and human society may fail. If a person gains income and position promotion, but at the cost of harming his health or by cheating or corruption or other misconduct, it is hard to say he is developed. If an organization, like a company, grows larger and makes great profits but ignores its social responsibility for exploiting employees and polluting the environment, it has not achieved development. If a country greatly improves its GDP and economic and military power but simultaneously deteriorates its justice and ecology, it is hard to claim this process as development. If human society enjoys economic prosperity and convenience and science and technology advancement but suffers biodiversity loss, global warming, inequality, terrorism threats, and culture clashes, we are not confident that we are developing. It can be developed in some specific spheres, such as economy, science and technology, infrastructure, education, and health, but may not be developed in other fields, such as equity, justice, ecology, and morality. It is neither comprehensive development nor authentic development.

1.1 What is development? Development means becoming better. Without a precise and concrete definition and understanding of the concept of goodness or value, it is impossible to define and claim development. There are many closely related concepts to development, such as individual development, economic development, political development, organizational development, social development, green development, sustainable development, and inclusive development, but they are all loosely used, lacking precise and consistent definition and understanding, and so, misguiding individuals, organizations and human society. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_1

1

2

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

First, individual development means that individuals become better. Here, “better” refers not only to income, career, position but also, more importantly, to health, morality, and mind. It is ironic, but sometimes real, to recognize that a rich but irresponsible person can be a developed one. A developed person should be not only materially wealthy and physically strong but also educated, rational, mature, and knowledgeable. Economic wealth and physical growth can be part of individual development but not the whole. The relationship between an individual’s income, health, and virtues is complex, probably consistent and probably not. Second, company development generally means that a company just makes a profit and expands the market size, but social responsibility management suggests that a company should not only be concerned with its profit but also people and the planet, take its social responsibility and fulfill its corporate citizenship. If a company earns much money but harms its employees and consumers by exploitation and fraud or damages the environment and ecology due to pollution, it is hard to claim the growth of the company as development. Third, regarding a country, economic growth, measured by GDP, is generally misunderstood as economic development, but comprehensive economic development concerns not only quantitative GDP but also qualitative contents such as equity, poverty reduction, infrastructure, health, education, and environment. Economic growth can be the premise of economic development but may not guarantee the latter. Political and social development, hard to define and measure, are more controversial and blurring than economic growth, potentially meaning becoming better in the political and social sphere, and can be roughly understood as the enhancement of freedom, democracy, rule of law, transparency, and particularly human quality, nearly covering all aspects of a society. Undoubtedly, human society has made much progress in many aspects, such as economic wealth, science and technology, infrastructure, health and education, but it also suffers global warming, ecological crises, terrorism, international conflicts, and World Wars I and II. Can we confidently declare human history as development, and on what aspects we can and why we can? In history, although our ancestors had to bear starvation, illness, bloody struggles among tribes, and deadly threats from nature, they could also enjoy some good things, as sociologist Giddens (2006, p. 38) stated: We should not idealize the circumstances in which hunters and gatherers have lived, but nonetheless, the absence of war, the lack of major inequalities of wealth and power and the emphasis on cooperation rather than competition are all instructive reminders that the world created by modern industrial civilization is not necessarily to be equated with “progress”.

The big problem for our modern society is, when we gain economic and science and technology development, are we going to lose some other important good things, or, whether and how can we safeguard and keep these goods things as more as possible? Truth, goodness, and beauty are the most important things for individual and human society as the basis of development. Only when a person and human society obtain more truth, goodness, and beauty can we say they are becoming better and achieving development. Truth, goodness, and beauty are the same things and indeed

1.1 What is development?

3

consistent. Therefore, comprehensive and authentic development should have been coherent and harmonious, and there should be no conflicts among developments in different social spheres. However, due to the insufficient understanding of truth, goodness, and beauty in human society and nature, there are always conflicts among them, and development failures always occur in practice. There are few controversies on truth, which is generally regarded as objective and can be mainly discovered by science and technology, while goodness and beauty are generally looked somehow subjective and controversial, since one can judge something as good and beautiful while others may look it as bad and ugly. However, this viewpoint does not invalidate the existence of goodness and beauty because we can reach basic consensus on them as we understand the world more deeply. At least some ideas and behaviors such as altruism, benevolence, and justice can be accepted as goodness, and arts and sceneries can be accepted as beauty. Although some people cannot temporarily enjoy the beauty of arts like Mona Lisa and Beethoven’s music and sceneries like Everest and the earth, they may when they have more experience and knowledge. Similarly, and comparably, some value nihilists may reject the existence essence of truth and scientific knowledge. All these oppositions and rejections of truth, goodness, and beauty are because these people do not have strong beliefs and sufficient education and experience of truth, goodness, and beauty. We understand that this point may be absolute and arbitrary, but we also recognize that anybody can reject any values if with strong reasons and evidence. This means that the truth, goodness, and beauty require people’s education, knowledge, moral learning, and experience to find, recognize, and appreciate them. Truth, goodness, and beauties are various kinds of values, and value is the core and basis of development, as well as the goals and meanings of individuals, organizations, and human societies. However, value is also a blurred, profound, and controversial concept in philosophy, morality, religion, and science. The research of value has formed a specific discipline in philosophy: axiology, deriving many other related value concepts such as intrinsic value and extrinsic value, instrumental value and ultimate value, universal value and human value, private value and public value, etc. Milton Rokeach (1973), a psychologist, stated that: The value concept, more than any other, should occupy a central position, …able to unify the apparently diverse interests of all the sciences concerned with human behavior.

Some great philosophers, such as Plato (427 BCE–347 BCE), believed that value is intrinsic, objective, and concrete, as truth, and humankind can find and grasp these values. This school can be named value substantialism. Other researchers, such as John Dewey (1859–1952), argued that value is always changing, there is no constant intrinsic value, and all values are, if they exist, extrinsic. This school can be named as value pragmatism. The third school is value nihilism or value emotivism, represented by Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), David Hume (1711–1776), and Axel Hägerström (1868–1939). They claimed that values are neither true nor false but psychological desire, feeling, sentiment or emotion. This blurriness and controversy have shaken value as the foundation of social development, public policy, and human behavior. However, in reality, value is real and prevalent, as individuals’ behavior,

4

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

organizations’ existence, and government policies are all potentially based upon some values. When an individual earns money, he believes he can become better because money is a value. However, if he harms his health or credibility simultaneously, he is losing the value of health and credibility. Similarly, GDP, economic well-being, science, and technology are all some values or have some values, while equity, justice, and ecology are also some values or have some values. These values are the explicit or implicit goals and contents of various developments. In the historical process of human society, the big problems are (1) are there any of these values, and how can we understand and grasp these values? (2) What are the relationships among these values, such as consistent or conflicting. (3) How can these values be created, balanced, protected, and safeguarded?

1.2 Human Society and Social Sphere 1.2.1 Human Society The novel The Adventures of Robinson Crusoe written by Daniel Defoe (1660–1731) in 1719 and the Hollywood movie Cast Away acted by Tom Hanks in 2000 imagined and described a man living alone on an island, enjoying his freedom but fighting the terrible nature. By these artistic illuminations, we can easily understand that it is only an imaginary nostalgia for humans to live alone because it is impossible to enjoy the division of labor and achieve social cooperation for an individual. We cannot have our hair cut, go shopping, see the doctor, take bus, go to restaurant. Therefore, people cannot live without society, and all the possible achievements and developments of humankind are based upon the division of labor and human society. As Karl Marx pointed that (Byron, 2013): The essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In reality, it is the ensemble of social relations.

From the perspective of biology, humans are also a kind of animal, a pile of complex living protein without much difference from other mammals. However, this understanding of humans is meaningless for humans as social beings. Social relations, or sociality, make humankind social beings. This social relation and sociality mean that we need to focus on the relationships of humans and argue what may be factual, good or bad, or appropriate social relationships. Social development is not the neutral change of society and social relations from one state to another, but means and requires humankind to construct the good or appropriate or better social relations of individuals, families, companies, governments, and society as a whole. These social relations are invisible but real, diverse, complex but also simple and understandable, such as husbands and wives, parents and children, heterosexual or homosexual marriages, managers and employees, companies and customers, subordinates and superordinates, colleagues and colleagues, citizens and politicians, civilians and officials, and humans and ecology. There are evolving and appropriate social

1.2 Human Society and Social Sphere

5

relations between humans and humans, for example, from suppressing, unequal, class, and antagonistic in history to modern relatively harmonious, equal, classless, and cooperative, which can be viewed as development, although far from perfect. In addition to the social relation between humans and humans, we also need to ponder and construct the appropriate social relation between humans and the environment. How should people treat the environment? Can people construct a dam on a river, slaughter livestock cruelly, or unpainfully and humanely? Can people climb, or conquer, the Everest by advanced technology, such as oxygen bottle, Sherpa assistance, and even helicopter, or by Alpine Style that only depending on his or her personal capability? Regarding the relation between human and mountain, Alpine style climbing refers to mountaineering in a self-sufficient manner, carrying all of one’s food, shelter, equipment, etc., as opposed to expedition style (or siege style) mountaineering which involves setting up a fixed line of stocked camps on the mountain which can be accessed at one’s leisure. Additionally, the alpine style means the refusal of fixed ropes, high-altitude porters, and the use of supplemental oxygen. This style became well known and popular with Italian climber Reinhold Messner (1944-), who gained the reputation of Mr. Mountain when he and Peter Habeler climbed Gasherbrum without oxygen equipment in 1975. Compared to the traditional expedition style or siege style, the Alpine style can be regarded as the purest form of mountaineering, setting a standard to which all mountaineers should aspire. Of course, the traditional expedition and Alpine style may both have some values and be preferred by some people: the former is for entertainment and leisure, while the latter is for real adventure, achievement, and possible communication to the mountain. In Alpine style climbing, a climber, such as Reinhold Messner, probably cannot, and will not, blame the mountain if depriving his/her life since they have reached an agreement and formed a just relation. Indeed, the social relations between bosses and employees, governments and citizens, and humans and nature have changed greatly throughout history. Human society and social relations are constantly changing, and we, as social scientists, need to understand and explore these diverse social relations, determine the appropriate social relations for the current society, and push reforms and transformations of society to adapt to constant changes, which can be the essence of development.

1.2.2 Social Sphere For simplicity, human society can be roughly divided into several social spheres, such as economic, politics, and social. These spheres can be further divided into more detailed subspheres if necessary; for example, the economic sphere may include agriculture, industry and tertiary sector, and the social sphere may include education, culture, and ecology, as Fig. 1.1 shows. This division is not strict, as the boundaries for different social spheres may overlap, and one behavior or phenomenon can also be categorized into several spheres simultaneously. For example, economic behavior

6

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

Fig. 1.1 Trichotomy of Society and Their Values ( Source Wang and Christensen (2017)

can also be viewed and studied as political and social behavior. These social spheres have different players, goods, decision rules, human nature assumptions, and values, as Table 1.1 shows. Generally, people can observe and differentiate the social spheres and apply the corresponding rules unconsciously, such as purchasing a car or voting the president. However, sometimes, people may also misplace the spheres and misuse the rules, such as marketing the human organs, polluting the environment, and bribing the officials, because these goods are in other spheres and should not be monetized and marketized in the market and economy. We can reasonably define and analyze the development of these spheres, such as economic development, political development, and social development, by the enhancement of the corresponding values with different principles. In the economic sphere, the main actors are companies and customers, employers and employees, with the government as an unnecessary, in practice necessary, medium arbitrator. Their relation is mainly business and commercial relations. The goods in the economic sphere are commodities with prices, such as cars, houses, foods, and money. Individuals in economics are assumed to be homo economicus, make careful and rational economic calculations and implement cost–benefit analysis (CBA) for their self-interest. Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism is the philosophical

1.2 Human Society and Social Sphere

7

Table 1.1 Trichotomy of Social Sphere Economic sphere

Political sphere

Social sphere

actor

company, businessman, customer, supplier

government, politician, citizen, civilian

family, NPO, social activist

Goods

commodity car, house, money

political goods public goods, public service, right, vote, policy

ethical goods love, friendship, human organ, environment, ecology

Decision rule

cost–benefit analysis rationality

obligation, duty, responsibility, ought rationality

emotion, obligation, duty, responsibility, ought irrationality

Human nature assumption

homo economicus

homo politicus

homo sociologicus

Ethics

utilitarianism

deontology

deontology

Key value term

profit, cost, money, income, finance, innovation

freedom, democracy, love, family, loyalty, justice, right, obligation, friendship, altruism, responsibility, hatred, culture, emotion democracy

Discipline

economics

politics

sociology

foundation of the economic sphere. The key values are familiar to us in the current market society, such as money, efficiency, income, profit, well-being, happiness at the micro level, GDP, growth, prosperity, and innovation at the macro level. Our human society has witnessed undoubted and tremendous economic growth, always referred to as development but not precisely, measured by income, GDP, material wealth, and economic prosperity. In the political sphere, the dominant actors are the government, politicians, citizens, and civilians. The relations among these actors are not commercial but political. Here, the political relation means political consideration such as justice, rights, obligation, and duty, fundamentally different from economic calculations. Politicians and citizens will behave according to political principles, that is, what they should do by their political obligations and duties, but not whether it is economically worthy to do. Although the economic principle and calculation may actually be applied in the political sphere by politicians and citizens, such as corruption and selling votes, it means that political values are eroded or alienated by economic values. The ethics in the political sphere is deontology from Immanuel Kant, which is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the worthiness of consequences of the action such as utilitarianism. The goods in the political sphere are political goods, such as public goods, political power, rights, votes, policy, and political activity, with key political values such as freedom, democracy, justice, fairness, equality, rule of law, and transparency. People are assumed to be homo politicus in the political sphere, making their decisions and behaviors according to political

8

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

values. We can claim roughly that human society has gained much political development in the long term but maybe not so in the short period because of the enhancement of these values. The social sphere is the third sphere besides the economic and political spheres. It is broad and loose, including all the human spheres and activities such as science, art, religion, sport, family, culture, and environment, and can be further divided into more detailed subspheres. Here, the social sphere is narrowly used, as the economy and politics are also parts of the social sphere in broad meaning. The main actors are individuals, families, NPOs, NGOs, religionists, scientists, artists, environmentalists, social activists, etc. These actors may overlap since one can take several social roles simultaneously, to be a consumer, a citizen, a husband, a son, a teacher, a donator, …. They can generally differentiate their roles and the spheres reasonably and effectively, but sometimes they may also be confused, contradicted, puzzled, and tormented. For example, when some businessmen or politicians resign or retire, they may also become social activists, such as Bill Gates, Al Gore, and earlier John Rockefeller. As businessmen and politicians pursue their explicit economic and political values, social activists pursue their social values, for instance, scientists for scientific value, artists for art value, and athletes for sport value. Sometimes these social values can be consistent with economic/political values but sometimes may not. This means that a successful artist, scientist, and politician can be rich, but not necessarily so. Economic value is not more ultimate or valuable than political and social values, meaning that science, politics, and art cannot be regarded as the means or auxiliaries of the economy. Rather, the economy and money may be instrument values to pursue the values of science, politics, and art. In the social sphere, goods are ethical or social goods (Sandel, 2013), such as scientific knowledge, environmental goods, human organs, love, friendship, etc. Although these ethical or social goods sometimes overlap and are confused with commodities, they are essentially not the same and should be transacted and dealt with and regulated by different principles and laws. When people practice social activities, such as doing scientific research, protecting the environment and human rights, and creating arts, they are pursuing some social gains and social values but not necessarily for economic return. After clarifying the various values, it is easy for us to understand diverse human behaviors and economic, political, and social development.

1.3 Human Nature and Human Behavior Human nature and human behavior are complex, but they are also simple and understandable, as the former is based upon the value and the latter is induced and directed by value. Different disciplines in social science have their specific human nature assumptions, for example, homo economicus in economics, homo politicus in politics, homo sociologicus in sociology, etc., all based upon some values in these disciplines. In addition, homo ecologicus, homo historicus, and homo scientificus can also be presented and argued in the disciplines of ecology, history, and science, reflecting

1.3 Human Nature and Human Behavior

9

different understandings and perspectives of human nature and value pursuit in these disciplines.

1.3.1 Homo Economicus Homo economicus, or economic man, is the foundation of modern economics and capitalism. In the book The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith (1776/2018), the founding father of modern economics, wrote: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages.

The homo economicus assumption presumes and justifies that anybody can be self-interested, perform rational calculations and pursue one’s own well-being by any legal resort, provided not harming others. This human nature is accepted as an axiom in economics and regarded as the origin of innovation and foundation of capitalism, as the Hollywood movie “Wall Street” advocated that “Greed is good”. Obviously, this assumption is based upon the economic value and can reasonably explain most human behaviors in economies and markets. Gary Becker (1930–2014), the Nobel Prize winner of economics in 1992, expanded the homo economicus assumption from economics to human behaviors that traditionally belong to sociology, including racial discrimination, crime, family organization, and drug addiction, and claimed that the human nature assumption of homo economicus can well explain all human behaviors (Becker, 1978). This expansion of economics has pushed the triumph of economic imperialism, which means that most economists believe that people are self-interested and utility maximized and that economics is the most powerful subject and methodology that can be used to analyze and explain all human behaviors. However, this human nature assumption is actually limited, narrow, and misguiding, focusing only on economic value and ignoring other values, such as political values and social values. Economics and economists have gained the reputation of “knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing” (Ackerman & Heizerling, 2005).

1.3.2 Homo Politicus Economists always claim that people by nature are economic animals, while Aristotle and political scientists believe people are by nature political animals. Homo politicus is the human nature assumption in the political sphere, assuming that people and politicians will pursue justice, freedom, democracy, and other political values rather than economic values. Most people can perceive and distinguish them from conducting political activities such as voting, debating, agreeing, and opposing, fundamentally different from economic activities, and so they should not be bought

10

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

out, selling their political rights and voices. Although some people, in reality, may exchange their votes for money or other interests, they can differentiate politics from the economy and be aware of the possible wrongness. Homo politicus is formed in the culture and social context from family, education, and social experience. It may vary but exist in everybody’s mind as conscientiousness and will influence human behaviors. As an individual can be both a citizen and a consumer, citizens are fundamentally different from consumers, and people can differentiate these two roles and behaviors. Citizens think and behave in the political sphere as homo politicus, pursuing political values, while consumers think and behave in the economic sphere as homo economicus, pursuing economic values. Relative to the general public, the extraordinary statesmen, such as George Washington, Martin Luther King, Nelson Mandela, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao Zedong, may be more strongly homo politicus assumed and behave. Their extraordinary and even some ruthless and cruel behaviors, such as Stalin and Hitler, can be well understood and explained by the human nature assumption of homo politicus. They are not businessmen pursuing private interest but political animals with their political ideals, for example, to be a president, to establish or strengthen their countries, to defeat the enemy by any means, or to achieve global peace. Their political ideals may be right or wrong, low or high, good or bad. It is quite low and bad, but real and practical, for a politician to solely attempt to be a president for personal power but not consider the well-being of people and development of country, and the president corrupted by material wealth for self and family is even lower and worse. George Washington and Mao Zedong successfully established or reshaped their countries and so were memorized as great statesmen, although still with controversies. Stalin and Hitler, as extraordinary politicians, attempted to strengthen their countries, as value A, but their behaviors and polices also brought huge harm and pain not only to their own countries but also to other countries, as value B. Their behaviors and policies can be well understood and explained, and their controversial evaluations are caused by the controversial evaluation of value A and value B. Contemporarily, many scholars and social activists, such as Arnold Joseph Toynbee, Daisaku Ikeda (1976), and John Rawls (2001), as homo politicus, have endeavored to pursue world peace. However, because of the current limited and narrow nationalism, this admirable political idea and value is far from being recognized and realized by most current politicians and statemen, prioritizing their own national interest above the global interest. Those who can push and practice this world peace and global integration will be commemorated as the greatest statemen not only for some countries but also for the world people, creating the greatest amount of political value for the world.

1.3.3 Homo Sociologicus Homo sociologicus, as the human nature assumption in sociology, pursues social values, a broad concept with abundant content. Any good things in society cherished by people can be attributed to specific social values, such as money, political power,

1.3 Human Nature and Human Behavior

11

environmental beauty and love. The human nature is complex, not only for economic consideration as homo economicus assuming but also for political and social consideration as homo politicus and homo sociologicus assuming. Some seemingly weird behaviors are easy to understand through their value identification. For example, in William Shakespeare’s play, Romeo and Juliet chose to sacrifice their lives for love. Here, life and love have their social value. Although ordinary people may generally regard life as the highest, or most important, Romeo and Juliet, as well as many lovers, placed love higher or more important than life. Shakespeare, as a litterateur, poet, and artist, has successfully manifested the value of love by his moving play and literature. Similarly, the famous poem by Sandor Petofi (1823–1849) cherished and prioritized the social values, or political value, of liberty, love, and life: Liberty and love, These two I must have. For my love I’ll sacrifice my life. For liberty I’ll sacrifice my love. In different social contexts, people may cherish and prioritize different values by their specific preferences. In the background of global warming and ecological crises, some environmentalists, such as Aldo Leopold (1887–1948) and Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862), tended to place the value of the environment and ecology above all other utilitarian values. Aldo Leopold, the founding father of ecological ethics, introduced the concept of land ethic, arguing that humans should transform themselves from conquerors of nature into citizens of nature, looking the land and ecology as the mother of humans. Then, the land and ecology may have some values similar to mother but not only values of usefulness and instrument. His essays, compiled posthumously in A Sand County Almanac (1949), had a significant influence on later biocentric environmentalists. Henry David Thoreau, the American essayist, poet, and practical philosopher, cherished the beauty of nature and was unbearable to break a dewdrop in his essay Walden (1854). However, although natural beings such as grasses, animals, lakes, mountains, landscapes, and the earth are beautiful and valuable, these values can only be perceived and enjoyed by people with abundant experience and recognition. Considering that there are so many poor people living in poverty, it is easy to understand that not all people can perceive and recognize the value of nature and prioritize these values sufficiently high. The solution of ecological crises depends on the value transformation of humankind. In the scientific field, most scientists, such as homo scientificus, may regard scientific theories and knowledge as more valuable than any other thing, including money, power, and reputation. A good example is Russia mathematician Grigory Perelman (1966-), who solved several important mathematical conjectures such as Soul Conjecture and Poincaré Conjecture. In August 2006, he was offered the Fields Medal for “his contributions to geometry and his revolutionary insights into the analytical and geometric structure of the Ricci flow”, but he declined the award and stated, “I’m not interested in money or fame; I do not want to be on display like an animal in a zoo.” For him, the aim of his work is pure for mathematics but not other material and

12

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

utilitarian ends. Actually, in every field and circumstance, people have their specific value considerations, which may be blurred and confused but real and persistent. As homo sociologicus, ordinary people have their various social value pursuits and considerations but may not be clear, confused or lured by material values. People may fail to understand and appreciate social values other than economic wealth, such as the beauty of arts, truth of science, and goodness of politics, but liberal art education, moral learning, and experience can help people enhance their homo politicus and homo sociologicus and then understand and appreciate the corresponding values.

1.4 Individual, Organization, and Institution Values can be roughly understood as something good, meaningful, or significant, or the function of individuals, organizations, and institutions. Individuals, as long as normal and rational but not schizophrenic, generally have their value pursuit, whether right or wrong, for money, health, reputation, power, sex sensation, or some other values. Even when one is committing something bad, such as crime, he/she is still pursuing some values but failing to consider the values of others. Organizations, including family, for-profit corporations, non-for-profit organizations (NPOs), and government, also have their value pursuit and creation. Institutions, including organizations and laws and policies, with their diverse forms and functions, are also to pursue, create and safeguard various values. Human society has been evolving and developing through the processes of discovery, recognition, conflict, and compromising of values.

1.4.1 Individual and Value Individuals’ behaviors, rational or irrational, have their value pursuit and can be reasonably explained and understood by value. When one is living a happy, healthy and meaningful life, according to his/her perception but not others, learning and studying, doing his/her job, raising his/her family, physically exercising, he/she is creating values, although he/she may not perceive these values or think they are trivial. Of course, it is not precise to claim the quantity of these values trivial or huge. For example, what and how much is the value of Reinhold Messner’s conquest of Everest, and Alex Hannold’s Free Solo of Yosemite’s 3,000-foot El Capitan wall, and the Theory of Relativity discovered by Albert Einstein, and some not so “great” scientific discoveries made by those unfamous scientist, and the ordinary behaviors of ordinary people. In contrast, one can also erode or destroy some values when he or she does some “bad” things, such as cheating, lying, stealing, family violence, drug taking, and even suicide. Cheating and lying are generally regarded as bad in nearly all cultures and circumstances, for some selfish interests. Children and adults are educated and required to be honest as a goodness or value, but cheating and

1.4 Individual, Organization, and Institution

13

lying are also common behaviors committed by nearly all of us in various situations. However, if we consider the values of those to be cheated, many of us may no longer cheat. This is the process of individual maturity and development, which means that a mature individual will consider more broadly and comprehensively. In some specific circumstances, cheating is not always bad. For example, a doctor may not tell the truth to the cancer patient under the requirement of his/her family. In this case, the value of relieving is more important than the value of honesty. Of course, if the patient is mentally strong enough and can bear the truth of the cancer, the doctor still needs to tell the truth. Similarly, suicide is bad and immoral for harming the spouse, parents, and relatives. Particularly, even if one is along without the necessity of consideration of others, he/she still should not commit suicide, considering the value of divinity of life. Surely, someone may still commit cheat, crime, family violence, suicide, environmental damage, etc., with their specific and temporary value concern. We cannot insist they are wrong but can only provide more comprehensive value analysis and hope they make their own value choice. Goodness, badness, meaningfulness, significance, and values eventually depend on individuals’ perception and understanding. Some seemingly weird individual behaviors can be easily understood and explained by value analysis. Reinhold Messner (1944-) is an Italian explorer, King of the mountains and one of the greatest climbers and adventurers, the first person to climb Mount Everest (8,848 m), the highest mountain in the world, without the use of contained oxygen for breathing, and the first solo ascent of Everest, also without the supplemental oxygen, and the first to climb all 14 of the world’s mountains that exceed an elevation of 8,000 m. Alex Hannold (1985-), the American rock climber best known for his free solo ascents of large walls, accomplished the free soloing El Capitan in Yosemite National Park on June 3, 2017, which is regarded as one of the greatest athletic achievements of all time. Why Reinhold Messner and Alex Hannold, as well many others, have done these seemingly nonsensical adventures at the cost of life and death? Are there any values for their seemingly absurd behaviors? They are surely neither for material wealth nor for fame. As a humble and introverted person, Alex has actually accomplished the feat many times without flaunts, but most professional climbers believe what he said. He did the free solo not rashly and casually but cautiously and professionally, with countless training and exercising and all the details in the mind. When inquired why climb? George Mallory (1886–1924), the great British explorer and mountaineer and the leading member of early expeditions to Mount Everest, whose disappearance on that mountain in 1924 was one of the most celebrated mysteries of the twentieth century and guessed as the first one ascending the summit, gave a famous and eternal answer: because it’s there. This means that the climbing and adventuring themselves, as well as many other things, have their value, not depending on other values such as money or fame. Because they are there. Here, “they” means not only mountains and rocks for climbers and adventurers but also the unknown and difficulties in the world for anybody, including scientists, artists, businessmen, and statemen, who can also be regarded as explorers in their specific fields. Newton and Einstein endeavored to discover the secrets of force, light, and the universe in physics. Beethoven and van

14

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

Gogh strived to create and contribute their best music and painting, exploring the music world. Those great businessmen, such as Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, are actually not only businessmen for profit and material wealth, but innovators and entrepreneurs to “change the world”, as Jobs’ motto says, although whether these changes are good or bad are still arguable, explored by others. Similarly, there are difficulties and challenges for politicians and statesmen, who can also contribute to change and benefit their countries and people. Despite being invisible, value is factual, as these people have substantial value pursuits. Among these values, economic value is particularly distinctive from values pursued by scientists, artists, politicians, and adventurers as explorers in various fields. Pure and true explorers can be poor, although they can easily become rich by their professionalisms and achievements. However, once rich, conflicts between economic value and other values may occur, and these outstanding explorers may be eroded by money and fame. Surely, governments, policies, and society should either guarantee the outstanding explorers deserving money and fame, although they are not the sole and ultimate values.

1.4.2 Organization and Value While individuals can pursue and create values, organizations can more efficiently and effectively. In modern society, families, companies, NPOs, and governments, as major organizations, can safeguard and create different values by their specific capabilities and ways. Family is the cell and most micro organization in modern society. Although the origin and evolution of family, marriage, and love in the millions of years of human prehistory are still unknown and worthy of exploration, family and marriage in the modern era can nourish love, emotion, education, security, etc., with their specific values. Surely, these values may be separated from family in the process of social evolution. For example, an increasing number of young generations can pursue their love without the form of marriage and family; women can gain their economic independence and security out of family and their husband; and the love of homosexuality can also be incorporated and safeguarded by the family and marriage. Therefore, currently, family is essential for human society and can safeguard and create various values, while the form of family and their values may evolve over time. Firms and companies are the second most prominent organizations in modern society. Historically, there were no firms or companies in the agricultural society, and most economic goods were produced in the agriculture sector by families and farmers. This means that the economic function, or value, has been mixed in the family in the agricultural era but gradually separated from family to firm after the industrial revolution. Companies, such as East India Company in the Netherlands and Britain, are the modern legal and institutional forms of firms, appearing in 1600 for exploration and trade with East and Southeast Asia and India. Currently, companies have been the major organizations in a market society, employing most laborers, manufacturing most commodities, creating the most wealth of nation, and

1.4 Individual, Organization, and Institution

15

contributing greatly to human society. The values created by companies are easily and directly perceived and measured by monetary profit and GDP, although not just digital numbers. However, companies have also destroyed values and damaged society when selling unsafe goods, exploiting employees, polluting the environment, and violating laws and regulations, while these values are implicit and indirect to be perceived and measured. Therefore, the law and regulation of companies and markets are essential to safeguard and create values other than economic value, directing human society more humane and sustainable. The government is the third crucial and essential organization in modern society. The origins of government and state, as the main contents of civilizations, are still scientifically unknown, tracing back to millions of years ago in the prehistorical age. The known government in human society has been unearthed and excavated as ancient Egypt (7000 BC), India (2000 BC), China (3000 BC), Greek City-State (800 BC), and Rome (700 BC). The exact times of these ancient governments are unknown and rough, depending on the current archaeological discovery, but it is undoubted that government is indispensable in any society and history. Although the modern Western government and politics may be the most advanced and developed, the ancient Greek and Rome, as the origin of Western civilization, are not the longest and most ancient. The government, politics and civilizations in ancient Egypt, India, China, and other regions are worthy of exploration and understanding. Currently, although always criticized, the government is still the best and sole institution solving various public issues, safeguarding and creating human values such as justice, stability, peace, and sustainability. As a political ideal, anarchy may be applicable in the far future but not so in current society. Similar to family and firm, government also evolves in the long history, not perfect but better than before. We need to reform the government but cannot discard it as the theory of anarchy suggests. The government and state are generally referred to as the first sector or public sector, the company and market are the second sector or private sector, and the NPO and NGO are the third sector and public sector. Actually, the third sector and NPOs are essential for today’s human society, mainly in the fields of charity, religion, academy, hospital, environment, etc. While the company creates economic values and the government safeguards political values, NPOs and NGOs in the third sector can pursue, safeguard and create some specific social values of philanthropy, arts, knowledge, human rights, the environment, etc. Although the government also needs to create or safeguard these social values, it has to balance and compromise these values, functioning indirectly, while NPOs and NGOs can directly pursue and create these values in more focused and professional ways. Although NPOs and NGOs can assist the government in creating values, in some circumstances, NPOs and the government may have some value conflicts due to their different value priorities. For example, environmental organizations, such as Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund, may strive to protect the beautiful and valuable environment and ecology and oppose some government pro-economy policy, while the government also needs to protect the environment but has to balance and compromise the economy, employment, and environmental protection. The mission and meaning of organizations, including companies, governments, and NPOs, is to pursue and create specific values;

16

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

otherwise, they will lose the value of existence. This is same true for individuals. Without value, an individual will also lose his/her direction and aim.

1.4.3 Institution and Value Institution is not only a prominent social phenomenon in human society but also a key concept in social science. Institutional economics (old and new) has been an important branch of economics and expanded to political and social institutions such as institutionalism, which means that nearly all social phenomena, including family, marriage, hospital, university, company, economy, government, state, politics, society, culture, and civilization, can be attributed to various institutions, and we can better and more deeply understand these social phenomena from the perspective of institutions (Ostrom, 2005). The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines institutions as (a) an established organization or corporation such as a bank or university, especially of a public character; (b) a significant practice, relationship, or organization in a society or culture, such as the institution of marriage. Samuel P. Huntington (1927–2008, 1996), the influential American political scientist and the author of the book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, understood institutions as “stable, valued, recurring patterns of behavior”. Most social phenomena, including family, law, norms, morality, company, government, and civilization, can be understood as diverse forms of institutions. First, as Huntington argued, institutions regulate recurring human behaviors, saving transaction costs and making human behavior simpler and easier to occur. A single time-occurring human behavior does not need to form and be regulated by institutions. For example, because men and women must combine to reproduce children, marriage has then been a necessary and important institution for all human races. Although marriage has many different forms in different cultures and societies, its various forms, such as institutions, can be explained and understood according to the circumstances, sustaining the social function of marriage. Similarly, as people eat, sleep, dress, transport, sex daily and repeatedly, various institutions in different fields with different forms evolve to facilitate these behaviors, such as the customs of eating, habits of sleeping, styles of dressing, ways of transporting, and taboos of sex. Therefore, customs, habits, styles, ways, and taboos form various institutions and constitute the culture and civilization. A lasting institution must have its social circumstances and social functions and values. Although some institutions, for example, cannibalism, polygamy marriage, autocracy, etc., are seemingly weird, backward, or barbaric, it is because we do not understand their social circumstances and social functions. Of course, institutions can also evolve and transform gradually or radically according to changes in society. We need to understand the institutions but not to criticize them. Second, to sustain and regulate recurring human behaviors, institutions are generally stable with diverse forms, such as invisible norms and visible rules and organizations. The invisible norms include customs, habits, and morals, and the visible rules

1.4 Individual, Organization, and Institution

17

include laws, procedures, ways, and policies to normalize various human behaviors. Organization is the combination of invisible norms and visible rules. Its essence is not the building, assets, and people but the combination of institutions and institutionalization of human behaviors. Families, corporations, universities, churches, governments, NPOs, and states, as various organizations, are essentially not physical or substantive bodies but various kinds of institutions with institutionalized human behaviors and specific social functions. Organizations are imaginary and suppositional, depending on the recognition, consensus, and habit of people in society. Here, the people in society include not only the members inside the organization but also the members outside of the organization and the whole society. Therefore, the perception and recognition of people throughout society will determine, shape, and transform institutions, organizations, and civilizations. For example, as we have analyzed the family and corporation (company) as institutions, we can go on to analyze the church as an institution. Although some people and countries do not believe Christianity, Jesus and the God, neither the Islam nor the Buddhism, there are still approximately 2.17 billion, 1.6 billion, and 0.49 billion population believing these three religions in 2010, and will go on to rise in 2050 (Pew, 2015). With the development of science and technology, religions still have great social functions and values, such as providing some explanations and spiritual relief for the uncertainty and unknown world, such as after death. This means that the church and its institutions will not vanish in the near future, although the forms and contents will change, as has happened in history. Third, as Huntington mentioned, institutions are valued, which can be understood and restated as creating and safeguarding values. The social function of institutions and organizations can be redefined as creating and safeguarding values. Family, corporation, and government, as macro institutions and organizations, are functional and valuable, sustaining love and marriage, producing and supplying goods, keeping security and order, although these functions and values may change with society changes. These macro institutions are actually the combination of a complex and sophisticated set of detailed rules, procedures, etiquettes, norms, regulations, and policies as micro institutions. The function and value of these micro institutions can also be dissected and understood, consistent or inconsistent with the macro institutions. The inconsistency of the micro institution will weaken the function and value of the macro institution, while the consistency will enhance the latter. For example, in the family and marriage, there are laws prescribing that the assets of a family, whether earned by a husband or wife, should be common assets and be divided fairly once divorced. The functions and values of these laws are to protect the equity of husbands and wives and their families and marriages. Similarly, the Constitution of the United States, as well as other countries, is a set of macro institutions, with other various micro institutions, to safeguard the freedom, democracy, and human rights, which is the value, spirit, and essence of American people and culture.

18

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

1.5 Natural Science and Social Science We are living in society, and we endeavor to make our living and society better. In the long prehistory and ancient period, people lived in their specific time–space circumstances without much understanding and knowledge of their circumstances, including nature, society, and their own minds. Even today, although we have gained unprecedented progress in science and technology and other knowledge, this progress may still be only a drop in the infinite knowledge of cosmos. In the long history before the scientific revolution during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, marked by Nikolaj Kopernik (1473–1543), Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), and Isaac Newton (1643–1727), humankind had lived in the domination of religions, traditions, and superstitions for millions of years or even longer. Although religions, traditions, and superstitions also have their values, sustaining humankind in history and creating splendid culture and civilization, science and technology give humankind true knowledge of the world and the power to change the world, making our living probably better. Although science and technology may also probably damage or even destroy humankind, it is not the fault of science and technology but the insufficiency of it. It is by science and technology, but not by religion and superstition, that we can make our society better and rescue us from possible disasters such as climate change and nuclear war.

1.5.1 Science What is science and technology; and what is religion, art, tradition, and superstition; and what is the difference and relation between science and superstition? Actually, science, religion, art, and superstition are all kinds of human understandings of the various subjects in the cosmos, while science may be the most reliable, falsifiable, and arguable understandings. As Dave Featherstone (2016), professor of biology and neuroscience, stated on Quora: Science = art. They are the same thing. Both science and art are human attempts to understand and describe the world around us. The subjects and methods have different traditions, and the intended audiences are different, but I think the motivations and goals are fundamentally the same. We need to understand because we are terrified by things that are unpredictable, that don’t make sense. I don’t care how crazy you say you are, how much you think you like adventure. Unpredictability and senselessness are stressful. They drive people to suicide. It happens in war. It happens as a result of neurological diseases like schizophrenia. Scary movies are all about unpredictability and things that just cannot be real. We crave order. We crave predictability. We share because we are social creatures. The success and failure of others is meaningful. We are bound up in this world together. All in the same boat, so to speak. Thus, when we have information, we like to share it. Even if it’s trivial. Who doesn’t gossip? Who doesn’t like to be the bearer of news? Who doesn’t like to show off some new insight? Everyone loves to talk about themselves, share their viewpoint, make their opinion heard. Quora and

1.5 Natural Science and Social Science

19

Facebook and telephones and books and movies are all about sharing our points of view and seeing the world through another’s eyes and experiences.

Science is generally and implicitly referred to as natural science about the physical and material world. Physics is generally accepted as the most typical science, and Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein are the greatest scientists. Physics is generally expressed in the language of mathematics, as Newton’s Law of Gravity F = G m1r2m2 shows. This equation means that the magnitude of the gravitational force acting between masses m1 and m2 separated by distance r equals the product of these masses and of G, a universal constant, divided by the square of the distance. This law of gravity is essentially the human understanding of gravity and force. Although this understanding is powerful for explaining the movement of celestial bodies, predicting their motion, and launching satellites, it is still limited and defective and unable to explain the essence of force. Actually, if you think more deeply about the force, you will find that we do not understand what it is, although we know Newton’s Law of Gravity. Modern physics has clarified four fundamental forces, or fundamental interactions, which are gravitational force, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force. There should be microparticles transmitting the forces or interactions between masses, but the graviton that transmits gravity has not yet been found since it may be too weak and tiny. Afterward, Albert Einstein attempted to unify the four fundamental forces by the Theory of Everything but did not succeed. Currently, quantum theory has been developed to explain and understand the mass and forces, but far from finished. Similarly, Einstein’s mass-energy equation E = mc2 is also the human’s grand understanding of energy, mass, and light speed. By this equation, energy and mass are the same thing just in different forms, and a tiny mass is embodied with great power if breaking its atom. As an understanding, this equation and theory are the basis of nuclear power. Therefore, any scientific theory is indeed the human understanding on some objects of the cosmos, maybe correct or wrong or limited. Science cannot ensure the correctness and truth by itself but can approach the correctness and truth by continuous exploration and argument step by step. As natural science focuses on natural beings and phenomena, social science focuses on social beings and phenomena such as economy, politics, religion, marriage, morality, culture, institution, history, civilization, and human behavior. Anything in the cosmos can be the objects of science, and anything in human society can be the objects of social science. As natural science and social science are all human understandings of natural and social beings in the cosmos, they have the same essence as human understanding, just different in their objects and methodologies. Although the methodologies of mathematics and experiments are generally used in natural science to observe, understand, and describe natural objects, these methodologies are not the criteria to distinguish social science from natural science. It does not mean that the social science cannot be science because it cannot apply mathematics and experiments; likewise, it does not mean that the social science can be science only when it can apply mathematics and experiments. Both natural science and social science are human understandings, arguable but not absolute, evolving but not ossified, developing but not fixed, accumulating but not divided, as

20

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

knowledge. They are the most reliable knowledge according to our current cognition of the cosmos. Although art is generally not regarded and recognized as, and fundamentally different from, science, it is closely related to science than generally thought, and even art = science. Similar to science, art is also a kind of human understanding of the beings of the cosmos, not in the language of mathematics and scientific jargon but in various forms, such as music, painting, literature, and behavior. Artists obtain their specific understandings of the world not from physical experiments or mathematical calculations as scientists do but from their personal observation, experience, cognition, and empathy. Similar to great scientists, great artists also have profound and deep understandings of the world, mainly about human nature and society, goodness and evil, beauty and ugliness, happiness and sorrow. In addition, they can express their understandings by their marvelous skills in various fields, such as William Shakespeare’s literature, Vincent Willem van Gogh’s painting, Ludwig van Beethoven’s music, and Alex Honnold’s free solo. They also try their best to understand the world and express their understandings of the world, similar to great scientists. Are these artists’ understanding correct? Similarly, we can also ask, are those scientists’ understanding correct? As Karl Popper argued that scientific knowledge only requires various assumptions to be falsified or verified by observation and experimentation (Thornton, 2019), any scientific theories are limited but not perfect and absolute, such as Newton classical mechanics and quantum theory, which cannot yet be falsified or experimented with by current technology since the extreme dimensions include Planck length and time, graviton, and multiple universes. We cannot say that Newton’s Law of Gravity and Einstein’s Theory of Relativity are absolute and forever correct. Actually, we do not know what correctness is and can only argue and approach the correctness gradually and continuously. Regarding arts, correctness does not mean whether it is factual or realistic but whether it is moving and enlightening, depending on the reality and accuracy of the author’s understanding and expression of the world. Although the art may be imaginary and exaggerated, the good art is based upon reality.

1.5.2 Social Science Social science is the human understanding of social beings and social phenomena, mainly including economics, politics, sociology, history, ethics, and psychology. Although generally divided and disciplined, these branches are actually the parts of the whole human society and social living without an essential difference, while scholars separated the disciplines just for simplicity and convenience. Production, consumption, technology, and government can be not only objects of economics but also objects of politics and sociologies. Political science concerns political phenomena such as the state, government, party, and power. Sociology argues all social phenomena, including marriage, family, economy, culture, and politics. History concerns the human societies in the past. Ethics studies what is good or

1.5 Natural Science and Social Science

21

bad, moral or immoral, and whether people should do or should not do something. Psychology argues that how people think and behave. Although all of us, as ordinary people, can have our understandings of these issues, only those profound, logical, and reasonable understandings can be accumulated as disciplined knowledge and form branches of science. This disciplined knowledge can provide insights into human society, but they should be combined and unified but not isolated and divided; otherwise, biases, misunderstandings, and failures are inevitable. Economics is the human understanding and explanation of all economic phenomena, such as production, exchange, distribution, and consumption, as well as economic institutions, such as markets, firms, property rights, and governments. Modern economics has expanded to so many topics and then formed subdisciplines such as micro, macro, institutional, public, environmental, political, and social economics, deepening our understanding of the economy and related phenomena and human behavior. For example, the theory and book of An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith (1723–1790), published in 1776, is about the homo economicus, division of labor, and free market, illuminating an explaining what is and how to create the wealth of nation. After Adam Smith, modern economics gradually formed its theoretical framework based upon homo economicus and utility (profit) maximization, explaining human behaviors in nearly all social spheres and gaining the reputation of economic Imperialism. From the perspective of economics, human society is undoubtedly developing and becoming better because it has created and enjoyed much more wealth of nation and well-being than the past. However, we do not think that modern economics and Adam Smith’s theory of the wealth of nations, as his understanding and explanation, are absolutely correct. Human nature and rationality are not sole and narrow self-interested homo economicus, but simultaneously maybe altruistic and sympathetic, recognized by Adam Smith in his other book The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Additionally, in the background of the environmental movement, the wealth of nations should include not only economic goods measured by monetary units but also human capital, environmental capital, and cultural capital. The wealth of nations in the modern era is much broader than that in Adam Smith’s time. Actually, the foundation and methodology of modern economics is rather defective for its value monism, gaining it the reputation of “knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing” (Ackerman & Heizerling, 2005). Political science is the human understanding and explanation of political phenomena in any history and society, such as state, government, statesman, politician, official, party, power, policy, election, etc. As economic and social living can also be part of politics, the economy and society cannot be divided from politics. It is hard to say which is more comprehensive among the economy, politics, and society, depending on the issues and perspectives. Any history and society have its politics. Issues such as political living in prehistorical human society, the origin of the state and government, political activity in any country at any period, and the performance of any statesman and politician are all interesting and important political phenomena that are worthy of argument and understanding. It is biased to look the Western liberal democracy as the “best” and “sole”, or “major” political system,

22

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

although they are important, and it is unscientific to describe some politics systems as backward totalitarianism, autocracy, authoritarianism, if these concepts have derogatory but not neutral scientific meanings. Even if we have to use these concepts, we should be cautious in excluding their emotional and valuational contents. We should understand and explain social phenomena, such as why there were bloody wars and genocides, why political leaders were chosen by hereditary systems but not general elections, why administrative bureaucracy is inevitable and necessary, and why the political system of China, as well as other countries, is different from that of the USA. After we truly understand and scientifically explain these phenomena and issues, we can gradually overcome various political defects and achieve political development. Actually, here, the defects and development may not be value neutral because they have potential value content, potentially meaning that politics are currently better than the past and that future politics are currently better. However, as an important social phenomenon and concept, the value concept and phenomenon can still be understood and argued profoundly and used scientifically. When we carefully and clearly clarify the value criteria of politics, such as justice, transparency, rule of law, and efficiency, we can declare that our human politics has been developing, becoming better, in the past. Sociology is more scientific than modern economics and politics because it truly attempts to understand and explain all social phenomena without implicit value judgment and biases. Sociology is more comprehensive than economics and politics, as the economy and politics are also parts of society and can be understood and explained by sociology as the branches of social economics and social politics emerge. Auguste Comte (1798–1857), the father of sociology, was the first to realize the importance of relating sociology with science and name the new subject “social physics”. Any social phenomenon can be researched and understood by sociology, including common phenomena such as economy, politics, culture, marriage, sex behavior, family, religion, and weird, terrible, and even disgusting phenomena such as war, genocide, crime, taboo, cannibalism, LGBT, corruption, and totalitarianism. Indeed, we should not use adjectives such as weird, terrible, and disgusting to describe these social phenomena because these words have implicit value bias. One prominent difference between natural and social science is that natural scientists will not criticize natural phenomena, regardless of how strange they are, but understand and explain, and then, natural scientists attempt to discover scientific principles and utilize them to benefit humans. In contrast, nearly all ordinary people and many social scientists always, unintentionally and implicitly, criticize social phenomena before understanding and explaining them. Actually, no matter how weird, terrible, or disgusting the social phenomena are, social scientists should, similar to natural scientists, understand and explain their objects, and then, they can discover some social principles, provide policy suggestions and recommendations, and benefit humankind either. Science, regardless of natural science or social sciences, is to understand and explain but not to criticize or value judge. Alternatively, reasonable criticism and value judgment are based upon deep understanding and explanation. As Jared Diamond (1999, pp. 17), an anthropologist and evolution biologist and the author of best-selling book “Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fate of Human Societies”, stated:

1.5 Natural Science and Social Science

23

Understanding is more often used to try to alter an outcome than to repeat or perpetuate it. That’s why psychologists try to understand the minds of murderers and rapists, why social historians try to understand genocide, and why physicians try to understand the causes of human disease. Those investigators do not seek to justify murder, rape, genocide, and illness. Instead, they seek to use their understanding of a chain of causes to interrupt the chain.

Is history a branch of social science? History is our recording and understanding of our past. What is happening today will become the history of tomorrow. We have recorded modern human history rather exactly and convincingly by texts and languages. For example, the history of the United States is relatively short, and what happened in the War of Independence (1775–1784) and afterward are basically clear, although more events and details and reasons are still unknown and worthy of discovery and argument. The history of ancient Greece, India, Mesopotamia, and China can be traced back to approximately 3000 BCE–5000 BCE, which is not as reliable as modern history, and more events and details are unknown and necessary to be clarified. Furthermore, the prehistory of humankind without texts but recorded by painting, building, instruments, and relics can be traced back to 2.5 million years as stone age or even earlier. The history before that and the origin of humankind are still scientifically unknown but still can be imagined, understood, and explained by myth and religion, although not reliable. When arguing whether history is science or not, we should distinguish two things: one is historical facts, and the other is the understanding and explanation of these facts. For example, the Holocaust of Nazi Germany in World War II is a historical fact, still with many details unknown and necessary to be clarified. However, the understandings and explanations of these facts may vary and conflict and may be argued forever, deepening on existing facts and more discovered facts. Although there may be some controversies regarding the facts, reasons, and explanations of these historical events, historians may gradually reach consensus, deepening our understanding of the Holocaust and World War II and avoiding this kind of tragedy in the future. In addition, there are controversies among natural scientists, and they can gradually reach consensus with the development of science. The discovery of historical facts, mainly by archaeological exploration and newly discovered documents and other new technology such as DNA sequencing and carbon-14 dating, can help historical scientists more deeply understand and explain history. Is ethics and morality a branch of science, and how can they be? We have argued that any phenomenon can be the objects of science, any social phenomenon can be the objects of social science, and science is a reliable human understanding of these objects. Ethics, morality, and religion, as real social phenomena, therefore, can be the objects and branch of science. Ethics is the research and knowledge about good and bad, right and wrong, and then whether people should do or not do something. Utilitarianism from Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and deontology from Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) are the two main theories of ethics, suggesting what people should do and explaining why people practically do. When people do business and earn money in the market as homo economicus, they basically follow utilitarianism, and when they take their social responsibility, fulfill the contract and sacrifice their interest or life altruistically as martyr, they follow the deontology.

24

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

Ethics and morality, although invisible and intangible, are the factual principles and basis of human behavior, formed and transformed in society, culture, and education. These theories of ethics and morality can well explain human behavior, so they can be scientific and reasonable and arguable. Any law, institution, or human behavior has an ethical and moral foundation, which are recognized by the general public and change according to the social circumstance and can be understood scientifically, for example, the law of death sentence or abolishment of death sentence and the illegality or legality of homosexual marriage. We do not need to choose one of them as good (correct) or bad (wrong) and do not need to force people to choose their moral principles but to understand these principles. When we truly understand ethics, we can clarify their goodness or badness. The goodness and badness of ethics is similar to the correctness and wrongness of science. As there is no absolute correctness or wrongness of science, there is no absolute goodness or badness of ethics. As human understanding, science and ethics are all limited and relative assumptions, arguable, developable, and changeable. The scientific argument of ethics and morality can help us deeply understand laws, institutions, and human behaviors. Religion is generally not regarded as science and is sometimes even an enemy of science in history. However, religion, as a real and objective social phenomenon, has a close relation to science and can still be argued and understood by science. The arguments of science of religion and religion of science are all reasonable and enlightening. In the long history of the Middle Age, people have lived under religions, and early scientists such as Nikolaj Kopernik (1473–1543), Giordano Bruno (1548– 1600), and Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) were all educated by theology, trained as missionary, convinced by science, and persecuted by Christianity. After the scientific revolution, religions have gradually declined but still existed and functioned strongly. Essentially, religion is also a kind of human understanding, similar to science, of natural and social beings, such as the origin of the universe, the heaven or hell after death, and the cause of fortune or adversity, which are still not perfectly answered by science. However, unlike science, traditional religion is absolute and arbitrary, not allowing doubt and query, while science encourages question, reflection, and deliberation. Since many phenomena, such as illness, earthquake, and disaster, can be well understood and explained by science, religion has retreated from these issues. In contrast, since many issues, such as the existence of God, the origin of the universe, and the spirit after death, cannot yet be well and satisfactorily explained by science, religion will still exist to explain these issues. Actually, as most understandings and explanations of religion cannot be falsified or verified, such as the existence of God, the scientific theories of Newton and Einstein can also be understood and explained as created by God. Indeed, science and religion can be compatible and harmonious, and some natural scientists, including Newton, are also religious. Although some religious behaviors, such as the absolute worship of God, the absolute belief and obedience of religious doctrine, and the arbitrary rejection of evolution theory, are not scientific, most questions, such as the origin of religions, the relationship and difference among religions, and the social function of religions, can be scientific issues and can be argued and understood scientifically. For example, why countries adopted the integration or separation of religion and politics in history and now, as a

1.5 Natural Science and Social Science

25

scientific and political issue, has been basically explained and understood and solved, deepening our understanding of religion and politics.

1.6 Scientific Methodology 1.6.1 Rationality and Experiment How do natural scientists do their research and understand their objects of the natural world? There are diverse scientific methodologies for various natural objects in different scientific fields. For example, in mathematics, mathematicians deduce from some fundamental and unquestionable axioms as assumptions. The correctness of conclusions and deduction can be guaranteed by the axioms, and relaxation of axioms can generate new mathematics and understandings, such as Riemannian geometry and Lobachevskian geometry, by rejecting the validity of Euclid’s fifth postulate. All the five postulates are: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e)

A straight line segment can be drawn joining any two points. Any straight line segment can be extended indefinitely in a straight line. Given any straight line segment, a circle can be drawn having the segment as the radius and one endpoint as the center. All Right Angles are congruent. Through any given point not on a line, there passes exactly one line parallel to that line in the same plane.

These new mathematics have deepened our understanding of space and time as the mathematical basis of Einstein’s Relativity Theory. In physics, theoretical physicians such as Einstein are basically professional mathematicians, doing their research by mathematical calculation and deduction, while experimental physicians will design and launch experiments to examine, verify or falsify the theoretical deductions and assumptions. Comparatively, astronomers will originally observe celestial bodies by the naked eye and now by increasingly powerful telescopes, such as the Hubble. Biologists will also observe tiny cells, viruses, and microorganisms by ultrastrong microscopy. Based upon their observations, scientists will construct their theories and explain the natural world. Therefore, mathematics, deduction, induction, experiment, and observation are some fundamental scientific methodologies. All these scientific methodologies are based upon rationality, the essence, and synonym of science. Science is to understand the world by rationality but not intuition and emotion. Rationality can help scientists, and us as ordinary people, find various fallacies without experiments and observations, while rationality still needs to be verified, examined, and argued. For example, Aristotle (384 BCE–322 BCE), as one of the greatest philosophers and early physicist, believed that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones. Galileo (1564–1642) conducted a thought experiment by rationality to refute this claim. If we link a heavier and a lighter object together by

26

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

a string, then we let them fall. As predicted by Aristotle theory, the heavier one will be impeded by the lighter one and will fall slower, and the string will be stretched and even break. However, as a whole object together, it will fall faster, and the string will be loose without stretching. This logic contradiction can indicate the fallacy of Aristotle theory, and the Leaning Tower of Pisa experiment further verified the correctness of Galileo and the fallacy of Aristotle (Gunther, 1935).

1.6.2 Thought Experiment Thought experiment is a powerful methodology in natural science and social science (Brown & Fehige, 2019). A logic and well-designed thought experiment can touch the core of issues and discover the essence of problems, particularly for extreme situations that are difficult or even impossible to physically experiment. There are many famous thought experiments in physics and ethics. For example, Schrödinger Cat and Einstein’s spooky action of quantum entanglement in physics has attracted scientists to ponder the weird quantum mechanism and try to design practical experiments to verify these thought experiments. In ethics, the classical trolley problem can help us ponder and understand moral justice in our social livings. The Last Man Argument, introduced by Richard Routley in 1973, urged us to imagine that (Peterson & Sandin, 2013): The last man (or person) surviving the collapse of the world system lays about him, eliminating, as far as he can, every living thing, animal or plant (but painlessly if you like, as at the best abattoirs). What he does is quite permissible according to basic chauvinism, but on environmental grounds what he does is wrong.

This thought experiment can reduce the complex ethical relation to a pure human environment and urge us to ponder and construct a proper and just relationship between humans and the environment. This means that humans cannot dispose of the environment and ecology arbitrarily, even if we have the unlimited capability and may not bear some negative consequences, and these are no other humans. For example, a moral person will not kill an ant deliberately. The Last Man Argument illuminates that the essence of the current ecological crisis is not only the humanto-human problem but also the human-to-ecology problem. Our human society can solve, and has basically solved, although not thoroughly, the problem of human to human by modern conceptions of human rights, rule of law, and civil society. The moral abolishment of slavery and establishment of equality of humans regardless of race, color, gender, and nationality can be regarded as the first moral revolution, achieving harmony among humankind. However, we cannot yet solve the ecological crisis because our current ecological ethics have not given enough moral consideration to ecology and have not formed the proper and just moral relation between humans and ecology. The second moral revolution is necessary to achieve harmony between humans and ecology.

1.6 Scientific Methodology

27

Actually, those well-defined assumptions, novels, and movies, maybe imaginary but with abundant and reasonable details and various possibilities, can be regarded as thought experiments, helping us to reason, question, and experience, similar to what Galileo has done. Movies such as The Matrix (1999), The Day After Tomorrow (2004), 2012: Doomsday (2009), and Ready Player One (2018) can help us ponder, introspect and argue the future of the earth, humankind, and the consequence of advancement of science and technology such as AI. Serious historical novels and movies, such as Stalingrad: Enemy at the Gates (2001), Darkest Hour (2017), 1917 (2020), maybe ideological and biased, are arguing and exploring some possibility of historical events and figures from some specific angles. Those great directors, such as The Wachowskis, Roland Emmerich, and Steven Spielberg, although not scientists, have profound thoughts and understandings of human society, similar to scientists. Therefore, it is reasonable for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, host of Academy Awards, to link arts and sciences together. Certainly, a scientific thought experiment, as a scientific assumption, must be verified and falsified by serious and strict experiments, while a good artistic thought experiment, in various forms of art, may not necessarily be physically verified but should also be real and moving. Relative to real physical and social experiments, thought experiments are easy and cheap to construct but may also be loose and illogical and should be strictly and seriously examined and verified. Comparatively, the Large Hadron Collider of the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator, is the most expensive scientific equipment and can do many physical experiments, but it cannot yet verify the Schrödinger Cat, Einstein’s spooky action of quantum entanglement, Planck length and time, which have been beyond the technical and financial capability of current human society and have to be understood and imagined by thought experiment. Different from and similar to physics, human society and human living cannot be deliberately experimented with, but we have done various social experiments, and the thought experiment can help us better and more deeply understand the world. Therefore, the pivotal thought experiment of this book is as follows: CONSIDERING ALL THE SPHERES AND FACETS OF HUMAN SOCIETY, IS IT BECOMING BETTER COMPARED TO THE PAST, AND HOW CAN WE DECLARE IT AS DEVELOPMENT?

1.6.3 Value Neutrality and Value Irrelevance Max Weber (1864–1920), one of the founders of sociology and social science, advocated value neutrality, or value irrelevance, as the basic methodology of social science. Natural science is about natural beings and natural phenomena, so it is relatively easier for natural scientists to look, judge, and research objects without emotion and value than social scientists. Particle physicists are generally familiar with microparticles, and zoologists are generally familiar with animals, but these familiarities do not necessarily mean that these physicists and zoologists, as natural

28

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

scientists, “love” or “hate” these microparticles and animals. Certainly, they may have some specific kinds of emotions to their research objects; for instance, physicists may be fascinated by the weird behaviors of the Higgs Boson and the beauty and harmony of the cosmos, zoologists may be obsessed by wild lions and tigers, and it is just the fascination and obsession of nature that motivate natural scientists to make great discoveries and contributions. However, these emotions of natural scientists are more as curiosity rather than the value judgment as good or bad. Much different from social scientists, natural scientists will seldom, if not never, criticize or blame the behaviors and phenomena of natural beings such as microparticles and animals and viruses but explain and understand why these natural beings move and behave in their ways. In contrast, social scientists and ordinary people, including politicians, businessmen, social activists, always criticize and blame, confusing the fact and value, understanding and criticism, explanation and evaluation. Indeed, although most natural scientists are professionally trained in their fields, they are not so in social fields and may still fail to understand and solve various social issues. Social science and social scientists are dealing with various social phenomena and social beings, including politics, economics, education, health, religion, morality, culture, and civilization, so comprehensive that Weber use “Cultural Science” or “Social Science” to refer them. Indeed, natural phenomena, natural beings, and natural science, as objects perceived and treated and utilized by humans, can also be included in social science research, so social science may be broader than natural science, including the latter, as the relationship between science and humans is an important topic in social science. Although it is difficult, maybe not impossible, to avoid human subjective perception, cognition, and evaluation for not only natural science but also social science, as the natural science is actually also the human subjective perception and cognition of natural phenomena and natural beings, it is particularly necessary and essential for social scientists to distinguish the perception and description of facts from the evaluation of facts. There are numerous so-called “good” social phenomena, such as benevolence, philanthropy, altruism, beauty of arts and environment, freedom, democracy, justice, etc., and “bad” phenomena, such as genocide, crime, war, rape, violence, disorder, dictatorship, autocracy, etc., and the issues of politics, economics, religion, and history always arouse the emotions and value judgments of researchers and ordinary people. However, value neutrality and value irrelevance, as social scientific methodologies, require us, as social scientists, to understand and explain these social phenomena first and scientifically and then allow us, according to presumed value standards, to criticize and evaluate these social phenomena and give some recommendations as valuers. Value neutrality and value irrelevance do not exclude the value, which is, on its own, a nonnegligible fact and phenomenon in human society and all of us, but look and treat various values equally. Regarding social phenomena, such as murder and autocracy, science requires us to explore, understand and explain why they occur, but not they are bad and should not occur. During the process of all social phenomena, there must be values pursuit and psychological activities, but social scientists should treat these values and activities neutrally and calmly but not disgustingly and emotionally. Rape is truly bad and disgusting for most modern societies and people, but by

1.6 Scientific Methodology

29

value neutrally, we need to explain why this phenomenon exists in the whole human history and even today; why it is more serious in some cultures and societies; what is the real reason of rape, for instance, law, education, culture, patriarchy, and even gene; whether there might be no rape at all in the prehistorical matriarchal society; whether the legalization and decriminalization of sex industry may reduce the rape; and what is the proper sex relationship between men and women? Here, “proper” may have some value implications and should be reminded. All these questions are scientific questions and worthy of exploration. Social scientists must have a more profound understanding of these issues than ordinary people, not necessarily correct, but being argued and deepened, and then can help us understand the rape more deeply and help governments and societies better establish laws and solve the issues. Here, the “better” also has some value implication, and what is “better” is actually determined by society and government but not social scientists. Social phenomena of politics, economics, culture, and history are filled with values and facts, which should have been distinguished clearly in their respective branches of science but actually not distinguished but mingled. Political institutions and phenomena, mixing with their specific economic, culture, and history, are diverse and colorful, similar to ecology. They have been defined and named autocracy, authoritarianism, totalism, aristocracy, democracy, monarchy, anarchy, etc. These names and terms can identify and describe some specific social status and features but have strong value contents and biases. Autocracy and totalism are generally regarded as low, backward, and barbaric, while democracy and constitutional monarchy are high, advanced, and civilized. These terms and viewpoints, if as value neutral descriptions and definitions, are not thoroughly wrong but may hinder more profound and scientific understandings of human society. What is good political system? If we regard democracy better than autocracy, on what aspects we can make this claim? Why do human societies have so much variance in their evolutionary paths, and are we going to converge to identical or similar political modes? Whether cultures and civilizations can be claimed as good or bad, and if so, how can we claim? Social scientists, as scientists, should understand and explain these diverse political, economic, and cultural phenomena. After clarifying and setting clear value standards, we can make the value judgment what are good or bad politics, economics, and cultures, and then governments and societies can pursue the values by their polices and behaviors. Meanwhile, the value standards are not absolute and fixed, and governments, societies, and individuals can also change and argue their values accordingly. Value neutrality and value irrelevance require social scientists to understand and explain social phenomena in the first place and criticize, blame, and evaluate social phenomena in the second place. Anybody can still criticize, blame, and evaluate some social problems, but only when he/she deeply understands these problems may his/her criticisms be more accurate and punctual, and his/her suggestions be more effective. Indeed, when we criticize, blame, and evaluate, we are actually no longer social scientists but policy researchers or consultants, who must embark their criticisms, evaluations, and suggestions according to an explicit or implicit value basis. The distinction between understanding and criticism is also fit for science and technology, since science is to understand and explain the world, while technology is to utilize and

30

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

change the world according to scientific understandings. Likewise, social science, as science, is to understand and explain social phenomena, while policy, as technology, is to change the human and society according to our preferences and values. First, understand, second, criticize and change toward to preferred direction.

1.6.4 Empathy Empathy, suggested by Max Weber, is the powerful methodology of social science to deal with various values. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, empathy means “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner”. The dictionary also indicates the similarity and difference between empathy and sympathy as psychological activities. Sympathy, as a virtue and value, means one can perceive and experience feelings and emotions, generally pain and sorrow, of others from the standpoint of “I”. Just because of sympathy, people may change their attitudes and perform moral and virtuous behaviors such as help, salvation, donation, philanthropy, etc. However, much different from sympathy, empathy means and requires that one can perceive and experience feelings and emotions, positive or negative, of others from the perspective of “them”, that is, imaginarily, thinking and behaving as others, putting yourself into others’ shoes. As virtues and values, sympathy is common, since everybody has more or less of it. In contrast, empathy, although everybody can similarly possess, is a scarce and valuable capability essential for the current turbulent world. As social science is to understand and explain social phenomena embedded in human activities, empathy is necessary for social scientists and everybody to understand and explain institutions, behaviors, persons, cultures, and nearly all social beings in much diverse social contexts. If social scientists only observe and research social beings from the standpoint of himself/herself, he/she cannot touch the essence and the truth because his/her findings are not factual, as the related actors do not behave and think as he/she imagines. Empathy requires social scientists to try their best to put themselves into the given social contexts and empathize with the figures and circumstances, understand and explain their institutional and cultural backgrounds, and then obtain some truth and insights. To understand some unfamiliar cultures and societies, the best way is not to read some documents, which also need empathy, but to visit, experience, survey, and communication with people there. People who understand China, the USA, Russia, or India best are those who can best empathize with these people and societies. Certainly, historians, as social scientists, are generally impossible to enter into the past, but empathy is still necessary and possible for them to understand historical events and figures. Good historical research is a reasonable and logical understanding and explanation of historical events and figures. Although nobody knows the mental activities of historical figures, such as

1.6 Scientific Methodology

31

Plato, Jesus, Stalin, or Hitler, and that of anybody else, these people and their behaviors can be reasonably understood and explained by empathy. Only when you can empathize with somebody can you understand him/her. Most existing methodologies of social science, such as visits, experience, field work and field trips, social surveys and in-depth interviews, and questionnaires, are actually based upon empathy to deeply understand the research objects. Although some great philosophers such as Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) could spend his entire life in the hometown, the city of Konigsberg, and constructed his great philosophy, most social scientists must visit and experience the concerned cultures and societies, while the essence of visit and experience is not to observe as outsider, but to empathize as insider. The aim of field work, social surveys, in-depth interviews, and questionnaires is to empathize with the figures, events, and institutions, to explain what is happening at that time and space, and to understand what the figures are thinking from the standpoints of them but not the researchers. This means that social scientists need to observe and understand and explain societies, not from the points of themselves but from the points of the players. Therefore, social scientists should immerse their minds and observations into the societies that they are researching. After that, they can come out and analyze and draw some principles and theories to explain their observations and findings. Then, they can obtain some insights as scientific discoveries. In addition to formal scientific training and disciplining, the capability of empathy can also be cultivated and gained by arts such as novel, movie, and documentary arts, as the viewpoint art = science suggests. Although most novels and movies are imaginary and exaggerated, they are not thoroughly fictitious and ungrounded but based upon reality, since the thoroughly fictitious and absurd arts cannot be moving and good. As a kind of think experiment, a good novel movie can design and depict the scenes of specific societies with abundant and vivid details, helping people and social scientists better empathize with their objects. Novel, movies, documentary, and other art forms, such as music and painting, have scientific implications and functions, cultivating the capability of empathy. Thus, the Nobel Prize placed the literature award with physics, chemistry, physiology, or medicine and peace together, as the literature can be regarded as a branch of science to discover and explore sophisticated human nature and society. Actually, a narrow natural scientist, only knowing the material world but not society and humanity, may be crazy and psychotic, jeopardizing society and people and his own family. In contrast, some great scientists, such as Albert Einstein, can understand and appreciate art, society, and humanity and sense the similarity and linkage of art and science. Ars can help us empathize, better understand and explain society and humanity, reduce conflicts and achieve harmony, and construct better politics and society, if there are.

32

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

1.6.5 Mathematics and Mathematic Model Mathematics has been generally regarded as the purest science. Some scholars believe that the extent of scientification of a discipline can be measured by the extent of mathematization in the discipline. However, this viewpoint is not correct because mathematics is one way to understand and explain the world but not the sole and essential way. Originating from practical applications, mathematics is the abstraction of the real world. Actually, there are no numbers such as 1, 2, and 3 in the real world at all but only 1, 2, and 3 items, such as apple and people. By the abstraction of the real world to natural numbers (1, 2, 3), mathematicians gradually developed integers (−3, −2, −1, √ numbers (1/2 = 0.5, 1/3 = 0.33…, −1/7), irrational √ 0, 1,√2, 3), rational numbers (√ 2, − 5, 3 + 2/3), transcendental numbers (e, π), and imaginary numbers ( −1 = i, 3i, 2−5i). Then, mathematicians have obtained the currently broadest class of numbers, making the algebra complete. Leonhard Euler (1707– 1783), one of the greatest mathematicians, linked these magic numbers by Euler’s identity, the so-called “most beautiful equation”: eiπ + 1 = 0. These numbers and algebra, as well as other mathematical branches such as geometry, calculus, logic, statistics, and probability theory, become the language of science, helping us describe, understand, and explain the real world more precisely, logically, and consistently. However, the essence of science is to observe, think, reason, understand, and explain the world, while mathematics is merely one, but not the sole, methodology of science, and not definitely necessary for all branches of natural science. Astronomy is to study and understand the formation and evolution of various celestial bodies, including blackholes, stars, neutron stars, planets, satellites, comets, atoms, quarks, light, and strings. What are there in the cosmos? What is the origin of cosmos? And what is the most basic structure of the cosmos? Biology and life science are used to study and understand life phenomena, including cells, viruses, genes, proteins, amino acids, DNA, RNA, etc. Why and how nonliving basic elements such as carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen can construct living and spirits? In these typical branches of natural science, mathematics may be used but not necessarily, while telescopes and microscopes may be more useful and powerful. Actually, mathematics, telescopes, and microscopes, as modern techniques, are neither sufficient nor necessary conditions of science because scientists before the inventions of these techniques could also think, observe and do their research by the naked eye and rationality. Here, we do not attempt to deny the great power of mathematics and scientific instruments and techniques but to clarify the essence of science and then argue how to implement mathematics and scientific techniques in social science more appropriately. Mathematical models have been prevalently used in social sciences, particularly in economics. For example, demanding and consumers’ behaviors can be mathematically modeled as a demand function Qd = f(P, Y, Ps , θ), linking the dependent variable, quantity demand (Qd ), with various independent variables that determine the quantity demanded, such as product price (P), income (Y), price of substitute products (Ps ), and other factors (θ). The elasticity of demand of some factors, say, price, = ∂Q · P. is defined as the degree to which demand varies with its price, eP = Q/Q P/P ∂P Q

1.6 Scientific Methodology

33

The phenomenon that demand generally decreases with increasing price has been drawn as the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility. Similarly, the producing and producers’ behaviors can be modeled as the production function Q = f(L, K, T), where Q is the production, and L, K,T are labor, capital, and technology, respec∂Q and ∂K , tively. The marginal product of labor and capita can then be defined as ∂Q ∂L and more sophisticated mathematical derivations can be conducted. In addition, the human, as homo economicus, can be mathematically modeled as a utility maximizer u = u(G1 , G2, · · · , Gn , I), where Gn is the n goods consumed by the person and I is income. Obviously, mathematical models are still one way to understand and explain human natures and behaviors, having the advantages of preciseness and logicality but neglecting the richness and complexity of human behaviors and human societies.

1.6.6 Evidence and Evidence-Based Analysis Science, regardless of whether it is natural or social, aims to understand and explain the world, which needs to be verified and falsified by evidence. In physics, an understanding and explanation of the natural world must be verified by strict physical observations and experiments. Otherwise, they are still unverified assumptions. Of course, even though they have been verified by experiments, they are still theoretical assumptions temporarily accepted, challenged by new evidence, verification, and falsification. This is the process of science, cognition, and discovery. Therefore, evidence is essential and crucial for science. Not only physicists, doctors, and natural scientists but also politicians, economists, and ordinary people must search for evidence. However, what is evidence, and how to collect, evaluate and use evidence are also scientific questions that need to be clarified. In the natural sciences, evidence is generally facts and phenomena observed by natural scientists. Because of the limitations of the naked eye and feelings, natural scientists increasingly depend on advanced instruments such as telescopes, microscopes, and medical equipment. Observing by naked eyes, Claudius Ptolemaeus (approx. 100–approx. 180 AD), the great Greco-Egyptian mathematician, astronomer, geographer, and astrologer, believed the earth was the center of the universe with the sun revolving around it and constructed the geocentric model of the universe now known as the Ptolemaic System. Although not true, this theory, as the early understanding and explanation of the universe, can be verified by some observable evidence but falsified by more credible evidence. In 1609, the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) observed the stars by his homemade crude refracting telescope with a magnification factor of approximately 8x, seeing the splendid starry sky and confirming his belief in heliocentric theory. By observing through more power celestial telescopes, such as the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), scientists and we now know that the sun is not the center of the universe but a very ordinary star, and nobody knows where the center of the universe is. Similarly, Antony van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723), Dutch microscopist and the Father of Microbiology invented the first practical microscope with a magnification factor of 200–300. By

34

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

his devices, he first observed and described bacteria with a size of 10–6 m (μm) and opened a new world of microbiology. However, viruses, with a size of 10–9 m (nm) and smaller than approximately 1000 times that of bacteria, cannon be observed by optical microscopy but can be observed by electronic microscopy. Furthermore, the behaviors of smaller particles, for example, the Planck length Lp≈1.6 × 10–35 m, as the smallest size that humans currently know, are far beyond humans’ capability of observation and so cannot be observed and experimented with but can only be imagined and reasoned. The advancement of medical science is based upon evidence. Hippocrates (approx. 460 BC–approx. 375 BC), ancient Greek physician and the father of medicine, advocated that doctors should diagnose and treat diseases by evidence and rationality, but not sorcery, curse, and wrath of God. However, according to the theory from his observations and evidence, the health and illness of a person depend on the balance of four types of body fluids, blood, mucus, black bile, and yellow bile, which is basically wrong according to modern medical science. Optical microscopy, electronic microscopy, and other powerful medical devices can help doctors observe and diagnose more precisely. However, as the human body is a complex system and diseases are complex issues, with various complementary but sometimes conflicting evidence, different doctors may have much different diagnoses according to their different understandings and cognitions of the evidence. Therefore, evidence-based medicine (EBM) was advocated and practiced after the 1990s, combining three components: the best evidence, clinical expertise, and patient demands and preferences. The essence of EBM is science and rationality, which recognize that there is various and even conflicting evidence, that different sources of evidence have different credibility and should be prioritized and that the preferences of patients and experiences of doctors, although subjective and maybe defective, are also evidence and should be considered. All of us, including scientists and the general public, by advanced devices or the naked eye will observe and gain our evidence, but we should distinguish and prioritize this evidence in rational and scientific ways. Social science about human society should also depend on evidence, and evidencebased analysis, decisions, management, politics, economics, and development are emerging and essential. Social development is about nearly all aspects of human society and relates to all branches of social science. Social scientists do not need to observe human societies by advanced telescopes and microscopes, and the difficulties of understanding human society and social science research are not the large or small dimensions of cosmos or quantum but the empathy of the human mind and the understanding of diverse individuals and societies. The facts of human society and social science are clear and definite, while sometimes we do not know the details that truly happened, and the values in the various forms of perceptions and moralities that lead to the facts are always blurred and controversial. Facts and values are all evidence that need to be considered in the social sciences.

1.6 Scientific Methodology

35

1.6.7 Concept Definition and Clarification Concepts and languages are crucial for humankind to think, express, understand and explain the world, but the concepts and language in daily life are much different from those in academia and science. Generally, concepts in natural science have been scientized, mathematized and quantified with clear dimensions and units. There are seven basic quantities in physics: mass (kg), length (m), time (s), electric current (A), temperature (K), luminous intensity (cd), and amount of a substance (mol). Other quantities can be derived from the combinations of these basic quantities, such as force (N = kg · m/s2 ), speed (m/s), and energy (J = kg · m2 /s2 ). Although many unknows and controversies remain, for example, what are the essences of these physical quantities such as force, mass, and time, these scientific definitions, mathematicalization, and quantification have solved many confusions and helped scientists and humankind more precisely understand and describe the world, signifying the progress of science. However, most concepts in social science are ambiguous, lack consistent and accurate definitions, and are difficult to measure and quantify, particularly about development and value such as goodness, badness, justice, equality, wealth, health, happiness, democracy, freedom, rule of law, transparency, innovation, culture, civilization, etc. For example, Manon Jeanne Phlipon (1754–1793), the French politician in the French Revolution, sighed that “O Liberté, que de crimes on commet en ton nom!” (Liberty, how many evils assume you the name by the line) before she was sentenced to death. Friedrich von Hayek (1898–1992), the Nobel Prize of Economics laureate of 1972, and many other liberalism scholars wrote, argued and clarified what liberty and freedom are, with so many adjectives such as classical, new, neo, negative and positive, economic, political, and social. John Rawls (1921–2002), professor of philosophy at Harvard, spent the whole life to research justice. In practice, many people and politicians and scholars still do not know what real freedom and justice are and then commit mistakes here and there. Some methodologies and techniques have been invented to measure and quantify the concepts in social science, such as the GDP to measure the wealth of a nation, the income and assets to measure the wealth of an individual, the Human Development Index (HDI) to measure social development, the Happiness Index to measure individual subjective well-being or happiness, and the Democracy Index to measure the democracy of a nation. These quantified indexes can be regarded as scientific data and evidence but cannot yet define and describe the concepts precisely and comprehensively. We should be cautious to rely thoroughly on these measurements, quantifications, and evidence and correspondingly declare somethings, somebodies, and some countries good or bad, developing or deteriorating, according to the principle of evidence-based analysis. The definition and clarification of these concepts may be the first and most important step for us to understand human and human society.

36

1 Development: Individual, Organizational, and Social

References Ackerman, F., & Heizerling, L. (2005). Priceless: On knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. New Press. Becker, G. S. (1978). The economic approach to human behavior. University of Chicago Press. Brown, J. R., & Fehige, Y. (2019). Thought experiments. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/thought-experiment/ Byron, C. (2013). Marx’s human nature: Distinguishing essence from essentialism. MarxistHumanist Initiative (MHI). https://www.marxisthumanistinitiative.org/philosophy-organization/ marxs-human-nature-distinguishing-essence-from-essentialism.html Diamond, J. (1999). Guns, germs, and steel: The fate of human societies. W. W. Norton. Featherstone, D. (May 16, 2016). Why art and science are more closely related than you think. Forbes. May 16, 2016. https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/03/16/why-art-and-science-aremore-closely-related-than-you-think/#5baa427869f1 Giddens, A. (2006). Sociology. Polity Press. Gunther, R. T. (1935). Galileo and the leaning tower of Pisa. Nature, 136, 6–7. Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon & Schuster. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University Press. Peterson, M., & Sandin, P. (2013). The last man argument revisited. Journal of Value Inquiry, 47, 121–133. Pew. (2015). The future of world religions: Population growth projections, 2010–2050. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewforum.org/2015/04/02/religious-projections-2010-2050/ Rawls, J. (2001). The law of peoples. Harvard University Press. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press. Sandel, M. J. (2013). What money cannot buy: The moral limits of markets (p. 2013). Farrar. Smith, A. (1776/2018). The wealth of nations. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Thornton, S. (2019). Karl Popper. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford. edu/archives/win2019/entries/popper/ Toynbee, A. J., & Ikeda, D. (1976). Choose life: A dialogue by Arnold Toynbee and Daisaku Ikeda. Oxford University Press. Weber, M. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. The Free Press of Glencoe.

Chapter 2

Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

Value is an important and popular but ambiguous and controversial concept and phenomenon in human society, social science, and philosophy. In everyday life, we will mention the value of something, exchange and calculate the value of a cup of coffee, an automobile, a house, or the value of life. Sometimes, we may ponder why we, or they, or some organizations and governments, attempt to do something, considering what is the value of life, love, dignity, knowledge, art, science, animal, earth, and humankind, and are they valuable or invaluable. Sometimes, we may say that it is your value but not my value, as people’s values are much diverse, with the meaning as subjective evaluation. All human behaviors and social phenomena have some relationships to value and evaluation, as Milton Rokeach (1973), a psychologist, asserted that the value concept … [is] able to unify the apparently diverse interests of all the sciences concerned with human behavior. Ronald Inglehart (WVS, 2021), professor of political science at the University of Michigan, launched the World Value Survey in 1981 and claimed that values change the world. The research of value has formed a branch in philosophy and axiology, and the value issue, as the basis of human behavior, can and should be researched scientifically and profoundly.

2.1 Intrinsic Value vs. Extrinsic Value Intrinsic value has traditionally been thought to lie at the heart of ethics and philosophy and may be the start of arguments of value concepts. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has given a comprehensive description of intrinsic and extrinsic value and raised some important and related questions, such as (a) what is intrinsic value, (b) what has intrinsic value, (c) is there such a thing as intrinsic value at all, that is, are there truly intrinsic values, (d) what sort of thing can have intrinsic value, that is, can something truly has intrinsic values, (e) how to compute, or measure, quantify, intrinsic value, etc. After we truly understand intrinsic value, we can understand extrinsic value. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_2

37

38

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

2.1.1 Intrinsic Value According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the intrinsic value of something is said to be the value that something has “in itself,” or “for its own sake,” or “as such,” or “in its own right.” Intrinsic value is crucial to a variety of inner moral judgments and external decisions and behaviors. Every one of us may sometimes be inquired, or introspect, that why we do something such as work or climb or kill? I must work because I must earn money. Therefore, work is extrinsic and money more intrinsic. However, the inquiry can go on that why I want to earn money, because I must make living. Therefore, money is extrinsic and life more intrinsic. When this inquiry reaches the end and we cannot find something more to trace, we probably touch the intrinsic value, or more precisely, more intrinsic than the former, but maybe not the ultimately intrinsic at all. Although not perfect and absolute, these inquiries and introspections can help us understand that money, power, position, prestige, with their values pursued by many people, may not be as intrinsic as knowledge, science, art, truth, and beauty. We admit that all these things may have their intrinsic values, that everybody may have their intrinsic value priority and value pursuit, and that some values are more intrinsic and fundamental than others for countries and humankind. The arguments and clarifications of intrinsic value may not identify definite and absolute intrinsic values but can help us understand human behaviors and clarify the value priority and significance of things and behaviors. The arguments of what is intrinsic value and what has intrinsic value can help understand the essence and form of things. Sometimes we may confuse these two concepts, but they are different and related. We can say that education, as the form, has intrinsic value as the essence, but education itself is not intrinsic value. The intrinsic value embedded in education may be knowledge. If we can obtain the same knowledge from other sources or forms, such as family, society, internet, distant education, and self-study, traditional education forms such as school and university may be unnecessary and changed, as they did change. More extremely, if we can obtain knowledge from more technical ways, such as study or memory machines that can impress knowledge in the brain when one is sleeping, we will no longer need education, although some conservatists may oppose these technical and social changes, such as opposition of distant education and homosexual marriage. Similarly, family has the possible intrinsic values of reproducing, love, and sex. However, currently, an increasing number of couples can breed their children, love each other, and enjoy intimate relations without marriage and family. Clone technology, homosexual love and sex, and intimacy out of marriage have shaken the possible intrinsic value of family. Everything as the form is always changing, but some possible intrinsic value as its essence may be kept. The arguments of what is and what has intrinsic value can help us better understand the change and conservation of society. Although controversial and ambiguous, intrinsic value can be verified and clarified by reasoning dialogs, arguments, and introspections. Plato has demonstrated the intrinsic value of pleasure, knowledge, and wisdom in his book Republic and

2.1 Intrinsic Value vs. Extrinsic Value

39

Theaetetus through reasoning dialogs between Socrates and people. Pleasure is generally regarded as an undoubted intrinsic value but is sometimes condemned. Socrates argued that when people condemn pleasure, they do so not because they take pleasure to be bad by itself but because of the bad consequences they may find pleasure often to result. The only reason why the pleasures of food and drink and sex seem to be evil is that they result in pain and deprive us of future pleasures. Pains such as hunger and humiliation can sometimes bring pleasure in the future. Therefore, Socrates concludes that pleasure is in fact good as such and pain bad, regardless of what their consequences may on occasion be. However, we can still argue that if one never experiences pain and hunger, one will not know what pleasure and repletion are. Therefore, an enduring pleasure may be better than temporarily extravagant pleasure, such as excitement from drug addiction. A colorful life with a combination of pleasure and pain may be more attractive than a plain and happy life. Of course, it still depends on individuals’ choice. Meanwhile, Plato also rejected pleasure as the only and highest intrinsic value. When Philebus argued that pleasure was the highest good, Socrates refuted that pleasure was better when accompanied by intelligence (Zimmerman & Bradley, 2019). These arguments can well explain the behaviors that some people may sacrifice their pleasure and even life to adventure like Alex Hannold and Reinhold Messner, to do the scientific exploration like Grigory Perelman, and to discipline and suffer like ascetics. Although these behaviors can still be explained for future pleasure or nonmaterial pleasure, we can clarify and classify pleasure and understand that at least material pleasure is not the sole and highest intrinsic value. Philosophers and ordinary people generally exhibit intrinsic values by listing value items. One of the most comprehensive lists of intrinsic goods that anyone has suggested is that given by William Frankena (Zimmerman & Bradley, 2019): Life, consciousness, and activity; health and strength; pleasures and satisfactions of all or certain kinds; happiness, beatitude, contentment, etc.; truth; knowledge and true opinions of various kinds, understanding, wisdom; beauty, harmony, proportion in objects contemplated; aesthetic experience; morally good dispositions or virtues; mutual affection, love, friendship, cooperation; just distribution of goods and evils; harmony and proportion in one’s own life; power and experiences of achievement; self-expression; freedom; peace, security; adventure and novelty; and good reputation, honor, esteem, etc. (Presumably a corresponding list of intrinsic evils could be provided.)

Almost all philosophers and ordinary people who have ever pondered the question of intrinsic value may find his or her answers represented in some way by one or more items on the list above. Frankena himself noted that he did not explicitly include love and knowledge of God in his list that certain philosophers believe to be the highest good, since he took them to fall under the headings of “knowledge” and “love.” One conspicuous omission from the list, however, is the increasingly popular view that certain environmental entities or qualities may have intrinsic value, although Frankena may again assert that their values are implicitly represented by one or more items already on the list. Some environmentalists, such as Henry David Thoreau and Aldo Leopold, may insist intrinsic value in certain “natural” environments, such as wildernesses untouched by the human hand; some may find it in certain animal and plant species. Indeed, one can sincerely claim some intrinsic values in anything or

40

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

any behaviors, such as some gifts given or bequeathed by friends or relatives or some cultures of a house lived by some historical figures or ordinary people. It may be absolute to insist some values extremely intrinsic, but it is reasonable to understand that all the values in Frankena’s value list are valuable and pursued by most people, although not simultaneously and equally. However, all the value items in Frankena’s value list are ambiguous, although they may be clarified and understood more precisely by thought experiments and comparisons among the extreme situations of the value. The first example is, what does life, consciousness, and activity mean? A patient in persistent vegetative states may be physically living but has no consciousness and activity. Is he/she still living, and is it necessary and moral to sustain his/her life unconditionally? A bad, or criminal and evil, life is still a life, but is it worthy of living, although it is necessary to define what is bad, criminal and evil, and good. The second example is, what is health and strength? Although health is traditionally referred to as physical health, mental health has been increasingly highlighted by the general public and the WHO. Is a strong weightlifter with great strength but serious sports injuries physically healthy? Can a physically strong criminal possess mental health? If one has extreme physical health but poor mental health, or vice versa, can he/she be healthy? The third example concerns pleasures, satisfaction, happiness, beatitude, and contentment. Pleasure and happiness are synonyms and have various sources, such as sensory stimuli from foods, amusements, sex, drugs, and sense of achievements from works and enterprises. The pleasure from drug addiction is essentially different from that ofcareer achievement. Similarly, what is beauty, and can the appearance beauty of ladies or handsomeness of men be comparable to the beauty of souls and behaviors and the beauty of arts and sceneries? Actually, these value concepts are so confusing that they all may be described and defined by adjectives and modifiers, such as physical and mental health, material and spiritual pleasure, appearance and soul beauty, negative and positive freedom, negative and positive peace, etc. The relationships among these intrinsic value items are also complex and ambiguous. Some values may be consistent while others conflict. For example, life, consciousness, health, and strength may be roughly regarded as consistent since quality of life not only means longevity but also encompasses physical and mental health. The truth, knowledge, true opinions, understanding, and wisdom, although with some subtle differences, are basically consistent. Objective knowledge may be in the form of books and media, can be learned and grasped by people as subjective knowledge, and can enhance our wisdom. However, wisdom is active and subjective, not necessarily being learned from schools and books but from experiences and introspection. Wisdom requires one master, understand, and apply comprehensive knowledge, and biased and narrow knowledge may also jeopardize wisdom. A successful businessman may grasp abundant knowledge of business operations and profit earnings, but he may also pollute the environment and exploit workers due to the lack of knowledge of social responsibility. In fact, individuals and organizations are always perplexed and troubled by value conflicts; for example, businessmen may sacrifice the environment and people for profit, adventurers may launch expeditions at the risk of lives, and politicians may pursue freedom but lose stability. We have to

2.1 Intrinsic Value vs. Extrinsic Value

41

balance and compromise these values, and successful individuals and organizations are those who can prioritize and arrange the values according to the circumstances properly and in a timely manner. Some intrinsic values are explicit and strong, while others are not easy to perceive and recognize. Some of them, such as pleasure, happiness, satisfaction, contentment, beauty, love, friendship, power, etc. are common, pursued, and cherished by most people. However, although almost all people may recognize the value of truth, knowledge, wisdom, morally good dispositions or virtues, esthetic experience, etc., only a few of them can truly and profoundly understand and appreciate these values, which needs education, experience, and capability, greatly varying among people. Not all people can truly appreciate the value and beauty of mathematics, such as the Euler equation eiπ + 1 = 0, the theories of Einstein, the paintings of Claude Monet (1840– 1926), the music of Mozart, and some so-called backward cultures. Furthermore, only a few can truly understand the values of some frontier and novel theories and behaviors and their inaugurators. Therefore, exploration, learning, education, deliberation, and experience can help people better understand various intrinsic values. Freedom and democracy are important not only because they are inalienable political and economic rights but also because they can help people and humankind discover and explore intrinsic values.

2.1.2 Extrinsic Value One of the controversies of intrinsic value is that many philosophers, scholars, and ordinary people reject the existence of intrinsic value. According to the MerriamWebster dictionary, “intrinsic” means essential nature or constitution of a thing from inner. Most moral philosophers before the twentieth century presupposed that the intrinsic goodness of something is a genuine property of that thing. However, water may be intrinsically good when it quenches thirst, but how about it when the flood arrives? Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) believed the goodness or badness of something to be constituted by the desire or aversion that one may have regarding it, and David Hume (1711–1776) similarly took all ascriptions of value to involve projections of one’s own sentiments onto whatever is said to have value. George E. Moore (1873– 1958) argued that intrinsic goodness, as a supervening property, is a very different sort of property (one that he called “nonnatural”) from those (which he called “natural”) upon which it supervenes. Axel Hägerström (1868–1939) developed an account of emotivism or value nihilism, according to which ascriptions of value are neither true nor false but are expressions of emotion (Zimmerman & Bradley, 2019). Those value skepticism, emotivism, or nihilism doubt that intrinsic value is not objectively intrinsic but subjectively perceived and recognized. After all, physicists have not found some natural properties as intrinsic values of anything such as temperature or mass. However, physical color research may help us understand the distinction between objectivity and subjectivity. Although most human eyes can perceive and distinguish and agree on the colors of rainbows, color is in essence a function

42

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

of the human subjective visual system but not an intrinsic property. Objects do not have a color; they just give off light with a different frequency that appears to be a color. Spectral power distributions exist in the physical world, but color exists only in the mind of the beholder. Color is determined first by frequency and then by how those frequencies are combined or mixed when they reach human eyes. Light falls on specialized receptor cells (called cones) at the back of the eye (called the retina), and a signal is sent to the brain along a neural pathway (called the optic nerve). This signal is processed by the part of the brain near the back of the skull (called the occipital lobe) and then forms the perception of color. The perception of color may be subjective, but the spectrum of light is objective. Similarly, any objects and their objective properties have to be subjectively perceived, recognized, and processed by the brain. The properties of the value of something may be different from those of temperature, mass, or light frequency but can be real and substantial. It is unreasonable to deny the value or emotion of somebody “loving” or “hating” something and claim these values and emotions unreal and nihilistic, although these values and emotions maybe not correct and not constant because they are not upon facts and can change. The intrinsic value of anything maybe there, as scientific laws are there, and we can only approach them more closely but never reach thoroughly. Another type of metaphysical challenge to intrinsic value stems from the theory of “pragmatism” presented by John Dewey (1859–1952) (Zimmerman & Bradley, 2019). According to Dewey and pragmatists, the world is constantly changing in such a way that the solution of one problem may become the source of another. What is an end in one context is a means in another, and thus it is a mistake to seek or offer a timeless list of intrinsic goods and evils of ends to be achieved or avoided for their own sakes. This argument has a reason because change and transformation are the basic facts of nature and human society. Charles Darwin’s (1809–1882) theory of evolution by natural selection explained and enlightened that the successful and surviving species, whether as large as tiger or as tiny as viruses, have specialties and skills and are adaptive to environmental changes, while the extinct ones, such as dinosaurs, have vanished or evolved to new species to fail to adapt, as birds are the offspring of dinosaurs. Human societies and institutions and cultures and races, not necessarily to be explained by social Darwinism, have to adapt to social change; otherwise, they may also be obsolete and failing and vanishing in history. Therefore, everything is changing, and there may be no fixed intrinsic values. However, nature is changing, but natural laws do not change; society in the form is changing, but the intrinsic values as the essence may not change. Plato believed the real world is just in defective forms, while rationality and mathematics and scientific laws can touch reality. Intrinsic value may equal the essence of the world, including nature and human society, which are all parts of the cosmos and should be equal from identical sources with identical laws in different forms. Mathematics, Newton and Einstein’s theories, as scientific laws, may be regarded as intrinsic and constant of the universe. They can be wrong or incomplete and modifiable but can be recognized, modified, and approached, while the scientific laws beneath social beings such as love, politics, and arts should exist in the name of intrinsic value. However, value pragmatism can remind us to consider the relationship between classicality

2.1 Intrinsic Value vs. Extrinsic Value

43

and modernity, reform and conservation, past and future, all of whom have values. The arguments of intrinsic value do not need to be absolute and arbitrary on who holds and what intrinsic values are but remind us not to ignore the importance and intrinsicness of some values in some circumstances, such as endangered species and cultures. As intrinsic value may be absolute and ultimate, some philosophers, scholars, and ordinary people can make a concession that there are no intrinsic values, and all values, if existing, are extrinsic. If all the values are extrinsic and no one is more intrinsic than others, they should be morally and pragmatically treated equally. Sometimes it is tolerant and reasonable for people and governments to pursue the various (extrinsic) values in the different contingencies and circumstances, not necessary to compare and judge which one is more intrinsic than others. However, it is still necessary to argue and inquire, among various extrinsic values, which one is more intrinsic, important, and urgent. For example, money and material wealth are not directly mentioned in Frankena’s value list (maybe can be represented by pleasure and happiness), but who can deny their fundamentality to individual livings and humankind sustainability and the facts of crazy pursuit of money and material wealth. Can we declare that knowledge and wisdom are more intrinsic than money when we are in extreme hunger and poverty? In the background of globalization and global warming, can we reach a consensus on a value priority, in which peace, equality, and ecology are more intrinsic than GDP numbers? Therefore, all the values may be valuable as extrinsic values, but these values have to be compared and prioritized. Intrinsic or extrinsic value arguments can help us practice moral introspections and determine which are more urgent and what types of living are more worthy.

2.2 Human Value vs. Universal Value With adjectives, human and universal values are some different but closely linked value concepts to intrinsic and extrinsic values. While intrinsic and extrinsic values concern the source and property of value, human and universal values focus on the popularity and universality of value, meaning that they can be shared and cherished by many people and in any human sphere, society, and culture. It is not only the tangible money, materials, instruments, machines, science, and technology that sustain individuals and societies but also the intangible human and universal values that motivate people to live with meanings and to create splendid civilizations.

2.2.1 Human Value Human value may be described and defined, not strictly, as any value cherished and appreciated by humans in any country and culture all over the world. It has basically similar value items as those in Frankena’s value list while highlighting

44

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

their significance to humankind. The prestigious Tanner Lectures on Human Values, a multiuniversity lecture series in humanities founded on July 1, 1978 at Clare Hall, Cambridge University, presented educational, scientific, and humanistic discussions relating to human values at top universities in the world, including Linacre College (Oxford University), Clare Hall (Cambridge University), Harvard University, Princeton University, Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley, University of Michigan, University of Utah, Yale University, and other educational facilities. The founder, Obert Clark Tanner (1904–1993), a successful entrepreneur and philanthropist, stated his ideal of the lectures (Tanner, 2013): I hope these lectures will contribute to the intellectual and moral life of mankind. I see them simply as a search for a better understanding of human behavior and human values. This understanding may be pursued for its own intrinsic worth, but it may also eventually have practical consequences for the quality of personal and social life.

The lecturers are outstanding scholars, including Nobel Prize laureates, in their respective fields with profound thoughts and understandings of various human value topics. As value concepts are generally ambiguous, it is essential for scholars and humankind to clarify the contents, definitions, and significance of diverse human values. From the titles, topics, and arguments of these lectures, we can easily determine what these lecturers are concerned about, what these values mean, and why these values are valuable. First, some prominent and typical human values about politics such as freedom, liberty, democracy, equality, human rights, etc. have been lectured and argued by many lecturers. Amartya Sen (1933–), the laureate of the Nobel Prize of Economics in 1998 for the contribution of economics and ethics, lectured twice with the titles Equality of What (1978–1979) at Harvard University and The Standard of Living (1984–1985) at Oxford University. George Stigler (1911–1991), the laureate of the Nobel Prize of Economics in 1982 for the contribution of incisive and unorthodox studies of marketplace behavior and the effects of government regulation, argued Economics or Ethics (1979–1980) in Harvard. Regarding liberty in the title, there are four lectures: (a) Active Liberty: Interpreting Our Democratic Constitution, by Stephen Breyer as an associate justice of the US Supreme Court, 2004. (b) Is Liberty Possible? by Charles Fried from Harvard, 1980–1981. (c) The Basic Liberties and Their Priority by John Rawls from Harvard, 1977–1978. (d) The Paradoxes of Political Liberty, by Quentin Skinner from Cambridge, 1983–1984. Regarding democracy in the title, there are eight lectures, such as The Pseudodemocratization of the American Presidency, by Robert A. Dahl from Yale University, 1987–1988, and Tension and Intentions: The American Constitutions and the Shaping of Democracies Abroad, by Margaret H. Marshall as Chief Justice, Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, 2006, etc. All these lectures attempted to clarify the ambiguity of these value concepts and highlight their significance. Second, some human values about society, other than liberty and democracy in politics and economics, are also discussed in the lectures. Culture has been mentioned by 12 times in the titles, such as American Culture and the Voice of Poetry, lectured by Robert Pinsky from Boston University in 2000–2001, and Culture and Society

2.2 Human Value vs. Universal Value

45

in Plato’s Republic by Myles Burnyeat from All Souls College, Oxford in 1997– 1998. Poetry was lectured four times, such as Poetry and the Mediation of Value: Whitman on Lincoln, by Helen H. Vendler from Harvard University in 1999–2000. Music, one time as Music and Ideology in the Nineteenth Century by Leonard B. Meyer from the University of Pennsylvania in 1983–1984. Beauty, two times, On Beauty and Being Just by Elaine Scarry from Harvard University in 1997–1998), and A Promise of Happiness: The Place of Beauty in a World of Art by Alexander Nehamas from Princeton University in 2000–2001. From these lectures and their related value arguments, we can roughly touch and feel the charm and meaning of these human values, while the deep experience and real understanding of these values depend on the research, experience, education, recognition, and practice, without an end. Third, although human values are generally presumed in the fields of economy, politics, society, and humanity, science is also an important human value and has been lectured nine times, including for instance, On Doing Science in the Modern World by David Baltimore from Rockefeller University in 1991–1992; I. The Science of Religion and II. The Religion of Science by Richard Dawkins from Oxford University in 2003; Science as a Way of Knowing by Neil deGrasse Tyson from Hayden Planetarium in 2013–2014; Space–time and Cosmology by Sir Roger Penrose from Oxford Mathematics Institute lectured in 1994–1995. Therefore, science is not excluded from the Tanner Lectures on Human Values and definitely has its “great” human value. Here, it may be imprecise to claim some human values are great or greater, as all the human values are great. However, although scholars, politicians, and people can pursue their specific human values in their ways, in practice, all these human values must always be compared and compromised. Although the topics of Tanner Lecture on human value are broad and profound, they are still not comprehensive and inclusive regarding the universality of human values all over the world and humankind. In particular, most lecturers and topics are concerned about and from Western society and civilizations, such as the American constitution, democracy, and liberty. European issues have been lectured by nine times. In contrast, there are only two lectures titled with the keyword Africa, The Challenge of Human Rights Protection in Africa by Mary Robinson as the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2003, and The Dynamics of Reform and Revolt in Current South Africa by F. Van Zyl Slabbert from University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa in 1987–1988. There are three lectures about China, Ideas of Power: China’s Empire in the Eighteenth Century and Today, by Jonathan Spence from Yale University in 1997–1998, Plurality and Unity in the Configuration of the Chinese People by Xiaotong Fei from Peking University, China in 1988–1989, and The Trouble with Confucianism by William Theodore De Bary from Columbia University in 1987–1988. Three lectures are about Islam, and none about India. Actually, the essence of human value arguments is to discover the values of all races and cultures, not just Western values or values from the Western angles. The understanding and perception of human values from only some aspects and fields are narrow, limited, and parochial, hampering the deep and real understanding of human values and ignoring the abundant values of humankind. Globalization and

46

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

equalization have ameliorated prejudice and bias but are far from sufficient. There is a long and endless way to go. Another deficiency of the human value argument of Tanner Lecture is that they are still rather philosophical and normative than pragmatic and positive, although the clarification and cognition of human value is generally the prerequisite of implementation and practice. Regarding individuals, the clarification and cognition of human value can help scholars and ordinary people reduce conceptual confusion, balance various values and live satisfactory lives. However, there are still many personal tragedies or failures of people, including achievers in some specific fields and researchers of human value, because they may still fail to balance and practice the various human values in other fields. For example, a successful businessman but damaging environment and a fruitful scholar but harming his/her health cannot be regarded as real success. Human value arguments help us make better and deeper value introspections and then decide and practice human value by ourselves. However, as there are still so many terrible and immoral collective behaviors and government policies, such as war, invasion, genocide, and extreme poverty, the pure academic arguments of human value by scholars and theorists are still pale and weak. We should practically influence businesses and governments, particularly wealthy and powerful ones for “with great power comes great responsibility.” Here, responsibility can be understood and explained as balancing, safeguarding, or creating various human values. Individual behaviors and government policies should be based upon and enhance human values.

2.2.2 Universal Value Human value may be cherished only by some people, minority or majority, and then not so universal, while universal value should be the human value cherished by the general public and whole humankind, with greatest universality and unanimity. Although it is difficult to gain a thorough consensus of all people on anything and any value, universal value should gain consensus from a sufficient majority. For example, the Buddhas of Bamiyan, as the World Heritage Site with outstanding universal value, was destroyed by Taliban, the extremely fundamental Muslim organization in Afghanistan in May 2001, by the excuse of un-Islamic. This case can illuminate that (a) there are universal and outstanding universal values in human societies, at least believed and declared by the UN and UNESCO; (b) there are some criteria or evidence for universal and outstanding universal values, while these criteria and evidence are generally for technical or operational demands; (c) there are still some, maybe minority, people and groups, such as Taliban, rejecting universal values, so value dialog, communication, and recognition are always necessary. The outstanding universal value is the core and basis of the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage adopted by UNESCO on Nov. 16, 1972 (UNESCO, 2019). Culture and nature are generally recognized as valuable, regardless of whether they are intrinsic, extrinsic, human, or universal. Although

2.2 Human Value vs. Universal Value

47

contemporary culture and natural culture may be more controversial, the protection of the values of ancient heritages is more urgent and easier to reach consensus. According to the text of the Convention, the cultural heritages are as follows: Monuments: architectural works, works of monumental sculpture and painting, elements or structures of an archeological nature, inscriptions, cave dwellings, and combinations of features, which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art, or science. Groups of buildings: groups of separate or connected buildings that, because of their architecture, their homogeneity or their place in the landscape, are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art, or science. Sites: works of man or the combined works of nature and man, and areas including archeological sites which are of outstanding universal value from the historical, esthetic, ethnological, or anthropological point of view. The following shall be considered natural heritage: Natural features consist of physical and biological formations or groups of such formations, which are of outstanding universal value from the esthetic or scientific point of view. Geological and physiographical formations and precisely delineated areas that constitute the habitat of threatened species of animals and plants of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation. Natural sites or precisely delineated natural areas of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science, conservation, or natural beauty. In addition to the descriptions and definitions, the Convention also stated some key issues of the outstanding universal value protection of these cultural and natural heritages. Pragmatically, it endows the national and international society, government and intergovernmental committee with the responsibility to protect the heritages and the values, in different forms and extents including financial, artistic, scientific, and technical. In particular, it also articulated that funds, international assistance, and education are essential. Technically, as any cultural and natural entities, such as your or my or any historical figure’s house, can be assigned and regarded to have some human values by you and me or him/her, the World Heritage Committee considers a property as having Outstanding Universal Value if the property meets one or more of the following ten criteria: i. ii.

iii.

to represent a masterpiece of human creative genius; to exhibit an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town planning, or landscape design; to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared;

48

iv.

v.

vi.

vii. viii.

ix.

x.

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

to be an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history; to be an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture (or cultures), or human interaction with the environment, especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change; to be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria); to contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and esthetic importance; to be outstanding examples representing major stages of earth’s history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features; to be outstanding examples representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems, and communities of plants and animals; to contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation.

Because different human societies have their own masterpiece, genius, natural beauties, and our human society, history, culture, and the planet are actually a synthesized whole, these criteria are actually subjective and technical, evaluated, and operated by a committee of experts, with the presumption that experts generally grasp more knowledge and experience of the outstanding universal values than ordinary ones. It does not mean that the criteria are fixed and objective nor that only the experts, committee, and UNESCO have the power to determine and set the outstanding universal value. Theoretically, anybody can claim anything possessing some human and universal value, while UNESCO and experts select only the most prominent and endangered ones technically and operationally according to the criteria. Meanwhile, as all of us are raised and educated in, and familiar to, some specific cultures and societies, we should try our best to reduce possible subjective biases, and give equal, or neutral, affections and evaluations to these heritages, although the personal subjective preferences and experiences may be unavoidable. Until June 2020, there were 1,121 world heritages, 869 cultural heritages, 213 natural heritages, and 39 mixed-world heritages worldwide. China and Italy have the largest number of world heritages, both with 55 properties. In China, well-known examples include the Great Wall, the Imperial Palaces of the Ming and Qing Dynasties in Beijing and Shenyang, and the Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries. In Italy, there

2.2 Human Value vs. Universal Value

49

are the Historic Centre of Rome (the Colosseum), Historic Centre of Florence, and the Archaeological Areas of Pompei, Herculaneum, and Torre Annunziata. The US, with a large geographic size, long culture of indigenous India, and two hundred years of modern civilization, has 24 properties, including Yellowstone National Park, Yosemite National Park, and Statue of Liberty. Other countries, such as Egypt, India, Iran, and Iraq, as ancient states with splendid history and culture, have 7, 38, 24, and 6 world heritages, respectively. Afghanistan has two world heritages, the Minaret and Archaeological Remains of Jam and the Cultural Landscape, and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley, while the second heritage was tragically destroyed by the Taliban in March 2001. The outstanding universal value of world heritage includes various values of science, culture, esthetics, and history, which are not equal but intertwined with economic value. On the one hand, the insufficiency of financial funds will render us incapable of protecting heritage areas and leave them ruining. This means that developing countries, generally possessing long histories and abundant cultures, will confront more financial difficulties in identifying and protecting their heritages. Thus, global aid and intergovernmental cooperation are essential but not sufficient. On the other hand, the title and reputation of world heritage can help governments, administrative departments, and private companies obtain more financial resources and benefit from the protection of heritages. However, the excessive pursuit of profit, such as overloaded visitors, business operations, and financial dependence, will also harm the outstanding universal value of the heritage. Therefore, appropriate policies, including law, financial support, science popularization, and education, are essential for the protection of the world heritage and appreciation of universal value, which also means balancing and compromising universal value and economic value. By the arguments of the outstanding universal value of world heritage, we can clarify that the outstanding universal values may be a part of universal value and universal value a part of human values and intrinsic values, similar to those in Frankena’s value list. These values can all be regarded as valuable and significant and universal for humankind, merely in different groups, fields, items, and behaviors, depending on people’s perception and recognition, similar to the universal value of world heritage. Therefore, in addition to the outstanding universal value of world heritage, universal values are sometimes referred to as democracy, freedom, rule of law, transparency, etc., mainly political value in political fields. Although these values are generally recognized as good and universal, their precise definition, description, and criteria are much more controversial and biased. After all, there are so diverse political traditions and systems with many definitions and understandings of democracy and freedom, and different countries and governments are situated at much different developing stages with much different perceptions and priorities of these universal values. Therefore, it is controversial to force some developing countries and governments and people to accept and implement Western-style democracy and freedom, just like forcing people to accept the outstanding universal value of world heritage, despite the sincerity and goodwill. It is more immoral to weaponize and politicize the democracy and freedom by the slogan of universal value to push the

50

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

color and peaceful revolution. Human value and universal value, regardless of how valuable they are, can only be perceived and recognized by free will and voluntariness. In fact, there are still some so-called authoritarian countries and governments currently in our world and human society, such as China and Russia, and there were also cruel and bloody rulings and wars in history, violating the universal values from today’s viewpoint. It is possible, but maybe difficult, for us to empathize with and understand the historical societies and figures because we do not have the history experience and background, but it is relatively easy for us to empathize with and understand our current societies and figures since we are living with them. The historical figures certainly should have their value pursuits, including Alexander the Great (356 BC–323 BC), Julius Caesar (102 BC–44 BC), Barbarian invasion (after fifth century), Great Charlemagne (742–814), Napoleon Bonaparte (1769– 1821), etc., but they should have no ideas of universal value. It is unreasonable for us to criticize, but to understand, their rulings, behaviors, and possible cruelty. The genocides in modern age, such as Holocaust of Nazi, are inhuman and disgusting because our humankind has gradually formed and accepted the conceptions of human rights as a universal value. The reasons for these terrible behaviors are worthy of research and understanding but not merely criticized and denounced. Undoubtedly, the modern politics of humankind have gained much progress, as liberty and democracy have been generally accepted as universal values. Although there are some countries and governments lagging, such as North Korea and Russia, they are not as cruel as history, and the United States is also not perfect. Therefore, the more appropriate way to deal with so-called authoritarian countries may be to suggest, persuade, and help governments, politicians, and people recognize and accept liberty and democracy by themselves voluntarily but not force or teach them to do so arrogantly. Any individual, country, and government are not perfect, with their weakness and need to improve. Moreover, it is devastating universal value to gain the benefits of some people and some countries at the cost of others, leaving more historical hatred troubles.

2.3 Objective Value vs. Subjective Value Value is sometimes confusing on objective value and subjective value. The objective value means that the value is embedded in the objective entities, items, behaviors, states, or consequences, irrelevant to humans’ subjective observations and perceptions. The intrinsic value and universal value have some implications of objective value, indicating that there are some objective and physical properties, such as mass, velocity, and temperature, as values. In contrast, a subjective value means that all values, if any, are subjectively psychological movements or a series of complex bioelectrical signals irrelevant to the objects, such as mental activities. The dichotomy of objective and subjective value actually reflects the divide of materialism and

2.3 Objective Value vs. Subjective Value

51

idealism, objectivity and subjectivity, which are two basic ways and methodologies for humankind to recognize and understand nature, human society, cosmos, and humankind itself.

2.3.1 Objective Value There are various objects in the cosmos, such as trees, rivers, animals, mountains, and stars, that can be observed and perceived by our sense organs such as naked eyes, noses, ears, tongue, feelings, and consciousness, while some objects, such as bacteria (10–6 m), virus (10–9 m), atoms (10–10 m), proton (10–15 m), electron (10–16 m), and quark (10–18 m), are so tiny that cannot be observed and perceived by our sense organs, while still can be by currently advanced scientific instruments such as optical or electronic microscope. However, string (10–35 m) and Planck length (10–35 m) are even tinier than just theoretical assumption and have not been, and impossible to be, observed and experimented in the near future. The other extreme is bigness and macro. Although we can observe the earth, solar system, galaxy, and the known cosmos by the naked eye and telescope, dark matter and cosmos beyond 93 billion light-years in diameter are unobservable and unperceivable. In addition to these natural objects, there are also objective facts, behaviors, and social phenomena in human society. For example, in July 1921, the exact date forgotten and later set on July 1, the Communist Party of China was established by 13 representatives, including Mao Zedong at the age of 28. After 28 years on October 1, 1949, People’s Republic of China was announced to be established by Mao Zedong in Tiananmen Square. Relatedly, on August 7, 2021, I, as a Chinese, was staying at home and writing the book in Wuhan, China. The weather was cloudy but not sunny, and no earthquake occurred. The sitting president of the United States was Joe Biden and that of China was Xi Jinping. These are all basic facts, and no one can doubt. Although maybe we do not know what were the similar basic facts 500 or 5 million years ago, or what is happening now at every corner of the world, there must be some facts which can be discovered and approached, not thoroughly but approximately and gradually, by historical records, archeological relics, carbon isotope stratigraphy, and possible some new technologies. These facts are real and can be cognized and understood and explained by various people, such as politicians, economists, sociologists, scientists, and ordinary people, and through various perspectives, such as mathematics, science, experiments, imaginations, and religions. Although we do not know the origin of the earth, the humankind, the lives, the governments, the cultures, and the cosmos, and what happened exactly at some time and someplace in the history, we are confident there are answers and we can gradually find the answers in the future. By these arguments, we believe materialism and oppose agnosticism. Natural objects have some physical properties, such as the mass, temperature, light frequency, material structure, and some natural laws, such as Newton’s Gravity Law and Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, which can be verified and experimented with, and no one can doubt and it is relatively easy to reach consensus with convincing

52

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

facts. Discovering and cognizing these physical properties and laws are the tasks of natural scientists, who must “respect the basic scientific facts.” Although some people may fail to realize and recognize these facts, they can as long as they observe by the instruments, such as seeing the bacteria and virus by microscopy, learning the related theories and knowledge, and possessing basic rationality and logic. Some people, say, achromats, cannot recognize and distinguish color, but they can also learn that color is the subjective perception of objective light frequency and may perceive and experience the color with the aid of medical instruments and recognize the fact of color. Similarly, social phenomena and historical events can be regarded as basic social facts and social objects with factual properties, such as time, place, figures, causes, and consequences. Although sometimes we cannot grasp all the details of these social objects due to the lack of recording and observing techniques, they are there in the history and can be learned and understood as long as we have better instruments and find more evidence, such as archeological discoveries and audio and video recording instruments, which can help our offspring understand us. The physical property and social property of objects are real and factual and can be argued by similar principles and ways, which is science. However, it is true that natural scientists have not discovered some physical property of the claim “the wild animal has some objective, intrinsic and universal value.” Some of us cannot find or perceive the claimed value. As our humans are much heterogeneous and any two persons are different in their spirits, emotions, and minds due to their different backgrounds, families, cultures, education, and experiences, it is reasonable for us to have much different subjective values on the same objects. Tom can claim lion is a beauty and has intrinsic and universal value, but John may reject it. It is sure that there are something in lion that cause Tom to claim it as beautiful and valuable, which may not have been perceived and recognized by John. Thus, the arguments and deliberation of Tom and Jack are necessary, and then, we can find, at least temporarily, whether the lion is a beauty and has value or not. In addition, the theory of learning and knowledge grasping are essential for the discovery and arguments of value because experts and professionals in various areas, such as science, environment, and art, can generally better understand the properties of objects and appreciate possible values. Evidence and demonstration of possible objective value are necessary. By strong evidence and careful demonstrations, one can actually claim any objective value in any object. The objective values of ordinary objects, such as science, art, and environment, have been generally recognized and undisputable to argue. Some extreme cases can be considered. The first is virus, which is generally regarded as the cause of disease but still can be claimed to possess some intrinsic value. Viruses are physically present on Earth, similar to plants, animals, and atoms, irrelevant to subjective goods or bads. However, some of them, such as HIV, smallpox, COVID19, influenza, prion (mad cow disease), and pestis (the plague is actually caused by bacteria but not virus), etc. have led so many people to death and brought so great sadness to humankind that the general public always regards them as evil and devil, no value at all. However, this viewpoint is wrong and superficial, as scientists have gradually discovered that all the lives on the earth may originate from virus,

2.3 Objective Value vs. Subjective Value

53

maybe from the deep outer space, that virus has played an indispensable role in the evolutionary process of biosystem, that 60–70% oxygen of the earth is generated from virus, and that the shape of the virus, such as coronavirus, maybe unbelievable beautiful (Zimmer, 2015). These natural properties of the viruses may be the source of their objective values, and the best way of curing virus-related disease is not to eradicate the virus, if possible, but to explore the relationship between humans and viruses and sustain that relationship. The second extreme case can be the murder and Holocaust of Nzai Germany. As factual human behaviors, these actions can be understood and explained by objective value and hopefully never recur. Murder, particularly the large-scale Holocaust, is generally regarded as bad and crime in nearly all cultures and societies. This means that the depriving of somebody’s life unintentionally is not murder, and the death sentence, as depriving somebody of his/her life lawfully, is necessary currently and historically in most countries. Although an increasing number of societies have abolished and will abolish the death sentence, this phenomenon exists in most human history and society with its functions and values to sustain the necessary social order. Similarly, the holocaust of Nazi Germany and Nanjing Massacre were bloody and cruel, but why the governments of Nazi Germany and Japan at that time committed these terrible behaviors, because the politicians believed there are some great goodness or values of these cruelties for their people and nations, such as the race eugenics, the superiority of their races, and the conquer of the neighbor countries and the world. If we can demonstrate and persuade the politicians that (a) these so-called goodness are not good at all, such as, all men are created equal and no one should be conquered, (b) even these goodness are actually good as objective value, they still need to be compared and balanced by other values, such as humanity and benevolence and peace, the politicians will realize the wrongness of war and slaughter and the similar mistakes will not recur. Objective value can be objective, but their objectivity depends on subjective perception and recognition.

2.3.2 Subjective Value The world may be real and physical and objective, but humans have to perceive this probable objective world by their subjective sensor organs, rationality, and irrationality. Without this subjectivity, we cannot perceive and identify the objectivity of the world at all. Thus, some scholars and theorists insist that subjectivity is more essential or transcendental than objectivity, that subjectivity, but not objectivity, is the essence of the world and that idealism is more correct and reasonable than materialism. For example, somebody believe that if you close your eyes, and die, this (your) world is no longer existing, and if all the humans close their eyes, and extinct, this cosmos is then vanishing, or meaningless. “To be is to be perceived.” If something cannot be perceived by me (humankind), it is not to be there, or at least meaningless to me (humankind). This famous motto seems reasonable, from George Berkeley (1685–1753), one of the great British philosophers of the early modern period and

54

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

memorized by the name of University of California, Berkeley. Similarly, but differently, “I think, therefore I am.” If I do not, or cannot, think, I am not there, but whether the world is still there? This motto is from René Descartes (1596–1650), one of the great French philosophers and mathematicians and scientific thinkers. This word highlights the importance of think and reason. It is not the general perception and feeling that make humans as human and that lead humans to realize and understand this world, as animals can also perceive and feel, but the thinking and reasoning that matter. Socrates also stated that unexamined living is not worth living. Unexamined living, as living without thinking and reflection, maybe objectively living but not a meaningful and valuable life. Although with different focuses, all these statements emphasize the importance of subjectivity. The scientific argument of the dichotomy of subjectivity and objectivity has been made by the brain in a vat, a thought experiment presented by Hilary Putnam (1926– 2016), one of the American leading philosophers. As human brains, in the skull and blood and nutrition, can only perceive the outer world by bioelectric signals from sense organs, how can we guarantee that the outer world sensed by bioelectric signals is real and objective? And if humankind’s science and technology develop highly enough and can construct a virtual world that we cannot distinguish it from reality, or can digitalize our mind and upload or download to, and edit in, the computer system, how can we ensure the world is real and objective? Is this a kind of immortality, and are we now actually in this state, as the creation of God or some super intelligence, while we cannot distinguish? This scientific assumption and thought experiment, although unable to be verified or falsified, has triggered the inspirations of some movies and their directors, such as The Thirteenth Floor (1999, directed by Josef Rusnak), the Matrix (1999, by Lana Wachowski, Lilly Wachowski), Inception (2010, by Christopher Nolan), and Ready Player One (2018, by Steven Spielberg), urging us to imagine and ponder the possibilities and consequences of parallel world, virtual reality, cyberspace, and the essence of subjectivity and objectivity. Quantum theory, as the most frontier of modern physics, also blurs the boundary between subjectivity and objectivity. The double-slit interference of photons, including electrons and other microparticles, a physical experiment performed by British physicist Thomas Young (1773–1829), demonstrated that light, traditionally thought of as a material particle, is a kind of wave, not material. However, the shock of the experiment, still not well explained and understood by physicists currently, is how the microparticle passes the slit because as long as it is subjectively observed and measured, the light wave will “collapse” to the material particle photon, but if not, the light wave will keep its state as a wave, meaning that the subjective observation may change and determine the physical state, wave or particle. Furthermore, the French physicist Louis Victor·Duc de Broglie (1892–1987), Nobel Prize Laureate in 1929, went on to explain the weird quantum behaviors and presented the theory (assumption and verified) of matter wave, claiming that macro matter is also wave and the wave will collapse to matter when observed. Then, the fundamental question is, what is the essence of matter? Schrödinger’s Cat, one of the most famous scientific thought experiments presented by Erwin Schrödinger (1887–1961), the Germany Nobel prize laureate of physics in 1933, proposed that the life of the cat,

2.3 Objective Value vs. Subjective Value

55

in a closed box, will depend on the possible radioactive decay of a particle and will be both alive and dead until it is directly observed. The quantum behaviors are spooky, in the words of Einstein’s thought experiment of quantal entanglement as spooky action at a distance. Richard Phillips Feynman (1918–1988), the American Nobel Prize laureate of physics in 1965, stated that “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.” Quantum mechanics is concerned about the behaviors of microparticles far smaller than the current humankind experimental and technical capability, so some physicists complained that quantum physics is increasingly resembling philosophy depending on thought experiment and imagination but hardly, if not impossible, to be experimented with. Quantum physics approaches the essence and core of the material universe, shaking the traditional dichotomy of materialism and idealism regarding whether the cosmos is real and objective or virtual and subjective, depending on subjective observation. Objective value may be understood as the natural or objective properties of objects, such as the environment, individual, behavior, and government, while subjective value may be understood as how we, as humans, researchers, politicians, or ordinary people, subjectively perceive, recognize, and evaluate objects. Because people have to perceive the objectivity by their subjectivity, all the objective values, based upon facts, are actually subjective values. People generally have much different subjective perceptions, or values, on the same objects because of their different position, background, family, education, experience, culture, and society. We cannot judge and declare simply that whose subjective perceptions are correct or wrong, while anybody’s subjective values may have their reasons and should be considered carefully. However, some may be more comprehensive and grounded, while others may be more biased and ungrounded. As the allegory of the Blind Men and the Elephant illuminates, although all the blind men are correct on their perceptions and cognitions of the elephant, as trunk, as snake, as spear, and as fan, none of them are more comprehensively correct. Any object in the world, including the individuals, human societies, governments, and policies, maybe more giant and complex than an elephant; thus, any subjective values of the object may be partially correct but not thoroughly correct. Thus, it is essential for people and decision-makers to take the systematic view, synthesizing, compromising, and balancing all subjective values. It is necessary for us to communicate and deliberate with each other and to understand, experience, and consider different subjective values. There may be great discrepancies between objective and subjective values. The material wealth measured by monetary income and GDP can be regarded as objective values, say, $1000, aggregating the amount of a pile of goods and services, the more money, the more utility and welfare and better. However, as subjective utility and welfare in economics are a kind of psychological state, objective national and individual wealth do not necessarily equal subjective utility, subjective well-being, or happiness, which can be measured by subjective surveys and questionnaires with the question “generally speaking, how happy you feel these days”? The respondents are required to score on a Likert scale, say, from 0 to 10. By these methodologies, the Gross National Happiness Account can be constructed, and the Gross National Happiness Index can be calculated (UN, 2021). The subjective perception can then

56

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

be related to objective data. Similarly, freedom, democracy, rule of law, and justice, as both objective status and subjective perceptions, can all be measured by subjective scores and questionnaires. In fact, social surveys, opinion or attitude surveys, field work, interviews, and questionnaires, as the basic methodologies of social science, are attempting to explore and understand what and how people subjectively think and behave. Regardless of whether right or wrong, these subjective values are also facts that greatly influence human behaviors and governmental policies. Subjective value, as humankind’s perception and understanding of the world, also includes scientific theories and assumptions. Although reliable and reasonable, some of these scientific theories and assumptions may be either biased and limited and incorrect. However, we can still approach the objective truth by scientific methodologies, including observation, experimentation, survey and interview, experience, and practice, with rationality as the principle and essence. The sole way for humankind to perceive and understand the world is rationality, as well as facts, trial and error, learning, arguing, and practicing. All of these are subjective. Even though we may be the brain in the vat, created by God or some superintelligence, we can still struggle to recognize the vat and determine the creator gradually, as we, our scientists and explorers, are doing. Even though we are blind men, we know the possible limitations of our understanding and can endeavor to overcome these limitations by rationality, learning, experimentation, deliberation, and prudence. Subjectivity and objectivity should not be isolated but combined, mutually examined, and verified.

2.4 Private Value vs. Public Value Public value theory has been claimed to be a new paradigm and big thing in the fields of public administration, governmental policy, and politics during the last several decades (Talbot, 2009). By the traditional dichotomy of public and private, public administration, government policy, and politics can be categorized as public sector, and the values in this sector can be referred to as public value. Indeed, political value and governmental value, pursued by politics and government such as freedom, democracy, rule of law, justice, etc. are also part of public values, as politics and public are essentially identical. In contrast, market, company, family, and church are generally categorized as private sector, and the values pursued by these organizations, groups, and individuals can be categorized as private value, such as profit, entrepreneurship, religiosity, friendship, love, etc. Although the dichotomy of public and private is rough and overlapping and controversial, it can help us understand the essence of publicness and privateness, the function and value of politics and policy, and what good or bad government and governance are.

2.4 Private Value vs. Public Value

57

2.4.1 Public Value and Publicness There are various organizations in human society, while governments play a pivotal role, regardless of ancient or modern age. Currently, society is more complex and interconnected, so the government is more crucial, basically determining the success and failure of a country, although other factors and players are also important and influential and cannot be ignored. As the major role in the public sector, what the government pursues can be defined and understood as public values, political values, and government values, with some subtle variance, which are more plural, complex, and ambiguous than private values pursued mainly by companies, families, and individuals. Mark Moore (1995), the professor at Harvard Kennedy School of Government, published the book Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government in 1995. Scholars in business management generally elaborated that value, actually as profit, can only be created by businesses and entrepreneurs, while the government and public sector cannot create values but only redistribute the value created by company and collected as tax and public finance by redistribution policy. Therefore, Moore’s idea that government can also create public value is enlightening. Another two professors, Torben Beck Jørgensen and Barry Bozeman (2007), listed a public value inventory, including (Table 2.1): This public value inventory is similar to Frankena’s intrinsic value list, while the former may be more political, including freedom and democracy, while the latter may be more individual, including life, health, and happiness. However, the public value inventory should be more comprehensive, covering most, even all, value items of Frankena’s intrinsic value list, as any modern government should pursue and enhance the values shared by the general public. This means that Beck Jørgensen and Bozeman’s public value inventory is still far from sufficient and comprehensive. Due to the overlapping and variance of these two value lists, it is essential to clarify what the adjective “public” means. By the traditional dichotomy of public and private, the public is generally referred to as state, government, and politics, while private is referred to as company and family. However, this definition and understanding do not capture the essence of publicness and privateness. As Fig. 2.1 shows publicness and privateness are relative, and all organizations can be public organizations or at least have features of publicness (Bozeman, 1987). An individual’s thoughts and affairs and behaviors can be regarded as private, as one’s free will, but when there are two persons, such as the couple or friends, they have public issues, public space, publicness, and politics, which means how to handle their human relationship. If they are slave and master, there are only private affairs, and the slave is the private asset of the master. However, if they are equal, there are public issues between them. In the family, although very private for the couple, there are still various public goods, public finance, public space, and public affairs that the couple needs to share. Thorough privatization of the couple means legal divorce or emotional alienation, as they become truly independent and private again. Through a thought experiment and basic political model, such as the Hollywood movie Cast Away (2000) and Daniel Defoe’s novel Robinson Crusoe

58

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

Table 2.1 A public value inventory Accountability, adaptability, advocacy, altruism Balancing interests, benevolence, businesslike approach Citizen involvement, citizens’ self-development, collective choice, common good, competitiveness, compromise, continuity, cooperativeness Democracy, dialogue Effectiveness, efficiency, employees’ self-development, enthusiasm, equal treatment, equity, ethical consciousness Fairness, friendliness Good working environment Honesty, human dignity Impartiality, innovation, integrity Justice Legality, listening to public opinion, local governance Majority rule, moral standards Neutrality Openness Parsimony, political loyalty, professionalism, protection of individual rights, protection of minorities, productivity, public interest Reasonableness, regime dignity, regime loyalty, regime stability, reliability, responsiveness, risk readiness, robustness, rule of law Secrecy, shareholder value, social cohesion, stability, sustainability Timeliness User democracy, user orientation Voice of the future Will of the people Source Beck Jørgensen and Bozeman (2007)

Fig. 2.1 Level of publicness

2.4 Private Value vs. Public Value

59

(1719), it can be understood that the handle of these public issues may be the politics of the two persons, such as, who is and how to choose the leader, how to allocate the resource, rights, and duties, and what is the relationship between them, what is the essence of democracy or autocracy. A community can also be considered a small-scale public sector, similar to but smaller than a state. Within the community, the affairs inside families are private issues, while there are also public space, public goods, public finance, and public affairs that should be shared by all the members and families of the community, such as security, parking, greening, garbage collection, etc. The publicness and politics of the community mean how the members arrange and solve these public issues. The privatization of the community means that the members and families deal with these public issues separately and individually, costing, and troubling more. A member or family can certainly leave the community and live independently, which means that there are no public issues for the member or family, but they will still confront similar issues with others. If they can live independently without any connection to the outside world and other people, they have to obtain food, water, electricity, education, hospitals, etc. by themselves, as the novel Robinson Crusoe (written by Daniel Defoe in 1719) and the movie Cast Away (directed by Robert Zemeckis in 1999) enlightened. In this extreme situation, there will be no public issues or politics for them at all, only their private issues, but it is truly not easy to live. Few, if not none, people can, or prefer to, live this way in the modern age. Therefore, the problem is not to evade publicness and politics but to search and establish good, or appropriate, publicness and politics. A company, although generally categorized as a private organization, has public issues and publicness. Even if the property of the company is invested and owned by only one person and the company is a thorough private company with only one owner, it does not mean that the owner can do anything in the company as he/she wants. The owner still needs to arrange the relations to his/her employees and customers, which will be regulated by law and can be regarded as public in the private company. If the company is owned by several owners as a limited liability company and the property rights are privately owned by its owners, there is still publicness among the owners, which means that the rights and responsibilities of the owners need to be regulated by law to achieve equal and justifiable relationships among owners. If the company is owned by the government as a so-called state-owned company, publicness still exists as the relationship between the owners and employees and customers. As Fig. 2.2 shows, we understand the essence of publicness and privateness are kinds of social relations among people. Similarly, a city may be private when the city and the citizens belong to, or are ruled by, one or a small group of people as private belongings, as the situation in (private) autocracy society in history. A public city means that the city does not belong to anybody but to all citizens equally, who elect the mayor to help them govern the city and handle the public affairs, pay the tax as public finance, and participate the public administration as citizens. This public city is the origin of the concept of “politics” in ancient Greek city-state, although citizens were only those thousands of men with property but not including the slave and women, with limited publicness. Gradually, the limited publicness has been expanded to include slaves, women, and proletariats; an increasing number of people; and even animals, plants, and the whole environment

60

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

Fig. 2.2 Publicness and privateness

in the future. Privateness only concerns an individual’s own mind and affairs, such as Tom, but when there is the second one, such as John, and even environment, such as Mountain, publicness, and public issues will emerge, meaning that how to arrange the relationship between Tom, John, and Mountain. Politics equals publicness, meaning how humankind deals with public issues, such as state, party, law, policy, politicians, citizenship, autocracy, and democracy. Where there are humans and social relations, there are politics and publicness, considering the thought experiment of The Last Man, rich and poor (political economy), man and women (gender politics), human and environment (environmental politics). Therefore, the problem is, what is the good politics, what is the sufficient publicness, and what is the appropriate relationship between human and human, and between human and environment? The publicness can be expanded from city to country, which may be the main concern of contemporary politics. However, as argued, the country is neither the start nor the end of politics and publicness, since the vision, knowledge, and capability of humankind are always expanding from small clan and family to country and earth. The current 193 national states in the UN have basically formed since the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, particularly after World War II. The publicness and politics of these countries are to pursue and protect the interests and benefits of their countries and people. However, in history before the formation of modern countries, publicness and politics were smaller in regions, city-states, clans, communities, families, and groups. Gradually, publicness and politics are enlarging through violent invasions, conquering, wars and peaceful integration, merging and influencing, forming modern countries, and the world. Contemporarily, publicness and politics are still expanding through regional integration and globalization, with possible conflicts and struggles. The regional integrations of EU, ASEAN, APEC, African Union, OPEC, Gulf Cooperation Council, and League of Arab States are some cases. Although the process

2.4 Private Value vs. Public Value

61

of globalization, as the expansion of publicness and politics, will not be smooth with unavoidable setbacks and reverses, such as the Brexit and anti-globalization after Trump Administration since 2016, the setback is temporary and the tendency is irreversible, considering the decades and hundreds of years and even longer human history. Humankind will definitely go out of the earth and into the vast universe. The publicness and politics of the UN are broader and higher than those of the national states, which means that humankind has more public issues and better solutions for local, domestic, and global public issues. Local and domestic public issues, such as marriage and divorce, public security, education and hospitals, economic growth and development, etc. can be basically solved by local and central governments with their publicness consideration. However, global public issues such as climate change, ecosystem degradation, terrorism, civilization clashes, global peace, and harmony cannot be solved by limited publicness and national politics but by the vision of larger publicness and global politics. Furthermore, if humankind can go beyond the solar system and step into the galaxy and cosmos, newer and grander vision of publicness is necessary. As all organizations, including families, companies, cities, and states, can be public, all their values can be public values. The values, such as love and loyalty of family, profit, and entrepreneurship of company, although privately pursued by the couples and the companies, respectively, should be, and have been, pursued, protected, and created by the governments of cities and states. These values make organizations preferable and successful. It is love and loyalty that make families happy and livable and profit and entrepreneurship that make companies competitive and sustainable. Certainly, other values also need to be considered, such as the income and health of the families and the social responsibility of the companies. Although private organizations such as families and companies are generally thought to pursue single value, such as families for love and companies for profit, they are actually based upon and necessary to arrange and balance various values. It is the complex relationships among these various values and their creations that make the management and operation of the family and company difficult, and then the failures of family and company are common. Similarly, states and governments, as public organizations, will pursue more various and complex public values, so it is more difficult for governments and politicians to create and balance plural public values. The success and failure of a politician, government, and state can be well explained and understood by public value creation and publicness enhancement.

2.4.2 Private Value and Privateness In contrast to public value and publicness, private value can be defined and understood as values pursued specifically and individually by entities, including individuals, families, companies, and the state, without the consideration of other entities and society. This means that an individual can pursue his/her private living and goals, a family of a couple can build their honey and private space and living, a company can make its profit solely and extremely, and a state can protect the interests of its citizens without the consideration of other countries and people, while all these behaviors

62

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

may be claimed as selfish. Although the values pursued by a state, say, A (composed of individuals as A1, A2,…Ai,…An), can be called public values (for Ai), they may degrade into private value for the state and its citizens as whole A and may conflict with the public value of another country and citizens B. The conflict and war between states A and B may occur because both A and B have private value PA and PB but no shared public value PAB . Therefore, individuals and organizations may pursue and create their private values specifically and extremely, signifying their private success, but without the consideration of publicness, the achievement of private value may also lead to various conflicts, failures, and even wars. An individual can pursue his/her individual and private values. First, and extremely, most deliberate crimes, such as deceit, robbery, and rape, are for private benefits or value but severely harm the values of others and societies. Thus, if criminals can consider broader values, which can be achieved by education and moral learning, they can consciously reduce their criminal behaviors. The consideration and calculation of more values mean the development and maturity of individuals. Second, adventurers, such as Alex Hannold and Reinhold Messner, are willing to pursue their personal achievements at the risk of their lives. Their accomplishments, such as the free solo of El Capitan in Yosemite National Park and 18 (mountains higher than 8000 m above sea level) +7 (highest mountains of seven continents) + 2 (south and north poles), as private values, are great but may worry their parents, spouses, children, and lovers. Thus, understandings and support from families and society are essential for adventurers, meaning value transformation from private to public. Third, scientists such as Einstein and Newton can also pursue their career achievements as private value. Since their scientific discoveries are not only harmless but also greatly beneficial to everybody and society, their private value of scientific discovery can be public value if they are open to humankind. Once scientific research and communications are closed and blocked, for some reasons, such as politicization or military consideration, they will degrade to private in some countries or groups, narrow and limited. A company and its entrepreneur can pursue their private values. In modern economics and business theories, companies generally assume monistic value pursuing, profit maximization, and other goals such as market share, innovation, employee morality, etc. can all be affiliated or attached to the profit as the sole value and ultimate goal. First, as an organization constituted by owners and employees, the company may be public for all of its members, and the publicness may unify all its members to pursue and share the maximized profit. However, owners, employees, and different departments may still have their private and conflicting goals and values, and the function of management and motivation is to harmonize these private goals and values to be public. A successful company and entrepreneur can achieve this publicness and earn large profits. Second, even if profitable, the publicness of the company may degrade to private if external stakeholders and values such as environments, employees, consumers, and governments are not considered and may then fail and go bankrupt, such as drug trafficking. A long-term successful entrepreneur should consider and balance more factors and values, not only profit but also social responsibility, identifying, prioritizing, and creating those key values. This means

2.4 Private Value vs. Public Value

63

that a successful and farsighted private company and its values should be more comprehensive and broader. A state may also degrade to private once only pursuing private value. First, if owned and ruled by a dictator and his/her minority ruling group, a state may be extremely private for the narrow benefits of the rulers, such as autocracy. Certainly, there may be limited publicness among the ruling groups and some benevolence to the people, such as aristocracy. However, this limited publicness will still damage the sustainability of the state. The democracy and republic can enlarge and enhance the publicness of the state, where the citizens are equal and become the master of the state, as democracy and republic. However, even if the states are fully unified and democratic and republic, with a high-level of publicness, there will still be value conflicts and even wars among the states, with their narrow patriotism, nationalism, and chauvinism. This means that the publicness of current democracy and republic is still flawed and necessary to be improved since it ignores the interests of other countries and people. Global peace can be achieved only when the member states share some public values and reach higher publicness, looking the earth as a whole.

2.5 Monetary Value vs. Environmental Value Value is generally, not always, referred to as, and confused with, monetary value. In everyday living, we are always considering what the value of a car or a house is. A car may be valued $50,000, and a house $500,000. Similar questions can be considered: what is the value of human life, environmental goods, arts, public authority, dignity, beauty, etc. The answer may be various amounts of money, with some reason but more problems and puzzles. In reality, these monetary numbers are prices, which may be a type of value but not the real meaning of value. The difference between price and value exists in nearly everything, including life insurance, body injuries, animals and plants, artworks, human organs, public authorities, etc. Is it true that we can buy and sell, and evaluate, anything by money, just with various amounts? Is the social development of human society just for the wealth of nation, well-being, and economic prosperity in the form of monetary numbers? As the price of pork, beef, and fish may be some amounts of dollars, how much, and what value, is the wild animals, the entire environment and ecology, and the earth as our sole home?

2.5.1 Monetary Value Monetary value, with different forms such as money, profit, finance, and GDP, is apparently important and indispensable for anybody, including individuals, companies, families, NPOs, and governments, but it is neither directly mentioned in the intrinsic goods of Frankena nor in the public value inventory of Beck Jørgensen and Barry Bozeman. Always disdained or worshiped at the two extremes, monetary

64

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

value is basic and essential, as anybody and any organization cannot survive and sustain without money in modern society. Money is a social, cultural, and historical phenomenon, particularly in the current commodity and market economy. Money has great social functions of exchange, deposition, payment, and measurement. The form of money has transformed from barter goods such as goat, grain, shell, to precious metals such as coper, silver, gold, to credit money such as paper currency, and digital money such as e-currency and bitcoin. By these forms, it is increasingly convenient to facilitate the social functions of money. However, if we, as individuals, companies, organizations, and governments, pursue money and monetary value solely and extremely but ignore other values, we may misunderstand the true value and real function of money and fail in the long run. Price is the quantity of monetary and economic value, and most related monetary and economic values, such as income, assets, profit, finance, and GDP, are measured and aggregated by price. However, what is the essence of price and how does it form? As a traditional economic question, are the prices $1 of a bottle of drinking water and $1000 of a carat of diamond truly their values? Why do the prices, or values, of water and diamond vary so greatly, while water seems so useful but diamond useless? In classical economics, as Fig. 2.3 shows, the price of any commodity is the equilibrium or balance of two sides: consumers’ demand and producers’ supply. On the demand side, the demand function D(Q) is actually the consumers’ willingness to pay (WTP), as subjective evaluation, for every unit of the goods. Although the price of a bottle of drinking water may be $1, there are surely somebody would like to pay, say, V1 , for the bottle of drinking water much higher than the price $1. On the supply side, the supply function, S(Q), is the expense of producer to produce every unit of the goods, C1 , actually reflecting the current technology and capability of humankind to produce or provide the goods. For the initial output of the bottle of drinking water, the expense (marginal cost) must be higher than the price $1 but lower than the WTP since people are willing to pay much to quench their thirst and even survive. Fig. 2.3 Price formation

2.5 Monetary Value vs. Environmental Value

65

However, the marginal cost of bottled drinking water will decrease gradually and remain stable because of the economy of scale and finally increase because of the limit of producing capacity. Meanwhile, the WTP will decrease as the urgent need for water relief increases. The price is formed when the demand and supply meet at P* as the equilibrium. Therefore, although the price of any commodity is seemingly objective and fixed, such as $1 for a bottle of drinking water and $1000 for a carat of diamond, these prices are essentially the subjective value (evaluation) of somebody on the goods. There are definitely somebody’s evaluations higher or lower than the price, as Tom prefers to buy while John does not. The economic function of price, as a so-called economic signal, is to equilibrate, clear, and balance the market and to direct resource allocation, which actually means that there is no over or insufficient supply and demand for all commodities, such as bottle water and diamond, and if there is any unequilibrium, the price will fluctuate and the resources will be input or drawn out to adjust the demand and supply and then to reach equilibrium again. Actually, in the real economy and market, there are never equilibriums, as the markets are always changing because of the shifts of consumers’ preferences, suppliers’ technology, and emergencies, but the flexible and sensitive price signals formed in the market can direct efficient resource allocation and achieve market efficiency. Therefore, the essence of price is somebody’s subjective value measured by monetary unit of the commodities, meaning that somebody, say, Tom, evaluates the commodity and is willing to pay this amount of money to get it, and others, such as I, also evaluate it and may be willing to pay more or less. The prices cannot be regarded as the full values for several reasons. First, the externality, no matter positive or negative, as a market failure, may distort prices, meaning that some effects of production and consumption of some commodities, such as education and automobiles, cannot be measured and accounted for in the market and prices. Although this market failure can be rectified by some policies and institutions, such as the Pigou Tax and Coase Theorem, the arguments of price and value lead to a more serious theoretical and ethical issue, that is, whether the price and market, even if they are perfect without market failure and externality, can measure the full value of commodities and whether all the goods in human society are commodities that can be valued by price. Considering the painting of Vincent van Gogh, the price is very expensive, say, $100 million, but is this amount of money the full value of the arts? Michael Sandel (2013), a philosopher at Harvard University, pointed out that there are ethical goods and civil goods in human society, such as environmental goods, human organs, labor, education, hospitals, and public positions. They are not commodities and should not be evaluated and allocated solely by markets. As all commodities are more or less produced from the environment and labor, they all have ethical and civic content to some extent, which means that you can buy them, but you cannot dispose them in any way. In human society, the economy is only one field, monetary value is only one value, and commodities are only one type of good. Economic ways of thinking and behaving are functional and important but not sole and exclusive. The market is essentially a mechanism of match, matching the producers and consumers according to price signals. Only those consumers with WTP higher than

66

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

P* can be served, and those producers with cost and technology efficiency lower than P* can win the market and produce. This is the resource allocation with economic efficiency, the best status pursued by economics. However, if this principle is applied in all fields, such as human organ transplantation distribution, only those who can pay enough money can obtain the opportunity for organs and even life. This mechanism of distribution and allocation may be efficient, as those willing and capable of paying can get the organ and life, but neither ethical nor just, because poor people have much less opportunity and those who can afford may not best fit, wasting the scarce organs they purchase. In reality, most countries prohibit commercial human organ transplantation and instead establish a match system, similar to but not market, according to multiple principles of medical condition, necessity of patients, and emergency. This mechanism has a specific value basis, different from the market, for justice or appropriateness but not for-profit (Wang, 2016). This case shows that (a) market and price are not the sole way, or institution, to evaluate goods, (b) not all goods, such as human organs and environmental goods, are marketized commodities, (c) there are many other ways and institutions to match, distribute, and allocate ethical and civil goods, and (d) even for commodities in the markets, there are some mechanisms and institutions preventing them from degrading to sheer commodities, such as laws to protect the environment and dignity of labor, since they have values other than monetary value. Therefore, it is easy to understand why money is always paradoxically treated, being chased and disgusted. Money, as a medium and instrument, can help people pursue and realize their true and ultimate goals and values. Money for billionaires such as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Jack Ma are just numbers but not values. Their values are the achievements of changing the world toward better by their products, technologies, and philanthropies. Shortsighted businessmen ignore social responsibility but chase profit and money as the ultimate value, damaging their business and long-term profit. Scientists such as Newton and Einstein and adventurers such as Alex Hannold and Reinhold Messner are not as rich as businessmen but may be richer in other values such as science and exploration. We, as ordinary people, can also find and create our values, balancing money and career, time, health, and family. NPOs are not-for-profit but for other values, such as the environment and human rights. The governments are not for sole wealth of nation and GDP, but through GDP to establish better countries and world with more welfare, equality, justice, environment, and harmony, where everyone can realize their values and ideals.

2.5.2 Environmental Value The arguments of environmental value have aroused deep reflections on the concept of value and the relationship between humans and nature. Environmental value should be the basis of economic value because nearly all commodities and services originate from the environment, so their prices are based upon the value of environmental goods. This market value measured by price is only the trivial part of environmental

2.5 Monetary Value vs. Environmental Value

67

values, and most environmental goods, such as animal, river, mountain, and air, have no market prices, or the prices could not reflect their full values, so they are defined as nonmarket resources. Some direct or indirect value elicitation techniques, mainly in economics, such as the travel cost method, random utility model, hedonic pricing function, and contingent valuation method (CVM), etc. have been utilized to estimate their environmental values. The aim of all these methods is to calculate and give numerical monetary numbers, as environmental values, to environmental goods. For example, a typical paper published in the scientific journal Nature estimated that the value of the entire biosphere (most of which is outside the market) is in the range of US$ 16–54 trillion (1012 ) per year, with an average of US$ 33 trillion per year (Costanza et al., 1997). As outstanding ecological economists, these authors should have known the abundant meanings of value and cautiously used the concept of economic value denoting these monetary numbers. The problem is the difference and relationship between economic value and environmental values. Many researchers have pointed out that in addition to economic value, the environment and its goods also have plural and incommensurable values, such as esthetic, cultural, ecosystem, historical, moral, religious, and scientific values, that cannot be measured by money (Trainor, 2006). These values are embedded in other social spheres, incomparable and incommensurable to economic values. This means that the environmental problem is not only an economic problem but also a political, ethical, sociological, scientific, religious, and moral problem. The method to settle these incomparable value conflicts could not be monistic money or interest aggregation and maximization, as Pareto Improvement suggests in economics, but deliberation and compromise between different incomparable values. Some environmentalists’ radical behaviors and theories, such as deep ecology, animal rights, and anti-anthropocentrism, could not be explained and understood by monistic monetary maximization and compensation but by their noneconomic values. The arguments on environmental values clearly show that there are plural and incomparable values embedded in different decision principles and discipline assumptions, homo economicus, homo politicus, and homo sociologicus, in economic, political, and social spheres. The value and principle in economics could not be applied and transferred arbitrarily in other social spheres; otherwise, it would be viewed as corruption or alienation, say, justice in politics and love in sociology but measured by money. There are two basic ethical relations, or ethical responsibility, for humankind, which will determine how humans evaluate the subjects and form their values. One is human-to-human, and the other is human-to-environment. The ethical relation or responsibility of humans-to-humans indicates that we, as humans, must treat another human as an equal human, respecting his/her human dignity and human rights. In contemporary society, all people are created equally. Nobody is, and can be, the master or slave of others, and no one can sell himself/herself, even with the willingness, to others as a slave because of poverty or any other reasons. Slaves have no human dignity or human rights, although they may have their functional values. We can possess and dispose our possessions and belongings, such as house, car, pet, and slave, by our preference and free will, but we cannot possess and dispose human in a similar way. This ethical relation means that humans have their intrinsic and

68

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

existence values, not depending on their functions and usefulness to others. This equal ethical relation of humans-to-humans has been achieved gradually and is not yet perfectly even today. The abolition of slavery can be regarded as the first ethical revolution in human history, although this process has not yet been accomplished, as there are still so many inequalities of gender, race, class, and nation in contemporary society. However, the ideas of equality and intrinsic value of humans have been basically accepted and recognized, at least ideologically, while the practical realization has still a long way to go, depending on people’s understanding and recognition of the concept of human equality, dignity, and intrinsic value. Similarly, the environment has two types of values and ethical relations to humans. One is functional, instrumental, extrinsic, or monetary value, as the environment has functions and usefulness to humans. The other is intrinsic value or existence value, as the environment has its rights and dignity. Although some people and scholars reject or ignore that the environment has intrinsic value, rights, and dignity and claim and calculate the environment’s functional and monetary values, the thought experiment of “The Last Man,” the theories of deep ecology and anti-anthropocentrism, can clarify the value of the environment and the ethical relation between humans and the environment. Some people and scholars argue that humans have no moral relation to the environment, and all moral considerations of the environment can be ascribed to humans and humans. For example, why I attempt to protect the environment, not pollute the river and air? This is not because of the environment such as rivers and air on themselves but because pollution will harm other people. In addition, even if there are no other people, I do not need to protect the environment and can pollute and dispose the environment as I prefer. However, as the thought experiment Last Man demonstrates, if there is only one man, such as Tom, with tremendous power and capacity, Tom still cannot destroy the planet or kill an ant casually. Surely, this claim may be arbitrary, and somebody, such as John, may insist that he/she, as the last man, can do anything as he/she wants. Here, Tom and John have controversy, and discussion, deliberation, reasoning, and reflection are necessary. Anybody can choose the moral position of Tom or John by his/her free will, but moral learning and reflection may help people form and change their decisions. Deep ecology is an environmental philosophy and social movement presented by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess in 1972. Traditional shallow ecology protects the environment for the benefit of humans, while deep ecology suggests that humans must fundamentally change their ethical relationship to nature from one that valuing nature solely for its usefulness to human beings to one that recognizing that nature has intrinsic value. It argues that anthropocentrism, a worldview regarding humans as the master of nature, has led to environmental degradation throughout the world and thus should be replaced by ecocentric (ecology-centered) or biocentric (life-centered) worldviews, where the biosphere becomes the main focus of moral concern. There are eight points of deep ecology, where intrinsic, existence, or inherent value play a crucial role:

2.5 Monetary Value vs. Environmental Value

a.

b. c. d. e.

f. g. h.

69

The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves. These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes. Richness and diversity contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs. Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease in the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease. Policies must therefore be changed to affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating quality of life rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to participate in the attempt to implement the necessary changes.

Deep ecology can be regarded as the second ethical revolution aiming to achieve the equity and justice of humans to the environment. Compared to the first one aiming to achieve the equity of human and human, the equity of human-to-environment does not mean that the environment should be thoroughly identical and equalized to human in all aspects, as human and human are not identical in all aspects, but urge human to consider environment morally but not merely instrumentally. The achievement of the equity of humans to the environment, as well as humans to humans, will take a long period depending on the transformation of people’s attitudes and ideas as subjective values. After that, the behaviors, laws, and policies can be transformed correspondingly, while our current behaviors, laws, and policies are still based upon shallow ecology and instrumental value of the environment. Therefore, deep ecology is not only an ethical requirement but also a pragmatic practice. It requires us to change our behaviors, laws, and policies and respect the environment, entitling some rights to the environment and involving moral considerations when making decisions and policies. Moral consideration does not mean that humans cannot touch or change the environment, as humans can either contact, communicate, and even punish or kill (death sentence) humans but it means that humans should treat the environment more seriously and reasonably, recognizing the intrinsic but not solely the monetary value of the environment.

2.6 Value Monism vs. Value Pluralism As value is a profound concept in philosophy, value monism and value pluralism are also much controversial and confusing value concepts. However, as anything in the

70

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

cosmos, nature, and human society can be cognized and understood gradually, value monism and value pluralism can be clarified after we have discussed the various value concepts. As value can be understood as the good things pursued by humans, there are many different types of good things in Frankena’s value list. As Fig. 2.4 shows, most values can be categorized as truth, goodness, and beauty. Truth is pursued by natural science; goodness is pursued by social science; and beauty is pursued by humanity and art. These disciplines and knowledge can help us understand and appreciate values. Some people, such as criminals and environmental polluters, are still pursuing their values but ignoring and destroying other values because they cannot understand and appreciate more comprehensive values. I, similarly, am pursuing my values but surely ignoring other values because I cannot understand and appreciate all values. This means that the value is plural, and some of them may be conflicting. You cannot have your cake (as value A) and eat it (as value B). However, if we experience and deliberate and empathize and understand and trace the truth, goodness, and beauty to the very origin, we may discover that all these values may be the same and consistent from the God, All¯ah, Creator, and Natural Law, as the essence of the cosmos, just with different names and forms in different cultures and fields. Therefore, value may be one and monistic.

Fig. 2.4 Plural and monistic value

2.6 Value Monism vs. Value Pluralism

71

2.6.1 Value Pluralism We are currently living in a plural and diverse society, not only morally but also secularly, after the movement of liberalism and secularization in the last several centuries. By the slogan of freedom and democracy, people can enjoy diverse psychological preferences, value judgments, and behavioral choices with various values. In the market, as economic liberalism advocates, we can buy and sell most commodities freely. Although there are some goods that cannot be exchanged freely, such as drugs, human organs, sex services, rare animals, and plants (in some countries), these restrictions are made by people’s collectively legislative actions and cannot be regarded as interfering with our free will. In politics by political liberalism, we can enjoy basic political freedom and civil rights such as speech, publishing, association, and demonstration. Although in many countries, particularly authoritarian countries, these political freedom and civil rights are not thoroughly fulfilled and maybe much flawed, they have still been basically recognized by nearly all people, governments, and even dictators, as nobody can reasonably reject freedom and democracy. In society, by social liberalism, we can enjoy some social freedoms, for example, choosing our clothes, foods, travels, lovers, and opening business, although some of these freedoms are also restricted in some societies and cultures, such as homosexuality, polygamy, and food taboos. In modern society, in the name of freedom and liberalism, we can enjoy value pluralism, valuing anything we want to value and practicing any things if they are legal. Although there may be some legal and moral restrictions, these restrictions are generally made collectively and can be pondered, questioned, and changed. Value pluralism means that various values may be incomparable and incommensurable, which are two linked but subtly different conceptions. First, commensurability means that values can be measured by the same unit, and the typical example is the monetary and economic value that can be measured by monetary rods. The profits of companies, the income and assets of individuals, and the GDP of countries can then be measured and compared. However, some values, such as the environmental value, scientific value, cultural value, and historical value, are difficult, if not impossible, to be accounted for and measured by the same unit. Although economists can use some methodologies, such as the contingent valuation method, hedonic function, and travel cost method, to survey and estimate the environmental value in monetary units, the crucial problem is that these values are incommensurable and unable to be transformed and measured by cardinal monetary numbers. Relative to commensurability, comparability means that various values, regardless of whether they can be measured by the same unit, can be compared ordinally without knowing their exact cardinal number; that is, various values can be compared and ranked by their value significance, V A ≥ VB ≥ VC · · · . Therefore, although these values may be incommensurable, i.e., without the exact number by the same unit, they may still be comparable. For practical policy evaluations and decision-making, comparability means that it is not necessary to calculate the exact monetary value

72

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

numbers but to compare the significance of the values directly, while incomparability means that the concerned values are fundamentally different and so cannot be matched and compared. For example, an environmental project such as the Three Gorges Dam can gain monetary value from power generation, $X, a great amount of money, and can function as flood control, Y, which is not necessarily measured by money but may submerge historical relics with a great amount of historical value, Z. If Y and Z can all be transformed and accounted for as an amount of money, X, Y, and Z can be commeasured, and then the optimal decision can be made. If Y and Z cannot be calculated as a number, the decision-makers can still compare and rank X, Y, and Z according to their subjective perceptions and cognitions. However, some scholars and people may reject the commensurability and comparability of values and insist that these values, such as economic values X, flood prevention values Y, and history values Z, are incomparable and incommensurable, which means that they are thoroughly different and cannot be compared. If forced to compare, they will feel upset and unreasonable. We cannot sacrifice the history and ecological values by any amount of money or instrumental values. Economic methodology and logic are essentially a way of evaluation, transforming plural values into monistic values. GDP, as the wealth of the nation, is the aggregation of all values of economic goods, as the equation shows: GDP = P1 Q1 + P2 Q2 + P3 Q3 + · · · Here, Pi and Q i are the price and quantity of economic goods, respectively. Only economic goods, such as cows, books, cars, houses, and any commodities with prices, can be evaluated and priced by monetary rods and then can be equalized, commoditized, compared, and aggregated by their prices. However, all goods, such as cows, books, vehicles, labor, and environmental goods, have values other than prices. Therefore, the capitalization, marketization, commoditization, and commercialization of human society mean that an increasing number of goods have been and will be evaluated by price and transformed into commodities. The process can be traced back to industrialization and regarded as a great transformation (Polanyi, 2001). Karl Marx (1954) criticized this commoditization as an alienation, altering the essence of goods from their origins to commodities and degrading their plural values to monetary numbers. Incommensurability and incomparability are pervasive, not only philosophical but also pragmatical. They may lead to various value conflicts and even wars without value deliberation and compromise. If values are monistic, commeasurable, and comparable, such as monetary value, these monistic value conflicts are easy to solve and harmonize by value aggregation and redistribution in the name of Preto improvement and compensation. Interest and value conflicts are common, and if interest and value are understood and defined as material, economic, and monetary interest and value, these interest and value conflicts are not difficult to solve. As the Chinese proverb says, those problems that can be solved by money are not real problems, while those problems that cannot be solved by money are real problems.

2.6 Value Monism vs. Value Pluralism

73

2.6.2 Value Monism In the medieval age of Europe and the traditional age of other countries, societies are rather restrained and stifled by the suppression of value monism. According to various versions of value monism, nature, humans, and society were created, operated, and directed by God, Allah, Creator, or some impersonalized natural laws, and people’s minds and behaviors should be in accordance with the Bible, Koran, or The Analects of Confucius in different cultures. Because all the values, knowledge, and principles originated from monistic sources, they were basically consistent and compatible. There may be value conflicts and religious wars among the different gods and cultures, such as the Crusades and Muslim conquest, but inside a religion and culture, it would be harmonious because all the values are consistent and monistic. Since consistency is one of the most important ideals of theory, religion, and society, because there would be no paradoxes and conflicts inside, value monism may be more preferable than value pluralism, as monotheism is generally regarded as superior and more advanced than polytheism. Therefore, Christianity can unify Europe, and Islam can solidify the Arab world, while polytheism in Greek mythology, although splendid and fascinating, has led to conflicts and wars among the various Gods. Although diversity and richness may be a value of pluralism, stability and consistency may be a value of monism, and these two values should be compatible and compromised. Although the plural values and monistic values have different features and seem to be conflicting, they can be consistent and harmonious at higher levels. Although different organizations, such as families, companies, and NPOs, have different value pursuits, they are all parts of society and should sustain society. There are more than 197 sovereign countries and 36 territories and their governments in the world, and most of us have experienced wars and hatred, but they are all parts of the world and can live together. Our different values, perceptions, and conflicts are temporary and partial, but not eternal and holistic, due to our limited understandings and cognitions of the world. Similarly, although religion and science have much different and various understandings and cognitions of nature and humans and can be divided into different factions and branches and conflicts arising, they are all essentially understandings of the same universe as a whole. The pluralism and conflicts are due to the limitations of our understanding, while monism and harmony can be achieved when we have a more comprehensive and systemic understanding of the world. Value deliberation, compromise, and appreciation are crucial and essential in modern society. Nearly every individual, organization, and country have their plural values pursuit, but they, i.e., we, also need to understand and respect others’ value. The growth and maturity of an individual mean that he/she can understand and appreciate more values, including music, painting, other forms of art, and other forms of social phenomena and human behaviors, all of which are motivated by various values. Even though there are some strange, immoral, and even evil behaviors, such as crime, slaughter, wars, and taboo, they are driven by some values. We do not need to agree or support these values, but we need to understand these values. When humans can

74

2 Public Value: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic, Private vs. Public

truly and deeply deliberate, understand, and appreciate plural values, we can solve our conflicts and reach harmony.

2.6.3 Value Measurement Values are philosophical and profound but also pragmatic and simple. They can be observed, measured, and recorded, at least partially. The advancement of measurement, such as the invention of natural numbers, negative numbers, fractional numbers, rational numbers, irrational numbers, imaginary numbers, and transcendental numbers, is a great achievement of mathematics, as a branch of science, of humankind. Although the measurements of values may not be accurate, they are the progress of humankind and can be improved gradually. For example, individual wealth can be measured by monetary income and assets, and national wealth can be measured by GDP. Individuals’ health can be categorized into physical and mental and can be measured by questionnaires and Likert scales. Therefore, we may claim that Tom’s physical health is 0.7, mental health is 0.4, and total health is 0.55 on average if the full score is 1. Similarly, an individual’s morality level can also be assessed and scored by teachers, parents, friends, and superiors, although not precise, implying that there are many unknown elements and relationships inside an individual’s health and morality. Similarly, a country’s national wealth, competitiveness, development, democracy, and happiness have been measured by economic, political, and social indicators such as GDP, Global Competitiveness Index (GCI), Human Development Index (HDI), Happiness Index (HAP), Democracy Index (DI), Human Freedom Index (HFI), Rule of Law Index (ROL), etc. These indicators are the description and measurement of some value dimensions of individuals, organizations, and countries. Although maybe not precise and exact, they can provide some information and be supplemented by philosophical and qualitative descriptions and analysis. Measurement means that we can understand and grasp the objects more substantially and essentially. Mathematics enables mathematicians to understand and grasp the natural world by numbers and equations as the essence of the objective world. The natural world follows the rule of mathematics. Although many scholars and people believe that the human mind and society are much different from the natural world, they can also be measured, depending on humankind’s cognition and understanding of our mind and society. Quality and quantity are the two dimensions of objects. In fact, for a natural object, such as a stone, there are originally no numbers or mathematics of it. However, as our understanding and understanding deepen, we can gradually count the number, weigh the quality, measure the temperature, and evaluate the features. This is the same for the human mind and society. We gradually know how to measure individual health by the health index, count wealth by income and GDP, and assess happiness by the happiness index. Quantification means that we have deepened our understanding of the world, although the quantification is far from sufficient and should be companied by qualitative analysis. This means that

2.6 Value Monism vs. Value Pluralism

75

we need to clarify what the various values mean, such as wealth, happiness, democracy, freedom, health, etc., and then we can measure and quantify these values more correctly and precisely.

References Beck Jørgensen, T., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values: An inventory. Administration & Society, 39(3), 354–381. Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organizational theories. Jossey-Bass Costanza, R., et al. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(15), 253–260. Marx, K. (1954). The communist manifesto. Gateway Edition. Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time. Beacon Press Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free Press. Sandel, M. J. (2013). What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets (p. 2013). Farrar. Talbot, C. (2009). Public value—The next “big thing” in public management? International Journal of Public Administration, 32, 167–170. Tanner, O. C. (2013). The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. http://tannerlectures.utah.edu/lec tures/index.html Trainor, S. F. (2006). Realms of values: Conflicting natural resource values and incommensurability. Environmental Values, 15(1), 3–29. UN. (2021). Gross National Happiness Index. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php? page=view&type=99&nr=266&menu=1449 UNESCO. Basic Texts of the 1972 World Heritage Convention, Edition October 2019. https://whc. unesco.org/en/basictexts/ Wang, B. (2016). Public value in moral market: A case study of human organ transplantation system. International Journal of Public Administration, 39(2), 135–145. WVS. (2021). World Value Survey. Values Change the World. https://www.iffs.se/media/1931/wvsbrochure-web.pdf Zimmer, C. (2015). A planet of viruses (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. Zimmerman, M. J., & Bradley, B. (2019). Intrinsic vs. extrinsic value. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/value-intrinsic-extrinsic/

Chapter 3

Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

Individuals are the basic unit of human society, and individual development is the basis of organizational development and social development. Although we always want to achieve individual development and claim that we have obtained individual development, what is individual development is still unclear and misunderstood narrowly as physical growth, income and asset accumulation, career and position promotion, while aging and death are not generally regarded as individual development but declining and decaying. All these aspects can be parts of individual development but neither the essence nor the whole. Because we do not understand individual development or the wealth, health, death, and significance of life, we always commit mistakes, such as pursuing money but sacrificing honesty, environment, responsibility, health, harming others and society, fearing aging and death. As development means becoming better, individual development means an individual should become better in every aspect, at least those key aspects such as career, health, soul, and life, and understand the true meanings of those key concepts of life, say, income, growth, maturity, health, morality, happiness, achievement, knowledge, and death. Individual development means that one can understand the world deeper and better.

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health 3.1.1 Growth and Maturity Everyone is born to parents, grows from a baby to youth, becomes maturity and old, and finally goes to death, generally within 100 years. An individual is born with many differences, healthy or congenital diseases, in a wealth or poor family, in a large or small country, with well-educated or poorly educated parents, etc. The initial condition and background will greatly influence individual development. Currently, most governments need to provide basic medical care for families and © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_3

77

78

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

babies and reduce congenital diseases. It is difficult, but not impossible, for babies with congenital diseases or other types of acquired diseases to grow up and achieve individual development, so society and government should provide them more help and kindness through philanthropy and public policies. Meanwhile, these disabled people can still pursue and achieve their individual development by learning and mastering some skills but not solely depending on others and society. This means that everybody, regardless of their initial conditions, can pursue and achieve individual development. All the babies are lovely. However, when they grow up physically to adolescents, some of them become annoying or disgusting and even juvenile delinquents. This means that physical growth and body strongness are only part of individual development but not the whole. Physical growth is necessary for babies and adolescents, and parents, teachers, schools, and governments should encourage and require children to perform physical exercises and enhance their health. There are healthy criteria for babies and adolescents, measuring individual development from the aspect of physical quality. A weak and sick individual cannot be claimed as a developed individual, and he/she can improve the physical quality by scientific nutrition intake and physical exercises. However, individual development refers not only to physical growth but also to moral development, at least including knowledge, responsibility, benevolence, and ideal, which are basically but not necessarily from family and school education, as a child who has not gone to school can learn these from society by oneself, albeit more difficult. If physical health, technical knowledge, and morality can be separated, by extreme, an individual with morality but no physical health and knowledge may be more preferable than an individual with physical health and knowledge but no morality, although one owning all three values is best, albeit difficult. This analysis indicates that physical health, technical knowledge, and morality are three important values for individual development. All necessary, they can still, and have to, be prioritized as no. 1 morality, no. 2 knowledge, and no. 3 health, although different people have different rankings and choices. In reality, all people are the combination of these three elements to various extents. Childhood is always memorable and unforgettable and beautiful for most people as a value. Although children themselves may not recognize their loveliness and happiness and may have their troubles and worries, most adults will cherish the children and childhood and should understand the children from the points of children themselves by the methodology of empathy but not their own standpoints. Most parents and families will protect their children and provide the living materials and education conditions as best as possible, and governments will establish public policies to safeguard children from being harmed physically and mentally and provide basic education to help children grow up. When we understand and recognize the value of children and childhood, we would like to cherish and protect children and childhood. Surely, there are cases of terrible childhood caused by psychological diseases and even crimes of adults, such as pedophilia. These behaviors are seriously wrong, selfish, and disgusting because they are not truly loving but harming children, although these psychologies and behaviors should be researched and understood more deeply. The harms in childhood may be severe and everlasting for the whole

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health

79

life of an individual, influencing one’s mentality and behavior in life. A good society, including government, family, parents, and every one of us, has the responsibility to protect children and provide good conditions for them. Most of us will grow up and become higher, stronger, and mature as kinds of development. We gradually leave childhood with purity but enjoy youth with strongness and energy and adulthood with maturity as other values. The period can be roughly from approximately 10 to 70 years old, divided into primary school, middle school, university year, work, and retirement. All of these periods, including retirement or not, can be regarded as golden age for an individual, although they have much different features, fineness, and troubles. For primary and middle school students, in most countries, such as China, they have to do tedious homework, sometimes be scolded and disciplined by parents and teachers, be bullied by classmates, and be troubled by complex social relations with their friends, classmates, teachers, and parents. They generally have insufficient money but financially depend on their parents. Perhaps in our adults’ minds, they are happy and carefree, but actually, they have their anxieties and depressions in a complex world full of conflicts, difficulties, and troubles, no less than our adults. Scientific research on juveniles and primary education is essential and can help us understand the world of children and youth. College students are more mature than high school students and have happiness and worries. Generally, they will become more independent physically and financially, living in the university dormitory or rented rooms, cooking and living by themselves, not with their parents any more. During the university period, in addition to physical growth, the more important thing for college students is to study and grasp more knowledge and skills. They will be under more pressure to find jobs and make living by themselves after graduation and entering the labor market than before. Although most of them may still be financially supported by family, they may look for some temporary jobs and earn some pocket money. Students from relatively poor families will face more financial pressure, while a good government and financial market can provide sufficient student loans to help them. Most university students are energetic, open, brave, and actively thinking, full of creation and innovation, with less limitation and staleness relative to adults. Their future achievements are bred and formed during this period. Particularly, they reach the age of love affairs and can enjoy the happiness and sweetness of love. If recognizing love as one of the most important values of humans, the university period can be the most fragrant and memorable time for an individual. However, love affairs may also harm the youth. There are numerous cases in universities in which young lovers hurt each other. The typical case was the talented French mathematician Évariste Galois (1811–1832), who solved the long-standing question of determining when an algebraic equation can be solved by radicals and contributed to the higher algebra now known as group theory. Reportedly, he died at 21 years old in a duel for his lover. Therefore, a university student should arrange and balance his/her study, work, love, and many other personal affairs. Otherwise, he/she may succeed in some aspects but fail in others. A well-developed student is not only a student with high performance on study and score but also with good performance on all the other aspects.

80

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

An individual can achieve development and success without the necessity of entering universities. Some successful figures have not studied in universities or quit universities but gained their achievements and success by their own hard work and self-study. A good example is Bill Gates (1955–). With strong interest in computer programming and business minds, he studied, wrote, and sold his first computer program at $4200 when he was 17 years old as a high school student. After entering Harvard University in 1973 with an SAT score of 1590 (the full score is 1600), he quit the university in 1977 and opened his enterprise Allen & Gates Inc., later Microsoft. As one of the greatest billionaires, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, and thinkers, he opened the gate of the IT world to humankind and formed deep thoughts on equity, philanthropy, and human fate. As an achiever, he knew his interest, career, and mission at a very early stage of his life, although he still needed to continuously study, modify and manipulate his enterprise and living. Still as a normal man, he definitely has some shortcomings shaded by his career success, such as his divorce in May 2021. Although the divorce cannot be regarded as badness, particularly in the United States as a free country, it has some damage to the reputation of Bill Gates as a public figure. Another case is Steve Jobs (1955–2011), who was born in the same year as Gates and raised by adoptive parents in Cupertino, California. As an extraordinary teenager, he spent his childhood and formed his enthusiasm in engineering and computers. He dropped out of Reed College in 1974, became a video game designer at Atari Corporation, and saved enough money for a pilgrimage to India to experience Buddhism. All the traits and experiences helped him shape the concise and cool style of later Apple, truly changing the world. Regrettably, he died at 56 years old of pancreatic cancer. Although we do not know exactly the relationship between the cancer and his living habit, it is essential for anybody to balance work, leisure, family, and health. If he could have lived longer and healthier, he could do more for himself and the world. The third case is Alex Honnold (1985–), one of the greatest American climbers known for his free solo ascents of large walls. He quit the University of California, Berkeley, where he majored in engineering. He has not become a great engineer but the greatest climber and adventurer. He must have a deep understanding of climbing, adventure, mountain, and life, expressed in his books Alone on the Wall (Honnold & Robert, 2018). For him and other professional adventurers, climbing and adventuring is not a dauntless life risking but another professional and cautious enterprise. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Alex Honnold, in different fields, have all achieved their individual development, which can be understood as becoming increasingly better in some fields for themselves but not following worldly opinions and evaluations. After university graduation, most ordinary people find jobs, make living, marry, bear baby, and maybe open their own enterprises, seek career achievements, and become older. Finding a job, earning money, and making living are the common lives for most people, maybe stressful, tedious, and routine for some, but meaningful, challenging, and hopeful for others. Career achievement, position promotion, and wealth accumulation may be ideals and goals for most people, as most of us are actually employees in the middle or bottom position of various hierarchies, such as companies, governments, and universities. We can achieve individual development

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health

81

on ordinary careers and positions, as position and salary promotion in hierarchies are generally regarded as individual development, but work without promotion can also be individual development if one can understand the significance of the work and try his/her best to accomplish the work. Every work, not solely the top and wellpaid, has its possible necessity and significance. There are many low-paid works, such as cleaner, waiter, and clerk, and most of these workers are at the bottom of hierarchies. It is truly difficult, but still possible and necessary, for these employees to understand the significance of the work and try their best to fulfill their duty well. Meanwhile, employers and managers also have the duty to train and educate these low-level employees, helping them understand the significance of work and achieve career development and providing appropriate salaries, allowances, security, and dignity. Governments also have responsibilities to protect these low-paid and bottom workers by minimum wage laws and social security. Indeed, not only low-paid workers but also many of us, even those with high income, position, and education, may not truly understand the significance of our work. For example, officials may be corrupted, CEOs may exploit their workers and pollute the environment, and professors may commit plagiarism or academic cheating. Although they gain high income, position, and prestige, these behaviors do not achieve individual development but deteriorate their careers. Therefore, individual development is based upon a deeper understanding of careers, income, health, and life. Aging and retirement are generally not regarded as individual development but are worried and feared as declining and decaying, approaching death. However, as the childhood, youth, university time, and career stage have their features, some goodness and some badness, aging and retirement are not necessarily pessimistic. Vigor and health are fading, and income and position are shrinking, but leisure time is plenty, and experience and wisdom are at the summit of life. The more than 20-year period of retirement is valuable and essential to be planned and managed. By well planning and management, the health of aged people can be sustained, income and time can be arranged, and those things that they have no time to do before can be practiced. Particularly, some happiness studies have indicated that retired people aged 60–70 reported the highest subjective happiness relative to young adults because they have no work pressure, enough income, passable health, and sufficient leisure time (Warr, 2015). These studies do not claim that elderly people are definitely happier than youth, as they still have problems such as loneliness, social isolation, and health problems (Courtin & Knapp, 2017). They suggest that aging and retirement are not as terrible as generally thought and can be solved. The human life cycle from birth to death is a natural process with different stages and features, and age, youth, and oldness are not the criteria to judge good or bad development or decline.

3.1.2 Death Human death and death of lives are inevitable for all people and nearly all lives in the world according to our current cognition, science, and technology. Death is

82

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

generally regarded as terrible, bad, and taboo in most cultures and societies; longevity is always good and preferable, and immortality may be the dream of most cultures, religions, and modern science and technology. Similarly, the deaths of organizations, including families, companies, governments, and countries, are also bad, while the sustainability and growth of organizations are always good and pursued. However, as one of the most profound philosophical and scientific questions, what is death, what is the meaning of death, and how should we view and cope with death are still much controversial and confusing. Birth and death are the most common natural and social phenomena and have been and will be experienced by everyone of us, but probably nobody truly understands them. Abnormal death, or irregular mortality, defined as “a premature death, or one that occurs before the average life expectancy for a person of a particular demographic category” by the free medical dictionary, is generally perceived as bad and should be avoided. Smoking is one of the major causes of abnormal death, but the basic fact is that most smokers are rational and aware of the possible harm of smoking and probability of abnormal death. The body and health belong to individuals, and their smoking choices and rights are based upon their freedom and rationality and should be protected by laws and morality. Others, including nonsmokers and governments, have no legal and moral rights to limit or prohibit the right to smoke. However, the regulation of smoking of juveniles and in the public space should not be regarded as the restrictions of individuals’ smoking rights and freedom but the regulations on public affairs based upon collective consensus, which means that even smokers agree with this kind of regulation. Smoking may bring some pleasant sense, relaxation, and comfort, as well as cough and lung disease. A smoker may feel regret when he/she suffers severe disease, including deadly lung cancer. Smoking is actually not based upon freedom and rationality but on one’s uncontrollable desire. Parents should educate and guide children not smoking because children are not rational and selfcontrollable enough, but most adults are also not rational and self-controllable sufficiently. Although governments should not restrict individuals’ smoking rights, adults need to make their own choices, learn more about the consequences of smoking, and bear the results by themselves. Accidental death, such as car accidents, is another cause of abnormal death. Car accidents are undoubtedly bad and should be avoided. According to the World Road Traffic Accident Report (Worldlifeexpectancy, 2021), more than 1,300,000 people die in fatal road traffic accidents per year, over 38,000 in the United States and 280,000 in China. Alcohol driving is the leading cause. It is difficult to claim that driving after drinking alcohol is rational choice and one can bear the consequence by him/herself, while some liberal economists can still define rationality by the utility function that the utility of driving after drinking, u, multiplying the tiny probability, p, is higher than the cost and risk, c, i.e., u · p > c. In fact, although we can recognize that all ordinary people are rational, their rationality is bounded and varies, depending on their wisdom, education, knowledge, and experience. As a key value in capitalism, free choices are unreliable and questionable in reality. After sufficient education and learning of the knowledge of driving and traffic accidents, the security of driving can be greatly improved, and the death of traffic accidents can be

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health

83

Table 3.1 Death by cause in the United States and China United States

China

Cause

Deaths

%

Cause

Deaths

%

1

Coronary Heart Disease

500,312

20.8

Stroke

2.018 m

20.6

2

Alzheimers/Dementia

259,480

10.79

Coronary Heart Disease

1.928 m

19.68

3

Lung Disease

193,160

8.03

Lung Disease

895,355

9.14

4

Lung Cancers

155,592

6.47

Lung Cancers

637,736

6.51

5

Stroke

147,277

6.12

Alzheimers/Dementia

563,472

5.75

6

Diabetes Mellitus

84,332

3.51

Liver Cancer

422,928

4.32

7

Kidney Disease

66,492

2.76

Stomach Cancer

328,257

3.35

8

Influenza and Pneumonia

66,211

2.75

Road Traffic Accidents

284,986

2.91

9

Colon-Rectum Cancers

63,042

2.62

Hypertension

276,483

2.82

10

Liver Disease

49,789

2.07

Oesophagus Cancer

204,627

2.09

Source Worldlifeexpectancy (2021)

effectively reduced. For example, the methodology of defensive driving is a series of driving skills, techniques, and ideology for driving safety, with the basic idea of not causing accidents and harming others positively but also not evolving and being harmed by others negatively. The essence is precaution and prevention, and the practices include following and understanding the traffic laws and regulations, not drinking or intoxicated, checking the tires and lights and other security facilities, maintaining the car periodically, driving carefully and not tiredly, etc. (Zakhareuski, 2021). Although these practices are just normal and common knowledge, they are helpful not only for driving but also for other affairs such as health, work, and politics. Premature death of disease or cancer is undoubtedly not good and should be avoided. In most countries, diseases are the leading causes of premature death. As Table 3.1 shows, in the United States approximately in 2018, the three leading causes of death are coronary heart disease, Alzheimers/dementia, and lung disease, killing approximately 500,312, 259,480, 193,160 people annually and respectively. In China, the three leading causes of death are stroke, coronary heart disease, and lung disease, killing approximately 2.018 million, 1.928 million, and 895,355 people annually and respectively. The advancement of medical science and prolonging human life are the dreams of science and society. Unsurprisingly, the average life expectancy of humankind has been prolonged from approximately 35 in ancient times to the current 75. This means that if premature death is avoided, an individual can generally live to 75 years old now. If one can keep no smoking, learn defensive driving, cultivate a healthy living habit, and maintain positive psychology, an individual can avoid premature death and live longer and better. The basic and common principle of living longer is to deepen the understanding of health, life, disease, and death. An ignorant, uneducated, and arbitrary individual can live with his/her free will and does whatever he/she wants but suffers a higher probability of unhealth, disease, unhappiness, and premature death. Individual freedom and free will should

84

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

be based upon reasonable, reliable, and correct understandings and cognitions of the world. Although nobody knows exactly whether his/her understandings and cognitions of the world are correct or not, they should reflect and introspect and change accordingly. Regardless of whether it is good or bad, an individual has to bear the consequence of his/her understandings, cognitions, choices, and behaviors. Although not at the top, suicide is one of the prominent causes of death. Around 2018 in the United States, it ranked no. 12 of the causes of death, killing 49,394 people a year, and in China, it ranked no. 16, killing 136,267 a year. Other causes of death ranking before suicide are basically disease, except road traffic accidents in China, ranking 8 and killing 284,986 people in a year. According to the latest CDC data, suicide rates in the United States have risen 15% between 2000 and 2009, and several studies indicate that the number of suicides is vastly underreported. In addition, in the United States, the number of people killed by suicide 49,394 around 2018 was much higher than the number of people killed by homicide 19,510 (Worldlifeexpectancy, 2021). Data from the World Bank (2021) verify the rising suicide rate of the United States from 11.3 (per 100,000 population) in 2000 to 15.3 in 2016. In China, this indicator witnessed a decrease from 13.2 to 9.7 during the same period. Although the reasons for suicide are multiple and complex, doctors and psychologists have identified that 90% of suicides are caused by depression, the fear of punishment of crime, suffering of diseases, and failures of career, love, and business. Although suicide is a complex psychological phenomenon, it can be roughly explained by the frustration of value and misunderstanding of life. By empathy, we can try our best to understand people in a depressed state, losing confidence and hopes of life. Officials committing corruptions and suicide are induced by greed, who do not understand the true meaning of public power and duty of public service. We surely should not blame those suicides for any reason, they could and should be more positive and optimistic by Learn, Think, Feel, and Do, as the slogan of Website of WorldLifeExpectancy advocate, which provides many useful data in our argument. All of us will definitely confront some difficulties and setbacks in the journey of life, and we need to understand them and handle them properly, but not escape and evade them cravenly. Medical science and technology have greatly prolonged human life. However, prolonging and sustaining life may be meaningless for patients in a vegetative state. Certainly, whether it is meaningless depends on the wills of the close relatives of the patient or the wills of the patient in the early testament if there is any. Euthanasia, which means dying with dignity and without too much pain, has meaning, significance, and values. As a tendency of human society, it is humane and has been legalized in some developed countries, such as the Netherlands and Nordic countries. Although it is not yet legal in most developing countries, the worries are mainly for economic and criminal considerations, worrying that the euthanasia decision cannot fully reflect the will of the patients. The argument of euthanasia and life in an unconscious state implies that consciousness may be the essence of life. If life has no consciousness but just physical breath and heartbeat, it cannot be looked as life any more. In contrast, even if an individual loses his/her moving capability due to disease or injury, as long as he/she still has the consciousness, he/she can be looked as living. Brain death

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health

85

defined by brain activities and consciousness, but not physical death defined by body activities such as breath and heartbeat, is the new understanding and definition of death or living by medical science and the WHO. This means that the essence of life is not physical activities but psychological activities. Surely, physical exercises and body health are essential, inseparable, and preconditions of consciousness and psychological activities under the current scientific and technological background, but they can be separated in some extreme situations, such as vegetative states caused by disease or injury or the advancement of science and technology, such as visual reality, urging us to ponder the essence of life and death. The argument of science and technology prolonging human life touches the essence, significance, and ethics of life. Longevity is one of the goals of science, technology, religion, and human society, and life expectancy has been prolonged from approximately 35 in middle age to current 75–80 years of age and may be 100, 150, and even 200 in the future. However, whether science and technology may immortalize life may be a serious scientific and ethical issue. The advancement of science and technology is discovering and approaching the secret of life. Scientists have found that aging and death may be caused by the shortening of telomere length or the failure of gene copying, and freezing body technology may be another alternative. By the methodology of thought experiment, if human can achieve immortality, what does it mean and result? In fact, death has its values, meanings, and significance in humankind’s current science, technology, social and political background. Pondering and understanding death can make our current life better. Death means rebirth, recycle, and renew. If there are no deaths but lives are immortal, human society and the planet may swell and burst, and new lives may have no place to exist and survive. Death can be considered a combination of immortality and renewal of the heredity of genes. The gene and the information inside may be immortal, while renewal and innovation and adaptation are also possible. Death also means equality and equity. Although there are various inequalities and inequities in current human society, death is equal, and nobody can escape and solidify inequality and inequity forever, regardless of how great and capable he/she is. If immortality is possible, powerful and capable individuals will first enjoy, ossifying society, thoughts, and nearly everything. Therefore, the immortality currently understood and pursued by humans is not necessarily preferable, and death may be valuable and significant, bringing sustainability, rebirth, novelty, and innovation. The advancement of science and technology provides another possibility of immortality: digitalizing the human consciousness and uploading them to the supercomputer system, and the human society and the universe may be some kind of supercomputer system. This scenario has been imagined, described, and argued by some science fictions. Although too much imaginary and fictitious, this imagination also touches the essence of life as consciousness but not physical activities. This idea corresponds to the theory of Buddhism that the body is just a useless skin bag. Our arguments do not attempt to belittle the importance of physical bodies and activities but to highlight the essence of life and the importance of consciousness. Even though we can keep our consciousness purely and thoroughly like some computer source codes, they should be changeable and renewable and can influence others

86

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

or be influenced by others. This means that consciousness, as the essence of life, should be learning, changeable, developable, and adaptive. After sufficient learning and development, our consciousness can cognize correctness and goodness, as well as badness and wrongness. This correctness and goodness are not solidified and ossified, depending on consciousness and cognition. Otherwise, if the consciousness is solidified and ossified, it is truly dead. Therefore, the continuous and endless renewal and refreshment of mind, knowledge, and consciousness of an individual is the essence of individual development. One may be aging and dying physically, but one’s gene and thoughts are continuous and everlasting.

3.1.3 Health Health is undoubtedly a value and a goodness, important for everyone. Nearly all of us hope to be healthy, but maybe most of us do not truly know how to achieve health, as most of us have committed more or less wrong and are difficult to always live healthily. The study of health can be a discipline and branch of health science, while health can be reasonably extended to organizations such as family, company, government, country, and even earth, as we can claim and pursue a healthy family, healthy company, healthy government, healthy country, and healthy earth. These healthy organizations are more preferable than happy families, profitable companies, authoritative governments, powerful countries, and beautiful earth because health may be more comprehensive and sustainable than happiness, profitability, efficiency, authority, and power. The arguments of individual health can help us understand organizational health since they should have some common principles. Health, defined by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2021), is “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” This definition reflects the gradual development of human understanding of health from biomedical, psychological, and social aspects. Although this definition is comprehensive and innovative, it is still vague, broad, and not measurable. For a long time, it was set aside as an impractical ideal, and most discussions of health returned to the practicality of the biomedical model. However, we support this definition and understanding of health because it catches the essence of health, that is, making an individual or an organization better on all, particularly the significant aspects including physical, mental, and social well-being. These aspects of health are closely related but not thoroughly consistent and sometimes can be separated, which means that an individual can be physically healthy but mentally and socially unhealthy, or vice versa. Comprehensive health means the balance and coordination of these health aspects. Physical health is generally regarded as the basis and precondition of health, although a disabled person can also be mentally and socially healthy. To achieve physical health, it is necessary to avoid and reduce congenital diseases, which are also the no. 33 and no. 26 leading causes of death in the United States and China, killing

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health

87

12,901 and 43,450 people a year, and bringing people various sequelae (Worldlifeexpectancy, 2021). Therefore, premarital and pregnancy checkups are necessary for childbearing couples to reduce the possible congenital disease of babies. Although some couples may be reluctant to do these checkups for many reasons, such as time and money consumption, as their freedom, they have to bear the consequence of the possible congenital disease of babies, although not high, say, 0.01%, comparable to traffic accidents. These choices indicate individuals’ bounded rationality and can explain why governments may establish the necessary laws and regulations requiring childbearing couples to perform the necessary medical checkups. After birth, children and juveniles generally do not have knowledge of physical health, and most parents will supervise their children’s diet and habits, basically forming children’s habits and physical health. Generally, most people will neither study their knowledge of physical health as a course or major nor keep their physical health through deliberate and active exercises but will just learn their health knowledge loosely and perform physical exercise habitually. Consequently, as an example, obesity has been a common, serious, and costly subhealth status or disease. According to the CDC (2021), from 2000 to 2018, the prevalence of obesity increased from 30.5% to 42.4%, and the prevalence of severe obesity increased from 4.7% to 9.2% in the United States. NonHispanic blacks (49.6%) had the highest age-adjusted prevalence of obesity, followed by Hispanics (44.8%), nonHispanic whites (42.2%), and nonHispanic Asians (17.4%). The prevalence of obesity was 40.0% among young adults aged 20 to 39 years, 44.8% among middle-aged adults aged 40 to 59 years, and 42.8% among adults aged 60 and older. Although many factors, such as family, income, race, genes, and habits, influence obesity and health, individuals’ knowledge and cognition may be the most direct and important factors. Physical health is not natural and random but should be managed and sustained through professional knowledge and scientific exercise. Health science as a scientific discipline and academic major are emerging, and health companies and health professionals as new industries and careers will thrive, but now they are far from sufficient. As we neither want to study health science as a major nor spend a great amount of money purchasing services from health companies, we can learn and grasp some basic principles of health and explore the relationship between physical health, individual development, and value. (a) We should consciously learn and record our health situations, as well as the family members’ health situations. Gene and inborn conditions are the major factors of physical health, and most cancers, hypertension, and coronary heart diseases are inherited, which means that an individual with close family members suffering these diseases has a higher probability of suffering. Although we do not need to worry too much about the gene and inborn conditions because we cannot choose or change them with current technology, we can master this information and make some preparations. (b) Good diet and living habit are essential. An individual’s diet and habit can be differentiated as healthy (good) and unhealthy (bad). Healthy diet and living habits include low salt, sugar, and calories; balance of foods; regular schedule and physical exercise; and no burning at midnight. Although these principles are simple and common, they are not easy to achieve, particularly for youth, because they are young and have less experience of illness and unhealthy.

88

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

However, when they feel, it may be serious enough, although it is never too late. Health problems and chronic diseases are generally formed over a long period as consequences of unhealthy diets and habits. However, the diet and habit are also formed in the long period and are difficult to introspect and change. Although some people may be physically healthy unconsciously and fortunately from their superior gene and unintentionally formed diet and habit, most people have to maintain their physical health by deliberately learning the knowledge of health, concerning their healthy status, keeping healthy diet and habit, and doing enough physical exercises. An individual can be physically healthy but mentally and socially unhealthy, but this imbalance may be unsustainable, as physical health will be harmed by poor mental and social health. Mental health means an individual has an appropriate understanding of him/herself and external society, including key factors such as income, family, love, marriage, health, disease, career, achievements, etc. Most modern people are always disturbed and confused by some of these factors. As a positive psychological status, mental health requires an individual to be open, optimistic, and active to difficulties and problems. Negative psychological emotions such as sadness, disgust, anger, and fear definitely exist in everyone’s mind and have psychological functions, but mentally healthy emotions can understand and control these emotions but are not controlled by them. As ordinary and normal humans, everyone must have some concerns, desires, emotions, and psychological problems, but mental health means one can understand these concerns and problems and can find some proper solutions to solve or handle, not developing serious depression or even suicide. Mental health implies that understanding ourselves, not only understanding our work and others, is essential. From the perspective of psychology, all of us are psychological patients to some extent, having various psychological problems, because nobody is perfectly mentally healthy, including psychologists themselves. Similarly, medical scientists and doctors are not perfectly physically healthy, having their own healthy problems. However, we still can reasonably anticipate that psychologists, biomedical scientists, and doctors can better sustain their mental and physical health than ordinary people because of their professional knowledge.1 The health of social well-being expands the health ideal and concept from biomedicine and psychology to social context. This means that an individual should have basic food, clothes, shelter, income, career, emotion, education, dignity, etc., much broader and more comprehensive than the traditional health concept. The health of social well-being mainly concerns the economic situation, not necessarily requiring one to be wealthy, but people cannot be in a state of extreme poverty. As the main source of global information on extreme poverty today, the World Bank has set the “International Poverty Line” and revised it in 2015. Since then, people have been considered to be in extreme poverty if they live on less than 1.90 international USD per day, based on the monetary value of a person’s consumption. According to World Bank data, most people in the world live in poverty, although not extreme. Two-thirds of the world population lives on less than international 10 USD per day, and every tenth person lives on less than 1.90 USD per day. It is hard to claim that people in 1

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/doctors-healthy-behaviors-_n_1943542.

3.1 Growth, Maturity, Death, and Health

89

Table 3.2 Extreme poverty of some countries and regions Country and region

1990

2000

2010

2018

Rate (%)

Bangladesh

44.2

34.8

19.6

14.8

−66.5

Tanzania

72.1

86

59.9

49.1

−31.9

Brazil

21.6

13.4

5.4

4.4

−79.6

China

66.2

40.2

11.2

0.5

−99.2

India

45.9

45.9

31.1

21.2

−53.8

South Africa

31.7

35

16.5

18.9

−40.4

United States

0.5

0.7

1.0

1.2

+140.0

East Asia & Pacific

61.3

38.5

11.2

1.3

−97.9

Latin America & Caribbean

15.2

13.7

6.2

4.4

−71.1

Sub-Saharan Africa

54.9

58.4

46.6

42.3

−23.0

World

36.0

28.6

15.7

10.0

−72.2

Source World Bank Open Data, various year

extreme poverty can be healthy, although a small portion of them may be healthy. People in poverty cannot eat well, wear warm, shelter in a room, not mentioning the education, hospital, and dignity. Although individuals should work hard and be responsible for personal income, poverty reduction and national economic development are either the main responsibility of governments, who should provide a stable, peaceful, sustainable, and friendly social circumstance for their people to work and live. Table 3.2 gives the data about extreme poverty of some countries and regions. Nearly all countries alleviated extreme poverty from 1990 to 2018, but to varying extents. China had the highest extreme poverty rate of 66.2% in 1990 but was reduced to 0.5% in 2018, truly a development miracle. In contrast, as the most advanced country and sole superpower, the United States had a quite low extreme poverty rate but deteriorated from 0.5% in 1990 to 1.2% in 2018, meaning that there were still 18.5 million people living in extreme poverty (Honnold & Robert, 2018). One of the ideals of human society is to eliminate not only extreme poverty but also poverty and make all people healthy and developing.

3.2 Career, Income, and Asset 3.2.1 Career Individual development is sometimes referred to as career promotion, income increase, or asset accumulation. Similar to growth and health, career, income, and assets are important for human living and individual development but not the core and essence. What do the career, income, and asset mean for individuals, what are

90

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

their social functions, and how we understand them will fundamentally influence and determine our attitudes and behaviors and our everyday living, and form the modern society. Except for minors and disabled people, most adults have their careers and will make living by their careers. Retired people have had their careers before and currently live on their pensions and may be served by nursing institutions and workers. Freelancers such as writers, artists, athletes, adventurers, movie directors, actors, and actresses also have their careers, although they may not be employed by some organizations but build their teams and employ others. Scientists in modern society will conduct their research as careers in universities or research institutes and obtain their salaries. Politicians such as presidents, senators, house representatives, and businessmen such as CEOs and senior managers are also having their careers. Particularly, some people working in criminal organizations can also be regarded as having their careers, illegal but always existing. Nearly all modern people go to school and find jobs as careers after graduation. Good job or bad job are our daily words. However, what is career; why we must have a career; what are the good or bad careers? Actually, careers are the phenomenon of a modern market society, and all careers are the result of the division of labor in the market system. In the agriculture age and even earlier stone age, there was no concept of career but work and labor. Or, most people at that time worked as peasants, while there were also warriors, businessmen, officials, craftsmen, etc., but the careers were far less and simpler than modern society. At any time, all the people must work to obtain food and make living, forming their family, community, clan, and society. There were some divisions of labor in the process of cowork, such as men responsible for hunting and women for collection and feeding, but these divisions of labor were simple and rough in ancient times, with cooperation and competition. After the industrial revolution, human society gradually entered an industrial age and market society. The division of labor was much more sophisticated and complex than before, as all the people just carried on a small fraction of works, forming various careers, and gaining incomes from their careers. In fact, all works and careers are significant and necessary for society and people, such as teachers, cleaners, artists, politicians, managers, and businessmen, although these works and careers are different in complexity, knowledge, skills, and incomes. If some career can be claimed as good or bad, it means that careers that need complicated and sophisticated skills are better and better paid than simple, repetitive, and lower paid careers. In the early age of capitalism, most workers were low paid, and the employers seized the most profit and surplus, as Marxism criticized. The basic reason was that the laborers of the bottom workers were simple, repetitive, and replaceable, while the laborers of the senior managers and capitalists were more complicated and competitive. Thus, the workers were in a disadvantageous position relative to their employers. However, this situation has changed greatly in modern society since simple and repetitive works have been basically replaced by machinery, and most existing works and careers are complicated and sophisticated enough that they cannot be replaced by machinery. Surely, there are still many simple works and careers in

3.2 Career, Income, and Asset

91

modern society, such as receptionists, factory workers, taxi and bus drivers, and even teachers teaching common knowledge. These careers are basically at the bottom of society, are low paid, and may be replaced by artificial intelligence in the future. Therefore, although all the careers should be morally equal, they are much different in complexity, knowledge, and economic return. Good careers are complex, knowledgebased, and well-paid, while “bad” careers are not truly bad, with different extents of complexity, knowledge, and payoff.

3.2.2 Income and Asset Income and assets are closely linked to careers and the phenomenon of division of labor, industrialization, and market society. Before industrialization, income and assets are not in the form of paper or credit money but in the various forms of, say, foods of harvest, instruments of production, livestock, or gold and silver. In the modern age, income generally means the annual or monthly or daily monetary inflow from the careers, as the price of labor. Individuals must make living by income, from their own career, parents, pensions, donations, or other financial resources. In the market society, the income of a career is basically determined by competition and market forces. Competitive, complicated, and unreplaceable careers can generally obtain high income, while redundant, simple, and replaceable careers can only obtain low income. The careers with the highest income are CEOs, senior managers of giant companies, and stars in various fields, much higher than presidents and scientists, while workers, drivers, and waiters can only obtain the lowest income. Although these huge income gaps in human society seem unequal, they are reasonable and understandable and may be fair and just. This income system can encourage people to work hard, pursue good education, and innovate. Governments are necessary to sustain a fair and just market system, including an income system, such as prohibiting fraud and anti-monopoly, providing social security to weak people, taxes, and just income. Although income is essential in modern market society, it actually is, but morally should not be, the measurement of individual value, achievement, dignity, and the goal of life. By the clarification of public value theory, every career has its values and significance and should be accomplished with endeavor and responsibility. An individual can only improve his/her incomes by working hard, learning, and promotion, and people working on bottom careers such as workers, waiters, and taxi drivers can also gain achievement and accomplishment on their careers, depending on his/her cognition, attitude, and behavior. Asset is the accumulation of income and may be in tangible forms such as deposit, real estate, stock, antique, and other intangible forms such as patents, technology, and social capital. However, assets, or more broadly, wealth, are generally referred to as economic and financial assets that can be easily transformed into money. Parents can definitely give some financial assets to their children, and an individual can be wealthy from the family heritage. However, these economic or financial assets can be squandered and exhausted, not the only and most important assets. Health,

92

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

knowledge, capability, skill, and cognition can also be regarded as various types of assets, which may be more useful and sustainable than economic assets. This is the reason that some wealthiest entrepreneurs and billionaires, such as Bill Gates (1955– ), Warren Buffett (1930–), and Mark Zuckerberg (1984–), who definitely have deep understandings of career, asset, and life, do not leave their great amounts of assets to their children as heritage but use their assets to do some more meaningful things, such as philanthropy and education, and provide the best education to their children. The huge economic asset and heritage to the children, without the knowledge and the correct cognition of assets, career and life, may be not asset but poison to them. Meanwhile, capital is synonymous with assets, highlighting the increment and growth of assets. Except for traditional economic capital, such as money, resources, and labor, the modern capital conception has expanded to human capital, social capital, knowledge capital, health capital, natural capital, etc., based upon various values, including knowledge, culture, environment, and health. These concepts of capital prompted us to ponder the essence of income, assets, and capital, which may be the truth, goodness, and beauty.

3.3 Various Careers 3.3.1 Politician Politicians or statesmen, such as king or queen, president or prime minister, congressmen and congresswomen, and senior officials or civil servants, is an old career that can be traced back to Ancient Greek. Political works, which may be disdained, misunderstood, and criticized by many people in modern society, are very complex and knowledge-based and impossible to be replaced by artificial intelligence. Modern political institutions such as government, parliament, and courts are not perfect but necessary and indispensable for modern society. Politics is actually the human wisdom to solve complicated public affairs (Chisholm, 1995). Political leaders are generally very controversial, but they are also ordinary human, understandable and reasonable. The controversies of political figures are basically from the different and varying value criteria and insufficient information. As a career, the economic incomes and material wealth of politicians and statesmen are generally not the highest relative to businessmen. For example, according to Title 3 of the US Code, the US President “shall earn” a salary of $400,000, along with a $50,000 annual expense account, a $100,000 nontaxable travel account, and $19,000 for entertainment. Comparably, the annual salary of Singapore president is $4.2 million, reportedly to be the highest among politicians, not considering politicians in corrupted and undemocratic countries. Some retired presidents or politicians, such as Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, can earn their skyrocketing income by speech or reminiscence writing and publishing. These amounts of incomes are quite higher than most ordinary careers but normal and less than the income of businessmen, top managers,

3.3 Various Careers

93

and stars. It is reported that the annual salary of Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, was $84.3 million in 2018, much higher than that of US or Singapore presidents. The explanation of this huge income gap is that the formal income of politicians, as public servants, is from public finance and taxes, strictly regulated by constitutions and laws. It is impossible to be as high as businessmen and stars, who are in the private sector and whose incomes are basically from market. The essence and value of politician as a career is not measured by income but by the performance of public affairs solving, public interest achieving, and their contribution to their country, perhaps including contributions to the planet and humankind. The value and contribution of politicians should not be measured by money, but how to precisely measure them is still a controversial and unsolved problem. Why we need politics and politicians? There are various public affairs or public issues in human society, locally, nationally, and globally. If there are no public affairs or public issues and if all the affairs and issues are private or individual, we do not need politics and politicians. However, because there are public affairs everywhere, in the family, community, city, country, and the earth, there are politics and politicians in these places. Even in the family, there are public issues but solved by the couples. If not, the family will break, and the couples will be estranged and even divorced. Public is the synonym and essence of politics. Currently, our largest political unit is the country, and the missions of politicians are to ponder and solve public issues at the national level. Although the UN is responsible for global public issues and institutions such as the World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, and UNESCO under the UN have been established and functioned, they are still weak, lacking the enforcing power and capability of a sovereign country. Our planet is still lacking a central government, and global politics is still the game among more than 200 sovereign countries, dominated by large and strong ones. Current politicians are still working for and loyal to their countries and people but not for and to the earth and all the human. Every country has its great politicians and statesmen. For example, George Washington (1732–1799) and Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) were great for the United States because they founded and strengthened the United States as the superpower, and their contributions to freedom and democracy are also enlightening and benefiting the world. Mao Zedong (1893–1976), Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997), Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869–1948), Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela (1918–2013), etc., are all great politicians, leading their nations and people to gain national independence. Joseph Stalin (1878–1953) and Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) may be controversial politicians because, although they have made their countries and people strong and wealthy for a while they have also committed great mistakes, such as mass killing and Holocaust, and have caused great damage to their own countries and people, as well as to other countries and people. Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882–1945), Winston Churchill (1874–1965), and Joseph Stalin (1878–1953) are great politicians not only for their domestic contributions but also for their contributions to the establishment of the UN. They can arguably be viewed as politicians with internal vision. Karl Marx, although not recognized by capitalism, may be one of the greatest political scientists for his concern and ideal

94

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

for not the individual country and people but the world and all humankind, as his word saying, workers of all the world, unite. However, most great politicians are still working for their nations and people, while greater politicians working for the earth and the whole humankind are still lacking. Surely, all nations and people should depend on their own and native politicians but not politicians from other countries. However, a great and farsighted politician cannot solely work for his/her nation and people at the cost of other nations and people, as nationalism and nationalist suggest, just as he/she cannot work for some of the native people at the cost of other native people, if we accept that all men and women, including not only nationals but also foreigners, are created equal, although this point may be not accepted by some people and politicians. Our current international politics are still nation-based and selfish, and the earth village is still an ideal but not real.

3.3.2 Entrepreneur and Businessman Entrepreneurs and businessmen are synonyms of similar careers, but they still have some different meanings and contents. The entrepreneur means innovation, changing the world by their products and services, as Joseph Schumpeter’s creative destruction suggested that the entrepreneurs’ innovation of products and services will destroy the old society and create a new one (McCraw, 2010). However, scientists also need to innovate, discover new ideas and change the world, and politicians also want to change their nations and parts of the world based on their ideals, policies, and movements. Actually, entrepreneurs, scientists, and politicians have some similarity in innovation and changing the world, while their innovation and change should be toward good directions. Scientists innovate mainly by their thoughts, theories, and discoveries; politicians by their ideas and policies; and entrepreneurs by their products and services, more practical and closer to everyday living, such as Coca-Cola, MacDonald, Windows, smartphone, Facebook, Amazon, etc. Steve Jobs’ slogan “I want to change the world” is the spirit and essence of entrepreneur, and he did change the world by his iPhone, Apple company, and his idea of simple, cool, and playful. Once losing innovation and changing, entrepreneurs will lose their spiritual essence and degrade to mediocrity, and their companies will lose entrepreneurship and become obsolete bureaucracy and hierarchy. Therefore, the great challenge for an entrepreneur and a company is to keep their spirits of innovation. In contrast, the essence of businessmen is business and administration, which means providing some products and services to consumers, lowering the cost, improving efficiency, and earning profits. Although the business also needs some innovation and the entrepreneur generally runs some business, they have different highlights, generally mixed, but can also be separated. A business in a traditional industry such as tobacco can remain profitable by monopoly without entrepreneurship and innovation. Tim Cook, the successor of Steve Jobs as current CEO of Apple company, confronted the challenge of how to keep the entrepreneurship of Apple

3.3 Various Careers

95

company and innovation of iPhone. Without enough innovation and entrepreneurship, the Apple company may degrade to be a mediocre company and Tim Cook, from an entrepreneur to a manager. In contrast, an entrepreneur may be good at innovation but not good at routine management, so he/she can sell his/her newborn innovative company to investors or introduce some professional managers. Entrepreneurs and businessmen, particularly large companies, generally have the highest income, but actually, they also bear fierce competition, great risks, and high failure rates. Dead and failing companies, without attention, are far more prevalent than living and celebrated companies. Similar to politicians, the work of entrepreneurs and businesses is complicated and experience-needed, including marketing, resourcing, financing, laboring, motivating, communicating, etc., much more difficult than the work of an inside manager or a worker. Therefore, their highest income can be reasonable and just compensate for their work and risk taking. Actually, entrepreneurs, businessmen, and their companies have contributed greatly and directly to society and people. As governments provide public goods and services, including law and order, modern companies are the basic producing units, providing most products and services and covering all fields, including foods, clothes, housing, and commuting. Nobody can live without companies and products and services since nobody can escape from modern society and return to forest and cave. However, although income and profit are essential, they are not the essence and should not be the sole goal for entrepreneurs and companies. The real goal and responsibility of businessmen should be to provide qualified products and services to consumers and people, and gaining reasonable returns should be secondary and affiliated. By this idea, the entrepreneur and businessmen cannot provide fake goods, because it is cheating; cannot monopoly, because it is unfair; cannot misguide consumers by false advertisement, because it is similar to cheating; cannot pollute the environment, because it is harming others and offspring, etc. If so, the entrepreneurs and companies are violating their social responsibilities, earning income and profit but harming other values. Although some entrepreneurs may be reluctant to fulfill their social responsibilities and pursue insatiable profit, they are shortsighted, and those outstanding and farsighted ones can understand and balance profit, social responsibility, and other values. Actually, the careers of entrepreneurs and businessmen should be similar to politicians and scientists, providing some goodness and good things for people, that is, politicians providing justice, scientists providing truth, and entrepreneurs providing goodness in the products and services. There are some controversial industries and companies, such as tobacco and weapon. Historically, smoking has been advertised as fashionable and masculine, and Tabaco companies have made great profits. However, currently, due to social movements and the scientific discovery of antismoking, the harm of smoking has been basically accepted as common knowledge, and nearly nobody can be misguided by tobacco companies. Tobacco advertisements are basically prohibited by laws in most countries. In this context, smoking has been regarded as an adult’s free choice, perhaps improving his/her well-being, while harm to health has to be undertaken by him/herself. From this point, tobacco companies can still benefit consumers, and their

96

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

taxes can benefit society, while they can innovate to develop new and healthier products of cigarettes. Although there may still be some consumers preferring more strong and unhealthy cigarettes, such as marijuana, tobacco companies can still remind and help them, respecting their preference and satisfying their demands, if accepting free will as a higher value. The arm companies are to produce weapons to defend the nation and kill people. If weapons are produced inside a country and used to do national defense, arm companies can greatly contribute society and protect the well-being of native people. However, if weapons are produced to invade other countries or traded abroad for unjust wars, the entrepreneurs of arm companies may be helping others invade and kill and should be blamed by society and conscientiousness. Because of historical and current world disorders and wars, the international trade of arms has been vast, growing by 7.8% from 2009–2013 to 2014–2018, reaching its highest level since the end of the Cold War. The total arms sales by the top 100 companies in 2018 was $420 billion in current USD, double from $201 billion in 2002 (SIPRI, 2019). The arm and ammunition of major exporters are the USA and Russia, and the importers are Saudi Arabia and India, as Table 3.3 shows. The top five companies are US companies such as Lockheed Martin Corp., Boeing, Northrop Grumman Corp., Raytheon, General Dynamics Corp., and BAE Systems, as shown in Table 3.4. Although the competition and innovation of arm companies can also push the development of technology, whether these developments of technology can compensate for the harm and loss of human lives is still arguable, since humans can gain technology development in other ways. From the points of social justice, the domestic weapon market should be strictly regulated by the government, as gun violence in the United States is generally regarded as policy failure by most countries and people. Similarly, the international weapon market should be regulated by the government and UN, considering more about ethics and justice but not profit. However, the UN currently does not have the Table 3.3 Major exporters and importers of arms (2014–2018) Rank

Exporter

Global share (%)

Importer

Global share (%)

1

USA

36

Saudi Arabia

12

2

Russia

21

India

9.5

3

France

6.8

Egypt

5.1

4

Germany

6.4

Australia

4.6

5

China

5.2

Algeria

4.4

6

UK

4.2

China

4.2

7

Spain

3.2

UAE

3.7

8

Israel

3.1

Iraq

3.7

9

Italy

2.3

South Korea

3.1

10

Netherlands

2.1

Viet Nam

2.9

Source SIPRI (2019)

3.3 Various Careers Table 3.4 Major arms company

97 Company

Country

Arms sales (million USD 2018)

Lockheed Martin Corp

United States

47,260

Boeing

United States

29,150

Northrop Grumman Corp

United States

26,190

Raytheon

United States

23,440

General Dynamics Corp

United States

22,000

BAE Systems

United Kingdom

21,210

Airbus Group

Trans-European

11,650

Leonardo

Italy

9820

Almaz-Antey

Russia

9640

Thales

France

9470

Source SIPRI (2019)

power and capability to regulate the international arms trade and market, and our world still has many problems.

3.3.3 Scientist Scientists are understood as people learning and researching in science and especially natural science, so they may include people who perform research and scientific work in any branch, including natural science and social science. If we agree that science = art, as Professor Featherstone (2016) advocated, philosophy, art, and humanities are also branches of science, and philosophers, artists, and humanists can also be included as scientists because they are doing similar work: exploring and understanding nature, society, and humans. Although politicians and entrepreneurs also need to explore and understand the world, their exploration and understanding may be more practical, while the scientists’ major mission and task is to explore, understand, and explain the world; form and accumulate theories and knowledge; argue and communicate their theories and knowledge to the people and society; and teach and guide people how to solve various problems. Although these missions and tasks can be separated and drawn as discovering, explaining, teaching, and practicing and may be implemented by different institutes, such as universities, research centers, think tanks, and companies, they are all parts of science. Income is important, albeit not the most important, for any career, including scientists. The income of scientists is generally above the social average level but much less than that of entrepreneurs. After all, even the Nobel Prize Award, roughly $5 million USD, is much less than the annual income of top CEOs. However, the achievements

98

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

and values of scientists should not be measured by monetary value but by scientific value. Those outstanding scientists such as Isaac Newton (1643–1727) and Albert Einstein (1879–1955) made great contributions to humankind and changed the world not less than any entrepreneurs, although their contributions are in different fields and cannot be compared simply by the same standard. To become a scientist means that scientific discovery, but not income, should be our career pursuit. However, in practice, scientists and professors are generally ranked as Nobel Prize winners, outstanding professors, professors, associate professors, lecturers, etc., linking to different positions and salaries, according to their academic performance. Although these titles, positions, reputations, and income are important for scientists and can encourage scientists to work hard, they are not the essence of science, just for pragmatic management and motivation. If a scientist is interrupted and misguided by them, he/she may not be fully developed. Scientists are working on knowledge. Generally, they have more knowledge of their specialty and are recognized as having more knowledge and wisdom than ordinary people. Therefore, we need to consider and follow the suggestions of scientists in their specialties. For example, for the health and disease, medical scientists know more; for physical world such as light and electricity, physicists know more; for number and computation, mathematicians know more; for money and economic issues, economists know more; for political issues and international relations, political scientists know more, etc. However, because modern science is so broad that no scientist knows all, once outside the specialty of scientists, the scientists might not understand and grasp the specific knowledge, although they still might have their insights according to their scientific training and quality. This means that scientists are only scientists in their specialties but not scientists for all issues. An outstanding physicist and artist generally do not know much about political issues than politicians and political scientists. Surely, in modern democratic society, everyone’s opinions are equal and need to be considered, but scientists’ opinions should be more concerned and followed in their specialties than ordinary people, while outside their specialties, scientists’ opinions are not definitely more correct and superior than ordinary people. Although scientists are knowledgeable, they may have shortcomings and then can be developed. Scientists are generally confident in their knowledge and wisdom, but they also need to be humble and cautious, as all theories are just assumptions and may be refuted and falsified by new evidence and ideas. Scientists should know the limitations and boundaries of their knowledge and specialty, outside of which they are no longer scientists but ordinary people. As humans, scientists may also have many psychological and health problems, which means that they should learn more knowledge of psychology, medical science, and political science. For example, as great scientists, Isaac Newton’s (1643–1727) disputes with Gottfried Leibniz (1646– 1716) and Robert Hooke (1635–1703) verified his eccentric disposition and possible low emotion quality. The great French mathematician Évariste Galois (1811–1832), the founder of group theory, participated in political movements of the French Revolution and was thrown into jail, dying at 21 years old in a reportedly duel for his lover. He is undoubtedly a great mathematician but not a successful politician and lover.

3.3 Various Careers

99

Although Newton’s disposition and Galois’s early death do not damage their scientific accomplishments, their possible failures on other aspects have been basically ignored by history, people, and society. In fact, all aspects in the world, including (Newton’s) disposition, (Galois’s) love, and (Plato’s) politics, can and should be researched and understood by science. If Newton and Galois learn some knowledge of psychology, love, and politics, they may better control their emotion, manage their love, and participate in politics, benefiting their scientific careers and personal living. It does not mean that a scientist should learn anything but means that any outstanding scientists are not perfect and can develop and become better in many other aspects. Particularly, an outstanding natural scientist, with knowledge and wisdom in their specialties, may not be a successful politician or lover because it is beyond their specialties.

3.3.4 Self-Employed The self-employed, or freelance, is essentially an entrepreneur running the business individually or with small teams. Their categories are very broad, including adventurers such as Reinhold Messner (1944–) and Alex Hannold (1985–), artists such as Michael Jackson (1958–2009), authors such as Isaac Asimov (1920–1992), athletes such as tennis players Roger Federer (1981–), and movie directors such as Steven Spielberg (1946–). Here, we give some famous examples to analyze the scientific principles of their careers. As self-employed, some of them may work individually, such as adventurers and writers, just climbing the mountains or writing novels by free solo, while most of them may organize a small team including the assistants, agents, coaches, etc. helping their freelance work and sharing incomes. Undoubtedly, the incomes of these most successful freelances are very high, similar to top CEOs of companies. Reported by the Forbes, Roger Federer is the world’s highest-paid athlete in 2020, $130 million in his career and mainly from the prize and endorsement (Forbes, 2021a). Similarly, Michael Jackson (1958–2009), as the King of Pop, was estimated to earn $1.1 billion during his adult solo career from 1979 to 2009, nearly $2 billion when adjusting for inflation (Forbes, 2021b). Steven Spielberg, the successful director and producer, was estimated to have a net worth of $7.5 billion and annual income of $150 million, which makes him the second richest celebrity on the planet, behind good buddy and fellow director/producer, George Lucas (who is worth $10 billion) (Celebritynetworth, 2021). Isaac Asimov, the great science fiction writer and author of the Foundation and I, Robot, has the new worth of $15 million (Wealthygenius, 2021). The net worth of Reinhold Messner and Alex Hannold, as great climbers and explorers, was much lower, $100,000–$1 million (Celebsmoney, 2021). Obviously, those outstanding stars in deeply marketized industries such as tennis, movies, and entertainment have the highest monetary worth, while those in less marketized industries such as novel and adventure have less. Although these huge monetary worth and salaries are glaring and enviable, they cannot fully reflect the real meaning and significance of their works.

100

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

These outstanding freelances are all masters in their fields, owning deep understandings of their careers and human society. Their works are highly complex and require a high degree of skills. They are the top players in their fields, and few people can reach their heights. Their genius and performances on tennis, music, movie, novel, and climbing are not only their own but also the testinomies of the height and possibility that humankind can reach. How can he/she achieve these, while they represent that our humankind can achieve these. Although the number of their audiences and the popularity of their careers vary, these various careers are equal and they have reached the peak of their careers. Therefore, their high income is reasonable and understandable, their accomplishments are admirable, and their experience and spirits and professionalism are worth learning. However, although how to spend and invest their astronomical income are their individual freedom, squandering and unlimited luxury are not appropriate. Philanthropy, opening tennis or music schools, helping poor countries and children, supporting the further development of their fields, etc., may be preferable. In addition, similar to scientists, although these top freelances are master in their careers and fields, they are not so in other careers and fields. They also need to be humble and learning. Outside their careers and fields, they can learn and develop in many other fields and directions. They can apply their experiences, skills, fortune, and understanding in their fields and other fields to make this world better. Except for these celebrities, there are more ordinary freelances and self-employed individuals. Only a very small proportion of freelances can reach the top, while most of them are at the middle or bottom, struggling for their career success and development. For example, in the professional tennis industry, there are approximately 14,000 professional players. Among them, about half will never earn a dime from the tournaments they play. The median annual income for all professional tennis players was $47,710 in May 2016 (Thompson, 2018). Governments should provide and sustain a fair law and policy to regulate and sustain these industries, while the freelances and players must depend on their own endeavors, opportunities, and talent. Although these middle and bottom freelances are not as successful and wealthy as those top players, they can also enjoy their career development through free work, healthy and happy life, enthusiasm and success of their careers, depending on their cognitions and understandings of the career and life.

3.3.5 Ordinary Ones Except for senior politicians, scientists, and freelances, most individuals are ordinary middle or bottom employees. Generally, they have their works, earn relatively higher or lower incomes, and live with their families or alone. They have their specific achievements, personal problems, happiness, or sadness, and they can all develop in various aspects and become better. They all have their careers, and in modern market society, every career is the result of division of labor. Before being replaced by artificial intelligence or disappearing in history, every career has meaning and significance and is worthy of work. A taxi driver is not just driving the car and sending

3.3 Various Careers

101

the passenger but also providing driving services, including a comfortable attitude, cleanness of the cab, communicating with the passenger, choosing the appropriate route, etc., and all can be improved. Similarly, a cleaner’s career is simple, but a good, learning, and dedicated cleaner can accomplish his/her work much better than the lazy one, making our city and community clean and beautiful. Works or careers are much different, and understanding, cognition, and dedication are common requirements and essence of career development. If one can effectively learn, understand, and endeavor in his/her career, he/she can achieve career development, maybe not reaching the top, but becoming increasingly higher. The professionalism is essential in every career. Income is necessary and important for every career and individual but not the most important and sole factor that needs to be considered. We should have a correct understanding and understanding of income. In the modern market society, the incomes of various careers are basically determined by market force, industry, company, and government policies. An individual, particularly middle and bottom employees, cannot choose and influence his/her income significantly, and the only way to improve income is to pursue career development by learning and promotion. An individual can change his/her career freely, but he/she still needs to pursue similar career development after job hopping, while appropriate job hopping may help him/her find a suitable career. The incomes of most careers are normally distributed around the average level. This means that most of us can reach average income, while the appropriate financial plan and spending of income are also necessary. Although we cannot control the inflow of our income, we can basically control the outflow of spending. Meanwhile, governments need to guarantee the steady income improvement of the general public, provide social security to poor people, and reduce the number of people in poverty. Poor people still need to be independent and responsible for themselves. Governments need to help poor people not only by providing relief but also by improving their capability, which is based upon learning and education. Although the promotion of career and income is generally regarded as individual development, the enhancement of capability of learning and understanding is more essential. In addition to career and income, there may be many other problems perplexing individuals, such as health, emotion, and family, depending on their specific situations. If an individual has serious physical or mental problems, such as cancer or depression, he/she has to spend money and time curing and tries his/her best to grapple with these problems. His/her normal living will be fundamentally disturbed. He/she should be introspected to determine the causes of the problems and make some great changes. If one fails on these problems, one has to bear the regrettable consequences; once one can solve these problems and recover to health, it can truly be regarded as individual development and success. Similarly, every family may also suffer serious problems, such as disloyalty, conflicts on assets, raising children, divorce, and health, and then conflicts, quarrels, and even family violence may occur. High income and assets are probably not fortune but trouble. These situations, if existing, cannot be claimed as individual development but individual failure. If the individual can, similar to health problems, introspect and determine the causes and

102

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

Table 3.5 The world’s biggest illicit industries2 Rankred

Turnover (billion USD)

Forbes

Turnover (billion USD)

1

Unethical hacking/Cyber attack

Unknown

Drug

300

2

Counterfeiting

250

Counterfeits

250

3

Drug trafficking

320–500

Arms trafficking

Unknown

4

Illegal logging

Unknown

Smuggled cigarettes

30

5

Human trafficking

30

Cargo theft

30

6

Illegal mining

Unknown

Human trafficking

28

7

Illegal fishing

23

Stolen oil

Unknown

8

Money laundering

Unknown

Art theft

6

9

Wildlife trafficking

32

Illicit wildlife

5

10

Illicit crude oil trade

15

11

Illegal weapon trafficking

60

12

Human organs trafficking

0.6–1.2

13

Trafficking of cultural property

Unknown

Source Vardi (2010), and Rankred (2021)

solve these problems, it can be successful for individual development. If the individual divorces and separates peacefully and friendly, they will still confront similar problems with their new couples or live along but confront other problems. Therefore, the problems are always there. One can be a master for one kind of problem but can hardly be a master of all the problems. If one wants to be an expert of all the problems, he/she needs to introspect and understand the problems, keeping learning and thinking forever.

3.3.6 Illicit Career In addition to normal and legal careers, there are also many illicit careers and even seriously organized criminals employing many people as the dark side of human society. The exact sizes of these industries are difficult to estimate exactly, but their existence, scopes, and impacts cannot be denied. Table 3.5 gives some data of the world’s largest illicit industries from different sources. Although these data may not 2

Nathan Vardi. The World’s Biggest Illicit Industries. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/2010/06/04/ biggest-illegal-businesses-business-crime_slide.html#22c79272760a. Rankred. 13 Biggest Illegal Businesses Around the World. https://www.rankred.com/10-biggest-illegal-businesses-around-theworld/.

3.3 Various Careers

103

be precise, they can depict a sketch of these huge industries and their numerous participators. The detailed causes and reasons of these industries are complex, but the principles are not difficult to understand and explain. It is because of the undue greed and desire, not understanding the life and human and society. Drug trafficking may be the largest illicit industry. As one of the most serious social problems, drug trafficking is caused by moral degradation, enduring poverty, breaking family, and failing education, all of which can be regarded as individual and social development problems. In modern society, some people, particularly young generations, have lost their life ideals but pursued unlimited freedom and illusory pleasant sensations from drugs. Meanwhile, global economic inequality has been enlarged after globalization for decades. People living in poor countries and communities are more inclined to be affected by drugs. The broken family and poor primary education worsened the situation. In particular, government loose policy is also an important reason for drug abuse and trafficking. Some liberal economists have suggested the legalization and deregulation of drugs, but if not solving the problems of morality, family, poverty, and education, the problem of drug trafficking cannot be solved solely by legalization and deregulation. Fundamentally, drug trafficking from supplying side is caused by people’s irrational, unreasonable, and uncontrollable free will and desire from demand side. Afterwards, addicts choose to take the drug, but not drug dealers, force them to do so. Similarly, most other illicit industries are basically induced by irrationality and immorality of human demands. People want to get something that we should not get, or by unreasonably cheap prices, such as drug, sex service, wild animal, counterfeits without property rights, etc., while the suppliers just satisfy these demands by illegal ways, and form the illicit industries. Only when we have correct understandings of these goods and services, as well as life and humans and society, can we basically control ourselves and reduce immoral demands. Drugs were not originally and thoroughly immoral and illegal because their original function is for medicine and salvation. Only when it is abused, it becomes poison. Sometimes we may be depressed or anxious, but we can never depend on our hope, solution, and inspiration on drugs. Similarly, counterfeits are not thoroughly immoral and bad. Counterfeits with basic functions, albeit violating patents, such as clothes and toys, can still benefit poor consumers, while economic growth and income increases may gradually improve the quality of goods and services, as anybody is willing to enjoy high quality and inexpensive prices. Human trafficking is also not thoroughly immoral and bad. It includes various forms to different extents, such as illegal immigrants, organized sex slaves, and juvenile prostitution. The real cause of illegal immigrants is due to the great gap between developed and developing countries, and some poor people want to move, by any means, to rich countries and change their lives. Although sometimes it is reported that some illegal immigrants die in dangerous journeys and are slaved by employers, most of them do have better lives in new countries. The solutions of illegal immigrants should be the comprehensive development of poor countries, as well as the education and regulation of employers in destination countries, and the sole crackdown on human traffickers is not enough. Sex service and juvenile prostitution are induced by undue desires by

104

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

humans. Economic theory suggests that government severe laws and crackdowns can only reduce the supply and push up prices but cannot eradicate their demands thoroughly. Similarly, the illegal exchange of wild animals and cultural properties are also large markets prompted by people’s immoral demands. Loving wild animals and cultural properties are good habits, but this does not mean we must own them. For the buyers, what is the meaning of possessing an ivory chess, an eagle, or a tiger skin, considering the capture and slaughter of these animals? What is the meaning of possessing Vincent van Gogh’s painting relative to exhibiting and sharing it in the gallery with all the people? What is the meaning of purchasing arms and ammunition relative to pursuing world peace? If those buyers do not understand the meaning of these industries and their behaviors more comprehensively and deeply, they will not change their attitudes and behaviors, and these industries will always exist. In addition to customers, these illicit industries also have their bosses, CEOs, senior managers, middle and low employees. Relative to legal and normal industries and careers, such as politicians, scientists, entrepreneurs, and employees, who help people and contribute to society, illicit industries and careers are doing bad for people and society, earning profit and money for themselves and families. Understandably, most of the middle and low employees engaging in these illicit industries are in poor economic condition and lack sufficient education. Poverty reduction, economic growth, and education popularity are the most effective ways to help and rescue these employees. In contrast, the bosses, CEOs, top managers, and organizers actually control these industries and grab most profits. They will protect their interests against governments and society. As leaders, they generally have their understandings of the world, society, and industries, but their understandings may be wrong. It may be difficult for them to introduce their careers and enterprises to their friends, families, children, and society and to make their families and children live proudly and normally. They have to conceal their careers and cheat their families and children to protect them. Alternatively, they may persuade their families and children to support their careers and involve them in illicit industries but then be attacked by governments and society. They may control these illicit industries by some legal appearances but should gradually retreat and transfer their businesses to some truly legal and beneficial ones. If they can, it is their real individual development. It is difficult to change from evil to good, but it is this kind of change that is the real development and improvement.

3.4 Cognition and Behavior Individual development is sometimes referred to as experience and knowledge accumulation, morality maturation, cognition deepening, and upon which an individual can act reasonably and understandably. These behaviors may not be correct because of bounded rationality and insufficient cognition but are reasonable and understandable because of partial rationality and cognition. Any individual, as long as not

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

105

schizophrenia, no matter ordinary or senior, no matter politicians, entrepreneurs, military commanders, or achievers in any specific fields, or even criminals, will behave according to their experience, knowledge, morality, and cognition, right or wrong, moral or immoral. These concepts related to mind are important for understanding human behaviors, cultures, societies, and individual development.

3.4.1 Experience Experience is a kind of personal subjective cognition of the world gained and accumulated from long-term social living and growing. When a baby is born, he/she has no experience but basic instincts. As he/she grows up, he/she can learn some basic experience through social interactions with parents, friends, and other people as the process of socialization. Generally, young people’s experience is poor because they have not experienced and confronted various people, difficulties, and events, although they may have their rich experience with some local and specific affairs, such as their school and study. This means that experience is local and specific, as in every small field, there may be some people with rich experience, such as cooking, swimming, climbing, playing tennis, and nearly everything. After going to college, graduating, finding a job and getting career promotion, or not attending colleges but going to society, an individual can gain and accumulate more experience. After retiring and aging, he/she may be isolated from society, and his/her experience may be obsolete. However, if one can still keep concern about his/her career and society, the experience may still be enhanced and accumulated. Although the physical health, vigor, creativity, and career achievement of an individual may be declining, one’s experience can be steadily accumulated. In the prehistory period, older people were fortune of a community because there were no texts or books or other technologies to record the knowledge, and the experience of older people was the most important knowledge about bearing, nursing, farming, hunting, medicine, and nearly all aspects of living. Currently, the experience of older people and all the people are still important personal and local knowledge, providing some guidance and references to those who need. Experience is very useful and important for an individual, helping him/her grapple with various problems from everyday living to health, family, and careers. Those achievers in every field are basically experienced and thoughtful. Generally, they have formed the habit to think and to determine the solutions and then accumulated these thinking and solutions as experience. Alex Honnold (1985–) is very experienced with climbing and mountains because he has overcome various mountains and cliffs, confronting numerous dangers and solving difficulties. Successful entrepreneurs must be experienced at business because they have experienced various problems and difficulties many times and overcome them. Experienced politicians are generally older, approximately 50–60, because political careers are broader than any other careers and need more comprehensive experience. A freshman in any field can hardly get success but fail and accumulate experience. Roger Federer (1981–),

106

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

the greatest tennis player, won his first grand slam in 2003 Wimbledon Championships four years after he first attended the match in 1999. To obtain success and achieve individual development, one must learn, think, summarize, and accumulate experience. Experience is personal, able to be taught, but essential to be learned and internalized. Tom’s experience can hardly be John’s experience. The parents, teachers, colleagues, elders can tell and teach their experiences to me, but I must learn and practice and internalize these experiences by myself. Leaning and practicing are essential for experience accumulation. Learning not only means learning in the school and studying various textbooks and subjects but also means learning in society from various people and events. Although some successful politicians and businessmen with abundant experience seem to be successful, their experiences may not be all applicable and appropriate to other careers and fields. Therefore, one must distinguish good experience and bad experience, ponder and persist his/her own ideals, and guide himself/herself toward correct directions. One must practice and accumulate experiences in his/her career and life and adapt and change in some ways. Experience cannot be copied and mimicked but be learned and innovated. There is no thoroughly same experience for any two people. Everybody can have his/her experiences, but not everybody has the same amounts of experience, and not everybody can be claimed as an experienced person in all fields. For individual development, one must learn, ponder, practice, and accumulate experience and recognize the limitations of experience. Experience is basically from the past and may be biased, stubborn, and misleading if one does not keep open and learning. Experience is local and in specific fields, so it is repetitive and can be accumulated, but anything does not repeat and happen twice thoroughly, so the past experience may not fit next time and the new age, as a successful elder may be obsolete and not necessarily suitable for the new era. Experience is personal, crude, not theorized, generalized and testified, while knowledge is. An experienced one in any field, such as Roger Federer (1981–) or Alex Honnold (1985–), can teach their experiences, as coach, to their students personally, while they can also write their experiences in books, better recorded and analyzed and theorized as knowledge. Particularly, some achievers with abundant experience may tend to be overconfident and stubborn for their achievement and success but may ignore the new tendency and fail the new challenge. Therefore, although older people are generally rich in experience, they may eventually be obsolete. Young generations have little experience, but they can learn knowledge, accumulate experience, and win games. In fact, age and experience may not be determinative factors, but learning capability and knowledge may be determinative factors. Individual development requires one to keep learning and open, aware of the function and limitation of experience.

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

107

3.4.2 Knowledge As the key content of individual development, knowledge is closely linked but subtly different from experience. Experience is personal and living, since when an individual dies, his/her experience will disappear, but if he/she writes their experience down as texts or books, the experience will be recorded as knowledge. Experience is specific while knowledge may be broad. An individual can be claimed as experienced and knowledgeable. Here, experience means that he/she is mature and skillful in some specific fields, such as tennis or social affairs, while knowledge means that he/she knows and grasps broad knowledge not necessarily in some specific fields. Therefore, experience and knowledge may be separated. An individual may be experienced but not knowledgeable. One may be the expert in some fields, say, cooking, but does not know much about other things such as mathematics and economics. Conversely, one may be knowledgeable but not experienced; for example, a college student may grasp much academic knowledge but know little about real society. Both of these situations indicate insufficient individual development. Knowledge is more general, theoretical, and may be checked and testified, while experience may be crude and coarse and not yet verified and examined. One example is traditional Chinese medicine, which is based upon doctors’ personal experiences but essential to be examined and explained by modern medical science; then, knowledge can be transformed and formalized as knowledge. Another example is that some ancient humans knew some Pythagoras numbers, such as 32 + 42 = 52 , as experience, while the ancient Greek mathematician Pythagoras theorized it as Pythagoras Theorem, a2 + b2 = c2 , as knowledge. Therefore, knowledge is more general and scientific and can be verified and falsified, while experience is more vivid and practical. These two should be combined but not divided for individual development. Knowledge can be subjective and personal and can also be objective and materialized. Subjective knowledge and personal knowledge are combined and inseparable in individuals’ minds with experience and will gradually grow and accumulate as individuals grow, age, and learn. Subjective experience and personal knowledge are synonymous with experience, basically determining one’s living, health, and career achievements. Any difficulties and problems can be solved by knowledge and experience, such as family conflict, sustained health, and career development. Some people may believe that only career development and academic research need knowledge, but actually all affairs, such as how to operate a family, sustain the harmony between husband and wife, raise and educate children, and keep healthy, need knowledge and form various research fields. Different people have much different subjective knowledge, depending on their background, education, and learning capability. One cannot be expert in all these affairs and fields and thus needs to learn continuously and comprehensively. Actually, knowledge, upon experience, can be regarded as the essence of individual development. As long as one can continuously learn and enhance his/her knowledge, he/she can be claimed to have achieved individual development. Old people can also develop themselves if they keep learning and open, while young people can be stubborn and stale if they reject learning and grasp knowledge.

108

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

Subjective knowledge and experience may evolve and be kept as objective knowledge when individuals write them down in books as theories, concepts, and statements, which are all human understandings of the world. Actually, anybody is equally qualified, but maybe not capable, to write and express their knowledge and experience in books or texts, as Isaac Newton can write his book Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, and you can also write your understandings on something such as music, cooking, or traveling, which will be preserved in human history as knowledge. Any knowledge may be wrong, and knowledge itself cannot guarantee its correctness. However, knowledge can and should be checked, challenged, verified, and evaluated. These new, temporarily correct, and significant knowledge may contribute humankind greatly and create new fields and disciplines, such as Newton’s calculus and classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, psychology, and health science. Knowledge written by ordinary people may also be recorded in human history but may not be as influential as Newton’s knowledge. Humankind has accumulated great amounts of scientific and academic knowledge in various disciplines, such as mathematics, physics, chemistry, economics, politics, sociology, and psychology, as well as living and practical knowledge, such as cooking, tennis, and music. Actually, all the knowledge is equal, just in different fields, and can solve various problems. Knowledge of cooking is also important, as it can help us to prepare an abundant and healthy lunch. The advancement and accumulation of this knowledge mean that humankind has a broader and deeper understanding of the world and can solve more problems and make the world and ourselves better. Knowledge of mathematics helps us know more about integers, decimals, reasonable numbers, unreasonable numbers, complex numbers, and transcendental numbers, and calculus can help us cope with tiny and continuous changes in curves. Knowledge of physics makes us know more about atoms and microstructures and matter and then utilize nuclear power. Knowledge of politics makes us understand freedom and democracy and how a government and country run. It is because knowledge that we can do something successfully, and it is also because knowledge insufficiency that we cannot yet do something, such as cancer. The accumulation of knowledge is the essence of individual development and social development. Knowledge has close linkage to but should be distinguished from belief, perception, preference, and value judgment, all of which are subjective cognition of the world, some correct and some wrong. Although knowledge cannot be guaranteed correct, it is most reliable according to our current understandings and evidence. Newton classical mechanics theory and Einstein’s relativity theory may be regarded as temporarily correct, but they are also evolving, not thoroughly and comprehensively correct. However, these theories and knowledge reflect our humankind’s current understandings of the world, society, and the universe. Knowledge is open and may evolve and develop; thus, our current knowledge and society are much different from those of history and that of the future. Comparatively, belief, perception, preference, and value judgment are also individuals’ subjective understandings of the world, formed and enhanced by their various backgrounds and experiences. However, these understandings are all individual, personal, and local, may be biased and narrow, and need to be checked, introspected, and verified. For example, Tom may

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

109

have a belief that wealthy people are happier than poorer ones, have a perception that developed countries are better than developing countries, have a preference for some foods, and may choose some evidence to verify his ideas. However, Tom should be cautious that all these beliefs, perceptions, and preferences are still not knowledge, and the evidence is not robust and comprehensive. This means that an individual should understand the properties, functions, and shortcomings of belief, perception, and preference, as well as knowledge, since knowledge is also not perfect. One should keep cautious and open on our understandings of the world, not necessarily to be cautious and open on everything, but on those crucial ones. While everyday living, such as family and health, may also be crucial issues, one should grasp the principle and form the habit of cautiousness, openness, and learning. This may be the core content of individual development.

3.4.3 Morality In addition to experience, knowledge, belief, perception, and preference, all people have morality, which is deeper, more fundamental and constant than the former, functioning in different ways. Morality is a set of principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong, good and bad, proper and improper behaviors. Morality can be a system of standards or principles derived from a code of conduct from a particular philosophy, religion, or culture, or it can derive from a standard that a person believes. Morality may be specifically synonymous with “goodness” or “rightness.” As a complex concept in philosophy, culture, and religion and argued by great philosophers such as Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) and Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832), morality is a common human psychological state and practical activity that can be understood through empathy. It is easy, at least not impossible, for us, as humans, to understand the morality of people from different races and cultures, but it may be difficult, albeit possible, for us to understand the morality of animals, if they have. As individual development includes morality maturing and improving, there should be some good or appropriate morality. As a common human activity, morality can be the objective of science and a branch of science, such as the science of morality (Palmer, 2021; Teller, 1998). The science of morality can help us understand morality more deeply and determine good and correct morality. Human morality is diverse, and we should understand, recognize, respect, but maybe not agree with, the various human moralities. Those seemingly strange and vicious moralities and behaviors should also be understood and explained but not criticized and blamed in the first place. Individuals’ morality is gradually formed during the process of individual growth in specific social and cultural circumstances and is influenced by many factors, including family, school, university, career, society, culture, religion, and experience. It is reasonable to explore anybody’s morality from his/her background and experience. Although everyone has his/her morality and is worthy of arguing and understanding, the morality and behaviors of these great figures are particularly worthy of analysis and explanation. For example, Adolf Hitler

110

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

(1889–1945) launched World War II and the Holocaust disasters not only for those killed but also for Germany. His morality was understandable from the points of eugenics, Aryan supremacy, and anti-semitism. These moral ideas had been popular at that time but were questionable and refutable as time went by, challenging gene ethics and racial equality. Although there may still be some supporters of these Nazi moralities and theories today, our human society should learn from history and science, throwing away these backward moralities and theories. Similarly, as Hitler’s counterpart, Joseph Stalin’s morality is also worthy of exploration. He led the Soviet Union to win World War II and developed his country’s number 2 superpower but also committed faults such as the Katyn Massacre and suppression of other socialist countries. He was a strong nationalist believing in nationalism, but the balance of nationalism and globalism to some extent may be better for him and his country. As great but controversial political figures, their extraordinary moralities motivated their extraordinary behaviors and doomed their successes and failures. However, although their moralities and behaviors were extraordinary, we have to understand and explain them, but not criticize and blame them firstly, since we cannot criticize and change the history, while we can learn from the history and try our best not to repeat the similar mistakes. In contrast, Winston Churchill (1874–1965) and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882–1945) have strong beliefs of freedom, democracy, and world peace, which have prompted them leading the Ally to win World War II and establish the United Nation. Certainly, the history only recorded these politicians’ political behaviors but did not record their psychological and moral activities in everyday living, which can better and truly reflect their minds and moralities but may be impossible to truly touch and know. Surely, historical research can help us better and deeper understand those political figures. Meanwhile, ordinary people also have moralities worthy of understanding and explaining. We, as humans but not the great figures, also have much diverse and colorful morality, sharing some common moral principles and worthy of understanding and empathizing. Morality is essentially people’s fundamental attitudes toward some basic items and issues, such as life, people, family, country, environment, etc., unobservable in the mind but guiding human external behaviors. Morality and ethics is a branch of philosophy but also relates to all branches of human behavior, including economics, politics, and sociology. Moral philosophy includes two basic theories: utilitarianism initiated from Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and deontology from Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). Utilitarianism means that humans, as rational homo economicus, behave and should behave, according to the principle of maximizing one’s utility, welfare, interest, or benefit, and governments, policies, and laws should protect their citizens’ maximization of utility (Driver, 2014), as Bentham’s book “An Introduction to the Principle of Morals and Legislation” indicates. Anything that is worth pursuing is because it can generate some kinds of utility and welfare to individuals. Since anybody has his/her utility, their utility and status should be equal, although in reality the utility of some groups of people such as aristocrats or some races are higher and more important than others. By utilitarianism, Hitler’s Holocaust and anti-semitism and Stalin’s Chauvinism are not morally proper because they believed that their national citizens’ utility was the upmost, violating the principle of utility

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

111

equity. If recognizing that animals and environments also have some kinds of feelings and utilities, animal and environment protection are reasonable and morally right, although somebody may refute that animal’s utility is not equal to human, and those unliving environment goods such as river and mountain have no utility at all. The morality controversy is the root of human conflicts. In contrast, Kant’s deontology does not place the reason of right or wrong on the utility, or consequence as consequentialism, of human behavior but on the behaviors themselves (Alexander & Moore, 2021). That behavior is right or wrong is not because of the amount of utility it generates but because of the behavior itself as an absolute order. Therefore, we need to love and respect our parents, contribute to our countries, protect the environment, etc., as what we should do as unavoidable responsibility, no matter how much utility they generate and how much cost we will pay. Similarly, we should not kill, cheat, and pollute the environment not because we are afraid of the possible consequences and punishments but because these behaviors are morally wrong. Moral philosophy is not only theoretical and philosophical arguments but also embedded in all practical affairs, actions, and policies. In reality, utilitarianism and deontology, as two basic moral principles, can be differentiated and applied to practical situations. In the family, we need to respect the parents, love the mate, take care of the children, and be responsible for the family. In the workplace, we need to work hard and be responsible for the work and the employee (if we are employers) or employer (if we are employees). In society, we need to follow the law and be honest to other people and responsible for the country and society. Every career and every behavior have their necessary moralities. Although sometimes we may not fulfill our moral responsibility, we need to introspect, learn, consult friends or psychologists if necessary, and determine the reasons and solutions of the moral problems. We need to learn some knowledge of morality and understand ourselves’ moral dilemma. All the people are not perfect and have their moral problems and puzzles, including those great figures. As humans, all of us have moral defects such as anger, jealousy, greed, dishonesty, and laziness, but we need to understand these moral defects and endeavor to overcome them but not let them go. Moral development, as the essence of individual development, means that we need to ponder and give moral reasons to our behaviors, particularly crucial behaviors. These moral reasons may not be correct and reliable in the long term, but they should be made after careful, rational, and comprehensive reflections and considerations. Those top leaders such as politicians and entrepreneurs should particularly do these moral considerations because they are responsible for the fate of their countries and companies, while we ordinary people are also necessary to do these moral considerations because we are responsible for ourselves and our families.

3.4.4 Cognition Experience, knowledge, and morality are all kinds of cognition, which means human understanding of the world, including nature, society, and ourselves. Experience

112

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

and knowledge are generally referred to as the cognition of nature and society, while morality is the cognition of ourselves’ mind and psychology. All the people, including those great figures and ordinary people, have their cognitions of the world, and some people’s cognitions are deeper, more comprehensive, and correct, while others’ cognitions are relatively shallower, narrower, and wrong, although nobody’s cognition of the world is thoroughly correct or wrong. Everybody’s opinion is worthy of listening and considering, as the principle of democracy, but the opinion, based upon cognition, of experts in various fields is generally more correct than others, so we should learn from them and follow their theories and suggestions. For example, mathematicians have deeper cognitions of mathematics; physicists know more about the natural world, such as electricity, magnetism, and light; political scientists understand more about political issues; and moral philosophers understand more about moral rightness and wrongness. Although these experts also have their personal issues and controversies, their cognitions are generally deeper and more reliable in their fields than ordinary people, certainly, probably wrong either. However, although the experts’ cognitions may be wrong and limited, they still reflect our humankind’s current cognitions on the issues, while anybody can refute the experts’ ideas and present new cognitions. Cognition success is the precondition of practical success. The achievers are generally experts in their fields, having their deep cognitions on specific issues, such as Newton on physics, Bill Gates on software, and Alex Honnold on climbing, so they succeeded in their specific fields. However, their successes are also temporary and specific because their cognitions are also partial and limited. Nobody knows everything of the world. If achievers’ cognition cannot follow the constantly changing society and the world, they may fail in the future or in other fields. If one attempts to keep his/her success in all the fields and all the time or keep his/her success as long as possible, he/she has to keep learning and deepen his/her cognition of the world. Although experts in various fields may know more, they may be biased and limited since everyone cognizes the world from his/her personal experience and angles. This means that everyone and our humankind are necessary to learn continuously and endlessly. The ancient allegory “Blind Men and the Elephant” tells the story that six blind men came across an elephant. The man touching the elephant teeth claimed the elephant as a spear; touching the nose claimed it as a snake; ear as a fan; body as a wall; leg as a tree trunk; tail as a rope. Although their cognitions of the elephant are all correct locally, they are all wrong comprehensively. In fact, this universe, earth, world, society, country, and everybody are similarly giant elephants. From different perspectives and moral principles, we can form much different cognitions, all of which may be correct or wrong to some extent. Most of us are accustomed to cognizing the issues and the world from our personal specific angle, but not from others’ angle, enemy’s angle, and the comprehensive angle. However, from others’ angle, we can learn that there are some new understandings and ideas; from enemy’s angle, we can determine that why we have enemies and whether we have some faults; from the comprehensive angle, we can view a panorama of the issue or the world, just like the elephant. The playgrounds, viewpoints, and cognitions of our humankind are always expanding, from individual to family, to community, to company, to local region, to continent,

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

113

to the whole planet, and to the solar system, and the universe. Therefore, globalization is an irreversible tendency, and our current international political system based upon national sovereignty is temporary and limited. We should consider and cognize the public, political, economic, and nearly all issues with broader and more diverse perspectives. Individual development means that individuals have broader, deeper, and more comprehensive cognition of the world. A baby only knows eating and sleeping. As growing to juvenile, he/she will go to school, learn knowledge and morality, and may start caring for his/her parents, family, and friends. As growing to adult, he/she will find a job and make living, enter the broader world and care about more issues. During this process, his/her cognition of the world may evolve to be broader and deeper, although also maybe biased and not correct toward wrong directions. Generally, everyone has his/her experience, major, specialty, career, and cognition. If individuals can deepen their cognitions of their fields, they can become talents and achieve career success. Meanwhile, they will expand their cognitions of other issues based upon their experiences and specialty, maybe correct or wrong. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Zedong have their cognitions of the world, some correct and some wrong. Their correct cognitions will help them achieve their countries’ development and solve many developmental issues, while their incorrect cognitions have caused the tragedy of themselves and their countries. Although hindsight is 20/20, we should learn from history and improve our understanding of the world. The World Wars I and II were historical facts, but we can endeavor to avoid the Worlds III and IV by expanding our understanding. Cognition success is factual and observable, although it may be temporary and arguable. When mathematicians prove some hypotheses or conjectures, such as Fermat’s last theorem (already proved) or Riemann Conjecture (not yet proved), they are achieving cognitive success, although the demonstration process can be argued and questioned. When physicists constructed nuclear power stations or explored the Moon and Mars, they achieved cognitive success. The nuclear war and killing of tens of thousands of people may be cognition failure because our humankind still lacks political and moral knowledge and cognition of how to peacefully and effectively use nuclear power. When medical scientists and doctors cure cancers or HIV, they are achieving cognitive success. In contrast, when humankind destroys forests, rivers, animals, and the environment and leads to climate change and environmental degradation, we are suffering cognitive failures. When individuals achieve their career development, family harmony, and physical and mental health, they are achieving cognitive success. However, when individuals experience career setback, family violence or divorce, or terrible disease, they are suffering cognition failure, and we need to determine the reasons and then deepen our cognition and reduce future possible failures. The cognitive success of humankind and individuals means that they have gained deeper and broader cognitions of the world, still temporarily and arguably. Nobody can guarantee that our humankind does not commit mistakes, which is the consequence of cognitive failure, but we should, and can, learn from the past failures and accumulate the knowledge and deepen the cognitions. Certainly, there may be some terrible cognitive failures such as nuclear war or climate change,

114

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

but as long as humankind is not extinct, we can rebirth and revive, paying great costs. If humankind becomes extinct due to terrible disasters, it is because of our cognitive failure. Comparing the advancements of natural sciences, our humankind particularly needs to deepen our cognition of politics, moralities, and values, which concern our mind, spirit, and behavior, and guide us more appropriately utilizing the natural sciences.

3.4.5 Behavior Nearly all the social sciences are attempting to research and understand various human behaviors and related phenomena, such as the economy, politics, culture, religion, and mind. Human behaviors are seemingly complex and diverse, but they are understandable and explainable, motivated by rationality, knowledge, cognition, and morality. Individual development also means that an individual behaves properly and appropriately. Although what are “properly” and “appropriately” are difficult to define, we still can and should argue what proper and appropriate behaviors are. These proper and appropriate behaviors will benefit ourselves, our family, colleagues and friends, our native people and the global people. Sometimes these benefits seem conflict, but they are actually consistent in a broader view because the family, society, country, and globe are all various communities with shared interests. All of us, as members of society, have some common interests or public interests. The individual interest and the common interest are consistent if we have the correct cognition. The family is a community with shared interests. Although maybe the husband works and earns money outside and the housewife does not work but takes housework in home, they are an integrated community with different divisions of labor, and the income earned by the husband is actually their common asset. If the husband gradually forgets or deviates from this principle or the housewife is isolated from society because of tedious housework, family conflicts will emerge, and the common interest will be harmed. Thus, the husband and wife need to learn together and keep pace. Likewise, the company, city, nation, and global society are also communities with shared interests. Different people have different careers, incomes, positions, and interests, which are just the consequences of the division of labor, and all people are integrated as a whole society, similar to the human body. Different cells and organs have different functions, consuming different volumes of blood, nutrition, and energy, but they are integrated as a whole body and have their common interest, surviving. Sometimes, there may be some conflicts of interest inside the body, such as the cells of cancer consuming more and unlimited nutrition and energy or the mouth just wanting to enjoy delicious food but not caring for the load of the stomach. These behaviors are all unhealthy and should be controlled and prohibited by the rationality of the brain. The government is something like the brain of our society, as the central controller and coordinator, while human society is composed of innumerous individuals with free will. Most of us cannot cognize the integrality of human society, and conflicts and hatreds are then unavoidable.

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

115

Although sometimes confusing and controversial, good behavior and bad behavior can be differentiated and identified as we deepen our understanding of the world. There are some undoubted good behaviors, such as diligence, physical exercise, and kindness; there are also some bad behaviors, such as plagiarism, deceit, laziness, and murder. Regarding good behavior, diligence, as a virtue, is a sufficient and necessary condition of success, although individuals should also balance diligence and physical exercise. Working hard but harming physical health may not be as good as reducing work but enhancing physical exercise to some extent. Helping others within one’s capability is another virtue. It does not mean that we must help others, or make some donations, or only those capable people can help others, but means that everyone, no matter rich or poor, powerful or not, should help others within his/her capability. These helpful behaviors can bring happiness and comfort to an individual. In contrast, those bad behaviors are due to some shortsighted or wrong cognitions. If people have deeper and broader cognitions of the world, they will not behave in those bad ways. Plagiarism is a deceiving behavior in academics, seemingly benefiting individuals but harming the public and society and finally the individuals themselves. Plagiarism behavior is bad for individuals if we have deeper and broader cognition. Plagiarism does not improve the quality of a scholar, just gaining him/her some temporary and illusionary benefits. The true successes are impossible to base upon plagiarism and deceit. Crime and murder are thoroughly bad behaviors, reflecting the poor and wrong cognitions of the criminals and murderers, seeing something but ignoring more. Between the extreme good and bad behaviors, there are many controversial behaviors in the middle, hard, but not impossible, to define good or bad. For example, transgene research, homosexual behaviors, gun control, induced abortion, etc. The controversies of these behaviors are actually caused by the moral, ethical, and value dilemma due to the insufficiency of morality science research. However, we humankind can still find some theoretical and practical solutions for these issues, with knowledge accumulation and cognition deepening. Transgene research, as well as other scientific research such as nuclear power, means the deepening of our humankind cognition of the natural world, while this deepening of cognition is unbalanced due to the insufficiency of our moral knowledge. Therefore, the consequences of transgene and nuclear power knowledge and technology are so terrible that they may devastate our humankind. Without a high level of self-discipline and morality advancement, the research and discovery of transgenes and nuclear power may be not blessing but disaster for humankind. However, scientific research on transgenes and nuclear power is also an inevitable tendency for humankind under the current global political system and cognition level. Therefore, the UN, scientific community, and governments have to try their best to establish ethical codes or international laws to supervise or regulate this scientific research. However, these codes and laws will still be violated by some radical and ambitious scientists and governments, such as He Jiankui, a Chinese scientist who experimented with gene-edited babies and was sentenced to three years in prison in 2019 (Hollingsworth & Yee, 2019). He is neither the first nor the last one. This case reflects that we humankind still lacks the knowledge and cognition of how to conduct scientific research. The possible solution is to strengthen the morality research to balance the science research, as there are some things more, or

116

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

similarly, important than scientific discovery, reputation, and reward, such as human fate, morality, and honesty. Homosexuality, gun control, and induced abortion, as well as many other issues, are also controversial behaviors. There are some pros and cons. Although all these issues are very complex and impossible to be clarified thoroughly here, there are still some basic and simple principles. These issues, as public issues, mean that we humankind has not accumulated enough knowledge and cognition and reached consensus on them. Both the pros and cons have strong evidence, reasons, and values and are hardly persuaded. These situations are also common in the natural sciences, as there are also numerous divergences and debates. We can still establish some principles as temporary solutions, such as respecting each other, continuous deliberation, dynamic adjustment, peaceful petition, etc. The current regulations and laws about homosexuality, gun control, and induced abortion are temporary solutions and can be changed in the future with more knowledge and deeper cognition. Even if an individual does not agree with the current laws and regulations, they can and should collect more evidence, attract more supporters, petition peacefully, and try to change the laws and regulations in the future. People’s attitudes, knowledge, and cognition can change gradually and fundamentally in the long run, and we should be patient. When there is more scientific evidence and findings of homosexuality, gun control, induced abortion, and other controversial issues, these intractable issues will be solved gradually, similar to what has happened in history. The controversies are due to our insufficient knowledge and cognition, while peaceful deliberation but not radical action may be the right behavior for these controversies. Politicians, such as Hitler and Stalin, as well as contemporary ones, behave and make decisions not for themselves but for their countries and people, very controversially. Some of them have committed behaviors undoubtedly wrong, immoral, and illegal, such as corruption and treason, induced by greed and desire. Certainly, Hitler and Stalin were not corrupted and treasonable; instead, they wanted to build their countries the strongest and wealthiest ones in the world. However, although they partially and temporarily succeeded, their understanding and cognition of the world were fundamentally wrong, and their decisions and behaviors, such as the Holocaust, Katyn Massacre, the Great Purge, and national chauvinism, were unforgivable and shortsighted, ruining not only themselves but also their countries. As leaders of the country and the world, great politicians are particularly necessary to learn deep, broad, and farsighted knowledge and form the correct cognition of the world. China’s Mao Zedong (1893–1976) is also a great politician, leading the Communist Party of China, gaining national independence, and establishing the P.R. China. However, during his later life after 1960, when at 67 years old, he gradually formed wrong cognition of the country and global situation, launching the Culture Revolution and addressing the class struggle but not economic development. In contrast, Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997), as his successor and the Architect of Reform and Open of China, had formed much different cognition of the country and the world, initiating the Reform and Open Policy in 1978 and transforming the national focus from class struggle to economic development. After that, China started to soar. Certainly, every

3.4 Cognition and Behavior

117

country has outstanding politicians, such as Lee Kuan Yew (1923–2015) in Singapore, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869–1948) in India, and Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela (1918–2013) in South Africa, as well as normal politicians. Their knowledge and cognition will basically determine their decisions and behaviors, achievements and performances.

3.5 Happiness, Responsibility, and Achievement Happiness, responsibility, and achievement are fuzzy concepts closely linked and subtly different and important for individual development. Happiness is generally regarded as one of the most important values and one of the ultimate goals of people. People earning money, making living, physical exercising, and nearly doing everything can be loosely understood as pursuing happiness. However, people may also shoulder responsibility, pay various costs, and even sacrifice their lives, abandoning happiness. Sometimes, some people may pursue various achievements regardless of the material wealth, health, family, and even lives. These phenomena and behaviors indicate that individuals are much more diverse, but understandable and explainable, and happiness is not the only and ultimate goal for all people, while responsibility and achievement are crucial. Individual development can be understood by the clarification of happiness, responsibility, and achievement.

3.5.1 Happiness As an important and popular value, happiness is hard to precisely define and measure. A baby or children generally have a much simpler understanding of happiness. When they satisfy their basic needs, such as hunger, thirst, safety, and emotion, they can feel happiness as a kind of satisfaction. Students may be happy when they obtain high scores, enter their ideal universities, find a good job, or win their love. Adults may be happy when they obtain salary increases, career promotion, family harmony, or perfect sex climax. Scientists may be happy when they make wonderful scientific discoveries. In contrast, when we experience failure, disease, or cannot get what they want, we will feel unhappy or sad or even depressed. Happiness can be understood as the satisfaction of individual demands. The American psychologist Abraham Maslow (1908–1970) constructed the well-known Hierarchy of Need Theory, classifying human needs into five hierarchies: psychological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization (Maslow, 1943). When people satisfy the lower level of need, they may feel happy, but only temporarily, and then they may become unhappy and unsatisfied and may pursue to satisfy the higher level of need. This theory may well explain that people in poor and low status may be happier than those in richer and higher status, as the presidents and billionaires may be unhappy while the beggars and waiters may be happy, because the former may have many

118

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

troubles and annoyances while the latter may be satisfied with their status quo. Selfactualization, as the satisfaction of highest demand, means that one believes that his/her value and ideal have been actualized, not necessarily measured by money. However, according to Maslow (1970), only approximately 20% of people believe they have achieved self-actualization. Therefore, happiness can be classified as lowlevel and high-level. Low-level happiness is from the satisfaction of psychological, safety, social, and esteem needs, and high-level happiness is from self-actualization, which may be also called as eudemonia by Aristotle. Individual development means that an individual should establish new goals and pursue his/her self-actualization endlessly, sustaining happiness continuously and becoming increasingly better. A good society and government should provide policy and circumstances to help an increasing number of people achieve self-actualization and feel happy and satisfied. Happiness is the synonym of, but different from, pleasure. Pleasure is transitory, fluctuant, and more similar to low-level happiness as physiological satisfaction and sensation, while happiness tends to be an enduring and constant psychological and living status. Particularly, pleasure, as a transitory feeling, can also be sensed from bad behaviors such as drug addiction, excessive drinking, whoring, and corruption. These behaviors bring temporary pleasure and sensation but long-term trouble and pain. Pleasures may be generated from seven sins in Christianity: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride. Therefore, some great philosophers, such as Plato, rejected pleasure as goodness and intrinsic value because it may lead to evil and crime. Moderate and sustainable pleasure may be better than extravagant and temporary pleasure. People’s total pleasure may be constant. If an individual consumes it excessively for short times, such as drug addiction, it may be depleted soon. The more appropriate way of experiencing pleasure and happiness is not ecstasy but stable, enduring and sustainable joy as a kind of positive psychology. The corresponding seven virtues—chastity, abstinence, charity, diligence, patience, kindness, and humility—can generate this kind of healthy pleasure or happiness. Additionally, even pleasure is good as a value, but it may not be the sole and highest good and value because, as Plato argued, pleasure is better when accompanied by intelligence (Zimmerman & Bradley, 2019). Wisdom and knowledge can help us understand happiness and pleasure more deeply and guide us toward authentic and healthy happiness and pleasure. Natural sciences have identified the chemical substances and physiological mechanisms of pleasure and happiness. It may be dopamine, a neurotransmitter, or chemical messenger that sends messages between nerve cells in the brain. It binds to receptors in the brain, sending signals from one cell to another. This causes cellular changes that can affect our well-being in a number of ways. Although these discoveries are very helpful for medical scientists to understand the mechanism of human body, brain, and happiness and for doctors to cure some diseases such as addiction and depression, they are not so enlightening for social scientists and ordinary people because humans are not the animal of sense or machine of happiness, just stimulated by chemical substances or bioelectricity. This situation has been imagined and described by some philosophers thought experiments, such as Hilary Putnam’s “brain in a vat,” Plato’s “cave theory,” and Chinese Zhuangzi’s “butterfly dream.”

3.5 Happiness, Responsibility, and Achievement

119

Some science fiction movies, such as The Matrix, in 1999 and The Truman show, in 1998, also depicted the human with sense but no meaning. Therefore, human living has meanings and significance other than these trivial chemical substances and bioelectricity. Even if the advancement of science makes it possible for humans to experience happiness by intaking a happiness dose or wearing a pleasure machine, it may be neither good news nor worthwhile for substantial happiness. The social sciences can measure subjective happiness, life satisfaction, and subjective well-being through surveys and questionnaires. It requires individuals to evaluate their happiness status and rate on the Likert scale or cantril ladder, such as 0–10, by questions such as “Overall, how satisfy are you with your life these days,” with supportive questions about gender, age, family, incomes, and other demographic variables. If the quantities of the samples are high enough and the survey periods are long enough, we can accumulate enough data to correlate happiness and other variables and determine their correlations. For example, Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union, surveyed residents’ happiness on a scale from 0 (“not satisfied at all”) to 10 (“fully satisfied”). The mean (average) life satisfaction of EU residents aged 16 and over was 7.3 in 2018, an increase compared with 7.0 in 2013. The mean life satisfaction varied significantly between EU Member States. The inhabitants of Finland were the most satisfied with their lives in the EU, with an overall average of 8.1, closely followed by Austria (8.0), Denmark, Poland, and Sweden (all 7.8). At the opposite end of the scale, residents in Bulgaria (5.4) were by far the least satisfied, followed by those in Croatia (6.3), Greece and Lithuania (both 6.4), Hungary (6.5), Latvia and Portugal (both 6.7). The highest increase was recorded in Cyprus (from 6.2 in 2013 to 7.1 in 2018), Bulgaria (+0.6), Czechia, Estonia, Poland, and Portugal (all +0.5) (Eurostat, 2019). Globally, the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network has published an annual World Happiness Report since 2013. In the latest 2020 report (Helliwell et al., 2020), the five happiest countries are Finland (7.769), Denmark (7.6), Norway (7.554), Iceland (7.494), and the Netherlands (7.488), while the 5 unhappiest countries are Rwanda (3.334, rank 152), Tanzania (3.231, rank 153), Afghanistan (3.203, rank 154), the Central African Republic (3.083, rank 155), and South Sudan (2.863, rank 156). Apparently, global happiness is strongly correlated with GDP per capita, which means that a richer country tends to be a happier country. This measurement of happiness shows that although GDP may be the key factor of general happiness, other factors, such as the environment, equity, and politics, also function. Likewise, we can expect that income may be the key factor for individual happiness statistically, while other factors such as health, education, personality, and cognition also function. However, the statistical analysis can only discover the general tendency, not the specific cases. Although rich people tend to be happier, there are undoubtedly rich but unhappy people and poor but happy people. If we can understand the essence of happiness, we can control and enhance our happiness regardless of how wealthy we are.

120

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

3.5.2 Responsibility Responsibility and happiness are seemingly at two opposite ends; that is, for someone, more responsibility may bring burden and cost and then less happiness, while less responsibility means more freedom, less restriction, and more happiness. However, this understanding is wrong and superficial because happiness without responsibility is only irresponsible and unmatured happiness, while happiness based upon responsibility is substantial and reliable happiness. We can anticipate and empathize that surveying a responsible father, teacher, policeman, and soldier that whether they are happy or not. Although paying more time, money, and even the life for their children, students, citizens, and country, they may answer something like this, “yes, I have paid much price, but I feel very happy and satisfied, because I have fulfilled my responsibility.” Meanwhile, although one may evade responsibility and enjoy temporary pleasure, he/she may feel long-term guilty if he/she still has some degree of conscientiousness. Even without the necessary conscientiousness, the irresponsibility of A will harm B or C and society as a whole and may return to A or his/her offspring. Responsibility and happiness may be the two sides of the same thing, as authentic happiness is generated from the fulfillment of responsibility. Every individual has his/her various responsibilities. A baby has no sense of responsibility, but when he/she grows up and is socialized in the family and school, he/she will gradually form the sense of responsibility as a part of morality and value, knowing what is morally right and wrong, such as respecting parents and teachers, being honest and not cheating, and being responsible for the parents, the family, society, and his/herself. This sense of morality may not be strong and defective initially, as the students may have thought that they are studying not for themselves but for their parents and families. As individuals become older, step into society, find their jobs, marry others, and have their babies, they may gradually deepen their understanding of the world, strengthen their sense of responsibility, and cognize their broader responsibilities for themselves, family, others, and society while experiencing various feelings, including happiness and sadness. There are some youths and adults still lacking the necessary sense of responsibility, and so commit various immoral or illegal behaviors, such as plagiarism, deceit, fake goods, pollution, steal, drug addiction, etc., but they can learn and change, as individual development. An individual’s responsibility can be expanded from narrow to broad, from him/herself, to parents, family, employer, society, country, and humankind. This does not mean that individuals have equal responsibilities to others, but a fully developed and mature individual should have a greater sense of responsibilities. The broader responsibility one considers, the more developed and mature one is. Responsibility includes legal responsibility and moral responsibility. Legal responsibility means that we, as citizens, must follow the laws and disciplines, doing those things that laws and disciplines require us to do, and not doing those things that laws and disciplines prohibit. The modern country is formed by social contracts, such as law, and obeying the law is the basic responsibility for a citizen. We may disagree on some laws, but we have to obey these laws first and change them by

3.5 Happiness, Responsibility, and Achievement

121

public discourse and legal processes second, but not ignore or violate them directly. We are also members of some communities and organizations, which are also formed by social contracts, as disciplines. Therefore, we have to obey the disciplines and rules of these communities and organizations as responsible members. There may be some bad laws and disciplines and hidden or unspoken rules, arousing such as sex harassment in careers and ME-TOO movement. Individual development means that we need to understand, fight and change these bad and unfair rules, or at least keep away from them, but not follow or participate. Meanwhile, legal responsibility is still not enough because law and discipline, even if they are good, just stipulate what people need to do at the bottom line. We, as moral and noble humankind, need to do more beyond the basic requirements of laws and disciplines, such as helping others, donating, and protecting the environment. It is not compulsory but voluntary, depending on our capability. Responsibility is not the passive fulfillment of one’s duty but to actively perform something good for him/herself, as well as for others and society. As part of society, an individual’s responsibility can benefit oneself, others, and society as a whole. Individual development means that an individual has a deeper understanding of responsibility and can enjoy real happiness from fulfilling responsibility. As the Spider-Man in the Marvel movies declares, with great power comes great responsibility, and the word saying to wear crowns shall bear the heavy, different people and career have much different responsibilities. As there is no superhero with superpower in reality, the top political leaders and other elites in every field will take more responsibility for their countries and people. Although this responsibility is mainly referred to as legal responsibility, moral responsibilities are also necessary, if not more important. For presidents, premiers, and chairmen, just following the laws and fulfilling legal responsibility is only the basic requirement but far from enough. Without a strong sense of moral responsibility, a president cannot be a great president and may even potentially violate the constitution and laws. In addition, the outstanding figures in every field, such as entrepreneurs, scientists, artists, and athletes, have specific career responsibilities, not just motivated by material interest. Entrepreneurs have legal responsibilities to produce qualified goods and services, as well as social and moral responsibility beyond law and profit on employees, the environment, and society. In the background of the continuous expansion of inequality, some billionaires, such as Warren Buffett (1930–) and Bill Gates (1955–), proposed that the ultrawealthy, including themselves, should pay more tax (Coudriet, 2019). This proposal should not just be a pose but also their moral responsibility based upon their deep understandings of the world, while most other billionaires may not understand. An equal and just society is not only good for the poor but also for the wealthy, as equality and justice can make the wealth healthy and sustainable. Similarly, scientists have their responsibility to society other than their scientific discovery. Albert Einstein (1879–1955) discovered the secret of nuclear power, and Robert Oppenheimer (1904–1967), the father of atom bomb and leader of Manhattan Project, transformed Einstein’s nuclear theory into reality and weapon. However, both of them were hesitant and introspective, if not regretting, when the atom bomb exploded in Hiroshima on August 6 and in Nagasaki on August 9, 1945. In 2018,

122

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

the Chinese gene scientist He Jiankui produced a genetically altered baby without sufficient consideration of his responsibility as a scientist, and he was sentenced to three years in jail. Elites and public figures should take more responsibility. Yao Ming (1980–), one of the famous Chinese basketball players in NBA, has made great donations and produced many public advertisements on environmental protection. Roger Federer (1981–), one of the greatest tennis players, reported shopping by environmentally friendly cloth bags but not single-use plastic bags. Their behaviors have exhibited their responsibility to the family, environment, and society, benefitting their careers and lives correspondingly. Generally, individuals will understand their various responsibilities deeper as they grow older. A baby has no sense of responsibility, and young people can cognize responsibility only for him/herself, his/her family, parents, and friends. When they go to work, they may perceive the responsibility for the company and employer. When they become managers and bosses, they may feel the responsibility for their subordinates and employees. When they have children, they must bear responsibility as parents. When they experience the killing of animals and polluting the environment, they may understand the responsibility for the earth. Experience, cognition, and education will cultivate and enhance one’s sense of responsibility. An individual with a poor sense of responsibility is less developed. If one has little sense of responsibility to society, the environment, and other people, he/she may be cold and ignorant to them, even devastating and destructing them as criminals; if one has little sense of responsibility to the family, he/she will not be kind to the parents, spouse, and children, and the family cannot be happy; if one has little sense of responsibility to him/herself, he/she is not selfish but self-abandoned and self-destroyed. The formation and cultivation of responsibility is crucial for individual development and determined by many factors, including parents, teachers, friends, schools, society, and social circumstances. Real achievers are those with a strong and comprehensive sense of responsibility, while temporary success is not sustainable and may be frustrated somewhere and sometimes in the future because of the lack of responsibility. Responsibility means that an individual has a deeper and broader understanding and cognition of the world.

3.5.3 Achievement Everyone wants to gain some achievements, but what is achievement and how to obtain it are still misunderstood by many people. Therefore, there are only a few achievers in every field, and most people are still attempting and even sacrificing their valuable belongings for illusory achievements. To gain achievement, we need to understand what the real and authentic achievements are. In every field and situation, there are specific achievements and achievers. In the political fields, there are great and outstanding politicians, although some of them are controversial. George Washington (1732–1799), Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865), Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882–1945), and Winston Churchill (1874–1965) are recognized as great statesmen,

3.5 Happiness, Responsibility, and Achievement

123

while Joseph Stalin (1878–1953) and Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) are much controversial, and their possible achievements were not sustainable. Top political leaders such as presidents and premiers can be regarded as achievers with achievements. In the science field, there are great scientists such as Isaac Newton (1643–1727), Albert Einstein (1879–1955), Nobel Prize Winners, and various other prize winners such as Fields Medal in mathematics. In the business field, great entrepreneurs such as Bill Gates (1955–), Steve Jobs (1955–2011), Warren Buffett (1930–), Mark Zuckerberg (1984–), Larry Page (1973–), Sergey Brin (1973–), and Jack Ma (1964–) are achievers. In the arts field, famous artists such as Vincent van Gogh (1853–1890) as painters, Ludwig van Beethoven (1770–1827) as musicians, and Steven Spielberg (1946–) as movie directors can be regarded as achievers. In the sports field, basketball players Michael Jordan (1963–), football players Pelé (1940–), and tennis players Roger Federer (1981–) can be recognized as achievers. They are just some well-known names and examples, and there are achievers in every field and careers, including those not so notable ones, such as cooking, nursing, driving, student, and environment protection. There are some conditions for achievers. First, understanding. The top achievers generally have deepest understandings and insights for their careers. Great politicians must understand the politics; great scientists must understand science; great mathematicians must understand math; great entrepreneurs must understand business, markets, consumers, technologies, and tendencies; great cooks must understand food, taste, and health. Although not necessarily to understand all, they are generally the top experts in their fields. Their understandings are from their capability of learning, not just from school and teachers but also from family, experience, diligence, and society. Their deep and accurate understandings enable them to perceive the issues and times, surpassing their competitors. Second, enthusiasm. The top achievers generally have enthusiasm for their careers and then can devote all their energy, time, and resources to them. For ordinary people, career may be just a job, working regularly from 9 am to 5 pm or some other times. However, for great achievers, careers are worthy of dedication. Third, diligence. All the achievers are working hard physically and mentally and pondering their problems day and night. Just thinking about Einstein hitting again the tree when walking and thinking, and Roger Federer and Michael Jordan practicing swinging racquet and shooting at basket for thousands of times a day. Fourth, persistence. No achievers can succeed at the first time or initial times but have to experience a number of failures and setbacks, which also have their values that can accumulate experience and train characters and spirits. Although there are some genius tennis players winning the grand slam when entering the final at first time, such as Michael Te-Pei Chang (1972–), winning the 1989 French Open at 17 years old, this situation is seldom with low probability. Experience based upon age and failure are necessary for the achievement of all careers. Finally, the opportunity and gene also may function. In some extreme cases, such as wars and single games, there are no second opportunities for losers, while in most ordinary situations, opportunities are generally fair for all. Gene may be unneglectable particularly for those top achievers because there are still somethings that cannot be learned and

124

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

altered postnatally, but gene is equal for most ordinary people who can also gain their extraordinary achievements. Achievement and success do not belong solely to leaders and celebrities, while anybody with any career at any position can gain achievement and success. After all, human society is composed of various hierarchical organizations, and only a few people can be promoted to the top of these hierarchies. Most people are definitely at the middle or bottom of hierarchies, but they can still gain achievements and successes with or without promotion. These hierarchies are reasonable and natural as the result of the division of labor, similar to the human body and biosystem. In the human body, different cells and organs are differentiated and hierarchized but harmonized as a whole body. In the biosystem, there are grass and tree, plants and animals, herbivore and predators, but they are all successful livings, and the biosystem is coordinated and balanced. In the human society with current technology, there must be somebody to do the jobs as cleaner, waiter, baby-sitter, labor worker. Their careers are equal to president, professor, and entrepreneur, although with variances in salary, position, knowledge and complexity. There are various inequalities and injustices in human society, such as family, region, country, and opportunity, that hamper individual achievement and development. On the one hand, we need to eliminate inequality and injustice and provide equal education and opportunity. On the other hand, we need to depend on ourselves, learn and endeavor, accumulate knowledge and deepen our understanding. A good human society should be open and flexible, and anybody should be able to practice his/her talents. On every position and career, one can achieve to be better and to be best of him/herself, getting their specific achievement and success.

3.5.4 Virtue Everyone has his/her virtues and sins, and it is hard to say that those achievers have more virtues and fewer sins than ordinary people. The top leaders and achievers also have sins, such as corrupted politicians and greedy businessmen, and may commit something bad and wrong, while the ordinary people also have virtues such as honesty and benevolence, and may be great and inspiring. All the people have both sides, and we need to be comprehensive and neutral when observing and evaluating people. Individual development may be understood as enhancing virtues and removing sins. Although it is hard to define what the virtues and sins are, seven typical virtues and sins have been presented by Christianity and basically recognized by nearly all religions and cultures. The seven virtues include chastity, charity, diligence, generosity, patience, kindness, and humility, and the corresponding sins include lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride, while many other related virtues and sins may be mentioned. Actually, these virtues are also public values that are worthy of pursuing by people and government, and the sins should be restrained and removed individually and collectively. Psychologically, everyone has two sides in the mind. One is for virtue, pursuing goodness and brightness, while the other is for sin, evil, and

3.5 Happiness, Responsibility, and Achievement

125

darkness. Although the sins can be temporarily suppressed and restrained by laws and punishments, they may still be there and may come out someday if without deep understandings, leading people toward evil and darkness. Meanwhile, the virtues and conscientiousness are either there, fighting the sins and leading people toward goodness and brightness. Sins can always bring pleasures and satisfactions, while virtues may always mean costs and prices. However, the pleasure and satisfaction of sins are temporary and superficial, while the benefits of virtues are enduring and permanent. When people have more education, knowledge, and wisdom, they may understand the evil of sins and the power of virtues, conquer the sins and pursue the virtues from the bottom of the heart. Virtues and sins are not only philosophical and abstract but also practical and applicable. There are virtues and sins in every decision, behavior, and policy. When I get up in the morning early and punctually, seize the time and work hard, it is the virtue of diligence, but when I sleep late and waste time, it is the sin of sloth. When I control my diet and economize the food, it is the virtue of thrift, but when I am engorging and crapulent, it is the sin of gluttony, leading obesity and unhealth. Although luxury and extravagance can be afforded by wealthy people, they may not be the virtue but the sin of consumerism and capitalism. Tiger Woods (1975–) is a successful golf player but suffers sex addiction, which has almost ruined his career, marriage, and personal living. The virtue of individuals in various careers is to fulfill their career responsibility, while the sin is to deviate or discard their career responsibility. The virtue of politician is to work for their citizens and countries, while the sin is to work for themselves position and reputation; the virtue of entrepreneur is to provide qualified goods and services, while the sin is to solely for the profit but harming the consumers, employees, and the environment; the virtue of scientist is to make scientific discovery, while the sin is that their discoveries may bring terrible harm for the people like nuclear weapon; the virtue of artist is to create arts and inspire people, and the sin is that their arts may also corrupt people like pornography, although pornography sometimes is hard to be distinguished from art. The virtue of an individual is to become better in every aspect, and the sin of an individual is to degrade and corrupt. Education, learning, wisdom, and understanding form the virtues and sins and determine human behavior and individual development. Everyone, including achievers, ordinary people, you and me, are not perfect, owning virtues, or merits, on some aspects, and sins, or defects, on some other aspects. The virtues and merits, or sins and defects, are confused together and hard to distinguish. Adolf Hitler (1889–1945) has some virtues or merits, such as art keenness, talent of speech, dedication to the country, self-discipline on food, alcohol, tobacco, etc. Without these merits, he could not become the political leader of Germany. However, his sins initiated World War II and Holocaust of Jewish people. Although the reasons and the processes of these terrible events are complex, he has made these significant decisions according to his cognition and understanding of the world and should take undoubted main responsibility. In his view, the war might be unavoidable and the best way was to attack, and the lives of Jew and other races were inferior to Aryan people. These cognitions and understandings are terribly wrong and low,

126

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

leading his sins and wrong actions. After Worlds I and II, we should learn and understand that war should be given up and that all races should be equal. Similarly, Stalin (1878–1953) also has some virtues or merits, such as braveness, firmness, calmness, plainness, self-discipline, and dedication to the country. When the Soviet Union captured the Germany General Friedrich Wilhelm Ernst Paulus (1890–1957) after the Battle of Stalingrad in February 1945, Stalin refused Hitler’s request to exchange the general to his son, who was a soldier, sent to the front line and captured by Germany in 1941, and said, “I will not exchange a soldier to a general.” However, his sins included the political purge of his comrades, killing millions of people, Katyn Massacre, and chauvinism. Perhaps in his mind, human lives and other small countries were trivial and might be sacrificed for the Soviet Union. Hitler and Stalin have not shown their respects of lives and equity of countries, so they failed finally. Virtues will benefit us, bringing real happiness and development, while sins will harm us, causing sadness and failure in the long term. Politicians should understand virtues and sins more deeply, and then they can make correct decisions for their people and countries for the long run. In contrast, ordinary people may possess some virtues and sins, affecting him/herself and a few people around. Anybody is not perfect and needs to develop, enhance virtues and remove sins by deepening their understanding of the world.

3.6 Meaning of Life An adult can choose his/her life and seek the meaning of life by free will. Nobody, including the parents, governments, authorities, philosophers, and the author, can judge the meaning of life of others and set the meaning of life for others. What is the meaning of life is a crucial and eternal question, pondered by nearly all the people and pivotal to individual development. It can be argued and understood scientifically and reasonably, and then, we may obtain more knowledge and understanding of it. As humans are a part of the universe, earth, world, and biology, we can ask and ponder similar and original questions, i.e., what is the meaning of the universe, earth, world, and biology? These questions have been presented and argued by some philosophers, religions, and science fictions. If everything including the universe, the earth, the world, and the human are created by the God, these things, as created, have meaning as obeying or following the tenets of the God. Therefore, the religious answer to the meaning of life may be simple and perfect, as we, as the son and daughter of the God, do not need to worry about anything, just worship and trust him, because he has prepared everything for us. However, since the scientific revolution of the sixteenthseventeenth century, the God has died, and religions have been declining, although still strong. However, an increasing number of people have given up religions and the God and have to search the meaning of life from other sources. According to our current scientific knowledge and cognition, the universe, earth, world, and biology may have no meaning at all if we do not know their origination, or we guess they were generated and evolving spontaneously. This meaninglessness implies that we

3.6 Meaning of Life

127

humankind can, if we have the capability, dispose the universe, the earth, the world, and the biology by any means according to our free will. The universe (sun and star) is too far and we still cannot reach, but the earth is near and we have altered it daily and greatly. However, if we can endow some intrinsic value or existence value to the universe, the earth, the world, the biology, and the human, they may have some meanings that we must consider. The meaning of the universe and the earth may be existence as “they are there,” as George Mallory (1886–1924), the British adventurer died when exploring the Everest in 1924, were asked and answered why he attempted to climb the mountain. Existence may be the meaning of unliving entities such as rock and mountains, so we may prefer to keep the world unchanged and untouched, or at least changed not by humans’ arbitrariness but by nature itself. Similarly, the meaning of biology, from lower organisms such as viruses and bacteria to higher organisms such as mammals and primates and humans, is to exist and reproduce and expand, and one’s existence should not deny others’ existence, although there is coexistence of competition and cooperation. However, only humans can ponder and introspect what their meanings are, such as striving to survive, to exist, to achieve something, to create this world better. The existence and living may be one of the meanings of human life, but neither the sole nor the most important one, at least for somebody. From the existence and living of humans, we may derive other meanings or values, such as comfortable living, money, happiness, fun, health, enjoyment, longevity of life, and even eternity. Therefore, in reality, we can observe various people struggling for living, running businesses, pursuing money, power, position and reputation, and even committing crimes or corruption. Although these behaviors and intentions may be diverse, high or low, legal or illegal, moral or immoral, they have their meanings of life, i.e., for good life of themselves, their children, their native people, all the humankind, and the earth. Our humankind has the right and reason and meaning to live better and better, but all individuals should have the similar right and reason and meaning to exist and live better, and one’s right cannot hamper others’ right, even the earth’s right. Therefore, cheat, robbery, violence, and various crimes are immoral and unreasonable for one to exist and live better at the cost of others. An inequal society in which some people can pursue their selfish better lives but ignore others is immoral and unreasonable. The protest and revolution may happen, and those upper classes cannot sustain their better lives in the long run. Similarly, humankind, as a whole, has the right to exist and live better, but the earth and biology, such as elephant and even virus, also have their rights to exist and live better. Our humankind then should not pursue our selfish existence and better lives but ignore the earth and biology. In particular, protests and revolutions from the earth and biology may occur in the form of climate change, disasters, and illness. Thus, our humankind cannot sustain our existence and better life solely. Therefore, the existence and better life, if temporary, is not sufficient to be the meaning of human life. It should be the sustainable existence and eternal better life for all the human generations and the earth, which depends on our accumulation of knowledge and deepening understanding of the world. People may place their meaning of life on particular entities or affairs, such as money, children, health, careers, or hobbies, from which they can seek happiness and

128

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

a sense of achievement. First, money is a symbol of modern market society and may be one of the most important sources of meaning of life for many people. However, according to scientific research and personal experiences, it is factual that happiness from money is contemporary, that billionaires are similarly happy to ordinary people and that people will have much different understandings of money after they truly earn a great amount of money. One may set money as the meaning of life but should understand that money as the meaning of life is not reliable and concrete. Second, some people may regard children as meaning of life and get happiness from raising children, and some parents may sacrifice their money, time, and even life for their children. However, we should look after and take care of our children when they are baby and juvenile, but we should understand that children and we as parents are all independent individuals. The essence of raising children does not mean that they are belongings of parents but that we should help them to become independent individuals and live their own lives. Third, health is necessary and fundamental but not the only one that should be pursued. Many people also sacrifice their health for other things. Health alone cannot be the meaning of life but balances and supplements for other things. Fourth, careers can be the meaning of life, but the problem is that many people do not understand the meaning of their careers and do not love their careers. Career for them is just a tool for living but not an enterprise for devotion. Finally, hobbies can be the meaning of life, and many people can obtain much knowledge, happiness, and achievements from their hobbies. Actually, some early great scientists are not professional experts in universities but part-time researchers with other jobs, such as Antony van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723), Dutch microscopist who has the hobby to produce the lens and was the first to observe bacteria and protozoa. Liu Cixin, the great Chinese science fiction author of The Three Body Problem, is not a professional writer but an electrical engineer in an electricity generating company in Shanxi Province, China. Their achievements are from their devotion of the hobbies. Similarly, those outstanding achievers in every field also set their meaning of life on some entities or affairs more enduringly and fundamentally, evolving to be their missions. It is the meaning of life and the sense of mission that distinguish greatness and ordinariness. Great politicians such as Nelson Mandela (1918–2013) and Mao Zedong (1893–1976) might regard their meaning of life, or mission, as rescuing and developing their countries and people, so they can be in prison and pay any cost for the meaning and mission. Those great scientists, such as Isaac Newton (1643–1727) and Albert Einstein (1879–1955), believed their meaning of life to be discovering the secret of the universe and satisfying their curiosity. The meaning of life for Karl Marx (1818–1883), as a social scientist, was to discover the law of social development and criticize capitalism and reform and change it by socialism and communism. Therefore, he wrote numerous books and papers such as On Capitalism and the Communist Manifesto, but lived in poverty. The mission for great entrepreneurs such as Bill Gates (1955–) and Steve Jobs (1955–2011) is to change and benefit the world by their products, while the money and profit are only the attachments but not the mission itself. The meaning of life for great tennis players such as Roger Federer (1981–) is tennis, while he may pay more care and love to his family after marriage and having children and then have deeper understandings of

3.6 Meaning of Life

129

career, tennis, and family. The meaning of life for great musicians such as Michael Jackson (1958–2009) is music. The devotion of something and understating of that thing are the reason and source of greatness. All of us can be great once we truly and deeply understand the meaning of life and devote us to pursuing the meaning of life.

References Alexander, L., & Moore, M. (2021). Deontological ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/ethics-deontological/ CDC. (2021). Adult obesity facts. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html Celebritynetworth. (2021). Steven Spielberg net worth. https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richestcelebrities/directors/steven-spielberg-net-worth/ Celebsmoney. (2021). How much is Alex Honnold worth? https://www.celebsmoney.com/networth/alex-honnold/2/ Chisholm, D. (1995). Problem solving and institutional design. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 5(4), 451–492. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037259 Coudriet, C. (2019, October 15). These billionaires want the ultra-wealthy to pay more in Taxes. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/cartercoudriet/2019/10/15/billionaires-more-taxesgates-buffett-bloomberg/#675aacdc7792. Courtin, E., & Knapp, M. (2017). Social isolation, loneliness and health in old age: A scoping review. Health and Social Care in the Community, 25(3), 799–812. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc. 12311 Driver, J. (2014). The History of Utilitarianism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https:// plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/utilitarianism-history/ Eurostat. (2019). Quality of life in 2018. How satisfied are people with their lives? Positive trend in subjective well-being. Eurostat, news release. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/2995521/ 10207020/3-07112019-AP-EN.pdf/f4523b83-f16b-251c-2c44-60bd5c0de76d Featherstone, D. (2016). Why art and science are more closely related than you think. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2016/03/16/why-art-and-science-are-more-closelyrelated-than-you-think/?sh=4f85933169f1 Forbes. (2021a). #7 Roger Federer. https://www.forbes.com/profile/roger-federer/?sh=32e306 c714ba Forbes. (2021b). Michael Jackson’s career earnings, year-by-year. https://www.forbes.com/pictures/ eeel45ekfki/michael-jacksons-career-earnings-1979-2009/?sh=506d593d5357 Helliwell, J., Layard, R., Sachs, J., & De Neve, J. (2020). World happiness report 2020. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Hollingsworth, J., & Yee, I. (2019). Chinese scientist who edited genes of twin babies is jailed for 3 years. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/30/china/gene-scientist-china-intl-hnk/index.html Honnold, A., & Robert, D. (2018). Alone on the wall. W. W. Norton & Company. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. Maslow, A. H. (1970). Religions, values, and peak experiences. Penguin (Original work published 1966). McCraw, T. K. (2010). Prophet of innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and creative destruction. Belknap Press. Palmer, C. (2021, June). The science of morality. American Psychological Association. https:// www.apa.org/monitor/2021/06/lab-science-morality Rankred. (2021). 13 Biggest illegal businesses around the world. https://www.rankred.com/10-big gest-illegal-businesses-around-the-world/ SIPRI. (2019). SIPRI yearbook summary 2019. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. https://sipri.org/yearbook/2019

130

3 Individual Development: Richer, Healthier, or Happier

Teller, E. (1998). Science and morality. Science, 280(5367), 1200–1201. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.280.5367.1200 Thompson, J. (2018). The average salary of professional tennis players. Chron. https://work.chron. com/average-salary-professional-tennis-players-6052.html Vardi, N. (2010). The world’s biggest illicit industries. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/2010/06/ 04/biggest-illegal-businesses-business-crime_slide.html#22c79272760a Warr, P. (2015). At what age does happiness peak? World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum. org/agenda/2015/11/at-what-age-does-happiness-peak/ Wealthygenius. (2021). How much was Isaac Asimov worth? https://www.wealthygenius.com/ isaac-asimov-net-worth/ WHO. (2021). Constitution of the world health organization. https://apps.who.int/gb/bd/PDF/bd47/ EN/constitution-en.pdf?ua=1 World Bank. (2021). Open data. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.SUIC.P5 Worldlifeexpectancy. (2021). World road traffic accident report. https://www.worldlifeexpectancy. com/world-road-traffic-accidents-report Zakhareuski, A. (2021). 5 Basic concepts of defensive driving that keep you safe on the road. https:// driving-tests.org/beginner-drivers/what-is-defensive-driving/ Zimmerman, M. J., & Bradley, B. (2019). Intrinsic vs. extrinsic value. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/value-intrinsic-extrinsic/

Chapter 4

Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

Organizations are the basic form of the human body and human society. Regarding the human body, countless cells constitute different organs, which are defined as relatively independent units with specific functions, such as sense organs such as the eye, ear, tongue, skin, and nose; digestive organs such as the mouth, esophagus, stomach, small intestine, large intestine, rectum, and anus; motor organs such as the muscle, skeleton, arm, and leg; and neural organs such as the brain, nerve, and spinal cord. All these organs constitute the integrated and harmonious human body. Although these organs have different functions and forms and consume different amounts of nutrition and energy, they can be regarded as equal and indispensable for the human body as a whole. The failure of any organ will lead to various health problems, although to different extents, as the failure of other organs will lead to disability, while the failure of the brain and heart may lead to death. Analogously, human society is also composed of organizations, mainly including families, companies, NGOs/NPOs, and governments, with various functions. However, much different from the human body, there are too many conflicts in human society and organizations because of our insufficient understanding.

4.1 Family Development 4.1.1 Family as Institution Family is the basic form of human society, and everybody is born into a family. Reproduction is a basic and essential activity for all lives, including humankind, before clone and gene technology thoroughly succeeds, which will bring great ethical and value changes to family and human society. Therefore, currently and traditionally, men and women must combine, form family, and give birth. Although giving birth is not the necessary choice for specific individuals, it is so for the whole human society; otherwise, humankind may not be sustainable. Not so extremely, the decreasing birth © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_4

131

132

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

rate and the aging society have caused serious social problems for many countries, such as Europe, Japan, and China. Family is a natural social phenomenon not only for humankind but also for other animals, although they have much different forms and behaviors. We need to understand these forms and behaviors, and then we can make our family and society better and more adaptable. Family is basic and important for human society to sustain its stability and sustainability. In the prehistory of humankind, the sexual behaviors and reproduction were probably disordered and chaotic, while wild animals could find some ways to avoid disordered sex behaviors and maintain the health of genes and reproduction. Gradually and understandably, humankind has experienced a long-term matriarchal society and patriarchal society with much different family forms. Although the family forms in these different societies were much diverse and even weird, as observed by today’s viewpoint, they are reasonable, understandable, and adaptable at that time. In the matriarchal society, women were at the center of the society because reproduction was difficult and crucial. The polygamy allowed the women to maintain sexual relationships with several men, and the children might only know their mother but not their father. These speculations are rough, while anthropology research can help us understand the situation at that time. After the long period of matriarchism, it was the patriarchal and agricultural age, the family that we modern people are familiar with gradually formed. Men were at the center of society and could marry several wives legally, reasonably, and justly accepted by the general public, while poor men might only afford one wife or even no wife. Family was the basis and cell of agriculture society because it was not only the unit of demographic reproduction of people but also the economic unit of production of food. Upon family, there gradually evolved a set of emotions, rituals, taboos, governments, laws, norms, religions, and cultures as various institutional forms to enhance and sustain family and society.

4.1.2 Love and Economy In modern society, the typical and legal family is monogamy, one husband, one wife, and zero, one, or several children. Modern families are generally based upon free love and protected and bonded by marriage and law. Family development means that the family is becoming better in major aspects, such as husband and wife can sustain their love and affection, keep loyalty, share their interests, overcome their difficulties, and raise their children together. This is not easy for many people and families, as there is so much family violence, disloyalty, and divorce. Love is the basis and essence of family and marriage, and there should be love between husband and wife. Initially, the man and woman are strangers, and there are somethings that attract each other; then, they fall in love and step into the marriage and form a family. However, it is difficult to keep the warm and ardent love forever for a couple, and the love gradually evolves to affection or cold down. Particularly, when they have children, their love may transfer to the children and mix with mutual responsibility. As their children grow up and work and live independently, the couple will become older, retired, and accompany each

4.1 Family Development

133

other. They should know each other’s personalities, preferences, merits, and demerits well. They may quarrel and get angry and may or may not forgive and tolerate. Family development means that the couple can sustain their family happily and healthily. As everything, including society and family, is always changing, couples and their families will confront many difficulties, such as emotional issues, economic issues, health issues, conflicting opinions, and personalities. It is quite difficult for the couple to solve all these problems and achieve continuous family development. This means that the couple needs to continuously learn, think, and seek the best solutions for these problems. As a kind of emotion, love is not constant but temporary and mutable. Before marriage, men and women can choose their lovers freely but should be honest. If you can cheat others, others can either cheat you. Even if you don’t cheat others, others can still cheat you. Therefore, one should learn and know how to protect their assets and loves. After the marriage, as a contract, the husbands and wives should also keep loyal to each other. However, according to infidelity statistics, approximately 40% of unmarried relationships and 25% of marriages see at least one incident of infidelity (Brian, 2021). An issue of Marriage and Divorce journal also stated that 70% of all Americans engage in some kind of affair sometimes during their marital life (Mpela, 2021). According to recent data gathered from the General Social Survey, 20% of the interviewed men and 13% of women admitted they had sex with someone other than their spouse while married (Wang, 2018). To the question “Is infidelity morally acceptable or not?” People in different countries and cultures have some different answers, as Table 4.1 shows. Regarding marriage infidelity, most secular countries are more tolerable than Islamic countries, and currently, people are more tolerable than before. Infidelity means that the marriage and family cannot satisfy the couples, as one side betrays the other and seeks what he/she demands outside the marriage. However, another possibility also exists that both the husband and wife betray each other, or Table 4.1 How many people think infidelity is morally unacceptable

Country

which % think infidelity is morally unacceptable? (%)

France

< 50

Brazil, USA

Roughly 85

South Korea, Uganda, Australia Roughly 80 Nigeria, Britain, Canada, China Roughly 75 Argentina, Poland

Roughly 73

Japan, Russia

Roughly 70

South Africa, Spain, Italy

Roughly 65

Germany

Roughly 60

Palestine, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan

Roughly 100

Source Brown (2020)

134

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

more precisely, it is not infidelity or betrayal, but both sides have affairs, acquiescence of the spouse’s betrayal equally. The marriage and family between them are loose and flexible. If both sides are equal and independent and rational, this form of family and marriage may no longer be a traditional family or marriage but rather some kind of polygamy, a new type of marriage and family. It is probably morally acceptable for some extreme liberalists because of free will, but it may also be heresy for those conservatists because it damages the traditional value of family and marriage. However, values and the forms of family and marriage may change. Traditionally, one’s love can only belong to his/her spouse, while now and in the future, one may pursue fresh love continuously, which can also be regarded as a value for many people. The question is whether the value and form of family and marriage are constant and unchangeable, as the argument between essentialism and pragmatism (Sandel, 1998). Of course, dishonesty and inequality are not morally correct, so this new form of love should be equal for men and women. Family concerns not only love but also the economy. Love and economy are two independent factors but are always entangled in families. Although purified love without consideration of the economy is desirable and admirable in movies or novels, love in reality is always mixed with a secular consideration of economy, position, career, and parents. Regardless of men or women, when they are young and falling into love initially, their love may be purified without much consideration of the economy and other things, but once they are stepping into marriage and family, the economies of their lovers and families are practical factors that must be considered. A woman may love a man for his wealth, and a man may love a woman for her beauty. A married woman may no longer love her husband and want to divorce, but the consideration of the economy may hamper her action. Although modern civil law and marriage law will protect men and women equally, all families and couples have to confront the issue of the economy, as well as love and affection, and understand their meanings. Modern families and marriage may be combined not only by love but also by economy. Particularly, in history and currently, women are generally weaker in the economy in most societies and families, so their positions should be protected more by marriage law. In the future, as women become increasingly economically independent, the economic function of the family may be separated from the love function, and then, the family can become a better place for love, without the confusion of the economy; and then, the form of family and marriage may change greatly.

4.1.3 Family Violence In modern society, violence is a terrible badness, and few people, if not none, will accept it as a value. Violence is unacceptable in most situations, and anybody cannot use violence to solve problems except in some specific circumstances, such as war, policemen action, and death sentence, and even death sentence is advocated to be humane and painless by injection in modern society. Therefore, family violence is

4.1 Family Development

135

particularly bad and should be banned legally and disdained morally. The existence of family violence indicates the great problem and failure of the family. The reasons for family violence may be complicated, but expectedly and understandably, mainly from men for the wives’ possible infidelity, husbands’ bad temperament, and less education, although family violence from wife to husband is also possible. Generally, well-educated couples have a lower possibility of family violence. Although couples may no longer love each other, they can take proper measures such as rational communication to rescue their marriage or quiet and peaceful divorce but not family violence. Disloyalty or infidelity of any side, particularly of wives, maybe the main reason infuriating husbands committing family violence. However, both sides, particularly husbands, need to ponder and introspect why disloyalty and infidelity occur. Anger and violence are not solutions for family problems, but communication and introspection are more appropriate solutions. If one can forgive and return, the family can be rescued and revived. If one cannot forgive and forget, separation or divorce may be better than family violence. A bad temper will make people violent, and one needs to learn to control his/her temper and emotion. Education can make people gentle and elegant. In the family and marriage, both husband and wife need to learn, cognize and adapt the partner, sustain and cherish their family and marriage.

4.1.4 Family as Public Space The family is the smallest public space. For an individual, there is no public space, and one can just consider and behave with his/her personal or private affairs freely. However, when a man and a woman enter a marriage and form a family, there is the smallest public space for them, and they need to learn how to deal with public affairs and practice public activities such as communication, equity, democracy, and freedom, similar in political spheres. Therefore, family is the smallest political sphere. Communication is important and essential for the couple. Family conflicts generally emerge not because the couple has much different hobbies or ideas but because they have not communicated sufficiently. Man and woman are equal not only in the society, which is further, but in their family, which is closer and everyday living. Even if the husband’s income is much higher than wife, or vice versa, their incomes are their common assets and should be shared by them equally, but it does not mean 50% and 50%. If the husband and the wife cannot recognize their equity, conflicts will hide and emerge. Surely, although in some traditional cultures or societies, it is possible that the husband is the master, and the wife is the appendant, accepting the inequality, this form of family is not a “good” or “modern” or “desirable” family from the value standard of modernity. It is not necessary to insist that the value standard of modernity is the sole or best standard, and the traditional family may also be a good family. However, it is in modern society that men and women, and all the people in the world, are equal. We need to find the appropriate form of family and society based upon equity.

136

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

There should be equity, democracy, and freedom in good marriage and family. Men and women should be equal in the economy and position. Their incomes and assets should be common and shared, although there may be property notarization based upon their recognition and agreement. They can express their ideas and make decisions together to the important issues of the family. Some divergence might exist between the husband and wife, so they need to reach some consensus through communication and deliberation, which can be regarded as the democracy inside the family. Democracy is based upon equity and deliberation not only in society but also in the family. Just because we are equal, we require democracy, meaning that we can express our opinions on public affairs, as well family affairs. Meanwhile, in a good marriage and family, the husband and wife can also enjoy their individual freedom and private space. They can have their personal hobbies, times, tastes, and choice, respecting each other, while they should have more common features, language, and publicness. The children may be their most important publicness, bonding them together. Although some families do not have children, these families lack some publicness, so there must be something else uniting the couples.

4.1.5 Homosexual Family It is true that homosexuality is changing the form of marriage and family. Although still not accepted by all people and countries, homosexual marriage has become legal in an increasing number of countries, as Table 4.2 shows. These countries are generally more economically developed and secular, and people are more tolerant and freethinking. As natural scientists have found that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon not only in human society but also in animals, humankind needs quite a long time to recognize, adapt, and accept it. Heterosexual love has been accustomed to human societies and depicted and cherished by various forms of arts for thousands of years, while homosexual love is still not accustomed to most people. Similar to the love between Romeo and Juliet, there may be an impressive love story for homosexuality. An increasing number of human societies may accept homosexual marriage and family, as we understand it more deeply. Family development means that a family should be a good family and become increasingly better, regardless of whether it is homosexual or heterosexual. The husband and wife should love each other and their children. They should be equal in economy and position and can communicate and deliberate on family affairs. They should be healthy mentally and psychologically and should not suffer serious diseases such as cancer or depression. Once ill, they should know how to deal with, since keeping healthy is crucial for individuals and families. They can sustain their love and affection continuously and solve family problems and difficulties together. They can have not only their personal hobbies but also common interests and language and then can enjoy their family living and grow together. Possibly, once they do not love each other, they can still find proper ways to separate, no family violence, as divorce may be the final solution. However, after divorce and possible remarriage,

4.1 Family Development

137

Table 4.2 Countries with legal gay marriage Rank

Country

Year gay marriage legalized

Rank

Country

Year gay marriage legalized

1

Netherlands

2000

15

France

2013

2

Belgium

2003

16

Uruguay

2013

3

Canada

2005

17

New Zealand

2013

4

Spain

2005

18

Luxembourg

2014

5

South Africa

2006

19

Scotland

2014

6

Norway

2008

20

Finland

2015

7

Sweden

2009

21

Greenland

2015

8

Argentina

2010

22

Ireland

2015

9

Iceland

2010

23

USA

2015

10

Portugal

2010

24

Colombia

2016

11

Denmark

2012

25

Australia

2017

12

Brazil

2013

26

Germany

2017

13

England

2013

27

Malta

2017

14

Wales

2013

28

Bermuda

2017

Source Kiprop (2018)

couples still need to learn from the past and develop their new marriage and family again, repeating the process and expecting new family development and happiness.

4.2 Company Development 4.2.1 Company as Institution While family is an institutional form existing for more than thousands of years since primitive society, the company is quite new, existing for only approximately 300 years after the Industrial Revolution. Before that, in the agriculture and collective age, there was no company, and the family was the basic production unit. However, in the current industrial society, the company is the basic and dominant production unit and organizational form. Nearly all products and services are produced and offered by companies, and most people are employed by them. In addition to the government and NPOs, the company is one of the most influential powers in modern society, determining a country’s economy, competitiveness, innovation, and hard and soft power. We are living with Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Volkswagen, Rolls-Royce, Boeing, Coca-Cola, Nestlé, McDonald, Hollywood, as well as those unnamed, big or small, various, everywhere, all the time. Therefore, what is a good company, what

138

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

is company development, and how to deal with a company are unavoidable questions not only for individuals but also for governments and humankind society. Similar to family, a company is a natural and unavoidable social phenomenon, which means that humankind will adopt the company as the production unit naturally and inevitably with the advancement of productivity and technology. Cooperation is the essence of humankind, enabling people to deal with the dangerous nature, capture beasts, produce goods, and obtain food in the primitive age. The family was also an institutional form for cooperative production in the agricultural age, while this cooperation was limited for only several people. Since the industrial revolution, people have produced not for themselves but for others and the whole society, and companies have been the simplest and most convenient institution and organizational form to achieve cooperative production. Originally, the company was the cooperation of two or more people to do something in the family, such as family enterprise, for example, to produce the shoes, clothes, or foods or something else to sell. The original company was generally the family enterprise, in which the family members participate in cooperation and share profits. This cooperation inside the family was very limited and could expand to the general public as limited or public company. A small group of people could then organize a team, raise funds, and take adventure to sail and explore the new continents, seize treasures, and make fortunes. These actions are truly dangerous but profitable. Then, the British and Netherlanders were the initiators of modern companies, raising funds from the general public, issuing stocks, and incorporating the first modern companies, British East India Company in 1600 and Dutch East India Company in 1602. Although their explorations in the new continents were bloody, violent, and cruel from current points, these companies were great institutional innovation and pushed Dutch and Britain the most powerful country at that time. Since then, with industrialization, companies have gradually dominated human society, produced products and services, and created great amounts of value but have also brought unprecedented damage and harm to humans, such as environmental degradation and climate change. We need to understand companies and make them better, more equal, humane, and environmentally friendly.

4.2.2 Legal Entity The company is a legal entity with its independent employees, assets, and places. There are various forms of companies, depending on different countries’ company laws, with identical essence. In the United States, a typical capitalist country with a mature company and law, there are generally 10 types of business ownership and classifications: (1) Sole proprietorship, (2) Partnership, (3) Limited Liability Partnership (LLP), (4) Limited Liability Company (LLC), (5) Series LLC, (6) C corporation, (7) S corporation, (8) Nonprofit corporation, (9) Benefit corporation, and (10) lowincome limited liability company (L3C), as Fig. 4.1 shows. Sole proprietorship is the default and original structure of a business that has not filed any paperwork to create a legal entity. When one starts a business by oneself, it is automatically a sole

4.2 Company Development

139 Company growth

small business

individual

sole proprietorship

big business

partnership

LLC

C corporaƟon

nonprofit corporaƟon

LLP

series LLC

S corporaƟon

benifit corporaƟon L3C

Fig. 4.1 Company classification and growth

proprietorship. A sole proprietor can hire employees, and there is no limit to the number of workers one can employ, but as an employer, one is responsible for all employment administration, recordkeeping, taxes, and obtaining an employer identification number (EIN) from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Sole proprietorship can be regarded as the extension of individuals and the simplest form of business ownership. If the sole proprietor wants to team up on a business venture without forming a legal business entity, the business is a partnership by default, with more than one owner. While they do not require formation paperwork, there may be limitations on naming a partnership, which may necessitate filing a “doing business as” (DBA) name. As a popular type of company ownership for professional firms, partnerships are usually founded on formal partnership agreements outlining the ownership share, rights, and obligations of each partner. In the sole proprietorship and partnership, the assets of the company and owners are inseparable, so the owners will take unlimited liability upon their assets. Furthermore, a limited liability partnership (LLP) is a legal entity available in some states to provide the simplicity and pass-through taxation of a partnership while limiting liability for the partners. As LLP becomes larger, it may evolve to be LLC, which is a legal entity formed by creating an LLC operating agreement and filing articles of organization with the secretary of state. LLCs allow business owners to retain some of the advantages of sole proprietorship while limiting legal and financial liability, making them a popular business ownership structure for small businesses. Series LLCs are an upand-coming type of business ownership structure that allows one parent LLC to form multiple internal LLCs in a subsidiary fashion. These nested LLCs can be used to isolate liability for different business units. As LLCs grow, it may be the corporation that is owned by shareholders who may have varying levels of control and involvement in the everyday operations of the business. In the case of stock corporations, ownership is issued in shares of stock. A corporation is formed by filing articles of incorporation with the state. The process of incorporation includes appointing a board of directors to oversee the business and establishing bylaws for its governance. With governance managed through a board of directors and ownership distributed among shareholders, corporations represent a further degree of separation between

140

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

the business entity and its owners. By default, corporations are C corporations, socalled because they are taxed under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). Unlike sole proprietorships, partnerships, and LLCs, C corporations are not pass-through entities, which means that profits belong to the corporation and are subject to corporate income tax. They may also be distributed through dividends to shareholders. Some corporations can enjoy the benefits of pass-through taxation by electing to be taxed as an S corporation, which requires the corporation to have no more than 100 shareholders and issue only one class of stock. Finally, nonprofit corporations, Benefit corporations, and L3Cs are various types of nonprofit organizations (NPOs), which are much different from profitable companies but are also incorporated as organizations. In the process of company growth, we find that the law requirements and stipulations are basically justifiable and reasonable, making the company adaptable and preferable for society (Fig. 4.1).

4.2.3 Profits as Goodness Most companies in the modern economy, such as partnerships, LLP, LLC, C, and S corporations, are for-profit organizations, as profit is the most important one but not the sole source of motivation and innovation. However, profit and free markets are also sometimes argued as evil, businessmen as greedy, and companies as dirty and destructive in many religions and cultures and theories (Fourcade & Healy, 2007). However, actually, the company is to do good things by providing goods and services for people and society. We can start our analysis from individual and sole proprietorship. Human beings and human nature seem complex, but they are also simple if we understand ourselves and empathize others. On the one hand, from the perspective of economics, human beings are homo economicus, meaning that one is self-interested, attempting to earn money and profit and doing something good for him/herself. On the other hand, from the perspective of other social sciences, human beings are either homo politicus or homo sociologicus, meaning that one may also be altruistic, doing something good for others, including his/her family and society. Anybody is generally willing to provide some help to others, such as offering food for strangers without charge. However, one can better provide help for others if he/she can open a sole proprietorship, such as a restaurant, which may become bigger and formal company as McDonald. These behaviors can be one’s enterprise and help more people. In fact, all companies must help others satisfy the demand of consumers in the language of economics by producing and offering some goods and services, such as foods, clothes, transport, entertainment, etc., with charge. It seems to be justifiable for one to get something he/she demands from others or companies by paying an amount of money as exchange, as long as the transaction is reasonable and justifiable, such as no cheating, no coercing, and no monopoly, and the government function is to ensure the fairness and justice of the transaction. Additionally, economic calculation and competition will propel entrepreneurs and companies to lower their costs and innovate to find a better way to provide their goods

4.2 Company Development

141

and services. By this economic mechanism, consumers’ demands will be satisfied, the company will develop, and society will be sustained. Therefore, companies may be natural and reasonable institutions to help others, satisfy people’s demands, and sustain society. More importantly, companies are not only units of economy and production but also entities of knowledge and professionalism. The short essay I, Pencil, and Hayek’s theory of liberalism and free-market (Hayek, 1945; Read, 2015), illuminates the basic principle of market and company as institutions to utilize the dispersed knowledge.Everyone has some personal and local knowledge, knowing something that others do not know. However, as there is so much trivial or profound knowledge in human society, nobody owns all the knowledge to produce anything, even a seemingly simple pencil, which has just the wood, lacquer, the printed labeling, graphite lead, slightly a metal, and the eraser. Producing these materials also requires a great amount of knowledge and cannot be accomplished by a single company, but upstream and downstream companies have pieces of knowledge. Other more complex products, such as refrigerators, airplanes, computers, CPUs, and any products, need so much knowledge that no one company can accomplish the production. Therefore, companies in various industries, as a whole in the market, can combine and cooperate the knowledge in everyone’s mind, endeavor to do research and development, accumulate knowledge, and improve their competitiveness and profitability. In addition, most individuals are loose and weak, while the company can organize ordinary people, achieve cooperation and form great power. According to Adam Smith, the father of modern economics as the author of An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, the wealth of nations is neither gold nor silver, nor the natural resources, but the goods and services produced by companies and market. Actually, it is not the goods and service, but company, knowledge, and human mind are the real wealth of nations. The more active and innovative companies a country has, the more wealthy and powerful the country is. Table 4.3 gives the top 20 companies with the most revenues on the Global 500 of Fortune in 2020. These companies master a great amount of knowledge and professionals and support the countries’ economy and status. As the US, China, European countries, Japan, and South Korea have more giant and competitive companies, they are the wealthiest countries in the world, although moderate and small companies are also necessary since they can grow to larger companies in the future.

4.2.4 Entrepreneurs As initiators and top leaders, the entrepreneurs and CEOs of the company are generally farsighted, ambitious, capable, and professional. They will basically determine the company’s profitability, mission, behavior, sustainability, goodness, or badness. Originally, entrepreneurs might attempt to do something for him or society, not necessarily helping others or doing something good or earn profit. For example, Bill Gates in the 1980s thought that the old disk operation system (DOS) was inconvenient and

142

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

Table 4.3 Top 20 companies on the global 500 of fortune in 2020 Company

Country

Revenues ($M)

Profit ($M)

Asset ($M)

Employees

Walmart

USA

523,964

14,881

236,495

Sinopec Group

China

407,009

6,793.20

317,515.70

582,648

22

State Grid

China

383,906

7,970

596,616.30

907,677

20

China National Petroleum

China

379,130

4,443.20

608,085.60

Royal Dutch Shell

Netherlands

352,106

15,842

404,336

83,000

26

Saudi Aramco

Saudi Arab

329,784

88,210.90

398,348.60

79,000

2

Volkswagen

Germany

282,760

15,542

547,810.90

671,205

26

BP

UK

282,616

4,026

295,194

72,500

26

Amazon

USA

280,522

11,588

225,248

798,000

12

Toyota Motor Japan

275,288

19,096.20

487,465.90

359,542

26

Exxon Mobil

USA

264,938

14,340

362,597

74,900

26

Apple

USA

260,174

55,256

338,516

137,000

18

CVS Health

USA

256,776

6,634

222,449

290,000

25

Berkshire Hathaway

USA

254,616

81,417

817,729

391,500

24

UnitedHealth Group

USA

242,155

13,839

173,889

325,000

24

McKesson

USA

231,051

900

61,247

70,000

26

Glencore

USA

215,111

(404)

124,076

88,246

10

China State Construction Engineering

China

205,839

3,333

294,070

335,038

9

Samsung Electronics

South Korea

197,705

18,453.30

304,907.50

287,439

26

Daimler

Germany

193,346

2,660.50

339,456.40

298,655

26

2,200,000

1,344,410

Years on global 500 list 26

20

Source Fortune (2020)

believed that the graphic operation system would be better as a technical direction. Then, he and his colleagues invented Windows 95, 98, 2000, XP, and 10, as well as Office software. Steve Jobs just thought the traditional mobile phone was ugly and not cool, and then invented first iPhone in 2007, and now the generation 11. Jeff Bezos and Jack Ma believed that the supermarket could be transferred to the internet and later established Amazon and Taobao. These great entrepreneurs have greatly changed the world and done much for society, meanwhile, brought them

4.2 Company Development

143

great fortune and success. Their companies gradually developed from a small sole proprietorship to LLPs, LLCs, and current giant corporations. The founders may sell the company to others and obtain the payment or run the business by themselves as CEOs. Outside managers and technicians can be employed, and the CEOs will further sustain the company and adapt the change of technology and society. They will also face great risks and challenges, since once they make serious mistakes, their companies may suffer loss or go to bankruptcy or be purchased by others. Failing, bankrupted, and unnamed companies and entrepreneurs are far more prevalent than successful, profitable, and known companies.

4.2.5 Profit as Badness Although the company and entrepreneur can do good things and create values by providing goods and services to their customers, they may also do bad things and destroy values by (1) fake goods, (2) abusing or exploiting employees, (3) environment pollution, (4) monopoly, (5) injustice, etc., where and when the company is not an ethical and justifiable entity but a disagreeable one or even enemy of society. First, there should be justice between the company and the consumers, while fake goods violate the justice. The products or services of the company should be beneficial and functional to customers. The quality should be guaranteed, and the company should provide necessary guidance and description to their customers, particularly for those products that may cause some hazards and harms, such as cars, drugs, foods, electric appliances, etc. Actually, the qualities of all the products and services should be guaranteed. Once harming customers, the company should make sufficient compensation. Although there may be some consumer faults, the company still needs to take some responsibility because the companies’ power and position are generally much stronger than those of individual consumers. This is the reason that most governments have established departments and laws to protect the rights of consumers. Fake goods are actually kinds of cheat because the company does not satisfy its customers’ demand. This means that the relationship between companies and consumers is not ethical and justifiable. Second, the company cannot abuse or exploit its employees, which means that the relationship between the company and the employee should be ethical and justifiable. Actually, the relationship between a company and its employees is also a kind of transaction: the company pays a salary to buy the labor of the employee. Therefore, the level of salary cannot be too low, so there is minimal wage law; the working hours and conditions should be safe and reasonable, so there is government regulation on workplace safety and condition. The relationship between employers and employees should be humane, so there are various labor acts. All these employee rights protections have been fiercely struggled and gradually gained in the history of capitalism in the last three centuries, with the aim of establishing an ethical, justifiable, and humane relationship between employers and employees and between humans and humans. Some liberal economists believe that labor protection, such as minimal

144

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

wages and safety regulations, may lower efficiency and cause more unemployment and suggest that the competitive market can automatically protect and improve labor rights. However, efficiency is not the only value and cannot replace human rights and dignity. Slave labor and child labor in modern society still exist but are disgusting, although they were prevalent and acceptable in the early period of capitalism. It will take a long time for the spontaneous order of the market, a concept from Nobel Prize Winner F. v. Hayek (Luban, 2020), to achieve the rights protection of labor and market failure rectification. Although most giant global corporations, such as Microsoft, Apple, and Google, are praised as high salary and excellent working conditions, there may still be unobserved injustice and oppression, as the case of Facebook employee suicide outside its headquarters (Rodriguez, 2019), let along so many small and medium size and unprofitable companies. It is a great challenge for entrepreneurs, CEOs, top managers, and the whole society to ponder and construct a good relationship inside the company, which is not only a place for profit but also a home for every employee to achieve individual development. Third, the company is necessary to construct an ethical and justifiable relationship to society, while monopoly and superpower may cause social repugnance and hostility to the company, particularly for giant global companies. Although companies such as Microsoft, Google, and Facebook have provided excellent products and services and benefits to people around the world, they are forming their monopoly and superpower, as most people cannot live without them. Although some entrepreneurs, such as Bill Gates and Larry Page, rejected the monopoly accusation of Microsoft and Google and insisted that the monopoly position in the IT industry is difficult to sustain because there are always new technology and company competing, the positions of these giant companies have caused serious worry and vigilance of society. One example is that on January 8, 2021, Twitter banned the sitting US President Trump’s account permanently, which caused fierce arguments about the power of high-tech companies. Although there were many provocative and violent remarks in President Trump’s tweet violating the company’s policy against glorification of violence, it is still controversial in modern society whether a private company can refuse to provide service even if the consumer violates the company’s existing policy, and whether a private company may own more power than the government. Is it more appropriate to keep this kind of decision and power to the public sector, such as legislatures, than to private companies themselves? Great profitability and responsibility require giant companies to be more transparent and responsible for society. Otherwise, human society may be dominated not only by the government as a possible dictator but also by the giant company and oligarchs as possible dictators, as Marvel and DC’s comics have illuminated. Fourth, the enormous salary of CEOs and senior managers has enlarged economic inequality and aroused social disgust. As well-educated, farsighted, capable, and professional elites, successful entrepreneurs and CEOs are highest paid people in modern society, much higher than presidents, scientists, and any other professionals. Table 4.4 shows the 20 highest paid CEOs. In the past 10 years, CEO pay at S&P 500 companies increased more than $340,000 a year to an average of $14.8 million in 2019. Meanwhile, the average production and nonsupervisory worker saw a wage

4.2 Company Development

145

Table 4.4 Highest paid CEOs Ticker

Company

CEO

Year

CEO Pay

1

Alphabet Inc

Sundar Pichai

2019

$280,621,552

2

Intel Corporation

Robert Swan

2019

$66,935,100

3

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc

Lisa Su

2019

$58,534,288

4

Madison Square Garden Sports Corp

James Dolan

2019

$54,116,491

5

Howmet Aerospace Inc

John Plant

2019

$51,712,578

6

The Walt Disney Company

Robert Iger

2019

$47,517,762

7

Pinterest, Inc

Benjamin Silbermann

2019

$46,222,113

8

Discovery, Inc

David Zaslav

2019

$45,843,912

9

United Therapeutics Corporation Martine Rothblatt

2019

$45,635,037

10

Liberty Media Corp

Gregory Maffei

2019

$44,045,070

11

The Kraft Heinz Company

Miguel Patricio

2019

$43,297,480

12

Microsoft Corporation

Satya Nadella

2019

$42,910,215

13

VMware, Inc

Patrick Gelsinger

2020

$42,549,725

14

Uber Technologies, Inc

Dara Khosrowshahi

2019

$42,428,233

15

Fox Corporation

Lachlan Murdoch

2019

$42,111,103

16

ServiceNow, Inc

William McDermott

2019

$41,682,335

17

Adobe, Inc

Shantanu Narayen

2019

$39,145,631

18

Netflix, Inc

Reed Hastings

2019

$38,577,129

19

CVS Health Corporation

Larry Merlo

2019

$36,451,749

20

Comcast Corporation

Brian Roberts

2019

$36,370,183

Source AFL-CIO (2020)

increase of $836 a year, earning on average $41,442 in 2019 (AFL-CIO, 2020). According to economic theory, this income level is determined by the free market, explainable and reasonable, as the works of CEOs are highly complex and competitive, enhancing the company’s profitability and competitiveness, while the works of ordinary workers are simple and repetitive. However, this great discrepancy (14.8 million/41,442 = 357) can also be explained as the serious flaw of free market and capitalism, considering the huge economic gap and potential conflicts between the wealthy and the poor. Warren Buffett, as a farsighted entrepreneur, admitted that he’s still paying a lower tax rate than his secretary and suggested that members of the billionaire club should be taxed more.1 Although it is debatable that the heavy tax on billionaires may discourage competition and hamper innovation, the continuous enlargement of the income gap will accumulate social contradictions. If we assume that people’s innate intelligence and wisdom are similar, the family, education, opportunity, and diligence should not have enlarged their income gap to such 1

A Message From the Billionaire’s Club: Tax Us. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/24/business/ economy/wealth-tax-letter.html.

146

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

a great extent. With great power comes great responsibility. The wealthiest CEOs are endowed with more wealth, and then they have to take more responsibility for society, not only legally but also morally. That is why previous great entrepreneurs such as Andrew Carnegie (1835–1919) and John Davison Rockefeller (1839–1937) donated their fortune to philanthropy to help more people, to do good things, to make their livings more meaningful, and to make society better (Table 4.4).

4.2.6 Social Responsibility The company is expected to take social responsibility in addition to profit earnings. Although some economists claimed that the only responsibility of a company is to maximize its profit within the laws, merely following the law is the minimal requirement for individuals and companies. A qualified, respected, and developed person and company should be not only law-abiding but also responsible, farsighted, and willing to do more for others and society. Laws are always limited, lagging, shortsighted, and hind-sighted. In the history of capitalism, companies have seriously damaged laborers, consumers, and the environment and have induced great hostility and opposition from society. After that, the laws of labor, consumer, and environment protection were established. Social responsibility requires companies to broaden their vision and consider not only profits and stockholders but also stakeholders, including customers, employees, governments, the environment„ and society as a whole. A company is not only a stockholder organization but also a stakeholder organization. It is owned and controlled by stockholders, but more comprehensively, it is influenced by and should serve stakeholders and society as a whole. Profit should not be the sole and ultimate goal of companies, while sustainability should be, and entrepreneurs and CEOs should ponder what the great amount of profit is for. Profit at the cost of human abuse and environmental damage is meaningless and shortsighted. Triple bottom line management, which includes profit, people, and planets, requires companies and entrepreneurs not only concerning profit but also people, including employees and consumers, and the planet, including the environment and ecology. In practice, companies have been increasingly heavily regulated by the government in various respects, such as taxes, labor, security, health, and the environment. Although some economists believe that these regulations violate companies’ freedom and lower their efficiency, profitability, and innovation, these regulations not only can be evaluated from the value of efficiency but also should be evaluated from multiple values, such as equity, environment, and justice. For some shortsighted and greedy entrepreneurs, profit is more important than human rights and environmental protection. They may achieve temporary success but will harm others and their own offspring and confront increasingly severe criticisms and regulations. They have to transform their business in the long term, if not bankrupting or be purchased. In contrast, farsighted and responsible entrepreneurs can understand the reason for regulation, make sufficient preparation, and direct their companies to be the models and leaders of the industries.

4.2 Company Development

147

A good company should be a citizen of society but not the master, dictator, superpower, or enemy of society. Corporate citizenship means that the company should be an equal and responsible participant, pushing our human society more equal, ethical, justifiable, and better. It can make great profits by providing qualified products and services but needs to establish harmonious relationships with consumers, employees, environments, and broader society. It should be transparent by opening the internal operation and administration and finance to the public and forming harmony to society. It should be not only self-interested or self-concerned but also willing to help government and society solve social problems such as inequality, environmental degradation, and climate change. Then, it is sustainable and adaptable to the great transformation of society but not disappearing or bankrupt in history. Company development means that a company can become increasingly better, not only more profitable but also healthier and more respectable, depending on the entrepreneur’s vision and capability.

4.3 NPO Development 4.3.1 Benevolence and Love The nonprofit organization (NPO) is an entity that is driven not by profit but by dedication to some social values, such as love, responsibility, benevolence, and contribution, generally in the areas of religion, science, education, peace, environment, and human rights. Distinct from for-profit corporations, all revenues earned by an NPO will be used in furthering its operations instead of being distributed to shareholders, members, or employees of the organization. Nonprofits in most countries, such as the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, are tax-exempt, meaning that they do not need to pay income tax on the revenue that they earn or receive. The revenues earned by NPOs are mainly from donations and fundraising activities from individuals, families, companies, overseas, and society, as well as necessary fees of services. NPOs in the United States are monitored by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) according to Code Sect. 501(c), which determines an organization’s eligibility for the nonprofit organization and tax-exemption status and the accountability to the donors, volunteers, founders, and the community, ensuring that the projects they undertake can help build public confidence in the organization. In other countries, such as China, NPOs are seemingly different but share similar principles. There are two types of NPOs in China. One is official NPOs in the name of public institutions (事业单位), such as hospitals, elementary, middle, and high schools, universities, religious organizations, cultural organizations, and social organizations, which are basically controlled, operated, and financed by the government, but they are not direct government agencies. These organizations were branches of governmental bureaucracy in the planned economy system before the 1980s, as nearly all the organizations were parts of governmental bureaucracy at that time. Since then,

148

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

due to reform and open policy, these public institutions have been gradually loosened, gaining relative independence from the government, but are still influenced and financed by government. Actually, the reform of public institutions lags much behind the reform of state-owned enterprises, which have been basically privatized and marketized and have become independent. The other types of NPOs in China are grassroots or unofficial NPOs, similar to those in the United States. They are launched by ordinary citizens, required to register in the Ministry of Civil Affairs, and strictly regulated by the government. Aiming to protect human rights and the environment, these grassroots NPOs generally cannot obtain public finance from the government but have to raise funds from society by themselves and can enjoy tax-exemptions. As volunteer movements are increasingly popular and welcomed in Chinese society, grassroot NPOs are weak but developing rapidly. In principle and theory, why are there NPOs, and what is the essence of NPOs? Similar to the company, the NPO will also do good things for the society, helping others, protecting human rights and environment, but the difference is that the NPOs do these good things not for return but for other goodness such as love and rights. Generally, they will not charge customers directly, or customers are the general public difficult to charge. Actually, as homo sociologicus, all the people are willing to do something good or help others more or less, but the power and capacity of ordinary people are limited, and only those powerful and capable ones can organize the NPO and obtain finance by themselves. For example, Jean Henri Dunant (1828–1910), the Swiss humanitarian, established the Red Cross (now Red Cross and Red Crescent) and the World Alliance of Young Men’s Christian Associations and won (with Frédéric Passy) the first Nobel Prize for Peace in 1901. Currently, Bill Gates, after his success in business, established the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in 2000 to reduce the inequality of health and human development. From their specific experiences and backgrounds, these founders of NPOs have formed great benevolence and love to humans and are willing to devote their time, capability, finance, and influence to establishing NPOs and achieving their ideals. Similar to great entrepreneurs, they can insist on their missions and enterprises, obtain financial and human resources, and make NPOs successful and influential, just without profit.

4.3.2 No Surplus Distribution The benevolence and love and the slogan of “not for profit” are the essence and preconditions of NPOs, but they must be ensured by law and institutions, not distributing profit or surplus. The essential difference between NPOs and companies is not their claims of for-profit or not-for-profit orally but whether they can distribute their profit or surplus to their owners, founders, or directors. As the founders of NPOs are not-for-profit but for their specific mission, they must register and incorporate their enterprise as the form of NPO, following the law of not distributing the surplus and enjoying the advantages of tax-exemption. As organizations, NPOs also must raise finance and obtain surplus (profit); otherwise, they cannot carry out programs

4.3 NPO Development

149

and may shrink to bankrupt. In fact, some NPOs are giant, influential, profitable, and can obtain great amounts of finances, such as Red Cross and Red Crescent, Ivy League Universities, churches, and hospitals, but they cannot distribute their surplus to owners and managers. Their finance and operation should be open to society and audited by governments, such as IRS in the United States or tax bureau in other countries. Alternatively, the founders of companies can also choose to register and incorporate their enterprises as NPOs, provided they agree not to distribute their profit. The profit and surplus can then be reserved in the organization and used to further their tasks. Therefore, both the company and the NPO are doing good things and contributing to society, while the company is for-profit and can be motivated by profit. Benevolence and responsibility of NPOs are guaranteed by the law and regulation of no surplus distribution. Education and hospitals are different from ordinary commodities, and they can be either profitable businesses or nonprofit businesses. Teaching others something, such as piano, language, and cooking, or healing some patients, without charging or just covering the minimal cost, can be benevolent and humane, but these activities can also be profitable business. In the United States, most public and private universities and hospitals are NPOs. They will charge their customers according to the costs, and the price and expense may be very high, but they are not allowed to distribute their surplus, which ensures their unprofitability. Meanwhile, there are for-profit universities and hospitals as companies. They can distribute their profits to their stockholders but must bear the income tax at the same time. University of Phoenix (UoPX) is the largest for-profit college, providing commercial online courses and certificates from Bachelor to Doctoral, with tuition cost per credit varying from $398 for undergraduate, $698 for master, and $810 for Doctoral in 2021 (UoPX, 2021). Although the reputation and quality of for-profit education may still not be competitive with traditional public and private universities, it is enlightening that the types of education are diverse, and some, such as basic education and fundamental scientific research, are more suitable for nonprofits, while technical and vocational education services are more appropriate for for-profits. Similarly, among 5,200 nonfederal hospitals in the US, 3,000 are nonprofits, 1,300 are for-profits, and 1,000 operated by state and local governments vary by state (Kahn, 2019). Nonprofit hospitals are communityoriented institutions driven by public interest rather than shareholder returns, while for-profit hospitals must balance community service with shareholder returns.

4.3.3 Board of Overseer and Governance The founder of NPO is not alone. He/she must invite or recruit some colleagues to push and sustain their missions and enterprises and form the board of overseers, similar to but different from the board of directors of a company. The founders and overseers may devote their assets and launch the NPO, but they are not the owners but the trustees of society to oversee and govern the NPO. Particularly, after the founders retire or pass away, they will not, and cannot, leave the NPO as a heritage

150

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

to their children but recruit new members from society to oversee the NPO. The members on the board of overseers are generally prestigious in related fields, who will work part-time and cannot be paid to guarantee neutrality and transparency. For example, the board of overseers of Harvard University, as Table 4.5 shows, is one of Harvard’s two governing boards, along with the President and Fellows, also known as the Corporation (Harvard University, 2021). Formally established in 1642, the board plays an integral role in the governance of the university. As a central part of its work, the Board directs the visitation process, the primary means for periodic external assessment of Harvard’s schools and departments, the quality of Harvard’s programs, and assurance of the university remaining true to its charter as a place of learning. The board typically gathers five times a year for plenary and committee meetings, in addition to the time overseers devote to other Harvard services. The plenary sessions commonly focus on a topic prominent on the university’s agenda— in areas such as innovations in teaching and learning, research initiatives throughout the arts and sciences and the professions, and efforts to enhance connections across the university’s schools and to amplify Harvard programs’ beneficial impact on the wider world. The board also has the power to consent to certain actions, such as the election of corporation members. These overseers’ inner professionalism, devotion, and responsibility, but not salary and profit, is the pillar of excellence of Harvard University. As organizations based upon benevolence, NPOs have their internal administration and governance. In addition to the Board of Overseers, Harvard University also has another governing board, the Board of President and Fellows, in charge of specific administrative affairs. This means that although NPOs are not-for-profit and benevolent pursuing, they have pragmatic professionalism, governance, and administration inside and have to deal with problems such as salary systems, employee motivation, and performance reviews, similar to for-profit companies. Although the overseers are unpaid and motivated by benevolence and devotion, the president, CEO, senior and junior managers, and employees of the NPOs should be well-paid; otherwise, the talented and capable human resources cannot be recruited and kept, and then the NPOs are uncompetitive and unsustainable. Table 4.6 gives the top 10 highest paid private college presidents around 2013. The highest one was president Robert J. Zimmer of University of Chicago with the total compensation $3,358,723 annually, rather high but still much lower than that of the private companies. This wealthy compensation is reasonable and explainable to sustain the dignity and status of presidents, administrators, and ordinary employees of NPOs. Understandably, although the salaries of employees of NPOs are relatively lower than those of companies, their careers are more stable and less competitive and risky, which may be another kind of compensation. Meanwhile, the governance and operation of NPOs are also professional, requiring expertise, complex techniques, efficiency, and effectiveness, similar to companies. This means that doing good things and being benevolent also need professionalism and scientific management.

4.3 NPO Development Table 4.5 Board of overseers of Harvard University

151 1. Geraldine Acuña-Sunshine (2018–2024), Boston, MA President, Sunshine Care Foundation for Neurological Care and Research, and Senior Counsel, Bracebridge Capital 2. Raphael W. Bostic (2020–2026), Decatur, GA President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta 3. P. Lindsay Chase-Lansdale (2016–2022), Evanston, IL Frances Willard Professor of Human Development and Social Policy, Northwestern University 4. R. Martin Chávez (2015–2021), Alford, MA Retired Partner, Goldman Sachs 5. Alice Hm Chen (2019–2025), San Francisco, CA Chief Medical Officer, Covered California, and Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco 6. Paul L. Choi (2017–2023), Chicago, IL Partner, Sidley Austin LLP 7. Philip Hart Cullom (2018––2024), Gaithersburg, MD Vice Admiral (retired), U.S. Navy 8. Fernande R. V. Duffly (2015–2021), Cambridge, MA Former Associate Justice, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court 9. Janet Echelman (2019–2023), Brookline, MA Artist, and President of Studio Echelman 10. Helena Buonanno Foulkes (2016–2022), New York, NY Former Chief Executive Officer, Hudson’s Bay Company 11. Brian Greene (2015–2021), New York, NY Professor of Physics, Professor of Mathematics, and Director, Center for Theoretical Physics, Columbia University 12. Carla Harris (2017–2023), New York, NY Vice-Chair of Wealth Management, Senior Client Advisor and Managing Director, Morgan Stanley 13. Meredith (Max) Hodges (2018–2024), Boston, MA Executive Director, Boston Ballet 14. Marilyn Holifield (2018–2024), Miami, FL Partner, Holland & Knight LLP 15. Darienne Driver Hudson (2017–2023), Detroit, MI President and CEO, United Way for Southeastern Michigan 16. Vivian Hunt (2019–2025), London, England Managing Partner, McKinsey & Company, United Kingdom & Ireland 17. Tyler Jacks (2019–2025), Cambridge, MA (continued)

152 Table 4.5 (continued)

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility Koch Professor of Biology and Director, Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 18. Ketanji Brown Jackson (2016–2022), Washington, DC Judge, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia 19. Beth Y. Karlan (2015–2021), Los Angeles, CA Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology, David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California at Los Angeles 20. John B. King, Jr. (2019–2025), Washington, DC President and CEO, The Education Trust 21. Alejandro Ramírez Magaña (2016–2022), Mexico City, Mexico CEO, Cinépolis 22. Margaret (Midge) Purce (2020–2026), Silver Spring, MD Soccer player, United States Women’s National Team and Sky Blue FC 23. Yvette Roubideaux (2018–2024), Washington, DC Vice President for Research and Director, Policy Research Center, National Congress of American Indians 24. Reshma Saujani (2019–2025), New York, NY Founder and CEO, Girls Who Code 25. Thea Sebastian (2020–2026), Washington, DC Director of Policy, Civil Rights Corps 26. Tracy K. Smith (2020–2026), Princeton, NJ Roger S. Berlind’52 Professor in the Humanities, Princeton University; 22nd Poet Laureate of the United States 27. Leslie P. Tolbert (2017–2023), Tucson, AZ Regents’ Professor Emerita, Department of Neuroscience, University of Arizona 28. Jayson Toweh (2020–2026), Atlanta, GA Program Analyst, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 29. Kent Walker (2016–2022), Mountain View, CA Senior Vice President, Global Affairs, and Chief Legal Officer, Google LLC 30. John Silvanus Wilson, Jr. (2015–2021), Cambridge, MA Former President, Morehouse College 31. Lawrence S. Bacow, President, Harvard University Ex officio 32. Paul J. Finnegan, Treasurer, Harvard University Ex officio Source Harvard University (2021)

4.3 NPO Development

153

Table 4.6 Total compensation of president of private university Rank

President

Rank

President

1

Robert J. Zimmer School: University of Chicago Total Compensation: $3,358,723 Time Served as President: 5 years

6

Amy Gutmann School: University of Pennsylvania Total Compensation: $2,091,764 Time Served as President: 7 years

2

Joseph E. Aoun School: Northeastern University Total Compensation: $3,121,864 Time Served as President: 5 years

7

Anthony J. Catanese School: Florida Institute of Technology Total Compensation: $1,884,008 Time Served as President: 9 years

3

Dennis J. Murray School: Marist College Total Compensation: $2,688,148 Time Served as President: 32 years

8

Esther L. Barazzone School: Chatham University Total Compensation: $1,812,132 Time Served as President: 19 years

4

Lee C. Bollinger School: Columbia University Total Compensation: $2,327,344 Time Served as President: 9 years

9

Shirley Ann Jackson School: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Total Compensation: $1,752,642 Time Served as President: 12 years

5

Lawrence C. Bascow School: Tufts University Total Compensation: $2,223,752 Time Served as President: 10 years

10

Richard C. Levin School: Yale University Total Compensation: $1,652,543 Time Served as President: 18 years

Source Westerholm (2013)

4.3.4 Tax-Exemption and Financing Why can NPOs enjoy tax-exemption, and can some NPOs obtain public finance from central and local governments, as well as raising funds from society? It is because NPOs are doing good things for the general public and society, their goods and services are similar to the public goods and public services that should be provided by governments. If income taxes are levied, the financial load will be transferred to customers and hamper NPOs. Sometimes NPOs may criticize governments and companies for their ignoring of some public affairs, such as education, hospitals, human rights, and environmental protection, because NPOs, companies, and governments have different value concerns and priorities and should actually be friends and cooperate to do good things for society. Raising funds is one of the most important issues for NPOs. There are several financial sources. One is government subsidies, such as public universities and hospitals. The second is from the donation of society. People are not only self-interested homo economicus but also altruistic homo sociologicus willing to donate to transparent and accountable NPOs more or less depending on their financial capability. The third is from the donation of business, which is tax-deductible and cost-saving for profitable companies. The fourth is the charge of the customers. Not-for-profit universities and hospitals can charge their customers, while the tuition fee of students and medical prices of patients have increased greatly in the last several decades in

154

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

many countries. There are multiple reasons, such as the reduction of government subsidies and the rising cost of NPOs’ services, but NPOs should also improve their efficiency. As companies should be corporate citizens of society, NPOs should be more transparent and accountable than companies, but sometimes they are not so. As companies are providing their goods and services measured by profits in monetary units in markets with fierce competition, NPOs are doing good things without price signals, so their performances are difficult to measure. For example, what is the outcome of a primary, high school, and university students; of patients who are cured, or not cured; of the rights of human, labor, and gender protected; or a tree planted, a wild animal saved, etc.? We can easily measure the financial costs that NPOs have spent, but what are the values of the outputs? What are the values or “good things” that NPOs have done? Although we can still use some quantitative indicators, such as the number of students graduated, patients treated, customers served, and trees planted, they are very diverse and difficult to compare and measure. NPOs are also creating public values for society, while these public values are unable to be measured by, and different from, monetary values created by companies. NPOs must open their performance and operation to society, and then society can evaluate their performance and make decisions regarding donation accordingly. Transparency and accountability are most important in the lives of NPOs. The scandal and corruption will ruin NPOs. The development of NPOs is not only the expansion of their sizes but also the improvement of the quality of their services, enhancement of their transparency and accountability, and strengthening of their professionalism and efficiency.

4.4 Government Development 4.4.1 Anarchy Much different from the family, company, and NPO, the government is at the center of society and is directly or indirectly responsible for all other organizations, public affairs, and social development. Currently, there are 193 sovereign member states and 2 observer states (Vatican and Palestine) in the United Nations. This means that on this small planet, 193 sovereign governments are recognized and accepted universally by most countries and people in the world, with this number varying. In 1945, when the UN was established, there were only 51 founding member states. The Republic of China was one of them but succeeded by the People’s Republic of China in 1971 because the Kuomintang (the Nationalist Party) government was defeated and replaced by the Communist Party of China (CPC) government in 1949. Comparatively, Germany, Japan, and Italy, as defeated countries in World War II, joined the UN in 1973, 1956, and 1955, respectively. The USSR collapsed on December 25, 1991, with its membership succeeded by Russia, and its 15 republics joined the UN at

4.4 Government Development

155

the same time. The most recent joining country was South Sudan in 2011, which separated and gained independence from Sudan after more than 20 years of civil war. The UN, established on October 24, 1945, after WWII, is the largest international organization, aiming to achieve peace, dignity, and equality of humankind and to establish a good and harmonious world. It is a quasi-government, or supergovernment, for not having currency and military force, but owning some super governmental functions such as global public goods providing, international conflicts solving and world peace keeping. It should be a central government for the 7 billion world people and all the individual countries, but due to the limited function of UN, our world is still governed by separated governments fragmentarily. Similar to family, company, and NPO, government is also a natural social phenomenon and institution in the political field and human society. Because we have understood government and politics to some extent, our government and politics have gained developments and achievements, becoming better; because we have not understood government and politics deeply and thoroughly, our government and politics are still far from perfect, and so there are many bad government and politics. The question of why the government is necessary is closely linked to several related questions such as what government, politics, administration, policy, democracy, and freedom are, and why there are these phenomena in human society. As our human societies must have a family to love and reproduce, company to produce products, market to allocate resources, NPO to help others, government is necessary and essential to unify the people, sustain stability and order, make laws and rules, provide public goods and services. Anarchy is a political concept meaning no government, which has two contrasting and extreme situations: one is bloody original jungle in disorder, where everyone is the enemy of everyone, and government could be the leviathan providing order and rule; the other is peaceful and harmonious, as utopia, where everyone is self-disciplined and self-governed, gentle, friendly, and free, and then government is not necessary. Both of these situations of anarchy are possible and practical in some extent and could be found in reality. To understand the essence of government, we can conduct a thought experiment from the model of “one and many persons.” If there is only one person in the world, he/she is free, although he/she may be poor and in danger because nobody can help him/her. There is no government, politics, or public affairs at all. When there are two persons, such as wives and husbands, they can help each other, bear and raise their children, or quarrel and fight. There can be the simplest government, politics, and public affairs between them. This simplicity can help us understand the essence of government, politics, freedom, democracy, and various kinds of social relations. If their relationship is not equal, say, husband is the master and wife the servant, the husband can be the one-man government, and this government may be unequal and autocratic. If their relationship is equal, say, the husband will discuss every important public affair with the wife and make decisions collectively; they are forming an equal and democratic government. Therefore, family can be the place to practice politics and government. As this simple two-person community expands, say, 10, 100, 1000, 1 million, 1 billion, and 7 billion people, there are many people with diverse interests, preferences, opinions, ideas, and public affairs

156

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

in society. People cannot participate and undertake all these public affairs personally. Therefore, they have to select and vote their leaders and representatives, delegate their powers to them, form the government, establish laws, and make decisions collectively. This government is a modern and democratic government. However, in history, it is also possible and realistic that one powerful man conquered the land and people, becoming the king or emperor, assigning his persons ministers and officials, establishing the governments, and ruling the people, with numerous wars, rebellions, and coups. Therefore, the government is diverse, not only a political phenomenon but also a historical, economic, and cultural phenomenon. The basic function of government and politics is to solve various public problems and public affairs, as the public is politic. If there is only one person, there is no public problem and public affair and neither government nor politics at all. When there are two persons, public problems and public affairs arise between them, for example, are they equal, how to cooperate, how to distribute the products, etc. They may cooperate harmoniously and peacefully or quarrel and fight bloodily. There would be some methods, mechanisms, and institutions to solve these problems, such as the rudiment of government and politics. When there are more people, such as the clan, there must be a leader or patriarch to coordinate their actions and solve their conflicts, similar to government and politics. Actually, every organization, such as family, company, university, city, and country, has its governance body and mechanism as micro or local “government” and “politics.” Therefore, the essence of government is not the buildings, assets, and officials but the authority of organizations and their behaviors and operations. That is why the leaders of countries, universities, and other organizations can share a title “president,” because these presidents have much common tasks and properties just in different organizations. Although a family may have only a husband and wife, we can reasonably claim the husband, or wife, as the president of the family, to handle the family affairs. This analogy and argument are not meaningless but attempt to clarify and understand the essence of government as some specific kinds of social relations among people.

4.4.2 Diverse Government Although the democratic and republican government is modern, popular, and maybe the best, it is not the only form, and the forms of government are diverse. Historically, the most ancient government can be traced back to Egypt, Babylon, India, China, Greek, and the Roman Empire thousands of years ago, while the modern democratic government was rather new, only approximately 300 years if regarding the Glorious Revolution in 1688 in Britain as the start of modern government and politics. John Locke (1632–1704) illuminated the principle of modern government in his book Two Treatises of Civil Government. However, before that, the institutions of traditional government have existed for thousands of years, and some of its elements will still last for centuries in some countries. It is necessary for us to understand, not solely criticize, not only the civil and modern government of John Locke but also other

4.4 Government Development

157

government forms in various cultures and societies. For example, why the hereditary system in monarchy was popular in history and applicable now. In the past, people were poorly educated, and society was static in most periods. Most people were accustomed to traditions and the ruling of king or emperor. They recognized that they were the people of the king/queen, and correspondingly, the king/queen also recognized that he/she should look after his/her people. The most convenient way of choosing the successors of ruler, or transaction-cost-saving in economic jargon, was to give the position to the eldest son, while selection from the civilians such as in modern general election was impractical and over-idealized in history. Therefore, most governments in human history, including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, India, and China, have implemented hereditary systems and monarchy politics for centuries, while the United Kingdom and some European countries took the lead to reform this political system and government form. Most governments in human history before the British Glorious Revolution in 1688 were monarchy. Although there were benevolent, moderate, and self-disciplined kings or emperors, most of them tended to be tyrannical and corrupted, even in the United Kingdom, such as King John (1167–1216) and Charles I (1600–1649). Lord Acton (1834–1902), the leading nineteenth century British historian in the classical– liberal tradition, claimed that “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” At that time, most people, particularly the rulers, did not understand the essence of power and government, believing the power was endowed and inalienable from God. Then, they tended to abuse the power, expand their willingness, persecute their people, and finally bankrupt their ruling and ruin themselves. The Glorious Revolution in 1688 in Britain was the milestone of modern government. Since then, the power of king and government has been restricted and stipulated by laws from people, and this political principle has gradually practiced, exercised, accustomed, and recognized by society as a whole. Currently, in the constitutional monarchy in the United Kingdom, Japan, and other countries, although there are still kings or queens and hereditary systems, kings and queens generally have no political power but etiquette and symbolic meaning. The country, society, and government are all ruled by law and rationality but not by the arbitrary willingness of the king or somebody else. The president, officials, and government employees are all elected from, or appointed by, the general public through transparent and justifiable procedures and are generally more capable of governing the country than hereditary rulers.

4.4.3 US Government The US government was the first republican government in human history, established in 1776 with the Declaration of Independence. The founding fathers, such as George Washington (1732–1799), Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), and Alexander Hamilton (1755–1804), were a group of well-educated, wealthy, noble, and farsighted intellectuals. They led American people to defeat the British colonists and designed

158

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

and practiced a new type of government, where people are free and equal, as the Constitution of the United States announced: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

For the first time in human history, humankind knew that there can be a government without a king, and all the people can be free and equal. Although slaves and women were not included initially, it means that people’s cognitions were still limited and could only progress slowly and gradually. Since then, the US government and governance have made it the greatest and most powerful country, and an increasing number of countries have learned and copied from the US government and politics as a model. Although the democracy and freedom of the United States and other developed countries, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, and Nordic countries, are also diverse and not yet perfect, the ideas of democracy, freedom, and republic from the United States have been popular and rooted in the minds of many, maybe not all, people in the world. Regardless of whether they are real, at least many countries have republic titles in their country names, such as the People’s Republic of China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and The Republic of Cuba. This means that traditional governmental ideas such as emperor, class, and privilege have been obsolete and thrown away, and the republic and its related concepts such as equity, justice, democracy, and freedom have been rooted. However, the problems are what are the authentic republic and related equity, democracy, and freedom, how to achieve them, and how to make our government better and better, if these are not perfect and end. As the US government is the most powerful and typical in the world, we can focus and analyze it in detail, while every government in the world is worthy of exploration and understanding. The brief structure of the US government can be depicted in Fig. 4.2 and can be argued from four aspects: people, party, federalism, and the separation of powers. First, as the Constitution of the United States claimed, all the American people, but maybe not including illegal immigrants, are citizens, equal and owning the various civil and political rights such as voting or being voted, various freedom, holding gun, etc. However, in reality, people are far from equal, particularly for ethnic minorities. Therefore, there is still a long way to go for the US government to achieve social equity and justice. People are very diverse with heterogeneous backgrounds, experiences, interests, hobbies, behaviors, choices, viewpoints, ideas, and practical actions regarding any government policies such as gun control, abortion, homosexual marriage, and euthanasia. We, as people, are all living in the public space and will confront these public affairs, impossible to escape. Second, there is the multiparty system in the United States representing various people, with the two largest ones as the republican party and the democratic party, as well as some small parties. These parties are essentially organizations led by political elites upholding their ideals and uniting similar people. From these points, we, as people, are not enemies but just have different interests and ideas. We can and

4.4 Government Development People A

Republican Party

159 People B

People C

DemocraƟc Party

People D

Other small parƟes

House of representaƟves

President

Supreme court

Senate

Secretary

Circuit court

State House of representaƟves

Governor

State Supreme court

State Senate

State Secretary

Lower court

Fig. 4.2 Government structure of the US

should solve our conflicts and divergences not by war and fight but by politics and deliberation. Third, federalism is an important feature of US politics. The United States originally had no central government or central bank due to the worry of absolute power of the central government, and most powers were reserved at 13 states by selfgovernment. After the American Revolution from 1776 to 1781, the Continental Conference evolved to be the federal government with weak functions and power. The federal reserve as a central bank was formally established in 1913 and greatly enhanced during the Great Depression in the 1930s. However, as society has evolved to become increasingly complex, the irreversible tendency is that the function and power of the federal government will be strengthened, while the states can still reserve some local and specific power. As the United States has giant geographic size, federalism can well, if not perfect, balance centralization and decentralization and keep the authority and flexibility of federal and local governments. However, regarding emergencies such as World War II, the emergency rescue of Hurricane Katrina, and COVID-19, the power of the federal government must be strengthened, and the relationship between the federal and local governments should be adjusted.

160

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

Fourth, the separation of powers was a great political innovation of the United States not only for the country but also for all humankind. As offspring of immigrants from Europe, most founding fathers and American people were wary of bad government and abuse of government power due to their experience of being persecuted by European governments with the excuse of religions and politics, they designed the separation of power, check, and balance of legislature, administration, and judiciary. Legislature is in charge of making laws, implemented by the House of Representatives and Senate as representatives of people. Administration is to exercise and execute the power and laws legally and reasonably by the president and the cabinet. The legislature should traditionally be most powerful since people are the origin of power and laws are the expression of willingness of people, but as modern society has become increasingly complex and the legislature generally does not have enough time and efficiency to make laws for every public issue, the administration and president have become more powerful through the executive order and administrative discretion. The legislative state dominated by the legislature has evolved to be administrative state by the president. Judiciary is to judge the cases and solve conflicts of people according to laws and to examine and censor whether the legislature and administration follow or violate the constitution and laws. These three powers were separated and relatively independent, checking, and balancing each other and guaranteeing the rule of law, transparency, and integrity of the US government.

4.4.4 Chinese Government China is an ancient, most populous, and currently second largest economic body, and the Chinese government has a much longer history than, and much different traditions and cultures from, the United States and most Western governments. It has established a centralized and unified government since 221 BC in the Qin Dynasty and has maintained a strong tradition of centralization and unification through the policy of the same language, unit of weight, length, and volume, same behavior, idea, and etiquette of people. After that, it was the rotation of dynasties including Han Dynasty (202 BC–220), Jin Dynasty (266–420), Tang Dynasty (618–907), Song Dynasty (960–1279), Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368), Ming Dynasty (1368–1644), and Qing Dynasty (1636–1912). China has been unified in most periods of 2000 years history, while in divided periods, most elite politicians’ idea was to achieve state unification, including Chiang Kai-shek (1887–1975) as the contemporary political leader of Kuomintang (the Nationalist Party of China) and Mao Zedong (1893–1976) as the leader of the Communist Party of China (CPC). In history, although Chinese people’s rights were not protected as good as in the modern age, they enjoyed relatively good governance and national peace most of the time. There were emperors, ministers, and officials, and the emperors would generally bequeath the position to the eldest son by hereditary system. Although the power of the emperor and government were overwhelming, it could not be derogatorily named autocracy or authoritarianism. We

4.4 Government Development

161

need to clarify and understand the true situations and contents of China’s historical and current government. Actually, most Chinese emperors’ power was not absolute but was limited by officials, Confucianism, procedures, and etiquette. First, the emperor must be benevolent to his people, following the ruling principle from the Sky (天, something like the God); otherwise, he would lose his ruling and kingdom. Second, Confucianism has established and formalized these principles as various etiquettes and moralities, and most officials were educated by the textbooks of Confucianism, requiring the emperors and their children to follow. Third, there were complete and comprehensive administrative procedures in the government, such as the Keju examination (Imperial Examination), to select officials. The emperors generally could not assign their relatives or somebody they favored to the government position arbitrarily. Officials were mainly chosen from the Imperial Examination and promoted and appointed by formal administrative procedures. This Imperial Examination has been prevalently recognized as the rudiment of the modern civil servant system, indicating that the government was open to society as a public government but not a private government belonging to the emperors themselves or their families. If we understand democracy as people making decisions on public affairs collectively, ancient China has some democracy, although far from perfect and mature, because most public affairs were determined and handled not by the emperor but by well-educated civil officials as representatives of people. Ancient China was actually not governed by tyrannical emperors but by benevolent emperors with etiquette, morality, and law together. Currently, the Chinese government can be depicted in Fig. 4.3, which has many differences but some similarities to the US government. As a republic, people are the origin of public power of government, and they also have many diverse ideas and interests, similar to the United States. The Chinese government is not autocratic or authoritarian but still necessary to protect and improve the welfare and happiness of its people; otherwise, it will lose its legitimacy. However, the much difference from the United States to Chinese politics is that there is only one major party, Communist Party of China (CPC), and eight democratic parties, including (1) Revolutionary Committee of Chinese Kuomintang, (2) Chinese Democratic League, (3) China National Democratic Construction Association, (4) China Association for Promoting Democracy, (5) Chinese Peasant and Workers Democratic Party, (6) China Zhi Gong Party, (7) Jiu San Society, and (8) Taiwan Democratic Self-Government League. The CPC was established in 1921, and other parties were formed in the same period in the first half of the twentieth century, a turbulent period in the modern history of China. Full of ideals and struggles, the CPC finally won the civil war and became the ruling party and established the People’s Republic of China in 1949. It is reasonable and explainable for CPC to keep its dominant position but not share public power with other democratic parties, as long as it can govern and develop the country well enough. According to the CPC statistics, at the end of December 31, 2019, there were 91.914 million CPC members, and more than 50.7% of members had a college degree. Comparatively, the eight democratic parties are relatively small and weak, with all members approximately 840,000, and can provide supervision, suggestions, and consultations to the CPC. As the sole governing party, the CPC is

162

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility People A

People B

People C

Communist Party of China

People D

Other small parƟes

NaƟonal People Congress

Premier, State Council

Supreme Court

NCCPPCC

Ministers, Ministries

Supreme People's Procuratorate

Local People s Congress

Governor

Local court

Local NCCPPCC

Departments

Local procuratorate

Fig. 4.3 Structure of Chinese government

not privileged and corrupted but disciplined, organized, strong, and capable. If it is privileged and corrupted, it cannot govern the giant country and 1.4 billion people and will fail and lose legitimacy in the long term. Much different from US federalism and decentralization, the modern Chinese government is unitary and centralized, as it has been in history. The tradition of Chinese unification and centralization can be traced back to its more than 2000-year history. The central and local government, as well as the legislature, administration, and judiciary, are all governed by the CPC. At the central level, the General Secretary of the CPC is the president of the country. The legislature is the National People’s Congress and the National Committee for the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (NCCPPCC). The former is constructed by elected representatives of people, while the latter is from mainly democratic parties and elites in various fields. The administration is the State Council composed of more than 20 ministries. The judiciary is the Supreme Court and Supreme People’s Procuratorate. All the heads of these institutes are high-level CPC members. In addition to the central level, China has five levels of local government: (1) state, (2) province, (3) municipality, (4) county, and (5) village and town. There are legislatures, administrations, and judiciaries at every level, with their heads as CPC members at corresponding

4.4 Government Development

163

levels. In addition, in every public organization, such as school, hospital, and university, there are generally two heads: one is the secretary of the party, and the other is the director, head, or president with different titles. These two heads, with several other deputy members, will form the lead team and cooperate and coordinate to make decisions collectively. By this strict governance structure, the CPC can then govern the whole country and people. Although there is no separation of powers and checks and balance in American style, the CPC has internal supervision and governance through self-discipline and self-cleaning and self-reform; otherwise, it will become corrupted and degraded. Although Western political theories do not believe and rely on self-discipline and self-cleaning, they are feasible and reasonable in Confucianism and Eastern philosophy. Even in Western political theory and practice, the check and balance are still ultimately dependent on self-discipline and self-cleaning, such as outstanding and farsighted statesmen such as Plato, Confucius, and George Washington. If the party and political leaders truly understand the essence of political power, republic, and the government, they can achieve self-discipline, self-cleaning, and self-reform, which is beneficial not only for the country and people but also for the party and political leaders themselves.

4.5 Illicit Organization 4.5.1 Terrorist Organization Why are there so many illicit behaviors and organizations in modern societies, such as terrorism, criminals, drug and human trafficking, and pornography? As the power and capacity of individuals are limited, organizing and organizations are necessary not only for doing good and legal things but also for doing bad and illegal things. If these illicit organizations are becoming larger, more profitable, and powerful, can we claim they are achieving organizational development? As there are goodness and public values, can these illicit organizations create some specific goodness or public values? How they sustain? The existence of these illicit organizations and behaviors is evidence that our human societies still have many problems and flaws. Terrorism has become increasingly serious and noticeable particularly since September 11, 2001, as the milestone of modern terrorism. Since then, combating terrorism has been the consensus for most countries in the world. However, why can terrorists and suicide bombers sacrifice their lives to attack civilians and pursue their ideals, similar to martyr, at least in their own cultures and communities? Why they hate us and the modern society so deeply? Because they did not have peaceful and reasonable methods to achieve their radical political ideals, such as resistance of the US superpower, separatism, and independence of territory, hatred of profanity of religion, etc. Terrorism is mainly from political and religious extremism, separatism, and radicalism. Therefore, terrorists and their organizations are still pursuing some specific values and ideals extremely, while these values are not shared and accepted

164

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

by the public but belong to their small groups. Terrorism is the extreme case of value conflicts and civilization clash, a concept from political theorist Samuel Huntington (2011). People hold different values but cannot mutually understand and respect. It is difficult, but not impossible, for people in strong values and cultures to understand and respect those in weak values and cultures. Therefore, the best solution for terrorism is not to attack and annihilate them but to understand, respect, educate, and develop them, as most terrorists are in the poor and less developed regions in the world. Another related problem is that some religions, particularly Islam, reject secularization and modernization. However, society is always changing. Religion, as part of society, should and have to change with and adapt to society together in the age of globalization, the internet, and artificial intelligence. Mutual understanding, respect, and deliberation among different cultures and religions are difficult but essential for today’s global world. If we cannot establish political institutions to achieve mutual understanding and respecting, terrorism will always exist.

4.5.2 Criminal Organization Criminal organizations are more harmful than individual criminals. Drugs, human traffickers, and smugglers are generally not committing along but organizing strictly and effectively and efficiently similar to companies and governments. Undoubtedly, the bosses and high officials of criminal organizations have similar capacities and experience as entrepreneurs, CEOs, and politicians, but it is regrettable that their capacities and experience are utilized in the wrong way. Actually, criminal organizations are also doing something good for their organizations, bosses, and employees, but what they have done is harmful for others and society, such as stealing, robbing, drug, and human trafficking, which are definitely bad. However, the problem is whether the boss, officials, and employees in criminal organizations can understand these harms. Yes, they surely can, but they may think that the profits from the criminal business are their own and more worthy of pursuing, while the harms are others and unnecessary to consider. They may have some conscientiousness if expanding their consideration from themselves and their family members to their friends and to strangers and society. Therefore, criminals’ visions are very limited, just concerning themselves, at best their family and friends, but not including broader strangers and society. Criminals should have no family since they have to isolate their criminal behaviors from their family members; otherwise, their loved family members have to be involved in the crimes and maybe jointly affected and punished. Their organizations and business are unsustainable and will be eradicated and eliminated sooner or later. Some farsighted criminal leaders may transfer and exit from their illegal business and wash clean. If they can truly correct their ideas and behaviors, they can definitely do something good for themselves, their families, and society. Therefore, regardless of how much profit is earned, crime is thoroughly wrong and cannot be developed but a way toward hell and ruin. But how the criminals stepped into their criminal path? Some are due to their poor family and lack of education, while others,

4.5 Illicit Organization

165

such as corrupted officials, are because of their greed for material wealth. Neither of them formed the correct understandings of careers, wealth, living, and society. The degree of illegality varies, and there are also some gray organizations in the middle of legality and illegality. For example, hard drug trafficking is thoroughly wrong and illicit because hard drugs such as heroin and cocaine will addict and plague people terribly. However, some soft drugs, such as marijuana, have been legalized in the United States and some other countries, but the government still needs to heavily regulate this industry. Soft drug dealers and their organizations need to take their responsibility to reduce the harm of their products, similar to cigarette companies. These dealers and their organizations can be corporate citizens, similar to companies, to do something good for society and pursue their organizational development. The second example may be illicit organizations running human trafficking, including children and women. Children’s trafficking is thoroughly wrong and illicit because children are incompetent people, and child trafficking will thoroughly destroy the family and the love of parents. All the people should have some conscientiousness, while the conscientiousness of people committing the children trafficking has been spoiled by the poverty and greed and poor education. Women trafficking is also wrong but less serious than children because women are vulnerable but competent people. Anyway, the organizations of human trafficking are thoroughly wrong and should be eradicated. There is no way for their development. Meanwhile, there are illicit organizations doing the business of illegal immigrants, which is much different from human trafficking. On both sides, smugglers are doing good things—helping immigrants enter preferred countries, obtain better incomes, and fulfill their dreams. Although there are some terrible cases, such as a death in the process, the techniques and methods of smuggling illegal immigrants are improving and becoming more humane. Actually, these illegal immigrants smuggling organizations can be developed and even changed to legal ones, doing the business of legal immigrants as international labor intermediary agencies. This is the same true for other gray industries, such as the sex service industry, pornography websites, and companies, which can do something good, as well as bad, for society. After all, the sex service and pornography industry have satisfied many people’s demands, although these demands may be immoral in some cultures and societies. Therefore, they are illegal in some countries but legal in others. The development of these industries requires people and society to be more rational, tolerant, independent, responsible, not violent, and fraudulent. The development and legalization of these industries depend on the extent of acceptance and rule of law of society. If governments illegalize these industries, they will move and run their business underground with disorder. However, these industries can still pursue development if they insist on doing good things. Afterwards, only doing good things and creating values can help organizations to be sustainable and preferable.

166

4 Organization Development: Love, Profit, and Responsibility

References AFL-CIO. (2020). Highest-Paid CEOs. https://aflcio.org/paywatch/highest-paid-ceos#:~:text= CEO%20pay%20continues%20to%20outpace%20the%20pay%20of,year,%20earning%20on% 20average%20just%20$41,442%20in%202019 Brian, P. (2021). Infidelity Statistics (2021): How much cheating is going on? HackSpirit. https:// hackspirit.com/infidelity-statistics/ Brown, L. (2020). Infidelity statistics: Data and trends revealed for 2020. https://hackspirit.com/ infidelity-statistics/ Cohen, P. (2019, June 24). A message from the billionaire’s club: Tax us. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/24/business/economy/wealth-tax-letter.html Fortune. (2020). Global 500. https://fortune.com/global500/ Fourcade, M., & Healy, K. (2007). Moral views of market society. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 285–311. Fung, B. (2021, January 9). Twitter bans President Trump permanently. CNN. https://edition.cnn. com/2021/01/08/tech/trump-twitter-ban/index.html Harvard University. (2021). Board of overseers. https://www.harvard.edu/about-harvard/harvardsleadership/board-overseers Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. The American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530. Huntington, S. (2011). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon & Schuster. Kahn, K. (2019). How do nonprofit and for-profit hospitals differ? It’s complicated. Nonprofitquarterly. https://nonprofitquarterly.org/how-do-nonprofit-and-for-profit-hospitals-dif fer-its-complicated/ Kiprop J. (2018). Countries where gay marriage is legal. WorldAtlas. https://www.worldatlas.com/ articles/countries-where-gay-marriage-is-legal.html Luban, D. (2020). What is spontaneous order? American Political Science Review, 114(1), 68–80. Mpela, M. (2021). These countries cheat most! http://www.dailysun.co.za/LIfestyle/these-countr ies-cheat-the-most-20210707 Read, L. E. (2015). I, Pencil. Foundation for Economic Education. https://fee.org/resources/i-pen cil/ Rodriguez, S. (2019, September 27). Facebook confirms employee death was suicide after protest outside its headquarters. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/facebook-employee-deathwas-suicide.html Sandel, M. (1998). What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. http://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/s/sandel00.pdf UoPX. (2021). Fixed tuition, no surprises. https://www.phoenix.edu/tuition_and_financial_options. html Wang, W. (2018). Who cheats more? The demographics of infidelity in America. Institute for Family Study. https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-cheats-more-the-demographics-of-cheating-in-america Westerholm, R. (2013). Top 10 highest paid private college presidents; why Harvard’s leader is nowhere close to top. University Herald. https://www.universityherald.com/articles/6244/201 31216/top-10-highest-paid-private-college-presidents-why-harvards-leader-is-nowhere-closeto-top.htm#:~:text=According%20to%20data%20released%20by%20the%20Chronicle%20o f,third%20of%20the%20nation’s%20highest-paid%20private%20school%20president.

Chapter 5

Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

We can clearly compare the height and weight of an individual and identify who is the highest and the weightiest in a group of people, although height and weight cannot be, and sometimes can be, accepted as values. As physical and mental health can be measured by some objective or subjective indicators, we can clearly identify who is the healthiest and weakest in a group of people, and health is undoubtedly a value. Similarly, we can also easily identify which company is the most profitable according to profitability, the largest according to market share or a number of employees, and the most respected according to the subjective scoring of respect, although maybe not thoroughly precisely. Therefore, we can also identify which country is the best country provided we give the value criteria, such as wealth, democracy, freedom, peace, equity, environmental beauty, etc. Obviously, the best or goodness or value are plural, as a country may be best on one dimension but not on the other. Furthermore, the relationship among the plural dimensions of beauty, or value, can be explored, and the core values can be identified. Then, the people and governors of countries can identify what their countries are good at and bad at and do something to improve their defects.

5.1 Quality and Quantity 5.1.1 Understanding Object Any object, such as individual, family, company, society, and country, as well as natural objects, such as rivers, mountains, trees, and atoms, have features and properties, and we can grasp and describe the features and properties of the object by quality and quantity. An individual has his/her name, height, weight, race, ethnicity, religion, health, morality, personality, etc., and all of these features and properties constitute the individual. A company has its profit, turnover, assets, market share, employees, technology, innovations, etc., and all of these features and properties © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_5

167

168

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

constitute the company. Similarly, a country has its geographic size, population, economy, development, political system, democracy, freedom, rule of law, culture, history, etc., and all of these features and properties constitute the country. By these features and properties, we can identify, describe and compare objects such as individuals, companies, and countries. Regarding countries, when we describe a country, such as the United States, it is a large country with a geographic size of 9.37 million km2 , no. 4 in the world, smaller than Russia 17.098 million km2 , Canada 9.98 million km2 , and China 9.60 million km2 . Its population in March 2021 is 326 million, no. 3 in the world, just less than China 1.4 billion and India 1.5 billion, and more than Indonesia 266 million and Brazil 210 million. Its GDP in 2019 was 21 trillion in current USD, no. 1 in the world, and the second was China with 14 trillion, 66.6% of the United States. The GDP per capita of the United States and China in 2019 were $65,118 and $10,261 in the current USD, respectively. Surely, these facts and data are far from sufficient and can be related and supported by other facts and data in more detail, such as the dynamic variation, comparison, and correlation, and then we can gain more information on the objects and deepen our understanding of them. For example, the US economy measured by GDP has kept no. 1 for more than a century since approximately 1890, while China was a poor country in most periods in the last century. In 1960, the GDP of the United States was 543 billion, still no. 1, while that of China was 59 billion, behind the United Kingdom’s 73 billion and France’s 73 billion, 10.9% of the United States. However, the economic growth of China since reform and open policy in 1978 was rapid and steady. Furthermore, other features and properties of the country can be described by these indicators and data, such as the expected life, GDP growth rate, CO2 emissions, and Human Development Index (HDI). By these quantitative indicators and data, we can grasp and understand the objects. Quantity is a powerful way for humans to grasp and understand the world, particularly the natural world. Physicists can describe the world by quantities and variables and can discover the quantitative relations among these variables, such as Newton’s law of universal gravitation F = G mr1 m2 2 and Einstein’s mass-energy relation E = mc2 . This is the reason why mathematics is crucial and essential for natural science. However, quantity is just one way for humans to understand and describe the world but not the only and necessary way. There are still many features of the objects in the world, particularly those items in human society and social science, which are difficult, if not impossible, to be understood and described by quantity. For example, the United States is capitalism and China is socialism. Tom is a boy and Mary is a girl. Boy and girl are the two genders of humans and an important and basic feature of Tom and Marry. Mathematically, boys can be given a factor variable and quantified as g = 0, and girls can be given g = 1. This quantification is simple, useful, and functional for data storage, searching, and calculation. If there are 83 boys and 17 girls in a 100-member group of youth, the average gender is 0.17, closer to 0 as boy. However, this quantification is far from sufficient because it cannot describe the abundant social meaning of boys and girls and the various stories among these youth. In particular, although all boys and girls have their identified gender, they are definitely different on other features and properties, such as family, hobby, and

5.1 Quality and Quantity

169

education. Therefore, any objects, such as individual, company, and countries, can be defined and described as a vector, Ii = v (f1 , f2 , . . . fk , . . .), and fk is the k features of the individual. This means that there are n dimensions for an individual, and n may be infinite. Two individuals may have the same gender, but they must have some other and different features. We probably have grasped and understood some of these features and the dimensions, but not all. When we discover, present, and argue more and new features and dimensions of an individual, we understand him/her more deeply. Similarly, a country can also be defined as a vector, say countryi = v (economy, politics, society, culture, environment, …), and further, any dimension can be opened and expanded, such as economyi = e (GDP, GDP per capita, equity, competitiveness, innovation, company, education, …), politicsi = p (government, democracy, freedom, rule of law, participation, education, …). This mathematical equation means that a country, as well as other objects, has many facets, as subsets, depending on the observers’ concern and focus. Here, we focus on the economy, politics, society, culture, and environment of a country and look them the basic, core, and essence of a country, while other people or scholars may concern and focus on other topics such as history, race, religion, geography of the country, and these topics can be subsets of the country vector. This understanding indicates that when we observe an object, such as an individual or a country, we should be comprehensive and systematic. When we argue which country is the best country, we should understand that a country may be good on v1 but may be bad on v2 , while we may determine the complex relationship among these factors and which factors are the basic and influential ones. According to the definition of an object as a mathematical vector, we may compare natural objects and social objects, such as a cell (c1 , c2 , …, ck , …) and an individual (i1 , i2 , …, i3 , …). Regarding a particular type of cell, such as red blood cells, scientists have given its name, c1 , understood its function c2 , known many other features from c3 to ck , but do not know many other properties from ck+1 to cn . The scientific advancement is that scientists gradually know more properties of the cell, and more dimensions of the cell cn+1 may be discovered and explored. However, according to our current knowledge, any two red blood cells should be the same, or their possible small differences can be ignored. However, although all individuals have some common features as humans, such as eating, sleeping, and having heights, weights, and hobbies, they are much different in other features, such as the physical body and psychological state. Do we truly understand anybody such as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, Donald John Trump, and Xi Jinping, as well as scientists such as Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, and ordinary people? Similarly, do we truly understand any countries such as the USA, China, Japan, UK, France, Singapore, South Africa, Egypt, and Iran? Some quantitative variables can be used to describe and compare these objects, while these quantitative variables are far from sufficient, and qualitative descriptions and analysis are also necessary.

170

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

5.1.2 Doctor vs. Politician A country, an individual, a company, and an NPO can all be viewed as objects. The question of which country is the best country can be asked as to which individual, company, and NPO are the best or good at. It does not mean that we truly attempt to determine the best one but that we attempt to gain deeper understanding of the object. We still want to make an analogy between (i) the human body, doctor, natural science, and (ii) country, politician, and social science. Seemingly simple, the human body is actually a complex system similar to a universe. Scientists know some of the human body but actually still very little, as there are still many unknown problems and secrets. Since we know some, we can perform some surgeries and cure some diseases, but because we do not know too much, we cannot cure HIV and cancer. Doctors are experts understanding the human body more than any experts in other fields, such as great mathematicians or politicians. Everyone may get some diseases, and doctors can diagnose according to their experience, medical machines, and various indicators. When diagnosing, doctors generally form the first impression of the patient according to their experience and judge the extent of the disease. The experience of doctors is basic and crucial for diagnosis, and a good doctor is generally an experienced doctor. However, based upon qualitative analysis, experience is not enough, and doctors are increasingly relying on modern medical machines such as B ultrasonic, CT, MRI, and other more advanced medical machines and equipment, which can be regarded as quantitative analysis. Without these medical machines and equipment, doctors can hardly make any diagnosis, even the simplest blood grouping and bacterial test. These medical machines can provide quantitative medical indicators, helping doctors make reasonable diagnoses. Therefore, qualitative experience and quantitative indicators can verify and support each other, but sometimes, they may also diverge and lead to diagnosis failure and medical negligence. Medical machines and indicators can generally give precise and objective results and data, while doctors may make different diagnoses according to their different subjective experiences, particularly for miscellaneous diseases, and diagnosis failure and medical negligence may occur. The consultation of doctors can effectively reduce the possibility of failure and negligence since the possible bias and deficiency of subjective experience can be avoided. Therefore, doctors’ medical diagnoses require the combination of qualitative perception from subjective experience and quantitative indicators from medical machines. Society resembles the human body, and politicians may be regarded as doctors of society. Society and country are also complex systems similar to the human body, no matter they are giant ones such as China, India, USA, and Russia, or tiny ones such as Vatican (799 population in 2019 and 0.44 km2 ), Monaco (38,964 population and 0.78 km2 ), Liechtenstein (38,019 population and 61.78 km2 ), and Singapore (5.7 million population and 277.65 km2 ). In addition to the great differences in geographic size and population, these countries and societies have specific histories, cultures, politics, governments, social problems, goodness, and badness. Anybody, like you and me,

5.1 Quality and Quantity

171

may know something more or less about these countries and the societies, while those politicians and researchers may know more about them than any others. The politicians of a country, such as presidents, premiers, and congressmen, are doctors of their society. Doctors can diagnose and solve various medical or health problems, while politicians, as social doctors, can diagnose and solve various social problems. As there are many different departments in hospitals, such as internal medicine departments, surgery departments, pediatrics departments, gynecology departments, stomatology departments, etc., there are also many independent departments and officials in government in charge of curing various social problems, such as the economy, agriculture, infrastructure, education, and hospitals. Legislature and congressmen are to make general laws and rules for the society and people; administration and president are to cope with various specific emergencies and administrative affairs; judiciary and judges are to solve the conflicts among people according to the existing laws. Similar to doctors, all these politicians, as social doctors, have specific and individual perceptions, experiences, and diagnoses of society. Therefore, they generally have various divergences and controversies regarding social problems and illness, and consultation and deliberation are essential. They are experts in the fields of politics and social issues and are generally experienced and qualified since they have been trained in governments and elected and appraised by the general public, but they may still make false diagnoses and policies and fail to cure social illnesses. One prominent difference between doctors and politicians is that it is relatively easy and seldom controversial to judge the quality of a doctor, while it is generally hard and much controversial to claim that a politician is qualified or not. The reason is that the criteria and standards for doctors are clear and precise, that is, whether one can cure the diseases and improve the health of a patient. However, social illness or social problems will affect many diverse people and their interests, so different people will definitely have much different perceptions and evaluations of politicians. Particularly, a good doctor will consider not only the disease itself but also the mental and economic status of the patient, curing and affecting only one person. A good politician must consider, define, and calculate the public interest for the country and people, curing society and affecting all the people and even the future generation. We do not suggest that the public interest is more important than individual interest but just attempt to clarify the essence and difficulty of these two types of work— doctor and politician. Similar to medicine, politics is also a professional field curing and solving social illness, but it is not generally viewed as professional as medicine. Therefore, doctors are seldom criticized but generally respected by people, as long as the doctor has not committed diagnosis failure or medical negligence. In contrast, politicians are always criticized, disgusted, and misunderstood by people, regardless of what they have done and achieved. These criticisms are allowable and welcomed but should be professional and enlightening. Biased and emotional criticisms are also allowed and welcomed as citizens’ freedom of speech, but this kind of criticism may not be too helpful for policy making and curing social illness. Only those criticisms from professionals may hit the nail on the head and help cure the disease. Surely, because all politicians have specific perceptions, understandings, and diagnoses of

172

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

social problems and public interests, it is understandable and explainable for them to have many different cures, policies, and controversies. Thus, it is necessary for politicians, as well as for doctors, to embrace expert consultations and keep their minds open. Similar to doctors, politicians need to diagnose society by the combination of qualitative experience and quantitative indicators. When we ask and argue which country is the best country, we need to define what the “best” means. Generally, we may loosely and roughly anticipate that the best country may be, say, the United States for the sole superpower, Norway and Sweden for Nordic countries with excellent welfare and equity, or Qatar and Saudi Arab for wealthy Gulf countries with abundant oil. Generally, the best countries are hardly developing countries such as China, Brazil, and Russia, not to mention African countries such as South Africa and Tanzania. These anticipations are reasonable and explainable but neither correct nor precise. The reason and explanation is that people, as the general public, potentially cognize countries and social development by the value standards related to the economy, such as GDP and GDP per capita, infrastructure, education, hospitals, etc. It is true that the US, Nordic countries, Gulf oil countries, and Western European countries are wealthy countries, and developing countries such as China and Brazil and African countries such as South Africa and Tanzania are relatively poorer. This cognition is factual, but not comprehensive and so not correct, because it ignores many other factors in the country vector (c1 , c2 , …, ck , …). Although developed countries are wealthy in the economy, they also have their badness and illness, while developing countries are economically poorer and less developed, but they also have their goodness and beauties, for example, on scenery and ecology. It is necessary for politicians and people, similar to doctors, to diagnose their countries and the world, determine their advantages and disadvantages, solve their specific problems, and then achieve social development.

5.2 Economic Best 5.2.1 From Agriculture to Industry The economy is the most basic condition for human society, upon which humankind can live and form politics, societies, cultures, and all other human activities and institutions. In the Old Stone Age and the Neolithic Age, the economy and everyday living depended on hunting and collecting. People’s living must be poor and dangerous if observed from today’s point, and people’s life expectancy was definitely low, approximately 20–30 years. However, their happiness might not be low because people at that time might think life was naturally that way and would not be troubled by modern annoyances such as work, income, promotion, and depression (Harari, 2015). Although we do not know the real living of that time, the discoveries of archaeology and anthropology can provide some reliable relics and evidence, and

5.2 Economic Best

173

movies such as Apocalypto, directed by Mel Gibson and shown in 2006, can depict everyday living and society at the time, cruel but reasonable. It was long ago but we can understand and empathize. As human society gradually accumulated knowledge and improved technology, the economy was growing. The collecting and hunting economy was replaced by agricultural planting and harvesting. Great ancient civilizations such as Egypt, India, Babylon, Rome and China were all based upon the agricultural economy, in which, a centralized government was established; a strong army with hundreds of thousands of soldiers could be afforded; human societies were organized, and large-scale human cooperation could be achieved. The agriculture economy and civilization were the most advanced at that time because they can occupy large geographic regions and organize and cooperate with millions of populations. African black people were strong individually, but most African countries were poor, backward, and later slaved by European colonists. One of the reasons may be that the African continent extends geographically from north to south and has fewer plain areas suitable for large-scale agriculture. Therefore, it has not formed a large-scale agricultural economy and civilization and then fell behind Asia and Europe. Although there were wars between nomadic people and agricultural people, such as Mongolia and Chinese Han people, and Mongolia Genghis Khan (1162– 1227) conquered Asia and Europe in the thirteenth century and established the largest empire, their ruling was kept for less than 100 years. After its collapse, human society was still based upon the agricultural economy until the industrial revolution in the United Kingdom in the eighteenth century. Therefore, China may be the country with the best economy in the agricultural age for more than 2000 years since it has a large geographic size, population, centralized government, and suitability for agriculture.

5.2.2 Wealth of National and GDP The modern economy is not based upon agriculture but based upon industrialization, which started in Europe and the United Kingdom in the eighteenth century. In the more than 1000 years of the Middle Age and before that, European countries were divided into politics, stifled by religion, and suffered by continuous wars. Its economy was poorer than that of Asian agricultural countries such as China and India, although these civilizations did not know too much about each other because of long distances and limited communication. However, after the Renaissance in the fourteenth–sixteenth century and the Age of Exploration in the fifteenth–seventeenth century, European people’s minds were liberalized, the stifling religion was relaxed, science and technology were initiated, and ordinary people’s capacity and energy were released. This was the period of awakening and enlightenment of the West overtaking the East. Marked by James Watt’s (1736–1819) steam engine and Adam Smith Wealth of Nation in 1776, industrialization in the United Kingdom led the country most wealthy and powerful in the world as “The Empire On Which The Sun Never Sets.” The United Kingdom and other neighboring European countries, such as France, Germany, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and Russia, have basically

174

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

conquered other countries and people all over the world and formed modern global political and economic situations. The USA, Canada, and Australia are extensions of the United Kingdom, and Japan, South Korea, and Singapore have basically learned and copied from the United Kingdom and United States. The economy and political systems of the UK, USA, and other European countries are entitled developed, industrialized, Western, capitalist, and free market, while other countries, such as China, Russia, and Iran, are named developing, less industrialized, Eastern, socialism, autocracy, or authoritarian, and most African countries are the poorest at the bottom. The modern economy of a country and the world can be roughly measured by GDP as the indicator of the wealth of the nation. When we attempt to argue the economy of a country, the simplest and most straightforward way is to see and compare the country’s GDP and GDP per capita. GDP is the most important economic indicator and can determine, or influence, most other factors and dimensions of a county, such as politics, culture, education, health, and environment. Although Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, published his milestone book, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, in 1776, economists and social scientists did not know how to count and calculate the wealth of a nation quantitatively but argued and analyzed it by qualitative experience and perception. More than 100 years later in the Great Depression in the 1930s and after World War II, with periodic economic circles and crises, economists thought it was necessary to manipulate and regulate the macroeconomy, and then, the quantification of the economy, production, and consumption, as a wealth of nation, was necessary. By the academic endeavors of economists, including John Maynard Keynes (1883– 1946), John Richard Nicolas Stone (1913–1991), James Edward Meade (1907– 1995), Simon Smith Kuznets (1901–1985), etc., the National Income Accounting System was established in the United States in the 1940s, and the first GDP was formally released in approximately 1945. After World War II, an increasing number of countries started to officially count and record GDP, and some international organizations, including the UN, World Bank, and IMF, collected, compiled, and rectified these data and made the data internationally comparable. In addition, more detailed GDP indicators have been calculated, such as GDP in nominal value, in real value, in PPP (purchasing power parity), and GDP per capita. GDP was praised as one of the great inventions of the twentieth century (Landefeld, 1999; Masood, 2016), and by this simple quantitative indicator, the wealth of nations can be clearly measured, compared, and analyzed. Otherwise, we do not know how to precisely grasp the wealth of nations but just perceive it qualitatively and roughly. Then, what is the GDP? The GDP is the abbreviation of Gross Domestic Products, meaning the aggregated products valued by monetary rods produced and consumed by a country or a region such as province, state, city, county, company, family, and even individual. The equation is: GDP = P1 Q1 + P2 Q2 + · · · + Pn Qn =

n  i=1

Pi Qi

5.2 Economic Best

175

In modern economies, there are many different types of economic goods, such as rice, cotton, goats, cows, cars, homes, machines, hospital services, education services, and financial services. It is impossible to sum these products up by their quantities—as rice and goats cannot be summed—but to sum up by their economic value Pi . Then, these products have the same unit, USD ($), EURO (e), Chinese Yuan (¥), etc., and can be summed up. This means that only when goods have prices, as the economic value of the goods, can they be counted as the wealth of nation and summed up in the GDP. However, in human society, there are also many nonmarket resources and ethical and civil goods, such as air, trees, rivers, wild animals, and human organs (Sandel, 1998). They do not have prices and cannot be aggregated in GDP and viewed as wealth of nation. Although some economists may use some economic methodology to evaluate the prices or economic values of these goods, and the black market can either form the prices of these goods, such as smuggled elephant teeth and eagles, these prices are not the real values of these goods, devaluing these goods. This is a major problem of the modern economy and GDP, as Al Gore (2000, p. 183), the former vice president of the United States (1992–1996) and laureate of the Noble Price of Peace in 2007, stated: The hard truth is that our economic system is partially blind. It “sees” some things and not others. It carefully measures and keeps track of the value of those things most important to buyers and sellers, such as food, clothing, manufactured goods, work, and indeed, money itself. But its intricate calculations often completely ignore the value of other things that are harder to buy and sell: fresh water, clean air, the beauty of the mountains, the rich diversity of life in the forest, just to name a few. In fact, the partial blindness of our current economic system is the single most powerful force behind what seem to be irrational decisions about the global environment.

Similarly, Robert Kennedy (1925–1968), attorney general and adviser during the administration of his brother, US President John F. Kennedy (1961–1963), and later a US senator (1965–1968), assassinated while campaigning for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination in 1968, delivered the speech at the University of Kansas on March 18, 1968: Our Gross National Product, now, is over 800 billion dollars a year, but that Gross National Product—if we judge the United States of America by that—that Gross National Product counts air pollution and cigarette advertising, and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and the jails for the people who break them. It counts the destruction of the redwood and the loss of our natural wonder in chaotic sprawl. It counts napalm and counts nuclear warheads and armored cars for the police to fight the riots in our cities. It counts Whitman’s rifle and Speck’s knife, and the television programs which glorify violence in order to sell toys to our children. Yet the gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play. It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate, or the integrity of our public officials. It measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country, it measures everything in short, except that which makes life worthwhile. And it can tell us everything about America except why we are proud that we are Americans. (Kennedy, 1968)

176

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

5.2.3 Capital GDP may be the flow wealth of a nation or a region but not stock wealth. Similarly, income or salary is the flow wealth of an individual or a family, while the various assets in the form of stock, bond, real estate are the stock wealth for an individual or a family. In addition, this wealth can only be regarded as financial or economic assets or capita, while celebrated parents can be regarded as family capita and good social relations as social capita. In addition, an individual may be poor, but if he/she has good health, it can be a health capita; if he/she is persistent and good at learning, it can be a learning capita. All these capitals are difficult to measure by and discounted from price, but they are valuable and even more important than salary income, and assets for an individual. Regarding a country, the GDP is only the annual, or periodical, income of a country but not the whole wealth of the nation. GDP is only the economic capita, while a country can have institutional capita, social capital, human capital, health capital, and natural capital (World Bank, 2006). A country may be poor in GDP, but it may be rich in social capital with a splendid and attractive culture and natural capital with an abundant and beautiful environment and ecology. It is generally difficult for a poor country to form a high level of institutional capital, which means good government and governance. The expansion of these capital or wealth concepts reflects our deepening understanding of national wealth. However, the basic problem is still how to count and calculate these capitals, i.e., how to evaluate the value of these capitals. Although some of them can be counted by monetary unit, this accounting is value monism and may devaluate their plural values. One possible way is to exhibit these capitals in an account and perceive and argue their values continuously and deliberately (Wang & Christensen, 2017), as Table 5.1 shows. Any country can be exhibited and compared in the table, such as the United States and China. Although their economies measured by GDP are no. 1 and 2 clearly and undoubtedly, their Table 5.1 Various capital and wealth of nation Content and indicator

US

China

Economic Capita

GDP, company, patent, innovation, …

no. 1

no. 2

Institutional Capital

Good government and governance, …

Unknow

Unknow

Social Capital

Attractive culture and history, equity, …

Unknow

Unknow

Human Capital

Education, innovation, R&D, …

Unknow

Unknow

Health Capital

Hospital, life expectancy, …

Unknow

Unknow

Natural Capital

Environment and ecology, …

Unknow

Unknow

More capitals can be added, if they can be clarified

…

Unknow

Unknow

5.2 Economic Best

177

other capitals are much blurred and controversial. Which country is the best country is an attempt to answer this question.

5.2.4 Essence of Economy GDP is basically created by companies because nearly all products and services in the modern economy are produced and provided by companies. When I sleep in the family, no GDP is generated, while when I go to cinema and watch a movie, there is GDP improvement, say, $20, as the box office for the entertainment industry and movie companies. When I do some cooking by myself in the family, there is no GDP generating, while when I go to a restaurant and buy a hamburger, there is GDP increasing, say, $10, as the income of food industry and McDonald. Actually, as long as an individual can provide some service and charge some amount of money from customers freely and equally without coercion and cheating, such as barber, cook, and taxi drivers, they create profit, income, and GDP. The essence of GDP and the modern economy is a kind of human mutual transaction and interaction measured, mediated, and counted by money. The growth of GDP and the economy means that there are an increasing number of human transactions and interactions measured by money. In contrast, there may be no GDP or economic activities if people keep along, such as thinking, sleeping, reading, walking, doing anything by themselves, or helping others without money charging. The GDP will be low, and the economy will be stagnant if the population is small or people have few monetary transactions. This indicates that the GDP and economy are important from the points of human monetary transactions, as people’s living may be more convenient as more services may be offered and fulfilled by others and companies—we do not need to cook, but go to restaurant. However, cooking by myself may generate happiness, despite no profits. The GDP and economy are essentially concerning human monetary transactions and interactions but ignore many other human activities without money as medium—you do not know how to cook and how to do many things by yourself. Therefore, an individual in a modern economy may find himself/herself incapable and unaccustomed when going to the primitive forest or remote village, where and when people have to do many things by themselves.

5.2.5 GDP and Knowledge Although GDP has great shortcomings and is far from perfect to measure the comprehensive wealth of a nation, it can still be a simple, direct, and important indicator to measure the main aspects of the economy. When we want to grasp and understand the economy of a country, such as the USA, China and Tanzania, the first response is to observe their GDP and GDP per capita and then explore other related aspects and indicators, such as economic structure, quality, innovation, competitiveness, and

178

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

human resources. GDP is not only a mathematical number but also an indicator of the capacity and knowledge that human society possesses to produce and manufacture. The essence of the economy is not GDP as a number but the production, manufacturing, and innovation capacity and knowledge behind GDP. Economist J. Bradford De Long (1998) at the Department of Economics, U.C. Berkeley estimated the historical GDP of the world in Table 5.2. Approximately 300,000 years ago, the total GDP of the world was 0.09 million, the GDP per capita was 92 dollars, and the world population was 1 million at that time. In year 1 AD, the total GDP was 18.5 million, the GDP per capita was 109 dollars, and the global population was approximately 170 million. These data have been increasing very slowly before 1700, and after that, the GDP, GDP per capita, and world population grew rapidly. In 2000, the total GDP of the world was 41,016 million, the GDP per capita was 6539 dollars, and the world population was 6.2 billion. Great improvements in GDP and GDP per capita occurred in the last three centuries accompanied by advancements in science and technology. It is unimaginable to estimate these data in the next hundreds of years. Actually, these numbers may not be precise and not important, Table 5.2 GDP and GDP per capita in the long history (1990 international dollar)

Year

GDP (million)

GDP per capita

Population (million)

−300,000

0.09

92

1

−10,000

0.37

93

4

−5000

0.51

103

5

−2000

3.02

112

27

−1000

6.35

127

50

−500

13.72

137

100

−200

17

113

150 170

1

18.5

109

200

18.54

98

150

500

19.92

102

195

1000

35.31

133

265

1500

58.67

138

425

1700

99.8

164

610

1800

175.24

195

900

1900

1102.96

679

1625

1950

4081.81

1622

2516

1970

12,137.94

3282

3698

1980

18,818.46

4231

4448

1990

27,539.57

5204

5292

1995

33,644.33

5840

5761

2000

41,016.69

6539

6272

Source Delong (1998)

5.2 Economic Best

179

particularly for those periods hundreds of thousands of years ago, but they can reflect the great accumulation of human producing capacity and knowledge, while natural capital, including the environment and ecology, has been seriously degraded but not measured and accounted for by GDP.

5.2.6 GDP After 1960 The historical data of GDP and population were rough, while these data after World War II with the establishment of the UN, World Bank, and IMF have become increasingly precise and reliable. Nearly all sovereign governments have established official statistical departments, counting the GDP, releasing the data, and regulating the economy accordingly. The UN, World Bank, and IMF have compiled the data and made them internationally comparable. GDP is the indicator first officially compiled and the most important among various social-economic-political indicators. Table 5.3 gives the rank of the total GDP of the top 20 countries from 1960 to 2020, as 1960 was the first year World Bank published the data, and Fig. 5.1 shows the time series variation during this period. According to the data, there are some important and enlightening findings. First, the USA, UK, France, China, and Japan were the top 5 countries with the highest GDP in 1960, and the United States has kept the no. 1 position since then. The strong economy of the United States was the basis of its superpower. Second, Japan’s economy has risen since the 1970s, and around 2010, it has kept the no. 2 position in the world. With a population of 126 million, no. 11 in the world in 2019 and a geographic area of 377,973 km2 , no. 62 in the world, Japan has achieved prominent economic performance. The peak of Japan’s economy was approximately 1995, as 71.3% of the United States. However, after that, it has not increased and gradually reduced to 23.8% of the United States around 2019, still ranking no. 3. Third, China’s economy has improved rapidly and steadily, particularly after 2000. In 1960, the total GDP of China ranked no. 4 as the giant and populous country, but its economy was only 11% of the United States, considering its largest population of 1.4 billion in 2019, no. 1, and geographic size of 9.6 million km2 , no. 3 in the world, while in 1980, China’s total GDP plunged to no. 12 in the world. However, after approximately 2010, China overtook Japan and became the no. 2 economic body. In 2019, China’s economy amounted to 67% of the United States, close to the position of Japan in 1995. It is anticipated that China’s economy will exceed the United States in the next two or three decades. Additionally, measured by GDP in PPP, China’s economy exceeded the United States in approximately 2016. Actually, the rank of no. 1 or 2 may be just a number and not so important, but the economic strength and position are the essence. Fourth, the economies of the UK, France, and Germany, as traditional capitalist countries, are not bad, still ranking ahead and remaining stable. Their GDP to the United States remained between 10–20% from 1960 to 2019. Fifth, India’s economy has improved greatly, although not as prominent as China. Its total GDP jumps from no. 13 in 1980 to no. 5 in 2019, overtaking the United Kingdom

180

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Table 5.3 Top 20 countries with the highest GDP in 1960–2019 Rank

Country 1960

Country 1980

Country 2000

Country 2019

1

United States 5.43E + 11

United States 2.86E + 12

United States 1.03E + 13

United States 2.14E + 13

2

United Kingdom 7.32E + 10

Japan 1.11E + 12

Japan 4.89E + 12

China 1.43E + 13

3

France 6.22E + 10

Germany 9.5E + 11

Germany 1.94E + 12

Japan 5.08E + 12

4

China 5.97E + 10

France 7.01E + 11

United Kingdom 1.66E + 12

Germany 3.85E + 12

5

Japan 4.43E + 10

United Kingdom 5.65E + 11

France 1.36E + 12

India 2.88E + 12

6

Canada 4.05E + 10

Italy 4.77E + 11

China 1.21E + 12

United Kingdom 2.83E + 12

7

Italy 4.04E + 10

Canada 2.74E + 11

Italy 1.14E + 12

France 2.72E + 12

8

India 3.7E + 10

Brazil 2.35E + 11

Canada 7.42E + 11

Italy 2E + 12

9

Australia 1.86E + 10

Spain 2.33E + 11

Mexico 7.08E + 11

Brazil 1.84E + 12

10

Sweden 1.58E + 10

Mexico 2.05E + 11

Brazil 6.55E + 11

Canada 1.74E + 12

11

Brazil 1.52E + 10

Netherlands 1.95E + 11

Spain 5.97E + 11

Russian 1.7E + 12

12

Turkey 1.4E + 10

China 1.91E + 11

Korea, Rep 5.76E + 11

Korea, Rep 1.64E + 12

13

Mexico 1.3E + 10

India 1.86E + 11

India 4.68E + 11

Spain 1.39E + 12

14

Netherland 1.23E + 10

Saudi Arabia 1.65E + 11

Netherlands 4.16E + 11

Australia 1.39E + 12

15

Spain 1.21E + 10

Australia 1.5E + 11

Australia 4.15E + 11

Mexico 1.26E + 12

16

Belgium 1.17E + 10

Sweden 1.42E + 11

Argentina 2.84E + 11

Indonesia 1.12E + 12

17

Switzerland 9.52E + 09

Belgium 1.27E + 11

Turkey 2.73E + 11

Netherlands 9.09E + 11

18

Venezuela, RB 7.78E + 09

Switzerland 1.19E + 11

Switzerland 2.72E + 11

Saudi Arabia 7.93E + 11

19

South Africa 7.58E + 09

Iran 9.44E + 10

Sweden 2.63E + 11

Turkey 7.54E + 11

20

Philippines 6.68E + 09

South Africa 8.3E + 10

Russian 2.6E + 11

Switzerland 7.03E + 11

Source World Bank Open Data, various year

5.2 Economic Best

181

Fig. 5.1 GDP growth of several countries (Source World Bank Open Data, various year)

and France and still enjoying potential strength. Sixth, as the geographically largest country and former superpower and legacy of the Soviet Union, Russia’s economy was not good after 1990. Its GDP to the United States was 8% around 1990, reduced to 2% around 2000, and recovered to 8% in 2019, ranking no. 11. It is difficult for Russia to sustain its position by its relatively poor economy. In addition to these countries mentioned, the economic performance of all other countries can be argued and clarified by the GDP data, although other indicators also need to be considered. GDP per capita may better measure economic performance and social development than total GDP, as generally, we are more concerned about the average economic level of a country. Table 5.4 gives some countries’ GDP per capita and ranks in 1960, 1980, 2000, 2019, and the data of other countries can be found from World Bank Open Data. First, the economy of the United States was quite good from 1960 to 2019. Although its rank on GDP per capita slipped from no. 1 in 1960 to no. 8 in 2019, it is because some small economic bodies have exceeded it. The top 8 countries with the highest GDP per capita in 2019 were Luxembourg ($114,704), Macao SAR ($84,096), Switzerland ($81,993), Ireland ($78,660), Norway ($75,419), Iceland ($66,944), Singapore ($65,233), and the USA ($65,118). In the financial crisis of 2008–2009, the GDP per capita of the United States declined slightly from $48,383 to $47,099 but soon recovered and grew again, much better than other industrialized countries such as the UK, France, and Germany. This indicates that the social problems of the United States are not caused by insufficiency of economic growth but by inequality that economic growth has not been shared by the general public. Second, Singapore has witnessed a strong and steady economic growth ranking from no. 34 to no. 7, with its GDP per capita $65,233 in 2019, higher than that of the United

182

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Table 5.4 GDP per capital in various year (current USD) Country

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2019

Brazil

210 66/100

445 57/129

1947 66/147

3100 63/180

3750 81/200

11,286 72/207

8717 74/180

China

90 83/100

113 114/129

195 143/147

318 163/180

959 135/200

4550 113/207

10,262 66/180

Japan

479 33/100

2038 29/129

9465 27/147

25,359 12/180

38,532 6/200

44,508 23/207

40,247 26/180

Korea, Rep.

158 64/100

279 81/129

1715 69/147

6610 50/180

12,257 46/200

23,087 47/207

31,762 31/180

Mali

–

60 128/129

248 135/147

317 164/180

270 186/200

710 188/207

891 159/180

Nigeria

93 82/100

224 92/129

874 94/147

568 138/180

568 156/200

2292 147/207

2230 131/180

Pakistan

83 85/100

172 101/129

303 128/147

372 154/180

576 155/200

987 175/207

1285 153/180

Sweden

2114 5/100

4736 3/129

17,098 9/147

30,594 5/180

29,625 15/200

52,869 12/207

51,610 13/180

UK

1398 12/100

2348 24/129

10,032 25/147

19,095 21/180

28,150 16/200

39,436 31/207

42,300 22/180

United States

3007 1/100

5234 2/129

12,575 17/147

23,889 13/180

36,335 10/200

48,468 18/207

65,118 8/180

India

82 87/100

112 116/129

267 133/147

368 155/180

443 165/200

1358 160/207

2104 134/180

Singapore

428 34/100

926 41/129

4928 42/147

11,862 36/180

23,852 24/200

47,237 20/207

65,233 7/180

Source World Bank Open Data, various year

States. This strong economy has led Singapore to be a highly developed country and enhanced its position in the world as a tiny city-state. However, Japan’s economy was better than that of the United States in approximately 2000, with its GDP per capita higher than that of the United States. However, after that, it performed not as well as the United States, as Fig. 5.2 shows. Third, China also gained economic success during this period. Its GDP per capita was $10,262 in 2019 and ranking no. 66, far less than wealthy countries such as the USA, UK, Singapore, and Japan. But considering its poor start, with $195 and bottom five among 147 countries in 1980, even lower than Mali with $248, China’s economic performance can be claimed as marvelous during this period, particularly considering its giant population and geographic size. In contrast, as Fig. 5.3 shows, many comparable countries, such as Brazil, Russia, South Africa, India, Pakistan, and Nigeria, have much better or at least similar start economies like China, but their current economic situations are not comparable to China. In particular, Russia, Brazil, and South Africa experienced great economic fluctuations after 2010, verifying their economic problems.

5.2 Economic Best

183

Fig. 5.2 GDP per capita of the United States and some developed countries

Fig. 5.3 GDP per capita of China and other comparable countries (Source World Bank Open Data, various year)

184

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

5.2.7 Competitiveness Although the economy is not the whole of a country and we cannot simply claim the wealthiest country to be the best one, the economy is the basis and main aspect and can determine or influence many other aspects of the goodness of a country, such as economic competitiveness, innovation, infrastructure, health, and education. Some of these aspects, such as the detailed goodness of a country, can be quantitatively measured by some indicators. For example, competitiveness can be regarded as the main content and quality of the economy but is hard to measure. The World Economic Forum invented the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) indicator to measure the competitiveness of an economy (Schwab, 2019). According to the compiler, competitiveness can be divided into three subindexes: (1) the basic requirements subindex, (2) the efficiency enhancers subindex, and (3) the innovation and sophistication factors subindex, which are correspondingly the keys for factordriven economies, efficiency-driven economies, and innovation-driven economies, as Fig. 5.4 shows. Furthermore, these three subindexes are composed of 12 pillars and, in more detail, 114 specific indicators with various weights. This methodology indicates that competitiveness measured by the GCI is the weighted average number of subindexes and driving forces. It is determined and influenced by the detailed contents of the pillars, such as institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic environment, health and primary education, labor market efficiency, business sophistication, and innovation.

Fig. 5.4 Structure of global competitiveness index (Source Schwab, 2019)

5.2 Economic Best

185

In 2017–2018, the top ten economies with the highest GCI were Switzerland (score 5.86), USA (5.85), Singapore (5.71), Netherlands (5.66), Germany (5.65), Hong Kong SAR (5.53), Sweden (5.52), UK (5.51), Japan (5.49), and Finland (5.49), while China ranked no. 27 by 5.00, and India ranked no. 40 by 4.59. The final five economies with the poorest GCI were Mauritania (rank 133, 3.09), Liberia (134, 3.08), Chad (135, 2.99), Mozambique (136, 2.89), and Yemen (137, 2.87). Therefore, the GCI is a number without unit and real meaning, just indicating the level of competitiveness of an economy comprehensively and relatively. The sole indicator is simple and direct, but it may conceal much detailed information. If opening the indicator and observing its structure, five stages of development can be classified. (1) Stage 1 and factor-driven economies, including 35 economies such as Bangladesh (rank 106, score 3.91), Ethiopia (108, 3.78), India (40, 4.59), etc. all of which are poorest economies. (2) Transition from stage 1 to stage 2, including 15 economies such as Algeria (86, 4.07), Kuwait (52, 4.43), Vietnam (55, 4.36), (3) Stage 2 and efficiency-driven economies, including 31 economies such as Brazil (80, 4.14), China (27, 5.00), and Thailand (32, 4.72). (4) Transition from stage 2 to stage 3, including 20 economies such as Argentina (92, 3.95), Romania (68, 4.28), and Turkey (53, 4.42). (5) Stage 3 and Innovation-driven, including 36 economies such as Japan (9, 5.49), USA (2, 5.85), and UK (8, 5.51), all of which are wealthiest and developed economies. Therefore, the essence of the GCI is not the specific number, such as China’s 5.00 and United States’ 5.85, but the relative position, economic strength and weakness, and the economic structure. Particularly, as Fig. 5.5 indicates, the correlation coefficient between GDP per capita (GDPPC) and GCI is 0.86, quite strong. This suggests that wealthy economies are statistically competitive economies, and poor economies are hardly competitive economies. Although there are some outliers, such as China (CHN) and India (IND), which have performed better GCI relative to the GDPPC, while Luxembourg (LUX), Iceland (ISL), and Eswatini (SWZ) have relatively worse GCI to the GDPPC, the tendency is clear that wealthy economies are more competitive than poorer economies. This is the same true if we correlate GDPPC to most other socioeconomic indicators below, meaning that the economy, measured by GDP per capita, can be the basis of social development, while those aspects weakly correlated to GDPPC cannot be ignored.

5.3 Political Best 5.3.1 Economics and Politics Much different from measurable concepts and mathematical equations in natural science, such as E = mc2 , economy and politics, and other concepts in social science, are all broad and difficult to grasp and clarify by mathematics and equations. We have

186

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.5 Correlation between LNGDPPC and GCI (Note LNGDPPC is the logarithm of GDPPC)

argued that the economy is the basis and can determine and influence social superstructures, including politics and cultures. In the long history, such as hunting and gathering age, agriculture age and industrial age, the economic situation could determine people’s mind, behavior, and political system. However, actually, the statement of A determining B may not be precise, as A and B may be mutually determining and affecting. The relationship between the economy and politics is complex, while many other factors, such as history, population, culture, geography, etc. also function. Human society is always changing, and there are determining factors, including economics, politics, and society. They can mutually impact and influence each other, and then human society evolves. However, one prominent difference between the economy and politics is that the economy can be relatively easily measured and compared by GDP and GDP per capita, while the politics of various countries are more diverse and heterogeneous. We do not have an indicator to measure, compare, and understand politics similar to GDP in economics.

5.3.2 Politics and Good Politics When we pondered the question of which country is the best country on politics, we are actually pondering the question of what good politics is and what politics is. Although there are many complex definitions of politics and good politics, they

5.3 Political Best

187

are actually simple because politics, as well as the economy, are social phenomena in human society. By the methodology of thought experiment, we can understand that the essence of politics is how a society handles public affairs and deals with human relations. In ancient Greek, politics means that citizens gathered in the city plaza and discussed their city-state affairs, which was the origin of the concept of “politics.” If there are only two people in the world, they have their politics as how they form their social relations, equal citizens or master and slave. In the family, there are politics among the husband, wife, and children. Are they equal, democratic, free, harmonious, or unequal, dominating, suppressing, violent? If we understand politics as human relations, we can find that politics is pervasive wherever there are people. Political concepts, such as party, legislature, government, judiciary, administration, policy, power, coercion, democracy, freedom, rule of law, etc., are all different facets of social relations. Then, the question of what good politics can be transferred to what good relations exist among people. In the long history, there were unequal and unjust politics or bad politics, although these bad politics were reasonable and explainable at that time. In the old class societies, there were emperors, kings, nobilities, landlords, and poor civilians. Because of the poor economy, insufficient political knowledge, and inadequate cognition, people at that time generally acknowledged and recognized these unequal political systems and class societies as unalterable principles, so they could be sustained for a long period. However, after the British Glorious Revolution in 1688, the French revolution in 1789, the American Revolutionary War in 1775, and the popularization of political theories from John Locke (1632–1704), Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1718), Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), equal and civil politics were popularized and accepted by most people, including rulers and governors. Therefore, equity and justice can be regarded as good and advanced politics in modern society, while unequal and unjust politics can be bad or backward politics. Although there are currently still monarchs with some privileges in some countries, such as the United Kingdom, royal members are still citizens unable to violate the laws, and their privileges are under the law but not above the law. The monarch and royal families are cultural rather than political and will also be changed according to citizens’ willingness and preference. However, although this equal, just, and good politics originated in capitalism and evolved together, better than the past, they were not fixed and perfect. There were still pervasive exploitations, suppressions, protests, and rebellions in capitalism in the past and now, indicating that the politics were still flawed. Therefore, Karl Marx (1818– 1883) criticized the inequality and injustice of capitalism and advocated socialism and communism, which means better politics and more equal and harmonious human relations, as well as human and environment relations. Although capitalism gradually implemented some reforms and the politics has improved greatly, in the United States for instance, such as progressive movement in 1900s–1920s, New Deal in 1930s–1940s, civil rights movement in 1960s–1970s, it is far from perfect and optimum, and there are still many social problems and inequalities and injustice, not only domestically but also internationally. Meanwhile, although the socialism and communism implemented by Former Soviet Union and East European countries

188

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

and other socialism countries such as China from 1950s to 1980s have been proved failure, it was not the faults of socialism and communism, but of wrong practices and false social experiments. Equity and justice, as the essences and contents of socialism and communism, are still preferable. The competitions and comparison of politics among various countries and ideologies are that which one can create and provide more well-being and equity and justice to their people. Every country has its specific and different politics, and no two countries have thoroughly identical politics, although some of them have more similarity than others, for example, USA and UK, China, and Vietnam, while it is hard to compare who are more similar among USA, India, Iran and China. We need to understand and research every country and their politics. Generally, modern politics can be classified into two categories: (1) Western politics and (2) non-Western politics. Western politics is represented by Western countries such as the USA, UK, Western European countries, Nordic countries, and some East Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea, and Singapore. Although there are still many differences among these countries and their politics, they share some common political features, including (1) multiparty systems; (2) general elections; (3) freedom of speech, association, publishing, demonstration, media, and legal political criticism; and (4) rule of law. These features are political goodness, and just by them, Western countries have sustained their relatively good politics, guaranteed equity, justice, freedom, democracy, and rule of law, and achieved economic growth and social development. However, there were only approximately 32 countries with GDP per capita greater than $30,000 in 2019 and 41 countries with GDP greater than $20,000. These countries can be regarded as wealthy or developed, and most of them have Western political systems, but not all, such as Qatar ($64,781), the United Arab Emirates ($43,103), Bahrain ($23,503), and Saudi Arabia ($23,139). In addition to these wealthy countries, most of the remaining 140 countries also implement Western-style political systems, but they still have been relatively poor for the long term. In particular, China, as the current second largest economic body, has a much different political system from the West that is worthy of argument and comparison. Meanwhile, the politics of Russia, Iran, and other countries are also interesting and significant and should be understood. China’s politics, as socialism with Chinese characteristics, is much different from Western capitalism, although there are still some similarities. As a one-party system, the Communist Party of China (CPC) is the sole governing party, with eight democratic parties not allowed to take power. There is no Western-style campaign or general election, while most of the officials are CPC members assessed and promoted by the party’s internal bureau —Organization Department (组织部). Although the Party and the government, as well as the Party’s departments and government’s departments, are formally separated, they are also integrated and regarded as the public sector and branches of integrated government, which means that the party and government are integrated as a whole. The freedom of speech, association, publishing, and demonstration are legal and written in the Constitution, although, observed by Westerners, these freedoms are strictly restricted by the government. However, this does not mean that Chinese people have no or poor freedom. As China is the giant country with the most population and geographic size and great

5.3 Political Best

189

complexity, the CPC government generally prioritizes political and social stability upon freedom. According to the CPC, the function of freedom of speech, association, publishing, and demonstration is to express discontent and discover social problems. Although restricting freedom to some extent, the CPC government does not ignore discontent and social problems and solves them one by one gradually, efficiently and effectively, perhaps not immediately and perfectly. Comparably, although most Western governments protect freedoms, they have probably not responded to their minority people’s appeals and solved their social discontents more efficiently and effectively than the CPC government. In fact, except for the freedom to publicly and fiercely criticize the CPC and government, which was regarded as overthrowing society, most Chinese people can enjoy freedom no less than people in other countries and do anything legally, such as traveling, opening business, wandering at night, etc. Although the Chinese CPC government is centralized and authoritarian, a concept always used by westerners, it is not the “big brother,” and Chinese people are living in normal, or even safer, society, as China has the lowest criminal rate among all countries in the world. As China’s politics are much different from, and unfamiliar to, Western countries and people, most of Westerners may have bias and misunderstandings on China’s politics, misguiding their subjective poll, attitude survey, and political activities, although actually we may have bias and misunderstandings on any country and anything. As science is to understand any object deeply and precisely, the best way to understand a country, a person, a society, and a culture is not only reading literatures and listening hearsays but also watching the facts and experiencing events personally, although all of these ways are still not enough. Scientific analysis, rationality, deliberation, and research are necessary. Meanwhile, Chinese people, including politicians and scholars, should also learn and understand Western politics and people, as well as any politics and people in the world. Mutual understanding is essential, despite being difficult, and those who can understand themselves and others more deeply and precisely will be wiser and more successful. We have argued and demonstrated that good politics, government, and governance should be a good and harmonious social relation defined by the concepts of equity, justice, democracy, freedom, rule of law, etc. All of these concepts have the same essence but are just different facets and names of good politics. Equity means that all men are created equal, including men and women, young and old, black and white and other races, natives and foreigners, boss, and employee, Christian and atheist, and all the people in the world. People may have many differences in gene, color, religion, culture, income, education, occupation, nationality, etc., but they are all equal to humans. Justice is the same as equity but can better accommodate appropriateness and diversity. A person who is more persistent and industrious can earn more income, and the criminal should be punished. These situations should be justice but not unequal according to our current knowledge. In particular, equity and justice can be further expanded to humans and the environment. It is inequal and unjust if humans pollute and damage and exploit the environment, so humans will be punished by the environment. Because we are equal, we need democracy and freedom, which means that we can express and behave equally, freely, and legally,

190

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

not interfering others. Governments should govern society and people by good and benevolent and appropriate laws but not by arbitrary rules and unjust forces. This is the principle of good politics.

5.3.3 Political Indicators As the economy can be measured by GDP, politics can also be measured by indicators such as the Democracy Index (DEM), Human Freedom Index (HFI), Justice Index (rule of law, ROL), Global Peace Index (GPI), Positive Peace Index (PPI), and Fragile State Index (FSI), etc. Although these indicators may not be thoroughly precise, they are the academic endeavors and contributions of social scientists, deepening our understanding of politics. Table 5.5 gives the scores and ranks of the top 10 countries and other concerned countries, such as the USA, China, Russia, and India, and the bottom 3 countries, according to these indicators. Obviously, wealthy countries are generally at the top, while poor countries are at the bottom. The Democracy Index (DEM) was calculated by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), a nonprofit independent organization that defined democracy as electoral democracy following the criteria of Freedom House (EIU, 2018). It should include (1) a competitive, multiparty political system. (2) Universal adult suffrage. (3) Regularly contested elections conducted on the basis of secret ballots, reasonable ballot security and the absence of massive voter fraud. (4) Significant public access of major political parties to the electorate through the media and through generally open political campaigning. Accordingly, the Economist Intelligence Unit’s index of democracy, on a 0–10 scale, is based on the ratings for 60 indicators, grouped into five categories: (1) electoral process and pluralism; (2) civil liberties; (3) the functioning of government; (4) political participation; and (5) political culture. Each category has a rating on a 0 to 10 scale, and the overall index is the simple average of the five category indexes. The data are from public opinion surveys, mainly the World Value Survey, and other sources, such as Eurobarometer surveys, Gallup polls, Asian Barometer, Latin American Barometer, Afrobarometer, and national surveys. Countries are finally categorized into four types of regimes: (1) Full democracies: scores greater than 8. (2) Flawed democracies: scores greater than 6 and less than or equal to 8. (3) Hybrid regimes: scores greater than 4 and less than or equal to 6. (4) Authoritarian regimes: scores less than or equal to 4. As expected, the top five among 166 countries on the rank of the Democracy Index in 2020 were Norway (9.81), Iceland (9.37), Sweden (9.26), New Zealand (9.25), and Finland (9.20), as shown in Table 5.5. Surprisingly, Costa Rica scored 8.16 and ranked 18th, better than Japan (21, 8.13) and South Korea (rank 23, score 8.01), with the three as the final full democracy country. However, France (24, 7.99) and the United States (25, 7.92) were categorized as flawed democracy, with India (53, 6.61) together. China was far behind, ranked 151 and scored 2.27 and categorized as authoritarian. The Central African Republic (165, 1.32), Democratic Republic of Congo (166, 1.13), and South Korea (167, 1.08) were the bottom three.

5.3 Political Best

191

Table 5.5 Score and rank of political index DEM

HFI

ROL

GPI

PPI

FSI

Norway 1, 9.87

New Zealand 1, 8.89

Denmark 1, 0.89

Iceland 1, 1.11

Denmark 1, 1.36

Finland 1, 16.9

Iceland 2, 9.58

Switzerland 2, 8.79

Norway 2, 0.89

New Zealand 2, 1.24

Finland 2, 1.36

Norway 2, 18.0

Sweden 3, 9.39

Hong Kong 3, 8.78

Finland 3, 0.87

Portugal 3, 1.26

Sweden 3, 1.40

Switzerland 3, 18.7

New Zealand 4, 9.26

Australia 4, 8.58

Sweden 4, 0.86

Austria 4, 1.27

Norway 4, 1.40

Denmark 4, 19.5

Denmark 5, 9.22

Canada 5, 8.57

Netherlands 5, 0.85

Denmark 5, 1.34

Ireland 5, 1.45

Australia 5, 19.7

Canada 6, 9.15

Netherlands 6, 8.58

Germany 6, 0.83

Czech 6, 1.36

Switzerland 6, 1.49

Iceland 6, 19.8

Ireland 7, 9.15

Denmark 7, 8.55

New Zealand 7, 0.83

Slovenia 7, 1.36

Iceland 7, 1.50

Canada 7, 20.0

Australia 8, 9.09

Ireland 8, 8.50

Austria 8, 0.81

Canada 8, 1.37

New Zealand 8, 1.53

New Zealand 8, 20.1

Switzerland 9, 9.03

UK 9, 8.50

Canada 9, 0.81

Switzerland 9, 1.37

Netherlands 9, 1.54

Sweden 9, 20.3

Finland 10, 9.03

Finland 10, 8.47

Australia 10, 0.81

Japan 10, 1.41

Austria 10, 1.59

Luxembourg 10, 20.4

US 22, 7.98

US 17, 8.39

US 19, 0.73

US 114, 2.23

US 19, 1.85

US 26, 38.0

India 42, 7.23

India 110, 6.41

India 62, 0.52

China 116, 2.24

China 85, 3.15

China 90, 71.1

Russia 135, 3.17

Russia 119, 6.27

China 75, 0.50

India 137, 2.54

Russia 93, 3.24

India 105, 74.4

China 139, 3.10

China 135, 5.91

Russia 89, 0.47

Russia 151, 3.05

India 107, 3.31

Russia 106, 74.7

Chad 165, 1.5

Yeman 160, 4.25

Afghanistan 111, 0.34

Iraq 161, 3.56

Afghanistan 160, 4.00

South Sudan 175, 112.2

Syrian 166, 1.43

Venezuela 161, 4.20

Cambodia 112, 0.32

Afghanistan 162, 3.57

Cent. African 161, 4.15

Somalia 176, 112.3

Korea D. 166, 1.08

Syrian 162, 3.77

Venezuela 113, 0.29

Syrian 163, 3.81

Somalia 162, 4.19

Yemen 177, 113.5

Note The DEM, HFI, and ROL are positive indicators; the higher, the better. The GDP, PPI, and FSI are negative indicators; the lower, the better

Figure 5.6 depicts the correlation between GDP per capita (GDPPC) and the Democratic Index (DEM) in 2018. The correlation coefficient R = 0.63, medium strong. However, the wealthy Gulf Countries significantly lower the correlation. Except for them, wealthy economic bodies apparently have a higher level of democracy, although there are some outliers, such as Singapore (SGP) and Hong Kong

192

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.6 Scatter diagram and correlation between DEM and GDPPC

SAR (HKG), while their democracy is still higher than that of most poor countries. As two contrasting cases, India (IND) has a poorer economy but better democracy, while China (CHN) has the opposite. However, as the data of the Democracy Index are actually the subjective scores from respondents, it is necessary for us to keep cautious about the preciseness of the data and avoid the bias and misunderstanding of China’s democracy, as well as any countries’ democracy and other facets. Freedom is generally synonymous with democracy, as liberal democracy is always combined, although they actually have subtle and huge differences. The Human Freedom Index (HFI) has been compiled and calculated by the Cato Institute, Fraser Institute and other research institutes (Vasquez & Porcnic, 2018). Using a similar methodology to that of the Democracy Index, the HFI is composed of personal freedom and economic freedom with 50–50 weight. Personal freedom includes (1) rule of law, (2) security and safety, (3) movement, (4) religious freedom, (5) association, assembly, and civil society, (6) express and information, and (7) identity and relationships, while economic freedom includes (1) size of government, (2) legal system and property rights, (3) sound money, (4) freedom to trade internationally, and (5) regulation. These subindexes are further composed of more detailed contents and scored by questionnaires, such as rule of law, which includes procedural justice, civil justice, and criminal justice. As Table 5.5 shows, in 2018, the top five on HFI among 162 bodies were New Zealand (1, 8.89), Switzerland (2, 8.79), Hong Kong (3, 8.78), Australia (4, 8.58), and Canada (4, 8.57). The United States ranked 17 and scored 8.39, while Singapore 25 and 8.16, Japan 31 and 8.10, India 110 and 6.41, China 135 and 5.91. The bottom three countries were Yemen (160, 4.25), Venezuela (161, 4.2), and Syria (162, 3.77). Again, wealthy countries are generally at the top,

5.3 Political Best

193

while poor countries are at the bottom. The United States is not good enough (no. 17), while India’s performance on HFI (no. 110) is much worse than that on DEM (no. 41), and China is similar poor on HFI (no. 135) and on DEM (no. 130). According to these data, may we cautiously anticipate that India is a democratic but not a free country, while China is nether democratic nor free? Most likely yes or no, since we need to be cautious about the preciseness of the data and understand the countries by the combination of quality and quantity. Figure 5.7 gives the scatter diagram and correlation between HFI and DEM. We find that the correlation is quite strong, 0.81, and China (CHN), India (IND) and the USA do not deviate too much from the tendency line. This correlation can verify the reliability of the data to some extent and can reflect the general subjective evaluations of democracy and freedom of countries. However, the authentic democracy and liberty of countries such as China, Russia, and Iran are much different from those of Western countries and unfamiliar to Westerners and should be argued not only by quantity but also by quality. Other indicators can be argued and analyzed in a similar way, for example, the Press Freedom Index compiled by the Reporters Without Borders, the World Governance Indicator by the World Bank, the Rule of Law Index by the World Justice Project, and the Corruption Perception Index by Transparency International. Although these indexes have some subtle differences in the contents, highlights, weights, structures, scoring and ranking countries, they measure the common aspect of the country—politics, which is quite a large subject. These indicators have given some similar results; that is, wealthy countries are generally on the anterior, while poor countries are on the posterior. These scores and rankings indicate that wealthier countries tend to have better freedom, democracy, governance, rule of law, and

Fig. 5.7 Scatter diagram and correlation between DEM and HFI

194

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

integrity, although some outliners remain, such as Gulf Countries. It is generally unreasonable for a country to maintain an advanced economy but poor politics or a poor economy but advanced politics. India has a relatively high level of democracy but low GDP per capita, but we cannot claim India’s politics is good since its performance on HFI and other indicators is poor. China’s economy has improved greatly, but its political performance measured by the DEM, HFI and other political indicators is poor. One explanation is that China is authoritarian and necessary to improve its politics, but another explanation of China’s poor politics may be that the compilers of these indicators, depending on subjective survey, have some misunderstanding of China’s political system. We cannot solely rely on simple quantitative indexes but should matched and explained the quantity with quality.

5.4 Social Best 5.4.1 Broad Human Society Society is broader than the economy and politics, and the economy and politics are parts of society. Human society is actually an integral whole, and economics, politics and sociology, as individual and separated disciplines, are just viewing angles and methodologies and theories that people and scholars observe and understand human society. For simplicity and by trichotomy, human society can be divided into economy, politics and society. Here, society is narrowly defined, including health, hospitals, education, infrastructure, the environment and all other related aspects of human society, although they are always overlapping and interwinding to economy and politics. As the GDPPC can measure and depict the economy and the DEM and HFI can measure and depict politics, the various aspects of society can be similarly measured and depicted by the indicators such as life expectancy, expected years of education, human development index, environmental performance index, happiness index, etc. We can reasonably anticipate that the economy can push the improvement of most, if not all, aspects of society, so the GDPPC will show a strong correlation with these social indicators. However, aspects of society not pushed, or even damaged, by economy are particularly worthy of notice and argument, such as the environment and ecology.

5.4.2 Life Expectancy Relative to subjective indicators such as DEM and HFI, life expectancy (LIF) is an objective and reliable indicator that partially measures the level and capacity of the health and medicine of a country. It is reasonable to anticipate that wealthy countries have longer LIF while poor countries have shorter, and those outliers, wealthy but

5.4 Social Best

195

short life and poor but long life, must have some reasons and are necessary to be concerned and explained. Table 5.6 gives the life expectancy of several countries, and Figs. 5.8 depicts the time series of the data from 1960 to 2018. We can easily find that at the initial stage in 1960, the United States had the highest life expectancy of 70 years, while Nigeria (37), India (41) and China (44) had the lowest life expectancy. In 2018, Japan (84) and Singapore (83) jumped to be the countries with the highest life expectancy, higher than the United States (79), while China (77) also gained prominent progress in this period, higher than Brazil (76), Russia (73) and the world Table 5.6 Life expectancy of several countries Country

Code

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2001

2010

2018

Brazil

BRA

54

59

63

66

70

70

74

76

China

CHN

44

59

67

69

71

72

74

77

India

IND

41

48

54

58

63

63

67

69

Japan

JPN

68

72

76

79

81

81

83

84

Nigeria

NGA

37

41

45

46

46

47

51

54

Pakistan

PAK

45

53

57

60

63

63

65

67

Russian

RUS

66

68

67

69

65

65

69

73

Singapore

SGP

66

68

72

75

78

78

82

83

United States

USA

70

71

74

75

77

77

79

79

World

WLD

53

59

63

65

68

68

71

73

South Africa

ZAF

48

53

58

63

56

55

58

64

Fig. 5.8 Life expectancy of some countries from 1960 to 2018

196

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.9 Correlation between Lg GDPPC and life expectancy (Note The Lg GDPPC is the logarithm of GDP per capita [GDPPC])

average level (73), particularly considering its low start point and largest population. India, Pakistan, Nigeria, and South Africa have also made progress but not so prominent. In Fig. 5.9, we find that the correlation coefficient between Lg GDPPC and life expectancy is strong at 0.83, verifying that wealthy countries are long-life countries.

5.4.3 Human Development Index (HDI) Since indicators such as GDP per capita and life expectancy are only single dimensional and can only measure narrow aspects of a society, some scholars, such as the Nobel Prize laureate in economics Amartya Sen, invented the Human Development Index (HDI), and the United Nations Development Programme compiled and published it annually since 1990 (UNDP, 2013). The HDI is the geometric average number of three dimensions: (1) long and healthy life, measured by life expectancy at birth, (2) knowledge, measured by the average of expected years of schooling and mean years of schooling, and (3) a decent standard of living, measured by General National Income (GNI, PPP). Since these dimensions have different units, they have been normalized by the equation: Dimensional index =

actuall value − minimul value maximum value − minmal value

And the HDI is calculated by the equation:

5.4 Social Best

197

HDI = (Ihealth · Ieducation · Iincome ) Therefore, the HDI is a number from 0 to 1 without units and may be regarded as more comprehensive and inclusive than GDP. In 2018, there were 189 economic bodies in the ranking. The top 5 were Norway (1, 0.954), Switzerland (2, 0.946), Ireland (3, 0.942), Germany (4, 0.939), and Hong Kong (5, 0.939). The United States was no. 15 (0.920); Japan was no. 19 (0.915); and Russia was no. 49 (0.824). The 62 countries with an HDI higher than 0.8 were categorized as the country with very high human development. The next 52 countries with 0.8 > HDI > 0.7 were the country with high human development, including Brazil (79, 0.761) and China (85, 0.758). Medium human development, 0.7 > HDI > 0.55, included 37 countries, such as India (129, 0.647) and Pakistan (152, 0.560). At the rear, there were 36 low human development countries, with HDI < 0.55, and the bottom three were Chad (187, 0.401), Central African Republic (188, 0.381), and Niger (189, 0.377). Historically, there were 144 economic bodies at the initial stage in 1990. The top five with the highest ranking improvement were Turkey (89 to 59, 30), meaning ranked no. 89 in 1990 to no. 59 in 2018 and improving by 30, Singapore (38 to 9, 29), Iran (92 to 65, 27), Ireland (24 to 3, 21) and China (103 to 85, 18), while Lesotho (106 to 164, −58), Syrian (94 to 154, −60), Yemen (116 to 177, −61) experienced the largest rank drop. The United States declined from 2 to 15 (−13), Russia from 32 to 49 (−17), and India from 114 to 129 (−15). These data and comparison indicate that, measured by HDI, Turkey, Singapore, Iran, Ireland, and China witnessed prominent social development during this period, while Lesotho, Syrian, and Yemen suffered most greatly, and the social development of USA, Russia, and India were worsening, albeit not so serious. These performances are explainable and reasonable since the GDPPC and HDI have strong correlations (R = 0.94) (Fig. 5.10). It means that HDI and GDP per capita are similar. If a country wants to improve the HDI, it has no other better ways than pushing its economy, and the other two dimensions of HDI, life expectancy and education, are all strongly correlated with the economy.

5.4.4 Equity Equity is also an important aspect of society, not only an economic issue but also a political and social issue. As an important public value, equity is subtly different from justice, but they also share some similarity and sometimes replaceable and complementary. As justice can be partially measured by the Rule of Law index (ROL) by the World Justice Project, equity as economic equity can be measured by the Gini coefficient (GIN). As a traditional and influential economic index, the GIN is a number between 0 and 1. Zero means the society is thoroughly equal and all the wealth is distributed evenly among people; and 1 means the society is thoroughly unequal and all the wealth is owned by one person. Generally, the GIN of an equal society is approximately 0.2–0.3, while that of an unequal society is above 0.4. Although economic equity is generally accepted as a public value, the thorough or

198

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.10 Correlation between GDPPC and HDI (Note The Lg GDPPC is the logarithm of GDP per capita [GDPPC])

extreme economic equity achieved by government coercive redistribution may be not good and preferable, since society will be excessively stable and ossified with little innovation and competition, as social experiments practiced in socialism planned and command economy and also in capitalism welfare state in 1950s–1970s, while huge economic inequity is also bad and risky, and may lead the social discontent, poverty, protest, and social turbulence. However, an appropriate level of economic equity is not fixed but varies and is influenced by various factors, such as tradition, culture, political system, and social tolerance. Therefore, it has been a classical and intractable problem for governments to control and balance equality and efficiency. Generally, Nordic countries are well known for their welfare policy and social equity, more equal than other Western capitalist countries such as the UK, Germany, France, the USA, Canada, and Australia, gaining a reputation of socialism and blurring the boundary between capitalism and socialism. China was an equal and socialist country before the reform and open policy in 1978, but its economic inequity has risen sharply since then and became a serious social problem and threatening society. However, the situation has been greatly alleviated after the strong poverty reduction policy and social justice enhancement since Xi Jinping administration in 2012. These observations and understandings can be verified by GIN data. According to the World Bank estimation in approximately 2018, the ten most equal countries are Slovenia (1, 0.25), Azerbaijan (2, 0.25), Ukraine (3, 0.25), Czech Republic (4, 0.25), Slovak Republic (5, 0.26), Belarus (6, 0.26), Moldova (7, 0.26), Iceland (8, 0.27), Kazakhstan (9, 0.27), Norway (10, 0.27), Finland (0.27), Sweden (0.28), and Denmark (0.29). Although economic equity does not guarantee other public values, such as

5.4 Social Best

199

Fig. 5.11 Time series of Gini coefficient of some economic bodies (Source World Bank Open Data, various year)

power, happiness, and development, it should be a main value and policy goal of the government. At the other extreme, the ten most inequal economic bodies among 167 economic bodies are St. Lucia (0.51), Brazil (0.52), Mozambique (0.52), Eswatini (0.52), Hong Kong SAR (0.54), Lesotho (0.54), Botswana (0.57), Zambia (0.57), Namibia (0.60), and South Africa (0.63). Although every country and region are worthy of argument, some of them are particularly concerned, as Fig. 5.11 shows. South Africa (ZAF) is the country with the most serious economic inequality, rising sharply from the 1990s. Brazil is a populous country with a population of 210 million in 2019. Its serious inequality may have plagued its social development, although it has experienced a steady decline in GIN since the 1980s. Most other Latin American countries, such as Haiti (0.51), Colombia (0.51), Panama (0.50), Honduras (0.50), and Costa Rica (0.48), have suffered similar economic inequality, which can be a main reason for their political instability and social problems in Latin America. As the second largest economic body and with the rapidest economic growth, the economic inequality of China is not relatively high, scoring 0.39 and ranking 92 among 168 in 2018, but it has experienced an uneven transition. Before the 1990s, China was a rather equal country in terms of socialism and planned economy, with GIN below 0.35, but it increased gradually, reached a peak at 0.44 in 2010, and decreased to a current value of 0.39 in 2018. With the expansion of economic inequality before 2010, China suffered serious corruption and social discontent, but after that, with the enhancement of social justice, the situation changed greatly. In contrast, economic inequality in the United States rose from 0.37 in the 1980s to 0.41 in 2016, not sharply but quite steadily.

200

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.12 Scatter diagram and correlation coefficient between GDPPC and GIN (Note World Bank Open Data. The GDPPC is the data of 2018, and the GIN is the data most recently)

Consequently, according to Pew (2020), the United States is currently at the peak of economic inequality after World War II, which can be a basic and nonnegligible fact to understand and explain the current social problems of the United States. In particular, although the correlation coefficient between GDPPC and GIN is not strong, R = −0.28, as Fig. 5.12 shows, the tendency is clear that a better economy can improve economic equity. Most wealthy countries have relatively equal economies with GIN below 0.35, while the United States is the outlier with the most seriously inequal economies among developed countries, and Singapore (SGP), Hong Kong (HKG), and Israel (ISR) have similar unequal economies. Comparably, the economic inequity in Sweden (SWE) was 0.29 in 2018, quite low, but still experienced a steady increase from 0.23 in the 1980s. Since the 1990s, with the triumph of new liberalism and marketization and globalization, the whole world has become more unequal. If we accept that all people are equal in the brain, dignity, and genes and their probable variance is not as large as the economic gap, an equal society is more preferable than an unequal society, although the relationship and difference between economic equity and social justice are worthy of deep clarification and argument. Nevertheless, a major challenge for all governments in modern society is to establish an increasingly equal and just society.

5.4 Social Best

201

5.4.5 Environment In addition to economic equity and the Gini coefficient, the environment is also an important part of society. On the one hand, the environment and biology of any country is an indivisible part of the earth. They have the same value and beauty, although some people may prefer some regions and landscapes, such as mountains, forests, and rivers, while others may prefer deserts, Gobi, and wilderness. The environment and biology on the planet are diverse, equal, and integral, while our current political system has divided it into more than 200 countries, big or small, coastal or landlocked, abundant or infertile. This integrity and publicness of the planet and environment have indicated the limit and narrowness of our current political system. An ideal one should be no political countries and borders, and all the people and animals can move and travel and reside at any place in the world. This may be the true meaning and ideal of freedom and liberalism. Although it is idealistic and far from pragmatic in current politics and society, it can be ideal, as an increasing number of people are willing and capable of traveling and enjoying the beauty of the planet. The problem is how to develop the economy and make traveling and moving affordable to an increasing number of people in the world. The environment and biology in different countries have the same value and beauty, but the extent and performance of the people and governments to protect them are much different, which can be measured by the Environmental Performance Index (EPI). This index has been compiled by the Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy since 2002 (Wendling et al., 2020) and designed to supplement the environmental targets set forth in the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. The EPI is composed of Ecosystem Vitality and Environmental Health with weights of 60% and 40%, and the two subindexes are further composed of the second and third levels of indictors, as shown in Fig. 5.13. Although perhaps not thoroughly precise, the EPI is comprehensive and can measure and compare the environmental sustainability of various countries. In 2020, the top ten on the EPI ranking among 180 countries were Denmark (rank 1, 82.5), Luxembourg (2, 82.3), Switzerland (3, 81.5), the UK (4, 81.3), France (5, 80.0), Austria (6, 79.6), Finland (7, 78.9), Sweden (8, 78.7), Norway (9, 77.7), and Germany (10, 77.2). The United States was (24, 69.3); China (120, 37.3), and India (168, 27.3). The bottom five were Côte d’Ivoire (176, 25.8), Sierra Leone (177, 25.7), Afghanistan (178, 25.5), Myanmar (179, 25.1), and Liberia (180, 22.6). Although we can claim the country with the best and poorest environmental performance and sustainability according to these scores and rankings, this information and knowledge are rough and insufficient. The observation and understanding of specific countries are also essential. As Fig. 5.14 indicates, the GDPPC and EPI still have a strong correlation coefficient, R = 0.85. This means that wealthier countries can statistically perform better EPI, while poorer countries have to suffer worse environments. Therefore, not surprisingly, the best countries on the rank of EPI are wealthy and developed countries such as Denmark, Switzerland, and the UK, and the worst countries are those poorest such as Afghanistan, Myanmar, and Liberia. The outliers are worthy of concern and argued. The United States is

202

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.13 The structure and weight of EPI (Source Wendling et al., 2020)

the country with worse EPI among wealthy countries; China and India also perform poorly relative to their economic performance.

5.4.6 Happiness Happiness has always been viewed as a crucial value and ultimate goal of individuals and societies, although it is traditionally a fuzzy and blurred concept and hard to grasp and measure. Many great philosophers, such as Plato and Confucius, have distinguished authentic and deep happiness, such as eudemonia, from sensual and shallow happiness, such as pleasure. Few people will agree that addiction is real happiness, although one may experience the climax instantly but suffer lastingly. A responsible father, a diligent scholar, and a sacrificed martyr may reasonably and sincerely claim they are happy when surveyed, although they may have sacrificed

5.4 Social Best

203

Fig. 5.14 The scatter diagram and correlation coefficient between GDPPC and EPI (Source The GDPPC data are from World Bank Open Data, and the EPI data are from Wendling et al. [2020])

much even including their lives. Therefore, real happiness is not only from material living but also from responsibility, contribution, altruism, and discovery. The philosophical and quantitative analysis can help us clarify and understand the true meaning of happiness, as well as other value concepts such as environment, democracy and freedom. Pragmatically and quantitatively, happiness can be, and has been, measured and indexed by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Gallup World Poll and Lloyd’s Register Foundation with the help of UN since 2012 (Helliwell et al., 2021). By subjective surveys and questionnaires such as “Generally, how satisfied are you with your life recently,” the respondents were asked to score on a Likert scale from 0 to 10, 0 meaning most unhappy and 10 happiest. When there are sufficient respondents and years, the average scores can roughly measure the happiness of people of countries and regions annually. With related demographic variables such as age, gender, family, income, and religion, the relationship between happiness and these variables can be further discovered. By this methodology, although the respondent can score his/her happiness by a number from 0 to 10, it is still arguable and controversial whether this happiness number is precise and comparable. Can we believe a respondent scoring 8 is happier than another respondent scoring 5? The deep and detailed observation and exploration and empathy of one’s live is more effective to understand happiness than just minutes of survey and scoring. Surely, when arguing the happiness of a country, large-sample surveys and questionnaires are still feasible and can provide some information. In the most recent happiness report in 2021, the top ten happiest countries among 149 are Finland

204

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

(ranking 1, scoring 7.842), Denmark (2, 7.620), Switzerland (3, 7.571), Iceland (4, 7.554), the Netherlands (5, 7.464), Norway (6, 7.392), Sweden (7, 7.363), Luxembourg (8, 7.324), New Zealand (9, 7.277), and Austria (10, 7.268). The United States ranked 19 and scored 6.951, China (84, 5.339), and India (139, 3.819). The bottom five countries were Lesotho (145, 3.512), Botswana (146, 3.467), Rwanda (147, 3.415), Zimbabwe (148, 3.145), and Afghanistan (149, 2.523). Again, as Fig. 5.15 indicates, there is a strong correlation between GDPPC and the happiness index (HAP), R = 0.84. This correlation indicates that wealthier countries tend to be happier countries, with a probability of 0.84. The variances mean that many other unexplainable factors deviate the countries from the tendency line, but the economic factor (GDPPC) can still explain happiness by 84%. This is reasonable and explainable because economy and income can basically determine people’s and society’s total happiness, while other factors such as family, education, culture, religion and even gene can also function. These factors can be argued not only by quantitative indexes but also by qualitative experience and empathy. The Happy Planet Index (HPI) is another index related to, but much different from, the Happiness Index. It was compiled by the New Economic Foundation as a measure of sustainable well-being, aiming to compare how efficiently residents of different countries are using natural resources to achieve long and high well-being lives (New Economic Foundation, 2016). The equation of HPI is below:

Fig. 5.15 Scatter diagram and correlation coefficient between GDPPC and HAP (Source The GDPPC is from World Bank Open Data, and the HPA is from Helliwell et al. [2021])

5.4 Social Best

Happy Planet Index ≈

205

(Life expectancy × Experienced wellbing) × Inequality of outcomes Ecological Footprint

By this equation and methodology, we can understand that the essence of HPI is experience well-being (happiness) adjusted positively by life expectancy and negatively by inequality and environment consumption. Much different from the Happiness Index as well-being, the HPI is a synthesis of happiness, equality, and environment. Although arguable and controversial, it may provide a new evaluation, ranking, and perspective of countries and the world. In fact, the various indexes are essentially kinds of evaluations and value perspectives. By GDPPC, there is a scoring and ranking and evaluation; by Democracy Index, Freedom Index, HDI, Happiness Index, there are other scoring and ranking and evaluation, while all these index and evaluation are correlated to some extent. However, the HPI gave thoroughly different scores and rankings. In 2016, the top ten among 140 countries were Costa Rica (ranking 1 and scoring 44.7), Mexico (2, 40.7), Colombia (3, 40.7), Vanuatu (4, 40.6), Vietnam (5, 40.3), Panama (6, 39.5), Nicaragua (7, 38.7), Bangladesh (8, 38.4), Thailand (9, 37.3), and Ecuador (10, 37.0). Most of these top 10 countries were developing ones and not so wealthy from Latin America and Asia. The best developed and western country was Norway (12, 36.8), Denmark (32, 32.7), the UK (34, 31.9), and the USA (108, 8.2). India (50, 29.2) and China (72, 25.7) ranked not high in the HPI. The bottom five countries were Mongolia (136, 14.3), Benin (137, 13.4), Togo (138, 13.2), Luxembourg (139, 13.2), and Chad (140, 12.8). Astonishingly, few indexes have ranked the United States and Luxembourg so backward. By the HPI, the best countries are no longer developed and wealthy Nordic, North American, or West European countries but Latin American and Asian countries such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Colombia, Vietnam, Bangladesh and Thailand. Therefore, which country is the best country depends on the value system and corresponding indexes that one explicitly or implicitly holds. The significance and enlightenment of HPI is not whether it is precise or not, but it can provide a new perspective and value system. By the new index, the traditional best countries are not best, while the traditional worst countries are not worst. This point can be verified by the quantitative correlation analysis, since the correlation between GDPPC and HPI is weak, R = 0.26, as Fig. 5.16 shows. This means that we should pay more attention to those indicators weakly correlating to the GDPPC, which can provide new values and angles to understand human society.

5.5 Good Country 5.5.1 Good Country Index Interestingly, the Good Country Index (GOI) has also been invented and compiled by Simon Anholt since 2014, an independent researcher and policy advisor. He

206

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.16 Scatter diagram and correlation between GDPPC and HPI

argued that things seem to be getting worse all the time: climate change, terrorism, pandemics, migration, economic chaos… the list goes on. All these problems have grown too large and too complex for any individual nation to solve. However, instead of collaborating, nations spend all their energy and resources competing against each other. This has to change if we want to make the world work. This is why the Good Country exists (Anholt, 2021). The GOI is composed by 7 subindexes. (1) Science & Technology; (2) Culture, (3) International Peace & Security, (4) World Order, (5) Planet & Climate, (6) Prosperity & Equality, (7) Health & Well-being. Every subindex is further constructed by five indicators, such as Science & Technology including: (1) International students: Number of foreign students studying in the country (according to UNESCO) relative to the size of the economy. (2) Journal exports: Exports of periodicals, scientific journals and newspapers (according to ITC) relative to the size of the economy. (3) International publications: Number of articles published in international journals relative to the size of the economy. (4) Nobel prizes: Accumulated Nobel prizes (up to 2016) assigned to countries based on laureates’ country of birth as well as country (countries) of institutional affiliation at the time of the award, relative to the size of the economy. (5) Patents: Number of International Patent Cooperation Treaty applications (according to WIPO) relative to the size of the economy. There are 35 indicators for the 7 subindexes. In the newest edition of the GOC in 2019, the top 10 among 149 countries were Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Canada, Netherlands, Finland, France, UK, Spain, and Norway, ranking without scoring. The United States ranked no. 38, China 60, and India 53. The bottom five were Iraq, Mauritania, Guinea, Yemen, and Libya. Obviously, although there were some outliers, such as the United States, the ranking of GOC was rather consistent with the GDPPC, which means that wealthier countries

5.5 Good Country

207

Fig. 5.17 The scatter diagram and spearman correlation coefficient between GDPPC and GOC

tend to be better countries, such as Sweden and Denmark, and poorer countries tend to be worse countries, such as Yemen and Libya. Since the compiler did not provide the detailed scores of the country, we can use the Spearman rank correlation coefficient (SR), which measures the correlation between the rank of data. As Fig. 5.17 indicates, the SR = 0.62, medium strong. The positive outliers were, for example, Bulgaria (BGR) and India (IND), since they achieved better ranking on the GOC by their relatively poor economy on GDP per capita, while the negative outliers were, for example, Qatar (QAT) and United States, since their rankings on the GOC were worse than that on the GDP per capita. Although these rankings of the GOC may not be thoroughly precise and reliable, they can verify the function of the economy and remind the outliers that they have some merits and demerits relative to the economy.

5.5.2 Best Country Index Similar to the Good Country Index, the Best Country Index (BCI) was invented and compiled by the US News, BAV Group and Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania (US News, 2019). This index is composed by 9 subindexes. (1) Entrepreneurship, weight 17.87%; (2) Adventure, 2%; (3) Citizenship, 15.88%; (4) Cultural Influence, 2.96%; (5) Heritage, 1.13%; (6) Movers, 14.36%; (7) Open for Business, 11.08%; (8) Power, 7.95%; (9) Quality of Life, 16.77%. To determine the weight each subranking score had in the overall Best Countries score, each was correlated to gross domestic product at purchasing power parity per capita, a measure of inclusive prosperity, as reported by the International Monetary Fund. Subrankings

208

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Fig. 5.18 The scatter diagram and spearman correlation coefficient between GDPPC and BCI

that demonstrated a stronger relationship with the wealth metric were weighted more heavily, and all weights were standardized to a total of 100. The data were surveyed by 20,301 respondents from 36 countries in four regions: the Americas, Asia, Europe and the Middle East and Africa. Of the respondents, 11,238 were informed elites, and 5,963 were business decision-makers. Some respondents were considered both informed elites and business decision-makers. On the BCI in 2019, the top 10 best countries, among a total of 80, were Switzerland, Japan, Canada, Germany, the UK, Sweden, Australia, the USA, Norway, and France. China ranked no. 16, and India 27. The bottom 5 countries were Lebanon, Serbia, Angola, Iran, and Iraq. Again, wealthier countries tend to be better countries, such as Switzerland and Japan, while poorer countries tend to be worse, such as Iran and Iraq. As Fig. 5.18 shows, the Spearman correlation coefficient between GDPPC and BCE is SR = 0.73, which is quite strong. Japan (JPN), China (CHN), and India (IND) are the positive outliers in which they have better rankings on the BCI than the GDPPC, while Qatar (QAT) is the negative outlier, again reminding the country’s excellent economy but poor performance in other social fields.

5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) Human society has many different aspects. For simplicity, it can be roughly trichotomized into economic, political and social. On the one hand, we can describe and understand human society and its aspects qualitatively; for example, the United States is wealthier (perhaps correct because GDP per capita is a reliable indicator)

5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

209

and more democratic than China (perhaps not correct because the Democracy Index is not as reliable as GDP per capita). On the other hand, we can grasp and compare human society and its aspects quantitatively by various indicators, such as GDP per capita, Democracy Index, Freedom Index, Human Development Index, Happy Planet Index, Good Country Index and Best Country Index, although these indicators can only measure parts of human society with limited reliability, and we should be cautious about them. The qualitative description and quantitative measurement should be cross-checked and mutually verified. Meanwhile, there are implicit or explicit relationships among these aspects and indicators. As we have argued the best country from various aspects and the corresponding indicators, we can find that economy measured by GDP per capita plays a crucial role and basically determines various goodness of a country, although there are still many other factors and indicators function. The complex relationship among various aspects and indicators can be explored and discovered by the Principal Component Analysis (PCA), which is a statistical methodology used to analyze interrelationships among a large number of variables. To measure the goodness of a country, we can roughly divide the whole society of a country into five fields: (1) economy, (2) politics, (3) society, (4) culture, and (5) ecology, where culture and ecology are also parts of society while separation can make them clearer. As Table 5.7 shows, we can use some indexes to measure and describe these fields. Although this list of indexes can be expanded since human society is broad, we can concentrate human society on these fields and indexes, and the other fields and indexes can be included and argued by a similar methodology. This means that in these five fields measured by the 15 indexes, we can claim which countries are best countries and then discover the relationship among these fields and indexes. Our argument is open since if any other fields and indicators and values are concerned, they can be included and analyzed similarly. Correlation analysis is the foundation of PCA. Although the correlation is not the causation, the correlation can indicate and hint at causation. If the correlation coefficient R between two variables, say, GDP per capita (GDPR) and Human Development Index (HDI) is 0.8, we can claim the GDPPC and the HDI have the similarity of 0.8, or the GDPR can determine the HDI by 80%, or the HDI can determine the GDPR by 80%, although which is the cause and which is the consequence, not crucial, are complex and may be mutually affecting. The correlation coefficient R of two variables can be regarded as their similarity and can be clearly exhibited by vectors and their angles. As Table 5.8 shows, if R = 1 for two indicators, say, y and x, it means that these two indicators are coinciding and thoroughly identical, and y can be expressed as the linear function of x, y = kx. The information embedded in y and x are thoroughly the same. If R = 0.5 for two indicators, it means that the angle between these two indexes α = 60° and cos α = 0.5. If R = 0, it means that the two indicators have no correlation, and they are perpendicular and orthogonal. If R = − 0.5, α = 120°. The negative correlation coefficient means that the two indexes have the opposite direction. The length of the vector is its standard deviation. Therefore, the 15 indexes in Table 5.7 can construct the 15-dimensional space, and the positions

210

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Table 5.7 Public value and social-economic index Social fields

Public value

Index

Abb.

Year

Publisher

Economy

Wealth Wealth Strongness

Real GDP Real GNI Global Competitiveness Index

GDPR GNIR GCI

2018 2018 2018

World Bank World Bank World Bank

Politics

Transparency Democracy Freedom

Corruption CPI Perception Index DEM Democracy Index HFI Human Freedom Index

2018 2018 2018

Transparency Int Economists Cato, etc.

Society

Development Happiness Equity

Human Development Index Happiness Index Gini Coefficient

HDI HAP GIN

2018 2018 2018

UN UN World Bank

Culture

Gender Equity Peace Happiness

Gender Gap Index Positive Peace Index Happy Planet Index

GGI PPI HPI

2017 2016 2016

World Economic Forum Economic and Peace New Economic Fund

Ecology

Environment Ecology Carbon Reduction

Env. Performance EPI Index EFP Ecological Foot CO2 Print CO2 Emission Per Capita

2018 2016 2017

Columbia Uni Glo. Foot. Network World Bank

of various countries are determined by their performances in the space. If more indicators are concerned, the dimension of the space is enlarging, and more perspectives are considered. Table 5.9 gives the correlation matrix of the 15 indexes in Table 5.7. We find that most of them have medium or strong correlations, particularly for the GDPR, GNIR, HDI, EPI, GCI, etc., generally at approximately 0.8, while the GGI and HPI have weak correlations with other indexes, generally at approximately 0.2. The interrelationships among these 15 indicators can be further calculated by PCA, and the results are given in Table 5.10. This indicates that the first principal component (Comp. 1) can explain 66% of all the information in the 15 indexes, and Comp. 2, 9.7%, Comp. 3, 7%, Comp. 4, 5%, Comp. 5, 3%. The first 5 principal components can explain 91% of the information of the 15 indicators. Figures 5.19 and 5.20 show the spatial relationship of the 15 indicators and the positions of countries. We can find that Dim1 (Comp. 1), explaining 66% of the information, are closely surrounded by GDPR, GNIR, HDI, GCI, CPI, etc., indicating their strong correlations. Thus, Dim1 can be named the Economic Component. Wealthiest countries, such as Norway (NOR), Switzerland (CHE), Canada (CAN), and the USA, are on the right hand, and

5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

211

Table 5.8 Correlation and similarity and of indexes R

Angle

Similarity

ρ=1

Index

0°

100%

ρ = 0.5

60°

50%

ρ=0

90°

0

ρ = −0.5

120°

−50%

ρ = −1

180°

−100%

the poorest countries, such as Burundi (BDI) and Chad (TCD), are on the left hand. Thus, the economic component plays the major role, 66%, in the 15 indexes. Because all the principal components are perpendicular and orthogonal, the Dim1 Economy Component is not only the GDPC but also the condensed and purified economy including all other economic contents in the 15 indexes, while other indexes no longer have economic content. Therefore, Dim2 has no economic content and zero correlation with Dim1. It is close to the HPI and can be named as the Ecological Happiness, playing the second major role and explaining 9.7% of the information in the 15 indexes. Costa Rica (CRI), Columbia (COL) and Nicaragua (NIC) are at the top, while Kazakhstan (KAZ), Mongolia (MNG), and Russia (RUS) are at the bottom. Similarly, Dim3 can be named as the Gender Equity, explaining 7% of the information of the 15 indexes. Rwanda (RWA), South Africa (ZAF), and Botswana (BWA) are the best, while

DEM

CPI

GCI

GNIR

Pearson Correlation

0.574**

171

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.724**

Pearson Correlation

139

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.843**

Pearson Correlation

193

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.996**

194

1

GDPR

Pearson Correlation

N

Sig. (2-tailed)

GDPR Pearson Correlation

Correlations

0.576**

171

0.000

0.725**

139

0.000

0.847**

193

1

193

0.000

0.996**

GNIR

0.587**

142

0.000

0.834**

142

1

139

0.000

0.847**

139

0.000

0.843**

GCI

0.761**

180

1

142

0.000

0.834**

171

0.000

0.725**

171

0.000

0.724**

CPI

Table 5.9 Correlation coefficient of 15 indexes

1

165

0.000

0.761**

140

0.000

0.587**

160

0.000

0.576**

160

0.000

0.574**

DEM

0.815**

156

0.000

0.781**

141

0.000

0.677**

154

0.000

0.634**

154

0.000

0.639**

HFI

0.640**

176

0.000

0.748**

141

0.000

0.856**

181

0.000

0.957**

181

0.000

0.951**

HDI

0.610**

152

0.000

0.680**

134

0.000

0.762**

148

0.000

0.818**

148

0.000

0.818**

HAP

−0.207*

160

0.000

−0.284**

136

0.000

−0.339**

163

0.000

−0.334**

163

0.000

−0.326**

GIN

0.568**

142

0.000

0.496**

131

0.000

0.403**

140

0.000

0.292**

140

0.000

0.296**

GGI

−0.823**

162

0.000

−0.927**

137

0.000

−0.838**

153

0.000

−0.831**

153

0.000

−0.827**

PPI

0.345**

138

0.049

0.168*

124

0.001

0.283**

137

0.001

0.272**

137

0.002

0.262**

HPI

0.654**

173

0.000

0.728**

140

0.000

0.746**

176

0.000

0.830**

176

0.000

0.827**

EPI

0.354**

167

0.000

0.633**

133

0.000

0.654**

166

0.000

0.747**

166

0.000

0.751**

EFP

(continued)

0.138

175

0.000

0.409**

139

0.000

0.519**

188

0.000

0.628**

188

0.000

0.623**

CO2

212 5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

GIN

HAP

HDI

HFI

Pearson −0.326** Correlation

148

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.818**

Pearson Correlation

181

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.951**

Pearson Correlation

154

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.639**

160

0.000

GDPR

Pearson Correlation

N

Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlations

Table 5.9 (continued)

−0.334**

148

0.000

0.818**

181

0.000

0.957**

154

0.000

0.634**

160

0.000

GNIR

−0.339**

134

0.000

0.762**

141

0.000

0.856**

141

0.000

0.677**

140

0.000

GCI

−0.284**

152

0.000

0.680**

176

0.000

0.748**

156

0.000

0.781**

165

0.000

CPI

−0.207*

150

0.000

0.610**

165

0.000

0.640**

153

0.000

0.815**

167

DEM

−0.250**

142

0.000

0.586**

157

0.000

0.674**

158

1

153

0.000

HFI

−0.373**

151

0.000

0.826**

189

1

157

0.000

0.674**

165

0.000

HDI

−0.261**

154

1

151

0.000

0.826**

142

0.000

0.586**

150

0.000

HAP

1

144

0.002

−0.261**

164

0.000

−0.373**

146

0.002

−0.250**

154

0.010

GIN

−0.076

132

0.000

0.426**

144

0.000

0.434**

140

0.000

0.610**

139

0.000

GGI

0.374**

147

0.000

−0.757**

158

0.000

−0.864**

147

0.000

−0.835**

159

0.000

PPI

−0.141

134

0.000

0.518**

140

0.000

0.355**

130

0.043

0.178*

138

0.000

HPI

−0.385**

147

0.000

0.775**

179

0.000

0.855**

155

0.000

0.682**

162

0.000

EPI

−0.396**

145

0.000

0.644**

170

0.000

0.707**

149

0.000

0.439**

157

0.000

EFP

(continued)

−0.292**

150

0.000

0.499**

185

0.000

0.570**

155

0.010

0.207**

162

0.080

CO2

5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) 213

EPI

HPI

PPI

GGI

Pearson Correlation

0.827**

137

0.002

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.262**

153

0.000

Pearson Correlation

N

Sig. (2-tailed)

Pearson −0.827** Correlation

140

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.296**

163

0.000

GDPR

Pearson Correlation

N

Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlations

Table 5.9 (continued)

0.830**

137

0.001

0.272**

153

0.000

−0.831**

140

0.000

0.292**

163

0.000

GNIR

0.746**

124

0.001

0.283**

137

0.000

−0.838**

131

0.000

0.403**

136

0.000

GCI

0.728**

138

0.049

0.168*

162

0.000

−0.927**

142

0.000

0.496**

160

0.000

CPI

0.654**

138

0.000

0.345**

159

0.000

−0.823**

139

0.000

0.568**

154

0.010

DEM

0.682**

130

0.043

0.178*

147

0.000

−0.835**

140

0.000

0.610**

146

0.002

HFI

0.855**

140

0.000

0.355**

158

0.000

−0.864**

144

0.000

0.434**

164

0.000

HDI

0.775**

134

0.000

0.518**

147

0.000

−0.757**

132

0.000

0.426**

144

0.002

HAP

−0.385**

134

0.105

−0.141

149

0.000

0.374**

134

0.380

−0.076

167

GIN

0.418**

122

0.018

0.214*

134

0.000

−0.555**

144

1

134

0.380

GGI

−0.840**

132

0.000

−0.310**

162

1

134

0.000

−0.555**

149

0.000

PPI

0.300**

140

1

132

0.000

−0.310**

122

0.018

0.214*

134

0.105

HPI

1

136

0.000

0.300**

156

0.000

−0.840**

142

0.000

0.418**

161

0.000

EPI

0.640**

133

0.426

−0.070

154

0.000

−0.675**

137

0.053

0.166

151

0.000

EFP

(continued)

0.453**

138

0.121

−0.133

157

0.000

−0.462**

142

0.802

0.021

163

0.000

CO2

214 5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

188

0.000

0.628**

166

0.000

0.747**

176

0.000

GNIR

139

0.000

0.519**

133

0.000

0.654**

140

0.000

GCI

is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed) ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

188

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.623**

Pearson Correlation

166

0.000

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

0.751**

176

0.000

GDPR

Pearson Correlation

N

* Correlation

CO2

EFP

Sig. (2-tailed)

Correlations

Table 5.9 (continued)

175

0.000

0.409**

167

0.000

0.633**

173

0.000

CPI

162

0.080

0.138

157

0.000

0.354**

162

0.000

DEM

155

0.010

0.207**

149

0.000

0.439**

155

0.000

HFI

185

0.000

0.570**

170

0.000

0.707**

179

0.000

HDI

150

0.000

0.499**

145

0.000

0.644**

147

0.000

HAP

163

0.000

−0.292**

151

0.000

−0.396**

161

0.000

GIN

142

0.802

0.021

137

0.053

0.166

142

0.000

GGI

157

0.000

−0.462**

154

0.000

−0.675**

156

0.000

PPI

138

0.121

−0.133

133

0.426

−0.070

136

0.000

HPI

175

0.000

0.453**

166

0.000

0.640**

180

EPI

169

0.000

0.845**

174

1

166

0.000

EFP

204

1

169

0.000

0.845**

175

0.000

CO2

5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA) 215

216

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

Table 5.10 Principal component of the 15 indexes Component

Dim.1

Dim.2

Dim.3

Dim.4

Dim.5

Dim.6

Dim.7

Dim.8

Eigenvalue

9.91

1.46

1.05

0.80

0.49

0.34

0.24

0.23

Variance (%)

0.66

0.97

0.07

0.05

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.02

Accu. var. (%)

0.66

0.76

0.83

0.88

0.91

0.94

0.95

0.97

Component

Dim.9

Dim.10

Dim.11

Eigenvalue

0.18

0.12

Variance (%)

0.01

0.01

Accu. var. (%)

0.98

0.99

Dim.12

Dim.13

Dim.14

Dim.15

0.08

0.06

0.03

0.02

0.00

0.01

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.99

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Fig. 5.19 Dim1 and Dim2 of 15 Indexes

Algeria (DZA), Iran (IRN), Pakistan (PAK), and Egypt (EGY) are at the bottom. This finding can verify that even the poorest countries, such as Rwanda (RWA) and Botswana (BWA), can have some best performance in some aspects, in this case, gender equity. Dim4 is basically from GIN and can be named as the Economic Equity, explaining 5.4% of the information of the 15 indexes. Other dimensions can be basically ignored because their information is increasingly less, below 3%, 2%, and 1% gradually. By the arguments of best country and PCA, we attempt to demonstrate the following: 1.

We can compare and rank countries by value standards such as wealth (GDP), competitiveness (GCI), happiness (HAP) and environment (EPI). By these value standards and indicators, the USA, Canada, the UK, Nordic countries, and other Western countries are generally viewed as good countries and always ranked at

5.6 Principal Component Analysis (PCA)

217

Fig. 5.20 Dim 3 and Dim4 of 15 Indexes

2.

the top of various ranking lists. The reason is that the potential value standards of these ranking lists are economy and GDP per capita or some values and indicators that strongly correlate to GDP per capita, such as democracy and freedom. All people, particularly elites such as politicians, entrepreneurs, and scholars, have explicit or implicit value standards. Therefore, we need to be cautious about our potential value standards, maybe biased, and try our best to keep value neutrality. If we change our value standard, such as HPI, the rank of the best country may change correspondingly and fundamentally. This means that the new values and new rankings will give us new perspective and understanding of the world. Values are always blurred while indicators are clear, but indicators have explicit or implicit value bases. Although any indicator can measure the corresponding value to some extent, such as the Democracy Index, Freedom Index, and Human Development Index, we need to be cautious about whether these indicators can fully and precisely measure the value. On the one hand, we need to depend on the quantitative indicators because they are relatively precise and comparable. On the other hand, we cannot rely on them thoroughly because they are also kinds of subjective evaluation and attitude and may be biased and misguided. Qualitative understanding and empathy are essential for value items such as democracy, freedom, happiness, and development. These values are so profound and abundant that the questionnaire, attitude survey and subjective scoring cannot fully reflect and measure them. It is essential for us to understand these values, which guide and direct individual behaviors and government policies.

218

5 Social Development: Which Country Is the Best Country

References Anholt, S. (2021). Good Country Index. https://index.goodcountry.org/ De Long, J. B. (1998). Estimating world GDP, one million B.C.–Present. http://holtz.org/Lib rary/Social%20Science/Economics/Estimating%20World%20GDP%20by%20DeLong/Estima ting%20World%20GDP.htm EIU. (2018). The Economist Intelligence Unit, Democracy Index 2018: Me too? Political participation, protest and democracy. www.eiu.com Gore, A. (2000). Earth in the balance: Ecology and the human Spirit. Houghton Mifflin. Harari, Y. N. (2015). Sapiens: A brief history of humankind. Harper. Helliwell, J. F., Layard, R., Sachs, J., & De Neve, J. E. (2021). World happiness report 2021. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. https://happiness-report.s3.amazonaws.com/2021/ WHR+21.pdf Kennedy, R. F. (1968, March 18). Remarks at the University of Kansas. https://www.jfklibrary. org/learn/about-jfk/the-kennedy-family/robert-f-kennedy/robert-f-kennedy-speeches/remarksat-the-university-of-kansas-march-18-1968. Landefeld, J. S. (1999). GDP: One of the great inventions of the 20th century. Bureau of Economic Analysis. https://apps.bea.gov/scb/account_articles/general/0100od/maintext.htm. Masood, E. (2016). The great invention: The story of GDP and the making and unmaking of the modern world. Pegasus Books. New Economic Foundation. (2016). Happy Planet Index 2016, methods paper. http://happyplaneti ndex.org/s/Methods-paper_2016.pdf. Pew Research Center. (2020). Trends in U.S. income and wealth inequality. https://www.pewres earch.org/social-trends/2020/01/09/trends-in-income-and-wealth-inequality/ Sandel, M. (1998). What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets. The Tanner Lectures on Human Values. Retrieved from http://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/s/sandel00.pdf Schwab, K. (2019). The global competitiveness report. World Economic Forum. http://www3.wef orum.org/docs/WEF_TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2019.pdf Sustainable Development Solutions Network. (2021). https://worldhappiness.report/ UNDP. (2013). Human development report 2013: Technique note. United Nations Development Programme. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2013_en_technotes.pdf US News. (2019). Best countries 2019. https://www.usnews.com/media/best-countries/overall-ran kings-2019.pdf Vasquez, I., & Porcnic, T. (2018). The Human Freedom Index 2018, A global measurement of personal, civil, and economic freedom. Fraser Institute. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/def ault/files/human-freedom-index-2018.pdf Wang, B., & Christensen, T. (2017). The open public value account and comprehensive social development: An assessment of China and the United States. Administration & Society, 49(6), 852–881. Wendling, Z. A., Emerson, J. W., de Sherbinin, A., Esty, D. C., et al. (2020). 2020 Environmental Performance Index. Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy. https://epi.yale.edu World Bank. (2006). Where is the wealth of nations? Measuring capital for the 21st century. World Bank Publishing.

Chapter 6

Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Our current world has been gradually divided and formed by 193 sovereign countries since modernization and industrialization in the eighteenth century and particularly after World Wars I and II in the twentieth century. The sovereign country is the basic unit of social development and the modern world, although the region inside or beyond the country is also feasible. Originally, as parts of the blue planet, all countries should be unique and beautiful, and all people and races have the same ancestor. However, in reality, as countries have much different economic situations, geographic politics, historical and cultural backgrounds, etc., they are sometimes viewed as rich or poor, strong or weak, allies or enemies, respectable or rogue. For example, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) referred the rogue state to countries that have committed terrorism, human rights violation, assassination, torture, etc. (Blum, 2000) and Worlddata (2021) designated Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria as the four current rogue states and Cuba, Iraq, and Libya as the former. However, every country has specific beauties and achievements, problems and illnesses, histories, and cultures. Although our human society has gained much progress in politics, economics, peace, democracy, and freedom compared to history, there are still many conflicts, wars, crises, and misunderstandings threatening the beautiful and invaluable planet. Our current domestic and global political system still have many flaws, far from perfect. One of the basic reasons is that we still do not understand politics, countries, and the world, while politics may be the most fundamental aspects relative to economy and society for a country and the world. Relative to other countries, maybe we understand our own countries slightly more, but actually, nobody truly and fully understands something, even like water as H2 O and material as quark (Sciencevibe, 2017), while the scientific studies can help us deepen our understandings of everything including politics and countries and the world. Although we can only focus on some specific countries, such as the USA, UK, China, and Russia, any country should be concerned and understood, as they are all unique, equally beautiful, and problematic.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_6

219

220

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower 6.1.1 The United States Exceptionalism If any country can be ignored, the United States cannot be, as it has so many reasons to be the dominant and exceptional country in the world. United States Exceptionalism has been a prevalent political idea and concept. All countries and people are currently living under the influence and domination of the United States, although they mutually influence and impact each other, while the United States may be the dominator. As the sole superpower after the collapse of the former Soviet Union at the turn of 1990 and one of the two superpowers after World War II, the United States has dominated the world for more than half a century, and still will dominate in the foreseeable future. Its politics, economy, and society have been generally viewed and recognized as the best model, not only by most Americans but also by many, if not all, people around the world. Nearly all countries, including Japan, South Korea, and even China, as its current supposed rival, have learned and benefited much from the United States, while some countries and people, such as Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and terrorists of Al-Qaeda, hate or at least dislike the United States. How to understand the United States? What are the reasons for it to be the superpower? Can it sustain its superpower position, and how long if it can, and if it cannot, why? What are the merits and demerits of the United States that are worthy of being learned and criticized? If there are some problems and illnesses for the United States, what are the most serious and fatal ones, and how can we, or Americans, solve them? These questions can be pondered and answered only when we understand the country more deeply and precisely. Since we, as social scientists, should clearly distinguish fact from value, there are some basic and unquestionable facts to understand a country, including at least geography, population, culture, and history. Table 6.1 gives the geographic area and population data of the top 10 countries and some other countries of concern. According to these two indicators, only the several largest countries, such as Russia, Canada, China, Brazil, Australia, and India, are matchable to the United States and have the potential to be superpowers, while the United States, as the current sole superpower, may be perfect or exceptional, with 9,372,610 km2 and 331 million people, and the others are all more or less flawed. For example, Russia and Canada are geographically large enough, but the populations of 145.9 million and 37.7 million are relatively too small, although the USSR as the predecessor of Russia had been the superpower, and Canada seems to have no ambition to be a superpower but to be a wealthy ally of the United States. India has the potential and ambition, but its second-largest population, 1,380 million, may be a heavy burden for its relatively smaller area, 3,287,590 km2 . Brazil has the appropriate combination of geographic area, 8,515,767 km2 , and a population of 212.6 million, but it still has not achieved sufficient social development due to the lack of government capacity and ambition. China’s population, 1.4 billion, is similarly overloaded as India, while its geographic area, 9,706,961, is much larger than the latter. Although the population can be educated and trained to

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

221

Table 6.1 Basic facts of some countries Country

Total area (sq. km2 )

Rank Percentage of world Population Rank Percentage of world landmass (million) population

Russia

17,098,242 1

11.0

145.9

9

Canada

9,984,670

2

6.1

37.7

39

0.5

China

9,706,961

3

6.3

1,439.3

1

18.5

USA

9,372,610

4

6.1

331.0

3

4.3

Brazil

8,515,767

5

5.6

212.6

6

2.7

Australia

7,692,024

6

5.2

25.5

55

0.3

1.9

India

3,287,590

7

2.0

1,380.0

2

17.7

Argentina

2,780,400

8

1.8

45.2

32

0.6

Kazakhstan 2,724,900

9

1.8

18.8

64

0.2

Algeria

2,381,741

10

1.6

43.9

33

0.6

Norway

323,802

69

0.2

5.4

119

0.1

UK

242,900

80

0.2

67.9

21

0.9

Singapore

710

190

0.0

5.9

114

0.1

Source World Bank Open Data

be human resources by appropriate public policy, it is not easy for any country to achieve this goal, including China and India. Other smaller countries, such as the UK, Germany, and Singapore, have no area or population conditions to be comparable and matchable to those of the United States. They can be wealthy and distinctive and locally strong countries but not a global superpower. This combination of population and geography may be the basic and unquestionable condition and fact for the United States exceptionalism. From the perspective of geography, all the countries on the planet are the same and equal as parts of the earth, but from the perspective of geopolitics, the geographic location of the United States is superior and much better than that of any other country, such as Russia, China, the UK, and India. The United States has the appropriate area-population combination, huge area, and population, but not too heavy a population burden. It has only three neighboring countries. The north neighbor is Canada, a wealthy, peaceful, abundant, and ally country. The south neighbor is Mexico. Although they have illegal immigrant disputes, this issue is not fatal and can be solved by the collaboration of the two governments. Russia is the third neighbor of Alaska State of the United States, but the remote Bering Strait is not currently a controversial and strategic region. The western and eastern areas of the United States are the vast Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. There are few hostile countries around the United States and basically no territorial disputes. Cuba has a bad relation with the United States in history and now because of Cuban’s socialism, Missile Crisis in 1962 and the harsh sanction afterward, while their relation has been gradually mitigated after the Cold War, and the two countries re-established diplomatic relations in 2015. Surely, it still challenges US politicians’ wisdom to handle the relation to

222

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Cuba. However, much different from the United States, China has the longest land border, 22,000 km, and 15 neighboring countries, including nuclear countries such as Russia, Pakistan, India, North Korea, and possible Japan. The territorial disputes with India and some ASEAN countries, such as the Philippines and Vietnam, on the South China Sea and Taiwan’s desire for independence, have seriously impeded China’s development and ambition, challenging Chinese politicians’ wisdom and capability. Therefore, China, as well as other major countries, has much more intricate geopolitics than the United States, and the latter has sufficient reason for geography and population to be the sole exception in the world.

6.1.2 The Biggest and Strongest Economy The United States has been viewed, by most Americans and people in the world, as the exception, the tower of democracy, the city upon a hill, the superpower, the leader of the alliance in World War II, and the winner of the cold war. It has enjoyed many merits, contributed the world, and created great amounts of public values such as liberty and democracy not only for Americans but also for the world, although maybe not recognized by those countries harmed and sanctioned as its enemies such as Iran, Russia, Cuba, and current China. In fact, the economy of the United States is, and has been, excellent, and it has kept the largest economy in the world since the 1890s, as Fig. 6.1 shows. Since 1960, when we have reliable GDP data, the economy of the United States measured by GDP has grown much more rapidly and steadily than any other major capitalist country, such as Germany, the UK, France, and Japan,

Fig. 6.1 The GDP of United States and other countries (Source World Bank Open Data)

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

223

while China may be distinctive. In 1960, the GDP of the United States was 7.4 times of United Kingdom, 8.7 times of France, 5.0 times of Germany, 12.3 times of Japan, and 9.1 times of China, while in 2019, these multiples were 7.6 times to the United Kingdom, 7.9 times to France, 5.6 times to Germany, 4.2 times to Japan, and 1.5 times to China. These data indicate that the economic position of the United States to the UK, France, and Germany has remained constant, while Japan, particularly China, has jumped. Considering the absolute figures, the economic gaps between the United States and other countries are enormous. In particular, Japan’s GDP has mounted to the peak, 71.3% of the United States in 1995, but gradually stagnated and declined since then, and in 2019, it was only 23.8% of the United States. In contrast, China’s GDP has gradually grown from 11.0% of the United States in 1960 to 67.1% in 2019, challenging the economic position of the United States. This may be the main reason that the United States increasingly regards China as the major rival and demonstrates hostility. Indeed, the economic performance of the United States can be viewed as excellent in the past several decades. Few countries, except China and India, can enjoy a matchable economy to the United States. On the average level, the United States is also excellent relative to other major capitalist countries, as Fig. 6.2 shows. The economies of most European countries, such as the United Kingdom and France, and the two defeated nations, Germany and Japan, were ruined in World War II, while that of the United States was greatly strengthened. In 1960, fifteen years after the War, the GDP per capita in nominal value of the USA, UK, France, Japan, and China were $3007, $1398, $1335, $479, and $90, while in 2019, these figures were $65,118, $42,300, $40,494, $40,247, $10,262. The GDP per capita of Germany, without the data of 1960, in 1970 and 2019 were $2,761 and $46,259, respectively. We find that the growth of GDP per capita in the United

Fig. 6.2 GDP per capita of the United States and other countries (Source World Bank Open Data)

224

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

States was much steadier and more stable than that in other capitalist countries, stumbling slightly in the financial crisis in 2008 but soon recovering and growing again. In contrast, other capitalist countries, particularly Japan, have experienced dramatic fluctuations, particularly after 2010. Although the multiples of GDP per capita of the United States to these countries did not change too much, the current gaps of the absolute figures are huge, approximately $20,000. Relatively, China gained great progress in GDP per capita from $90 in 1960, as one of the poorest countries at that time, to $10,262 in 2019 as a medium wealthy country, although it is still low relative to the United States due to the giant population. In fact, the economic performance of the United States, as a giant country in terms of area and population, can be claimed to be successful at the total and average levels. In addition, the United States ranked no. 2, just behind Switzerland, on the Global Competitiveness Index compiled by the World Economic Forum in 2017–2018. This indicates that in addition to GDP, the economic quality and competitiveness of the United States are excellent.

6.1.3 Industry Hollowing and Inequality However, the success and competitiveness of the US economy may hide some problems and crises. During and after World War II, the United States was the manufacturing hub until the 1990s–2000s, when it could be regarded as the start of globalization, networkization, and digitalization triggered by information and communication technology (ICT). Before that time, the United States was a maturely industrialized country, manufacturing the majority of industrial products, including military arms and ammunition such as aircraft carriers, airplanes, and cannons, by which Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were defeated, and civil goods such as cars, computers, telephones, chips, machines, equipment, and infrastructure, by which the United States gained its economic power. Celebrated industrial brands and companies such as GM, IBM, Dell, AT&T, Intel, and McDonalds have been symbols of the United States, and “Made in America” has been proud of the country. In addition, these manufacturing industries have employed most workforces, formed the largest middle class in the world, improved people’s living standards, and actualized the “American Dream.” Meanwhile, upon the manufacturing capability and largest economy, the US dollar has become an international currency since the establishment of the Bretton Woods System in 1944. Although this system collapsed in 1971, the US government can still issue dollars without gold reserves due to its strong economy and lack of challenges. This financial capacity has sustained and strengthened its economic, cultural, and superpower position. However, there are also some hidden problems, such as industry hollowness and social equity. Globalization, networkization, and digitalization driven by ICT since the 1990s have greatly altered the economic composition of the United States, capitalist society, and the whole world. On the one hand, the United States, as the most innovative country, once again led the information age, contributed and benefited a lot, and

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

225

Fig. 6.3 The percentage of manufacturing industry in GDP1 (Source World Bank Open Data, various years)

kept its no. 1 economic and science and technology position in the new era. A number of new and great ICT companies emerged in the country, such as Microsoft established in 1975, Apple in 1976, Amazon in 1995, Google in 1998, Facebook in 2004, Twitter in 2006, etc. These companies greatly propelled and strengthened the economy, competitiveness, and innovation of the United States. However, due to globalization and the pursuit of efficiency, as the basic principle of free markets and capitalism, most manufacturing companies have gradually moved their production lines and assemblies to some developing countries, particularly China, due to their low cost from a large labor force and relatively poor labor and environment standards at that time. However, China has paid much labor and environmental costs to gain the advantage of low cost and economic efficiency since then and has gradually accumulated manufacturing knowledge, experience, human resources, and economic capacity. US consumers have also enjoyed products with good quality and low price, improving their economic welfare. When most manufacturing industries and job opportunities moved to China, the United States economy mainly transformed to the service industry, including finance of Wall Street, design and innovation in Silicon Valley in California, higher education of top universities and colleges, entertainment in Hollywood, etc. According to the historical data of the manufacturing industry contribution to the GDP of the United States and China in Fig. 6.3, the declining 1

World Bank Open Data does not provide the data of industry of the USA from 1960 to 1996. It defines this indicator, Industry (including construction), value added (% of GDP), as industry

226

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

tendency of the industry in the United States is clear, from 23.1% in 1997 to 18.6% in 2018. China has gradually replaced the United States as the largest world manufacturing hub. Actually, this world economic and industrial transformation is the natural consequence and function of the economic principle of the division of labor and comparative advantage but should not be explained and accused by the US government and some politicians, such as China’s theft of property rights or unfair trade. The outflow and hollowing of the manufacturing industry in the United States since the 1980s has brought profound and lasting impacts to the country and the world. First, the Rust Belt States have emerged and suffered an enduring economic downturn. These regions, running through central New York state, western Pennsylvania, Ohio, Maryland, Indiana, southern parts of Michigan, northern Illinois, eastern Iowa, and southeastern Wisconsin, were historically known as the Manufacturing Belt or Steel Belt, the backbone of US production. The deindustrialization and outsourcing of many “blue-collar” jobs overseas have left the regions in a state of decline and decay, giving the “Rust” Belt its name. The turning of voters in these regions from Democrat to Republican in the general election in 2016 sent Donald Trump to the White House. Low-wage, laid-off, less-educated, and white voters who suffered in economic decline constituted the majority of populism. This political transformation is greatly changing the United States and the world. Second, the middle class, which was the backbone and main body of American society before the 1980s, suffered and diminished in the information age. Although ICT has generated many eye-catching high technology companies and billionaires, the hi-tech industry cannot employ as many laborers as the traditional manufacturing industries, and the income and the population of the middle class in the United States have been shrinking. The United States is transforming from a spindle-shaped society dominated by the middle-class population to a pyramid society in which poorer populations dominate. In contrast, due to rapid industrialization, the percentage of the middle class in China was approximately 10.7% in 2018, still, less than 37.7% in the United States, but the absolute populations in the two countries were 92 million and 62 million, respectively, and this figure in China is still increasing while that in the United States is decreasing. China is gradually replacing the United States as the country with the largest middle-class population in the world (Kimalainen, 2018). Third, as the manufacturing industry declines and the middle class diminishes, economic inequality in the United States has enduringly worsened since the 1980s. As Fig. 6.4 shows, in the 1970s, the Gini coefficient of the United States was approximately 0.35, close to other main capitalist countries, such as Canada 0.33 (1975), the UK 0.30 (1974), Sweden 0.34 (1967), and higher than Germany 29.2 (1991). However, from 1970 to 2017, the Gini coefficient of the United States gradually climbed from 0.35 to 0.41, while these other major capitalist countries basically kept

corresponds to International Standard Industrial Classification (ISIC) divisions 10–45, including manufacturing (ISIC divisions 15–37). It comprises value added in mining, manufacturing (also reported as a separate subgroup), construction, electricity, water, and gas.

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

227

Fig. 6.4 Gini coefficient of major countries from 1960 to 2020 (Source World Bank Open Data. Some countries, such as China [CHN] and Germany [DEU], have no data before 1990, and the data are not available for every year)

this indicator stable and declining, although fluctuating, below 0.35 in 2017. Consequently, the United States has evolved to be the most inequal country among major industrialized and capitalist countries. In contrast, as a socialist country, China was quite equal before its Reform and Open policy in 1978, as traditional socialism had a planned economy and public ownership. However, it has experienced a sharp increase in inequality since then, with the Gini coefficient mounting to approximately 0.44 in 2010. However, since President Xi Jinping’s administration in 2012 with effective policy combinations, including poverty reduction, anti-corruption campaigns, and social justice enhancement, the Gini coefficient has been greatly reduced to 0.39 in 2016, much lower than that in the United States but still higher than that in the UK, Germany, Canada, and Sweden. By these comparisons, the US government has not taken and implemented effective measures to mitigate economic inequality or still regarded its level of inequality as acceptable and reasonable.

6.1.4 Racism, Drug Abuse, and Gun Violence The manufacturing industry outflow, diminishing middle class, and enlarging inequality have led to, or worsened, several other social problems and illnesses, which may have existed in the US society for a long period but have not been directly faced up and effectively solved by previous governments. Racism may be the first one. As the third populous country, the United States has a very diverse population composition by race and ethnicity. As Table 6.2 indicates, in 2020, there

228

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Table 6.2 The population composition of United States Year

White* (%)

Black (%)

Hispanic (%)

Asian (%)

Multiple races (%)

Other** (%)

2020

59.7

12.5

18.7

5.8

2.3

0.9

2025

57.7

12.7

19.9

6.3

2.6

0.9

2030

55.8

12.8

21.1

6.7

2.8

0.9

2035

53.8

12.9

22.3

7.1

3.1

0.9

2040

51.7

13.0

23.5

7.5

3.4

0.9

2045

49.7

13.1

24.6

7.9

3.8

0.9

2050

47.8

13.3

25.7

8.2

4.1

0.9

2055

46.0

13.4

26.6

8.5

4.5

0.9

2060

44.3

13.6

27.5

8.9

4.9

0.9

Source Ghosh (2020) *Excludes Hispanics **Other includes American Indian/Alaska Native (0.7%) and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (0.2%)

were 59.7% White, 18.7% Hispanic, 12.5% Black, 5.8% Asian, while by the year 2060, it is expected that White tends to decrease to 44.3%, Black basically keeps stable, Hispanic and Asian increase to 26.6% and 8.5%, respectively. This means that in 2020, there were approximately 197, 62, 41, 19 million White, Hispanic, Black, and Asian individuals in the country. White is the majority, while other races and ethnicities are not small numbered and will continuously increase. Historically and currently, the United States is, and has been, unique for its immigration. It was reportedly 46 million, 14% of the total population, no. 1 in the world relative to Germany’s 12 million, as no. 2, were immigrants (Dillinger, 2019). The top source countries of immigrants in the United States are Mexico, India, China, and the Philippines, as well as all countries around the world. This makes the country one of the world’s most multicultural societies. The “American Dream” is inspiring and attracting most people in the world, and a number of elites in nearly all domains, including scientists, engineers, physicians, and international students, have entered and immigrated to the United States, and some of them received citizenship, constructing and benefiting the country and making it the most innovative. However, illegal immigrants, estimated to be approximately 12.5–14.3 million in 2019 (O’Brien et al., 2019), is also a serious social problem costing and plaguing the country and the government. The US government has endeavored to eliminate or alleviate racism and promote racial and ethnic equity in its short history, but it is hard to say success. After the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the enactment of the Constitution in 1778, the United States had been still a slavery country for approximately 100 years until 1863, when President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, and the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were continuously passed in 1865, 1868, and 1870. However, the equal protection of voting rights and other civil rights of Black has not yet been fully achieved and realized for more than two centuries, exemplified

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

229

by the speech I Have a Dream delivered by Martin Luther King Jr. in 1963 and the enacting of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The constitution and rule of law have entitled equal rights to all citizens, including Black and other races and ethnicities in form, and political correctness requires equity and indiscrimination in form. Bare and explicit discrimination are officially opposed, but the various informal and implicit discrimination, in people’s mind and ubiquitous social situations, again Black and other minorities are still widespread in the United States. One evidence is the death of George Floyd (1974–2020), who was killed by police violence on May 25, 2020, triggering the “Black Lives Matter” movement afterward. In fact, as the third-largest minority race in the United States, the civil and human rights of Black have been more concerned and protected by the general public than those of Asian and other smaller minorities. In addition, the white supremacy and xenophobia in the United States have been stirred and amplified with the process of manufacturing industry hollowing and inequality enlargement, particularly by President Donald Trump’s administration from 2016 to 2020. Racial and ethnic harmony essentially depends not only on the enactment of constitution and law, although necessary but also on education enhancement, culture fusion, and specifically identity recognition. More than 200 years of American history has not been enough to achieve human rights protection of Black and other minorities, and there is still much work to do and a long way to go for the US government to achieve racial justice. Therefore, it probably has insufficient reason and ground for the US government, boasting as a human rights teacher, to blame and accuse other countries, such as China, as a human rights violator. The human rights issue, presented by the US government, is not based upon facts and evidence but has been politicized and weaponized as a political slogan and weapon. Drug abuse may be the second most serious social illness in the United States, arousing wide public concern, much more serious than China and other major industrialized countries. As a liberal, loosely regulated, and individualism-founded country, drug use may have been traditionally regarded as individual freedom. The deregulation of drugs, legalization of marijuana, loose prescription of drugs such as fentanyl, etc., have made it easy for people, particularly young people and children, to access drugs. Capitalism, liberalism, and individualism have offered people seemingly reasonable excuses to indulge in addiction. In fact, in 2018–2019, approximately 19% of Americans and 35% of minors in grades 8, 10, or 12 reported having used any illicit drug in their lifetime. Drug use is most common in the 18-to-25 age group, with 39% of all people reporting current drug use, and 47% of all young people using illegal drugs at least once by the time they leave high school (Redrock, 2020). There has been a dangerous wave of drug abuse sweeping the nation. Drug abuse and addiction have caused many other related social problems, such as rising medical costs, interest group capture, widening inequality, increasing crime, family breakdown, and loss of labor. The US government and political system have not solved this issue effectively if recognizing it as an issue. In contrast, although accused as authoritarian, the Chinese government has controlled drug trafficking and abuse much more effectively and successfully than the US government if recognizing this is goodness

230

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

and value, although criticized as human rights violation. At least on the issue of drug abuse, China is much better than the United States. Gun violence may be the third, definitely not the last, intractable, if not unsolvable, social illness for the United States and its government. It has been debated and quarreled for a long period, but no effective measures and policies have been undertaken since there is still no consensus in American society on the issue. The supporters of gun have resorted their reasons to individual freedom, American tradition and culture, personal security, masculinity, and profitability of the industry, all of which can be attributed to some significant public values. In contrast, the opponents also have strong reasons that all individual freedoms in modern society have to be restricted, that any tradition can and should adapt to the social transformation, that personal security can be safeguarded not by an individual but by government, that gun is not the only way to manifest masculinity, that the profitability of the rifle industry should give place to the public interest. Sole arguments and democracy cannot solve the problem effectively. Gun violence has been a shame for the United States as the sole superpower, the tower of liberty and democracy, and the model of capitalism. Regarding the related issues of social safety and crime rates, according to the data from United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), as Table 6.3 indicates, the prison population per 100,000 people of the United States was approximately 671 in 2017, the highest in the world and much higher than China’s 111. The homicide rate Table 6.3 Prison population, homicide rate and suicide rate of United States HDI rank 2018

Country

Prison population 2012–2017

Homicide rate 2012–2017

Suicide rate 2016 Female

Male

1

Norway

64

0.5

6.5

13.6

2

Switzerland

77

0.5

6.9

15.8

3

Ireland

78

0.9

4.2

17.6

77

1

4.8

13.6

13

4

Canada

Germany

113

1.8

5.8

15.1

14

New Zealand

222

0.7

6.2

17.3

15

UK

141

1.2

3.5

11.9

15

USA

671

5.3

6.4

21.1

17

Belgium

88

1.7

9.4

22.2

19

Japan

41

0.2

8.1

20.5

49

Russian

418

9.2

7.5

48.3

79

Brazil

335

30.5

2.8

9.7

85

China

111

0.6

8.3

7.9

129

India

32

3.2

14.5

18.5

152

Pakistan

42

4.2

3.1

3

Source UNDP (2020). The unit of data in the table is per 100,000 people

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

231

of the United States was 5.3, just below Russia 9.2 and Brazil 30.5 but higher than China 0.6, India 3.2, and Pakistan 4.2, the highest among the major industrialized countries. As safety can be an important public value, the United States is not a safe county, while China is one of the safest countries in the world.

6.1.5 Liberty, Democracy, and Capitalism Although with various social problems and illnesses, the United States has still been the sole superpower in the world since the end of World II, making great contributions and creating tremendous public values for not only Americans but also humankind. The core values the United States upholds can be summarized as liberty and democracy, from which more related public values such as equity, justice, wellbeing, safety, innovation, etc. can be derived. It is because the United States has pursued and realized these values much better than any other country in the world that it obtained its superpower capacity and position. Undoubtedly, it is still far from perfect on liberty and democracy, and so is flawed with problems and illness. Historically, it has been challenged by the USSR during the Cold War but finally won depending on the better performance on liberty and democracy. Currently, it is challenged by China, and whether it can win again depends on whether it can sustain and improve its liberty and democracy better. In fact, misunderstood and biased by US politicians, China’s temporary achievements in the last four decades are not from the stealing of intellectual property rights, unfair competition, government malign influences, etc., which cannot make any country truly strong and wealthy, but from the respect and acceptance of liberty and democracy, virtually learning from the United States, although in different forms and names such as “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics”. Authentic liberty and democracy, as well as other related public values, are the foundation and source of hard, soft, and smart power and social development. Regardless of whether the USA, China, Russia, or any other country, who can win global competition and become the best country depends on who can realize and achieve authentic and better liberty and democracy, as well as other related public values. The United States has inherited and developed liberty and democracy from the United Kingdom. As a former colony of the United Kingdom, the United States has fought battles with the British Empire from 1776 to 1783, finally won the war and gained independence. The United Kingdom was the first country to practice liberty and democracy through a series of institutional innovations, such as the Magna Carta in 1215, parliament in the thirteenth century, Glorious Revolution and Constitutional Monarch in 1688, and industrial revolution in the eighteenth century. Thus, it developed to be the superpower and “the empire on which the sun never sets” in eighteenth–nineteenth centuries. However, the United Kingdom has not practiced sufficient liberty and democracy in its colonies, including the United States, where people were still exploited, suppressed, and taxed heavily and unduly by the

232

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

unjust ruling of the United Kingdom. Therefore, as the mother of liberty and democracy, the United Kingdom has not practiced and achieved these important values thoroughly and universally. The United States, as well as other British colonies, fought for their independence by the inspiration of liberty and democracy. After the independence of the United States in 1776, founding fathers, including George Washington (1732–1799), Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), and Alexander Hamilton (1755–1804), drafted the Constitution of the United States in 1787. However, the Constitution was still not perfect and was amended by one to ten Amendments as the Bill of Rights in 1791. Afterward, 11–27 amendments were continuously passed and ratified from 1795 to 1992. The Constitution of the United States was the first written constitution and has been generally regarded as the best one in the world, but it is still not perfect, as the liberty and democracy in the United States for all Americans have not been fulfilled even to date. The Bill of Rights has protected the rights of most white and male, but black slaves and female were excluded initially, who were given the voting rights by Amendment XV in 1870 and Amendment XIX in 1920, 94 years and 144 years after the Independence. However, even today, the civil rights of Black and other ethnic and racial minorities have not yet been sufficiently protected, as indicated by the death of George Floyd in 2020 and the campaign of “Black Lives Matter.” The United States may have better performance on liberty and democracy, as well as human rights and some other public values, than other countries such as Russia and China, but it is neither the best, nor the perfect, and still necessary to reform and improve. It will take a long time for any country to improve liberty and democracy and other public values. Other countries, such as Russia and China, can compete with the United States in creating liberty and democracy and other public values in the long term. The United States and its capitalism have developed and evolved since the establishment of the country in 1776 to date and will further reform and change in the future. With the social transition, it has been confronting and solving many problems and issues in history, enhancing liberty and democracy, and achieving social development. As a typical capitalist country, the economy of the United States was rather laissez-faire during the nineteenth century with the ideology of classical liberalism. By the motivation of free competition and little governmental regulation, the economy of the United States grew rapidly, overtaking the United Kingdom and becoming the largest economy in the world at the end of the nineteenth century. However, at the same time, many serious social problems emerged, including monopoly, income discrepancy, corruption, poor quality of products, and environmental pollution. Industries such as oil, steel, beef, medicine, and finance have gradually been monopolized by some giant companies. With a monopoly, economic efficiency might be improved while the opportunity for newcomers and innovation might be damaged. Under this background, the Sherman Antitrust Act, proposed by Senator John Sherman from Ohio, was passed by the US Congress in 1890 as the first antitrust law prohibiting monopolies in the world. Since then, anti-monopoly, or regulating monopoly, has been the task of the federal government. Although the definition of monopoly and practical measures of regulating monopoly might always be

6.1 United States: The Sole Superpower

233

controversial, the objective and principle are clear and stable—making the economy and society more just, in other words, enhancing liberty and democracy of the society. The history of the United States from the 1890s to the 1920s is referred to as the Progressive Era stirred by the Progressive Movement, aiming to enhance social justice toward a “better” society. Here, we need to clarify and define “better.” The progressive reformers pushed a series of social and political reforms, seeking to harness and expand federal government to eliminate unethical and unfair business practices, reduce corruption, and counteract the negative social effects of industrialization. President Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919, presidency 1901–1909) and Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924, presidency 1913–1921) embraced the movement and accepted the ideology of new liberalism and social democracy, which were essentially influenced by Marxism, socialism, and communism, albeit not so extremely, and differentiated themselves from classical liberalism. These ideas believed that traditional capitalism with a free market was not perfect and might fail and should be regulated by the government toward social justice. The function and regulation of government should not be understood narrowly, by those conservationists, as interference of free market, but as a remedy of flawed capitalism and free market and enhancement of social justice. Consequently, during the period, the monopoly was regulated, as the Standard Oil Company was broken into 34 independent companies by the court’s decision. In addition, protections for workers and consumers were strengthened by the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, which created the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to guarantee the safety and purity of food products and pharmaceuticals. Women’s right to vote was guaranteed by the Nineteenth Amendment in 1919. The National Park Service was established by President Woodrow Wilson in 1916 to preserve invaluable natural, environmental, historical, and cultural sites, and there were 62 national parks in the United States until December 2019. Although these measures were controversial and opposed by some conservatives at that time, they have been recognized unanimously as common knowledge by the general public currently as the source of superpower and evidence of advancement and lead of the United States in human history. The Progressive Era and Movement at the turn of the twentieth century were neither the start nor the end of social reform in the United States. Due to its insufficiency, only thirty years later in the 1930s, the Great Depression occurred, and capitalism characterized by the free market and liberal democracy was again plunging into crisis. The temporary and weak government regulation since the Progressive Era could not sufficiently cure the blindness and defects of the free market, liberal democracy, and capitalism. President Franklin Roosevelt (1882–1945, presidency 1933–1945) rescued the country and capitalism by the New Deal based upon the theory of Keynesianism, with policies such as more government expansion, regulation, and interference with the economy and society, including stabilizing the financial system, enlarging governmental spending, and establishing a social security system. The essence and consequence of the New Deal and Keynesianism were to enhance social justice and strengthen liberty and democracy, not for the benefit of a small group of people but for that of the general public. After that, capitalism in the United States became more, but not ultimately, appropriate, humane, and equal. The

234

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

New Deal, as social reform, was also controversial and opposed by some conservatives at that time but actually escalated the United States from the crisis and helped it win World War II and become the superpower after the War. There will be no end to social reform because society is always changing and will never stop. After World War II, the United States experienced the Korean War from 1950 to 1953, the Vietnam War from 1955 to 1975, the Cold War from 1945 to 1990, the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s–1970s, etc. Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968) was assassinated on April 4, 1968, by racist James Earl Ray. The civil rights of ethnic minorities in the United States have undoubtedly progressed but are far from perfect. The dominant ideology after World War II was Keynesianism and social democracy, by which most governments in the world, including the USA, have expanded their public spending and regulation. The government of the United States was becoming larger, social justice and equity were enhanced, and economic growth and competitiveness were weakened. After 1981, President Ronald Reagan (1911– 2004, presidency 1981–1989) took the administration and implemented the policy of liberalization and deregulation by theories with various titles, such as neoliberalism, neoconservatism, and Reaganism, highlighting economic efficiency more than social justice and economic equity. Afterward, the United States led by President Reagan witnessed the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the failure of the former Soviet Union (FUS) in the 1990s. The United States, capitalism, and Western liberal democracy seemed to triumph over FUS, socialism, and totalism. The subsequent science and technology revolution represented by information and communication technology (ICT) further strengthened the economic, political, military, technological, and cultural power of the United States, Western world, and capitalism. However, during this period, the dominant neoliberalism and globalization also widened the economic inequality in the United States and the world. Civil rights and social justice have not gained sufficient progress compared to the economic side. Meanwhile, these problems have been entangled with other social problems, such as political polarization and populism. Capitalism is evolving, and the United States is now confronting new social problems and issues. Whether it can sustain its superpower position depends on whether it can solve these problems effectively and directly, not just accuse and pass the buck to other countries such as China.

6.2 China: The Rising Power 6.2.1 Long and Splendid History The United States is a young country, tracing history back to the Declaration of Independence in 1776 for approximately 250 years, if not including the colonial period back to 1607, when the British established the first colony in Jamestown, Virginia. In contrast, China is an ancient country with a credible history and civilization back to the Qin Dynasty in 221 BCE, Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring State

6.2 China: The Rising Power

235

from 770 to 221 BCE, Zhou Dynasty from 1046 to 256 BCE, Shang Dynasty from 1600 to 1046 BCE, and possible Xia Dynasty from 2070 to 1600 BCE, at least more than 3000 years. Most ordinary Chinese people generally believe their country has a history of more than 5000 years. Although the existence and historical details of the Xia Dynasty, such as the text, relics, and towns, are still controversial in academia, the history after it was convincing and credible. Although the current People’s Republic of China (P. R. China) was only formally established in 1949, all Chinese people naturally recognize that their national history is not just approximately 70 years but more than 5000 years. According to current historical knowledge, the history and civilization of China is not the solely longest worldwide. There are several other ancient civilizations, such as ancient Egypt, which can be traced back to 5000 BCE, ancient India back to 3000 BCE, and ancient Babylonia back to 2500 BCE. The ancient Greek and Rome civilizations, as the origination of modern Western civilization, can be traced back to 800 BCE or even longer. However, as a fact, China is the only country with the longest and continuous civilization in the world, since the civilization of ancient Egypt, India, and Babylonia have all been interrupted or vanished, and no single Western country inherited the ancient Greek and Rome civilization along. This is why Martin Jacques, professor of Cambridge University and Fudan University, claimed that China was a civilization but disguised as a country, a civilization-state rather than a nation-state (Jacques, 2010). Although all civilizations and countries should be equal and have the same value, they are actually competing, struggling, and conflicting, as well as influencing, merging, and evolving, enriching the diversity of human society. Some of them, such as current Western civilization and ancient China, are dominating and enduring, while others, such as Muslims and African civilizations, have been invaded and suppressed in the modern age. Currently, the Thucydides’s trap stirred by the US–China rivalryhas aroused arguments and worries of the danger of new cold or even hot war (Allison, 2017). The future and destiny of human society depend on the mutual understanding of the United States, China, and all other civilizations. The Qin Dynasty, established in 221 BCE, was the first unified and centralized nation-state of China, and Qin Shi Huang (259 BCE–210 BCE), the creator of the dynasty, was the first emperor of the country. The emperor and his dynasty consolidated and standardized the law, measurement units, currency, characters, and axle length. In particular, to avoid the separation of the country caused by the system of enfeoffment in the previous Zhou Dynasty, Qin and the emperor invented and launched the system of prefectures and counties, which laid the foundation of the Chinese political system ever since, and then, China has been basically a unified and centralized national state for more than 2000 years, although with temporary splits and turbulences. There were continuous wars between Han people and peripheral nomadic and ethnic groups, but unification and centralization were the mainstream, and most ethnic minorities were gradually integrated into the Han nationality. Although Mongolia and Genghis Khan (1162–1227) established the Yuan Dynasty and conquered and ruled mainland China from 1271 to 1368 and Manchu and Nurhachi (1559–1626) established the Qing Dynasty and ruled from 1636 to 1912, all these ethnic rulers and their people gradually blended with Han and merged into

236

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Chinese, and these emperors and dynasties, albeit established by ethnic minorities, were regarded and accepted naturally as Chinese histories. Therefore, the long-term centralization and integration of China is much different from the decentralization and separation of Europe. After 2000 years of blending and merging, there are 56 officially recognized ethnicities, and the Han, with a population of 12.2 billion and 91.5% of the total population, was the predominant ethnicity, while the four largest minority ethnicities with a population greater than 10 million were Zhuang (16.9 m), Hui (10.5 m), Man (10.3 m) and Uygur (10.0 m), according to the sixth-round population census conducted in 2010. In addition, there are 14 other ethnicities with populations greater than 1 million, and the smallest ones, such as Gaoshan, Kaba, and TaTaer, have small populations of 4009, 3682, and 3556. Most of these ethnic minorities and Han people have a sense of national identity as Chinese, although the separatism and terrorism of Uygur in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region still existed and challenged the Chinese government. Considering the giant population and geographic size, China is a country with rather strong ethnic, cultural, and geographic diversity, while it is still a relatively purified and unitary county compared to Europe, Africa, the USA, and India (Karnane & Quinn, 2019). The more than 2000-year history of China has created splendid civilizations, including literature, poem, music, and painting, but may not include politics and science in the eye of modern Westerners. Chinese character is thoroughly different from the Western alphabet. The beauty of symmetry and metrics of Chinese Tang and Song poem is difficult, if not impossible, to be understood and appreciated by those who cannot read Chinese. Every language and culture, including English, Indian, Arabic, and small languages, may have its beauty and value. This requires us to understand China, as well as any country and culture. In fact, traditional Chinese politics, ethics, history, literature, and art are integrated, as most politicians and government officials must pass the imperial examination and then enter the government. As politicians and officials, most of them were also well-educated intellectuals, historians, poets, painters, and artists, and their ultimate goal, from the education of Confucianism, was to participate in politics and achieve the governance of the country. In traditional China, politics was the utmost knowledge compared to any other knowledge, such as poem, painting, and literature, which were regarded as only entertainment but not the highest and most important knowledge. Great Learning (Da Xue, 大学, same pronunciation and characters as university in Chinese) was the first and most important classic literature of Confucianism, claiming that the principle of great learning is to “enlighten the lucid virtue” (明明德), “to approach the people” ( 亲民), and “to stop at the utmost goodness” (止于至善) (Theobald, 2021). As natural science explores the external universe, politics and ethics explore the internal soul and mind, while ancient Chinese have paid more attention to the latter than the former. This may be one of the reasons why ancient China created excellent arts but not science. In addition, Chinese political philosophy, from tradition to modern, emphasizes history and heritage, and China has the longest, most continuous, and comprehensive historical record for more than 2000 years. The twenty-five official dynamic histories recorded a detailed history of dynasties from Qin to Qing, including

6.2 China: The Rising Power

237

important persons, events, institutions, and scholars’ evaluations. Confucius (551– 479 BCE) was generally regarded as the first sage and the founder of Chinese culture and political philosophy, similar to Plato (427–347 BCE) in the Western world, and Confucianism has been accepted as official ideology and political philosophy for approximately 2000 years in China. Confucius personally was not only a philosopher but also a historian, editing the first influential history book Spring and Autumn and praising the governance paradigm of the Zhou Dynasty, which was thought to be well governed by ritual, music, stability, peace, and harmony. These values, albeit not liberty and democracy but closely linked, have been regarded as the basis of Chinese political philosophy not only in the ancient period but also now. In addition to Confucianism, legalism is the second most important political philosophy sustaining the governance, or ruling, of ancient China. Some scholars argue that legalism is thoroughly different from the rule of law in the modern age, which requires that all people, including the government, royal family, and rulers, be equal and obey the law, while legalism takes law as an instrumental weapon to rule and suppress people but does not fit and restrict rulers. This understanding of legalism is narrow and biased. In fact, the political ideals of Confucianism and Legalism are identical to achieve the good governance of the society, while the former believed that human nature is benevolent and the measures should be rituals and education, and the latter presumed the bad human nature and favored force and tactics. The essence of legalism is actually political realism, as Han Feizi (c. 280–233 BCE), the greatest of China’s Legalist philosophers (Ames, 2021), was regarded as Chinese Machiavelli (1469–1527), who wrote the book The Prince and was thought to be the establisher of political realism in Western philosophy. By the reforms and policies of legalism, Qin State, which was initially the weakest and poorest among kingdoms in the Spring and Warring Period, became the strongest and defeated other states and unified China in 221 BCE. Although legalism is generally criticized as strictness, cruelty, and inhumane and the Qin Dynasty lasted for only approximately 15 years, its political realism could be effective and pragmatic. The combination of Confucianism and Legalism is thought to be the basic ruling idea of ancient China. In addition, there were other abundant political philosophies in ancient China, including Taoism of Lao Zi, Mohism of Mo Zi, and The Art of War of Sun Tzu (Rošker, 2021). These political philosophies have offered theories and measures for ancient Chinese ruling and governance, sustaining its 2000-year civilization. In addition, Chinese civilization and culture are not closed and ossified but open and evolving. Currently, it does not oppose and reject but has been greatly influenced by, and actively embraced the Western liberal democracy, although in implicit ways not as thoroughly and comprehensively as westerners observing. The competitiveness of civilizations and countries depends on their openness, tolerance, and learning capacity from other civilizations and countries. It is generally recognized that in most periods before the eighteenth century, China was one of the greatest powers in the world, paralleling the Roman Empire (1 century BCE–fifteenth century) and Arabian Empire (seventh century–thirteenth century), but gradually, it became closed and arrogant and weak. The European Renaissance occurred in the fourteenth-sixteenth centuries, and the Age of Exploration was in the

238

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

fifteenth–seventeen centuries. At that time, China was basically in the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644). At that time, Zheng He (1371–1433), the admiral, maritime explorer, and foreign diplomat under the Yongle Emperor, accomplished seven great voyages from 1405 to 1433, similar to the age of Portuguese Prince Henry the Navigator (1394–1460) and before Vasco da Gama (1469–1524) and Christopher Columbus (1452–1506). However, afterward, the Western world was greatly changing, while Chinese emperors, officials, and intellectual elites did not care and know much about that. In the eighteenth century, the United Kingdom launched the industrial revolution and became the pioneer of industrial civilization. The British Empire was formed in the same period and began to dominate the world. In September 1792, Earl George Macartney (1737–1806) was dispatched to China as the envoy with a diplomatic mission by King George III (1738–1820) in the name of congratulating the 80 birthdays of the Qianlong emperor (1711–1799, reign 1736–1796). He was generally thought of as one of the greatest, cleverest, and most capable emperors in Chinese history and his sixty years of ruling was regarded as the summit of ancient China. Macartney and his mission brought China the most advanced industrial products, including clocks, globes, porcelain, and weapons, as gifts and presented some diplomatic requests, including a convenient offshore island as a permanent trading post, more ports opened to trade, and diplomatic representation in Beijing. However, these requests were all rejected because the emperor was proud of China’s prosperity and showed little interest in trading and weapon (AFE, 2021). Particularly, due to China at that time regarding itself as the Middle Country, meaning it was absent the idea of modern diplomacy and treated all other countries as tributaries, the envoy was required to kneel and kowtow to the emperor according to Chinese traditional etiquette, which caused the diplomatic dispute and finally solved by one knee bent as to the King of United Kingdom. This event was the first formal diplomatic contact between the Western world and China in the modern age. Lord Macartney and his retinues observed China carefully and wrote detailed reminiscences, helping British and European understand a real China, while the Chinese emperor Qianlong and his officials, as intellectual elites, knew little about their counterparts. Soon, approximately 50 years later in 1840, by the excuse of Qing government confiscating and destroying more than 20,000 chests of opium—some 1.400 tons of the drug, the British Empire sent the fleet and troop to China and the First Opium War broke out. The proud Qing Dynasty was defeated, and a Sino-British Treaty of Nanking was signed. Treaty, Hong Kong was ceded; five cities were forced open as trade hubs; twenty-one million dollars was compensated. This event and treaty was regarded as the starting point of modern China. From then on till 1949, ancient China had been defeated, invaded, and humiliated by Western industrialized countries for more than 100 years, when the P. R. China was established by the lead of the Communist Party of China (CPC), with unification and centralization returning again.

6.2 China: The Rising Power

239

6.2.2 Autocracy, Totalism, Authoritarianism, or Meritocracy The politics of ancient China, as well as modern China governed by the CPC, were generally defined and understood, by westerners, as autocracy, totalism, or authoritarianism, with some small and subtle variances, mainly because of Chinese political traditions such as dynasty, emperor, unification, and centralization, which are much different from and unfamiliar to Westerners. However, the political systems and institutions in various human histories and societies, resembling biosystems, are quite diverse and colorful, adapting themselves to temporal and specific circumstances and backgrounds. Therefore, there are many different politics in an ancient agricultural age and modern industrial age and future possible AI age, in Asia continental and European coastal geographic area, in Christianity, Muslim, and Confucianism societies. Civilizations, with politics as the main content, may evolve and develop in different paths and styles, with some advancing and fast, such as Europe, while some lagging and slow, such as China and Africa. Perhaps here, the expressions of advancing, fast, lagging, and slow are not appropriate because of the principle of value-neutrality of social science presented by Max Weber (1949). This principle of value neutrality requires that we, as social scientists, understand and explain social phenomena, including politics and economics, neutrally but not criticize, praise, or evaluate them by implicit or explicit values firstly. Or, we can do these evaluations, such as claiming Western liberal democracy advanced and better than Chinese authoritarianism or Iranian theocracy, but this evaluation and claim can only be made after clarifying the concrete value standards such as equality, liberty, democracy, and human rights, which are also always controversial. Sociologists and anthropologists generally apply this principle and methodology much better than political scientists and economists because the latter generally have strong and implicit value bias, while the former mainly observe and explain. For example, Jared Diamond (1937–), an American geographer, historian, anthropologist, ornithologist, and the author of Pulitzer awarded book Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fate of Human Society (Diamond, 1997), presented and argued Yali’s question that why human societies developed so unevenly? By value neutrality, he opposed the Eurocentric approach and claimed that New Guinea was not so seemingly primitive, as the local people might be smarter than Westerners on a jungle trail and erecting shelters. By the principle of value neutrality, the social phenomena in China, such as the autocracy, totalism, authoritarianism, dynasty, emperor, and centralization of power, should be understood and explained but not solely criticized and disliked. Autocracy, totalism, and authoritarianism are the modern and Western political concepts describing and defining some political and social institutions, generally in Europe, meaning that rulers and governments are brutal and ruthless and have to sustain the ruling by force and coercion, such as Hitler’s Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Great Purge, which should also be explained but not solely criticized. However, ancient China was basically governed by Confucian rituals and etiquettes, and the forces to civilians were restrained to the minimum degree in most periods. It seemed that the emperors had absolute power, but the power was actually limited and traced back

240

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

to Heaven (天), which was not personalized God in Christianity but something like impersonalized natural law, by the explanation and definition of Confucianism. If the emperor did not care about the people but treated them arbitrarily and ruthlessly as a dictator, he would lose his legitimacy, power, people, and land as the turnovers of the dynasties. There were some ruthless emperors in the more than 2000 years of history, and some of them might be manipulated and hoodwinked by their ministers and officials, and not all were competent to the task, but the prototype and most of them should be, and were, well-educated and benevolent and diligent. There was no general election, and the emperor could inherit the position by a hereditary system, but most government positions could not be obtained by inheritance. The ancient Chinese governments, in fact, have been opened since the Qin Dynasty in 221 BCE, when most officials were recruited from educated civilians. The successive Han Dynasty (202 BCE–220 A.D.) practiced the evaluation and recommendation approach (cha ju zhi, 察举制), which means that local officials could recommend filial and honest young talent to governments. In the Sui Dynasty (581–618) and Tang Dynasty (618–907), the Imperial Examination was formally established, and most officials were selected by the examination and evaluated and promoted by the government. The contents of the examination were mainly the Confucian theories about how to govern the country, as well as the literature, history, and philosophy. Under this institution, most officials were well-educated intellectuals capable of not only politics and governance but also history, literature, poem, painting, and music. These civil officials formed strong power and sophisticated institutions balancing and limiting the power of the emperor. As Ray Huang (1981), the famous Chinese historian teaching at State University of New York from 1968 to 1980, argued that Wanli (1563–1620, reign 1572–1620), the emperor of the Ming dynasty, could not change the position of his successor according to his will. Therefore, the emperor should not be regarded as a disliked arbitrary dictator in Chinese tradition but a respectable and benevolent father, similar to the modern Chinese government. Daniel Bell, a Canadian political philosopher, argued that the Chinese political system should not be defined as autocracy, totalism, or authoritarianism but meritocracy, which means that society is governed by well-educated professionals (Bell, 2016). By the penetration and education of Confucianism, the governments and politicians in ancient China did not believe in and pursue absolute power and did not have the Westernized conception of autocracy, totalism, and authoritarianism but preferred good governance by etiquette. Ancient and modern Chinese politicians understood that if the government and governance were good, it could be sustained, but if it was bad, it might be overturned and replaced. This Confucian governing ideology and political system have sustained traditional Chinese agricultural society for 2000 years, shaken and challenged by Western industrial, liberal, and democracy in the modern age but still greatly influences modern China.

6.2 China: The Rising Power

241

6.2.3 Reform and Open The Chinese history for approximately 100 years from 1840 to 1949 was the period of being defeated, invaded, belittled, humiliated, and searching for the path of independence and development by Chinese intellectual elites. Finally, in 1949, P. R. China was established by the leader of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the founding father Mao Zedong (1893–1976). Although P. R. China has only an approximately 70-year history of independence, most Chinese naturally and unconsciously recognize the continuous 2000-year history of their country. Chinese people, CPC, and government are neither rigid nor ossified but flexible and pragmatic. After independence in 1949 and in the Cold War in the 1950s and 1960s, China stood on the side of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) as an alliance to selfprotection and copied it thoroughly from a planned economy to a political system to build, culture, and art. The USSR was regarded as the best model and the friendly big brother during that period. The USSR style, with the characteristics of centralization, planned economy and government domination, rapidly and effectively pushed Chinese industrialization, laid the foundation of the national economy, and strengthened the young republic, symbolized by iconic accomplishments such as atomic and hydrogen bombs and man-made satellites in the 1960s. However, there were also serious mistakes, such as the Culture Revolution from 1966 to 1976, damaging the country and dragging its economy and society to the edge of collapse. The CPC itself has recognized this ten-year turbulence as the darkest age of modern China, and this political event, by value neutrality, can be explained and understood as Mao Zedong mistakenly highlighting the class struggle and attempting to consolidate the country, as well as other complex domestic and global situations. It could be regarded as a serious mistake of CPC, as the governing party, in the unprecedented search and exploration of socialism and development. As nobody and no party can thoroughly avoid mistakes, Western liberal democratic countries can remedy mistakes by campaign and election, while China can also adjust policies and correct mistakes by the one-party CPC itself. If it cannot, it will fail. In 1978, Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997), as the colleague and comrade of Mao Zedong (1893–1976), formally ended the Cultural Revolution and initiated the Reform and Open. Undoubtedly, Deng had many different understandings and perceptions on governance and development from Mao, transferring the focus of the country from class struggle to economic development, by his famous statements such as poverty is not socialism, plan or market is not the criteria of socialism and capitalism, and it does not matter a cat is white or black, as long as it can catch mice. Since then, in spite of controversies and oppositions, Deng decidedly and uncompromisingly pushed the policy change in the slogan of Reform and Open, with the essence of marketization and liberalization in the economic field. During the last four decades since 1978, the CPC government has continuously launched various reforms, such as agricultural production and land system reform, state-owned enterprise reform, double-track pricing system reform, banking system reform, corporation system reform, capital market reform, labor market reform, and social security reform.

242

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Reform has been the keyword of China, meaning changing the obsolete planned economy system and way of thinking and establishing a new and market-oriented system. There have been various problems and difficulties emerging, including unemployment in the name of laid-off workers caused by the bankruptcy and closure of low-efficiency state-owned enterprises, fake and inferior quality goods, workers’ rights protection, environmental pollution and degradation, citizen morality decline, political corruption, etc. The reason for these problems, diagnosed by the CPC, is that China’s socialism is still in the primary stage, and the solution is not to reverse, but to further deepen reform, optimize market, and improve the government and politics, despite rejecting the Western multiparty and general election. By the marketization reform for 40 years since 1978, China’s economy witnessed strong and steady growth by approximately 11.7% from 1980 to 2019, as Fig. 6.5 shows. At the start of Reform and Open in 1980, China’s economy was very poor, as its GDP in nominal value was only 7% of the USA, 20% of Germany, 27% of France, 33% of UK, 17% of Japan, and similar to India. In contrast, in 2019, China grew to be the second-largest economy, with its GDP in nominal value 67% of the United States and 3.7, 5.3, 5.1, 2.8, 8.4, and 5.0 times that of Germany, France, the UK, Japan, Russia, and India, respectively. Particularly, measured by purchasing power parity (PPP), China’s GDP has overtaken the United States since 2017. Meanwhile, China’s GDP per capita was $194 in nominal value in 1980, ranking no. 144 among 148 countries, similar to Guinea-Bissau ($141), and lower than Malawi ($198) and India ($266). In contrast, in 2019, its GDP per capita was $10,261, ranking no. 67 among 181 countries, much higher than comparable countries such as India ($2,104). As economic growth is the precondition and foundation of development, China has achieved comprehensive, maybe not balanced, social development in nearly all social domains, including education, hospitals, infrastructure, poverty reduction, the environment, and politics. For example, in 1990, on the Human Development Index (HDI) compiled by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) incorporating education, hospital, and economy, China ranked no. 103 as medium human development among 144 countries, while in 2018, it ranked no. 85 among 189 countries, stepping in the high human development group. This is extraordinary progress, comparing India from no. 114 to no. 129, Brazil unchanged at no. 79, and Singapore from no. 38 to no. 9 (UNDP, 2021), particularly considering China’s giant population and area. Similarly, on the Global Competitive Index calculated by the World Economic Forum (WEF, 2021), China ranked no. 27 in 2017–2018, contrasting South Korea no. 26, Russia no. 38, and India no. 40. In addition, China has achieved incredible infrastructure progress on ICT, such as 5G; renewable energy, such as solar and wind power; and transportation, such as high-speed trains and expressways. China has constructed the longest expressway with a total length of 160,000 km, overtaking the United States at approximately 70,000 km since 2014 (The Geography of Transport Systems, 2021). Meanwhile, at the end of 2020, the CPC-led Chinese government officially declared eliminating extreme poverty thoroughly. In contrast, extreme poverty is returning to America, with its GDP per capita $65,118 in 2019, 6.3 times larger than China’s $10,261. Poverty and inequality problems have never been effectively solved by the US government ever and have worsened in the last

6.2 China: The Rising Power

243

Fig. 6.5 Total GDP in nominal and PPP value (Source World Bank Open Data)

several decades. The Chinese government has implemented Five Dimensional Integrated Development (五位一体综合发展), which means that the economy, politics, society, culture, and ecology should be developed synchronously and systematically. The centralization and meritocracy of China may achieve the synchronousness and systematicness of development better than decentralized and polarized capitalism such as the United States. The economy and society of China have experienced great transformation since the Reform and Open policy in 1978, enjoying more economic and social freedom. However, as most Western scholars and politicians observed and blamed, its politics seemed unchanged as authoritarianism and people had no more or even worse political freedom. This viewpoint may be inaccurate and superficial. In ancient

244

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

China, although the political system from the Qin Dynasty (221–207 BC) to the Qing Dynasty (1636–1912 AD) seemed to be static as an autocracy with the overturning of dynasties, it actually developed and evolved to be more sophisticated and mature. Chinese philosophy and culture prefer stability, continuousness, implicitness, and conservatism, but not the opposite side as radicalness, revolution, explicitness, and aggression, although in modern China in the last century, China was rather radical and revolutionary. Reform, meaning gradually and steadily and controllably changing but not radial revolution, is the consensus of Chinese politicians and people. Therefore, since the Reform and Open in 1978, although the governing party and the basic political system seem unchanged, their governing ideology and policies have fundamentally been altered. The Core Socialist Values advocated by the CPC have 12 value items, including Prosperity, Democracy, Civility, Harmony, Freedom, Equality, Justice, the Rule of Law, Patriotism, Dedication, Integrity, and Friendliness (Chinadaily, 2017). Liberty and democracy have not been rejected by the CPC, the Chinese government, or the people. In contrast, these two values have been the most frequently spoken words in Chinese everyday living, just without the multiparty campaign and general election. Free expression, respecting others’ opinions, discussion and deliberation have been generally accepted as common knowledge by most Chinese people. Although these core values, including freedom and democracy, have not been thoroughly and perfectly achieved by the CPC and Chinese government nor by any party and government, they are not just hypocritical slogans but the guidelines and aims of the party and the country. The competition among the countries, including China and the United States, is essentially the competition of these values, and those parties and governments, and countries that can better achieve these values are the better, more capable, lovable, and powerful ones.

6.3 United Kingdom: The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets 6.3.1 The First Country to Enter Modern Era As the once largest and latest empire in the modern age, the United Kingdom is particularly worthy of understanding and analysis. It could be the representation and start of modern Western society, like the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the 53 Commonwealth of nations are all its former colonies or territories, sharing similar language, culture, and politics. Other European countries, such as France and Germany, may have more similarities and common interests to the United Kingdom than their divergences and conflicts, although there were also bloody fights among them in history, and Brexit is currently on the way. As a small island with an area of 244,000 km2 and a population of 66 million in 2019, similar to a medium province of China and a state of the United States, the United Kingdom could be a development miracle in human history, greatly shaping human society and the modern world.

6.3 United Kingdom: The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets

245

Tracing back to the Roman Empire, the British people have created splendid history, culture, and civilization, although this civilization was synchronous and paralleled as other civilizations and did not demonstrate too much distinction at the early age before its uprising, comparing horizontally to Egypt, Arab, India, and China. Historically, the small island was successively conquered and ruled by various people, including Roman (first–fourth century), Germanic (fifth–seventh century), Anglo-Saxon (seventh century), Viking (eighth century), and Wessex (eighth–tenth century). In 1066, when was the Song Dynasty (960–1276) in China, the Duck of Normandy from France, William I the Conqueror (1028–1087, reigned 1066–1087), led his troop, invaded the island, conquered the Kingdom of Wessex, and established the House of Normandy, which was thought of as the start of feudalism of the United Kingdom. Since then, the island has been ruled or governed sequentially by the House of Normandy (1066–1154), House of Plantagenet (1154–1485), House of Tudor (1485–1603), House of Stuart (1603–1714), House of Hanover (1714–1901), House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1901–1917), and House of Windsor (1917–now). During this long and intricate history, similar to other regions and cultures, there were benevolent or tyrannous kings, bloody wars, peaceful periods, turbulent rebellions, conspiracies, and trickeries. Although there were many differences from ancient China’s dynasties and emperors, there were also kings and houses and centralization of authority in the ancient United Kingdom. Actually, the governance of king, or emperor, and the system of hereditary should be regarded as natural governance or ruling modes or institutions in human society in the age of primitive and agriculture, not only in China but also in the United Kingdom and other regions, when and where people had a relatively poor experience and cognition of ruling and governance, although with many differences and evolutionary paths. Before the Renaissance in fourteenth -seventeenth century, Age of Exploration in fifteenth -seventeenth century, and Industrial Revolution in the 1760s, United Kingdom and European countries were in the dark medieval for more than 1000 years, not too much distinctive and advanced comparing horizontally to other regions and cultures at that time. However, what factors impel the United Kingdom and Europe, surpassing the then Arab, India and China, and occupying the leading position of the world afterward? Much different from the centralization and unification of China in most periods of history, Europe and the United Kingdom have never been consolidated as unified countries, and kings in Europe and the United Kingdom did not have as much power as the Chinese emperor, although they always attempted to expand and strengthen their power as a natural tendency for anybody holding power. One reason may be the geographic condition of Europe. The intricate coastline of the European continent and the English Channel cultivated and protected many small and city states including the United Kingdom in World War II, making it difficult for any king to unify and maintain Europe as a unified and centralized country such as China. There were some ambitious kings or rulers, such as Charles the Great (742–814), Napoleon (1769–1821), and even Hitler (1889–1945), including the current EU, who attempted but failed. Regarding the United Kingdom, isolation as an island by the English Channel has long made it psychologically recognized itself as a non-European country by politicians and people. It was difficult not only for the

246

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

kings of Europe to unify the United Kingdom but also for the kings of the United Kingdom to occupy Europe. In comparison, the vast plain of East Asia has rendered it relatively easier for Chinese emperors to establish and maintain a centralized and unified empire. The second explanation can be attributed to the religion of Christianity. Since the Roman Empire, the Pope and Vatican have gradually obtained the religious power of church paralleled to the secular power of the king, conflicting with but mutually supporting each other. This dual power structure has hindered the formation of centralization and unification of Europe and the absolute power of the king. Third, feudalism in the UK, Europe, and China has many different institutional meanings, as socialism communism and capitalism are all so controversial and confusing concepts. In the United Kingdom and Europe, feudalism means that aristocrats, as large or small landlords with hierarchical levels and titles such as Duke (Duchess), Marquis (Marchioness), Earl (Countess), Viscount (Viscountess), and Baron (Baroness), have private, self-ruled, and self-governed fiefdoms and correspondingly independent rights and obligations from the king based upon the spirit of the contract. Although the king was the top ruler of the country, his power was relatively limited rather than absolute, qualified to tax and command the aristocrats and civilians according to the conventions, but unqualified to rule and break the conventions arbitrarily. This feudalism had formed the decentralization of governance of the United Kingdom and was thought of as the origin of common law, rule of law, contract, and the spirit of freedom. Comparatively in China, the emperor has more absolute power, and landlords have to submit their lives and assets to the rule of the emperor, although this absolute power was also relatively limited by Confucianism and educated officials. This means that the absoluteness of power is relative and continuous like a spectrum but not absolute and discrete like black and white. With this history and culture, the United Kingdom has been regarded as the origin of modern government and politics, which can be understood as stepping out of the autocracy and establishing freedom, democracy, rule of law, limited and civil government. The establishment of freedom and democracy in the United Kingdom, as the pioneer in humankind, was a long historical process with some milestones. In 1215, when it was the Southern Song Dynasty (1127–1279) in China, Magna Carta was written and signed by aristocrats and King John I, which was thought of as the origin of freedom and parliament of the United Kingdom since the power of the king was formally restricted by law. King John I was actually reluctant and forced to sign the document, as he still attempted to expand his unlimited power. After that, the Magna Carter was abolished and reissued by successive kings, including Henry III (1207–1272) and Edward I (1239–1307), and the principle and spirit of limited power and freedom were asserted and strengthened repetitively, and gradually accustomed and accepted by the rulers and their people. However, in 1642, when was the end of the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644) and the initial stage of the Qing Dynasty (1636– 1912), the English Civil War (1642–1651) broke out, and King Charles I (1600– 1649) was executed, since he still attempted to exert his power arbitrarily, violating the principle of Magna Carta. Protector Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658) led his army, defeated the King, and established the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland. However, freedom was still not coming, and Protector Cromwell also aspired

6.3 United Kingdom: The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets

247

to unlimited power, becoming the dictator without the title. In 1688, the Glorious Revolution without wars and blood took place, and the constitutional monarchy, as a new political system, was established by the wisdom of British political elites. This event is regarded as the milestone of human political development, signifying mankind, not only the United Kingdom, stepping into a new era, when the power of government came not from the king but from the people. Since the sixteenth–seventeenth century, the United Kingdom and Europe, but not China and India and any other countries and civilizations, have led the world not only in materials and instruments invention but also in politics and thoughts innovation. The Renaissance in the fourteenth–sixteenth centuries liberated people’s minds from religious confinement in the middle age and provided the ideological basis for the rise of Europe. The contemporaneous scientific revolution, symbolized by Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543), Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), and Isaac Newton (1643–1727), helped the European realize a true world. The competition among European kings encouraged the great discovery of new continents and geography, although inevitably accompanying the bloody conquering, slaughtering, and slaving of other regions and people. The Industrial Revolution in the seventeenth–eighteenth centuries meant the great transformation of human society from an agricultural age to an industrial age, and societies still in agriculture, such as China, India, and Africa, could not resist industrial weapons and power, suffering the fate of being defeated, invaded, colonized, and even annihilated. Since then, Western civilization, represented by the United Kingdom with the contents of science, technology, freedom, democracy, politics, culture, and English as a language has spread to the world. However, it does not mean that non-Western civilizations, states, and people could be regarded as subordinate and backward. As humankind, we, including Westerners and non-Westerners, should learn from history and establish a more humane and equal world.

6.3.2 The British Empire The British Empire was the first modern and global empire and superpower, shaping today’s world. The Constitution of Monarch as a new political system, the scientific revolution as a new ideology, and the industrial revolution as a new economic system empowered the country, helping it compete and defeat its European rivals such as the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, France, and Germany. Since the great exploration in the fifteenth-sixteenth century, Western people started to settle and colonize the rest of the world, including Africa, America, Asia, and small islands in the oceans, and the colony of the Great Britain was the largest. In 1600, the British East India Company began establishing trading posts in India and gradually unified and governed the country in the next three centuries until its independence in 1947. In 1620, the ship Mayflower and the 102 passengers sailed from Plymouth to Massachusetts, initiating the history of settling and colonizing North America. The United States and Canada were the colonies of Great Britain until their independence in 1776 and 1867, while

248

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Canada was still a dominion of the United Kingdom until the Constitution Act of 1982. Australia was colonized by the British in 1770 when Captain James Cook discovered the east coast of Australia and named the place New South Wales, while the Australia Act 1986 authorized the country’s wholly independence. In addition, South Africa and New Zealand were colonized by the British in approximately 1806 and 1769 and gained full independence in 1961 and 1947. After approximately 300 years of operation, the British Empire reached its peak in the 1920s after winning World War I, with Canada, Australia, South Africa, and India as the largest five overseas territories and the area of 35.5 million km2 , occupying 1/4 of the total land surface of the earth. There were countless unhuman slavery trade, brutal ruling, and sanguinary wars between the then British government and colonial people, but the language, culture, politics, and civilization of Britain have also spread and rooted in the whole world. After the collapse of the British Empire and the independence movement of national countries after World War II, the Commonwealth of Nations composed of 53 independent countries was left afterward as a new type of institution to cooperate and coordinate, sustaining the glory but avoiding the unfavorable implication of the old empire. Can the process and history of the British Empire be regarded as social development? Surely it can, but we need to clarify what is good and bad. On the good side, the British people invented a new and advanced economic and political system, upon which it established the empire and spread the new and advanced civilization to the world. For example, the power of government should be limited and regulated. Freedom and democracy and equity of people are possible and authentic and should be protected. Science was popularized by the royal family’s respect and loving of science, as the Royal Society was established in 1660 and the British Museum in 1753. The former has been encouraging scientists to explore the world, and the latter collects and preserves the outstanding relics of most human civilizations. In particular, the ruling and governing model of the British Empire was characterized by decentralization, contracts, and self-governance. The Empire generally sent governors and senior officials to the colonies or territories to tax and govern. Although the colonist government may be unequal and unfair to local people, their governance was generally more efficient and transparent and rule of law than local and native governance. The USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and Hong Kong, as former colonies of the United Kingdom, became advanced countries or regions currently, while the clash of civilizations between the United Kingdom and local cultures should be harmonized but not exaggerated. On the bad side, due to historical limitations and narrowness, British civilization was still Western centralization but not human egalitarianism. The British government advocated freedom, democracy, and rule of law, but these principles are only suitable for the British but not all human races. The early colonists were, on the one hand, brave and explorative, on the other hand, greedy and cruel without the conception of racial equality, trading the black African as a slave and slaughtering the American Indian. When spreading European civilization, they also destroyed and ruined splendid African, American, and Asian indigenous civilizations. Although the clash, conflict, and war of civilizations were inevitable in human history, we have

6.3 United Kingdom: The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets

249

learned from history that the communication and exchange of civilizations could be peaceful and mutual. The British Empire has become history, but its legacy is still strongly influencing the modern world through the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the whole Western world.

6.3.3 Modern United Kingdom and Brexit After World War II, the United Kingdom was the winner as a member of the Allies. However, with the awakening of national consciousness and the advancement of the national independence movement, the British Empire was unsustainable and lost all its overseas territories. The United Kingdom returned to the island of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, with a population of 66.79 million in 2019 and an area of 244,100 km2 , a medium-sized country similar to a province of China and a state of the United States. As Fig. 6.6 shows, the total GDP of the United Kingdom has been roughly coincident with that of France but slightly lower than that of Germany since the 1960s, while the GDP per capita of these three countries has been similar at approximately $45,000 in 2020 but much lower than $65,000 in the USA, $75,000 in Norway, and $82,000 in Switzerland. Therefore, the economy of the United Kingdom has not been the strongest among Western countries, similar to France, but inferior to Germany and the United States. As one of the permanent members of the UN Security Council and the successor of the British Empire, the United Kingdom has been still an influential country, but it has to continuously search and locate its position in the current and changing world, being perplexed to be a member of the EU with France and Germany together, or relatively independent and separated one from the EU with the attempt to be the no. 2 after the United States. Historically, the United Kingdom has always been perplexed by the question of whether it is a part of Europe or independent from Europe. As the great empire in the past 300 years, this question seemed not serious, as the British Empire leading not only Europe but also the world. However, after the end of the empire in World War II, this question reappeared and challenged the British again. Actually, the idea and practice of unification of Europe always existed in history, which can be traced back to the Roman Empire, the Frankish Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the First French Empire, the British Empire, and Nazi Germany. On September 19, 1946, after catastrophic World War II in 1946, Winston Churchill, speaking at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, proposed the creation of “a kind of United States of Europe”—“a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this mighty continent” (Garrity, 2016). However, French and Germany, as historical competitors of the United Kingdom, led the establishment and evolution of the European Coal and Steel Community, European Atomic Energy Community, European Economic Community, European Community in 1965, and finally, the European Union in 1993. The United Kingdom, with Denmark and Ireland, attended the European Community in 1973 and attempted to obtain some special rights, but France rejected the United Kingdom to be a member of

250

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Fig. 6.6 Total GDP and GDP per capita of United Kingdom (Source World Bank Open Data, various years)

6.3 United Kingdom: The Empire on Which the Sun Never Sets

251

the EU, indicating tension between the two neighboring countries. Despite disputes and conflicts, the form of the EU can be regarded as an unprecedented institutional innovation and achievement in human history since it is formed by peaceful and voluntary unification but not conquer and war. The EU, with 27 current member states not including the United Kingdom, has a population of approximately 500 million and a square of 4,379,963 km, matchable to other giant countries such as the USA, Russia, China, Brazil, and India. Practically, the EU, as an integrated body but not the individual UK, France, or Germany, has gradually become one of the equivalent powers in the world. Although the military force and national security of the EU still depend on the United States, it can become more independent and stronger by its unification as the world becomes more multipolar. However, Brexit in 2016 once again demonstrated Britain’s hesitation in dealing with the relation to Europe. This event undoubtedly harmed the solidarity of the EU, delaying and weakening, and even perhaps reversing, the pace of EU integration. It might benefit other powers in the multipolar world who were willing to see a weakened Europe as a competitor, including the USA, China, and Russia. After Brexit, the United States had a more intimate and reliable ally other than the EU; China and Russia had a new independent trading partner and balancing power other than the United States and EU. However, the most important issue is how Brexit will affect Britain’s interest and future. The political decisions, joining or exiting the EU, seem complicated but are essentially the calculation of interests. The United Kingdom’s decision to join the EU in 1973 was made because politicians at that time calculated the various interests and believed that joining would be better. In the same way, the supporters of Brexit in 2016 believed that exit was more favorable. This important decision was made by referendum, which means that the citizens will make decisions by the principle of one person one vote, and the majority wins. The result was 17,410,742, 51.89%, leave, vs. 16,141,241, 48.11%, remain, with the total electorate 46,500,001, rejected ballots 25,359, and the turnout 72.2%. This result means that there were still 27.8%, 12,948,018 voters who did not express their ideas and 48.11%, 16,141,241 voters who explicitly rejected the idea of Brexit. For this crucial decision influencing the fate of a country, both the pros and cons have good reasons. However, the referendum, as the core of democracy, may not be a good decision method since electorates are not experts for these complicated political issues and interests calculations if we admit that political issues are also highly complicated issues requiring professional knowledge. From the point of professionalism and knowledge, it seems that the decision-making of Brexit by members of Parliament, as experts of politics, maybe more reliable than that by ordinary electorates. This point may run counter to the principles of democracy, but democracy, as a decision rule, maybe flawed and not absolute and unchallengeable. The United Kingdom after Brexit would be more uncertain, and all the British people have to bear this uncertainty for the future, maybe success and maybe failure, as what they have done in the past.

252

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

6.4 Russia: Once Superpower 6.4.1 Brief Early History Although any country should be researched and understood, Russia and the USSR are particularly worthy, as it has been one of the two superpowers after World War II and is now still an influential country in the modern world. In particular, the rise and fall of the USSR can be regarded as the most contrasting and controversial development case, worth researching and understanding and learning as lessons and experiences for itself and other countries. Russia, as well as USSR, is a country with splendid history and culture, despite not being as long as China and India. The ancestor of Russia was a branch of Slavs, who lived in the plains of Eastern Europe and gradually divided into east, west and south Slavs, and Russians were the offspring of the East Slavs. In the eighth–ninth centuries, when the Tang Dynasty (618–907 AD) of China occurred and approximately two centuries before the Norman Conquest (1066 AD) in the United Kingdom, it was said that East Slavs fought terribly and were tired of endless fighting. Then, they compromised and invited Ryurik, the head of Varangian with another name, Rus of Viking, living in the Scandinavian Peninsula as a capable ruler, to the region and restored the order. Ryurik established the first dynasty or country of East Slavs in history, the Ryurik dynasty, and later gained the title of Grand Duke Novgorod. This dynasty was also called Kiev Russ since it took Kiev as the capital. Five hundred years later, at approximately 1223 AD, Kiev Russ, as well as most other Asian and European countries, was conquered and occupied by Mongolia Golden Horde. To rule the area, Mongolia enfeoffed several duchies, including the Grand Duke of Vladimir to Ivan I (1288–1340), who set the capital at Moscow and grew gradually to be the strongest as Grand Duchy of Moscow. His grandson, Ivan III (1462–1505), defeated Mongolia and unified the country. Their successors, such as the Grand Duchy of Moscow, further expanded. In 1547, Ivan IV (1530–1584) was firstly coronated as Tsar, which was a title similar to Emperor in Slavs and recognized by other European emperors and the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. In the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, Russia gradually conquered and occupied Siberia toward the east. In 1682, Peter I, also called Peter the Great (1672–1725), a younger brother of Ivan IV, succeeded as Tsar and carried out his ambitious and fruitful reform by copying and learning from the Netherlands and United Kingdom. Led by him, Russia defeated Sweden during 1700–1720 through a series of wars, obtained the sea gates of the Baltic Sea and became a strong European country. After Peter the Great, Catherine II, also called Catherine the Great (1729–1796, reign 1762–1796), as the wife of Peter III (1728–1762, reign January 1762–July 1762), took power by a coup in 1762 and initiated her time. As another ambitious and competent Tsar matchable to Peter and the sole queen titled Great in human history, she led Russia to defeat Ottoman Turkey in the south and carved up Poland with the Kingdom of Prussia and Austria Empire in the west. During her reign, Russia became stronger and more integrated into Europe, although most of its territory was

6.4 Russia: Once Superpower

253

in Asia. After her son Paul I (1754–1801, reign 1796–1801), her grandson, Alexander I (1777–1825, reign 1801–1825), led the Anti-French Alliance, defeated Napoleon (1769–1821) and the First French Empire, revived European Royalty, and gained the reputation of Savior of Europe. Subsequently, Alexander II (1818–1881, reign 1855– 1881) expanded toward the east and occupied large territories from then China’s Qing dynasty. He abolished the serf system and prepared for the reform of constitutional monarchy under social pressure but was assassinated by radicals. His second son Alexander III (1845–1894, reign 1881–1894) succeeded in the throne and pushed rapid industrialization and economic growth, while social crises were accumulating and breeding. Finally, the eldest son of Alexander III, Nicholas II (1868–1918, reign 1894–1917), accepted constitutional monarchy, launched the Russo-Japanese War but lost, participated in World War I, experienced the February Revolution and the October Revolution, and finally lost power and was sentenced to death by the Soviet in 1918. USSR and humankind society stepped into a new era with the first socialist and communist country. As a giant country with the largest territory, Russia and its people were brave, aggressive, and indomitable with the reputation of a fighting nation. Its history was full of war, killing, conquest, and resistance, just considering the defeating of Napoleon by Alexander I as the Savior of Europe and Nazi Germany by Stalin in World War II. Meanwhile, Russian people also contributed Chaikovsky’s (1840– 1893) music and Pushkin’s (1799–1837) literature. However, its economic situation has lagged behind other European countries in history, and its politics have been regarded as more centralized and autocratic than other European countries. Although European countries, including the UK, France, and Germany, also have emperors and centralization and autocracy in their history, European monarchy and autocracy were smaller scaled and less extensive due to lack of unification and centralization and were shaken earlier by social movements such as the Glory Revolution in 1688 and the French Revolution in 1789. The politics of Russia, as well as China, lagged behind Europe, while Russia was closer to and more easily influenced by Europe, and then it was wealthier and stronger but more radical and extreme than China. Therefore, Russia took the lead in building socialism and communism, which originated and spread from Karl Marx in Europe, but it also took the lead in failure after the collapse of the USSR, stumbled into the development trap and still searched its directions currently.

6.4.2 Soviet and Socialism Experiment Any political figures such as Lenin (1870–1924), Starling (1878–1953), Hitler (1889– 1945), and Mao Zedong (1893–1976), as well as ancient figures in any country and culture, should not be criticized or demonized but be understood and empathized. They have their specific political ideas and behaviors aiming to change their country and the world, although some succeeded and benefited most people and society, while others failed and caused damage. Generally, it is controversial to evaluate politics

254

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

and political figures because of the lack of clear value criteria. If we can clearly define and list the specific values, we can reduce the controversies of evaluation and understand political figures as well as ordinary people. Lening (1870–1924) was a great theorist and practitioner, not only developing Marxism, socialism, and communism theoretically but also leading the October Revolution and establishing the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) as the first socialist country in the world. His successor, Starlin, launched a new economic system, planned economy, by three rounds of the Five-Years Plan in 1928–1932, 1933–1937, and 1938–1941. By these long-term government strategic plans, the USSR was transformed rapidly from a backward agricultural country to a strong industrialized country, no. 2, just behind the United States. In the following World War II, USSR, depending on the strong industrial capability and vast territory, led to defeat Nazi Germany with the United States together, and won WWII. After the war, the USSR became one of the two superpowers and dominated the world from 1945– 1990. During this half-century, USSR continued to carry out socialism, planned economy, and another 8 rounds of Five-Year-Plan until 1990, gaining a series of achievements, such as nuclear atom in 1948, the first orbital flight by Yuri Alekseyevich Gagarin in 1961, and many other science & technology accomplishments. These achievements demonstrated some superiority of socialism, communism, planned economy, and public ownership, while modern capitalism actually has also absorbed and adopted some advantages and measures of socialism such as welfare state, social security and equity, government regulation, and nationalization, just not so extreme. However, the serious defects of the planned economy and socialism in the USSR have also gradually been exposed, such as low efficiency and no innovation, misallocation of resources, stagnation, and no freedom. The planned and command economy, as an economic system covering the whole society, can function well in short term and small scale, such as five years or in a company or an industry, but it was infeasible for a giant economy like USSR to implement the comprehensive plans for the whole society for four decades. Economists at that time, such as Mises and Hayek, found that as economic decisions and efficient resource allocation require countless information, knowledge, and motivation, the planned economy cannot sufficiently utilize the knowledge in society and will definitely lead to poverty, shortage, and stagnation (Hayek, 1945; Mises, 1951). The USSR has attempted but failed to launch timely and sufficient reform and finally failed. However, socialism does not equal the planned economy, and capitalism does not equal the market economy. The various mixtures of these two paradigms are the common situation of modern economies, particularly in China with its Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. The politics of the USSR also failed because of its centralization, autocracy, dictatorship, inhumane, intolerance, and cruelty in the Great Purge, in contrast to liberty and democracy in Western politics. Although Starlin, as a great, selfless, and iron-fisted stateman, had made a great sacrifice to win WWII and led USSR to be the postwar superpower, he was also the political figure with many defects, such as intolerant and inhumane to his political opponents, and particularly, unable to establish a good and sustainable political tradition and system for the country. During his reign from 1928 to 1953, millions of elites in nearly all fields were prosecuted, exiled, or

6.4 Russia: Once Superpower

255

executed, seriously damaging the country. His successor Khrushchev (1894–1971) thoroughly denounced Stalin in 1956, but this radical reverse cut the linkage and tradition of the USSR, shake the legitimacy of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), and planted the seed of later collapse. In contrast, in China, after Mao Zedong’s death in 1976, his successor, Deng Xiaoping, did not negate Mao completely but positively affirmed his major achievements by 7:3, which meant that Mao’s merits were 7 and demerits 3. This can be explained as the Chinese political wisdom of moderation. In addition, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), as the single ruling party in the USSR, gradually became degraded and corrupted and then lost support from the people. Although the successors, particularly the final leader, Gorbachev (1931–), had attempted to launch some economic and political reforms, they have not properly handled the relationship between reform and stability, change and invariance. In addition, the political elites of CPSU have lost the confidence in socialism and communism and thoroughly and radically embraced Western liberal democracy and free economy by the policy of Shock Therapy. Therefore, the failure of the USSR was not only the failure of economics and politics of the USSR but also the failure of ideology and beliefs of the ossified socialism and communism of the USSR. However, the socialism and communism of the USSR are much different from China’s current Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. Competition, or more preferably, mutual learning and cooperation, between capitalism and socialism, and between the West and the East, among various political and cultural systems, are still worthy of exploration and understanding.

6.4.3 Putin’s Era After the collapse of the USSR in 1990, Gorbachev (1931–), the final president, resigned and faded, despite the award of the Nobel Prize of Peace in the same year. CPSU, the once most powerful communist party with 20 million members, was dissolved, and Yeltsin (1931–2007, presidency 1991–1999) took power as the president of Russia. Although Russia carried out the Shock Therapy, which meant rapidly and thoroughly adopting a Western free market economy and political system, Russia’s economy has not recovered prominently, and the political relation to the West has not warmed substantially. As Fig. 6.7 shows, in 1990, the total GDP of Russia was $517 billion, 1.43 times China’s $361 billion, and the GDP per capita of Russia was $3,492, 11 times China’s $317. However, the economy of Russia continued to deteriorate in the 1990s and recovered slowly afterward. In 2019, the total GDP of Russia was $1700 billion, only 12% of China’s $14,300 billion, and the GDP per capita of Russia was $11,585, similar to China’s $10,261. In addition, the quality, potential, and innovation of Russia’s economy are not as competitive as those of China, not mentioning the United States. In addition, the economy of Russia is now mainly dependent on crude oil and natural resources but not high technology and innovation. Russia tended to be a country based upon natural resources but not industry and technology. Russia is still a strong country with a formidable military

256

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

Fig. 6.7 Total GDP and GDP per capita of Russia2 (Source World Bank Open Data, various years)

2

World Bank Open Data.

6.4 Russia: Once Superpower

257

and nuclear power, but this power is mainly from the accumulation of the USSR but not from the period after the collapse. Russia is still stumbling in the trap of development and searching for an outlet for the future. There were many strong and great political figures in the history of Russia, such as Peter the Great and Catherine the Great. Stalin may also match the title of Great but lose his fame after his death. Putin (1952–) is also a great statesman, while whether he can be titled with the “great” should be determined by history. Examined and chosen by Yeltsin as the successor, he has taken the presidency of Russia for four terms, 2000–2004, 2004–2008, 2012–2018, 2018–2024. At the end of his second term in 2008, his partner, Medvedev (1965), took the president, and Putin served as premier. Then-president Medvedev signed the amendment of the constitution and changed the term of the presidency from four to six years. In 2020, Russia amended the constitution again, allowing the sitting president to extend another two terms, which means that Putin can be the president of Russia until 2036, when he will be 84 years old. As a controversial statesman, President Putin’s ultimate political ideal and mission is to restore Russia’s superpower status, which should depend on a strong economy and good politics. President Putin has claimed, reportedly, be given twenty years as president, he could return to a powerful Russia. Until 2020, when President Putin has governed Russia for approximately twenty years, Russia has not regained its strength sufficiently, at least in the economy. In the field of politics, the term system is the basic requirement and principle of modern politics, which means that no matter how great and successful a political leader is, he/she can only assume a fixed term of office, and then the possible policy mistakes can be adjusted and corrected by successors in a timely manner. Although the overlong or even lifelong term of political leaders, say, Starling (1878–1953) from 1924 to 1953 for 29 years and Mao Zedong (1893–1976) from 1949 to 1976 for 28, may allow them to make great political accomplishments, it may also make them commit huge mistakes. The four- or five-year presidency term and two reelections in the United States and other liberal democratic countries is a good political tradition, injecting fresh political ideas and blood to the country. Thus, Deng Xiaoping, as the architect of China’s reform and open policy, recognized the advantage of the term system of political leaders and implemented it personally in China. After him, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao took the presidency of China for only two terms for 10 years, 1992–2002 and 2002–2012. One of the most important things for political leaders may be to establish and maintain a good and sustainable political tradition, such as George Washington’s and Deng Xiaoping’s resign, but not to persist their ideas and policies until death and be overturned after death. From this point, although President Putin may have revived Russia to some extent and be great in history, his four and possibly more terms may leave a negative political tradition to future Russia, while he still has enough time to adjust his ideas and arrange his political legacy after his era.

258

6 Understanding Countries: Achievements and Problems

References AFE. (2021). Asia for education. Two edicts from the Qianlong Emperor, on the occasion of Lord Macartney’s mission to China, September 1793. Retrieved July 13, 2021, from http://afe.easia. columbia.edu/ps/china/qianlong_edicts.pdf Allison, G. (2017). Destined for war: Can America and China escape Thucydides’s Trap? Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Ames, R. T. (2021). Han Feizi, Chinese philosopher. Britannia. Retrieved July 13, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Han-Feizi Bell, D. A. (2016). The China model: Political meritocracy and the limits of democracy. Princeton University Press. Blum, W. (2000). Rogue state: A guide to the world’s only superpower. https://www.cia.gov/lib rary/abbottabad-compound/5F/5FC9177D115DFAE199E5204183A6F3E2_Rogue_state__By_ sout_al_khilafah.pdf Chinadaily. (2017). Core socialist value. Chinadaily. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/19thcp cnationalcongress/2017-10/12/content_33160115.htm Diamond, J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel: The fate of human society. W. W. Norton. Dillinger, J. (2019). Countries with the most immigrants. https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/hig hest-immigrant-population-in-the-world.html Garrity, P. (2016). Churchill, Britain, and European Unity. The Churchill Project. https://winstonch urchill.hillsdale.edu/churchill-britain-and-european-unity/ Ghosh, I. (2020). Visualizing the U.S. population by race. Visualcapitlist. https://www.visualcapita list.com/visualizing-u-s-population-by-race/ Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. The American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530. Huang, R. (1981). 1587: A year of no significance. Yale University Press. Jacques, M. (2010). Understanding the rise of China. TedSalon, London. https://www.ted.com/ talks/martin_jacques_understanding_the_rise_of_china Karnane, P., & Quinn, M. A. (2019). Political instability, ethnic fractionalization and economic growth. International Economic Policy, 16, 435–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-017-0393-3 Kimalainen, S. (2018). Top 15 countries with the largest middle class population in the world. Insider Monkey. https://www.insidermonkey.com/blog/top-15-countries-with-the-largest-middle-classpopulation-in-the-world-639374/?singlepage=1 Mises, L. V. (1951). Socialism: An economic and sociological analysis. Yale University Press. O’Brien M., Raley, S., & Ryan, C. (2019). How many illegal aliens live in the United States? Fair. https://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/how-many-illegal-aliens-united-states. Redrock. (2020). Drug use statistics. Redrock Recovery Center. https://bedrockrecoverycenter.com/ drug-abuse-statistics/. Rošker, J. (2021). Epistemology in Chinese philosophy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/chinese-epistemology/ Sciencevibe. (2017). “No one really understands water!” admits physicist. https://sciencevibe.com/ 2017/05/01/no-one-really-understands-water-admits-physicist/ The Geography of Transport Systems. (2021). Length of the interstate highway system and of the Chinese expressway system, 1959–2017. https://transportgeography.org/contents/chapter5/roadtransportation/highway-length-china-united-states/ Theobald, U. (2021). An encyclopaedia on Chinese history, literature and art. Retrieved July 13, 2021, from http://chinaknowledge.de/Literature/Classics/daxue.html UNDP. (2020). Human Development Report, various year. https://report.hdr.undp.org/ UNDP. (2021). United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report (various year). http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi Weber, M. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. The Free Press of Glencoe. WEF. (2021). World Economic Forum. The global competitiveness report (various year). https:// www.weforum.org/reports WorldData. (2021). The 4 current rogue state. https://www.worlddata.info/roguestates.php.

Chapter 7

Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat

According to our human’s current knowledge, the earth is the only livable planet for humankind. Even though there may be some terrestrial planets discovered in the future, the earth may still be the most valuable or invaluable place, as home, for humankind. The earth, as a giant ball with a diameter of 12,742 km and a surface of 510 million kilometers square, was huge and seemingly boundless for ancient people, who were living and knowing just around tens, hundreds, or thousands of kilometers, gradually expanding. It is currently very small and limited for modern people, taking approximately 12–15 hours by airplane from China to the US, roughly half of the earth. All our humankind’s family, happiness, sorrow, politics, economies, societies, arts, cultures, and civilizations have happened, are happening, and will happen on this small planet. Although some issues, such as birth and death, marriage and divorce, achievement and failure, slaughter and friendship, war and peace, are intractable and vital for individuals, families, companies, countries, and humankind, they may be trivial and solvable from the perspective of history and outer space. The development requires us to form a broader vision, from individual to family to community to country, and to humankind. When we observe and consider from the broader vision, the original difficulties, puzzles, and conflicts may be harmonized and solved, and then we can achieve development and step into a new era.

7.1 Development as Globalization Nowadays scholars have generally traced globalization back to the popularity of the internet in the 1990s–2000s, or back to World War II in the 1940s, or back to great geographical discoveries in the fifteenth century, depending on different criteria. Globalization has never stopped but has progressed and advanced since humankind originated from apes in East Africa 300 million years ago. Although this paleoanthropological knowledge of human origination is still controversial and far from perfect, it may be more reliable and convincing than other theories and knowledge such as © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022 B. Wang, Public Value and Social Development, The Frontier of Public Administration in China, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0248-2_7

259

260

7 Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat

religion and creationism. Homo sapiens, as one branch of early hominid, is the only known species that has successfully populated, adapted to, and significantly altered a wide variety of land regions across the world, resulting in profound historical and environmental impacts. Between 70,000 and 100,000 years ago, due to various guessed reasons, such as foraging, escaping, fighting, and searching for better habitat, Homo sapiens began migrating from the African continent and populating parts of Europe and Asia as the ancestor of modern Europeans and Asians. They reached the Australian continent, guessed through canoes, sometimes between 35,000 and 65,000 years ago, as the ancestor of current indigenous people there. Scientists studying land masses and climate know that the Pleistocene Ice Age created a land bridge that connected Asia and North America (Alaska) over 13,000 years ago. A widely accepted migration theory suggests that people crossed this land bridge and eventually migrated into North and South America 12,000 years ago. Then, human beings propagated and resided in most livable continents in the world, with other animals, living and dying and reproducing and prospering. However, their distinctive brain helps them develop languages approximately 50,000 years ago, allowing them to communicate, collaborate, capture giant animals, and finally win out from other species. In addition to language, they further invented text approximately 5000 years ago in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, allowing them to record and accumulate skills and knowledge and then create splendid culture and civilization. People migrated from the same origination, east Africa, to continents all over the world, and they have achieved this great migration for more than 100,000 years, without anybody knowing this process exactly. Humans in the different regions created their culture and civilization independently and dispersedly, with little communication and exchange. Around the rivers and plains livable for humans, some earlier civilizations were established with their specific languages and texts, such as ancient Egypt around Nile back to 5000 BCE, ancient Mesopotamia and Babylon around Tigris and Euphrates back to 3500 BCE, ancient India around Indus and Ganges back to 3100 BCE, ancient China around Yellow River back to 2000 BCE, and Minoan and Mycenaean civilization back to 3000 BCE, as well as some smaller and later civilizations. Our current humans and societies are all their offspring. Since geographic isolation, these civilizations and humans have developed independently and dividedly for thousands of years, living and dying, producing goods, forming families and reproducing children, creating arts and buildings, establishing governments and armies, fighting and negotiating, merging and expanding, and finally, accumulating knowledge and achievements, or declining and vanishing. Originally, in any specific region, there must be some tribes, fighting, conquering, and merging to be bigger ones, and gradually forming states and governments, although without clear borders and not the modern sovereign countries. It was difficult, maybe not impossible, for one civilization to contact, communicate, and even fight and conquer, another remote one, while the possible contact and communication, such as trade and travel and marriage, would imperceptibly influence and alter those original civilizations, generating new ideas, products, economics, politics, cultures, arts, and even humans, maybe peacefully and bloodily. For example, although there was still little evidence that ancient Chinese civilization was mutually influenced by ancient Egypt,

7.1 Development as Globalization

261

since it was too far, ancient China had strong and long-term cultural communication and exchange with closer India, Persia, and Europe by the Silk Road. Buddhism was formed in India in the sixth century BCE, when it was the late West Zhou Dynasty of China (1046 BCE771 BCE), spreading to and influencing China through the path of central Asia to Xinjiang and to mainland China approximately 67 AD, when it was the East Han Dynasty (25220 AD). After that time, Buddhism was believed and accepted by some rulers and emperors and scholars and monks in China as a kind of knowledge or even truth that can relieve and save people from pain and death. The spreading and pursuit of Buddhism, as truth, motivated India and Chinese monks to travel their countries to teach and learn Buddhism, overcoming formidable difficulties. For example, Chinese monk Faxian (334–420, East Jin Dynasty) started walking from the capital Chang’an (now Xi’an) to India and Sri Lanka at the age of 65, crossing more than 30 countries then and more than 50,000 km, spending 14 years, coming back from India Ocean at the age of 78, with hundreds of Buddhism books. The later case is Xuanzuang (602–664, Tang Dynasty), walking from Chang’an to India through Xinjiang and central Asia in 629 AD, crossing more than 110 countries then and staying and studying in India for 17 years, returning China in 645 AD with more than 600 Buddhism book, and translating these books in his rest life. Since then, Buddhism has been gradually integrated into Chinese culture and become an important ingredient, with Confucianism and Taoism together. Comparatively, Christianity was first introduced into China in 635 AD (Tang Dynasty) as Nestorianism, but with little impact on the majority Han people, just remaining in some remote areas and ethnic minority groups. In approximately 1300, Roman Catholicism and Nestorianism spread again in mainland China with the establishment of the Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368) but soon interrupted as the demise of the Yuan Dynasty in 1368. In 1583 in the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644), Matteo Ricci (1552–1610) (Chinese name 利玛窦), the Italian Jesuit missionary, came to China, lived there for nearly 30 years and died in Beijing. He was a pioneer teaching Christian to the Chinese intellectuals, officials, and ordinary people, introducing modern Western science and technology ideas and bridging mutual comprehension between China and the West. Since then, in the Ming and Qing Dynasties, Christianity has spread rapidly in mainland China, integrating Western culture more deeply into China on the one hand, accompanying conflicts and invasions and wars on the other hand. Regardless of whether it is good or bad, China, as well as other regions in the world, have been increasingly closely linked. As humans must migrate, flow and go far away, globalization is an inevitable trend. In human history, globalization has proceeded not only through peaceful travel, learning, communication, and trade but also through bloody invasion, conquering, colonizing, and even genocide. The Age of Exploration launched by Western navigators and explorers in the fifteenth-seventeenth centuries, such as Christopher Columbus (1452–1506), Vasco da Gama (1469–1524), and Ferdinand Magellan (1480–1521), has greatly propelled globalization, introducing Western advanced science and technology and economic and political ideas to other regions and people, and simultaneously, bringing colonization, pandemics, genocide, and destruction of

262

7 Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat

local cultures and civilizations. Australia and North and South America were colonized, and most indigenous people were killed and expelled. World Wars I and II can be regarded as the most terrible cases of globalization, reflecting ignorance, barbarism, and less development of humankind. Although some scholars, politicians, and ordinary people probably believe that Social Darwinism, which means that strong and competent nations, races, and cultures can defeat and eliminate weak and incompetent nations, this viewpoint is apparently, despite arguably, unhuman, unethical, unjust, inappropriate, and unacceptable in modern society. With sufficient, albeit still far from perfect, experience and knowledge, humankind and human society have the capability and wisdom to achieve peaceful and harmonious globalization and development. Since the end of World War II in 1945, humankind, as an integrated whole, led by outstanding statesmen such as Franklin Roosevelt (1882–1945), Winston Churchill (1874–1965), Joseph Starling (1878–1953), Chiang Kai-shek (1887–1975), established the United Nations to pursue and safeguard world peace. Although the UN has been far from perfect, and the cold war still arrived afterward, and the nuclear war was imminent during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1961, humankind has successfully, at least, avoided world hot war and kept general peace for seven decades. There were still local conflicts and wars and poverty and oppression, but peace, development, human rights, and justice have become the mainstream accepted by most people, politicians, and countries. Observed from the long history of hundreds of years, human society has developed and became better on the values of peace, while we should not hope to achieve thorough world peace in a short period of decades because it will take a long time for humankind to solve various social difficulties and accordingly change and transform their minds and souls and ideologies. Although with the huge costs of war, conquering, and genocide in history, globalization, as an irreversible trend, has benefited humankind, albeit not all, greatly in major aspects such as economic well-being, convenience, political progress, science and technology, and world peace, if they could be recognized as values and goodness, while environment and ecology may be an exception. The big problem is not to oppose and resist and reverse globalization, going back but not ahead, but how to make globalization benefit more people and more countries. This is a major challenge not only for every individual country and the government but also for major countries and governments such as the US, China, Russia, the UK, and France, as well as other developed countries as their international responsibility and for humankind as a whole. If we only consider the problem at the local and micro levels, we always fail to find true solutions but only shortsighted solutions, such as containment, antagonism, suppression, exploitation, and worse solutions, such as enemies and war. However, if we can consider the problem at the higher, systematic, and holistic levels, regarding humankind as an integrated whole, we may find much better solutions and promote globalization. Although every country and government and statemen should have this systematic and holistic view of globalization, those large countries, particularly the USA and China, as the no. 1 and 2 economy body and superpower, have more responsibilities. However, confronting the competition and challenge from China, the US government and some political elites have gradually changed their policy and

7.1 Development as Globalization

263

attitude from pro-globalization to anti-globalization since 2016 marked by the Trump Administration. As the great country and sole superpower, the United States and its statemen, such as Franklin Roosevelt (1882–1945), who led to the establishment of the UN, and Woodrow Wilson (1856–1924), who advocated the League of Nations as the nascence of the UN, have broader vision and far sight when the country was more superior and powerful at their time and before the new millennium. However, when the status of superpower and superiority to the rivals was narrowed, the United States and its political elites became more provincial and parochial, tending to be more nationalistic and national interest prioritizing, containing China as the rival but not welcoming competition, and resisting globalization. In contrast, China has been one of the most closed countries in the world before the 1970s, rejecting globalization and resembling today’s North Korea, but it has opened the door and embraced globalization since the Reform and Open policy in 1978, even assumed to be the leader of globalization after four decades (Bolton, 2017). Although its development may have some problems and flaws, criticized and even stigmatized by the US, such as insufficient freedom and democracy, violating human rights and international rules, stealing intellectual property rights, obstructing freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, etc., these problems and flaws are actually not realistic and have been effectively alleviated if observed for decades. The Chinese people have enjoyed much more and better freedom, democracy, happiness, human rights, intellectual property protection, and clean environments than before and have not violated the international law of the South China Sea. In particular, relative to the US, modern Chinese people and political elites have a broader global vision and systematic mind. The Belt and Road Initiatives are not, stigmatized by the US, the Chinese ambition and greed to dominate these regions and the world, but Chinese contributions to globalization and integration. China experienced a planned economy and traditional socialism before the 1970s, a market economy and capitalism afterward, and Confucianism for 2000 years. It has learned the advantages and thrown away the disadvantages of these various ideologies and knowledge and combined them together as the Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. In particular, Confucianism has the specialty of systematic vision, public spirit, and globalization. Although globalization in Confucianism in history meant the harmony and integration of all Chinese, including ethnic minority groups, due to limited geographic knowledge, it can be easily expanded to the globe in the modern age as the ideological source of Belt and Road Initiatives. In contrast, closeness, bias, and arrogance in traditional China and the current United States will undoubtedly weaken and hamper the development of the country, which can be a piece of convincing experience, knowledge, and wisdom from history. Globalization and continuously going beyond are human nature, as humankind will go beyond the earth and into the solar system, galaxy, and cosmos currently and in the future.

264

7 Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat

7.2 Development as Knowledge Accumulation What is the most important thing in the world, and what is the essence of development? It may be the knowledge, but not the money, wealth of nation, economic well-being, happiness, military power, political power, nuclear power, or any other things, even not the science and technology, since science and technology is only referred to as the knowledge about nature, while the general knowledge also includes that about human society, human mind, and all the beings in the cosmos. Although the knowledge of science and technology is most reliable and important, enabling us to utilize electricity, nuclear power, and lasers, constructing buildings, bridges, and skyscrapers, curing diseases, cloning and editing genes, and maybe achieving eternity and interstellar traveling, it is still not enough and far from completion, as we humankind still need to know, at least currently, what is morality, virtues, justice, goodness, religion, art, beauty, and soul, which are all knowledge beyond the scope, also linking to, science and technology. Before the scientific revolution in the eighteenth century, there was not much scientific and technological knowledge in human society, but abundant knowledge of morality, religion, and art, helping humans solve various problems and live through a long history. The explosion of scientific and technological knowledge has greatly benefited but also simultaneously threatened humankind due to the imbalance of knowledge of morality and virtues relative to science. Knowledge, in essence, is human understandings of all the things and beings in the cosmos, including subjective knowledge in living people’s minds and objective knowledge in books, libraries, computer memories, and other various mediums. Social development, in essence, is not the more products, economy, wellbeing, education in material form but the more knowledge in objective and subjective form, meaning that we humankind, as well individuals, have grasped, known, and understood more and more, but maybe never full, about society, the world, and the cosmos. Although the nuclear bomb is important, knowledge of atom and nuclear power and how to utilize them appropriately is more fundamental and preconditional. Knowledge can help us solve, maybe not perfectly, various problems. Knowledge of cooking, simple but also sophisticated, can help us prepare delicious meal; knowledge of health can help us treat disease and form good habits and keep healthy; knowledge of love can help us better deal with love, marriage, and sex affairs, as love, marriage, and sex may be closely linked; knowledge of engineering can help us construct bridges and skyscrapers; and knowledge of politics and globalization can help us better and more deeply understand freedom, democracy, party, government, policy, and related issues and then achieve better politics and globalization. Meanwhile, because we do not have sufficient knowledge, we cannot do these things perfectly and sometimes fail. Particularly, it is just because our knowledge about politics, globalization, and development are insufficient and flawed and even wrong that our politics, globalization, and development, particularly in the US, China, and all the countries in the world, are far from perfection and need to be reformed and improved.

7.2 Development as Knowledge Accumulation

265

Although the knowledge of politics, globalization, and development is profound and complex, there are some simple and enlightening principles, such as (a) the war is terrible and should be avoided, and even if necessary, it should be under the mandate of UN; (b) the public values such as freedom, democracy, human rights, and prosperity, etc. are crucial, while they should not be defined and forced by some countries such as the US. Those countries and governments violating these principles and knowledge of political science, such as China before 1978 and in the Ming and Qing dynasty, North Korea, and the current US, have failed in history or may fail currently and in the future. If we recognize that political science is also, and can be, a branch of science, and that science as knowledge is the most reliable way for us to understand the world and solve problems and that rejecting science and knowledge will fail, as the bridge may collapse if rejecting engineering, we may conclude that rejecting political and development science will lead political and development failure. Therefore, the core problem may be (a) what is political and development knowledge and science? (b) China and the US, and any other countries, whose politicians and politics and development modes are more consistent with political and development science? Political and development science, as a branch of scientific knowledge, are arguable, rational, evidence-based, most reliable, and not absolute, such as the debates between Albert Einstein (1879–1955) and Niels Bohr (1885–1962) on the quantum theory in the Solvay Conference (Lambert et al. 2015), while politicization, emotion, and religion are not scientific, no evidence or biased evidence-based, irrational, arrogant, arbitrary, and inarguable. It is subtle and intricate that realistic politics is much divided from political science, and politicians, as practitioners, are neither political scientists nor following political scientists. This may be one of the greatest differences between political science and natural science, as most people recognize that natural science is real science and we must follow scientists, while most people, particularly politicians, always forget that politics can also be science and they (we) should follow political scientists. Surely, they may believe, invite, and consult some political scientists and accept their ideas and suggestions, but they, always over self-confident and decisive as political leaders, may also ignore that the essence of science is not whether theory A or B is correct and scientific or not, but science is only an assumption, and both theory A and B may have some merits, and evidence should be comprehensive and not biased, and the systematic vision is necessary. Consequently, the current politics in the US, as the sole superpower and dominator and boasting the most advanced political science in the world, have been rather partisan-based, politicized, polarized, and populism-directed, which is not scientific at all and so will probably fail. Although its containment policy against China may be effective in the short term due to its existing position and power, it may not be low price to its own and seriously threaten other countries and the world peace, challenging and depending on the possible faults of China. In contrast, although stigmatized by the United States and described as authoritarianism and autocracy by flawed Western political science, which may be not scientific, China’s politics is also defined and explained as meritocracy (Bell, 2016), which means that the country is

266

7 Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat

governed by well-educated elites and in a more scientific way. The rapid and comprehensive development of China, although still flawed and imperfect and arguable, may be evidence of its more scientific politics and development. Although challenged by containment and stigmatization, it is still necessary for Chinese statemen to be open, inclusive, and farsighted, exploring and following political science, and searching for the best ways to grapple with misunderstanding, containment, and stigmatization from the US. Surely, it is necessary for both the statesmen and people in the United States and China, as well as the whole humankind, to explore and follow real political science and knowledge, to solve various problems, and to develop our human societies and the whole humankind. Otherwise, there will be setbacks and failures, hoping no wars, self-destruction, and extinction.

7.3 Deterioration as Environment Degradation As the hot war, cold war, and Thucydides Trap in nuclear deterrence may lead to the destruction, or even extinction, of humankind, these threats, still existing, may have been alleviated by political advancement and development. However, environmental degradation and ecological crises may be another realistic and prominent threat. Humankind has gained undoubted progress and development in some aspects, such as economic goods, well-being, convenience, science and technology, general knowledge, and even politics, considering that we have achieved the reduction of terrible wars and slaughters, but we are undoubtedly losing environmental cleanness, intactness, existence, and biological diversity. Since the cosmos, galaxy, solar system, earth, human society, environment, and ecology are always changing, having its start and end, the earth and environment and ecology do not need to be protected and saved by their own fates, as they can adapt to any change and disaster, even the extinction, considering that of the dinosaur. It is us, the humankind, that need to be protected and rescued by ourselves. Development as globalization means that we humankind are sharing the earth, environment, and ecology as public goods and services, but we still treat the earth dividedly and separately and privately by individual countries and governments, lacking the systematic vision and publicness. The Yellow Stone National Park in the US, the Tibetan Plateau in China, the Siberia in Russia, the Amazon rainforest in Brazil, and the oceans and continents do not belong to specific countries but to the whole humankind. Wealthier countries, such as the US, have the resources, knowledge, and capability to protect their domestic environment and ecology and sustain a relatively good local environment but are reluctant and incapable of protecting the environment and ecology in other countries as an indivisible whole, which may be the apparent incapability and foolishness of our humankind. Meanwhile, development as knowledge accumulation indicates that humankind has gained and accumulated increasing general knowledge in various fields, but knowledge of the environment, ecology, and climate change is particularly insufficient. Although environmental pollution, ecological crisis, and climate change have been studied and warned by

7.3 Deterioration as Environment Degradation

267

scientists and concerned by the general public and politicians, they are still not prioritized highly enough due to the short sight of humankind, which always gives more concern to short-term, nearby and familiar affairs such as the economy and family and nation but gives less attention to long-term, remote and unfamiliar affairs such as the south pole and biodiversity. Politicians, particularly in democracy, are not farsighted enough; for example, the US, as the sole superpower, apparently places its policy priority on sustaining its economic and political superiority but not global climate change and environmental degradation, which may be not wrong, as anybody and any politician and any government may have their value concern and policy priority but may be shortsighted, as there are some more successful and failing ones. Environment and ecology and humankind and earth are an integrated and indivisible whole. On the one hand, they are divided and separated and individual, protected or destroyed by sovereign countries and governments with varying development stages, national conditions, and capabilities, but on the other hand, they are also linked and related, as the sandstorm, atmosphere, animals, and virus will not care about the border. As parts of the ecology and earth, humankind is greatly influenced and determined by the ecology and earth, such as the earthquake, volcano eruption, hurricane, and tsunami, but meanwhile, we can also greatly change, and have greatly changed, the ecology and earth, without knowing the exact consequence. As facts, with the migration of humankind from East Africa to Europe to Asia to Australia to North and South America, humankind has occupied most lands on the planet during the millions of years, with its population expansion from hundreds or thousands to 7.7 billion in 2021 and by estimation to exceed 8.0 billion in 2025 and 9.0 billion in 2050, which truly needs to be scientifically controlled. Humankind has been undoubtedly the master of the planet, but still without sufficient knowledge, wisdom, and capability. During this period, the biological diversity was greatly reduced, according to our current knowledge, with the extinction of many, but the exact number of unknown, species such as the dodo, quagga, African Black Rhino, passenger pigeon, Great Auk, and Wooly Mammoth, etc. (Dail, 2020), and numerous endangered, vulnerable, and threatened species, such as the African forest elephant, Amur Leopard, and Black Rhino, to name a few (WWF, 2021). Although the extinction of some species or even great geographic movement, such as the extinction of dinosaur, may change the ecosystem and generate new species and epochs, such as mammals and humankind and Anthropocene Epoch, it is ignorant, incapable, and foolish for us to destroy the planet and livings and ecology, as our own home and relatives and friends, while these home and relatives and friends are a little giant for us to recognize.

References Bell, D. A. (2016). The China model: Political meritocracy and the limits of democracy. Princeton University Press

268

7 Earth Village: We Are in the Same Boat

Bolton, K. R. (2017, April 7). Will China assume the leadership of globalization? Foreign Policy Journal, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2017/04/07/will-china-assume-the-leader ship-of-globalization/ Doil, K. (2020). List of 50 extinct animals on planet Earth. Trippy Nature. https://www.feri.org/ext inct-animals/ Lambert, F., Berends, F., & Eckert, M. (2015). The early solvay councils and the advent of the quantum era. European Physical Journal Special Topics, 224, 2011- 2125. WWF. (2021). Endangered, vulnerable, and threatened species. World Wildlife Fund. https://www. worldwildlife.org/species/directory?direction=desc&sort=extinction_status