Conversation

Replying to
I like to think being an immigrant twice over has helped me get rid of both kinds of blindspots (cultural self-essentialist and humanist). India —> US STEM interests —> liberal arts/humanities interests A tweet or two about each...
1
10
I was never at risk of self-essentializing a “big” Indian identity. India in the 80s when I was growing up was a sad joke. Big-identity Indians were (and largely still are) insecure buffoons with entire identity built on a somewhat overstated claim to having invented the zero.
1
13
(exaggerating a bit for effect there...) I was briefly at risk of becoming fully “westernized” and becoming a fully gone-native western thinker with a wog epistemology. I do think 90% in English, but I’d say only ~30-50% of my thought patterns are classical western ones).
1
8
I was *very* briefly at risk of becoming a STEM supremacist (for about 3 months in the summer of 1993, between getting accepted at IIT, a big hubris booster, and discovering upon getting there how ordinary my STEM talents were in that cohort).
1
10
When I got interested in non-STEM topics, I was coming off 15y in the STEM world, exiting with 3 mediocre degrees, mediocre track record (including a deadpooled product, 6 meh patents, and a dozen meh publications), and a small but secure identity/confidence. No Elon Musk but ok.
1
4
I was never a STEM supremacist because I didn’t win enough to get an inflated sense of myself that way. But I won enough that it was enough to immunize me against the intimidation and contempt defenses against dirty barbarian STEMmie attention on lofty humanist questions.
1
8
Interestingly there is nothing like wog epistemology (“brown sahib” Indian —> European going native) for STEM —> HSS. I’ve never met a STEMMie so in awe of critical theory that they accept access to HSS discourses with deferential gratitude and abandonment of subversive impulses.
2
4
So, tldr of my 2 immigration stories: I never self-essentialized as Indian or wog-Westerner, or as STEMMie doerist or HSS critical-theory supremacist. This has been the reward for a spectacularly mediocre 22-year adult career along all conventional vectors of accomplishment.
1
8
The consolation of mediocre success at life’s games around big prizes is an identity too small to obscure your view of where and how your feet are on the ground. Immigration story #1 makes me incapable of ethnonationalist sentiment on *any* side that might accept me as a member.
2
9
Replying to
I don't get it. I've achieved less success than you, yet I don't have a worldview that idealizes mediocrity, *and* I'm not horribly sad about my failures. Success is actually hard! It's possible to admit you're not the best and also that it would be great if you were!
1
1
Replying to
I have no problem with that. I admire success, recognize that it is hard, recognize that it creates dark consequences/has a cost too. I don’t idealize mediocrity. I just recognize it as a condition worth inhabiting as much as success. In fact, I think I prefer it to “success”.
Replying to
For the simple reason that it’s not entirely something you can choose not to be. Which means you have to learn to appreciate what it infact is instead of futile pining for other life conditions. When the mediocre strive too hard to be “successful” they usually end up miserable.
1
1
Show replies
Replying to and
“Success” solves for impact, material rewards and historic significance. “Mediocrity” solves for a deeper, less judgmental appreciation of all of existence, including the success that a minority of smarter/harder-working/luckier people may achieve.
1
1
Show replies