Impostor syndrome

Wiki defines impostor syndrome as a"psychological phenomenon in which people are unable to internalize their accomplishments. Despite external evidence of their competence, those with the syndrome remain convinced that they are frauds and do not deserve the success they have achieved." Hmm sounds all too familiar...

Recently we have been struggling with trying to convince some of our highly intelligent and promising students that there were indeed brilliant. Their self doubt seems to make them convinced that they won't graduate or get good jobs when they do - all the while we are telling them that they will in fact graduate and trying to convince them to apply to good places. The common consensus was that as grad students we had all felt self doubt, so this was normal and we should only keep encouraging them.
A subsequent discussion among the "younger" post-docs and we voiced sentiments like "I don't know what I'm doing" "everyone else seems to know more" "I'm not sure why I was hired". So much for this being a grad student issue. Some general looking into each others contributions and skills ensued and we all felt a little better...maybe... A senior post-doc then joined us, someone who we think is very knowledgeable, skilled and has got it together. He had been applying for an award...he slumps down with a "I don't think I'm good enough"! - does this ever end?

Are you Indian?

Not a lot of things make me annoyed as much as being asked this question. Not a lot of things brings out the "rude me". Asking this question as a conversation opener is almost guaranteed to make me rude. It is also a source of great amusement to my friends. So why does this question have such an irrational effect on me...
Well to start with I look south Asian - so generally I don't mind an assumption from people who are not from the region, that I may belong to the largest country in the region. Statistically there is a good chance that I am from there. My problem stems from having to insist that I am not from there and still have people refuse to believe it. I am born Sri Lankan, and I cannot link any ancestry back to India (and I can trace back as far as 6 generations). I have also never been there so I have as much local knowledge as can be gained from TV/Internet.
First annoyance started when I moved to Singapore and was required to declare my race. Let's move on from the need to declare a race in this day and age - that is a discussion for another day. I was given the option of Malay, Chinese, Indian or Other. As far as I am concerned Indian is a nationality and not a race. I don't identify with it as my race (whatever that is). So I go for Other and put Sri Lankan as my race seeing as how the other options were nationalities too. I have trouble with officials accepting me as "other" when they see me in person. In fact I have had cases where my form as been "corrected" for me.
Throughout my travels or living and working in other countries, I've had several conversations which have opened with "Are you from India?"/"Are you Indian". When I answer in the negative, it is generally followed by "But you look Indian". So? Another classic "So do you speak Hindi?" - no! "Why not?" - why would I? It is not a language officially spoken in ANY of the countries I have lived in. "But you have a bhindhi/pottu/dot" ... Er yes, I am Hindu/Tamil - neither of which are exclusive to India. Just as much as wearing a headscarf is not exclusive to someone from Pakistan for example. Or being a white caucasian doesn't mean you are from Britain or must speak English.
Why does it make me rude? Often these questions are asked of me by random strangers who are from the region. I have tired of insisting. I am also tired of people from the region who seem to only want to have something to do with me if my answer to the question is yes. Am guilty of generalizing that everyone who asks that question is going to be the same... but having had the formula repeated countless times in countless locations I have grown wary. Next time maybe just talk to me about the weather!

Resurrection

A recent conversation with friends about their blogs reminded me about this blog, and I thought why not resurrect it. When I write things down here, I tend to write as I would speak almost. This helps a lot to avoid the kind of passive voice writing I tend to revert to in report writing or academic writing . Looking back at the posts, I started the blog about 10 years ago somewhere during my undergrad, (yikes how time passes) and last wrote something about 4 years ago.
I decided to remove some of the extremely random (and seemingly angst ridden) posts and leave in those that I may still identify with. A lot has changed since I stopped writing in it long ago - in both my personal and professional lives - and I hope that maybe some of my posts will be more mature (hah!), but a lot of it will continue to be in the same vein of being very random. Will I keep it going better this time? Who knows - only time will tell.

Preah Vihear

Starting off at 5am on the 30th of Dec 2009, our destination was the temple of Preah Vihear situated in the north of Cambodia near the border of Thailand. After two hours on a smooth highway we are at Anlong Veng which was the last stronghold of the Khmer Rouge and also the supposed final resting place of Pol Pot. 2 more hours along a dusty but smooth road and we are at the base of the Dângrêk Mountains. We chang over to an army pickup truck and go up along the streep road up to the temple, along an army guy jumps into our truck and seems to be our supplementary guide and escort for the rest of the journey.

Constructed mainly during the reigns of the Khmer kings Suriyavarman I and II dedicated to the Hindu god Shiva, Preah Vihear has been a sight of dispute between the Thais and Cambodians. In 1962 the Internation Court of Justice awarded the temple to the Cambodians. After the end of the Cambodian civil war in 1998, the temple was opened for tourists from the Thai side - from where it could be easily accessed via an expressway. Even after the construction of an access road up the cliff from the Cambodian side, there was still limited access by tourists from this side. Preah Vihear was designated as a UNESCO World Heritage site in July 2008, but fresh disputes broke out in October 2008 and April 2009. The access from Thailand was closed during this time, but is supposedly reopened now, though we didn't see anyone approach from that side. The visitors center with the Thai flag flying above it can be clearly seen.

After a 20 minute ascent, we arrive at the temple near the first Gopura. The staircase below leads to a market which was destroyed in April by Thai shelling. Most of the stones of this gopura have fallen off but some are precariously balanced. Walking up along the stone path we pass through the other 3 gopuras which contain carvings from Hindu mythologies. At the topmost gopura we are greeted by the sounds of music being played by the soldiers there, apparently to call the gods to the temple. Inside we receive blessings from some Buddhist monks there.

Beyond the topmost gopura, we come to the tip of the cliff from which there is a breathtaking view of Cambodia and to the north Thailand. Below the rocky outcrop is a small space in which we were told the civilians around could hide if fighting broke out again. Coming back down we are shown the wells like area which have now dried up due to deforestation in the area. The Cambodian army also proudly point out their artillery and anti-aircraft weapons on our way down while our guide gives us a history and politics lesson. On our way down we see a few Thai soldiers who are still stationed in a small monestary along the road (though it is on the Cambodian side).

Four hours later we are back in Siem Reap. The journey was not as ardous or treacherous as the guide books make it out to be, and neither is it as expensive as some tour companies in Siem Reap make it, if you privately arrange for a guide and transport. Though most of the mines around the temple have been cleared, the area around it is still not so it is a good idea to stick to the worn paths and follow your guide. The experience and the sights were well worth the trip. Once the road between Anlong Veng and the temple is completed the journey should be much smoother and the Cambodians expect more tourists to come. Right now not many make the jouney as we saw only about 2 or 3 other groups while we were there and a few locals.

Personality Issues

I suppose that when a person is hired into a regular job their personality which comes across in an interview would be considered, for example how they would fit into a team and so on?
What if you were deciding on a person who would take charge of a piece of equipment (with no benefit to them except maybe the experience :|) and you have two candidates one who is very technically sound but severely lacks people skills and is known to cut corners when doing procedures. And another who is technically weaker (due to lack of experience) but can work well with other people and follows procedures correctly. Bearing in mind that the person would have to teach other new people coming into the lab and deal with technical issues that crop up. I am inclined to pick the less later person as his technical weak points could be improved with more experience and training but personality issues are not so easily overcome.

In another scenario where a person wishes to use a piece of sensitive equipment without supervision; They do a demonstration to the person in charge without any flaws in their technical skills, however they display impatience and not caring too much about following certain checks which ensure the machine continues to work properly. During the demonstration all the proper procedures are followed but here and there certain impatience is displays which makes the person in charge wonder if they would skip things if left alone. Would it be prejudicial or wrong to not allow that person to use it without supervision based on these "feelings"? In this case the persons work may be affected as they now have to wait for the person in charge to also be available.

The people who influence us

To a large extent we are shaped by our environment. Specifically people. In our early lives its our parents. Much more than character, and opinions are influenced. Parents also encourage or discourage certain behavior or inclinations that we have according to what they feel is right as well. Often people find on hind sight that even our career choices have been influenced to a large extent by our parents, either by encouraging us to study along a certain field that they like or feel is suitable for us, or by our own actions of rebellion against these encouragements. Encouragement/discouragement also enters into the child's development through other elders and teachers whose opinions we are taught to value.
As we grow older, these authority figures become less of an influence as we tend to form our own opinions and not take what is told as face value. But our opinions are still not entirely our own. It is still linked to the people we hang around. Living away from your parents mean you grow closer ties with friends as a support system and their opinions begin to matter. Having conversations with friends and colleagues lead you to broaden your perspective and you tend to assimilate some of the general opinions. Those who are more stubborn or strong willed tend to hold on to their preformed notions while those more weaker willed will tend to sway with a group opinion.
These are common people who influence everyone. But take a specific example of grad students and you find that a lot of them are influenced by their supervisors. More than in a common work environment where there is a chain of control, and people come and go, get promoted, work in different groups and so on; a grad student has a close relationship with their primary supervisor for 4 - 5 years in general and as this is generally their starting point of their professional life a lot of cues are picked up from the supervisor. From very basic things like presentation/writing styles to more character issues like how forceful, perfection oriented, organized etc. In some cases where there is a chance to evaluate and choose supervisors/students its likely that people of similar character choose to work together, however even when thrown together randomly, by the time of graduation a lot of the supervisors characteristics are mirrored in the students. I cannot say if my initial assumption that this is not so common in workplaces is true or not though.

Genetics Abortion Ethics

Congenital conditions can be scary - some develop only after adulthood (or methods of detection were only developed in later years), at this juncture you might have children and passed on these illnesses to them. If on the other hand you find out about them before you have children what are the options you have. Based on the condition you could have a 0 - 100% chance depending on whether it is recessive/dominant and your partner's genetics. Assuming of course that you want to have children (otherwise the discussion becomes moot), what are the choices you have. If the chances are especially high of passing on the condition there is always adopting children. Assuming then that you want to have biological children there seems to be two choices.
First there is preimplantation genetic diagnosis which requires the use of IVF. This means the testing is done before implantation but at the embryo stage (I believe after the third division). Of course this means taking the IVF route which is a costly procedure and becomes a longer route if the couple has no other problems concieving. Only certain diseases can be tested for and it assumes that one cell is representive off all - leading to more false positives/negatives. Not all countries provide this due to ethical concerns
Prenatal diagnosis is the other option which can be non-invasive for certain conditions or more invasive procedures like aminocentesis. Invasive procedures carry their own risks to the fetus.
Both these procedures come close to eugenic like selections - hence the reason for most ethical arguments against them. Although as a parent who is likely to pass on congential conditions to their children perhaps it would not seem this way as they are not using these procedures to select sex or traits.
The tricky part is if there is a positive result to these tests. In the preimplantation diagnosis it would be an easier proces to discard the embryo (as not all embryos generated for IVF are used anyway regardless of screening). In the other case it comes down to whether the parent wished to carry the child to term or abort the pregnancy. Some conditions would cause death or severe disability almost from the time of birth hence it seems ok to abort the pregnancy. Fetal corrective procedures are rare so this seems the choice that comes with prenatal screening. There is also the case of less sever cases where the child maybe able to live a semi normal - normal life with assistance - so are you taking away this right. The parents physical/mental/ financial ability to cope with such children I think needs to be taken into consideration. Of course if abortion is illegal in a certain country these tests can lead to no useful results except perhaps better prepareredness before the birth of the child. What about the extreame case of diseases which are late developing - i.e. person can lead a normal life until their 50s or 60s where the congenital condition starts giving problems. Does a parent abort or carry the child to term. The person might never develop problems (or they might), they might die earlier of unrelated incidents, a cure maybe developed in their lifetime. Is there some good to try to stop the continuation of passing on these genes which seemingly have a negative impact on the human being's health. Or is this a mild form of eugenics too.