Re: Why and How

[Aiviet Nguyen <aiviet@cat.syr.edu>]

HI Anh LAM and folks,

   Actually, I made a mistake and sent a private mail to Anhai to VNSA.
Fortunately, I am glad that no top secrets like love stories and pha.m hu'y
was revealed.

    Thanks to Anh Vu Hong Lam for contributions. Actually, if you divide
the society into many layers, actually the WHY of the lower layer used
to be the HOW of the higher layer.

    So I am not sure that there exists the ultimate WHY that belongs to the
scholars as Anh Lam said. ( Remember I am not an ontologist, but rather a
positivist as most of physicists). Here I am concerned about the relative
WHY, and the midle boss will have to have the HOW to report that low 
level WHY to his supervisor.

    Cheers
    Aiviet


On Sat, 10 May 1997, Hong Lam Vu wrote:

> Hi ba'c Aiviet, Sonnet, et al,
> 
> On Wed, 7 May 1997, Aiviet Nguyen wrote:
> 
> > I have attended an AMWAY's gathering. I don't know how good their 
> > business is, but was impressed very much of their talk.
> 
> Could you tell me what AMWAY is?
> 
> > 
> >   One VP of AMWAY said: " Those who know how and what to do always work 
> > for those who know why to do."
> >   
> 
> Cha` ba'c ga~i va`o cho^~ ngu+'a cu?a em ru`i nghen.
> 
> In a modern society there are the professionals and menagers who know HOW,
> the politicians and the shareholders who know WHAT, and the ideologists
> and other theorists who know WHY.
> 
> In the traditional Chinese-style society, there were the confucian
> literates who combined all three types of knowleadge. Nha` Nho know HOW
> and WHAT and WHY.
> 
> > 
> >   The AMWAY's phylosophy is obvious but how rarely be realized in our 
> > society. That is why those people oriented in why used to be in leadership. 
> > 
> 
> Look at the modern society where those folks who know HOW tend to take
> over the leadership.
> 
> La^m
> 
>