Before I decided to focus on studying the psychology of political partisanship, I was very passionate about broadly exploring the social sciences and humanities. During high school, I wrote a dozen or so articles on topics (e.g., political economy, law, epistimology) that now seem slightly out-of-place. Nevertheless, I decided to give a few I thought were the most representative of my interests a place to be showcased on this website. I hope they offer a brief insight into some other things I may enjoy discussing and learning about if anybody shares these interests. Please take into account that these articles are far from the standard I would hold myself to for more serious scientific publications; however, they did play an instrumental role in the early development of my writing and research skills.
I also plan on updating this page with new projects during college, hopefully covering an even more diverse range of topics and/or formats. Some will be reflections on new questions or subjects I’m introducing myself to. Others might be modifications of certain class assignments I enjoyed working on, granted all academic integrity protocols are followed.
I wrote this essay after I first learned about Goodhart’s Law, which states, “when a metric becomes a target, it ceases to become a good target.” Although Charles Goodhart initially made this assertion during his analysis of the Thatcher administration’s economic policies, I found it applicable to many historical examples and ethical debates too. A brief understanding of, and caution against, humans’ and governments’ tendency to aim towards what they measure, is quite helpful to have in most cases.
This was written when I was looking into constitutional law and how the U.S. Supreme Court has shaped the country’s trajectory. Specifically, I was coming to terms with the concepts of judicial activism vs. judicial restraint, zooming in on the Warren Court and Civil Rights Movement. The judiciary, though tremendously important (as both history and modern events show), is often overshadowed by the other two branches in popular discourse, something I was attempting to counter.
Two materials inspired this essay. The first was Duke’s online course, “Introduction to Political Economy,” taught by Michael C. Munger. The second was the then-not-Nobel-Prize-winning-but-now-is book, Why Nations Fail. This was back when I still wanted to go to college for a Philosophy, Politics, and Economics major. Through this essay, I was trying to get myself more familiar in explaining how these disciplines are interconnected, both theoretically and in reality.
Why do some things stay stagnant, while other things change for the better? Before we say its because some countries have better policies, or some groups have better strategies, or some people have better gym routines (which can all be true), we could consider if its a matter of philosophy. Maybe it’s pretty straightforward—different entities have different views of the concept of progress, and these views allow them to adopt a mindset that better manifests actual progress.
My favorite YouTuber, J.J. McCullough, did a video on this topic which I found really interesting, so I did a bit more digging and expanded on the things he covered. Education has pretty much been a centerpiece for my entire life, and learning in different environments (U.S. and China, international and public schools) has led me to experience drastically different teaching styles. Hence, writing this piece was also a way for me to reflect on the ways I’ve been educated, and their uses/limits.
Derek Mingda Xu 