In this modern era where the economic system is featured by fierce competition, the Malays seem to be lagging behind. Psychologists tell us that thinking affects behaviour and vice versa. Based on this, it appears that the Malays' thinking norms are under par as reflected by their economic laggardness.

A concerned government and an understanding citizenry had recognised and accommodated this shortcoming. It devised policies with the view to level the competitive economic playing field for the Malays. It agreed that the Malays 'must be given a chance to compete', to quote the underlying rationale describing this inadequacy.

With this understanding, the Malays have been given a concerted dosage of state-sponsored affirmative action programmes after Independence. These come in various forms, among others, juicy government licences and contracts, scholarships, preferential entry to public universities and sinecure in the civil service.

The thinking behind these programmes is that given these opportunities, the Malays would rise to the occasion and be on equal footing with other Malaysians.

But four decades after Merdeka, with 46 years of this massive mollycoddling, the Malays are still struggling. To the Malays, the economic playing field is apparently still terribly uneven. Seen in another way, the depth of the psychological malaise must be more severe than realised.

We cannot help but to ponder why the disparity is so great. In the past, the finger has been pointed at colonialism. But there must be other more compelling reasons. A fresh look into the thinking features or norms of the Malays might offer an alternative view, a new hypothesis, for a more plausible explanation.

The 'Malay thinking norm'

To begin with, thinking is a process that takes place in the mind. This process begins from the time an idea is formulated to the moment this idea is concretised into reality.

Psychologists tell us again that there are two thinking norms, two process types. One is the traditional type and the other the rational type. Each has its own features. The Malay thinking norm has features that fit well with the former.

This traditional norm has several fundamental features. First, it is literal in nature. When the mind perceives an idea, the idea is literally translated into its reality. In this case thinking is reality.

As an illustration we take the case of water. When a Malay person formulates the idea of water in his mind, he does not think of several other possible alternative forms of water like steam, fluid, liquid, vapour, ice, cloud, or any thing else before this idea is translated into its reality. It would be water straight away, and nothing else. To him, thinking is indeed reality, for what else can it be?

Second, as a graduation of the literalist mind, this traditional thinking norm falls under the ambit of the Law of Excluded Middle. This is an old principle of logic that says if a thing is not white then it must be black. Translated into daily life it says rather simplistically if you are not for me, then you are against me. There is no doubt, skepticism, wonder, no alternative, between the two extremes.

Also, this Law of Excluded Middle excludes all other shades of colour from white to black. The computer can tell us that there are at least two million different shades in the spectrum between white and black. The Malay does not perceive these colours. Conceptually and psychologically, and by virtue of this Law, he is colour-blind.

The literal thinking process coupled with the Law of Excluded Middle makes thinking easy and direct. Thus, the Malay mind tends to accept any existing belief forms, social norms and values without much debate and analysis. Blind acceptance is the order of the day.

Take the case of the society's customs and traditions and values. These are hand-me-down wisdom from the previous generations - accepted and appreciated in their totality - that had served its fathers and forefathers well. By this virtue, the present society would accept them virtually in toto.

So, these are to be taken as the 'truth,' the governing wisdom, for the current generation. These inherited wisdom are furthermore taken as the single source of authority for the beliefs, traditions, customs, myths, legends, and social values of today's society. The wisdom of the past becomes the governing authority for the present.

Third, this traditional thinking norm does not go for alternative interpretations to an idea once it is formulated in the mind. Nor does the idea undergo any analysis or evaluation to determine its validity or truth. What this means is that the Malay has no avenue for thinking than in the literal colour-blind way.

In this way he is always 'right'. He is never wrong, for the path to him realising he is wrong does not exist.

Expressed in another way the Malay mind cannot detect its own mistakes because the circuitry for detection is not there.

Fourth, the Malay mind tends towards hyperbolism. What it sees as white, is therefore very white; what is black is very black. A friend or leader is always described in the best possible terms; an enemy likewise is described in the worse possible terms.

Fifth, the Malay mind tends to be alarmist. He fears the breaking of any existing rules. He fears going astray from the conformist and conservative way.

This traditional thinking norm favoured by the Malays would cultivate conservatism and conformity in culture and tradition, and orthodoxy in religious beliefs. Its blind acceptance of past values would mean that all past religious dogmas, all legends, myths, magic, taboos, and even prejudices are taken as the truth, authority, and values of the present.

The truth in any case comes from one 'central' source - the norms, beliefs, values, superstitions, traditions and customs inherited from the previous generation. For the individual, truth or authority is determined from a central external source.

It is a closed mind. It rests on the premise not to question anything, but instead to accept everything. Being so, it is resistant to fresh perspectives and change.

This closed mind is not wrong. It is natural. It makes for a very simple way of thinking. Truly it fits well with the simple life of the Malays' forefathers.

Islamic worldwiew

Islamic philosophy seems to display the features of the same traditional thinking norm as well. As Malay culture is heavily influenced by it, we see how Islam cements Malay conservatism, conformity and religious orthodoxy. For this, we glance a little at Islamic thinking parameters.

The traditional thinking mode inherent in Islam is similar to the Malay's traditional norm - the literalist interpretation, the Law of Excluded Middle, that the truth it carries comes from one central source, that it is right and never wrong, that hyperbolically Islam is the one right religion for the world.

There are two sources of authority in Islam. The primary sources are a combination of the Quran, and the Hadith and Sunnah of Prophet Mohammad. The Quran carries God's revelation, the 'Word of God', and the Hadith and Sunnah carry the oral and behaviourial traditions of the Prophet.

These primary sources have since then been given exhaustive collation, evaluation, and interpretation by four great Imams revered to this day by Muslims, by the names of Hanafi (699-767), Maliki (d. 795), Shafii (d. 820), and Hanbali (780-855). Their bodies of work known as ijma' and qiyas are the secondary sources of authority (or of 'truth') in Islam.

These primary and secondary sources of Islamic authority together become the one single and central authority for the Islamic religion. Religious teachers claim that these sources cover every aspect of life, of faith, belief, liturgy, worship, the gravesite interrogation, the Hereafter; Heaven and Hell; of social rules governing morality, dietary regulations, marriage, divorce, inheritance, business, indeed every aspect of Islamic jurisprudence.

Syariah law, hudud law, the element of riba (interest), Man as a viceregent of God in this world, the Islamic state, all fall under this ambit.

This entire body of knowledge, and rules and regulations has its own term, which is taklid , or what can generally be described as the Islamic worldview. As a matter of fact, these are taken as the blueprint for life in this temporal world and in preparation for the permanent world of the Hereafter.

This is the rationale for Muslims touting that Islam is a complete religion, a complete way of life, for this world and the next. So much so that all a Muslim needs to do in this world is to find out what these rules are, and once found, to accept, appreciate, apply, and implement them; to internalise them.

The cue for Muslims is to find, observe and practise them. They would then be on the right path. So much the better if they could also protect and propagate them.

These behaviorial patterns are all the products of the traditional thinking norm. We paraphrase this statement by repeating that the traditional thinking norm produces literal thinking and the Law of Excluded Middle, which in turn produce conservatism, conformity, and orthodoxy.

Rational thinking

Rational thinking is the other thinking process. It differs from traditional thinking in some subtle but very important ways.

Firstly, rational thinking also translates an idea formulated in the mind into its concrete form. But in between the idea and its concrete form, there is a middle point where the idea goes through a process of evaluation before its concretisation.

If we take the illustration of water, then the middle point is the conceptual step where the idea undergoes an evaluation: could it be steam, ice, cloud, vapour, or anything else for that matter? All these possibilities are evaluated before 'water' is chosen. The rest are rejected.

Because of the existence of this mid-point, rational thinking is more difficult, for nobody has the level of knowledge to be correct all the time. He can easily be wrong, and very often is. Indeed thinking is not reality to the rational thinking norm.

But this difficulty carries a favourable plus point: rational thinking possesses the path or avenue for realising its mistakes, a process allowing for analysis, skepticism, and even wonder. It has the capacity to put things right.

The overall feature is that rational thinking is conceptual, and allowing for many different ways of looking at things. It allows for the awareness for the spectra of colours between black and white. Unlike traditional thinking, it is not colour-blind. It is indeed, an open mind.

In real life, rational thinking does not accept any or all past customs, practices, and social values as the gospel truth, and authority. Questions are always asked about the authenticity of any given idea.

Nothing is taken at face value until proven as fact. No fact is taken as immutable. In a world of manic changes, circumstances change as well, as do times and perceptions.

In practical terms this means that rational thinking, although a more difficult process, is in the end more flexible.

It is always open and amenable to correction, modification, even falsification. The circuitry for correction is present. If the validity of past wisdom are found wanting, they are discarded. Objectivity is key.

Part 2 will be posted tomorrow.

AB SULAIMAN is an observer of human traits and foibles, especially within the context of religion and culture. As a liberal, he marvels at the way orthodoxy fights to maintain its credibility in a devilishly fast-changing world. In his free time, he loves to read, travel and play golf (although his game could be better).