With the increasing religiosity in our society, pockets of self-righteous religious zealots who seek to impose their beliefs on others have also engendered. This is a cause for concern, for it threatens one of the fundamental tenets on which our society is built upon – secularism. It is not a fluke that Singapore has managed to come thus far and maintain racial and religious harmony. Rather, our harmonious multiracial and multi-religious society, which is the envy of many countries, is due largely to the fact that we have ensured secularism to be the prevailing tenor of our society. It is with this conviction with which I disagree with NMP Dr Thio Li-ann’s parliamentary speech “A Recipe for Disharmony”, in which she mentioned that “…militant secularism is an illiberal and undemocratic vice in seeking to gag religious views in the public square and so to privilege its atheistic values, as in communist state.” That Dr Thio made the speech not long after the AWARE saga seemed to imply that she has directed much of the vitriol to those were against the old ‘new guard’ exco of AWARE, though she did not explicitly mention this in her speech.
For those who have not been following the news, the AWARE saga started in April this year when a group of Christians hailing from the same church took over leadership of AWARE (a secular voluntary welfare organisation) by getting fellow church members to sign up as new members and vote the former in through sheer numbers. It is no surprise that the use of such underhand tactics to gain leadership of a secular civil group in Singapore has resulted in a public backlash. The old ‘new guard’ of AWARE led by Ms Jocie Lau claimed to champion for mainstream values such as ‘anti-gay’ notions. Nevertheless, the fact that her team only comprised of people from her faith and church begs the question of their true agenda. If what they were really pushing for were mainstream values, should they not have found it prudent to include people of other faiths and free-thinkers as well? Surely there is no dearth of capable people from other faiths in Singapore? The reticence of Ms Lau and her team in announcing their goals and directions for AWARE after gaining leadership only served to add to the public unease. It was even more astounding that Ms Lau had the temerity to suggest that the press harboured hidden motives in its reporting of the story when she and her team resorted to stealthy tactics of gaining control in an organisation and then keeping mum about their motives. People who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, has mentioned the importance of having a ‘rainbow coalition’, which means including people from various faiths and races, in political and civil activist groups which claim to be secular. Doing so would be far more effective in allaying public unease about the ability of the organisation to ensure that a plurality of voices and opinions of those from other faiths and races would also be heard and considered in the decision-making process, as compared to mere rhetoric.
It would be naïve to believe that religious tensions in Singapore are completely non-existent. The public backlash following the AWARE saga has showed us how easy it is to stress the fabric of our society’s cohesiveness. We need to exercise caution when dealing with matters of religion in the public sphere. Religious leaders must also be prudent when addressing their followers and not misuse the pulpit like what Pastor Derek Hong, from the same church as Ms Lau and the rest of the old ‘new guard’ exco of AWARE, did when he called on his fellow church members to rally behind Ms Lau and her team. While I agree with Dr Thio that “religiously-informed views” can contribute positively to public debate, we must not condone any self-righteous mentality by any particular religious group. No religious group should unilaterally claim that it alone represents the mainstream and impose its ideology and beliefs on others. Only then can we ensure a pluralistic society where religious freedom is the order of the day; a society where no one would be coerced into subscribing to beliefs and convictions imposed by others. It is reassuring to know that the various religious leaders in Singapore have readily come forth to express their commitment in upholding secularism in our society after the AWARE saga.
Incidents such as the AWARE saga serve as a timely reminder for us that politics and religion should be segregated instead of being conflated. Parents, schools and religious leaders have to inculcate in their children the importance of having respect towards those from other faiths. Only when the various religious groups discard the notion that their religion is the one and only one ‘right’ religion, or to paraphrase Obama in his recent speech in Cairo that “the measure of one’s faith (is not) based on the rejection of other faiths”, can true respect for each other’s faiths engender. Otherwise, the religious harmony which we have will only be skin deep and go no further than mere religious tolerance, without much understanding of the other faiths; it would only exist as a façade under which mindsets harbouring religious superiority and self-righteousness would take hold, and this would be the real “recipe for disharmony”.
Showing posts with label My thoughts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label My thoughts. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Thoughts will soon be secrets no more
It was reported that researchers at the ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories have succeeded in processing and displaying images directly from the human brain. The team has only managed to reproduce only simple images from the brain but they believe that the technology could eventually be used to figure out dreams and other secrets inside people's minds. (http://www.physorg.com/news148193433.html)
It seems like we have opened yet another Pandora's Box. The potential of technology which allows others to read people’s minds is simply mind-boggling and its potential dangers are anyone's guess. It is only a matter of time when such mind-reading devices become as ubiquitous as mobile phones. There will undoubtedly be useful applications of such technology such as in solving crime cases and creating drawings and animations directly by visualizing them in the mind. However, in such a future, personal thoughts will no longer be private anymore as our very last sanctuary of privacy is encroached upon.
Already there are companies which sell commercial brain-computer interfaces (BCI) products such as headphones, based on electro-encephalogram (EEG) technology. Such devices allow the user to control the computer using their thoughts alone; they could control the cursor on the monitor screen, a computer game character or even a robot in the real world. Such technology will make it possible for people who have lost their limbs or wheelchair bound patients to be replaced with robotic prosthetic limbs which can be controlled by their mind. In fact, there have already been patients fitted with such BCI devices such as blind people who have partially regained their sight using electrodes implanted into their visual cortex and linked to an external camera. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-computer_interface) With the aid of BCI devices, doctors will be able to perform surgeries with better accuracy for longer hours with less physical fatigue from their hands, and astronauts can manipulate tools and conduct delicate experiments in space more efficiently using thought-controlled robotic arms instead of their bulky spacesuit gloves. BCI devices can also contribute a positive impact in the education arena and will enhance the learning experience for students. Uses of BCI in treatment of psychological disorders such as depression, phobias and attention-deficit disorder are also possible. Other applications include marketing uses, advertising, consumer electronics, and entertainment.
In the near future, it is highly possible that there will be groups, organizations or even governments willing to utilize such BCI devices to control others as well. Just as we can control computers and robots using our thoughts, the reverse could probably happen also. The prophetic vision of the future portrayed by the film The Matrix might not be too far-fetched after all. Initially there might be many people resisting the use of such devices for ethical or personal reasons, but the inadvertent tide of science and technology will nevertheless remain an unstoppable force. I foresee a future where even normal people would fit themselves with such BCI devices to enhance their physical and even mental abilities. This may sound repelling to some right now but it may be perfectly acceptable to people of the future. People of the past may never have thought that our generation would be so dependent on electronic devices such as computers and mobile phones, where people carry them along everywhere they go, so much so that some of these devices have become something of an extra limb or appendage to us. It is only a matter of time before mobile communications technology and even computers become available as chips which can be embedded in our brains. There will be no need to carry mobile phones or laptops then, and we will not even need to talk to communicate for our thoughts can be directly transmitted to each another. Perhaps, that is how we will achieve extra-sensory abilities such as telepathy in the future.
BCI technology, as with many other nascent technologies, is progressing at a rate too fast for comfort for many and has engendered numerous ethical issues and controversies. We live in an age of rapid technological advances and must to learn to live with the ever-changing technologies that arise continuously. Technology is a double-edged sword. Will we lose our sense of identity and become mindless cyborgs immersed in the virtual world controlled by others or computers or will we be able to utilize and maintain control over technology for the greater good of mankind in our quest to achieve utopia?
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
F1 - Frivolous Number 1?
With the recent hype surrounding the highly successful staging of the first ever Formula 1 night race in Singapore, it might seem a little inappropriate for me to label F1 races in general as frivolous. Nevertheless, the environmental impact of F1 races is understated and given insufficient attention in the media and I shall explain why I feel such races are frivolous.
Amid skyrocketing fuel costs and growing concerns about global warming everywhere in the world, the incongruity of wasting massive amounts of petrol on fuel-guzzling race cars for Formula 1 races is glaringly imprudent. It was reported in the Straits Times that a F1 team typically uses around 200,000 litres of petrol per season. Personally, I feel that this is a vast wastage of our rapidly declining reserves of oil. Instead of squandering away this important non-renewable resource on races for entertainment, we should save it for more worthy uses such as transportation, power generation and as raw materials for the petrochemical industry for the production of plastic materials.
F1 races are also widely known for its large numbers of affluent fans, many of them being millionaires and billionaires. It probably does not come as a surprise that the affluent would enjoy extravagant leisure activities like F1 races, for it is a reflection of their spending habits. However, for the majority of us, there is no compelling reason why we should support such a profligate sport.
While it is true from the economic viewpoint that staging F1 races is a boon to the host country in terms of global publicity of the city and increasing tourist arrivals and spending, we should not just be concerned about raking in revenues and relegate environmental concerns aside. As fellow inhabitants of Earth, it is time we exercise prudence in managing our resources and do away with unnecessary and prodigal entertainment activities such as F1 races which do more harm than good to our planet with their high carbon footprint, no matter how appealing or economically viable they may be. There are many other ways to generate revenue which are environmentally sustainable. One may argue that the F1 race has helped to portray Singapore as a more vibrant city, but is it the only way and at what cost? If Singapore is to showcase itself as an example of sustainable development and a green country, we must place more importance on adopting green policies and walking the talk. We have to decide what is it that we really want to portray ourselves as to the rest of the world.
Amid skyrocketing fuel costs and growing concerns about global warming everywhere in the world, the incongruity of wasting massive amounts of petrol on fuel-guzzling race cars for Formula 1 races is glaringly imprudent. It was reported in the Straits Times that a F1 team typically uses around 200,000 litres of petrol per season. Personally, I feel that this is a vast wastage of our rapidly declining reserves of oil. Instead of squandering away this important non-renewable resource on races for entertainment, we should save it for more worthy uses such as transportation, power generation and as raw materials for the petrochemical industry for the production of plastic materials.
F1 races are also widely known for its large numbers of affluent fans, many of them being millionaires and billionaires. It probably does not come as a surprise that the affluent would enjoy extravagant leisure activities like F1 races, for it is a reflection of their spending habits. However, for the majority of us, there is no compelling reason why we should support such a profligate sport.
While it is true from the economic viewpoint that staging F1 races is a boon to the host country in terms of global publicity of the city and increasing tourist arrivals and spending, we should not just be concerned about raking in revenues and relegate environmental concerns aside. As fellow inhabitants of Earth, it is time we exercise prudence in managing our resources and do away with unnecessary and prodigal entertainment activities such as F1 races which do more harm than good to our planet with their high carbon footprint, no matter how appealing or economically viable they may be. There are many other ways to generate revenue which are environmentally sustainable. One may argue that the F1 race has helped to portray Singapore as a more vibrant city, but is it the only way and at what cost? If Singapore is to showcase itself as an example of sustainable development and a green country, we must place more importance on adopting green policies and walking the talk. We have to decide what is it that we really want to portray ourselves as to the rest of the world.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
The Hedonic Treadmill
I believe most people want to be rich, strive for fame, status and money. It may not be their intrinsic desire to do so, but rather a result of societal, parental and peer pressure. Nevertheless, a life based on the ceaseless acquisition of material possessions, wealth and accomplishments is not the answer to everlasting happiness. This is explained in a theory called the 'hedonic treadmill', a term coined by Philip Brickman and Donald Campbell.
So what is the hedonic treadmill? It is an analogy of someone running on treadmill to illustrate the point that we need to keep striving in order to maintain the same level of happiness, akin to someone running at the same speed just to maintain the same position on a treadmill. If we want to increase our happiness, we need to strive even harder. Psychology researchers have found that the level of happiness of lottery winners increased initially but returned to their original levels quickly. The reverse is also true - the level of happiness of those recently handicapped fell initially but climbed back to original levels subsequently.
"In all of these situations, despite a massive shift in standard of living or achievement of major life goals, after a short period of time the life-satisfaction levels return to normal. Despite the fact that external forces are constantly changing our life goals, happiness for most people is a relatively constant state. Regardless of how good things get, we'll always report about the same level of happiness. It is believed that the baseline of an individual's happiness is at least partially genetic. For example, identical twins are usually equally prone to depression. "-quoted from Wikipedia
So if you think that striking the lottery, snagging the President's scholarship or winning some prestigious award will give you prolonged joy, think again. But then I am sure, many people would have had first-hand experience of the effects of the hedonic treadmill themselves, yet they still strive for even more material wealth, fame or higher status in the hope of attaining the elusive everlasting happiness. As the internationally acclaimed author J.K. Rowling has aptly put it: "...personal happiness lies in knowing that life is not a check-list of acquisition or achievement. Your qualifications, your CV, are not your life, though you will meet many people of my age and older who confuse the two." (http://harvardmagazine.com/commencement/the-fringe-benefits-failure-the-importance-imagination)
I have had relatives and friends asking me why I did not choose to study medicine or some other courses which more lucrative in nature. Being a doctor will allow me to save lives. Yes, it is a noble thing, but my passion still lies in Physics. Nevertheless, there are many people who wish to become doctors and lawyers not for lofty ambitions, but for the high pay. Last year, there was a spate of articles in The Straits Times which highlighted the trend of general practitioners in Singapore offering cosmetic surgery to boost their income. Plastic surgeons and cosmetic specialists earn much more than an average GP, and this explains why cosmetic courses are so hot in medical school. This merely drives home the point that many doctors are more interested in making big bucks rather than saving lives and earning less. As much as I would like to believe that people of such intellectual calibre would be enlightened enough to realise the trap of the hedonic treadmill, it is not to be. Well, maybe the fault is not theirs alone. It is not easy to overcome the strong societal, parental and peer pressure to achieve the so called 'success', which is defined shallowly in terms of monetary wealth and societal status.
Before the current financial crisis, business and finance courses in universities were all the rage given the high salaries of those working in these sectors. However, reality sunk in upon the unfolding of the Subprime Crisis and many graduates are now finding it an uphill task to get a job or even an internship. As a result, more students are now turning towards the engineering and other faculties. Several years back, there was also a sudden wave of interest in the life sciences industry after the government's exhortation that it is the 'next-big-thing'. As with all fads, the life sciences craze fizzled out some time as well. Sounds Déjà vu? My point here is that we should not just follow where the money seems to be, for it may very well turn out to be the wrong path. Neither am I advocating that one should always blindly follow one’s interest, for we have to feed our families and ourselves. Nevertheless, monetary remuneration should not be the salient and over-riding factor in determining one’s career path. A balance between pragmatism and idealism has to be struck.
When I was younger, I wanted to be a great scientist and aspired to win the Nobel prize. However, as I grew older and wiser, I realised that winning prizes is not the most important thing in life and it will only give me temporary happiness. I still wish to be a scientist, but my main aim now is to help people through science research and development, as well as through other forms of community service. I am not advocating that everyone should give up their ambitions to be bankers or superstars or even the President of United States. It is good to have aspirations, for you will then have something to work for and life becomes more meaningful. But making money and attaining status should not be the ultimate aim in life. We must exercise caution in threading the fine line between sinking into complacency and being overzealous or 'kaisu', or we would only be the ones to suffer.
So what is the hedonic treadmill? It is an analogy of someone running on treadmill to illustrate the point that we need to keep striving in order to maintain the same level of happiness, akin to someone running at the same speed just to maintain the same position on a treadmill. If we want to increase our happiness, we need to strive even harder. Psychology researchers have found that the level of happiness of lottery winners increased initially but returned to their original levels quickly. The reverse is also true - the level of happiness of those recently handicapped fell initially but climbed back to original levels subsequently.
"In all of these situations, despite a massive shift in standard of living or achievement of major life goals, after a short period of time the life-satisfaction levels return to normal. Despite the fact that external forces are constantly changing our life goals, happiness for most people is a relatively constant state. Regardless of how good things get, we'll always report about the same level of happiness. It is believed that the baseline of an individual's happiness is at least partially genetic. For example, identical twins are usually equally prone to depression. "-quoted from Wikipedia
So if you think that striking the lottery, snagging the President's scholarship or winning some prestigious award will give you prolonged joy, think again. But then I am sure, many people would have had first-hand experience of the effects of the hedonic treadmill themselves, yet they still strive for even more material wealth, fame or higher status in the hope of attaining the elusive everlasting happiness. As the internationally acclaimed author J.K. Rowling has aptly put it: "...personal happiness lies in knowing that life is not a check-list of acquisition or achievement. Your qualifications, your CV, are not your life, though you will meet many people of my age and older who confuse the two." (http://harvardmagazine.com/commencement/the-fringe-benefits-failure-the-importance-imagination)
I have had relatives and friends asking me why I did not choose to study medicine or some other courses which more lucrative in nature. Being a doctor will allow me to save lives. Yes, it is a noble thing, but my passion still lies in Physics. Nevertheless, there are many people who wish to become doctors and lawyers not for lofty ambitions, but for the high pay. Last year, there was a spate of articles in The Straits Times which highlighted the trend of general practitioners in Singapore offering cosmetic surgery to boost their income. Plastic surgeons and cosmetic specialists earn much more than an average GP, and this explains why cosmetic courses are so hot in medical school. This merely drives home the point that many doctors are more interested in making big bucks rather than saving lives and earning less. As much as I would like to believe that people of such intellectual calibre would be enlightened enough to realise the trap of the hedonic treadmill, it is not to be. Well, maybe the fault is not theirs alone. It is not easy to overcome the strong societal, parental and peer pressure to achieve the so called 'success', which is defined shallowly in terms of monetary wealth and societal status.
Before the current financial crisis, business and finance courses in universities were all the rage given the high salaries of those working in these sectors. However, reality sunk in upon the unfolding of the Subprime Crisis and many graduates are now finding it an uphill task to get a job or even an internship. As a result, more students are now turning towards the engineering and other faculties. Several years back, there was also a sudden wave of interest in the life sciences industry after the government's exhortation that it is the 'next-big-thing'. As with all fads, the life sciences craze fizzled out some time as well. Sounds Déjà vu? My point here is that we should not just follow where the money seems to be, for it may very well turn out to be the wrong path. Neither am I advocating that one should always blindly follow one’s interest, for we have to feed our families and ourselves. Nevertheless, monetary remuneration should not be the salient and over-riding factor in determining one’s career path. A balance between pragmatism and idealism has to be struck.
When I was younger, I wanted to be a great scientist and aspired to win the Nobel prize. However, as I grew older and wiser, I realised that winning prizes is not the most important thing in life and it will only give me temporary happiness. I still wish to be a scientist, but my main aim now is to help people through science research and development, as well as through other forms of community service. I am not advocating that everyone should give up their ambitions to be bankers or superstars or even the President of United States. It is good to have aspirations, for you will then have something to work for and life becomes more meaningful. But making money and attaining status should not be the ultimate aim in life. We must exercise caution in threading the fine line between sinking into complacency and being overzealous or 'kaisu', or we would only be the ones to suffer.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
'We do not need magic to change the world'- J.K. Rowling
I was very inspired after watching J.K.Rowling's recent speech at Harvard. I highly recommend everyone to watch it. It is probably one the best inspirational speeches I have heard so far. In her address to graduating Harvard students, she touched on two themes- the importance of failure and the importance of imagination. My favourite part of her speech is this: "If you choose to use your status and influence to raise your voice on behalf of those who have no voice; if you choose to identify not only with the powerful, but with the powerless; if you retain the ability to imagine yourself into the lives of those whoso not have your advantages, then it will not only be your proud families who celebrate your existence, but thousands and millions of people whose reality you have helped transform for the better. We do not need magic to change the world, we carry all the power we need inside ourselves already: we have the power to imgaine better."
Part 1:
Part2:
Part3:
Hope you enjoyed and learned something after watching the clips. I have never read any of the Harry Potter books but now I know why J.K. Rowling is such a great writer.
"As is a tale, so is life, not how long it is, but how good it is, is what matters." -Seneca
Part 1:
Part2:
Part3:
Hope you enjoyed and learned something after watching the clips. I have never read any of the Harry Potter books but now I know why J.K. Rowling is such a great writer.
"As is a tale, so is life, not how long it is, but how good it is, is what matters." -Seneca
Monday, May 19, 2008
Happy Vesak Day!
Wish everyone a very happy Vesak Day! While we celebrate the birth and enlightenment of Buddha here in Singapore, we should not forget about others who are suffering. Let us pray for the victims of the two recent major natural disasters- the Sichuan earthquake and cyclone Nargis. Amidst our relatively sheltered life in Singapore, which is free from natural disasters, it is easy to forget that there are so many people in other parts of the world whose lives have been wrecked by such calamities and their daily existence have become a ceaseless struggle. It is heartening to know that countries and people all over the world have provided humanitarian aid and monetary donations to the afflicted countries. While we may not be able to help out with the relief efforts, we can donate and pray for the victims. Let them know that the world is still full of compassion.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Arthur C. Clarke’s Final Odyssey
It was indeed a loss to the world that one of the world's most visionary and renowned science fiction author has passed away. Arthur C. Clarke, one of my favourite sci-fi authors, passed away on 19 March 2008 at the age of 90. I started reading his books when I was in secondary 1 and it was through his vastly imaginative and thought-provoking stories that cemented my love for sci-fi. Contrary to general sentiments, sci-fi is not just totally nonsensical ideas. Rather, most ideas in sci-fi stories are based on scientific theories (especially those sci-fi stories written by scientists or engineers). Contemporary sci-fi also explores a variety of issues ranging from philosophy to psychology and even politics. It is no mean feat to reconcile the schism between mainstream literature and hard core science and to bring across scientific ideas to the masses in an accessible manner through stories. Few can claim to be able to do this as skilfully as the late Arthur C. Clarke. Indeed stories have been around since the dawn of civilization and have tremendous power in disseminating ideas and influencing the masses. What better way to spread scientific ideas and stretch the imagination of human minds than through stories? Herein underscores the undervalued importance of science fiction in the modern society.
Arthur C Clarke wrote 100 books, more than 1,000 short stories and essays over 60 years. Some of his best-selling novels include ‘Childhood's End’ (which is my personal favourite), 2001: A Space Odyssey (The Oscar-nominated movie of the same title was based on this book), ‘Rendezvous with Rama’ and ‘Fountains of Paradise’. Trained in physics and mathematics, Sir Arthur also wrote many books and essays of non-fiction on space travel, communication technologies, underwater exploration and future studies.
It is widely believed that Clarke's most important scientific contribution is his idea of using geostationary satellites as ideal telecommunications relays. He wrote a paper titled ‘Extra-Terrestrial Relays — Can Rocket Stations Give Worldwide Radio Coverage?’, which was published in Wireless World in October 1945 delineating how the concept of geostationary orbit can be put to practical use. The geostationary orbit is now sometimes known as the Clarke Orbit or the Clarke Belt in his honour. This shows why we should pay attention to sci-fi writers, for we never know if some wacky idea which is deemed impossible today will be possible and useful tomorrow. Jules Verne’s idea of an underwater submersible ages before the development of the first submarine is another example of the prophetic power of science fiction. Indeed, Arthur C. Clarke once said that ‘in order to find out the limits of the possible, we have to venture a little way past them into the impossible’. Never has the words of someone had such a profound impact on my thinking than those of Arthur C. Clarke’s.
Before his death, Clarke said: "I’ve had a diverse career as a writer, underwater explorer, space promoter and science populariser. Of all these, I want to be remembered most as a writer – one who entertained readers, and, hopefully, stretched their imagination as well." Well, he has undoubtedly stretched my imagination and I believe that of many other people too.
“It may be that the old astrologers had the truth exactly reversed, when they believed that the stars controlled the destinies of men. The time may come when men control the destinies of stars.” -Arthur C. Clarke, First on the Moon, 1970
As a leading proponent for space travel and exploration, Clarke has also chaired several space advocacy organizations. I do believe the day will come when mankind will advance into a stage 2 or even stage 3 civilization and alter the destinies of stars as Clarke prophesized.
Arthur C. Clarke’s even came up with 3 ‘laws’ of prediction which he called it Clarke’s 3 Laws:
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
As a fitting eulogy, I decided to name the title of this article ‘Arthur C. Clarke’s Final Odyssey’ after one of his books in the Space Odyssey series, ‘3001: Final Odyssey’. I highly recommend you to read his novels and be inspired by one of the greatest masters of sci-fi. Arthur C. Clarke may no longer exist on this world, but his legacy will forever live on in his books and be immortalized in the minds of his fans.
My recommendations:
• Childhood's End
• The Light of Other Days
• 2001: A Space Odyssey
• 2010: Odyssey Two
• 2061: Odyssey Three
• 3001: Final Odyssey
• Rendezvous with Rama
• Against The Fall Of Night
• Time's Eye
• Sunstorm
Arthur C Clarke wrote 100 books, more than 1,000 short stories and essays over 60 years. Some of his best-selling novels include ‘Childhood's End’ (which is my personal favourite), 2001: A Space Odyssey (The Oscar-nominated movie of the same title was based on this book), ‘Rendezvous with Rama’ and ‘Fountains of Paradise’. Trained in physics and mathematics, Sir Arthur also wrote many books and essays of non-fiction on space travel, communication technologies, underwater exploration and future studies.
It is widely believed that Clarke's most important scientific contribution is his idea of using geostationary satellites as ideal telecommunications relays. He wrote a paper titled ‘Extra-Terrestrial Relays — Can Rocket Stations Give Worldwide Radio Coverage?’, which was published in Wireless World in October 1945 delineating how the concept of geostationary orbit can be put to practical use. The geostationary orbit is now sometimes known as the Clarke Orbit or the Clarke Belt in his honour. This shows why we should pay attention to sci-fi writers, for we never know if some wacky idea which is deemed impossible today will be possible and useful tomorrow. Jules Verne’s idea of an underwater submersible ages before the development of the first submarine is another example of the prophetic power of science fiction. Indeed, Arthur C. Clarke once said that ‘in order to find out the limits of the possible, we have to venture a little way past them into the impossible’. Never has the words of someone had such a profound impact on my thinking than those of Arthur C. Clarke’s.
Before his death, Clarke said: "I’ve had a diverse career as a writer, underwater explorer, space promoter and science populariser. Of all these, I want to be remembered most as a writer – one who entertained readers, and, hopefully, stretched their imagination as well." Well, he has undoubtedly stretched my imagination and I believe that of many other people too.
“It may be that the old astrologers had the truth exactly reversed, when they believed that the stars controlled the destinies of men. The time may come when men control the destinies of stars.” -Arthur C. Clarke, First on the Moon, 1970
As a leading proponent for space travel and exploration, Clarke has also chaired several space advocacy organizations. I do believe the day will come when mankind will advance into a stage 2 or even stage 3 civilization and alter the destinies of stars as Clarke prophesized.
Arthur C. Clarke’s even came up with 3 ‘laws’ of prediction which he called it Clarke’s 3 Laws:
1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
As a fitting eulogy, I decided to name the title of this article ‘Arthur C. Clarke’s Final Odyssey’ after one of his books in the Space Odyssey series, ‘3001: Final Odyssey’. I highly recommend you to read his novels and be inspired by one of the greatest masters of sci-fi. Arthur C. Clarke may no longer exist on this world, but his legacy will forever live on in his books and be immortalized in the minds of his fans.
My recommendations:
• Childhood's End
• The Light of Other Days
• 2001: A Space Odyssey
• 2010: Odyssey Two
• 2061: Odyssey Three
• 3001: Final Odyssey
• Rendezvous with Rama
• Against The Fall Of Night
• Time's Eye
• Sunstorm
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Singaporeans An Ungracious Lot? Think Again.
There have been numerous articles on newspaper forums written by foreigners complaining about Singaporeans being ungracious. Among their usual complains include people not giving up their seats to the elderly or pregnant ladies when using public transport, ‘reservation’ of seats at foodcourts and hawker centres using packets of tissue paper, the way some people treat their maids and rushing to board trains during rush hours. Foreigners are quick to point their fingers at Singaporeans but I am sure in many such instances the culprits are not locals. According to the demographic statistics for 2006 (http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/reference/yos/statsT-demography.pdf), about one fifth of our nation’s population comprises of foreigners. Most of these foreigners hail from Malaysia, China, Myanmar, Vietnam, and other South-east Asian countries, so at first glance one might not be able to tell them apart from the locals. It is only when they speak do they reveal their identity through their accent. However, a foreigner might not be able to discern between the local and foreign accents and might end up mistaking another foreigner for a local. Most foreigners have a tendency to assume that almost everyone they see in Singapore is a Singaporean but it is clear that given our high percentage of foreigners living and working here, this line of thinking is fallacious.
While there are indeed Singaporeans who are guilty of being ungracious, making sweeping generalizations and pushing all the blame to us is illogical. Through my own personal experience, I have encountered many incidents whereby foreigners here behaved in a manner falling short of civic-mindedness too, such as spitting on pavements for pedestrians, blocking entrances to trains, cutting queues, littering, talking loudly in public places like the libraries, etc. There are also many people in other countries who behave ungraciously so I see no reason for foreigners to single Singaporeans out. My message to foreigners in Singapore is this: The next time you see someone behaving in an uncivilized manner, do not jump to the conclusion that he/she is a Singaporean. He/she may very well be one of you or a permanent resident.
While there are indeed Singaporeans who are guilty of being ungracious, making sweeping generalizations and pushing all the blame to us is illogical. Through my own personal experience, I have encountered many incidents whereby foreigners here behaved in a manner falling short of civic-mindedness too, such as spitting on pavements for pedestrians, blocking entrances to trains, cutting queues, littering, talking loudly in public places like the libraries, etc. There are also many people in other countries who behave ungraciously so I see no reason for foreigners to single Singaporeans out. My message to foreigners in Singapore is this: The next time you see someone behaving in an uncivilized manner, do not jump to the conclusion that he/she is a Singaporean. He/she may very well be one of you or a permanent resident.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Why are the rich more selfish?
I have always had the nagging feeling that rich people are less generous when it comes to charity giving. Well, it seems that I am right after all, based on the results of NVPC (National Volunteer and Philanthropic Centre) 2006 survey on philanthropic giving in Singapore. The results were published in The Straits Times article ‘In aid of the poorer or richer?’ by Willie Cheng (Sept 04, 2007). The survey results showed that lower-income earners donated a larger proportion of their income compared to higher-income earners. For example, those earning less than $1000 monthly donated 0.65% of their annual income while those earning in the range of $9000-$9,999 donated only 0.12% of their annual income. But it is not only the rich in Singapore who give less proportionately compared to the less well-off. In Britain, a study by Banks and Tanner showed that the richest 20% of households donated less than 1% of their expenditure while the poorest 10% donated 3%.
It seems counter-intuitive that the rich should give less compared to those who are poorer. Having their basic needs met and left with so much surplus wealth, the rich would feel much less pinch to donate some of their money compared to those who are struggling to make ends meet. Yet the reality is stranger than what our logic dictates.
So what might explain the tighter string-purses of the wealthy when it comes to charity giving? Perhaps the more affluent one is the more detached from the other segments of society, such as the needy and less fortunate, one becomes. As one grows richer, one’s circle of friends and acquaintances evolves as the rich tend to clique among themselves. This might result in the inability of the rich to fully comprehend the difficulties faced by the needy and less fortunate or become ignorant of the extent of the problem. This is especially true for those who grew up with silver teaspoons in their mouths. One might think that those among the rich who came from poor backgrounds would be more inclined to donate to charity. This may not always be true. Even those who saw their fate turn from rags-to-riches might forget what it meant to be poor with the passage of time or due to other social factors like peer pressure, and as a result be less generous than expected.
The parsimony of the rich toward philanthropic causes may also be a reflection of the apathy of the rich towards the less fortunate. The rich may feel that the suffering of the less fortunate is in no way attributable to their actions and thus should not be compelled to help them. They may argue that the poor and less fortunate only have themselves to blame or it is just their fate that they are mired in their unfortunate situations. However, such an argument is devoid of morality. As part of the larger society, the rich has an obligation to contribute back to it and help the other segments of society that require assistance. I am not suggesting that the rich has to support the needy and less fortunate financially all the way for doing so would be counter-productive. Donations from the rich should be used to fund education or programmes that will equip the needy and less fortunate with skills to enable them to break out of the cycle of poverty. As the saying goes “Give a man a fish and he will only live for one day, but teach him how to fish and he will live for a lifetime.”
It is inconceivable that the rich might be willing to splurge thousands or even millions on Lamborghinis, Rolexes and personal yachts or even planes but donate so little of their wealth to charity. Recently, there was a newspaper report of a late British tycoon who left one million for the upkeep of her dog. The rich has definitely got their priorities wrong. Such money could have been put to better use if donated to charities. I wonder what is the purpose of amassing so much wealth when one can only live finitely and that material possessions are merely transient. Is it because one becomes blinded by wealth the richer one gets so that they become only concerned with amassing ever-increasing amounts of wealth? Or is it the lack of moral guiding principles among rich people that has led to this perceived apathy towards the needy and less fortunate?
Whatever the reasons may be for the selfishness of the rich towards philanthropy, we should take heart in the fact that there are many out there who give whatever little they have to help the needy and less fortunate. It is this kind of spirit of giving and selflessness that should be encouraged.
It seems counter-intuitive that the rich should give less compared to those who are poorer. Having their basic needs met and left with so much surplus wealth, the rich would feel much less pinch to donate some of their money compared to those who are struggling to make ends meet. Yet the reality is stranger than what our logic dictates.
So what might explain the tighter string-purses of the wealthy when it comes to charity giving? Perhaps the more affluent one is the more detached from the other segments of society, such as the needy and less fortunate, one becomes. As one grows richer, one’s circle of friends and acquaintances evolves as the rich tend to clique among themselves. This might result in the inability of the rich to fully comprehend the difficulties faced by the needy and less fortunate or become ignorant of the extent of the problem. This is especially true for those who grew up with silver teaspoons in their mouths. One might think that those among the rich who came from poor backgrounds would be more inclined to donate to charity. This may not always be true. Even those who saw their fate turn from rags-to-riches might forget what it meant to be poor with the passage of time or due to other social factors like peer pressure, and as a result be less generous than expected.
The parsimony of the rich toward philanthropic causes may also be a reflection of the apathy of the rich towards the less fortunate. The rich may feel that the suffering of the less fortunate is in no way attributable to their actions and thus should not be compelled to help them. They may argue that the poor and less fortunate only have themselves to blame or it is just their fate that they are mired in their unfortunate situations. However, such an argument is devoid of morality. As part of the larger society, the rich has an obligation to contribute back to it and help the other segments of society that require assistance. I am not suggesting that the rich has to support the needy and less fortunate financially all the way for doing so would be counter-productive. Donations from the rich should be used to fund education or programmes that will equip the needy and less fortunate with skills to enable them to break out of the cycle of poverty. As the saying goes “Give a man a fish and he will only live for one day, but teach him how to fish and he will live for a lifetime.”
It is inconceivable that the rich might be willing to splurge thousands or even millions on Lamborghinis, Rolexes and personal yachts or even planes but donate so little of their wealth to charity. Recently, there was a newspaper report of a late British tycoon who left one million for the upkeep of her dog. The rich has definitely got their priorities wrong. Such money could have been put to better use if donated to charities. I wonder what is the purpose of amassing so much wealth when one can only live finitely and that material possessions are merely transient. Is it because one becomes blinded by wealth the richer one gets so that they become only concerned with amassing ever-increasing amounts of wealth? Or is it the lack of moral guiding principles among rich people that has led to this perceived apathy towards the needy and less fortunate?
Whatever the reasons may be for the selfishness of the rich towards philanthropy, we should take heart in the fact that there are many out there who give whatever little they have to help the needy and less fortunate. It is this kind of spirit of giving and selflessness that should be encouraged.
Hostages - The Currency of Terrorists?
There has been much controversy over the recent South Korean hostage crisis in Afghanistan which began on 19th July and I would like to add my two-cent worth. The Saemmul Presbyterian Church from which the 23 South Korean hostages hail claimed that they were only doing aid work such as teaching English and hospital work in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, their aid work was only a veneer for their main motive to proselytize their religion to Muslims in Afghanistan. One must question if such an aim was sensitive to the Muslim community there, or to those of other religions in other parts of the world. The South Korean missionaries only intended to stay for a short-term and this places doubt on the sustainability of their aid work. Their prudence in traveling to such a troubled region despite a travel ban to Afghanistan by the South Korean government and without necessary protection is also questionable. Thus, it is only natural to expect ambivalent feelings of sympathy for the two hostages who were killed and relief for those who were freed and flaming criticisms for the 23 missionaries by South Koreans and the world at large.
While the hostage crisis has ended, the political crisis is not over yet. The Taleban claimed that the South Korean government has given them US$20 million and promised to withdraw South Korean troops in Afghanistan by the end of the year. The Taleban also went as far to claim that they would use the money received to buy more weapons and conduct more suicide bombings and other terrorist activities. In their over-zealous evangelistic zeal to ‘spread the word of God’, these missionaries have not only put their lives in danger, but also the lives of others, as well as the political situation in Afghanistan. The readiness of the South Korean government to give in to the Taleban’s demand have merely emboldened them and boosted the morale of terrorists all over the world. It seems that hostages are the new currency for terrorists these days. Well, the South Korean hostage crisis was not the first of its kind and I do not expect it to be the last either. There have been hostages from other countries such as Germany and Italy taken by the Taleban in the past too. The South Korean government has promised to withdraw all missionaries in Afghanistan but this is not enough. There are still many South Korean missionaries in other dangerous regions who are at risk of being kidnapped by terrorists. Other countries should also ban missionaries from visiting troubled regions and withdraw those already there. I wonder when these foolhardy people who take unnecessary risk will stop visiting such troubled regions and leave the aid and relief work to the experts and correct agencies. It would indeed be foolish for these missionaries to think that just because they are doing good deeds or proselytizing, they would be protected by God, and when they face trouble God would save them. One must not be blinded by the desire to spread his or her religion or do good deeds without careful consideration of the risks involved, otherwise one may end up doing more harm than good.
I wonder what action the Singapore government would take and what the public reaction would be if any Singaporean was so unfortunate to be taken hostage by terrorists in another country. If he or she is personnel of the SAF and doing peacekeeping work in the country then I believe the public’s response would be of sympathy for they would understand the purpose of his or her presence in the country. But would the public be as sympathetic if he or she was proselytizing in that country despite a travel ban by the Singapore government?
While the hostage crisis has ended, the political crisis is not over yet. The Taleban claimed that the South Korean government has given them US$20 million and promised to withdraw South Korean troops in Afghanistan by the end of the year. The Taleban also went as far to claim that they would use the money received to buy more weapons and conduct more suicide bombings and other terrorist activities. In their over-zealous evangelistic zeal to ‘spread the word of God’, these missionaries have not only put their lives in danger, but also the lives of others, as well as the political situation in Afghanistan. The readiness of the South Korean government to give in to the Taleban’s demand have merely emboldened them and boosted the morale of terrorists all over the world. It seems that hostages are the new currency for terrorists these days. Well, the South Korean hostage crisis was not the first of its kind and I do not expect it to be the last either. There have been hostages from other countries such as Germany and Italy taken by the Taleban in the past too. The South Korean government has promised to withdraw all missionaries in Afghanistan but this is not enough. There are still many South Korean missionaries in other dangerous regions who are at risk of being kidnapped by terrorists. Other countries should also ban missionaries from visiting troubled regions and withdraw those already there. I wonder when these foolhardy people who take unnecessary risk will stop visiting such troubled regions and leave the aid and relief work to the experts and correct agencies. It would indeed be foolish for these missionaries to think that just because they are doing good deeds or proselytizing, they would be protected by God, and when they face trouble God would save them. One must not be blinded by the desire to spread his or her religion or do good deeds without careful consideration of the risks involved, otherwise one may end up doing more harm than good.
I wonder what action the Singapore government would take and what the public reaction would be if any Singaporean was so unfortunate to be taken hostage by terrorists in another country. If he or she is personnel of the SAF and doing peacekeeping work in the country then I believe the public’s response would be of sympathy for they would understand the purpose of his or her presence in the country. But would the public be as sympathetic if he or she was proselytizing in that country despite a travel ban by the Singapore government?
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Where have the Confucius teachings and moral values gone in China?
Recently I have been seeing more and more news reports of fake food products, slavery and large-scale environmental pollution in China. Unscrupulous people intent only on making more money have thrown aside their moral values and sold themselves to the devil, doing unthinkable things such as selling fake baby milk powder which caused the deaths of 12 infants in China and other food products contaminated with or even made from inedible poisonous substances like paint which was used to manufacture fake toufu. The vegetables grown there are also tainted with pesticides and the pigs there force-fed with waste to make them grow fat faster and cheaper. Even more shocking and saddening is that such cases are not isolated but rampant.
There have also been reports of slavery practices in numerous brick kilns in China where children are abducted and sent to work in harsh working conditions for more than 15 hours a day and fed nothing more than mere porridge.
Large-scale pollution of the environment is also common-place in China where factories spew noxious fumes into the air without proper treatment and discharge toxic effluents into rivers and lakes, contaminating the water supplies of millions of people. Countries which share the same contaminated rivers like Russia were also affected.
Lost and blinded by greed, people can become inhumane monsters without regard for the lives and well-being of others. It is indeed unthinkable that China, the country that gave birth to the Confucius teachings would become the state that it is in now. Corruption, lack of a proper system of checks and the difficulty in implementing such checks has helped to perpetuate such irresponsible acts. Amid the increasing pressure from both its citizens and international environmental watch groups, the Chinese government has recently pledged to redouble their efforts to put an end to such egregious acts. Well it is certainly in their best interest to do so, for such acts tarnish the ‘made-in China’ brand and will have detrimental effects on their trade exports and image of the country. Already countries like the United States have banned some products from China as they failed to meet the required safety and quality standards. It looks like in their quest to make more money, those unscrupulous Chinese have only lost more.
There have also been reports of slavery practices in numerous brick kilns in China where children are abducted and sent to work in harsh working conditions for more than 15 hours a day and fed nothing more than mere porridge.
Large-scale pollution of the environment is also common-place in China where factories spew noxious fumes into the air without proper treatment and discharge toxic effluents into rivers and lakes, contaminating the water supplies of millions of people. Countries which share the same contaminated rivers like Russia were also affected.
Lost and blinded by greed, people can become inhumane monsters without regard for the lives and well-being of others. It is indeed unthinkable that China, the country that gave birth to the Confucius teachings would become the state that it is in now. Corruption, lack of a proper system of checks and the difficulty in implementing such checks has helped to perpetuate such irresponsible acts. Amid the increasing pressure from both its citizens and international environmental watch groups, the Chinese government has recently pledged to redouble their efforts to put an end to such egregious acts. Well it is certainly in their best interest to do so, for such acts tarnish the ‘made-in China’ brand and will have detrimental effects on their trade exports and image of the country. Already countries like the United States have banned some products from China as they failed to meet the required safety and quality standards. It looks like in their quest to make more money, those unscrupulous Chinese have only lost more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)