Thoughts on the quarter-century

"My peers and I come from a time of great changes, whether we realize it or not. I was born in 1987 on the day a stock market correction. I vaguely remember the first Gulf War. And then the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. The panic over the Y2K bug and anxieties about a new millennium. 9-11, the War on Terror, the dot-com bubbles and bust, SARS. More bombings. The rise of China, then BRICS then all sorts of emerging nations in elaborate acronyms. And then of course, the still-unraveling economic crises. Where our parents talked of the Soviet Union, we talk about Russia. Where Communism was real, but only theory for us. Where “tag” and “poke” meant physical things, not mouse-clicks. That we now hold in our hand computers more powerful than the ones that went to the moon. In Singapore, we once feared too many children, but now fear too few. Where we now allow casinos where once they were taboo. We now have the flourishing of the arts, where nature now does not always give way to development. These developments have led to all sorts of changes in the society, where the social and cognitive fabrics are being rewoven on very different terms. We don’t know what the new rules are, and there is no final pattern to refer to. Those graduating in recent years have had to deal with the character of disruptive change ever since university days and before. And increasingly, even more so in the years to come. Change – amplified and deepening is the norm now more so than ever before. My peers have dealt with them. The skillsets, visions and stories we have are the result of having to deal with this very essence of deep and intense change. To those surfing on the waves of these changes, disruptive change is not something “major”. Disruptive change is “meh”. We live it, embrace it, and move on to the next one, or create it. There was no manual for how to use Facebook or Twitter, or any of those platforms. There were guides, but even these guides could not be sufficient for the explosion of uses for these media. We don’t know the ultimate game that we are playing; the game we play now is the one that keeps on going, and the aim is not to let it stop. We just have to decide what game is it that we are playing in the first place."

Comparisons between different countries

I want to compare the experiences of Denmark, The Netherlands, Finland, and Singapore.

I was reading a recent issue of Monocle, which included a soft power index. Small nations, such as Denmark, The Netherlands and Finland all rank ahead of Singapore, which I thought was rather curious. On Singapore, there was a comment "it's hard selling your soft power brand when people are not sure what it means to be Singaporean". 

Interesting enough, the 3 soft power power of these countries are facilitated by a strong design brand, and Denmark and The Netherlands used to have liberal immigration policies, only to have them tightened in the last few years, along with recent episodes of intolerant attitudes.

Thinking out loud. 

Of Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism

In a world of open borders, patriotism can seem unreasonable, even anachronistic. Still, we do feel obligations towards communities in the particular, to our friends, to the families that we belong to, to our local communities. As much as could be said that individual successes can be independent of the situation of nations, or even larger communities, I cannot help but feel that emotional ties remain even after spending considerable amounts of time in another country. As much as we might live in an open world, these emotional linkages inevitably remain, even if they are links associated with the family, or with institutions changed beyond the recognition of memory.

What then? To become a member of this cosmopolitan world is to have access to as wide a range of opportunities as could be imagined. Yet these emotional links remain, drawing individuals to significant places, such as those of childhood, of affections, of character formation. These ties remain nonetheless, in a cosmopolitan, open world. 

Having the chance of entering into the club of cosmopolitans, I suppose that it would be all too easy for anyone to harbour the notions of leaving Singapore for good and in being based elsewhere, starting life anew. Even then, starting anew would not be completely accurate; individuals are likely to have the chance to make connections prior to decisions of emigration, especially in the context of an environment as global as NUS. Even in those circumstances, one would already have an easier path in the pursuit of success in both material and personal terms.

What then? How is anyone to make sense in an open world - being free to choose between different obligations, some asking to break with more intimate connections, often promising rewards both personally and materially?

What then, Singapore? Yes, there are constraints of attitude and openness, yes there are misdirections in how things have been done, especially with claims of being people-centredness. And mostly true as well, the claim that money-making is seemingly the main focus, all the time. 

I don't think anyone can ever be completely severed from ties to Singapore (or to home countries, for that matter), even as people are able to make ties and linkages elsewhere. Then comes the question - how is anyone to proceed with choices of staying and leaving?

I don't think it's possible to be based elsewhere and then to be able to make very direct contributions to the society and polity in Singapore (or elsewhere). Or is this Singapore-centricity a mistake in the first place? I can't decide now, and I wonder if the dichotomy is a false one. Is it possible that the option be available so that one could stay and make direction contributions whilst still retaining a cosmopolitan outlook? I don't know. I suspect that the option is too simplistic, too naive. 

While we find ourselves having the capacity to pursue lives of freedom, we also find ourselves to some regard, bound to to obligations which are not based on choice or contractual terms.

Still, we choose often, to destinations of opportunities, to places which provide the best outlets for our self-actualisation, often too, in arenas where we might achieve results of great impact. This is an expression of the cosmopolitan environment we find ourselves in, especially for those who have acquired a measure of skills and capabilities that are recognized at least in the societies of the richer world. We are then forced with the dichotomies as illustrated before. How are we to choose? To stay in the communities of affections in the hopes of being able to make direct contributions, or should we go into the world to pursue the opportunities that might further actualise our capabilities and worth?

There is no cost-benefit calculus here. In the final steps, questions of convictions, of belief then enter in our deliberations. The extent to which our convictions bind us, I suspect, is where our choices will be made. 

Reflections from a funeral

Reflections from a funeral

My grandma passed away recently. She was 96. She was a matriarch of 5 generations, and it was significant enough that a Chinese evening tabloid covered it. I have no significant memories of my grandma; I attended the funeral as a matter of custom and tradition, and for my mum. But that was it. Along the way I realized the reality of such things as tradition and custom. While often deemed as irrational or 'backward', in the face of the mystery of death, these traditions and customs have a powerful effect on worldviews. In this sense, the funeral I participated in was not so much an emotional one, but a chance to participate in the worldviews of others, and along the way, to gain other insights. There are other findings and realizations, some more urgent than others. This was an all-Chinese funeral. I saw people born in the my parents generation, those born in the 50s and 60s. I begin to realise that traditions and customs are a powerful force in their right; in that educated PMETs would even willingly conform to such worldviews. Perhaps they lived in a different Singapore, where opportunities were structured much differently than they are today. These are the people for whom education was optional, where individual intuition mattered more. As we live today, the magnitude of these changes are difficult to comprehend, but it is the recognition of these chasms that require attending to for any would-be strategist intending to change any trajectories. The people in the 18-35 age group have to attend to that worldviews chasm as they (we) live in a Singapore that will be dominated demographically by the people born in the different setting a generation ago. I realise that the family played a far greater role than today; whereas today I inhabit a friend-based networks, my parents inhabit a world where economic relations and kinship ties frequently overlapped. I am distant from my kin-contemporaries in a way that my parents would have thought anathema regarding theirs. There is also another aspect to these observations, and this pertains to the cultural aspect. I am realizing the importance of cultural and aesthetic diversity. Why should music of various Asian traditions (and I acknowledge the difficulty of such labels) be any less valued than music of european traditions? Or for that matter, why should aesthetic education be deemed less valuable than scientific knowledge? This is not being anti-science, but the recognition that the task of meaning-making takes many forms, of which scientific knowledge is but one. I've only recognized the implications of Sir Ken Robinson's TED, and so the potential of those ideas for a more enriching experience for our lives remin unfulfilled. A Malay wedding is being held across the road in the void deck of another flat - a reflection of the intersections that exist in our society. These intersections need to be attended to as well, as we proceed towards an uncertain future.

Reads!

As Singapore is one of the low-lying cities mentioned, this will certainly be interesting to note.http://www.deltacities.com/

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/011646.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+worldchanging_fulltext+(WorldChanging.com+Full+Text)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

On a related note, responding to climate change remains an issue, and the psychological aspects of it are only becoming understood in a comprehensive manner, in ways that could be relevant for policy makers, perhaps. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/23/climate-change-psychology-response-scepticism

An Epiphany of sorts

Recent struggles in life have indicated to me this fact:

1. That Singapore and the various social institutions took on a paternalist view on the people under their charge. This means that NUS does not trust students to do things responsibly; and translated to as such to wider society - Singapore government and politics basically don't trust their citizens to act responsibly or intelligently.

2. The question to ask then is: why?

- We have no political education, or rather that in the education process, students (citizens-to-be) are not asked at all to discuss what it means to be a citizen.

- The political discussion that presents itself during adulthood becomes then the arguments on ad hominem and reasonable dialogue.

3. What then, is to be done?

Generational divides

Generational divides There are tremendous differences in the way people born in the 50s and those born in say the 80s. The main difference lie in how they perceive the importance of the extended family. I personally don't care much about the relevance of the extended family because my immediate family is much smaller than the family sizes of my parents and grandparents. I suspect that the increase in education levels have led to increase in career and job opportunities without the need of the clan/extended family connections. The situation of parents and grandparents are vastly different, however. Without education, and without the corresponding opportunities, parents and grandparents have had to rely precisely on those clan/extended family connections. Which explains why I'm stuck attending big family gatherings thrown by ostentatious relatives flaunting their wealth. The other thing that's very different, but less distinct, is the perception of the importance of material values. I suspect that people born in the 1980s are less status conscious than parents. That is however, just s hunch. Or rather, the benefits that come with material abundance are more equal, instead of the relatively scarcity of material accumulation in the past. The material and status consciousness that we inherit is a throwback to the past of needing to prove that we have outdone others, and in an era of relative egalitarian conditions, such differences might matter less; on the other hand, the super rich become the focus of the collective envious.

involvement in USP is not solely about USP

At this point, I find myself quite taken aback by the alignments in the various initiatives that I'm part of. The realisation of these alignments lead me to think that life is somewhat fractal...

First off, I am interested in the developments in USP - it is an emotional as much as it is intellectual as much as it is spiritual. I think about how USP could continue to nurture the talents that go through it's doors for impacts thereafter. I believe that part of this nurturing lies in creating a better student community that engages within the different groups within the community, and in engaging people beyond USP and NUS, to the less-privileged communities, and in exchanging ideas at the cutting edge of things.

The second thread in this is that I'm interested in developments in Singapore, which again, is emotional, intellectual and spiritual as well. And as I'm involved in USP, I realise that the entire experience of learning about the process of governance and politics spills over into how I think about governance in Singapore and what it means for the future. The realisation is this: that the same process of engagement in USP, of openness and collaboration, I believe, are hugely relevant to the process of governance in Singapore. Of course I'm simplifying things here, but the resonance of between these efforts blows my mind.

So I come back to the title - that my involvement in USP is not simply about USP alone. These experiences have allowed me to gain insights into the process of political engagement... And of course, all these connects into the way I think about how Singapore needs to prepare for an uncertain future, and it has been amazing that I am first applying certain thoughts in USP first.

See the fractal-ness of it? USP is almost like this small experiment I'm learning from in order to work on a full-scale project called Singapore.

So far, it's been amazing, and I am really deeply in the debt of gratitude for those who have guided, mentored, facilitated, argued, debated, discussed, conversed, collaborated ... in short, for everyone who have shared their ideas with me.

The journey has been as exciting as the prospect of arriving at the destination!

changes in the neighbourhood

To myself, this seems ironic: I like change, but when it is unexpected, I find myself unable to accept it; yet plenty of changes unexpectedly happen...

I guess one of these examples have to do with the changes in the neighbourhood. Today I finally realise: an Indian barber whom I go to for haircuts is no longer gone. The sadder thing is that this was the same barber my mum would recommend; whom my dad would go to. I guess the Indian barber was old enough to retire. In the place of him, lie shelves of stuff, an 'organic' wholesaler from China nationals, I think.

So what do I make of these sudden, unexpected changes? Frankly, I wasn't totally surprise that he would go - people grow old, retire, and move on in their lives. I hope he has earned enough to retire comfortably for the next few decades of his life. And I guess I have to move on too, frequent another barber in the neighbourhood now, I think.

I wonder too, of the broader demographic changes - I there are many shops in the neighbourhood there have been in the entire span of my life and longer. The aquariums, the provision shops selling household items; the bakery; the many other provision shops; the coffeeshops... I have to, eventually, realise that none of these things will stay for long - the shop owners are near their retirement age, and they too, will fade away.

Yes, nostalgia is seeping in, there's simply something, missing... almost as if a part of you, or at least, a part of the memory has faded away, like a phantom limb, and though one thinks that its there, it really isn't - hence the cognitive dissonance - the disconnect that results. And this change is just is - it is neither good nor bad - it is value-neutral. The change is neither too fast nor too slow - the change has simply happened. And many more changes will happen, for example, USP will move to the Residential College, University Town, and for those involve in it, that change is looming, it will happen, and then it becomes - it has happened. To the alumni whose memory of USP has become fixed onto USP @ Blk ADM, it will be a change that they too, will have to accept... Situations change, people change, and those affected by the change are simply left to cope - find the alternative barber (which I have), or simply learn to get use to the change instead of grumbling about it constantly. Change simply is, most times. Like the cells in the body, like the sky and the clouds, like the waves in the ocean...

design failures in SG

I would want to write about the various design failures in SG and how they impede social interactions.

For example, there's a Senior Citizen Active Corner that has exercise devices more suited for people wanting to do serious workouts. The purposes of the exercise devices are also unclear...

One could always think about the bus stops, and how despite their pleasing aesthetic, sucks at providing comfort to the people waiting for bus stops. And then extending on... the lack of amenities that serve a social function... all of these are design failures in themselves...

And then going on, the extrapolation that SG as a country and the flaws in its policy design...

Hmmm....

A curious MRT train ride

Today I did a couple of things that might have been wrong.

I got fed up with MRT commuters that I deliberately pushed an oncoming MRT passenger. I felt his buay-songness as he shoved back.

I'm not feeling exactly proud of it now, but after-the-fact, I think about the fact that Singapore's social engineering isn't working in some of the areas it SHOULD work. Commuter courtesy is definitely something that leaves much to be desired.

I really shouldn't have pushed that oncoming innocent fella, but I was just so fed up that people don't know what to do, despite them being in the same situation as I have been many times.

Why can't people just understand that they need to step aside when people need to move out?

This line of thinking got me started on... the notion that Singapore is really a place where there are first-class infrastructure and maybe, third-world people. I know that phrase is a cliche but still, I can't help but think that the notion is quite spot on.

Which leads me once again, to the acknowledgment that there are many different Singapore(s) that there are sections of Singaporeans that live life very differently from that presented by the government. Which means there are rifts and gaps that need to be SEEN, and bridges need to be built. Some of these rifts are taboos, words spoken in private, but hardly in public... Things need to be seen as they are, not imagined to be, nor glossed over.

Some stray thoughts that jumped...

Education is the key to... courtesy? One could imagine comparing commuter behaviour between the rush hour traffic on weekday mornings, which compose of office executives... and the commuter behaviour during weekend rush periods. Different crowds, different behaviours, perhaps?

Because in the weekday rush hour, people do get out from trains at stations to let people alighting passengers exit. Whereas in the weekend evening rush hour... civility... ?

I am making some casual correlations, and observational studies might prove or disprove my correlations. And of course, the golden adage in all statistical studies: correlation is not causation. Anyhow, the observation of different behaviours might also be the result of entirely different reasons, reasons that are independent of education level or socio-economic status. Carefully designed social experiments might be able to tease the details out. But one wonders whether the appearance/inner gaze of the office suit and its behavioural entailments might figure in somewhere.

Next, I wonder about foreign workers, and thinking about their social integration... but thats an open-ended thought, which leads to nowhere, at least for now.

More importantly, I'm looking at the notion of different Singapore(s), because like I said earlier, I stood opposite someone who might be called an Ah Beng, who professed, in his conversations to his young brother, to aspire to be a gangleader, summoning man with the twitch of his finger. So somewhere along the lines, gangs have been romanticised, and the guy seems also to disregard his education, saying, 'whether i study or not, the results are still the same' which might seem to reflect nothing, until his young brother says he aspires to university and trash his elder brother in that area. Note also the coarse use of language.

The entire sequence on the train was rather... interesting. Fact that the supposed Ah Beng is still with his mum could mean that he is still at least, financially dependent on him, and that deep in his heart, he's still also a mother's boy who simply found alternative ways of social involvement (note: gangs) that might make his mother proud of him. But that might not be the case.

I mean, I don't know, actually. I wonder if its alright to say that these kids went 'wrong'. That might be politically, socially correct, but right/wrong statements are limiting. These statements merely 'state' things. Nothing changes. But if these people do commit socially destructive things - ie, hurting other people, hurting themselves, physically, emotionally... then... no one is better off, eh?

"Productive" is such an economic term, I avoid it. But one can't help but feel that something went wrong in their lives... some misguidedness.

Anyhow, this post is going nowhere.

I really wanted to talk about education, and how the parenting and social environment very much affects the individual's response to it.

I really wanted to talk too, about the kind of education that exists, and I think I finally get it! We receive an Administrative-ended education, an education system that really trains people to become administrators. Even university is not untouched by that attitude. Really smart people get training and amazing things do get done, but within a box, within a system. While that is really cool and all, the box exists.

But then, every education system is the same in that respect. People do become administrators, oversee, supervise, project management, plan... Very, very few visionaries. They are rare, hence highly sought after, anyhow. Hmm... something to mull about. Singapore has smart people. A lot of them. And there are mindblowing things being done. But... but... something is missing, eh?

Shall blog about these things another time, another space.

why i love NYTimes and why Singapore media... well... frankly, it sucks...

I love the NYTimes. And I can't say the same thing for the SG media.

You go to the NYTimes website, the website is cleanly designed, there's a lot of exciting news, but more than that, there's an intellectual depth to the NYTimes , where the journalists are producing top quality news stories of their own, especially blogs such as Green Dot... and others... http://www.nytimes.com/ref/topnews/blog-index.html

This is in contrast to the ST blogs, where the journalists are just giving their opinions on certain items of popular culture. http://blogs.straitstimes.com

There's no... gravitas? There's no intelligent arbitrating of information for the intelligent reader. Going in this direction of thought, it seems to reflect as much about SG readers as much as it does about SG media.

after going through catherine lim...

I've read a bit of Catherine Lim, and from her writings...

I suppose there is something there to write about: the description of people and their fates as they transit from one culture to another, through different generations. I guess thats why people can write about the displacement of values, as children become estranged from the values of their parents, as they go about their own ways...

But a lot of it is... from a macro point, understandable, since Singapore is still very much a society in transition, and even in the present today, the impacts of the past still linger with us. No generation of people can truly start anew, and us, those born in the late 1980s carry on the legacies of the past, and on and on... Things like 'generations' are an iffy term to use, but I think it'll take sometime before the transition peters out, and it will be true that someday, dialects will gradually become an extinct sound...

I'm thinking about Stanley Fish and his response to a book...http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/17/god-talk-part-2/ its so intelligent...

And suddenly this wider world of literary culture looms into view, and its a huge huge world to get lost into. I really want to be THERE, and READ, and WRITE!

I'm thinking, Singapore writers are really voices for the present. A kind of representation... Catherine Lim has one perspective, other authors have their perspective...

Meantime, I'm also thinking about a possible photo-journalistic work called, The Singapore Condition(s)...

Meant to capture a snapshot in time about what Singapore is, in all its diversity - that there really are many Singapore(s) existing in one place, and there are contestations.. The Singapore Govt is aware of that, but chooses to trump one perspective above others. Others the govt tolerates, still others, the govt declares illegal or forbidden. I remember somewhere, someone said, 'Singapore has no poverty/poor people' or something to that effect. Which is really interesting.

That is obviously a show of power and where media manifests that... Hmm.. I guess to narrow it down... have to choose a niche and show how diverse it really is...

just another thought. will blog about it more at

http://eddiechoo.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/writing-about-an-transition/

and...

http://eddiechoo.wordpress.com/2009/05/18/singapore-conditions/

reflecting and reflecting again AWARE

I received an email from my cell leader about a Christian perspective.

Singapore lost on that day. The AWARE saga, despite being trumpeted by the CSOs as being a watershed moment for civil society in Singapore, was instead, a demonstration of the weaknesses of Singapore society. Despite being twitted and all, it instead showed mob rule, and it degenerated into intolerance and insensitivity - both of which reflected poorly on Singapore.

There was neither diversity of opinion nor debate, no persuasion nor compromise required for a democracy, for a genuine civil society.

Christians might have lost, but so did Singapore, and so did civil society. Is it possible to be religious in a secular context? How do people express religious perspective in a secular environment?

Words such as 'conservatism' and 'liberalism' don't mean anything anymore, judging from the American experience. Let's be real. Singapore is neither a conservative society, nor a liberal society, but a society in transition. I think there is a place, where homosexuals are allowed to live their lives unharassed, but at the same time, their viewpoints as only just one of the many perspectives in society.

A democracy does not mean the loudest voice win. Democracy means debate, persuasion, compromise: it means logic. Both sides, if to be put in so polarised way: means that both religious groups and secularist groups HAVE to give way to one another. This is what it takes to be a genuine open society, where all groups have their opportunity to express themselves, and to debate.

awaresg, new media, implications

To be honest, I had no idea what AWARE was about. I mean, Repeal 377A came, and I let it passed me by, and this AWARE incident, and though I know that my CSO/NGO/activist friends would all be rather interested in all these, I well, just let it passed by. But this AWARE incident has demonstrated at least, I think 2 things. The first was the impact of the social technologies that are becoming more and more pervasive in Singapore society. Looking at the tweets that were revolving around the AWARE saga, it demonstrated that Singaporeans are becoming conscious of the use of social technologies to express themselves. This definitely has certain implications. But first, additional observations. The crowd that is using the technology seems to suggest that for a bunch of people, technological-savviness is coupled with a high level of social activism. My peers that are engaged in their CSO/NGO work know how to use technology to spread their message across. Many informal groups use Facebook extensively, and the use of Twitter and the ability to text updates through their mobile phones, is truly a powerful technology, and it will surely take a while for government to respond to the implications.I would think that these social technologies will finally begin to become pervasive throughout Singapore, and these technologies will come to centrestage come the next GE. It would be interesting to see how Singapore government and society will view these technologies...

The second thing, that I'm more worried about, is that the whole episode was perhaps an insight into Singapore society. While the whole issue has been framed in terms of societal maturity, I would actually think that the AWARE saga reflects that Singapore society, at least the bit that engages in such civil discourses, is highly polarised. As far as I can tell, it is only the English-speaking crowd that is engaged in this, and I can hardly see the same level of engagement within the rest of Singapore, in particular Chinese-speakers. What does that mean? Is social activism limited to the English-speaking crowd?

Regarding the maturity, the so-called secular bunch of people have been shown to be as intolerant as the so-called Christian Fundamentalists that, as others have framed, 'took over AWARE'.

To sum, while the entire episode has been interesting from a society-technological point of view, it does reflect rather troubling trends in Singapore society.

night of first recollections from NY/Princeton

The trip to New York and Princeton now feels as if it happened a lifetime away. Such is the working of human memory. I had already worked on another piece of thoughtful analyses, but this ad-hoc, impromptu one will do for now.

I remember walking on the streets of NY and suddenly feeling so small. It seems like NY was the world, and it was only then that I began to understand a bit of what it meant in the world and learning to figure out its vastness and accepting it. I still get that feeling now, especially as I participate in the teeny conference and coming to realise what the world means through the eyes of Americans, especially from students.

Back to NY. NY is such vibrant place, especially when one walks around Times Square, eat in its restaurant, watches the plays on Broadway, riding on the subway, arriving at Grand Central, to see the architecture of the 18th centry and the 21st century. I was at the Empire State Building, and all of NY was spread out before...

It is a city that is alive in the flows of people. NY is always young, never really ageing as immigration continues, as people keep coming in fresh from their previous contexts and adding something to NY both good and bad. It is a city that always 'moves on', never really staying in the present, but always moving. I didn't realise that NY had moved on from 9-11, and the makeshift temporary memorial park is gone, instead, it has already started rebuilding. Even that place of tragedy is now alive, with cranes and other construction material even possibly healing the sore wound of NY's soul, that though it will heal, the marks will remain, but all of these is a testament to the resilience of a city. Could Singapore survive a physical attack to its CBD? I leave that as an open question.

I walk down Fifth Avenue, walked through UN HQ, tried to go to the HQ of the TED Conferences (didn't work out), and everywhere there is this sense of *life*... Things are always moving, dazzling, even in the day, images all vying for attention. But I guess after a while, you get tired of such things. I would say that I felt similar vibes at a condo that overlooked Singapore's CBD.

NY doesn't represent America, but I think it represents, what the world thinks of America - a huge diverse place, full of life and energy. In other words, it represents the American Dream.

So yeah. That was NY. Princeton was another experience.

Princeton is a beautiful campus. Every inch of that spot seems dripping with history, with even the brick sometimes dedicated to a person, or by a class. These institutions have wonderful alumnus support, which explains the dedication and the endowment that they have. All that said, the people there aren't really that superior. After a while, I begin to realise that its not about the student, actually, its about the culture and the opportunities that students have. I took a picture of summer opportunities, and its simply amazing. The Ivies themselves have tremendous opportunities summer exchanges with each other - I think about Singapore and I wonder whether NUS would think about summer classes with NTU, and vice versa. Both universities have strengths and weaknesses, and it doesn't seem too weird an idea for the two institutions to compliment each other. It isn't all about competition, its also about cooperation, not just at the staff/research level, but also at the student level. I just don't get it - don't understand...

And then the other thing is about the attitude of education. While many people both in the US and Singapore just think about getting a bachelors and be done with it, the difference (seemingly) in the top universities is that they have people who really are passionate about what they are learning, and they will want to go on learning and learning... Its not about getting a degree so you can find a job, for many of these people, lifelong learning is itself a job - and it is that passion that makes them want to take up opportunities, push themselves, and become the best that they can be. They are persistent, disciplined, and work tireless towards their objectives (add having fun with friends in the process). There really is no secret to success, or *things to do* and all. The self-help books, as I realise are complete shit. All there are to success - persistence, discipline, passion. As a comparison, I could possibly say that USP is to NUS what the Ivies/top unis are to the whole system of higher education.

(I come back to NUS more eager to be what I can possibly could be. )

grace, and tonnes of it

i went to a prayer meeting and it was about grace.

How apt. As I'm writing this, my anger is subsiding, and I'm letting grace do its work. Here is the incident.

I put my clothes in a drying machine, and I left it there. I returned at the end of the cycle, and my clothes were replaced by someone else's. I guess what happened was, someone replaced my clothing with his/her...

I felt angry, and a many, many things were going through my mind about what to do. Should I dump it in the toilet, wet it? Should I throw them all away somewhere, as a lesson for the person not to mess around with other people's clothing? 

Well, it was so childish thinking about it, but I still did. Vengeance and pride can be very dangerous to handle. Oh well. In the end I just left them at the top of the machine, and after I was done, put them back in the dryer... 

Vengeance is the Lord's. I pray that the Lord have mercy on that person... 

And grace again.

This one is much more serious, and it concerns my relationship with an institution that I belong to, the church, namely, FCBC. First of all, FCBC is a wonderful church. Great people, great leadership, bold vision, with the guts, faith and love to do it. The problem might just be myself and my own perception. Here's how it goes, and it starts with who I think I am. I like books, I like apologetics, like philosophy, reasoning and arguing, in things intellect. I'm not exactly fun-fun, but I can be... But I know that what brings people to Christ is the relational and the emotional aspects of connecting to Jesus as saviour. I get that. And FCBC is really big on that, because as far as I know, bringing people to Christ really requires that relational/emotional stuff. Its just that... I've never been exactly big on that, meaning - I'm not exactly that socially/emotionally-adept, and the way I handle people is kinda different, meaning, I prefer small-groups, less than ten perhaps, and I want to focus on who these people are. And I want to talk, engage them, engage their ideas, because I think that a large part of Christianity is also knowing who God is, who Jesus is, and why they should be confident about their faith, in knowing what Christianity means, and how it faces up to challenges... 

I'm fearing that the nature of church hierarchy in FCBC - being essentially a vertical hierarchy with strict chain of commands - might make it difficult to respond to certain types of changes, especially tech-wise. Meaning, that since everything flows from the top, changes might not be reflected in time by the time it reaches the top from the ground. Besides, I am beginning to realise that some churches are not meant to be democratic, meaning, that there are some individuals who are thought to be... exceptional. While I do agree that some people are anointed and appointed by God for church leadership... hmm... this is an incomplete thought, but I think people can see where its going. A thought experiment would be: if a very high-up pastor does something ethically wrong but not criminally wrong, and if that person does not admit mistakes despite being wrong and even goes on to justify leadership through previous anointing, will there be means to... remove the person from authority? 

One of the things that I never really stopped wondering was whether Christianity supports authority or not... 

One of the threads here is that, when more people become more aware of the transformative power of infotech to change the modes of engagement, how will it change the way churches function? Open-sourced Sermons? Where believers flow from one congregation to another, depending on the sermons? Right now the network of churches is kinda disparate - meaning that every church does its own thing, oblivious, not really knowing what other churches are doing, because there is no need to. maybe with LoveSingapore, then more churches become involve with one another, and there is some communication, but still, for day-to-day stuff, churches are a social institution serving the spiritual needs of the community... I mean - thats a more technical perspective. Is it possible to conceive of a *super-church*, where there are no longer boundaries between different churches..... like a *hive* of some sort... specialisation into *workers* who do the work of evangelism and community outreach, *musicians* - worship specialists...

Oh shucks. I am becoming incoherent. Better stop now.. the point is, there is a dissatisfaction about being in FCBC that I haven't found a way to resolve. But if I truly grasp that: it was never about me, or how I feel, but about how God wants to do something through me - reach out to people and do some other stuff - then it ought to have settled things right? I do *get it* but some other thing feels not quite right... Lotsa scary thoughts, but just stopping now to do some other work...

Grace.

revisiting an old idea...

A few days ago I was thinking about an old idea - to have a conference/event where people present and share their ideas about the future of Singapore. Really. Have people/students gather in small groups, and think about socio/technological change in the next 20, 40, or even 60 years. Present pictures of optimism, pessimism, failure and success - how, and why things get to there.

Need lots of official partners though, for the prize money and promises of internship at specific government ministry.

two thoughts of the day

Was going out a bit at Orchard Road, when I saw that there the plans for Orchard Road were being realised. Malls were sprouting out around. And then an ecology analogy hit me: that malls were physical substrates for the fulfillment of the niches of human desires...

And the second thought that makes me wanna do something is the thought about having a bicycle diary around Singapore. All I need is a bike and a good camera to record everything in still images. Because a video record is going to need serious editing...

Because of the first idea, and the biological analogies, I really want to simply blow the academic boundaries apart. That in academic pursuit - there is the application and reapplication of knowledge in different ways.

I want to study ecologies and the chemical flows and how these flows have analogies in the human, social and political worlds.

So where do all these... areas of knowledge fit?

the first post in 2009! scary things for the year ahead

I commit the next year unto the Lord.

Some things to pray about:

1. I got so convicted about writing and Singapore, that I think I'm gonna write until something happens, write till my hands bleed or things to that extent. Writing until change happens, and knowing that the basis of change is LOVE.

2. Next year might somehow also be barren. I'm not sure in what sense, but I feel that it'll be another year of preparation, as how Moses wondered in the desert...

3. Why am I a connector? Why am I able to stand at the middle point, connecting positions of OPPOSING perspectives?

On another note, as a note to myself, when we become MORE successful, I hope to be able to throw a dinner banquet for friends and teachers from the sec class! Book a ballroom, book the Singapore Flyer, maybe... But this dream might take a while...