Results for 2nd semester

English For Academic Purposes (Arts) B
Introduction to Economic Analysis B
Founders of Modern Philosophy B+
Metaphysics C
Philosophy and Film B+
Singapore Society B-

Cap: 3.4

Sucks! Meta-my-ass!

Friedrich Nietzsche - quotes

The greatest weight.—

What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you in your loneliest loneliness and say to you:

"This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence—even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again—and you with it, speck of dust!"

Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: "You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine!" If this thought gained possession of you, it would change you as you are or perhaps crush you; the question in each and every thing, "Do you desire this once more, and innumerable times more?" would lie upon your actions as the greatest weight! Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?
--

A traveler, who had visited many lands and peoples and seen several of the earth's continents, was asked what quality in men he had found everywhere. He said: they tend to be lazy.
To others, it seems that he should have said, more rightly and significantly: they are all fearful. They hide themselves behind customs and opinions. At bottom every man knows quite well that, being unique, he will be in the world only once and that no outlandish coincidence will shake together, a second time, such a marvelously variegated multiplicity into unity as he is: he knows it but hides it like a bad conscience—why?
For fear of his neighbor, who demands conformity and cloaks himself with it. But what is it that forces the individual to fear his neighbor, to think and act like a member of a herd, and to have no joy in himself? Shamefacedness, perhaps, in a few rare cases. For most it is idleness, inertia, in short that tendency to laziness of which the traveler spoke. He is right: men are even lazier than fearful, and fear most of all the burdensome nuisance of absolute honesty and nakedness.
Artists alone hate this lazy procession in borrowed manners and left-over opinions and they reveal everyone's secret bad conscience, the law that every man is a unique miracle; they dare to show us man as he is, unique even unto each move of his muscles; even more, that by strictly in consequence of this uniqueness, he is beautiful and worth regarding, new and incredible, as every work of nature, and never boring. When the great thinker despises human beings, he despises their laziness: for it is on account of their laziness that men seem like factory goods, indifferent, unworthy to be associated with or instructed.
Human beings who do not want to belong to the mass need only to stop being comfortable; follow their conscience, which cries out: "Be yourself! All that you are now doing, thinking, and desiring, that isn't you at all."
Every youthful soul hears this call day and night and trembles at it; for it has a premonition of its eternally fated lot of happiness, when it contemplates its true liberation: a happiness it can never attain to, so long as it lies in chains of fear and convention. And how desolate and senseless life can be without this liberation! There is no more unpleasant and adverse a creature in this world than the man who has evaded his genius and who now looks peers left and right, squinting behind him and all about. In the end, one cannot come to grips with such a man, since he is all exterior without a core; befallen, bedaubed, baggy robes, a trimmed ghost that cannot provoke even fear and certainly not pity.
--

The madman.

Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market place and cried incessantly: "I seek God! I seek God!"
As many of those who did not believe in God were standing around just then, he provoked much laughter. Has he got lost? asked one. Did he lose his way like a child? asked another. Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? emigrated? Thus they yelled and laughed.
The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. "Whither is God?" he cried. "I will tell you. We have killed him—you and I! All of us are his murderers! But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? And backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us? Do we not need to light lanterns in the morning? Do we not hear nothing as yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition?—Gods, too, decompose! God is dead! God remains dead! And we have killed him! How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives,—who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed,—and whoever is born after us, for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto!"
Here the madman fell silent and looked again at his listeners: they, too, were silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern to the ground, and it broke into pieces and went out. "I have come too early," he said then; "my time is not yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, still wandering—it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and thunder require time; the light of the stars requires time; deeds, though done, still require time to be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than the most distant stars—and yet they have done it themselves!"— It has been related further that on the same day the madman forced his way into several churches and there struck up his requiem aeternam deo . Led out and called to account, he is said always to have replied nothing but: "What after all are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of God?"

Why we have tummies.

Taken at NUS YIH canteen.
Honey and Cinnamon sugar and butter? What is this? Sugar bomb? Honey not sweet enough for you? You need sugar with that?

Butter with pork floss and condensed milk? This is either so right, or so wrong.

A sign!

I finished my exams, and I went on a walk-about. All sort of adventures and interesting things including trespassing onto Malaysian land(come to think of it, it's kind of suspicious). Anyway, this sign which I saw. 2 sentences which by themselves are meaningful and usual. It's just kindof strange when they are put together.

If it's monitored by cameras, why do you need us to call the police if there is anything suspicious?
And we should call the police in cases of suspicious activities because the place is important enought to be monitored by security cameras which are nevertheless prone to failure during periods of suspicious activities and must rely on civil minded citizens who happens to walk past to call the police.

Groundhog Day

I just did a paper on Groundhog Day. If you haven't seen it, you really should. It's a 1993 comedy film starring Bill Murray and Andie MacDowell. It's deeply philosophical (but then all good movies are), and religious people love it( one reason is that it contains speck of wisdom from Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, and Christianity). It's a great feel-good comedy and quite a decent romantic film. It's deep and meditative without getting preachy.

Phil, played by actor Bill Murray is trapped inside a
time loop in the small town of Punxsutawney while covering the annual Groundhog Day festival. Every morning he wakes up in the same bed and it’s always February the second. He has to relive the entire day, again and again, apparently without end.

Here's my paper for those of you who are interested:[pdf]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groundhog_Day_(film)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0107048/


14th May 2007: Hey I got an A for this paper. Althought prof. commented that the language is "somewhat rough". I really got to work on my english this vacation.

Happy Birthday Professor Dawkins

Richard Dawkins celebrated his birthday on the 26th of March. Friends and well-wishers from all over the globe send him pictures, videos and audio messages. Here's mine.
Check out other's here.

Happy Happy Joy Joy Parliament

I read this article on Little Speck: Too much self-praise, What Singaporeans want is some frank, value-added debate. By Seah Chiang Nee, The Star on Mar 24, 2007. [Link]
It reflected on a topic that I have been thinking about so I thought I'll post it here.

NEEDED in 21st Century Singapore: A new breed of articulate Members of Parliament who can match the likes of Lee Kuan Yew, S. Rajaratnam and David Marshall.

With few exceptions, today’s lot – whether in government or opposition – lacks that sharp tongue and fire in the belly that marked the previous generation of politicians.

As the Old Guards left one after another, they were replaced by young, co-opted technocrat-MPs, who were good problem solvers, but who lacked the passion and ability to motivate Singaporeans.

Neither are they good at debates or explaining policies in the pull-no-punches way that Minister Mentor Lee and his peers could do with ease.
The lack is fine as long as the PAP continues to enjoy the complete trust of voters the way that Lee had.

But his son, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, is dealing with – and has to win over – better educated, more cynical citizens with very high expectations.

That requires the party to govern with more than top scholars and good policies; it also needs people with the power of persuasion.

After demolishing all strong opposition one way or another, Minister Mentor Lee has admitted that many young MPs lack the opportunities to learn the thrusts of political debate.

For its own survival, the PAP has to allow its MPs to speak frankly and openly on issues of the day, even if it is galling to the party.

It has another reason to do this. It has rejected the opposition playing a checks-and-balance role in the government, saying it can do it by itself. For this to be credible, observers say, it has to be seen doing it.

Most Parliament sessions here – unlike in Kuala Lumpur – have been tame, polite affairs involving prepared questions and answers, after which the MP would sit down to make way for another.

This was evident during the recent Parliament budget session that was to give important tax changes (GST up 2%) and rising poverty a proper airing.

Most government MPs spoke in favour of a rise in the unpopular Goods and Services Tax – no GST can be popular anywhere in the world – from 5% to 7%. Yet they made it sound like it’s the long-awaited salvation.

(The budget also provided offsetting payments, with the poor and older people getting a larger share, which will help to mitigate – for five years – the impact on the lower class).

Singaporeans are generally opposed to the GST increase, which is the centrepiece of the budget, and several government MPs pitched for more aid to the poor.

But the majority of backbenchers praised the budget, some in exuberant terms that are opposed to public sentiment.

Despite the leaders’ exhortations to MPs to speak their minds, not many had done so.

A sample of backbenchers’ exuberant praises included – “generous and forward looking”, “good intentioned” and “made in heaven”, “a landmark budget”, “wonderful”, “innovative” and “pragmatic.”

The generosity of the budget is possible under the stewardship of the ruling People’s Action Party, said one MP, sounding like a Pyongyang news headline.

Another remarked: “Nowhere else in the world can you get a budget which includes love and compassion in abundance as this one.”

Some young Singaporeans say they were turned off by these flowery but useless descriptions.

Even a commentator of the pro-government Straits Times, Chua Mui Hoong, was moved to call on the PAP MPs to go beyond “cheerleading”.

“Too much self-praise by the PAP is off-putting,” she wrote.

“An MP's role should include critiquing policies, voicing independent points of view and scrutinising the executive's decisions,” she said, adding that some did so, but they were a minority.

Former PAP MP Hwang Soo Jin, 71, related how a doctor had surprised him by asking why Parliament had bothered to debate the budget when the government had already decided to implement it.

Hwang wrote in the Chinese Lianhe Zaobao that there was a 'chasm' between Parliament and the people.

After Lee Kuan Yew stepped down as Prime Minister in 1990, his successor, Goh Chok Tong had steadily eased up on control of people’s’ lives.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who took over from Goh, has pledged to continue the process.

Some feel Parliament could do with the return of several strong-minded ex-PAP backbenchers, who had the moral courage and skills to take on ministers.

They included former Speaker Tan Soo Khoon, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Dr Wang Kai Yuen, who have left behind an outspokenly biting legacy.

Soo Khoon once hit out at government wastage, targeting seven gr-and ministerial building projects, labelling them sarcastically as the “Seven Wonders of Singapore.”

He likened some of these gleaming new buildings to five-star hotels, which led him to wonder if the ministries were competing to see which of them could “be better than the Four Seasons Hotel.”

“(People) complain because they realise that if you spend so much money, then we will be taxed more. That's why people are unhappy,” he added.

Parliament is a stepping-stone for tomorrow’s leaders, which explains why MPs should be encouraged to use their flair.

Some analysts, however, believe that sustained periods of affluence and stability are not ideal to producing brilliant leaders; only chaos or wars can.

It was chaotic Singapore in the 50s and 60s that threw up leaders like Lee and his contemporaries – and that just can’t be re-created.

Enough said. Well I have to say that the Singapore Parliament does seems to be very boring, to me anyway. It looks, to me anyway, staged. Kind of like WWF. I use to believe that WWF were for real when I was young. I mean they look real, the people appears to be really fighting one another, they seems really passionate about what they are doing and stuff. But in the end, it's all a show. The outcome of the fights are always decided forehand. Kind of like the reality TVs we have nowdays. The results are not exactly surprising.

Maybe I am not been fair, but maybe been on the same political party does make it hard(er?) for you to disagree on policies. It seems that the MPs will come up all hot and enthusiastic on some issues like: "are you sure Singapore can support a the growing population?(6.5 millions)?", "are the welfare payment really enough?", "is there enough done to off-set the GST impact?", "our transport system, is it good enough?", blah... You know.

Then some ministers will come on and in a nut shell says: "yah, don't worry about it, we're good."

And then the MPs will be like: "Oh, really? ... Ok."

That's what it looks like to me anyway.

And our few oppositions are not really very impressive, frankly.

That's why its so hard for Singapore government to answer a question straight and not treat us like idiots.

There's no one to hold their feet to the fire and asks difficult questions and demand a straight answer.

Do you agree?

See! I told you people are weird!

Or at least horny.
A guy was charged with having sex with a dead deer that he found in a ditch.

http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/03/oh_deer.html#comments

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1122061deer1.html

Enough said.