ramblings
been reading a few books lately:
1) "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris, a philosophy graduate from Stanford
it's a very critical account on religion, though a little verbose and repetitive sometimes. Highly recommended for those interested in the subject of religion and philsophy, for ardent religion fellowers, for hardcore atheist, and also for agnostic and other who lie somewhere along the line. highly religious people may not like this book, but i find his arguments critical and plausible. This reminds me of another classic which i would love to read - "Why I am not a Christian" by Bertrand Russell.
2) "The pursuit of happiness" by Bertrand Russell
a must-read for all modern men and women who seem to find happiness unattainable and elusive in this society
3) "The Book of Man" by Osho
yes i re-read it. but still havent finished it. this book reminds me of what is a new modern man
4) "What is Man" by Mark Twain
a humorous yet critical attempt to answer the question: what is man, what are the intrinsic and acquired qualities and characteristics that make a man
5) "Economics" by John Sloman
i am starting to read on econs to see whetehr i really love this subject. i forgot tt this book is timo's and i brought it back to KL. holy!
7) Kuala Lumpur Public Transport Guide
ok i am kidding.
public transport is non-existent in KL.
7) "Lee Kuan Yew- The Beliefs Behind The Man" by Michael Barr
i read with particular interest on his view on elitism. The author brought out a very good point: of all the great men with great achievements, there is one common point between them - self-confidence. indeed self-confidence is a pre-requisite to achieving greatness. with strong self-confidence, one will set high target for oneself, and hold high ambition and expectation. His actions and thoughts will then naturally centre around his ambition. In order to dream big and achieve big, one needs a self-confidence that can hold this dream, whether it is an inflated ego, a queit self-belief or an accidently-bestowed confidence. Lee KY is described as somewhat cocky by his former classmates: "ambitious, forceful, a little cocky, but not consciously arrogant and condescending" I believe that a lot of us will find this natural cockiness in some of the high achievers even though they have never consciously felt that way.
i think that i have a strong self-confidence that can accommodate my big dream. well, i certainly hope it is not an inflated ego haha.
aniway, i quite agree on his view on elitism. with great ability comes great responsibility, i believe that elites should lead the society. however i do not agree that this responsibility should be exclusive to only the "elites". political egalitarianism, a founding principle of democracy, should be practised and advocated. even though some may find it idealistic, it is an ideology that we should uphold at all cost because it would be sad if a person is born and told right away from his family background that he is not among the "elites" and is not "supposed" to be a minister.
think Gattaca. think Brave New World.
and i still cannot believe that Mr.Lee would openly support cutural eugenics.
don't get my wrong. in theory, the idea of elitism and social eugenics make perfect sense and do strick a chord in me. however personally i feel that these are some things that a leader or any person with influence should not have expressed publicly and explicitly. we need to understand and be sensitive to the feelings of those non-elitists, those socially, structurally and genetically less favoured brothers and comrades.
"For all of Lee's supposed empirical reasoning and his theorising, his elitism and geneticism looks suspiciously like the conceit born of a pampered and privileged childhood."
Mr.Lee, sometimes, the end does NOT justify the means. you cant build a society on elitism and social eugenics. even though you have established a highly productive and efficient system politically, socially and economically, you should understand that it takes more than (and perhaps, less of) these efforts to build a real nation. there was a great article in the Straits Times by Sumiko Tan on the social echelons and distinct classification in every aspect of Singapore. to be frank, i have never seen a society that is so clearly and distinctly classified. HDB vs Landed; express vs normal; scholars vs non-scholars; overseas vs local; there are more examples, only if you can just be more critical and observant of it. i am able to do that coz' i do not grow up, i do not live in singapore. it's easy for me to see the structural problem.
most s'poreans are always too concerned about their bread-and-butter issues to think about this more grave and less-bread-and-butter issues. i mean, take a look at singapore General Election. the campaigning is so peaceful, the issues raised are so mundane and bread-and-butter, the outcome is so predictable. i think a tourist who tour singapore during this period would not know that the election is coming.
but i dunno. i dunno whether singaporeans do concern about this whole thing. or is it that political stability and economic prosperity matter more than anything else to the extent that cultures, spirits, and other social fabric of a society are insignificant?
ignorantly happy. does this end justify the means?
(i hope i would ellicit some vigorous response or even death threats from my fellow singaporean friends. at least that has some passion in it.)
http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/Human%20Rights/barr2.html
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/other/culture.html
ok i intend to take part in the following clubs/associations. at least once in my four years in uni
Students for a Free Tibet
Underdog Music Consortium
Wesleyan Dharma Study Group
Silence
Queer Social Club
League of Extraordinary Virgins
Interfaith Justice League
Freeman Asian Scholar Association
Fellowship for a Financial Future
Chinese Speakers Association
Buddhist House
Amnesty International
Alliance of Progressive South Asians
1) "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris, a philosophy graduate from Stanford
it's a very critical account on religion, though a little verbose and repetitive sometimes. Highly recommended for those interested in the subject of religion and philsophy, for ardent religion fellowers, for hardcore atheist, and also for agnostic and other who lie somewhere along the line. highly religious people may not like this book, but i find his arguments critical and plausible. This reminds me of another classic which i would love to read - "Why I am not a Christian" by Bertrand Russell.
2) "The pursuit of happiness" by Bertrand Russell
a must-read for all modern men and women who seem to find happiness unattainable and elusive in this society
3) "The Book of Man" by Osho
yes i re-read it. but still havent finished it. this book reminds me of what is a new modern man
4) "What is Man" by Mark Twain
a humorous yet critical attempt to answer the question: what is man, what are the intrinsic and acquired qualities and characteristics that make a man
5) "Economics" by John Sloman
i am starting to read on econs to see whetehr i really love this subject. i forgot tt this book is timo's and i brought it back to KL. holy!
7) Kuala Lumpur Public Transport Guide
ok i am kidding.
public transport is non-existent in KL.
7) "Lee Kuan Yew- The Beliefs Behind The Man" by Michael Barr
i read with particular interest on his view on elitism. The author brought out a very good point: of all the great men with great achievements, there is one common point between them - self-confidence. indeed self-confidence is a pre-requisite to achieving greatness. with strong self-confidence, one will set high target for oneself, and hold high ambition and expectation. His actions and thoughts will then naturally centre around his ambition. In order to dream big and achieve big, one needs a self-confidence that can hold this dream, whether it is an inflated ego, a queit self-belief or an accidently-bestowed confidence. Lee KY is described as somewhat cocky by his former classmates: "ambitious, forceful, a little cocky, but not consciously arrogant and condescending" I believe that a lot of us will find this natural cockiness in some of the high achievers even though they have never consciously felt that way.
i think that i have a strong self-confidence that can accommodate my big dream. well, i certainly hope it is not an inflated ego haha.
aniway, i quite agree on his view on elitism. with great ability comes great responsibility, i believe that elites should lead the society. however i do not agree that this responsibility should be exclusive to only the "elites". political egalitarianism, a founding principle of democracy, should be practised and advocated. even though some may find it idealistic, it is an ideology that we should uphold at all cost because it would be sad if a person is born and told right away from his family background that he is not among the "elites" and is not "supposed" to be a minister.
think Gattaca. think Brave New World.
and i still cannot believe that Mr.Lee would openly support cutural eugenics.
don't get my wrong. in theory, the idea of elitism and social eugenics make perfect sense and do strick a chord in me. however personally i feel that these are some things that a leader or any person with influence should not have expressed publicly and explicitly. we need to understand and be sensitive to the feelings of those non-elitists, those socially, structurally and genetically less favoured brothers and comrades.
"For all of Lee's supposed empirical reasoning and his theorising, his elitism and geneticism looks suspiciously like the conceit born of a pampered and privileged childhood."
Mr.Lee, sometimes, the end does NOT justify the means. you cant build a society on elitism and social eugenics. even though you have established a highly productive and efficient system politically, socially and economically, you should understand that it takes more than (and perhaps, less of) these efforts to build a real nation. there was a great article in the Straits Times by Sumiko Tan on the social echelons and distinct classification in every aspect of Singapore. to be frank, i have never seen a society that is so clearly and distinctly classified. HDB vs Landed; express vs normal; scholars vs non-scholars; overseas vs local; there are more examples, only if you can just be more critical and observant of it. i am able to do that coz' i do not grow up, i do not live in singapore. it's easy for me to see the structural problem.
most s'poreans are always too concerned about their bread-and-butter issues to think about this more grave and less-bread-and-butter issues. i mean, take a look at singapore General Election. the campaigning is so peaceful, the issues raised are so mundane and bread-and-butter, the outcome is so predictable. i think a tourist who tour singapore during this period would not know that the election is coming.
but i dunno. i dunno whether singaporeans do concern about this whole thing. or is it that political stability and economic prosperity matter more than anything else to the extent that cultures, spirits, and other social fabric of a society are insignificant?
ignorantly happy. does this end justify the means?
(i hope i would ellicit some vigorous response or even death threats from my fellow singaporean friends. at least that has some passion in it.)
http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/Human%20Rights/barr2.html
http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/other/culture.html
ok i intend to take part in the following clubs/associations. at least once in my four years in uni
Students for a Free Tibet
Underdog Music Consortium
Wesleyan Dharma Study Group
Silence
Queer Social Club
League of Extraordinary Virgins
Interfaith Justice League
Freeman Asian Scholar Association
Fellowship for a Financial Future
Chinese Speakers Association
Buddhist House
Amnesty International
Alliance of Progressive South Asians
