...

Of a certain kind of reunion

2012-01-18T23:16:00.008+08:00

What would you do if you were the only one on time for a primary school dinner gathering near your primary school? If you were like me, you would, first and foremost, clandenstinely walk in the back gate of the school - the vehicle gate, for the passenger gate where parents and maids are milling about would be locked. Both change and constancy would strike you. You would notice that the basketball court has been replaced by a driveway, that there is only 1 canteen now, complete with designated tables for classes, that the sports hall is now air-conditioned. You would notice that many things have changed, even as the familiar contours of past memories mingled with your current perception. You would note that some things, remarkably, haven't changed - the field, the table tennis tables, the corridors.

After your clandestine tour of the school, you would nonchantly exit by the front gate - where, of course, everyone else hasn't arrived. You would smile, accepting that this is part of life. You would then take a walk in the surrounding neighborhood, for it is evening, and it is a quiet neighborhood. While soaking in the orange ambience you would try to recall if there are any nice food places in the area, for it is not often you travel to this area, you are quite hungry, and you are entertaining the prospect that everyone else is not going to turn up. At this point - while still on the lookout for nice places to dine in - you would arrive at a serious dilemma. You would wonder if you should call the organiser. The dilemma presents itself because on the one hand, you are perfectly content to find a quiet spot and dine by yourself; plus you are very shy. On the other hand, reunions don't come by often; plus there is a small chance you got the time and place wrong (that would be a most charitable view of human kind). At some point you would stop in your tracks and think furiously. And at some point you would opt for a compromise - an unimposing sms sent.

You would then proceed to a coffeeshop for some tea. A reply is received - we're meeting at 7pm, not 6pm. But of course! The time would change without you being informed - this is as unsurprising as everyone else being an hour late. You would smile again, a wave of equanimity spreading through you as you drink your tea, for such is life, and, for whatever the cause of the timing mismatch, it had at the very least presented an opportunity for you to have a long walk by yourself. A long walk - and you would have felt that you already had a certain reunion of sorts before everyone else had arrived.

If you were like me, you would already have half of this blog entry composed in your mind during the walk, during the insipid moments of the dinner in which people talked about their work lives. (To be fair, not all talk about the working world is boring - did you know that 90% of Singapore's ice-cream is owned by a single corporation? Did you know, too, that the very same MNC that produces Panadol and anti-malaria drugs is also the same firm that produces Horlicks and Ribena? [to which I half-jokingly said that GSK should include a packet of Horlicks in the anti-malaria packs they distribute in impoverished countries]) There were some stories of the filthy rich too, almost inevitable given people are just starting out on the corporate ladder and taking their first look upwards. Someone who worked in the real estate line said that a Taiwanese had bought the whole block of Reflections (a condo unit at Keppel Bay) after only half an hour there. The agent who handled that client would have had her commission in millions, assuming she had no cap. You would have felt envious - money comes by so easily for some.

Talk of money would have, at the end of the day, made you wonder how much you would be willing to give up past memories and past attachments for cash. Suppose you were offered $200,ooo, but you would have to give up all memories of my primary, secondary and junior college days. That is, when you think back to those times, you would come up with a blank. You wouldn't recognise anyone from those times, though they would recognise you. All your school records, photos, would be intact, but they would mean just as much as a bus ticket of a journey you cannot recall. Would you accept the deal? What if it were $500,000? $1 million? If you were like me, you would have no answer.

Simple

2012-01-02T17:11:00.003+08:00

I spent the whole of yesterday playing board games at a friend's place. Had a slow start with people not turning up as usual - such is life. And then I realised some people did - and that's what matters. That's what I've got to be thankful for.

Returned home late tired but satisfied. I wound down before sleeping with Schweppes' Bitter Lemon, chilled in the freezer first. Some people like a glass of wine for such moments. I think it doesn't matter. What we all want, while relaxing on a couch or bed listening to some music, is a cup of something strong, something that doesn't tempt you to finish the drink prematurely while your thoughts wander and the music plays. It doesn't matter if it's a glass of wine, a can of beer, or some tonic water. We all want the same thing.

Drive

2011-12-27T20:04:00.002+08:00

Watched Drive some time back. Amazing. It's my kind of film: sparse, poetic, consistently poignant. It's hard to convey poignancy without being icky. That's where Drive's sparseness really helps. As John Lui of The Straits Times wrote:

You know you are in the presence of a director of great talent when he can show a man and a woman throwing furtive glances at each other in a lift, and in a few seconds, without the use of dialogue or tinkly piano or pensive folk-rock background music, it is clear to the audience that they have fallen madly in love with each other.

It has been said that film is a director's medium and here Drive is proof. Its most affecting scenes, such as the one in the lift, have little or no dialogue. They involve little more than good acting and putting the camera in the right place to catch it.

I prefer sparse ontologies in Philosophy too.

It was the best of times; it was the worst of times

2011-12-12T20:12:00.004+08:00

Looking at my junior college yearbook never fails to make me laugh. Class photos are split into groups. I was in a photo with 3 other male classmates. We weren't smiling at all, and the contrast between the 4 of us and the other cheerful faces lit for the camera is absolutely delightful.

I was hugely alone those 2 years: I was the only male taking the particular subject combination I took, so I had many breaks all to myself. I would on occasion join 3 of the other male classmates for a meal when our breaks coincided, but they were largely simple, silent affairs. That's partly because we had few things in common, but also because we were quiet people by nature. I have no complaints: I enjoyed the peaceful lazy-afternoon meals we had at the nearby coffeeshops, away from the school where everyone else were.

Most of my relationships during this period were one-to-one. There were no class things, no groups. I built a number of meaningful relationships with individuals, many of them outside my class. And I still remember the times we had our meals outside school. A particular history lecturer would always read from his slides word for word; I remember skipping his lectures to have brunch with a person every week.

Most of these relationships are gone. Some regrettably so, others less so. Why are they gone? As with the uniqueness of each individual the reason for each case is unique. There is but one common factor: everyone has moved on in life. That's inevitable. Junior college gave a pressure for us to be together; more often than not, we were together because it was an alternative to sticking with our classes. We've lost that pressure, and we've either failed to replace it or failed to acknowledge we needed to move on.

In a few years time it would be 10 years since I left junior college. I think, then, that I need to meet a few people.

Agricola

2011-11-16T22:05:00.003+08:00

I nearly won one of the top Agricola players in the world. The score difference was 8. 8 points is a world of difference when it comes to Agricola, but he only got those points from a single, fortunate draft pick. My first draft pick was Constable. This is a card that gives all players who receive no negative points 5 additional points at the end of the game. Constable is pretty much a double-edged sword, as you can imagine. (In Agricola you receive 1 negative point each if you have got no sheep, cattle, grain, vegetable, pasture, etc at the end of the game) Because it was my first pick, no one else saw it during the draft phase. But he drafted Yeoman Farmer nonetheless. This is an occupation card that says you receive negative points only for unbuilt farmyard spaces and begging cards. Nevermind about those - that card alone gave him 4 points (because you get from -1 to 0 with Yeoman Farmer, if you have, for example, 0 sheep at the end of the game), and secured him my Constable bonus too. On top of that, the card effectively saved him 4 moves, because he didn't have to spend moves picking up animals and vegetables to place in his farm.

Perhaps I should have drafted Yeoman Farmer during the draft phase, since I knew I had Constable. This would be a largely denial move, because I had aimed to go for a traditional farm setup with everything in place, meaning the value of Yeoman Farmer is less for me. Perhaps. That would have meant forgoing something else, but I can't recall what was in the Yeoman Farmer draft then, that I picked over it. It would have helped if Yeoman Farmer hadn't been in the draft packs in the first place. Admittedly though, such counterfactuals are tricky, because he would probably have done things differently if he knew he didn't have Yeoman Farmer.

All that said, even if I had won, it doesn't mean much. Just as in any sport, consistency is key in any comprehensive evaluation. It doesn't matter if you once beat Roger Federer on his off day when you are hundreds of places below him. It doesn't matter if a club beats Manchester United but loses most of its other matches against other clubs. And when it comes to that, I'm consistently performing poorly. I've played 101 games on the Agricola site and won only 2 of them. Granted, 4 players play in a standard Agricola game, and the vast majority of times only 1 person wins. But 2/101 is still a very poor record.

So now, why am I consistently performing poorly? A few reasons. 1) I tend to be too ambitious. I like to go for many projects at once, sometimes halting one in an incomplete state before moving to start another. 2) I tend to overvalue certain actions. I like spending a peep to go for the Starting Player place to get the Plow/Sow action next round. The Plow/Sow action is an incredibly efficient action in the game, but there could have been better options for me. 3) I still can't find the right frame of mind for the game, the right pacing, the right groove. I don't know when's a good time to go for rapid expansion, and when to slow down and develop a food engine. 4) I'm too self-absorbed in my own play. This starts at the very start, during the draft phase. When I draft my cards, I don't take special notice of the other cards in the draft packs - when actually that's very important. Same thing during play, especially in the middle of the game when things start to get messy. I become too absorbed thinking about my own combos and ignoring the others.

In any case, I find it enjoyable just watching 4 good players play. I learn alot, and I like observing creative and good moves being made. I think I need to start slow. Start getting my fundamentals right, and then I can start being creative. Without a good understanding of the game, I can't just do what I want and expect myself to deliver.

?

2011-11-07T13:30:00.003+08:00

I dropped by a nearby church earlier because I saw some people having a buffet and the church gates were open. As I was queueing up for my food, it struck me that everyone else was too smartly dressed for the usual church gathering; plus it was a Monday. So I made an enquiry and discovered that it was a wedding event. Feeling too out of place in my bermudas and slippers, I made a quiet exit.

A sunny and windy afternoon for a change. Chicken rice and iced milo at a half-empty coffee place. Really - nothing was lost.

Hmm

2011-11-01T23:49:00.002+08:00

What do we want of a literary education anyway? Scholarship and judgement of the highest kind for a few. And the few are no problem. But for those of unspecialized general intelligence who are the proper subjects of a humanist education? We expect a literary education to expand their range of human awareness and sympathy; to enlarge their imagination beyond the limits of their own class and country; to show them that our problems and obsessions are part of a larger pattern of human experience, and assume a new meaning within the larger pattern. I should feel suspicious of the human competence of a leader or administrator who had not had at least a little of that sort of education. But it need not have made him a literary critic or historian, or an editor, or an emender of Shakespearean texts.

- Graham Hough, as cited in An Introduction to Philosophy to Education.

Hmm

2011-10-20T23:14:00.005+08:00

Feeling quite relaxed now because my Honours Thesis presentation is over, and it didn't go as bad as I thought it would be. I felt quite pleased some told me it was a clear presentation. I only wish there had been more undergraduates present, because I feel that too few people are interested in what I'm interested in, in this part of the world at least. Maybe things like temporal parts just don't grip them. I can kind of understand, because things like Kantian Ethics don't grip me either. I might take a module covering it (in fact I have), I might become vaguely interested, I might start taking up sides in the field, but at the end of the day, I would feel that I've just done an intellectual exercise. I would feel that I have just done something rewarding but not deeply satisfying. Maybe that's what others feel about metaphysics. There's not much to say here, except that that's just the way things are.

3/5

2011-10-16T23:41:00.009+08:00

I watched Dealer's Choice a few nights ago, Attack the Block before that. Both were ok I guess. 3/5. Life these days is filled with 3/5 movies and plays. I can't find something that really grips me. I'm not sure if this is due to me growing up or me just not having the time to catch some of the potentially nice shows I missed. I yearn to watch a movie, or a play, that will leave an indelible mark on me. Something that really grips me, something that will recur in my mind 3 days later, 3 weeks later, 30 years later.

Examples? Battlestar Galactica qualifies. (Yes it's a tv series but it'll count) A couple of scenes were great: every now and then I would go to Youtube and re-experience the scenes again. And the overall quality of the drama is good, though it did sag somewhere between the 2nd half of Season 1 and the first half of Season 2. Half Nelson qualifies, because of scenes such as this. Ponyo was good (4.25/5), so was Inception (4/5), Confessions (4.25/5). There are definitely more, but I'm too lazy to search through my compiled ratings list and movie tickets now; these are just the things off the top of my head.

What makes for a great production? I've only 2 benchmarks. 1) The production must be impactful. It must have me leaving the theater stunned, or my mind reeling. This is a necessary condition for 4 stars from me, but not a sufficient one. Benchmark 2): the production must be consistently good. It mustn't leave my mind wandering at any point of time. This is necessary though not sufficient too. 1) and 2) are jointly sufficient for 4 stars from me. What happens if 1) obtains but 2) doesn't? This happened in Milk: the last few scenes were extremely powerful, poignant ones. But I felt the middle parts were too draggy. So I gave it a 3.99. 2) is very important as well. What happens if 2) obtains but not 1)? Slumdog Millionaire,Valkyrie and The Hangover are examples of such cases. They would simply go into the 3-3.5 star range.

So now, what exactly would have a great impact on me? Many things actually. One good way is to have a striking ambiguity in the end: that's why I like Inception and Pan's Labyrinth. Another way is simply to have masterful acting, plot and pace: that's why I like King's Speech, The Dark Knight. A reliable way is to simply have well-crafted, emotional scenes: that's why I like Half Nelson, The Cove, The Brave One. An 'artistically brooding' atmosphere works too: that's why I like Shutter Island, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, Confessions (and many other arthouse films I'm sure). Artistically macabre/surreal stuff work too: that's why I like Chaser, Pan's Labyrinth, Confessions, Space Odyssey, Ponyo.

Thinking of all these is making me want to watch films again. I just need to get a presentation over, take a break, complete an essay and some other teaching assignment, take a final exam, and then I have some time to myself.

Update

2011-09-23T20:16:00.004+08:00

I co-taught my first lesson today. It's a pretty simple game meant to teach kids the concept of probability. It went ok. I had hoped to handle the entire lesson, but in the end I handled only 50% of it, which was quite disappointing because I thought I was well-prepared for the lesson. Teaching isn't my strongest interest nor is it my strongest skill. But I did find genuine pleasure seeing kids so young pick up the game so quickly. It was nice too to see how even the naughty kids eventually became engrossed in the game. "Teacher teacher, move like this can anot?" "Teacher teacher, see I my beads are so near the top already". I'll be handling more classes soon; hopefully in the near future I will get to create and carry out my very own lesson.

In an unprecedented move, I went down to a Philosophy Social Event held by the Philosophy Interest Group in NUS. Why the unprecedented move? One simple reason: I'm in my final year of undergraduate study. It strikes me that I don't know many of my peers. So: go to socialising event. Already it has yielded significant dividends. Through the Social Event I found out that there's a nice Peranakan restaurant within walking distance from NUS that serves lunch buffets. I tried it once, and I must say they have very delicious bakwan kepiting soup, and their pandan rice is more fragnant than above-average nasi lemak ones. We form many misconceptions of others when we don't know them well enough, and vice versa. This is why even a small exchange can sometimes go a long way in understanding others and being understood in return. I found out that 2 females whom I thought were lesbians were actually of a more normal orientation. And I met someone who is actually interested in probability - really really rare for a local philosophy student, as far as I can see.

Myself, I wish I've got more time to research and write my thesis. I've been going through some complex scientific theories dumbed down for philosophers - things that have got to do with space and time. There came a point where I realised that I can't do that, not for now. I probably could have if NUS had offered an Advanced Metaphysics course, a Philosophy of Spacetime course, or if I had been a more diligent student a year ago. None of those obtains, so I can't now. What exactly does Philosophy got to do with Physics, one might ask. A professor of mine spent a year on sabbatical leave studying special relativity. He intends to write a book arguing how special relativity shows that our consciousness is located in a single point in space. Neat stuff.

I'm still trying to find something less scientific. 3 years of studying Philosophy and one of the greatest lessons I've learned is also one of the simplest: good Philosophy is done slowly and simply. Don't think too much, or you'll get fuzzy in thought and argumentation. Start small, so to speak - the sophistication will emerge naturally thereafter. That lesson still isn't fully ingrained in me yet. Perhaps it would take 4 years and a thesis to fully appreciate it. Time's the issue here, in more than one sense of the word.

Blog

2011-08-23T20:19:00.006+08:00

I live now in an Age of Intellect. This is because I have been in recent weeks

1) Reading fairly advanced stuff in Philosophy, in preparation for my Honours Thesis
2) Learning the ins and outs of new board games, as well as being involved in teaching and playing them with students, in line with an internship I am under; and
3) Playing Agricola, a complex board game requiring various thinking skills, both on and offline.

In other words, I have been, and will be using my brain a lot, more so than in any 3-month block in the past.

I live too in an Age of Cockroaches, as I have spotted (and killed) 2 cockroaches in my house in the past few weeks. One might point out that this could simply be a coincidence and not due to any systematic occurence that would justify the hailing of an era. But we should ask which is the more reasonable explanation to adpot: a statistical anomaly giving rise to the spotting of such unsightly creatures, for before these past few weeks I have never spotted a single cockroach in my place for at least a year; or the fact that cockroaches are now actively breeding in my house. Before you go eew and postulate that I live in an unkempt place, allow me to suggest that even extremely posh and clean houses have their own share of cockroaches lurking somewhere, always. At this very instant, there should be at least 1 cockroach either in your home, or in a place readily accessible to your home. The question is whether these cockroaches are just tourists or citizens.

I had a dream last night. In the dream I invited 2 female acquaintances and 3 male friends for a jog. 1 of the females called another along, whom I recognised but who went somewhere else. Another was quiet, someone whom I haven't seen in a long time, and who didn't mind the fact that she didn't know anyone else but me. Cut to a scene where we were all attending a mass exercise conducted by a trainer. I was alone with many other strangers, on a muddy field. Everyone else was on a dry sandy ground some distance away.

Cut to a cosy underground room, fully airconditioned. I own this room. I like this room alot, especially in afternoons where my whole family isn't around and I can have the whole place to myself. I recall that there's a concert going on - and for some reason I find myself wanting to stay in the room and listen to the concert live, as though the concert would unfold itself in the room. I lie down on a mattress and feel an immense sense of tranquility.

End of dream.

I haven't had a dream in a long while. Or, at least, I haven't had a dream I can recall upon waking up in a long while. I like dreams; I like dreams like the one above. They make me think of things I don't ordinarily think of, in ways I don't usually do. They make me feel surreal for some time; the really powerful and unique ones linger for days.

I think I shall go play Agricola for now, a reward for finishing a written assignment earlier.

Games and the feeling of inhibition

2011-08-07T19:21:00.004+08:00

I play mahjong. I play board games. I play computer games that pit players against other players. One of the common threads I observe in these activities is that psychology matters when it comes to results. This shouldn't come as anything new: I'm sure there are tons of literature on the psychology of sports, and these activities can quite naturally be considered mental sports. But it's another thing to experience it first-hand.

When I'm on a losing streak in any of these activities, my morale dips. Against strangers sometimes I feel a sense of frustration. Against friends I don't feel unhappy, of course; but I start feeling more and more inhibited. I feel like I'm not in the flow. I feel like I can't flow. I feel like...ok enough. You get the point. If you have ever been on a losing streak playing a win-or-lose game with friends, you will get the point. I will say 3 things about this feeling of inhibition.

The feeling of inhibition is most acutely felt when one has been on a winning streak before. In fact, one can go as far as to say the feeling of inhibition arises precisely because one has either been on a winning streak or has done generally well before. If you've won the first game, you start feeling good. Win the second, and you grow more confident. Your morale rises. You start being "in the zone". When you're in the zone, everything seems to flow. Perhaps different people feel differently when they're in the zone, but for me, I know I am in the zone when I actually process information in the game more quickly. The time it takes for me to take a turn on mahjong is usually around 2-3 seconds upon drawing a fresh tile. When I'm in the zone, the turn is taken lightning-fast. Upon seeing the new tile, I know instantly what to do, and my turn can be over in under a second. This has nothing to do with me having a near-complete set already; this fast processing can still occur even when a full picture of what to take and discard hasn't emerged. And we note too that the time elapsed could actually still be the same: I could still have been taking 2-3 seconds to think and make my move. However, it could have felt faster than that because I could have been subconsciously processing a lot more information in that 2-3 second time frame than if I were not in the zone. In other words, when my morale is high, when I'm in the zone, I become extra-sensitive to all the information around me.

Now, having been in the zone, I feel inhibited when I am unable to attain that level of heightened sensitivity, that heightened feeling of feeling the game. My sensitivity to information in the game becomes dull. And I feel like the more I lose, the more I am taken away from that heightened awareness of the game. The more I lose, the more I feel out of the flow.

The second thing I want to bring up is that the cause of inhibition is not limited to the experience of a losing streak. Many things outside a game can lead one to feeling inhibited while playing the game. This can range from issues like having a deadline to meet a few days later, to playing in an uncomfortable environment (perhaps a player is smoking in the room, perhaps you are unused to playing under warm fuzzy lights, and so on), to simply feeling out of place socially with the company you are playing with (for example, perhaps they are making jokes you don't quite find funny, but still feel obliged to laugh).

The final thing to say is probably the most important thing to note, and that is that being in the zone is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for victory. One can be in the zone and yet still lose - sometimes this might spark off a steady spiral of defeats. Neither is being in the zone a necessary condition for victory. One can repeatedly win a game without feeling like one is in the zone. A usual indicator of this is when the serial winner remarks: "Well, actually, I'm not sure what I was doing. I was just playing and I won". A winner who was in the zone, on the other hand, might tend to say something like: "Yes it felt great. My opponents were good players, but I played my cards right and when an opportunity rose I took it and ended the game." And between friends, usually someone who wins and is in the zone would feel buoyant and start giving out advice to his or her mates.

That being said, feeling uninhibited probably boosts one's chances of winning any game. The challenge when one is on a losing streak, or when one is feeling inhibited for any other reason, then, is to try to get rid of that feeling of inhibition. This can sometimes mean getting rid of the source of the inhibition (can we open the windows for some fresh air please?) This can sometimes mean ignoring the feeling altogether (I need to relax, if I think straight I can eventually win). Being confident of yourself helps a lot. I find that music helps a lot too.

Hmm

2011-08-01T09:37:00.002+08:00

As part of my school curriculum this semester I am a part-time intern at a company that teaches thinking skills to young people through the use of board games. As part of my internly duties I went to a church yesterday to help out in a marketing event, and I was mildly surprised that at 730am a mass was already in full swing and the followers already well-advanced in their communion with God. I think it would be pretty cool if there were masses at 3am. I can imagine a sparsely populated, air-conditioned hall filled with soft, peaceful hymns to be quite the sanctuary to be in to digest one's food after supper.

Nothing much else. We roped in people to either play the games (it was a carnival), buy the games, or sign up for our programmes. A young child nearly beat me in Blokus, and one of the things that pleasure me greatly on this job is to see the development of shrewd, strategic thinking on people so young.

One of the things that saddens me, however, is to see discrimination happening among people so young. On one occasion with Primary 4 kids, an Indian student had tears in his eyes because the Chinese in his group kept attacking him in the game, for no tactical reason at all. So I tried to comfort him and I told the others off. What happened after, though, was good: the Chinese eventually bent the rules of the game to help the victim - a certain card that helps a player has only limited effect but they decided to expand that effect even though that isn't allowed in the game.

Discrimination doesn't just occur along racial lines. Walking around facilitating the games, I see on occasion students of any age and of any gender persistently persecuting someone of their own race whom they don't like, even when doing so doesn't make any sense in the game. I think they do so people they don't like the looks of the person - ugly, geeky and fat people face the brunt of this. I think some part of it goes to their lack of grasp on the game: if you don't know how to enhance your position in the game then just spend moves sabotaging the person you dislike. Some part of it also goes to the design of the game: some of the games have the identities or resources of players hidden, so given a lack of knowledge you just have to randomly target someone first. But underneath all that is I think the drive to always congregrate in groups and adopt a hostile-first approach to outsiders - tribalistic behavior, we might say. We can only hope that as people advance in age they become less parochial.

On another note: Xenophobia in general is unjustified; but sometimes the issues xenophobics raise are valid issues. More precisely: the cause of xenophobia is unjustified. But the consequent issues that some xenophobics raise (that is, an effect of xenophobism) might be valid concerns. It is the effect of xenophobism that is the cause of more moderate positions. Take overcrowding as an example. Xenophobics may complain of overcrowding because they hate foreigners (usually for unjustifiable reasons). But overcrowding is the cause of why some other people may dislike foreigners. Because of this overlap, we might find that more moderate positions tend to get mislabelled as xenophobism.

Art and Life [Longer entry]

2011-07-17T09:25:00.035+08:00

Went to Goodman Arts Centre to catch an art exhibition last weekend. I went on the afternoon the artists were there to present and explain their works, and the session convinced me that visual artists are better smokers than Literature majors.

What do I mean by smoking? It's the ability to win someone over with words, where the content in one's argument either doesn't exist prior to the argument, or where it exists but is plainly false. When I assert, for example, that this car is what every young man dreams of, I am smoking. It is not the case that this car is what every young man dreams of. Yet the words may have a hold on a potential customer.

A Literature major might be quick to point out that they do back up their arguments with evidence from the text. They might thus say that the content of their arguments do exist prior to their argument. Usually, however, those arguments rely on an reasonable interpretation of the text. The activity of interpretation is, to me, essentially subjective. There is no one right interpretation, nor are there many right interpretations. There are just your interpretations, and how you present your interpretation in a persuasive and consistent way. Arguments put forth by a Literature student are evaluated on a different basis than that of say Mathematics, where reason is used to unearth objectively existing truths of the universe. Those truths verifiably exist in the world; while we might not see them physically, we grasp them first through the mathematician's logic and reason, and then our own. In Literature (and some other fields as well) interpretations don't exist objectively. They aren't there waiting to be unearthed. Rather, the interpretations are created. In this sense, Literature isn't about uncovering truths, but of creating them. The extent to which you can persuade your audience to hold your interpretation is the extent to which you are able to smoke.

Let's look at an example. The artist here presented this work (below) as something resembling a charred body. While we might think that yes, this does indeed resemble a charred body, while we might even accept his point that that part there is the leg, that part there is the torso, and so on, there is no independent truth that determines whether one is right or wrong in thinking this resembles a charred body. Someone might say this doesn't resemble a charred body to him, and we find that reasonable too. In this sense then, the artist is "smoking" when he says this part is the leg, this part is the torso, and this resembles a charred person. He is smoking in the sense that he is trying to convince us of a link that doesn't objectively exist. He would have sounded equally convincing if he had said these are the remnants of some coral reefs that had been poisoned and scarred by some man made chemicals. There is no objective fact of the matter whether his work resembles a charred body, mutilated coral reefs, or both.

You can find more cases of smoking here, this time dressed up in nice language. (The first one is okay though; I will touch on it shortly) Or you can visit an art exhibition when the artists are holding a talk. I am pretty certain you will see a lot of smoking.

Now, I may be sounding more derisive than I really am. I can't help it: some of the things the artists said were so incredulous I couldn't help grinning, so I feel more provoked than I usually am. I'll say one thing to give you a larger picture of where I stand on the topic of artistic licensing and interpretation.

One part of art is, in my subjective opinion, letting people see ordinary things in different ways, and in relating two objects in a way we hadn't thought of before. In this sense, I think there is, or there can be, a lot of art and beauty in life. Looking at an ant seated on the cover of my metal cup now, which is reflecting light from my desk lamp, I am reminded of a man at a summit baked in intense sunlight looking over the countryside below him. All that needs to be done here is to write that out in a story, relating that to a larger theme, or to other parts of the story. And then you have a passage of prose that can be moving, poetic, and original. You potentially have a work of art. Perhaps you scoff. Perhaps you are now grinning like I was grinning at the art exhibition last week. But art is subjective. That was something I maintained earlier. The audience at the art exhibition I went to weren't grinning; they probably held the comments made by the speakers seriously. Art pieces sometimes work for some, sometimes they don't work for others. That is just in its nature.

Another example. A few days ago I was having breakfast in an outdoor area. Ten metres away from me were two office workers standing about a rubbish bin smoking. I thought of that scene transposed onto a desert: two office workers and a thrash bin placed in the middle of the desert. The desert would have represented desolation, and also the arid dryness of smoking. If an artist had drawn such a scene I would like it. We don't usually think of office workers, smoking, and desert in one package. Art can bring them all together in a meaningful and insightful way.

Where does this bring me? Well, simply this: because art is, or can be, found in many places in life, I am usually quite tolerant of works of art, as long as the artist strikes me as sincere and the connection he is trying to make as not too far-fetched. I might not fancy many works of art, but I wouldn't dismiss them with a wave of my hand. Where visual artists sometimes strike me as being insincere, literary interpretations by some tend to strike me as being too far-fetched.

On a separate note, we will note here that the job of the visual artist isn't to uncover existing truths or connections, like the mathematician. (Actually, the metaphysics of that may be up for philosophical debate; but we set that aside for now) He creates them. His job, then, is to persuade his audience to accept a connection that doesn't exist. The extent to which he succeeds in this lies partly on the subjectivity of his audience, which is what makes art subjective and controversial.

Extreme smoking aside, I thought the art exhibition was a good experience. I like listening to artists come together and discuss their craft, debate, ask questions, forge alliances. The people who went there were distinctively bohemian, and I felt nice observing them and their intricacies.

Here's the piece that I found the most striking.

By itself I wouldn't have made much of a connection to dreams, which was the theme of the exhibition. But here's what the artist said:

In the sculptural work, Bench, a slight physical change has occurred to a typical piece of furniture. The (un)combination of the slanted form and the rigid square-ness of the ceramic titles results in a disharmonious state. Similar to Black Pebble, the slightly out-of-ordinariness makes it hard to rule out that one is already in a dream.

The artist makes a connection between dreams and a bench. (The seat is on the opposite side of the photo) When I read that in the brochure I went "Hm, that's interesting. I never thought of benches that way before". And now everytime I see a bench of vague proportions I will think of the vagueness of dreams. It wouldn't work for everybody. The charred body work above didn't work for me. But that's just a testament to the diversity of human thought and consequently the potential diversity of art.

I had my play staged last week too. Allowing for the nature of the organization and participants I thought it was okay. I went down 3 out of the 5 sessions. Second time I wanted to say hi to the actors and director, but I was too shy and hesitated for some time. By the time I finished hesitating some of them had already left, so I went down a 3rd time, though I didn't watch the play itself then. Talked to the director and some of the actors. It was good. I am looking forward to the post-production party, one of the few parties I look forward to. That is where I'll get to meet everyone together.

The important thing here is that I saw a lot of potential in the play, as it got acted out. I know it can be a lot better, and I know that if it does approaches its full potential it can be a great play. That energised me. But for now I got other things to take care of. I started my internship a few days ago at a firm that teaches analytical thinking skills through board games as part of a school module. Since it's only 1 module the internship isn't a fulltime one; I am only committed to them for 15 hours a week. More on this another time.

Lunch for Today (VII): Lai Heng Mushroom Minced Meat Mee

2011-07-04T12:36:00.019+08:00

Located just around 1km away from my house, this visit was overdue by a few weeks, when I first learned about the stall from a short Sunday Times review. I dropped in on the following Wednesday but found out they are closed on Wednesdays. I saw it listed on Makansutra 2011 a few weeks later. It was rated at 2.5 chopsticks, out of a maximum of 3. I told myself that there can be no further delay, and set sail immediately on the next working day, 11am on working days being when I find it most pleasurable to have lunch.

The stall is located in a small heartland coffee-shop, which can seat around 80 people in its main area:

Had to wait around 15 minutes for this to arrive, there being a queue before me when I ordered. The dish doesn't stand out for me. It could be because there was too much chilli in mine (my tolerance level is pretty low), and my tongue grew insensitive to the taste of the noodles after a while. The first few mouthfuls were good: the noodles were springy and had a certain fried flavour that I like my mee kia to have. At the same time, it wasn't outstanding: it isn't significantly better than the average bak chor mee stall, and one or two uncelebrated stalls I've been to may even have surpassed it. The liver was good though. It has a full-blooded taste, which I suspect means it's fresh. Overall, I would say this is good but not something I would walk 2km and wait 15 minutes for.

The coffee-shop expanded its premises by adding tables to the adjacent void deck. One will note that the coffee-shop contains a Western Food stall that is also critically acclaimed. I tried it the last time I was here, and it was cheap and good.

I was seated beside a table of three old ladies who reminded me of grand witches. They were conversing loudly as though they owned the coffee-shop, and during pauses they would cast their looks slowly about the shop. When an elderly cleaner whom they were on friendly terms with coughed as he walked past them they imitated his coughs too, then cackled wildly. It's as though they have not a weight in the world, it's as though they have become young girls again.

Imagination and Indecisiveness

2011-06-27T00:39:00.003+08:00

One of my mental characteristics is my indecisiveness. I was out earlier and, feeling a sudden craving for a drink, I stopped by a 7-11 to purchase one. I couldn't decide between Dutch Lady's Full Cream Milk at $2.40, a can of milo at $1.75, a packet of milo at $1.30, some fruit juice of various brands in different flavours at various prices, a packet of Vitasoy at $1.10, or some Meiji's milk, so I stood by the fridges for at least 5 minutes, looking and contemplating. Eventually I settled on Meiji's low-fat strawberry-flavoured milk, and on my way home as I consumed the drink I thought of what is the main cause of my indecisiveness.

First we got to note that my indecisiveness is not restricted to the purchase of drinks. It extends quite generally to many aspects of my life. I am indecisive when I play chess; even more so in Weiqi. My first and only game of Weiqi took 4 hours and it wasn't even completed before the CCA time was up. I am indecisive in deciding whether to attend a particular outing. I am indecisive in choosing my exam questions; even more so in choosing which essay question to answer. I am indecisive in whether to go for a jog this day or the next. I am indecisive in whether to send out a particular email or not - this particular one can sometimes drag over days. And yes, though my wardrobe is relatively limited, I am indecisive in what to wear sometimes.

It will be helpful to contrast these cases of indecisiveness to when I am decisive. I am decisive in certain multiplayer computer games. I know exactly what to do in certain situations, and I follow through. I am decisive when the event is a novel and exciting one and where I don't get to meet new people. I am decisive when presented with an extremely challenging or intriguing option - sometimes I decidedly go for that, sometimes I decidedly go for a safer choice.

From these general observations I will venture to say the cause of my indecisiveness is a vivid imagination. Vivid imagination is what makes me indecisive. When I was deciding what drink to purchase earlier, my thoughts didn't drift off to other things. In fact, I was quite intently thinking about the drinks. I was visualizing myself drinking that creamy full cream milk. (And then I got put off by the price tag). And then I imagined the taste of the each and every other candidate. When I settled on one I immediately recalled the other sensation of what it is to drink the other drink. Hence my indecisiveness. The same, I think, can be said for the other cases of indecisiveness as well. Vivid imagination causes my indecisiveness by bringing alternative options to the same level of appeal as any others. This way, even initially unpalatable options can, through the process of vivid imagination, become serious candidates of choice.

(Incidentally, you will note that experiments have shown that giving too many choices to consumers will increase the chances of them not buying anything at all - I got that from Sheena Iyengar's book "The Art of Choosing").

Now, when I play computer games against other players, I don't act indecisively because being under pressure takes away the chance to vividly imagine options. In real life contexts where I act decisively, it is usually the case that one option stands out. But it is not that I don't have time to think about the other options. In fact, I do. It is simply that that one option captures my imagination the most. The others don't. At the same time, it is not that I will always pursue the option that captures my imagination the most. In fact, sometimes I decisively pick the option that least captures my imagination, or at least the one that is not as vivid as the most intriguing one. This is especially the case when past experience has shown that, in similar or relevant contexts where I single-mindedly pursued the most exciting option, I shot myself in the foot. (On the other hand, things do indeed get more complex when I imagine myself taking up the most vivid option and bringing benefits to myself, even though past experience suggests this isn't likely. In such a case I will become indecisive again)

I don't think it's particularly controversial to say one's imagination causes indecisiveness. It won't be the only cause, of course. After all, it is reasonable to think imperfect information causes indecisiveness as well. As far as I'm concerned, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing either. It just makes me look weird when the cashier notices I have been in the same spot for 5 minutes, looking at the bottles of drinks intently.

Super 8

2011-06-16T23:18:00.003+08:00

Watched Super 8. Found it so-so. There was technique in the show - there was a good flow of gentle and loud scenes, for example. But nothing really leapt out at me and made me go wow. As a friend put it: something you wouldn't regret spending money on, but in the end there wasn't any message to bring home.

One note though. Both the male and female leads are very good-looking. Scenes involving them felt sweet to me, though at times they grew to become cumbersome cringe-worthy cliches. The film in general had no lack of them, the worst for me being the part where the male actor spoke to the alien.

Hmm

2011-06-08T23:20:00.009+08:00

Some males these days wear shoes that look pointy. I don't think it's because male feet are shaped in a way that favours wearing such shoes. I wear normal-shaped shoes for both formal and informal occasions. Over the course of military service, school camps, and other events that require one to strip one's footwear, it seems clear to me that my feet are normal. So most males should be able to wear normal-shaped shoes comfortably.

Two reasons come naturally. The first is social identity. Sometimes people want to dress in a certain way to feel they're part of the in-crowd. The in-crowd can consist of the vague image of a typical urban male, whom one may perceive as leading a nice life. Or it can consist of your colleagues. When your colleagues start wearing pointy shoes, and when they seem so chummy together, some part of you also desires to wear pointy shoes so you can blend in better. You want to feel part of a certain group. So you start dressing like them. (Note that people who intentionally buck the trend, or who claim they "don't care what they wear, as long as it's comfortable" are making their own kind of social identity statement. They are carving out their own social space and trying to distance themselves from certain groups)

The second reason is that they feel masculine wearing it. It's the same reason why males tend to wear watches with large faces, whereas females tend to go for watches with small faces. Why exactly does pointy shoes make you feel more masculine? For a simple reason: they make your feet look bigger. And we all know size has a large part to do with masculinity. I would think that wearing shoes that are broad in breadth works too, if it weren't for the high practical cost involved.

Sigh

2011-06-01T21:35:00.004+08:00

The Straits Times today ran an article on cattle abuse of Australian cattle sent to Indonesian slaughterhouses. Examples of the cruel treatment captured include whipping a bull in the face, gouging its eyes and jumping on its back to get it to move, and cutting a bull's throat while it was tied down and fully awake. What struck me the most was that one cow was displaying signs of stress and discomfort as she watched her companions got killed. I personally couldn't see it from the video, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to believe the report.

A short version of the Straits Times article here. Better viewing of the videos can be found here.

Hmm

2011-05-23T22:21:00.013+08:00

Some of you might have felt unsatisfied about my brief account of why I almost always won't vote for the PAP. You might have felt unsatisfied because you can't quite feel the force of my guiding principle, which is my desire for Singapore to be something more than the PAP. I won't say much if you don't share the same desire; my brief account was not out to influence you to my viewpoint in the first place.

What I have to say instead will hopefully give you an idea of the kind of appeal that that desire has for me. We consider an analogous case. People often say that remembering or preserving the past is important. The brochure for this year's Singapore Arts Festival says this:

In remembering, we also look at histories both public and private that inform our sense of self and identity. Ranging from events, periods and generations
past, these productions serve as reference points as we navigate the future. Rather than being nostalgic, the reconnection to these histories informs the larger discourse about our sense of place in time and our relationship to a time forgotten.

The writers of the Arts Festival brochure think that being engaged with the past is important because it "informs" us of our "place in time". The appeal in this is primitive: there's just something nice in knowing one's place in time. To me, envisioning a Singapore without the PAP has the same kind of force: there's just something nice in thinking of a Singapore that has gone beyond the PAP.

That's all I've got to say on national politics for the next 5 years. Back to an apathetic life.

I've been reading Theodore Sider's Four-Dimensionalism, among other things. Hopefully I will get to say some interesting things on that here.

Why I felt disappointed, and why I almost always will vote for the Opposition

2011-05-11T22:51:00.000+08:00

I felt disappointed at the recent GE results, but that feeling's gone now. Let me first explain why I felt disappointed. And then I'll tell you why I don't feel so now. I'll end off by giving a short account of why I almost always will vote for the Opposition.

I felt disappointed for 2 reasons. The first reason is that the opposition contesting Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, the constituency I'm in, had I think favorable chances of winning it. The SPP team had veteran opposition leader Chiam with them. If you went to a SPP rally, you will know he draws many supporters. I'm not sure if he would still draw in as many people 5 years later, if he is even contesting again. Voter resentment was probably at a good level too, with the Mas Selamat incident, widening income gap (encapsulated by the issue of ministerial pay), influx of foreigners and the high costs of living contributing. I'm not sure if the ground will be so sour come the next two elections. This was a good time for the SPP to take Bishan-Toa Payoh. They failed to do so, and I don't know if they will be able to come as close to 43% in the next 10 years.

The second reason is that the results show many people still support the PAP. Since I don't, the results show I'm not on the same wavelength as many people. I will go as far as to say this reflects a fundamental disconnect between me and the society I live in. Political views aren't like preferences for one's soccer team. I might like Arsenal for its style. And I might support Arsenal because I think style is an important aspect in soccer, more important than even wins. The fact that there are many people who disagree with this principle (and they can be supporters of Arsenal as well) doesn't depress me. The fact that so many people still so strongly support the PAP does. This will require some explanation of why I am pro-Opposition. I will cover that shortly.

I said that my disappointment has subsided already. This is because, aside from the momentary buzz during the GE period, I am politically apathetic in general. Why am I politically apathetic in general? Two reasons: the stakes I care about are not there, and because I feel the people had no say in the running of the country from the start. There was nothing to lose.

The first reason. I have never been interested in specific economic issues and policies concerning them. I don't really care what is the best way to raise the income of the poor. I don't really care how HDB units are priced. I don't care because I don't see myself as affected one way or the other.

One qualification and one remark are in order. First, when I say I don't care, I mean that I don't care about the means of policies. I do care at the principles involved. You can think of what I care about as the should/should-nots, not the hows. Should we help the poor? Why exactly? Should the prices of HDB units factor in the price of the land? I have opinions on these matters. When a party says something that goes against the spirit of my opinions, I care. Many debates don't, however, revolve over such concerns. For those debates, I don't care. Now, to be sure, opposition parties do question the principles behind various economic structures or policies the PAP endorses. At one of the opposition rallies (can't recall which already - I went to 3), the speaker questioned if our two public transport providers should be privately owned entities affiliated with Temasek. This is something I care. However, these are issues that are not usually picked up by mainstream voters, the mainstream media, and the PAP itself. Until these issues rise to the forefront of political debates, until there is a real possibility that change supported by my principles is about to come, I am really not deeply affected over which party wins in the end. The stakes that I truly care about are just not there.

That aside, people care about different things. I don't care about housing proposals because I don't envision myself buying a house for a long time. On the other hand, many people ostensibly don't care about the funding cut of Wild Rice Theatre by the National Arts Council. I don't see why not-caring one thing should be any more immature than the other.

The second reason is that the PAP has by and large been a technocratic government from the start, one that has over the decades set the agenda of what matters in politics and governance. Elections aside, it seems to me the common citizen has no substantive power over various big issues. Did you feel you had an influence over the setting up of casinos in Singapore? If the incumbent wishes to enhance the powers of the President do you think the people have any real influence over the matter? If the boundaries of various constituencies were to be redrawn next election, thus nullifying any grassroots work the opposition has done in those areas, do you think anything could be done? I don't want a technocratic government. But a technocratic government is such that if it were to form for a successive term, I would just feel like what I've been feeling in the previous term - nothing at all. It's back to my own private life.

Let me now give a brief account of why I will almost always vote for the Opposition. There is only one primary reason, and it is a simple one: I want Singapore to be something more than the PAP. PAP supporters will claim this is voting for the opposition for the sake of voting for the opposition.

I don't deny that. We should, however, look at the statement more closely. What exactly does it mean? I think a reasonable interpretation is this: that one has no positive and specific reason to support the Opposition, yet one still does so anyway, simply because one doesn't like the dominance of the PAP. Many pro-opposition voters are guilty of that. But I think at least some of the pro-PAP numbers are guilty of voting for the PAP just for the sake of voting for them as well. When asked why exactly they voted for the PAP, they probably can't give you a specific policy the PAP proposed. Nor, I doubt, can they even give a vague description of some of the core PAP values. They will just wave their hands and say: well, the PAP has got a strong track record so far, there's really no reason to vote for the Opposition. There's really no reason to rock the boat, so to speak. If this is right, at least some pro-PAP people vote for the PAP just for the sake of voting for the PAP. If voters are to be cautioned over voting for the opposition just for the sake of voting for the opposition, I think a caution should be issued on the side of the PAP as well.

I want Singapore to be something more than the PAP. Why is that so? Here I part ranks with many people sympathetic to the cause of the Opposition. Pro-opposition people, and opposition parties themselves, tend to cash out the vague idea in something more tangible. They say we need to have a credible alternative should the PAP one day stumbles. The Workers' Party says we need to get ourselves political insurance, or a co-driver. For these people, Singapore has to be something more than the PAP because of certain practical benefits - that Singapore can still continue functioning or even prospering if the PAP were one day not in charge. Or that the fusion of state and the PAP drives away many citizens, because they feel there is no one to represent their interests if the PAP doesn't.

I do sympathise with such concerns. In fact, I will probably cite these points in making my case to others. But I must say that I want Singapore to be something more than the PAP not for these reasons. I want Singapore to be something more than the PAP just for the sake of Singapore being something more than the PAP. What I'm going after is an ideal even loftier than that of having an alternative voice to represent citizens' interests. Because it's so lofty and vague, I can't give a precise notion of why I exactly I believe in this. What I can say to give you a rough idea is this: 50 years later, when I am 74 years old, my heart will be filled with pride when I look back and see how Singapore has shaked itself from the shadow of the PAP. Singapore has transcended the PAP. She proves to be something more, and that's all that matters to me.

Funny things

2011-04-27T17:26:00.004+08:00

I was watching some of the speeches given by election candidates live earlier, after they submitted their papers on Nomination Day. Was quite funny when some of the PAP candidates were jeered at while they were making their speech. When one was stating emphatically that for the past x years the party has never failed to deliver, had always kept their promises, etc, he was nearly drowned out by the jeering. When another said, as a closing remark, "We are the best party for Singapore!" and pumped his fist in the air, he was met with a large wave of boos.

This is no reliable indicator of who's going to win. Nonetheless, it was still pretty funny.

Politics isn't entertainment, young man

2011-04-25T00:36:00.006+08:00

I look forward to reading the newspapers these days because it's entertaining to watch the PAP and the Opposition grapple with each other. The PAP and the WP in particular have traded blows over Chen Show Mao, the WP's concept of a First World Parliament, and various economic suggestions. I particularly like it when one party goes on the offensive, and the other party responds by going on the counter-offensive. When the PAP pressed the WP to give an example of a First World Parliament, the WP responded by pointing out that our electoral system has no precedent. When the PAP pointed out that 1 of the WP's proposal would be equivalent to "raiding" the government reserves, the WP responded by pointing out that using the same reasoning the Grow and Share package the PAP is handing out can be considered a raid on government reserves too.

We can imagine an armada of space ships launching an attack on a distant galaxy. The attack is repelled, and the aggressors now find themselves in hostile territory with weaker nunmbers. The defenders go on the counter-offensive, pushing them back to their homeland, where this time it is their time now to be outnumbered. And this will go on indefinitely. It will escalate. Both parties will get desperate, as their resources get lower and lower and the prospect of losing greater and greater. This is ideal. This is ideal because it leads to a climatic battle and a satisfying resolution. Unfortunately, because of the nature of politics where there is a large number of issues to grapple with, of which parties will never admit they are wrong in any one of them anyway, and because the PAP seem fond of disregarding the moves made by their opponents, we can't have that. Instead we have a series of fights which don't escalate and don't achieve satisfying closure.

Nonetheless, I haven't been so entertained since the Aware saga in 2009.

The Office

2011-04-11T22:13:00.005+08:00

There's this particularly hilarious scene from The Office Season 2 Episode 4 that I wanted to present here, but I couldn't find it online. It would have given you an idea of one of the things that make me laugh uncontrollably.

My favourite character? I'm still in Season 2 where not all characters are fleshed out well. Jan's attractive though, Jim and Pam are conventional but endearing, and Michael Scott...Michael Scott's just great.

Hmmm

2011-04-02T20:05:00.013+08:00

I met the Head of the Philosophy department a few days ago to seek the department's assistance on a problem I faced. The problem was that all 4 of Honours-level modules offered next semester were not interesting to me.

I said hi and said the following to her. I will first briefly state the problem. I will then lay out 5 options available to me. Some of those options require the department's assistance. Of those that don't, I will explain why they are undesirable options to me. I will then flesh the problem out further by replying to two replies one can make to my position. She laughed when I said that last bit.

I didn't get to do that however. When I got to option 4 she had already agreed to help me.

There are some people you meet in life who exude an aura of calm and steadiness. When they say things like "I will look into the matter", you immediately feel at ease. You feel secure. The Head was one such person. I guess the aura her many chinese philosophy books exuded contributed to the feelings I felt too. They made me feel I was in the company of a sage.

I recently found out a peer of mine lives in the block I used to live in, is a philosophy major, is a female, and plays computer games too. How cool is that? Why exactly is this cool? Of the people I know, few are philosophy majors. Of the few philosophy peers I know, few play games. Of the females I know, few play games. Basically, it's just a remarkable convergence of descriptions. Plus that feeling you get when you know, oh all this time you've been neighbours. A pity she only plays role-playing games. I've always wanted to belong to or form a stable community of people who plays the same games as I do. I will explain why that is so, and reveal more of my other ideals, some other time.

Insensitive etc etc

2011-03-13T00:30:00.006+08:00

Photos and videos of the Japan earthquake strike me as surreal.

More here.

You might think that I wouldn't find it surreal if I were affected by it. I don't think so. If a loved one died in it the feeling of loss would probably overwhelm any other feeling. But I would still think the images are surreal. If I were going to be swallowed up by a tsunami, a few thoughts would race through my mind. One of them would be that I'm going to finally know what's it like after death. Another thought would be that the earth and the universe will still go on without me, without any one of us. I think I would feel surreal then.

Hmm

2011-03-07T20:26:00.005+08:00

I'm interested in modal realism. That is the view that possible worlds are real entities. A possible world is a world in which our actual world might have been. You might be out in a bar now instead of being in your home reading this entry. This translates to: there is a possible world in which you are out in a bar now. There is also a possible world in which the roof collapses on you after you are finished reading this entry. There is virtually an infinite number of ways the actual world could be, especially when you permutate the various possibilities, and include various trivial matters such as the pen on your desk could have been one centimetre to the left than it actually is.

One motivation for this theory is that it provides an account of what possibility and necessity means. What exactly is going on when you say, "It's possible he won the match he in fact lost." Well, simply this: There is a possible world in which a counterpart of him (a person similar in relevant aspects to him) did win the match. It's this analysis that makes the quoted statement true, and thus coherent. Note that this is a personal interpretation of mine. David Lewis doesn't actually says this, which brings me to my next point.

Lewis, the key proponent of modal realism, writes in a rather dense way. He packs a lot of things into his paragraphs and sometimes doesn't elaborate much. It's like he expects you to be well-versed in philosophy. Other times he writes amusingly, or in a witty manner, which adds color when I find more elaboration would be better. This is unfortunate for me because I can't fully appreciate his theory as much as my counterparts in worlds where Lewis writes in a simpler manner do.

The main reason why I'm interested in this theory is because it grips my imagination. It takes my breath away.

Some people will agree wholeheartedly

2011-03-01T21:42:00.002+08:00

Against Sylvia Lim's accusation of gerrymandering in Aljunied GRC, SM Goh has this to say: “Actually the electoral boundary is not the critical factor. The most important factors will be the quality of the candidates and the reputation of the party.”

Against the "inevitable accusations of gerrymandering", The Straits Times has this to say:

But the proof of the pudding is in the eating - and it looks like the opposition is set to contest all the SMCs and all but two of the 15 GRCs. If the alleged gerrymandering were so coercive as to assure the ruling party of a free ride in every instance, the opposition would not be planning to contest so many seats - the most they have in decades.

One dodges the issue, the other assumes that the presence of Opposition contestation indicates lack of unfair play. No one says gerrymandering (Sg version) assures the ruling party a free ride. Whether it gives them an easier ride in an unfair manner is another matter.

Update on various things in life

2011-02-13T19:57:00.004+08:00

1. I asked a classmate if he could keep quiet in class, because he's wasting a lot of time with unhelpful comments and questions. My exact words were, I think: Do you mind keeping quiet in class, it's very disruptive.

He first said sorry. And then he commended me for being frank. And then he said something about us starting on the wrong foot. After a brief conversation in which he tried to maneuver me to start on the other foot, he said thank you again, for conveying my criticisms face-to-face. To which I enquired if anybody had done that before, after 3.5 years in school. He said no. He said people would usually talk behind his back, but never once face-to-face. To which I was quite surprised, because this fellow has a very pervasive presence, one that I think cannot be safely ignored.

(What, too, is the world coming to: people are too polite or unhelpful or tolerant to give constructive criticism)

We talked a bit and after a while I tried to soften my stance. I pointed out an instance where he made a good contribution and said if you would say things like that I wouldn't mind him speaking up in class. It is often the case that we are harsh towards people we don't interact with. Once we get to know them better, we find that they're not all that irritating after all.

Next task: this group of 3 girls who are constantly whispering during lecture. Why don't I relocate? The room's not big enough; the problem will still persist. It's likely they would be apologetic because they genuinely don't think they're being a royal nuisance.

2. You may have heard of the analytic-continental divide in philosophy. A recent philosophy tutorial showed how different people in philosophy can be, a student fervantly explaining and defending some view that has some roots in the continental tradition, to the puzzlement of some others. I say puzzlement, not disagreement, because after ten minutes most students (and the tutor) were still trying to figure out what exactly he was advancing.

I fear I may be saying something immature here, but I have the feeling people on either side of the divide have radically different mindsets. All disagreement can be traced to this purported fact, as well as all puzzlement. A contintental person may give a comprehensive account of what being-in-the-world means, and the analytic person may still not have a good intuitive grasp of what's that, even if she can grasp it via some other means. It's kind of like the person who is blind but is hooked up to a machine that can translate light waves into sensations on the skin. Such a person may still be able to correctly identify colors, but we may think he doesn't have an intuitive, or direct, grasp of what colors are. Only thing here is that in the case of the divide, there's no saying who's the blind one, if any.

3. I went to attend a singalong session of Chinese evergreens last weekend. It was held at the Esplanade's outdoor theatre. Mostly middle aged and old people were there. Heartening to see the some young people and foreigners as well who stayed through one whole session.

Old classics have this feel to them that one cannot accurately describe, except to classify songs that have this feel as evergreen classics. Some songs played by the live band (the mic was passed to members of the audience) were this, this and this. Seeing how the older generation sang to songs of their time, I am reminded of something indescribable this generation has lost.

4. I tried Starcraft 2 and I have to say I don't fancy the game. People will think it is a strategy game, but if it is, it's a very poor one: the game places too much emphasis on reaction speed and the dexterity of one's fingers. Units are very easily killed and battles are frequently over in 3 blinks of the eye.

This is not to say there are no strategic elements in the game. There are. There is the usual unit -counter thing going on. There is a tradeoff between an early rush and teching up. If you spend resources on early military units, you spend less on resource-gathering activity, which means you may lose out in the later part of the game if your rush didn't cripple the opponent enough. But all this is, in my opinion, undermined by the emphasis on reaction speed. It favors the player who is slightly weaker in tactical thinking but significantly better at managing all his units at battle and pressing hotkeys to produce even more units, than the player who is worse in that aspect but significantly stronger in tactical thinking.

Let me digress a bit to anticipation, a concept I quite like in games. We see this in Company of Heroes, one of my favorite all-time strategy game. In that game, a starting unit a player playing the American faction can recruit is the Rifleman squad: good in close range but poor at long range. A starting unit a player playing the German faction can recruit is the Volksgrenedier squad: poorer in close range combat but better at a long-range fight than the Rifleman squad. Now, what happens when these 2 units meet in the opening stages of a match? A good player with the Volksgrenedier squad will choose to disengage from the Rifleman squad if the range is too close. The player with the Rifleman squad, however, will want to close in to that opponent squad as much as possible.

If I am the German player, upon seeing a Rifleman squad, I would immediately back away, luring the opponent into traversing an open terrain, where damage inflicted is multiplied. That's because I anticipate that a Rifleman squad will want to close in to my squad. Thus I can get the enemy out of position and win that fight. Now, a good American player will correctly guess this luring move. In a way, he will anticipate the German's anticipation. In seeing a Volksgrenedier squad backing off, he may not chase that squad, because he anticipates the German's move. Thus he will choose to back off, Riflemen are poorer fighting at a distance anyway.

Here's another example. A Machine Gunner can easily win a fight against any of those squads - if the machine gunner is set up in the right position (it has a 140 degree firing arc). If I opt to build a Machine Gunner as my first unit (and not the respective basic infrantry squad listed earlier), I must correctly anticipate the direction of the enemy's first unit. If not, the Gunner will lose. A smart opponent will out-anticipate me by sending his first unit down a different path than what I anticipate, so that he can get my Machine Gunner from the rear or sides.

If he doesn't, and his unit gets caught in my unit's line of fire, he has to retreat that unit - resulting in precious time lost as he has to move his unit up again for map control (to gain resources). Now, here's where he gets his second unit (and I will have a second unit too). At this point he knows the position of my Machine Gunner. So he can use his two units to flank my Gunner. But a competent player will anticipate that move, and reposition his Machine Gunner to a different spot, so that he can't be flanked. (He may move his Gunner up closer to the enemy's base, for example, so that both of the enemy's units coming out from his base meets the firing arc). The competent opponent would anticipate this move, so he may choose to lead his two units down a different path. And so on it goes. Through moves that anticipate the enemy's moves correctly, one can outsmart the opponent from move 1 to victory, leaving the opponent no breathing space at all times.

Now, there's no such anticipation in Starcraft 2. (There is the usual kind of anticipation: an opponent is Zerg, so he will either build AAA or BBB) It's hard to pinpoint why exactly, but I think the lack of unit variety and terrain factors figures. The way units are so easily destroyed also takes away the potential for the kind of tactical positioning and countering described above.

I spent $3 on the game. Yes, if you haven't realised, Starcraft 2 has a prepaid option where you buy cards from 7-11 stores. There's a $3 for 7 days card. And then you can download the Starcraft 2 game for free. If you're the kind of player who only plays campaigns, then you can easily finish the game for $3. It's a nice option to have. And it probably makes sense on the company's part too, because earning $3 is better than earning $0. There's also the possibility that a person may spend $3 to try it out for 7 days, and then buy the full game for $100.

5. I'm quite happy there's now a 24-hour coffeeshop 500m from my home. And they have prata too. Well, technically there was: just that the stalls in it weren't open in the night. They've introduced some new stalls recently, so hopefully that means it will now really be a 24-hour coffeeshop. I asked the stall owners, and they said yes they will be open 24 hours. I'm not so confident the volume of business they get will make this situation a lasting one though.

6. Skippy Dies is an excellent book. So excellent that after borrowing it from the library I got to buy it. I will mention it again in the future.

7. I was in a queue to top up my EZlink card. The girl in front of me was taking a long time to get her business in order; she was inserting and reinserting coins and pressing and repressing buttons. I was quite annoyed and tried to make it known that I was quite annoyed. When it came to my turn, I took a very long time too, because the machine wouldn't read my NETS card, and I reinserted it several times, having to wait for 30 seconds for the message to reaffirm my belief that the machine isn't reading my card each time. I found this ironic and funny and laughed silently to myself, because I can just imagine the frustration the person behind me must be feeling, having two people in front of her who had to take such a long time at the machine. Of course, I almost immediately imagined what she would be feeling at someone in front of her who was laughing to himself, and that made me laugh even more.

Datuk (Msia)

2011-01-22T20:42:00.023+08:00

Last December, I went for a 2 day 1 night trek up a 870m hill in Malaysia. I was enthusiastically told that during the night one could get to see a sky full of stars, but as luck had it the skies were cloudy after sunset. Not to be dampened, I set an alarm for 2am (slept in tents near the summit at around 10pm), which proved unnecessary because the cold wind and hard groundsheet kept me awake at intervals. I can testify that at 2am, 3am, and 4am, the stars were still obscured from view. The flip side was that it didn't rain at all.

Now, there were around 30 of us on the trek, divided into 5 tents, and we occupied the space of one and a half classrooms. As such, everyone not asleep could overhear what the occupants of another tent were saying. At 10pm, 4 out of 5 tents were silent. Conversation and laughter was going on in one tent, and the occupants were quite oblivious to the fact that they were either disturbing or entertaining occupants of the other tents.

I personally found it highly entertaining. (Couldn't sleep at 1o anyway) In two ways. One, they were so innocent in making so much noise and disturbing some others that I found it amusing, especially when they burst into acts of cooing and piercing laughter and all the other attendant sounds we may expect from a robust social interaction involving four females and a male. Thus whenever they burst into laughter I couldn't help but laugh silently too, because I could just imagine people in other tents grumbling to each other.

Two, some of the content was kind of amusing, and the situation as mentioned is such that outsiders in the other tents always have the possibility of saying something in reply, as though they were a natural participant of the conversation; if so, then the ensuing silence as they realise that others can hear them would have been an interesting one, and I can just imagine them replying something back, and so start a inter-tent dialogue which hopefully will then go on to disturb those who weren't already disturbed, and maybe then things will snowball to a case where everyone was talking and no one was sleeping.

That didn't happen. But I must remark that when one girl abruptly asked, "So have you ever thought of suicide?" I was indeed quite amused, it coming after a wave of merry talk had barely subsided. And other things: they were trying to persuade the male to sing the One Little Two Little Three Little Indian song for some reason unfathomable to me.

The trek was marketed as an introductory one but, consistent with my overall lack of physicality, I found it fairly tiring. In fact, the last time I was so exhausted was when I was being tickled and laughed so much I couldn't breathe, and when I was doing the military route march. There were parts which inclined up to 70 degrees and hands had to be used, but the main factor was the speed at which the group travelled, which was the speed of a brisk walk most of the time.

Nonetheless, it was enjoyable. It's always nice to push your body to keep going. To exercise willpower. I found the second half of the trek uphill less tiring than the first, maybe because my body is more efficient in the second gear, that is, the gear where you burn up fat for energy. (Or some such thing) Or maybe because the greater the challenge, the more I resolve to rise above it. Or both. As my entire t-shirt and face was drenched in sweat I thought of a number of things. I thought of Michael Loux's introductory book on Metaphysics in my bag. I thought of how it'd be like for the forest to swallow me up, for there were parts where I couldn't see the person in front or behind me. I thought of how a Christian friend of mine would draw on God for inspiration, and that itself gave me motivation, because I felt that faith in faith as an empty arbitrary, concept itself is sufficient for one to overcome one's limitations. But mainly I thought of forcing myself to take deep measured breaths and to keep pushing.

Brief social commentary. I was in a group with 3 male friends and 2 other females we were assigned with. There wasn't too much interaction between us and them, or between us and other groups. Not surprising, since it's only a 2d 1n trek. Though I do kind of regret being less interactive, because I could have gotten to know more things. There was a male nursing student, for example, and I wanted to find out more about his interest in nursing.

A number of strong alpha-males. I observed that males, when in groups, tend to act funny and cute and laugh rowdily. I suspect it's a way of showing males from other groups how tight their cohesion is, as well as a way of attracting females because of that. Females in the group, on the other hand, tend to laugh at almost every single thing the males say. I suspect it's a way of creating a bond with the males in that group, so that they have some protection. My group is not above such human activity. Brief social commentary over.

At 4+am, we (that is, the group I was with) decided to go up the summit from camp. It was kind of exciting because we went without the others and it was still very dark. The short climb up was not free of dangers, because a fall somewhere would mean a fall down the hill. Up on the summit it was cool and windy, and we watched as the terrain slowly came to life. It was a quiet and peaceful experience. I must say I now have more than a vague idea of what Cormac Mccarthy's characters are experiencing in The Border Trilogy when they sit on top a mountain and looking at the landscape below them.

Here are some photos of the trip, some of them courtesy of Colin Tan.

Rest point.

That's me either thinking looking at some ants on the ground or pulling myself together.

At the summit during sunset. It was foggy. And fairly cool.

A barely-there sunset.

Eating instant noodles and canned food for dinner.

Tent area.

A town below us, from the summit.

Daybreak.

At the top of the hill. Quiet, windy.

I like this photo for some reason.

This is my pick for best photo. You will note that the lights didn't look as bright in reality. It was the camera that did the trick - but you can't say that it's like Photoshopping because the camera merely collected more light than usually enters the eyes. That is, no editing was done.

I like it because it looks like two persons looking onto a world that is being obliterated. Looking on in companionable silence. Looking on in equanimity.

Nonhuman animals

2011-01-16T21:28:00.001+08:00

If you're an educated person, there's more than a slight chance you would have encountered some form of argument against eating meat. If you have had such an encounter, be it through newspapers, documentaries, or articles online, there's more than a moderate chance you would have continued your meat-eating ways.

I've had my fair share of encounters. I still continue my meat-eating ways, with one notable difference: I've resolved to cut down on beef, because by some estimate producing beef is one of the more inefficient activity that has negative consequences to the environment and to humans.

I do feel guilty eating meat, though only when I think of the articles I've read or the documentaries I've watched, not when my mind is busy with the company of friends or something else. I feel guilty because many of the arguments I've read are compelling. The way I justify my meat-eating ways lies not in refuting those arguments, which probably should be the way to go if one wants to defend one's practice of eating meat, but in thinking that I'm not necessarily motivated to do what's right.

A lot of us think otherwise. We may think that for any person A, if A thinks x is wrong, A wouldn't do x. If you think this way, then you should either refute anti-meat eating arguments or give up eating meat altogether.

In any case, here's an excerpt from one of the well-known writings on the topic.

It is not merely the act of killing that indicates what we are ready to do to other species in order to gratify our tastes. The suffering we inflict on the animals while they are alive is perhaps an even clearer indication of our speciesism than the fact that we are prepared to kill them. In order to have meat on the table at a price that people can afford, our society tolerates methods of meat production that confine sentient animals in cramped, unsuitable conditions for the entire durations of their lives. Animals are treated like machines that convert fodder into flesh, and any innovation that results in a higher "conversion ratio" is liable to be adopted. As one authority on the subject has said, "cruelty is acknowledged only when profitability ceases." So hens are crowded four or five to a cage with a floor area of twenty inches by eighteen inches, or around the size of a single page of the New York Times. The cages have wire floors, since this reduces cleaning costs, though wire is unsuitable for the hens' feet; the floors slope, since this makes the eggs roll down for easy collection, although this makes it difficult for the hens to rest comfortably. In these conditions all the birds' natural instincts are thwarted: they cannot stretch their wings fully, walk freely, dust-bathe, scratch the ground, or build a nest. Although they have never known other conditions, observers noticed that the birds vainly try to perform these actions. Frustrated at their inability to do so, they often develop what farmers call "vices," and peck each other to death. To prevent this, the beaks of young birds are often cut off...

Since, as l have said, none of these practices cater for anything more than our pleasures of taste, our practice of rearing and killing other animals in order to eat them is a clear instance of the sacrifice of the most important interests of other beings in order to satisfy trivial interests of our own. To avoid speciesism we must stop this practice, and each of us has a moral obligation to cease supporting the practice. Our custom is all the support that the meat-industry needs. The decision to cease giving it that support may be difficult, but it is no more difficult than it would have been for a white Southerner to go against the traditions of his society and free his slaves: if we do not change our dietary habits, how can we censure those slaveholders who would not change their own way of living?

The same form of discrimination may be observed in the widespread practice of experimenting on other species in order to see if certain substances are safe for human beings, or to test some psychological theory about the effect of severe punishment on learning, or to try out various new compounds just in case something turns up. People sometimes think that all this experimentation is for vital medical purposes, and so will reduce suffering overall. This comfortable belief is very wide of the mark. Drug companies test new shampoos and cosmetics that they are intending to put on the market by dropping them into the eyes of rabbits, held open by metal clips, in order to observe what damage results. Food additives, like artificial colourings and preservatives, are tested by what is known as the "LD50" - a test designed to find the level of consumption at which 50% of a group of animals will die. In the process, nearly all of the animals are made very sick before some finally die, and others pull through. If the substance is relatively harmless, as it often is, huge doses have to be force-fed to the animals, until in some cases sheer volume or concentration of the substance causes death.

- Singer, All Animals are Equal

This article was written two decades ago, so conditions may have improved. Or maybe not. One of the things mentioned is the Draize test, Wiki here. In any case, even if farm or animal experimentation conditions have improved markedly, Singer's stand runs deeper: if we would not allow human imbeciles or infants to be farmed commercially, for whatever reason, or used as subjects in scientific tests, but allow animals to be so used, then we are guilty of speciesism. Speciesism is akin to racism. If we object to the latter, we should object to the former. And if we do object to speciesism, then the way we live our lives will have to be changed drastically.

The article can be found here, though some finer details are left out in that version.

I am inclined to the thought that centuries from now, people will be shaking their heads at the way we treat and think of animals, in the same way as we oppose human slavery now. Yes, we've heard this and all of the above before. What are we doing about it?

Tehehe

2011-01-09T09:32:00.003+08:00

Ten years ago, we would sometimes eat duck rice at a hawkwer centre near school for lunch. We would pass under a building, dark and mostly empty. And then Goh Jianda would, sometimes on our request, other times on his own volition, laugh his trademark loud and sinister laugh that will echo against the walls and send us into juvenile squeals of laughter.

Ten years on, I've added him on Facebook. It tells me he is studying aeraspace engineering at NTU. I vaguely remember him telling me he wanted to do that, probably in sec 2 when we weren't in the same class, when we were just a tad more serious.

Goh Jianda, if you're reading this, I hope you haven't forgotten how to laugh.

On Friday I took a random stab at a free music performance by The Cheese Monkeys. I figured I wouldn't like Bubblegum Pop much, but they gave those old pop songs a jazz/blues veneer which I think works because some of those songs get too melodramatic at times.

I will never be able to play music on stage because I will never feel comfortable smiling and moving my body to the music - things that would make a world of difference for a live audience.

You will want to check the Waterfront website every now and then for free performances. I think it's a great initiative; I must remember to write a supportive email sometime. I'm looking forward to the Mosaic Music Festival in March. I will definitely be catching The Trees and the Wild. They're a great Indonesian band.

Here's a song in the meantime.

Update for updates

2011-01-03T19:57:00.003+08:00

It's kind of amusing how one group of people I play mahjong with think this song is horrible, but another group thinks it's so good they hum to it as we play.

For the record, I think it's a great song. It has a certain lightness of touch to it, a lightness that combines very well with her poignant tune and lyrics.

I haven't been too diligent in writing new posts here. That's partly because I haven't been diligent at all this holidays. But it's also because ideas usually strike me when I'm out of the house: walking to a destination, waiting for the bus, and so on. When they strike me I form the sentences in my mind. On occasion I pen those sentences down, which sometimes get transferred here. Other times I just file the notes in an in-tray, which will be forgotten until I sort through the tray. Because I haven't been diligent at all this holidays, I haven't sorted through a lot of the tray. At the same time, just because scribbled writings are in my in-tray doesn't mean they will definitely get transferred here. Sometimes the feeling's already lost, and I don't feel like transferring what I wrote on paper here. The result of all this is what you don't see here on this blog: new and frequent entry posts in the past few weeks.

I do have a number of things I want to say though. However this has to be augmented by some visual illustrations from cameras. Because I'm kind of lazy in hooking up my camera to the PC, or in downloading and sorting the files from another friend's camera, I can't say the things I want to say. But I feel I would feel like hooking up the camera soon, so photos will get transferred and I will then be able to say what I want to say, which hopefully will result in a new entry soon.

Just keeping you updated.

Management of success: What is success?

2010-12-07T20:07:00.003+08:00

I was reading some articles from Management of Success: Singapore Revisited, and I was going to laboriously type out (can't copy and paste) some stuff that one may find interesting, when I decided not to this time, because there is a greater worry here of publication rights infringement than as I usually have when I laboriously type out excerpts for you.

So, instead, I shall just give you this link to whet your interest enough to at least want to browse the book. Comments on that page are mildly amusing.

The sound clapping with one hand makes

2010-12-03T08:37:00.003+08:00

Neil is about to leave the country.

Burke: You said goodbye to everyone but me, Neil. Why's that so?
Neil: I think you know the answer. You're the only person who can change my mind.

That was in White Collar, a drama I feel is under-appreciated. This probably doesn't say much, because I think Channel 8 dramas are under-appreciated as well.

I once commented that only postmodernists eat Post Cereals. The person to whom this remark was directed to rolled her eyes and tried to prevent us from falling into an awkward moment, which of course led to some awkward moments. It takes some time to realise that nothing witty is meant by such a comment. Therefore, there's nothing to salvage. The idea here is the mutual recognition that that's me trying to be funny. If it works it usually ends up being funny or at least fairly amusing.

Jane McGonigal - Gaming can make a better world

2010-11-30T18:15:00.004+08:00

Nobody wants to change how they live, just because it's good for the world, or because you're supposed to. But if you immerse them in an epic adventure, and tell them 'we've ran out of oil', this is an amazing story, an adventure for you to go on. Challenge yourself to see how you would survive. Most of the players have kept up the habits they've learned in this game.

-Jane McGonigal

She says this here, as part of a somewhat interesting and amusing talk on how gamers can change the world.

I play computer games myself. (Don't play World of Warcraft; play Eve Online). I have my doubts over her proposed solutions to worldly problems. I don't disagree with the fundamental notion that gamers are a resourceful bunch of people. After all, a game is where one uses the resources at one's hands to either outsmart an opponent or to achieve some kind of goal in a limited environment. People who spend time on games probably develop ways of thinking or skills that can be applicable to some extent in solving real-life problems.

McGonigal's route is to do it the other way: define real-life problems in terms of a game. Gamers who play such a game would then either change their lifestyles or develop solutions in the game's context, solutions that would presumably be translated back to reality terms. At least, that was the gist I got. There's just something we would want to say here, but I can't quite place my finger on it. Maybe it's just the effect of it being a mildly bizarre, novel solution. Maybe there's some deficiency in doing things this way. In any case, I don't think going her route is necessary for me. All the motivation I get in wanting to do something good for the world, I get from an increase in knowledge of states of affairs, or in exploring the consistency of my behavior and thought.

Computer games are just like sports to me. Playing sports may give you a robust frame, and that may be useful in other areas of life. It may even be better for the common good. But to translate a real-life problem to sports, such that when people play this new sport, they are contributing quite directly to an improvement of the world, doesn't seem quite so attractive to me. I prefer playing games to solve problems I don't encounter in real life.

Kōan

2010-11-21T20:06:00.002+08:00

I reached home at 430am this morning after spending 17 hours yesterday attending a reading of mine and 9 other plays produced from a playwriting class. This, despite the fact that I've got exams tomorrow and beyond. It kind of reminds me of the stayover I had at a friend's place the weekend before the A levels started, in which I ended up playing S11, a football console game with my friends, rather than revising. I was quite lousy in the game and I ended up losing more often than not.

It's nice to do things that are spontaneous, irrational. I suspect it feels nice to me because acting so reaffirms the notion that I am essentially a free person whose actions aren't easily predictable given any set of circumstances. Not even the circumstance of possessing a biological disposition to act in spontaneous, irrational ways - to transcend this determination I may on occasion choose to act in an obedient and predictable manner. Thus there will be some exams where I study, and some where I wouldn't mind going against the grain when opportunities present themselves. More on this, perhaps, another time.

For now I want to note that it was a pleasant 17 hours. The quality of scripts was good, and I generally like listening in on any congregation of like-minded people. Here's an excerpt.

***
SEPTIMUS is in his room alone, seated in his armchair. He is holding on to his watch.

Septimus The billowing wind stirs up hues of scarlet red. Infinite arcs twisting through us, flittering down, down, down, downwards, into the fissure. It stops there. Drawing inwards, the fading murmurs wait to be heard. Waiting.

Footsteps of a slow march can be heard.

Septimus Waiting.

The footsteps stop.

Septimus For you.

Pause.

Septimus Evans?

SEPTIMUS gets up.

Septimus Here you've arrived, bringing with you a deafening silence. Alongside, smothering darkness approaches, robbing my sight of colours, extinguishing the floating lamps of red and yellow flowers on the grass. Our minds remain muted, yet time creeps on, on, on, onwards, never looking back. You and I, continue on, never knowing that as our emotions dwindle - as we feel only complete void within, nothing remains.

Pause.

Septimus To love makes one solitary.

The footsteps start again, growing louder.

Septimus But no. I shan't relent. As the wind arrives, we shall seek brighter and clearer days. The swelling undulations shall carry away the stale monotony that weighed us down, cleansing and renewing us. As the wind gently tickles the precious chimes, the crisp and fresh tinkling will revive our deepest understanding of what needs to be done.

SEPTIMUS stares forward.

Septimus (energetically) I must speak to the Prime Minister. Let me speak to him; I must tell him the following: the supreme secret must be told to the cabinet; firstly, that trees are alive - they are alive and amongst us; second, there is no crime - none at all whatsoever; third, love, universal love - (all energy fades) what about it?

Pause.

Septimus Here I lie, my flesh melted off the world, my body macerated - only the nerve fibres are left, spread like a veil upon a rock.

Clearer distinct footsteps from an opposite direction can be heard.

SEPTIMUS turns to look over at where the footsteps are coming from.

Septimus Evans! Please, grab my hands and never let go, help me...stop me from falling down, down, down, down into the flames!

Bradshaw (offstage) My dear lady, please allow me to -

SEPTIMUS drops his watch onto the ground.

Blackout.

- Dalloway, Ng Zheng Yang (Zach)

: )

2010-11-14T13:12:00.002+08:00

The new knuckleduster: constructing a fear of losing the good life

2010-11-04T22:19:00.005+08:00

I went for a forum discussion yesterday. Topic: "Economic Growth: At What Cost?" Reform Party, Workers' Party and, of course, the PAP were represented. Today, by way of a school lecture, I saw a video of the "5th Singapore Forum on Politics: 'Singapore 2030: Views from the Ground' " held in 2008. The phrase "Views from the Ground", by the way, is important - this particular event could be seen as a response to a more elite conference held in the same year, on the same topic of Singapore in 2030, in which Lee Kuan Yew was a keynote speaker.

Having witnessed these two events I am now more convinced than ever Singapore is not bereft of interesting thinkers, though we may very well wonder how many we have already lost. I want to mention here Catherine Lim. She gave - I thought - a mesmerizing speech in the 2nd event, made all the more impressive because she had no notes at all. She was spontaneous, fluent, and though she lacked concrete facts and figures her language did a very good job in persuading me to her standpoint. I later found out that some, if not most, of the content were already fleshed out before: they can be found here. I don't think that degrades her speech significantly nonetheless.

I will give a quote from her later, a quote I found had a very nice rhythm. First, in less beautiful words, here is Chee Soon Juan:

The opposition is prevented from freely and effectively communicating with the voters (through restrictions imposed by the Singapore Broadcasting Act and Newspaper and Printing Presses Act); deprived of adequate funding (through the Political Donations Act); and kept from knowing the constituency boundaries in advance (through the Group Representation Constituency system)... And when there are allegations of irregularitiesin the electoral process, to whom do the complainants turn? There isn't even an independent body to conduct the elections. The Elections Department works out of the Prime Minister's Office and takes directions from the Government.

Elsewhere,

The most striking example of this occured during the 1997 elections when several PAP ministers had entered into polling stations to greet voters. Under the Parliamentary Elections Act (PEA), only the candidate and his/her officially appointed election agent are allowed into the polling stations. Unauthorised persons, including ministers, are prohibited from entering the premises and even barred from loitering within 200 metres of any voting centre. Yet election officials did not attempt to enforce the rules in the above instances.

When some opposition candidates complained to the police about this infraction, the Attorney-General defended the PAP actions by saying that the ministers were inside the polling centre - as opposed to loitering on the outside - and, hence, not in breach of any regulation.

Another incident happened in August 1996. The SDP had hung some bunting with salutary messages and celebrating the National Day at Bukit Gombak, a constituency which it had won. The Government quickly sent workers to pull down and confiscate the flags. In the meantime in a neighbouring constituency, PAP flags, without any reference to National Day, fluttered freely in the wind.

- The Power of Courage: Effecting political change in Singapore through Nonviolence

Catherine Lim:

If man does not live by bread alone, a nation does not survive in the long term by material prosperity alone. I’m going to risk being churlish and say that as long as Singapore’s leaders do not pay heed to the fundamental needs of the human spirit, they can never be called wise, only clever; and as long as the nation they lead is admired only for its material achievements, it can never be called great, only successful.

Such passages are the kind that make me unable to absorb anything else for the next ten minutes, maybe more, as the words echo in my mind over and over again, unable to extricate itself from the exquisite rhythm of the language. To make no mention of the fact that the content expressed is pertinent too.

I should also note I caught Volcanic Disco earlier, a play by students from a Theatre Studies module in NUS. I'm all for abstract, non-conventional theatre, so I was quite pleased when there were some music and dance elements. But the content of the vignettes I found not so pleasant: it didn't offer any fresh take on sexuality. A nice evening nonetheless. I always enjoy watching people being passionate at the things they do, be it debating about Singapore's future or acting in a play.

These two days aside, I've been getting a general sense that exciting things are going to happen in Singapore, and sometimes it makes me wonder what my role in them would be.

Ok

2010-10-31T01:08:00.007+08:00

I read one of Parfit's essay on personal identity. And then I thought of what psychology and sociology might say on personal identity. And then I thought that while they may have interesting insights to offer, nothing can be more exciting, intellectually, than philosophy.

I am not one who seeks to show that philosophy has practical applications. I don't think there's a strong need to, unless when making a shrewd move to preserve or extend the vitality of the discipline. There is something about the abstractness of philosophy that makes it attractive to me. Very few people care if the A-series or B-series conception of time is correct, or neither. I don't think it's a matter of grave importance. Nonetheless, I find it pleasurable reading articles on them, and it's a pleasure no other discipline can give.

The unsurprises in my life

2010-10-11T01:06:00.008+08:00

Why am I not surprised that the very person who planned a group discussion at 6pm would say: I got to eat dinner, I will join you guys at 7.

Why am I not surprised that I spent 25 minutes waiting for the bus?

Why am I not surprised that I spent a lot of time and energy figuring out how to prove a logic equation, a task that yielded no tangible benefit for me, when I have a lot more pressing tasks at hand?

Why, too, am I not surprised at the inordinate amount of traditional media coverage given to Mrs Lee Kuan Yew? Two things to note here. First, some of the people's tributes' and articles strike me as quite sexist. It's as though some Singaporeans equate a successful woman to one who tends to her husband silently, unwaveringly, and with a dedication to details. While such traits are commendable, I would be quite annoyed if I were a female and if she were hailed as a role model for women.

Second, their relationship is touching. But we must be more circumspect here. I think that any couple relationship that lasts that long would have at least a handful of memorable, touching moments. The difference between the Lee couple and normal couples is that the former receives a lot more attention from the media. So, for example, we get to see a nice moment where they ride a camel in Saudi Arabia together. I will suggest that the same kind of montage can be crafted for any couple that have spent so much time together. Chee Soon Juan has other things to say here.

(Why too am I not surprised that a sex-video scandal between 2 ACJC females is prime news in our national newspaper)

Why am I not surprised that people don't get back to me when they said they would?

Why am I not surprised that many people find the major religions so appealing?

Why am I not surprised that people don't care enough about the environment or factory-farmed animals? (Myself included)

Why am I not surprised that despite my valiant efforts to encourage people to try certain things, people don't want to?

Why am I not surprised that Okto has pulled Battlestar Galactica off for the 4th time now, without prior notice, without any excuse? Now I got to go through the same process of resending my emails, waiting for their reply, and then threatening to refer this to *someone* higher up when they ignore my emails 3 times.

I think I will just go listen to some music now.

?

2010-10-04T01:25:00.013+08:00

No God

2010-09-25T02:34:00.000+08:00

I watched a bit of U2's performance at the Rose Bowl on TV earlier. There was a part where they turned off all the lights and all you could see were the lightsticks and flashes from cameras. You can catch a glimpse of it here. There is always the need to remind ourselves of how infinitesimal our lives are, and there can be no better way of putting it than a mass of people under a night sky with stars or with lights that resemble the stars. It doesn't matter if you're alone or if everyone else is watching the sky with you. The silence will always be there, and it is always very beautiful.

Ok

2010-08-22T00:14:00.002+08:00

The liberty of man consists solely in this: that he obeys the laws of nature because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been externally imposed upon him by any extrinsic will whatever, divine or human, collective or individual.

- Michael Bakunin

Some tall gates have been erected at some train stations recently. I hope that people who want to cause as much inconvenience as possible when suiciding don't get deterred by such measures, especially when the cause of one's grief is intimately tied to the condition of the state.

Kasparov

2010-08-17T21:22:00.004+08:00

Travelled to 3 different places when Garry Kasparov came to Singapore last Sunday, as though I were the chess enthusiast I would like to be. Well, I'm not. I enjoy playing and studying the game but as with many things in life one procrastinates and gets distracted and I haven't touched chess in months.

First, 10am at Thomson CC for a 1-hour game analysis of one of Kasparov's game in the 90s, supposedly one of the most beautiful games in decades. If it was, some of the beauty was lost on me because Kasparov talked really fast and somewhat fleetingly. He spoke chess notation as though it were his second language, so "At this point I thought rook d7 would be the best action but if rook d7 white queen c6 my knight will have to go e5 and I will be in trouble if white pawn e4 or rook e1. Alternatively, rook d7 knight a4 and I will still be in trouble " is the kind of sentences he would rumble off in 4 seconds. There was a screen and a chess program shown of course, and I guess some background knowledge of the match would have helped, but overall I did not absorb as much as I could have if I were better prepared.

And then 2 Blitz exhibition matches against top Singaporean players and a brief talk by Kasparov on chess at Conrad Hotel's ballroom. Nice small hotel by the way, next to Millenia Walk. They provided the venue for free and threw in some snacks and coffee. This is the kind of Sunday I like, there's a kind of communal feel provided not just by the communion of people who share an interest but also by the generosity of opening up a posh place to not-so-posh people, a generosity that lifts the barrier between the aristocracy and bourgeoisie.

And then it was a simultaneous exhibition match against 22 players at Serangoon Gardens County Club. I've always wondered what is the point of such matches, because I've always assumed it wouldn't be challenging to the Grandmaster who does it; it doesn't really prove any point. (Same goes for a great chess player beating an intermediate player blindfolded - doesn't seem interesting). But having stayed for the duration of the match (he won every game) I can start to see why a top chess player would like to do it: by looking at a board and formulating a plan in under a minute it's a kind of affirmation to the level of chess he has attained. Chess has essentially become so ingrained in him that he can, presumably, play largely by intuition, and playing largely by a 'feeling' is in itself probably quite an intoxicating experience.

That's that. A couple of pictures below. For more, go here. Razor TV also has some tv clips that will give you a better idea of what went on.

Ok

2010-08-14T14:28:00.000+08:00

And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.

- T S Eliot

Let us all not support the YOG, and hope that it will be a flop

2010-08-06T18:56:00.006+08:00

Suppose I write on an online site, 'Let us all not support the YOG, and hope that it will be a flop'. Suppose, too, that I live in an absurdly sensitive quasi-authoritarian regime, and that I am taken to court for making malicious comments that undermine the interests of the nation - not too hard to imagine since a Facebook boycott on the YOG disappeared without a trace. Then, suppose I say in my defense that by YOG I meant 'Yoyo On Grass', not 'Youth Olympic Games', and that Yoyo On Grass is a private venture by some of my not-so-close friends who intend to design a yoyo that is so smooth it can roll on grass; and suppose that these friends eventually testify that they do indeed intend to market that product. However, they are unable to produce evidence of this apart from sketches from their imagination: no business plans, no company started up, no engineer/designer who could testify, and so on.

Would the judge buy my defence? I doubt so. Would the judge acquit me? I don't think so. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like I will be convicted and the judge in her ruling will report that my defence is not convincing enough. To me, this is actually a defect in the legal system, because it allows room for personal intuition. The facts are in support of me making a comment that has nothing to do with the state. I am sure many of us make such comments every now and then, and while they may on occasion seem a tad aggressive they are rarely legally condemnable, particularly when no insidious rumours are spread about the product in question. (Consider the statement, 'Let us all not support the iPhone 4, and hope that it will be a flop'). And yet despite the facts the judge can assert that my case is nonsense, and that I was really referring to the Youth Olympic Games. If it were the case that the perpetrator was referring to the Youth Olympic Games, he got his punishment - but the manner in which he was convicted remains far from satisfactory.

(We may want to note too that if I am convicted, my friends who testified in support of Yoyo On Grass should be convicted for lying too; if they are not, then there is some manner of inconsistency here)

Ok. That's that. Now, suppose I have written all of the above on a blog, with the title 'Let us all not support the YOG, and hope that it will be a flop'. In this case, should I be convicted? The essential difference between this case and the last is that now I have no friends who testify in support of Yoyo On Grass: that product only exists in the first scenario. On the other hand, I can now say that the statement was made in order to ponder on some issues surrounding a fair legal system in a blog entry.

What if I'm a little bit more cheeky and write, on that blog entry, 'I have accomplished my goal of informing my friends of what I think about the Youth Olympic Games, without exposing myself to any potential legal trouble.' Presumably, this 2nd statement can be used against me. So I conceal myself further by writing 'What if I'm a little bit more cheeky and write, on that blog entry, ...' By doing so, I can claim to be still talking about a hypothetical scenario.

But not anymore, if I've written the last 2 sentences in. So I should either leave them out, or continue posturing about what happens if one writes against the Youth Olympic Games on an online site. After all, that's my main concern here, not attempt to persuade people to not support the Youth Olympic Games. But of course, one can rule that this last sentence is a sham, a smokescreen - and such a ruling will be no different from that which we find in the first scenario.

Lunch for Today (VI)

2010-07-28T19:13:00.008+08:00

Spize: The Supper Club at Bedok Road. This place is half an island away from where I live. Not that I mind. Sources informed me they sell the best roti john in Singapore, and I'd gladly travel the island two times over for good food. Besides, I find there is a certain tranquility in travelling long distances.

The place is within walking distance from Tanah Merah Station. I would like to say that Spize is nestled comfortably in a small village center, away from the hustle and bustle of life. But while the human density on the pavement was low I couldn't get rid of the incessant drone of vehicles, even when I turned away from the main road, so the statement would be too far away from the truth to make it even a tolerable exaggaration.

Took the roti john chicken special, the most special thing about it being there is very little chicken.

Overall was decent though. That orange dressing you see adds a nice sourish tinge, something like thousand island cream. Best roti john I've had is still from a vendor at Sembawang Camp. That may be a biased judgement, because the times I had roti john then was when the superiors weren't around or when the workload wasn't a lot. That is to say, the times I had roti john in camp was when I was feeling relatively happy.

Customary post-lunch walk ensued after I cleaned my mouth on a national day banner conveniently hanging around. Weather was cool. No sun. Windy. You should know me by now. I love those walks down long roads through landed property, hearing the faint sounds of people going about their lives in their homes, children playing, mahjong tiles clicking, the sound of television, maids hosing gardens, birds chirping, the occasional dog barking, overcast sky above and the road before me.

Update

2010-07-23T23:26:00.002+08:00

Toto $8 million. Didn't win anything.

Good

2010-07-20T15:23:00.004+08:00

Free performances last weekend at the Esplanade, caught The Trees and the Wild. Here's what a friend has to say. Some free recordings on their myspace. Their live performance at the Waterfront was breathtaking.

Update

2010-07-12T20:21:00.002+08:00

Yesterday I went to watch a free chinese chamber music performance at the Esplanade. And then I caught some indie music performances, also free. Citizens of Ice Cream, a Malaysian band, was good.

Today I spent ten minutes on the streets furiously contemplating whether to have economical rice or Popeyes for dinner.

Tomorrow I'm going to bump into someone and have the wind knocked out of me.

General Interest (Can't believe I typed this out for you!)

2010-07-08T20:37:00.003+08:00

As a graduate student from Stanford University, I collaborated with my adviser Mark Lepper on a set of studies that demonstrated these differences. The first study took place at an elementary school in Japantown, San Francisco. A small classroom was set up with a table and two chairs. In one chair sat the experimenter; let's call her Ms. Smith. On the table lay six markers, each a different color, and six piles of anagrams, each of which was labeled with a different category and consisted of a series of jumbled letters that could be rearranged to form a word related to that category. For example, one card labeled "animal" contained the letters R-I-B-D, which could be rearranged to form the word "bird". One by one, seven- to nine- year-old students, half of whom were Asian American - children of Japanese and Chinese immigrants who spoke their parents' native language at home - and half of whom were Anglo American, entered the room and sat across from Ms. Smith.

Each child had been previously assigned, at random, to one of three groups. The first group of children was shown the anagrams and colored markers and told by Ms. Smith, "Here are six piles of word puzzles you can choose from. Which one would you like to do? It's your choice." After choosing a category of anagrams (let's say animals), each child also chose a colored marker with which to write the answers (let's say blue). The second group of children also saw all six anagrams and all six markers, but as each child perused the options, Ms. Smith said, "I would like you to work on the animal anagrams and write your answers with a blue marker." The third group of children was also interrupted while they looked through the anagrams and markers, but this time, Ms. Smith flipped through a stack of papers and announced, "We asked your mom to fill out a form earlier. It says here that your mother wants you to work on the animal anagrams and write your answers with the blue marker." In reality, none of their mothers were asked about their preferences. Instead, when Ms. Smith chose for the children she picked the same anagram and marker that the previous child from the first group had freely chosen. This procedure ensured that children in all three groups worked on the same task so that their performance and reactions were easily comparable. After the children completed the anagram task, they were left alone in the room for several minutes, during which time they could continue working on the anagrams or choose to explore the other word games in the room, such as crosswords and word search puzzles. While the children played, their behavior was discreetly observed and recorded by another experimenter.

Such small differences in the way the task was adminstered yielded striking differences in how well the children performed on the anagram task. Anglo American children who were allowed to choose their own anagrams and markers solved four times as many anagrams as when Ms. Smith made their choices for them, and two and a half times more than when their mothers supposedly chose for them. These children also spent three times as long working on anagrams during their free play compared to the other two groups of children. In other words, Anglo American children did better and worked longer when they were able to exercise personal choice. The moment anyone else told them what to do, their performance and subsequent motivation dropped dramatically.

By comparison, the Asian American children performed best and were most motivated when they believed their mothers had chosen for them. These children solved 30 percent more anagrams than those who were allowed to choose their materials themselves, and twice as many anagrams as children who were assigned materials by Ms. Smith. When Asian American children were allowed to play freely after solving their puzzles, those who believed their mothers had chosen for them spent 50 percent more time playing with anagrams than those children who chose for themselves, and three times longer than those for whom Ms. Smith had selected the materials.

Indeed, a number of the Anglo American children expressed visible embarrassment at the thought that their mothers had been consulted in the experiment. Mary had an especially memorable reaction. After being read her instructions, she reacted with a horror that only seven-year-olds freely express: "You asked my mother?" Contrast this with the reaction of Natsumi, a young Japanese American girl who thought that her mother had chosen for her. As Ms. Smith was leaving the room, Natsumi approached her, tugged on her skirt, and asked, "Could you please tell my mommy that I did it just like she said?"

-Iyengar, The Art of Choosing, pg 47 - 49.

For a look at how countries fare on the individualist - collectivist scale, try this.

Tehehe

2010-07-04T23:40:00.002+08:00

Went to catch Argentina v Germany and Paraguay v Spain quarter-finals at a community center last night. A lucky draw was held after the 2nd match, top prize $1000 worth of shopping vouchers. There was a small crowd who stood by the stage listening to the prize-winners' name read out, and after the last prize-winner was drafted there was a chorus of boos (or "errgh-er") and everyone walked off even though the organiser was still talking. I propose that we find such scenes delightful because we have just witnessed liberated behavior. In an age where graciousness is always harped on (there's a morbid fixation over it on, for example, The Strait Times forum) it is always very refreshing to see people behaving in an honest manner.

And then a lady requested for us to help pile up the chairs. I assume no one helped; I was resolute in getting away, so I didn't look back, and as I exited the auditorium I heard her say, in a reproving manner: "All these young men, don't want to help". This is one thing I like about Singaporeans, and I don't mean it in a sarcastic way.

I watched 20 minutes of Vicky Christina Barcelona on Okto earlier. I thought it was boring, so I went online. And then I saw some comments on the film's Wiki page, which made the film sound very good. So I decided to give it a 2nd try. I caught another 5 minutes of it before I decided nah, this film isn't for me, I have completely no idea why this film is so highly regarded. Life is like that. Someone finds that the film "reverberates with implacable melancholy, a sense of loss," I find that it's little more than Sweet Valley High for adults.

Dream

2010-07-02T10:03:00.001+08:00

Just woke up from a gripping dream. Many friends and I were eating at a coffeeshop. We were cleaning it up after eating, and I was not pleased with that. So I shouted at another: tell me one good reason why we should be doing this. I don't mind cleaning up for a legitimate reason but this is unreasonable. Cut to me walking to some place with urgency, to distance myself from this friend I shouted at and another.

I am back in school, I see those two friends walking through the gates too. I am fearful for some reason. Cut to a classroom, we're all in it. I feel worried and angry. A pope's in front, and the reason why I'm fearful becomes clearer. Those two friends report on me. They say I had possessed some one else, I don't know who. And that's a sin. After class, the pope comes to speak with me. He asks me, gently, what exactly happened, and I told him I possessed someone. He asks me what it was like to do so and I told him I felt transcendental, like as if I were flying and I could still see myself in my HDB flat doing things. And then because I knew I was going to be in trouble I possessed the pope. I lay down on the ground writhing, the pope collapses. The two friends rush in, dream ends.

Admittedly, a lot of details are missing. I don't know if they're missing because they weren't in the dream, or if they were and I forgot about them. Probably a combinaton of both. For example, I can't recall the first possession, if it ever happened. But it's ok. Dreams don't really matter in real life. In the context of the plot, the ambiguity is healthy.

My dreams, at least the ones I remember, are usually as such. There's a lot of cutting and usually the overall plot is incoherent. Come to think of it, some details in the above account may have been superimposed by me. A number of these dreams are very gripping, if for no perceptible reason at all. That is, in the dream I recall being very fixated over things, very breathless. I don't wake up with a start like you see in shows. I just open my eyes and lie on the bed, as though I have just been released from a physical claw. To maintain the utmost fidelity to my dreams however, I've learnt to pen down the details as quickly as I can, while replaying the scenes over and over in their sequence so I won't forget them. It's always like a race, the fabric of the dream dissipating by the second while I try to capture as much of it onto paper, though it is always a mediocre attempt because dreams of any kind, not just the best, have one and only one moment of vitality and they cannot be resurrected in any form once the transition to a conscious state has been made.

Good

2010-06-21T14:33:00.002+08:00

Borrowed a random comic book, The Waiting Place, from Bishan Library. Turns out it is a book I absolutely must have ownership of. It's a pretty strange work, because it bases itself on stock types and scripts, yet somehow works out to be a captivating piece. The ending is a slight disappointment however, and I only wish McKeever would have made the series longer. I borrowed it because I needed something for light reading before bedtime, and it was almost like a blindfolded selection. This underscores the importance of some randomness in life.

Something tells me I am not going to like Mckeever's later works, but I'm willing to give them a try.

A personal conception of soccer-betting

2010-06-15T19:00:00.003+08:00

Before I begin, it should be noted that I'm no expert on gambling, nor do I take it seriously: hence the insignificant betting amounts mentioned. Why I make the effort to bet on soccer will be made clearer later.

I remember some years ago, the payout for Arsenal winning an away match against Man U was 4. I bought $10 of it and Arsenal subsequently won. After that particular bet, I stopped betting on sports altogether. Prior to that I was mainly going for low-risk bets for some small-time income and a profound sense of self-satisfaction. The payout for those low-risk bets would be around 1.2 (for a simple full-time home/away win), and I would buy either $5 or $10. When I scored that relatively major coup, I stopped because I knew it would be too tempting to spend the winnings away on random wild bets; and since in the long run the house always wins, I guessed it was prudent to withdraw when you've won something.

To say that I went for low-risk bets, though, would not be entirely accurate. What I focused on was on sweet spots. Hold on a second. What is a sweet spot? To be sure, it's not an erotic body part. A sweet spot is where the payout exceeds the odds of an event happening. So, for example, betting for heads on a coin flip where the payout for heads is >1 is sweet. Simple enough. But what about sports? There doesn't seem to be any reliable, comprehensive way to determine the probability of team X winning against team Y. So what payout would be sweet, if I am to bet on team X winning team Y?

That's where intuition, feelings, and rough estimates come in, and I belong to the side that believes sports betting to be more of an art than a science. Now, there are some pundits who will admit this, but at the same time analyze various factors concerning the match in order to come up with a better idea of which team will win. Hence they may look at past records, the fitnesses of the players involved, crowd support, the formations and styles of the different teams, and so on. They will concede that there is always some unpredictability involved in soccer matches (and at the same time proclaiming that that's what makes soccer interesting),but they will attempt to quantify, in some way or the other, the numerous mentioned factors. This is a model of soccer betting, and it's not a model that is agreeable with me, in large part because I think they take themselves too seriously and are grasping at straws, whether they admit it or not.

Here's a simpler model: the sweet-spot model. The sweet-spot model bases itself almost solely on the payout given by the gambling vendor. Looking at the Singapore Pools on the World Cup now, Brazil has a 1.14 payout of winning N.Korea, Spain has a 1.21 payout of winning Switzerland. These are not sweet bets because the payouts are too low for the odds.Too low for the odds? This seems to imply that I've got a rough conception of the probability of Brazil and Spain winning. Admittedly, I do. But it's a value derived more from intuition or rough feel than anything more concrete. That's the main difference between the imprecise science model and the sweet-spot model. That is, according to this model, I'm not even going to read up on reports and statistics. In fact, I can't even name you more than 5 Brazilian or Spanish heavyweights offhandedly. They don't matter. All I've got is the Singapore Pools payouts in front of me, and a rough impression of a team's capability.

Now, if a team is almost certain to win another, and the payout is 1.1, or 1.0000000001, it makes sense to make the bet: it's basically free money. This would be the case if we pitch a varsity soccer team against an international team. This isn't the case for the World Cup. There are no such extreme differences between the teams in my opinion, at least not extreme enough to justify the belief that one can make a bet that is almost certain to win. How do I derive that a payout of 1.21 for Spain over Switzerland is not enough then? By intuition, for one. For another, the real possibility of a draw, which is not that uncommon between teams of significantly differing strengths.

What would be a sweet spot then? In the Man U-Arsenal match a few years ago, the payout for Arsenal winning was 4: that's very sweet, considering Arsenal are not incapable of winning Man-U. Remember, past statistics and other factors are completely disregarded. (I've never appreciated the importance of them) Presently, England has 1.16 for winning Algeria, Algeria has 12 for winning England. The former is too low, the latter looks slightly attractive, but would probably need to be slightly higher to justify the risk. A draw at 5.50, though, looks solidly attractive. Slovenia has a 3.5 payout for winning the US, and the US has 1.9 payout for winning Slovenia. Either seems nice.

3 assumptions give the sweet-spot model her vitality.

1) Soccer is at its core unpredictable. That is to say, there can be no pre-determined probability of team X winning team Y, how many goals will be scored, etc.

2) Vendors calculate payouts based on the value of public bets for or against. Sweet spots can therefore be created and maintained by public perception.

3) Public perception can be wrong.

All one needs to do in this model, then, is to find deals where the public is being excessively resolute, and bet against that. Case in point: Brazil and England seem to be be receiving vast amounts of support, thus depressing their payouts. It wouldn't be wise to bet along with them. Seeing that Germany has a 1.47 payout of winning Serbia, it would seem that not an overwhelming majority of people are thinking Germany are going to win. I'd go for it. In any case, I'd like to go for a draw between Brazil and N.Korea at 6.60. It doesn't seem likely to happen, yet the payout feels like it exceeds the odds for it happening, and I'd probably buy it if it weren't already too late.

The other basis I have for betting is the feeling model. This doesn't mean I bet based on feel. This means I bet to create a feeling. Many a time I watch a soccer match and don't feel particularly engaged. By placing bets on the scoreline, or on one team or the other, I become more invested in the match. There's still no much feeling when a clear favourite scores the first goal though, so to further spice things up one can bet on total amount of goals scored, who leads at half-time, and all those other betting options. This is especially important this World Cup because I don't feel affiliated with any team, though I must say that it is my wish that England will not progress, and North Korea will eventually play against South Korea.

Update

2010-06-11T21:37:00.005+08:00

Today as I was walking to a foodcourt a man was walking from the opposite direction. It was clear that we were going to collide if we maintained our trajectories, so he walked diagonally right, while I proceeded to my diagonal left. We ended up in each other's way at a point, and he let off a sound of irritation. Amused, I echoed him before we each went our way. All things considered, it would not be an exaggeration to state that this is among the most exciting things in my life recently, especially given that the two Koreas are not going to fight.

Lunch for Today (V)

2010-06-04T21:48:00.005+08:00

Cafe Jules Bar at Jalan Riang, near Lorong Chuan MRT. 2nd time there, didn't see Sumiko Tan, only the usual well-off people who talk in proper English and laugh politely. Laid-back place, peaceful neighbourhood.

Tehehe

2010-06-04T02:29:00.003+08:00

Comments made by people in support of City Harvest Church reinforce the idea that some differences are irreconcilable.

Battlestar Sonatica

2010-05-31T11:52:00.004+08:00

One reason why you should watch Battlestar Galactica.

If only I have a piano. 2nd best option: download it. It's not on torrent. 3rd best option: buy it online. Amazon doesn't sell mp3 files to customers outside the U.S. 4th best option: buy the entire album soundtrack. Can't be bothered. One of the previous options will be available to me someday - I'd rather wait.

In the meantime, I'd just click on the repeat button repeatedly. It's beautiful. I need to be able to play this in a completely private space.

Sci-fi Dramas

2010-05-26T00:12:00.003+08:00

Feeling good now because, on the 11th episode of Season 3, Battlestar Galactica is back to its best. Dramas like Battlestar and Lost are stellar when they touch on interpersonal conflicts, moral issues, adulterated philosophical debates and have large doses of good acting and plot ambiguity. Some level of Space Odysseyque surrealism wouldn't harm too.

I remember there was a part in Lost where the stranded people on the island were informed they had to press a button every 108 minutes or so. The reason why is not known to them. It was nice watching how different people had different views about it, views that were informed by and consistent with their past and character. It was nice too seeing how the different characters negotiated in different ways with their new reality as castaways. Dramas shine this way, not when characters combat apparitions that were the offshoot of experiments gone wrong.

The Sandman/Shutter Island

2010-05-09T12:52:00.007+08:00

Newly refurbished Toa Payoh library. Looks fresher, neater. Would be a great place to spend time in if it weren't for the fact that it closes at 9pm and that people usually make a lot of noise.

I'm two-thirds into The Absolute Sandman Vol. 1, and here's a brief list of why I wouldn't be a fan:

1. Too much telling. The comic isn't shy of directly telling the reader who this person is, what is his history, why he needs to do this and this, what just happened. When Dream (the protagonist) overcame John Dee even though the latter had his ruby, an important tool of his, he said: "But you destroyed the ruby. I doubt I would have thought of that. Destroying it, you released the power stored in it. My control of the dreamworld. It's all mine again."

2. There's alot of fluff. When Dream was preparing to leave Hell after he collected something that belongs to him, Lucifer said: "The million lords of hell stand arrayed about you. Tell us why we should let you leave? Helmet or no, you have no power here -- what power have Dreams in hell?"

Dream replied: "You say I have no power? Perhaps you speak truly...But -- you say that DREAMS have no power here? Tell me Lucifer Morningstar...Ask yourselves, all of you...What power would HELL have if those here imprisoned were NOT able to DREAM of HEAVEN?"

That particular section then ended with Dream walking out of Hell, the demons making way for him silently.

3. There's a lot of death, destruction, decay and arbitrary, senseless violence going on in the comic. There's nothing wrong with that in itself. Some parts, though, feel nothing more than a collage of sick acts strung together. Other parts have themes and images that are nothing but banal. Prostitutes and young boys killed, people sleeping too much, people walking through the living as though they were dead, teenager chained in a basement sleeping with his own pee in a corner, Queen who fell in love at first sight with Dream and who tries to flee because mortals falling in love with The Endless can only bring disaster for others.

4. It may be true that it's hard to avoid such recurrent themes, but The Sandman makes it even harder reading by not having a good poetic voice. A lot of the narrative just sounds hollow to me,

5. Things like Lord of the Dreamworld, non-mortal beings like Death and Desire, demons, angels, witches, just don't cut it for me.

Actually, I should have known these points better, because I didn't like Gaiman's American Gods or Mr Punch. But here's why I am going to continue reading The Sandman series, likely to the very end:

1. It makes for good bedtime reading. In fact, comics of any kind make for good bedtime reading, and I've yet to find something like Tintin and Asterix.

2. The Cereal Convention part was good. A convention of murderers at a countryside motel, with the other guests a female and a man who don't know anything about the true nature of the convention. That particular issue was quite gripping, because you don't know what would happen if any of the convention members discover there are two hotel guests who are not of their creed, or if the latter discover the terror nest they're in. (Unfortunately, this part wasn't played up well) I like the premise a lot - I wonder if there's a film or book based on it, there should be. The Sandman would be decent if it stuck to such simple, gripping plots instead of going into surreal, abstract realms.

Speaking of gripping, Shutter Island wasn't too bad. (Spoiler alert - stop reading if you haven't watched the film and would watch it in the future) I feel it would have been much more powerful if the film had remained ambiguous on whether Teddy Daniels was a real federal agent or if he had been effectively brainwashed into believing he has been a mental patient on the island for two years. Unfortunately for my taste, the film came out quite strongly on the Teddy-as-a-genuine-patient side. If it were the ambiguous scenario, the viewer would have been confronted with the unarticulated, unconfirmed possibility that a sane man was successfully manipulated to believing he is insane. From both the viewer's and Teddy's perspective, you'd be unsure of which is reality and which is fiction, and that's always very beautiful.

Need a good female cover on this

2010-04-28T01:47:00.005+08:00

Chinese song.

People will say, "eee chinese song", or "how old already". Of everyone I know, only a handful will like this song. A German person posted a comment on one of the variation of the song: super schönes lied könnte es den ganzen tag hören ^^ -> very nice, can listen to it all day, as translated by a friend. Pretty remarkable how a German got to know it.

The beauty of the song cannot be overstated. Just listen to the way the lyrics roll off the tongue. I don't understand much Chinese to appreciate the full meaning, but listening to the melody fills me with a delight I haven't been able to find in any other genre of music - if you think you know a piece that surpasses this in musicality and the lightness of being, share it with me and I will be slightly grateful to you for the remainder of my life.

Hahaha

2010-04-24T22:39:00.003+08:00

NMP Calvin Cheng told The Strait Times he opposes the move to raise the number of NCMPs because Parliament did not need "opposition for the sake of opposition".

He said: "If opposition MPs are to enter Parliament, it should be on their own merit, through a popular mandate by the people.."...

...Said [Ms Irene Ng (Tampines GRC)]: "I hope the opposition can walk the talk so that Singaporeans can assess the quality of the opposition. I also hope that, with smaller GRCs and more single seats, the opposition will contest all seats so that more Singaporeans will have a chance to vote."

- The Strait Times, Pg A6, 24th May 2010; emphasis mine.

I love Tintin

2010-04-24T13:16:00.004+08:00

There's an amazing amount of things people are doing in their lives that make me feel like I'm wasting mine away, or, at least, not living mine out to the fullest. Time and time again I am captivated, inspired. But time and time again I remind myself that I just need to stick to my niche and I will see my own rewards one day. As much as there is an amazing amount of things I can't do, I'm pretty sure there are some things that I can do which many others can't. For now, however, I need to take my daily afternoon nap, and maybe I will give this more thought when I wake up.

Good

2010-04-18T10:11:00.005+08:00

Had a pretty fulfilling day yesterday attending the reading of one-act plays at a tutor's house. Really nice place, remote, spacious with lots of natural daylight, living room was large enough to fit almost 20 people comfortably. Photos will be up on Facebook, not here.

A number of seniors turned up, many of whom are working adults, and I was quite heartened to see a cross-section of society spending an entire Saturday listening to amateur or, at least, non-established plays. There is a kind of dedication there, or at least a perceptible interest in art. The idea of a close arts community is always comforting, and I felt quite at ease just listening to people talk about the latest plays, the latest art exhibitions, upcoming art events as well as, of course, the read-out plays.

It's not just a matter of art. People gathering on a Saturday over a particular interest is always nice. It reflects that there's more to their lives than corporate work.

Where do I go from here? From here I've got to apply Lyotard's theory of the postmodern to Jeanette Winterson's Oranges are not the only Fruit and Pinter's The Birthday Party. If that sounds nice, it's actually quite simplistic, the points really plain and straightforward. It'd be possible to bring up more interesting points but I've got no time to look too much. It's a matter of sequence. I spent the past week doing the play; if the reading had been on a later date, I would have spent that amount of time doing the essay, and then work on my play.

It's not a matter of sequence. If I didn't procrastinate so much in earlier weeks, I would've freed up more time for this potentially interesting essay. But it's ok. I think I'm the sort of person who needs poor results to motivate myself further. I'd go crazy if I had to aim for an A in everything and then despair when there's a B.

After the B it will be revision for final exams, after that a short nearby holiday trip, after that I will see what opportunities offer themselves. I've got a number of things to settle, not least of which is to have a splendid meal at KFC.

Hmm

2010-04-14T21:34:00.002+08:00

I know a literature student who takes some maths modules, because she says there's a calming effect in doing maths, in finding answers. The reason why I'm putting this here is completely unknown to me.

24-Hour City

2010-04-08T00:44:00.006+08:00

I just had a somewhat filling supper of Mcdonalds, consisting of salt, sugar and saturated fat. I'm pretty sure there was a substantial amount of MSG too when I ate the Shaker Fries. I licked my fingers just to be sure.

You would think there are better supper options at the center of one of the most developed heartland places in Singapore. The fact of the matter is that there is none. There's a small kopitiam that claims to be 24 Hours but most of the stalls are closed most of the time after 10 or 11pm. Apart from that, Mcdonalds and 7-11s are the only options one has available if one is in dire need of a filling supper away from home-cooked food.

I long for the day where cities operate round the clock. To achieve that, we need a critical mass of businesses and industries to operate round the clock. Many of them can't. Some industries can't work by night because of noise issues. Some businesses require correspondence with other businesses in Asia. For the rest though, there shouldn't be an issue; higher electric bills can be subsidised by the government. But why would the government want to do that? For a simple reason: to spread the density of human beings across time. Anyone who's been caught in morning and evening rushes would know it's a pain to travel to and from work. The simplest and most effective solution, as I see it, is to simply have two shifts of work. And, of course, when there's a critical mass of workers going to work at night and through the morning, the rest will fall into place: F & B outlets, retail shops, consultancy firms, barber shops, even libraries.

The thing is, there's already a number of people who have a demand for late-night services. When I left Macdonalds it was past midnight and the workers were preparing to go home. There'd be youths who would want to meet up somewhere to smoke, drink, play cards, vandalize public property, and adults who would want to watch live sports and forget there's work the next day. If these people don't have their own means of transportation, they're going to be taking taxis, which is a relatively inefficient way of travelling. It's far better to have MRT trains leaving at half-hour intervals, something which would be implemented when more and more firms decide to work in two shifts. Furthermore, a lot of places are already lit up every night. The corridor outside is lit up through the night. The public car park downstairs is lit up through the night. Nearby roads which are virtually empty of traffic are lit up through the night. In other words, we aren't spending that much more resources in operating around the clock.

I would like to think this is only a matter of time. As population grows the absolute number of night owls who demand late-night services will rise, and so will the density of people on trains, buses and public places, creating an increasingly unbearable environment to be in during the day time. As other cities shift toward a 24-hour regime local businesses which work in contact with businesses overseas will find themselves in need of, or with a greater incentive to, extend their operating hours. As energy technologies become more advanced the cost of lighting up places (a cost that, we remind ourselves, we are already paying for in large part even now) through the night will be reduced.

The most important consequence that will come out of all this is that night owls like myself will have more food and recreation options late in the night. I'd like to have more close-by options for my supper. Fried beehoon, nasi lemak, prawn noodle soup, laksa, roti prata. Anything but Macdonalds.

V

2010-03-21T00:38:00.002+08:00

Watched V for Vendetta on TV. Just like Watchmen, it's much more gripping and poetic on paper than on screen. Natalie Portman acting as Evey was just terrible, and I almost turned off the TV when the opening sequence portrayed Evey as a self-confident woman and not as she was in the graphic novel.

Life is generally stable so far, with a number of ants running around the table looking for scraps of food. In secondary school people would clandestinely tap the shoulder of a friend and act innocent. Friendships those days were plain, simple, intimate. No one plays such silly games anymore.

Lunch for today (IV)

2010-03-08T21:45:00.016+08:00

I read a food review on Sunday Times and with immense swiftness and enthusiasm headed down today to try the food out. The place: Northern Thai Restaurant at Tyrwhitt Road. The food: Tom yum fried fish soup with rice. Calling it a restaurant may be slightly misleading because it's really just a stall in a coffeehouse. There are 3 other stalls under the same roof and the place is quite unremarkable as coffee shops go. It was written in the newspaper article that the area is tranquil but I beg to differ. It's tucked away along a small road, sure, but the traffic's still moderately busy, at least when I went at 1pm. There are more peaceful coffeeshops in Singapore.

That being said, it's still a pleasant place to have a slow, relaxed lunch on a weekday. Food I tried was so-so, better than foodcourt fare but not much better than coffeeshop fare. The best tom yum fried fish soup is still the one opposite Zhonghua Secondary School. It's shifted already, whereabouts unknown.

Here are some shots of the surroundings. The area is definitely a nice place to do some exploring, lots of small roads and traditional shops around. There's a swimming complex on the same road too, so a 10am swim 11am lunch would be great.

Was heartening to see some foreigners about. One of the beauties of Singapore lies in her quiet roads and coffee shops in the heartlands, and I've always thought it amusing how so many Singaporeans are smitten by overseas travels without first fully exploring our tranquil neighbourhood gems.

Dropped by City Square Mall too, which was in the area. A relatively peaceful mall in the midst of some residential areas. There's a pretty pleasant foodcourt at the 4th floor with lots of natural daylight and lots of space.

I feel cosy eating in large places with low human density. You can hear the faint tinkle of utensils and people talking around you while still be able to remain in your own world.

I've been watching Survivor: Heroes versus Villains. In this season selected good guys from past seasons are placed in the same tribe, selected bad guys in the other tribe. In the last episode both tribes were given a clue to the hidden immunity idol, which grants an individual (not the tribe) immunity to the person who finds and uses it at tribal council.

I think it's interesting how the two tribes responded. The Villains tribe set up an agreement: no one is to look for the idol by him or herself, or that person would be ostracized. The Heroes tribe responded by having a free-for-all search for the idol. Given the nature of the idol, it's most advantageous to find it without letting anyone else know you've found it. What I think is that everyone in the Villains tribe knew that everyone else is going to search for the idol discreetly. One may verbally agree not to look for the idol, but I think everyone knew everyone else would be tempted to break that verbal agreement, so they implemented a further deterrent: anyone caught looking for the idol would be a target in future tribal councils. The Heroes tribe, on the other hand, set up no such contract. Everyone just searched for it openly.

I'd say society operates more like the Villains tribe than the Heroes tribe. We enact laws and compel people to follow them because we know we would do condemnable actions if it were otherwise, and we suspect everyone else would do so too. Because we are cognizant of this, and because we are fearful of the chaos that may ensue, we say: Ok let's set up a truce. No one is to rob from anyone else. Anyone who robs is punishable. From this perspective a wrong action is wrong only because it was defined wholly that way by society, and not because there is something intrinsically wrong in that action.

Of course, there'd be people who choose to defect from the contract, which is why you've got someone like Russell who went to search for the idol discreetly, all by himself, and got found out in the end.

I witnessed a primary-school dance competition on Saturday. Young girls were dancing in a raunchy manner to loud hip-hop music. The sight was so depressing I had to go eat KFC for lunch.

The crowds...are overwhelming

2010-03-05T02:55:00.004+08:00

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2010/03/sylvia-lim-economic-growth-must-benefit.html

All this comes at a time when salaries for ministers are rising once again, something not reported in The Strait Times.

Meeeeeeadoooooooowlark/ fly your way down

2010-03-03T00:50:00.002+08:00

Makes you forget about the drudgery of life almost immediately.

Haben Sie gehört das Deutsche band?

2010-02-18T02:00:00.002+08:00

Watched The Producers for a class. Not bad, not too bad at all. There's a single scene inside that cracked me up for 20 seconds. It was great. Some jokes are best when you first watch it. After that you can never attain the same amount of quality laughter again.

Here's a scene. No it isn't the scene that I like best. I don't even find it funny. Ok, it's mildly funny. I do, however, like one of the song inside. It makes me want to wobble my head left and right.

Arghumgamgr

2010-02-09T00:34:00.003+08:00

Just read an article which shows, among other things, that there is a positive relation between use of news media and civic engagement. Some theoretical explanations offered are that news give 'voice to community concerns', and 'not only [do they] educate, they provide the basis for political discussion and deliberation that can lead to civic action' (pg. 371).

The writers are, of course, quick to re-emphasize that the role of news media in promoting civic participation may only be mediatory in nature (pg. 371). In other words, it could be the case that people who are already disposed to engage in civic activities merely use the news as a springboard to civic participation.

Now, I'm quite apathetic to the plight of the Haiti people, as well as most victims of natural disasters. Apart from interesting links friends sometimes insist I read, my only consumption of news media is The Straits Times, whose quality many would find debatable at best. I consistently skip articles on natural disasters, terrorism, military conflicts, the economy (especially Singapore's economy), and politics (especially Malaysian and American politics). What I'd like to know here is if I'd participate in fund-raising events for Haiti if I had actually bothered to read more about it, not just in The Strait Times but in weekly magazines, emails and websites. If there's an increase in my civic participation in this regard, then I'd be more inclined to think use of news media has a causal link with civic participation; if not, then I'll just be one more example showing that civic compassion is derived from deeper sources.

I remember going down to sign a petition by the SDP calling on the Singapore government to disclose her arms dealings with Myanmar, or something like that. Obviously I'm concerned over some issues more than others. My number one concern now is the warm weather. Buses taking 20 minutes to arrive is a close second, though whether we live in a matrix is an equally pressing issue.

2 responses

2010-02-03T21:58:00.004+08:00

I'd criticise people who cherry-pick modules based on how easy they think it is to score in them, at the expense of intellectual or personal interest. This semester, however, I replaced 2 modules that had group project components with 2 that didn't, at the expense of some intellectual interest. How different am I then from those I'd criticise?

2 responses here. 1) I retract my impressions of such people and concede that I am just as pragmatic, or shallow, as them. Or 2), I argue that shunning modules which one believes one can't score in is more shallow than shunning modules that have group projects in them.

I'll give this issue more thought the next time the bus takes 20 minutes to arrive.

Dinner for yesterday + King's Albert Park

2010-01-25T12:20:00.012+08:00

Dinner for yesterday: Korean food at some Korean restaurant near King's Albert Park. 13 complimentary dishes with free refills - they are those you see in small white bowls and include things like anchovies, kimchi, sweet potato, lettuce-in-spicy-sauce, and other less appetising vegetables.

Main dishes (no free refills for those) we ordered were fairly generic dishes: BBQ pork, Ginseng chicken soup, and some beef in sweet sauce. Nothing particularly Korean, though we did have some unique noodles and rice-with-some-sauce. All in all I didn't really like it because most dishes taste too plain. For example the chicken soup had very little chicken flavour, and you need to add a copious amount of salt to have it taste more appetising. I suspect it's more a reflection of Korean culture than it is the shop's lack of culinary skill.

By the way, the food entries you find on this blog are not meant to be reviews of any sort. Hence a lack of effort to find the exact name of the dishes here, as well as the name of the restaurant. Hence you see that the food here are already partially eaten. In fact, one shouldn't view them as food entries; they're more like: here's what I did today.

Here's what I did yesterday too: I took a walk around King's Albert Park, since it is usually the case I arrive earlier than my friends. I used to think King's Albert Park as just a Macdonalds building. When I went there I saw some greenery behind and I thought it was just a space for cars to park. And then I saw a small path leading to an enclave of landed properties.

I like the peaceful landed-property neighbourhoods in Singapore. I particularly like the houses buried deep within those neighbourhoods. There's a sense of cosiness, of isolation. It's always fantastic to walk along long stretches of such tranquil roads in the evening light.

Tehehe

2010-01-18T23:04:00.003+08:00

We need greater turmoil than this.

I should be dropping Philosophy and Literature and taking Twentieth Century instead. Twentieth Century is a lit module covering modern and postmodern lit. Philosophy and Literature offers a 20% weightage on final exams, the lowest I've seen so far apart from modules that don't offer final exams. The lecturer said she believes philosophy should be done with plenty of time, hence the lower weightage on a 2hr exam. I completely agree.

But I'm still dropping it, for personal reasons. Twentieth Century is so-so. Always good to know more about modern and postmodern lit, though I've got some reservations over the texts. I've had a headache since 6pm and 18 pages of James Joyce has only made things worse.

Good.

2010-01-15T01:20:00.005+08:00

This is cool.

From the OP:

When you can see how they organize their nest, its like a human city.

If you observe them properly you will realize that
theres a waste disposal area,
theres a graveyard
theres a fungus farm
theres a ant childcare centre
etc etc

Like ants since I was a kid. Want to rear a farm, ruin their homes, and be inspired by their tenacity time and time again.

Summary/Update Part 2 of 2

2010-01-09T20:01:00.006+08:00

The underpass to the Esplanade has a mini-exhibition of some criminals' photos and some details about those criminals - what they had for their last meal, for example. That set me thinking: if I am a criminal sentenced to death, what statement can I possibly make with my last meal request. If I am a drug lord, I would probably want something that resembles drugs, so a bowl of white flour should do it. It will signal my unrepentance and disagreement with the law. If I am a political dissident fighting against an authoritarian regime I would probably request for a bowl of white rice, signalling purity; rice is a food for the masses too, so there would be some significance there. If I am convicted by the PAP, I would probably want a bowl of white rice mixed with black or brown rice. In that case white would symbolise the PAP and the coloured rice would symbolise how the PAP is tainted. Or maybe a bowl of white rice with some soya sauce, if just rice is too plain and hard to stomach. Then again, there would be more of an effect if one doesn't touch the meal at all, leaving it for the jailers to see.

It's Monday. School term's started. The 6-week break saw long stretches of inactivity punctuated by short periods of activity, as is usually the case with my holidays. Highlight of those 6 weeks would be a primary 6 reunion dinner at Swensons followed by a roundtable chit-chat session at some bar. Attendance was great, over half of 40 people, was great seeing everyone all so grown up and doing their own things, our form teacher turned up too, and in an old friend's words during the cab ride home, to see Ms Heng (the form teacher) after ten years is really something money can't buy. Trite yes, but only if you haven't experienced it. And yea -2009 marks our primary 6 tenth anniversary.

Resident class joker now a big-sized fellow. He was scared of injections in the past and now he's on his way to becoming a doctor. Classic. Form teacher brought our primary 6 class photograph too. Priceless.

All the alpha-males, the cool guys, didn't turn up. Not surprising - they probably can't be bothered with their past. Mildly disappointing though, because it's always interesting to see whether power relations in the past still hold after ten years, or if they don't, how the quieter people would deal with their presence. The basis of the alpha-males' position in the past was that they were in the in-clique. With that basis gone one would wonder whether they would still behave as though it were not gone or if they would defer to the peace-loving majority. More males are in higher education than females. Wonder if that's just a coincidence.

I remember my primary school classmates based on our seats in class. 4 columns of paired tables. I used to seat in the 2nd last row in the 2nd column from the right. The front half of the class would be occupied by the quieter ones. (Incidentally, a substantive portion who turned up for the reunion were from the quiet region) To my right would be the active region of hot chicks and males. That's where most of class noise gets generated.

My region could be seen as the esoteric region of outcasts both voluntary and not. To my left is a guy who played soccer with the cool males but who was sometimes ganged upon by them - always a lot of tension between him and the front figure of the male pack. Behind me is a guy who was more plump with small eyes and an abrasive attitude, the kind that always attract the most flak from the cool people. I was seated with a female who sometimes ran along with the popular females and who had her own small clique other times. I remember she used to call me childish. To my front would be a guy, Heng Wee, who once during class suddenly spurted a stream of water from his mouth high up toward the ceiling. He was, I think, playing with water in his mouth. I can never forget that.

After dinner we played truth or dare in some bar, though the game should be more aptly named truth or truth because no one ever does the dare. As you'd expect familiar sex-related questions were asked. I've never understood the meaning of the game because no one can enforce the rule of honesty, and if you really don't want to reveal certain stuffs, like for example whether one had slept with a boss or teacher for favours, you can just lie. The kind of truths that are put up are the truths that people don't mind telling. There was also general chit-chatting where we swap places now and then as though we were speed-dating; and there was once when we went round the table and everyone said green light or red light with regard to our relationship status, but I guess there's always got to be some structure when everyone wants to get to be updated with everyone else in a limited amount of time.

To be honest, it was strange meeting everyone again. A friend summarised the gathering perfectly: it's like making new friends out of old friends.

The other highlight of the holidays is a bout of stomach flu, where I vomitted in my own room and felt quite sick for two days. That was the second time I vomitted in my life. The first would be after drinking a glass of white wine, and after that incident I told myself not to consume alcohol again. It's a wretched feeling, vomitting, it feels as though your insides are coming out and you got no control over your movement.

That's for the past. Where do we go from here? I should be taking these modules this sem:

*Intro to Continental Philosophy
*Philosophy and Lit
*Intro to Playwriting
*Mass Media and Culture.

4 modules only, partly because I can afford to having done some work during the holidays in the past, and partly because I've got national service remedial training these few weeks. I view that as one module (though the time spent per week is closer to the weight of two), so I'm leaving out one academic module. People ask why I fail my fitness test, and my reply is life is like that. We can have people who smoke and don't work out and who still perform very well. And we live in societies and in societies there are bound to be systems that reward some individuals and penalise others. So in NUS for example you have people who spot essays trends and who memorise essays in anticipation of those trends and they get rewarded, sometimes at the expense of others.

But it is ok. Training would be over soon enough and then I'll have more free time. I still haven't recovered from last semester, so it would be good to have more free time this semester. I'm a slow person in a fast-moving society. Initial plan for the modules is to take Environment and Society and The Theatre Experience in place of two others above but they happen to have disagreeable stuff like projects and class debates so I dropped them in the last minute. I can't stand those stuff. I just can't. The list is not finalised yet, I'm still looking for other modules that may suit my taste better.

I got Facebook recently. After the novelty has worn off I'm struggling to find a reason to log into it. There is some overlap between that place and blogging so henceforth all light stuff will go on Facebook, heavier stuffs here. Example of light stuff: Went to catch so-and-so movie today. Example of heavier stuff: why I think there is no difference between Heaven and Hell if they exist, and lengthier summaries/updates of my life. Photographs of myself and other things that I'm not using words to complement will go on Facebook. In addition, some lunches will be declared from there and you just decide whether you want to turn up or not. I've always thought that the 2nd-best system of arrangement.

The best, in my opinion, is where all your friends live in a small town, and everyone has a rough idea of where everyone else is at any time. So if today you are feeling like hanging out with a certain group you know where they'd be. Or if you feel like eating certain food you know beforehand the company that's going to be there. And if you prefer to be alone you know where to go. There is still room for some randomness though because your friends won't always be at the same places at the same time like clockwork. If you want to eat with some people and they're not where they usually are they can leave a message with the cafe owner and he'd pass it on to you when you get there, and you decide whether you want to go to the new venue or just lunch alone at the usual place. In such a system, communication will occur without any technological medium, which is the way I like it.

Speaking of technology, here's a female robot you can have sex with. With man's obsession with sex it's only a matter of time you'd have something like that. The interesting thing now is to see if this lady is the solution to rape, or if it'd reduce casual sex drastically. Of course we say that most males would probably still prefer raping or having casual sex with real people, but what if we make robots more and more life-like? Nah, probably still won't work, seeing how people still prefer natural breasts to synthetic ones. On the other hand, if a male has sex with a robot in the morning he'd probably feel less inclined to have a tryst at his workplace or go to a club at night.

Lunch for today + Dessert + Crushing a snail's shell

2010-01-06T22:48:00.006+08:00

Lunch for today: Chicken House somewhere along Upper Thompson Road. No pictures - I forgot to take them before I tucked in. What's supposedly good about this stall is they sell kampong chicken, which are purported to be firmer than normal factory-farmed chickens. It wasn't as tasty though, and the meat portion was small. Overall I'd say go for Nam Kee Chicken Rice just a couple of bus-stops away.

Wanted to have some dessert for dinner. So I queued up, told the seller what I wanted, she told me that wasn't available, and then without waiting for my response took order from the person behind me. I glared at her for a while before I left annoyed. Was what I did irrational?

I'd say so. I wanted the dessert somewhat. A more mature thing to do would be to calm myself, wait for the seller to serve the customer behind me, and then place my order. This way I still get my dessert after at most a minute's delay. Instead I left in a huff.

Perhaps there's a way to rationalise my behavior. Perhaps we can say, by glaring and leaving in a huff we are signalling our displeasure, and if they want to keep a customer around next time they'd do well not to bypass them so quickly. By withdrawing our purchases we feedback to poor-service businesses how they should behave in order to get our money, and this should ultimately benefit the consumer in the long run.

It's hard to buy into such a line of thought. For one, losing a customer probably doesn't mean much to a dessert stall with a reasonably high volume of potential customers. My feedback is going to be ineffective - and I lost a chance to eat the dessert I wanted. For another, the stall hasn't lost me completely. I'm still going to purchase from the stall when I feel like it. I'm not going to deprive myself of dessert from that stall forever because of one instance of poor service. So yea, I guess I was irrational to act in the way I did. That's why they say emotions are sometimes irrational.

Some nights ago I saw a gigantic ant-like bug the size a third of your finger. I got a pair of scissors and played with it for a while, before snipping off the top third of its body. The severed head was still moving even after thirty minutes. I took some shots with a camera but I'm not going to put them here partly because the shots are too blurry but mainly because I'm feeling lazy now.

What can we say here? I believe there are some who will say I will get my retribution next time. Maybe when I go to Hell I would experience being tortured in the same way I tortured the bug. I wonder how this group of people feel when they use insecticides to kill pests. Others like Kant may say such sadistic treatment of insects is indicative of how this person would treat human beings under certain circumstances.

I wouldn't be so quick to judge people like that. While it's true sadistic treatment of insects reflects a sadistic streak in one, we must be careful of expanding this streak to humans or other higher-being animals. At best we are entitled to say sadistic treatment of insects reflects a sadistic nature against insects. I do not think we are entitled to say a sadistic nature against insects reflects a sadistic nature against any part of nature that are not insects. I remember some time ago there was some person who cut off the legs of cats. We feel disgusted, but I think people who make remarks that such a person is a danger to human society are unjustified. I hold that such a person is liable to the charge of animal cruelty, and I hold that if there is such a thing as insect cruelty I am liable to that charge; however if we are to extrapolate such behavior to behavior against humans, and judge one's morality from there, then the onus is on the prosecution to prove that there is some link, even a correlational one, between same sets of action applied to different sets of beings.

The same goes for people like Seetoh (see post below) who want to judge one's moral character based on, in part, how one dresses and how one behaves in public.

The young lack moral compass

2009-12-31T20:55:00.007+08:00

From http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_472080.html:

Dec 31, 2009
TEEN CRIME
The young lack moral compass

I REFER to the series of reports this week, titled 'Teen crime: A ticking time bomb'. We should be alarmed. The audacity of youth crimes is symptomatic of the moral milieu of our youth.

Contributing to the moral crisis is de-traditionalisation, which is the progressive decline in the influence of tradition and social institutions on the formation of values. This has grown in parallel with an increasingly tolerant and individualistic interpersonal morality.

Actions which were considered shameful in previous generations are now considered 'cool'. Skimpy shorts worn by girls, vulgar prints on T-shirts and inappropriate expressions of intimacy are a common sight. Youths no longer fear social stigma; some find their self-worth precisely in their fearlessness to break social conventions.

Institutional negligence is another contributing factor. Flagrant disregard for rules is rampant and left unchecked in educational institutions. I have seen students smoking, wearing flip-flops, playing poker and occupying seats reserved for staff in cafeterias, under signs that prohibit such behaviour. Warnings and campaigns have not worked.

Teachers are reluctant to discipline students for fear of parents' complaints and negative feedback from students. When students know the authorities are lax in enforcement, they lose respect for rules and push the envelope.

After getting away with small violations, they become emboldened to commit more serious offences. Unfortunately, when they cross the line, it is too late and they end up in jail.

As observed by Dr Carol Balhetchet, director of youth services at the Singapore Children's Society, parents have become more indulgent and less of a moral compass to their children.

Many parents fail to see that children who misbehave in public today will become the inconsiderate and selfish neighbours and colleagues of tomorrow.

Let's not fool ourselves with the statistic that fewer youths are arrested. Listen to their language and watch their behaviour and you know the situation is dire. With the push to make youth creative, globalised and entrepreneurial, let's help them to be moral too.

Seto Hann Hoi

Questions we need to ask

1. In what way is dressing in certain ways and smoking in school indicative of one's morality?

2. Are old traditions always morally sound and ethically justifiable, such that "detraditionalization" is automatically a negative phenomenon?

3. Is it true that "children who misbehave in public today will become the inconsiderate and selfish neighbours and colleagues of tomorrow"? Consider the converse: Is it true that children who behave in public will become considerate and selfless individuals?

4. Is the "flagrant disregard for rules" the result of weakening moral fibres or the result of a larger teenage population base? Is the observation even a valid one?

5. In what way is enforcement via authority a morally superior system to an authority that does not enforce rules as strictly?

Summary/Update - Part 1 of 2

2009-12-29T00:56:00.006+08:00

Philosophy of Language exam was with a History Honours exam a few weeks ago, and on that day I observed how carefree and merry those History buffs were. They made jokes in good english and there seemed to be an unspoken cohesiveness amongst them and even their professor chit chatted and laughed with them. Five minutes before entering the exam classroom, you would have thought they were a bunch of friends going into a bar or something.

I've always been envious of such a class. In the first place, it's good enough to meet people who pursue the same intellectual interests as yourself. Even better if you can get along well with them. And to display such a light-hearted attitude toward examinations is surely a refreshing change from the hunched-over-notes atmosphere we find common in Singapore.

One would have thought there would be something similar going on with the Philosophy of Language students. After all, class size was similarly small, the kind that is best for cultivating a warm and jovial atmosphere. And you'd thought people who are interested enough to take such a course would bond well. But it is not the case, for a multitude of reasons I shall not explore here. If past experience is anything to go by, I doubt I'd find myself a nice Philosophy class where I'd get to know some really nice individuals. To date the best class I've been is a non-Philosophy class, and it's likely I would enjoy the company of those classes more than I would Philosophy classes. Surely there's an irony there, because, again, you'd have thought people who share the same intellectual interests would click better. That's a thesis I think that would prove to be untrue with respect to myself. The comeback, of course, would be that people who take the same classes do not necessarily have the same intellectual interests...But let's leave it at that for now.

One more thing can be said about that History class: I think they were as relaxed as they were partly because they knew they're all competent people. They were probably well-prepared for the exam and they knew they would do well. And they also knew that their friends are competent people who would also do well. And some of them probably knew that they knew. When you know that the peers you're talking to are competent people like yourself, there's a feel-good feeling that emerges. It's something akin to fighting close combat against some rivals with a group whose members you know are well-versed in close combat because you've trained with them before.

I wasn't too happy after I took the Introduction to Psychology finals. Firstly, silly sideline things were tested. More important, they told us to study the 1st half of the course for the finals when it was covered in the mid-terms. Nothing wrong with that, but only 1 out of 5 short-answer questions was related to content covered in the 1st half of the semester, and it was a question you probably didn't need to revise to answer. The annoying thing is students expend significant amounts of time and energy to revise the 1st half of the course, because we were told it was examinable for the 5 short-answer questions. Being a conscientious student that was what I did, and so I couldn't help feeling cheated.

That's all for school matters. To be honest, that's not all. I've wanted to write a critique of grading systems in general and this sem's going-ons add more fuel to the fire. It should be emphasised that I'm critical of both desirable and undesirable outcomes, not just the undesirable ones, because there's always a tendency to think people who criticise systems usually do so only because they are disadvantaged by the system. I believe I've been given the advantage in the current system many times, and I believe those advantages, as much as the disadvantages, are unfair, unjustified, incoherent, and contradictory to the tenets of an institute of higher learning. But I shan't. It is ok. I realise the best action I can take short of dropping out of the system completely is to dissasociate myself from reality as far as possible. Our lives aren't accountable to the standards of outsiders. They are to ourselves.

Hmm

2009-12-26T18:51:00.002+08:00

And the priest? A man of broad principles. Of liberal sentiments. Even a generous man. Something of a philosopher. Yet one might say that his way through the world was so broad it scarcely made a path at all. He carried within himself a great reverence for the world, this priest. He heard the voice of the Deity in the murmur of the wind in the trees. Even the stones were sacred. He was a reasonable man and he believed that there was love in his heart.

There was not. Nor does God whisper through the trees. His voice is not to be mistaken. When men hear it they fall to their knees and their souls are riven and they cry out to Him and there is no fear in them but only that wildness of heart that springs from such longing and they cry out to stay His presence for they know at once that while godless men may live well enough in their exile those to whom He has spoken can contemplate no life without Him but only darkness and despair. Trees and stones are no part of it. So. The priest in the very generosity of his spirit stood in mortal peril and knew it not. He believed in a boundless God without center or circumference. By this very formlessness he’d sought to make God manageable. This was his colindancia. In his grandness he had ceded all terrain. And in this colindancia God had no say at all.

- Cormac McCarthy, The Crossing.

...

2009-12-13T18:26:00.004+08:00

My suffering provides me with the opportunity to show courage and patience. It provides you with the opportunity to show sympathy and help to alleviate my suffering. And it provides society with the opportunity to choose whether or not to invest a lot of money in trying to find a cure for the particular kind of suffering. A good God gives us a deep responsibility for ourselves, each other, and the world (for whether and how we flourish); and the free choice of how to exercise that responsibility. And it is very good for us to have this responsibility. Although of course a good God regrets our suffering, his greatest concern is surely that each of us shall show patience sympathy, and generosity, and thereby form a holy character. Some people badly NEED to be ill for their own sake; and some people badly need to be ill in order to provide important choices for others. Only so can some people be encouraged to take serious choices about the sort of person they are to be. For other people, illness is not so valuable.

- Richard Swinburne, Oxford theologian; link here

Singapore Idol 3 Top 3 [Updated]

2009-12-08T21:18:00.005+08:00

Tabitha sang Superwoman very nicely. Sylvia sang a ballad song after Tabitha, and I wonder how much of Tabitha was still in viewers' minds when Sylvia sang Held (both are ballads).

How much do sequences matter? To what extent are evaluations affected by preceding ones? Exam scripts, interviews, music performances, food-tasting, applications.

Tabitha's Superwoman was great. I'm downloading the song illegally now. I only like the non-chorus bits though.

Here's the youtube video.

Nice appearance.

Lunch for Today (II) + Small Four-Wind Blessing

2009-12-07T21:07:00.013+08:00

Lunch for today: Blk 681 Hougang Avenue 8, Western food stall called Lava Rock at a small coffeeshop. Went on a friend's recommendation. It takes the concept of Botak Jones without much success, I think, because the food isn't fantastic. For $6.50 you can get a standard meal with 2 side dishes.

Herbed garlic fish.

Honey mustard chicken.

Lamb and pork, of some variety. Water droplet on the lens there reminiscent of this afternoon's slight downpour.

Peaceful walk after lunch along uncongested roads, nice feel of the cool after-rain wind and the knowledge people are at work on a Monday while you are strolling with no deadline nor pressing issue in mind. I should have taken photos of the tranquil avenues, but I decided my attention should be held fully and uncompromisingly by the cool wind and the blue sky and the near-empty sidewalks and nothing much else.

I almost pulled off a Small Four-Wind Blessing combination in mahjong last night. If it were successful, it would be my second. What's nice about mahjong, I think, is the beauty of creating nice patterns, the beauty of receiving a very nice hand, and the tension involved in waiting for that last tile to complete that pattern you strived for. The time I successfully did the Small Four-Wind Blessing, I had such a neat opening hand I regret not taking a photo of it. Unfortunately, I alerted my partners this time round by referring to a mahjong manual someone once hand-wrote for me. It made them suspicious of what I was trying to do, so I had to abandon the plan. I guess this means I can't take a photo of a nice hand next time, because that would make people suspicious too. Heheh.

Environmental Fascism

2009-11-29T21:25:00.006+08:00

Villages [in Zimbabwe] sell elephant licenses. Hunters currently pay as much as $30,000 for the privilege. It is a lot of money in a country where the per capita annual income is around $2000. What about the morality of sport hunting? Is it something a sane person would do? Winston Churchill once shot a rhinoceros, but failed to kill it. The wounded rhino charged. The hunting party opened fire. The rhino kept coming into a hail of bullets, swerving aside at the last moment before more bullets finally brought it down. Churchill later wrote that, even in the midst of the charge, "There is time to reflect with some detachment that, after all, we it is who have forced the conflict by an unprovoked assault with murderous intent upon a peaceful herbivore; that if there is such a thing as right and wrong between man and beast - and who shall say there is not? - right is plainly on his side.

-pg 19-20

Do we have the right to put a stop to [animal culling]? Animal rights organizations say no. Their approach is individualistic rather than holistic. They focus on each and every animal rather than on larger questions about species or habitat. Their view is particularly salient in the case of elephants. When rangers cull elephants, they take out whole families in order to avoid leaving orphans and other remnants of shattered families. The horrible thing is that, under favorable conditions, elephants can hear the sound of a culling operation up to thirty kilometres away, and elephants are smart -- smart enough to understand and sgare the terror of the ones being shot. Cynthia Moss, who has written fascinating and convincing books about what it is like to be an elephant, says elephants deserve something better than to be exterminated like rodents. She has a point.

Lawrence Johnson, though, argues that there are times when "the interests of species are not adequately protected by a concern for individuals." The individualistic animal rights position is powerful, given the nature of elephants, but it leaves us in a horrible quandary, for the price of absolute rights may be extinction. Nonetheless, elephants are not like zebra. They are not the kind of creature that we have a right to treat as mere means. Cynthia Moss (p.226) said she would rather see elephants go extinct than see individual animals murdered for sake of population control, and she is not alone. If elephants had a voice in the matter, perhaps, they would thank Moss for her stand. Perhaps not.

- pg. 22-23, David Schmidtz: When Preservationism Doesn't Preserve.

I'm with Cynthia Moss on this one, even if the price to pay is the extinction or suffering of the entire herd.

Lunch and society

2009-11-26T14:49:00.009+08:00

Lunch for today, Hup Hup bak chor mee at Ang Moh Kio Central Block 724 Food Centre. Supposedly very good, but it wasn't really to my liking. Ingredients were good and plenty for $2.50, noodles were bouncy, soup was tasty. But I like bak chor mee with the strong vinegar taste, for this one the tomato ketchup taste was too strong. Or maybe they got my order wrong, and gave me the no-chilli version instead of the less-chilli version. You would have thought mee kia with the vinegar taste would be pretty common everywhere but in recent times a new style seems to have replaced it. This new style, like the one I had for lunch, seems to emphasise the ketchup taste more, at the expense of the vinegar taste. It's hard to find the older style these days, at least at the areas around me.

I had no problems finding the place but I forgot the way back and so after lunch I got lost among the shophouses and HDB flats. Not that I minded though, it's always nice and peaceful to stroll around neighbourhoods and stretches of shophouses after lunch. I saw school kids with uniforms tucked out and long j-pop style hair accentuating their perceived wildness, mothers screaming at babies in trolleys screaming back at them, mobile-phone shop attendants with dyed hair dyed blonde looking listless in their small counters in the hot afternoon weather, old folk some in groups some alone all walking at a slow pace in any case. I missed the train, waited 6 minutes for it, saw people rushing for seats when it came, noted that there will always be more people than there are seats. This is how society is, this is how society will ever be.

Examination theories

2009-11-22T04:31:00.006+08:00

I've got a number of theories as to why I have been feeling restless and completely unmotivated to revise my work.

Theory 1: I've read what I need to read. In fact, I've already gone through some of the content twice, especially those covered for midterms. I am the sort of person who hates going through things again. The interest is just lost. This theory explains why I feel a significant sense of repulsion at the mere thought of revision. The counter to this explanation is that it's not entirely true my interest is lost at everything I've already read.

Theory 2: I've crammed a lot of stuff in the past week, I'm burned out. This theory explains why I feel generally lethargic, such that revision is not possible. What this theory needs to explain though, is why sleep doesn't remove the mental lethargy. Also, what is there in having been exposed to too much information that leads one to feeling 'burned out'?

Theory 3: Final exams are quite pointless to me. Getting a list of As has never been part of my game plan. Learning has been though. Unfortunately, I think final semester exams are a poor way to test one's learning and skills. All I think it tests is how well-read you are (sometimes involves memorisation) and how well you can apply knowledge in given questions. There is nothing inherently wrong in being tested in your ability to think on-the-spot and apply what you've learnt in the confine of 2 hours - I just don't see the value of the goal of such tests. If the goal is to ensure that students have internalised knowledge that they should internalise, then I fail to see the need of a timed test; if the goal is to test students' critical thinking skills, then I fail to see how projects and term papers don't already do that. One can further argue against the former by pointing out that firstly, some exams are open-book anyway. Secondly, most arts papers have a number of essay questions one can choose from, so the examination obviously isn't out to test whether a student knows all salient points of the course. Thirdly, if the goal is to test if students' have come out of the course with the knowledge they should have, then I fail to see how bell-curving has any relevance at all.

And the issue is made worse by the fact that they don't return examination scripts, even upon request. Students therefore can't learn what they did right or wrong, so I really don't see the value of such tests. It is only natural, then, that I feel totally unmotivated. It's kind of like putting you in a room and asking you to walk in a circle and being graded in how well you can walk in a perfect circle. The exercise seems quite pointless, and one can hardly blame one for failing to feel motivated to do well in the task. We can say that doing the deed can get you out of the room - and that's precisely why I am doing the deed, that is, not sitting in the corner of the room and not walking at all. But again, the motivation to walk in a perfect circle is not there, and that's the focus here. To make things worse, you may walk in a perfect circle but still be told it is an oval; or you may walk in an oval but still get a standing ovation from the authorities watching you. And you just simply can't figure out the reasons why.

Theory 4: The weather's pretty good. This is not a theory to be taken lightly. As someone said somewhere, this weather tests my resolve not to sleep. This theory probably accounts for why I'm sleeping so much these days; it fails to account for the significant sense of repulsiveness when I think of revision though.

Theory 5: I lack willpower, discipline. Definitely a theory to be taken seriously. But the question one can pose here is why. Why do I lack willpower? I submit that it is either the case I was born with a limited amount of willpower and an unlimited amount of restlessness, or that Theories 1-4 are at work here, in any combination.

Low Morale

2009-11-21T02:35:00.003+08:00

Come December, my usual board game partners will all out of town.

People always don't want to try (Fringe)

2009-11-16T23:50:00.004+08:00

Tonight's episode of Fringe wasn't bad at all. The show to date hasn't been impressive, though the female protagonist is very suave. Her looks are very good, her acting isn't bad, and she has some facial expressions that are quite unique, including her look of perplexity that is mild and ambiguous in some way I cannot put into words.

In this particular episode Dunham (that's the female character) was told by a leading bad guy to pass test 1 of 10 tests designed for unwilling recruits of some cult that that our world is at war with a parallel world. The test came in the form of a wooden box with bulbs on it, and the test is for Dunham to turn off the lights, after they have been switched on, mentally. If she completes it successfully, the bad guy would reveal information pertaining to the location of a bomb that will detonate and release a deadly toxin in the city. So she cheated. With the help of her colleague who reprogrammed the bulbs discreetly she completed the task, got the location and went down to de-activate the bomb.

The twist - and I think it is a good one - is that the same setup of lit bulbs were found on the bomb, and to turn off the bulbs mentally is the only way to de-activate it without harm. So she tried to do so this time and it worked.

This whole thing might sound amateurish but the appeal lies in the ambiguity of the plot. Beneath the thread of cultish science fiction, that the writer probably anticipated it to repel many a scientific person, is the possibility that the whole thing might have been a hoax. Dunham was unsure how she could have managed the feat - and an explanation was offered by her colleague that the lights were probably pre-programmed by the bad guy himself, so as to convince her that she does have some power and therefore be still a pawn in his depravity. That is, beside incredulous science fiction is also the simpler notion of psychopathology; the whims of a a para-normal individual becomes more like the whims of a psychotic individual who just wants to play games with people. But Dunham asks how it is possible he could have known what time she would have arrived at the bomb site. Again, the focus here is the ambiguity - no clear answer is given yet, and the viewer is left curious over how the plot at large would play out.

One other interesting point of the show came up when they were reading a manifesto written many years ago presumably by a member of the cult. I can't remember the exact words, and they are definitely more poetic than my summary, but essentially the manifesto said that: all our brains have infinite power, and this power is limited by physical forces, social forces, etc.

I think it's an intriguing point, if not a particularly mature one to make given our current state of knowledge. The idea that our brains are essentially superhuman but limited immediately by the fact of being born in a social setting, by a biological mother, on this planet that exudes many physical laws and social norms, is an interesting prospect and I would definitely want to take it up in reading or in writing.

I'm looking forward to future episodes now, not least because of Olivia Dunham, who is...Oh I already mentioned. Too bad the male characters aren't very cool; a Lincoln Burrows, T-Bag (Prison Break) or Sawyer-type character (Lost) would have complemented the coolness of the female lead quite well. I think the last two would be good, add some rogue humour and it'd be interesting to see how a cool character like Dunham responds. Traditional pairings have always been physicality and intelligence, hot and cold, good leader and roguish rebel, young and old, streetwise person and savant, witty and witty. It'd be great to see cool and confident with rogue and stand-offish.

Where bears roam free

2009-11-14T02:35:00.007+08:00

I was doing a bit of blog hopping when one particular one made me go wow. I don't typically keep in touch with socio-political blogs, be it the intellectually refined kind or the gutter kind, so I must admit I'm quite taken aback to witness the kind of thoughts people are holding. Or rather, I am aware some people out there hold very conservative views; it is, however, quite a different matter to see them fleshed out in the open, in writing.

Now, this is the blog I'm referring to. In this place where bears roam free, the author thinks that the legalization of homosexual acts will lead to the destruction of the family unit, and that there is no such thing as rape in marriage. In the comments of this entry, he/she (actually, we can probably assume it's a he) says: 'In marriage, there is already a blanket consent to sex. How can [there] be rape?' He goes on to say:

It is a UNIVERSAL custom all around the world, with NO EXCEPTION (until the today, no thanks to the work of the Family Busters), that marriage means blanket consent to sex. That is one of the special privileges in marriage since time immemorial.

I would suggest one reads the comments of that entry in greater detail, for a better understanding of the thoughts different people hold.

Reading some of his entries, I'm now more aware of the extent to which heterosexuality has been normalised into our society. I would like to draw your attention to some of the arguments and details I've gleaned from a sociology module I'm taking, a module that I would recommend to every student, but unfortunately I do not have the luxury of time to do so. Suffice it to say that 1) homosexual behavior was not only tolerated but ritualised in many societies in the past and indeed in some even in present times; and 2) it was through, in large part, the hegemonic spread of the ideals of certain religions that heterosexuality is now internalised as appropriate, and that any other behavior contrary to that is deemed as deviant, abnormal, a threat to the family unit, a start to the decline of civilization.

Regarding underage, but consensual sex, my position is the same as with all forms of consensual sex: the state has no business in them.

I've added the website to my list of bookmarks because I need to be more aware of what's going on in the real world. I need to understand how different people think. Only then can one substantiate the claim that the world is a tragedy for those who feel, a comedy for those who think.

People always don't want to try

2009-11-11T22:58:00.007+08:00

Let's say you're on the bus reading something. The person beside you is looking at what you're reading in an unabashed manner. You know that he is looking at what you're reading. And unless his social intelligence isn't too well-developed, he should know that you know he is looking at your stuff. It follows naturally that you know that he knows that you know he is looking at your stuff.

Every one of us has achieved a desirable result in our lives at some point of time or another. It could be in video games, it could be winning a dance competition, it could be scoring well for a project, it could be pulling off a nice joke, it could be successfully befriending someone, it could be getting your superior to grant you a pay rise, anything at all. And there are some people in life who, in thinking about success or failure over any particular event or in general, know that they will do well. Of these people there will be a smaller group of people who know that they know that they will do well. And there will be some who know that they know that they know that they will do well. I don't think this chain of thought goes on infinitely.

Let us call the achievement of result the 0th level. If you know that you will do well, you are a confident person, and you are at the 1st level. If you know that you know that you will do well, you are a reflective and confident person, and you are at the 2nd level. If you know that you know that you know you will do well, I think it means your mind wanders a lot while waiting for the bus, and you are at the 3rd level where buses take very long to come. We may think that it's possible to go to level 4, but I think if you're at level 3, you would almost reflexively think that this can carry on forever. Paradoxically, when you think that, the chain of thought collapses and remains at level 3 or somewhere slightly beyond that in a murky darkness.

The step from level 0 to 1 usually requires that we have some kind of feel to the situation. And this feel usually comes with experience. If you had a certain feel prior to achieving a result, then it is only natural to feel like you would achieve a similar result when that same feel comes. So, for example, if you are playing chess with players of your own league and you had a very good opening and middle game, then you usually start feeling confident because you know from experience that given a good opening and good middle game, you should go on to win the match, barring any careless mistakes. (Note that we don't have to actually do well to know that we will do well)

But I wonder if this feeling one gets is reliable at all. Which is why I started a project some time ago: given a selected event, I would describe my feeling before the release of results, and write down the results to see if feeling is a reliable indicator to result. So far, though, the findings have been inconclusive.

I would also like to mention that the Indian stall in NUS arts canteen is, I think, fantastic. The chicken curry is great - light and salty - and I like the chickpeas and the tandori chicken. Sadly, going by the length of queues, it seems like people either haven't tried it, or tried it and don't like it. I think most would be of the former. People always don't want to try.

It is also worth noting that I am one who likes looking at other people's stuff on the bus, sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly. It's sometimes quite amusing because sometimes I want to blatantly signal that I am interested, and I want to signal that I know that he knows that I am interested. So if someone is sitting on the seat beside me, I would look directly at his or her stuff, and the very mere fact that he or she knows that I know, and also that I know that they know that I know, is enough to tickle me for quite a while. I also generally do not mind if people look at what I'm reading. In fact, I think it's pretty amusing if you signal that you know that they are reading by positioning the material such that it is convenient for both persons to read.

Ah

2009-11-08T00:19:00.004+08:00

I'm eating tom yam instant noodles now. I've got a cup of cold milk with me, and I've got no deadlines left. I would be feeling a lot more content with life now if this cup of instant noodles weren't so small.

Sweeter for the larceny of time and flesh, sweeter for the betrayal.

2009-11-02T23:32:00.005+08:00

One of the main threads going on in Cormac McCarthy's "All the Pretty Horses" is a 'dangerously ill-fated romance' that sees the story's protagonist falling in love, quite at first sight, with the daughter of his boss at the ranch. As you'd expect, the old folks aren't in favour of their relationship, so they have to do things discreetly. All things constant, I should have put down the book there and then. But there's something egging me on, there's something alluring about his prose, and I think it's best if I put you in his words:

They'd ride at night up along the western mesa two hours from the ranch and sometimes he'd build a fire and they could see the gaslights at the hacienda gates far below them floating in a pool of black and sometimes the lights seemed to move as if the world down there turned on some other center and they saw stars fall to earth by the hundreds and she told him stories of her father's family and of Mexico. Going back they'd walk the horses into the lake and the horses would stand and drink with the water at their chests and the stars in the lake bobbed and tilted where they drank and if it rained in the mountains the air would be close and the night more warm and one night he left her and rode down along the edge of the lake through the sedge and willow and slid from the horses back and pulled off his boots and his clothes and walked out into the lake where the moon slid away before him and ducks gabbled out there in the dark. The water was black and warm and he turned in the lake and spread his arms in the water and the water was so dark and so silky and he watched across the still black surface to where she stood on the shore with the horse and he watched where she stepped from her pooled clothing so pale, so pale, like a chrysalis emerging, and walked into the water.

She paused midway to look back. Standing there trembling in the water and not from the cold for there was none. Do not speak to her. Do not call. When she reached him he held out his hand amd she took it. She was so pale in the lake she seemed to be burning. Like foxfire in a darkened wood. That burned cold. Like the moon that burned cold. Her black hair floating on the water about her, falling and floating on the water. She put her other arm about his shoulder and looked toward the moon in the west do not speak to her do not call and then she turned her face up to him. Sweeter for the larceny of time and flesh, sweeter for the betrayal. Nesting cranes that stood singlefooted among the cane on the south shore had pulled their slender beaks from their wingpits to watch. Me quieres? she said. Yes, he said. He said her name. God yes, he said.
- pg. 144-145.

I was struck by this passage. It left me limp, and for a long time I couldn't understand why. It was like a certain sense of nostalgia came to me, only I couldn't grasp the referent of the feeling. It definitely isn't the man-woman romance here that caught me. I think there's something far more poignant going on than that. After some amount of reflection I think it must have been the idea of sneaking out at night, in the countryside, under a moonlit sky, going into a pool naked, no deadlines, no school, no work, nothing in your head but the splendor of the night and the splendor of life. It's the very dream I have held since I was a kid, a dream which got buried under too many things of late, too many things indeed.

Tehehe

2009-10-29T21:44:00.007+08:00

Introduction to Psychology requires us to fulfill a certain number of hours of research participation in seniors' experiments. This means you get some jokers who speed through the study as quickly as possible, giving responses without reading the questions or instructions.

Now, I'm such a joker. Today I sat beside another such joker. This joker tried to answer the questions on the computer screen seriously from the start. I know because that's what I did. Not too long after she started randomly pressing numbers on the keyboard, which was what I was doing at that time. I found that scene pretty amusing and I laughed; but I had to contain it because all else was quiet in the computer lab. So I covered my mouth with my hand and continued snickering. That in itself was amusing, so soon I was reduced to smothered bursts of uncontrollable laughter. The best part was when this joker brought out her handphone and fiddled with it while giving random responses to the questionnaire. I think the best joke of all would be if she was twittering: There's some guy beside me who's laughing like an idiot.

Reminds me of this 1.5hr long survey and people started leaving after 20 minutes. The questions required some thinking and there were so many of them that I doubt one could have seriously answered the questions within 20 minutes.

I caught up with a long-lost friend today. He's staying on campus, so I asked him if he has ever witnessed people playing charades. He said not really, though there was once he was returning back to his room late at night and he heard a woman shrieking. He thought it was someone in distress initially, but revised that opinion after some time. Because it was fairly consistent, he then thought it was the television, but concluded it was just some people playing an intensive game of charades.

He assured me he would get to witness how the game is conducted after he gains some party-organisation skills on exchange next semester, comes back and initiates his own parties. I wished him the best of luck in his endeavors.

Red herring?

2009-10-28T18:35:00.003+08:00

With respect to criticisms of Singapore's press freedom, our law minister K.Shanmugam, as reported in today's Strait Times, says:

How objective is the criticism of Singapore in relation to press freedom? Is it possible to have a modern, successful, open economy if the people are not empowered and educated?

There is an organization called Reporters Without Borders. It comes out with a ranking of countries on press freedom. In 2008 they ranked us 144 out of 173 countries, somewhere below Ethiopia, Sudan, Kazahkstan, Venezuela, Guinea, Haiti, and so on.

Monday's International Herald Tribune carried a story on Guinea. It reported: “One month ago, over 150 people were gunned down by soldiers in the West Africa country of Guinea. Women were raped on the streets, and opposition leaders were locked up. This was the response of a brutal military junta to a group of brave citizens who dared to hold a peaceful pro-democracy rally.”

Singapore is apparently below Guinea on Press Freedom.This year, we have behaved better – so we moved up to Rank 133. Below Kenya (which saw riots following a disputed election), and Congo (which continues to struggle with the aftermath of an armed conflict that has claimed more than nine million lives), but above North Korea and Eritrea.

If you look at a different ranking - the Freedom House rankings for 2009 - Singapore is below Haiti, Colombia, Kenya, Moldova, Guinea, Pakistan and so on. We are 151 out of 195.

These are all countries which are trying to progress. My point is not that we are in any way inherently superior to them. The question is whether a truly objective assessment will give us such a ranking. Our approach has therefore to been to ignore the criticisms which make no sense. The people of Singapore know better. And the investors who put in billions every year know better as well.

They do not have to come here. We do not have any natural resources. Our main selling point is that there will be good value added when they invest here, their investments will be protected, and that we are a stable democracy.

-The Strait Times Oct 28 Pg. A30.

I'm not sure if what he's trying to say makes sense at all.

Time

2009-10-21T22:29:00.005+08:00

I realise that I have been too kind a person. I've given too many classes chances that I regret giving. To date I have never skipped a class because it is not worth going; I have only skipped classes because there were more important things to attend, like for example a seminar or a meal with people with whom the arrangement of a meal is extremely hard to attain.

This has got to change. I got to take charge of my life. I got to buck up and skip classes that are not worth the time. I can't be wasting 2 hours of my life here and there attending classes with the hope that the class is worth the time. There are 2 cases in which classes are informative but still not worth going. The first is where the class simply summarises or regurgitates information that can be gotten elsewhere at significantly lesser cost. The second is where there is some value added, but where the value added is so slim that to dedicate 2 hours of time and energy to gain that value is a poor bargain.

Some may think it's pretty presumptious of me to think that I can gain information without some classes, or that I think the value added is not a lot. That's what I told myself for a year. Time and time again I've also told myself the next class would be better. And I've been punished time and time again for my discipline, humility and hopefulness. It's time to stop being kind and start being more discerning.

Hmm

2009-10-17T23:54:00.003+08:00

Watched Mary and Max earlier. I wouldn't have known about its existence if my friend hadn't flagged it to me. It's showing as part of Animation Nation 2009, something I wouldn't have taken notice otherwise. The show's very good, and I'm led to wonder how many gems are lying out there undiscovered.

I like the drums and the voices

2009-10-12T15:55:00.003+08:00

Listened to Bolero on the bus home today, reminded me of scenes of massive destruction and extreme depravity. There has got to be a reason why beautiful symphonic pieces are not dissonant with a murderer killing people for no reason.

I've got a reservation for a library book and which the previous borrower is still hogging onto a week after its due date. Obviously the library fine system isn't a very good deterrent. I suggest changing it to 50c for the first three days it's late, and $50 for every day thereafter. Sending a destructive virus to the person's email account works too.

Here's Bolero.