Why of all things i adore felines

its funny. in the darkest recesses of my mind i can pull out an image of one of my first impressions of cats. a white fella with pinkish eyes. it was at cuppage food centre back in the eighties. back then it wasnt the shithole it pretty much is now- it had decent food (i guess, judging from the crowds), and was a hot hawker centre with little ventilation and strays runnin around it.

so i stuck my hand out and the bugger clawed me, leaving a mark on my right hand.

of course it may not have been a pounce but a friendly gesticulation, but it scared the shits out of me.

so much for childhood trauma.

perhaps it was seeing them so much at hawker centres and around the neighbourhoods, or just looking at their furry coats, or the expression in their eyes as they looked up at you pleadingly, mewing for food. some might associate them with dirtiness, but somehow these struck a chord in my soul. reaching out and stroking those animals made me feel warm and fuzzy inside.

i still love them today. dirty strays may they be, but to me all cats are beautiful. they are the greatest, cutest, most adorable living things i have ever seen.

olive branches

a conversation with a friend made me think back and reflect on myself.

but no that changes nothing. its still the same.

but yes. for all intents and purposes i should moderate myself i guess. what makes me any different from them in any case?

thank you my friend.

Organisation

decided to organise the posts.

my religious rants can be found on a whole new blog.

a link to my serious stuff can also be found there.

thank you for ur continued patronage

On proselytising

If you are a Christian, and you are reading this post, i challenge you:

1- Can you read these words without a shred of bias towards your own religion?
2- Are you willing to accept the logic of the argument?
3- Or do you just see this as a rant of an unhappy unbeliever?


proselytise

1. To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith.
2. To induce someone to join one's own political party or to espouse one's doctrine.


Perhaps to understand the act itself, what about breaking the barrier down even more.

Here are definitions for two other words that are of relevance:

faith
- a system of religious belief (one of many definitions)

belief
-something believed; an opinion or conviction


But then by these 2 definitions we see that the very act of definition makes things circular!
Taking a step further: how about the definition of "opinion"?


opinion
-1. A belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.


The argument based on definition

1- An opinion does not have complete certainty (from definition above)
2- A belief is an opinion (from definition above)
3- A belief does not have complete certainty (1 and 2, combined)
4- Proselytising involves inducing one to certain beliefs (from definition above)
5- A belief is uncertain (3, reverse double negation)
5- Proselytising involves inducing one to uncertainty (4,5, combined)


This is why proselytising has resulted in conflict and strife. This degree of uncertainty is too great to ascertain the validity of. As such the vast majority is unable to come to a general consensus about how relevant such a belief is, or vice versa. Because of this uncertainty, and resulting failure to come to a general agreement, proselytising becomes nothing more than an act that puts itself in direct opposition with existing beliefs and opinions.

Well, of course the argument is that beliefs are more than just a smear of definitions you put up.

There should be a more human element to beliefs, right? How about the countless lost souls who have found grace through church? Have come to a reconciliation with God thru His voice which spoke to you?

Consider this then. The logic of comfort. I use the analogy of a baby crying. Why does he cry? There are a few possibilities:

1- The baby is hurt
2- The baby is hungry
3- The baby needs to take a shit. BADLY.
4-The baby's diapers are so full of shit it feels downright UNCOMFORTABLE

(Babies are simple. They dont have complex cognitive proceses running thru their heads and they have not yet decided on their best invisible friend, so that's why i chose it as an example)

How can the baby's problems be solved? Simple.

1- Bring him to a hospital- get that cut straightened out
2- Feed him milk!
3- BRING HIM TO THE TOILET (oh you unattentive parent, you...)
4- CLEAR HIS DIAPERS (because he's making a ruckus and its just stinking the house)

As we grow older, and we develop slowly, our needs and wants change. WE can very much fend for ourselves, and procure our own food, take care of ourselves, yada yada.....

As it is with a parent bringin food to a baby. Similarly, religion acts as food to our little minds. It is, as is so often quoted, opiate for the masses. Opiate for the masses that operates on an individual level.

But i dont eat sauce with my burger. And YOU dont like to eat red meat! And YOU are a vegetarian. Can we come to a general consensus? That there is a source of food that EVERYONE can eat? (ok maybe chicken, but what about vegetarians? vegans? monks?)

the answer ish, NO.

You cant force me to eat prairie oysters!


Singaporeans should know best- we know our food well enough to know that that neverending queue for doughnuts is just, well, hype. Or that chicken rice that took half an hour to buy? Perhaps its not as good as your friend vehemently insists it is!

Just like food, there is no universal consensus as to who likes what best. Why should religion be any different?

So dont proselytise.

Of course, unless i want to know more about it myself.

Friends, nakama, friendship

yew ish my goot brudder.
even ur bak chew O BA KA
or ur bin KANNA SAI
yew still my brudder.

-unknown forwarded sms greeting


So the issue comes up again. After a few months, the people in hall have all drifted into cliques. Typical of singaporeans. Like it was a while back, i looked at the people around me and thought to myself- how many of these people will i actually be in contact with in ten years time? Whats the point of being peachy keen and maintaining the friendlies when i know nobody genuinely gives a shit?

But its true. The guys are desperate losers, the girls lack any semblance of EQ and everybody here just cares about themselves really. Which is kind of sad because you wonder really what the word friend entails. I prefer the word 'person' or 'acquaintance'. It makes the line between people more defined.

Then again i have never hoped for anything, have never expected anything from anyone. If i ever felt unhappy, ive come to reflect that it has all been because of me putting too much trust and emphasis on the way people would look at me as a friend, and that has been grossly overestimated. Those who i genuinely gave a shit about dont even care or are just simply oblivious to everything. But as it is with life its worth taking a pinch of salt with and moving on.

Thus i offer a solution to emotional problems. To relationship problems. And let me provide an analogy.

In Mahjong, technically speaking, the dealer has the first advantage over the other players, by virtue of the fact that he draws one extra tile. But then what if he keeps getting shitty draws? He might have to depend on someone else to provide him with the tiles needed to win- IE a chi or a pon. What is nobody's that charitable?

So at the end of the day, the most powerful driving factor behind winning a mahjong hand is not the cards that come out. Sure, you are able to stall opponents winning hands by use of observation and pure skill, but these mean nothing if......

you get draws that are powerful. In short, people would say that ur 'luck is good'. The phrase i use for this is that one should always 靠自己. Depend on urself to win. Dont expect that the 5 pairs in your hand will become that 对对+混一色+ 1台 = 满台 that you are so wishing to get. What if nobody feeds you the pairs. Now, if you change that hand to a hand that is composed of kongs/kans, how much more ideal!

At the end of the day, one should always depend on his own draws. Do not expect the player in front of you to give you the tile needed to complete that 1-3 wait or 9-8 single wait.

Likewise, in life, as it is in relationships, do not depend on others and bank on their reactions and their actions. Its not a worthy investment. There are no guaranteed returns and each deposit carries with it a high risk of failure. Depending on yourself is the surest way you can ensure that your investment caries with it the maximum risk protection.

Cos if you dont give a shit about urself who will?

(Nah, actually i know of others who WILL give a shit. But theyre not here in perth. So ill have to depend on myself to draw that last card needed to complete my 十三么。 )

Supper!

supper was so good(t) i nearly wana cry.

Continental instant soup with.......

a serving of bread from the dining hall topped off with......

ROMA TOMATOES!! They are so fresh i can cry...........

Roma tomatoes are fucking good!!! I think i am infatuated with those red weenies.

The trick is to cook it with slight low heat. IE, pour boiling water over them or cook them in hot water for no more than a minute. There should be a slight tear in the skin of the tomato, like a slit.

That is goodness.

Still have some chicken stock cubes left. Perhaps i will try making some beef in chicken stock with the rest of my roma tomatoes.

ROMA TOMATOES! I LOVE THEM!

Herb!!!

It just came to my mind all of a sudden.

An irrelavancy.........

OREGANO

oregano is a form of wild majoram.

The leaves are spicily sweet, very faintly peppery and the herb needs to be used carefully or it will dominate all but the strongest of flavours. IT can, for instance, survive the joint competition of olives, anchovies, and cheese. It can be used to advantage with grilled or roasted meats or aded, with discretion, to egg and cheese dishes, salads, dressings and to leafy green vegetables

- Jill Graham, Cooking with Herbs and Spices

I WANA COOK!!!!

Why i dont believe in God

All i will say here is based on my own personal experience. In my opinion this, more than anything, justifies my stance.

I cannot make myself believe in something i have never felt. 6 years in an environment that promotes the religion still is unable to make me convinced that there is someone up there, a soverign God and the whole message that christians preach. I've felt nothing and to me those who profess to be touched during chapel service are doing nothing more than inducing a state of euphoria onto themselves.

It is that simple. Statements like "but ur from FMSS/AC" and "Everybody goes to Church" and "But i dont want you to go to hell" have absolutely no effect on me. I dont subscribe to ur beliefs so why should i care.

To me this religion comes into conflict, DIRECT conflict with my identity. My identity as a Chinese. I have seen so many instances where christians are unable to make the distinction between RESPECT and RELIGION. Please, if your ancestors did not survive the hardships that they endured during the early years do you think you could wear your sunday best and attend those happening cell groups? No. You do not have to subscribe to the practices to Taosim or Buddhism to show respect to ur elders. IF you cannot make that distinction between the 2 R's, then you deserve to be struck by a thunderbolt.

( i have the utmost disdain for "deathbed preachers". theyre nothing but a bunch of losers, pretty much like vultures picking on scraps of carrion. they are utter TRASH. )

I can never understand why this religion is so fixated on the consequences of a fundamental and the afterlife. Is what happens to us when we die any more important than the way we conduct ourselves as people in our lifetimes? Why should this religion talk so much about the consequences of eternal life at the expense of our present actions?

And of course, i cannot subscribe to something that, in my opinion, is nothing more than a selfish, self-propagating ideology that justifies itself as worthy enough to replace ANY belief system an individual subscribes to.

Not to mention conflict- i've lost people dear to me because of religion, and i have had enough. I have seen families break up because of this "invisible friend" that claims power enough to beat down all other "invisible friends".

Is the worship of an invisible friend more important? Or is the way we treat our TANGIBLE friends and family more important? To me its obvious.

That is why i will never subscribe to it. I never will.

On Mega-churches and religion- namely CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIANITY. With so much debate, people should just openly use that word.

It makes things so much easier instead of using the word 'religion' when concerns are very obviously levelled at this particular religion.

Shouldnt it? Why should anything be considered taboo?

Interesting snippets from the Forum today:


Peter Thompson:

AS AN international speaker and educator, I found Dr Lee Bee Wah's comments in her letter, 'Some mega churches affect students adversely' (ST, Sept 19), with regard to children being influenced by 'mega churches', a rather dangerous assertion which needs to be corrected......

(then he says.....)

............What would Dr Lee prefer, youths spending time learning about God or spending time at game arcades and gang gatherings which lead to rioting?

- y so defensive? arent you making an assertion urself? self righteous prick.



Teo Choon Liang:

I am a final-year university student attending what is presumably one of the 'rich' mega churches Dr Lee alluded to. While I sympathise with her feelings of 'losing' her loved ones, I find some of the assumptions and generalisations she made unfair. Firstly, while mega churches in Singapore are active in sharing their faith with the public, they do not target impressionable teenage schoolchildren. As with any religion, it is natural that as Christians we desire to share the joy of our faith with our friends and loved ones.

While church activities do take up time, as a cell-group leader I can vouch that never has the church sought to sow discord in families or influence teenagers to rebel against their parents.

- Causation does not imply correlation. But, what Dr Lee has pointed to is an obvious example of a CAUSATION. Can you say for sure that this is the case for ALL CHURCHES across the globe by the term you use as "the church"? Get your facts right, fat boy


Perhaps the most sensible article i read today is one that takes an impartial stance, by Mr Felix Ang Kok Hou. What he brings out is simple and gets the the basics. He writes:


Why Some people become "lost to Religion"

I REFER to Dr Lee Bee Wah's letter 'Some mega churches affect students adversely' (ST, Sept 19).

It is a common sentiment shared by many people whose family members and friends are 'lost to religion'.

Many new converts to a religion become fascinated with its teachings, charismatic teachers and bonds of fellowship. It's as if the meaning of their lives has been discovered. They devote all their time and effort to study and practise their religion, often isolating themselves from non-believers. The isolations are sometimes deliberate because everything that happens outside their religious grounds and circles suddenly appears unholy. They do not want to be tempted into their previous state of lives. And families and friends find it difficult to dissuade them because religion is a personal choice.

Young converts should investigate and experience for themselves whether the teachings make sense morally and how the teachings can make them better people. They should take note that most religious documents were written many years ago before history was recorded properly. And many religious teachings were delivered orally during times with no modern technology to record the teachings. Many religious teachings were originally written in languages that are no longer used today. Meanings could be lost in translation since there were words available in certain languages and not in others. And finally the contexts in which the teachings were written were vastly different from today's. Cultural, ethnic, racial, social and political forces can shape the development of a religion.

It is also important for these converts to realise that moderation and not extreme zealotry is the better way to sustain them throughout their religious lives. I know people who suffer from 'religious fatigue' after a few years of extreme religious involvement. They eventually lose their faith and release their pent-up emotions on undesirable activities.

Religious extremists do not make good followers. They make terrorists. Major religions, when properly taught, extol good moral values. A good religious man should be able to live a full and integrated life with his faith as the foundation. A holy man is not simply one who walks on holy ground. He is one who can maintain his holiness on all grounds.

...........................................................................



The problem with religion stems from the act of proselytising.

Get it into ur thick skulls. Nobody has any right to make another person believe what he does not want to. Leave it at that. One shoul always be given a rational choice of whether to believe or not to believe. This forms one of Dawkins' major arguments- the influence of religion on the young. As Mr Ang writes, "Young converts should investigate and experience for themselves whether the teachings make sense morally and how the teachings can make them better people. They should take note that most religious documents were written many years ago before history was recorded properly."

But how is it possible for kids to make that distinction? Striking them at their most impressionable? Underhand tactics, i say.

No matter how much religious people may preach about impartiality and freedom, it is but a bad faced lie. Religion that thrives on propagation will never be able to live in harmony with the world at large. It can NEVER be impartial, it can NEVER take a neutral stance. Ur either with them or against them.

One example of how religion is BIASED:

When i was in secondary school, i was told as a kid that i was REQUIRED to attend chapel service. BUT THE MUSLIMS ARE EXCLUDED. Where is the rationality behind that? Is being a Buddhist any less than a Christian or Muslim? Preferential treatment? What the FUCK man seriously. But my agitation at this is tempered by the fact that i DID MAKE A RATIONAL CHOICE to attend a christian school, so i cant really blame the school. BUT BUT BUT.....

WHY NOT THE MUSLIMS!!! ALLAH =/= GOD MEH? Shouldnt there be MORE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE BIBLE AND THE QUARAN?

I dont get the logic or the inherent bias.

Then you say- but religion has so many merits and benefits! The moral values, the emotional comfort, etc.

Then i say- why should an ideology, a BOOK CHOSEN BY A COUNCIL OF MEN, be taken to its literal extent? Imagine this- centuries ago, the bible gets compiled, a series of books, of which books are CHOSEN for inclusion.

But i am digressing.

At the end of the day, i believe that religious emphasis should always be slanted towards a singular purpose, that is the development of MORAL values and positive attitudes.

NOTHING MORE

Anything more will only breed conflict

Conversations

Some interesting conversations-

1- With my boss

(about her kid)

Me: Yeah wait another ten years and ure gona have a tough time

Boss: Yeah, with the boyfriends and girlfriends and everything

Me: Then ur gona get those calls from the principal and teachers.....

Boss: Well, thats whats its like. As long as they do the right thing, go to church and everything im okay. Do you go to church?

Me: Nah I don't

Boss: Thats interesting, everybody goes to church on sundays!

Me: (slightly amused) Well not me..............




2- At the dinner table, discussing a friend's girlfriend.

Me: Wa why so evil one

Friend 1: Really lah you ask him his gf dun like me.

Me: Why? What does she have against you? You too lao lan ah.

Friend: No lah cos i go temple. she hear i go temple then she (makes a disgusted motion with the hands) "eee" already.

Me: Huh? Wtf sia?

Friend: Really lah you ask him

Friend 2 is silent throughout.

The "Island'' Theory and Pascal's Wager- Consequences of Believing in God

The "Island" theory

This comes from the show of its same name. It is the story about how two individuals escape a microcosm of society that they live in to discover that their society is nothing but a machination created by others. There are many similar science fiction movies with similar existensialist themes, such as the ever popular Matrix franchise, the Thirteenth Floor and Dark City.

This forms the basis for this theory-

How sure are we that the fabric of society as we know it is something that is, for sure, what it really is?

Translate the consequences of religious belief into this, and this is the result-

If we believe in God, but if the above statement holds true (reality as we know it is but a lie), then what can we say about our beliefs? Wouldn't everything we know to be true be nothing more than a fabrication? Can you accept, will you be willing to accept that everything you have believed in for your whole life is nothing but a big fat lie?

The majority of people, i take, would rather be swimming in a sea of blissful ignorance about the truth than accept it for what it truly is. That i would rather live a lie than be told of the awful truth. The best analogy of this would be the scene brought up in the Matrix- where you would rather eat the blue pill than take the hard truth of the red.

You would never stoop to even consider if what you believe in is flawed, but what if, just what if, it really is? Is it so difficult to imagine a life without God? Surely you have to understand that there are those who also find it difficult to believe, just as you cannot come to reconciliation as to why the whole world does not want to believe! I know for a start the muslims dont agree with you. y dont christians proselytise to them?

and i dont want you to go to hell LAH.............



Pascal's Wager

• If God exists, you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
• If God does not exist, you gain nothing & lose nothing.
• Therefore you should live your life as if God exists

Makes it seem like a win win situation dosent it?

Therefore there is no loss. Correct?

Read those words carefully. "You go to heaven". "Your gain is infinite".

Can these two phrases be proved in any possible way?

What if you are living in a false reality? The concept of hell and heaven then is totally brought down by the sheer possibilities that can be wrought up.

tsk

Some mega churches affect students adversely

I READ with deep interest the article, 'Drawing the line between Caesar and God' (ST, Aug 2).

The objection of one of the large independent churches in Singapore to complying with provisions in the draft code of governance for charities would logically provoke concern about its financial transparency. This is especially so as these are 'rich' churches, judging by their well-equipped premises and set-up. These circumstances bring to light another concern. Some of these 'mega churches' have relentless recruitment activities in many schools and junior colleges.

My friends and I have loved ones whose lives and attitude have changed after they joined these churches. They lose interest in schoolwork to the point of academic failure. Family time is curtailed drastically, and they stop attending family functions. Parental objections are ignored, family squabbles ensue and family harmony is disrupted. It's heartbreaking. It is like we have lost our children.

I write this not to impugn any religion, but to warn against the abuse of religion. Having had such traumatic experiences, I cannot remain silent. I hope this letter will serve as a warning to parents regarding such youth activities that may destroy their personal lives and family harmony.

Dr Lee Bee Wah

.......................................................

quotes quotes, verses verses verses.

save us the religious discourse and antiquated anecdotes please. can the entirety of society as a whole come to a consensus with what you believe so staunchly? people should keep their beliefs to themselves.

true, religion may give psychological comfort to those who accept its doctrines, but ultimately it is failure to draw the line between the public and the personal that has changed religion in this way.

i do not understand how a religion can be considered something beneficial if it has the sheer power to drive a wedge between the closest possible bond between people- a parent and a child. in the face of this, even the considerable influence of a church's monetary power and influence pales in comparison.

the sheer power of being able to influence the cognitive processes of a human being is one to be feared and to be treated with caution. this ideology is more powerful than the economy of a thousand mega churches banded together. this alone is something that is cause for alarm, and a trend that we see in society today.

Nostalgia

Somehow when i heard this song today i thought of her

I remember a time many years ago when she first told me to take the mike and sing this song with her. I was just a kid back then, and it was pretty awkward listening to my voice booming out loud, but it was fun.

To my dearly departed 5th aunt- this song will always remind me of you.



Without You

No I can't forget this evening
Or your face as you were leaving
But I guess that's just the way the story goes
You always smile but in your eyes your sorrow shows
Yes, it shows

No I can't forget tomorrow
When I think of all my sorrow
When I had you there but then I let you go
And now it's only fair that I should let you know
What you should know

I can't live
if living is without you
I can't live
I can't give anymore
I can't live
if living is without you
I can't give
I can't give anymore

Well I can't forget this evening
Nor your face as you were leaving
But I guess that's just the way the story goes
You always smile but in your eyes your sorrow shows
Yes, it shows

I can't live
if living is without you
I can't live
I can't give anymore

Why there surely is no justice in the world. NAH BAY.

Suharto awarded $162m in libel suit against Time

Magazine alleged in 1999 article that his family had amassed US$15b during his rule

Sep 11, 2007 JAKARTA - INDONESIA'S Supreme Court has ordered Time magazine to pay US$106 million (S$162 million) in damages for defaming former leader Suharto by alleging his family amassed US$15 billion during his rule. The cover story in the magazine's May 1999 Asian edition said that much of the money had been transferred from Switzerland to Austria before he stepped down as president amid riots and pro-democracy protests in 1998. Mr Suharto maintained the article defamed him as well as the state of Indonesia. A three-judge Supreme Court panel ruled on Aug 31 'that Time magazine has to pay US$106 million for defaming Suharto', a court spokesman disclosed yesterday. The decision is likely to spark outrage in Indonesia, where the ageing former president has avoided being brought to trial over persistent allegations of massive corruption during his 32-year, iron-fisted rule. 'We accept the suit filed by Suharto and refuse the decision of the Appeal Court and Central Jakarta District Court,' Supreme Court spokesman Nurhadi told reporters, referring to rulings against the ex-leader made in 2000 and 2001. He said the court had also ordered that an apology be published in Indonesian newspapers as well as three Time titles. Mr Suharto had been seeking more than US$27 billion in the defamation suit filed against US-based Time over the article alleging he had stashed a massive amount of money abroad. Time said, in the article, that it had traced some US$15 billion in wealth accumulated by Mr Suharto and his six children following a four-month investigation by its correspondents in 11 countries. The money, the article alleged, included US$9 billion in cash that was transferred from a Swiss to an Austrian bank shortly after he stepped down amid unrest in May 1998. The magazine also said it had documented that more than US$73 billion 'in revenues and assets' passed through the Suharto family's hands during his time in office. But those holdings had allegedly been reduced over the years by mismanagement and the 1997-1998 financial crisis, it said. Mr Nurhadi told reporters that the Time article was 'considered inappropriate, far from decent and careless, so it is considered against the law on defamation, and against the honour of the plaintiff who is a military general, retired, and former Indonesian president'. 'Based on those considerations, the plaintiff's civil suit and demands on immaterial damages are accepted in order to uphold justice,' he added. Under Indonesian law, the only legal avenue open to Time now would be to file a request for a judicial review, for which new evidence or a procedural dispute needs to be claimed. A lawyer for Time, Mr Todung Mulya Lubis, told the afternoon daily newspaper Sinar Harapan before the ruling was confirmed that what Time published was 'based on journalistic ethics'. 'It was fair and covered both sides,' he was quoted as saying. Mr Suharto has always denied accumulating a fortune while in power. He described a Forbes magazine estimate after he stepped down that he was one of the world's richest men as 'ridiculous'. Bringing him to justice has been seen as a key test of the government of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who was elected in 2004 on an anti-corruption platform. A long-running criminal case against Mr Suharto was abandoned in May last year on health grounds, triggering widespread criticism of Dr Yudhoyono. State prosecutors filed a civil suit seeking more than US$1.5 billion in damages against the former strongman in July, claiming that he misused charity funds during his rule, but analysts are sceptical that it will be successful. Analysts see rampant corruption in Indonesia today - it is regularly ranked as one of the world's most graft-prone - as a legacy of Mr Suharto's rule. ASSOCIATED PRESS, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

A different work ethic

Time the dog had its day? Try the cat's way

Sep 10, 2007, ST Soapbox If yours is a dog's life, here's a solution that might make you feel better

By Jessica Lim

'WORK like a dog, lor,' my ex-friend snapped when I asked him over dinner two years ago how his day had been. He then began a two-hour tirade: It was painfully complicated, his boss asked him to do something redundant (explained in detail), he was given menial tasks (this and that), he had no idea what he was doing in construction, he was quitting the next day. It got stale hearing the same refrain, so we stopped hanging out soon after that. Surreptitious checks with mutual acquaintances have revealed that he is still stuck in the pound, and, yes, whining all the way. But his might well be a dog's life because, according to an article in Ohio's daily The Plain Dealer, dog-like behaviour can lead to one being treated like a dog. Its author, Jim Pawlak, thinks most employees 'live for that gratuitous 'good dog' pat on the head'. Anyone just starting out in his career knows how that goes. A day at work is not unlike performing - you heel, you get barked at to jump higher, quite likely for the equivalent of a measly biscuit - all to gain approval. When that pat doesn't come, you slink home, tail between your legs. This, despite your going to all extremes to please your master. So you just obey, don't think, and repeat it, until 5pm - also your cue to start howling about your very tragic life to anyone who will listen. The whole aim of this, uh, doggie style, is simple: Get your boss to throw you a bone for your efforts; or at least, just tell you where to dig for a better assignment. Pawlak offers this antidote: Get catty. No, not hiss and scratch - not all the time anyway - but adopt cat-like characteristics. I agree. Cats manage their owners by showing they are capable and know what they are doing. In turn, their owners leave them to it. Which boss wouldn't want more time to manage his own bosses? To dig up his own treasure? After all, the boss-employee relationship is a symbiotic one. The more you understand your boss' constraints and pressures, the better you can help him succeed. And, yes, score one for the team. I realised this when I became a small boss of sorts myself when I was asked to mentor a few interns. One, in particular, irritated me because he asked if I was free to talk when I was clearly in the middle of a phone interview. When I said no, he would hover within my peripheral vision, and only after wild gesticulations and a 'COME BACK LATER!' scribbled on a notepad would he leave. This happened repeatedly. It made me wonder: Was I doing similar things to my boss? So I started being more self-aware, and realised it saved me a lot of second guessing - and time. I stopped barking up the wrong tree, learning instead to read between the e-mail lines, and deciphering non-verbal cues. At least I can now sniff out the bigger assignments from the less important ones, which saves me running around in circles trying to catch my tail. Now you try: Does your boss prefer communicating face-to-face or on the phone? Does he prefer short, precise meetings? What are his priorities? Figuring that out may mean getting promoted, landing ground-breaking assignments or pay raises. Most importantly, you will no longer feel as though you'd rather jump off a building than go back to your job. My cat, Smoky, manages me well. Attentive, he can detect a foul mood a mile away - so no meowing for chow. Independent, he refuses to be micro-managed and fulfils his pet duties by catching a few cockroaches a month. In return, I fill his bowl with salmon treats. Occasionally, I throw in a neck rub. Though lately, I've been wondering if he's ready for a bone or two...

wonder if this happens to other religious honchos

Mother Teresa's Crisis of Faith

Time Magazine
Thursday, Aug. 23, 2007

On Dec. 11, 1979, Mother Teresa, the "Saint of the Gutters," went to Oslo. Dressed in her signature blue-bordered sari and shod in sandals despite below-zero temperatures, the former Agnes Bojaxhiu received that ultimate worldly accolade, the Nobel Peace Prize. In her acceptance lecture, Teresa, whose Missionaries of Charity had grown from a one-woman folly in Calcutta in 1948 into a global beacon of self-abnegating care, delivered the kind of message the world had come to expect from her. "It is not enough for us to say, 'I love God, but I do not love my neighbor,'" she said, since in dying on the Cross, God had "[made] himself the hungry one — the naked one — the homeless one." Jesus' hunger, she said, is what "you and I must find" and alleviate. She condemned abortion and bemoaned youthful drug addiction in the West. Finally, she suggested that the upcoming Christmas holiday should remind the world "that radiating joy is real" because Christ is everywhere — "Christ in our hearts, Christ in the poor we meet, Christ in the smile we give and in the smile that we receive."

Yet less than three months earlier, in a letter to a spiritual confidant, the Rev. Michael van der Peet, that is only now being made public, she wrote with weary familiarity of a different Christ, an absent one. "Jesus has a very special love for you," she assured Van der Peet. "[But] as for me, the silence and the emptiness is so great, that I look and do not see, — Listen and do not hear — the tongue moves [in prayer] but does not speak ... I want you to pray for me — that I let Him have [a] free hand."

The two statements, 11 weeks apart, are extravagantly dissonant. The first is typical of the woman the world thought it knew. The second sounds as though it had wandered in from some 1950s existentialist drama. Together they suggest a startling portrait in self-contradiction — that one of the great human icons of the past 100 years, whose remarkable deeds seemed inextricably connected to her closeness to God and who was routinely observed in silent and seemingly peaceful prayer by her associates as well as the television camera, was living out a very different spiritual reality privately, an arid landscape from which the deity had disappeared.

And in fact, that appears to be the case. A new, innocuously titled book, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light (Doubleday), consisting primarily of correspondence between Teresa and her confessors and superiors over a period of 66 years, provides the spiritual counterpoint to a life known mostly through its works. The letters, many of them preserved against her wishes (she had requested that they be destroyed but was overruled by her church), reveal that for the last nearly half-century of her life she felt no presence of God whatsoever — or, as the book's compiler and editor, the Rev. Brian Kolodiejchuk, writes, "neither in her heart or in the eucharist."

That absence seems to have started at almost precisely the time she began tending the poor and dying in Calcutta, and — except for a five-week break in 1959 — never abated. Although perpetually cheery in public, the Teresa of the letters lived in a state of deep and abiding spiritual pain. In more than 40 communications, many of which have never before been published, she bemoans the "dryness," "darkness," "loneliness" and "torture" she is undergoing. She compares the experience to hell and at one point says it has driven her to doubt the existence of heaven and even of God. She is acutely aware of the discrepancy between her inner state and her public demeanor. "The smile," she writes, is "a mask" or "a cloak that covers everything." Similarly, she wonders whether she is engaged in verbal deception. "I spoke as if my very heart was in love with God — tender, personal love," she remarks to an adviser. "If you were [there], you would have said, 'What hypocrisy.'" Says the Rev. James Martin, an editor at the Jesuit magazine America and the author of My Life with the Saints, a book that dealt with far briefer reports in 2003 of Teresa's doubts: "I've never read a saint's life where the saint has such an intense spiritual darkness. No one knew she was that tormented." Recalls Kolodiejchuk, Come Be My Light's editor: "I read one letter to the Sisters [of Teresa's Missionaries of Charity], and their mouths just dropped open. It will give a whole new dimension to the way people understand her."

The book is hardly the work of some antireligious investigative reporter who Dumpster-dived for Teresa's correspondence. Kolodiejchuk, a senior Missionaries of Charity member, is her postulator, responsible for petitioning for her sainthood and collecting the supporting materials. (Thus far she has been beatified; the next step is canonization.) The letters in the book were gathered as part of that process.

The church anticipates spiritually fallow periods. Indeed, the Spanish mystic St. John of the Cross in the 16th century coined the term the "dark night" of the soul to describe a characteristic stage in the growth of some spiritual masters. Teresa's may be the most extensive such case on record. (The "dark night" of the 18th century mystic St. Paul of the Cross lasted 45 years; he ultimately recovered.) Yet Kolodiejchuk sees it in St. John's context, as darkness within faith. Teresa found ways, starting in the early 1960s, to live with it and abandoned neither her belief nor her work. Kolodiejchuk produced the book as proof of the faith-filled perseverance that he sees as her most spiritually heroic act.

Not all atheists and doubters will agree. Both Kolodiejchuk and Martin assume that Teresa's inability to perceive Christ in her life did not mean he wasn't there. In fact, they see his absence as part of the divine gift that enabled her to do great work. But to the U.S.'s increasingly assertive cadre of atheists, that argument will seem absurd. They will see the book's Teresa more like the woman in the archetypal country-and-western song who holds a torch for her husband 30 years after he left to buy a pack of cigarettes and never returned. Says Christopher Hitchens, author of The Missionary Position, a scathing polemic on Teresa, and more recently of the atheist manifesto God Is Not Great: "She was no more exempt from the realization that religion is a human fabrication than any other person, and that her attempted cure was more and more professions of faith could only have deepened the pit that she had dug for herself." Meanwhile, some familiar with the smiling mother's extraordinary drive may diagnose her condition less as a gift of God than as a subconscious attempt at the most radical kind of humility: she punished herself with a crippling failure to counterbalance her great successes.

education again. whats new

STFORUM

Sep 4, 2007

Direct entry scheme at RGS 'very stressful' I AM writing this letter out of frustration from my daughter's stressful experience in the recently completed direct school admission (DSA) programme at Raffles Girls' School (RGS).

My daughter applied under the maths talent route and sat for the first phase (psychometric test) in late June. Subsequently, she was short-listed for the maths programme on July 14. When, after about a month, we did not hear from the school, I asked via e-mail if my daughter would be short-listed for the interview.

Even a negative reply would have been appreciated as she could concentrate on her prelims. I did not get any reply at all.

So, we waited on tenterhooks. My daughter asked me every day if RGS had replied, and I had to disappoint her every time. Then, two days before the end of the interview period last week, as we were about to give up hope, I received an e-mail from the school inviting her to an interview the very next day.

My poor daughter, who had her prelims that week, had less than a day to prepare the required speech about herself, as well as read up on the school. She had to forgo revising for her science prelim paper the next day.

Due to the short notice, I had to cancel important appointments, at great inconvenience and cost to myself, to take her to the interview.

Our efforts proved futile last Thursday when I got a mass e-mail about her unsuccessful application. I was shocked as my daughter told me her interview went smoothly and all she did was reiterate what was already in her application. I asked the school for an indication where she had fumbled, but so far have not received any reply.

Parents who are considering the DSA at RGS, consider these odds: Of about 700 girls who applied under maths, about 30 were short-listed. Of these, fewer than 10 (possibly including foreign students) were granted an interview. If I had known these odds, I would never have subjected my daughter to such emotional upheaval.

Maria Loh Mun Foong (Ms)

About blogging

Why do people blog?

Is it beacuse:

1- I want people to hear what i have to say
2- The act of Blogging is cool and happening
3- Blogging lets me post my camwhore pics
4- Blogging let me share my weal and woe with the world
5 -Some other reasons?

I actually wanted to make a list from 1-10 or 20, but i got lazy and stopped at 5.

Truth is, is what we write on our blogs really what we feel? Well i guess it differs from person to person, but the fact that this is a public avenue goes to show that somehow or other, a part of our subconscious acts in a way to 'censor' what we write into a form that is deemed presentable to an audience. Which means, what we write on our blogs are the words we want people to see, to hear, to read. The intention is there. I WANT to he heard. I WANT people to see what lovely pics of my travels there are. I WANT the world to know that i want that camera for my birthday, that i like taking photos of MYSELF, that I love cats, that my day was as exciting as can be.

pretty much a very self centered notion isnt it?

that it is what it is- a reflection on the self. it all boils down to a single word- the self.

you selfish bastards you.

About Reciprocation

emotions can be such a terrible thing. they hold us down, like shackles, and act as blindfolds, covering our eyes to the reality that lies beyond.

whats the point of giving a shit when NOBODY gives a shit?

hell, is that person even worth the attention? worth your time? ur effort? ur BRAINCELLS?

nobody GENUINELY gives a shit

everybody's so busy screaming to be heard that nobody listens anymore.

so why should anybody be an exception to the case? you would just be a sucker ending up wallowing in sorrow and sadness.

nothing is ever reciprocated, nothing ever.

so, take life with a pinch of salt. life's unfair. just look at the poor kids sued by ODEX. think thats fair? no it never is.

at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is.....


Laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone.
-Oh Dae Su
OldBoy

Too late. You cant keep me from staying here, punks.

Fourth varsity:

Third time's the charm? The Government's last U-turn on the fourth university is still fresh on the minds of polytechnic graduates and their parents. What has changed in the last four years to merit a relook?

Education Correspondent SANDRA DAVIE tracks the twists and turns on the road to a fourth university

Sept 1 2007

BUILDING a fourth university is well and good, but Mr Chew Ah Bah wishes it had been set up a decade ago. That might have enabled his three sons to get university degrees right here at home.

All three did well enough in polytechnic to progress to universities in Britain, where they earned first class honours. But sending them abroad required big sacrifices from Mr Chew, 63, and his wife, Madam Ong Kin Choo, 56.

Over the last 12 years, he has had to clean out his savings earned from his small trading business in herbal products. He also mortgaged the family's three-room flat.

And Madam Ong deferred plans to retire from her job as a factory operator.

Recognising the quality of a Singaporean polytechnic qualification, the British institutions - University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Surrey University and Imperial College London - allowed the boys to complete their degrees in two years.

Singapore's existing publicly funded universities were less welcoming.

From yes to no

THE proposed fourth university is expected to cater to polytechnic upgraders like Mr Chew's sons.

While the news cheered those with children about to enter the polytechnics, the Chews and other Singapore families like them feel it should have been set up years ago.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced the decision in his recent National Day Rally speech, noting that more students were doing well in school and eyeing a university education.

To Madam Katherine Wong, 48, the situation sounds familiar. It had begun happening in the 1990s. And a panel headed by then-senior minister of state for education Peter Chen had recommended setting up a fourth publicly funded university.

Thousands of polytechnic graduates were heading to universities abroad every year, after being rejected by the local universities.

A new university could cater to these degree-hungry polytechnic graduates. The panel had proposed that the new university be set in a different mould from the existing three, providing a strong practical and technical orientation compatible with the polytechnics.

But then came what many saw as a U-turn on the policy.

A new minister of state, Dr Ng Eng Hen, led a panel to review the university sector, including the proposal for a fourth university.

'There is neither need nor any advantage to be derived in creating a fourth university,' said the panel's 2003 report.

It was better, it said, to leverage on the reputation and expertise of the existing universities, especially the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Nanyang Technological University (NTU).

The panel suggested that NUS create two 'niche' campuses besides its Kent Ridge flagship: a research-intensive university in Buona Vista and a small, specialised institution for a graduate medical programme and other health sciences.

NTU was to be expanded, to offer programmes in the physical sciences, humanities and design and media.

Madam Wong, 48, is one of those who felt let down by the decision. Her son Sean had just completed his engineering diploma programme and was entering national service.

She ended up cashing in an endowment policy and taking a company loan to send her son to Australia for two years.

She is surprised that the fourth university is now back on the table.

'Really, I hope it happens this time round,' she said. 'But I do wonder how come just four years ago they decided there was no need for it and now suddenly there is a need.'

Insight put this question to Dr Ng, who is now Manpower Minister. He defended his panel's recommendation as the best one at that time.

His panel, he said, had the same end goal as Mr Chen's: to increase the proportion of each cohort with a place in local universities to 25 per cent by 2010. At the time, only about 20 per cent made it to university.

'We had to look at the best way to offer additional places in the university,' Dr Ng said. 'A fourth university was not necessarily the best or the speediest way to provide the additional places.'

He also pointed out the economic backdrop to each panel's review. In 2000, when Mr Chen's committee was set up, Singapore's economy was already back on its feet after the 1997 financial crisis.

But by the time Dr Ng's committee came into being in 2002, Singapore was headed for its worst recession in almost 40 years.

'When I came in, the world had changed. Our unemployment was up to 6 per cent, the economy had gone down, the Bali bomb blast; there was also a budget deficit.'

(tis is really no link lor)

The right time

THE environment has changed again. 'For one, the graduate job market could not be more different now,' Dr Ng said.

'In 2003, we created 20,000 jobs a year. This quarter, we created 60,000 jobs. That's the contrast you are talking about: in one quarter alone, we created three years' worth of jobs compared to 2003.'

Even if the job market had been healthier then, a fourth university would not have been the right solution at the time, he stressed.

It would have taken too long, he said. The Government had to act quickly to create enough places in time for the 'Dragon baby' bulge that would reach university age starting this year.

'Our challenge was to give students both a place and a good degree,' he said. 'In retrospect, even if the economy had been doing well, I think to expand NTU to absorb that 4 per cent would probably have been the quickest and best way to do it.'

This, in turn, raises the question of why a fourth university is needed now, instead of continuing to expand the existing three. After all, these have the advantage of already having strong reputations. NUS, for example, was placed 19 in the last Times of London's world ranking.

Current Minister of State for Education Lui Tuck Yew, who leads a committee to develop the fourth university, has a ready answer.

He said that, four years ago, the three universities still had room to grow, especially NTU. They have since reached their optimal size, with both NUS and NTU having an undergrad population of over 20,000 each. The Singapore Management University (SMU) was always meant to be a boutique university. (huh? wtf?)

Expanding them further could adversely affect their quality, Rear-Admiral (NS) Lui said.

The other advantage of setting up a new university is that it could add diversity to tertiary education.

In particular, it could cater for the kind of students now heading overseas, including the polytechnic upgraders.

The minister had said his panel would study different university models - including the technical universities of Europe, the American liberal arts colleges and foreign specialised institutions - and then recommend, in a year, one or more models for Singapore's fourth or even fifth university.

A new route

POLYTECHNIC students who have been cheered by the news said it is time the Government provided them with a suitable university route.

They said their older peers, including gold and silver medallists, could have secured places in local institutions but opted to go overseas because they were allowed up to two years' exemption on their degree course.

An example is Mr Lucas Lim, 27, who returned recently from his studies in Australia. 'I did my sums and realised that though the two years overseas will cost me more, I will start working earlier,' he said.

Like him, several other polytechnic graduates interviewed complained how the university system is geared to favour the students coming through the A-level route.

Their admission criteria, the timing of the annual admission exercise and even the way courses are taught provide a better fit for A-level holders.

'The new university should suit those who come through the polys. For one, poly students do better when the teaching is more hands-on and practical,' said Mr Lim, who has a first-class honours degree.

Like many of his poly peers who headed to Australia, he is considering migrating there in the future. (good on you)

His disenchantment comes through most clearly when he says that polytechnic students have a tougher time not just in university admissions, but also in getting government scholarships.

He points out that it was only just a few years ago, in 2002, that a polytechnic graduate won the Public Service Commission's prestigious Overseas Merit Scholarship.

The hunger for degrees is such that parents are also wondering if the Government is still too conservative. It is now aiming for 30 per cent of every cohort to enter the local universities - but why stop there, some ask.

'Shouldn't the Government be looking further, to increase it to 40 per cent as in the European countries?' said Mr Kumara Rajan, 38, who has two school-going children. 'It can be easily done by converting a couple of the polys into universities.'

He argued that raising it to 30 per cent would add only another 2,400 places a year, taking it to a total of about 16,000 to 17,000 university places a year.Going by this year's 28,000 applications from polytechnic and A-level graduates to the three universities here, that would mean a rejection for 40 per cent of applicants.

In 1990, 15 per cent of each school cohort made it to the local universities. This went up to 20 per cent in 2000 and will be raised to 25 per cent in 2010. The rate is now 23.5 per cent.

But what is significant though is that up to half of each cohort do end up with degrees, whether from here or overseas - ample evidence of the burgeoning demand for university education.

Avoiding the pitfalls

STILL, RADM Lui believes that Singapore has been wise to raise the number of local university places at a gradual pace.

Singapore has avoided the pitfalls of expanding the university sector too quickly. In some countries, universities have had to handle high dropout rates and graduates who find it tough to land jobs.

He is also opposed to converting polytechnics into universities.

Citing Britain's experience, he said: 'The elevation to university status has diluted former polytechnics' mission as institutions that imparted solid, applied skills that employers demand.

'None of the former polytechnics given university status in l992 has made it to the top 50, even by 2007, and most remain in the bottom half of the UK's university league tables.'

Mr B.K. Lim, 44, a former project manager, appreciates the fact that there must be a careful balance between quality and quantity.

The father of two secondary-school-going boys has a business degree through distance learning. He was among the first to be laid off when his firm shed workers four years ago. He ended up driving a taxi.

'As a parent, naturally I want more university places for my children, but it's not so good if the standard is brought down too low just to admit more people,' he said.

Polytechnic student Carolyn Tan, 19, who is looking forward to the fourth university, agrees: 'It will take some time for the new university to gain a reputation. So the Government should not set the bar too low. It must be a high-quality institution.'

This, RADM Lui said, is exactly what the Government aims to do.

'If we go by the timescale for the establishment of SMU, it took three years,' he said.

'The commitment has been given, subsidised university places for 30 per cent by 2015, and a high-quality education...We will deliver.'

Insight

ST NSIGHT The long road to a fourth university

By Sandra Davie, Education Correspondent Sept 1 2007

AFTER getting his engineering diploma from Ngee Ann Polytechnic, Madam Katherine Wong's son wanted to pursue an engineering degree course in Australia. She had to cash in her insurance endowment policy and take a loan as well to finance his ambition. That was in 2005. Today, the 48-year-old, who is divorced, fears her 24-year-old son, Sean, has flown the coop for good. He has hinted to her that he wants to stay in Australia after graduating. For parents like Madam Wong, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's recent announcement of a fourth, and maybe even a fifth, university has come too late. While those entering or studying in the polytechnics welcome the decision, she is among those who believe it should have been taken a lot earlier. Since the 1990s, thousands of polytechnic graduates have been going overseas each year to get a university degree. Madam Wong feels that universities here should have provided more places for polytechnic graduates like her son. A fourth university could also have kept him here. Like many poly graduates and their parents, she still remembers the Government's decision in 2003 to overturn an earlier decision to set up a publicly-funded institution. That decision was taken by a committee headed by then-Minister of State (Education) Ng Eng Hen. So, what happened in the last four years that prompted the Government to re-consider the fourth university proposal? Insight examines the twists and turns leading to the latest decision to press on with the fourth university.