You are currently browsing the monthly archive for December 2009.
Ah, it was as I guessed:
When it comes to fallibility and failure, it is either my fault or the fault of others.
One is more probable — by far. How the heck did I forget that?
Heh, I love these vague posts that can have either meaning.
When you finally have a taste of the most awesome thing (in this case, Royce chocolates: MY LITTLE PIECES OF HEAVEN), you realise that all the other chocolates you have been eating were crap.
You lose your desire for all other chocolates and all you want is more and more of those chocolates!
(STAIRWAY OF HEAVEN. FUCK GOLD — IN HEAVEN THERE ARE STREETS OF ROYCE CHOCOLATES)
Wow, I almost sound like I’m proselytizing (Good News!) — especially if i were to say that anyone else who eats any other chocolate GOES TO HELL, BIATCH! Heh.
And from another perspective, it sounds like I’m promoting a vice — all vices starts from its initial tastes of sweetness, cultivates an addiction which latches on and removes desire from other things.
That aside, the question is — what if you don’t get any more of it? (WHAT IF YOU SPEND ETERNITY SEPARATED FROM ROYCE!! Can you feel my existential angst?!)
I make a good advertiser (:
Having said all that, $15.
In the final session of Revisited, the topic was “Solution: Who is Jesus?” A.S did presentation centred around C.S Lewis’ trilemma — Based on the two certain facts that Jesus was a real man and did die as a political criminal, Jesus cannot be a mere good man/teacher because of his audacious claims. Either he is a Liar, Madman or God.
The fourth historiographical perspective is then added to make it a Quadrilemma — a Legend constructed by followers after his death. And this is an idea I have been looking at, how are we sure that the Jesus of real life is the same as the one who has teachings recorded in the Bible? Some theologians claim that the story of the adulteress was a fabrication. What is to stop people from adding their own descriptions of Jesus? I think it is possible that we do not have a complete picture of Jesus — perhaps even a slightly distorted one.
Let’s examine the claims in brief and the counterclaims in not-so-brief. Most of this are from the presentation, usually two arguments were given per point, I just selected whichever I thought was stronger:
1. Liar? Most unlikely, given that he went through the torture of crucifixion. A supposed mere liar would cave in and simply concede unless he had a cause and motivation to suffer — which would mean serious delusion.
2. Madman? A.S claims that Jesus could not have been a madman because of his intellectual wit in dealing the pharisees and in the Sermon of the Mount. I think there’s room for doubt — since intellect and delusion are not mutually exclusive and there are probably multiple historical examples.
A valid counter-argument would be a mere Madman would not actually have been able to do whatever Jesus did. But for that, we have to examine those who recorded what he did — historiography (or heh, bibliography)
3. Legend? According to A.S, this is unlikely on the grounds that the Teachings of Jesus were actually not the sort that would be popular with both the ruling romans as well as the common legalistic Jews.
I find this argument valid but not sufficiently compelling. 1. I would think that his teachings offered some form of hope to the outcasts of society (otherwise there will really be no appeal to anyone) 2. Even if some parts were authentically Jesus’, there could be parts added by others which aren’t — not so much teaching-wise, rather than miracle-wise.
From how I see it, to ascertain whether something is a fabrication or not, you need to examine the “fabricators” as well. This is where the Liar counter-argument applies to the disciples who supposedly saw the resurrected Jesus. Most ended up martyred for what they saw. And my central assumption is that if there is no real cause, you will not martyr yourself. In addition, it is highly unlikely that a whole bunch of disciples hallucinated the same thing.
But isn’t my assumption shakey — aren’t there many suicide bombers, am I saying that they have a real cause too? Not necessarily. These were not the deluded and impoverished minions with nothing to lose and only 72 virgins to gain, these were the supposed first hand witnesses/disciples/creators of the ‘Legend’. They endured the Roman torture with a strong cause. Even if we assumed that Jesus was a madman, surely not all his disciples were? In essence, Jesus’ witnessed act of resurrection is more significant than his claims alone.
I find this central argument the strongest: beyond the mere teachings of Jesus, the witnesses of resurrection martyred themselves. (In bate terms, this is a Hung Case though)
My ‘The Sunday Posts’ often point in a direction of rational criticism rather than evangelical direction, but in this quadrilemma, that leaves….
Two additional thoughts:
1. I strongly disagree with militant Christian nuts who believe that non-Christians shouldn’t get to celebrate Christmas — on the grounds that strictly speaking the origins of Christmas is Pagan in nature. In fact, history would show that the Church at one point did try to ban Christmas because of its merry making. At the same time I disagree with militant Atheist nuts who think that it should be “seasons greetings” instead of “merry christmas” — since the festival has evolved to put on a secular face as well.
2. On the point about its secular face and the historical origins of Christmas, I think its merely a Capitalist Conspiracy to get people to buy things they otherwise can’t bear to buy. No better way to move people to buy things they otherwise would be unwilling to buy than to tell them its a sacrifice for someone they love — even if they might not reallyyy want it.
I suppose though — the physical gifts itself don’t matter, its the thought and meaning behind the giving that impresses matters. Heh.
Happy Capitalistmas. Ho ho, hos. (heh, I just asked Gremlin if she wants a guy wrapped up in a ribbon with something the size of Mistletoe or the size of Christmas Tree =D Sigh, I think i’ll just get her an Elf Suit instead)
I refer to this newspaper article today that talks about women who demand from $1000, $2000, $5000 and even an outrageous sum of $50000 as compensation for alleged molestation.
1. It makes me wonder how many of these are actually real. I am inclined to believe that many of these are in fact false accusations — but the fact of the matter is that there is no way to ascertain against such untruthful claims. Its a bit like witchhunts – it’s easier to just admit to the false accusation that you’re a witch! Clearly, the law is tilted in favour of women!
2. On one hand, it seems that there is an added deterrent for guys now — on the grounds that it equips women with the knowledge of how to respond to such incidents. From a less intuitive perspective, I would assert that this atmosphere of “falsity” might even encourage molesters thinking that they can either pay their way out or better still, claim that they were falsely accused. (This however depends on what “checking mechanism” there are against false accusations. I doubt there will be anything effective though)
3. It just shows how lucrative law might Not be. Singaporeans aren’t exactly the kind who want the trouble of going to court especially when the legal fees might be more than the wrongful compensation O_o
4.Most strikingly: Wow, these women are getting a lot more money than hos for doing even less. Oh yeah, it is cheating after all.
Yeah, reasons I’m not doing law. I think its a very good scenario to pose at a university law interview though!
And i have no idea why my mum/dad specially left that page in my bed before i woke up. Not my sort of place to go anyway -_-
I have many books in my library.
Most of them are interesting, rather intellectual, maybe even enigmatic.
Some of which are still in the process of being read.
Others I had put a bookmark in for some time.
One or two I pick up and start reading again from where I left off.
Others, the book is completely gone — I am unable to start where I left off.
Many of them I have finished reading, closed the book and put it away-
- for good.
I think books can reflect how the reader is like.
And in my opinion, better a few good books than many crappy ones.
“Some folks have it, some don’t. Those who have it would be devastated if it were ever cut off.
They think that those who don’t have it are somehow inferior. They think it gives them power.
They are wrong. Those who don’t have it may agree that it’s a nifty toy, but think it’s not worth the fuss that those who do have it make about it. Still, many of those who don’t have it would like to try it.
It can be up or down. It’s more fun when it’s up, but it makes it hard to get any real work done.
In the long distant past, its only purpose was to transmit information considered vital to the survival of the species. Some people still think that’s the only thing it should be used for, but most folks today use it for fun most of the time.
Once you’ve started playing with it, it’s hard to stop.
Some people would just play with it all day if they didn’t have work to do.
It provides a way to interact with other people. Some people take this interaction very seriously, others treat it as a lark. Sometimes it’s hard to tell what kind of person you’re dealing with until it’s too late.
If you don’t apply the appropriate protective measures, it can spread viruses.
We attach an importance to it that is far greater than its actual size and influence warrant.
If you’re not careful what you do with it, it can get you in big trouble.”
Not often I talk about the events within a day, but I find today rather satisfying.
Work-wise: I finished preparing a powerpoint this morning. Ironically, the less slides they want, the more time I take. Work/Output is a necessity to appreciate mucking around/rest.
Spiritually: Went for the Final talk at church, which I found quite enriching. (More of this on Christmas Day)
Nutrient-wise: potato pie, ham, turkey meat and then THREE CUPS OF SOFT CHOCOLATE ICE CREAM
Philosophically: spent an afternoon by myself reading philosophy. First I read a bit about the basics of Logic. Then the fulfilling part comes when I sat down to read Bertrand Russell’s Conquest of Happiness (which coho has read before and recommended). I don’t necessarily retain everything, but it leaves me feeling good and fulfilled. After the seventh chapter, I realised — it was better to read one chapter a day instead, plus I had other books waiting for me at home.
So I went home.
Physically (and aesthetically): I WALKED back from jurong east to lakeside in about 45 minutes, humming New Slang — since no one was around to walk apart from joggers, indians and chinesenationals. The things people miss out on because they’re in a rush to get from point A to point B/too preoccupied running.
Any further additions: Drinking soco by itself now while I type this.
Only one thing is lacking — companionship. I didn’t really spend any time with anyone I was close to today. Yes, there were a few nice NSmen seniors — but they’re still fresh acquanitances. Yes, there were a few from school — but they’re the churchy felloshippy kind I don’t talk to.
So it was a good day by myself — a time and place for everything I guess.
With almost exactly two weeks to confinement, I still have six people I need to meet up with (not counting the three or more I decided to postponed to post-confinement)
I offer a rating of workerholism based on the link between unhappiness and work when the two can actually be quite separate.
Low: You’re unhappy because of work
Below average: You’re unhappy about work
Moderate: You can’t work because you’re unhappy
Above average: You work inspite of being unhappy
High: You work IN ORDER TO take your mind off being unhappy.
Workaholic: You find happiness in work
If I’m damn awesome– I will be able to finish a research paper in a day (as usual, not counting the sit around and think about it time)
I want nothing new.
This is information that is nothing new — I am essentially a reactionary.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
If you do something to solve the problem, a new set of problems arise (sometimes worse)
In the study of economics, I am anti- interventionist, anti-equilibrium disruption. (ironically I’m probably quite the opposite! — need to balance my readings with other school of thought soon)
In the study of history, I am YEHENALA your conservative Qing official (in my dream, I was in fact an embezzling one)
In terms of technology, I am more akin to the dinosaur generation.
I am also a hypocrite through and through, that merely claims to believe this as an excuse for doing nothing, for resisting change — for reasons of fear, uncertainty and laziness. Of course improvements always have its merits and its risks
… but I’d rather not pick up the magic egg, when I don’t know what’s inside.
You know what the reality is, change is the only unchanging inevitability. It isn’t an issue of “Yes we can”, it is one of like it or not, “Yes we must.”
There are only a few things which fuel us in life and they’re usually at the expense of the other
1. Money — I take a cab when its raining, spending money.
2. Time — I stone at the MRT station while it rains, spending time.
3. Trouble (or the lack thereof) — I use an umbrella and later need to dry it, which is troublesome. Or i need to dry my clothes, equally troublesome
4. Comfort — I walk in the rain.
5. Pride — I’m too proud to get drenched.
6. Morals — I steal an umbrella.
Some are more important than others to people. And usually we compromise on one to gain on the other,
Like selling morals/time/comfort/pride for money.
So make a guess — how did I get home in the rain
Wow, thats a lot of Angst.
It’s the first time I’ve seen the Hitler parodies (including the HL math one)
I bet more people have seen the parodies than the original video.
By end february, we’ll know whether I get to come out in the evening or not. Some time clashes are starting to annoy me
This is quite funny. Most people have too much time, too much freedom, that they don’t know what to do with it. They spent two years whining about the tokeeia ib workload and late nights (was that bad meh)
and then when its finally over — they’re bored of their freedom and freedom. they don’t know what to do — to the extent that some go back to seeking a 9 to 5. What’s the word for it — stockholms? Masochism?
It’s quite funny because I have had a few weeks of ‘free time’ which has too much to do. And I have these rushed deadlines and papers to write, when I want more free time or at the very least finish
reading my damn book spend more of my remaining pre-Service time with some people.
Perhaps the reason I can better appreciate my free time is that it’s scarcer than the other people’s .
It actually disturbs me that seven weeks is taking quite a while to pass.
Ah, I finish one presentation and the next one to prepare arrives.
Time spent writing things out: 30 minutes
Time spent messing about online: 2 hours
Time spent reading related material: 30 minutes
Time spent closely related but distantly relevant material: 2 hours
Time spent lazing around thinking about it: 4 hours
Time spent actually doing the final product: 0 so far — I hate the use of Technology and the need to make things neat, beautified and presentable. So troublesome.
Work style doesn’t change, does it? I think the second last component counts as a vital part of planning and an extremely essential part of the entire process.
From one perspective, i put in not much from work. From another, which counts the so-called ‘idle time’ would be a damn lot of work.
I realise I spend a lot of time listening to piano covers on youtube. I actually quite like listening to piano. Gremlin prefers violin and I can see why.
(Need to stop procrastinating about getting a youtube downloader already)
Maybe I might want to embrace my musical side and pick up piano when i’m shit bored eventually to prevent the onset of Alzheimer — after all, I do have long fingers.
I foresee I’ll get lazy to practice and bored of it — then again, I have a track record of being freak-level hardcore when it comes to some things i’m interested in.
Like artist embracing athletic side and athlete embracing artistic side.
For the first time in my life, I took two last trains home in order to save cab money.
It was very rushed, especially when I had to top-up my ez-link card at the last moment.
I realise I take really long train rides — Economic History of Britain there and Economic History of Germany back.
But for these things, if you miss it, you miss it.
When I said I wanted to go to Germany for university, I got my ass owned literally ><
Right now, I’m giving myself a crash course on Marketing, partly for the fun of it — its quite common-sensical
Today I went for the second last lecture that on Time (and Heaven and the Meaning of Life), I was very annoyed at this fatwoman who took the last slice of pizza.
I constantly speak of Everything Being Temporal. Yet, I do not think that this current temporal life is solely a trial and a preparation for the after-life. To think so would be largely hypocritical and foolish. Life has to have greater meaning than that.
Controversially, I do not think that non-Christians have no meaning to life. On the premise that there is no after-life, life is about satisfying the temporal and short-term happiness. But this matters for both Christians and non-Christians.
In fact, I don’t think that we have a “God-shaped hole” in our heart, we just have a Plain-shaped Hole in our heart — even Christians still have this ‘hole’ of perpetual seeking.
From a more Christian-like perspective, think of the current life as a journey towards an end-point. And while on the journey, there is still a scenery (like fields of flowers at the side of the road) to appreciate before reaching the end-point.
From a more honest perspective: Heaven is an eternity, our current lives are temporal — and we only have ONE chance at it. Better to make the most of the current experience.
If you truly think that everything in life is about the End-Point alone, give up material enjoyment and the seeking of happiness! Stop studying, stop working — they’re all futile.
Then on the issue of Karma/Justice (the session I missed) we constantly hear: Do good get good, do bad get beat. Keep the Commandments and you go to heaven, break the Commandments and you go to hell.
I’ll put it very bluntly: In as much as I admire the teachings of Buddha, I disagree with the concept of Karma, especially so in the context of the Christian belief.
What is unique about the Christian faith isnt that it is a “relationship with God” — heck, any religion can claim that. I think it’s unique point is in placing more emphasis on Belief rather than Deed as a means of Sanctification.
(I will explain this in more detail some other time, I risk getting misrepresented)
It seems as if that whether a person goes to heaven or hell is determined by his Belief in god rather than whether his Deeds were moral or immoral. Consider the example of Dr Mengele or a child-sex offender/psycho murderer that gets away scot-free from the crime — where is the justice? The Christian says “In the afterlife, of course!“
Then What IF your psychotic wretch in question accepts Christ at the last moments, I am inclined to think that even Hitler, if he accepted Christ in the end, would go to heaven — since his sin would have been paid for as well, hard as it might be for us to accept it. Where then is your so-called “justice”?
As a further note to consider, wouldn’t the layman find the very system of justice which is a) based entirely on beliefs rather than deeds and b) contains Eternal Suffering as a punishment, is one which is excessively and unjustly wrathful and vindictive? Even if you claimed that Justice needs to be dealt and disbelief in God mattered to him, would you consider eternal damnation for the sin of -disbelief due to there being little evidence- alone as proportional punishment?
The Christian rationalises: Hell is created for the purpose of so-called “justice” of a Just God. But why hasn’t anyone questioned that this vindictive hatred and anger might not be a good thing despite its nice name — ”justice”?
To the surprise of some, I went for a bate competition yesterday. Surprising because I haven’t for so long, I was damn sian last year during the midc period, and I was monkey happy (and unscrupulous) about getting out. Surprising because I too was surprised, even on the day itself — what the hell possessed me to come wait two hours -_-
Our team name was “No Action Talk Only”. Other names I considered were random nonsense like:
1. Ministry of Flying Abroad (the organisers usually abbreviate so that gives..) or Ministry Of Foreign Office
2. House of The Dead (Random)
3. Mindeff (maybe next year)
4. We Are Now Kings (they abbreviate)
5. Taming The Dragon (and if the Indians ask I tell them its pronounced Da-Ming, like Da Ming De Long)
6. Random organisation like Building Construction Authority
7. Korean News Network (they abbreviate)
8. Chowed Cheese Pie
Of course, the main concern was the rust and whether or not I could remember how to deliver — especially when the others were University baters experienced in BP style, while we (probably plus Team raffl worldschools) were used to a very secondary school style, which seemed like child’s play in contrast. Far more gentle and less aggressive, or should I say, rowdy and intimidating.
It didn’t seem too bad. I actually prefer this style, involving two cooks rather than five cooks. The preparation time of 15 minutes is seemingly passable. That being said, a lot of credit has to be given to my knowledgable and intelligent teammate (damn a lot for the later three rounds).
Learning points: I’m not completely gone yet and I still have some skillz, glad to say. I’m roughly back to sec 4 standard. Though I was pleased with the performance at the first and the last round, which was better than sec4 i think.
My knowledge of the very current affairs, especially the very regional, is very lacking — and I don’t think much can change that. Economic theory by itself (as I should have known by now how useless it is in the real world) is very weak in a debate – and hardly convincing to an adjudicator from law school -_-
The little of the competitive spirit/drive I used to have is now completely gone. It wasn’t much to begin with, but now I didn’t even care about winning rounds. Partly because I had no stake, partly because I didn’t think it was realistic, partly because for two rounds my mind was on “whether I can make it for dinner on time”, largely because it was too much trouble to wake up at 7 again to go to bukit timah the next day.
Mm, perhaps I messedup a bit at times. But whatever, in front of the Singapore people, more specifically those whom I know from within the Realm, I still performed reasonably.
Oh yeah, now I remember why — to warmup for things to come
Yesterday night I went back to my old housing estate for dinner. While convenient, I took a walk around to see some rather familiar surroundings. It seems that not much changed — from the see-saw to the dolphins to even where the water-cooler was.
Perhaps its the slight historian side that likes revisiting the past — finding interests in museums, biographies and Singapore history in particular.
With reference to both History as a study and personal history, I actually think appreciating the past is not very rational — there is no real gain. The person of the present is a separate entity from the person of the past. Events of the present can be viewed in isolation of the past. It does not matter what I ate for yesterday’s breakfast, all that matters is the breakfast I’m having today. What does a person gain from keeping the past in mind?
Some academics (and most students have been taught) would argue that events of the past will influence the events of the present. Possible — but not necessarily the case all the time, since there are so many variable factors and changing circumstances. True in some cases — but not others, since many things would have completely moved on by now. For instance, social history such as “Society in an age of mass leisure” or “Culture in the 1700s“. Yet, these areas which probably do not support the statement that “events of the past will influence the events of the present” are still worthy of study. In my opinion, the above statement is merely a side-line justification (excuse) to lend the area of study some degree of importance.
As a digression, I think Social History is most interesting. Economic history most useful. Political History most exam-trained in. Military history most frivolous (I wonder if I’m biased again). Ah heck, but in reality, they all overlap. I THINK it’s very simplistic to attempt to constantly compartmentalise the three areas neatly. In examining courses, one looks at these three factors — 1. Interest (Fun) 2. Usefulness 3. Ability to do well. Of the three (completely discounting military), it’s most likely I do Economic History — see, my nation has trained me to be a pragmatist.
And I still appreciate history more than I appreciate literature (a long-lasting area of criticism for the past two years. Maybe I’m biased). Maybe because one is more real than the other.
In fact, things which have passed are no longer temporal. Your interpretations (perception) of the event may change, but nothing will change the fact about whether or not the event has happened or not.
I told someone three to four years ago that memory, by itself (assuming it doesn’t affect your actions), is actually a horrible thing. If you have bad sad memories, it obviously isn’t good to remember it. If you have good happy memories, you’re only aware of what you don’t have anymore.
Very cynical even then. I pause to think. It makes sense, but is it really the case?
Yeah, I’ve aged.
“Facing your demons” has always been regarded as something noble and arduous. Often, one expects good and closure to result. Yet, it may well be counter-productive.
What if in the attempt of demythologisation — one finds the myths to be in fact realities?
we have changed but we’re still the same
I think in NS, I will be pursuing this inner pilgrimage. (You can take my body for Service and take my mind for Service, but you can’t take my soul!!!) I have three to four books in mind to get which argues a case for God/Christ etc. One of which I will probably borrow from someone. In between, i’ll chuck in the very feared militant-atheist Dawkin’s book on The God Delusion.
In my opinion, it is the moral duty of any good Christian to at least have read the book and know the central arguments — partly to dispel the perception of close-minded irrationality (which I think is true for most anyway).
Most pertinently, it is perhaps to put the notion of Faith to a test. I argued before in “Rational Criticism” that it is necessary to weed out mistruths and strengthens the remaining truths that survive the test.
I seek a balanced view to build my judgment upon — while having all the blank time in Service to meditate.
Incidentally, I’ve watched Dawkin’s argue against religion in schools (right before going for prom). His argument is actually quite convincing. The Christian will find the argument easier to swallow once you recognise that his argument applies to the other religions as well.
If the world were to end tonight/ or more realistically, if you were to die tonight,
What will be the one thing you wish you had done?
That will reveal what is truly important in life. All else is trivial.
A very basic introduction to Linguistics: Words do not have meanings by themselves. Be it “Man” “Woman” or “Ribs” — it is only when a person attributes meaning or an image to this sequence of letters, that words gain a meaning.
In Genesis, God made woman by taking out a rib from man. Stretching the logic, it portrays woman as secondary and perhaps inferior.
In that case right, why does Man – not – have one less rib bone?
Or maybe — 1. it wasn’t a rib bone. Anyone who has read Song of Solomon will understand how metaphorical the bible can get. There is only One Key Difference between Man and Woman….
But then, didn’t God take That out from Man. Why is it that Man has it and not Woman?
With reference to the introduction, 2. Maybe the term “man” was in fact woman!!!!
By this account, God made woman first. Took out the rib and ”closed up the place with flesh“. (HAHAHA) Heretical (Heresy is defined as heresy only if it affects the important Men in question) in that, it becomes the stupid man who conversed with the serpent and ate the fruit — thus removing and in fact reversing a reason for misogyny.
Now it all makes sense!
Okay, no la, Genesis quites clearly says “one of the ribs” (unless you call That a rib too) Let’s also take it that Eve was created with the same number of Adam after the rib was removed also.
Question to consider: we will assume that if the writer of Genesis (supposedly Moses) ever had the balls to swap the names Adam and Eve, Man and Woman around, he’ll be struck dead. Yet for some reason, this no longer seems to happens — why is there this inconsistency/change?
If it doesn’t happen, what is to stop the writer from putting things in a more beneficial light if he wanted to? Where is your checking mechanism?
Too nonsense to be a Sunday Post. Hah. Tomorrow’s lecture at the School Church is going to be on Pleasure. Should be interesting for the week.
Surprise surprise, I’m still studying even after exams.
With an interview on Monday, I have dug up a few books on Singapore history. It somewhat reminds me of -exactly- a year ago, except that the books now are more economic rather than political in nature, and the focus has shifted from our northern neighbours to our northern ancestors. My EE was originally tailored for the Ministerial-authority of Flying Abroad — had I more foresight (which is somewhat impossible), I would have tailored the EE in a different way.
I suppose some people have been busy studying for SATs like siaow (which is today) — it seriously annoys, begrudges and troubles me that one day I might have to do the same, probably in May, on Labour day. Hurhurhur.
Then there are others who have taken up internships, usually at law firms if not some ministry (usually Flying Abroad). Some more than one. More often than not, I think internships shed insight on what you -don’t- want to do rather than what you would want to do. It narrows rather than broaden your horizons. If anything, while the supposed objective of internship is to learn, its real intention has evolved to become A Trophy to put on record.
There’s are key differences tho
1. I’m actually enjoying what I’m doing, seeing that I do not have an examination as an end-point.
2. It’s only one weekend instead of a week or two (actually this is cos I started late and means that I have to compress 5 books in 2 days)
3. There’s no money involved. Be it paying a heck lot to take tests or getting some peanut money to do photocopying and other mundane tasks at a firm.
After all, I’m getting “a job” too — employed by a Ministerial-authority also, one of the biggest and richest one (; For $400 to $500 a month and with no exit clause. It is in the two years where I get an insight of how life might be like if you are forced to work in order to pay your mortgage and car loans (neither of which I intend to have)
Then the week after the interview is probably quite packed with people.
Previously I had this pseudo-insane wanting for a long academic pursuit later in my life to become a Doctor So and So. For the time being I think it unlikely.
Upon my return from NIPPON, I have the further insane wanting to learn foreign languages. Japanese is particularly useful since most people there can’t to save their lives (and here we are complaining about our bilingualism). I might learn it in place of Chinese — which is intentionally an easy cheap shot since my Chinese is of some standard to begin with; and my justification of expanding the available literature can be said to be already attainable anyway.
The crazy part starts when I expand it to wanting to learn French, being swayed by Gremlin’s argument that the French are the ones in the universe who are too stuck up to learn English.
Then it expands further. From french, you link it closely to German. From Japanese, you link it closely to Korean.
I think the Blue Ocean way would be to take Vietnamese for now (and I say this with its potential in mind)
I would say Arabic also. But that’s one place I rather not risk getting posted to, if any.
In practice, this polylingualism is unlikely to come to pass, given the amount of time and effort required. Furthermore, language is such that you have to learn it in its entirety. In my opinion, there is little point in the piecemeal construction of a bridge. Moreover, it is likely to fall apart and degenerate the moment it is not put into use. In addition, I’m not so sure of my multilingual-tasking and it might end up counterproductive to what I already have ><
The ambitious end-point tends to be an arduous journey with a heavy burden. Sometimes I think it’s too high a cost for too little a return. It’s quite amusing though, these “lofty ambitions” hardly have a practical benefit/return — it is somewhat for the lolz, somewhat for a hobby and maybe somewhat for the fact that I can brag that I speak “Xnumber of languages”
Besides, desires tend to be temporal also.
Overall, I think it is likely that I learn one foreign language in addition to Chinese. Anything more is unlikely.
Or “This too shall pass”. I constantly say that “there is only one unchanging reality — Everything is temporal.”
Things change, people change — in short, circumstances change
Feelings, thoughts, beliefs, aspirations change — as we become more aware of the changes in circumstances. Much like how every child starts off wanting to be a doctor and teacher, only to realise the reality later on.
Disturbingly, what is regarded as “Fact” might also change — due to our changing perceptions. Changing perceptions result in changing beliefs and thoughts.
From an alternative and almost historical perspective, perhaps sometimes things don’t change, merely our perception and recognition of the new evidence of what was always there to begin with..