People have been wondering why I don’t want to study things like Law, Economics or Politics, or even Politics with History for that matter. Here’s a bit on why I will not study politics. (Probably on law and econs some other time) Of course my thoughts might change over time, this blog already shows quite a few beliefs changing over the past half a year — just that there isn’t much more time for a change of mind, is there?
Politics is a potent subject of study. It is a driving force behind improvements in a state machinery. But like fire, it could empower and at the same time destroy. And like fire, it is something which the gods are afraid to share. Anything which can cause improvement will cause disruptions as well. Think of how horse carriage companies felt when the automobile was invented, or telegraph companies when the telephone started to phase them out. Benefits aren’t for everyone, there will always be someone who loses something — especially those who are comfortable in the current system.
I wouldn’t study politics in Singapore because the version of theories and frameworks taught would have been to some extent controlled and sanitised. Its an assertion — since I haven’t actually seen for myself what a NUS political science course is like. But I base it on criticisms from others (though not sure how reliable they are). Furthermore, Warwick University, which initially planned to set up a campus in Singapore in 2004, changed its mind due to reasons of limited academic freedom and freedom of speech. Unless you’re fine with studying a diluted version of the subject.
But I wouldn’t study it overseas either. All the more so to not receive the undiluted form of doctrines and a new found sense of awareness. This might be one of the reasons scholars who go overseas say that the way they see things changed in the process, leaving them wanting to do something outside of the civil service, possibly due to disillusion. (though its more likely that this is because of a different way of life abroad)
I again assert that a study of politics overseas breeds idealism as it opens one’s eyes to a greater reality. And idealism unfulfilled leads to pessimism and frustration. (Or as proverbs says, hope deferred makes the heart sick). It is like the feeling of having experienced a liberally spacious and luxurious western-style house before being crammed into a small and confined hdb flat.
Political science is a bit like philosophy — its a subject of the devil (although I vehemently insist that MATH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE DEVIL). The latter is for the Church to contend with, the former for the state.
In the present environment, political science remains as a theoretical subject in a biology textbook without any practical applications.
****
Bullshit aside, one practical part I don’t quite like is having to constantly be up to date in reading international news. And when I say international I mean from Georgia to Tehran to Lagos.
That and I don’t think it will be very fun decrypting texts like Levithian in its original.
More here on not studying politics (from last year) http://findmuck.wordpress.com/2009/09/22/intellectual-revolution/
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
August 27, 2010 at 10:48 am
ed
Can you imagine what the world will be like if people thought and taught that ‘idealism unfulfilled leads to pessimism and frustration’ and ought to therefore be content with life in the proverbial well?
That is a confucian way of thinking, or perhaps, we could call it ‘positive pessimism’. Haha. In other words, we assume our failure in overarching arenas so that, or as a result of which, we could be absorbed in self-interests. And the perspectival underdevelopment that results leads to positive pessimism becoming ‘culture’. And that simply condemns our progeny to not wanting to know more and thus not better. Hence, we are well-prepared to confuse shit for cordon bleu.
The great minds of the past never thought that their ideals would go unfulfilled, rather they gave reason to future idealists to never stop trying. One wouldn’t have one’s ‘ipod’ or a site to publish thoughts, or evidence of not thinking enough, if it wasn’t for them.
August 29, 2010 at 1:22 am
King of Siam
I don’t quite believe in this Kantian idea of ‘universalizing maxims’, I do believe that there is a place for idealism as a dynamo for a few bold risk takers to become great movers and shakers. But it is not for everyone.
I do acknowledge the impactful successes of manifested dreams, but those are just the successes — what about the failures? The fact remains that for the losers who were condemned to futility, their unfulfilled idealism did lead to pessimism and frustration.
Whether some manage to rise above past failures is a separate issue altogether.