Gosh, can anybody feel and show any sympathy at all? I'm at the test of the devil, of one foreboding after another; first the emotional blackmail, then the profaned sex, then the implicit disaffectation of my teacher and classmates, and now the oral presentation. Could I really, on my own, engineer my own demise? No man is an island, so as surely I had the help of Brad and fellow course-mates!!!
Even for the worst part, I can proudly say I was the least understood out of the 4 speakers, or so I think, because not one person could find good words to, what would ordinarily to baronial audiences have been a crystal clear, and poignant analogy, between the rescue mission in the tsunami and the one in the sea of problem gamblers. In a word, their tears at the close would be token evidence of sure understanding of the problem’s context.
Again the only bad that materialized about my concluding role: it didn't draw the sort of epiphanic emotions from the audiences; while in the good I made sure I stuck, do or die, beg, steal or borrow, with the aristocratic ambience, in locution and moderation, of the likes of National Broadcasting Company and British Broadcasting Corporation, because theirs is of good patronage. I’m happy for these things I did to reasonable extents thus!
But Brad found no part in the presentation asking ‘how’ and ‘what’ to do with the proposal. If it wasn’t clear in the 3 other speakers, I might not have been able to do anything about it, but if it wasn’t in my part, that is unpardonable when I made three explicit statements all starting with “I want you to do this”.
Salud
Un Abrazito
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Friday, April 8, 2011
Thursday, April 7, 2011
THE SIPHONING FOREBODING IN ES2007S
The single most important cause why that has happened was because I have all this 3 months sought to treat professional communication from the ‘why’ standpoint of view, while the rest might have thought it more appropriate to talk about the ‘how’ and ‘what’. The ‘why’ necessarily correlates closely with the philosophy of professional communication, which is why I give all my ‘whys’ in the linguistic style AND LENGTH of that philosophy, because doing otherwise will distort both the fundamental content of the ‘whys’ as well as its edifying value. When classmates claim such linguistic styles are pretentious, I simply don’t get it.(recent word of mouth).
The ‘why’ also happened incidentally to correlate with Simon Sinek’s admonition to engage your audiences, social circle of friends, and everybody you will ever meet in terms of the ‘why’, and what you belief, because he says that is only way the interpersonal, intercultural, interview, oral presentation will achieve conviction, substance and therefore excellence. Well he is right, and if I have been trying to achieve his vision of a successful professional communication through its ‘whys’ rather than ‘hows’ and ‘whats’, I couldn’t be that far away from being right too. It might be simply nobody can see virtue in the ‘whys’ of professional communication and its linguistic styles, which would frame the ‘hows’ and the ‘whats’.
Consider this angle: there are 2 types of people, the first type follows blindly, the second follows wisely. The kind of people in the former are only interested in ‘how’ and ‘what’, in other words their minds operate completely in the automatic/limbic mode, devoid of critical thinking. Of course modern human beings are generally a mixture of ‘why’, and ‘how’ and ‘what’ types of people. The kind of people in the second type like to have their minds operate more critically and questionably, and the likelihood they will find conviction, value, excellence whether in professional communication or otherwise is higher, because these people will not be accepting wholesale, without differentiation and order, the lessons and values learn in ES2007s; in other words they are voluntarily, not naturally, selective of information they will admit into their basket of skills and know-hows. It is hopefully the second type of people can raise the standards of the people closer to the first type, both in terms of linguistic styles, and their knowledge or ‘why’ cores.
Again there is nothing wrong with treating professional communication or any other subject from the superficial ‘how’ and ‘what’ points of view, and there is nothing wrong if Brad or my fellow classmates have absolutely no interest when I go into a sermon on the ‘whys’ or when I use the linguistic styles and even punctuation norms, such as having a colon before the word ‘but’ and ‘so’ when explaining something, of such academic philosophies: but that is good for a great diversity of views; and nobody should feel disaffected with all my written work because I go into all my writing with the lowest expectations in terms of replies and comments, and I don’t coerce anyone in terms of these: in fact I don’t expect anyone would read either, because I write for charity and not for self-esteem.
This is the SIMPLEST style of writing, grammatically and structurally sound, I can ever manage, and if anybody still thinks I used bombast words, I’m probably just too daft to write any simpler!
Salud
I cannot wait for the semester to end sooner, for all the foreboding reasons, and I'm embarrassed to say it came to such a closing..............
I cannot wait for the semester to end sooner, for all the foreboding reasons, and I'm embarrassed to say it came to such a closing..............
Monday, April 4, 2011
THE SEXUAL FOREBODING IN ES2007S
I just finished watching Black Swan (2011)---the movie Brad briefly mentioned about in ES2007s class the other day, and somebody else (quite a few) in class pitching the movie as great and must-watch of the year. Thinking the movie taught noble lessons of life and therefore persuaded, I downloaded an online version of the movie free of charge and to my horror discovered a sordid mess of graphic emotional and sexual blackmail!! Some of you have seen it, there’s no removing the brain degenerating sludge-fest, for those who haven’t, you don’t ever, ever want to commit blind martyrdom with your set of eyes, gifted and sacred.
It’s hard to feel proud for Miss Portman of Harvard once upon a time; it’s hard to be moved into solidarity now with the Oscar-deserving benchmarks she set herself; it’s even harder for me to reconcile her time in clean-cut Victorian gentility scripts, which doesn’t seem all that long ago in the Star-based series, to the present prima donna struck comatose by the witch spell of carnal Hollywood.
Question was did the cash-stocked ledgers and promises of middle-rags to riches by Hollywood highway do so well to cajole her underwriting the contract for the role? Or was she, in still a young career trying to perhaps make the totem pole of the likes of the sensational Licole Kidman, titillating Pate Winslet, and sensuous Daomi Watts, been a victim of blackmail herself, of underside favors and drawer cash.
Why of all scripts Miss Portman chose to rocket her Oscar stardom, she picked; had to be coerced, or otherwise, the unconstitutional blackmail part, for which I played victim to a few days back recently, and suffered sutured emotional scars. As if blackmail ordinarily hadn’t caused her enough mental, moral ill, she probably found more dignity and honor, or more fulfillment of self in enacting the blackmail of a profane sexual nature.
In the film, one senses her gift of feminine sexuality debased, dismantled, suffused with, commodified in carnal cross-cuts, which falsely herald her sexual violability as essential femininity, when it is really both SEXUAL BLACKMAIL and mistaken power.
To grab the Oscar with such a prurient subject is not too proud headliner, except if it is one for your negated sensual tastes.
The lyric that went God Save the Queen is compelling enough today for God Save our Portman!
Oscar now goes to……….
Cheers
Friday, April 1, 2011
THE FOREBODING IN ES2007S
The devil has revealed itself. The fraternity of ES2007s' students had a devious turn of ideas. Yesterday, they conspired a blackmail attempt on me, a fraternity member, for the rambling blasphemous texts they thought I wrote on the ES2007s portal. These are ES2007s' darkest times yet. Below is a cry of utter distress:
Gosh, can any game be called a game we intuitively know it to be if it is so depressive?!!?!? Few games live up to such a billing as the Game Of Death (2010); and I can't believe I'm roped into one? But knowing myself very well, I cannot write what I need to say in fewer sentences until I'm completely sure I've said it how it needs to be said?
This is not a test of conciseness so much as it is a test of your reasoning faculties, because if it is then all of the best New York Time's and The Telegraph's editors need to take classes in conciseness? NO, that couldn’t be the case?? Rather, there is a concise for every genre of writing; and as you would see I’m writing closer to academic genre or style, not the facebook one, it is pretty concise when academic texts are upwards of 50 pages??
Wasn’t the intention of setting up such a portal of professional communication in the very beginning to facilitate academic discussion? If replies can be as simple as 3 lines, we could just exchange phone numbers and start a texting revolution??
Again I think this is not a test of conciseness so much as it is a test of logic and reason, which needs writing to be content rather than rule-based for there to be any useful exchange of knowledge and learning?? This is not to say too I haven’t learnt how to be concise at all?
Honestly, ignoring me might be good, but knowing about myself in this respect, would not be good enough at all?? Very frankly, somebody, maybe Brad, needs to manually remove or block me from the portal???
This is not a test of conciseness so much as it is a test of your reasoning faculties, because if it is then all of the best New York Time's and The Telegraph's editors need to take classes in conciseness? NO, that couldn’t be the case?? Rather, there is a concise for every genre of writing; and as you would see I’m writing closer to academic genre or style, not the facebook one, it is pretty concise when academic texts are upwards of 50 pages??
Wasn’t the intention of setting up such a portal of professional communication in the very beginning to facilitate academic discussion? If replies can be as simple as 3 lines, we could just exchange phone numbers and start a texting revolution??
Again I think this is not a test of conciseness so much as it is a test of logic and reason, which needs writing to be content rather than rule-based for there to be any useful exchange of knowledge and learning?? This is not to say too I haven’t learnt how to be concise at all?
Honestly, ignoring me might be good, but knowing about myself in this respect, would not be good enough at all?? Very frankly, somebody, maybe Brad, needs to manually remove or block me from the portal???
Salud
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Ladies and Gentlemen........
Ladies and gentlemen, the 2011 Bioconference saw a significant turn out from public as well as NUS faculty, staff, and students. Below are a few of my thoughts on the conference which contain many scientific implications for organizational interactions and behaviors.
I was rudely surprised Brad didn't show up when the well-known scholars from famous American and British faculties of genetic engineering, anthropology, sociology, psychology, neurobiology, evolution science, were sharing and discussing their expert knowledge on organizational interactions and behaviors; and at no cost with NUS students, staff, and the public! Guess what? I was seated in the back row of the lecture hall and being filled up with rarefied information on interactions including but NOT LIMITED TO----both interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships in the workplace, which the scholars say have an evolutionary social, economic, anthropological, political and EVEN BIOLOGICAL (NEURO AND PHYSICAL) basis that was first seen outside the workplace in more personal spaces of life.
To be honest, the ORAL PRESENTATIONS they gave to share their knowledge were breathtakingly high level, in terms of not only the content and structure, but also in eloquence, composure, confidence; and especially the high degree of language expression and vocabulary used that as I observed are so frequently associated with native English speakers from those superpower ‘Western’ countries.(you should know what I mean by western do you?). You could never get any minister of Singapore, or even the Singaporean with the best English language proficiency in spoken and written language expression and vocabulary, to express (speak ideas) as NATURAL and UNINHIBITED, without thinking twice ever what next few words to string in a rhetoric; simply because they, and you and I Singaporeans aren’t native enough to written AND ESPECIALLY SPOKEN English of the linguistics, style, enunciation, ways of expression of those superpower states.
For instance I remembered so clearly one of the ‘western’ panel experts, who became my overall favorite speaker of the day, for speaking smooth as silk (not fast mind you, but smooth is something different, something to do with style of expression). And I observed his smoothness lay in his perfect locution in which he expressed just like the way I have seen most academia or work professionals of native ‘Western’ origin.
Let me give an example of a few such expressions, which Singaporean subjects like you and I will deem unfit for formal speech and therefore not even dare to say it out in a formal presentation for only being appropriate in an expository or argumentative essay: but the native English speakers would speak the way they write, not as in word for word, but more in the form of the language expression----the creative ways they beautifully string words in a speech in many different kinds of orders that would obviously sound very good (good expert first, then only you can feel good smooth) to the untrained ears of non-native speakers like us Singaporeans. Ok without further ado, here go a few examples of superb language (speech) expression on a range of issues from anthropology to neurobiology and evolutionary biology and genetic engineering. Phrases are mostly word for word based on sharp memorization, unless otherwise stated.
1. “The problem with management in today’s organizations is their obsession with the bottomline, they want to increase productivity yet not be willing to give nap times for their workers in the afternoon who are the ones to help them achieve that productivity by being well-rested and ready to go. Well can’t they see the workers productivity is the extent to which they achieve the productivity?” (Only I and a few ‘Western’ visiting academics managed a chuckle for having captured this final pithy statement made here, while the rest of the Singaporean audience comprising of supposedly more rhetorically adjusted business and arts and social science students remained NONCHALENT to my shock. At first I had thought I was the person out of his mind for being the odd one finding the statement mirthful; but now I know about the ones who were inexcusably found wanting.)
2. “Positive organization behavior------what does that mean? Well the mutual care and trust it creates and helps elevate in organizational environments; the oxytocin, the building bridges and welfare it prompts; for all of these positive organizational behaviors cultivate.” (Again one can see the spoken conventions of fluent native English speakers right here, which become unconvention if spoken by Singaporeans in front of Singaporeans in some formal presentation or otherwise, for coming across as aloof, deviant, and crackpot! Singaporean context would demand Singaporean style of stringing sentences to an expression which I find very odd and hard on my ears these days after having listened to native speakers of English speak so well. It’s all well and fine to speak in Singaporean English style for boys in the army, but if you are speaking in a presentation, you odd to learn from the native masters of English expression both written and spoken, and this is different from asking you to produce all the range of American or British accents!!! NO!!!!! I am talking about the language expression of the words that they speak and create and string in sentences, not so much the voice-tones and accents.
3. This whole paragraph here is PURELY MY OWN STATEMENT and the sense I can achieve after listening to the lectures on workplace interactions.
You need to see that our neurobiology originated from that of hunter-gatherers, and it was a very basic and rudimentary heuristic for a small-knit community of only 40 or 50; perhaps 100; 150 to 200 upwards at most. And so we develop this strong trait of affiliation; we are built, from the evolutionary biological standpoint, to identify strongly with people closest to our ingroups; in other words we take a natural suspicion towards outgroups, and organizational management need to recognize that if they are to create mutually building relationships all-round at all levels of the hierarchy; where each level of the hierarchy is not only one ingroup unto itself, but one more outgroup unto other ingroups in other hierachies, they need to find a way to identify among groups; which is difficult but not outright impossible, or find a more inter-divisional structure and goal of organization and management that fit all groups.
4. “If you were to put a stranger next to some other stranger in an elevator with small confine spaces, he would almost certainly feel a certain level of self-awareness or self-consciousness which is indicative of some discomfort. Now ladies and gentlemen, I’m not saying it’s wrong to feel uncomfortable or is there anything abnormal about your feeling uncomfortable, because by evolutionary and neuro biology, that is the most natural feeling in the world. I just don’t want you to next time feel uncomfortable about feeling uncomfortable!” (The last statement here again demonstrates a very original language (spoken) expression that sets in motion in you the feeling of good confidence, eloquence, smoothness, of the speaker. It is times and statements at strategic positions in an oral presentation like these that really attract the attention of your audience, presuming your audience are themselves very good native English speakers and writers like perhaps Brad, for the half-choked English of the Vietnamese and even Singaporean locals or otherwise can NEVER find any attractive value in the language expression of the native English speakers if they cannot understand or catch the gist of an idea output in its expression. I’m also not saying I have any grievances about my classmates' Singaporean English ways of expression, both speaking and writing, for I once came from such a state of decrepit too. We all grow and learn.
5. This last statement here is mine, again gleaned over and summarize from the lecture in pithy sentences that show the sort of native genius of language expression of ‘Westerners’:
“Rewards and benefits tend to find the wrong kinds of leaders, because real leaders do not seek for the rewards and benefits of their leaderships, or vice versa; which follows if real leaders had any reward or benefit associated with their positions of authority, they deflect them all away so that they become equally redistributed amongst the ruled for their reward and benefit instead.”
Buenas senoras y senores
I was rudely surprised Brad didn't show up when the well-known scholars from famous American and British faculties of genetic engineering, anthropology, sociology, psychology, neurobiology, evolution science, were sharing and discussing their expert knowledge on organizational interactions and behaviors; and at no cost with NUS students, staff, and the public! Guess what? I was seated in the back row of the lecture hall and being filled up with rarefied information on interactions including but NOT LIMITED TO----both interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships in the workplace, which the scholars say have an evolutionary social, economic, anthropological, political and EVEN BIOLOGICAL (NEURO AND PHYSICAL) basis that was first seen outside the workplace in more personal spaces of life.
To be honest, the ORAL PRESENTATIONS they gave to share their knowledge were breathtakingly high level, in terms of not only the content and structure, but also in eloquence, composure, confidence; and especially the high degree of language expression and vocabulary used that as I observed are so frequently associated with native English speakers from those superpower ‘Western’ countries.(you should know what I mean by western do you?). You could never get any minister of Singapore, or even the Singaporean with the best English language proficiency in spoken and written language expression and vocabulary, to express (speak ideas) as NATURAL and UNINHIBITED, without thinking twice ever what next few words to string in a rhetoric; simply because they, and you and I Singaporeans aren’t native enough to written AND ESPECIALLY SPOKEN English of the linguistics, style, enunciation, ways of expression of those superpower states.
For instance I remembered so clearly one of the ‘western’ panel experts, who became my overall favorite speaker of the day, for speaking smooth as silk (not fast mind you, but smooth is something different, something to do with style of expression). And I observed his smoothness lay in his perfect locution in which he expressed just like the way I have seen most academia or work professionals of native ‘Western’ origin.
Let me give an example of a few such expressions, which Singaporean subjects like you and I will deem unfit for formal speech and therefore not even dare to say it out in a formal presentation for only being appropriate in an expository or argumentative essay: but the native English speakers would speak the way they write, not as in word for word, but more in the form of the language expression----the creative ways they beautifully string words in a speech in many different kinds of orders that would obviously sound very good (good expert first, then only you can feel good smooth) to the untrained ears of non-native speakers like us Singaporeans. Ok without further ado, here go a few examples of superb language (speech) expression on a range of issues from anthropology to neurobiology and evolutionary biology and genetic engineering. Phrases are mostly word for word based on sharp memorization, unless otherwise stated.
1. “The problem with management in today’s organizations is their obsession with the bottomline, they want to increase productivity yet not be willing to give nap times for their workers in the afternoon who are the ones to help them achieve that productivity by being well-rested and ready to go. Well can’t they see the workers productivity is the extent to which they achieve the productivity?” (Only I and a few ‘Western’ visiting academics managed a chuckle for having captured this final pithy statement made here, while the rest of the Singaporean audience comprising of supposedly more rhetorically adjusted business and arts and social science students remained NONCHALENT to my shock. At first I had thought I was the person out of his mind for being the odd one finding the statement mirthful; but now I know about the ones who were inexcusably found wanting.)
2. “Positive organization behavior------what does that mean? Well the mutual care and trust it creates and helps elevate in organizational environments; the oxytocin, the building bridges and welfare it prompts; for all of these positive organizational behaviors cultivate.” (Again one can see the spoken conventions of fluent native English speakers right here, which become unconvention if spoken by Singaporeans in front of Singaporeans in some formal presentation or otherwise, for coming across as aloof, deviant, and crackpot! Singaporean context would demand Singaporean style of stringing sentences to an expression which I find very odd and hard on my ears these days after having listened to native speakers of English speak so well. It’s all well and fine to speak in Singaporean English style for boys in the army, but if you are speaking in a presentation, you odd to learn from the native masters of English expression both written and spoken, and this is different from asking you to produce all the range of American or British accents!!! NO!!!!! I am talking about the language expression of the words that they speak and create and string in sentences, not so much the voice-tones and accents.
3. This whole paragraph here is PURELY MY OWN STATEMENT and the sense I can achieve after listening to the lectures on workplace interactions.
You need to see that our neurobiology originated from that of hunter-gatherers, and it was a very basic and rudimentary heuristic for a small-knit community of only 40 or 50; perhaps 100; 150 to 200 upwards at most. And so we develop this strong trait of affiliation; we are built, from the evolutionary biological standpoint, to identify strongly with people closest to our ingroups; in other words we take a natural suspicion towards outgroups, and organizational management need to recognize that if they are to create mutually building relationships all-round at all levels of the hierarchy; where each level of the hierarchy is not only one ingroup unto itself, but one more outgroup unto other ingroups in other hierachies, they need to find a way to identify among groups; which is difficult but not outright impossible, or find a more inter-divisional structure and goal of organization and management that fit all groups.
4. “If you were to put a stranger next to some other stranger in an elevator with small confine spaces, he would almost certainly feel a certain level of self-awareness or self-consciousness which is indicative of some discomfort. Now ladies and gentlemen, I’m not saying it’s wrong to feel uncomfortable or is there anything abnormal about your feeling uncomfortable, because by evolutionary and neuro biology, that is the most natural feeling in the world. I just don’t want you to next time feel uncomfortable about feeling uncomfortable!” (The last statement here again demonstrates a very original language (spoken) expression that sets in motion in you the feeling of good confidence, eloquence, smoothness, of the speaker. It is times and statements at strategic positions in an oral presentation like these that really attract the attention of your audience, presuming your audience are themselves very good native English speakers and writers like perhaps Brad, for the half-choked English of the Vietnamese and even Singaporean locals or otherwise can NEVER find any attractive value in the language expression of the native English speakers if they cannot understand or catch the gist of an idea output in its expression. I’m also not saying I have any grievances about my classmates' Singaporean English ways of expression, both speaking and writing, for I once came from such a state of decrepit too. We all grow and learn.
5. This last statement here is mine, again gleaned over and summarize from the lecture in pithy sentences that show the sort of native genius of language expression of ‘Westerners’:
“Rewards and benefits tend to find the wrong kinds of leaders, because real leaders do not seek for the rewards and benefits of their leaderships, or vice versa; which follows if real leaders had any reward or benefit associated with their positions of authority, they deflect them all away so that they become equally redistributed amongst the ruled for their reward and benefit instead.”
Buenas senoras y senores
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Eunice revealed!
Agent Eunice talks about the importance of staying open-minded, or sensitive and on guard of stereotypes.
Hi Eunice, you always seem to impress me with all your understanding ways. Yet Eunice, constructive interpersonal/intercultural behaviours are easier said than done. The illusion is extremely powerful, and it isn't all the time you will be ...able to keep an open mind. I mean it depends on your day to day mood, feeling, state of mind, and basically things that are out of your consciousness. Basically we operate in automatic mode you see, because it is energy conserving (ie your brain will tend to work in automatic mode because you are made that way to survive, though different people are automatic to different degrees), and so to keep an open mind all the time requires HERCULEAN ROUND THE CLOCK AWARENESS OR A HEIGHTENED SENSE THAT MIGHT DRIVE YOUR BRAIN CRAZY AND LAND YOU IN AN INSTITUTE FOR THE MENTALLY SICK. Yes, that can happen to you Eunice, given as I observed your huge sensitivity and heart for things and peoples of all kinds; and you might be so sensitive and aware, or emotional and interpersonal, you become un-moderated (lack of justice or moderation philosophy) and your brain or mind breaks down into pieces enough for you to land in a clinic! Rather Eunice, there are times when not keeping an open-mind keeps helps you to survive and keeps you regulated so that you don’t burn yourself and your energy stores and fall ill. Interpersonal and intercultural is good; but an obsession of it IS NOT GOOD! I’m waiting to see, Eunice, one instance where you lash out at or judge me severely, coldly, and non-interpersonally; I’m waiting to see if you can show me disrespect!
Now although things that require your prefrontal cortex to work with can be learned enough to be registered into your automatic mode, but what we are talking about is different individuals who are different every one of them, if not in culture then in person, and you meet them in the hundreds of thousands throughout the course of your work and interpersonal life, and you could never get your prefrontal cortex to learn every single one of them to such an extent it became automatic. It is because 1) you don’t meet them or work with them for enough time (ie quantity; a short time of perhaps 5-10 years I suppose for normal career jobs these days) and enough intensity and privacy (quality) of interaction, for your prefrontal cortex to learn them into automatic mode (ie your prefrontal cortex is always second guessing and on the look-out for changes in a person’s agent because very often people in the workplace are not role-playing and not behaving to their true colours with their families or otherwise, besides they are role-playing under performance stress and duress most times and all these affects people’s interpersonal and intercultural dispositions; it’s not like your husband whom you can be honest with because he is your closest confidante and whom you will have time to memorize into automatic inside out all his personality/interpersonal traits or otherwise because you intend to stay with him for a long, long time, 2) There are too many people for your prefrontal cortex to commit to memory or automatic, and normally, normal cortexes of human beings can process no more than 3-4 logic threads (and hence people) at once, even the brightest ones can at most keenly and effectively analyze and interpersonally/interculturally consider others in an open-minded and non stereotypical way 5-6 logic threads/people.
It would be more fair, Eunice, to say that we should be at least 60 percent of the time interpersonal/intercultural and non-stereotypical; alright maybe 70 percent if you are complaining I’m being such an ‘asshole’, for anything more is unjustified and asking too much of an imperfect being. In fact I would say 60 percent is like a miracle already! I think normal people in normal everyday mode are no more than 20-30 percent interpersonal or using their prefrontal cortex to perceive subjects. They are mostly on automatic mode or stereotyping!!
No expert communication author writes this, for nobody would buy their book if they wrote an anti-thesis to their principles of communication, only I would write such stuff, because I don’t need the money for now! Haha!
Cheers to Eunice
Now although things that require your prefrontal cortex to work with can be learned enough to be registered into your automatic mode, but what we are talking about is different individuals who are different every one of them, if not in culture then in person, and you meet them in the hundreds of thousands throughout the course of your work and interpersonal life, and you could never get your prefrontal cortex to learn every single one of them to such an extent it became automatic. It is because 1) you don’t meet them or work with them for enough time (ie quantity; a short time of perhaps 5-10 years I suppose for normal career jobs these days) and enough intensity and privacy (quality) of interaction, for your prefrontal cortex to learn them into automatic mode (ie your prefrontal cortex is always second guessing and on the look-out for changes in a person’s agent because very often people in the workplace are not role-playing and not behaving to their true colours with their families or otherwise, besides they are role-playing under performance stress and duress most times and all these affects people’s interpersonal and intercultural dispositions; it’s not like your husband whom you can be honest with because he is your closest confidante and whom you will have time to memorize into automatic inside out all his personality/interpersonal traits or otherwise because you intend to stay with him for a long, long time, 2) There are too many people for your prefrontal cortex to commit to memory or automatic, and normally, normal cortexes of human beings can process no more than 3-4 logic threads (and hence people) at once, even the brightest ones can at most keenly and effectively analyze and interpersonally/intercultu
It would be more fair, Eunice, to say that we should be at least 60 percent of the time interpersonal/intercultura
No expert communication author writes this, for nobody would buy their book if they wrote an anti-thesis to their principles of communication, only I would write such stuff, because I don’t need the money for now! Haha!
Cheers to Eunice
Hwee Teng and married life (2)
Continuation from part 1
Which cultural group in our world demonstrate the most noble kinda marriage and its love? THE TIBETANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why?
Because they have a system of marriage where the men turned 18 are automatically assigned brides chosen by their parents and discussed with the girl’s parents. Neither the girl nor the boy has any part in the decision. The marriage is ‘forced’ automatically when the boy and girl turn 18; AND THEY ARE REQUIRED TO LOVE EACH OTHER EVEN IF THEY DON’T FEEL LIKE THEY LOVE OR ARE ATTRACTED TO EACH OTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How in the world? Simply because the foundations of such ‘forced’ marriages where YOU LEARN TO LIKE SOMEONE OR SOMETHING WITHOUT NATURALLY ALREADY LIKING AND LOVING THAT BODY OR THING, are founded on stronger virtues and values of life (that is most like AGAPE), AS COMPARED TO THE CARTE BLANCHE MARRIAGES IN MOST WESTERN AND ASIAN NATIONS INCLUDING SINGAPORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
QUESTION IS, COULD THERE BE ANYTHING THING WRONG WITH ‘FORCED’ MARRIAGES OF SUCH CULTURAL GROUPS IF THEIR DIVORCE RATES ARE NEARLY NON-EXISTENT, OR HAVE WE SINGAPOREANS/AMERICANS/OTH
For if Hwee Teng’s parents were to assign her a pre-selected (BUT NON RANDOM OF COURSE, BECAUSE THERE WAS CAREFUL SELECTION) husband not of her own free will, she will be totally disgusted and cry a human rights transgression!!!!!! That is because she was socialized (illusion) to view marriage differently from the Tibetans, and vice versa for the Tibetans. Sadly to say, THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE OF THE MODERN WORLD’S ARE A NECESSARY EVIL, AND ALSO GROUNDS FOR THE REPRODUCTION OF FURTHER EVILS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All this that I have said is similar to saying that YOU SHOULDN’T LEARN WHAT YOU ENJOY DOING MOST; OR YOU SHOULDN’T STUDY THE COURSE IN UNIVERSITY THAT YOU ENJOY AND LOVE MOST, OR THAT YOU SHOULDN'T DO A JOB THAT YOU ENJOY DOING MOST. Why? By virtue of the logic of marriage and divorce derived above, it is safe to say you WILL GAIN MORE SUCCESS DOING, LEARNING, WORKING THE THINGS YOU HATE MOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you see the beauty of philosophy???? Philosophy derives answers to questions that most normal men cannot fathom or admit! Philosophy puts to death the believe that graduates should do the kinda professional work they love best!!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead, philosophy/religion/otherw
I apologize to all the girls and guys of ES2007s for saying something so bold: but that philosophy was meant to be bold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have no choice and I’m honest; I’m not the one whose bold or crazy: but that philosophy is of that nature.
So therefore, all my fellow ES2007s coursemates, I only have one advice for you, contrary to what Brad, Eunice or Yu Tian(in his blog I think) pupports:
“Don’t do the work you love; don’t study the course you love; don’t ever ever ever stay together or get married to the girl or boy your eyes endear themselves to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m not saying you wont gain anything good from doing the things you love: BUT THAT THERE IS INFINITELY MORE TO BE GAINED SPIRITUALLY, MENTALLY, PHYSICALLY, BY DOING THE THINGS YOU HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And I cringe and face in my palms at the sight of NUS Career speakers from CDTL and CELC or otherwise, who are so called experts in the field of work-life, and who all of them promote doing what’s best for your short-term and long term satisfaction and enjoyment!!! But I couldn’t blame them if they needed to say WHAT PEOPLE WANTED TO HEAR!!!!!!!!; for if they said otherwise, society and cultural norms will demand they be sack from the job!!! Haha!
Cheers
Why?
Because they have a system of marriage where the men turned 18 are automatically assigned brides chosen by their parents and discussed with the girl’s parents. Neither the girl nor the boy has any part in the decision. The marriage is ‘forced’ automatically when the boy and girl turn 18; AND THEY ARE REQUIRED TO LOVE EACH OTHER EVEN IF THEY DON’T FEEL LIKE THEY LOVE OR ARE ATTRACTED TO EACH OTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How in the world? Simply because the foundations of such ‘forced’ marriages where YOU LEARN TO LIKE SOMEONE OR SOMETHING WITHOUT NATURALLY ALREADY LIKING AND LOVING THAT BODY OR THING, are founded on stronger virtues and values of life (that is most like AGAPE), AS COMPARED TO THE CARTE BLANCHE MARRIAGES IN MOST WESTERN AND ASIAN NATIONS INCLUDING SINGAPORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
QUESTION IS, COULD THERE BE ANYTHING THING WRONG WITH ‘FORCED’ MARRIAGES OF SUCH CULTURAL GROUPS IF THEIR DIVORCE RATES ARE NEARLY NON-EXISTENT, OR HAVE WE SINGAPOREANS/AMERICANS/OTH
For if Hwee Teng’s parents were to assign her a pre-selected (BUT NON RANDOM OF COURSE, BECAUSE THERE WAS CAREFUL SELECTION) husband not of her own free will, she will be totally disgusted and cry a human rights transgression!!!!!! That is because she was socialized (illusion) to view marriage differently from the Tibetans, and vice versa for the Tibetans. Sadly to say, THE INSTITUTION OF MARRIAGE OF THE MODERN WORLD’S ARE A NECESSARY EVIL, AND ALSO GROUNDS FOR THE REPRODUCTION OF FURTHER EVILS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All this that I have said is similar to saying that YOU SHOULDN’T LEARN WHAT YOU ENJOY DOING MOST; OR YOU SHOULDN’T STUDY THE COURSE IN UNIVERSITY THAT YOU ENJOY AND LOVE MOST, OR THAT YOU SHOULDN'T DO A JOB THAT YOU ENJOY DOING MOST. Why? By virtue of the logic of marriage and divorce derived above, it is safe to say you WILL GAIN MORE SUCCESS DOING, LEARNING, WORKING THE THINGS YOU HATE MOST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you see the beauty of philosophy???? Philosophy derives answers to questions that most normal men cannot fathom or admit! Philosophy puts to death the believe that graduates should do the kinda professional work they love best!!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead, philosophy/religion/otherw
I apologize to all the girls and guys of ES2007s for saying something so bold: but that philosophy was meant to be bold!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have no choice and I’m honest; I’m not the one whose bold or crazy: but that philosophy is of that nature.
So therefore, all my fellow ES2007s coursemates, I only have one advice for you, contrary to what Brad, Eunice or Yu Tian(in his blog I think) pupports:
“Don’t do the work you love; don’t study the course you love; don’t ever ever ever stay together or get married to the girl or boy your eyes endear themselves to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m not saying you wont gain anything good from doing the things you love: BUT THAT THERE IS INFINITELY MORE TO BE GAINED SPIRITUALLY, MENTALLY, PHYSICALLY, BY DOING THE THINGS YOU HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And I cringe and face in my palms at the sight of NUS Career speakers from CDTL and CELC or otherwise, who are so called experts in the field of work-life, and who all of them promote doing what’s best for your short-term and long term satisfaction and enjoyment!!! But I couldn’t blame them if they needed to say WHAT PEOPLE WANTED TO HEAR!!!!!!!!; for if they said otherwise, society and cultural norms will demand they be sack from the job!!! Haha!
Cheers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)