Tuesday, April 29, 2008
My faithful friend.
If there is a song that can make me feel for the singer, I think this has to be it. It starts slow, so you might want to wait a bit before you write it off. =)
Monday, April 28, 2008
Does America need a democracy?
I find the principles of democracy strangely amusing now. I like the ideas, but there are bits about the world that point to democracy being sub-optimal as a form of governance.
I was forwarded this article in the Time magazine recently that discussed the Democratic party in-fighting that some analysts say are going to cost them the presidency. That may be true, but the bit about the article that really got me thinking was the part when they started looking into the tactics that both candidates employ.
Obama projects the calm, collected, and controlled persona. He avoids using negative campaigning and has an almost detached feel from the rest of the country. And apparently, its costing him dear. "In his 1991 book, The Reasoning Voter, political scientist Samuel Popkin argued that most people make their choice on the basis of "low-information signaling" — that is, stupid things like whether you know how to roll a bowling ball or wear an American-flag pin." Obama tried a different tactic. He tried to see the bigger picture and deal with the biggest problems that Americans are facing. But the Philadelphian people were not interested. Apparently, the debate that he was involved in recently "will go down in history for the relentless vulgarity of its questions". In short, the American public prefer having one of their own SUV-driving, big mac munching dude next door as their president.
But are they really making the right choice? I honestly don't think the average American understands the state of their country at the moment. And I also think that if they did understand, they would care a lot more about their national healthcare policy than flag pinning or bowling balls. But democracy works by giving the power to the people. My question is, what if the people don't know what they are doing?
I know that I am taking a very dangerous line here. I know that I have no right to tell a polygamist red neck how to live his life, or what to believe in, or who to vote for. Who is to say that my line of thinking is superior to their's? But I also know that there is an information imbalance in this case. Unless of course, the American people intentionally choose to not take the war in Iraq and their battered economy seriously, which is too weird to even contemplate.
In the end, this is how I see it. In America, the questions they should be asking are 'Can he help our economy?' or 'What does he want to do to our health system?' But the questions that they are instead asking are 'Does he like barbecued pork ribs?' and 'Does he own a pick up truck?'. It is pretty damn obvious to me that the first two questions are far more important, but for some reason, are brushed aside in favour of the third and forth ones. It is in their best interests for the people to vote based on the big issues, but they are choosing not to.
Can we still say that democracy represents the best interest of the people?
I was forwarded this article in the Time magazine recently that discussed the Democratic party in-fighting that some analysts say are going to cost them the presidency. That may be true, but the bit about the article that really got me thinking was the part when they started looking into the tactics that both candidates employ.
Obama projects the calm, collected, and controlled persona. He avoids using negative campaigning and has an almost detached feel from the rest of the country. And apparently, its costing him dear. "In his 1991 book, The Reasoning Voter, political scientist Samuel Popkin argued that most people make their choice on the basis of "low-information signaling" — that is, stupid things like whether you know how to roll a bowling ball or wear an American-flag pin." Obama tried a different tactic. He tried to see the bigger picture and deal with the biggest problems that Americans are facing. But the Philadelphian people were not interested. Apparently, the debate that he was involved in recently "will go down in history for the relentless vulgarity of its questions". In short, the American public prefer having one of their own SUV-driving, big mac munching dude next door as their president.
But are they really making the right choice? I honestly don't think the average American understands the state of their country at the moment. And I also think that if they did understand, they would care a lot more about their national healthcare policy than flag pinning or bowling balls. But democracy works by giving the power to the people. My question is, what if the people don't know what they are doing?
I know that I am taking a very dangerous line here. I know that I have no right to tell a polygamist red neck how to live his life, or what to believe in, or who to vote for. Who is to say that my line of thinking is superior to their's? But I also know that there is an information imbalance in this case. Unless of course, the American people intentionally choose to not take the war in Iraq and their battered economy seriously, which is too weird to even contemplate.
In the end, this is how I see it. In America, the questions they should be asking are 'Can he help our economy?' or 'What does he want to do to our health system?' But the questions that they are instead asking are 'Does he like barbecued pork ribs?' and 'Does he own a pick up truck?'. It is pretty damn obvious to me that the first two questions are far more important, but for some reason, are brushed aside in favour of the third and forth ones. It is in their best interests for the people to vote based on the big issues, but they are choosing not to.
Can we still say that democracy represents the best interest of the people?
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
The 9 types of intelligence.
While I don't consider Howard Gardner's theory to be totally accurate, it does make a certain amount of sense to me.
A quick Wiki of multiple intelligence theory tells us that Gardner believes that no one kind of intelligence is more important than the other. I find that belief a bit naive to be honest.
It might be an unnecessarily utilitarian way of looking at life, but having what it takes to carve out a living sure beats everything else. I would personally rank logical intelligence near the top simply because so many jobs in the world right now need exactly that.
But looking at the types of intelligence, I can't help but to think that one single type stands out well above the rest in terms of importance as a life survival tool - interpersonal intelligence. Remember how people always say that its not what you know anymore, its who you know? I think that nicely sums up why its so bloody important to have interpersonal intelligence. 'Young adults with this kind of intelligence are leaders among their peers, are good at communicating, and seem to understand others’ feelings and motives.' I got that from some random site. Screw the last two. Look at the first one. Want to enter the corporate world? Intend on getting far? If you don't have this form of intelligence, then don't count on it. Actually, I would go as far as to say that it extends to all professions. A char kuey tiow seller with good interpersonal skills build up customer rapport. The only time when this doesn't affect your career is if you really and truly work alone. Like as a lighthouse watchman or something. Even then, you are going to need that intelligence when you approach your boss for a raise. If you ever approach your boss for a raise...
And what would be the worst one to have career wise? I have to say intrapersonal intelligence. 'These young adults may be shy. They are very aware of their own feelings and are self-motivated.' Who needs self motivation when you can make people believe that you are already self motivated? Personally, I think that shyness is a death sentence in the world. People tend to view shy people and wonder what is going on in their minds, and constantly trying to guess if that person means harm. Shy people constantly avert people's gaze. Do people assume that the reluctance to make eye contact is due to shyness? I think most take it as a sign that the person is an egoistical prick. Isolation from the rest of humanity is something that no amount of gardening (naturalist intelligence), tennis aces (bodily kinesthetic intelligence), or best selling novels (linguistic intelligence) will be able to compensate for.
At this point, I would like to borrow a phrase used by my friend once. 'Socially retarded at every level'. Its a brutally honest quip that explains everything. It is a form of retardation, bad enough, in my opinion to warrant a certain amount of medical attention. I find it amusing how much we fight for equality at the workplace when this fairly obvious shortcoming is not accounted for. Maybe its hard to classify and hard to determine, but since when has something being hard to do ever been an excuse for not doing it? As of now, we only treat severe shyness. Unless its really bad, its not even recognized as a problem. Thats like saying that we will help people who have lost their leg, but those that have lost their foot don't need our help; they can deal with the problem on their own.
I know I'm not making any sense. I know that what I'm proposing is insane and even if it were possible, we are 20 years away from it. And even if we do come close, there would be protests from Scientologists and other mental purists. But I think its a problem, and its one worth solving.
A quick Wiki of multiple intelligence theory tells us that Gardner believes that no one kind of intelligence is more important than the other. I find that belief a bit naive to be honest.
It might be an unnecessarily utilitarian way of looking at life, but having what it takes to carve out a living sure beats everything else. I would personally rank logical intelligence near the top simply because so many jobs in the world right now need exactly that.
But looking at the types of intelligence, I can't help but to think that one single type stands out well above the rest in terms of importance as a life survival tool - interpersonal intelligence. Remember how people always say that its not what you know anymore, its who you know? I think that nicely sums up why its so bloody important to have interpersonal intelligence. 'Young adults with this kind of intelligence are leaders among their peers, are good at communicating, and seem to understand others’ feelings and motives.' I got that from some random site. Screw the last two. Look at the first one. Want to enter the corporate world? Intend on getting far? If you don't have this form of intelligence, then don't count on it. Actually, I would go as far as to say that it extends to all professions. A char kuey tiow seller with good interpersonal skills build up customer rapport. The only time when this doesn't affect your career is if you really and truly work alone. Like as a lighthouse watchman or something. Even then, you are going to need that intelligence when you approach your boss for a raise. If you ever approach your boss for a raise...
And what would be the worst one to have career wise? I have to say intrapersonal intelligence. 'These young adults may be shy. They are very aware of their own feelings and are self-motivated.' Who needs self motivation when you can make people believe that you are already self motivated? Personally, I think that shyness is a death sentence in the world. People tend to view shy people and wonder what is going on in their minds, and constantly trying to guess if that person means harm. Shy people constantly avert people's gaze. Do people assume that the reluctance to make eye contact is due to shyness? I think most take it as a sign that the person is an egoistical prick. Isolation from the rest of humanity is something that no amount of gardening (naturalist intelligence), tennis aces (bodily kinesthetic intelligence), or best selling novels (linguistic intelligence) will be able to compensate for.
At this point, I would like to borrow a phrase used by my friend once. 'Socially retarded at every level'. Its a brutally honest quip that explains everything. It is a form of retardation, bad enough, in my opinion to warrant a certain amount of medical attention. I find it amusing how much we fight for equality at the workplace when this fairly obvious shortcoming is not accounted for. Maybe its hard to classify and hard to determine, but since when has something being hard to do ever been an excuse for not doing it? As of now, we only treat severe shyness. Unless its really bad, its not even recognized as a problem. Thats like saying that we will help people who have lost their leg, but those that have lost their foot don't need our help; they can deal with the problem on their own.
I know I'm not making any sense. I know that what I'm proposing is insane and even if it were possible, we are 20 years away from it. And even if we do come close, there would be protests from Scientologists and other mental purists. But I think its a problem, and its one worth solving.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Why does it have to be so hard?
Why can't things be easier? Why does the obviously right thing to do have to feel so neutral, but the consistently, stupidly dodgy path raise my pulse everytime I think about it? Why did the stakes have to raised? I know I asked them to be raised, but still... Now there is so much to lose, and so much I could regret. I'm good at lying to myself, but I'm not that good.
I know what I need to do. I just need to start feeling what I need to do. But thats the really hard part. I can't make myself feel it. Not now at least. Maybe, if I actually had the opportunity to help it along. Sometimes it feels like the opportunity is always there. Sometimes it seems completely unfeasible, even to the most hardcore impulsive action-taker I know.
Gah!
Message to the universe : I know that you can do a lot worse, but, please, be kind to me... You know the way my mind works. You know that to most other people, it won't even be a problem. But its insanely confusing to me. Stop messing around with my head. I'd really appreciate it.
I wish I didn't have to be so cryptic writing this, but for my continued survival, I think I ought to.
I know what I need to do. I just need to start feeling what I need to do. But thats the really hard part. I can't make myself feel it. Not now at least. Maybe, if I actually had the opportunity to help it along. Sometimes it feels like the opportunity is always there. Sometimes it seems completely unfeasible, even to the most hardcore impulsive action-taker I know.
Gah!
Message to the universe : I know that you can do a lot worse, but, please, be kind to me... You know the way my mind works. You know that to most other people, it won't even be a problem. But its insanely confusing to me. Stop messing around with my head. I'd really appreciate it.
I wish I didn't have to be so cryptic writing this, but for my continued survival, I think I ought to.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Hats off to this guy. I think.
This was forwarded to my inbox recently. Its a pretty old story, but its still freaking hilarious. And since I haven't updated in like forever, I decided that someone else's thoughts are better than no thoughts at all. I don't condone such behaviour though. =P
This is why women should not take men shopping against their will.
After Mr. And Mrs. Fennell retired, Mrs. Fennell insisted her Husband
accompany her on her trips to Wal-Mart.
Unfortunately, Mr. Fennell was like most men--he found shopping Boring
and preferred to get in and get out.
Equally unfortunately, Mrs. Fennell was like most women--she loved to
browse. One day Mrs. Fennell received the following letter from her
local Wal-Mart.
Dear Mrs. Fennell,
Over the past six months, Tom has been causing quite a commotion in our
store. We cannot tolerate this behavior and may be forced to ban both of
you from the store. Our complaints against him are listed below and are
documented by our video surveillance cameras.
1. June 15: Took 24 boxes of condoms and randomly put them in people's
carts when they weren't looking.
2 July 2: Set all the alarm clocks in Housewares to go off at 5-minute
intervals.
3. July 7: Made a trail of tomato juice on the floor leading to the
women's restroom.
4. July 19: Walked up to an employee and told her in an official voice,
'Code 3 in Housewares. Get on it right away.'
5. August 4: Went to the Service Desk and tried to put a bag of M&M's on
layaway.
6. September 14: Moved a 'CAUTION - WET FLOOR' sign to a carpeted area.
7. September 15: Set up a tent in the camping department and told other
shoppers he'd invite them in if they would bring pillows and blankets
from the bedding department.
8. September 23: When a clerk asked if they could help him he began
crying and screamed, 'Why can't you people just leave me alone?'
9. October 4: Looked right into the security camera and used it as a
mirror while he picked his nose.
10. November 10: While handling guns in the hunting department, he asked
the clerk where the antidepressants were.
11. December 3: Darted around the store suspiciously while loudly
humming the 'Mission Impossible' theme.
12. December 6: In the auto department, he practiced his 'Madonna look'
by using different sizes of funnels.
13. December 18: Hid in a clothing rack and when people browsed
through, yelled 'PICK ME! PICK ME!'
14. December 21: When an announcement came over the loud speaker, he
assumed a fetal position and screamed 'OH NO! IT'S THOSE VOICES AGAIN!'
And last, but not least
15. December 23: Went into a fitting room, shut the door, waited awhile,
then yelled very loudly, 'Hey! There's no toilet paper in here!'
Regards,
Walmart
This is why women should not take men shopping against their will.
After Mr. And Mrs. Fennell retired, Mrs. Fennell insisted her Husband
accompany her on her trips to Wal-Mart.
Unfortunately, Mr. Fennell was like most men--he found shopping Boring
and preferred to get in and get out.
Equally unfortunately, Mrs. Fennell was like most women--she loved to
browse. One day Mrs. Fennell received the following letter from her
local Wal-Mart.
Dear Mrs. Fennell,
Over the past six months, Tom has been causing quite a commotion in our
store. We cannot tolerate this behavior and may be forced to ban both of
you from the store. Our complaints against him are listed below and are
documented by our video surveillance cameras.
1. June 15: Took 24 boxes of condoms and randomly put them in people's
carts when they weren't looking.
2 July 2: Set all the alarm clocks in Housewares to go off at 5-minute
intervals.
3. July 7: Made a trail of tomato juice on the floor leading to the
women's restroom.
4. July 19: Walked up to an employee and told her in an official voice,
'Code 3 in Housewares. Get on it right away.'
5. August 4: Went to the Service Desk and tried to put a bag of M&M's on
layaway.
6. September 14: Moved a 'CAUTION - WET FLOOR' sign to a carpeted area.
7. September 15: Set up a tent in the camping department and told other
shoppers he'd invite them in if they would bring pillows and blankets
from the bedding department.
8. September 23: When a clerk asked if they could help him he began
crying and screamed, 'Why can't you people just leave me alone?'
9. October 4: Looked right into the security camera and used it as a
mirror while he picked his nose.
10. November 10: While handling guns in the hunting department, he asked
the clerk where the antidepressants were.
11. December 3: Darted around the store suspiciously while loudly
humming the 'Mission Impossible' theme.
12. December 6: In the auto department, he practiced his 'Madonna look'
by using different sizes of funnels.
13. December 18: Hid in a clothing rack and when people browsed
through, yelled 'PICK ME! PICK ME!'
14. December 21: When an announcement came over the loud speaker, he
assumed a fetal position and screamed 'OH NO! IT'S THOSE VOICES AGAIN!'
And last, but not least
15. December 23: Went into a fitting room, shut the door, waited awhile,
then yelled very loudly, 'Hey! There's no toilet paper in here!'
Regards,
Walmart
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)