杏里 - 悲しみがとまらない
平成20年10月12日日曜日
平成20年10月8日水曜日
The Would You Have Been a Nazi Test
Your result for The Would You Have Been a Nazi Test...
Der Kommandant
Achtung! You are 38% brainwashworthy, 41% antitolerant, and 57% blindly patriotic
Opportunistic, patriotic to a fault, and not so fond of people who aren't just like you, you are like a Nazi General. Back in Germany in the 1940's, you would have been at the top of the asshole list. Not for Nazism, necessarily, but for your own sick, twisted values. Then, out of superior intelligence (relative to other Nazis, that is), you would've climbed to the top.
Conclusion: you would have been a Nazi, and most likely would have served them well.
- new test, it rules, take it -
The Terrorism Test
Conclusion: you would have been a Nazi, and most likely would have served them well.
The Terrorism Test
平成20年10月4日土曜日
Who Would You Be in 1400 AD Test
Your result for The Who Would You Be in 1400 AD Test...
The Knight
You scored 39% Cardinal, 41% Monk, 44% Lady, and 65% Knight!
You are the hero. Brave and bold. You are strong and utterly selfless. You are also a pawn to your superiors and will be lucky if you live very long. If you survive the Holy wars you are thrust into you will be praised for your valor and opportunities both romantic and financial will become available to you.
平成20年9月26日金曜日
Shocked by students' views
Shocked by students' views
ZOROASTRIANISM is the 'sign of Zorro'. Islam is when 'their marriages take place in the void deck'. Buddhism is 'about filial piety'.
These were some comments made by youth here on various religions, as found in a study by former Aware president and educator Phyllis Chew.
Shocked by the results, she states unequivocally that Singapore needs to review the teaching of religion in school.
'A lack of knowledge of different faiths is a potentially unstable situation and it might be productive here to rethink what we could do for youth,' says Dr Chew, 55, an English language and literature lecturer at the National Institute of Education.
It was not the only disturbing finding from her study, which involved 2,801 students aged 12 to 18 from six secondary schools. Its aim: To find out the nature of religious switching by adolescents, and how much they know about religions.
While 76 per cent said they were 'tolerant' of other religions, their idea of tolerance was 'not talking about it'.
And while a whopping 92 per cent expressed desire to find out more about other religions, the majority said they would do so from the Internet.
At the same time, Dr Chew found that they switched religions through an emotional process. 'They will usually say things like, 'I've a good feeling (about this religion)' or 'My friends influenced me'.
'So it's not a very rational decision, like what are the pros, what are the cons. It's not very cognitive. The switching process is usually an emotional one.'
This is particularly so as adolescence is a period when self-esteem issues come into play, she adds. 'This is a time when they are trying to find out who they are. They are questioning the values their parents taught them, they are trying to find their place in society.'
What all this shows is the urgent need for a more systematic way for religion to be taught, says Dr Chew.
'What I hope to see is a course on comparative religion studied by all regardless of religious affiliation,' she says.
'This course must be taught by trained, knowledgeable and sympathetic teachers of comparative religion.'
This, she notes, is being done in Britain, where students study a book of all its main faiths, and do a comparative study of their histories, practices and beliefs.
At the same time, Singapore has to learn from its lessons of the 1980s, when Religious Knowledge was introduced in schools in 1984. It was terminated five years later.
Under it, students chose to study only one of the religions offered - which 'leads to polarisation along ethno-religious lines', says Dr Chew.
At the same time, teachers were 'not adequately trained and, in fact, some were overzealous and used it as a springboard to promote their own faiths'.
Today, aspects of religions and cultures are taught informally as part of civics education classes.
But more has to be done, says Dr Chew. 'We don't want youth to feel that the meaning of being tolerant is not to talk about it. And therefore feel that evif I want to find out about religion, I can't even ask my friend, I go to the Internet.
'Now, I don't know whether youths have the skill to sieve through the Internet as to what is factually correct and what is factually wrong.'
Dr Chew was herself a 'switcher' during her adolescence.
While her grandparents were Taoist, her parents converted to Christianity after her mother recovered from an illness.
'But I got very, very disturbed in my teenage years, because my grandmother is Taoist and the Christian priest said my grandmother was not going to heaven,' she recounts.
So the young Phyllis searched for answers. In university, she joined the Buddhist society, the Baha'i society and even checked out the Tamil society to understand more about Hinduism.
In the end, she became a Baha'i as 'it was unequivocal in accepting that all religions worship the same god and so my perennial question - what will happen to my beloved grandmother - was solved.'
But while she made the effort to educate herself about various religions, she is concerned that today's teenagers are not doing the same. This, she worries, may lead to a 'potentially unstable situation in the future because of ignorance'.
'We can be tolerant only if we know what other religions are about, otherwise we are operating in a vacuum. We are like frogs in a well.
'People guard their turf because they are defensive. It's a lack of knowledge, actually.
'If you have knowledge of all the religions, then you can be really more confident and less defensive and this really is what the world needs now.'
This article was first published in The Straits Times on Sept 12, 2008.
Ignorance is bliss. However, not for the academic. Not for the sake of world peace and harmony. One must have knowledge in order to understand and understanding leads to true peace and religious harmony. No man lives alone on his own island. Ignorance is only for the hermit.
ZOROASTRIANISM is the 'sign of Zorro'. Islam is when 'their marriages take place in the void deck'. Buddhism is 'about filial piety'.
These were some comments made by youth here on various religions, as found in a study by former Aware president and educator Phyllis Chew.
Shocked by the results, she states unequivocally that Singapore needs to review the teaching of religion in school.
'A lack of knowledge of different faiths is a potentially unstable situation and it might be productive here to rethink what we could do for youth,' says Dr Chew, 55, an English language and literature lecturer at the National Institute of Education.
It was not the only disturbing finding from her study, which involved 2,801 students aged 12 to 18 from six secondary schools. Its aim: To find out the nature of religious switching by adolescents, and how much they know about religions.
While 76 per cent said they were 'tolerant' of other religions, their idea of tolerance was 'not talking about it'.
And while a whopping 92 per cent expressed desire to find out more about other religions, the majority said they would do so from the Internet.
At the same time, Dr Chew found that they switched religions through an emotional process. 'They will usually say things like, 'I've a good feeling (about this religion)' or 'My friends influenced me'.
'So it's not a very rational decision, like what are the pros, what are the cons. It's not very cognitive. The switching process is usually an emotional one.'
This is particularly so as adolescence is a period when self-esteem issues come into play, she adds. 'This is a time when they are trying to find out who they are. They are questioning the values their parents taught them, they are trying to find their place in society.'
What all this shows is the urgent need for a more systematic way for religion to be taught, says Dr Chew.
'What I hope to see is a course on comparative religion studied by all regardless of religious affiliation,' she says.
'This course must be taught by trained, knowledgeable and sympathetic teachers of comparative religion.'
This, she notes, is being done in Britain, where students study a book of all its main faiths, and do a comparative study of their histories, practices and beliefs.
At the same time, Singapore has to learn from its lessons of the 1980s, when Religious Knowledge was introduced in schools in 1984. It was terminated five years later.
Under it, students chose to study only one of the religions offered - which 'leads to polarisation along ethno-religious lines', says Dr Chew.
At the same time, teachers were 'not adequately trained and, in fact, some were overzealous and used it as a springboard to promote their own faiths'.
Today, aspects of religions and cultures are taught informally as part of civics education classes.
But more has to be done, says Dr Chew. 'We don't want youth to feel that the meaning of being tolerant is not to talk about it. And therefore feel that evif I want to find out about religion, I can't even ask my friend, I go to the Internet.
'Now, I don't know whether youths have the skill to sieve through the Internet as to what is factually correct and what is factually wrong.'
Dr Chew was herself a 'switcher' during her adolescence.
While her grandparents were Taoist, her parents converted to Christianity after her mother recovered from an illness.
'But I got very, very disturbed in my teenage years, because my grandmother is Taoist and the Christian priest said my grandmother was not going to heaven,' she recounts.
So the young Phyllis searched for answers. In university, she joined the Buddhist society, the Baha'i society and even checked out the Tamil society to understand more about Hinduism.
In the end, she became a Baha'i as 'it was unequivocal in accepting that all religions worship the same god and so my perennial question - what will happen to my beloved grandmother - was solved.'
But while she made the effort to educate herself about various religions, she is concerned that today's teenagers are not doing the same. This, she worries, may lead to a 'potentially unstable situation in the future because of ignorance'.
'We can be tolerant only if we know what other religions are about, otherwise we are operating in a vacuum. We are like frogs in a well.
'People guard their turf because they are defensive. It's a lack of knowledge, actually.
'If you have knowledge of all the religions, then you can be really more confident and less defensive and this really is what the world needs now.'
This article was first published in The Straits Times on Sept 12, 2008.
Ignorance is bliss. However, not for the academic. Not for the sake of world peace and harmony. One must have knowledge in order to understand and understanding leads to true peace and religious harmony. No man lives alone on his own island. Ignorance is only for the hermit.
平成20年8月21日木曜日
A Moral Home for the Aged
From Constantine Goh, " I saw the Thye Hua Kwan moral home for the disabled. Makes you wonder what an immoral version must be like."
平成20年8月20日水曜日
Back to the Future
This is a photo of the Chinesisches Haus (Chinese House) in Potsdam, Germany. Built by Frederick the Great between 1755 and 1764, this is a classic example of Chinoiserie.
This is an extract of the facebook discussion on the building.
Mr B wrote at 11:05pm
"chinese"?!
Mr C wrote
at 11:13pm
Does it look Chinese to you? This is what the German imagination came up with when they thought of China.
Mr A wrote at 11:33pm
they need to see some movies, pictures or videos of China.
Mr C wrote at 11:50pm
I wish I had taken photos of the statues. They're supposed to be Chinese people, but they're just a bunch of Germans dressed in ridiculous clothing. =P
Mr D wrote at 12:47am
Chinoiserie.
Mr F wrote at 3:43am
yes Chinoiserie was all the rage in France when it first recognized the "people's republic"
Here is a little background info on Mr A. Mr A claims he knows history better than the average guy. However, judging from what he just said, I think he is a plonker with no concept of time.
The only two men I know who have the right to make that same comment would be Dr. Emmett L. Brown from Back to the Future and The Time Traveller from H. G. Wells's The Time Machine.
These two gentlemen, should be able to bring Frederick the Great to a modern cinema and allow him to watch as much Chinese movies. I suggest that Frederick the Great should start with a couple of Bruce Lee films. This should tell him that if he screws up the building one more time, he'll end up like the riffraffs in the film.
平成20年8月18日月曜日
Cause or Clause
An extract of a group of Singaporeans arguing over the picture titled * Singaporeans coming together for a good clause.* on facebook.
Mr Aye wrote at 9:55am yesterday
Clause? Haha... =P
Miss Si wrote at 11:23am yesterday
What is clause? It says in the dictionary: single part in a treaty, law, or contract. i dont understand
Miss Si wrote at 11:26am yesterday
Oh yes, i understand now.
Mr Bee wrote at 11:08pm yesterday
so should be a good cause? or clause?
Mr Aye wrote at 11:13pm yesterday
I give up on the both of you man... LOL.
Miss Si wrote at 2:40pm
It's Clause... it's in the dictionary.
Miss Dee wrote at 5:15pm
cause. for a good cause.
Miss Yee wrote at 5:51pm
aiyo... you all ar super leh ... can fight over the word clause n cause... its still english words mah......
Is it too much to ask that they understand what the !"#@ they are talking about?
Mr Aye wrote at 9:55am yesterday
Clause? Haha... =P
Miss Si wrote at 11:23am yesterday
What is clause? It says in the dictionary: single part in a treaty, law, or contract. i dont understand
Miss Si wrote at 11:26am yesterday
Oh yes, i understand now.
Mr Bee wrote at 11:08pm yesterday
so should be a good cause? or clause?
Mr Aye wrote at 11:13pm yesterday
I give up on the both of you man... LOL.
Miss Si wrote at 2:40pm
It's Clause... it's in the dictionary.
Miss Dee wrote at 5:15pm
cause. for a good cause.
Miss Yee wrote at 5:51pm
aiyo... you all ar super leh ... can fight over the word clause n cause... its still english words mah......
Is it too much to ask that they understand what the !"#@ they are talking about?
登録:
投稿 (Atom)
