My Perspective - My Other Impression?

When i read what i have written below, i thought: "Damn, i am doing what i am asking others not to do". Practicing what i preach is never a reality when i get too emotional. To be able to write a powerful, influential and convincing article, i believe one basically cannot write two sides of the same argument in the same story, i think. It makes the point you want to put across rather weak. It might even confuse some people. "So what the hell are you trying to say here you dimwit?", "so if i do it this way, is it good or bad??". You can't possibly tell your love one: "Hey, you look so beautiful tonight, i would have thought you were a princess, oh, there is a pimple over there." (sorry for the 'top ten most unromantic line'..i don't much experience in this department. i did something similar years ago, but thats another story again. i was...stupidly honest. hehe.)

There is nothing to blame but the way some people think. i don't know. i don't want to say and i don't care. Like i've said, i am no psychologist. Like when you rally your troops, or when you want to bring up the morale of the people you lead, seldom do you mention about the 'other' side of the story. When a leader is seen to be two-minded, it brings an image that he is not convicted, and that he does not believe it himself. A bloody fence sitter! Same for an article. When you write one, you do want others to take notice, to feel "Hey, i know what you are saying man! i can even feel your conviction for that whatever cause!".

This is what i learnt in GP. I have always failed GP in class. Not because i cannot think i hope, but because i always wrote two sides. okay..i also did not support my argument with fake statistics, and i always did it just before class. (i hate writing. i rather go play outside with my friends.) But in the GCE 'A' Level, i knew i had no choice. I was taught to take one side. (Erm, or rather, in the time i was awake in class, i thought i heard that somewhere..hehe)...Maybe that helped. or maybe the 'colourful statistics' i faked helped me out. I mean, how the hell can you remember every single statistics for everything that happens in this world?! what a crappy subject GP was.

Now. For the 2nd installation of "My Perspective - Impressions of Others". Yes, i also believe, but i have to admit, rather much less, that the media should be opened up for new ideas. If you don't, how can a country improve? There is a whole population of ideas, millions of ideas, surely a few thousands would have been quite revolutional and would bring much prosperity to the country. If you don't open up the media, won't the population feel that they are not being heard, that their story is being suppressed? If you don't open up the media, how do you stop propagandas from spreading? If you don't open up the media, then what is democracy? Most importantly, if you don't open up the media, how do you expect the others to realise the other side of the story? We have to give power to the people. Alternatives.

*Erm..i am really sorry, but i have more fun writing the other side of the story...*

Let me ask you. Which one do you think is the right way to cure a fever? The chinese way advocates covering up the body till you start sweating or something. The english version douses you with cold ice to bring down the temperature. I am not too sure for the chinese way, but i think it does require you to get him in a thick blanket. heh...i dun really care either. But here are two ways of curing fever in singapore. Take your pick. Choose the english one and i am going to throw you the 1000-year history of chinese medicine. Choose the chinese one and i am going to throw you the idea that science works and prevails.

Then you have a physician. He is called Dr Abish. A patient comes in with very high fever. He needs immediate treatement. Its been a long 5 hour journey ride to the hospital. There are signs of brain damage. How do you think Dr Abish will save this guy's life? Does he have more information? no. He read the english version in chapter five of "The English Common Illness Treatment" book 3. He had read the chinese version in chapter six of "Historical Chinese Medicine" book 2. He is confused. He is a doctor, not a medical researcher. He couldn't act with conviction. But what he did not realise, is that he works in an english hospital, if the patients were to come in, they probably hope to receive english treatment. Not some hot blanket treatment. He starts to think deeply, both arguements have weight, seems correct, what shall i do? I want to save my patients life. But. Which is true? And he spends his whole life wondering...(he probably might have tried to notice the word "historical" in the title of the book...haha...how many of you caught that?)

Haha...yes, i did make this ideal example suit my argument (as some articles do). And like some 'very polite' undergrad in NUS said to our dear leader: "I can find 1000 more examples to counter your argument..."..

Then, What if the population is ready to decide? what if the population is smart enough to decide what they want? what if the population knows both sides of the story, but is unable to decide for themselves which one is good which one is bad What if the population also cannot hear the another side of the story because its a secret stupid. What if....they even don't know who is our prime minister? (go figure the statistics yourself...).

Bear in mind, there are things that even the people up there cannot say in public. You won't tell your customer that you are lending him money in order for him to freely spend like an idiot in your shop, so that you can feed your family, would you? That would ruin your, in this case, rather unethical, but required strategy. You have a family to feed. The media goes to everyone's house. Including your customer. If you are smart enough, you can probably guess how a person is thinking through a series of questions. "Are you giving me money so that i will spend endlessly at your shop?". To say no is to lie. To say yes is to lose the chance to feed your family. To not answer is to admit to it. To say maybe is to say yes. To say "lets go for a drink" is to say yes. To "are you nuts?" is to say no, which is to lie. i wish all things were so simple. haha. Either way, there is a higher chance of losing, either in the short term or the long term. go figure. i am too lazy to write anymore. haha.

Then i ask you. (i am terribly sorry that the examples are quite computer-user friendly.) What is an anti-virus? Why does everyone in the world have to install anti-viruses? Why is there a fire-wall? Why does a bank has a safe? Why doesn't the bank use a 1 digit pin number? isn't it so much easier to remember? if i tell the world how to open up the safe filled with billions of dollars in any bank branches, if you see 10 person doing it, without even being arrested, living like a king, what will you do? why do we have to protect ourselves from a small minority of people called "crackers"? hmm..I believe we have no choice? I wish we do. But most importantly, information can be pretty damaging. Hence, censorship. Why shouldn't the country's people know their own country's bank account number and password? Didn't you say we own a piece of this country?

Now comes the next example: Dr Chubby. Chubby is a XXX (which ever country you want to think) sensei. He heals patients by putting them in this couldron filled with snakes. Yu Du Gong Du (Fight poison with poison). A patient comes in with a cobra sting. Ouch. He is put into the couldron and died. But that is how he is taught all along, Chubby thought. In this case, he should have read the paper which told him that the english has deviced a new way to treat poisons. To make the antidote with the poison, not to inject more into the patient. But the papers did not contain this information, even if he wanted to read. Its truth will undermine the whole XXX system of medicine law. A person should be allowed to get both point of view so that he can decide which is the better method, rather than to follow the "correct doctrine" all the time based on trust. You get what i mean.

"what the heck are you trying to say?"

its quite obvious, and i do know the benefits/detriments, if you are wondering. Honestly, i have not enough information to say whether the media is good or bad. oh well. I am still thinking like Dr Abish. Lack of information and expertise.

who pissed me off today? another person who thinks i am one-track minded. Just because i often like to make myself a joke, doesn't mean i am a joke. How fast that person fixed my personality, and is so full of himself that he knows that i am like that, i dislike. Its not just that though, my pressure cooker takes pretty lots of beating before it blows, so you are safe.

For the record, its not anyone really close to me. So if you think its you...NO its not...
for this time at least..haha ... i just got to know him...he doesnt know i am blogging here...and you are here...go picture.

so here i am. Trying to convince you and myself that i am right again. hehe. Full of youthful idealism perhaps. But aren't we already living in a world of fulfilled idealism? If Man did not dream, we would not even have things called the media. Everyone of us here would be sleeping in our caves, wondering, "what shall i catch for breakfast tomorrow?".

*writing this with a fever, cough and flu. Can't sleep thanks to Starbucks's Mocha Frappachino. i probably might have written something which i didn't intend to. So enjoy this 'article' with a light heart, thank you*