Personally, the projects day were quite the disaster for me. Mistakes were obviously made, however what is important to learn from the mistakes we made.
1. I felt that I lacked the appropriate leadership skills. One big regret in my project was the lack of one of my team member's participation- Justin. However, this was not to blame him. Our project was very messy. Essentially the making of the prototype and finalization of the slides were all done one week before the actual judging. The work was rather unequally divided among us. Most of the time, it was me and my other member, Samuel carrying out the work. The other members, Kay Han and Justin rarely did anything. This was because I came into contact with Samuel more easily than Justin.
I would like to place the blame of the disorganized workload on me, the leader of the group. At first, I blamed the other two members a lot for their lack of contribution. However, after the Semi-Prelims, I realized that blaming them was not appropriate. I understood an important point- I did not assign work to them. I feel that this has been a major mistake on my part. The blaming essentially was also wrong.
2. Secondly, I felt that the overall flow of the project is incorrect. I shared my the story of my project with my tuition teacher, together we dissected the whole process and successfully identified the problems. The crucial mistake was at the very start. We had an idea before every else- we were so big headed. We spend a whole 2 months working on that idea even before the start of the year. Then, during the first IvP peer mentoring session, disaster struck. Instantly, the idea was rejected and "shot down" by most of the people.
I thought about this. It was very unsafe for us to have jumped the gun. The problem was that the idea was not secured, but yet we still chose the category. We took a huge gamble- a gamble that failed. What could have been better, was to put in the extra effort to confirm the project with a mentor, so that at least there is an insurance.
I feel that this can help me with my projects day so that next time, disaster can be avoided.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Friday, July 22, 2011
The Singapore Spirit- Races
Singapore is a very diversified country. Nonetheless, race itself is diversified throughout Singapore. Hence, there is a necessity for a "common race" or "common belief" among people in order for unity.
This "common belief" would be the infamous "Singapore Spirit". This Singapore Spirit is highly ambiguous. Many people have many different opinions and interpretations of it. To me, the Singapore Spirit acts like a bridge and common platform among all the races in Singapore.
Over the years since Singapore's independence we have been plagued with many racial disputes and collisions. The 1964 Prophet Muhammad Birthday riots, for example, was certainly unfortunate. It was a very depressing sight- Singaporeans killing Singaporeans. The violence killed 36 people and injured another 556. About 3,000 people were arrested. Racial disturbance was very high in Singapore. I would hence classify these killings and racial disputes as the lack of the Singapore Spirit.
Despite all the unhappiness and anger among the races, there were also positive and brighter sides to racial relations in Singapore. A very good example would be the 2003 SARS outbreak. The SARS virus was a deadly virus that affected 37 countries all around the world with more than 8200 cases and 775 deaths. The virus was deadly and also the first time Singapore faced an epidemic or such caliber. However, medical staff risked their lives to try and save patients from this unknown disease. In this period of darkness, heart-wrenching and inspirational stories of courage and selflessness emerged. A doctor even said: "We went in there 90 per cent expecting to die,". However, Singapore stood as one, as one nation, as one race, as one body. This is true Singapore Spirit.
The Singapore spirit is very important to Singapore. It is very powerful as shown in the SARS crisis. The Singapore Spirit is a spirit in people in which at the end of the day, regardless of race, religion, age or position, you are a Singaporean. As a Singaporean you are responsible for Singapore and every other Singaporean. That, is the real Singapore Spirit!
This "common belief" would be the infamous "Singapore Spirit". This Singapore Spirit is highly ambiguous. Many people have many different opinions and interpretations of it. To me, the Singapore Spirit acts like a bridge and common platform among all the races in Singapore.
Over the years since Singapore's independence we have been plagued with many racial disputes and collisions. The 1964 Prophet Muhammad Birthday riots, for example, was certainly unfortunate. It was a very depressing sight- Singaporeans killing Singaporeans. The violence killed 36 people and injured another 556. About 3,000 people were arrested. Racial disturbance was very high in Singapore. I would hence classify these killings and racial disputes as the lack of the Singapore Spirit.
Despite all the unhappiness and anger among the races, there were also positive and brighter sides to racial relations in Singapore. A very good example would be the 2003 SARS outbreak. The SARS virus was a deadly virus that affected 37 countries all around the world with more than 8200 cases and 775 deaths. The virus was deadly and also the first time Singapore faced an epidemic or such caliber. However, medical staff risked their lives to try and save patients from this unknown disease. In this period of darkness, heart-wrenching and inspirational stories of courage and selflessness emerged. A doctor even said: "We went in there 90 per cent expecting to die,". However, Singapore stood as one, as one nation, as one race, as one body. This is true Singapore Spirit.
The Singapore spirit is very important to Singapore. It is very powerful as shown in the SARS crisis. The Singapore Spirit is a spirit in people in which at the end of the day, regardless of race, religion, age or position, you are a Singaporean. As a Singaporean you are responsible for Singapore and every other Singaporean. That, is the real Singapore Spirit!
Saturday, July 16, 2011
3 types of Thinking
Today, I will be describing three types of bad thinking and share some of my opinions about it.
Firstly, we have Sheep Thinking. Sheep are often reflected to come in a whole group or cluster. Hence, Sheep are compared to people that belong to a part of a whole group. The essential thing is that these sheep follow and play along with what other sheep go or do, similarly, these people often play along and follow what other people or the majority do. This kind of thinking lacks that involvement of one's own opinions.
Secondly, we have Egocentric thinking. As suggested by the name, Egocentric thinking is centered around oneself. "Ego" refers to one's pride and glory, while "Centric" essentially means "centered". Hence, we can know that Egocentric thinking would be a kind of thinking that is centered around the thinker's own pride and his advantages. This is a very selfish type of thinking.
Thirdly, we have Haphazard thinking. Haphazard essentially means disorganized, hence Haphazard thinking would be disorganized thinking. This would mean that you do not put in the effort to consider other aspects when thinking. This is usually the spark of a fiery, but avoidable argument.
I feel that Haphazard thinking is the deadliest among these three. The critical aspect about this type of thinking is that it has the power to change a trivial thing to a major argument. Let's use a scenario to explain this point. Imagine someone accidentally stepping on your foot. Due to Haphazard thinking, you unleash your rage on the person and give him one hard punch. The other person retaliates in rage too. The teacher hurries over to stop the fight. Afterwards, the teacher's boss reprimands the teacher for not handling the class properly. No one is happy in the end. Could all these have been avoided? At the very first part of the incident, if you chose to forgive the person instead of punching him, the person might have been much happier and apologetic. The teacher would have less trouble to take care of, and the teacher's boss would have less teachers to scold.
Haphazard thinking is very powerful- in a bad way. It is able to cause a chain of unpleasant events. Hence, in conclusion I feel that Haphazard thinking is the most dangerous thinking out of these three thinking.
Firstly, we have Sheep Thinking. Sheep are often reflected to come in a whole group or cluster. Hence, Sheep are compared to people that belong to a part of a whole group. The essential thing is that these sheep follow and play along with what other sheep go or do, similarly, these people often play along and follow what other people or the majority do. This kind of thinking lacks that involvement of one's own opinions.
Secondly, we have Egocentric thinking. As suggested by the name, Egocentric thinking is centered around oneself. "Ego" refers to one's pride and glory, while "Centric" essentially means "centered". Hence, we can know that Egocentric thinking would be a kind of thinking that is centered around the thinker's own pride and his advantages. This is a very selfish type of thinking.
Thirdly, we have Haphazard thinking. Haphazard essentially means disorganized, hence Haphazard thinking would be disorganized thinking. This would mean that you do not put in the effort to consider other aspects when thinking. This is usually the spark of a fiery, but avoidable argument.
I feel that Haphazard thinking is the deadliest among these three. The critical aspect about this type of thinking is that it has the power to change a trivial thing to a major argument. Let's use a scenario to explain this point. Imagine someone accidentally stepping on your foot. Due to Haphazard thinking, you unleash your rage on the person and give him one hard punch. The other person retaliates in rage too. The teacher hurries over to stop the fight. Afterwards, the teacher's boss reprimands the teacher for not handling the class properly. No one is happy in the end. Could all these have been avoided? At the very first part of the incident, if you chose to forgive the person instead of punching him, the person might have been much happier and apologetic. The teacher would have less trouble to take care of, and the teacher's boss would have less teachers to scold.
Haphazard thinking is very powerful- in a bad way. It is able to cause a chain of unpleasant events. Hence, in conclusion I feel that Haphazard thinking is the most dangerous thinking out of these three thinking.
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
People over penny (Dr. Susan Lim case)
Dr. Susan Lim is a very renowned doctor in Asia; she was the first to conduct a liver transplant in Asia! However, her true colours were revealed when she charged the Brunei royal family a stunning $21million dollars for her medical care. I would like to voice some opinions.
Evidence has shown that she marked up the bill issued by the specialists that help to take care of the Bruneian queen's sister from 0.9 times up to 526 times the original bill. This has really raised my concern. It seems that the Singapore bad "love money" attitude had deteriorated to such a ridiculous level! I think Dr. Susan Lim has essentially erased all her credit and fame by her silly actions.
I believe that doctors are a very sacred occupation. Doctors have the control over the well-being of people, hence they should be people of very high moral etiquette. Dr. Susan Lim, being a doctor, however, has failed miserably at showing the aspect of possessing a high moral etiquette. She has obviously taken advantage of the fact that the client was of royal background to try and acquire as much money for selfish purposes. A doctor should not be like that, in fact, as a doctor, you are sworn to place people above penny.
Benevolence should be the first priority of doctors, it is certainly disappointing to see yet another prominent figure blur the lines between the people and the penny. I thank the legal actions taken against her, especially by her own country- housekeeping. I hope and pray hard that Singapore would shift away from being such a money-oriented society.
Evidence has shown that she marked up the bill issued by the specialists that help to take care of the Bruneian queen's sister from 0.9 times up to 526 times the original bill. This has really raised my concern. It seems that the Singapore bad "love money" attitude had deteriorated to such a ridiculous level! I think Dr. Susan Lim has essentially erased all her credit and fame by her silly actions.
I believe that doctors are a very sacred occupation. Doctors have the control over the well-being of people, hence they should be people of very high moral etiquette. Dr. Susan Lim, being a doctor, however, has failed miserably at showing the aspect of possessing a high moral etiquette. She has obviously taken advantage of the fact that the client was of royal background to try and acquire as much money for selfish purposes. A doctor should not be like that, in fact, as a doctor, you are sworn to place people above penny.
Benevolence should be the first priority of doctors, it is certainly disappointing to see yet another prominent figure blur the lines between the people and the penny. I thank the legal actions taken against her, especially by her own country- housekeeping. I hope and pray hard that Singapore would shift away from being such a money-oriented society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)