Christmas Thoughts?

what do you think when standing alone throughout the 2-hour advent service? strange thoughts, i assure you.

It is always tempting to call a young man uninformed for his lack of wrinkles, and to call an old man wise for an abundance of the same.

Just as youth breeds pride, so does age invite negligence.
So shall communication end in conflict and history mire in hiccoughs.

Thus speaks a youth weary of speech: what despair awaits him in evanescence!
Yet if he persists in silence, who would hear his heart breaking?

Then pray you, cry out!
Suffer alone no more, O Solipsist!
Still, he may utter not an audible syllable until his hair grays and his digits tremble.

Whereupon he shall speak his father's tongue, and impress his son's quiet.
Praise, therefore, the Lord Almighty!
For all is but vanity.

am still struggling with norm-bending ideas... but really, i am tired. why does god bother to give me these ideas? why put them in this mind in such a country? sounds like sadist pleasure to me. i am always thinking "change" in a static society. i must bring god such joy.

how to disappear completely

you know, life is really quite fun. you meet people, you laugh, you discuss deep far-out philosophical ripostes as if you understood them just for the heck of it. then of course, there's also the not-so-fun parts, where the challenge is really to just get thru with them as though they were fun too.

now, back to living my life.

no so long ago, when i was in secondary school, i had a thought experiment. instead of spending all that effort trying to enjoy life, making sense of things, looking for a reason to wake up tmr, why not find a way to disappear?

which brings me to radiohead's obscure song, "how to disappear completely". i don't even remember much about the song, other than rating it 4 stars in my mediamonkey, most likely for the title. in one decade, i have yet to think of a way to disappear completely, without a trace, without affecting anyone else who still wants to continue existing. i mean, if you just 一走了之, many ppl would be quite affected lar. how irresponsible! wanna disappear, should at least do it in such a way which minimally impacts others, especially those who love you. the effort would most likely involve one of those dystopian erase-all-traces kinda thing, but that is unfortunately unachievable for most of us. "eternal sunshine of the spotless mind" gave me a glimmer of hope too, but making everybody forget about me is just as tough eh? not like the mind-tampering technique even exists.

so now i realise one thing: there's no way (at least with our current technology) to disappear completely. which leaves us with either continue living or dying (which is excessively messy). to conclude, it is because of this mildly coerced choice which leaves most of us living, attempting to find some value in taking the next breath, commissioning the next thought with some grand meaning.

is this the root of all anthropic perspectives? the dilemma of being stuck with an easy choice which requires a lot of effort and constant exposure to insecurity, and a difficult choice with no security at all. thus, we force some sensibility out of this absurd reality. we invent logic. we create science. we worship gods. if not... what would we do? either way, you're stuck with life.

with reality already created and so strongly in place, "how to disappear completely" becomes a dream, a mere song for commercial profit. why bother fighting established principles of life? why, life is already full of difficulties as is - leave it alone. let go. let someone else do the thinking. feeling indignant about choicelessness is little more than being brash and emotional. you may not agree, but everyone thinks you should have better things to do.

and without so much as a sigh, i go back to living the life imposed.

smells like religion

14 oxygens waiting to be read - bad time management can really squeeze God out. but now that the deadlines are firmly dead, what's next? i start sifting thru some of these oxygens, and the first thing i notice is how the message jumps out, but separated into two tracks. one, that nice fuzzy feeling of some higher being looking out for you; two, that strange dissonant ring of doubt.

"smells like religion."

that is what an atheist would say, no? i have been wrestling with some of these questions for too long... and every time i think of blogging about them, i have to stop myself. what if these words cast an indelible mark of insecurity upon my readers? this blog is not merely for myself. these are not simply ideas i wish to air. there are people - dear friends - who will see them. if i can see a need to exercise prudence as an exco member, then even more so should i not air these virulent doubts.

but... i already have aired a slight hint of these doubts. they are highly philosophical in nature. if i've learnt anything from 'Hume & Kant', it is that some of these questions can be debated for another 200 years and we will still not arrive at any greater clarity. yet i feel a strange connection with them... just like how the mind of an 'empirical realist' or a 'transcendental idealist' deals with existential questions fascinates me.

"smells like philosophy."

why does that not evoke the same kind of negative connotation? why does grappling with philosophical questions which concern the very state of reality itself seem more acceptable than dealing with questions of faith and afterlife? is God more certain than cognition? why do i feel academic about doubting my senses while doubting the bible reduces me to queasiness?

"smells like sociology."

norms. socialisation. peer pressure. monkey see monkey do. if you care about any person, you would care about that person's belief system. between attempting to deconstruct beliefs which are taken for granted and giving the believers due concern and respect, is there any path to tread? or is battling the comfort zone doomed to all-out war? i need more demarcation, yet perhaps it is something impossible to achieve.

and yet, this so-called concern for others still rings hollow. i believe my uneasiness is due to something deeper within - that fear of deconstructing faith itself. what if i succeed? what if i become the person i claim to be trying to understand - an atheist?

what ever it smells like, the only reason why "smells" is used instead of "sounds" or "looks" is probably because it is one of those senses which don't alert you all the time - only in times of sensibility. i pray the sensibility sticks.

unmotivatable

is this one of those "lows"? i don't know. all i know is, i've tried what i believe to be "summoning some strength" but it never does materialise. am i barely hanging on? when my mind goes kind of blank and i forget - really forget - just what i am doing or the reasons for doing so, a part of me begins to give up. i surrender (not exactly to god) and i must admit (not because i'm humble) that i've overestimated myself.

i simply don't have what it takes to juggle all i'm juggling. i'm not delicate enough for this balancing act. i'm not capable enough to organise all those clashing thoughts. i'm not even stable enough to deal with these issues as what they are - separate issues.

i have to give something up. before i bloody crash and burn.

tired

so tired of preaching.
i need to start practicing.
why are you holding me back?
that's what i really wanna do!
why do you warp my reality?
why fill it with wars?
i've had my fill; it's not what i wanna feel.
you've been defiled; and i'm concerned.
what are you concerned with?
my deep consternation -
with these condescending nations?
let them descend!
then send me to them!
when they've saved enough,
then it'd all depreciate.
let me save them - i was born for it.
let me appreciate it.
but you're a stubborn god, aren't you?
if society was god, you'd've stubbed your toe.
you'd've toed that line
between socialism and communism.
but you don't communicate with us -
you're just an export from the US.
quit practicing consumerism;
it's quietly consuming our preaching.

can you hear the spirit...

...calling come away?

if you hear about it,
and you think about it,
even talk about it,
what would you do?
what would you do about it?

if you read about it,
and you write about it,
even sing about it,
what would you do?
what would you do about it?

i've heard your calling -
a fire raging in my soul,
a slight tremble in my fingers
as the images fill my mind.

i've witnessed your glory -
the undeniable fruits of faith.
but my heart continues to doubt;
these thoughts escape my control.

when you see mountains of obstacles
take heed my friend, recall his words:
all you need to move them is a mustard seed of faith!

are you sinking in your sorrows?
are you worried about tomorrow?
are the pressures of this life too hard to bear?

try to cast your cares on him
he'll give you perfect peace within
can you hear the spirit calling come away...

capitalist greed... or feudalistic greed?

i have a new habit of making short posts.

would you prefer a world where materialism and petty capitalist feuds ruled the headlines... or a world where religious wars and ethnic conflicts are the norm? so long as selfish greed is endemic to the rich/powerful, capitalism would just be a less physically violent presentation of outright warfare.

obedience & tenacity

why stop at being a phag?
now i can be a phagot.

to be Obedient to God and the authorities He has placed in power over me.

to be Tenacious in accepting the trials He has entrusted me with.

Amen.

courting controversy

with new roles comes new responsibilities. was about to blog my sincere, heartfelt, radical comments about the pope-quote-byzantine-emperor saga - but i have second thoughts.

as a representative of css, how should i behave? as a lector, could i doze off in the front pew during an excessively boring homily? as a close friend, do i simply do as i like and ignore his/er feelings?

if being myself means being a pain in the ass, being a relentlessly repugnant rebel, being a n impropmptu challenge to a person's beliefs, is that still a "self" i'd like to call myself?

society exists for a reason. people do not generate and follow norms for fun. not all these justifications may be acceptable for me, but being a Phag means 4 norms straight to follow.

Patience. it is not always the time to court controversy. take a step back, and two forward may follow.

Humility. don't court controversy just to hear your own voice ring out louder than others'
thoughts.

Appreciation. controversy tends to criticise and dismiss instead of appreciate. court appreciation.

Gentleness. court whatever - but how gentle is the spirit? things will get across better if done gently.

so the only controversy i shall court tonight is making this prayer:
Lord make me a PHAG.
Amen.

who am i to judge

g: dear god...
G: yes, dear?
g: whoa, that was fast!
G: *rolls eyes* so, what's up?
g: ah well, nothing much really. just something bugging me.
G: uhhhh-huh.
g: i uh, kinda pissed a friend off.
G: *chuckles* you knew you had it coming, didn't you?
g: right, right. with free will everything's my fault...
G: "...even though You planned everything in advance." dude, you don't have to trail off, i know what you're thinking.
g: really? then you know i'm stumped.
G: yes, of course you are.
g: i mean, i don't understand how it happened at all.
G: mm hmm.
g: okay so i was going on with my self-righteous bullshit and shooting my mouth off like a deranged kid in a high school shootout.
G: *pause* that seemed unnecessary too.
g: hey, i get emotional too. you're the god, you deal with it.
G: easy boy. i could still zap you.
g: whatever. i still don't get it. what exactly did i do wrong? when did i piss her off?
G: you weren't wrong. even if you ever were, you won't admit to it. you've already made up your mind about yourself.
g: yea... glad you agree with me.
G: actually. no, not really.
g: *pause* oh. it was sarcasm.
G: more like i'm echoing your thoughts.
g: fine. so i was stubborn. she was too.
G: she was more of exasperated, i'd say.
g: and what, i'm not? do i look like i'm enjoying this?
G: now, now. it's not always about you.
g: ah.
G: remember your commitment to PHAG?
g: fag? i thought i gave up smoking.
G: *pause* very funny.
g: oh. oh you meant Patience, Humility, Appreciation, Gentleness.
G: there, you got it.
g: let's see. i think i failed in all four huh.
G: no need to be that harsh, dear. you keep trying.
g: i did not wait. i did not check my pride. i did not see her point of view. i did not care.
G: that's somewhat of a more accurate appraisal...
g: man, i feel really lousy now.
G: ...except for the unnecessarily large amount of guilt involved.
g: okay, so what do i do now?
G: you know.
g: apologise?
G: arboh? what else?
g: buy her sweets?
G: you know, that humour of yours can make crocodiles cry.
g: ouch.
G: you talked about being judgmental in your little soliloquy with her.
g: yep. i am still very much convinced that the reason adults expect people to be well-dressed and formal is simply to extend their pretentious work-lives to church. it still sickens me that i have to dress up when lectoring just to avoid their judgmental remarks.
G: who are you to judge?
g: i... what? did i judge?
G: you clearly did.
g: i uh, was only "very much convinced"...
G: so what?
g: am i not entitled to personal opinions?
G: that privilege came with free will.
g: so what, i shouldn't have told her all that?
G: you could. but you didn't do something.
g: like... talk to those 'adults'?
G: that's one.
g: there's more?
G: think PHAG.
g: right... i could've waited for the adults to explain themselves. i could've respected their opinions. i could've seen the value of their points. i could've loved them more.
G: you don't sound very convinced.
g: because i know they won't bother to explain! because respect is not for me to give, but for them to earn! because their points would only be overturned by my arguments-
G: because you can't bring yourself to love them?
g: because... oh my goodness...
G: who are you to judge?
g: *long pause* indeed...
G: now that you are less muddled, you could go repent.
g: yes, Lord.
G: good boy.
g: okay, one last question.
G: shoot.
g: am i supposed to simply not judge, then?
G: kind of.
g: and have no opinion at all?
G: nah, that goes against the rules of free will.
g: then what?
G: patience, my friend. leave the judging to me, and in time you will have worthy opinions to share.
g: i see...
G: go read Proverbs and Wisdom.
g: that sounds like penance.
G: haha... that one, i like.
g: thank you, Lord.
G: welcome.

coming to terms with decklessness

the grime and caked brickwork
cheesy colours and non-existent ventilation
smokers under the watchful glare
chatters usurping the reserved-for-staff chairs
a weird layout designed to confuse the crapping crows
the quirky, the naggingly irritating
nobody loves the deck anyway

the food so oily, the drink so dilute
here a bit tasty, the rest makes us puke
queues which discriminate
queue-cutters who infuriate
sometimes we exalt this non-descript experience
other times we are simply too busy
nobody would miss the deck anyway

heaven, earth, and hell
to whom would these words ring a bell?
hawkers, one friendly, one faceless
i do wonder if they care about us
are these friends or just grade-thirsty singaporeans?
the countless nonchalant rendezvous
nobody thinks about the deck anyway

a place of worthless memories
a place to satisfy the hungries
a place where muggers mug
a place where slackers slack

a place whose flavour OED wants to retain

but seriously, who really gives a damn?
nobody cares about the deck anyway

except us who have fallen
for all its senseless flaws
do not accuse us of taking you for granted
just because we eat with you everyday
every morsel, swallowed, spilt, or spat out
you have been our non-judgmental abode
you are somebody to us nobodies

for 25 years,
everybody who has savoured the deck
has savoured fass culture
like the artz babes this lady's getting new clothes
see you in '07
in heartfelt gratitude
au revoir

title inspired/plagiarised from our very own HOOKED. techno edge, anybody?

commissioned!

it's something i've been thru before... yet it still feels so fresh. with an expectant community bearing down upon the few of us, only God's grace can pull us thru!

now, lest i forget, let me put down the commissioning prayer.

Almighty Father,

We thank You for gathering us together today as one family in Christ. You have called us here to begin our journey in the service of Your Church. Grant us the wisdom and the love to deepen the faith of Your community here in CSS, and may we always remember that we are called to be humble servants to every member of our community.

Keep us focused on the mission that You have given us, and constantly remind us that it is by Your immense grace that we stand before the community. We are many parts in one body, and through Your greatness, bring us together as one community and help us remember that we are salt of the earth and light of the world.

We make this prayer through Your Son Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, One God, forever and ever. Amen.

God bless our ministry... may we resolutely march forward with this prayer etched into our hearts. alleluia!

'plagiarism' taken to new heights

Were you good at spelling as a child?

Even so, leukaemia, lymphoma, or heaven forbid,
Habdomyosarcoma would've been a challenge.
Even if you were a spelling bee.

Now imagine having to learb new words not in a school,
But in a hospital.

Just because you can't spell it doesn't mean you can ignore it.
Just because it's not in your vocabulary doesn't mean
It's not in you.

All you know is, it's something that makes you sick.

It makes grown-ups cry like children.

It makes children more grown-up than grown-ups.

Cancer can happen to any child.
Almost all types of cancer in children happen
Spontaneously, for no apparent reason.
Whether you've been bad or naughty or nice.

There's absolutely nothing a parent can do to prevent it.

The child is usually put on a combination of
Chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery for
At least one year. Hair will fall out.
School is also out; the risk of getting an infection
Is simply too high.

What happens then?

Repeat. Remission. Relapse. Repeat.

No wonder they say living with cancer can be worse
Than dying from cancer.

About 250,000 children are diagnosed with cancer each year
Around the world.

But the truly appalling statistic here is, only one in five
Children receive adequate treatment.

We won't let that happen in Singapore,
Where half of all children with cancer are no older than six.

There is hope.

Most childhood cancers are curable. Especially with
A positive attitude and sheer determination.
A strong mind helps when the body is weak.

Many of our young patients do return to school.
(Where they learn the more conventional ABCs.)

The Children's Cancer Foundation has helped over 1100
Children and their families cope with cancer since 1992.

It is a non-profit organisation funded solely by the public
And well-meaning sponsors. The money is put
To providing emotional, financial and medical support.
You can make a donation of any amount at www.ccf.org.sg
Every dollar helps.

Everything we do, we do it for the children.
Nothing else.

We only want to help improve the lives of children
Living with cancer. Not their spelling.

(direct transcription from Tulip Hearts Day poster @ CSS Corner YIH)

obsessive-compulsive

did i recently announce that i have some mild form of OCD? i might have. it's really quite similar to what brian described on his blog... and i realise how mad it can get, like when i do some powerpoint slides i end up spending more than 5 hours in total? or like how i can rename each of my few thousand mp3s just so that they follow the same naming convention? or the classic eat-my-plate clean now extended to the scraps which fall off the plate?

but none is as jarring and disconcerting as my obsession with css. on the surface it seems a good thing, to be so concerned and active. however, i have my misgivings. yesterday i just kinda blew steph (and artz comm) off for the slight miscoordination regarding calling freshies for cg. i wasn't at their meeting so i didn't know what their plan was, but it simply seemed wrong/ambiguous. so i self-righteously "made comments" (if i could use a euphemism). the blundering forward of candle with regards to our handover is making me so jittery i even lost some sleep over it. indeed, the heart-in-mouth adrenaline rush i got while replying those nerve-racking emails stand in mock testimony to my obsessive excesses.

looking back, i have grown a little over the past year in css. however, i have also made countless mistakes... poking my ugly nose where it is not wanted, extending my ominous shadow over every conceivable css activity/role/thing-to-do. in my quest to become the ultimate administrator, have i not lost sight of service? look at the effort i am putting in - is it equal to the fruits i am seeing? have i gone off the straight end and landed myself in a perpetual state of nitpicking, criticising, and chastising other servants of the lord? what ever happened to patience, humility, appreciation, and gentleness?

forgive me, lord, for the empty promises of self-control, and for needlessly adding to your immense workload. forgive me, css, for the selfish narrowmindedness i have inflicted your poor members with. jesus, please rein me in with your sacred heart, let me love like you do. mother mary, pray for me that i may imitate your example.

now to find the litany of humility.

光良 - 童话

why am i posting this? hmm. shrugs.

broke up, but not broken up

all bets were off!

and indeed... after just a month, we realised how difficult it was for us to simply reconcile the differences. it didn't help that we rushed into the relationship so eagerly - like two people who have been single for years. but after an extremely honest 3h conversation, yvonne and i now believe we can love each other much better at a slight distance, where the hedgehod dilemma ceases to be so significant.

anyway, i feel really silly for screaming to everyone "I'M ATTACHED!!!" two weeks ago only to now start saying sheepishly "we broke up"... so i'm not gonna go tell everyone we broke up because it just sounds unnecessarily sad.

we moved on and our relationship has developed further now. the openness we experience now is what we've always treasured from before. being so close has only stifled this most important aspect of our relationship.

for those who have showered me your generous concern thus far, from the bottom of my heart i am grateful! your steady support has given me the courage to grow in this relationship with yvonne.

for the rest who are simply eager to know - yes, greg's single again.

another (old) theory

this is the theory: most people spend much of their personal life (i.e. alone time) dealing with one very general topic: managing their addictions and obsessions.

these may come under the larger schema of 'dealing with weaknesses' but then again, one could be said to be obsessed with that same 'dealing with weaknesses'. the management of these virulent attributes may range from attempting to stop biting nails, overcoming some phobia, improving grammar/vocab/inflection, disciplined time usage, or the proverbial "being more positive" about things.

perhaps they can be summed up as that perfectionist streak in most of us to brand certain less -than-savoury patterns of behaviour we have as 'bad habits', 'afflictions', or 'weaknesses' so there'd be an odd assurance that we can become 'better'. could all these bitter accusations and self-deprecation actually point to some deep-seated hope for improvement? or are these labels a remnant of oppressive activity once rendered by authoritative figures in our childhood? maybe they are just idle processes which keep our minds working and sane when we're alone!

but one thing is for certain, whatever the reason for one to obsess with addictions, they never seem to go away. one could substitute addiction A for addiction B, but inadvertently an addiction remains after an entire chain of substitutions. and that is if addiction A was truly substituted in the first place, lest it resurfaces! yet substitution is a sensible strategy, assuming addiction B to contain less undesirability than its predecessor. perhaps eliminating addiction A in one fell swoop is too large a step to take and hence the strategy to go step-by-step down.

the tough-minded may prefer the bold approach of going it all at one go anyway. perhaps by smoking less cigarettes a day or administering self-punishment for each alcohol sipped, or by attending self-help groups, or simply going cold turkey. yet these bold-sounding tactics risk becoming a new "addiction" in itself... the penchant for catching oneself in the act again so as to dispense admonition. or worse... failure may result in damage to self-esteem and even social relations - guilt and remorse may lead to anti-social/isolationist behaviour and downward spiraling depression? indeed, self-help groups or voluteer watchdogs could turn into victims as well... in a number of ways.

so with all that random rumination out of the way, i believe that in order to successfully drive out any addiction or obsession one must know why that behaviour is there in the first place. a deeply rooted behaviour may require tackling the root cause before it is truly uprooted for good - roots have the uncanny ability to spawn new shoots. then again, when do we know if we've identified that root or not? it is largely guesswork... trial and error until something hits the spot. that is assuming this whole 'trial and error' business does not itself degenerate into a new addiction...

or maybe... we have addictions to simply remind us of God's great love for us? that even in our unwavering weaknesses, he still loves us for that... sappy eh?

it all began at the padang...

two years ago (roughly), we met while working part-time as drinks servers at the rugby sevens tournament. i still remember the careless way she drank from her bottle, leaving a stream trickling down the corner of her lips. it was that fortuitous overflow which piqued my interest.

then we went out once in a while... in fact, it was so sporadic that it felt more platonic than anything. we dined at unique locations, explored a fair bit of underexplored singaporean destinations, and even smoked our first sheesha together. we talked about social issues and sparred philosophies as if it were a normal thing to do. we talked about life's niggling problems.

and then we planned to go backpacking! for two weeks in june, the 4 of us (+ 2 other rugby sevens colleagues: soffia and vienna) went to bangkok, macau and hongkong. it was the most exhilirating adventure of my life thus far! the fact that 4 of us split into 2 twin rooms (soffia & vienna, me & yvonne) notwithstanding. and under the constant betting of our fellow backpackers on which day we would finally go official, we got attached inevitably.

so now it's been a month... we're discovering more about each other day by day, and learning more abt our eccentricities has been fulfilling at least. how would this relationship turn out? i can only say that all bets are off!

zionism? what the hell?

while i am still struggling to understand why human beings blissfully place so much authority and power into the hands of lethally armed and suspiciously unrepresentative governments, the news keeps pummelling my thinking space with jarring bad news. as we all know it, the eternal battle between "good" and "evil" now wears a new label as the unceasing Arab-Israeli conflict. some questions burn in my heart as i read abt the goings-on...

what is zionism?

what is arab solidarity?

what are the people on either side really dying for?

why are their leaders so willing to cause destruction and loss of life?

who gets to call whom good or evil, and on what basis?

what would i do if i were caught in such a situation as:
a) an "innocent" civilian caught in the hot zone;
b) a soldier called to "defend my country";
c) a political leader in a position to make impactful statements;
- and for what agency?

what else can i do, just as who i am right now?

people around the world are getting sick and tired of how power politics floods our senses with senselessness. the light-hearted try making bad jokes of missiles, pointless bravado and their leaders' intellects. the religious pray harder and harder at the expense of some of their faith. the young grow up either associating patriotism with wars or they simply become apathetic. miss universes and their calls for 'world peace' are becoming increasingly bimbotic statements with no relevance to reality. where is the love?

i want to change the world.

i want to impose my optimism on these dark times.

i want politics to stop invading our private lives.

i want our dreams to exit impossibility and appear in reality.

... and perhaps one day i will.

where am i?

i can sense the danger lights flickering yet again... i guess i'm on the threshold of exhausting myself yet again.

right after the exams (which i loathingly revised for) a jolly bunch of us were thrown into the frenetic business of planning the orientation camp. right after this camp, i had a couple of days before leaving for my 2 week trip through bangkok, macau, and hong kong. unlike the camp, i didn't really plan much of the itinery for this trip, and many a surprising turn characterised my first attempt at backpacking (including getting myself attached!) and before i could realise i'm back in singapore, it was foc follow-up, lined up right before the life in the spirit seminar. well, here i am after catching a bit of a breather for one day, but mm is having their retreat soon...

am i missing the point?

i know i have a pathological need to keep myself occupied with the business of entertaining others, sharing myself with people. but in all this outpouring, have i neglected those dearest to me? yes, i guess i enjoy self-deprecation a little too much for my own good, but even then i also realise - from the question 'where am i?' - that i have probably neglected my own needs as well.

and embedded in all this misdirection, is one gigantic scandal: what if my under-managed efforts to 'minister to others' are a sham? what if in my enthusiasm to reach out and impress/debate/entertain, i am actually nourishing a spirit of pride more than anything?

am i developing a complex?

even then... amidst all my self-doubting, the foc had been a resounding success - largely due to an amazing team of exuberant workers serving an unbelievable posse of freshmen; the overseas trip was nothing short of fantastic - a collection of wondrous experiences i can never forget; and LISS truly refueled my thirst for the spirit's gifts. i had learnt to cling less to my doubts and allow belief to blossom. i have had reminders aplenty that all is in good hands - God's mighty hands - and all i have to do is love as he has commanded.

so then... where is the love?

then let me boldly affirm this: love is where i am - I AM IN LOVE!!!

and now... all i need is to get these warning lights to dim. world cup is over, time for a disciplined sleep cycle.

a new bad habit

i'm beginning to sadistically enjoy telling people not to judge... being the almighty perceptive mind-reader that i assume myself to be, i even pinpoint the exact moment where a person is supposedly 'judging' so that i can crusade in and break the accused judge-a-holic's spirit -kachow!-

"it's easy to judge eh? why don't you put yourself into that person's shoes?"

such great advice... always pertinent, always applicable. people never learn, do they? what kind of communication do we pretend we have when we don't even try to empathise? and with that, old gerg transforms into the indefatiguable Defender of the Misunderstood.

so what? am i really that great an empathiser? do i truly bother to step into the shoes of the oppressed? what is the purpose of me attempting to impress guilt upon those who fail to do so?

shallow me. i was merely attempting to avoid my own hard-pressing guilt. i am he who has failed to see the first sign of tears welling. i am he who has festooned poorly expressed concern as judgmentalism. i am he who has fomented shaky esteem issues into outright suicidal intent. like my accused, i have been easy on my judgment and my ugly feet will never fit anyone's shoes.

prejudging... sounds so familiar? your speck or my log? against whose standards shall whom be judged by who? his words ring despondently in my poor soil... when will i ever learn? for as soon as i hit publish... i may very well continue to judge myself poorly.

my new bad habit i lift it up to you o lord. may your abundant blessings be upon the collateral.

sunday best

just as you realise how late you are, an obstacle looms before you... what to wear for mass? shirt? jeans? yellow? green? don't worry, i'm only going to miss the entrance hymn, let's get this outfit perfected first. slippers? accessories? bag? perfume? and by the time you feel confident enough to walk big strides out of home and into church, the priest had just finished with "my dear friends, the good news of the lord." while you're still trying to murmur "praise you lord jesus christ" in mock response to an unheard gospel, the priest has already continued:

"i am very disappointed with the way some of us are dressed today. slippers? spaghetti straps? might i remind you that this is the house of god? when you go to an important function, do you choose your most comfortable clothes? no! you make sure that you are at your most presentable. and yet we gather here for worship in singlets! berms! miniskirts! the weather is no excuse... that's one of the reasons why we have air-conditioning! back in the old days people wore suits even in summer and those churches didn't even have fans! yada yada..."

luckily you've worn your sunday best and were not among those accused in this week's sermon. you heave a sigh of relief, but out of the corner of your eye, you catch a glimpse of someone whom the sermon is targeted at. he's an old man, probably over 70, his wrinkly limbs poking out of an almost tattered singlet and what looks like unwashed boxers. he slumps over his spot on the pews, with a 50cm radius of empty seats around him in the packed church. a voice begins to say "aiyo, why can't he dress up when he visits jesus? if it was some other priest, he might kena thrown out already lor." so unglam, right?

didn't that all sound somewhat wrong? punctuality issues aside, why does nobody ask this question: what is the sunday best? to me, it's straightforward. it's nothing to do with what you wear on the outside, but how you dress up spiritually. Matthew 5:23-4 goes "if you are bringing your offering to the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your offering there before the altar, go and be reconciled with your brother first, and then come back and present your offering." if you need to mend a broken relationship, repay a certain spiritual debt, or even just say some words of encouragement to someone you know needs it, then do so before going to mass and you'll be dressed in your sunday best. regardless of what you have on your back.

it goes some way beyond this too. Matthew 7:3 asks "Why do you observe the splinter in your brother's eye and never notice the great log in your own?" "Do not judge, and you will not be judged; because the judgments you give are the judgments you will get, and the standard you use will be the standard used for you." i always harbour some resentment for priests who preach with so much fire that every line becomes a pronouncement of judgment. is that really how we behave as christians? jesus forgave mary magdalene, whom the pharisees wanted to stone. Matthew 23:4 records jesus' sharp tone against them "They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on people's shoulders, but will they lift a finger to move them? Not they!" are we in danger of becoming pharasaical?

and then it reaches out. Matthew 25:40 "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me." Matthew 19:24 "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for someone rich to enter the kingdom of Heaven." Matthew 19:30 "Many who are first will be last, and the last, first." so when you see one of christ's brothers needing help, do not waste time judging the hypocrites forming the 50cm perimeter around him - go straight up to him and offer him your best. yes, stepping out of the comfort zone isn't easy, but that is how christ's mission for us looks like. start by just saying hi, getting to know the person at least, and then build up from there!

... so now mass has ended and everyone is squeezing their way out, some trying hard not to blurt vulgarities while exiting the carpark, others simply waiting to call the next person to honk "unchristian". the heaviest irony is that the so-called christian community is really little more than a farcical bunch of middle-class snobs trying to fulfil their sunday obligations and book a place in heaven. are you going to leave your christian mission behind in the pews? or will you heed the lord's calling and tend to his sheep?

i'll end off with Matthew 6:28-34:
"And why worry about clothing? Think of the flowers growing in the fields; they never have to work or spin; yet I assure you that not even Solomon in all his royal robes was clothed like one of these. Now if that is how God clothes the wild flowers growing in the field which are there today and thrown into the furnace tomorrow, will he not much more look after you, you who have so little faith? So do not worry; do not say, "What are we to eat? What are we to drink? What are we to wear?" It is the gentiles who set their hearts on all these things. Your heavenly Father knows you need them all. Set your hearts on his kingdom first, and on God's saving justice, and all these other things will be given you as well. So do not worry about tomorrow: tomorrow will take care of itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."

pomo greg I

just wondering... how is it that i can both believe that the one worth waiting for is worth waiting an entire lifetime up till the final breath while also acceding to every opportunity is love in its infancy... why beauty is only as deep as the observer while goodness tends to show on one's countenance... the proverbial do unto others as thou wilt have unto thyself even as justice and fairness to all regardless contains similar amounts of moral righteousness... even the easily accepted logic breeds reason and persuasion in the interest of rationality and utilitarian equity faces contradiction with rationalisation begets mind-numbing bureaucracy and ends-serving amorality in the service of status quo.

these truisms have a simple similarity: they are expounded proudly in the absence of context.

contextualisation (note its subtle differences with rationalisation) brings form to essence; it gives a love story sordid details, it matches quantum mechanics to the world, it allows political rhetoric to blossom into war. the human experience is but an unfathomable sublime abstraction if not for the expressive agency of language, and thus communication. your feelings are truisms, up till the point your expression contextualises it for me, whereupon i see through your glasses, thus your experience is empathised into a common reality between us.

context is very much an inextricable nature of reality (i will critique reality some other time), and in saying that different contexts varies the commonality of experiencing realities between different entities, i concede that reality is very much subject to relativism. in one context, truism A may apply, yet in another, its complete opposite truism B makes marvelous sense, even if these opposites are as contrasting as black and white, or even mutually exclusive pronouncements of morality. killing a person for his money is wrong, so is killing out of jealousy, although killing in a fit of rage seems slightly more forgivable; in a war we kill each other fairly; a cop is allowed to kill if the suspect is substantially dangerous while killing the unborn child in defense of the mother's life is almost universally faultless. in this one subject of taking life, myriad contexts already present their fervent cases: could you live happily if thou shalt not kill crept into your mind (and held you back) when you had the chance to kill the eventual murderer of your family?

so i wonder if the postmodern critique of objective reality and absolute truths could hold more than just some water. indeed the entire paragraph on killing above reeks clearly of modernistic rationalisation either way. neither does removing the absoluteness of morals dilute its capacity as some of life's greatest pieces of advice. in this case, can we say pomo is attempting to move closer to the truth? that contextualisation is a more apt appraisal of reality than fundamentalism?

watch out for pomo greg.

automatic typing

a mind is a terrible thing to waste... and mine is one of the most terrible. this week was supposed to be packed with activity... straight out of the exam panic and into the css/foc delirium. yet strangely, i found myself settled aimlessly at home... a bored and dazed phantasm fiddling with this bizarre yet oddly cognizant surrounding. has it been too long away from my own room, that i actually need an entire week of stupor to reacquaint myself?

nonetheless, work is piling. after skipping one mm practice and a games comm mtg, i find myself slipping back into discordant anonymity with my responsibilities. granted the dizziness is overbearing, but the consonant effort is sorely lacking. why? don't i wish to help out? isn't that my sole purpose in life? to be at the service of others?

and yet this listless illation about purpose only serves to beguile. why ought i serve? when i mutter "purpose" like a prairie dog, do i really care about it? have i got a clear grasp of that exceedingly abstract and sublime concept? what is my purpose? and why must i have a purpose?

it may seem like effusive dawdling, and indeed it might prove to be so. for even if i have yet to completely demystify the grand paradoxes in my psyche, i could still get on with what i have to do. and so here i go again attempting to nudge myself into action. so much inertia in here, so many tasks awaiting accomplishment...

this is definitely not the time to ask more questions eh? sighs.

singaporean myths

so... are we apathetic or not?

will the govt really fire opposition voters?

is the secrecy of our vote truly compromised?

are there myriad isa agents eavesdropping on our every phone conversation?

will our swat team snipe us from range if we suan lky?

is sph filled with pro-pap journalists?

does temasek holdings make good economic sense?

will we really get back our cpf one day?

is the opposition bad for singapore?

is pap good for singapore?

talk about conspiracy theories... is it even possible to know any truth about such issues? perhaps we've all been duped! perhaps we are not trying hard enough to search for clues. perhaps we are not being critical enough. perhaps we have succumbed so long to mental imprisonment that subsequent freedom would be so shocking that we end up choosing to remain incarcerated.

we are the myth, and we are unravelling before our very eyes - but are we aware of it?

opposing for the sake of opposing

i'd like to spend a few minutes ruminating on this strangest of singaporean inventions - opposing for the sake of opposing. we do many such similar actions: believing for the sake of believing, breathing for the sake of breathing, and living for the sake of living. but what makes opposing for the sake of opposing so worthy of disapproval? isn't the gahmen ruling for the sake of ruling also?

philosophically, this is probably a special case of the utilitarian proposition - the ends justifies the means - where the means and the ends are the same, i.e. it is recursive or reciprocal, hence illogical and absurd. in such a reading, members of the opposition are chastised when they use the means of opposing to achieve nothing but the ends of simply having opposed. this allegation strongly discredits the opposition's various objections against gahmen policies - how can an illogical argument hold any water? another implicit allegation within this label is that the opposition is serving no useful purpose other than to oppose.

however, this assertion has some implicit flaws as well. when the opposition "opposes" any policy, it does not simply "oppose"; it has to raise a movement during parliament and follow some procedures, or seek agreement within its party members to include such an objection within its manifesto if parliamentary objection fails. this would be the means to achieve the ends of opposing - albeit just a technical definition. those who believe opposing is a straightforward urge which immature children are likely to indulge in, well, opposing as a member of the opposition is definitely not something like that.

secondly, the opposing does not merely lead to more opposing - the gahmen is sorely mistaken if the opposition opposes various motions for no good reason. even the silliest of opposition measures (think dr chee's asking goh chok tong "where's the money") are directed at representing singaporeans. granted, not all singaporeans may feel so personally "represented" by some of their actions, yet the effort of our opposition politicians cannot be discounted: dr chee risked fines and jail for it. a slight reversal would look like this - why does the gahmen react so strongly to actions which merely amount to "opposing for the sake of opposing"?

this insight also extends to myself, strangely. today i ranted in objection about voting singaporeans who "don't know anything about singapore politics". my recommendation was a disdainful "don't know don't vote lah!" but! this would amount to a form of "opposing for the sake of opposing", attempting to bully some citizens into relinquishing their inalienable right to vote. especially so because i am easily incensed at pro-pappers who are simply so bought over by pap's condemnations and have lost all ability to respect the opposition. therefore to exemplify a legitimate form of opposition, i should be trying earnestly to show my fellow citizens what they might have missed; positive rather than negative action.

so here i would like to offer my sincerest apologies to fellow singaporeans whom i have taunted recently out of anti-pap exasperation. i would like to affirm that no matter how little you know about the gross fact-distortion which pap has committed against the opposition, you are entitled the right to vote even based on that lack of information. i am NOT (personally) accepting such a pap-advantage as legitimate electoral procedure, but to claim that these citizens do not "know enough" about singapore politics to vote is definitely out of line.

but all the same, i would invite fellow voters to visit the opposition's websites before unfairly judging them:
Workers' Party
Singapore Democratic Alliance
Singapore Democratic Party
Singapore Elections - a useful voters' repository
Check Your Poll Location - gahmen site

for those who suggest i am flouting the law against political blogging, i would like to emphasise that this is NOT party politics, but simply defending the opposition from the "opposing for the sake of opposing" fallacy. that's the main grouse i have against pap.

oxygenated

when i find it hard to finish reading up the oxygens in my email, is it because i'm allowing myself to drift away from god? no, the font is weirdly small in gmail, i have to revise, etc. but i don't see myself applying these excuses for my indulgent addictions.

when i do get to reading some of it, why does every affirmative line arouse some vestibule of doubt in my mind? questions abound:

1. why do we consider christ's love perfect?
   consider the anthropomorphic principle: because we are not capable of fathoming or imitating his type of love. if i were to go spread the word of god as he did, and end up getting brutally murdered, would anyone say i did that out of love for every single human being that ever existed, even if i claim it so? yet because he was god so his sacrifice fulfilled old testament prophecies and redeemed the world. how can there ever be a question or doubt to such logic?
   
   
2. why are we touched by the experiences of his disciples?
   do we truly identify with the trials and tribulations they went thru? the way the apostles mistook christ's promise of a kingdom... the way the apostles got scared and ran away... the way the apostles found renewed hope and zeal in the good news of easter... is that truly how we identify ourselves with them? or are we making effusive extrapolations which are not adequately substantiated?
   
   
3. why is every christian journey one of repentence and renewal?
   are we really that sinful? recalling such theories as internalisation and externalisation of responsibility, what function, then, does guilt serve? the 40 days of lent and all that repression... is it truly helpful, or am i just revising psych a lil too much? how does shame and judgment comingle to make us better (by what standard, too) people? where do abstract stuff like faith, hope and love come in? how do they work?
   
   
4. what is that fluffy sensation i get when i somehow recognise some of the sharings?
   when you feel some tingling beneath your skin, that somehow soothing allusion to "deep inner peace", how is that quantifiable? is that truly what i seek? why? why bother? is that not a somewhat positive form of addiction? but is losing one's self-mastery to such positivity (which once again begs further definition) really such a suspicious act as to warrant all my doubting? especially when i have far less respectable addictions to deal with... am i justified? or is either way destined to feel emotional and irrational anyway?
   
   
5. why am i so sceptical about "life-changing" experiences?
   am i simply jealous? am i simply evil and mistrusting? am i trying too hard to obtain indisputable proof, proof which a jealous, evil and mistrusting secular world would demand, and still not be satisfied when they see it? is not the conversion of an chronically irrepentant ex-convict a miracle? is not the willingness of once megalomaniacal assholes to surrender their pride to the lord (or anything else "respectable" enough) something to give good cheer for? is not the serendipity of a CDD 'A' level score still managing to squeeze into NUS god's sign? or am i too caught up with the social factors which allow such dramatic changes, with deconstructing these maudlin expressions of human fickleness, with my forcible attempts to tear the wool out of my corneas?

where am i going with this? should i truly take a REAL break, take PROPER stock, and do what i think i should do? trust my conscience! how could i, after all that i've doubted! and thus i may have oxygenated my ability to belief - hanging in midair indefinitely, somewhat aspirated yet still preposterously uninspired.

may god have mercy on my soul (if i still have one).

obedience

somewhere in milgram's report, he quotes someone as saying that "obedience has caused more misery and hardship than rebellion in history", referring to the insignificant nazi minions who carried hitler's crazed dreams to fruition (without these "insignificant minions", we would never have heard of hitler, really). i wondered if that meant someone as quarrelsome and disagreeable as myself would actually produce less misery and hardship than all those pap sycophants out there. of course, equating pap to the nazi is hardly fair la.

unfortunately, i turned out to be quite obedient too. that very night, i sat on a front row seat aboard the a1 shuttle back to pgp. along the way, i thought that i got the best seat, since it would be nearest to the pgp entrance when i get off, thus insignificantly saving me a few steps. strangely, the driver would refuse to open the front door when he finally stopped at pgp. "alight behind," i think he retorted. at that very moment i felt very indignant, and contemplated requesting that he open the front door in a less-than-threatening manner. but weirdly, like milgram's test subjects, the nazi minions, and the pap sycophants, i meekly headed for the rear door, with a slight frown and some cognitive dissonance.

perhaps walking a few more steps was simply too insignificant an inconvenience to risk a nonchalant argument with a bored bus driver? perhaps the glazed eyes of my fellow commuters extinguished some of the revolutionary fire burning in my heart at that moment? perhaps the exertions of trying to trick myself into revising the whole day had enervated me to the point of apathy? so many perhapses, but the most poignant one would be this: i probably lacked the resolute belief (what others may call zealous conviction) in that particular fight for that particular cause. and this hollow deficit of deliberate consonance probably rings true in almost every other area of my life: religion, education, love, etc. deliberate consonance... what a strange term to use in place of free choice.

and thus i conclude: for me obedience signifies a lack of consonance with fighting that authority. obedience indeed could allow much misery and hardship to proliferate.

tonight i mourn

i thought i was going to sleep, but the thought didn't really appeal to me. it's these mindless thoughts that keep one awake, only to realise that one wasn't truly awake, only staring with open eyes. so what if your neurons fire upon sensory stimulation? so what if you believe you have vision? what matters is that we never truly experience truth. even when we attempt to live life the fullest we can. it may simply be the best lie you've ever told yourself.

and with that in mind, i attempt to change the world. no wait, the world is big. it's got 6.5 billion people. i'll start with singapore. and what a place to start! everyone's a mindless robot. if i had for one moment believed that i wasn't thinking, i just need to look around me to console myself.

everyone hates the pap. you'd think that's because they've done a good custodian job and imposed good stern rules to keep singapore in good shape. wrong. they've used every possible short-term strategy there is to maintain their hegemony they could ever think up and used it on the poor populace. once upon a time, we singaporeans were tough, we fought for our independence, we fought against racial injustices, we shed blood daily to build the nation (now we hire bangladeshis). today we are just a desolate people long ago succumbed to the brainwashing powers of the men in white. with their keen sense of indoctrination and materialist massages, the hegemon had no trouble imprisoning the 4 million hardy dogs in their own minds. sph, ns, cme, cpf, hdb, coe, erp, gst, isa... i think there were at least 2 dozen other cold faceless acronyms that have come to dominate our reality.

if any singaporean truly believes s/he understands her/is reality, let her/im stand up! oh no, we don't even have the courage any more - our knees have gone to jelly. who knows which phantom sniper would shoot your head off when you say lky should just die. who knows which sycophant is gonna sack your sorry civil servant ass when you decide to spoil your worthless vote. who knows when the day will come when one of your outspoken friends would get locked away in sentosa without any warning. is this all we are capable of? fear? cowering in the false prosperity of the incorrupt party? clamouring for puny upgrades to overpriced hdb flats we will never be able to pay off in our pathetic lifetime? bloodthirstily scanning coe prices for the right time to scrap a mint-condition car so that you can get that next one to show off to your other bloodthirstily coe-scanning friends? and of course, nothing beats mugging your brains to mush just to score that flimsy A on a worthless certificate.

yes, tonight i mourn, for the reality that i was going to allow myself to escape from (through sleep). the only problem is, morning always comes too soon, and before anyone can begin thinking, i'm stuck in the daily routine yet again. the melancholic wailings of a semi-subservient loser... what ever the fuck did i bother to type this for. small wonder i keep my private addictions and pretend to pretend they don't exist. small wonder a small part of me dies away every morning.

and you know what? it was easter. perhaps the hopelessness i see in the country is the reason i over-exert myself in css. perhaps the hierarchical nature of the church seems a great proving ground for my liberal socialist ideologues. i am treating my religion like an opiate - to soothe my wounded idealism and to escape from the harsher reality.

why don't i just go play guitar instead.

cursory concern

"hey."
"sup."
"life sux man... my girlfriend is giving me trouble."
"geez... poor you."
"it was only making eyes at some babe across the street. what's the big deal really?"
"yeah."
"she does that with cute guys, so i'm entitled!"
"mm hmm."
"not like i'm gonna go pick that girl up or something, you know."
"nah."
"ogling is perfectly normal practice among guys."
"i guess."
"i'm just being a normal guy."
"of course."
"so it's her being oversensitive! girls..."
"tsk tsk."
"dude, thanks so much for clarifying with me!"
"sure, anytime."

and so girlfriend-trouble guy goes on ogling. what do you think will happen to his relationship?

there is a socially imposed requirement to "care for others", even when one does not really feel like it. when someone requests for small acts of concern, it is duly given out of obligation, and the requestor is thus placated patronisingly. what then, is the point of such cursory concern?

to the cursor's benefit, not everyone is in the right mood or mode to give advice or listen. it's a tough life and everyone is busy dealing with their private sorrows. isn't it good enough that i bother to listen? unfortunately, it may result in further sorrow, where concern turns sour. what if you received cursory concern? the cursor, so long as such response is doled out consistently with no explanation or disclaimer, is not in benefit but ought review such lack of responsibility.

to the requestor's deficit, most problems ought to be dealt with personally. or should they? why are we a society if we are supposed to feel so alone? if we are capable of social relations, why not make the most of it? the requestor, so long as the requesting is genuine, is not in deficit although greater caution should be taken when approaching others for advice. yet, such stability of thought may not be present, so greater onus rests on the acceptor to be attentive.

are you guilty of cursory concern? or have you been a victim?

criticism gone awry

today i shall critique the practice of essay-writing for 20-30% of a typical arts module's grade. to be fair, it's a pretty established standard of grading, with much proven results in its efficacy. however, various intrinsic problems do exist and these are often exacerbated by the extenuating factors unique to nus.

intrinsic problems
essay grading depends on subjective objectivity - i.e. the objectivity of one single marker such that this person represents the yardstick and determinant all rolled into one. the subjectivity stems from individual bias, assuming that the marker (if there's only one) is either a) not exposed to sufficient broadness in the field/module, b) holds personal prejudices/preferences where opposing views are pertinent, c) susceptible to moderating judgment based on personal relations (or the lack thereof) with the student, d) inordinately influenced by environmental factors (emotions, memory, fatigue, comfort, stress, etc) at the time of marking, or e) unable to "sufficiently understand" the expression used by the student. these 5 factors represent some of the more common pitfalls of subjective grading in general, but are neither exhaustive nor meant to be significant simply due to its multiplicity. each factor may exist in varying levels per different markers, though an objective way to measure these biases may not be possible thus far. put more simply, the marker's objectivity is often dubious and little transparent effort is invoked in most grading; whereas for instances of transparency, it is not standardised and may contribute to inter-module/field/faculty systemic biases.

whew. what a mouthful. just think about it... some markers are affected by the standard of the student's language (esp. in FASS) while others demand elaboration/conciseness all in one bite. another common problem is... that more often than not, it is more than one marker grading the papers. even when the marker's demands are understood, is that then an objective standard? of course, that's assuming that objective grading is desirable in the first place!

systemic bias, as touched on above, is an even more insidious problem with even lesser attention paid. what if faculties are getting disproportionate grades? but yea, i do see that this argument truly borders on being alarmist and unnecessarily sceptical. the only problem is that such doubts hang in one's mind until disproved.

extenuating factors
the most prominent one is the fact that we are doing an average of 5 modules per 13 week (lectures-tutorial) semester. essay questions are usually only released from the 3rd week onwards, where in any case most are not able to choose a proper question until more immersion in the module is properly acquired. deadlines are usually around the 10th-12th week, owing to administrative deadlines imposed upon the teaching staff. this equates to about 6-10 weeks at most for 5 essays (assuming each module requires one essay). the workload in itself is not necessarily asphyxiating, but most students are also called to participate in extra-curricular activities, i.e. hall stuff, society matters, church/temple, family commitments, part-time jobs, friends and lovers. coupled with most arts modules being only marginally related to each other (most departments do not offer sub-field specialisation) with an emphasis on broad-based learning, quite a lot of odds are stacked against us!

personal factors also play a large role. students are only nominally trained to do research for arts essays, while grading methods are not often availed to them. the lack of knowledge, skill, support, and confidence are very debilitating personal factors which often conspire to throw students into fits of absurd panic, wailing stress, and pitiable depression. are we trying to make these students feel worthless?

quid pro quo
so why go nuts for an institution that simply oppresses everyone indiscriminately? lecturers and tutors also have to sift thru mountains of material just to give us that non-descriptive grade. if grading is only more or less arbitrary, does it matter how much effort you commit to lit reviews or referencing? do you have confidence in a system that saps you of your own confidence? or are most of us happy robots willing to be ordered by a system that operates on misdirection, ambiguity, and superstition?

quid pro quo, students are not inclined to produce top quality work. surveys are often fabrications, and some of these "innovations" extend even to citations and so-called interviews. the lack of scientific objectivity in grading is leading to a parched social science academe. grading constitutes a major source of socialisation for aspiring social scientists as they learn about the intricacies of producing scholarly research. if they spend more time exploring the system's kinks and working the bell curve, are they still capable of studying what they set out to study? or have we become rational pragmatists in the game of deconstruction for exploitation's sake?

BUT! this critique does not represent a rejection of the system. just a long-winded lament for the countless hapless students who have been indelibly scarred by the ruthless hopeless impositions of society. yes, we are eulogised, so now let us march forth with valiant honour till we meet an untimely aneurysm. god save the undergrad!

ode to the crashed harddisk

in a term not too far ago
as far as my memory would show
the songs of an undistant past
the stories i once thought would last
but what patent nonsense!
oh what artful magnificence!

for the lost may yet be found
as sure as a watch tightly wound
is toward an eventual stop bound
only what sleeps deepest within
granted immunity from the recycle bin
would relish existing again

so there it goes, this hard drive
across the fairway and out of my life
when they call for your backing up
you must learn to not ever bochup
some say you'd remember if you care
but i say i forget and i still don't care

it's painful to lose 3 seasons of spongebob, 15gigs of pure aural pleasure, 2 years of photographs, photoshop works, mind-bending ideas, and everybody's birthdays. but guess what? i've learnt the importance of memory. and that is something i would never forget.

and so the story goes...

it's a life devoid of life. oh, the pain of existence is simply intolerable. mumble mumble moan moan why-don't-i-stop-whining-now-so-you-can-get-back-to-your-life. yup, i've sorta gotten sick of undulating about how i still can't seem to get over myself despite myself. i'm a christian, so i should simply leave that to god.

it is easy to do an essay. all you gotta do is start. get an outline. do some lit review. make a spanking cover page. play dota. watch youtube. hmm... and all this while don't forget to reassure yourself how much you detest the current "education" system you are stuck in and how all this muckjacking secretly amounts to a silent marxist revolution against an oppressive society bent at bending you to its sick demented will. well, the essay should be done by tomorrow tho. i may keep doing all these schizophrenic manic-depressive bitching in my head, but the lifeless heap of flesh it's attached to will still get on with it. at least i hope so.

but of course, the problem is whether my head actually does control that body! psychologists would have you believe that some of us actually have an external locus of control. sniggering about grasshoppers aside, some of us magically submit to external influences, while others are strangely independent. sounds a bit like freud's ego vs superego thing. even rousseau and the other social contract theorists allude to this when they say we surrender some power to a government so that we can achieve collective insecurity. perhaps that's why some us so-called christians kinda leave it to god eh?

on the other hand, in control or out, the more important issue is probably responsibility. i remember this silly pun on the word (which may well be its etymology) that a responsible person reponds. indeed, i guess i haven't been responding much to challenges such as fulfilling the requirements of a certain overly demanding yet underly rewarding undergraduate programme. netto says i may have an external locus of responsibility, where i conjure semantically aesthetic hypotheses to explain away my inability to follow norms. i had to immediately interject with some pseudo-academicism regarding falsifiability - like what's the difference between a person responsible to an exploitative institution and a person lamenting for him? they could both be responsible - to different ideals. on the other leg, i may just be meandering around the foregone conclusion of how irresponsible i really am.

from here i fall into a rabbit hole. control and responsibility both seem to assume an irrefutably reality experienced by multiple entities, right? i mean, why would you bother with control or responsibility if you found out you were merely plugged into the matrix? in other words, if your life were a lie, would you be game enough to play along? as for me, just reaching this point has already pretty much exhausted my enthusiasm for the day. it's the question of 'what for' again: it's not like the outcome of this question is going to make me do a Columbine, become John the Baptist II, or fling my guitar out of my window. but i might just decide to read Alice's Adventures In Wonderland before Through The Looking Glass just to horrify myself.

the underworked mind overworks with unproductive blabber. i might as well pray for Abdul Rahman. and my four ulcers.

out of focus

sometimes i wonder if my eyes still see the world as it is... especially when tears well up uninvited and unanticipated, am i still perceiving the same images? what is it that i observe when i try to look? am i able to tell when my faculties have failed somewhat and i am no longer truly in focus?

and that's just vision. imagine the mind imagining. how do you conjure images in your head? how do you make sense of reality? when i piece images together in some form of flowing thread, do i truly grasp any of these sequences to any significant standard? do i even understand when i think i do? or is reality merely a figment of belief, that there can be no standard of understanding, that everything which i consider to exist can only do so insofar as i choose not to doubt it? and when i do doubt to some insatiable standard, then belief fades to obscurity, while objective existence theoretically ceases?

this can't be... it must be absurd. and yet i am infecund to protest this argument. when one tries to grasp something greater than himself, attempting to dissolve some semblance of self so as to experience a larger whole, one would seem to necessitate losing focus. losing belief. losing the firmness of ground upon which he used to stand. when attempting to qualify the totality of reality, how can one keep focus? or is the human mind doomed to losing it?

sometimes... i no longer understand what it is i think i am trying to understand.

steadfastness vs adaptibility

when the whole world disagrees with you, but you still feel firmly for what you believe in, how do you resolve that conflict? would you cave in and go the way the world says you should or stand stoic for your faith?

what if a sense of urgency was placed to this question - if a person points a gun at your face for instance - would that change your stand? do you have a belief that you would gladly martyr yourself for? why?

if you'd prefer to live and fight another day, is that considered wiser? since you involve some form of longer-term planning, consequently this "take one step back now, and two steps forward later" strategy must be superior, isn't it?

who is greater - the saintly pope or the martyred convert?

embracing the lighter side of things

today i went for countless countess runs, found some good stuff, and lost them all while trying to arrange them and got connection interrupted. diablo2 is good clean fun eh? thanks mark, for reintroducing me to my favourite weakness.

well, i'm beginning to find that temper is not exactly something that really dominates you. usually, the lag would've pissed the shit out of me and set off an incoherent chain of vulgar unpleasantries. yet i managed to consciously laugh it off! a small victory in the long march towards sainthood.

and now it's time to plagiarise oxygen again~ this time it's hsingdee's delightful providence: the litany of humility.

O Jesus, meek and humble of heart, Hear me.
From the desire of being esteemed, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being loved, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being extolled, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being honored, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being praised, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being preferred to others, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being consulted, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the desire of being approved, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being humiliated, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being despised, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of suffering rebukes, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being calumniated, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being forgotten, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being ridiculed, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being wronged, Deliver me, O Jesus.
From the fear of being suspected, Deliver me, O Jesus.

That others may be loved more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be esteemed more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That, in the opinion of the world, others may increase and I may decrease,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be chosen and I set aside,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be praised and I go unnoticed,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may be preferred to me in everything,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.
That others may become holier than I, provided that I may become as holy as I should,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.

Caritas
"Charity is patient, is kind; charity does not envy, is not pretentious, is not puffed up, is not ambitious, is not self-seeking, is not provoked; thinks no evil, does not rejoice over wickedness, but rejoices with the truth, bears with all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
(1 Cor. 13:4-7)

To have Charity is to love God above all things for Himself and be ready to renounce all created things rather than offend Him by serious sin.
( Matt. 22:36-40)

by Merry Cardinal del Val, secretary of state to Pope Saint Pius X from the prayer book for Jesuits, 1963
(plucked from Eternal World Television Network)

have fun praying it everyday!

why johari when u can nohari?

whatever. i hate fads. which is why you shouldn't bother visiting http://kevan.org/nohari?name=geg to fill up my nohari window simply because you should instead be spending that time answering this question: why should you? besides, there's no hurry.

on a more intellectually anal note, you fadsters should realise how the johari window works and its relevant contextual uses. read the wikipedia article, or else, please don't bother clogging up poor kevan's server any longer. thus sayeth the information superhighway's very own ERP gantry wannabe.

now... i got a psych midterm to fail. goodnight.

the anthropomorphic reality

Genesis 1:27 states:
וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ, בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ: זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, בָּרָא אֹתָם.
"God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."

and thus began the indiscriminate personification of objectivity to suit the human experience. if we were created in god's image, does it follow that he is "like unto us"? take for example, dolls which we humans create in our image: are they "like unto us"? indeed they may resemble us in the attributes which we willingly ascribe to them for the sole purpose of humanising these creations. and thus we have an infinitely differentiated realm for creativity and diversity when creating dolls. but is it fair to parallel this creation process with gen1:27? is it true that god has willingly ascribed various godly attributes unto us such that we resemble him? the problem here is that we, as the created, cannot tell with certainty, just as dolls probably have no idea how alike they are to their creators. yet our creator has given us the ability to think, to feel, and to reason, which to our best efforts have not been replicated genuinely in our creations thus far. thus, i contend that a proper parallel cannot be drawn as yet between human-doll creationism and god-human creationism. an extrapolation made from an incomplete presumption cannot stand as truth.

unfortunately, much of this prudence is lost in human history. we have attributed human characteristics to almost anything we come across. indeed, such is our limitation that our minds can only be creative insofar as that creativity lies within the finite realms of human experience - i.e. we simply can't imagine a god that is far from human likeness. and so our explanations for occurences in reality are constricted, tied to the leash of human-ness which we can't seem to escape. we are self-made prisoners of our language, mental schemata, cultural influence, and individual personalities. anthropomorhism is very much the de facto modus operandi of humanity, much like how materialism forms the superstructure of capitalist society.

yet these "human characteristics" are themselves crudely defined. philosophers have ruminated for centuries and are still unable to decide what makes us human. we can only grope around with a vague understanding of these ideals, consciously and subconsciously reinforcing each others' beliefs that to be "humane" is to be benevolent, welcoming, disciplined, etc - the proverbial "all things good". yet truthfully, the assertion that humanity tends towards goodness is deeply unorganised and lacking in parsimony or falsifiability, and so are any other exotic contentions for a generalised etiology of human characteristics. can there ever be a scientific evaluation of this human-ness?

and therefore i propose a new objectivity - one that brings an intention to reject anthropomorphic interpretations of reality. for reality and existence is not a human creation, and indeed until we can call our understanding of such phenomena "sufficient", we ought only tread with prudence when creating theoretical frameworks to "make sense of things". the scientific method stands as a rudimentary form of anti-anthropomorphic objectivity, yet i must admonish that careless treatment can still allow anthropomorphic elements to seep through - whether it is forming a hypothesis, designing an experiment, or interpreting data.

but some doubts linger. is it possible to maintain such a level of objectivity when it seems to take superhuman consciousness in every step of deliberation? could such an attempt be considered an exercise in "dehumanising" the inquirer? ultimately, would the removal of our anthropomorphic veil truly and uncompromisingly allow us to see reality with more clarity?

if we can't settle some of the questions raised here, we may permanently be unable to escape from the anthropomorphic prison that we have constructed for ourselves. but why would anyone want to escape it?

for a more contemporary discussion of anthropomorphism (free from gerg-thropomorphic contamination), simply wikipedia for it.

status quo vs progress

there are always two ways to deal with a tiring job: accepting it as part of your life, learning how to get used to it, and taking it on as a challenging responsibility; or rejecting it altogether, finding out how to get out of this prison, and claiming your own freedom from oppression. the first resembles confucian philosophy a lot - adapting to the situation and conforming to order and rules. the second is revolutionary, left-wing, and often the inspiration for such things as terrorism.

yet we always go thru both strategies when faced with life. every responsibility we get can be interpreted as a form of exploitation (regardless of its relevance to capitalism, really), such that even serving in church becomes committing yourself to slaving for the slackers in church. once the motion has been started, you start gaining a form of 'class consciousness', separating yourself from those who are different from you and classing them as oppressors of your reality. this 'revolutionary' mindset would start to get you interested in rebellion and the eventual inversion of the prevalent order itself. of course, many do not go all the way to this stage, but many do dream of changing the world.

however, why can't we simply accept that reality is harsh and demanding? that our destiny is little more than to be mindless robots perpetuating an exploitative society? why can't we be willing and obedient slaves, selfless bearers of their own crosses, rushing to die once given the order? is it pride that holds us back? is it a sense of greater purpose? but when we look at christ who gave up his life for the worthless millions who craved his death... do we see that order as having a meaning? christ obviously believed that his death was not for the worthless, or that these worthless ppl will no longer be worthless in his death. will this ever apply for us? when we give of all that we have to supplicate this oppressive reality, are we actually giving it worth or meaning? will this passive gentleness be sufficient to impress society with our hopes and dreams?

why should i work with the status quo? why should i attempt to kickstart progressivism? existentialism continues to plague my belaboured mind. this third way of tackling life's challenges which i hardly approve of has unfortunately become my favourite path. the way of escapism and delaying response. debating in my head won't solve things or move me forward... but i can't snap out of it...

Le Grand Voyage

life, it seems, is like a very long journey... one so long that many get lost in the sightseeing, sometimes forgetting their destination altogether. it may be "chinese" new year, but this movie about an unlikely father-son pair making a pilgrimage to Mecca couldn't have been shown at a better time.

the Haj is the fifth pillar of Islam, and thus all Muslims are compelled to make an arduous journey from wherever they may be, whatever they may be doing, all the way to Mecca, the holiest site in Islam, where the Sacred Mosque built by Abraham and Ismael stands. this snippet of information has much relevance to me, both as a catholic and a sociologist.

as a catholic, i learnt to respect this teaching of Islam. did Christ himself not take a journey into the desert? indeed, the pious routine of praying 5 times a day brings to mind the hours which our catholic priests do daily. for all the differences we see in each other, Christianity and Islam purportedly worship the same God of the Old Testament, and we are pretty much called to the same ideals of self-denial for the will of the Father. why bother about petty differences when there's so much to share? why stay absorbed with disagreements when our prayers are almost identical? i shall be praying more for the courageous Haji who risk life and limb all for the gruelling lesson of pilgrimage.

as a sociologist, i see once again, the delicate interplay of cultures as the father-son pair trudged through ten or so european, mediterranean and arab countries. the delightful intrigue of each new experience, the absorbing thrill of traveling through foreign land, the mystique of an enchanting encounter. these emotions kept me wondering: is there more to life than just the daily humdrum? how can a terse father-son relationship measure up in the face of unfamiliar challenges? i see that, any journey undertaken with companionship will ultimately result in closer bonding, no matter the differences.

and so i heighten my own resolve... to partake of my own voyage as well, my personal pilgrimage of life. lent is soon upon us, that yearly affair which invites us to recount the steps we've taken and the stops we've made.

is yours going to be a grand voyage too?

family

sometimes i'd wish i had an ideal family.

but somehow there's never gonna be a proper replacement for the current one i do have...

family will always continue to hurt me in ways family will never understand.

and for this family, i'm willing to bear the pain.

forever.

the lesson of the roach

why do you kill roaches? why, when u see one, u just erupt in disgust and wish all roaches were exterminated? what did the roach do? what is really so disgusting abt a roach? can they really be eliminated?

is this how you treat life?

today was a day of enlightenment for me. i've learnt much abt life... abt frustration and cynicism... abt action and reaction... abt faith, hope and love.

i must be gentle. i must be less caustic. i must have more faith in God's creation. i must adapt myself more to the ever-changing world. i must love... not like i want to, but like Christ did.

but when he said "greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." did he mean that we should all die for one another? perhaps all we need to do is carry our crosses, helping our friends along the way, for all our life? perhaps he meant that we are to put our gifts in service for all our friends? the idea... had always been to change oneself, not for the sake of change, but for the sake of others. if it takes one's entire life to change oneself for the sake of others, then that is what his or her life is for - self-renewal. the only time we may stop bettering ourselves is when we've becoming Christ-like in every way... and then we'd be in heaven.

is sociology getting to me in ways that have changed my behaviour? is deconstruction telling me that all social norms are there for the breaking? can i ignore the rules of behaviour simply because i claim to have deconstructed them? what about those who haven't deconstructed them? am i allowed to say that these are inferior beings who are under-enlightened? who am i to pass such judgment? why should deconstruction bring me such status? is there a better way to reach out to those whom i deem slaves to the establishment? will accusing them and wounding their pride do any more than spark new wars? would i then have the resources to fight at every new front i create? is it acceptable to throw order aside for the sake of clarity and understanding? whose order? whose clarity? whose understanding? am i learning for the betterment of society or so that i can curse it in more ways? am i learning how to understand human nature so that i can use that knowledge to help others or so that i can pervert it? what is the purpose of living?

the lesson of the roach tells me that 300 million years of evolution cannot guarantee a purpose for living. yet the feat of surviving requires stoic adaptation. since life is all i have... why not adapt?

the paranoia of the narrow viewpoint

no one likes to be squeezed... and the only thing worse than being squeezed is the strange feeling that you are being squeezed when all your senses tell you that you are not. insecurity and lack of control are two potent emotions with hardly any warning signs - until it is too late.

when one is incapable of seeing (or meta-seeing!) that one's view is reduced, paranoia sets in with relative ease. with paranoia, nothing seems what they are meant to be. everyone seems to be staring at you. the baby in a pram is judging you. the pillars are mocking you in unison. the tiles are passing beneath your feet disgusted. nobody is on your side; the world was created to torture you. suddenly, all is but loneliness, and everything is wrong. you either sink into panic, delusion, depression, or you become a fanatic for non-existent causes, maniacal. paranoia is the prelude to many clinical definitions of madness.

and paranoia may already have you. how would you know? when was the last time you took stock? perhaps the new bag you bought is a wrong colour. you're not standing straight enough. you feel the bus driver's glare when you tap your ezlink. there's always a cockroach hiding behind the cupboard door.

we have narrowed our senses. things no longer seem what they are not because we are trying to understand them at a deeper level, but because we don't understand what "a deeper level" means. we second guess ourselves at every opportunity, undermining our very concept of order, simply to escape the feeling that our senses are narrow. it is at once an impetus for proactivity while stifling rational progress.

so far so good... except... that i myself may be paranoid.

The Cold Blue Sky

The Cold Blue Sky
Gives way to the purple night
And I'm just sitting here
Wond'rin' if this love's just Obsession
Though I tried my soul's darndest
This heart of mine simply refuses
Oh I'm sinking even when she's near
This love is naught but Possession

The Cold Blue Sky
Gives way to the mornin' light
And my weary mind's still cravin'
For the chillin' depths of Obsession
Yeah I tried thru' the gruelling weeks before
Her scent lingers on and oh so much more
Dear Lord I'm so in need of Your savin'
From this sweet sweet sweet Possession

The Clear Blue Sky
Soon reveals the Sun's lonesome might
Yet even in that blinding glare
Her dazzling silhouette is still my Obsession
No no, I've given up my all to her
Just this moment now 'till forever and ever
I will be lovin' her even if in despair
Even if this were the Coldest Bluest Possession

The Cold Blue Sky
I resume my dark vigil again tonight...