Sunday, March 05, 2017
Saturday, July 30, 2016
So what do I think about the recent reports of improper orientation activities in NUS which led to NUS deciding to suspend "all student-organised freshmen activities" with immediate effect?
Posted by LCC at 11:28
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Dr. Chee cites the possibility of nationalistic Chinese nationals causing trouble within Singapore. So are we to reject foreigners who express nationalistic sentiments? How are the authorities supposed to screen for nationalistic sentiments?
Dr. Chee also cites again the example of radicalised Bangladeshi foreign workers who were recently arrested in Singapore. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe most of these Bangladeshis were radicalised after they arrived in Singapore and not before. So how would pre-emptive screening have helped? And I suppose the authorities would already have a list of dangerous individuals who are denied entry into Singapore.
It also seems strange to me that while many have criticised Denise Phua's reference to foreign workers as "walking time-bombs", not many appear to object to Dr. Chee's reference to foreign workers as a potential security risk.
In the end, while Dr. Chee's argument might be appealing on the surface, it is simplistic and erroneous in my opinion. He may dispel counter-arguments as straw man arguments but it is because his position is unclear and lacking in details that straw men are easily constructed out of it.
Posted by LCC at 21:02
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.
Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds. And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the dogma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but cumbering the ground, and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction, from reason or personal experience."
-- J.S. Mill, "On Liberty"
Posted by LCC at 21:01
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
Posted by LCC at 12:06
Saturday, December 21, 2013
Friday, October 25, 2013
Other related similar articles/posts:
1. "Why censor when you can regulate?"
2. "In response to a parent's plea for censorship"
Posted by LCC at 21:02
Although I am somewhat concerned that this new initiative may end up duplicating the efforts (or worse, eat away at the existing resource pool) of other anti-poverty groups in Singapore such as One Singapore and World Vision, it will hopefully be a case of the more the merrier with regards to fighting poverty in Singapore.
Hopefully, all these different groups would coalesce together into an anti-poverty alliance - pooling together resources (instead of competing with one another for them) and leverage upon one another's efforts & expertise. After all, although there may be differences in their philosophies and approaches, the common goal of these groups is to fight poverty; this commonality should over-ride any differences.
Other similar videos here.
Posted by LCC at 20:39