Science - A Menace To Civilisation?

In today's society of technology and advance, many have identified the rising problem of Science being the downfall of society as we know it today. Such ideas and beliefs have further been embodied in books, works of art etc, spreading this radical notion to the neutral, innocent rest of the populace, indoctrinating in them this belief that the technological advances of today, and of the future, will decimate civilisation.

What is civilisation, then? Some argue it to be the orderly, predetermined fashion in which governments and societies adhere to. Others believe it to be the basic grounding that humans should fall back upon, the basic laws of nature that homo sapiens should abide by to survive, and not relying on technological advances to spearhead their lives. Definitely, it is the basic will to survive the way we are right now. However, what most do not realize is that change is inevitabe. Sure, talk is rife about adaptation to change, adaptation to new challenges. However, what is innocuously shunned is the impact of such change, the extent of it on a scale of 1 to 10. Such an issue is blatantly overlooked by citizens and netizens alike. When the wave of change, incessantly fueled by high demand for ever-rising standards of societal living via the means of technological advacnes, eventually hits the masses without ever tiring, complaints and disgruntled comments surface, widespread over all forms of the media, that this technological wave is set to crumble society in the future, where values lax and machinery takes complete, unchallenged control, further supported by subtle opinion of the people firmly assured by induced happiness caused by such technology. Convenience and assertment of enjoyment predominate ideals revolving round the ideas of technology of the future, with yearn for slack obviously evident in supporters of the creation of this technology.

What is essential along this timeline of developments in technology is to bear in mind the conscious realization that such rapid advances were requested, more indirectly than not, by the people themselves. This exemplifies the unjust accusations heaped upon the very idea of Science's advancement as time goes by. However, it further delineates the subconcsious frame of thought dominant in the common man's perception of issues presented unexpectedly in broad daylight. More often than not, links between the destructive power of Science and advances in technology are strongly established swiftly without thought spared for the promiscuous benefits underlying critical, essential succeses in various fields indirectly related to the masses themselves. Let us take medicine as a case in point, and view the issue across the entire spectrum. Science created the nuclear bomb, and formulated vaccines that cure the population of diseases that would otherwise be lethal. Inevitable it is for the masses to voice out insinuations over prickly, controversial issues in peaceful times. However, what exactly has assured these times of peace? With disease spreading like wildfire, such groundless accusations would have definitely been razed to the ground with ease, along with numerous human lives.

The notion of Science violating nature's basic laws have been rampant over the past few decades, clearly sparked by the rising use of animals in inhumane laboratory testing. Stout supporters of this notion have presented the seemingly glorious argument of animal testing being essential in the advancement and progress of Science, indirectly the progress of society, in this modern, advanced world where Science settles the present, dictates the future and recalls the past. It is inevitable that in peaceful times, the ignorant masses of overly-controlling, albeit directly or not, would itch to oppose current trends in an effortless bid to re-create and restructure society to another level.

Is there another 'level', however? Visions and fantasies of human life becoming even more relaxed with technological advances and machinery are fed incessantly by the propaganda machines of societies in an effort to create a falsified vision of the future, to indirectly spur on industries and the working man in fields related to the abovementioned issue via discreet exploitation of subconscious desires. Who knows what the future might hold? One thing is for sure, if current trends hold - Science and technology will be the masters of the future. But one thing must be made clear, that is although technology will define standards of futuristic living, it may not neccesarily delineate the purpose of living.

Is there another way to bring society to another level besides the widespread use of Science and its development, as asserted by the many rebellious individuals to Science? Many point to religious methods, such as the development of Jerusalem into a prosperous city with the divine intervention of God. Such possibilities form the basic roots of ideologies firmly rooted in today's society, such as Communism. Why communism? The tragic desire to unite the people under one common cause and to establish unchallenged dictatorship can be interpreted to be somewhat like the intention of cities developing based on religious beliefs - with one common ideal, they work towards the future along a predermined line, the former being one dictated by the Communist head, while the latter being the divine word of religion. Hence, it is obvious that such ideologies spark due to subconscious opposition to Science, rather than being due to the development of Science within civilization itself. My stand is clear - Science is, and should never be, asserted as a detriment to the development of civilisation.

A Gift Of A Programme

Ever since the incorporation of the Gifted Education Programme (GEP for short) into Singapore's pristine education system, many individuals - parents of non-GEP students and critical observers alike - have objected to the existence of such an elitist programme. Segregation and elitism as salient points have led the way for a wave of controversy to hit the Ministry of Education full-force. Amidst rapid, critical re-engineering done to the Education structure, the GEProgramme has retained its firm position within the education system, never falling in prestige nor dimishing in the eyes of the beholder.

Controversial ideas revolving round the shady idea of the GEP breeding elitism and segregation holds firm within social circles and community itself. By 'extracting' the cream of the crop out of the large population of students and placing them in a specially-designated group for these future 'elites', with the GEP's ultimate goal of nurturing leaders of tomorrow in specialized sectors, spearheading Singaporean technology and commerce on the global stage. This clearly reveals the government's dubious and selfish underlying intention behind the grand facade of promotion of the GEP for the 'enhanced development' of talented students' minds. Although undeniable the benefits students recieve, public opinion is generally tilted towards the government for credit, with unending propaganda machines subconsciously convincing masses that the GEP is the right thing, the GEP must exist for opportunity to reach the skies, the GEP is the premier programme for any students that want to make it out in that competitive, lethal world of politics, commerce and industry. Essentials, when grasped young, are cultivated into unique traits inculcated naturally into one's work performance, giving the GEP-experienced proffesional the extra edge over those deprived of such an opportunity to grab such vital, useful skills and knowledge.

The idea of being 'special' for those in the GEP runs rampant in today's competitive society. The basic building blocks of life for Singaporeans in today's modern times, with credit crunches and technological advances sending prices of new products soaring sky-high, is almost completely materialistic, through and through. Let's put it in another way. In today's modern society where technology dictates the future, materialistic assets forms most Singaporeans' worlds. Happiness evolves into an expression judged by yardsticks set in place by materialistic factors such as money. Simply extrinsic. Segregation is a likely by-product of such a programme, with elitism forming due to the mixure of ideology and perception. With a cluster of higher-ability students, who wouldn't think of this group being 'special'? This is directly percieved by the GEP students to be that they were 'special', a unique cut above the rest, with this priviledge taken for granted. What we should truly work towards is the clear, distinct identification of GEP being a programme that provides and nurtures such talent, not somewhere which proves that you are a talent. A fine margin, a world of difference.

Acting Education Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam feted them at the Gifted Education Conference on Thursday, speaking of the scheme's goal of creating individuals who have big hearts, and are keen to use their talents and energies for the betterment of society. Acting Education Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam spoke at the Gifted Education Conference, speaking of the scheme's goal of creating individuals who have big hearts, and are keen to use their talents and energies for the betterment of society. This clearly delineates the government's main ambition for this programme to churn out useful pawns to further Singaporean ideals. Singaporean ideals, as we put it, is beneficial to all of us - we are Singaporeans, no? However, many fail to look beyond this superficial skim of the surface. These ideals are fixed in perfect position by political ideologies and propaganda influence, changing our perception of matters and inclination to things on a large scale. Thus our ideals follow suit. What are our true ideals then? Are we supposed to swallow this dicatorship of our lives unknowingly? What is freedom? Do we actually know what it means, in this constructed world where we are conditioned to feel appeased in, with economic success firmly keeping this ideology in place?

Pornography - Censor?

Many a wise man have attempted at the intricate description, the delicate defining, of a term widely known to many but such knowledge denied upon query, but few have come close to being able to describe it as it really is. Pornography. The word that either strikes raw excitement or pure shame in people, or simply strikes a dull bell, which resonates throughout the body without any clear registering of its presence. What's with the big hoo-ha over such a topic scarcely talked upon within common social circles? The psychological and physical factors, coupled with varying perceptions of this issue and different lights cast upon it by different people, cause it to be such a controversial and undefinable term. Pornography's ultimate intention is to cater to men's sexual desires and fantasies, creating an illusory world for them to revel in. What the public finds fault with is not the main aim of it all, but the repercussions that it might cause. Many fail to realise the underlying factors underneath the word 'pornography'. Is it simply a term used for the display of sexual behaviour, be it on the net, on CD's etc? Or could it be, that it is the tool to unlocking a paradise for men which can prove to be effective stress-busters and boosters to mental health? Such a controversial term. Campaigners for outright disapproval of pornography to be marketed so freely in a world of modernization and technology where the internet takes hold of weak-minded beings, coercing them into partaking in activities and developing ideologies based on what is broadcasted on the net, fail to see this frail, albeit invisible link between pornography and well-being. General views have been placed unfairly on this term, that it is wholly evil and malicious. Whoever views such explicit material is therefore branded the status on the same level as a convict in a society where prejudice and discrimination holds true. Radical views are cast away as this strong, possesive mindset that Pornography is simply not good is exemplified through actions and speech, surmounting an unstoppable crusade against this deemed evil. Should pornography be censored, then? Yes or no. Of course, two divided factions will definitely compete for either claim. What is vital, or rather, essential, in the judgement of pornography is the repercussions that might occur NOT having it in society. Rape cases will definitely rocket sky-high, with men harboring perverse intentions, unable to release this sexual desire in this make-believe paradise that pornography perfectly creates, project this desire onto other human beings.