I have come across an 11 year old who is really bright. He read about metaphysics at his age and asked questions about time travelling. Not the usual kid but he also had a heart that was so evil that it made my eyes pop: he basially thinks that people can only survive long by attaining both power and longevity, which includes getting rid of anyone who blocks his path. He doesn't want to die since dealth would take away all he has. This kid appears to look up to me for answers. He said he basically wanted immortality and be powerful and he wanted to know how to have this power. To add to his list, love was to him an evil thing that made people weak and too vulnerable for any kind of success.
His intelligence on many scientific concepts was astounding for his age. Equally 'astounding' was his selfishness in life and the fear for mortality.I was both terrified and angry. But as you start to learn about his background, your anger would simmer down.
I gave him my heartfelt feelings about life. He seemed to be tinkered somewhat towards the brighter side. But appeared to still remain in his negative mode because his parents' lives overshadowed him with all the bad sides of life -- monetary greed, extramarital affairs, deceit and discrimination.
So what did I tell him?
** Longevity is dependent mainly on a healthy thought for people and oneself. This includes how you want to live your life. It all comes in a cycle. The mind, I feel, is the most crucial. People, who tend to be really kind harbour few or no negative thoughts, are usually healthier in both body and mind. When the flow in your body is fluid and less stressful, your health will be in an optimal state of balance.
**Wealth also doesn't guarantee you a long and happy life. I have seen a lot of wealthy people consuming lots of tonics, spending huge amounts of money looking fit but none could really compare to those centenarians whose lives are simple and pure. It sometimes doesn't even have to mean you eat healthy organic foods every day such as this longest living centenarian whose life defies almost all orders about healthy eating. But she didn't defy one order: that is to lead a simple happy life free of negative stress.
**Being mean could get you to power. But no one's an idiot. Everyone knows how to spot the negatives. And when you step over people's toes, one day they will come back to you. If they don't, life will sort you out somehow, usually via health issues since your mind is always in an imbalance of complexity. (plotting to harm is unbelievably complicated; if you start to think about it, thats added stress that is un-needed.)
** regardless of whether you are religious or not, the bad habits don't pay. It doesn't pay well scientifically, social-economically, artistically etc.Tell me and give me examples of any bad minds of thoughts give you a truly sustainable solution ? (he couldn't give me any. Maybe he was too young. But can anyone here tell me ?)
** the more you are scared of death, the more likely you'll going to die sooner. Fear is a poison to good health.
Got to pop in to bed now. Life may not be a bed of roses. People can be somewhat crazy but as long as you know how life rules in the long term, I bet you'd choose to be simple and be plain nice. I've got plenty to learn about simplification of life and I am still learning everyday.

[pic source: www.macmothership.com]

@GreatestQuotes: "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Albert Einstein

Just retweeted it. Thought I add a few thoughts about the perplex layers of the human mind. We've come across great men and women whose paths have been obstructed because they have been different. Einstein was not alone. Together with many other great minds in innovation and invention, politics and literature; thinking different often means opposition. And its true even today when we are supposed to fully evolved and morphed into this new kind of cacoon which it should be born a free and beautiful butterfly.

The type of butterfly that is supposed to be from the new age, new born, new minds that are big and open.

But are we?

Everyday we could read from our papers (doesn't matter where the heck you are on this little blue planet of ours) there must be some kind of fights: from domestic violence to national disputes; from toilet politics to international politics; from simple words of simple thoughts blown out disproportinately into complex thought & fights. Some people appear to be able to just find fault in some people somehow. I often think we are all weird speices of the strangest kind. First off, we could see the bad in others. Next off, most of us fail to see the good in others and third off, we can't see the bad in us. Well maybe we do. Just that we forget all about it very soon after.

I think this is negativity in the worst form. Its venom seeps into the mind in making it far more complex than it really should be.Ever wondered why the crazy human mind has rarely evolved beyond being genuinely nice? And why there must be shades of grey in every kind of human relationship? I believe most of it comes from self defense - the kind of defense that links to the way one feels that they might be walked over, and hence must do a plot or a con in self defense, often in the name of 'survival'.

I think that is an excuse.

And we need to requestion about what is real 'survial'.

'Survival' actually really means to allow what is good for us to prevail. Great minds and ideas to flourish. Not there because of certain hidden interest.

Societal problems, like different kinds of discrimination, has never really eluded us. Most of the time, it has been haunting us. Kingdoms have formed and take over the weaker races / dynasties to create a variety of social classes. Its how one forms power. It has always been happening and I'm afraid it will continue to happen. In the many books I've come across, people do take sides. And often at a discriminative account. History has never been really fair in making 100% truthful accounts.Then again, history is written by us -- human beings.

For as long as the idea comes from a human being, I supposed it will not be 100% fair. It'll most likely be from Plant C (Complexity) where simple issues would be wired from one to another; into several volumes of history, rarely wanting to look just simple and clear.Which really would be the ultimate form of sustainable survival. Agree?

PS: CHANGE is actually about facing reality. To deliver the truth and admit flaws would be the real guarantee for the future.

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

|.....Creativity.....|

There are many different kinds of creativity - from the way we take care of ourselves to the way we handle the world. Some forms of creativity may seem as unacceptble depending on the individual's preference, which is affected by ones culture and inborn qualities.

This just came to me while I was reading the various sources of news and have been thinking.

Singapore has started the IR (integrated resorts) 3 years ago; and it does seem to have worked very well despite concerns. Economy expanded far more than the expected 6% to a whopping double digit range of 12-15%. Banks are coming in to share the pie and it does look that people take up the positive economic sentiment to move to bigger and far more exlusive private residences that commands at least 3 times psf than your ordinary public housing. Prices for public housing on the other hand, has been rising very fast.

Creative thinking, as in innovative thoughts in education, health, arts, dramma and the sciences and technologies, are often more touted as being useful. Creative problem solving that sorts pollution problems are too. But it doesn't appear to me that as many people are thinking creativity on an ethical value, which is a little strange.

Creativity must bear some form of positive output else the creativity is nothing but graffiti.
Than again graffiti can also be seen as an art in its own right, which is true. Art in museums have their value too. So are art forms that the layman does for a therapeutic reason. The only creative sin I could see is to use negative lateral thinking to do harm to the environment / another living being with no good reason apart from mere personal interests via exploitation.

Creative thinking in solving problems is another. Everyone's creative. Its just a matter of quality and the direction that creativity is heading to.

Should we have preferences in creativity? What kinds should we retain, change and strip? I wonder. Or let certain acts of creativity eat us up?

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

[pic source: www.gmtmag.com/en/]

I read this article: 'America is rotten and China is awesome?' by G.E Anderson at the Forbe's website just a while ago; and felt compelled to write quickly about my 2 cents on innovative & creative thinking. I'll zap it straight to the point.

We all know we need to know enough and have solid foundations in our subject areas. Yet we also need to know how to quickly think via various channels in different scenarios. From an outsider's immediate point of view, many American students seem to lack the former and the Chinese students lack the latter. Having taught both nationalities before as a teacher tells me that certain curriculums need to be changed. But that again, it has always been difficult to say how and why because I always feel difficult to put in my comments especially when I do not come from a big country. And that coming from a tiny young one makes everything all the more difficult.

Americans, like many other Western countries, tend to have more creative minds that could twist and turn to create ideas of thoughts, innovative solutions etc. But having lack the depth in both Math(s) and Sciences is going to stunt them in the near term and we can start to see the effects even now, where a lot of foreign students who have graduated in the States are now working in the US developing niche products and services. All this new preference for the humanities and the arts by the Americans come from somewhat a natural distaste for numbers & physics. I also suspect that it has a lot to do with affluence where looking towards the arts where social sciences would be more interesting to learn than fomulas in math(s) and the sciences (especially Physics and engineering sciences). Natural sciences, however, doesn't seem to be much of this kind of problem. However the reality is many advancements in technology, typically with the ones that directly affect us in phyical life, requires one to be superior in these subjects.

Chinese students, on the other hand, are masters with numbers and logical thinking. Too again with many other Asian countries and typically with Russian students, where mathematics to them are like playing magic with figures.They are not uncreative but they do not appear to learn how to sit and think of other ways to come up with new solutions. Everything appears to have evolved from similar or the same common base. I attribute this problem to the way the society and economy works. When you are striving to get out from poverty to become extremely well off, the first thing you need to do is to just follow the path that will send you fastest to sucess. And that does not often allow you time to think and try. In certain instances, daring to think in a different path may be a personal economic risk, where your time and effort may be grounded to a far less profitable result. From another flip point, countries which are industrially established in the east, still tend to carry on the safe path of thinking where you focus on the safe path to climbing up the social ladder. Creativity is often set aside after you attain your financial freedom, which is exactly the formula to stunted creativity as it is better to start early and have it in our living surroundings.

In the States or indeed in the west as a whole (bearing in mind the different cultures in the west) have more accessibilities to innovation as far as the culture of free thinking / sources of various information goes. Free, also as in the freedom of not having to worry about the basic needs -- as in the society allows you the luxury of time and money to truly try different things in store.

Personally, I do not have a preference for whom is going to be the super powerhouse of the future. I think if you were to clear your minds a little, thinking a little far a little, the optimal that will keep the world sane and healthy is to actually not have any single super powerhouse in innovation. It simply isn't healthy. Creativiity, in my opinion, depends on a rich array of experiences that we can share under the common umbrella of the skies, where different creed, people etc will offer you various insights of true wonder that our own cultures may fail us in seeing what could be the best solution. We cannot be benifiting anyone, if we think true innovative thought must come from a certain part of the world.

Great brains, in my modest opinion, is one which is not only solid in the fundamentals of as many subject areas possible; but also in the way it develops over time to be fluent in the nth number of ways to come up with solutions despite under any circumstance. (politically, economically, socially etc). Innovative thinking has to make the world as one, where it shows sensitivity to the rest of the world and other people's needs. You can't do this when you start to brand one another, or trying to sit somebody off.

So in a way no one is exactly rotten and no one is exactly awesome. We have everything to share and learn from everyone. And the brain that has the ability to sort nth number of problems has got to be also a brain that is very open to all.

Quick draw at one go. Doubt a lot of people would read about it. But I thought I might as well hit the keys since I have been interested in such topics for a long long time. I don't believe in certain stigmas and a crazy few dogmatc thinking egos. My approach may somewhat look slow, but it has gained me a lot of invaluable insights and train me to think fast.

Got lots to say but I really need to pop into bed. Its 2.25 in the morning ! -- Karen Fu, some little nobody sitting on the equator, in front of her PC, smattering away from tiny Singapore.

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change