I have been following the news of the coming elections. The heat is on and I can feel it's different from the past. And I hope there will be more new blood coming into the scene. Times have changed and we need a different set of leaders who will effectively and efficiently bring us all to the next lap of peace and prosperity in a new dimension.

I was thinking what kind of leaders we should vote in. And there are a couple that I think is fundamental. Contrary to popular belief, governing a tiny county isn't easy especially if it is in a unique 'waters'. We need some top leader who is brave to lead a pack of very able group of ministers. I think, at this point, we have none though there are many very capable groups of people emerging in this pre-election. And many are from the legal profession. I hope we will see more talent who could sit into the different ministries in a more direct way where the minister will have a direct tertiary training that is straightforwardly useful in his/her ministry. I think it serves the best interest of all to have a direct professional unless we can't find any.

The problems that we have today are of a different nature compared with the problems we have in the past decades. We need to be independent and stand up for ourselves as a very young and extermely tiny country in the future era where the change of political global climate emerges. People tend to pay much more attention to nations that are huge. We can be huge in our own unique way via our courage to chop down the odds and by creating our own set of knowledge and skill sets. People tend to respect countries where her people are brave, righteous, genuine, and innovative. No one respects any country that is pompous, arrogant and throws their might over others. We have a neat social order. But we need more than that -- a society that is very inventive and has a very healthy view of issues.

The leaders we need to pick have to tough. The courage to turn mountains of obstacles and be tough to beat the odds. Not someone who needs any form of say or protection from already a group of seniors. That's not a real leader. Take problems on independently; face the music. Politics or indeed life itself is not at all a smooth sailing one. One cannot expect full protection in comfort. Life isn't a bed of roses where its fragrance will always await you. In reality,it's a bunch of good, evil mixed in shades of grey. Fortunately there is a room for the genuinely good and kind for the law of nature forbids evil intentions.

We need leaders who can uphold justice in the highest order; someone whom everyone, both oppostion and the ruling party, will respect. Finding fine leaders who are not lured by monetary rewards is definitely hard in times when people these days have not rarely gone through destitude and poverty. In times where pragmaticism is around with material comforts are at its highest for many successful professionals; finding the right leader who can comprehend the poor, the needy and the disadvantage is a real task.

I hope the upcoming election will show a few really good men/women who will show us the renewed light for the next 10 years. It will definitely be a different world by then. And whoever is going to be the next prime minister has to be fiercely independent and extremely intelligent. For our survival needs are very different from large countries like China and the US. We need the kind of substance where our leaders can walk down any aisle anywhere in the world with an air of respect that is like no other. -- Karen Fu.

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Recently, I saw The Ideas Economy's website and posted 2 ideas that I thought it would be useful. One was to design modular mobile smart housing that acts as a self sustainable unit; and the other a kind of 'lead net' that covers the entire nuclear plant in several layers before it actually explodes.

It just came to me after reading and following up the number of natural and man-made disasters that seems to erupt in a short span of 3 years. Regardless if the Mayans had been right about 2012,  we have to prepare for a definite real climate that is today and the near future.Highly populated areas, usually in cities, do not have much open space for escape. As such, I am thinking of the many possibilities of designing the units and the 'safety net'.

Climate change does not confine to the natural environment, about melting ice caps and the rise of sea levels. We are now facing another impending problem that is more instaneous and dire: terrorism. While we can add in rows of CCTVs, sending police and guard dogs to patrol at stations, airports, and sub stations; we must first eliminate any possible attack inland. For that reason alone, nuclear plants, oil rigs in danger points should be seriously considered for a permanent removal.The energy that we should use must be some form that we can contain in a much higher possibility. With the recent Fukushima Nuclear accident, signs are begining to show that the spread of radioactive pollution is going world wide. I think that is itself an expensive lesson to take and we have yet to see the full impact of the disaster.

I particularly liked the idea of solar energy. Many may not for the actual costs of producing them as compared to nuclear energy. But recently I have accidentally stumbled upon a paper by the late John O Blackburn, who wrote 'The Historic Crossover:Solar Energy is Now the Better Buy'.(see reference below)
I really wouldn't want to try nuclear in the long term given the change of climates now where there appears to be a rise in the number of earthquakes.Naturally people may doubt about statistics. Despite the nature of hard core research stats, we live under the sky to know what is really happening. Sometimes, a better trust is within us. Within me, myself, I do not believe that nuclear is the solution. It has never been. With the Fukushima Nuclear incident, I am more than adament to vote against nuclear energy. You know how the Japanese work. They are very merticulous and responsible people. If this could happen, I think its serious enough to make a resolution. -- Karen Fu, adapted from my own post to PhD forum.

Reference:
(A) The late John O. Blackburn, Duke University’s Professor Emeritus of
Economics and former Chancellor,
Solar and Nuclear Costs—The Historic Crossover: Solar Energy is Now
the Better Buy’ http://www.azocleantech.com/details.asp?newsID=11407
Obituary of  Dr John Blackburn, which reflects his personality:
http://news.duke.edu/2011/01/blackburn.html
Prof Blackburn's paper:
http://www.ncwarn.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/NCW-SolarReport_final1.pdf
(B)  Nuclear waste recycling problems:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rethinking-nuclear-fuel-recycling
http://www.nuclearwasterecycling.com/
(C) Nuclear reactors in quake zones: http://tinyurl.com/4kxux8u

Just posted my reply to Fil Salustri on PhD-Design forum list with regards to Nuclear energy.This is related to my ealier blog posts here. Sharing this on my blog and open for comments:

I just knew before I shut my eyes to sleep that someone would say this because
I didn't specify 'Fire'. My apolgies for missing the explaination.

Forest fires are natural occurance. But what I was trying to say was that
fire is something we cannot control effectively despite our advancement
in technologies. Fires can be started by humans as they could be started by
nature. With climate change and weather conditions getting drier in places
in California and Australia, prepare for more fires.

And many fires are initiated by humans.
And often it is very hard to recover. Often at the risks of firefighters.
One typical example is the forest fire in California in the US about 2
years back.
It was outrageous. (see reference links below my sig.)
And notably the fire caused in LA was human induced too.

Naturally occurring uranium is harmless, but after human intervention, this can
become harmful. The same could be said about gun powder. Some cultures use
it for fire crackers, celebration; while some used it to blast their
enemies' heads off.

The hard truth is there are people who have uncanny ways of doing things.
They are all innovative. But the cause for concern is the potential and the
extent of danger that each element poses. It I hold uranium. or even harmless
amount of untouched hydrogen, I am fine. But if I hold just hydrogen
alone and played
with it in huge amounts under pressure, I get a hydrogen bomb. Human ingenuity
can come up with ideas. Just that it has to be on the right track.
Hydrogen is abundant.
Wrong use, and its a terrifying abundant gas used for massive destruction.

True we are imperfect beings. And also due to our imperfection, we cannot also
be confident and sure that humans can design the best containment to fuels
that are potentially highly combustible. Both nature and humans cannot
ensure 100 percent
containment on any materials that we have to be totally safe. We need
precautions.
If we can prevent a disaster like Fukushima, and we are able to do now; I feel
we should take the precaution now like some of the EU countires are doing now.

Should have added to say that I don't even want coal / fossil fuels and anything
that exhaust fumes.  Anyway I've just stated my stand on coal now at
late bedtime.

I am trying to hunt for the stats. It comes with a large world map
showing where the
nuclear plants are. US has lots concentrated in the eastern part of
their country.
Then they show the costs of setting up a plant that is initially high
and covers itself
over a period of time. If memory doesn't fail me, in aroun 5-8 years
time, and its covered.
I should have recorded the link when I read it last week.
I will try to find it.

if thats the only game in town, then we are being utterly uncreative.
How can we be confined by that one source of energy alone when there
are clearly others at hand?

Its like talking about using only force to answer problems in the world.
There are many ways of doing it. Gandhi used peace for India to obtain
freedom for
his people. Singapore used to believe that merging with Malaysia as
the only way to
survive. People used to think that a country that has lots of natural
resources are the ones
which will prosper. It is via human creativity that makes our
prosperity and it is
humanity that keeps our society sustainable.
All these policies/inventions.ideas are man-made. We can change. For
that to change,
we must have guts to go into the unknown and venture. And fortunately for us,
we have other sources of energy that we can source. It may not be quick and cost
effective like nuclear, but we can design it with our expertise of new
forms of energy tio
answer problems. Policies to encourage smart use of energies. My blog
is about that.
If anyone's interested, its below my sig too.

The reality is do we need to really use
that much energy? Of course we don't. Thats another topic.

Its already 3:20 am here. I need to get some sleep. I only login an
hour ago. Shouldn't have.
But I did. So I might as well complete at least this email. I have
books to cover and notes to take
tomorrow.

Thanks for the advise. But I don't drink.
I only use wines for culinary purposes.
And I don't take caffeine to wake me up.
I use excercise. It works.  : )

I'll look for the infographic and the stats and post later.

Karen Fu
elfin blog: http://daringtochange.wordpress.com
Other blogs can be traced from here. Your adventure may vary.

My sleepy links are for your reference. I shall endeavour to look for more.
But for now, let me have my slumber.... (thanks)

1. California Forest Fire, New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/us/30wildfires.html
2.What causes forest fires:
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/what-causes-forest-fires.html
3. Human caused wildfires increases in Calif
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wildfires/2009-05-14-human-caused-wildfires-increasing_N.htm
4. Eyeing Japan, Countries reassess Nuclear Plans:
http://www.greatenergychallengeblog.com/blog/2011/03/15/eyeing-japan-countries-reassess-nuclear-plans/

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Just threw the question to the list, and I thought I might as well put it here as I am looking for answers.

 

'Happen to miss some important emails and now I ended up a living Owl.
I just answered Fil offlist and I thought it would be nice to ask the
list a few questions:

1. are we playing fire when we suggest that nuclear energy is containable ?
We can't even effectively control fire, something that is an ancient
fuel that we have been using
for millions of years. Forrest fires in the States and in Australia
are clear recent examples. They burned for
days with huge social costs.

2. Knowingly that nuclear energy is the most cost efficient and
therefore the attractiveness of making lots
of money is one strong advantage, at least from the commercial point
of view. And that natural resources like coal is depleting, offers
another point for Nuclear,  how about the cost of playing nuclear
energy which is tonnes more spontaneous than fire.
Can we be afford it? What is the safest nuclear plant design that
would contain possible accidents?
Reading the accidents and news daily, can we trust people to play god?
Or at least the master of something
that we cannot 100 percent contain?

3. What is the real benefit of having a nuclear plant? Why is it that
we cannot make other forms of energy cheap? Why has it got to be
nuclear? Sun is abundant source of energy in many parts of the world.
Why not tap and transfer this energy?

In all, why should it be all fission?

Hope this is taken in good candor.

I'm fully awake...
Karen Fu'

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Thought I paste my reply to a forum post which I think is important. I've found Clive Dilnot Professor of Design Studies from the School of Art Design History and Theory Parsons School of Design, New School University; more than thoughtful. This is only my answer to the initail part of his email post to PhD forum. I have suggested an initail idea of a multilayer lead net to contain radioactivity. But I believe the more important issue is to change the minds on consumption and the way we live. The psychology behind is to focus both in policies and products.   here's the copy of my reply, open for crit:

Can't help it but to want to post thoughts on Clive's email after seeing how the Japanese community here
felt and how I come to shock of the latest events in Japan. All these, despite natural disaster, has
a strong link to human error in design.

In regards to the unfolding double tragedies in Japan, Donald Norman’s
“leap-to” diatribe in defense of engineers completely misses the
point. In fact, it is part of the problem (in that, as the subsequent
replies showed, it diverts the real question in all the wrong
directions—no Virginia, building a 100-metre sea wall is not the
answer).

Totally agree on this aspect. But unortunately many scientists, engineers etc
do not think this way. Despite the prowess of what advance science and technology can do,
the ultimatum is still human factors. I see this tragic event the result of systemic loopholes.
The other thought that came to my mind is that we over emphasis about nuclear energy and being
awfully over confident about our abilities to contain such technology. Our human complacency can
often misquide us to think that advanced know-how is the solution to all, which unfortunately isn't.
Its often like a problem left to the open thinking that you could swat them with a large net, forgetting that
the problem may be larger and more powerful in strength. When all these add up, it mutates into
a snowballed problem that could have been sorted at base point.

Nuclear energy is by far, I think, the most dangerous form of energy to use. It may be economical from a commercial standpoint, but the opportunity cost is often devastating. Apparently Fukushima had mechanical problems way back in the 70s. But strangely, they have not been totally cleared off. It makes me wonder how could engineering problems such as pressure and cooling systems were solved. I would have thought policies or products to encourage alternative fuel sources with possible policies to cut down unneccessary consumption would greatly reduce the need for electrical energy. On many levels, psychology may well be the most fundamental aspect in solving energy problems.

The immediate thought was to design a kind of 'lead net' that covers the entire nuclear plant in several layers before it actually explodes. Damn thick wall, but I suppose it is better than nothing or leaving 50 brave Japanese rescuers choosing to risk their lives to look for survivors. I think its utterly unfair to these people. The persons who design
the reactors and those who allowed the faulty systems to be in place for so long should be the ones
to take on most of the responsibilities.

My original post asked two questions. The first was open—what does the
word “design” mean when it is used in connection with the design of  (or
what I would call the configuration) of the Japanese nuclear plants?
What is “design” here? What is that in the nuclear plant or as a quality
of the plant, that causes commentators to talk of its ‘design”?

Design here would simply mean to be responsible; be wise & honest to know the risks; be
intelligent to fit all the demands with a solution that has a backup for possible accidents despite the
magnitude.

No design is considered even passable, when any kind of problem is overlooked. 
The age of the reactors may be a problem. But I think the system in place is a greater problem.
The thinking of those people who design the policies and the physical product are the most
important factor. Everything grows old with age. But why is it that some products/buildings could last
while some don't? Simply because the strict attention to every design detail in compliance to
different kinds of human environments & our common natural environment keeps it good.

Only have this bit of bedtime for the long torso and tail bit of Clive's detailed thought on the mega accident.
It's actually a wake up call not only for Japan but to everyone of us on this globe. We have not yet figure out
the pending danger it poses to the environment. Looking at the line of eathquakes that have happend,will there be a string of other similar earthquakes waiting to errupt ?

Pretty frighteining stuff if you pile all these up with what Dr Stephen Hawkings had mentioned that
our future is in space. But instead of lining up to fly to Mars or wherever into the unknown, we need to solve the problem that is inherent within us. I see it as a root problem. For if it is not solved by the root, your evergreen tree cannot grow, and nevermind if it would last.

That's how I see it.

Night night all,
Karen Fu

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

I just couldn't resist taking the time to pick out the important lessons off from her talk when she

received her commendation from Venerable Jingkong some 3 years ago. I may have missed a couple of points,but I think I

have somewhat covered most of the pointers. I only have pockets of time to do this and I thought the best format would be in the form of

a 'poetry'. And I call this 'Dare You Make This Change' -- Lessons from Hsu Chih. She is an extremely humble person, but I thought she's got 

lots of cool factor that is humble yet gutsy; old yet young. Here's my shot for the day:

 

想年轻 就年轻!

Think young and thou shalf be young!

吃
很浪费时间

干嘛
买菜  洗菜
又煮菜
餐餐洗碗
多麻烦 ！

 

Eating is a waste of time

Why waste it on

Buying food, washing them

& cooking them

After whish

the hell of washing follows

What a chore!

 

 

不如看书
做有意人的事情  更妙 !

Might as well read books

Do chores to benefit mankind  Such is a pure wonder!

 

她
只有爱人的宗教
没有别的
心清静
头脑只为为众生

She

Only harbors the idea of Love

Love is her religion

Nothing else.

The heart is at peace

And the mind is for humanity

 

 

切勿动干火!
因为
发脾气  浪费时间
伤害自己 伤害别人

 

Boil not your head

'Cos

Fuming churns away your time

Harms yourself & others

 

不拿病人的钱
人家给她的钱
她全给其他穷人
交水电   房租
买粮食

 

Not taking patient's money

Whatever money that is given to her

She passes it on to the poor

To pay for bills, rent

To buy food.

 

她从不浪费

因
  照顾的人很穷，

所以
   一定一样跟他们一样的穷

 

She never wastes

'Cos

   there are many poor people to take care of

That's Why

   she feels she needs to be as poor as them

 

 

爱
她信仰是个‘爱’
永远爱世人 爱众生

 

Love

Is her mantra

Always love humanity, love all fellow beings

 

她投其四好：
存好心，说好话
行好事， 做好人
百年功绩
就在她 执着的博爱

 

She focuses on mainly four beliefs:

Keep a good heart, say the wise words

Do the good deeds, practice being a good person

100 years of achievements

lay on the principle of compassion.

 

苦人太多，贫穷人太多
跟最穷的人一起往来
她的生活要比他们好，她的心不安
这是真的，不但自己心不安
穷人看了会怕；

 

Sad people are many, poor people are many

Mingle among the poor and interact with them

She feels uneasy when she is better than them

This is real: Not that she feels uneasy

The poor who sees the better off are uneasy

 

必须过和他们同样的生活
跟大多数人打成一片
就是和平共处的苦心状举！

Henceforth the effort to experience the poor's life

Be part of the majority

Such heartfelt emphathy is the foundation of peace !

-- compiled in the stanzas in the middle of the night by Karen Fu...

Night All !

 

PS: The basis of peace formed by Teresa Hsu may be a tall order. If not almost impossible, but I believe that if we could move towards the basis of empathy in her direction, we would have sorted out a lot of problems in life. The essence of thrift, sharing and compassion could take us all out of misery that is stemmed out from jealousy, greed and poverty.

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

I am sitting in front of my PC and am reading this brouchure that is sitting on the table. It says 'P3 GEP Prep course'(GEP-- Gifted Education Programme) & highlighting a variety of different courses to train superior writing skills & arithmetic. I am impressed by the types of courses available for these young students and they are indeed stretching their minds. It is a far cry from what GEP was some 26+ years ago, when the first batch of students go in for their kill with no professional coaching.Nonetheless, they still managed to understand the Qs and made their replies. If memory doesn't elude me, it was a test selectively for those top PSLE (Primary School Leaving Examination) kids who had scored at least 3 A*s. They were fished out & given some hundreds of test questions to complete in the stated time. 100 students out of the entire PSLE chohort of some 30,000 students were picked up as GEP students, who would then placed into Raffles Girls or Raffles Institution for their secondary education.

Today GEP is expanded to 9 selected Primary schools which will train youngsters who are merely 9 years old for rigourous academic training and mind stretching. They do Olympiad Math, Science and participate in various mind camps. It is also expanded to secondary schools and junior colleges in Singapore. All these are great but what is not so great is that students begin to compare with themselves and start to differentaite between GEPs and non-GEPs.

Seriously, if Gifteds are gifteds, would they need to get trained that much ? If they were trained to ace those test papers, then are these students trained in a restricted frame of taught thinking strategies and minds that are planned in their taught subjects?

Gifteds or naturally talented individuals are trained primarily by themselves. Their minds could formulate ideas and methods with minimal guidance. While these kids do need a condusive and stimulating learning environment to grow their minds; I thought such paper chase training has inherent  flaws. One main concern is that it could be unhealthy habit to society as a whole where compeition becomes fierce and people start to actively compete on the main basis of proving one's superiority. Students should learn to grow in a humble environment, made aware of different social issues. If you are gifted, great. If you are not, that's fine 'cos everyone has their own strengths.

We have successfully groomed very academically abled student bodies at different levels of education. There is no doubt about it. But the idea of superiority in a so-called gifted programme can actually ruin the lives of many whom fail to understand what is really important in life.

Test papers simply cannot identify every form of giftedness. It cannot exactly give an overall view of smartness 'cos smart means how you react in different situations, not just test situations on paper.

The world's a big place yet it is also small in many ways.  -- Karen Fu

 

 

 

 

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

black sesame snow skin rum raisin lin yoong

has a very mellow sweet taste that is both cooling and refreshing.

Almost taste like ice-cream, the centre filling goes excellently

with the seasame seed 'cold skin'. One of the best for new

mooncakes.

 

'Salt' moon cakes (suyan yuebing) is the one on the top right hand corner,

which has a delicate sweet, salty and clean taste that is like no other.

You'll have to taste it to understand. It doesn't bear with the extra rich

taste like a lot of other traditional mooncakes. Yet it has a classic

taste and bite that will linger in your mouth even after a long while.

 

 

black diamond mooncake bamboo charcoal

has a single yolk in the centre with lotus paste and a little mix of nuts.

Covered in edible bamboo charcoal, the taste bears contemporary flavour that

is now considered as one of the most popular mooncakes in the market.

 

 

 

5 kernel moon cake (wuren yuebing)

is healthy as it is delicious. As the name implies, the mooncake consists of 5 differnt kinds of seeds

and nuts chopped into finer pieces. The mixture is then mixed with maltose to hold them up together in a paste.

This mixture can differ from dialect groups in the Chinese race. Some add in delicate pieces of jinhua huotui (ham)

and further sweeten with wintermelon. It is usually the best among the traditional mooncakes

and it is usually the most expensive too.

 

I didn't have a lot of time enjoying the Moon cake festival this year.

But it seems that I have a few very nice surprises for mooncakes that

cheer my days up. --- Karen Fu

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

black diamond mooncake bamboo charcoal

 

black sesame snow skin rum raisin lin yoong

Hainan - 5 seeds moon cake (wuren)

Hainan - Salt moon cakes (suyan)

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

Posted via email from Daring to Posterous-ly Change

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