The Blind Side of Blandishment

To those who had a religion,

At times, you were (or still are) surprise(d) or truly amaze(d) at how "obstinate"(subjective) some people can get when you tried to tell the good news of your religion to them.

Some people may give you the friendly nod or (Duchenne) smile, some may brush you off, some may even reverse the process by telling you about their own views.

I've experience many of such encounters and I come to a realization that there are certain issues that were never brought on the table.

First - Some people simply do not believe in external life. I've many friends whom when probed(asked), told me that. Death, is just like sleeping. 75% of my non believer friends told me that.

Note: Before I continue, I wish to clarify that what you encounter may differ from mine.

Now, imagine that you are an insurance agent. You are trying to sell a saving plan to Mr X. This saving plan requires him to set aside $500 per month, and continue to commit to do so for 25 years (Total commitment = $500 x 12 x 25 = $150,000). In return, he will get one lump sum of money at the end of the 25 years, and this sum is greater than $150,000. Once he signed up for the plan, failure to commit(perhaps due to financial crisis), will incur a penalty fee and may end worst off than his initial position.

Will he buy?

Going back to my point, if Mr X did not believe that he will (or have a high chance) live beyond 10 years, persuading him to take up the plan due to the higher pay-off is not going to work. In fact, in real life, I've come across insurance agents enticing me with this carrot of high payoff.

Instead, the agent should try to convince Mr X that he will live for the next 25 years or more.

How to convince? Well, that is the difficult part....

One thing for sure though, try sleeping without breathing, and I think sleeping may not be pleasant after all.

Second - Social forces are more visible and evident than "religious forces".

Try telling Mr X that God will hunt or punish (angrily/lovingly/benevolently) him for his sin by striking him with a bolt of lighting or sending an earthquake with the epicenter directly below his feet. Mr X will label you as "off-the-mark".

Telling Mr X that the mysterious incurable disease that he had was due to God's punishment or even that God is sending his 'crusade' from Country Y to kill him have a higher 'impact' than the natural forces.

(Some) people tend to look at the olden history of religion and associate them with the natural forces. It is understandable. Ancient people worshiped many natural elements of the earth. And a good portion of ancient people also worshiped God that control such forces. In olden days, people could not understand why natural disasters happen to them and how it happen.

Nowadays, people studies and know why and where is can occur, so they can be "unreachable".
Which may explain why no one or perhaps(more optimistically), some still worship the Sun in the modern day.

The notion 'almost everything is in our own control' is a difficult barrier to break...


Third - The negative/false impression of religious leaders.

I understand from some, that is also one of the barrier that they had.

Inevitably, quite a number of non-believers create some sort of money "flowchart" - people do offerings -> religious institution gets the money ->religious people who control the institutes get the money-> religious leaders needs more money -> preach and ask people to give more/be faithful -> Repeat cycle. Admittedly, this is a generalized and perhaps narrow view and there may be a better flowchart to incorporate a wider range of views.

(Some) people expect religious leaders to be frugal, humble etc... somehow similar to Muhammad Gandhi, Mother Theresa, _________(fill in the blank).

But, sorry to disappoint.

Leaders do have the freedom of using the money that was given to them. But if the religious leaders, especially those that are earning directly from the offerings of the people, have the wrong motive and use religious reasons to cover up or (sugar) coat such motives, then I believe it is not right.

It is hard to discern and distinguish between the white and black sheep...

And on a further note, I've come across religious leaders that say(somewhere along the line): In the secular world, with my qualification and capability, there are many better paying jobs that I can take up, yet I choose to work as a lowly paid religious leader.

What are they trying to invoke? It will only add more layers of barrier.......


Once again, I'll like to end off with this: What I saw or encountered may differ from yours. After all, we live in a diverse world, and you may be living in a world that is culturally/ethically etc different from mine, and you may not see or feel what I see or feel. You don't have to agree. :)

Rational Deterrence

Two days ago, I was traveling on the highway. The vehicle I was on was traveling slightly above the speed limit. During one part of the course, the traffic at my direction slowed down. To my left, I saw a police car parked at the side with its flashing lights on.

I wasn't surprised, because drivers were known to slow down in areas where there are hidden speed cameras. They would slow down near the location, and after they passed, they will continue their "beyond speed limit" speed. (Generalization here).

But what is surprising here was that the drivers, after passing the police car, did not speed up. In fact, the traffic remains within legal speed limits for quite some time before it resumed back to the "norms".

Some thoughts came to my mind.

1) Drivers were very rational and very "preemptive". A police car does not necessary mean that only that specific portion of the highway was being marked. It may just be a start of a series of law enforcements waiting for you right till the end of the highway.

(2)Traffic law enforcements may know the above point(pt 1), and hence may just employ one vehicle to achieve the effect, thereby saving on manpower.

(3) Some experienced drivers may know the above point (pt2), hence may be unfazed and may step up the gas after passing that single traffic police car.

(4) However, some drivers may not know point 2, hence they will take extra precaution and slowed down. And because of these drivers and the collective effects, it will overall, still slow down the highway speed.

(5) The law enforcement teams know all of the above, hence, their equilibrium strategy will still be - the deployment of one police car.

Does A Picture Say A Thousand Words??

Some may ponder about my previous Kevin Carter's photo. What has it got to do with the Cheetah's story?

Admittedly, there isn't much of correlation between them. It was the mentioning of the vulture that led to the derailment.

The only point I want to bring out is that because of my past experiences/encounters(though not physically up close) with vultures , my mind was "conditioned" in such a way that I formed a negative schema (ruthless, prey on weak, nasty, ugly) about them.

Therefore, when I first saw the Kevin Carter's photo, my first initial feelings were a mixture of hate and sympathy.

Many may have agreed with me that Kevin Carter's photo portrayed a situation whereby the girl was either in great pain or dying soon, and the vulture was eagerly waiting in anticipation(if you have thought of this, you may already has a schema about vulture) to devour or attack the little girl.

The sense of injustice, sympathy or the thirst to kill that vulture may well from within you. I had that too.. initially.

Looking back, reorganizing my thoughts and feelings, I would like to propose certain views, and this may not go too well with some of the readers.

First - Vultures are one of the misunderstood creature in the animal kingdom. They have this gift of spotting motionless creatures on the ground. They are able to differentiate between a sleeping animal and a motionless animal. When a motionless animal is spotted, they will circle above it, and land to further inspect and verify. In fact, some of the predators rely on this circling signal to find their food. If the animal is not injured or dying, they would take flight.

Second - This means that the vulture in Kevin Carter's photo (denoted as vulture KC) was merely inspecting the girl. Attacking/eating the girl is a possibility, but so is the reverse of this, depending on the situation.

Third - It may also means that vulture KC was inspecting some other creature nearby, but it wasn't caught(deliberately or not) by the photographer. An alternative report by Joao Silva reported that the girl was left alone briefly as the parents went to the plane to get food and supply aids, and the vulture eventually flew off. Hence the vulture may be interested in the commotion or enticed by the food supply.

Fourth - The picture shows the inequality of the world. And the people who sympathize these poor people are the people who in the first place create a social system and structured in a way that may be disadvantage to most of these people.

Fifth - Dying, may not be a bad option for the girl. I'm very sorry. But if I were to put myself in her shoe/situation, I would choose to die than suffer.

I would elaborate more on the 4th and 5th point in my coming entries...

Scavenger Instinct

This photo was introduced to me not long ago. Kevin Carter took this photo and became famous/infamous. A substantial number of people criticized him for photographing instead of helping the Sudanese girl - "The man adjusting his lens to take just the right frame of her suffering might just as well be a predator, another vulture on the scene."

I felt the pain in my heart when I first saw the photo. Perhaps it was the image of a innocent defenseless young child of the same species that was going to be torn apart by the scavenging creature.

I've watched countless of animals documentary. There was one video that I will always remember - and it is the first and only documentary that brought tears to my eyes.

In Brief: It was about the life of two male cheetahs in Africa that grew up together, hunting and looking out for each other. One fine day, one of the brother(Cheetah A) went out early to hunt for food for the both of them, in his course, he ventured too far away and got lost. When his brother (Cheetah B) woke up and realized that his brother (A) was missing, he went out to look for him. Every few metres, he would let out a high pitch sound (or chirping) to try to alert or call out for his brother. He combed many areas, for a few hours, under the hot desert climate. Eventually, all his energy was expended and he(B) took a rest near a tree.


During his rest, he continued to chirp out for his brother. As cliche as it sounds, his brother(A) happened to be nearby and when he heard the chirp, he chirped back and started to walk toward B. But Cheetah (B) chirping also caught the attention of a nearby lion and Cheetah B was attacked from behind by that lion. It turned out that the tree he was resting belonged to the lion and because of his tiredness, he failed to smell the lion's scent. In such a situation, typically, a cheetah can outrun and escape from the lion, but because of his languorous, was attacked and got badly injured.

His brother sensed something amiss, and started to sprint towards his brother's direction. Cheetah B managed to limp away and the lion didn't make further advancement(due to the fact that he wasn't hungry), but after limping a short distance, he collapsed as his hind area was badly injured. He(B) continued to chirp out so as to enable his brother to locate him. When Cheetah A reached him and saw that his brother was badly injured, his expression was painfully sad and confused at the same time. His brother(B-injured), was more of happy to see him, yet at the same time, you can see that he is in great pain.

They rubbed nose for a moment before they licked each other on the cheeks. This was the gesture of farewell. A flock of vultures was flying in circle over his brother. His death was imminent and the brothers knew that. Cheetah A reluctantly walked a few steps away from his brother, glancing back frequently. His injured brother kept looking at his brother, knowing that he will not have the chance to do that again. A few vultures landed near Cheetah B. Cheetah A stopped in his track(about 30metre away from his brother), and laid in such a way that he was looking perpendicularly away from his location. He just wanted to be close to his brother, yet at the same time, he could not bear to watch his painful (and cruel) death. The documentary ended when Cheetah B laid down his head..for the last time.

It was an extremely painful and sad video. The show lasted for an hour and was telecast many years ago. Yet I still remembered the story. I also remembered how much I hate vultures since that day. (And, yes, I knew it wasn't the vulture's fault.)

To be continued...

Are you really happy?

A short post in the midst of my busy schedule.

I was reading this article and come across this term called Duchenne smile, where it purports that you cannot fake a "real" smile. What it basically means is that if you are really happy, your smile will involve and activate the upper portion of the facial muscles (Orbicularis oculi muscle - for the science fanatics) , which is absence in fake pretentious smile.

With this, you may be tempted to analyse people's smile. But then, some people may also know this theory and can fake a real smile. and you can never know the true mix of the people who know or do not know this. So it leaves you wondering, perhaps even more puzzled now, whether the person is really happy or not.

That.. is the danger of knowledge/information. =)

Appreciation to the Unappreciated

A few days ago, I was studying(cum sleeping, reading magazine) in a public library. During one of the short break, when I was about to walk into the gents, out of the corner of my eyes, I saw an old lady sitting at the corner near the toilet, waiting for her next cleaning schedule to kick in. She was hedged by 3 big trash bags and 1 mop. She was, quite obviously(at least in my society context), a cleaner. A sense of sympathy filled me, which was followed by a sense of gratitude.

Let me express my thanks to the following people.

1) The toilet cleaners - without them, I may not even want to take a leak in a public area

2) The people who cleared, cleaned the table in many food outlets - without them, I can eat in no peace.

3) The construction workers - Rain, or shine, day and night, you work just to create buildings for us to live, shop or work.

And many of those people cited in pointer 1 and 2 are old folk that are in my "grandmother/grandfather" category.

I truly appreciated you. Whenever I say "thank you", it is from the bottom of my heart.

Sincerely,
Shengjie

P/S: I know that many of the above mentioned will never get a chance to see this...

The First Cause

Come across an article written and spoken by a famous/infamous philosopher. He was "expressing" himself in front of a crowd on why he believed there is no God/Creator. It was an interesting and stimulating(both are subjective) read - well as least for me.

Before I continue, I would like to make this clear again(even though I have said it many times) - My views do not mean they have to be yours, and by no mean, I represent any organization. Acknowledge does not mean agreeing to it. This is essential as I'm going into a extremely sensitive realm.

[I found this sentence: 'My father taught me that the question "Who made me?" cannot be answered since it immediately suggests the further question, "Who made God?" ' That very simple sentence showed me, as I think, the fallacy in the argument of the First Cause.]

It is true that 'Who made God' is by no mean is a facile question to tackle. In fact, I would rate this question as "mission impossible"(at least during the time on Earth). But that does not mean that this make it one of the final verdict that there is no Creator.

God may be created by another subject and may be govern by another set of rules and regulations(or it may not be such). And the subject may in turn be created by another subject and so on. But this not prove the non-existence of a Creator(of the Earth).

The terms "Creator" and "God" in my opinion represent our belief and they may(can) be a source of conflict(or unity) when used albeit too loosely(or narrowly).

Let take an example, "Our God is the Creator of the Universe". "Our God" is very debatable(and may even ignite/incur/bring-about extreme hostility), otherwise there will be a convergence view. Note: this convergence level is 2nd level from the top(First-> God vs No God. Second-> Which God?).

"Creator of the Universe", at least for me, represent the fundamental crack at the top level. Quite a number of people(very vague and non-statistical term) do not believe in natural design/creator. One interesting thing I would like to point out is that believing in a Creator of the Universe does not necessary mean that the Creator/God is not created by another superlative subject -- because the "universe" is very much define by our definition/imagination/yard-stick and "things" that are outside this realm of thought(or universe) may very well exist and are beyond our comprehension.

Yes, "they" may exist, but well, you may not agree. :)