Term 3 Week 6 (Blogging assignment)

Can mercy and justice co-exist?
Firstly, I would like to define what these two terms mean. Justice refers to following the law by the book, punishing one for his acts which are considered wrong by the law. Mercy means to  taking into consideration the circumstances of a situation that a person was in when he commits a mistake, giving him a lesser punishment, ultimately forgiving him. Some people find that both cannot co-exist as by showing mercy, justice would not be served as the convicted would be escaping with a lesser lighter sentence as compared to what is demanded of him. However, I believe that both of these two factors are able to co-exist peacefully.

Justice is a subjective term as everyone has different views to how justice should be served. Should we have an eye-for-eye system where each person should be punished according to how each crime was committed? Or should justice refer to punishment based on the circumstances that the crime was committed and its severity? It can be seen that justice has many different sides to it.

For me, I feel that mercy can co-exist with justice based on several factors: Circumstances of the crime and the severity of the crime. If the convicted was caught for committing henious crimes such as mass murder and arson, obviously mercy should not be shown to such criminals and justice should be served as charged. However, in circumstances where the crime is less serious than mercy can be taken into consideration if the person who committed the crime shows remorse for his/her mistakes and is willing to repent. When someone is willing to repent, we would be more willing to forgive and show mercy towards the accused. Also, we should take into account the mental state of the person as he committed the crime, is he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol, causing him to be unable to make proper decisions, than mercy can also be taken into consideration.

Hence, at the end of the day, I feel that justice and mercy can co-exist based on the different circumstances of the different crimes that were committed.

Term 3 Week 5 (Blogging Assignment)

In the play The Merchant of Venice, Shylock is potrayed as the main antagonist of the story. From the text iteslf, it is difficult to define what kind a character Shylock is, on one hand he is seen as a victim as racial discrimination and on the other he is seen as a vengeful person who is completely heartless. As such, I can only assume that Shakespeare's intention was to make the audience watching his play show more emphathy towards Jews but still stay true to the general sentiments towards the Jews then which were generally negative.

In one sense, he is potrayed as a victim of racial discrimination which can easily be supported by the racial remarks made by the characters such as Antonio and Bassanio:"The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
An evil soul producing holy witness
Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,
A goodly apple rotten at the heart:
O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!"
These were quotes based in the scene where Bassanio attempts to borrow money from Shylock to fund his courtship of Portia. We can see that despite them requesting for a favour from Shylock, they nonetheless still criticize him. From this point of view, Shylock is represented as a victim of racial discrimination and undergoes all these criticism simply because he is a Jew. As such he should deserve our emphathy.

However, this sense of emphathy soon evaporates as he later manipulates Antonio into signing a bond that would allow Shylock to cut off one pound of flesh from Antonio if he fails to return the money on time which Antonio ultimately fails to do so in the end. Also, towards the end, Shylock turns from a man with feelings suffering from all of these injustice to an unfeeling man who remains hell-bent on taking revenge. Our emphathy towards him changes to a sense of anger when he cries for justice and refuses to show mercy to Antonio. As quoted:" My deeds upon my head!
I crave the law,
The penalty and forfeit of my bond."
As shown from this quote his seems to have lost his humanity and wants to kill Antonio there and then.

In conclusion, I feel that Shakespeare's intention was to raise awareness of the feelings of Jews during his era but at the same time not make it too obvious to keep in line with the norm of his time

Merchant Of Venice

I feel that Shakespeare was indeed biased against the Jews in terms of his portrayal of the main characters in the play The Merchant of Venice. In the play Shylock was described as a cruel and heartless person right from the very first time that he appears. Shakespeare also subjects Shylock to much racial discrimination from other characters such as Antonio and Bassanio, often critising him for the actions that he takes. Furthermore, despite him suffering from much indignance, Shakespeare also wrote that his daughter had left him too as a result of his cruelty and heartlessness. Instead of taking pity on Shylock, Shakspeare had to rub in it further by making his daughter leave him. Also, in the end during the trial, Shylock was eventually nearly robbed of his entire fortune in a stunning twist of events. In my opinion, I feel that all of these actions point to me that Shakespeare was biased against Jews and that this play was Anti-Semitism.

Term 3 Week 4(Blogging Assignment)

In this article, Jim Roger's main aruguement is that in order for children to survive in an increasingly more competitive world of the 21st century, students have to be able to immerse themselves in different cultures and languages. Countries would continue to grow "closer" and "closer" together with the advancements in technology and it would be almost impossible to isolate oneself from the different countries that we would meet as we join the workforce in the future. He further mentions that if America were to continue to feel superior of its superpower title, they would eventually lose out in the future to the rising economies. Hence, immersion in the different cultures and languages would be vital to one's survival in the future.

I feel that Jim Roger's arguement in which he decides to send his children in order to prepare for the future where Asia would be the leading super power in the world is a very viable one. He argues that he sent his children to Singapore to study in order to enable them to be bilingual as to prepare for the future. I agree with Jim Roger's arguement. Currently, China is undergoing rapid industrialising and is the biggest producer in the world, manufacturing most of the things that the world uses. If we were to consider the world to be a car, China would be like the engine as it drives the world onward as it produces almost every single thing that the world needs. Furthermore, there are also other developing economies such as India could turn out to be the next China in 50 years time. On the other hand, the West consisting of european countries and the United States are facing a mountain of debts and are struggling to pay it off. The United States are currently facing debts in the sum of trillions and several European countries such as Greece are bankrupt. If one looks at this situation from this point of view, it would be obvious that the West and losing the advantage that they used to hold and the East are catching up at an alarming rate.

It would be important to put students in a global world since young as by doing so, students would not feel out of place if they were to leave school and enter the workforce. This would allow for students to transit from schooling to the workforce better and much easier Hence, Jim Roger's arguement can be easily justified.

Term 3 Week 3 (Blogging Assignment)

I feel that Janalle Lim's view on Singapore's education system is surprsingly in-depth and accurate. Of the ideas that she had listed, I must say that I agree with most of them. Schools do not encourage students to speak up and ask the question "Why?" which is the fundamental question to understanding. Many times in my primary school, teachers are often unable to reply our questions or just simply cannot be bothered to reply them. Often enough saying that since the textbook says so it has to be correct. During science lesson, understanding would naturally be the most important comcept, however, our education system has made it such that memorising science facts is more important as it is the factor that makes us do well in our exams. These are some of the examples of Singapore's flawed education system. Also, I feel that our Moral and Civic lessons do not really achieve its aim to inculcate good values in students. During Primary School, teachers often use this lesson in order to make up for any lost subjects and skip it. Furthermore, the true aim of this lesson is not met as I feel that students are not taught why we are supposed to so good deeds but rather are told to do so as the society expects us to do so. As such the inqusitive nature of students is quashed as their questions are hardly answered and they no longer bother to question for it will not be answered.

In my opinion, I feel that there can never be a "perfect" education system. Every single person is born differently and everyone has special talents and weaknesses. In my opinion, I feel that the best form of education would be to segregate students into different streams such that teachers are able to teach students based on their strengths and weaknesses. By seperating students into different streams, teachers would be able to teach the students accodingly and explain to them different concepts better. Hence, I feel that while there are no such thing as the perfect education system, the best way to teach a child would be to teach him based on his merits and bad points.

Term 3 Week 2 (Blogging Assignment)

Is there a difference between treating water as a human right and as a commodity?

 

Water, also known as the blue fuel, is essential to every living organism in the world. Every living thing requires water in order to live, without any water no organism would be able to live. In increasing years, global warming is starting to take its toll on Earth, drinking water is becoming more and more scarce and with the gradual increase in the world's population, the demand is also increasing. A human right refers to a right that every single person is entitled regardless of their social status; whether poor or rich, young or old. On the other hand, a commodity refers to an item of value that can be sold. If water is an item that every single person needs, water should never be treated as a commodity as poor people would not have enough money to afford water and they would die of dehydration.

 

 In your opinion, should water be treated as a human right or as a commodity?

 

In my opinion water should be treated a human right and not a commodity as water is a particular resource that everyone requires. If water were to be a commodity any money-minded person would control the prices of water and raise the prices to a premium where many people would not be able to afford it. However, since it is a necessity people would be forced to pay for it and many people lives' would be poverty-stricken from then on. Hence, water is required by every single person and it should not be manipulated by businessmen.

Term 3 Week 1 (Blogging Assignment)

In your opinion, should the giving of weekly days off be legislated in Singapore?

Maids come to Singapore in search for employment as they are unable to look for jobs in their hometown. Out of desperation, they have no choice but to come to Singapore in order to look for a job so that they are able to support their family back in their hometown. In order to earn money to be sent back home, maids have to work long hours taking care of their employers home. Taking care of a range of housework ranging from cooking, cleaning and even taking care of the elderly or children. However, these maids left their hometown in order to come here and they have no relatives or friends here, many of them would grow sick and tired of their life in Singapore. I feel that giving weekly days off for maids is a feasible idea but it should be based on each maid's productivity and workrate. If a maid works hard and takes her work seriously she should be more than entitled to taking a day off to relax and make friends. However, this should not be legislated as maids may try to take advantage of this by putting in less effort when doing the household chores but still entitled to the day off. In that light, I feel that employers should have a hand in deciding if a maid should be entitled to a day off. The weekly day offs should be based on a weekly report, if in a particular week the maid did not  put in hard work, the employer should be given the rights to revoke the privilege for that week. This would also serve as an incentive for the maid to work hard in order to get a day off to rest