LONG ENTRY


During my first semester in school last year, I took a module offered by the Department of Philosophy. The contents are interesting, yes, but it takes up way too much time just to read through them. And not to mention, the reading material is staggering. It comprises of a THICK STACK of A4 paper. SUPER THICK, LAH!!!

Hate though to admit it, but I really and honestly do find the reading material intriguing and fascinating. The different point of views. The convincing arguments. Exploring the grey areas. Standing by of personal convictions. Lashing out of intriguing thoughts. Refuting and finding loopholes in other's arguments.

Just reading stuffs such as Rene Descartes's Meditation, John Sturt Mill's On Liberty, Plato's The Republic, Plato's Euthyphro, Socrates's Meno and etc is simply such an enjoyable pleasure. A simple delight. A sumptuous treat. It sets your mind thinking and fires up your brain cells.

Can virtue be taught?
What defines holiness?
Would you convict a family member of murder?
Nature versus nurture?

And it's really intriguing when philosophers, each with their own view and different beliefs, lash it out professionally and convincingly. The way they establish their own arguments and back it up with strong evidences. It just wows your senses and implodes your brain. Their eloquence simply blows off your mind and their tactfulness, sweeps you off your feet. Really.

Earlier just now, while I was planning for my modules for this coming semester on my personal lappie, I wandered about my computer system a little and chanced upon this file folder in my D: drive which I use to keep my saved school assignments.
I opened the file folder, and out pops a list of module codes. Then I saw. PH1011E Reason and Persuasion. And I recall the pleasant, intriguing, and fascinating reading materials. I opened the Word Document files, and read through what I've written.

And it makes me feel so tempted to retrieve the reading materials from the stacks of paper in my cardboard and immerse myself in delight.

While reading through the files, I suddenly remember this amusing and enjoyable piece of short reading, titled: Love is a Fallacy by Max Shulman.
We (the students) have to "blog" about what we think of it. To make our stand. Whether do we agree with the man, or do we disagree with his way of thinking.

And surprise oh surprise! I re-discovered what I've written a year ago.

Here we have an intellectual young man with a brilliant mind who gives a momentary value to every situation and circumstances. Is this for the better or for the worse, no one can really tell for certain. Sure, he’s obviously an overly-confident young lad who deems and prides himself on being more superior to his peers in terms of logic and astute. But let’s hang on for a moment, isn’t what he is doing, all to his own benefits? Who in their right mind would make choices that are detrimental and destructive to themselves? Doesn't a wise man watch out for his own welfare?

Let's start with this question: Is it considered a bad thing if we view every circumstances in life in a shrewd and calculating manner?

Isn’t there a well-known adage which goes, “the survival of the fittest”, after all? Before we point our finger and criticize the man in question, should we not evaluate ourselves too?

Just like how Mr. Logic had tried to educate Ms. Pretty-airhead on, well, logic, and ended up making an embarrassment of himself, are we, similarly, threading down the same path? Before labeling him “mercenary”, “superficial”, “thick-head” etc, let’s just evaluate ourselves first.


Let’s say I am a drop-dead gorgeous, curvy and shapely babe with a much-coveted Harvard brain, who is very much the ideal bachelorette and the fantasy of every man - dead or alive (Please, kindly don’t burst my bubble; let me dream on). Before me is a bunch of similarly-attractive and equally-eligible promising young men who are all willing to abandon their raccoon coat in exchange for yours truly. Assuming that all the men are of equal standing – financially, intellectually etc, and all of whom I can communicate with as effortlessly, on what other criteria(s) should I pick Mr. Right from this gargantuan pool of potential Mr. Rights? What other quality(s) makes Mr. Right a cut above the rest?

Hasn’t it been said that only the fittest survive?

If I’m a person who esteems intellect, do I not pick a person who is not unlike Mr. Logic?
If I’m a person who values moral, do I not pick someone who is deeply imbedded in the teachings of philosophers such as Lao Tze?
If I’m someone who exalts money, do I not pick a rich young mister who practically rolls around in cash?

Aren’t we doing the same thing which Mr. Logic had done? If so, who are we to criticize him for wanting a beautiful, smart, and gracious wife – a wife who is able to complement him perfectly and aid him in his career?

Everyone has some form of expectations in one way or another. Educators expect their students to pay attention in class and pass the examinations. Parents expect children to be respectful. A husband expects a wife to cook (WIFE = wash, iron, food, entertainment?). A teacher is expected to teach. A chief is expected to cook. A cleaner is expected to clean. Boyfriends expect their girlfriends to be faithful and vice versa. Not forgetting, some educators expect us to contribute 3 blog entries and write 2 paper assignments for Reason and Persuasion module.

Is it bad to have expectations? Is it wrong to expect something from someone?

It can be argued that “love is blind”. Putting it in another way, I would say that love isn’t blind. It’s just that the person in question has sloppy expectations.


It can also be argued that “love covers a multitude of sin”. Based on this fact, Mr. Logic should love Ms. Pretty-but-dumb for who she is, how she is, and what she is; and not attempt to change her in any way.

In retrospect, just because love covers a multitude of sin, does it necessarily mean that we have to condone the negative things? Isn’t it also been said that “he who spares the rod, spoils the child”, and “open rebuke is better than love carefully concealed”?

Who are we to criticize if Mr. Logic wants to rejuvenate the hardly-alive brain cells of Ms. Pretty-but-dumb? If your child steals, do you encourage him to? If your spouse cheats on you, do you cheer him/her on? If your significant other smokes, do you puff together with him? If your son flunks his exams, do you pat him on his back and exclaim “Well done, my son! I’m so proud of you!”?

Heaven forbids!


In one way or another, aren’t we doing what Mr. Logic himself is doing here? We’re all constantly attempting to change people, and to mould them into better persons.


To conclude, if you ask me, love is not a fallacy. In fact, love is pretty much logic. =)

Isn't Philosophy a cool subject?

Anyway, I mean what I write. And based on what you've just read in the passage above, you don't have to agree on my point of view. You can frown or tsk or furrow your brows or whatever.
Personally, I think that love is very logical. I'm pragmatic, and am more of a realist.



But heck, I've gotta admit:

• I did not complete all the reading material which was assigned to this module. Not even half of it. Because the amount of reading material was way too staggering, on top of my core Chemistry modules to juggle.
• I did not attend most of the lectures. Because I had Chemistry practicals before the lecture, and Chemistry lectures right after the Reason and Persuasion lecture. AND it is so much of a hassle to travel to and fro from Faculty of Science (FoS) to Faculty of Arts and Social Science (FASS). ESPECIALLY at lunch time, 12pm. It's hazardous and frustrating, trust me.
• And I skipped a couple of tutorials. And on the occasions when I'm present for tutorial, I would lurk about at the back and keep my mouth shut while my aspiring-to-be-a-philosopher tutorial mates debate and trash it out with my tutor. Because I did not attend the lectures. Because I have not read up on the assigned reading material. That's why I shut up.
• And don't ask me how much I scored for assignment Paper 1 and Paper 2 (we have to write 2 papers which are graded, and contribute 3 blog entries - not gradeable - in order to meet the criteria to pass the module). Because I did not collect back my scripts for Paper 1 and Paper 2 from the Philosophy Office.

Horrible, yes, I know.

And in case you're wondering did I pass this module, of course I did.
But I don't know the actual grade I received. Because I've Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory this module. This S/U option is established as a bid to encourage students to try out for modules of a different discipline which they normally would not have dared to, for fear of affecting their academic standing. However, by utilizing this S/U option, whatever grade that we received for this particular module will not be counted towards our C.A.P (otherwise known as G.P.A) score.
And yes, I passed the module. I got a Satisfactory. Which means I got at least a grade C or higher.


My personal promise to myself for this semester?
1) Study the best I can
2) Adhere to my timetable and not skip any Singapore Studies classes that are to be held at FASS
3) READ THE ASSIGNED MATERIALS!!!