old posts

- originally notes i posted on facebook -

QUIBBLES WITH SALVATION 

A very very random chain of thoughts came to being this afternoon; a throw back to good old college days -

Do good in this life, or rather what is pronounced to be ‘good’, to save yourself from anguish – often eternal mind you – in the afterlife. In this standard form Salvation, with a big S, is at once used both as a carrot and stick to coax and harangue compliance to a set of traditions and conventions which are purported to be ‘good’. This promise and threat of Salvation is certainly not the only motivation for compliance, but I reckon that for a large number Salvation is in fact the determining factor for such compliance. For this lot, even if these traditions and conventions turn out to be ‘good’ in the absolute (for argument’s sake), the problem is that they would be doing all the right things but for all the wrong reasons. The motivation to do good in this instance is self-interest and fear centered in the (uncertain) afterlife rather than true concern and compassion for others in this (certain) life.

A more compelling alternative, in my opinion, is that we drop all this talk of Salvation and ground our ethics solely in this life. The fundamental ethical question should be framed: how should we live this life with true concern and compassion for all others who are affected by our actions; be they in the present or in the future. Whether an action is ethical depends solely on its impact on the interests of this set of people, and correspondingly true motivation for ethical actions can only stem from concern for these same people.

If we lived life in ways which are consistent with the interests of all and on the motive of true concern and compassion for all, we have lived an ethical life. If one, for whatever reasons – cosmic or consequential – is devoid of such true concern and compassion, then he/she would not have lived an ethical life even if he/she acted in superficial conformance (whatever the underlying motivations).

The ethical life should be a good in itself and that’s that. It will be a huge bonus, but an independently standing bonus nonetheless, if such an eternal afterlife does indeed exist and that salvation happens to be secured by having lived such an ethical life. If, however, entry into the eternal afterlife is not to be secured on these terms but on terms contrary to the interests of all, does it not strongly suggest that the eternal afterlife is not worth living after all?

- Wednesday, 05 December 2007 at 19:35

-------

A PRE-SCHOOL PROPOSITION 

caught an installment of the documentary 'my brilliant brain' on nat geographic on monday (it airs at 9pm - there's one more episode; do watch if you haven't caught the series yet). it left me even more convinced that the quality and breadth of an individual's early childhood stimuli/experiences (from birth to approx. 3-years of age) crucially impacts the individual's approach to and capacity for learning/social interaction etc. in later years.

I've always been interested in early childhood learning; holding the opinion that there is much that can be done to improve pre-kindergarten and kindergarten education especially in sg. There's still too much rigid goal-oriented teaching (preparing the child for the primary school syllabus) when the focus should be on kindling the childrens' curiosity and providing a rich and varied environment - filled with books, sports, arts and crafts, music, nature etc. - for them to explore and embrace on their own terms.
 
I do believe early childhood learning is something that can make a real difference in lives. So if there's anyone else who's interested in getting involved in a possible project in this field, do get in touch.

p.s. to read about an interesting experiment conducted in this field, check out - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abecedarian_Early_Intervention_Project

- Wednesday, 19 December 2007 at 10:27