Calibre Or Empathy?
-
Deng bai I remember watching an awful movie called "Armageddon". In order to destroy an asteroid and save the world, they trained oil workers to become astronauts, instead of training astronauts how to drill.
Though it doesn't make sense, I suppose the story writers did that to allow the audience (which is 99.99% non-astronauts) to empathise with these working class heroes.
In politics, people skills are very important. Of course, qualifications and technical abilities are also helpful to get more respect. But you can see in the US, actors like Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger do well in politics because they have super people skills.
Do you think in Singapore, the "calibre" of a person (his scholarships, "oxford mushroom"ness, career rank etc...) is more important, or the "empathy" (how he talks, Hokkien, grassroot popularity...)?
Is it easier to train a True Beng into an elite leader, or to train an elite leader to become a True Beng?
I am not saying these are mutually exclusive, I hope to discuss what weightage our people prefer. -
i would say that the elite don't want anything to do with the normal people, therefore it would be easier to teach the normal person to SERVE THE PEOPLE... which is what the elite if already failing to do in the first place..
-
Are you thinking it's easier to train a True Beng to be more elite? But then he have no paper wat. Even if he damn popular, will the people respect him as their leader?Originally posted by the Bear:i would say that the elite don't want anything to do with the normal people, therefore it would be easier to teach the normal person to SERVE THE PEOPLE... which is what the elite if already failing to do in the first place..
Or do we still come to the same - must have sekolah tinggi then pretend to be normal-normal? -
Again over emphasism on qualifications
-
isn't it better to have someone who is grounded in the real world learning the how to deal with things rather than an educated person how doesn't know the real world?
never ever mistake education for intelligence.. -
I think to be a good leader, of course calibre is important. I don't mean to sound elitist, while being emphatatic to the needs of ur fellow men is quintessential to one's exercise of his responsibilities, it has to be complimented by thorough awareness of real world situations and the ability to make sound and rational decisions. I mean, you can get an individual who loves his fellow man as much as he loves himself, but he is not vested with the ability to make essential decisions according to the dictums of the real world, he would just worsen the situation of his fellow men, and through no fault of his, but his lack of knowledge. Of course, knowledge can be inculcated, however, not everyone utilizes knowledge in the same effective measure, even through inculcation. Even the most idealist of individuals in this forum has to concede that indeed it is unfair to assume that a system can give each and everyone an equal opportunity at enquiring knowledge. This is the unfortunate circumstance of situation, I love to blame it upon fatalism, but the caprices of fate lies in fate itself and can't be debated by pure human logic and rationality. Instead, we must succumb to circumstance, and will that society must do it's best to give everyone an equal opportunity to enquire the gift of knowledge. Then again, some have that opportunity and grasp it. They are our scholars we know of - the cream of the crop as they say. Now, measure emphaty, emphaty is not an idealism, it is, in my view, a neccessity. The beauty of democracy lies in it's ability to utilize the frailities of mankind and bring about through it's mechanics - a greater good. Therefore, a functioning democracy will bring about, through the fear of losing power, a neccessity to conform to the needs of it's citizens. Emphaty comes through democracy's mechanics, albeit hypocritically. However, think of it this way, a system functions in itself, and brings to fruitation what one will concieve to be an idealism.
-
Are you going to comment on their relative weights?Originally posted by Quincey:I think to be a good leader, of course calibre is important. I don't mean to sound elitist, while being emphatatic to the needs of ur fellow men is quintessential to one's exercise of his responsibilities, it has to be complimented by thorough awareness of real world situations and the ability to make sound and rational decisions. I mean, you can get an individual who loves his fellow man as much as he loves himself, but he is not vested with the ability to make essential decisions according to the dictums of the real world, he would just worsen the situation of his fellow men, and through no fault of his, but his lack of knowledge. Of course, knowledge can be inculcated, however, not everyone utilizes knowledge in the same effective measure, even through inculcation. Even the most idealist of individuals in this forum has to concede that indeed it is unfair to assume that a system can give each and everyone an equal opportunity at enquiring knowledge. This is the unfortunate circumstance of situation, I love to blame it upon fatalism, but the caprices of fate lies in fate itself and can't be debated by pure human logic and rationality. Instead, we must succumb to circumstance, and will that society must do it's best to give everyone an equal opportunity to enquire the gift of knowledge. Then again, some have that opportunity and grasp it. They are our scholars we know of - the cream of the crop as they say. Now, measure emphaty, emphaty is not an idealism, it is, in my view, a neccessity. The beauty of democracy lies in it's ability to utilize the frailities of mankind and bring about through it's mechanics - a greater good. Therefore, a functioning democracy will bring about, through the fear of losing power, a neccessity to conform to the needs of it's citizens. Emphaty comes through democracy's mechanics, albeit hypocritically. However, think of it this way, a system functions in itself, and brings to fruitation what one will concieve to be an idealism.
I am guessing Singaporeans prefer more qualifications in their leaders than they admit. -
[quote]Originally posted by Cystaire:
Are you going to comment on their relative weights?
I am guessing Singaporeans prefer more qualifications in their leaders than they admit.[/quote
I'm supposing that you mean calibre relative to empathy? I think I have. Personally, I see that to be a gd leader one has to possess ability, but at the same time has to take into consideration the welfare of his fellow Singaporeans. However, altruism in my view, is not man's natural, lets put it this way, tendency. We are, born and breed as individuals, and individuals we will be. One can never look down the list of talent, and choose a pure altruitarian out of them. I simply do not think such a person exists. Rather, our social enviroments bring about acts of altruism through the promise of self beneficiance. Similarly, that's how great leaders are made. -
I noticed that overseas scholars are usually people who have at least a Masters or mostly a PhD, practical work experience, and have at least one paper in peer reviewed articles. They usually have some specialised consultative authority or are being trained further to be specialised in a specific area of study .
In Singapore, scholars are just top jc graduates, and perhaps a few top poly graduates, sent straight to prestigious universities.
Very big difference. -
Well, we will have a lot of elite bloggers next time as your MPs.
Better be prepared.
-
No lah!Originally posted by charlize:Well, we will have a lot of elite bloggers next time as your MPs.
Better be prepared.
Only 80+ seats for MPs, must reserve a seat for PM's son one. So, when it comes mathematical, let the number of MP seat be x, then the number of seats that is avaliable for elite bloggers is:
x-1.
But got a lot of elite blogger mah, then wat happen to those not in the (x-1) one?
Easy, you dunno Singapore got lots of GLC meh? It is always easy for any GLC to come up with another Optus or Shin Corp deal one. -
I won't place too much hope on a getting Beng to lead. Leader must have ability, first and foremost. A populist leader will lead us to nowhere. Although a large number the Singaporeans are not too smart and not too rich, we should not draw from the lower tier of our society. Instead the leader should be a person of proven success and calibre like Sim Wong Hoo or Oei Hong Leong.
These days, it seems like the trend to ask Government for hand-outs or subsidy to help the poor. We should not automatically fall for populist, welfare measures.
The Singaporean leader must be able to deliver the unpopular and brutal truth: If you are poor, you should work harder or smarter to improve your lot, not sit on your bump and wait for things to improve.