Thursday, January 24, 2008
I think it is a pretty common question that people ask themselves. 'What will people say about me at my wake when I die?' Seriously, I always wonder why people even bother with such a question. The simple and plain truth is that in general, during a wake, nobody in his or her right state of mind is going to say, 'This guy lying in the coffin.. You know, he was a sucker before he died.' I mean given the societal norms of our time and place, talking bad about somebody at his/her wake seems to be a pretty impolite thing to do.
However, let's say that there is just one such person in the world who happens to dislike you so much that he chooses to go to your wake, shouting about how much of a loser you were or how much you hurt him before you died. Just what has he achieved by doing so? Nothing. You are already dead. There is pretty much nothing he can do to resolve his unhappiness. Maybe by letting it out, he feels better by a little. Then there is pretty much nothing you can do about it since you are already lying in your coffin. Probably with layers of make-up to cover up your decaying skin.
Of course, in such a case, nothing can be done in the future if something like that is to happen. As always, the present is the key. The question here is simply, 'What can you do so that you are certain that such a thing will not happen in future?' The problem is that you can never be certain about it. In everything that you do, there is bound to be some form of benefits to some people and damage to others. We may try everyday to be the nice men and women to everybody but all it takes is just one unlucky day for it to not work out and cause others to dislike you. Ultimately, the most important question is, 'Just how much of yourself are you in the course of your everyday interaction that you could avoid antagonizing others?' If the answer is very little. Then does the benefit of people not talking bad about you during your wake outweigh the trouble of being somebody you are not?
Now, if we stop to think about it, everybody has his or her own right. Our rights come in different forms like right to life, right to be ourselves etc. Suppose that we get on everyday just exercising our rights of being ourselves, what will happen is that some days we may infringe on the rights of others. Thus causing them unhappiness. It is here that I feel that we should not be that bothered with the rights of others in some sense. It is also here that the others whose rights are infringe upon then has the right to do something about it. Be it to scold you or to avoid conflict or more. If the other person does not exercise his/her own right at this point but chooses to hold back and be quiet about it, then that's his/her problem. If he/she chooses to hold it back until your wake and he/she explodes with all his/her unhappiness about you, then I guess it is a form of sympathy for that person as he/she did not have the courage to exercise his/her rights until you are dead?
Haha.. Am I making any sense here? Sounds like an asshole's way of doing things.
The Origin. 1/24/2008 03:45:00 pm
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
I did it. I am finally back into blogging I think or at least currently at 1200 hrs and Jie Hui's msn dying on both of us, I am back into blogging. It never fails to amaze me how the simple blogging template on blogger can make me think about so much stuff that I otherwise can't come up with on the MS word processor. Take for example, a simple journal entry that my module requires me to write for 6 days. I am currently on day 2. I was having difficulties coming up with what to write for day 1 until I started blogging a bit about it. here is a small excerpt of it, only half done and not vetted yet.
"
Day 1 began with the exercise on trying to fix a price for a product called Vidget. Basically, we were divided into groups of 4. Within each group, there are two companies and I formed a company with Lynnette while Gabriel Fu formed the other company with Kai Xian. The idea was that we are the two companies that produce and sell Vidget. Being employees of the company, we are given the task of maximizing the profits of our companies and we are only able to set the prices at $15, $25 or $35. $25 was the original price Vidget was sold at by our companies. Both Lynnette and myself agreed to set the price to be at $35 because we wanted to send a signal to the other company that we should both set the price to be the highest so as to reap profit and make mutual benefits for both companies. At the same time, we were also hoping that our counterparts would do the same too.However, when we came to know that the initial price set by Gabriel and Kai Xian was $15, Lynnette and I decided to cut prices to $15 so as reduce our losses. This maintained until representatives from the two companies were allowed to meet and discuss on prices. It may be because I have read one of the recommended text before attending the lesson and also did some math on the table given, I assumed that the others knew that although one side may win the other by cutting prices, ultimately even more profit or benefits could be reaped when both companies charge the highest price. As such, during my first conversation with Gabriel, I simply established that a price of $35 by both sides is beneficial to us all. I neglected the other important areas like establishing common goals and interests, and very importantly, trust. This negligence on my side led them to cut the price down to $15 (from $35) when it was announced that profits was doubled. Gabriel later did mention that one of the reasons for them doing so was that they were afraid that Lynnette and I would break our promise and under cut them. This could have been avoided if I had paid more attention to building trust, especially since it was the first time we are seeing each other in real life.This was later resolved when we met a second time. I felt that Kai Xian handled it pretty well in the sense that she agreed to allow us to set a lower price than them so as to allow us to recuperate some losses. In a way, she was giving us some benefits to allow us to keep the doors open for negotiation. Thus the prices then maintained at $35 for both companies until the one round before the last when we both undercut our prices. I feel that this was mainly because we did not trust one another and also to begin with Lynnette and I had lower profit margins. As such, on Gabriel's and Kai Xian's side, we had a stronger motive to back stab them to gain profit. To some extent, I feel that having some kind of value is important to gain some standing in the negotiation process too."
In any case, one of the more interesting things I learn on day 1 was something about peoples' responses to issues depending on the importance of the issue and that of the relationship. The choices are collaborate, compromise, accommodate, avoid and compete. To avoid for unimportant issues and unimportant relationships. To collaborate for important issues and important relationships. I feel that it is a relative kind of thing whereby to somebody there may be very little issues that that so important that he or she may choose not to avoid, when in comparison with how important relationships are to him or her.
On a separate note, I was sitting in Jun Hong's car the other day. He just got his license!!! yeah! In any case, I thought that it was some kind of habit. I tended to look behind when every Jun Hong wanted to change lane. It wasn't that I don't trust him. Just that I am used to looking through the mirror to look behind when I change lane.
The Origin. 1/22/2008 12:09:00 am
Friday, January 11, 2008
And so with 1 point into UBZ3001 - Conflict resolution, I have my single USP module for this semester. I am hereby doing 5 modules this semester. Not doing any French modules as I will be going to Alliance Francaise this May or June to study it.
Haha.. I think I have MIA-ed from this blog for a very long time since the examinations. Of course, ignoring all the low quality blog entries. In any case, below is a lame entry on chickens.
I find that the species known as chicken is probably one of the most disadvantaged species around. Firstly, they come in a size neither too big nor too small. They are unable to evade from predators as many smaller species do and they are not big enough to even protect themselves from say, a lion. Next, they have wings but are only able to be airborne for a few seconds. This coupled with their short legs means that they are not exactly the best at escaping from predators. The only form of defense they probably have is the beak, which may scratch but not kill.
On top of being disadvantaged, they are also probably one of the most deprived species around. "Because of its relatively low cost, chicken is one of the most used meats in the world. Nearly all parts of the bird can be used for food, and the meat is cooked in many different ways around the world." Not to mention that eggs are also eaten. Eggs, which should hatch into chicks or if you forgot what it means, it means BABY chickens! Further to this, unlike many other species like the cow or the pig, there is probably no known modern religion that holds any restriction towards the consumption of chickens only. And in some, it is even being viewed as related to bad qualities.
Meanwhile, maybe it is a trick of the eye but I believe that the pigeons around Singapore have gotten fatter over the years and their numbers are growing rapidly. It is time to change the world! Let's stop eating chickens and start on pigeons which shit anywhere they like all over Singapore. Kill the pests! Free the useless! haha... crap...........................
The Origin. 1/11/2008 06:56:00 pm