Democracy.. again

I can't sleep. So I might as well update, since I don't have the mood to do anything at the moment. And as always, I do not organise thoughts well, so this post will as usual not be well articulated.

This festive season, I ponder upon the meaning of democracy.

You see, in the most ideal sense, democracy is the best policy out there. A collective society, harnessing the wisdom of the society as a whole (note, where the majority of the people have enough sense that the 'noise', i.e. the deviants and the clueless do not hold enough sway) point to the direction it wishes to go. In the past, conquest was probably of the greatest interest (I am no historian btw, this is a speculation).

Today, I sincerely believe we do not understand democracy (neither do I, for that matter).

Point one. (This is a pretty far fetched argument, but I think there is an underlying link somewhere.) We live in the information age. There is simply too much to think about, to pay attention to. You have the current advances in technology, oh that's iPhone 79, Android, Star Wars, epidemic, homosexuals, that new game in store, that hot chick right there, your work, boycotting bread, politics. So how many people do actually pay attention to politics (and policies for that matter). I have written before that politics in Malaysia is all about idolatry. Its about the leaders of both the government and the opposition. Its NOT about the policies they bring, and its NOT about the direction they want to go, which is missing the point completely.

What do I think democracy is? Well, it is easy to say 'a collective sense of direction for the country' or even 'people power to decide what's best for the country'. Put it in simpler terms, I think its all about us as a society trying to solve our problems. Which is why I believe there are different parties in the first place. The religious party might think the prominent problems are that the people are not God fearing enough. The Green thinks more about sustainability etc. (That was a general analogy btw, I don't think its accurate).

And when we look at Malaysia, we see only one problem. Read the comments in RPK's post, read the comments in TMI. In fact just read the comments anywhere on the Internet that mentions vaguely about our government/politics. The generic answer will be 'Whatever the problem is, remove the current government first. They are responsible for yada yada'.

It appears that a point has reached where people simply stop paying attention to anything any longer. They have implanted firmly the anti-establishment message in their head. And they won't listen to anything else.

Point two, directly following point one. How many people actually think of progress? We throw the words around, yet they hold no meaning. And as always, we like to say 'remove the government first. They are corrupt. They impede progress'. So what exactly is this progress that we are always talking about?

Good pay, good looking prime ministers, holy men acting holy, sustainability, everyone hand in hand dancing and singing and happy? That so does not sound like reality to me.

What happened to working more towards mutual understanding and accepting each other? Do we have that?  Unfortunately I think no. At this stage, in my honest opinion progress for our country is to forge greater ties with ourselves. Despite all the problems revolving around economy, diseases, food etc. that threatens our very life, our greatest hurdle is still social living. In collective living, different view points are guaranteed. How we deal with it reflects the level of maturity of a society, which I believe ties in strongly with 'progress'. Progress to me is not as simple as building skyscrapers and eliminating poverty. It is how we think of each other and how we resolve differences, and how we solve problems together. We might not work well together today, but say in a month we worked together slightly better. Now that's progress to me. Everything else comes naturally after that. I firmly believe so.

So to summarise what I think: We have a distorted view on 'progress' (point two), we do not understand 'governance' (point one).

Note: I know I made a mistake in thoughts somewhere, but I think the points are supported to some extent. I am half asleep now

Old stuff

I recently rediscovered Avril Lavigne. The Canadian who was my high school imaginary sweetheart, with her powerful voice and some lovely songs now entertains me again. I am happy, despite exams breathing down my neck.

And Avril Lavigne >> Taylor Swift. My friends are avid fans of Taylor Swift. I think Lavigne wins hands down. At least I can relate to Avril Lavigne's songs (old songs anyway, like FREAK OUT) more, Taylor Swift is alwayssssss about some sweet love.

There's something I don't quite understand about exams. I don't think exams are useful. I don't think exams are a fair assessment of what I have learned. After all, learning which equation to put to which problem doesn't sound very helpful when you're asked to design a real bad ass reactor, for real.

And yet, I somehow find myself stressing out each and every time there's exams. I can't seem to shake off that grip exam has on me, I must do well in this exam because the grades are important. I know its not, I tell people its not, but my ego is there to tell me I must do better than the others, because there is that satisfaction I can answer exam questions better than them! HA!

No, ask me any time and I'll tell you exams are a waste of time. Somehow formal education has put itself in a bind, I guess. Without any assessment, who is to say whether the whole time spent on educating you has not been a waste of time? And yet the only form of assessment that we have is so unbelievably standardised that it fails its purpose. Ironic.

Chances are, I won't be an engineer a good portion of my life, despite spending 4 years on it (5% of my life, assuming 80 years lifespan). I roughly know which path I want to take, but whether I will do it is unknown to me. I do not like dabbling in the future, except when dealing with issues about safety and risk.

On another topic, I recently blew quite a bit of money buying books to read. This is acceptable money spending, except I hide in a game here and there to tell myself ITS ALRIGHT! ;)

Currently reading 'Life's X factor' by none other than my department head, Professor Neil Broom. I found Dawkins to be horribly boring except Greatest Show on Earth (before I read Prof. Broom. I haven't even completed the book yet). I finished Selfish Gene somehow, and Extended Phenotype helped me sleep many nights away. So reading Prof. Broom is a refreshing activity, since the book is dedicated to point out what he thinks is wrong with all these biologists out there who denounce the existence of God, behind the shield of 'natural selection'.

This topic interests me greatly. How on earth did evolution, natural selection etc. manage to drag the existence of God into question? I suppose largely its because mainstream religions like to portray a God that breathes down our neck and checking whether we've been naughty or not. And now we find that we are evolved(ing) creatures, and that our existence is not directly attributable to the Mighty One. And we argue.

Honestly? The fact that existence exists sounds to me as though there already is a manner of creation at hand. You cannot have something without creation, or its just a logical difficulty. In fact, I believe in a God, but not a mainstream God. I do not side with anthropocentric views, but there is certainly a cool guy out there who made things possible.

Back to revision. Update again when I feel bored enough. There's so much thoughts that I haven't been able to jot down, its such a waste, really.

Because in the future (oops) I will look back and maybe laugh at myself a bit (Yes I do it now too. I think I was an idiot. Probably still am) when I read back about myself. Its a great way to reassess how one has changed, particularly the self.

Purpose

I am a firm believer in having a purpose. In anything significant that we do, of course there are lee-ways for such a statement. After all, we sometimes like to space out and stay in the other zone.

Back to my point. I am a firm believer in having a purpose. Sometimes, I feel as though our generation are a disillusioned bunch. We don't question anything, because everything has been laid out nicely for us.

The education system is in solid grounds now, thus nobody ever challenges it. Because challenging it requires us to put forth a better alternative. No one as of yet has seem to come forward with a better idea.

And because of that, students 'follow the path', simply because it is safe. And our future generations will follow this style as well, improving the path as they go. There are no major problems with that, my problem is that people do not think of why they do things anymore.

How many of you are studying because you want to? Most of us feel compelled to pursue education because it will put us in an advantage in searching for a better paying job, which will mean more money and a more comfortable life. How many of us actually believes in pursuing academic excellence because of what it offers in essence, i.e. knowledge?

To begin with, question the reasons behind every significant action of yours. People I know, in fact almost everybody I know have a generic purpose in things they do. I join this activity because it will look good in my CV. I do this because I want to meet more people (which is actually a good thing I suppose). And most of all, I work because I must feed myself. The last point is my point of contention, I don't believe we work solely for the purpose of feeding ourselves. Society cannot persist on a community of people wanting to feed themselves. It will degenerate eventually with greed, corruption and anarchy. It is symbolic of civilization that we know prudence; know what is enough and know the purpose in pursuing further.

I must admit I was mainstream once. I was living a completely comfortable life, everything accounted for from birth. Food, shelter you name it. Just one thing I was not provided in that totally dependent life. Purpose.

Not that I have found a purpose though, its not solid as of yet. But I just wish to highlight the fact that, we live our lives not for an awesome CV, not for employment and certainly more than genetic requirements. Because we have intelligence, we must transcend the genetic purpose.

PS: No longer do we have those questions about dreams as we did during childhood. What do you want to be when you grow up?

........Doctor. To save lives. Ok maybe even the children are generic now as well

Eating alone is lonely

Anyone ever felt eating alone is just about the saddest thing to do? Everytime I find myself with food and no friends around, some form of solitude creeps up in me. The food is not enjoyable, because somehow company during eating is an integral part of the daily ritual. For that reason, I really dislike eating alone. Its too lonely.

I'm struggling to finish Bertie, too many things to do. My university decision-makers are complete assholes, because they took an automated gun out and riddled my timetable with holes. Some holes look as though they have been done in with a bazooka. I mean, 3 hour gaps between lectures? TWO of them in one day? It turned a 3 1-hour-lecture day into a 9 hour day. I shouldn't be whining like this, but I must scream out somewhere that there is an imbecile at large. Oh why is that? Because the 1-hour gaps are unproductive, 2-hour gaps are slightly less unproductive, and 3-hour gaps are lesser unproductive. And they are all unproductive. Complete waste of time.

Why is that so? First, it takes 15 minutes to find a spot to settle down. Then it takes up to half an hour to get the rhythm of productivity, by which time you pack up and go to the next lecture. Or else you can continue the productivity for an extra hour, and find that you cannot finish your assignment. And the next time you sit down, you take an extra 15 minutes to recall what you have done and get back on track. That's one hour to get the rhythm going.

No, I don't think I'm slow. Its to do with the mood. I'm not one to switch modes immediately. Heck, I take at least half an hour to fall asleep at nights.

Ooh, I have not updated for ages and suddenly I come back here whining. I am ashamed of myself.

Oh well, I should finish Bertie soon, because I have purchased Dawkin's The external phenotype. Now, don't start the fire about Dawkins being a complete bigot about religion. He's a downright atheist, and completely pro-evolution theory. Nothing wrong with evolution theory, I think. But I do not think that evolution theory is sufficient to justify the lack of existence of a divine being. Nor do I think it justifies the existence of a divine being. Divinity is a tricky problem, because the only tool we have is faith and logics. Logics is incapable of inferring the divine, simply because it is fundamentally flawed, riddled with epistemic problems. Faith is even trickier, simply because it does not offer argument and it is usually hard to differentiate between the blind, the zealots, the liars and the sages.

Ahhhhhhhhhh

Bertie's book is good. Its light enough for heavy stuff, and is comprehensible for people in general (I guess. I can't take common sense for granted though).

Haven't been updating, simply because I can't find the mood to do anything. Instead, I am seeing a lot of conflict between people recently.

So, you see, its understandable when someone criticizes you, or wants to cast you away, obviously there is some problem. AND its perfectly understandable when you get on the defensive, because everyone feels they either did nothing wrong or always deserve a second chance.

I should like to think in history no one has ever been to war thinking they are on the wrong side.

See, we tiny creatures have so much social problems simply because we can't communicate properly.

I want to hold a pen and write proper stuff. But I can't seem to do it, because I can't seem to want to make myself do it. I wonder.... I am so lazy =/

About Japan, its heart rending. It affected me in the sense that my anime shows are being disrupted, but I'm not complaining. They have it tougher there. But somehow, on the Internet, you get to see people who says stuff like

"Haha Japan, remember Pearl Harbor? Its Karma!!!" or similar.

And to think, we are in an enlightened age?

Well yes, put it bluntly, some of us are in an enlightened age (I wonder where do I fit). Some. Most of us are in the other category. Emotion driven, and temperamental (temper and mental).

Back to Thomas Friedman's 'Lexus and Olive Tree'.

In

about 2 weeks I'll be off to Auckland again. This year I have planned a few (really a few) stuff to do that will keep me occupied and still have time for studies and wasting (I hope).

Top and foremost is to continue my philosophy studies. If there is one thing I seriously realized from my trip overseas, it is that I cannot only focus on engineering studies alone. That would mean I am following along the path that has been well laid out (more on this). Hence, I took up philosophy as an interest, and to guide my life along, myself.

Second is a tentative plan to volunteer. I considered SPCA and Greenpeace, and some slight internal debate raged until I asked Aimee Lee and her reply was 'if the planet is not here the dogs won't be either'. Makes sense. But I proceeded to lecture her about 'saving the world'. Because its fun.

These few days will be silent contemplation while I finish off a 1000-piece jigsaw puzzle. Talk about multitasking. I actually think a lot while I'm doing something that requires a small degree of thought and heaps of concentration. Weird eh? I'm like 'Ethics of humans should be like.. oh this piece goes here... now where was I? Oh space travel is currently...'

But enough about me. It is dangerous to share too much info about yourself on the net. Many people have been receiving death threats for ill treating a dog they didn't have because some guy had a tattoo and they didn't. Talk about common sense.

Now, the police said they don't know who tortured poor Sushi. Oh of course, the owner should not ill treat his pet, which he bought to love. I wonder why do people not become outraged at the cruel way we're slaughtering chickens or cows. Oh, they're not animals, they're food. My bad. Talk about common sense.

But really, a national outrage over dog abuse? Death threats? My goodness, there's even much hoo-haa over some child custody case that is so high profile. And of course, there is the ever entertaining side such as banning Valentine's day, fear of evangelism and conversion, sin polices etc. Really, talk about common sense.

And of  course, racism.
(Racism is only there because we are conscious about it. There is some weird psychological thing going on here, why do we discriminate when we are recognizably the same species? It is one thing I think I will find notes about. Philosophy dabbles with psychology much, you see.)

And the moral police in Malaysia is always the interesting group. Imposing one's will upon others tends to be a messy business, unless you are a mighty king who has the adoration and worships of your people. Otherwise, attempting to tell people what to do (or what not to do), especially people who thinks they are (or in fact, are in some sense) free people, will be difficult. Now, its not hard to see where they are coming from. Generally, religion requires us to control our desires and be one who is nice and fair. No problem there. Problem comes when different people try to pick apart word by word what the religious scriptures tell. A picture tells a thousand words, a thousand people looking at the same picture will be telling what... a million different words? Talk about common sense.

In the words of a friend, "I feel insulted they feel my faith in my religion is so easily swayed by something such as a party celebrating a special day of another religion".

And the more I read of philosophy, truly the more ignorant I feel. Yet at the same time it is fascinating.

And at the same time, I am no nearer to figuring out why are we still running education in the first place. Besides churning out workers. To help the country progress to... I don't know where.

I still feel strongly that the first step is to pick up the trash in your own home and make life easier before we consider ambitious goals. Easy to say, doesn't it? But nooo, we humans are complicated beings. We MUST complicate stuff because 'its not so easy'. Try calling your telco customer service and see what I mean.

(I just suddenly remembered the 100 storey project to flaunt our country's wealth. Talk about common sense).

So, this blog post ended up being another rant on multiple topics in one go. Talk about common sense.

But at least I realized throughout writing this post, that common sense doesn't seem so common after all.

There is

an inexplicably frustrating feeling when you are not being heard.

I need to take a break from overthinking things. Its tiring, keeping the mind in overdrive constantly.

I am

....approaching 200 blog posts.

Not too terribly many, considering my postings are so irregular.

Today, I would like to recommend to any dear readers, do read books written by Farish A.Noor. He writes very good books, books about his travels are GREAT. Because I love how he injects his feelings, emotions and revelations as he travels around searching for himself, searching for enlightenment and above all else, searching for meanings in life.

I practically devoured his books, and during work time at that.

And a recurring theme he writes? Loss of self, seeing too much and he highlights that an all too always-repeating source of conflict is the lack of understanding and communication. Every conflict ridden place he trods on, people lament that they are not being understood or appreciated.

The elite, the learned, the academics who do not truly step foot in and talk to them always misunderstand. Sometimes, what people want above all else is recognition, respect and not development in the capitalist sense.

In a sense, I am happ that such people are out there. People who do not seek comfort in air conditioned malls, convenience and comfort in life. All they want is an identity, to live out their life as they please and not subject to the fashions and trends of the rich and the urban people. Materials are all they are, materials. They mean nothing if you understand what you are, an animal. Not that I am an extreme who thinks he can live without contact with money or materials (there are people like that. I forgot what the term is to describe them)

I would very much love to talk to the man. Perhaps I should consider travelling, real travelling. Not one where the itinerary has been planned beforehand, where tourist spots are visited. No, travel and talk to people. Understand people.

Our dream of a united humanity will never come true until the day we understand one simple thing; variation. Tolerance does not even come into the picture. And acceptance not really. Just understanding.

Just after

I wrote I believe racism cannot be solved by identifying it, I read Farish A.Noor's book that wrote 'racism' does not exist, because as far as the strictest technical definitions goes; there is only one race. The human race. When I read that, I realized how mistaken I was, and couldn't even begin to think of why I didn't realize that word play in the first place.

And we use the words 'racists/racism/racial' so freely. What are we? Monkeys and Chimps?

The issue here, is dealing with ethnic discrimination, if you like. Or ethnic whatever. And well, Farish made the arguments so well that I am very inclined to agree with them.

Well, the idea of 'racism' in Malaysia pretty much came from our so beloved colonists, the British Empire of then. The ruling idea of then was the well established 'pecah dan perintah', split em and rule em all. And from there, well, I think you get the idea.

And reading his book, it strikes me harder than a homerun baseball landing right on your nose (I don't know how it feels though). I DO NOT REALLY KNOW MY COUNTRY'S HISTORY!! How sad.

And indeed, apart from the high school textbook (which is horrendous, in my opinion. Too much emphasis on memorizing, too little on us actually understanding and appreciating), there really isn't much published information about our country available in our bookstores.

A dear friend tried to search for historical books on Malaysia once. And she couldn't find it. Not in any bookstore.

I browsed through MPH's online catalogue. And they, well categorized books by Malaysians and about Malaysia under the category 'Malaysia'. At least three out of four are about our shitty politics. Experts offering opinions. Books by Mahathir. Books about Anwar. Books about corruption, scandals, elections. And if its not about politics, its either comics or lifestyle (I remember I quite enjoyed Lydia Teh's books).

So the point is, and I bet most of us Malaysians do not realize, or even care, that we are losing our roots. We do not safeguard our past, we are concerned about the present and the future of our country's politics (and incidentally, the present is a mess and the future? Nobody knows where we're even going)

At times like this, I feel for my country. My fellow people, who thinks patriotism means to love your country and that's it.

'Tak kenal maka tak cinta', I should like to throw this quote back at the people who gave it to me.

Finished

At Home by Bill Bryson. Very enjoyable read, I must say. The only complaint being the rising price of books (RM120? Daylight robbery. Fuck Inflation)

And now I am plowing through Farish A. Noor's What your history teacher doesn't tell you. I realized, all the philosophy books I have read are a form of history. So yes, I have been deeply immersed in history reading for the past two years. Surprising, even to myself. Even more surprising is I don't know shit about my country's history. I know more about the West. Tells me something, does it tell you something?

Back in High School, history was one of the chew-swallow-regurgitate subjects. It is not one to give much thought for, my past thoughts were that they are past events. Despite the quote 'Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it' printed in the textbook, it is not appealing at all.

Now, slightly more grown up, I still loathe the school's history textbook. For entirely different reasons. I abhor the methods employed in getting us to know our history. I absolutely hate the twisting of history (and I did question why the heck are we honoring pirates in our textbooks, simply because they fought the anjing penjajah?). Now academics are piling up the texts about how wrong the history we learned are, and at a time when History is becoming a must pass subject? So what's a student to do? Learn the wrong stuff and pass simply because the government wants it to be? Talk about senseless education. Talk about meaningless education. Talk about purposeless education.

And through my twenty odd years, repeatedly the government has tried to reach out to me and preach their ideas of racial superiority. The BTN comes to mind, NS not so much, and the school syllabus? Total insult to academics. Teaching what, and not why is one thing I can never ever swallow down. This is why you are getting idiots, mass produced even. And the idea of racial superiority is utter bullshit. Privilege can be given, no problem there, but when it comes to assigning levels of civilization based on races, then definitely it is done by those who feel they are inferior. We are born equal (misfortunes like mutations aside, and external environment like family richness aside), the essence that differentiates each of us are our thoughts.

Which is why I do not like politics. Nobody does, except if it helps them get rich.

Incidentally, despite what I wrote up there, I do not believe racism can be eliminated. For each day I am identified as a Chinese, that's when racism is alive. Make everyone beige, as Russell Peters suggested, then we may be able to talk of racism as something of the past.

Democracy is an excellent idea, provided you get the right people up. And that condition is almost impossible to fulfill, as I am now led to believe. And no, don't even consider about the other government structures. Shifts could be well bloodied. Ideas in the hands of people can get dangerous, and history has shown it many times.

I like night time. It helps me think, because of the silence. And yet I have to sleep, for I have work in the daytime. Sometimes I wish I was an immortal who does not need sustenance, yet am able to partake in food. SOMETIMES. Living forever does have its perks, but I shudder at the consequences.

SWEAT

First decent post of a new year, which I don't see the significance.

First thing to note. I AM NOW A CRAZY FANBOY OF A CERTAIN WOLF.

I can't remember the last time I broke a sweat watching an anime. That was how intense it was to me, despite it all being about trading o_O

Ok, enough about the degenerate activities that I indulge ever so often. On a more productive side, I have finished 'THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH' by a certain evolving Mr. Dawkins. Evolution might not be the greatest show to me, but it certainly is perhaps one of the best books out there about evolution. The way he lays out everything, the way I see it is that the evidences are extremely convincing. So much so there is little room for debate. I have admittedly not given this issue much thought, for evolution and nature are topics of the real. In my head lies questions on meta levels, and those are much more absorbing to me.

So in light of this book, I would indeed profess to admit this theory is, for the most part the best there is in the foreseeable future. Naturally, theories can be improved, even new ones can be introduced. In this case, even if we introduce a new theory, it will probably be an even more refined (not to say its not refined now) theory of evolution, with a lot more details to iron out whatever creases there might be that the Creationists can attack. If, that is. I do not know if it is necessary, but I like to think there are always holes in everything. Me being the sceptic of perfection.

But honestly, in an age of Science can we say for sure that the philosophy of science is spelling God's demise?

My proper answer would always be 'I don't know for sure'. But revelations upon revelations pile up, and the few big questions are being shoved out of the way.

For now, it is still romantic to think of existence as something made with a moral/cosmic order. Considering the fact that existence came from nothing, then in the puddle of existential chaos there came a small pocket of order that gave birth to life and us wondering where everything came from.

No, God did not design you. It will be arrogant to even think of that. The possibility of us being an intermediate to a greater species remains (haha evolution speaking), and even if you do not believe in evolution the possibility of an even greater species existing out there that can outsmart and outfight us remains, no matter how small.

With the way stuff wink in and out of existence, and time being a relative thing, pretty much everything is chaos when we reach the cosmic scale. Whos to say our little mind will be able to understand the turbulent nature of... randomness?

Random fun word : Cosmologists describe the experience of falling into a black hole as 'spaghettification'. You are stretched out like a spaghetti by gravity. It would probably be painless. Why? Cause you'd be dead.

Bryson's new book 'A short history of private life' is an awesome read. Feels to me that, from the time he embarked to undertake the project of 'A short history of nearly everything', Mr. Bryson here has been learning and thinking a lot more. Because his previous books feel differently, them being travel notes. But his humour is evident. I like the way he presents history. They are full of stuff you won't find in your history text book. Like someone famous having sex with a prostitute on the roadside and nobody knew because it was so dark (this was the pre-electric age). Its worth the money, in my opinion.

Judging from my situation with the real, I probably can't start on Mr. Russell's 'History of Western Philosophy'. The book bears quite a bulk, and its paperback. Full of heavy stuff. I expect headaches. Perhaps I should try the mischevious wolf's light novels, just for something to take my mind on a holiday to.

Well, perhaps.

Haven't done this for a long time

........uploading a picture that is.

Lets end the year

with a blog post.

Of course, knowing me, don't expect nice stuff like 'oh this year had been a great year, i resolve to be better next year'. Because I think that's shallow.

Instead, I shall drone about how we, as a human society has failed to understand our purpose. Well, maybe not all of us, but it certainly is apparent in people I come across. And even though my facebook boasts 200 friends (I am an 'average' Malaysian. Imagine that. I thought the average 'friendship' of Malaysians should be like 1000. You people have way too many friends, some that you don't even know anymore), I do come across heaps of people. And we talk.

So yeah, what did I mean by not understanding our purpose?

For starters, many of us don't know why we are doing science. Or that science is fallible in some places. Or what science exactly is.

I might be wrong here, and this is certainly what I believe + my own opinions. They are not in any way.. well.. presented as facts, rather as what I understood from observation and some reading. You get the point I assume.

So what is science? It was an attempt to understand, exploit Nature and at the same time I guess it was also to undermine religious institutions (you know which one) from holding absolute political power and telling people what does not appear to be true.

But science has grown, so much that many people who study and practice science don't know what it is anymore. In the streets I see many claims that 'this is scientifically proven', but nobody questions what it means to be scientifically proven, nor the methods of proving it. And incidentally, most of the time it employs statistics (which apparently is widely misunderstood, even by statisticians so it is claimed).

To illustrate, I take points from an article that I agreed with (no I won't link it here. Its long boring and you won't read it anyway).

Few tests that deal with real living subjects have no effect. Few, in fact almost virtually none. The method of statistically proving, or rather disproving stuff relies heavily on what is known as a null hypothesis. Since the testing methods are limited and heavily influenced (eg hard to control the variables) , the usual step is to set up a null hypothesis.

Lets say 'Eating Grass will not make you look prettier'. And you get a sufficiently large group of volunteers, say 100 people. Their looks you have managed to quantify (somehow), and you have a reasonably controlled environment. For simple arguments sake, everything is good for your test. Except your results.

Now, living beings being living beings, we are dynamic. So the expected results will be a scatter, since that is the point in the beginning, you want to know the distribution. And you do get one, you analyse it. You get a spread. Some people do get prettier, some people get uglier, but most people are unaffected (or significantly affected). But overall, the bulk of the data gives you a, say 98% probability that the effect is give or take 3 unit of prettiness. You would perhaps confidently announce there is no 'significant effect' from eating grass.

I draw the distinction between 'significant effect' and 'not make you look prettier'. One absolutely states that it will have no effect on your looks, and that is the hypothesis. But your data indicates there ARE changes, good or bad or too little to bother with, and they balance out nicely to tell you 'no significant effect'. So, while you may say it is proven statistically, somewhere out there 1 out of 100 people will get prettier if only they would eat grass. And you told them it won't.

I wonder if I made it simple enough, and I don't know if eating grass will make you prettier.

And, second point being that, a few younger people I came across recently profess interest in science. But when I ask them 'why', I get generic answers. 'Career'. 'Interest'.

What irks me is they are interested in something they don't really know what is going on about. I don't know how to put it in words (really honestly), but sometimes I question whether they truly understand what science is for and why.

Lets step back a bit and allow me to explain something a little bit out of place, but I hope to use this to explain the position of science from my perspective.

We humans have two ultimate goals. One is to survive, and another is to understand. The price of developing intelligence is that we are too aware. We question our existence. We are curious, and incidentally insecure.

That is why over time we began the practice of worship (I can be entirely wrong here. This is pure reasoning on my part, not even scientific or religious). We want to feel we have something to pursue for. God became the ultimate idea (I am agnostic by the way, but I guess I would change soon, after a bit more thinking. Not to mainstream though).

Hence, philosophy came in. And boyy, did they come in huge. I don't know when philosophy 'began', but from the Western side it probably started with them Greeks. But hey, that is not in the strict sense, since if we are capable of thought and questioning from way back, then philosophy should probably arise when such capabilities arise.

Many schools form, Socratic Platonic Tectonic you name it.

And one of them appeared in somewhat modern human age. That is science, the philosophy of causality. Everything that happens has a cause, and an associated effect. I think we can even attribute this to the Greeks. That's how far back it went, though not formally called science until much later.

So what is science about? Classical science employs empiricism. You observe something, you infer a cause and you test it under controlled conditions. I think it was called similitude, simulating nature in a lab. It has been successful so far, since many things in our macro world are reproducible. A ball that you throw upwards will always fall down, due to gravity. That is highly reproducible, and not once has it failed to fall down (the ball I mean).

Thus far, it has certainly served us well. Such simple ideas behind it. Understanding the cause and the effect brings about huge effects (hah!). We build factories and stuff based on this. Processes, machines, you name it. All products of science, which is a child of philosophy (I like to think of science as a child of philosophy).

But today, science has grown. We not only observe and take note, we predict. With almost absolute certainty, I can tell you any ball you throw upwards will fall down towards the earth.

...  but of course you could launch it with such great force that it breaks free of the gravity field. I am wrong there then.

But you get what I mean, we can predict stuff. Ah hey, but we not only can predict stuff, based on these information we now can put forward new theories/ideas/models based on old ones. And these are mostly borderline metaphysics.

The atomic theory comes to mind. Funny how no one disputes atoms around me, but many people out there apparently do not believe in atoms simply because it hasn't been seen (oh but it has been seen. They have managed to scan their shapes out). Quantum theory gives us a whole list of subatomic particles (I can devote an entire year to writing blog posts about them, not to say I understand a whole lot there. Just to show how much you can say about it), and string theory predicts even freakier stuff. Thing is, not one of them can be experimented on for now. They fit into models very nicely, and whatever indirect observations that can be made seem to conform to it.

Bearing in mind that we cannot know anything absolute, these are the powers of science that allow us to understand, or at least seem to understand nature. (I want to complain that we do not ascribe laws to Nature. We propose Laws or Models that describe Nature, not the other way around! Realize that! Many people don't, surprisingly).

Stephen Hawking miffed me when he proudly announced that philosophy is coming to an end. Because they, using physics and their results are able to describe Creation itself. I find that somewhat disconcerting, and for lack of a better word, arrogant. Socrates will have a field day with Mr Hawking there.

So look, science is philosophy in action. It is applied, and it has changed our lives so much. It made survival easy for many of us that the only problem you have is your love life and you want to kill yourself because of it. Good way to clear the gene pool of stupidity I say.

Lets summarize what I have written. Science is a branch of philosophy that deals explicitly with reality, in the way that we interact with Nature and observe its behaviour. And we have expanded it to be capable of (certain, reasonable) predictions and even propose models for behaviors of Nature that cannot be experimented upon. Did I miss anything? I hope not, its 2011 and I am tired.

Now if I can just get more people to appreciate what they are doing and why, that we may fulfill the 2nd purpose better.

P/S : Will we someday reach a pinnacle of knowledge and wisdom that we have but one Law that can describe Nature in its entirety? One Law that will be able to explain everything from existence down to every single process, why there are energy, why there is matter etc. And perhaps One Mathematical (if maths survive the advancements.) equation that will allow us to calculate everything from your body temperature to the exact date and time the sun will blow up in your face to the total number of galaxies in existence. All in one.

That would be nice, but it remains unclear if science will give that to us, because the part of being unable to experiment is, well, not so 'scientific' in some sense.

That said, I hope I covered my grounds properly (I always write without drafting or editing. Pardon my errors). Happy New Year