To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree. - Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species.

To those of you who have not read Darwin’s The Origin of Species, the above quotation of him seemingly saying that the eye could never be formed under Natural Selection would, I presume, seem extremely weird. This is exactly the same quotation used by some people in justifying Darwin himself was not certain of this theory of Natural Selection. What they usually leave out is the following line:

Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real.

Such practice, as seem from above, is called Quote Mining. Wikipedia defines Quote Mining as “practice of purposely compiling frequently misleading quotes from large volumes of literature or speech”. In essense, it is to pick and choose certain quotations so as to make one seems like one is saying something one is not. Now, let’s “prove” that Darwin was a racist, from The Voyage of the Beagles:

I could not have believed how wide was the difference between savage and civilized man: it is greater than between a wild and domesticated animal…

What I have actually left out is “inasmuch as in man there is a greater power of improvement”. To put the whole sentence together,

I could not have believed how wide was the difference between savage and civilized man: it is greater than between a wild and domesticated animal, inasmuch as in man there is a greater power of improvement.

A lot of creationist likes to use the term “Social Darwinism”, when they are actually referring to social clensing, which an extreme and twisted kind of eugenics. To differentiate between those two terms, as defined in Wikipedia, Social Darwinism is a theory that competition among all individuals, groups, nations or ideas drives social evolution in human societies; while Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention. Throughout history, eugenics has been regarded by its various advocates as a social responsibility, an altruistic stance of a society, meant to create healthier and more intelligent people, to save resources, and lessen human suffering.

These creationists seem to think that by discrediting Natural Selection, through linking it to racism and Nazism, they can debunk the validity of the theory. What has that anything to do with the validity of the Theory of Natural Selection, I cannot imagine. Arguing that a theory leads to adverse (albeit untrue) consequences does not in anyway discredit the validity of a scientific theory. What it does show is the immaturity in thinking, and the shallow understanding of scientific method of the persons arguing in such a baseless manner.

Now, I came across this article, Calvin’s Dragon, today. The author, Bodie Hodge, thinks that because an artwork from 1578, which is prior to the coining of the word dinosaur, depicted (or resembled) dragons, hence humans must have co-existed with dinosaur, at one point during the history of Earth. The author claimed that “the extinction of dinosaurs and other creatures reminds us of the presence of death in the world: the result of our sin.”

My comment is that the author has really done a great job in excelling in his quote mining ability, such that he or she can argue for the co-existance of men and dinosaur based on artwork! The author really brought the meaning of quote mining to a whole new level. Perhaps such phenomenon can be called Image Mining, with the definition, “practice of purposely compiling frequently misleading images from large volumes of images.” Job well done, Bodie Hodge.

Now, for your enjoyment, Man Is But A Worm:

Ugly, isn’t it? Now where’s the pause button…?

For those of you who can’t stand ugly (but highly recommended) programs like the one above, you can try this Defraggler by Piriform. Piriform is the same company who brought you CCleaner. It used to be called Crap Cleaner but they change it to CCleaner. I prefer to call it Crap Cleaner. Now, an snapshot of Defraggler:

Who needs buttons anyway?

Firefox 3 was officially released on the 17th of June, well 18th for my side of the planet anyway. I was one of the few who pledge to download it on that day, and so I did. And just like the other approximately 8.25 other million people who downloaded that day, I was one who contributed to Firefox 3 making a new Guinness World Record. What do I like about the new Firefox? The Zoom In feature! Reading’s a lot easier now, on blogs. I still don’t understand why some people don’t use a fluid theme on their blogs. And yes, watching Youtube’s much better now, zooming in a little. The little lost of quality is much compensated by the saticfaction of watching it bigger.

George Carlin passed away on the 22nd this month. I have to admit it, though I haven’t seen a lot of his works, probably just Dogma and Jersey Girl, and other things on YouTube, I’m certain he’s a great comedian and a good actor. Now, let’s give it up for George Carlin on Religion:

What other interesting things happened this month? My exam’s over! Hm, wait. That’s not interesting. I’m sorry.

A couple of nights ago, my brother and I were in discussion about the effects of cultures in our lives. His stance is that culture is an imporant part of what defines us as who we are, which group that we belong to. My stance, however, is that some traditions are outdated and should not be practised.

Taking my grandmother as an example, my brother rethorically asked if I think she really believe that somebody will bless her, protect her, answer her wishes if she prays. I am not very certain of the answer, but I have a feeling that she’s an agnostic, and somewhat theistic. I think if I ask grandmother, she’d have answered me, there’s no harm done believing, so it’s better to believe than not to believe. Somewhat a Pascal’s Wager, don’t you think?

Another culture which is still somewhat prevailence among Malaysian Chinese is spiritualistic beliefs, especially among the older generation. Taking a recent event as example, a woman in Penang was conned of her jewellery and RM 6000. Apparently, she believed that she’s experiencing bad luck, and wanted to get rid of it. Detail aside, in the end, she was conned by three women, one of them claiming that she had learnt some skills from a medium.

Obviously, you can claim that this is just due to her ignorance, and possibly due to the lack of proper education. I say, however, if this spiritualistic beliefs are not in prevailence, this particular event might not have happened. If this kind of spiritualistic beliefs in my culture is what defining who I am, I would rather abandon my identity.

Obviously, if you want to get really scientific, what really defines us is our human genome, our individual unique genetic makeup, aside from natural or artificial clones. However, what I have in mind is how other people would describe us. Well, normally, I guess people would just say that I am a Chinese. Straying from the topic a little, I find it interesting that how those Chinese coursemates of mine from mainland China seem to be so shocked that I can speak Mandarin.

Now back to the topic. Sure, I am a Chinese, and I identify myself as a Chinese, but I don’t think that’s very imporant at all. I think people tend to care too much about racial differences and appearence. Growing up in Malaysia, religion aside, I do not think that children of different races live too different lifes. In fact, I think that it is very much possible that there are more similarities between two children of different race than two children of the same race.

This just reminds me of Tan Hong Ming and Umi Qazrina. Please do have a look at the following YouTube video, Percintaan Tan Hong Ming (Tan Hong Ming In Love) :

I think people of difference races in Malaysia are not too different from each other, it’s just that some people put too much emphasis on our differences, and choose to be blind about all the similarities that we share. They claim that we have different cultures, that we live totally different lives, and some other will agree without really reflecting and pondering this issue in their mind first.

Sure, we might have really different culture, 50 or 100 years ago, but I think this wall of difference between us is slowly, but surely desolving. Keep emphasizing our differences will be like constructing an imaginary “Malaysian Wall” which divides people of different races, taking steps away, rather than towards, unity. As a side note, ex-Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dr. M, is still claiming that “after the land is sold, the Malays will be driven to live at the edge of the forest and even the forest itself”, referring to Iskandar Malaysia, or formerly known as Iskandar Development Region. So much for racial unity.

I think, one of the most beautiful fact that science has proven is that all humans are truly brothers and sisters. Perhaps it is time to embrace that fact, rather than wallowing in our imaginary racial superiority. No, I am not talking about abandoning our own culture. What I am saying is that we ought to acknowledge and embrance our differences, but emphasise on our similarities. However, I still hold strong to my stance that the aspects of culture which you deem unsuitable or even wrong, should be abandoned.

I urge you to have a look at Wade Davis’s talk on TedTalk, The Worldwide Web of Belief and Ritual :

In common day to day usage, some of us use the word theory as a synonym to speculation and opinion. However, for a scientific hypothesis to be recognised as a scientific theory, it has to be able to withstand the scrutiny of peer reviews by the academics in the field.

Before we can establish any hypothesis, we must have a set of axioms of which the hypothesis can be built on. Axioms, or postulate, are propositions which are not proved, and are considered to be self-evident. For example, it is meaningless for me to ask you to prove to me a + b = b + a, or 2a is even (if a is an integer), as they are axioms and are considered to be self-evident.

However, I have to clarify, I am not saying that all the axioms are true, and or can never be proven. For example, the Parallel Postulate states:

If a straight line falling on two straight lines make the interior angles on the same side less than two right angles, the two straight lines, if produced indefinitely, intersect on that side on which are the angles less than the two right angles.

For those who can’t seem to get the meaning at the first quick glance (I am one), let me put it down in words much more easily understood. Given two lines (which are seemingly parallel), if a third line intersect those two lines, and the angles at any side of the line does not sum to 180°, then the first two line given will eventually intersect, if extended indefinitely.

Parallel Postulate is a postulate which holds for Euclidean Geometry. There exist non-Euclidean Geometry which satisfy all the other axioms but not the Parallel Postulate, such as elliptic geometry or hyperbolic geometry. As a point of interest, the simplest form of elliptic geometry is a sphere, and the shortest distance between any 2 points on a sphere is along is geodesic, or it’s Great Circle. This is the reason why, if you look at the map, airline routes are not straight, but curved. This is the result of showing a surface of the globe, which is non-euclidean on an euclidean surface.

Now that we are clear on what axioms are, let me continue on how the axioms are used. Since axioms are the defining properties of a system, we can utilise these properties to prove or disprove hypotheses within that system. One of the more interesting way of proving something is by reductio ad absurdum, or proving by contradiction. Using this method, if we want to prove a case, we assume that the opposite is true, then prove that the assumption leads to a contradiction, and hence proving that the case is true. For example, consider the proof of irrational numbers.

Define: irrational numbers are number which cannot be expressed by the a ratio a/b, where a and b are integers and coprime (meaning they have no common factor other than 1).

Assume that √2 is a rational number, hence it can be expressed as √2 = a / b

Hence, (a / b)² = 2

a² / b² = 2

a² = 2b²

Therefore, a² is even since a² = 2b² .

Since, a² is even, then a must be even.

Since a is even, it can be expressed as a = 2k.

Substituting the a = 2k into a² = 2b², (2k)² = 2b².

Hence, 2b² = 4k²

b² = 2k²

Therefore, b² is even since b² = 2k² .

Since, b² is even, then b must be even.

BUT, if both a and b are even number, they cannot be coprime, as they share the same factor 2.

Therefore, assumption that √2 is a rational number leads to a contradiction.

Therefore, √2 is an irrational number.

Another method of proving or disproving something is through hypotheses, experimentations and observations. The data collected by the observations are facts. If facts support the hypotheses, through statistics, we can calculate the confidence level that those hypotheses are true. Now, if a lot of observations shows that a hypothesis is true, then our confidence grow. Hence, a theory can be accepted. A theory explains a certain observations and make predictions on the future outcome. However, if a theory is proven to be inconsistent with certain axiom, it will be proven false.

Having said this, certain axioms might just really be conjectures, and in time, they may be proven to be unfounded. For example, if we only consider Newtonian mechanics, it is self evident that mass can travel faster than the speed of light, as all we have to do is to apply force. Now with the understanding of relativity, we now know that speed of light is the ultimate speed barrier, and hence the “self-evident” assumption that mass can travel faster than the speed of light is actually false.

When conducting an experiment, or formulating a theory, any assumptions must be stated. In some cases, the assumptions are in fact conjectures, such as the law of conservation of energy, of which the cause of the phenomenon is yet to be proven, but has be consistent in countless observations. Another famous conjecture, although now proven, was Fermat’s Last Theorem (it was a conjecture, despite its name).

Since experiments and theories are based on conjectures or assumptions, it is important to keep the number of assumptions as little as possible, since having more means having more chance that the experiment can be proven false. This is because if any of the assumptions were to be proven false, the experiment would be render useless. This is essentially the idea of Occam’s Razor, which states that “entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity”.

After a long winded, at yet greatly summarised introduction to the scientific method, let me go back to the original topic: why it is ridiculous to call evolution just a theory. Anybody who has an adequate high school knowledge of science could have told you this, although I do agree that many people do not have adequate high school knowledge of science. For those of you who still do not understand why it is so, I urge you to have a look at Evolution as Theory and Fact on Wikipedia. It has much much more explanation than I can ever include in this article. It is interesting that most of those people who criticise the theory of evolution are well, hardcore theists.

I thought it would be interesting to try to determine the axioms used by certain groups of theists in their explanation of this world. The the bible for example. Let’s consider the two conjectures below:

1.I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. (Revelation 22:13)
2.But you are the same. Your years will have no end. (Psalm 120:27)

Anybody with a hint of common sense would have detected that those two conjectures are contradictory. One say that there’s a beginning and an end, and the other one say that there is no end.

The above is but one out of the many examples of contradictory conjectures in the bible. Of course, I think somebody can come up with a certain sets of theological internally consistent axioms of which further proves can be built on. However, even if this is achieved, it would be meaningless in explaining the world because, well, it does not explain this world!
Although, I guess they can find comfort in seeing and accepting the world based on the certain conjectures, written centuries ago, before the existence of the scientific method. Of course, you can argue science and religion and be coexist and still be consistent.

Let me draw an analogy: even though the world is spherical, a lot of time, we still use euclidean geometry, oh say, in civil engineering. If we assume that non-euclidean geometry and euclidean geometry cannot coexist, does that make euclidean geometry true and non-euclidean geometry false in explaining the world? Or does that mean the civil engineers are just a bunch of people (who happen to be the ones building your houses) who don’t understand basic geometry?

No! The reason why euclidean geometry is still used is because it gives a good approximation to the boundary we are working in. It is somewhat, but not exactly, the same as why Newtonian physics is still applicable in our life, even though we have a more precise theory. No sane engineer will tell you that he believes the world is flat, and no sane engineer will be willing to lobby the government, or change the school syllable, to make you think that the world is flat!

However, this is not the case with religion. The reason why religion cannot coexist is because there is only one universe that both science and religion are trying to explain. Some theists will tell you that their religion is the one and only truth, and their holy book is internally consistent and flawless. To the more extreme, some theists are willing to kill to prove a point.

Ever wonder why there aren’t any militant atheist who claims that atheism is the one and only truth, and he will kill you if you do not embrace atheism?

I am interested in a lot of fields of science, and I guess this is, in a small part, because I am interested in the question of the origin of life on Earth. Although the title may have mislead you to think that I’m going to discuss the fallacies of the Genesis “Hypothesis” in the Bible and stong evidence in support of evolution, but no, this is not my intention. What I am going to talk about has something to do with our high school syllabus, or possibly our primary school syllabus.

Doubtlessly, we have been pondering about the question “Why are we here?” for a very long time. I admit that science doesn’t really give us an answer of why we are here, but it does give us a better understanding of how we are here. More precisely, it tells us what are the constraints needed, in the whole universe at a larger scale; and on earth at a smaller scale. Now I think that it is important to be exposed these ideas since one is young as they truly encourage interest in science, which is parallel to what our government it trying to do.

Obviously, I am not saying that we should spoon feed facts and figures to children, because, as Plato mentioned in Republic, “It’s true that if physical work is performed under compulsion, the body isn’t impaired, but compulsory intellectual work never remains in the mind”. And so, you can see that spoon feeding have exactly the reverse effect. What I have in mind is that school children should be exposed to an overview of how science has given us a better understanding of how we are here, and also that how many different, and seemingly unconnected fields of science are in fact related to each other in the most intricate way. To me, I consider it art.

Let’s start with high school biology. Frankly speaking, why do we even need to know the effects of Auxin has on the growth of plants when we were not even taught the concept of evolution? I don’t think biology class should be all about facts and memorising. I believe it is important for students to know a little history of biology and its related fields. To start with, Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection, Watson and Crick’s discovery of DNA, both of which I think are the most important contribution to our advancement of biological science.

Now about Physics. I seem to remember there’s just a small section of form 5 physics syllabus which is nuclear fusion and fission. Obviously I think that it is insufficient. I am not saying that students should remember the elements and energy involved in say… the CNO cycle. What I am saying is that the syllabus should discuss the implications of the facts and theories we learn. Obviously, it applies for all the facts and theories we learn. In the particular case, it should at least discuss about the relationship between stars and the essential elements involved in biological processes.

As for Chemistry, well, let’s just say I have terrible teachers in Form 4. Even until now, I am not much interested in chemistry then I am in physics and biology. What we learn in chemistry is to remember which A reacts with which B, which yields which C; or which A is used to test for the existance of which B, in the a which C solution, etc etc. What I consider the most imporant is the view of chemistry as a bridge between physics and biology. For those who even bother to read this blog post until here, I think this fact is quite obviously to you.

Sometimes, I pity those students who are going through all those toot which I have been through during high school. Even more hilarious the government’s move of changing back to Malay because the students can’t cope, or so they claim. It’s as if the integrity of the education system should be risked, just so that more students can cope. I am not an expert, but I’m pretty sure this is not the proper way to improve the quality of our students. But then again, Malaysia knows all about “Malaysia Boleh”, when W. Edwards Deming had specifically said, “eliminate slogan”.

I reckon it’s inevitable that I feel like this, wondering if I’ve lived my life as I like to over the years. I think I’m more of a glass-is-half-empty person. I get depressed over the mistakes I have made in my life, sometimes. I try to view the world logically, methodically and mathematically, but I guess part of growing up, for me, is to learn that not everything can quantized, and the future is uncertain. Life is more like a compromise, and I have to learn to give and take, in order to reach a comfort zone. But I also like to believe that there is always room for improvements.

My mother mentioned that I was born prematurely, about 2 or 3 weeks early, in a breech birth. Doctor suggested a Caesarean section to be performed due to the risks involved, but I was safely born without operation, perhaps due to my low birth weight and size. Mom never forgets to say that my size was comparable to that of little kitten… Some studies have shown a direct link in between an increased birth weight and an increased IQ. Does explain why I am so toot, doesn’t it?

When I think back when I was 5 or 10, I used to think that my cousin, who is 10 years tolder than me, is so much more older than me. I sure thought that my parents were much much older than me. But when was already 10 and 12 when 2 of my cousins were born. I watched them grow up. I still think that they are THAT much younger than I am. But the fact is, I’m not that much older than they are, and in a few years time, they will be as old as I am now.

The funny thing about life is nearly everybody thinks that they are the smartest people in the room, even if they never admit it. The fact is, however, we aren’t really that smart and we are pretty much ignorant about a lot of things. We expect that our parents know a lot, especially when their age is like the nth multiple of ours. But when we reach a certain age, we realise that the number n is so small, and we might start to think that they don’t know much, that they are not up-to-date and ignorant in this fast changing world. The truth is, there’s always something we can learn from our parents, as we have done so throughout our whole lives.

Couple of days ago, my cousin asked me, what do I want to do in my life? Not an easy question to answer, I think. Thinking back just a few years ago, I am surprised that so many things have changed. And I’m surprised that so many things remained the same also. A few years seems to be short, but it is still a large percentage of my life. A lot can happen in a few years. One can get rich, one can loose everything. One can fall in love, one can fall out of love. One can loose one’s life, but it’s not really likely that one be suddenly come back from the dead. Heh.

6 years of primary school and 5 years of secondary school, whenever I think of it now, still feel like huge part of my life. Now that I’m in a 4 years bachelor’s degree course, I’m supposed to feel that it’s long also, right? But last year seems to have past a blink of an eye. This semester, however, seems to be so long! I can’t really believe that I’ve been back here for less than 3 months. It seems much much longer. I want to go back home.

What do I want to achieve in my life? Have I even achieved anything in my life worth mentioning? Am I even a person worth knowing? Heh…

I’ve been thinking, what genre of books do I read more often? I can see that there’s a shift from Fiction to Non-fiction in the recent couple of years. I will list out the subjects of books I read, and which is the best or most important book I’ve read so far.

As for Physics, I have to say, the most important book I’ve read is Relativity by Albert Einstein. Of course, prior to that, I read General Relativity From A To B by Robert Geroch. Else I don’t think I could have understood as much from what I read of Einstein’s work. I consider this one of the most important work ever accomplished to the advancement of our understanding of the world around us. It is amazing how Einstein could produce such work from thought experiment alone. Perhaps, understanding relativity can encourage us to have an open mind to thing foreign, strange or even bizarre to us. Speed of light, anyone?

For Biology, I think one of the most important book ever written is The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. I have to admit, I am still on the process of reading this book, even though I bought this book 2 or 3 years ago. I attempted to read this book a couple of times before, but I thought that the way Darwin wrote is very long winded and somewhat confusing. I soon got bored of the book, and place it on my To-Read-In-Future list. Now I am glad that I have brought this book over here. I find the book quite interesting now. Indeed we have have progressed much after a mere 150 years since the publication of the book. One can only imagine how Darwin would feel if he were alive today.

For Mathematics, I think God Created The Integers: The Mathematical Breakthroughs that Changed History would be a good book to start with. To be fair, this books is not written by a any one mathematician, but is a compilations of pivoting mathematical works going as far back as Euclid and Archimedes, to as recent as Kurt Gödel and Alan Turing. I have yet to finish reading this book, but I did manage to finish the part on Euclid’s Elements. It was probable that Euclid was not the inventor of the mathematical result in Elements, but he was the first person to compile them together. Indeed, he deserves the honour to be called Father of Geometry. I shall attempt to finish this book…… some time in the future.

For Philosophy, I am sad to say I have only read one philosophical book. It is Republic by Plato. Captivating indeed was Plato’s idea on how an ideal city should be. I think Plato s was precise when he wrote this, “It’s true that if physical work is performed under compulsion, the body isn’t impaired, but compulsory intellectual work never remains in the mind.” Although I think a lot of Plato’s idea were impractical, some of his criticism were precise. Perhaps we have much to learn from the the ancient Greek on how to run our government, how to educate ourselves, and how to live our lives. I urge those who are interested to read plato’s allegory of the cave in Republic. Truth can be hard to accept, it seems.

For Literature, again, I must admit that I have only read a limited amount of great literature works. I nominate both The Iliad and The Odyssey by Homer. The most important reason behind this would be because both of them are two of the oldest literature work in the world. I would have nominated Epic of Gilgamesh but unfortunately I have not read it and hence I cannot comment on it. I think The Iliad and The Odyssey should both be read. The Iliad talks about the war 10th and final year of the Trojan War, which is more complicated than the movie Troy. The Odyssey talks about the Oddyseus’s ten year journey home to Ithaca.

On Investment, I have to nominate The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham. In the preface to the 4th Edition of this book, Warren Buffett wrote: “I read the first edition of this book early in 1950, when I was nineteen. I thought then that it was by far the best book about investment ever written. I still think it is.” Well, there’s something I can say I have in common to Warren Buffett. I read this book in 2007, when I was 19. I think it is a great book on investment, and I urge anybody who thinks, that investing in the share market is like gambling, to read the first chapter of this book! I will read this book again this year.

To finish off this post I am tempted to, and hence I shall, quote the most important concept of investment written by Benjamin Graham:

The true investor scarcely ever is forced to sell his shares, and at all other times, he is free to disregard the current price quotation. He needs pay attention to it and acts upon it only to the extent that it suits his book, and no more. Thus the investor who permits himself to be stampeded or unduly worried by unjustified market declines in his holdings is perversely transforming his basic advantage into a basic disadvantage. That man would be better off if his stocks had no market quotation at all, for he would then be spared the mental anguish caused him by other persons’ mistake of judgement.

A crayon was found stuck in Homer’s brain, of which was removed later. It turned out that the crayon was the cause of the Homer’s undeniable stupidity. Homer’s life changed after that. The upside was that he became very intelligent, could solve Rubik’s Cube in mere 2 moves. The down side was that he became very critical in his thinking and pointed out other people’s mistakes. His friends resented it, and soon he became lonely and sad. Lisa pointed out that there is an inverse relationship between intelligence and happiness. Feeling that there was no reason to be intelligent if he was unhappy all the time, Homer chose to have the crayon inserted back in his brain…

I think how well you are doing compared to the people around you, or in another word, self-worth is an important factor of happiness. Take for instance if you earn $2000 a month while your peers earn $5000 a month, it is very likely that you will be haunted by the thought that you are not as competent as your peers. In a dog-eat-dog world, I think intelligence is an important factor affecting one’s promotion, career, earning power, and hence indirectly, to one’s self-worth. Compare the previous case a person who earns $5000 while his peers earns $2000 a month. I suspect that the chances are, the person in the latter case would be happier. In this sense, I think more intelligence leads to happier life.

Having said this, I think intelligent people like to analyse things. Intelligence, I think, has a lot to do with one’s ability analyse causality and anticipating the future. There must be a lot of intelligent people in this world, but not all succeed in what they do. For those who failed, analysing the causes of their failures is their nature. I shouldn’t have said that; I shouldn’t have done that; I shouldn’t have invest on that; I should have acted faster… These statements would have haunted them after their failure. It is good that one can analyse one’s cause of failure and never does the same mistakes again. But some people may dwell on their failure and feel miserable about it. It doesn’t help when one knows the failure could have been avoided if not for one’s action or inaction. Maybe intelligence leads to an unhappier life.

I believe intelligence has a a lot to do with one’s learning ability. An intelligent person, I presume, would be able to understand a concept or a theory more readily and quickly than a less intelligent person. I think this has to do with an intelligent person’s ability to see patterns, and the relationship between separate incidences, concepts or knowledge. This grants one the ability to detect and identify problem, and formulate solutions quickly. I guess the obvious benefits comes from the satisfaction with ones own ability in solving problems, as well as the feeling of superiority to their peers. In this aspect, I have to say that intelligence is a factor for a happier life.

I think it is possible and likely that intelligent people have interests which requires thinking. Intelligent people enjoy thinking and challenging their thinking skill. I think science would be a common interest. Intelligent people doesn’t like to be told fact; they want to know why as well. They like to have conversations which causes one to ponder and to wonder. Questioning established knowledge, beliefs and dogma can be common. I think, it is entirely possible that some people simply do not like their questioning. Most people just do not have the same interests they do. Most people just do not like to have conversations which require too much thinking. I think, some intelligent people may feel lonely, and can depressed at times.

What say you? Do you think there is a correlation between intelligence and happiness? Is the relationship direct, or inverse? Ignorance is bliss, some say. Maybe it’s better not to be intelligent?

If I were to sum up the whole book into 1 sentence, it’d definitely be: In pursuing our goals (cheese), always anticipate change and change ourselves accordingly. Sounds simple, isn’t it? It is, but sadly, I believe, life is not that easy. Changing means leaving our comfort zone. Changing means uncertain future. Changing can be painful.

I guess I am trying to say is that the book, to me, seems incomplete. The book tells us not to stay still, always be moving forward in pursuit of the cheese. Perhaps, it is wise to stand still and wonder, what do I really want?

In different stages of our lives, we will, without a doubt, have different dreams, ambitions or goals. These are the things which motivates us to take a step forward, to better ourselves, to achieve our targets. But sometimes, human ambitions can be unrealistic. Sometimes, we have outgrown our dreams. Sometimes, we have ambitions forced to us by our parents. Sometimes, we do not even know what we really want!

Things which deemed to be utmost important to us in the past, upon hindsight, can turn out to be such silly, petty, worthless joke. Our thinking and behaviour in the past may reek of immaturity, irrationality and ignorance. What we want in the past can become a very insignificant part of our personal history.

Is life all about learning? Is life all about becoming a better person? Is life all about understanding the chaotic harmony of the mysterious Cosmos? Is life all about uncovering the veil of unexplored territories? Is life all about heeding the words of scriptures? Seems meaningless sometimes, doesn’t it?

But the truth is, we are fully capable of choosing what our cheese is, and under logical circumstances, nothing is impossible. I guess life’s greatest joy is knowing that we have limited time and power, but our cheese, may it be feta, cheddar or parmesan, are within our reach. All we need to do is to ask ourselves what we want, and go for it.

What I want is to have some cheddar to go with my crackers.

That simple phrase lingered in my mind, and I started to think how true it is, that we are truly the product of our own environment. Of course, that does not mean that the outcome of people from similar environment will always be the same. Different people reacts differently to similar situation, hence the different outcome. But… For people to think and react differently, does it not mean that they previously had to be exposed to different environment? Then, does this mean that they react differently because they are already product of their previous environments? I shall leave this philosophy of never-ending causility alone, for now.

I remember my sister used to complain that my parents pampered me too much when I was a little kid. I vaguely remember that she said my parents used to buy more toys for me. I can hardly remember, but I know I must have been quite a brat. I remember that my first rather expensive toy that I bought was the Game Boy, after playing my cousin’s. Yes, it was the earliest version. I remember I paid quite a small fortune for it in 1998(or was it 1999?), from my own saving. The toot-est thing is that Game Boy Colour came out not long after I bought it. I spent too much time playing my Game Boy and my mother had to confiscate it to control me. Not to forget, I had to get myself a pair of glasses not long after that.

Funny though, how that Game Boy affected my life. In 2000, XJ was sorted into my class. It was that year that we knew each other. It was also the year that we started to play Pokemon game on our Game Boys. He owns a Game Boy Colour. We spend quite a lot of time in the school talking about it, what pokemon we’d encounter at which location. What were the differences between the Red and the Blue version. Heck, I even bought a tooting game guide! I was playing Red and he was playing Blue, we managed to trade Pokemons and I did finish the whole 150 pokemon collection.

Come to think of it, there were differences between how we approach the game. I very much preferred that all my Pokemons are at the same high level, but XJ preferred to speed through the game with only selected few. It took me quite a long time to finish that game. As you can see, we had different approaches, no doubt because we were different products of different environment. With hindsight, perhaps I can speculate that I liked a slow and steady approach to things, and that firm and broad foundation must be laid out before a strong empire could be built. Or perhaps, it reflected the more socialist side of me, where every pokemon deserved my time and energy to bring the best out of them, and none should be neglected. I can’t help myself but to laugh as this is starting to sound too political. I must remember I was just a primary school kid then!

I did wonder how I got through my primary school years without much revision, and with so much Game Boy-ing. For those of you who are wondering what happened to my Game Boy, I guess I have grown out of it. I spent very little time on it after I went to high school. In fact, about 2 years ago, I found it in my cupboard and unfortunately, I had forgotten to take out the cells. The electrolite in the cells leaked and “drowned” my Game Boy. I do remember that I once played Mario when I was in high school, and I thought: why did I ever think that this game was hard when I was in primary?

Hmm…… Is anyone still reading this?

I started reading Jin Yong novels when I was in Form 1. They were in Traditional Chinese. Of the 14 novels he wrote, I am proud to say that I have read all of them, other than 白馬嘯西風 and 鴛鴦刀. I used to bring a novel with me wherever I go, so that I can read them whenever I am free, even during meals! It took me about 2 years to read those 12 novels, but I did read 神鵰俠侶 twice or trice. Laugh all you want, but I like the love story very much. With all the reading, perhaps you might suggest that my Mandarin would benefit from it. I guess it did help a little, but reading and writing are totally different aspects of a langauge. I am never a good writer, I have to admit. Also, a lot of times, I find myself knowing what a word means, but not knowing how to pronounce it. And I call myself a Chinese…… (shake head)……

Sometimes, I wonder how I started reading. Was it because my father likes to read? Maybe that was one of the reasons, but I doubt it was a major factor. My dad likes to read, but his reading materials are nearly all in English. I started with Traditional Chinese instead. My mother used to be worried about my English. She said I didn’t read English books, and hardly spoke or wrote in English. Indeed, my parents were worried about the English standard of my siblings and I that during the year-end holidays in 1999, my parents sent us to English Language School (ELS) in Han Chiang. I resented the idea. Think about it, 5 days a week for 4 weeks! I thought it is a total waste of my time, and I very much rather spent my time enjoying my holidays instead! Truth to be told, I still think it was a waste of time. And money.

I remember the government implimanted the Buku Nilai program when I was in high school, though I don’t remember what year it was. At first, the school demanded that students hand in an entry every week. My first reaction was toot! Let me ask you, how was I supposed to finish a 400 over pages novel in a week, not to mention that they were in Traditional Chinese, and it must be done during school days! Of course, the school never really required that we read novels, but they must be books, fiction or non-fiction. However, at high school level, I would supposed that we have to read books of reasonable standard. But then again, we were prescribed the shortened version of The Prisoner of Zenda in Form 3, a 100 pages book, with illustrations!

I always wondered how those people who provided entries for n books a year in their Buku Nilam managed the mission impossible. However, I realised how they accomplished the task this afternoon. I was cleaning my room this afternoon and I found some old books, some were given by relatives, some were mine such as The Prisoner of Zenda. Those books never get a place in my cupboard, where my book collection is. Anyway, I found this book 小白象变猪. I am pretty sure you are not interested in it, but hey, out of curiousity I did finish reading the book. All illustrated 38 pages of it in 5 minutes. Maybe more. I was just too mesmerised by all the pretty illustrations of how that White Elephant was turned into a pig. Haha. Yeah, I know, it’s a book suitable for a 5 years old, but hey, I guess it is reasonable as an Fiction entry in Buku Nilam! Sigh…… I could have won that bicycle…… (shake head)

Seriously, is anybody still reading this?

I remember that in Form 3 (or was it Form 2?), my form teacher who was in charge of our Buku Nilam demanded that the class write an English entry. If I am not mistaken, that was one of the first few English novels I read. I can’t find it in my room, and I don’t remember what the name of that book is. However, I am pretty sure that it’s those kind of books you can find in the Teenage section of a bookstore, not too thick, 150 pages perhaps…… I read Harry Potter too, after either my brother or sister bought the first book. I suspect it was my sister, because it is very rare that my brother reads a book, much less buys a book. I am not saying that he does not read. I am just saying that he seldom reads books. “Have to embrace the new technology”, says he, staring at his computer monitor.

Anyway, Harry Potter didn’t appeal much to me. Since I had already read the first book, I bought the subsequent books too, until Book 5, The Goblet of Fire was it? That’s when I told myself, enough is enough. I decided not to read the other 2 books. I enjoyed reading The Lord of The Rings but The Hobbit was like a children’s book while The Silmarilian was like a tooting history book! I like The Wheel of Time series but why the toot did Robert Jordan die before finishing the 12th (also the last) novel!

I don’t remember which was the first non-fiction book I read. Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time, maybe? I noticed that I started reading more non-fiction these couple of years. If I were to nominate the best book that I have ever read, without a doubt, I would have chosen The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham. Took me weeks I read it, though. But I wished I have read it years ago, oh say… before 1997! Haha. Seriously though, I do hope I have read it earlier in my life. And I shall read it again.

Is this post getting anywhere, you may ask? Yeah, I have no idea also. In fact, I don’t think I’m A Product of My Environment is a suitable title at all. Perhaps What I do during my free time is a much appropriate title. Then again, the post is inspired by that Zits comic I read and I -am- the author or this blog.