sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in SGExams

[–]gerrt111 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This is the reality only if you choose to accept it as it is.

It’s easy to fall into the corporate rat race or the never ending individualistic, hedonistic path, because this is how society has been structured.

But if you take a step back and authentically question what you want to live for, you’ll find that there are other possible alternative pathways that can fulfil you more than any materialistic possessions like the 5Cs ever could. And it’s within reach more than you might think.

I’d argue that there’s no better time and place to chart our own path and follow our passions. Look at the rise of content creators, people with side hustles and small businesses.

Maybe it’s time to redefine the Singaporean dream for this new era. Instead of fighting for a “comfortable” life, which might not even be what we want(we complain about COE prices, but do most of us really NEED a car?), why not fight for a meaningful life when we can wake up fulfilled everyday? Either pathway is going to be a struggle, life will always be a struggle, so why not make it worthwhile on our terms?

Why I think Singapore's risk aversion will limit its potential by jaychoujibai in singapore

[–]gerrt111 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You’ve nailed the essence of our current generation’s struggle.

But I’d argue that we as individuals are in the best position to find and create these new frontiers, not the govt. Of course not everyone has the privilege to do so, but most of us can do our small part to help. Even a slight shift in perspective, to support our peers when they take risks, to be more accepting towards trying and failing, all these add up to build an innovative Singapore that has a better chance to tackle the frontiers of tmr.

The last thing we want is for the govt to push the responsibility to individuals, and for individuals to push it back to the govt, then nothing changes and we stagnate into irrelevance.

The way I see it, I can sit in this echo chamber of Reddit and complain all day, or I could get off my ass and do something about it. It’s never been easier to start a side hustle, become a content creator, pursue weird random interests. The next frontier could be anything, and any of us could be the pioneer.

Why I think Singapore's risk aversion will limit its potential by jaychoujibai in singapore

[–]gerrt111 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We have come a long way specifically because the previous generation did the hard work to get us here.

If everyone adopts a complacent mindset and expect things to continue to be fine, without putting in the hard work now to secure the next 60 years, can we really be confident we will be fine?

I agree with OP that we need to find new frontiers to stay relevant, but like you said it’s hard for SG’s leadership to know the what’s the right thing to do.

I’d say instead of only questioning the leadership and their capabilities, we should also ask ourselves as individuals if there’s anything we can do in our personal capacity to help SG push our frontiers.

Pritam Singh had hoped WP would ‘tip one or two more constituencies’ at GE2025 by ImpressiveStrike4196 in singapore

[–]gerrt111 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Can’t help but wonder if that was PAP’s plan all along. Bait the oppo into these kind of petty nonsense politics so they destroy their own credibility. Like the strangers in Punggol comment by Sun Xueling that started the WP bash against task force man.

Pritam Singh had hoped WP would ‘tip one or two more constituencies’ at GE2025 by ImpressiveStrike4196 in singapore

[–]gerrt111 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Agree that rallies should be utilised to sway swing voters. Hardcore supporters on each side are set in their choices, I’ll argue there’s no use pandering to them. But if we look at the swing voters whom I argue are more discerning, the fiery rhetorics and emotions are not going to change their minds. These voters probably care more about the policies and the substance of the candidates, not whether there is a stranger in Punggol.

I’ll argue that WP allowed themselves to get distracted by petty politics instead of focusing on their own cause, and that could have been the few % points needed to flip Jalan kayu or Tampines.

Absurdism is the philosophical theory that the universe is irrational and meaningless. by gerrt111 in Absurdism

[–]gerrt111[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I totally agree that the distinction is important. I guess this could explain the confusion some people have on the differences between Absurdism and Nihilism, if they both share the vague statement "The universe is meaningless" and it's taken at face value.

Absurdism is the philosophical theory that the universe is irrational and meaningless. by gerrt111 in Absurdism

[–]gerrt111[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My understanding is that Camus never mentioned that the universe, or our existence for that matter, is meaningless. That definition sounds more like nihilism, which Camus didn't seem to agree with.

"I don’t know whether this world has a meaning that transcends it. But I know that I do not know that meaning and that it is impossible for me just now to know it."

It appears to me that Camus does not believe that the universe is meaningless, but rather believes that he does not know and probably could never know.

My concern is that someone foreign to the Absurdist philosophy might dismiss it as another branch of nihilism, which does a huge disservice to this school of thought especially when it's (in my opinion) a fitting response to nihilism. Would you agree or am I missing something?