Where will our development take us to?

'GDP is not representative of the actual strength of an economy.'

These are chilling words for the USA and other giant economies out there. The strength of China is an intriguing issue. It was one of the world's strongest economy eons ago, and now they are back again. They have trudged through adversity and some daunting obstacles, only to make a full circle to the economic limelight. How are we going to stop China?

Truth is, we can't. And if we can't, we might as well join them. It is a good time to start picking up mandarin, for all we know, it might be an essential language in time to come. Basically, I am suggesting that we have something important to take away from this. We must prepare for China's inevitable rise. For example, this embodies having good links with both the east and west. The world is changing, and we need to keep up.

How do we become a rising star then? To be open-minded? To be hungry for success? To be optimistic and willing to take risks to invest? I agree that these factors brought up are necessary for a star to rise. However, I would like to bring a chinese saying out here. That is '知己只比，百战百胜’. In english, it means 'Know thyself and know the enemy, and every war can be won'. I feel that knowing the enemy (by being open minded to criticism and improvement techniques) is not sufficient. We also need to understand our own anatomy and makeup, our strengths and our weaknesses, and our ability in order to truly be a rising star. These two sides complement each other, and allow us to elevate to greater heights. This model can be applied across many fields, such as in business and in our everyday lives. However, it is also true that understanding ourselves can be a potential hurdle, as we could underestimate or overestimate ourselves at times.

We then followed up with a video about the MDGs (Millennium Development Goals). The video was concise and straightforward, providing statistics to the current conditions to each problem the goals were trying to address. By providing awareness to everyone in the class(and possibly beyond), it has achieved quite a bit already. The first step to any goal is to create public awareness of the situation, especially to countries such as Singapore as we are not exposed to many of life's atrocities. The goals might take a long time to complete, but the first step has been taken.

The break came to abruptly pause the vivid discussion, and when we returned, human development came into focus.

When Prof probed me regarding the definition of human development, I answered with a generic and generally accepted answer. However, human development has always been very hard to define. Was the pinnacle of human development attaining happiness? Or was it to satisfy materialistic needs? Or is it something else? The human development index based it on 3 things - education level, standard of living and life expectancy. We all would disagree as it is a very abstract and subjective issue. We can never understand why the people in India are happy while the people living in urbanized cities aren't. Worst of all, we are unable to 'reboot' our mind such that the embossment of the cities were erased so that we can empathize the happiness felt by the Indians despite their living conditions. The disparity is there to stay and we can never close the gap together. Now then, where would our development take us to?

This is the question that I felt should have been considered in class. If a rise in GDP (urbanized city) is counteracted by a decline in happiness or rise in stress levels generally; how are we different from the country that has a low GDP (India) but yet a happier place? The number indicated by the HDI would most definitely be different as happiness is not a factor of consideration due to its in-quantifiable nature. However, does that mean cities with the higher HDI are better off?

The presentations by members of the class was well thought out, and interesting to a large extent, not to mention entertaining. It provides us with different perspectives on the topic and triggers our thought process. Now, i see the value of the oral presentations during class. The discussions were once again astounding. It has also made clear to me that having an extension base of general knowledge is extremely important. The 2nd class has lived up to the expectations set by the first.

Implications of a question

It only took a simple question - asked perhaps in an innocent and curious manner - that took Jared Diamond across the world and in a furious search for its answer. It was a question that was profound in its simplicity, and yet it left him dumbfounded. Yali questioned the roots of our civilizations and why things turned out so differently for two groups of the same species. Why does the contrast between the fortunes of New Guineans and the white men exist?

Diamond stumbled across an interesting observation during his research. Over time, he recognized that the New Guineans were actually of a highly intellect compared to the white men, and contrasted it to the reverse in fortunes that these groups are currently facing. It is clear that intellect, while important, is not quintessential to the development of technology. Most people would dismiss this notion as we have been taught all our lives that the brainy intellectuals drives R&D. Furthermore, this observation only served to pile more questions on top of Yali's one. However, it is a reminder that technology and innovation is not solely driven by intelligence. Personally, I would think that they are spurred on by need, want, convenience and imagination.

Diamond tried his best to justify why white men ended up with more 'cargo'. Many ideas were brought up - genetic inferiority, climate, geographical conditions, and many more. It is at this point that I discovered this. Questions, which could change the way we view the world, are avoided if not dismissed. People have stopped asking the same question Yali did, and when Diamond tried to find an answer, people generally looked for counterarguments. From this, we learn that we need two powerful tools to answer any question of this scale. They are persuasion and evidence. At the same time, we also learn that it is paramount to be able to prompt questions that have many implications. These ways of questioning and answering questions is definitely critical in this class.

Following that, something else occurred to me. Could Yali's query be attributed to one enigmatic phenomenon? Chance. Some may term it as luck. Irregardless of what anyone calls it, it is doubtlessly one of the biggest determining factor in any situation. With so many possible answers staring at a dead end, is it possible that everything that has transcended the past be due to chance? I feel that it is most definitely possible. However, it is understandably indignant to a scientist or historian to ever accept such an answer.

Yali then shifted out of focus and he was replaced by a picture of a obese male holding a drink in his hand. Placed at the most righthand side of the evolution chain of man(and being so out of place), one could not help but question, is that our future? A discussion ensued. Everyone in class seemed to agree that technology's influence is only as good (or as bad) as man makes it out to be. I agree with that too. However, what if the influence of technology was unintended or indirect?

Let me explain with a rather far-fetched idea. It is well known that the anatomy of man varies for every individual. There are people who can eat so much, and yet not grow fat or be unhealthy, and vice versa. If we believe in natural selection, and that if obesity results in a shorter lifespan, the combination of males and females who are 'genetically unable to grow fat' should provide a new generation of babies whose size is not dependent on their diet. Assuming that the above is true, this is where technology rears its ugly head, unwittingly. Medical advances have allowed obesity to be less life threatening, and have been keeping many unhealthy people alive literally. That is a good thing. However, we overlook the fact that natural selection has thus been nullified, and generation after generation will carry the same genes that aren't very diet friendly.

The class was gaining so much momentum in that topic of man evolving to fat man. I felt it was pretty wasteful that we had to cut it short for the lesson to end on time. Also, I think history of the subject should have been given more focus as our present and future can be very dependent on our past.

On the whole, the first lesson has generated a lot of interest in me. I guess it is pretty safe to say that the people around me felt the same way as well. It had triggered a lot of thought, and many people had come up with fantastic ideas and we had a great discussion. The topics were good as they generated a lot of enthusiasm. Hopefully, every subsequent session can be equally or more enriching than the previous one.

P.S. Please understand that my analogy above is not directed against any group or individual, nor am I devaluing or undermining obese people. I am also not stating that obesity is a genetic weakness. It is plainly an idea (albeit far fetched) to explain how technology can indirectly affect us. Peace out.