Week 5 Blog Prompt: MOV

By the end of the trial scene, do you think true justice and mercy was achieved? Reflect and write on the following questions.

1. Is there true justice? Why?

I feel that there is true justice. First, we will have to define what is justice. Based from the dictionary, justice is rightfulness or lawfulness, as of a claim or title; justness of ground or reason. The trial scene shows us that the law was not changed and the law still applied in the trial scene. The bond was not changed and Shylock had what he wanted. However, there was a twist of words by Portia but still, no law or bond was being changed. Hence, there was true justice being exercised in the trial scene.

2. Is there true mercy, as expounded by Portia? Why?

There may or may not be true mercy as it depends on how we view it. Antonio wanted to make Shylock into a Christian. Some may say that this is because Antonio wanted to help him or some others would say it is because of the amount of hatred Antonio has to Shylock. If we take it that Antonio sincerely wants to help Shylock, Antonio did that so that Shylock would be prevented from further ridicule by others but if we take it the other way, Antonio wanted to change Shylock's religion as it would be the worst thing to do as it was the last thing Shylock could have thought of, therefore, there are many ways to see to it. Another matter would be that Shylock had to give up his fortunes where half of it goes to Jessica and Lorenzo. I think this is quite merciful though.

3. Justice and Law can be manipulated by people in power. Comment on this with reference to the text and other real-life cases and examples.

I think that this is very true. People in power can manipulate almost anything and so, it would definitely be easy for them to manipulate Justice and Law. In Merchant of Venice, as the Jews were considered low class, many Christians try to persuade Shylock to have mercy but if Shylock was a Christian and Antonio was a Jew, this would not happen but instead, others would encourage Shylock to show no mercy. Hence, this is so unfair.

Week 4 Blog Prompt

What are your views?

I feel that the letter have both appropriate points to agree with and some that I do not agree with. For example, she says that memorizing facts is useless and one must learn to ask questions like "Why?" I agree with the fact that asking questions is important but I also find that memorizing facts is sometimes also needed to learn things. Biology for example needs students to memorize facts first before experiments are being carried out. To be able to learn languages, one must also memorize basic words first. Hence, I disagree with some of her points. She also gave an example of "Why is carbon a non-metal?". She said that she had never been told the answer to this question but I find that this example is not very good. This because the answer is simply that people have already defined what makes an element a metal or a non-metal, hence, carbon must have some properties that make it a metal based on the definition of metals. Overall, I find that this letter has both good points and also some points that I disagree with.

Read the article and give your responses to the following prompts:

1. To what extent do you agree with the issues that the student has raised here? Point out some issues of agreement and possible contention.
   
   I do not agree fully with the issues the student has raised. I agree with the student that sometimes it is just not right to mark answers wrong just because you express it in your own words. However, I also feel that there is a purpose of having model answers for us. It may be because the model answer is more precise and more detailed than answers that are expressed in our own words although the idea is still the same. I also disagree with the point on stifling students voices just for the sake of pleasing the examiner. Students are not forced to not ask questions.Students can ask questions or give suggestions in school. However, I also have to agree a little with this point as it will not work if the teachers are unhelpful and just reply to you saying "this is the model answer/the system and this is what the school wants so do not ask so many questions."
   

2. Examine her tone and attitude in this letter. Do you think it’s a well-crafted letter with the appropriate tone?
   
   After examining her tone and attitude in this letter, I find that it is not a well-crafted letter and it does not have the appropriate tone. In my view, I find that it is a little hostile and a little tinge of anger in the letter. I also feel that she is kind of like blaming the Minister for the education system. I feel that she should first calm down and then write a letter politely to the Minister asking him why the education system is in this manner and tell him what she does not like about it and seek his explanation on why the education system is in this manner since there is a reason why the education system in Singapore wants us to memorize facts in our studies.
   

3. If you should write a letter to Minister of Education, what are some issues you would raise? Remember- your intention is to make the system better for society’s betterment via CONSTRUCTIVE ideas.
   
   I will raise issues like how we can apply things we learn through the education system in our life ahead.
   

You may view the letter here:
http://www.temasekreview.com/2011/07/12/an-open-letter-to-the-education-minister-from-a-secondary-4-student/

Week 3 Blog Prompt

In your opinion, is money important in relationships?

In my opinion, I feel that money is not necessarily important in relationships. To me, money in life is definitely not everything. There much more things in this Earth that are worth even more than just money. For example, there are many things that cannot be compared with money like friendship, love and trust ect. We cannot use money to buy friendship, neither can we use money to buy love or trust. Hence, money is definitely not everything. Hence after saying all these, money is clearly not significant in relationships. This is because one must look more in to the actual relationship and into the characters of each other. Values are also a very important thing one must see in your spouse. Hence, there are much more than money in a relationship.

Consider the "transactional" element observed in the relationships between the couples. Do you think there is an upward trend of relationships and marriages valuing money over other qualities?

It is not that obvious now as people get more advanced and more educated, money in marriages and relationships are not that important. However, there are also still some marriages where a dowry is demanded although not as common nowadays.
Overall, I feel that in Singapore, I do not really see the "transactional" element in the relationships between the couples nowadays. I think this might be because of the change in mindset of people nowadays as they are not so money concern as Singapore is a developed country now. However, still, there are some people who are just greedy and wants to marry a rich person for his or her wealth but there are not so many rich people so the number of couples that value money more may not be that much.

Week 2 Blog Prompt

In your opinion, how has war evolved from the past to present? Please use examples to justify your opinions.

In my opinion, war indeed has evolved from the past to present. War has evolved in many ways. For example, weaponry have become more advanced (eg. guns,amour) and also nuclear and chemical warfare have also been introduced. Many weaponry vehicles and aircraft have become more advanced and able to have more functions (eg. better control,unable to be detected, faster speed) and this make them even better and more dangerous than before than before. This will result in war in the present becoming more serious than before as technology becomes more advanced. Hence, war should be prevented as it will be a bigger problem than before.