my main point was actually towards your previous points so your point was saying that companies should advertise more on all on all on their, their, their what social media or whatever like do a lot of advertising on whether , on whether like, the packaging, they should like uh advertise more use like recycling issues but what what I feel was because they they they really make uh refilling price the refill cheaper than the original with the bottle one already so


and also this, and also recycling is for everyone's part is not just for company's part so even though they're like, they are a sustainable company right they like introduce like they do environment friendly uh company or stuff but, I don't think that is only the company's problem to actually have to advertise all that


isn't it is also the people's problem we also have to we not that people like look at their advertise or look at their web uh Facebook page or whatever then we oh we must recycling we we must uh learn, to recycle all that it's not it's not that case what right we still have to we still have to we have still have to recycle for our own own side so it's not just like we just buy the refill we are recycling that's just a that's that's a small thing but actually if everyone is doing it if the whole world is actually doing it right then it's not just a token gesture what right


part two debate topic two


okay so I agree that poorer countries should also address environmental issue, even when their basic needs or of their people is not being met because actually, it is very important to have or to be to, to to address environmental issues especially when environment plays very very very important role in healthy living of uh of anyone so


environment is it's like you are actually doing err, if like, even if you are poor you should also do you should also, help the, environment even though it's uh the little the most small things you can do


it's also actually very important


of course I'm not saying that the the countries should prioritise environment issue over their their basic needs of them what I'm saying is they should also address uh this issue as well is maybe of course they should help their basic needs of their people first follow by also then address the environmental issue okay


kay so uh for basic needs I'm saying about like like their electricity or, or is it really their basic need, so,


okay of course the basic needs needs to be tackled first but how they tackle is another issue so they can they can also help help out like by uh using some environmental uh by, using err, not like they they shouldn't do it like in like a modern country so like some modern country use a lot of electricity all those to like improve the basic needs or build a lot of uh houses all that but what they can do is like they can actually do it using uh environmental friendly


friendly method, definitely before but also but environmental issue is also very important so I'm not saying that because uh they they're they're very poor so they don't have to like recycle or they don't have to help do something to help the environmental issues so it should also be addressed


so it like of course their their basic need is a priority but I'm not saying that because, , they're they're they're very poor they're they don't even have the basic needs so they they don't have to like recycle it don't have to to have help environment


right so what what you what what are you trying to say is right is that oh because they're very poor so they can like do anything they want, just, okay


okay so you are saying that they shouldn't have address the environmental issue is it, but here,


okay but for example you are saying china right they're doing a very good job but they are also wasting a lot of electricity and at the same time and that's not very environmental friendly right


okay so okay I do agree that the government has to put priorities on their basic needs first but also when he is putting priorities he also should have like, also introduce like the environmental friendly issue because like


kay example like what you say people are starving all that then, like people also will have, okay people are starving that's why they will result on like uh what high rate of death high death rate all that right


then there is also uh human waste right, correct, then it will also leads to unhealthy living condition what, right to the people with more and more more and more like human waste


disposal around them, right, (mmhmm)


because there's still many people around the world that depends like on the natural environment for their health and livelihood, especially people like the poorer country in in the poorer country, that's why if a healthy environment would definitely


if they live in a like if they create a better healthy err environment right then of course their water food air will definitely automatically be cleaner right


then they also then this also will definitely help their economic growth all those, then they will have that then when economy grows it will can fight for their the natural disaster all those


right, , yes


oh what do you mean


they do, people there build their own houses


using the, the cow poo, issue (uh huh)


okay


okay so what you say was the government should have lah okay their poorer country should their government should have do done do done something right, then what do you suggest the government to do since they're already poor they definitely don't have enough money to that like build like uh improved sort of like, uh grow so fast like china right


and then the people there is poor too so they can't be giving taxes or anything to that build all these what


okay, but what you are trying to say is, they don't have to address this issue because their basic needs is not met but what I'm saying is like because uh their basic need is not met even though their basic need is not met right


I know uh there are countries have to address their basic needs problem but they also have to address environmental issue problem what so like at least when they they're being like uh, like, uh taught this concept since like day one so they don't have to when they're improving better then they know take things for granted and not recycle or whatever


so they should also address it since day one together with their basic need, right so when they're, ya this is


(uh huh), okay but for poorer countries right they're not their waste, like you are say they are not wasting a lot of electricity they are not having a lot of clean water but


okay lah what you say right they may have like upset stomach and then may may may lead to death they had their their those those country have higher death rate what so they're also causing like human err, they're like they're still having a human waste disposal issue so what I'm trying to say is when like it when the government is


so when their government is, uh talking about or helping them to address this issue right they should uh he should they should also implement that or they shouldn't err, they should also uh address environmental issue because like at the same time this will also like


help them and also teaches them something, that helps the environment helps the world but what what you are trying to say is right the the government should just emphasise on basic needs first but of course when when basic needs is is being satisfied right they will should also they shouldn't then start on


being uh uh being environmental friendly but they should start since even before when they already have their basic need


no it's together when their basic when they're talking about this basic needs problem, together


okay but how are the government is going to improve their basic needs first so definitely they are going to use some method there is not so environmental friendly right so we say they can he can actually use and use the environmental friendly method to to to like, helps the basic needs of the people what right


but there's no need to focus on one right, is there a need to focus on one, (mmhmm)


okay, of course basic needs have to be met but what I'm trying to say here is that when basic need is met at the same time they can also like be environmental friendly, I'm not saying that basic need shouldn't be met but I think they should be met but at the same time they should use environmental friendly


you know to get the their basic needs like instead like like what you say they have limited resources right that's why ah what I'm trying to implement here is like they can use like uh okay ah what


part three debate topic three


okay so, so you are saying that the rebels is the real hero of the environmental, issue


okay but I don't really angry agree that they're the real heroes because, issue right


kay so, so uh they they're they're they're just actually uh killing all the killing all the illegal loggers correct so they're just like


I don't, okay I don't really agree with you from your side you say that it doesn't matter what kind of method they're using right so long as the message uh the message is being uh uh, uh is being sent across the world but


but if they're do they're but what I do what I feel that they're not using the right method, to handle such things, so that they are like, they're like going around to kill those illegal loggers but, is it then are aren't they causing like err human disposal human waste disposal


then they're also they're also like contradicting themselves what isn't it


okay but why don't they like, why don't they do other other methods like uh getting the police to catch all them or what why do they have to


okay I okay I do agree that uh what you are try try what what you are saying is also uh partially correct but I don't agree that they're the real heroes, what what what what what make someone the real heroes of it just because they go around killing people that that the killing the illegal loggers what what what what then what what what what do you then what are what about other companies that also like


err like help uh doing err environmental friendly uh friendly stuff or what about other people in the world they're actually uh trying very hard to recycle all that are are are you trying to say they're not doing enough, they will they can be their own real heroes of the environmental what correct


is not necessary just just them, just because they go around killing people preventing extinct or some animals or, cut down trees all those, right


uh


okay allow me to go back a a bit just now you say that individual are not doing enough so how much is enough going around stopping all these is enough killing people is enough


okay but


but, okay, yes I agree that they're actually helping the environment but what makes them the real hero, what makes them the real hero, so just


then what makes other people that they're are also also helping the environment just not as just not as uh just not using this kind of method, less uh less of a hero, (uh huh)


ya what make what what makes them not the real hero


okay, but what their method what their method is wrong what why can't they use another method why must they put up their life to go like kill illegal people instead of like, using the right method, wouldn't it will be more efficient


they definitely can do something else rather than killing them


so how how did they force them out, what what are some of the method that they do that drive them out, okay, so must they always use a violent violent way to chase people off


, have they try other non-violent ways, okay have they tried non, (ppc), then maybe then maybe


so are you trying to say, so are you trying to say uh because


okay stop are you trying to say because uh because what what uh because they're not listen to the they're not listening to government they're not uh they're not like, err, uh following the law that's why they deserve to die


(ppc), (ppc), (ppc), (ppc) ya so is to die right


so are you saying that killing people there is not is is is is is is is legal


okay, let, okay let's say if this environmental thing is a human do you think that he will be happy with this method being used, sacrificing people's life


okay but but, but tagging, okay but tagging them as a real hero is just encouraging them to like even kill more people or what right


okay what is if that that that people it only like do harm to environment but actually do a lot of other good stuff, so just because it's not environmental friendly then he have to die so will it still make them the real hero


by calling them a real hero right you are just encouraging them or like giving them like what the the the more what will power to actually go do this kind of things using the wrong method so what I'm trying to say is, many people can be a real hero but, what they're using is wrong a wrong method


, , suggestion wise I would have to think about it, okay so do you agree with me that what I'm saying is that they shouldn't be just tagged as a real real hero just because they what put their life out and then go kill people this just this just encourage them to do more wrong things right


I know other people may be wrong but doesn't mean you have to do the wrong things too right it's just like for example uh, you went to slap somebody doesn't mean I have uh somebody else have to come slap you, right, do you agree with me what I'm trying to say is this so just because some people it's not environmental friendly are doing harm to environment just because you love the environment doesn't means you have to go uh like go take his life away


or go teach them a lesson using your own personal method using violent method to teach them a lesson, it doesn't make sense what right, it doesn't


the difference is very big


ya but one is one is following the rule but one is using violence the police then it's not going to use violence right they're not going to punch the people there they will just going to handcuff them, isn't it, unless is in US


ya, ya, they can catch them and then jail them, okay so you you are saying that oh uh so you should let them do


so control them what, by by killing them, what makes you think after you give them a few okay what makes you think you give them a few punches they won't come back


then why are they not fear if they're if they're they're jailed, why is it not the same jail is like taking taking your freedom away, oh, then just find them more money


then just jail them, okay then, then the country should implement jail time to them


okay, they should lah then they should this is my suggestion, no


part one debate topic one


okay so on the side of opposition I do accept the definition of bad publicity being the thing said by well known figures typically working against your favour, however on the side of it the side in which proposition tries to argue is on the side of capital gains being the end point of bad publicity in which it to that end there is no such thing however


the world in which opposition tries to put forth is one of more a realistic one in which the people who are supporting these celebrities and well-known figures are now more brand conscious because with the recent movement towards being a more


active citizen within the global context consumers are now more aware of the faces, running the companies and more aware of societal and global issues and have a strong desire in supporting brands that actually champion good causes, to this extent the capital gains that was put forth by proposition is no longer a feasible one granted that things that are said by well known figures that lead to bad publicity such as the open indictment of gays


nonsensical remarks made typically against a certain group of people and things of similar nature tend to work against the favour of these people and these corporations for the sole purpose of, them alienating


the very consumers that tried to support them because of what, is implied by , against publicity which in short, would actually be they don't really care about, the state of the world right now one good example would be the recent drama that's caused by joanna Theng the daughter of doctor julian Theng who owns the


eagle wing cooperation in which joanna Theng openly indicted gays and stated quite clearly and very simply that the LGBT flag was created by the devil this has caused a big media uproar


within social media in which people, the singaporeans to be exact, uh actively voicing out boycotting against the whole EagleWings corporation for the sole reason of them being anti-gays and that is not to say that it is


the owners perspective itself but rather the owner's daughter from this insolent incident we could actually see how, bad publicity can negatively impact, a cooperation to this extent I would argue that


there is such a thing as bad publicity and there will always be because if you look beyond the local contacts you could think of the scandal that has been caused by theranos, in two thousand one in which


over inflated figures have actually lead to bad publicity because of how, irresponsible those figures are, to this extent I would argue that the capital gains put forth by proposition from the point of of increased exposure is not a realistic one because that increase in exposure leads to a certain critical mind that people are now more aware of


which leads to a criticism of that, of a criticism of the morals of the people running such corporations which then will lead to people not wanting to support such corporations to this extent opposition believes strongly that bad publicity does exist and leads to negative outcomes


(ppc)


on the side of opposition, we do concede the point in which, bad publicity in the long run does not have lasting impacts by virtue of men's forgiving nature in which as humans there is a tendency for us to forgive people for their actions in the past


to put focus more on the present and the future however despite that , on the side of opposition we do fundamentally believe that, we should not only focus on the long terms but also on the immediate terms what it implies of the individual who makes such a statement do we want people who are opens anti-semites to be supported in their business ventures


that would be tantamount to supporting hitler, to to to to drive this point more closely, to support, an individual who at that moment in time is morally wrong


in his capital ventures and could possibly be using, the, gains he has experience from either his business, or the social cloud that he may be experiencing from such a


such dramatic fallout within the public eye, it it fundamentally puts into question what is he capable of doing from this, accumulation of various kinds of cultural gains in in other words in other words


if on the grounds of certain basic humane principles he is unjust how could we fully argue that within, the economic sphere he is just to simply, focus on the will of the people to forgive does not excuse the perpetrators in excusability of having done wrong


put in essence, bad publicity exist, for the very fact that it is the reflection of the personal feelings of an individual within the public space and how it could lead to possible cultural gains be it capital or societal value within this whole


enigma of bad publicity this tantamounts to, a failure within the eyes of opposition for the very fact that the people who should be within the public eye should remain a certain level of public decorum that should be respected


on the grounds of being humane which is totally being transgressed by people who purposely and actively pursued bad publicity to this end, opposition disagrees, with the long term


non lasting impacts that proposition champions for the very fact that it reflects very poorly of what the values of wider humanity would be then


well put put it put it plainly, just because the status quo is as such should not mean we shouldn't


try to be better than what we are now, rather than focusing on, the the bad aspects at only the possibility of a better future why don't we focused on the present and tried to improve it from there


but the thing is here it's the whole issue of bad publicity being caused by, typically things said by well known figures that typically works against the favour of such well known figures having characterised as such by proposition wouldn't you agree that we should stem this problem


from the things either being said by the well-known figures or the controlling of the well-known figures themselves either through the mechanisms of one the public decorum or two, by the non-support, of us consumers when such well-known figures are known to say such things


but wouldn't you agree that, this games, that is benefited these these games that are accrued by such people and such companies comes at the cost of the values of humanity that it comes at the expense of being human it takes the worst natures of what we are


divisive aggressive, to benefit the field at the expense of the many fundamentally that is not something that's fair


part three debate topic three


on the side of opposition I would like to make some challenges to the definition or rather I would like to add on to the to the definition outline by proposition (ppc) rather than simply just being a prolonged video of content for entertainment purposes (ppc)


it should be a prolonged video, content for the entertainment purposes which are artful and tasteful that is to say films that are purposefully made with the intent of an artistic impression so these cuts off any documentaries this cuts off all sorts of dramas


on the side of opposition in direct contention with proposition rather than, being grounded in reality films offer a tool for escapism in which, escape from reality is defined to be the capacity to do things with zero consequences to the world


in this particular case to other people to things and to animals that is to say the engagement with self and the film is wholly contained within the self rather than being, one that allows yourself to interact with the world


so the side opposition we believe that, films only offer, tools for escapism for the sole purposes of allowing the process of self actualisation, with minimal stakes that is to say in allowing an individual to escape into a fantastical land within their own minds do films allow an individual to improve themselves


within themselves, so, as a case in point let us look at, a film such as the movie gifted in twenty seventeen the movie's about a young, bachelor taking up his daughter as his legal child and the challenges that comes with it


it it discusses what it means to be masculine what it means to be a man and what it means to be a caretaker at the same time, whilst grasping, that, economic impossibility of being a father, while simultaneously being a


liberal arts graduate, the movie prompts an individual to take a introspective look into oneself and to discuss and and firmly asks one person what are the values that they want to uphold for the rest of their lives to this extent


the, escape from reality such a film gifted is allowed, to give a viewer enables a viewer, to be self indulgent within the process of trying to be the best possible version of themselves without having to interact with the outer world to this extent


opposition argues films do not, offer anything more than escape from reality


on the side of opposition I do concede all points to proposition for she rightly pointed out the flaws within my arguments however she has made the vital mistake of, pointing out the fact that films at the end of the day are artistic impressions of what reality is so on this basis I shall now move on to my next point films do only offer


escapes from reality for the simple fact, of the tools of the trade, films compromise of cinematography techniques music scores, and lightings, these three primary functions or rather tools


are what allows a viewer to escape from reality though the films may be a reflection of reality in of itself, the way it is captured is not realistic that is to say the use of a dolly zoom is impossible to replicate the human eyes a panning effect does not elicit the same sentimental feelings as one would do if panning from left to right in one's own life


to this extent the tools of the trade that films utilise do offer an escape from reality for it shows us the different perspectives we can take, that are inhuman in all its capacity to depict what reality is being constructed by the mechanisms of a camera


and to the language of film that is to say how each different cut and editing technique ellipses elicits a certain emotional response that could be that is impossible to replicate in any other medium in any other capacity of interaction within reality


it is on this primary basis, of films being an artistic impression of what reality is and ought to be that, opposition argues that films are not likely to offer anything more than escape from reality for the very fact that the way how it depicts reality


and their stories in which it allows reality to exist is not grounded within reality itself


to put simply, reality is defined by the constraints that we humans have to interpret what reality is, and as a result films are restricted by the tools that which allows


them to capture reality a camera lens would not sufficiently replicate, the equalities of a human lens a a a processor of a camera would not have a same function nor capabilities of a human brain colours captured with different cameras create different effects while as the human eye see colours in a similar fashion


my green may not be your green but the green captured on a certain camera remains the same way and could be further edited using editing software so with with this, knowledge in mind even if a film were to be realistic in all sense of the word realism


it still fails to capture what reality is for the fundamental basis of the equipment itself


on side of opposition, wait sorry could would you repeat ya the last sentence again


I mean


wouldn't the whole purpose of a vicarious entertainment itself be an escape from reality that second hand enjoyment you get from viewing another person's life is in itself a fantasy of you living in their own shoes in your particular example of a vlog wouldn't that be the case


you are not watching, the purpose that the that the creator had for the film may not align with the interpretations of the viewer himself , where the creator may view it as a simpler uh a simple act of sharing their lives a viewer may interact it as a vicarious leaving and inhibiting inhabitation of your life


in it in that in this particular extend it would seem that films only offer an escape from reality no for the simple fact that it allows me to live your life and escape mine momentarily


part two debate topic two (ppc)


on the side of opposition I would like to clarify some key definitions of the debate first, television in this particular context there are two types of television that we're talking about , premium television typically referring to cable networks such as SingTel StarHub for our cases in local singapore and we have the the public television services you know such as channel five


Suria, and Vasantham and such, okay so, on the side of oppositions she has argued that the main purpose of the television is to educate


however what she ignores in this particular context is the fact that, television, programmes are interspersed and broken with advertisements which brings me, to my point, the main purpose of television is not to educate it is to entertain it is by virtue of this entertainment that makes people want to watch the television programmes


why put simply, the whole incentive of, the television is to get as many eyes to watch the advertisements that run the televisions, despite cable television and public television being run by different revenue models what is still fundamental


what is still fundamental is the fact that, what is fundamental is still the fact that, television, in this context is simply to entertain and to drive a certain revenue model


the amount of money being spent, and investment being reaped the most effective way to ensure your bottom line, for this television companies is the quality of an entertainment no matter how educational


a programme may be it is still beholden to the principles of entertainment uh side proposition brought up an example of animal planet which teaches about animals though this may be true the techniques used by the cinematographers


are cinematic techniques, films that are yarned and carefully edited performed a entertaining narrative and traps the attention of the viewers which enables such television programmes to have advertisements filling up influencing


the public to buy certain goods and to actually support, this entertaining programmes it is for the purposes, of television being run as such that I argue


that television is not to educate as its main purposes but rather to entertain, being driven, by revenue streams


while I personally I personally agree with the arguments made by side proposition, there is still one fundamental fact that we, both opposition proposition must, acknowledged on the side of how televisions run


all and every programmes are subjugate are subject subjected to popularity ratings or viewership ratings in which it, dictates whether a programme will still be aired or not, on this ground, I would argue that between education and entertainment the main driving factor that drives popularity ratings and viewership


is the quality of the entertainment rather than the purpose of education, within the within the recent decades, the most highly watched shows are not, shows on philosophy shows on debates no


game of thrones, walking dead, rupaul’s drag race you know so like, show of such nature are highly produce for the fact that they are shine to perfect polish


to entertain people in every capacity they could sex drugs violence those are what makes people want to watch because that is what, entertains people that that is what excites people to to spend


their limited time on earth, to forget all their worries and to be excited over fictional scenarios that will never happen in real life it is it is a form of escapism from the mundane's, mundanity of human life to this extent


the purpose of television is to for for education seems to be a little bit too infantile and too optimistic as a tool to educate wouldn't uh wouldn't a book and a conversation be a, with a friend be a more effective tool to educate rather than a one sided interaction within television where there's no back and forth


of inputs and outputs, to this extent the singular direction of input and output a television has with a viewer is more effective when it comes to entertainment rather than education which is to that which is possibly why the top grossing shows


game of thrones the walking dead , have been in existence for so long relative to how most programmes are being filmed, are, they have been running for so long for the fact that they've been so entertaining that people want to watch more of it


to which, I agree but


the main purpose at the end of the day, it's still to entertain education could come in as an unintentional side effect, fine by me but the purposes of television be it paid, be it premium or public at the end of the day is to provide a form of escapism for people to be entertained by


that idea does still stand however when you look at the amount of people watching television the percentage of young children watching television far it's far too insignificant when compared to the adult population of people watching television


let let let us not consider, the people the the vast amount of people who have transitioned from television to streaming, streaming services online because we have large continents like india, and russia who are still relying heavily on television most of their viewers there are adults watching


opera soap operas on a daily basis, what educational purposes does a soap soap opera have in all frankness


on the side of opposition I would like to clarify that, the dichotomy between education and entertaining should not be viewed as a dichotomy of weak of good and evil in which, to be good is to educate and to be evil is to entertain on the side of opposition we believe that entertaining and education still serves one primary function that is the accumulation and the discussion of what we want our


culture to culminate to to this extent, despite, understanding that education will still be an inevitable outcome of television what opposition is still being firmed on is that the primary function of television


is to entertain in which form of this entertainment it takes we are not concerned of, but the primary function of the television is above all to provide a safe space for viewers to negotiate their feelings that ill wills of society and their ideas of self and the world in end in a manner in which


it would not negatively harm another individual whilst stimulating their imaginative mind to this extent, television is to entertain but as a consequence and as a side effect of such entertainment the digestion of cultural artefacts


allows education to happen as a byproduct of the process of entertainment to which the television is the main purpose for


ah so for first of all I like to define what is bad publicity which is, would I feel that bad publicity should be things that are said about somebody maybe like a celebrity or maybe uh someone who is not who is well known lah


by more by a lot of people and something that is not said in their favour so maybe something derogatory about them or something unsavoury about them so why I feel that no no there is no such thing is as bad publicity is because


even if something bad is said about a person people are still curious to find out what happened to that person so most likely, more people would look up this person to see what they did and it turns out to be good for them because when more people find when more people find out about this person maybe for let's for example they're an actor


maybe more people know them they get more famous and then maybe they would be cast in more movies it will turn out better for the actor as well even for example kim kardashian had a sex tape that leaked, and even then like because of that people started looking it up and then people want eventually people wanted to know find it and then


she became more well known by people and eventually she became someone who is really influential and has a lot of has a big following on instagram and gets a lot of like, not only does she have her own uh TV show she also has uh she also gets sponsorships from uh different companies for


as a social media influencer so I think even then it's still turn out a lot better for her because she managed to earn a lot more money because of what happened to her which I think is a good thing lah and also even if you have, even with things like gossips like gossip magazines like in the UK like the sun is very


is very common is those publications still survive to this day even when magazines do not when magazines are not doing so well in general because people are still curious on what happened to other what happen to famous people like what happen to people in the movie industry people who


knows maybe even just social media influencers who build their way up those people get featured on magazines like this because people want to know any unsavoury things that happen to these people like, this person oh this person cheated on another actor or this person had a baby or without wedlock people are always curious about these things so gossip magazines like this hook onto that


the idea that people want to read unsavoury things and they make money off a weight by making a magazine so definitely bad publicity can still can still be turned out to be something good because money can be made off of it which I would define as a good thing


to to wrap up my point bad publicity is good because no matter what bad publicity is still publicity and it can still bring good things to the table for the person involved the victim so to speak, because you can earn a lot in some people earn up end up earning a lot of money or even get better publicity because of it


so I realised that opposition has only proven the point that only brands do not benefit from the fact that, that brands experience bad publicity because they lose money when it comes to when people say something bad while it is possible that it can happen as proven by opposition I feel like he has lack to acknowledge the fact that


how it affects brands versus how it affects people he has not mentioned about why, how it affects one person rather than how it affects a brand I mean, when sometimes when someone


say something bad about a brand it the same thing also can happen where you know you look up you look up a particular company and you look up, let's say someone uh let's say for example erin condren erin condren is a planner company who recently was under fire because the owner of the company actually used the black lives matter


use uh black lives matter permit to hold the graduation for children this made everybody look up erin condren so much more more than she had ever done before but, and it brought a lot of publicity to her page


a lot of people started looking at her web looking at her website looking at her products not that she was not well-known before in the planner community, but it became such an uproar to the point where like everybody was you know interested in looking at what she had on what she was as a person because you know she says she did something like that and she said something so terrible


I think proposition uh proposition believes that there is no bad publicity because anything said bad about someone can, not only turn out good but even if it still lingers people still remember it and if as long as people know you there's always something that comes out of it


like if you have if you are an influencer and you say something bad I mean it depends, on how big you are but also when people see it like oh they will remember that oh you said this thing and maybe they'll screenshot it so easy to take a record of something without you knowing and because they remember you said that they'll hold it and they keep you in mind until when they see you again they'll be like oh this person maybe I should look up this person again


or this particular brand again then when you look them up you give them more engagement you gave them more engagement on their website you' gave them more engagement of more followers on their page it you know it increases their their view count their follower count you know it


all ends up it all ends up being positive for the brand whether it's monetary or not which is why I believe there is no such thing as bad publicity


my question to you opposition is how many people actually maintain public decorum I mean let's be realistic how many people I mean why do, uh gossip magazines still exist if people are still want to uphold want to uphold public decorum


but if if that should have happened it would have happened long ago thing is history always repeats itself, and I think there is no right or wrong time or I don't think it will ever happened because the levels of it are always fluctuating to a certain extent not everybody follow public decorum some people do some people don't and some people only do it sometimes


so I don't think that's a realistic idea to uphold


I think the the problem is not about what is being said or what the person said what matters more is what happens after what the person has said as I've said before something happens after what some after what the person has said, some they will say like after somebody has said oh this person uh I don't like black people for example and then everybody will


be sharing and and for example if it's a tweet everybody will keep retweeting it it will go on instagram it will go on whatever social media there is whatever people use these days and it will go viral everybody will know about it once everybody knows about that thing doesn't it end up


being good for the company when they start searching the brand or the person on a company up ultimately it will still lead to something beneficial whether monetary or not as I've stated earlier


I think the I mean, when it comes to things like social media like you don't think of the person behind the page as a person you think of it as an idol someone who you don't be you basically don't see as a person so what values or what principles do you have to uphold as a person when it comes to


you know social media page we don't even see people, there's no real thing to uphold there in my opinion


part two debate topic two


as proposition, I agree I have to agree that the main purpose of television is to educate because no matter your age there is always something to learn of the television


let's start with kids I mean is very well known that kids love to watch any shows on the TV there's stuff like sesame street there's stuff like, hi five or whatever whatever there is today that teaches kids of basic alphabet's basic numbers sings them the alphabet song teaches them how to add numbers


those are the basic fundamental things that children or toddlers for that for that matter need to learn in order, to you know go on to kindergarten and further on go on with their basic studies so definitely kids do learn a lot from television but it doesn't stop there the thing is that people of all ages also can learn from learn from the television whether


you're a teenager you're in your sixties and you're retired or you're a middle aged person working in a corporate job, there's things like documentaries like animal planet where people learn about what animals are out there in the safari is in in africa how what the behavioural


how animals behave how why certain animals live in the same place or why do some people why do some animals like you know don't, why some of them meet why some of them don't meet their life cycle how do they give birth how do


they lay eggs that kind of thing so definitely there's always something there's something to learn out of that even then things like, cooking there's cooking shows they give you a recipe and you can pick it up and cook it at home like a ten minute meal that you can create for a single person


at home who doesn't know how to cook well or even when it comes to renovating your own home you can watch HD TV and learn what you want or you don't want in a home, how you should go about and look for a home how do you set a budget for buying a home how what are some things you should do or you should consider when you want to renovate at home there's always so


much you can pick up passively by watching television, and I and I think that, you know even if you're watching something for entirely entertainment purposes like TV dramas variety shows even things like that can also give you like life lesson certain things certain scenarios you may


pick up for example you learn the you learn what it means to be honest you learn what it means what it means when you see someone deceitful on how it hurts someone when you were when someone is deceitful you learn things like, friendships how how are you suppose what is real friend and what ends up being a predator or


relationships how do you deal with relationships and what is a healthy relationship and what is a toxic relationship, and I, there are so many things that you can pick up from watching television alone that I feel that every single time I sit down and in front of the television there is I can I can say something that I've picked up from


whatever show I've watch maybe let's say I'm sitting down and watching uh, watching a cooking show maybe I learn the new recipe or like I learned how to cook Lasagna I learned how to or what what should I put in a Lasagna you know those for those things I feel like


they you you can pick it up for television just by watching and for that matter I think the main purpose of television is solely is more to educate rather than to entertain


okay I feel that what opposition has said about earning uh about earning money the main purpose of television being to earn money is is an accurate is an accurate uh idea to make but at the same time


if if someone feels that they can learn something from the television then I feel that, you can still if someone is enticed to learn something they are more likely to watch the show because they can learn something too, and that still can bring you bring forth to you some bring forth to the television company some revenue whether it be premium television or public television because at the end of the day they just want to make money but at but why are educational shows still produce to this day


if they didn't make money for the company they wouldn't have produced it at all, that's why they are they are still shows that still, teach you how to like what I said teach you how to cook because they are young people might don't know how to cook or there're things like


about you know for for children as well why do why are kids' shows still being produced and shown even on public television because there's money to be made of it if whether it's public or private or a premium channels sorry, and I feel that no matter


I don't think it really matters whether your television is premium or public because at the end of the day I don't think that's what people look at when they want to watch television I think what people look out for is, what can this show bring out to bring forth to me if I watch this show some


someone always wants something out of doing an activity so when it comes to watching television your idea can be I want to learn something from watching this show, or it can be I want to learn something I want to learn I want to just watch because I have nothing to do at least you still get something out of it even if you are entertained but even even to that fact how often do you watch television because you are you know bored


even if even if you're free you still think about I want to watch something that will bring out more and not just to pass this time that's where the education part comes in and you'll be like oh I want to watch this show over that show out if out of all the channels


because I can learn how to cook while I'm not uh while I'm doing nothing and I'm bored and I'm free during this free time, so that's why I feel that the main purpose of television ends up being to educate rather than simply to entertain, I'm not saying that you can't educate people I I you can't entertain people but education takes stance over is more important than the entertainment


in this in this situation when it comes to television


my question to opposition is that no matter how entertaining a show is isn't there's still something that you can still learn from the show no matter what it is


so from what I understand from opposition is the fact that you choose, you more more people will be likely to watch television to entertain and then the secondary purpose is to educate but what about maybe like what I mentioned children shows where you know the main purpose is actually to educate do you think that is that idea still stands


I think I mentioned in the beginning that no matter even if you watch something that is meant for entertainment there are still things to pick up like life lessons I also mentioned that you could pick up honesty by watching someone


while watching how people interact you can pick up how toxic versus healthy relationships I think I brought up those points and I think they're valid so why do you think those why do you think shows like this only served to entertain where I have when I have explained that there are still things to be life lessons that still can be learned from such uh from such shows like that


so since since opposition has mentioned that your main purpose is to entertain why, I feel that I still, feel that the main purpose of television is to educate because no matter how how entertained you are by something


you can still learn from something and my issue with my issue with opposition is the fact that they are not acknowledging the fact that people still do watch television in order to learn something, and I and I think that opposition did not take that into consideration when proving their point


part three debate topic three


okay so my I agree that films often any films do offer something more than an escape from reality because


so I feel that films offer something more because of the fact that when when, a film is something that I would consider as a movie or maybe like a drama or something that


some or maybe uh okay so I would define a film as something as, uh movie or an episode or of a drama where there's a prolonged uh prolonged video of content that is produced for from that that is produced for entertainment purposes and I feel that


films provide more than an escape from reality because there are many reasons why someone would would start watching television so not not only to people sometimes pick up a show to watch for educational purposes but sometimes


uh people just want to pick up a show to watch because they are free or maybe because you know they just don't want to, they want to do something else they want to procrastinate it I would say that people do do


watch films they watch films not for an escape from reality but more of, another purpose to pass time to learn something to be entertained even not which does not necessarily result in an escape from reality


and furthermore I think when it comes to reality TV shows or things that are real life I think that's a bit more difficult when it comes to you know, wanting to watch to escape from reality because you're watching a reality TV show no matter how dramatise it is they're still real people that you are watching it their real life that you're watching just formatted into another into


an episode that you can watch maybe like one week across like a forty minute episode and because of that I feel that, that's when people start to watch shows to know what to find out more gossip or to learn or because they're curious about celebrities


more than an escape from reality so for these reasons this is why I feel that films don't just provide an escape from reality they, the purpose of film can provide so much more to a consumer who is watching a film


the reason why I feel that films should be more than escape from, reality is, not only did I mention the other the other reasons why people watch films in the first place but, I also feel that opposition did not, did not necessarily prove why that movie they had given as an example would necessarily lead to an escape on reality


what I took away from oppositions opposition's example is more of a self reflection and I don't see how that that how that actually equates from, to an escape from reality what I would see as more of an escape from reality is something in a more


in a setting that is not, human like maybe like let's say we can give a popular example like star wars why would I call that an escape from reality because it's not like reality you don't see monsters like yoda you don't see a chewbacca walking around


that's what gives you an escape from reality, so I don't I don't see why, I don't see why oppositions uh example would give, would only give an escape from reality when his example as only proven to me that you can you can get more than just an escape uh from reality when it comes to watching that movie so


for that I don't I don't understand what what the point opposition is trying to prove because I don't see why it is an escape from reality from the example he has given, and there are more ways as to why an escape from how you can get an escape from reality


hold on ah you can get some you can get something more from an escape from reality when it comes to when you want to watch something and you


so the reason why I believe that films offer more than an escape from reality is because not only did I mention that you watch movies for another different purpose I think that an escape from reality should be something that


opposition has mentioned that how an escape from reality from a film is shown when because a film is an artistic impression of something that mimics reality or does or


you know a some is like a mythical world created, by the director or the producer of the show but I feel that, those those shows are not created with the intent of creating escape from reality not everybody produces a show for that purpose so I don't see why I don't see why opposition should believe that an you can only get an escape from reality when it comes to watching shows


I don't see from of from what opposition has said I don't entirely see how I how when I admitted that it was an artistic impression that it should be an escape from reality because it is an artist because the film is an artistic impression


films don't necessarily have to be an escape from reality if they are an artistic impression if they are meant to replicate real life scenarios or if they are meant, to show to show how humans or creatures


interact when it comes to certain genres so I I I would like I would like opposition to explain how an artistic impression would as would be a more would be proven as an escape from reality


I if I used let's say if I decided to make a a blog like a video blog


I would you know I would use a camera to take it and I would stitch the video together with an editor and it would still mimic real life and not be an escape from reality because I'm showing what I do in my real lives so how that would still be consider a film


but how is that going to be an escape from reality is it because I'm living in someone's shoes, but even then I'm showing you my life through my own eyes so I don't see how, that would necessarily mean an escape from reality opposition has not proven to me how that how that form of seeing something through a lens equals an escape from reality because you can take away a lot of things by seeing something through someone else's eyes


so my question to opposition is I don't see why something you capture on a camera and you edit using editing software would necessarily equate to being an escape from reality because it could mean a lot of things


on top of being or besides being an escape from reality


then my question to, my question to opposition is if you're watching another like a show for example, like a documentary that is still considered a film or uh, maybe like cooking show, or maybe like a video tutorial teaching you how to how to do something like maybe stitch a book or something then how would that be an escape from reality even when that is considered a film


I think but sometimes is like yes being compassionate is a good thing but sometimes err some people maybe too kind like some people maybe like over involved, and then like


the other person might feel like they are being like trapped and then they are, they feel like you are meddling too much into their personal life


but it may like the other person might feel like they have err


lost a sense of like how to say, err, leadership in their own life when because they cannot solve their own problems, and then they might feel like they're being how to say too suffocated by maybe


your health and then your advice and then like maybe the solution to their problem


ya then I think there's where the over compassionate part comes in like, let's say like if you give someone the advice and then they are not taking it


then you will be how to say you will feel, like you need to, offer more advices and then like you know help the person more, then it might become like how to say troublesome to other person


okay let's say like now , if person A does not want to take your advice and then all your suggestions pertaining to their problems


err but if, they do not accept all the solutions we give them, then you will be how to say, you will feel like you need to offer again right ya you need to you


okay how about now okay you will feel like you need to offer them more suggestion and more help, but, that will feel like you know it's a never ending cycle so if they don't accept then you will just keep on giving the unwarranted


advice and all that, so I think it like in a matter of like time, you the person will feel like you are nuisance more than like you are helping them, with the person will feel like you are nuisance more than like you


ya but ya like what you say yes like you will come to a point like where you will stop, if they err do not take your advises right


ya so how to say when you stop


because you are not helping them anymore already you are taking a step back just like everybody else


okay okay ah let me give you another example okay let's say like err someone's err, kid when we say okay, okay like in a mall then err let's say like


you as a person you saw the kid and then you try to how to say keep the kid, like in a safe place maybe you bring the kid to go and, have some ice cream or whatever to just keep keep the kid very calm and then you know just while waiting for the parents then on your part you think that it's actually compassionate right


like you are helping out somebody and all that okay but let's say hypothetically speaking lah what if the kid is like maybe allergic to something that you just gave the kid then, I mean you did it with a good heart like you know you wanted to keep the kid calm and then you know you wanted to calm it down and all that


what if they're like ya what if they're like lactose intolerant like very bad lactose intolerant then when they the parents come back they see like


you know all the symptoms of like you know that the child has taken milk or something, then will you think that the the parent will be happy that it actually found that kid back or like irritated that you fed the kid something their that the kid is not supposed to eat


true but may but we have seen in like how to say many like, in articles and all that like like you know people being very uh how to say err, not thankful lah not grateful in the sense that they just say that eh how come you


you err fed my kid something that is not supposed, to eat like you just can mind your own business like maybe if you were so worried you could have just like, like send the ah kid to the you know the, the help help counter it like you know that kind of thing


okay


ya but I mean like you cannot expect everybody else to be compassionate other than yourself correct so if others are not compassionate so


how are we supposed to react are we supposed to still be very compassionate towards those people who are not compassionate


okay maybe I can give you an example another example which has happened err, in real life to me lah kay so one time I was like crossing the road and then I saw a blind person


then, you know naturally like as a normal human being like having some like, sense of compassionate I mean ah compassion, so I actually ask the person let's say like if you wanted help like the person reacted in a way is like


how to say no I don't want your help you can just you know leave me alone, you know because the person feels like, they don't want sympathy from other sometime, being too compassionate might come across as sympathy instead of being just compassionate, so that person feels like they do not want your sympathy they do not want your pity


so how will you maybe in this kind of like like scenario how will you still continue being compassionate


fair I found it as in like how to say like it just taught me that not everybody needs your help that how to say and then it makes you feel like next time you see another blind person you will think twice before you actually approached them for like you know that


like they might need your help like you will think eh does this person really need my help or were they like rush me off like the other person did


(hmm), for this scenario I not really because is a bit of like a bit conditioning also because once you have went through


experience maybe even once or twice like it's a very like how to say err, it's not like every day situation lah so it will be like I think it will be your mind like that experience that you actually came across, and then I think that you will actually


think twice before you actually extend your help once again like to this kind of like maybe err, blind people or maybe handicap people


when you say friend yes because you know the character of your friend and like how to say like err your feelings of your friend like you can roughly gauge their feelings and all that, but why is a is a complete stranger again


ya the situation is different but how to say the topic is whether if, we need to always be compassionate ya


but I think that we shouldn't be always be compassionate yes there's a time and place to be compassionate but always is not the how to say from my stand point always is not how to say feasible


ya that is privilege but how to say, but how to say there are some people who are not uh


how to say do not receive this err, help and then like this privilege positively some people, are just negative about everything like they will just feel like eh stop meddling my life I don't need your, help I don't your pity I don't need your you know your sympathy for myself I I can manage it on my own


like sometimes your good thoughts might not how to say reflect the same way you wanted it to like in a way lah


okay so let's say why what if let's say uh you tried to help a stranger, and then they actually shouted back at you they're like in front of everybody else let's say at bus stop they said eh I don't need your help can you just move away


and they're just shout at you so how will you feel for this will you like tell yourself oh I tried you know, and imagine strangers like ah the rest of them at the bus stop they're looking at you like you know maybe like you did something wrong like they like look at you accusingly so how you feel


but !woo! are you trying to say that you won't be even like a bit embarrass like you know when the person shouted at you in front of like everybody else


(mmhmm) okay and then how to say there is this effect on the bystanders whereby they also like reflect on your experience as a third party, they might think that eh you see this guy tried to help this person


and then how to say the person is not like appreciative of the help so, they as a person they might feel eh I think better like it happens in the in real life also like, err like eh we better mind our own before like you know people get like in trouble


okay yes okay maybe , okay not I think that you someone shouldn't always persevere


because let's say like when you know that certain things are like, err not going to work out like you already know that you know like it's already ah eighty percent ninety percent fail, so even though you persevere I feel like you are just wasting your time on it


and you are wasting your time and and then he and your resources I need when you could easily like you know, put (ppc) all of these tree into another new project or maybe invest in a new maybe even person or whatever it maybe lah


okay yes I understand okay let's say like there's a change as in another way okay maybe if, uh okay I wanted maybe err, buy a maybe BMW okay by my thirties


and then I actually err from like it's my dream since young so I was persevering all the way, like till my mid twenties, can hear me, okay let's say like I wanted, to own a BMW since I was young


and then like I was keep persevering like you know working towards, that goal for the past maybe ten years, okay then, there comes a time where you like you realise that it's not like you do not really want that thing anymore like


because it's just a maybe like a, status symbol like, when that like how to say when you grow up you also like, , mature like mature thinking you wouldn't want the same thing, which you wanted ten years ago


so your goals will change and then your priority change, so you actually beside that you don't want the thing anymore, so, when it comes to that kind of scenario so would you still, would you still persevere like because you wanted it once upon a time


because I think like sometimes we can come to be like really very defined by like our goal that, how to say it's very easy to for us to take them for granted, because is like how to say you'll think like, of course I wanted there uh cause I I want that because I wanted it since forever


so even though like even like let's say now I don't want it so should I still persevere


okay but what is the cause of the success if let's say like the cause of success is like, how to say like, maybe you while trying to save up for it like maybe, can hear me now, okay let's say like uh ah like at what cost did you like how to say persevere and about like


like you completed your goal what if it's like maybe you, maybe hypothetically speaking maybe, you wanted to also get married by thirties like now there's a new goal, you wanted to get married by thirties but since like you wanted a BMW since forever


you actually uh forgo your wedding like you know the savings you had for your wedding to actually like persevere and then you just go for it go for the BMW, so, I mean like in the sense like sometimes your when you persevere certain goals it will really make you unhappy


because, I think you shouldn't sacrifice your day to day happiness, like in the hope for some like happiness in some like distant future also


I said that how to say, ya like goals are very like, important and all that but I think that you shouldn't sacrifice your day to day happiness for the hope of like happiness like in a distant future


do you think it is like how to say, intelligent to err


prioritise a BMW over like conducting your wedding like how to say when it comes to priority lah


okay coming back to the point just now you stated where like you think you said that err your family member or your close one or your friends will be proud of you like when you actually persevere stick to it and then like achieve your goals


okay what if like the only reason like, someone hasn't is because like, they're just worried about what other people think so, do you think that how to say, it is still like, how to say is it still counted as a whole to like persevere and get the item that you wanted because I think that you can't satisfy your life to like


make other people happy like just because they know that you wanted it since young so you have like you know you have been about it since young that you want to own a BMW let's say, so, you are afraid of what people might think like if you like don't own that a BMW one final day


(mmhmm) but how to say alright but there how to say but should you always persevere because since it's your goal so should you always persevere


(mmhmm) okay let's say now we know a lot of successful people who persevere like that to the like the status they want and all that but we also know that while going through like all of the experiences they have some like maybe err


so it, (mmhmm), like is it like correct to like how to say give up on your own identity on your own mental health


to still persevere and then like just because you wanted it so is it still like how to say recommended


okay okay let's say like what if okay, understand okay what if let's say like you are in a company where you are trying to get to the manager post


okay but your current manager is still so much on stress, you like how to say fill up her role let's say like to actually uh promoted to her, to her level, and then like how to say everyday you are crying and then when you wake up the first thought like


in the morning you still give up but that was in like how to say your all the way like, you know to be a manager of like a certain position and all that, but you really hate the job I mean like you are just, there because you wanted the like the


how to say the title I mean the manager and then the salary like let's say like higher salary but, like when you get home you are sad you are depressed and then like, err you have so much of work to do and then because of that like, you are like


err spoiling your own person relationship with people also, so in this case do you think like you will still with err suitable to persevere, I mean like stay on with the company still like trying to, you know everyday still go through with like your daily life


or is it better to maybe give up on that option and then like, maybe err start over at a new place


maybe your goal like maybe your goal currently it does not how to say give you a positive outcome for now


okay let's say like okay you were buying for that manager position then you just realise that that manager position is like, not paying high already because of the recent recession and then like you have to take on more than like you know maybe, you must take up maybe the assistant manager ah like role also


okay let's say have to do the both the job for like a lower salary but you just have the title of the manager so, like how to say it's not compared to the previous goal you had this is not the positive outcome, okay so do you think that without this positive outcome do you think it still fair to always persevere


okay that is correct but sometimes maybe when you are trying to solve this problem it takes over all like that aspects of their life like because you know certain like going back to the point just now certain err goals that require can hear


ya certain goal requires you to give up like you know sacrifice on other err, other part of your maybe your, your life also so at these kind of like a really like standstill point so do you think like I don't think it's very viable to


persevere because how to say maybe your too concurrent goal may, clash with each other so in the end you have to let go of one of the goal you cannot how to say persevere and then like you know err try to attain both the goal


oh okay when you said that I don't think that, a good government is only like how to say you cannot judge whether the government is good or bad just based on how the economy is managed because let's say for example in china like you we all still know that is a still a communist country okay


where they're like how to say shield from like, you know random things like you know they even like, have no access to like the internet like as in like how other worlds I mean other countries have, you know they are so shield and then they are so uprise and all that okay


but their economy is one of the best in the world but, people are still complaining like you know they don't have like, the freedom they don't have like the, you know like just everybody else like there are just basic human rights guess like other people so do you think that their government is still good


okay but also brings back to the same question okay let's say like


okay let's , say for example america okay, their economy is also good like before the COVID-nineteen I'm talking about all these scenario before the COVID-nineteen okay, their economy was also good and then like how to say their people are like you know they're very like they have a freedom of speech


they have you know access to, a lot of thing that they want and all that, okay but their economy is also very good, versus china, whose economy is also very very good okay, but their people are not treated well


so do you think that the key criteria how to say it can just be based like like key uh criteria for a good government it just based on how good the economy is, like shouldn't there be more criteria to there like maybe how their people are treated or maybe like uh what kind of like welfare they have in hand


like because we know that how to say even though in uh china ya the they're one of the world's largest economy but there are still like homeless people there are still like people living in like, villages don't have good how to say access to food


water and then shelter, so I think that the government is still not doing a good job even though their economy is well maintain


so okay but but when you say is just the key key criteria so do you think that how to say the economy is more important than their people's life and like their health


singapore for example our economy is good but is not as good as maybe america or china but we do still have like let's say like subsidy when it comes to healthcare we still have like you know like almost everybody it has like the needs like how to say like the like access to like good food like proper food


clean water and then have a shelter over their heads, they're like they're very like little like there's a very minority group who are homeless lah, like it's not an everyday thing that we hear about like homeless people in, like singapore, okay but our economy is not as strong as china


okay ya but whereas china their economy is like they're doing like trillion of you know they have trillion of dollars and all that, but why are they not how to say able to, reach out to the people in their country and then you know


how to say they just are interested in how to strengthen their economy, like even though they have so much of money like just now brings the brings the same err key point from your argument just now you said that


if the economy is doing well then they can actually reach out to these people and help them, but their economy is already doing very well so how come their people are not getting like you know all these basic needs (mmhmm)


okay what you says how to say okay ya understand where you coming from but, how to say you said that you said that err wait let me think


okay you said that maybe space is the how to say like their population and like china's population it's way, bigger than singapore's population and then our currency is stronger right okay but you also must see in china their hierarchy structure3


the poor are really poor and the rich are really rich and then there's like how to say ah very huge gap between like the rich and the poor in china, but in singapore the, the the gaps ah how to say filled in there are like maybe the very elite group


and then there are like the well to do the middle income the lower middle income, and then the how to say poor people so, do you think that our government has really done how to say one of the, key criteria I think for a good government is


how like the government is able to like how to say reach these gaps, so that they bring the people closer together so that the poorer don't become poorer, and the richer how to say don't become like how to say too rich more rich than you know everybody else


okay okay let's say if the like how to say the government want to strengthen the economy okay how do you think this good economy is being achieved, ya maybe is through education


ya is where education is through like maybe a how to say, like getting people to save money like being prudent with their money and all that correct, so, (mmhmm) so to how to say achieve this goal of being like having a good economy


the, more important criteria will be how to upgrade people in the country, and then how to achieve manage all these different factors so that how to say we can achieve like, a better economy for singapore correct


ya so I think the underlying, criteria let's say good education, maybe ah good leadership in the governance and then like, maybe err what are the different aspects, in the government we need maybe like for transport for education


for maybe finance that should be the more important criteria more than just like you know I want to make my, err government I mean my economy best like you know first class in the world ya


okay


okay okay like just to clarify what you said right okay


you said that how to say, , to give everybody how to say it's more, it's more we should be more result based because how to say, when the result is good economy so we should be result based right


so what about those people who are not doing, can hear me now, okay you said that just the, , economy how to say the good economy is the result that you want correct


ya so if how to say let's say like the student don't actually, how to say don't actually, get the result that they want which is a good economy so does that mean that we are failing as a country is that the only like how to say


criteria that how to say that eh you know we failed as a country we are not a good country we are not a good government


(mmhmm) is the inflection so how to say your key factor here is the student who actually studying correct


so they are the more that they are more of the key criteria more than the how to say the results which is how to say how how good the economy is like very good economy, am I right (mmhmm) so how to say


ya ya you can say you can say


what if the teacher is like how to say but I think that everything cannot boil down to the teacher the teacher is not really how to say like the ones that drive you and all to come to school everyday and all that it comes it boils down to how to say how the student themselves like their characteristics and then like


what are their own goals as well correct I mean like the teacher can be like how to say very good like maybe from harvard you know like study from harvard come down so much experience and all that but the but the students are not how to say receptive to how the teacher is teaching


so then how will you like how to say how can you just say that the key key criteria for this ah teacher how to say this uh it's just the economy


(uh huh) okay but if the students are not how to say receptive they're like like very notorious they don't like stay in class and all that, so what is the point of having a good economy what is the point of having a good teacher


with a good economy let's say like very very good economy but with a how to say not so good government who actually practices maybe like you know like bribing and then all the corrupt practices, it's also proven that the good economy can actually fall to these kind of practices ya


but the the argument here is whether good economy how to say good ya good economy is equal to good government, is not whether good economy is I mean ah whether good government is equal to good economy what you are trying to prove is that good government is equal to good economy let's say like


uh current like a government without corrupt practices like you know and all that but what if the, economy is really very good and then someone new comes over like the government comes in and then they start to practice like you know corrupt practices and all that so do you think that having a good economy is still going to be a saving factor for the country


like maybe like there is internal corruption like you do not know of okay it was okay it was all the rage going on but you do not know off and then they are like so well hidden and then the equator, okay it was all the way going on but we do not know of and then they are like so well hidden and then the economy still doing very well so does this still reflect


okay so uh let's continue, so


oh okay so being compassionate, err, we should always be compassionate, uh and we should always err, uh be a good person because uh, uh being compassionate is actually a kind of a morale kind of a value uh it's it it it gives a


err a a character to us so, yeah it's it's a good thing to be compassion


okay okay but what why would you say that we are over and something that, we are doing good it isn't it a good thing that we are doing oh why should it why should we be over and something good


okay if you say that then isn't it still just a given advice or I mean you you you can choose to actually follow advice you can uh choose to follow, whatever other say you don't need to do it so


that other person who is doing the compassionate but this is just doing a good thing so why would anyone blame that, saying that oh don't involve in my ah whatever or just don't advice advice is free will so what's what's the what's the err like how do I say err what what's there to lose


(mmhmm), again, no you are again you are again paused ya


okay but uh don't you feel as a person uh normally with you are compassionate


don't you have that sense of feeling that you actually self at , oh I have done my part and that is odd that satisfaction being compassionate is that ya


okay valid point valid point, but don't you think that you will still carry out that compassionate in you to actually do it to another person and actually carry on what's your act what's your what's your character is what is your


so you you you you continue being good you continue being compassionate


so we I I think I think we are current back to the point that we are always supposed to be uh very compassionate person ya, (mmhmm)


ya I mean you are given a very very it's a very very err hypothetical situation isn't it , like when you see the thing it this kind of thing doesn't actually uh happen like like it's very rare to happen like


err like okay fine any no one actually can allergic to ice cream I think maybe maybe they can be allergy to milk


I mean you asking me this question definitely err I should say that they they will be first happy that err well they got the kid back rather than the kid is allergic because the kid is there alive already


so it it was much better than a situation when you couldn't get the kid at all isn't it


okay okay so well if you say that then don't you think that it's better that we should


we should all be always compassionate so let's say if this person who's trying to save the kid or whatever err tries to give the ice cream and stuff and uh they get the kid allergic okay


so when the other person the parents okay and they are compassionate it is it isn't it a both way kind of thing, like will definitely be oh okay I understand that you are you are just trying to help so thank you so much so being always compassionate not only applies to one person it always applies to everybody that's my point


you see when you say that when when when we are supposed to uh be compassionate and you should know that you are compassionate right


so doesn't it actually apply for everybody always you should feel that I should be compassionate I should be compassionate well given the situation like yours then maybe like they can actually panic but, most of the time art people always compassionate which is ya which is important


okay I ask you something first well did when you when you did this did you had thoughts in your mind and do it


you so so you you extend a good action to another person right you trying to be compassionate that person didn't receive it or didn't uh reciprocate to it correct so uh after the person actually neglect your action or or or your thought did you feel err bad about it


well you are giving me an example of a blind person one if eh like okay yes this this person actually felt that felt the need to actually tell you okay I don't need your help but


err but in most of the cases when when there is a handicap person or person with disability err they should be compassionate right ya so every time you see another blind person


you wouldn't actually give a second thought you will help them after helping them if the the person who hurts you or scold you or whatever it is and then you will be like oh okay fine it doesn't worth a help but again when you see like a handicap person will feel the same compassionate don't you


so are you try to tell me that err let's say you've faced this err this this situation where you you help to disable person and the person rejected you does that mean the you shouldn't help a friend a friend of yours in other situation


okay so so that defeat your purpose of saying that you wouldn't be compassionate what you are still being compassionate always it just it's just it it is just that the situation is different


don't you think that when when you actually send the thoughts and everything it would actually get back good thoughts isn't compassionate being good is actually like a it's it's it's not a it's not an entitlement to for people who actually but it's like always a privilege correct


okay okay it definitely you won't get every time every situation you are going to be compassionate to others you definitely won't get the same outcome but you will still get the same you you will get the feeling that ya I have been I have been doing good and I have done my part you get ease the whole idea of being compassionate is about my my opinion because


when when you do something good you will actually feel good to within yourself so that's why you should always be compassionate


okay well I will actually first thing first when I do that whatever help that I got standing our nature that I will actually put myself in the situation that to show people I am actually helping but if that person actually rejects


the people around me confirm can see that I eh I was just trying to be a help I was not trying to be annoying person where I just I I just go to that person then like you go try to disturb that person or whatsoever, so I feel that uh in like or in any situation you should keep yourself in a situation or you should keep yourself in the position where you show people then you were actually trying to be in help


well that is an I I I I I think I should say that is a a is a a ripple effect lah I mean it it's it's what you get when you help someone in need


a person who is not uh is a who is a unappreciative person so I think that's that's something that you would would handle it well because if you are ready to be compassionate always definitely you can there will be err there will be faces where people are not ready for you compassion or people are not ready for your you know your your good things to come ya


okay ya correct I mean that is the problem with everybody if anybody actually one person actually says that okay uh wait I am actually willing to help but others will see and follow


and if the that person really need help others will actually come in to help so it's it's it's actually I I feel that it's actually uh the thing that you could things you should follow it's a good thing that you can follow so that's why I say that you should always be compassionate


definitely it should be encouraged because it it it's it's it's in the books that you should persevere to achieve successful like ah uh like I don't really to say uh the it's it's like a text book kind of thing


ya so it's perseverance should always be encouraged due to uh not due to uh you if you want be a successful person yeah you persevered


okay okay yes I don't understand that if you know that if uh eighty percent ninety percent uh uh a situation then you actually not err pursue it, ya that's the right word I should say you shouldn't pursue it but you can actually persevere to actually make the situation a better situation for yourself so I feel that ah where you uh given the outcome when there you know that it it's going to be you know that you tried


so when you when you tried it and you may never know what's the outcome any situation given you you can actually face err certain uh like like uh, certain things that surround you that uh you should you suddenly feel that eh I have this err situation and I have to persevere to do this


and if I actually persevere there is a fifty fifty percent that this actually can be a success, so from my eighty percent or ninety percent you actually bringing it to fifty fifty percent I feel that it's actually a huge jump and when you persevere only then you can actually reach that situation you can actually don't persevere as what you said you feel that okay I should just giving up then you never know which like


the whole point of you persevering for ever you dream for and you actually you let's say you actually succeed it already


and it's a success already whether you want it or not is second dream the primary goal was there it's to to get a BMW so ya so you you you got an BMW so


like of course people won't actually take for granted what I see is situation is people actually will like see you as a person who actually persevere so much you actually got your your goals uh met your goals, and definitely people will be proud of you let's just say your your ones definitely they will be proud of you normally will actually say that or she actually persevere so much to actually get a BMW and then she don't want a BMW


okay okay fair enough fair enough well if it's if you feel that perseverance is actually gives you uh a situation where you need to actually uh like you know pause your wedding for a while or or whatever it is okay it's it's again I'm coming back it's in the textbook if you need to succeed something you need to sacrifice something


so there it there are sacrifices that there there may that you make need to make in order to actually get to what you wanted to do so that it's actually just you you just did a sacrifice that you wanted a BMW so I have to I have to pause my wedding


or I need to extend the day or whatever so but again you have actually succeeded in leave your primary goal your wedding which came about was just maybe on the go that you've always wanted a BMW


ya true err that's where I said when you set your priority when yours your your priority of getting a BMW was always your goal so when you you set your priority right and you actually manage your time that actually boils down to


how you manage your priority it is it isn't a a topic where you shouldn't persevere ya so but I think again persevering to what you are actually doing is always encouraged ya


ya of course of course of course you see again this is your goals and this is what you want to talk about when it comes to uh let's just say you today your goal is actually to get a BMW


and one week later or or down the road you actually think okay BMW is not the I don't want to actually uh get a BMW but then I want to get uh err a wedding, so now your priority has changed you actually changed your goal


so when you changed your goal that's on you so when but it doesn't actually says that you shouldn't persevere to do anything you're still persevering to do your wedding now it's just the changed of situation


ah it's your life it's your life in your hands then when you persevere you get good things you persevere you get when you put in perseverance it's actually hard work


or smart work or ya but hard work is actually connected to persevere more I would say because, if you if you if you put your hard work to in place there shouldn't be a problem where you don't get a things ya


of course if it if it of course it it takes for you to actually sacrifice certain things you do it that is actually perseverance


okay I I do understand where you're coming from uh you are trying to say that uh let's just say that you are it you are in in no good health, but then you still persevere to actually go and work err and get this done uh is that right ya that's your point right so okay at this point of time this is an given situation that you have to uh pause whatever you are doing and take care of your health first because well health comes first after that you are still going to persevere


to do your goals so this is just going to be a pause situation or it would be a a a situation where you yourself a giving yourself a break doesn't mean that you can always come back


(ppc)


okay so let's just say you have to make some sacrifices to actually uh uh do your your goals okay and then you end up


err ya you have uh you have to be encouraged to be perseverance to like you uh to persevere so given any situation my point is, given any situation be it your primary goal your secondary goal be it doing your wedding or whatever be it you are doing your studies or whatsoever you should always be encouraged to persevere


ya it is always it's it's always uh it's always err a good thing to actually persevere because say you never actually get a outcome what you get uh what you actually wanted, but again wen you do the next thing you have to persevere whatever you do in your life whatever you have to uh whatever you have to choose to do in your life you have to persevere


that's very you would actually get a better outcome than what you actually thought that would be a failure


I mean what's what's what's the harm in doing your vote like if you can get fifty percent of one and fifty percent another then you you still persevere and you still get both what so isn't it a success


debate topic three, okay this is a interesting topic okay the key criterion for


uh good government is how well the economy is managed yup I should really really accept that this is err how a good government is you see uh when economy is well uh okay uh it sadly to say sadly to say err right now the world wants okay runs


by money money is very important it's actually the sole primary thing that we are all working for so if the economy is bad in any country then, I don't I don't know how a good government will actually so ya (ppc)


okay okay so I mean if if my point is is the key criterion for being a good government is to ya


how how well your economy is where right now the world runs around how they actually judge you based on how your economy is, like what is your value in the economy chart and that is how everything is decided whether you are a developed country or a developing country or whatsoever whether you are a third world country or a first world country so I feel that economy is is actually the key criterion uh for ya good government


okay uh coming back to your question that uh is taken or should I say the topic if you if you do realise that they say the the key criterion for good government is how well the economy is managed not the only criteria


ya so it is a key criteria I accept but it's not the only criteria for a good government so ya


okay right now again I would like to reiterate that err money runs everything so when money runs everything you have to you have to see how good is your value to actually get good healthcare good housing and everything


yup so economy should be good it is definitely the key criteria to have a good government which can serve the people better (uh huh)


okay this is a case of where uh you are see a a we say that economy in in china is better than singapore but I'm back to defer that because we are having a better currency than them


our currency is much higher than them and get shows that we are actually err definitely from and plus err if you see the thing is you're comparing a a a a country that is uh a certain square feet meters and then


where china is a better uh like a bigger large land where the government has to so and so many people, so I feel that this is actually a case of a a a a space a a a a between a very uh small country and compared to larger country


okay ya uh this I would like to say again if you're saying that err ya of course china it can be in such a situation but in singapore because of economy is good everybody is actually err uh given a right equal amount of a uh of opportunity to actually rise up in like


so again the there are a lot of criteria that that that sums up a good government okay but the key criteria is definitely economy


okay so you are saying that uh other criteria are much more important than economy okay so uh then if okay this regard just give an example so are you okay to actually have


err okay let's just say economy is actually equals to results okay and then err we are all students okay okay and then there is this leader who is so good in the class he actually leads everybody in everything does that mean every person in the class become smarter


ya but let's just say we have an leader okay we have an average leader and then there are all, everybody is actually equally very smart and they're actually very tedious people this average leader actually pushes them and stuff like that to actually do err like better


okay so in that case economy becomes better you see so it doesn't give you key criteria that err it is the middle that is actually taking the err the key criteria


the key criterisa is a result it's it's it's just based on how we behave how you are as a country and how is your monetary value more than you your leader


of course it it it boils down to whether you are a good class based on your merit value, every school are based on their merit value how how how they are they have done


ya ya okay (mmhmm) ya ya ya no okay you see the thing is err okay, eh okay this is a given situation where students are economy if I give you the same situation where the teacher is the economy


then we as students won't we go for the teacher which is a economy then the leader which just our monitor or whatever ya so sub


because well it's how the teacher teaches you and how you give the result that's why it's based on


exactly (ppc) of course you see then this also boils down to err your own citizens, okay so with good economy you can teach values you can put advertisement you can propaganda you can so much of things but let's just say you have a bad economy


it is very difficult for any any country to actually come up with bad economy it's actually proven ah


well I would like to correct you there because with corrupt and bribery or whatever so the country will become not a good economy country their economy will fall definitely okay but doesn't mean that so this again shows that


the economy is based on how the government is so good government equals to economy


ya that that that means they're actually they're actually giving up certain things to actually get a good economy correct so err that again doesn't if it doesn't reflects that err doesn't reflects that economy isn't the key criteria


ya economy is definitely the key criteria okay so err well the key criteria with with like without economy I feel that a good government will actually so I I feel that it is the key criteria


on my oh phone app ah oh phone app okay okay I was like !huh! which app okay wait ah so it's the phone app, !oops! ah wait wait ha where this okay


part one debate topic one


okay so for


okay all right the topic is uh practical ability is just as important as intellectual skills uh in my opinion alright


it would be I would say that practical ability is of uh slightly higher, importance than intellectual skills uh let me explain, why uh I would think that way rather than both are of equal


importance because with yes intellectual skills is important because that if without intellectual skills you don't have the ability to develop idea or or have certain you know ability to