but I feel like there's something uh very detrimental about bad, publicity as companies may lose the trust and credibility of the consumers especially if this particular company has always presented itself to have a clean image


any breach of this image may result in consumers boycotting the companies and their corresponding fall in the revenue once the trust is lost it's often hard to restore it back, so like for example uh bread Breadtalk's uh soya milk saga has tainted their public image regarding the integrity of the company and the nature of how they get their products


so the thing that happened was that uh the a Breadtalk employee was actually caught uh refilling their so-called uh fresh soya milk bottles with uh Yeo's can soya milk bottle uh soya milk so


uh due because of that many consumers have like taken the issue online and even threatened to boycott the company for future purchases due to such an unethical mislabeling of their soya milk bottles consumers were outraged that they had been deceived into paying money for overpriced soya milk


but I disagree like because uh it depends on the country that the the singer is in also because uh in south korea people tend to take this more seriously so


for example right in there's this K pop group called two P M and back in two thousand twelve one of their members uh got in accident for drunk driving, and due to that a lot of people uh were enraged by it and they they


boycotted him and, due to that all his fame just drop and his fans just left him and he was unable to like salvage the situation, so even though people remember him but it was a bad uh image and nobody wants to like uh support him anymore


and so until now he's still unable to to like save the image and his uh people mostly forgotten about him, and


(mmhmm)


ya but I feel like uh say sorry continue, oh so ah I feel that like, even though you you want to have uh strong impression but then the company, should be must be able to like salvage the situation as well cause if they can't handle it right then uh


uh the careers will just go downhill, for example you know in singapore back then uh Temasek poly there's this uh, so called uh bumblebee happened at the lecture theatre where they had a quarrel


so he's he shot to fame because like uh, well because of his uh bad attitude and styles so everybody like criticised him and everybody knows him, but then now nobody talks about him anymore and he's also uh forgotten as well


so it I feel like it depends like whether if you can like maintain whether if uh the attention, so if it's unable to maintain right then like uh is a bad thing, to have bad publicity


oh so you think that uh he didn't handle it well lah yours, ya actually actually after that uh whole saga right he actually uh, did even worse thing such as dissing his mom and stuff which caused even more attention


ya, so I guess that's that's why he didn't manage to salvage his reputation


okay so ya so I feel that the bad publicity is like a double-edged sword lah so it and and it really depends on how forgiving the public really is towards such uh negative news so is whether you go lucky or you unlucky lah


okay


uh part two debate topic two


okay but I feel like the entertainment role should not be underestimated as well, given its ability to allow the masses to unwind and enjoy programs after hard day of work is a cheap form of entertainment that uh families can bond with one another so I personally myself I'm


usually I'll watch TV just for like the dramas and shows I wouldn't watch the news, so, uh I, I will only I watch dramas then so I will miss out on the news so I wouldn't know like all the like educational purposes


and uh, so like you said the elderlies they they'll they'd they'll watch TV and they find out about the, the all the COVID nineteen news and how to like uh


to prevent them right but then uh most elderlies they also, uh tend to watch like the this they have this popular singing programme like golden age, where they watched elderlies uh singing and compete with each with one another so I feel like uh while watching that they will


they'll want to watch that show more than uh watching news and while watching the show they'll be like the show can like advertise about educational things, throughout the show to teach uh the elderlies so uh entertainment is actually very important cause


it gives them the feel like they they need to they need and they want to watch the show instead of like being forced to watch


yes but then, so the children when they watch TV right their main purpose is to like get entertainment like they want to, uh watch shows that they like and enjoy so


uh, so for example if there's no entertainment in the shows right then the children wouldn't want to watch it so they won't , so if they don't watch it so no matter how much uh how much, of the education that is in the show if they are not interested like then they won't watch the show so that's like is kind of pointless without entertainment


and uh no no kids would want to watch a boring show such as uh national geographic, ya where they just give you information but then they don't they don't bring any like uh laughter or any


things, they will uh it's like you said they will prefer okto, where they they uh craft interesting uh shows that kids would like like and enjoy, so entertainment I feel that entertainment is actually like more important than than education eh because it helps to get attention so that they can


(uh huh), assist in the education


okay but I feel like as entertainment is still essential as it brings in like advertising revenues for the media industries and creates job for the local industries, programs focusing on entertainment rather than education usually


have, higher viewership than, uh which will translate into greater profits, that's why , the entertainment shows are usually at uh for example channel eight is at seven o'clock and nine o'clock where people are like more free


and they are at home so that because they are more interested in in those shows and because of that they put a lot of uh advertisements during that period so that uh, they can earn as much money as possible so like uh advertising revenues is like very important for media industries because


through the shows they don't really earn much cause we don't pay to we don't pay much to watch the TV let alone like the shows, so the only way they earn is actually through the advertisements so without entertainment right the viewership will be lower so that they actually earn lesser which which is hard for them to sustain the TV so without entertainment they might not even be able to sustain the


uh education show


okay but I feel that uh entertainment right will leave a stronger impression on people, so for example when you watch a drama you will tend to discuss with like your friends or anyone watch the same drama so you discuss the plot and stuff


so like any education is within the drama, you can also you'll you'll most likely discuss it along as well so it has a longer lasting uh impression, on people's mind rather than just purely education so after people watch it right they might forget about it like easily whereas in uh entertainment shows when they can discuss and find common topics so


they uh they can remember the that the things that they learned from from the shows, uh ya, so it's actually I feel that is more is better to have to use to entertain than to educate


yes and you will remember it longer rather than just from news where you have no interest at all


part three debate topic three


so uh indeed it may appears as if film simply offer an escape from reality due to their ability to construct an alternate world, often romanticized to allow viewers to temporarily forget the bitterness and hardships of real life


for example, the popularity of, superhero movies like captain america and the dark knight taps into our inner desires, for messiah to shoot down from heavens and salvage us from the dark cruel world we live in many films but especially superhero movies condenses all the evils of life into a single defeatable entity


the villain the seductive appeal of this film allows the viewers to position themselves into movie ideals, where there is often a happily ever after, momentarily drawing the viewers away from the fact of life that there are no superheroes with superpowers that will miraculously solve all of our problems overnight


moreover such romanticized, films are usually hollywood blockbusters, thereby distributed worldwide enjoying pervasive influence, the perception that films seems to offer nothing more than escape from reality is propagated


for personally myself right I feel that uh, I will enjoy watching uh korean dramas right so because of the


uh, all the romance thing in the korean dramas which I I can I never experience in, real-life so it really helped me to escape from reality and like uh, it it really like uh gives me a feeling like that where I cannot have it in real life


so, personally to myself like uh, it it's just like, if you experience something that you can never experience in real life


however I feel that because some say films are only to entertain and this is because film techniques that have been developed evidently seem to only be, targeted towards increasing the entertainment that factor for viewers


increasingly sophisticated techniques are used to delight and entertain audiences, for instance animated films, which involved the display of rapid movement in artwork usually more vibrant and dramatic compared to their live action counterparts


has become more widespread, the advent of, computer-generated imagery or CGI for short also made it possible to do spectacle more cheaply and on a massive scale, CGI techniques and visual effects can be used to create realistic images of people landscapes and events


both real and imaginary, and also to animate nonliving items such as Lego, furthermore with the rise of threeD technology and films, once two dimensional images projected into a flat cinema screen comes life in full threeD


dimensional gory, much, technologies were created just to make movies seem even more entertaining than they actually are and give viewers a better movie experience as seen even the amount of work put into making a film interesting and entertaining


I feel that the sole purpose of a film is just to do that and which is to, uh of uh help, escape from reality


uh however those animated films right, so their main like so which is also quite cartoons so that actually like targeted uh young children, so, they actually


because as young children's uh mind uh they don't know much about the world and stuff, so, uh they usually try to make it is is usually unbelievable, so if you make it like too realistic the childrens they also won't be able to understand


and, thus they won't uh be interested so like cartoons they try to make it unrealistic where which children will usually enjoy more, and uh, also people would no humans will also like enjoy the escape from reality as


, that's what usually they watch the show for cause they they they're like tired of like everyday life so they watch a show to entertain themselves and if if they watch a show and yet the show is like uh reminds them of real-life then like they they might not want to watch it


actually I feel uh this depends on uh the perspective between the viewers and the filmmakers lah cause to the filmmakers they want like to inculcate like education and stuff to to the viewers


so so that they learn stuff learn new eh uh knowledge, however for the viewers, they actually uh watch the show to to escape from reality like ya so uh


it's actually kind of both in a sense, cause, while escaping from reality they actually still learn uh things about the, the films uh the education lah


okay


oh part one debate topic one, now we got time to plan and organize what


okay I would like to start with defining what is bad publicity so bad publicity is the negative images and news about uh individual or company making the headlines repeatedly this could also possibly refer to controversial news


this trick is most commonly used in businesses and individuals especially if they want to acquire fame in the shortest possible time especially in the highly saturated world that permits them the news, this phase assumes that even if there is bad publicity it is good as long as your name is being talked about by people


regardless of the intentions behind those people, , and this is this such as how you're in evoke and even relevant in this highly competitive marketplace


so I'll like to state my point of what is the purpose of bad publicity and how it can be good for companies and even individuals first of all companies exploit bad publicity to create marketing hype about their companies and their new products they want to launch


their products or even employment procedures that are discriminatory so one example Abercrombie & Fitch headstart headlines for restricting customers who are too fat and old for purchasing their clothes as it does not fit into the target group that they want to cater to


while this may be while this may have the reverse effect of building up the brand image of being hot athletic and sexy it is will lead to more youths purchasing their products


however I believe that certain times even though bad publicity may lead to customers boycotting or spreading, bad uh bad messages about your brand image certain times this message can it still it still reaches to other people regardless of the intentions behind it and sometimes that may still bring in more customers that will that it will be


attracted to your product or, even try out your product because even though there is bad publicity about it, so celebrities often make of make use of this kind of bad publicity to shoot for fame and to become the top of the town


this is especially pertinent in this highly competitive cut throat industry that requires people to do it to be just known and carve a niche for themselves in such case any form of publicity will be good publicity as long as their names are being talked about


because this suggests that at least their names are on the minds of the people and they stand a chance of being remembered for example justin bieber has made frequent headlines for his bad boy behaviour such as drink driving and even hitting out on people on the streets


even though he did such like negative things his fame and reputation grows each time when he hits the news for something negative essentially he is he is running on this kind of bad fame in order to be known inside


the music industry so even though he has generated such a bad name for himself he , in time right people will tend to to forget the things that a person did in the past especially when especially when you try to override it by doing like good things so for example justin bieber he has been trying to get rid of his


clean cut image ever since he was introduced into the industry, so in the past he has been always like trying to do all these kind of immatures young and immature things, so


so after a while he he can do some he can do things like uh introducing re-introducing himself and like sending out apology videos and, like you know transition like even on music videos he can he can show that he's like trying to change and in fact this rides on his previous bad reputation


and in fact it will generate even more fame and publicity or for themselves because of his effort so-called effort of trying to change for the better for himself, so even though he had generated bad publicity it he can he eventually managed to use it to create a good better reputation for himself especially nowadays when you look at the media


at often people talk about justin bieber uh justin bieber and his works and people tend to forget about the things that he had done back then just because he has so-called reclaimed himself through through his uh through the actions that he's trying to do nowadays


I believe that we can look back into what


is the definition uh what what is the point of publicity and why people try to publicise themselves even if it's bad, because often times more than not, in the news you'll see that there's always bad news because everytime everytime there's too many good news right news tend to be too boring cause is like good news is something that you tend not to care too much about


like cause if it's good news right you don't you don't think it will affect you that much like, it's not as important as a point of worry as something like uh climate change or, you know uh wildfires such as is such as in australia


so usually this kind of bad publicity tend to get more attract uh attract more attention and get more more views than, you know normal normal, or even good like so-called good publicity so generally bad publicity is sought after for companies like people want to do like generally companies want to


create publicity that is, not as like uh normal or like they're the more controversial it is the more attention it attract, and that is usually the fastest way to get attention to something or a brand or somebody in the in the shortest time possible because people will tend to pay more attention to more controversial things or


or even like bad news kind of things so, ya no no no you can continue


uh even if you look at it let it if you look at the example right the publicity has done its job it has attracted a lot of attention and what comes after that right is depending on the individual so even it even if it's even if the attention or even if


the reaction from the publicity wasn't very good or it's just negative, it still ultimately depends on the person to handle handle the aftermath or whatever comes afterwards but the publicity itself right it has done its job and it has essentially attracted a lot of people


and even if it's so-called bad publicity right if you can handle the situation right then it will be very, it can it can turn, is more like a gamble so you can hit the jackpot and essentially turn yourself into a star or something similar so say for the bumblebee guy


if he tried to change his image no no because there's so many people following his news back then if he try to change his image or try to become better right, there will be a lot of people they will see they'll in fact see this as like a good thing and eventually it'll turn his image into something better because you know everyone is talking about the change and soon people will just forget about his past


and in fact now if he had done if he have handled that uh publicity well right then there will be no, it can essentially turn a bad situation into a good one and it's like hitting a jackpot ah ya


ultimately I believe that even if like bad part bad publicity in its


in itself right it is a very effective way of garnering attention and information and ultimately everything that happens afterwards is up to the individual or company or the brand to salvage it or


to handle it essentially, so even if you had bad publicity right if you handled it well right you can turn that, you can turn that negative view is something very good cause people like to see some like people like to see


like uh bad things turning good like you know like the australia for example like australian wildfire turning like people fixing that issue or uh people being saved, ya people don't people like to see people are attracted to headlines that are like very controversial or like worrisome you know in some way but they also like to see some good news after the after that you know so say if we make some bad publicity right it'll


it will attract a lot of it will attract a lot of attention and you can use the attention and if you try to change for the better or try to like admit to your mistakes right, you can turn that bad that negative view into something good


and so I'll think that there's no such thing as bad publicity because as long as you can turn it into something like better like you can if you can change your image for the better people will tend to follow that change


and that view is to generate uh it will change from negative to positive


okay that's a good point lah


it is a double-edged sword but, if you can turn it into good right if it if the bad publicity is turned into something good right that I don't think there's like if that I I believe there is


there is proper ways to handle this kind of things and if you know the ways to handle this kind of situation right is not so much up to luck but more of your awareness of the situation and what other people think


and your ability to like kind of publicise the change and to really show that you can change for the better and things like that so for justin bieber right he he had bad he had bad publicity before


and attracted a lot of attention to him and nowadays he's, trying to like make a change for the better, through his music videos or or you know social medias uh or whatever you know and now when people talk about justin bieber they think about like the change he has gone through rather than the bad things he has done


part two debate topic two


okay first of all I would like to, start with the definition of what it means to educate and what it means to entertain so educate is to impart values or knowledge to society while entertain is to allow audiences to relieve stress rewind and enjoy after a day of work


so I'd like to propose is that educational that educational role is more important than entertainment, first of all television is most often the main vehicle of transmission of important news that the government would like the public to know especially in critical situations such as the spread of diseases such as MRSA MERS or even COVID-nineteen


the government has to reach out to the wider public to disseminate news in the fastest possible time so nowadays television is considered a more traditional medium of, transmission and not everyone yet has access to social media especially the elderly or the young nor adolescence


this media plays an important role also during wartime or national emergency to disseminate news such as places to go for shelter and food rations, so television is most importantly to educate the public and to to disseminate news that is important in the most critical situations


for example the latest pandemic COVID nineteen, requires a lot of information that has to be disseminated from the government to the public such as how to protect yourselves from spreading the virus or even getting the virus and how to


and also updating on the news of COVID nineteen throughout the world so even though, there is a lot of news that's also on social media not everyone has access to those news such as the elderly because they they may not still have a smartphone or even


know how to use the social media and thus this kind of information if it's just shared through social media it will be lost and definitely television is the most familiar to them because it's been in their life for the most for the longest time as the most


simplest uh is the fastest way for the government to disseminate information rather than through mail or other forms so the main purpose of television is to educate because it's the fastest way for the government to reach out to the wider public


because eh ya especially in the most important of situations where time is a critical where time is critical ya


however I believe that uh these kind of shows right they should be purely educational because especially nowadays teenagers ya they don't watch the television much however young children


like from age like uh five to ten in primary school you know this kind of uh young children right they don't have access to social media, usually they don't have access to social media at the same way as teenagers or young young adults do and so most of the time these kind of children they are watching television and especially those kind of kids' shows uh such as okto


and this is a very important step in their development, in their growing up a lot of these values that they learn throughout the years they are often other than through their parents they are also taught


through television you know through, through uh shows such as uh sesame street or ben ten see such as us, so sesame sesame street right they will provide like general knowledge to children through you know educational shows


and other shows other more uh other more other cartoons right such as justice justice league or ben ten right, they inculcate values and manners that are important for the development in the future so despite


being entertaining right these shows are ultimately educational because this uh these shows right they formed a very strong impression on these children despite their young age, because these shows are these shows are made to be entertaining however the main point their main purpose of these shows is to be educational so so that these children can learn the right things when they're growing up


uh but I think despite that right I think I think that I believe that television has a social obligation to impart values the society so this value is being imparted, often stayed endorsed for social stability ya but one must note that censorship is strongly evident due to the fact that most governments control the media and the government


and let the government decides what the people what they should consume and what they should not so for example shows and dramas in singapore are usually focused on family-centric theme of filial piety and heterosexual marriages


anything dealing with homosexuality or politically divisive news are being censored, so if television focuses on entertainment right it may lead to negative impacts on adolescence or young children's views on sexual attitudes and expectations which may destabilize the institution of marriage and family


so lots of entertainment programmes such as sex and the city desperate housewives and even uh sweet sixteen that are gaining attention, but what is the value of watching such programmes if our moral values and and attitudes gets eroded what will be the future of these children that watches this kind of shows and


tries to base their values on this kind of this kind of shows like, it will lead to uh improper thoughts or even


like sexual attitudes or expectations that they had they have in the future


however it does not have the uh how how is it doesn't have to be just entertainment cause educational programmes can also help people to uh broaden their horizon and perspectives about other nations


you know shows such as national geographic or even uh national new uh channel news asia, they are purely educational, while they can be entertaining as well but, this kind of shows do not can be entertaining but educational as well and this that was the main point of this shows that


for example new channel news asia they will they will they will play educational shows, such as uh news especially a lot of news and even uh travel guides to other countries and those news are and those kind of shows they are all educational and that's the most important


part of the whole of the channel that is to be educational national geographic is also quite popular and they're purely uh documentary style kind of channel and it produce a lot of you know wildlife documentaries


and documentaries into other nations et cetera and those these kind of shows are highly educational and their production is also made to be entertaining, for the for the for the audience as well


and that's honestly the most important most important use of television that is to deep that that is to impart this knowledge, to people and to broaden their horizons and perspectives even though these kind of knowledge may not be specifically useful everyday life you know but it can help


it can help broaden their knowledge you know increase their knowledge on this kind of topics, and they'll help this help people to become more globalized, so I believe this is due to I believe that education is still the most important purpose of television rather than just purely entertainment without any education inside of it


well that may be true right I think that ultimately what you get from like this like what you said this kind of educate uh entertainment right is the lesson learned behind of it so for so for example if you


like say in a drama like a woman cheats on a man and then, she gets like uh some sort of, uh karma for it you learn that you know cheating is not good and eventually you will still eventually it will


lead to a lot of issues a lot of problems and ultimately what you get even though you remember what happen in the drama the lesson you learn from it is still the most important thing that you have gotten out of the drama and stuff


part three debate topic three


I'll start with, I'll start with an introduction so from a layman's perspective films are often regarded as a way to escape the pains of their day to day responsibilities, it is an opportunity for them to learn for explored imaginary world created by filmmakers


leaving behind the harsh realities of real-life and that working world and we get engrossed in watching captain america or iron man saved the world we often forget about bills that must be paid and responsibilities that must be fulfilled, that for most people it is often the key benefit of watching films


on closer inspection however films often offer us a plethora of benefits that surpass a mere escape from reality, from a social perspective films often offer offer us a subtle form of social commentary that enable us to tackle difficult social issues without offending people outright


films give us an opportunity to explore our collective belief as a society as well as that of our own the X-men series of films a constant theme that runs throughout each movie is the question of whether or not the mutants in the film should be accepted or persecuted


this often runs parallel in our society today, which the mutants otherwise known as migrants or foreign talents are often shunned by the local population for their differences, the X-men films then offer us a look at the various perspective regarding immigration and outsiders they also provide the necessary subtle social commentary on a hot button issue of immigration today be in singapore or USA


from this you can see that on top of offering escape from reality reality films also offer our society an opportunity for reflection and introspection within our societies


however that I think that the claim that films offer nothing more than escape from reality comes from the point of view of the consumers for the filmmakers films are not just an escape from reality but they are also a medium to communicate a passionate message


films are often used to translate social commentary and social experiences, for our Tanwarin Sukkhapisit insects in the backyard held a lot of symbolic meaning far from being an escape from reality the film was loosely based on her personal experiences as a trans women


dealing with the haunting effects of transphobia in society has transphobia had in society has on individuals films allow her to speak about her experience when the government tried to silence her, because you know the insects in the insects in the backyard movie was banned in thailand itself


for the viewers plenty of insights and understanding about the inner thoughts of a typically marginalized person can be found in the intimate nature in in which film presents their characters, thus besides offering an escape from reality films also able to convey the social experiences of filmmakers and even bridge social gaps


but more commonly films I think that while it's good to have films that you know allow the the audience to put themselves into another world and leave the current world behind


films can also be educational regardless of the viewer's age you know for children, the moving images permitted in film are able to capture their attention particularly when learning academic subjects which may be difficult to grasp when they are learning them for the first time


this is especially evident in numerals children's guide to alphabets populating video shops and bookstores for teenagers that are who are likely to be learning to make their own decisions sometimes even rapidly


they are unlikely to heed advice provided by their parents or teachers they may instead turn to film to learn the behaviors that are conventional patterns, would would by taking a moral high ground shows such as hormones


paints relatable characters for teenagers try to empathize with them in their journey instead of judging them or dismissing their curiosity even for adults films can also be educational, especially in documentaries that are solidly grounded in reality allowing viewers to learn in depth about the world around them


for uh for example documentaries such as undercover undercover asia and crimson are able to explore the hidden parts of society and expose the sympathetic plights of the worst victims, instead of merely reading about it for which our perception is determined by by individuals limit of imagination films are able to record moving action as if it were real


this allows the viewer to feel the atmosphere which can be produced through appropriate cinematography as if they were really there to witness other people's lives, hence it is far from being merely an escape from reality as films can be also extremely educational about the realities of life


despite that many many fiction films are still a commentary on issues that are still relevant to our reality hence an escape for reality is not the main purpose of the film


for example #hayao miyazaki#'s princess Mononoke is set in a fantasy world and depicts a a fictional world between humans and animals, the film serves to point out the impacts of mass action on our environment a very real problem in our world today


there's also another film called zootopia that is set in a city of anthropomorphic animals where a rookie bunny buddy cop and a cynical con artist fox must work together to uncover a conspiracy


it has an underlying message about racial profiling especially in, america where there is the black lives matter movement so despite these films being completely fictional and is completely different it looks and feels completely different from the world we live in


the main purpose of this film is to bring across a message or a commentary on the issues, that we can relate to in our life despite despite the world and the characters being completely different from what we have in our in our world


I understand your point that uh, like generally cartoon shows are catered to children and generally they're they're made to bring the audience into a different world


but however I think that, truthfully all these films they're not just uh they're not just a portal to another dimension they're not just there to transport the the audience


or the individual into another world and and back because this film is they they all carry a message they always carry a message that they want to convey to the audience


even if that film maybe may seem completely educational, because generally these films right they serve as a as a point of communication between the filmmakers and the audiences


and and they always carry themselves a educational message that they want to bring across that they might not otherwise be able to do so in conventional forms of uh of communication


but I believe that you know escape from reality is what people can watch what most people watch films for like learning a message or learning learning a point from it is the most important thing that they can take care of it ya


practical ability, it's just as important as intellectual skills


how far is this true in your society


you should mix up our points directly conflict, so, your point three, conflicts with my point two, but your okay your point one conflicts with my point one your point three conflicts with my point two so say that first


say point one first then point two, ya, ya ya basically that that's the idea then uh we do this, point one can you say a bit more


no it's not ensure it's a good point, maybe you got like forty skills, you're talking about economy becoming more skills intensive, you're talking about oh oh


economy is skills intensive shanine so you can talk more about that, simple only you just wrote a few lines only, but but you can uh let me see uh, poly diploma right


it's all all about vocational, uh education, what can an A level graduate do that A level cert tell me, don't type you don't have to type you don't have to type


okay can you just spam more example then got more time to say you got longer, talk about how like practical skills are, like you know it it's


you know intellectual skills, be like, are only towards the, only ends off at the theory you know it's not exactly workplace but the things that immediately apply to the world is practical ability mah, and in the current society that's what they look at more right then an example


uh what employers look more at like work experience rather than grades correct, yeah just like that I do, I am helping you made your argument stronger shelly


so remember one in three then I'll be one in two then open debate we will ah I see if I got opinion, eh use your never mind lah use your second point as open debate lah


ya lah but, I don't even know what you're writing , okay okay


oh I see oh okay wait I know you have a point that your second point's a good one


so according to what you said earlier you were trying to talk about how practical ability is just as important as intellectual skills because currently in singapore's society you you were saying that, our economy is evolving to become more skills intensive


however, even though it is true that singapore is trying to become more skills intensive largely as a whole in our context singapore's context intellectual skills still has a greater weightage than practical ability in determining whether one has access to more precedence high paying jobs


the, the whole idea is, mainly, singapore's education system is shaped in rewarding students who do well in their academics, rather than in hands-on board so, this requires them to have the intellectual skills in order to do well and therefore


intellectual skills will determine their grades and thus their educational qualifications so actually if you look at the top tier scholarships in singapore, , they mainly they mainly prefer to look at the top students who have gone in gone to JC


you know JC which has a greater emphasis on holding intellectual skills rather than those from the polytechnic so, poly in your polytechnic courses it's more of like a vocational style of education where students learn more hands-on work that is that it's your practical ability in a work so


in twenty nineteen for the public service commission scholarship which is one of the top tier scholarships only nine out of the ninety three students were from polytechnic, and, they were the ones being awarded the PSC scholarship so it shows that in singapore's


context that, they reward students more, for their intellectual skills rather than their practical ability and this has uh also has some implications because the student's intellectual ability which affects the grades therefore affects their educational qualifications


will in turn affect whether they can qualify for your you know high paying jobs, and then eventually your social economic status, so as a result, you know in singapore's context I would say intellectual skills is more important than practical ability


you know, while of course it is true, , I mean your point about how singapore is going towards practical ability I my main stand here is to say that we are largely still, uh, emphasising a lot on your intellectual ability


okay so, , according to what you said earlier you were trying to say that practical ability is just as important as intellectual skills, because you say that, who's to say practical skills do not require intellect and vice versa so you're trying to say here


that , practical ability and intellectual skills, are just as important because they come together, right so but okay however, I would take the view that intellectual skills are still like are instead more important than


practical ability, it's actually because of, once again I bring this to the context of singapore so, in singapore the nature of our industries is such that, like, we are looking towards more services oriented industries that requires more theoretical knowledge so thus you need more intellectual skills and these industries are what singapore specialises to our economic advantage so


uh, in this case in this particular context, intellectual skills will be more important so let me give an example so uh likewise like I said earlier singapore specialises in services that require


a high degree of complicated theoretical study such as the refining of your petrochemicals and manufacturing of pharmaceuticals this is what singapore specialises in and you know when it comes to refining petrochemicals or like pharmaceuticals you know manufacturing those


we definitely need a lot of, theoretical knowledge on it or if not you can't make your your medicine you can't uh refine your petrochemicals there's a whole chemical reaction, that cup like the whole theory of like, what chemical reactions come after another you know so


definitely you will need the intellectual skills in the intellectual ability to understand this you know, and because of this, because we need this , we need to have this tertiary services sector


for the economy to function so uh we need to understand all this highly theoretical concepts we we need to have the theoretical skills, but, more important first without adequate understanding of the theory there can be no applicability to its practice you cannot


you cannot try and, focus on practical ability when you have absolutely no theory, and even more so maybe emphasize a lot on the theory so, I would say like due to the nature of industries which singapore specialises in to their


economic advantage, you know, intellectual skills are instead more important than practical ability


and also, like, so your as I was saying earlier lah your as I was saying earlier your intellectual skills, being more important than practical ability, because of , what we specialize in I can I can give more examples so


uh singapore also does a lot of like food technology so like research on food tech your genetically modified food crops, because , based on singapore's nations singapore's national interests on ensuring food security


we can't grow our own crops so we actually uh research on genetically modified crops for other countries to plant and then we get the harvest that's the idea to get food security once again with so much emphasis on like scientific research


we need definitely need to have the theory how can you genetically modified crops if you don't have that theory on DNA


so shanine do you have anything to say


I do agree that you do have that point that small medium enterprises yes it's true they contribute a lot to singapore's economic growth however you also made the assumption that small medium enterprises, don't don't have specialized or or like don't are not involved in these specialized uh industries that require


that kind, of highly theoretical knowledge , there are, there are SMEs and the idea is what does singapore specialise in, singapore specialises in industries that require all these uh highly theoretical concepts right, and


uh that's how singapore was that's what contributes to singapore's economic growth the services sector, so I, I don't think it's like, fully valid to say that SMEs in singapore uh, not don't involve this kind of


uh theoretical knowledge I I do like in a certain sense yes of course not all SMEs but it's not such a small minority of SMEs that involve this, had either theoretical knowledge you know, and , also I I do want to to speak about the point you were saying earlier you were talking about the traditional indicator of


in singapore of a person's intellectual skill is the university degree and how, that that that was what, was in the past and you're trying to say that now currently, , employer singapore employers look more at your


uh, portfolio your , at work experience internship et cetera, however if we look at like just, we just look back at singapore's current education system, no matter what at the end of the day


in based on singapore's context within the singapore government, is be is looking toward looking at students who perform well academically that's the first thing, if you realize for instance teachers right


they how how do they judge that they get enough, pay, no their income is actually based on whether they, uh get a first class honors, versus a second class honors in their degree, so


at the end of the day it's the academics, in singapore that determines, , how well they will do and therefore the intellectual skills first


only educated people should have the right to vote in elections, what is your view


why shanine very hardworking ah, write so many thing, uh I we need to to see which point that really conflict one ya


I had highlighted with some I don't know grey colour so I can't read , your point one and point two sounds very similar disputed


oh point three is new point three is interesting


okay uh how about this can you say, okay point three directly conflicts with my point one


I think you can write then afterwards you can see your point one and point one point two it's about the same, it's about the same yup, point one point two is just a whack , I will


it can't be an intellectual, I think we're going to start soon yeah


ya it's not her name it's missus P, point four is


let me just summarize a little bit of what you said you were saying that we should, like, only the educated people should have the right to vote in elections because you were saying one of your points was, barring people from voting due to education as a factor is reasonable because this status can change in the future


and I just want to say, that, when you said, that, this status of being barred from voting can change in the future and you also, uh, talked about children you know not being allowed to vote


here's the difference okay, children, when they grow up to become adults citizens they will eventually have their right to vote, how it is different from saying from barring people to vote when you say that you bar people to vote and then you say it's reasonable because this status can change


the moment you silenced their voices the moment you take away their rights, and they don't even have any way of getting it back, it means, that their status as not, having uh the right to vote can remain permanent or if not for a very very long time


that's the idea you, I don't agree that you can say, , it's fine to bar people from vote because you can change your status you most like most likely their status wouldn't change you know for a very long time that's one thing then the next thing is when you were talking about how it's reasonable to limit the ability of the uneducated to vote


because there were cases in the past where certain groups of people were not allowed to vote and then you brought up children, and you were trying to like, compare the uneducated to the children you're trying to say in a sense they don't have the they don't have the well thought out reason ideas


of politics and therefore uh may not make the best decisions for for when they are voting, however I must say that, when you when you, firstly, uh as I said before children eventually grow up


to have the right to vote, even though they don't have the right to vote now eventually they will have, the right to vote so, this example already is doesn't really it's not a very good example that supports your point, of, how it's reasonable to vote uh reasonable sorry to limit the their ability to vote when because in the past there already people who cannot vote your your example doesn't


really support the point it's not the best and the next thing is, it's not reasonable to limit the ability of the uneducated to vote, as a whole because it defeats the purpose of democracy, you know and possibly takes away the initial idea idea of representing the majority so a democracy involves all individual adults citizens to participate in voting who can best represent their interests in the parliament


so essentially, by already ensuring that a particular targeted community which is in this case is the uneducated is not given the right to vote this ensures that their interest will not be accounted for by the ruling government especially especially in your less developed countries your LDCs where the majority are uneducated


if their voting road rights are to be stripped away the nation will not, will will only be functioning for the interests of a minority who are educated and not the majority so uh for example in a, in niger a vast majority of their population are uneducated their literacy rate is only nineteen percent one nine percent so stripping away the voting rights of the uneducated can change the entire foundation in which the nation is based on the nation the idea is the nation can no longer be a democratic society


and it's possible that they might you know even become a dictatorship you know where only a small minority holds the absolute power without the proper checks and limitations to this political power it is possible, that, corruption can be rise


while where the uneducated majority can only suffer because their individual rights have been suppressed when you take when you took away their voting rights does, I would say the society is no longer fan the democratic once you take away the voting rights of the uneducated and therefore you should not


okay let me just summarize a bit of what you said earlier we were talking about how one should not, like the, uneducated should not vote because they lack the understanding of politics and they are more likely to make, or or they don't understand the consequences of their vote so instead only the educated people should vote that's your stand and then you were giving some examples of


the the, well the consequences when ill-advised policies, are being implemented because the voters don't really know what they're doing in that sense right so let me just say a few things


you okay, while, in that sense you do, have, a point where it's you know it's possible that, the uneducated may not exactly, uh make informed decisions when voting but I can also say the same thing the educated people don't exactly make


informed decision not all of them make informed decisions when they vote the educated you know, so does that, that that not the educated doesn't always make informed decisions when they vote, so, why is it that only the uneducated is the one that must be targeted for not voting at


okay okay interesting, educated people not not all of them actually go through political education


let's look at, like singapore you can't really singapore students they don't really go through political education, they, so like let's say from, okay let's talk about ideals , poly or JC


so did, normally what happens is that MOE teachers are not really allowed to say their political decisions which is okay fair enough true, but in but there is no subject to talk about, politics unless you are talking about


for our general paper in JC, but even then it's one small topic out of so many GP topics and not everyone goes into JC either so, you can see the exposure of singaporean students to politics in our singapore education system is actually really small


very small fraction and therefore you can't really say that educated people are also politically educated, if you just take singapore for an as an example


but likewise the same in other countries as well, they , even though they are educated they still make uninformed decisions, politically it it's true, it's true just look at america you can tell me america one third of them don't even know what the federal government is now I'm using an example against you


but, I can also say but americans it's not like they're literally, literacy rate or the literacy rate is low what it's not their a lot of them are educated as well this one third, I mean this one type of americans cannot even tell you what is the branches what is their government system


so, then it just shows educated not all educated people also can make, informed decisions when they vote, and then uh all the more we talk about uh uneducated people here is okay let me let me just say my point, the reason why you cannot neglect the voting rights of the uneducated


the people who are uneducated are normally unable to access education in the first place because they lack, financial resources and when you neglect their voting rights, you can instead breed elitism or change the


democracy into a plutocracy so many of those who are uneducated needless to say are poor they can't go to school and then, if they cannot even have their voting rights, then, their interests will not even be accounted for by the ruling government so since policies implemented are not shaped for the benefit of the poor and the uneducated


which is a vulnerable community that needs that help the most it becomes harder for them to break the poverty cycle on their own, on the other hand the government will only function to serve the interests of the educated, who, have the financial resources to access education in the first place so there are many your middle income or your rich people so this only serves to worsen income inequality


because, while the country is only serving for the middle income and the high income and they just disregard the low income people the low income uneducated people so over time the country may no longer be a democracy but instead develop into a plutocracy so like an example is in twenty nineteen so the there were anti-government protest in thailand


calling for the rights of the uneducated to be taken away but the election commission members Pornchai he said that this argument is unacceptable because, , when you as as I said earlier when you take away the rights the voting rights of the poor you allow the rich to the rich and the middle income people to exploit the voting system make the system


, inclined towards them, you know, for their benefit so I would say, that neglecting the voting rights of others who are unable to access education because of a lack in financial resources can breed elitism and so we should not only let the educated vote


the word failure should never be used in education


okay once again let us make sure our points directly conflict so, , okay demoralizes them that's my point then your one is


it sounds a little emotional , so what


oh okay okay so I will say point one you say point three, then, point two I thought about narrow definition of success but I'm pretty sure this doesn't hit your one okay


your point three and point four is better to, ya ya point three and point four should be used to argue to my point one, cause they're kind of the same then you speak okay, failure is constantly present in our everyday lives


I can't I can't disagree , you know when your ice cream drops


okay I talk about how failure discouraged them from developing said skills further, oh okay wait your point three should use to fight my point one, then your point four can fight my point two


because you talk about will they improve right I'm talking about how you just destroy them then uh, point three I'm trying to say that failure is useless, I think failure is senseless


you can use point two, to ya, then point one is like, ya then point one is kind of like your own opinion about it ya okay that would work, replacing failure no it's like they push in the swimming pool swim swim swim


, it like drowning , uh, okay so I'll start soon, right okay so, I agree that the word failure should never be used in education using the word failure can demoralize students and add pressure on them possibly damaging their mental health so many students in today's age they already face you know having to study in a rigorous education system


, mainly in your developed countries and they have yet to fully develop their own mental tenacity in response to difficulty here I mainly talking about students from the age of children to teenagers, so shoving them in their face of like failure amidst an already highly pressurizing environment


can just crush them utterly like crush them emotionally instead of helping them to learn to cope and grow so, the idea here is really just saying oh you failed you're a failure, that hurts a lot


emotionally to this, and to this students who can be from who are mainly from the age of of being a, a child to a teenager and they can't, can't really expect them to, be able to you know handle this kind of strong painful words


and, what it does is the the the idea of mental health it really damage it can damage their mental health from a very young age so for example in twenty sixteen it hit the the news the headlines and everything a primary five boy in singapore he committed suicide after failing his exams


and like, it's only primary five, and, just because he I mean just because he didn't do well in his exams, couldn't meet expectations, he failed you know


he took his own life, at such a young age so it's it just shows that the kind of, damage to the to one's mental health to be constantly told oh you failed you failed you failed, it it is I I would say it's it's not good it it demoralize


really demoralizes your students and therefore, I would say , since for these students the shock of failure can be just too much for them, you know , the word failure should never be used in education


okay so if I were just to summarize what you said, very quickly you are saying that, , for the sake of their education, failure, functions more like a benchmark, to signal whether okay the proficiency of a student will be useful in helping them improve so whether


so failure can tell, where did they go wrong and then, therefore their approach is okay so now this is where we went wrong and we are going to try and correct, that that's the idea right so , uh, okay true, but, I must say that


while you you talk you while you talk about it more positively that you know failure can help one to improve more, at the same time failure can discourage uh discourage the students you know, to, just stop doing whatever they're


doing completely so let me talk about it more in uh, let let me talk about it more as in like the definition of success in school, so I'm sure we can agree that in school, okay in general you are successful in that sense when you do well academically correct


so, simply labeling so if they don't do well in their, academics then of course they will, they will get a fail grade lah, they will get a fail grade so, this is the idea that, this is the problem that I have simply labelling students' efforts that do not conform to the narrow definition of school success as a failure may end up discouraging discouraging them from developing the said skills further and eventually cause a loss in potential talents


while earlier you were trying to say oh you know failure after they failed they realized where they go wrong then they improve here I'm trying to say they keep saying that it's wrong, they failed you because it is wrong, even though it might not exactly be wrong, you know


so uh let me just talk about it more, the problem with education is its narrow definition of success as academic and excellence the unthinking ability, which is in in in in in a lot of schools actually especially in singapore's context as well the unthinking ability to simply memorise regurgitate information and then do read rote learning


so, students who try thinking out of the box gets penalized for not meeting question demands by being given a fail grade in the exam so if they tried to think out of the box they are, they, the exam or the school will say you are wrong you are wrong here


even though they tried thinking out of the box which is not a, like thinking creatively, creatively which is not exactly wrong, so, this that discourages them from thinking in creative ways resulting, in a loss of a potential talent so if you look at, uh


there's according to the report by the singapore business federation singapore lacks local entrepreneurs due to its rigorous inflexible education system, many do not possess the skill to make calculated risk and to be innovative with their ideas schools do not produce


and do not produce entrepreneurs employers, as they they keep producing employees if anything, and that that's what I mean when we like, when school just simply labels failure, success


and they just go with it you you lose all these potential talents, you discourage, students from thinking out of the box in school, when you just say oh fail fail fail, I can I can think of like another example for instance like a


uh, let's say your, math, it's constantly people say oh learning math is great because you know it teaches you to, uh think of solutions you know maybe think of students solutions how to solve problems but here in school because it's all it's all about how you get the answer it's all about how you do well academically they don't what what happens in the end is that most students just do rote learning


rote learning as in like they just learn okay this is the method for this type of question this is the other method for this type of question just keep doing and they kind of like sort of memorised the method, of doing it then when they do that they, they are not, if they don't if they don't do the rote learning you know if they try to (oo) on my own way I try to solve then


if they do that then they will fail, they're not being encouraged to think creatively at all, their only thought oh you can only use this method you can only use this method, that's the idea like I have, and this is also why I think that you know, when they use failure and they and they really discouraged develop the students' development of other skills and then


like eventually cause all these potential talents to be lost, I would say that the word failure should thus never be used in education


let me just say earlier on you you were just talking about how failure though because failure is going to be constantly present every day in whatever we do, it doesn't make sense you would say, through , say that failure doesn't exist or like to to pretend failure doesn't exist that that's more accurate to what you were saying


but what if labelling the students' work as a as a failure is senseless, what what if there was no meaning to call it a failure in the first place this is especially in things in subjects that are, subjective to interpretation


so, when it comes to interpretation there is no right or wrong, and it merely becomes a matter of opinion and not downright facts, so there is no meaning when you call a particular work


as a, this subject a particular work of that subject that is , may leave uh left for interpretation to be a failure, when it's just not liked not preferred by the teacher out of personal opinion


you know so let's for example art know, art is very much subjective in its style of aesthetics the same piece of work can be regarded as beautiful by one and unappealing by another does it make sense to call that piece of artwork failure when you just don't like the style of drawing or the style of how they colour they do their art it


calling that a failure doesn't seem to make sense I don't see any benefit, because it's just a matter of preference and everyone has different opinions in that sense so, I I would say because for, for this certain subjects to call it


a failure you know to call students efforts works here as a failure, it it's just senseless it's just senseless, I mean you you did say earlier failure, is constantly present in our lives but


when you make up this as a failure, in the school context I just think that there is no use no benefit and therefore you shouldn't actually say that it is a failure


if I interject a bit yes okay so but this is with the idea that they already applied whatever technique that was in, , I and you talk about uh what game art design is it, my I I did I did like talk to a few Nanyang polytechnic students about game art design


because it like in the game ya in the exact cause, because for some interview projecting so the idea is that, they it is it is like said like or just across just art courses even though they already applied the whatever techniques that they are taught


the teacher, or the the the lecturer or whatever the teacher will just mark their their, work art work, with a worser grade even though their artwork can actually like be done the the techniques used in their art work is better than another person


but because our preference right and it is such a subjective


practical ability is just as important as intellectual skills how far is this true in your society


, , you never check at all


so to say point three first then point three then say point two already hor, okay first


, , , uh I can't think any example no my point one is like a more like a intro help


I don't remember what I wrote


I forgotten already ,


, , I was never very good at this


okay I see very often into


oh okay okay okay okay can but I don't recall I wrote anyway me neither


uh it doesn't matter never mind , okay okay never mind we will use that some other time


(hmm) to me practical ability actually refers to a hands-on vocational approach so things like for example what you're learning polytechnics as well as things like learning how to cook


or you know knowing how to apply something basically whereas intellectuals, skills is to me the ability to understand this, as well as solve complex concepts and problems so


firstly I I believe that our economy is actually evolving to become more skills intensive so that's why I believe that practical ability is just as important as intellectual skills, a person with practical ability will actually value add in the workplace


and technical ability and experience elevates a person's prior academic knowledge as they know how to effectively apply the knowledge that they learn, in their schools or wherever they learned it from so for example we


we know that , poly polytechnic diploma right is actually worth more than say a cambridge A level exams certificate because we know that poly diploma is actually a


uh uh sorry polytechnic, education is actually vocational in nature and you it it actually prepares you for working life so the topics that they have are like, I mean those are either there's things that you learn can range from say business communication management supply chain things like that so they are


immediately applicable to, work life so, because our economy nowadays is quite is quite, skills intensive like I said so you will learn you'll have to know how to apply things quickly and work and and need to know how to work effectively especially because like singapore has very small workforce so you need to know how to


you need to know how to uh, you need to know how to effectively pull off like certain project or whatnot so employers actually do expect, uh when when employers uh looking at employees uh background knowledge things like that they actually look more for work experience than a than grades and that's


why for example a poly diploma is actually worth more than A level certificate and hence why practical ability is as important as intellectual skills


okay so do I start now okay, okay so I do see where you are coming from about how in singapore especially the in the intellectual skills is still holding a greater importance


but besides who's to say that practical skills don't actually require intellect and vice versa the intellectual skills can actually require practical ability as well, like for example a surgeon also needs to have good knowledge of medicine on top of being able to have surgery skills


right they need the experience as well as the knowledge, meanwhile jobs that do not require degrees they are actually increasingly being accepted and welcomed even in such a pragmatic society like singapore thanks to the success of many entrepreneur


who are breaking out of their traditional school school and workplace for example like some hawkers they have practical skills like being able to cook well, being able to speak well forming connections with others


things like these right have people beginning to see that, their practical skills, can be just as important as intellectual skills, so long as you pursue what you love and what you're successful in there's no need to perceive practical ability as inferior being a degree holder it may help you for example in like marketing in branding of the


store that you are running but that's just one aspect of hawker business and knowing how to network with others building a loyal customer base these ensure that customers keep coming back for more it is vital to the survival of a hawker business


one I don't think one would learn how to do that in school where books marks instead are cultivated


yes


okay let me see, oh okay so I actually have another point that says the traditional indicator of a person's intellectual skill


you know we generalize it to say a university degree in singapore so that in the nineteen eighties holding this university degree it was like a golden ticket to success , however in this day and age where there are more and more graduates for example there were eighty one thousand people enrolled in university as of twenty fourteen with thirty thousand of graduates actually vying for the same or similar jobs


the discerning factor that differentiates one person from the crowd in an employer's eyes is actually their practical ability few employers nowadays, will be willing to give one a job based on how well they performed in exam or in their academics


even though there is an increasing percentage of university graduates that have outstanding results it merely reflects the test taking ability of our generation and not so much our ability to perform in the workplace setting one's performance with skills picked up like


for example being able to manage a team working under them the experience you have in presentations communication et cetera , these are invaluable practical skills that will gain from hands on learning, increasing your employability in the corporate world


also an interesting point to note is that an increasing percentage oh sorry sorry that's that's not right I'm sorry yeah I also noted right you mentioned about how uh petrochemicals


and specialised industries in singapore actually require theoretical knowledge but we must not neglect to remember that the small and medium sized enterprises in singapore are also a key pillar of singapore's economy and not all of them


actually require specialised knowledge and some more this SMEs they actually contribute, eight forty eight percent of our GDP and employ about sixty five percent of our workforce so they are actually pretty significant and not all of them will require theoretical knowledge and intellectual skills in order to be able to be successfully pulled off as a business


only educated people should have the right to vote in elections what is your view


!huh! really


they agreeing with this right, ya okay okay okay


sure or not sure or not


no the the I think some of these they said like you know if it's still political nature you shouldn't include it, yeah so I may not include one point like the this this one the one where I, started it ah I highlighted it, can you see ya highlighted okay okay okay this one I'm not reading it


I never said I was good at this


okay so you want me to say it first


then I just say it at one shot lah at one shot just say it, okay okay , me too I think I spend at least an hour searching yesterday


, no personal information


, should I say my point four as well alongside point three


can I just just say other whatever okay okay it doesn't matter because okay okay doesn't matter I just say it anyway


I actually agree that, wait what , I actually agree that only educated people should have the right to vote in the elections and I define educated people I mean sorry I define uneducated people as


either those that didn't have formal education as well as those who uh are politically uneducated so they are not aware about political affairs, so that is my definition of uneducated people who shouldn't be allowed to vote


so firstly I believe it is reasonable to limit the ability of the uneducated to vote because there already have been cases in the past where certain groups of people were actually not allowed to vote, so right now you know that in singapore the legal age to vote is twenty one


and children actually cannot vote until they are of age of age twenty one ah it is widely agreed that children they are too young to understand the nuances of economic policies , and also children they're easily guided by their emotions coupling this with their immaturity at such a young age I find it understandable that the vote that they cast the it may not be well thought out and reasoned


similarly uneducated adults in a matter of politics can likewise be considered too immature to make good judgment on the vote that they cast, and hence only the educated should be allowed to make a vote and should leave we should leave out uneducated adults in politic in political matters like elections


furthermore the reason why we use like the legal age to vote as twenty one is explained it is explained as that most singaporeans will have at least undergone some kind of political education in school for example like in social studies or like


ya in social studies so that allows them to make a more informed decision when voting so, in when it's when they are educated person it they can at least have more informed decision when voting but if they are not educated on at least some kind of political education it maybe they should not vote because they cannot make a good judgment


uh on top of that right I feel that barring people from voting due to education as a factor is pretty reasonable because like this status it can change in the future it's actually not permanent, one ought to show that they are politically aware before they are being allowed to vote because it's part of their responsibility as a citizen in order to want the best for the country that they live work and play in


so we know that formal education in singapore is heavily subsidised and is compulsory for parents to send their children for formal education, furthermore since most students they learn politics from social studies and what not


uh we actually know that you know this barrier in barring people from voting using education as a barrier is actually not unreasonable because you can overcome it with time, yes


okay I I see where you're coming from about how uh we are taking away the rights of people when it come to voting in a democratic society but you may want to note that if we should only allow educated to vote


as the uneducated who lack the understanding of politics can make uninformed decisions when voting so for example only thirty four percent of americans can name the tree branches of federal government which are judicial legislative and executive


the fact that most people don't even know this basic information points to the lack of informed voters, who make a vote each election this actually suggest that not many people follow politics closely and are generally ignorant about politics and public policies


one should not be allowed to vote if you do not understand the if one does not understand the consequences of their votes so even if you didn't allow people to vote like the minority to vote, if they make a poor decision and then have to live with the consequences of their vote the entire society may be worse off


so someone who is ignorant about the power of their vote they may negatively impact the rest of society with it and then they give allowance for ill-advised policies that shouldn't even have been implemented if we if we had, if we had allowed people the uneducated uneducated people to vote


so for example, that economic policies they can negatively affect the economics, status within a country as well because uh one, third, like I I'm using america as an example one


third of, americans actually believe that foreign aid is the government's largest expense when actually it's expenses on benefits like medicare and social social security that which are larger as well as grossly underestimated so these uneducated americans they may tend to believe that


fiscal deficits can actually be resolved without having to cut their entitlement or to raise taxes when actually the opposite is true so furthermore in, in twenty twelve appeal research centre poll highlighted the lack of political knowledge amongst americans few of them know who even are the upcoming presidential candidates as well as their stance on key issues


instead they vote candidates in based on factors like race religion and sexual orientation and neglect to scrutinise the suitability of their proposed their suitability as well as their proposed policies, so the consequences of these voters' actions can actually be quite dire as seen in twenty thirteen when the deficit reduction was made america's fiscal policy priority when in fact


fiscal deficit actually fell and so it was unnecessary through central policies around reducing this deficit, furthermore majority of the older generation in singapore they actually continue to vote for the PAP without having a good understanding of what the PAP can offer or even what alternative proposals opposition for for the uh parties have to offer so


ya because I already had that's it


oh let me let me interrupt a little because I define educated people as politically educated people as well so ya


(hmm)


uh we must not forget that singapore is just one small island in like a whole world and there are many many different countries with different levels of like political education so we must not neglect to remember that that's all


, (hmm)


is very low either right, ya


choices ya


the work, failure should never be used in education discuss


how come still don't know , you need wait wait wait no sorry uh, I think my point three, yes it can discourage you, yes okay I think we pointed already


no no no yes it can discourage you but so what , I'm too I'm too practical sorry about this ,


ya I think it doesn't like may, uh wait wait wait let me see again sorry


I wonder why


, uh just that's the last one then , okay, ,


okay then your point what, (uh huh), you are using that ah (uh huh)


maybe I can use it as a point one, oh point two okay okay, okay then I use it as the last one lah


so I as uh as uh if I recalled you mentioned that failure can actually damage the mental health of


children to teenagers in in if you use it in education and that it will, crush them if it totally crush them totally because it hurts a lot, so I, I do agree that yes failure may indeed discourage students and deal a blow to their morale but I don't believe that the extent will be so severe to to to say that it will crush them totally cause


because right in can uh what students can uh the discouragement that a student faces can actually be eased with the support of their friends their family and their teachers so is that is that is to say that a student actually has a support group behind them they are not totally alone


wouldn't it in the engaging with failure so if I if I recalled your the example about how that primary five boy, he actually , kill himself because of ah failing a paper


actually when his mother found out the news right she was very destroyed and said that she actually will have continued to support him and like helped him in whatever way that she could if only she had known about it so if he had, mentioned about his failure to his parents or even his teachers and friends they I I think they would have definitely stepped up to find ways


to help him to improve and not look at it in such a negative light so more critically I believe that for the sake of their education a benchmark, that signals the proficiency of them as a student will be useful instead in helping them to improve so for example a math test requires one to be able to solve


problem sets calculate correct the the correct answers use formulas et cetera being unable to do so actually tells the teacher whether or not one has learned from the lessons taught so if you fail the test it gives an indication to the teacher where should they improve their teaching method


how should they tailor their meet their lessons better to the needs of their students so students will actually benefit from these lessons that are more closely suited to their learning as well so it gives them space to improve as well as learn from their mistakes


yes and that is why I believe that even if a failure is a is discouraging to students it is a temporary stumbling, it is a temporary stumbling block in fact, how you approach the failure afterwards will uh will help you improve instead


and hence why it should be used in education


(mmhmm)


oh okay so you know what if okay from what I recall, ya you mentioned about how uh


failure using the word failure will end up in, people in in will end up in students conforming to rote learning in just going like this the same, way lay reducing their creativity and


and just regurgitating information as well, but, actually in singapore they singaporeans, uh singapore scores as an eight on the low uh on the uncertainty avoidance


uh index so actually we are have a very low uncertainty in avoidance we actually feel comfortable in unstructured situations and changeable environments and we try to have as few rules as possible so it's not necessarily that failure will cause us to


uh have rote learning uh have rote learning and conform to certain ideas and and such because where we are faced with change we actually embrace it this is uh ironically enough, uh so I believe, right that as long as the word failure it is used constructively it can actually motivate students to improve upon themselves uh we should not look so negatively upon the word failure because


we like like I said singaporeans are have a low uncertainty avoidance we are actually (ugh) tolerant to change we accept change a lot, so which we should, use failure to motivate ourselves cause it's inevitable


in life it is it's true we will encounter failure at some point in life whether or not it's in school or in the real in the real world, so we should at least steal our side against failure like we should steal steal ourselves self against failure in a controlled setting such as a school or an institution of learning


such as so that students can have the space to grow they they can learn from their mistakes and also find ways to manage their response to failures so like I said eh you can have like a negative response to failures but schools can actually teach you to have a positive response through failures


so by acknowledging that failure exists our schools can then guide us in the right direction they help us to identify places where we fall short and how to improve upon them, regardless of where this failure exists be it in test papers or as a as a fact of life it has and will always continue to exist so pretending that it doesn't exist is unrealistic and it ironically increases one's chance of encountering failure once you leave the former education


okay so I heard about that and it's


ya so I heard do it that you said that art is subjective means open to interpretation and that there is no clear cut right or wrong but uh if you are studying art in the former education setting there are still certain guidelines that you need to learn


like for example if you are doing digital game art design you need to know how to say cel-shade you need to provide storyboards, ya you need to have certain lighting certain elements in a in a subject that you need to be able to know so if you don't show it in your artwork for example


then it is is I think is reasonable for the teacher to tell you that you failed that piece of artwork if it doesn't show what they are trying, to teach to get you to learn so even if you replace the word, ya sorry sorry yes


there is no such thing as bad art


okay thank you jeremy so to summarise uh basically uh you said that art is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination typically in a visual from such as painting or sculpture producing works to be appreciated primarily for their primarily for their beauty or emotional power


so, you also went on to say that art is subjective and that the notion of bad art or even art alone is not falsifiable, meaning you cannot find evidence to suggest that there's such a thing as bad art, because


from looking at a free will perspective, like, one's anyone's opinion is just as fairly as another person's and, , while there are objective ways to judge art, such as composition contrast and concept ultimately you were saying that art is subjective in a sense that it was


uh it's just a way for one to express himself, however I think, art is not uh there's such a thing as bad art, as uh like when an artist completely imitates another work of art from another artist also known as art forgery, so there are quite a few instances of this happening


, one uh in united states otto wacker he forged many of the famous painter vincent van gogh's artworks, and more more recently, there's a california man who was sentenced to five years in federal prison for attempting to sell over six million dollars worth


of forged paintings to an art gallery in miami, so, these people they forge art works with the intent to profit off an artist's reputation, in the case of otto wacker he wanted to profit off vincent van gogh's uh reputation to make a personal for personal gain yeah and when this happens that is uh that becomes wrong


and even though a high level of skill is required to replicate a piece of art perfectly you cannot, consider it to be good art as no creativity is involved in the process, going back to what jeremy said about the, uh, definition of art the definition of art is the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination


and , when you forge a piece of art there's zero creative skill involved, yeah so, therefore art forgery, or when an artist completely imitates another work of art from another artist, uh that is bad art


uh to end off let me quote anna, choutova, a famous artist, she says that bad art is unchallenging safe and still art that has nothing new to offer nothing interesting to bring to the table, and with that I uh conclude my point jeremy your turn


okay thank you jeremy, so basically , uh jeremy uh to summarise your point you were saying that art, uh there's no uh there is no such thing as bad art, as uh, art is used as a symbol of hope right


it can serve as a symbol of hope for many people who use it as a coping mechanism when faced with hardships in life, because art is basically the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination while


one may judge a person singing for example you were singing eight PM, people flock their balconies to sing, one may consider that to be horrible singing, or you were saying the british a prisoner of war that were held it in uh held captive in changi prison


like while one may consider their murals or painting to be, ugly, but to them is, their way of expressing expressing their uh emotions and


therefore no one can judge their art to be ugly, or bad, so yes I agree with this point, however, another point of I would like to raise is that, art, has been used as a tool, to propagate hatred towards others in the form of racism violence or insensitivity


and, when it is used in such a way, that's when art becomes bad, one example that comes to mind is when a degenerate art, uh is the degenerate art used by the nazi party in germany


so basically in the nineteen twenties the nazi party, would use uh would use uh modern art and they'll remove, these art from state-owned museums and ban them


on the ground that this is just an insult to the germans


okay understand, okay, ya so so basically , yeah uh they they use, they, they basically just said that art was ungerman or jewish and therefore used it as a ground to ban art from being displayed at all


and , people were banned from producing art and that's when art becomes bad


I agree I agree with those points but what if , what if art, while using uh while used as a means of communication is used to communicate you intent that may not benefit the society


therefore I feel like while art certainly has its good points you cannot say that there is no bad in art at all because the truth uh, is that art, does have its bad points, that's uh what I feel about it


okay


singaporeans appreciate the appeal, of theatre dance or music


okay so I will start with the debate, the question is singaporeans appreciate the appeal of theatre dance or music in our society , and in this case I agree, so singaporeans, will appreciate theatre, dance and music because


right now in singapore there are a lot of facilities and institutions, they are targeted, towards cultivating and pruning, the artistic performing skills, of the youth on top of that, there are museums and


uh, concert halls around the place such as uh, victoria concert hall, and uh singapore art museum, they are aimed at pruning and developing the artistic performing skills of people they are aimed at uh giving adults exposure, towards art


uh all forms of art such as theatre dance or music, and, there are singaporeans that are keen and interested in dwelling into a local arts theatre industry, as a means of starting a career, or, even entertainment venues


so some examples I can name uh school of the arts SOTA, lasalle college of the arts, Nanyang academy of fine arts, walrus esplanade, singapore the singapore arts festival that's conducted annually


the singapore youth festival which is, a festival that encourages students, in performing arts CCA such as chinese orchestra band, dance , as uh theatre and drama et cetera would showcase their artistic performances


and uh while people may have the impression that singapore is very academics focus, , the wide variety of arts performing arts CCAs, and uh performing arts schools show uh say otherwise


ya jeremy your turn


so basically the usage of arts theater and music, by locals as a mean of signifying our vibrant and diverse culture, identity as well as portraying our strong sense of identity as singaporeans reinforces our appreciation for it, there are many examples for this ranging from music


to visual arts, so for example we have many national day songs and music videos they are annually created, , count on me singapore is uh one an example of a very well known national day song that singaporeans have been singing for years and will be singing for years to come


through songs like count on me singapore, through national day songs like count on me singapore, singaporeans, the locals can come together and uh share a common identity which is being a singaporean, their music videos are also created like


, Ah boys to men the Ah boys to men music video which is uh something that's uh that other cultures or other countries won't get, so this gives us a unique sense of identity, so stage performances by people of different races


uh, are quite common as well for example, uh, national day twenty twenty national day, yeah the uh, the stage performances held during that time showcase people of different uh races, uh symbolising unity and racial harmony


the presence of film series and musicals, uh like as I said just now Ah boys to men, created by local director jack Neo further reinforces our sense of national pride, and the need to serve national service in an entertaining, and interesting manner


so in singapore, like songs such as home by kit Chan all this kind of songs they evoke a sense of patriotism, and, there are many successes by singaporean singers abroad such as JJ Lin, stefanie Sun


beatboxer, uh Dharni, these people are famous internationally and they are often referenced, and , recently uh in twenty, nineteen, the death of uh


aloysius Pang uh an actor, sparked public outrage and the spread of poems and this cause poems and songs to be spread, uh one example is singaporean son by #low kian seh#, so, these are ways that uh singaporeans


, use the uh the usage these are ways how singaporeans appreciate the appeal of theatre dance or music in our society, , other examples that I can kind of think of is uh , some uh some


uh singaporeans that use art to express their creativity, for example #priyageetha dia#, uh a lasalle fine arts student pasted with movable gold foil on a flights of flight of steps of a HDB block at #jalan rajah# and even though she was asked to restore the steps to the former state


, this uh showcase singaporeans' creativity in art, another person samantha Lo uh known as the sticker lady was, uh spray painted , some singlish phrases such as my grandfather road on walls and streets


and pasted removable stickers on traffic lights, , while that stirred controversy, , with many deriding her for vandalising, public property, many other singaporeans lauded it as refreshing and innovative art


and these are just some examples to show that art, uh, singaporeans can appreciate art and have been appreciating art, , so singaporeans use arts as a mean of showing their political dissent


through towards the government, as well, other #alfian sa'at's# poems , these uh singaporeans unite through uh poems like this over common


uh uh over a common understanding of uh, what, poem uh the poem means, okay I'll hand over to jeremy


yes I was talking about samantha


okay thank you jeremy so, you were saying that , people like uh samantha Lo, got uh arrested for her


if I'm not wrong she was released on police bail but she was sentenced to two hundred and forty hours of community service and had to make a full restitution, of the cost of cleaning to the affected parties which supports your point that, singaporeans cannot, appreciate art because the government do not give them enough space to do so am I right


ya but however, do you know that many singaporeans uh protested against her, uh her arrest and , tried to uh uh, speak out and make the government change their mind on their view of such things and because of these singaporeans uh


because of this outcry from these singaporeans uh sentence was greatly uh reduced, same for for #priyageetha dia# the uh lasalle fine arts student I was talking about, ultimately uh she had to restore the steps to the former state, but uh she was praised by many singaporeans


and, I understand that it is difficult, , for the government to differentiate lah like between uh vandalism and art lah right, , one example that I'm thinking of is the michael fay incident, the this american called michael fay was caned for vandalising a host of public properties


, which has absolutely no artistic merits ah, he was spray painting scratching and destroying things like street lights public building walls and even a supreme court justice car which is definitely not art, but we cannot expect the government


and the policemen the police, to decide whether something has, artistic merits because, uh as we are talking about just now , one man's trash another man's treasure lah so, uh, so what one may consider to be art may not be art to another person and


therefore, I I think my point in which uh, singaporeans appreciate art has merit when it comes to this, so I'm going on , I think singaporean


the arts are uh luxury and not a necessity, discuss this view with reference to your society


so basically jeremy you were saying that art is a luxury because it is impractical to spend money on arts when basic necessities such as food water and shelter cannot be afforded by those of lower financial standing, and furthermore you also stated that according to research conducted by the national university of singapore faculty of arts and social sciences


twenty six percent of twenty six percent, of households in singapore are living in relative poverty where they lack the minimum account of income needed to in order to maintain the average standard of living in the society which it live, in this case singapore so like


you said that arts is seen as a form of entertainment as opposed to as opposed to something that is, necessary , okay so I disagree, while arts are deemed by singaporeans to be something only the wealthy can pursue as maybe a form of career


many are just oblivious to the amount of effort and time spent involved in order to succeed in it, just as how one should act when pursuing other areas, for example #taufik batisah# singaporean uh


from the age of ten this singaporean took on all sorts of odd jobs ranging from being a mascot to a pizza delivery boy in order to help shoulder his family's heavy financial responsibilities, nevertheless, he never wavered in his musical ambitions and before he won the inaugural season of singapore idol


he was one half of a hip hop duo called bonafide during his secondary school days, so, this example highlights how someone from a, uh someone from a family living in relative poverty can, still rise up above his adversities and pursue his career


on top of that, (hmm) art is also part and parcel of our everyday lives as it serves as a coping mechanism for us singaporeans particularly in this day and age where we live stressful lives in the first world consumerist country


for example a study by tech company Kisi, that was released recently showed that singapore was named the second most overlooked city in the whole world right after Tokyo, in terms of work life balance, singapore ranked thirty two out of the forty cities studied


so this Kisi index , compared data on work intensity institutional support legislation and livability of forty global cities based on their success in promoting work-life balance to their citizens, the cities included in the twenty nineteen uh in the in the twenty nineteen index are known for attracting professionals