to their to their budget where they can actually purchase that particular whether it's a laptop or whether it's a computer uh like uh ipad or a phone people, still have that bandwidth of getting that device if they really need it as in because technology is coming up people would find a way whether it's it could even be second hand that they would use the technology


so I I think generally now people are although although people are people are very dependent on it but it actually, improves the quality of people lives right now at this point of time


I mean even when you go to restaurants people are very dependent on their, menu which is on an ipad they don't no longer give a physical menu because when you actually put it on an ipad everything goes directly to the systems that they had so you know it's convenience and to the whole restaurant or


on a general basis where people it's easier for them to extract the information, instead of them writing everything physically also, they would you know having a more convenient on an ipad where the menu is there and they just select, and it goes automatic and then they get their order


but I mean technology generally I mean if we look at singapore lifestyle, people are dependent on that technology and I I think it it it should make them happy because you know even while waiting for somebody they had that phone with them or they had that particular technology with them to actually get them based they are more dependent on that


and maybe like you know even playing a game it's it's it's , you know it it it it it feels maybe it makes them, a bit more busier that you know they actually got something to do on a on a on a device then you know just waiting there and not doing anything I mean I think every


even when we talk about I mean again then we talk about technology right now everything although I know it goes down where people lose their jobs but even when you'd look at so many companies everything was online there because it's on so much easier for them to


handle where you know again I say it's even if it's a delivery company they don't have to you know uh the company doesn't have to waste so much of money uh giving it out to the people were you know they just need one proper device or they need


to where they have to pay the the the people a lot more money its cost saving as well when you talk about technology because you know they just need a few things they don't need so many people working even when we look at uh companies around the world


you shop online everything it's convenient so when it's convenient and actually improves, the people's life because they don't have some people may not even have the time to go out and you know pick up what they need but when they have an app where they can just select what they need then it it comes on a convenience and it actually improves the lives


I mean even if we don't look at ordering things online even when you go to or, when you go to a supermarket you that whole technology where people don't have to you know collect your money and make payment you'll have an automated machine where you have pack everything yourself and everything is


based on the technologies the subs check out right so where people it that also brings it convenience so in general, technology actually improve people's life because it's convenient


okay because I personally feel that you know if you had the convenience and you can just go in there I mean although, those people who are not able to use the the technology that is actually happening now that is why they actually send people to educate you I mean even it's elderly you see so many things online where they


you know people go in and educate the elderly people okay how to how to use a certain things or they had their domestic help on how to how to actually order things online


part two debate part two debate topic two


okay so science still exist but we can do farming actually without science you look at our older days we didn't actually need all the science and you know we just


actually used the natural staff to actually farm


but if we look at the olden days the olden days never needed science to know which fertiliser to use they were just use it and you know it would be it would be it it it would be healthy they wouldn't they wouldn't they wouldn't actually bother about


oh we can use this we cannot use that and to me, this approach actually seems uh essential to successful and agriculture


(mmhmm) not, necessary because I mean again I said we look at the olden days people in the village people in the forest they don't depend on they don't they don't really depend on the the science structured they actually just they will just go on with what they need to do in the forest or in the village


and not not not feeling that the science is important you know even planting vegetables of, in in the farm they don't have to think about oh is this right or is this wrong


people still go on you know in in life where they don't need the science, I mean I'm not saying that science is not important that it is important but they can do it without it


okay so in in if you look at a farming you know weather it's spinach or vegetables or you know getting chicken when I'd as of right now we have our uh we have like the older people who lived in the village concept


it's all brought forward to the youngsters were you know in their head they don't know anything about science they'll just tell you what they know and in this generation, there are people who would listen to the people who lived in the village because you know it's a whole different I mean they've been through it and I I think


in general basis you can't farm without chemicals I mean there are chemical farming solutions out there which have been proven and you know you can actually use those there's actually worm farming natural farming uh harvest propping up and a lot more


so why do we need to use the science to farm


well without agriculture you would , I mean I I I think this is this generation where you actually look more in detail in science these gifts can be, taught how to you know how to how to grow something


uh without the science I mean were again be the older generation teaching them, you know how to how how how to grow without, science big around I mean I'm not saying that it's


is it if it's not needed it is needed but it is possible to do it without science


what you see I mean talking about you know when we when they talk about injecting chickens generally people when you tell them something they wouldn't eat it so science is actually not needed they would just be like okay you won't you know you won't eat it


right, (ppc)


agree but the thing is when you look at people who actually do farming in other countries they can't study science they don't have the ability to study science so to them is okay we we do farming without science that it to them is effective because


they don't have the bandwidth also you know to go in detail, or that you know that science should exist, you know they just, normal normal each farm


but if they do effective farming without science that's cause sailing to them too because they don't have to do any research they don't have to go in detail on you know that is that is that is a encouraging cause to them also


so but if they know that they can farm, effectively without sight and stand they don't need to go, as in they don't they don't they it's not necessary for them to know that uh you know it science is necessary


ya so then again uh general they can actually like they said earlier they can actually farm without chemicals you know they have options and it's been proven so why not use that instead of using science where you know


uh uh uh, okay but I still think that you know that, if again we go all the way back people don't use the science to actually do farming I mean people who live in villages they are able to sustained without the science they're but still eat the vegetable then you know


ya so I I think farming is possible without science, but thomas had been doing it for so many years and I I I mean it somehow should go through being effective


for them I mean people can share their experiences


(mmhmm), okay but how long how long how how long are they gonna depend on science


, ya but I think there will still be doing farming without science because I think people who know how to do it they would do it effectively


part three debate topic three


okay let's talk about artificial intelligence right now, uh I think we are all dependent on it and we look at most companies we have the automated you know the chat box where you just have to clean the word and keeps answer it's so convenient you know that it


that that you know that we should embrace it


actually , I think it it it brings a lot of convenience to people because I mean most companies that you know even I deal with they they have the they have this


uh a chat box where you can actually I mean you just have to key in your, keyword and then they give you the whole list of answers and that is why they actually at the end of the at the end of the question they ask you know is that what we're looking for and if it's a no then they still give you options eventually that is supposed to give you your answer and I think


like a lot of companies around the world use it a lot of korea companies use it a lot of oh you know banks use it and it's very convenient to people where you know they have this and I think they they they embracing it


I think even you know even kids are embracing it look at uh example look at fifa you know there are players were they actually show their strengths and they show their weaknesses in actual players and you know it the kids also get excited


as in like they actually use the whole uh the whole fifa concept where they you know actually use the players and, the good players and the the weak the weaker ones it actually allows people to you know view the whole


the whole thing and


we lose out in our human touch but you know even when you're born you can just take your phone and talk to google or you can talk to siri and they'll tell you a joke or you know they will wake you up you don't need a physical around clock we have google


yeah again we talk about you see a bit convenience for I mean where they be the of course we would want the family you know waking us up but what about those people who are alone and they live alone, they have to be dependent on something and that is why you know they created such things where you know people can still use it you know people talk to siri


with their phones you know even when calling somebody it saves you the time, of messaging you can just talk to siri and they will take the whole message for you and they will you know call the person that is required so when they create such things I think it makes things easier for people I mean even doctors


when they do surgeries they need they need they I you know not even humans can do it


, well I mean I think most companies people they will have


have the the the chat box and people don't even have the option so when the company's come up with it, I think they think of uh making it easier for people and I mean I I guess people embrace it even more because it's there and in today's world we're going so advance that you know we need that this AI should be there technology should be there where people can just


you know at the snap of the finger they can just, use it


, I I think I mean even when we talk about like wanting lights I mean we save electricity, we don't need read it the moment you enter if you're at home okay by you snap your fingers your lights on and you can off it you can save electricity you don't even have to worry about the charges that go up you know comes it comes up electricity TV


anything


but I don't think like big companies and like like their big companies would do such thing where they would use codes, and and I I think usually big the bigger companies use the use the chat box and the bigger companies use the robots because I think they're more confident and I mean look at google look at


look at the I look at apple their big companies I don't think they would want to have something which you know would would break codes or go back they would definitely have a backup plan


but I think at this point of time a lot of people are embracing cause it's there and it's so convenient I mean even when you do like uh the chat box kind of thing you don't have to


oh please hold on, you know you at least get instant replies when you you you you you message them you don't have to that that you know and you do a customer service officer will asking to hold on you don't know how long you're going to hold on for so you know and you


but you know if it if it's there people would definitely embrace it because it's convenient I mean so if I whenever I use it it's it gives you my answer ,


, well I I think yeah of course AI should not be used for the wrong things but


I mean look let's look at the positive side that people are embracing it, you know again you have uh apple you have all these online it's it it's good I think it it it embraces because it gives you a lot of convenience and yeah it gives you a lot of convenience and we are living in a technology world


and I I think whatever technology given people generally embrace it because you know it's convenient and easy for them to use, again they don't have to they don't have to wait for someone for the longest that said uh okay I'm finding the answer hold on and I guess that is why they give you the option of like you know when you talk about the chat box again where you know you just type it just that give you your answer and it says no okay then they ask you another question


it somehow another they have to answer you as him, you know that that okay


, okay I mean uh I mean we we have to face it lah nowadays people are, using a lot of the artificially intelligence you know I mean even again when we go back to like doctors or we go back to clinics


they need it because, even humans cannot even solve the issue so that is why they need the artificial intelligence


okay so okay but I mean since we have it we should embrace it


and , you know I mean I I think that's what most of us are doing that you know I mean it it it it won't take over our lives but, since since it's their people should embrace it with because, it's there


but I I think if we're looking at the generation now it would actually all this would overtake you know all the personal touch and I mean of course even overtime when you go to schools and everything it will


come onto artificial intelligent when people should embrace it


part one debate topic one


for me uh being the opposition I believe that modern technology, uh, does not improve doesn't uh always improve the quality of people's lives, I am, understand with chat board it uh you know allows people to communicate but there are times when uh


, actually chat board may not even give you the answers that you need, or the answer that you are looking for so in in an actual fact it does not allow you to you know to, it it's a actually basically does not even give you uh what you need and


uh reduces your efficiency and, may even waste time, so your quality of life actually just you know is effective


in my in okay my aspect uh just to point to bring up is that uh with modern technology, machines usually replace manual labour, and when that happens, uh people lose their jobs


and it basically reduces their income or basically they don't have any income because you have a machine uh replacing their kind of work and when this happens and they have uh no income their quality of life actually is affected and it in fact


(mmhmm), you know it has a negative impact on the quality of life


, I understand where you're coming from and terms of modern technology, and , in terms of robots replacing you know cleaning gadgets and, and help that we get besides that


we're talking about how and you talk, about how it you know helps with school uh home base learning, but not essentially would it improve the quality of life because at the end of the day uh balance you know your social balance


it, it's basically affected so kids don't go to school they're at home on their computers and they don't interact so in terms of quality of life that's impacted, and at the same time, if we're talking about uh social media


and how, does modern technology improve uh like when you say it does improve for me I believe it in fact uh, uh has a negative impact on the quality of life because, (mmhmm), but social media everything is connected on the phone and


and, you may lose your personal touch you may actually lose, , you know talking to people in person, and everything is about you know posting pictures and tagging people but you may have not even spoken to that person for, uh days and months


so in actual fact the quality of life, (mmhmm), I mean although everything is fast, the the balance, uh you know quality of life is is affected


(mmhmm), so I believe what you trying to say that uh modern technology is essential uh in our daily lives in the sense that we need it, purdue to situations uh you know uh unforeseen situation or and challenging situation like COVID nineteen and it is essential but whether it improves the quality of people like people's lives is another thing


you know whether it it makes us have a great balance so, in terms of being essential yes but in terms of how modern technology uh affects the quality of people's lives, uh is a different thing so like you say about you know visiting our parents it keeps us connected I agree with that


but, not essentially improves the quality of life because at the end of the day uh we're at home we're with technology and, we're isolated so it it, does help in terms of keeping people connected but how


does, uh an impact on the quality of people's lives


okay so but in terms of how so the thing about quality of life is also subjective so but at the end of the day the idea of quality of people's life is, not spending more for something less I mean at the end of the day it's also about you know having a work life balance


and uh you know it's about, saving it's about spending time with family having occurred so it's basically, earning enough to ensure that, uh your quality of life is, you know is not uh impacted so if you're talking about modern technology it's it's not


cheap okay it's not affordable it's not something that is affordable by uh a lot of people so we talked about the layman so the layman, got average uh earning income, a person would probably be able to afford a normal phone but what about uh you know laborers or those who are working in factories


how would modern technology improves the air quality of life in fact it has a negative impact in fact it will pull back their quality of life because at the end of the day they're not connected and they feel that they may be losing out


you know so at the end of the day uh with modern technology it does not uh always improve the quality of people's live


but I guess in terms of modern technology ya it you know makes things more convenient and you know uh you go in you tap something and your orders in but, in terms of quality of people's life is it is it something that makes them happy is it something that they they're satisfy doing there's some people who may feel that their quality of life has been


uh affected by this modern technology because now they can't speak to the waiters and waitresses they can't have a chat they can't do the orders personally or customize it, so these things may be important to some people, and modern technology would


not, you know improve uh the quality of their lives and in this aspect, so it's more of losing that personal touch because you know modern technology moves you know it's so fast everything is uh, automated and then at the end of the day is it something that people want uh is it is it something that makes them happy is it something that allows them to you know uh be satisfied and you know and things like that


but is actually improving the quality of their life I mean they could have miss that you know that a bird that was flying or they could miss that uh you know the clouds in the sky I guess I guess at the end of the day uh I feel that modern technology


does not always improve the quality of people's lives because it also depends on what these people place as importance what they feel is their quality of life, because at the end of the day if it's an old grandma who standing there and you gave her a phone and she's probably not gonna be able to even see it so how does that improved her quality of life so


but if you give a kid the phone uh while waiting at the bus stop and in terms of how they feel they're happy it has improve that quality of life because they are playing with their friends and they're kept occupied so at the end of the day it this modern technology


I feel does not always improve the quality of people's lives it's very dependent uh on the kind of the group of people that are actually you know , involved or you know as a subject matter


what about those people who actually you want to walk on to supermarket and pick, their you know their vegetables their fruits, where, so for these this group of people they, technology you know going into an app and selecting what they need may not be what they want and may not be what makes them happy so in terms of uh people who like say housewives uh for example people who have OCD you know they're very particular about the certain things that they


that they pick so for them, techno of modern technology actually is not gonna improve their quality of life because uh for them they have to step out walk into a shop pick what they want, and come back home, so which is what uh lot of people while okay maybe uh a few people uh are still doing uh although a lot of people are moving towards what you're saying


but it does not always improve the quality of people's lives


uh, but there's convenience always mean, what I guess, okay in terms of convenience that's one thing but improving the quality of your life I mean depending on how you uses this modern technology, you know at the end of the day yeah I mean you go in and you tap your card but there's some people who still want to pay cash so


like I said for modern technology does not always improve the quality people's lives, uh in this respect


debate topic part two debate topic two


as your position if you ask me is effective farming possible without science I will say no because okay first we look at what is science, okay science basically is knowledge, and uh knowledge is forever evolving


so at the end of the day if you're talking about science you know a few centuries back and now it has evolved, and if we talking about, farming okay we define farming, farming could be livestock it could be crop uh and uh including agriculture so an effective farming means you are you know


you're, you're growing you're growing uh you know crop and you're wearing all his livestock effectively which means that low cost, and, a higher higher turnover turnover so if you are asking me is effective farming possible without science I would say no


uh firstly because, uh we talking about you know the user fertilizers for example with with science you discover which fertilizers grow your crop uh you know effectively uh and grow them well, in terms of abundance and quality so as we use the science in our farming I believe that uh it would be effective and beneficial to society and uh you know uh


livestock in that sense


okay so you saying that farming is possible okay without science, uh but at the end of the day what we're talking about is is effective farming possible without science so we're talking about how we're feeding uh a rising population a growing population uh how we're feeding uh an increase in the world population and producing food that


you know uh effectively and that also quality food so with science uh we're always they're always trying to develop, ways to actually come up with crops like we talk about coming up with crops, uh without even using soil and then you have organic uh you have organic crops I believe even when the world started uh I don't think organic was even uh known about so but at this point in time everyone's talking about organic and how did organic come up uh without science so if you were talking about effective farming


we're talking about producing uh with uh producing, plants, uh food agriculture, with low cost, and I believe only science can do that


okay we're talking about like say the study of growing fruit and vegetables, uh in proportion to how how were actually trying to to to like the world's needs okay so now we're talking about farming and weather's like right now if we have right forest fires in indonesia and we're talking about


uh cold weather's where's it snow how we going to grow our crops or even have uh you know reared chickens in such climates I think , even learning about uh having knowledge about what would be good and what would actually help aid in you know allowing for these crops and our uh livestock to you know to grow and


to make sure that they're actually at the end able that you are able to sell them and still you know no not not at lost, and in fact, so I feel that we're talking about effective farming and science they are they actually go hand in hand because when we talking about new lot new knowledge with new knowledge comes


you know a lot of discovery is I mean you're talking about , how we can actually produce a spinach for example uh without even using fertilizers and you have, fertilizers that are not good for our children and not good for people not good for consumption and only with science we're able to understand which one is actually you know which one is actually the best to use


so but if we just take it for granted that okay you know what we're just going to grow our crops, and, it's gonna be effective, I mean at the end of the day you still need science to come in and and help you you know decide which fertilizer you want to use which is going to produce more even with chickens I mean you hear stories about how


how we gonna produce how we going to cater to the needs or say a certain uh you know industry that requires this particular mean how are we going to produce chickens fast enough, and the only way is to actually you know study a study and get knowledge and apply this knowledge in farming so that we make it effective


, but I mean the thing is at the end of the day we talking about effective farming so if you are gonna be studying a topic if we want to talk want something to be effective we need science, we need science for basically everything and it's actually parts of our daily life not only farming so we're talking about uh how to use science and how to use this knowledge to make farming effective you see so even in schools when we learn and we teach children you know we teach your children


oh this is how plants grow they need the soil uh they need water they need you know certain certain nutrients to grow this is what we teach them so this is science at the end of the day so now in order to, to actually make it effective we have to study more into it and that's why you have the studies and you have experiments


that allow us to test certain things so that's why in school and you know even when the kids are taught they've not just let's not talk about just growing something I mean, you know how a how a how how do you grow a green bean for example how do you make it grow effectively and you can only learn this in science


and it's, talking about how we can make it better like okay so we're if we're talking about effective farming and the masses then you talking about, agriculture and the industries that produce this, in you know how we going to apply this this science in order to make it more effective


it's okay it's possible but whether it's effective, like okay we talk about a company that wants to mass produce chickens and then they come up with uh something that they injected chickens with for example and, and they think it's effective but with science uh you will understand whether this particular thing that you are injecting the chickens to mass produce is actually effective or not and if you didn't have science


uh you wouldn't even need you wouldn't even know so, with with science, and I think science and effective farming they go hand in hand and it's it's impossible to have, you know effective farming without science


I mean see the thing is, when we talk about science right and effective farming, it's more of what you produce okay so producing something at a lower cost, and how would you how would you know that producing this, is uh at this at this caused is actually going to be efficient


I mean at the end of the day you need to put in make sure that your output is is worth your input, right so if you are going to study it, and science is actually you know something that, need you to study uh science is knowledge then


you know this would actually be a very big contribution, uh to effective farming


, but at the end of the day if you talk about a farmer okay uh, uh like one of those traditional farmers and you talk about a company that needs to produce food for the masses, uh and we're talking about how how is this effective so if I have technology and if I have the funds and I'm going to put in a research into how I'm gonna produce a certain crop or you know effectively science comes in


like the farmers probably just gonna be doing the same thing you know like everyday just going in and doing the same thing and may not even, have the resources, to know what is effective, right if we're talking about effective farming


we're talking about injecting knowledge funds research to make sure that whatever you produce is something that is cost effective, and , and basically ya effective


but if we inject more funds okay initially for research and development and we know that uh and we understand that by putting in the certain amount we're able to get this kind of output, and we're gonna be able to save a lot like in terms of cost savings and you know the time that's taken so with science we know that if I mean if you do research and development


we will understand that better we won't be doing the same thing thinking that this is the best and this is effective you know if we if we actually were into it and we started at which is science then we will know that, what would be more I'd be putting this this certain amount of input to generate a greater output and a better quality and that's what effective science is about effective farming is about I mean


but what if they're uh chemicals that are good and allow you to be more effective, and there not uh you know, and there are not a detrimental to to your crops I mean if it's going to help and it's effective


then if we did more research it would be something that would be beneficial and more effective for farming but if we did just continue to do it and we didn't use chemicals it means, that cannot be effective it may just be okay farming like okay uh produce this amount this is amount of effort that goes in right so if we're talking about effective farming we're talking about making it


uh quicker, better with better quality, and not losing the nutrients, or even if we could add nutrients it mean we had uh you know soil that actually helped with the growth and allowed your vegetables to be more fresh especially when we're transporting it from one country to another


I mean you need to have good quality vegetables and this is only possible with, with science


, yeah but what about effective farming


and learn from each other as I think that's what you trying to say, but I think at the end of the day if you're asked if you ask me I would say that effective farming involve science and that's the only way towards it that's the only way that's the direction that we're taking


uh in this generation, forever really forever I mean it's always evolving it's forever


part three debate topic three


okay so good you talked about chat box because, uh, I have experienced so if you talking about artificial intelligence we're talking about non human right we're talking about , the computers basically in general your computer answering your question your your so okay so we're talking about chat board okay you type a question and not necessarily you'll get your answer and sometimes I feel that it's very frustrating dealing with chat board because


uh they supposed to be intelligent but they don't actually come up with answers that you need so there sometimes when you ask a question that's not in their you know in their template, and then they come back with something that oh I'm sorry I don't understand you can you reply and at the end of the day you just wasted your time


uh using chat board so at the end of the day we talk about artificial intelligence, rather should be embraced or not I mean I know it exists but embracing it and actually, uh accepting the fact that you know this is how we we everything is to be about artificial intelligence I think that's going to be hard


so I think okay we're trying to say that okay so it is inevitable it's true that uh AI is actually take kind of taking over a lot of our daily lives but at the end of the day if we're going to the question is whether we should embrace it or not, , we're talking about the impact of AI like for example even loss of jobs you talking about a chat bot replacing uh customer service officer for example it's like okay so a chat board can answer a question faster is to the point uh and


our customer service officers are laid off so and this is because of artificial intelligence so you talking about loss of jobs, AI and is that something that we really need I mean I believe that uh AI should not be embraced I think it exists it's something that


we cannot run away from but we don't necessarily have to embrace it, you know we're talking about a fishing we're talking about uh you know use all these computers and technology and we're talking about how these cameras can actually you know use codes too


uh to go in and you know steal information it makes things a lot easier with AI you know by programming it so I feel that there's a threat, there's and it should not be embraced


but it's that something that we want our kids to embrace, I mean okay we talk about them, playing a computer games okay we talk about them uh playing fifa at home but what about actually go out playing soccer I mean to to a certain extent like I said we cannot run away from AI uh it's actually part and parcel of our lives but I think it's a matter of


uh knowing how to accept it and not just you know embracing it with open arms and okay this is it you know I'm just gonna use AI everything that I do I think willing to be selective, even if you talk about oh okay my whole house is you know programmed then I just had to walk in and say !hey! google turn on the light but


you see it's something that you choose but whether you choose to embrace it, uh whether you choose to let it take over you know your daily lives that's really how I mean I believe that we shouldn't be doing that because if we we lose out we lose out on our human touch


but we need our we need our family I think we need that you know uh !hey! can you mummy can you please wake me up at this time you know rather than don't worry you go I will take care of it so how you embrace it you know how you let it takeover uh what you do everyday I mean I think we need to be very careful because


we can't let it rule our lives uh we may lose our creativity we may even lose the fact I mean with may even stop thinking what if we just say okay you know what let this let google decide what I'm going eat for lunch you know what if what if that happens, and when we embrace it we're gonna be very complacent at the end of the day we're just gonna leave everything to AI


I I think that's something that we have to think about


well okay in terms of science there is there are certain situations where AI needs to be use so it's a necessity yeah but uh at the end of the day when you walk, into a hospital you know being graded by robots or uh when you walk into the operating theatre and you see this machine in front of you and there's no human you panic you know like okay I really sure whether something goes wrong or electricity gets cut so


I think we still need to uh use AI but we embracing it embracing it, is a different level I mean I wouldn't I wouldn't completely embrace uh AI I would still feel I still need that it's something that we can utilize we can use we can employ and I uh daily you know


activities and maths and in banking but I've I believe that we shouldn't be completely embracing it, in our daily lives, I mean


but I believe that if we are going to be leaving at all to AI and embracing at and saying, !hey! let's be part of our lives uh in everything that we do like you know I I believe that like we talk about quality of life you know it's it's pretty gonna drop like you walk in you snap your fingers your rice cookers already on you sit down your TV turns on to your favourite channel I mean what's gonna happen to us


you know if AI is going to take care of, you know take care of us I think that's scary I think we need it we need to use it uh in our banking and our medicine I guess it uh embracing it is, not something that I agree on


uh, that's, true that's true I mean see the thing is, we can't run away from it right everything is becoming automated everything is being taken care like I even when I went to uh I went to japan and we walked into hotel and a robot came to us and greeted us


I mean and then you know it will give you directions or where to go I mean it's interesting it's inevitable but embracing it you're still looking for your reception as you are still looking okay where do I check in I mean, see the see the thing is we're accepting it we're not denying that it's uh you know it's it's not part of our lives but uh actually fully embracing it and saying this is what uh life is going to be is not something that uh we should be doing


what if it what if at the end of the day it backfires I mean how are we going to trust AI completely and and I mean how do you even trust someone who's actually coming up with it, they could be putting it codes that you know are to their own benefit and how would people who don't have knowledge like lemon like us how do we know what whether it's AI is programmed not to kill us night like you know how are we sure how do we trust this


you know,


but they utilize it I mean I agree they utilise it, you know like all these big companies utilize a AI and uh in their work and their staff and the employees you know I mean I mean they have been replaced by AI there's certain southern been replaced by but I mean we are using it we cannot run away from it


but how we accept it and whether we want to embrace it I said we can accepted but embracing it uh is a whole different level


but what if you ask a question and and like you have a question that cannot be answered by AI I mean there are because so many questions you can actually tested you can ask a question and I mean the replies that you'll get are absurd it's like, I think I think we can use it like for basic things but we can't embrace it because at the end of the day you still want to speak to somebody you still want to speak to a human being people use it right but we weren't we're not gonna embrace it


, maybe I'm not asking the right questions no but, what if there are people who lead other things


even with uh like for example drones okay we talk about drones and how people use that in terms of how it's being used it could be used for even things that uh for wars I mean people may be using a AI in the wrong way and


like we talking about when know previous years where was mean you physically go in and you battle but with drawings you just go in and you drop what you need to do and if you don't use it correctly it's going to be detrimental uh for you know for for the country that you have if supposing that country chooses to use AI and for war


but some people don't embrace this I mean you can't like for example you want and you you want to go dating I mean generally you know if we're going to be embracing a I means that very accepting artificial intelligence as part of our lives uh in terms of our major part of our lives


if you want to actually give your parents a hug or you going to use AI, I mean we're not gonna embrace it to an extent where replace human human beings I think we can utilize it you can employ it in our daily lifestyle but embracing it to that extent would you be something that I agree with


so they use it in their orbs they use it because uh there's certain things that humans cannot do and that's why AI's are created uh to perform such tasks but at the end of the day they administered by humans, so it is still controlled by humans and it doesn't take over our minds and we shouldn't allow it to take over our minds we can use it because it helps us it helps us in our daily lives and it helps us do things better


okay so we use it but if you are talking about embracing it means that if if a if a doctor was supposed to do that uh when you do a video call to doctor that you won't be even talking to a human being you'll be talking to a computer who's going to diagnose, diagnose you over the you know and and what if he gives you the wrong medicines


I mean, so we can use it in certain ways, uh in certain ways but we're not able to I we shouldn't be embracing it


I choose to disagree because I think we it is inevitable we we need to utilise it but it should be embraced uh we are not we we going to be losing out a a lot in terms of human touch and uh upbringing of our children moving forward


part one debate topic one


you have three minutes, (hmm), yeah I don't have much to say


are you serious , !aiya! just babble lah, I have a page


, it was from a website , as in the points are there


no don't tell me now, later we start at we start at seventeen, but we have to but we have to finish, at O O


you can start soon, JJ, (ppc)


okay like so I'll go next, , so I I think, , like it's good to be compassionate


because like you put yourself in another person's shoe, shoes and then you can see things from their perspective, but I feel like we should not always be compassionate, because, you might actually end up hurting yourself


so for example , like once you open yourself up to other people's sufferings, then you you suddenly will be aware of like how much suffering there is in the world and, actually like you're you're just a very small person lah and you cannot have like a lot of impact on


, on what you can do about it so I think you will feel like very overwhelmed it very helpless, and, and ya


ya I just feel like, you can't really do much as a single person so you feel very helpless, and also, another point that I have is, !aww! so well, uh you might you might feel like very guilty


because, you would have to understand from like that person's, point of view and you're like, you would have like a compassionate response, towards their their pain so, so I feel like you will end up hurting yourself


at the end of the day, your turn


yeah


another point that I have is, like maybe this is more of like a personal thing but, but, I feel like if you are like very caring and very considerate and you're very compassionate right so sometimes like, when you when you make a certain decision it would


lead you to experience like a certain amount of guilt, because like you try to like have a compassionate response, to the other person's pain so for example like, like say you are planning a trip with your friends but you know that, you know that you don't travel very well with her


so you know you know if you like don't travel with her your feelings would be very hurt, so , so despite your reservations, you you don't turn her down, because like you know that like her feelings would be hurt if you refuse her, company


but then as a result of that because you always like try to be compassionate and, and try to extend like empathy towards other people you put yourself at, at risk, and then you you you might hurt yourself


so I feel like like having compassion is good but, maybe you don't have to always be compassionate towards, others, like they're like certain situations where maybe you can put yourself first instead of other people


, I did I I guess so , yes yes, , she nodded


what did you write down


but would then you hurt your hurt hurt your friends feelings in that, in the long run


okay, seven that's, a lot I don't really have anything else to add


I don't know eh


no we are at the open debate part, , a man I don't know


I think your points are valid though, , what other points do you have


okay what should we do now, but you can't, agreed to my point, it's like uh agree to disagree


(mmhmm), again again


(mmhmm), but I kinda agree on that,


but I don't agree on that , , no


okay okay I have another point, so when you're always compassionate, you waste a lot of time arguing, like, you you will try to like persuade other people like someone who is


you will try to persuade other people that, the suffering is real, bla bla bla and then like, and then when people don't really care about it then you will feel guilty, and then you will hurt yourself again


, as in as in I feel like okay I feel like when you when you are always compassionate, then you would also want people to like, , to share the same sentiments as you, to like to like tell them like oh like


the suffering is real like like certain parts of the world and then like when people don't really care I think you will start to like, have more burden, and then you will start to feel like very guilty


, that's why I feel like you should not always be compassionate


it's also like it's also getting it's also getting people around you to, to to act the certain way what, to always extend that to always extend that courtesy and like, empathy to other people


part of compassionate


(mmhmm),


, , I also have nothing


how about you summarize your view then I summarize mine, I go first or you go first okay


, !huh!, no what


oh, yeah yeah


, so in summary I feel like we should not always be compassionate, because, we might end up hurting ourselves, because, uh when you're when you're very like caring and considerate person when you make decisions you might inevitably like


lead to, you experiencing a certain amount of guilt, because, when you open up yourself to other people's sufferings in the world, you would realize like you you are overwhelmed then you can't really do much about it


yeah, so I guess like yours you start feeling guilty, and then and also, what, and ya lah just in general, yeah okay nice


part two debate topic two


wait three minute,


not yet one more minute


(ppc), okay


yeah


(ppc), I think perseverance is, like an like a very admirable trait cause sometimes it makes, people , it makes success possible but I feel like it should not always be encouraged


so, I think we we we tend to focus too much on this, successes, for example and your example we you talked about thomas edison, and there are the lights of elon musk


uh steve jobs, Jess, uh jack jack ma, who like yeah who like, persevered a lot and and became successful, but I feel like in reality those cases are the exceptions


so, it is far more common for people to like give everything that they have, and persevere but not make it in the end, or like they don't end up succeeding in a way that uh they wanted


so I think I think like we tend to really like focus too much on like the success cases, and we neglect like the majority of the cases where like, you persevere and you you see through the entire thing but you don't get like, the outcome that you wanted so one of the so one of it is like uh the sum called fallacy in economics


so it traps people, so like like , in the some called fallacy you, you put in like a lot of your time and emotional, investment, and then like people would tend not to like walk away from it even though that


even though they know like it's not working out, and whatsoever lah, so, so as they invest like more into something, it becomes like really hard for them to walk away from it, yeah


, I feel like wait ah, but I feel like when you


when you see till the end right for example like in a relationship, like you know that this relationship is very toxic, but you feel like you have already spend like, so much, of your time your effort, and your energy into like this your partner


and and then like you in this case like perseverance should not be encouraged right, anyway remember to tap your phone, so ya ya so so so like I said for example you have been with someone for like five to ten years


and you you know that it's not working out, so I think I think in this case like perseverance is, is not good because and it should it should be discouraged actually, because you


you know that it's toxic and you know that uh it's not working out but because of this sum cause fallacy you you you persevere you put in so much emotional investment into that person you don't want a mockery, so I think , maybe it should be encouraged sometimes but not all the time


and also, and and also, err, also another another part of like sound cause fallacy and and like, why perseverance should not always be encouraged is that it kind of creates like a prison for ourselves


so for instance a lot of, people like don't really like what they do, uh for living in their jobs, and , like they they they will keep telling themselves like oh it's a job, , they cannot create they cannot leave yet because they have they have only been there for six months


like for example like like the fresh graduates, when you first come out and you'll look for your first job people will tell you oh even though you hate it you have to like persevere in a job even though like you you are like putting in like sixty hours per week you hate you hate what you are doing but people would say oh persevere


things that work out in the end, but some, fans you know that if it's not a good fit then it's not a good fit what you should know yourself better than anyone else, so in this case I don't think perseverance should be encouraged, ya I think I think like you should know when to create


and you should not always see things till the end, yeah, I see you're you you are at a loss ya ya


please don't, persevere


no is not is not a crucial to your career but more more of like expectations from, society is is just, like is like an unspoken rule you know, of some sort yeah


(mmhmm)


no no not, as in my example was was in a relationship not a, marriage, like uh maybe like uh five year relationship, I didn't say marriage


, you just what,


, , as and but as, and but you you as and you can talking about thomas edison and


and who whoever else like the injentas but , how about in in like your normal, life situation, because because they are innovators right, so they they have an outcome


that they want to achieve but how about like for example in a job, yeah like


(mmhmm) (mmhmm)


, as in I, I agree I agree like to a to a certain extent you should, persevere some times, but I don't think it should always be encouraged I think like you should know when to quit, when you ya ya


I feel like it depends but I feel like it depends on like circumstances and and like different situations


fine, okay I think I almost done , no


part three debate topic three


not yet not yet not yet uh okay, welcome to the debate


what which one do you win, yeah yeah you did , you know first time was very difficult leh from my point of view


yeah okay,


no it's not


that's all my my turn I feel like I feel like, other than like, managing the economy well something else that, a good a good government should be is to like ensure the social welfare and social


developing of a country, so in terms of like areas of employment education health care, and as long as like a low crime rate, so if you think about it like, there is very little use if people in the country is very rich I mean if if the country is very rich


but their citizens are very poor and they are unable to gain like access to basic health care, or like there is like high crime rates in the country, so for example,


can I can I say the country, I will just say then I would say, okay for example like like, like USA, they they have like very high health care rate even though


because their healthcare their healthcare sector is privatised right, so healthcare in US is very expensive, and even though the country is very rich is like one of the, top, economy is in in the world


I think like healthcare should be one of the basic need, so there is no use if like the country is so rich but like citizens cannot gain like access to basic healthcare, or like for example, they have a lot of fears regarding like high crime rates in the country


which is what is happening in USA right now, so I think like social stability of a country is very important and it, and like, it's one of like the key criterion of like good governance, like, to ensure that people have like the basic


necessities of life, so another example I can I can bring in is like china, there is a lot of like trade-offs because, they they kept growing their economy right, but then they are actually like damaging a lot of


uh, like in terms of like pollution and like, environmental damage, for example their factories you have a lot of factories in their cities and then , and this resulted in a lot of pollutants


so I think, uh, by european union standard, it's only one percent of its urban population briefs eh that is considered safe, so


as you can tell from this example even though like, china is able to achieve, , double digit uh GDP rate in the past ten years, there is uh very like hefty cost, to, I mean it comes at a very like heavy cost to its citizens


so I think just having like uh good governance as, like as in just having like a key criterion of, good governance as, how well the economy is managed is


not, a very fair assessment and we should always tie in to like the social welfare and stability of it, country,


(mmhmm)


tap your phone,


but that's mainly due to corruption you know, I thought, in africa it's mainly due to corruption


, , okay but I don't anyway I don't agree with the USA one because they are actually one of the largest economy either first or second in the world and if you look at places like sweden or denmark like the Scandinavian countries where they can have like


where like they have, a good economy as well as like, a great social stability and welfare so I don't think that that argument to like USA being a very big economy but like showing cracks in their social welfare is not a very good like argument because if you look at smaller economies like sweden denmark they are able to offer like


like, great social welfare to their citizens, and at the same time, I still like having, uh great economic growth, so yeah, and another point I want to bring out that


the key criterion for good governance is also like being corrupt free, so, because I think when you are (ppc) when you have a corrupted government it would erode the trust of its people and people will feel like very unhappy and upset at the government


even though, no matter how well the economy is managed I think like when you are corrupted, that like people will get unhappy and they will lose trust in you, so for example countries like


wait ah, like Afghanistan and north korean, north korea according to the corruption perceptions index they're ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world


so in north korea there uh there's a lot of bribery deviation of materials, or like using funds and deward, for their private use and I feel like, this is a reflection of poor, government


and they are like actually oppressing its people and depriving them of a better life because when you are corrupted you tend to like use the money for your own needs instead of for the welfare of, people, and at the same time if you compare them to singapore


who scores one of the lowest in corruption, in the corruption perceptions index you see that uh we have very like good government and people, and the citizens of singapore trust in the government, because , ya there is like accountability entrance


transparency, and then we can work hand in hand to like, to to grow the economy I guess yeah, so I think like having transparency and being corrupt free is one of like, an important criteria of for good governance


(mmhmm),


as in but the, but the reason why like health care in in USA is so expensive is because it's privatized and like, a drug in USA can cost like twenty or thirty times more than a drug say in singapore, is because it's privatized and they they they care about their capital


they care about making money more than, the welfare of its citizens and like, the access to, even like basic healthcare needs, like even even buying like I think like paracetamol is like super expensive in USA, so I think I shouldn't shouldn't


like basic healthcare needs be accessible to, like citizens, (mmhmm)


(mmhmm), (mmhmm)


(mmhmm)


, okay, I would agree that it is a good criterion but I feel like we should not overlook other factors


like corruption and social stability of a country cause I think trust is very important


part one debate topic one


wait soon oh yes I have to go first right ha oh okay nice, yes twenty minutes is quite long twenty minutes is quite long


I knew what like three sentences really you to, yeah, , serious eh I only got uh three sentences, what what do you have


Siao you are full of shit you said you said you didn't prepare, !wah! lame gift


okay fine I will just make my argument because because I only have three points uh I wrote that you should there aren't there, wait why, ha we can we can start doesn't have to be strictly like that what it's it's just a rough guide


oh okay sure she and she rapped more points then


yeah I know, okay , first point out of three ah okay say wrote that wait ah let me get my voice recorder closer to me ah


yes okay so compassion is defined as sympathy and concern for the suffering of others and then I wrote that which should always be compassionate because we don't know what the other person uh has to go through or


or or or where they are and what they're what what, struggles they're facing right like like for example when like celebrities are are driven to suicide because they when celebrities in the past were driven to suicide because they were criticised relentlessly


I think like especially if the the celebrity was out of line or if they behave in uh, in a very improper way uh fans might have felt justified to to act in a way that is less than compassionate and to seek social justice by maybe twisting or or writing comments


on youtube or whatever yeah but but it's very difficult to know uh the kind of devastation and the deaths and the the impact that that your actions can cost because you you'll never privy to another person's ah thought processes and and the


the kind of uh life barriers that they have to go through so it's always better I think to to air on the side of caution and and choose to be compassionate when you can, ya that was my point that's all I have actually there


, , ya you ya you proposing uh your your point


, uh okay


so you said that sometimes you shouldn't be compassionate because uh, if you too compassionate you end up hurting yourself because you're you're taking on uh the burdens of other people and that might lead you to feel helpless because you you not equipped to to save the world and and to that point I would suggest that uh you you don't have to


you don't have to save the person I think uh to be compassionate is simply to treat them in a way that is is kind I I think I I define that's why I defined compassion at the start as sympathy and concern for the sufferings of others , uh yeah it it does you you don't have to play play hero and and solve their problems by think if you act in a way that that uh


sort of signals sympathy and signals concern it's it's good enough and I think to to to your your point sometimes is better sometimes compassion requires that you choose not to act instead of, uh instead of taking like a pre emptive attempt to solve someone else's problems like in the example I mention where where


people on internet bullied a celebrity into suicide I think the the compassionate response is is not to try and save her or change her but rather to uh just not do anything oh and understand that she has her own demons and and the way she acted she acted because uh


uh because she was going through something that you you can't quite understand and sometimes is better to just skip, quite I think I think that also classify as compassion so ya that's my that's my point your turn


yeah I get that


okay is it is it my turn, wait my my facebook notification came on on my laptop that's fine right, it just yeah okay okay it's my turn ah so you you said that you said that sometimes when you're very caring


uh it might lead to long guilt because like for example if you you know you can't travel well with a friend but you still insist on doing it because you feel that that's the most compassionate response you may put yourself at risk of of, hurting yourself lah because you are you're in in in attempt to be compassionate to other people so like to you compassion might come at uh uh very great personal cost and


those circumstances then it's better to not be compassionate right yeah and, eh I I I knew you will say eh I I wrote down uh, I said that you can you can be compassionate without being permissive and sometimes


uh compassion requires that you are stun so it in in your case the the the the greatest good uh is that you guys do not travel together because to you travel together then should rob you of the wrong way and and then you might you might


you might feel that you want to be her friend less or or you might like her less and you might affect your friendship or you might blew up at her and then sabotage the entire friendships so I think uh, long term the the compassionate response and this case is really to to not be permissive and and to stand your ground and say that I I I I treasure you as a friend but we're not compatible travelling together so


yeah but but you will you will you will save her a lot more potential hurt also so it's not always it's not always being permissive I think sometimes , uh compassion if if you take a a larger view of compassion it it might require uh being stunned and and allowing somebody to


to feel more pain in the short term so that long long term everything's better it like much to say many parents discipline their children like I think a good parent uh might feel very might feel a lot of compassion towards their their their children but but that compassion doesn't


always have to manifest in in a permissive attitude in the end they still have to discipline their kids and they will have to demand that their kids sit down and do their homework because they know that although it's it's it's tough now those those behaviors will lead to better outcomes for their own children so I think if you take a larger view of compassion then


it it makes sense to not always be permissive yeah, how more minutes do we have ah oh seven more minutes !wah! there's a lot of time ya okay


, I also don't have already how those those are my three points, uh !wah! how's ya, can we just like chat eh no you you have to be but my my points you have to restate my points and then rebut it


, oh shit so fast eh that's the last five minutes what we still got, we still got about one minute, yeah yeah you have you have to you have to argue argue against my points


oh thank you okay debate debate over moderator, , don't have already ah that's all that's all the points I have


the the rest I was just responding to you so you should respond to know, , no I I said that the first the first point I made was that you you don't know what the other person has to, go through so you shouldn't be so quick to like add in a non conventional way uh I suppose you can argue that point if you want


I said that you'd like you you don't know what the other person is going through so it's always better to be compassionate that was my first point lah I think if you want to to drag the time you can argue that point


cannot say that we are debating !hey! can you deduct can't show her she's not cooperate, think just take away five dollars, oh !yay! okay okay make it


okay


ha do I I I not understand wait wait you you,


oh okay I think I know who you're referring to you, , yeah uh, okay so I guess I'll have to argue that point I I don't think that's compassion and I think I think that is just trying to signal your virtue


uh yeah I think to be compassion is just to act in a way that in a way that is sympathetic, I I I I


I don't think compelling other people to to to be as socially aware is, is always compassionate I think like if you are eh imposing your views on other people that without knowing where they're coming from or or what their struggles are and what their their positions are it it could be the opposite of compassion because you not ah really sympathy


like being sympathetic uh being sympathetic about their position uh, yeah I think think you can still be compassionate and uh more passive way in that you don't actively hurt other people and you do what little you can to make the lives of other people even a bit better but you you don't have to preach about it I think uh


uh, shit we still got two hours no two minutes and thirty second, it's , !wah! okay I nothing already eh let me see ah, uh uh man


oh good idea good idea you should summarize first no you should summarize first right I'm I'm I'm the I'm opposite proposition, okay no I I should go first I should go first I'm cause I'm I'm a proposition right, uh okay so I said that


you don't know what another person is going through and you should therefore be, uh okay no first so I define I define uh compassion as a like acting in a way of being having sympathy or concern for the sufferings of others and I said that because you don't know what other people are going through ah we should always


oh shit my phone my my phone went off, yeah oh no, okay


oh okay okay okay , is your your phone on right persia, pet okay oh thanks thanks you save me didn't see that my phone run out


, ya okay so I said that, uh ya you you don't know what other people are going through so you should always just err on the side of caution and try and be as kind as possible to other people


yeah and that sometimes being kind and compassionate uh doesn't equate to a permissive attitude sometimes you have to be stern so that uh the greatest scoot and the greatest wellbeing can can come out of the whole situation ya okay


I think I know is because


part two debate topic two, okay so , oh right


moderator can you hear my writing now I put a pad below my paper


is the time to start


okay I will just keep touching my phone so that it doesn't go black again, can remind me also like after your points


okay I guess I'll start then so can hear me right yeah uh I define


perseverance oh google defined perseverance as steadfastness in doing something despite difficulty uh ya so that's the definition I'll use in my arguments but you can have another I suppose


ya so my first point was that you never know if okay so like, I I think you cannot be you cannot persevere in in every single thing in life is is not like it's not even physically possible but I I think oh at least how interpreted the question was that once you committed to a course of action or particular goal that you think is worth attaining than you should


always persevere all the way ya and my first point uh an arguing for that is that you never know if like a particular tangent will lead to your destination so once you are committed to it you, you only know like how far you can go and what can be achieved if you push it all the way


yeah and then uh I think like , when I was researching like one example I came across was that like thomas edison took like what a hundred times to get the light bulb working so in the first ninety times uh you could even argue or I'm sure his his friends told him that that it's pointless lah to even try


cause you felt like so many times just give up don't waste your time, but you only know the value of your effort when you succeed so that is reason enough I think to continue persevering ya that's my point


okay so !wah! shit that's a good point , I will I will say that as first ya uh


so so you you mention that uh, like my fallacy is that I I my argument focuses on the successes but uh in reality a lot uh successes are a rare exception and in in many more cases people fail and and


and they failed at great personal course because they they put in too much in the persevered and and you also brought up the the sound cause argument to substantiate your your proposition uh, ya so I I would suggest that that ah the success of the outcome is great but it's also not the entire point of perseverance uh I think the the process of persevering is is


rewarding on the soul uh you only know your full potential when when you go all in on something, yeah so like like for example uh


if you if you don't commit yourself and apply yourself to something meaningful and work uh work your hardest and that then you know you you you you will not you'll you'll never going to be, at your best you never going to be the best version yourself so you will always remain a shell what what you could be your true potential which is I think a key aspect of of what people should should strive and aspire to


but many people don't don't reach it because they they they are not keen on putting the kind of trying and effort that that requires uh and then another thing is that, uh


ya like like, perseverance is a skill and it can be trained so so if you are going oiling on something the the process of perseverance makes you a stronger person in itself yeah that's my point


thank you for that


, how to argue what, !wah! limps yeah the question


ah, okay let let me see , , I knew you would say that I knew I knew I knew uh we all like you say that, (hmm)


(hmm), okay so right , , okay so uh


like you said that sometimes you find yourself you find that you are not a good fit in a job , you're not a good fit in a job and then you know yourself you not a good fit but you have a contract or it's it's it's uh crucial to your career that you stay a bit longer and and you should quit because


ah okay expectation maybe for like uh employer okay ya, ya okay so, that you should just follow your instincts and for your guts and quit and then you also make another argument that uh


well if you're married to a person for example and it's not working out then then uh you know It it is rather to just if it's it's better to just call it quits than to suffer through what might feel like eternity with the person right


so I, okay so like we I think right uh, uh, you cannot you cannot commit to everything I can say so you cannot commit to like


every friendship or every relationship we cannot commit to like everything that you want to put your mind to but but if you've made a commitment already then it is right the right thing I think not not just for yourself but for like like your community and society and everybody around you that you you see it through


ya like, like for example that's why people people have marriages and they they take a vow and and they're they're legal, oh okay


!wah! Sian , nothing ah nothing to say I'm I just think you should persevere lah okay whatever just I just think you should persevere


okay but right but right, ah I think if given the choice, it's better to always persevere than if everybody just did what they want and and because like like like who who are you to know whether whether something is is worth persevere or not like like for the first seventy times thomas edison would have probably thought it was a waste of time right


ah, uh yeah think, ya so at at at at at those instances if if he just gave up then the the, world the world will not be what the world is


today lah right so so you are arguing that that if it's if if you feel like your goal is not worried just quit lah uh and and it's intuitively correct but anything like if if edison did that and if


if elon musk did that or bill gates did that, or steve jobs that then the world be a very a vastly different place so, I think , I think if you take a larger perspective look at like, how the world has developed and how the world developed on the sacrifice of great men and ah how what we have today is predicated on great man persevering through all the odds that


they face then it stands to reason that you know given the chance people should should persevere because like you can say like okay if if if you you feel like like this this pursuit only leads to suffering then then then it's not worth it right uh but


but who are you to know like it's not worth it now but it might be worth it when you succeed and you only know when you succeed so and you never know like when when you succeed it might change the world so the world is better for it if you succeed and and far far worse if you fail, right like like the the the like


in in in in the world war if if if the allied troops gave up because they felt that they were losing early in the war and they felt like even if I try more man will die but I'll still lose myself give up and save lives than the world we know today will be vastly different and and we'll all be worse off for it so


I don't think your arguments stance like , sometimes you says you said that sometimes like, it's obviously it's obviously better to quit and to call it quits and to to hate your bets but but how do you know you you don't know until you succeeded what and you haven't succeeded so I'd say push it all the way and then then you really know whether it was worth it or not yeah


!woo! salvage sia, come back


, (mmhmm), ya ya no so I I I I set out two two streams one is that one is that we say that everybody should persevere right and then the on the other side we say that okay


ah if if if you want to give up you can give up right I, I'm I'm suggesting that the first the first world that we created is a much better world than the other world so taking a very broad view if everybody committed to their goals committed to their commitments and and persevered I mean okay sure ah yeah


yeah, right right, yeah I'm suggesting that you you don't know whether it's worth quitting until until the very end so like if if you I'm I'm are not saying that if you persevere you always be happier than if you don't persevere I'm saying that if everybody perseveres the world will be better


then if like some people don't persevere because you you you you don't know whether whether the person that gives up is is a guy escaping a shitty marriage or or whether it's a guy that, that uh is going to invent the next big thing and save the world so it's better if we all just persevere some people might be stuck in


some people might be stuck in crappy marriages like I can say like it depends on on on the situation on the situation sometimes people might be stuck in like crappy marriages or bad jobs but at the end because the great people will eventually succeed the world as a whole will be a much better place


yeah and also I got to say at lah is my is actually my proposition , , okay okay I said that was a draw


part three debate topic three


okay welcome to the debate Petrinago, no I just said welcome to the debate only ha, eh so the score is one one now right


is one one right I obviously won the first one obviously , , I this one is this one is a deal breaker


, okay shall we start you think


okay so the question is the key criterion for good government is how well the economy is managed, this is a fair assessment so I think is a fair assessment because at the end of the day uh


people's core concerns are always are always uh well, the the essential is whether you have uh your livelihood in check whether you can provide for the people around you and and these things are predicated on the strong economy


right and I think it's it's tempting it's tempting to base, the the the, your appraisal uh of of of the government or or its mandate on on more frivolous and peripheral things like say like uh I don't know representation or whatever but it's that political no its not


, at the end of the day people only look for these things when their livelihoods are secured so the core issue a government has to meet first and foremost is always a strong economy, yeah and then so its legitimacy really I mean it like it is legitimacy the legitimacy of the government


doesn't come from like the popularity of his rhetoric or or how like how how inspired people fail but whether their lives are discernibly better discernibly and objectively better and if they're not then you failed yeah so that's my point


yup (mmhmm)


(mmhmm)


cannot see the country where I don't think can ah oh


that's interesting okay, ,


, (mmhmm)


, okay so I will I will address your two points I think first you your your your your brought your brought uh your broad argument is, that it is social welfare also not just the economy and and and and overall the the welfare of of like the larger community the larger global community that is


ultimately important uh and ultimately the mark of a good government so so you you said that social sustainability is important but I would suggest that uh uh, social stability and social welfare is is predicated on a strong economy so I think you brought up the US as an example of a strong economy


ah ah but, their healthcare is is is their their healthcare isn't afforded to all I would suggest at the the US the reason that healthcare isn't afforded to all is because it is it is


it is badly managed and I think you can see the cracks not just in it's social policy but, but but also in its economy uh their their economy, they are becoming more uh protectionistic and their economy is is is expected to shrink by experts and also their their their income per capita is still is still high now but it is also expected to shrink and they're losing out to other developed economies


they they had a very good headstart after the second world war and that is the reason for that they're doing so well but, but I think to suggest that they are strong economy uh but, but have poor social policies is I think incorrect I I think their the governance the the the way that the country is govern have led to both problems in in the provision of social welfare and and also uh


the the security of their economy and I think that they had a very good economic head start but the cracks are starting to show, ya so, that's what I would say about the US regarding china I think you said that


uh should china's uh economy is is showing like uh like exponential growth but their, at the cost of the larger community in that they are leading to a lot of environmental damage right


uh if I would suggest that uh, the chinese government is whether the chinese government is good or not uh that's not depend on the global the the the global state of affairs it depends on chinese people and ultimately


uh whether they are good government or not, or rather the government is answerable to the chinese people, and I think like, I I know that there are international census done and and public trust in the government is higher now than it's ever been before in china so there is there there are very and these are international studies so that that that they they're not done by the the the the communist party they're done by by international groups


so so public trust is very high uh confidence in the future is very high overall happiness is much higher than than it's been before so, uh it suggests that this high economic growth actually leads a lot of trust in the government and I I know the country has its problems


and and uh everybody has to admit that but at the end of the day like I said people want their bread and butter and and, they want to be doing while the the poor people are now middle class middle class are now business owners, so everybody's lives are improving uh and despite the problems I think


once those things are taken care of the government has succeeded at least or has at least succeeded for its people, ya and then I would offer a a counted proposal to china and the US I mean US had a very strong economic headstart so they're not a good example you will see the cracks in the future


for china I've I I've I've made a point that, a strong economy leads to very high public trust despite the flaws in its system, and then I would also say that in many developing countries that were very quick to adopt uh any electoral democratic system like in africa or or southeast asia you see a lot of them actually still suffer from poverty and civil strife


yeah uh so even though their leaders had a democratic mandate and even though they promise social policies and, uh even though their sorry


yeah so so so what what what I'm suggesting is that is that when the economy doesn't get better like like like even when when you make people feel good and you inspire them and even if you are democratically elected if the economy is poorly managed, there will be civil strife that we poverty and on all measures that count you have failed as a government so that that that's my point


, okay so I I answer the the USA example first uh, you said that the USA still has the most one of the most in the the most powerful economy at the moment and I agree uh they they have the most powerful economy because they have the most spending power per capita right I think


but, that there have been signs that that their spending power per capita isn't as growing as fast or or isn't retaining uh relative to other nations and also I think is a bit disingenuous to compare the USA to the nordic countries because the difference in their size is vast I mean


you are talking like uh many times different so I think their economic models are very different people in norway and sweden uh


, yeah


yeah, ya I know so I I I I agree that basic healthcare needs are important and I think that the US model is also, uh it's it's detrimental to to his people but I think the the question states that the key criterion for good governance is how well the economy is managed I I I would argue that it it is not the only criterion and there are other important criterion as well but if you had to pick one criterion uh


the economy is a good is a good pick I think it's uh it's a very good overall litmus test, uh talking about the the the, like economies of the nordic countries even though they're even they they they they provide health care for all but their economies are also uh quite well developed and and and they're willing to pay very high taxes to keep it going so that that works for them and and and


their their economic model works and that that that's why it's a very good litmus test for the success of their state, so I would suggest that the the economy as a litmus test is not perfect but it's good enough and then I think to substantiate that uh they're always they're always uh exceptions to the rule of course governance I think is very complex and then economy is very complex but I think if you were to pick one single criteria uh


to determine whether the government is good or not economics is is a good bet and, uh like bringing china into the equation again uh like see even when even though china has led to so much environmental damage and and corruption rates in china is still is still on the higher side globally public transit still very high because because uh


because their economy is taken care of because people are getting richer their economy's growing so when when the economy is strong there is a lot of latitude given to the government, uh to to, maybe stinge on social policy or be a bit harsher in in in their in their legal system


so I'm suggesting is that people intuitively know that when the economy is strong when when they feel that they are getting richer than they have they will have this impression that the the government is doing well and they're willing to make some concessions so overall as a general criteria


I think uh management of the economy is a very good is a very good uh sort of very good criterion yeah


okay, part one debate topic one


okay so our topics our topic for this debate is are some writings superior to others, so I do believe that some writings would be considered superior to others in our current society is very easy to read almost anything lah if given the correct parameters and requirements


so one way to determine superiority based on is based on red relevance so how relevant these writing is to your life and how relevant it is to people people tend to perceive this to be more superior than the rest, writing about something that impacts your immediate vicinity or lifestyle would often tend to have more importance to oneself compared to writings that are there is something more far fetched and


uh about something you don't really care about this is also in line to how it impacts the world lah so it could be impactful such as a scien-tech scientific writing or writings that advocate social equality, this kind this kind of writings uh be it good or bad will have a definite impact on the on the world ah guiding on a brighter path


cures for diseases technological advancements or studies would probably be more of more value compared to a creative piece by shakespeare


even in literature I think some writings are still considered more superior to others lah, literature had it's a medium that mirrors life and that's it it takes uh an exceptional writer to make, a medium that mirrors life to present it to people in a more interesting way


uh a great writer will be able to take even the most mundane task, and spin it into something one could read over and over again without getting bored, a great writer could create a world in their mind filled with exotic dangerous creatures and phenomenons


so great writings will resonate with the intellect the rationality and reasoning of their readers as much as they resonate with their emotions, great writings will leave you with a calm feeling a soft smile on your face and yet


provide an equally provoking, uh thought provoking uh, debate about one's morality and rationality leading one to ask whether this is correct or not or whether this should be happening, so


ivan's speech on god and morality is one fantastic example of this lah so another level of a great writing uh can mystify and, mystify through the absurd and nonsensical they can make you imagine uh different uh !wow! things uh just through words alone


and Murakami does that very well he's the author okay so more often than not you won't know where the plot of his stories are going but when you read on you'll be very eager wanting to explore further whether to see what this author's imagination takes you to lah


so great writings , can entertain but at the same time they do educate as well and that's the very big difference between those few works that are usually forgotten after awhile


like let's say geronimo stilton a very popular series but once you grow older it doesn't really relate to you and anymore and that's works that last forever lah maybe decades or even centuries to come


okay I think I think one more type of writing that we can consider more superior than others, would be something related to secrets investigative writings of sorts, these these writings usually are deemed to have a higher value lah so the bigger the secret they're they're investing investigating on and writing about the more valuable it is lah and I mean


this kind of writings are exposed injustice, hidden by , hidden from the public and bringing to light these truths lah so in the in a sense this kind of writings holds a lot of value to many people of power and as well and to the public as well so


what makes a writing superior would definitely be based uh would from my perspective will definitely be based on the value people place on these writings and in a more pragmatic sense are either, writing has no value it even no matter how great it is I don't think it should be considered superior to the rest yeah


that's it from me lah


ah okay then , I would say ah okay as mentioned previously I think that , writings that impact the world greatly will have will have a, will be more superior than those like written by shakespeare or let's say the rest lah so like personally like if you


read on, uh invention on light bulb by let's say uh thomas edison and a piece by shakespeare I think who yes shakespeare might be a very creative person and the piece might be very interesting but that piece of artwork doesn't really contribute much to society


economically uh and there's and like, how do I put it like what's the word, like your your your, what's that word shit


your standard of living yeah it doesn't it doesn't increase much based on a creative piece unless let's say you are already at the peak like in singapore you are at the you are first world country and you are starting to look at something that is less tangible in a in a form for your standard of living lah so


ya so in that sense I still believe that a a writing that has a definite positive impact on the world would be more superior compared to those who are less like more shady kind of uh impact lah ya, then


yeah that's really all I have


uh okay but in that sense if you don't judge it based on your fixed criteria then you wouldn't be able to rate it if uh fairly mah it's like it's like how you take exam so this kind of writing should also have a standard to be able to meet, to be able to


achieve a certain a certain requirement so that they can be deemed useful in this world mah if not every writing is a great writing then, how do you differentiate what kind of writing is good you get what I mean so,


I still believe that writings do need to have certain criterias for evaluation lah so in my in my in my place in my stand is writings that are relevant to oneself writings that are impactful to the world, writings that uh have uh highly valued or sought after by people and even in let's say literature itself different kind of authors were


create impacts in the world differently so it still goes back to the point whereby uh how the writing should impact the world so I mean if it's a educational piece compared to let's say a comedic piece, definitely the education peace would be deemed more superior compared to the rest and though the comedic piece does bring bring about joy and laughter but it doesn't really change the world


uh as it is lah so in that sense, yes it's still important to have all all these various type of pieces but at the end of the day it, still go goes back to how it changes the world lah and how it makes it a better place comedic piece they come into play later in the future when everybody's standard of living is at the peak but at the moment when you still have homeless people


people that are still suffering and not and and starving I think, this kind of pieces can still take a back seat lah before we we, uh to so that we have enough resources to help these kind of people lah we should dedicate our resources to researching progressing our technology and


social and our society standing lah so that these kind of cases will be reduced uh before we start, taking care of those in the, in the, enjoying higher standards of living lah


okay sorry, oh can already ah, sorry I


part two debate topic two, I was I was lagging sorry


(ppc) (ppc)


okay so , our topics our topic for this debate will be, how foreign films and TV series are affecting our local culture, okay so I think one unique feature of singapore's culture is that we are multiracial


and multireligious society, so in my opinion the omnipresence of foreign films, and TV programmes in our daily lives, has a great influence on our lifestyle heritage values


and and, our society itself lah, so in my opinion I do agree that , foreign uh TV series and films are really affecting our lives more


negatively than positively, okay so first of all foreign films, and TV programmes have large influence over the latest fashion and actions so there's a great impact on how we dress and act based on what we see on television


whenever we see, pretty or handsome stars and actors, in the films and television programmes uh most people do anything just to appear or even go to go through great length just to dress up like their idols


for example when the eight season of american idol was being aired in singapore, adam lambert was sensational and was idolized by the majority of singaporeans, who watched the famous american variety show


being dubbed as glambert their their fan the fan base lah, adam was adam lambert was glam in all his performance by having a unique dressing style which is more of a goth kind of look wearing black eyeliner black nail polish and uh basically is overall T-shirt and dress style is very dark lah


so since that season a substantial number of singaporean teens young adults, and, maybe some older generation both genders started to follow that trend, people started going out in the street with black eyeliners and black nail polish which is quite a significant impact


from this foreign TV series and films lah, so singapore has been said to be a very conservative society so our local culture is just a very conservative one and this means that we will be very sensitive towards


like controversial issues such as uh homosexuality, so uh in our in our in this sense singaporeans would tend to condemn cross-dressing or similar ideas


so uh eyeliner and nail polish are seen uh sorry, eyeliner and nail polish are things that are usually worn by females because these are considered makeup, however because of this american idol series


even guys started following uh adam lambert's look in attempt to follow the latest trend so, this this create this went against our local conservative culture lah and some some like older generations tend to look down and frowned upon this lah


okay and another example would be the emergence of cosplay in our society so due to the rise of japanese films animes and so on in recent years, many people in singapore become very fascinated with these anime characters or fantasy characters portrayed in the japanese production


as a result uh a number of these people have gone, uh extraordinary lengths just to dress up like these fictional characters more often than not they would tend to start cross-dressing guys dressing up as eh guys dressing up as girls and girls dressing up as guys


in the sense to portray their characters onto themselves their favourite characters onto themselves and even some even goes go so far as to dress up as monsters or even robots from different japanese animes, so this will definitely still go against our conservative culture of look frowning upon and condemning cross-dressing and other similar ideas


(ppc), okay I mean uh other other than that I mean actually on the same note so in foreign films and television programmes especially american ones so actors are are portrayed as flamboyant lah so not only in the way they dress but also


the way they carry themselves so in a sense it's the same as what uh <P2>wan ting</P2> said whereby they, they rebel rebel against , ideas that are, are usually more conservative so in her in her example it was positive because


the the, black football the black actor became uh overcame uh racist stigmas and became a well respected football player, but, for my example basically


shows like desperate housewives and gossip girls the characters are very open towards liberal ideas such as sex and a lot of sexual element are present in foreign shows, as a result these for these topics which are usually taboo among the singapore society is becoming more prevalent


and, (ppc) this can be seen, by the increase rate of pregnancy from about seven hundred cases in twenty twenty O seven to around two thousand cases in twenty ten, so , yes although although teenagers and young adults become more open to such liberal ideas the


the talk about it is still a taboo topic amongst those who are more experienced and those who are older so this this led to , a misunderstanding and or less or rather a lack of understanding in such a topic so when young teens start to try try them out it becomes


it it starts, to create problems lah for our society, ya, so , therefore it can be seen that foreign films and TV programmes have quite a great impact on our culture in singapore lah so constantly influencing the way we dress


and some, which have even gone against our conservative culture, , our traditional I our traditional view of thinking lah so this immense influence that foreign films and TV programmes have over our society is unquestionable


uh and I do believe that, it has created significant problems for our conservative society lah I mean if we were more open it wouldn't be a problem but in this case because our culture itself is a conservative one it creates problems lah so we have to understand that this convergence of culture is leading


towards a more, towards homogeneous, I cannot pronounce yeah so it's a two way two way relationship whereby we need to we need to understand the western culture as well so that it doesn't clash with our it it doesn't clash with our culture too


, too badly and rather we should find a way to co exist with this , rising new western culture in singapore lah so while other countries are still influencing us in terms of culture singapore is also influencing them in our culture


so you can see westerners start starting to pick up our local food chilli crabs overseas yeah and, even some some youtubers who have been to singapore and live for quite a short period starts to pick up on our cultures as well and bringing them back to their to their country


and, helping propagate our culture in their their their country so it's a two way thing and, we should be embracing this with open arms and trying to adapt or rather, than resisting this natural flow which is which is something that is a result of globalisation lah


yeah so , I think that is all


okay, part three debate topic three