so even in the US has not abolished the death penalty for serious crime so states like alabama, arkansas florida kentucky south carolina tennessee virginia arizona california utah and washington still send hardcore criminals to die so by gas inhalation lethal injection or hanging


(ppc) so human rights, uh advocate most cases that most uh uh, are only armchair critics so in countries nobody has been handed the death penalty without first undergoing a lengthy trial in accordance with the law provided by the constitution


so it is only after a fair trial with evidence against the offenders it's beyond any reasonable doubt that those found guilty of serious crimes are sentenced to death and only when they the law provides such for such a punishment


so malaysia was at the top of his this alongside most third world countries what does this say about our nation, when narrow down to south east asia region malaysia is still near the top of the list with a crime index of


sixty five point s~five six uh percent vietnam cambodia and indonesia has slightly lower indices or at the fifty three point four five fifty two point seven two and, fifty two point one six percent respectively so unsurprisingly given the stricter laws our neighbour


err our country singapore took the last spot with a err, skimpy index of only sixteen point four nine percent in southeast asia is which is one of the lowest crime rate


so it was the second in the world ranking so singapore has the lowest crime rate in the world for certain offences in city state the death penalty is mandatory, so more than four hundred people were executed in singapore mostly for drug trafficking


between nineteen ninety one and two zero zero four so the state does not tolerate serious crime and has prospered despite the criticism it received from humanitarian groups


back over to you Shaiful


okay no doubt, the death penalty should be abolished but uh


well it in certain countries a death penalty should be death to be enforced so that, people will not commit uh such mistake and they are in a very well known that if they commit a crime such as murder or trafficking of drugs it is punishable by death


so not all criminals are not cautioned that committing certain crimes can lead to death penalty if they still dare to commit such a crime then they should be held responsible and made to face the law


so hardcore criminals should not be allowed, to rear their ugly heads so it is the rights of the peace loving people that should be the priority in any society not the minority


so although the death penalty


is enforced only sometimes in grave cases of premeditated murder it is regularly meted out to drug traffickers drug dealers and people in possession of certain quantities, of illegal drugs in countries such as philippine they are constantly


are fighting a drug war against the drug lords because philippines drug problem is very rampant and the only way to deal with it is death by penalty


so drug abuse is a menace in many society severe crimes like rape and murders are committed under the influence of drugs so drugs is the root of all evil, drug traffickers are the ones who become wealthy at the expense of the innocent they are capable of paralyzing a nation if they're not uh reined in so incidentally the majority of drug addicts in malaysia are malays followed by indians and chinese


so in singapore we even though our society are well educated but still there are people who commit, such a crime whether they are a drug traffickers themselves or a uh drug abusers


so they've very know very well that if they dealt with drugs uh uh I think if err more than five grams and above, they're going to the gallows for sure so there's no turning back and this should be


uh known a well known err fact when they reach uh uh primary six or you know this they should know and they know that drugs is bad they should not even touch it and


those who uh those who traffic drugs and sell drugs to those people they're even ought to be hanged because they are , promoting drugs to people


who doesn't know what's the consequences and they will lead to other things like crime, and you know they will they'll do anything for drugs you know just to get the money to buy the drugs to to to keep their habit uh going so (hmm)


death penalty should should not be abolished it should be enforced and the government has the right and to protect innocent people, uh from drug abuse okay over to you Shaiful


okay while it is good to educate, the and the rehab these people , uh but a hardcore uh drug abusers and drug traffickers are


I I don't think so uh it is err clear cut that if you abuse or or traffic drugs, is death by penalty there's no two ways about it in Singapore and err other countries knows that singapore err is very strict on this and so is malaysia


and uh indonesia as well, so and philippines so I I think it should stay and it is good for the betterment of the local err locals in that country itself and for the for the benefit of the rest of the population


prompt one of four


okay , sex work should be illegal, we've all bought something at some point in our lives, rather we pay to get our teeth cleaned, buy a ticket for a concert or tip a valet


we depend on the service industry for, convenience, health and entertainment many of us, have also sold a service at one time, by offering our skills, labour for money yet some people are angered


that sex is bought, and sold in the same, manner some men and women, choose to do sex work, because they enjoy it, and see it as a meaningful and legitimate form of work


a magazine psychology today explains how sex, work has grown into a broader field that is also becoming, less stigmatized, and less foreign many sex workers


find themselves in the industry, because it is an easy way to make money, when it becomes difficult to, find other jobs as well in an industry whereby there's a lot of uncertainties


in both cases, there are people who has a service to offer, sexual gratification through various methods and there are people who wants to purchase, why is this specific form of service


criminalized, when it is done between consenting adults, of course many fear legalizing, sex work because of the forms that aren't consensual


they argued that legalizing sex work, would permit more sex trafficking particularly with underaged girls, sex trafficking is definitely an issue, that still needs to be fixed, and should have the attention of law enforcement


like the police or the government, however sex trafficking and sex work involving minors should, not be confused, with legal adults, who are willing to engage, in sexual services


married couples as well, legalizing sex stops the criminalization of people who are simply, trying to make a living, and protects consenting sex, workers from harm


it is important to note that, many many sex worker, especially those who are women, are abused by their clients, according to another post by, huffington post, forty five percent to seventy, five percent of workers has experienced sexual violence in their careers whenever this happens


the women are not able to report it, because of fear putting themselves at risk since, sex work is illegal I'm done Seng


alright, #kee seng# yes sex workers should not be g~legalised yes we agree for underaged girls definitely, underage girls mean in singapore it is uh sixteen years and below


and not only for girls is either gender boys and girls, it does not matter if you are sixteen and below and you consented yes it should not be legalised for sex workers who are below sixteen years of age


police abuse sex workers yes so many we heard of so many stories and news that's why we need to protect sex, workers more by making it legal so that they have a framework, easy target, because it is illegal yes that's why


because of they're being scrutinized and being opposed they want to, be they'll become easy targets hence as a result we need to, protect sex workers, south africa it is illegal and then they are being abused and laugh


at, so all the more south africa it should be made legal, for, sex workers to work with confident, this there was a case, for <P2>layar mona ress</P2> a former worker in DC who was stabbed by client after he refused to pay for her service


just imagine if it's legalized, it will become as legitimate as other line of, work, meaning clients who assault workers can be appropriately punished by law, this would ensure that the safety of the sex workers while on the job


being protected, in the interview, more comfortable, reporting minors and other victims of trafficking to the police


legalizing sex work can also make the experience of buying and selling less, taboo, there will be better transaction, all kinds of service, are legally regulated meaning they are by law and there is a proper channel


so should brothels example in singapore there are plenty of cat houses along Geylang, uh, Lorong not to be mistaken by #geylang serai#, regulations will create safe working conditions establish healthcare benefits and provide avenues for both


to report abuse in the workplace, we do have framework like workplace safety and health, so, these uh workers they need, they need to be protected at all time


okay david I'm done


thank you very much mister david, yes sex workers are exposed to disease, that's why we need to legalize it, with legalization they have proper framework, and, healthcare coverage


hence, when they have themselves checked, they will be clean and those who have disease are early detected and prevented, foreign sex workers provided services, yes they come here perform jobs illegally spread disease to the local community


that's why we should make it legal have a proper regulation have a proper healthcare system in place so that they are checked, and then they are certified, without any problems to the community


sex work has been discussed more in the political realm recently because of bill being passed by president donald trump, the bill known as, FOSTA SESTA is meant to, curb trafficking of young girls young girls as


young as ten years old by allowing website owners to be prosecuted if they allow, these workers to advertise to them, this bill will no doubt harm, the adult workers for one you will make more difficult for the legal and consenting adults to conduct business safely


the bill also removes the ability for workers to screen customer just imagine if you do not know who your potential customer is, could be perverts thieves minors or even HIV infected


partners, that's why it's sex work, must be legalized if, it is illegal it is difficult for workers to determine if the potential client are dangerous, legalising the work


creates a platform to ensure proper safe measures, for all adults within the industry, I strongly agree and strongly vouch that the sex work should be legal, through proper framework better healthcare system early detection to prevent spread in the community


any uh back to you mister david


alright my turn I, yes I believe that high rates of foreign workers, uh especially the ladies do provide sexual services, yes I believe there are under age workers also young and vulnerable that's why it should be made legal meaning foreigners who want to work as sex workers should not be allowed


unless they come here with a proper work permit, under aged girls should not be allowed, at all to protect the young and vulnerable, and then be caught because of illegal work and that's why we need to legalize it there's a proper channel proper framework and proper healthcare so that sex workers feel good comfortable and will be


, beneficial to the community so I strongly agree that sex work should be legal, that's all for me mister david


prompt two of four, okay, charity work should be made compulsory


of course we have performed and have seen, many, members of the public perform, charity work some of them perform, voluntarily, , some of them perform with their heart


it should be made compulsory because it's not does not only benefit the community the society, it also benefits the whole country as a whole, community work by tertiary students here have often been a voluntary effort


but another school has recently made it compulsory as part of its students curriculum, raising the question of whether kindness should be enforced or graded, tertiary students are seventeen years old and above


in singapore national service, enlistees are at least eighteen years old, they are matured smart and able enough to carry weapons and arms, so being seventeen years old shouldn't compulsory


uh charity work be made to tertiary students, at #ngee ann# polytechnic, also known as NP, every diploma course have at least one, module that has a service learning, element, in which students design projects to solve existing problem in the community


not only the community benefit, when students design, and create something which is good, something which is, for beneficial for the country something that is charitable


a score is given to students based on an oral or written report of their experience and their ability to apply the academic knowledge in the projects design imagine a seventeen year old teenager being able to capitalise


and produce good work, charitable work for the community doesn't it, make the country proud, hence charity work should not only be voluntary and wholeheartedly given but should also be made compulsory


some twenty two service learning modules will be rolled out this year by #ngee ann# polytechnic, this will grow into fifty modules, by the end of the year, because of the popularity of being a service volunteer


charity work has been made into, whole heartedly and giving but in the reality, it should be made compulsory as we singaporeans know that most of our local citizens and community are vulnerable


if we rely on volunteers itself, example during the COVID nineteen there are people who are stuck at home, eager to go out to perform charity work, but due to the measures stated by the government they are willing they are eager and they have no way to go out and perform charity work


unless government make it charitable, and compulsory they will provide a time and a proper framework for the charity workers, to perform their compulsory duties, imagine you will receive food by charity workers


for your lunch for your dinner, because it is a compulsory service to provide those who are vulnerable, those who need it, instead of relying on volunteers and you wonder when will my food arrive, that's all I have for now mister david up to you


okay yes I understood, by nuisance not willing to give to charity because you have no choice because it is compulsory no longer voluntary work yes we agree that we want to perform something


of care and kindness, but when charity work is made compulsory it does not have to be every hour, it does not have to be every week, it can be once a year once a year compulsory for the love of your community


for the benefit of our nation, for the best of ourself, we are given a choice of whether we want to perform our compulsory charity work over the weekend or, over the weekday


once a year is very good, once a year will be very appreciative out of six million people in singapore, once a year doesn't mean anything to most of us, young age from primary school ten years old should


if get involved in charity work yes should it be made compulsory not yet we cannot say but when they, turn seventeen years old at a tertiary age before they perform their national service that is when they will be prepared they know that charity work should be in their life and blood


parents must provide a proactive support for these young students so that when these students look and reflect on what their parents have done, they will feel more comfortable and will understand, singapore management university SMU


has made it a requirement for its students to complete eighty hours just simply eighty hours of community service, in order to graduate since the university open in, two thousand


the service perform however is not graded but it is felt in the community it is felt by our nation and it's appreciated by our locals, for other NUS students community work it's not a must


at SIM university also known as unisim students have to do projects to help needy groups after the university rolled out full time, undergraduate degree programme in twenty fourteen


students are given one of, three banding grades, hence compulsory charity work yes it is necessary, to build a good culture a good nature, and for our future generation to appreciate


that, things doesn't come free doesn't come easy things have to be enforce, they can learn, throughout their lifetime that it is, a desire that they should be giving to the nation that has brought them up so charity work should be made compulsory starting from a young age


of seventeen years old, just before they perform their national service at eighteen, when they are in their national service by the time they reach eighteen years old, they already managed to, understand and uh capitalise on the nature of charity work being compulsory


thank you mister david yes what about other, institute of higher learning viewers lure and steady influence all these institute of higher learning to adopt the best practices that ngee ann polytechnic has performed UNISIM has


tried, and NUS has adopted, with relevant model and with full hearted leaders charity work should be made compulsory because it doesn't take much of the tertiary student time


like I said once a year, is good enough, you have three hundred and sixty five days, for yourself why not just make one day compulsory for, charity work, it is a free global market


being free global market charity work should not only be performed in our local singapore it can be diversify and give a reaching helping hand to countries in need such as myanmar such as aceh and such as the latest


island that has been hit by tsunami, in Bandang, income tax incentive for low wage workers yes if they perform charity work why not why not we should extend income tax incentive for these low wage workers but that will not come from the heart because of incentive


they perform charity work no charity work must be made compulsory because we want to, advocate the, nation will want to advocate the people, there it should be, in our lifeline in our bloodline so that they can understand that not all are born


with golden spoon, so charity work started at, young age is good is a very leading example by the time they reached tertiary education it should be made compulsory, social awareness by making


charity work compulsory and having awareness we need to advocate via advertising and social media to inform, uh, our nation and our people that charity work is not bad it is not degrading at all


we have colleagues who perform charity work every weekend imagine how the recipients or the benefactors felt when they see the familiar faces of our charity worker


charity should be done by everyone that's why charity work should be made compulsory and we totally agree with you that charity should be done by every one, for NP or #ngee ann# poly one reason for grading community project is that assessing students' help them reflect


on whether their project, has met the needs of their beneficiaries rather than going through the motion, mandatory community work could have encouraged students to volunteer more of their time


one student from SMU, #ong seow heng# said on average, he, put in about one hundred and forty five hours of community work more than the required of eighty hours hence


making charity work compulsory doesn't stop there once a year, one day for three hundred and sixty five days for charity work is nothing compared to the benefit that we receive when the volunteers perform extra and above for charity work


work that's all I have today for now mister david back to you


prompt three or four, death penalty should be abolished


there are moral hypocrisy by the late and great indian leader #mahatma gandhi#, he said, an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind, nothing to see, there is no argue that crimes associated with death penalty


such as premeditated murder, are reprehensible, however if we are to agree that taking the life of another humble human being can be categorised as the, utmost heinous of acts how can we justify treating a crime with punishment that mirrors the very thing we so adamantly condemn so we should abolish death penalty


it is also because that this support of the death penalty can be deemed as moral hypocrisy how can you, treat a human being into death penalty no empathy without any chance for him to redeem himself


also reasons to abolish death penalty because of cruel and it is a unusual punishment if we can horrified by this act, which were used on suspected terrorists


almost which of them will not lead to death how can we, condone punishment of death for suspected criminals in singapore, moreover the death penalty proven to be, unconstitutional, meaning it is so


violent that every person who faces death penalty are traumatized stigmatized, and has to be done only on a friday, and the the the, the family members, try to uh plead for uh president clemency and it is not easy for


the parents to feel that the death penalty of their children, hence death penalty should be abolished at all, in united states the eighth, amendment, constitute states that the use of cruel


and unusual punishment should be prohibited, and death penalty is one of the cruel and unusual punishment, death penalty should be abolished if we can consider the aforementioned methods of torture


cruel and unusual, the punishment of death, is also considered, very inhumane, crime rates there is no evidence that posed the use of death penalty as being casual


to a reduction in crime meaning, by performing a single crime you will be hanged to death, it's so ridiculous they represent a group that is highly unlikely to make rational decision


based on fear of future consequences for their action, death penalty should be abolished not only affect livelihood and families but it'll affect the morale and traumatize every relatives every


community everyone every human, death penalty should be abolished because it is inhuman, by taking someone life, just like that, there are many other penalties that we can enforce


like, prison lifetime prison or performing charity work over the weekends, hence death penalty should be abolished because everyone deserve a second chance, back to mister david


thank you mister david yes the government's duty is to, curb crime, by making the crime rate, low if possible zero, but giving them by giving them humane punishment instead of death penalty not only death penalty is very cruel it also affect a lot of


family members especially the young ones, yes you mentioned jail term should not be deterrent for any crime, imagine the criminal is yourself, do you deserve a second chance, or do you


feel that you need to be faced by the death gallow, top of the list in other countries, because of crime rates, because of thefts, these are all due to no awareness lack of education


and poverty, our nation is modern and very developed, we do not need death penalty, we can perform better than other countries, death penalty should be abolished not only because


it is inhuman but it affects a lot of, people, yes singapore said low crime doesn't mean no crime, but due to our performance and our awareness we advocate a lot of good practices


example engaging any criminal, engaging the youth at risk, informing them that thing should not be done this way and it should be, the other way, imagine that our local community are very filial very conservative we know that taking drugs


is no good, why why are we influenced, some of them are traffickers and some of them are runners do the runners themselves who are poor in need of money, and was caught does he deserve the death penalty


death penalty should be given to the hardcore yes but he should be fairly trial in a modern nation, like singapore, what if an inmate sentenced to death is later found to be innocent of their convictions


can you perform a back to life can you pardon whatever you have done, can you inform the families that you are sorry, what if the uncovering of these innocent comes, after a lethal injection


or a death by hang that has already been administered, if a conviction is ever overturned can take decades at the very least, however, there are several documented cases of prisoners being released after life sentences


which alternatively better, than death penalty because they are proven, innocent does that shows that our system is bad no, because sometimes evidence proof


after many years that these human or this criminal does not deserve the death penalty, the cause of death penalty, as opposed to life sentence without, parole, is exponential it is very high


due to the extra measures taken in the judicial proceedings, lawyer fees trials witnesses, in the end it will goes even higher, capital punishment cases with racial disparities and injustice


death penalty should be abolished because every guilty verdicts that lead to death penalty may have been influenced, by the race of the offender, hence we do not want to be labelled as racist


or as unsympathetic, people with substantial income can afford the best criminal defense team the best lawyer, before going for trial, whereas for those low social economic status


they can only afford, a meagre sum of fee for the lawyers, hence, proven who will win, death penalty should be abolished because the verdicts are largely dependent on the quality of the defence team


and the price of a good lawyer, that can equate to that entire mortgage, death penalty should be abolished to prevent further traumatise, on the criminal, on the family as well, that's all I have back to you mister david


thank you death penalty should be abolished yes even though drug abusers are not tolerable in our nation but enforce a death penalty no I advocate awareness instead educate the citizen touch their heart


and they will repent, death penalty should be abolished because the desire for revenge is understandable, it is also based on emotions which are heated and catalyze not long after a severe incident has occurred


enforcement of the death penalty denies the opportunity for rehabilitation as mentioned many individuals who are charged with, capital punishment become emotionally and mentally unstable


due to the characteristic towards the rehabilitation rather than execution many of them help the criminals to immerse back into the society we can prevent a similar incident in the future through proper education, and proper awareness so death penalty should be abolished and instead we should enforce


good awareness and education


ah okay uh, , uh part, one debate topic one


uh uh although I agree that the these social economic factors do come into play


but uh I still believe that these are subjective and non-academic factors should uh only come into play on the side to help students like develop their characters outside the classroom but uh it shouldn't be the main factor when it comes to looking at admissions


and uh I feel that this is because the main purpose of education in singapore is to like ensure that students are well equipped with the necessary skills to take on like increasingly, complex jobs that require more than just like being active outdoors or having a kind character so on and so forth


and I believe that academic factors such as exams would better prepare students to face the business world and any challenges that may arise during their work and uh this also because, uh academic factors allow students to like think critically without uh trying to solve uh when trying to solve a problem and it allows them to adapt and apply the relevant knowledge to solve the issue at hand so uh therefore I feel that


(ppc) by uh allowing by uh having uh, academic factors to be considered for admissions it will be the best factor and it'll be the fairest factor as well ya


uh I agree with your point but uh when it comes to talking about subjective factors uh I believe that some uh people take into consideration like personality as well


uh and I feel like this would make the whole system like very confusing because like uh from a student's point of view, I would feel that uh I I'm not good enough or competent enough if I do not display like a very outgoing or extroverted or like dominant personality


to like outshine the rest uh to get into a school that I want and uh this would in turn force uh more and more people to try and, uh change their personality to like fit in because they feel that this personality uh is taught from young that it's deemed acceptable in society and it will help you to get


into schools and uh far in life as well , so uh therefore I feel that uh it's still very unfair when it comes to uh schools considering subjective and no- academic factors when it comes to admissions


when uh the whole basis of school is uh to to actually learn and like take exams to to uh prove like your knowledge skills and like you are ready for the working world, ya (ppc)


uh I agree with the rising stress levels and uh like non-academic factors helping them to cope with stress


but uh on the other hand I also feel that uh by allowing students to uh consider subjective and non-academic factors uh when it comes to admissions into the different schools


I feel that some students may find themselves like cutting some slack and trying to rely more on these other factors to get into the schools that they want instead of trying to strive to gain and learn more knowledge from textbooks and educational materials that


uh will essentially be helpful for them in the workforce in the future because if they're not even able to like grasp the basic foundation and basic knowledge , uh whereas uh they would rather rely on like non-academic factors uh this would result in the students not being able to perform well when they enter the job market


uh ya that's true


uh I feel that after all the points that we have discussed uh there are good, there are, good and uh bad when it comes to uh considering subjective and non-academic factors for admissions and uh it's definitely open to more discussion


ya , okay then, , uh okay


oh sorry uh part two debate topic two


uh ya uh I, understand what you're saying but uh I feel that it's a bit ironic if the government tries to produce chinese dialects as, uh one of its mother tongue languages and uh this is also because uh of what you said earlier that the government has spent like uh many many years over fifty years trying to bridge the divide between the different dialect groups in singapore


ever since its gain its independence, uh by getting people to speak mandarin as uh common language for the chinese people and uh, the the , with ah the reason behind


the reason behind this uh was so that the different dialect groups could speak and communicate in a common language as you said earlier to ultimately form better bonds uh between, each other uh ya and uh sorry sorry


and uh so I feel that uh, eh don't disturb it ya, uh and so I feel that uh by introducing dialects as a mother, tongue language uh this would be countering the


governments uh, fierce efforts, in trying to minimize the segregation, sorry uh segregation sorry


uh uh, ya this would be countering the government's uh previous efforts in trying to uh , minimize the uh segregation and division between the different groups in singapore


uh ya I agree with what you said when uh you say that, uh, learning dialects can help to bridge the communication gap and like the


and to increase bonding with our grandparents and the older generation because uh personally I I also feel that uh by not being able to speak dialects uh I'm not able to like communicate with my grandparents as well


uh because they know like minimal english and they are more comfortable in speaking with dialect either rather than uh mandarin speaking mandarin but uh, also uh I feel that uh


adding on to this point uh students nowadays, are already struggling to master chinese as a mother tongue language uh especially since english is the main language used in schools and I feel that if the government were to offer chinese dialects as a mother tongue language instead


I personally feel that the younger generation would stray even further from being able to speak and write in proper chinese , and uh this would lead to uh even bigger problems uh in the future such as


uh having trouble communicating with chinese people both within singapore and uh in other countries as chinese has already been a well established and common language for the chinese people , and


and uh even though, I feel that this dialects can be used to communicate with others abroad , like countries who use like uh countries who uh teach third languages in schools as well but I feel that uh


especially since china is emerging as a global power economically it is better for us to focus on uh improving the basic uh mandarin and chinese uh for students in singapore before uh extending out to the dialects


uh because I feel that uh it would be a very uh new and different uh uh area for them and the students would struggle in in school ya


uh I agree with your point on the uh people being able to communicate better with


uh like rural uh like rural, areas in china especially since businesses are like expanding uh at a very fast pace nowadays but uh I also feel that uh


uh I also feel that this can be like uh sorry chinese dialects can be offered as like a third language instead of being as a, instead of it being uh like a main mother tongue language in singapore and also uh bring back to my point that uh most students are already struggling to master chinese as a mother tongue language nowadays


and also because of uh what you have mentioned earlier when you said that uh chinese dialects are usually only (ppc) for spoken uh chinese dialects are only used for us as a spoken language instead of a written language


and with that being said I feel that uh the chinese dialects are not very uh have not been very well put together such as such that uh there's no like uh


common system or, common system to follow for the, chinese dialects as opposed to like mandarin where you have like systematic uh you have like uh very organized uh way of like learning ya the language itself


ya and uh also I feel that uh your point on it being unfair to the other races in singapore it's also true , and even though some uh indian dialects have been introduced but wouldn't this be unfair to like other races in singapore as well like the malay race or like any other races trying who have different dialects uh within their own language as well


and uh because it only allows chinese people and indian people to have more options in schools whereas it limits the other races uh this this would not uh promote like a very just and a very fair system in schools when uh


uh when like little variety of choices are given to like the minorities as well


it's okay continue first


uh but then again I disagree with your first point uh when you said that the they should also allow like malay dialects in schools because uh I feel that, for


uh all these uh minorities uh they they usually only speak like uh one language uh and they do not, and the different, dialects of the minority groups are not widely used in singapore so I feel that by offering these uh dialects


to them as a mother tongue language, uh when it comes to uh being in the long run uh I feel that these students would lose touch of these dialects because you're not uh use constantly using it in singapore, due to uh people not like widely speaking it in singapore ya and so I feel that by allowing students to like take on these dialects instead of the main language that is being used in singapore as their mother tongue language uh I feel that


these students would be at a disadvantage as they grow up and as they progress further in their life , uh ya


uh part three debate topic three


uh ya I agree with your point that uh learning outside helps, like students to take a breather from the stressful educational system uh however I still feel that the emphasis should be placed on learning uh inside the classroom where students can fully focus and build up on the basic foundations in their studies


because uh by being outside in the classroom although it helps to make learning fun and nurtures the joy of learning in students , uh I still believe that the best way is to uh go by the traditional method of learning inside the classroom where the students can be fully focused on learning without any distractions


and uh this is because the basic definition of learning is defined as the acquisition of like knowledge or skills through study experience or being taught , and so I feel that uh


learning in the classroom has more positive attributes as compared to like learning outside of the classroom , and also because of the uh different like the many distractions and temptations that comes uh with learning outside of the classroom where students are are not being like so-called controlled or under control


and so for example uh they may have a tendency of like succumbing to uh temptation such as using their smartphones or their other electronic devices , which would uh which would uh then hinder the learning process for these students because uh due to the lack of supervision and


uh uh and, no control uh these students may uh ya succumb to these temptations and they will not be able to learn uh with like learn uh fully ya


uh


I hear what you saying but uh I feel that uh, this brings me back to the point of the lack of supervision so like uh with no schools and classrooms available for the learning to take place uh


even external people such as parents will still have to continue uh uh they may not have the time to like watch over their children, so in a classroom setting it's still it's still the best I feel because uh the teachers would be able to keep like an eye on everyone uh and to help them strive to do their best uh to keep the classroom uh conducive with zero distractions


and also uh I feel that uh on your point of, the internship I feel that that can be like a secondary thing, uh but not like the main the main way of uh people of the student's learning and this is because uh it also brings up the issue on character development as well because if learning is uh


is uh being like uh standardised to be taken place outside of the classroom uh the students will no longer have like his or her peers or teachers, who can act as role models for them uh in school and uh nowadays especially since uh many students are intrigued by many of these uh social networking sites such as facebook or twitter


without any role models in place uh in their life to help guide them through life and especially since they are at a growing stage now, where uh they they learn by uh picking up the behaviors of the different people around them


these would uh negatively influence the students and they may pick up a lot of bad behaviours and habits from these, and uh also because the teachers have rights to recommend students when they do something wrong this would allow them to reflect and repent on


uh what they have done and uh to correct their behaviors as they continue to grow in uh, conducive environment so uh without these teachers in place uh students, will not be able to grow up with an unimpressionable mind and good habits which would lead to even more uh even more problems in the future when they are faced with any minor uh like disagreement or uh issues


uh at their workplace


uh yeah I agree with uh what you said about uh, it's the students being able to take it at their own pace when they're learning out


side but uh I also feel that uh on the other hand uh some, as as what you have mentioned some students may, uh find it find the pace of learning slow or too fast in a classroom setting but uh wouldn't this apply to learning outside the classroom as well because I feel that some students are uh uh learn better


when they're being placed in the classroom uh with minimal distractions and they're able to focus uh fully on what they're learning as opposed to uh being outside all the time and having to cope with all the different distractions and the different


uh things that are going on in the environment and ya that's why I feel that uh being, able to learn in a classroom would be effective to most uh definitely not all but uh most of the students and uh for when it if it's not effective to uh


some students uh that's why like uh different remedials and after school uh tuition come into play where uh these students can like keep up with what they do not understand or, uh if they're having trouble with uh learning in the classroom ya


ya I agree on your point , uh and what you said about like how it can help with their interpersonal, uh characters and like personal development but I feel that uh


learning outside of the classroom does not, uh only it's not only restricted to like being outdoors but it can also mean by learning uh like allowing students to do home based learning and learning from home as well which is also outside of the classroom


and I feel that this is not, very practical for every single student as well because of uh mainly because of the well being of the students and the idea of not allowing students to be in a classroom setting for learning may cause like a huge impact on themselves


because uh not everyone has the has a fortunate background and many students and used are also exposed to uh domestic violence back at home so, by uh, forcing these students to learn at home instead of uh being in a classroom or being outdoors they they may experience like emotional mental or even social damage that can affect this uh development developmental growth


and uh, as some students uh see school as like a sort of like mental escape from home when they're faced with like domestic violence at home, I feel that this uh learning outside of the classroom which is learning at home in this case uh forces them to go back into the very abusive uh environment and situation that they were trying to escape from in the first place


and this would lead them uh this would lead to even more social and uh emotional, uh, detrimentation because uh, uh some people would feel like socially isolated and unable to uh connect with their friends during this uh


and uh as easily due to the social discomfort or confusion over like what is acceptable so if if uh uh putting myself in like a student's point of view if I'm facing like domestic violence at home


uh in this environment that makes me very like uneasy and uh makes me very unhappy I feel that I wouldn't be able to learn as effectively and, uh it wouldn't be like a feasible solution in the long run because of the the mental stress that it would put be put on myself


ya as opposed to like if uh I can be able to uh learn effectively in a classroom where I have uh minimal like, uh minimal


uh, how to say minimal like uh emotional trauma or stress


ya uh that's true I also agree but I feel that it's not very feasible in the long run as well because even though


uh it's a feasible learning process right now because of the whole like COVID situation, but in the long run where we uh introduce uh when we if we continue to have like outside of the classroom learning such as like at home learning


uh it would uh lead to more, uh inconvenience because some parents uh because parents would still have to go to work and especially for the younger, uh


younger children who, are being forced to learn from home they would be left alone at their house and uh ya with like, minimal supervision ya so although I feel that


learning outside of the classroom is good because of the points that you have mentioned on like character development and having more like flexibility I feel that uh it would still be more feasible to to have learning take place uh within the classroom itself where there is uh like teacher supervision


and uh and like other factors as well ya okay ,


one debate, topic one


okay so for question one the stand that the, proposition is taking is that schools should indeed consider subjective and non-academic factors for admissions taking into account co-curricular activities, soft skills personal values and character so there are many reasons as to why the proposition is taking this stand so firstly studies done by harvard have found that socio-economic status is strongly co-related with admissions for schools


so like well to do students have more financial resources and opportunities to attend enrichment and tuition classes, so this helps them to prepare, better for national exams for PSLE and o or a levels better, but then this may not necessarily be a fair ground to test student's academic abilities because other factors other external factors do come into play such as their socio-economic background as mentioned and also other factors so like students who do not are not as well to do so they have lesser financial resources and they might have to take up


like part-time, jobs in their free time instead of attending tuition lessons so uh this may not, so they do not have they may not have enough opportunities to uh prepare themselves better for national exams so it's not fair ground so therefore by considering subjective and non-academic factors it ensures that all students have an evil even playing field so it actually it sounds fairer


system to do to consider admissions


uh while I get while I understand your point that , like uh, doing academics it's it's the best way to , uh determine like student's education level and help them to adapt into the working world and equip them with the knowledge that they need however I feel that uh with non-academic factors in play so they can actually


turn what they learn in theory into practice so even though like non-academic factors such as CCA performances they're inherently more subjective than standardized exam scores , this could this could require our society to move away from a grades based meritocracy which it is currently in right now and also to embrace a wider definition of meritocracy that includes more subjective factors so student's capabilities and like in their success in the working environment in the future


are not based on and limited to only their academic abilities, but also it is holistic so while including this non-academic factors we can then gauge how well they can actually put what they learned to use and to develop their other more practical hands on skills they're also needed in like the working industry in the future


so this also allows a gauge of learning outcomes in schools without encouraging an overly competitive culture in schools right now, so also judging only academic factors for admissions create stigmatisation whereby students who are less academically inclined are often stigmatised


so for example even though secondary schools are slowly phasing out the streaming in terms of results in the past students are, categorised into three stream so express normal academic and normal technical , this is based on their PSLE results and these have often resulted in stigma attached to students who did not manage to get into the express stream so by considering subjective and non-academic factors curriculum can cater to students of different learning paces and learning needs and therefore this will reduce like the stigma and discrimination that


less academically inclined students will face


okay so !wah! actually agree that uh personality and like personal character and values are very subjective thing so everybody might have different like benchmark or opinions about it , but I don't think subjective and non-academic factors should revolve so much around personality traits and like your how outgoing you are but it should measure other things that are


even though subjective but, uh but it's still kind of measurable like uh for example, your uh CCA so for example, your leadership skills or your for example if you learn ballet then maybe if you reach like grade eight or something or if you have if you learn swimming then like if you are good at it with a lower timings like you know uh so it's not


that, subjective but it's like non-academic factors but still with a measurable segment to it so we can determine who is better in these areas rather than, just basing it on personality which I don't which I also agree that it is not a very good factor to determine whether students should get into certain schools because that is not fair


uh ya so uh furthermore I feel that , students statistics have also shown that students are experiencing rising levels of stress these days as much like much more importance is placed on their abilities to score well on exams so as reported by the institute of mental health more and more teenagers are actually seeking help


over the years so this rising stress is unhealthy for student's health which can also lead to other unhealthy coping mechanisms like, smoking drinking, uh stealing, so including like non-academic factors can reduce stress for students as they might have other


like non-academic hobbies or talents that may bring them more enjoyment and at the same time help them to get into the schools of their choice to further develop their interest


uh I agree that if we, take into account non-academic factor some students may actually use this as an opportunity to slack and like not work as hard because, uh the importance of on academics is not as great anymore but then uh it might not be the case for all students like maybe a minority of them would do so but even if they


do slack in terms of that area maybe they have other, uh other like, non-academic factors like their hobbies that can actually help, them, to like get into the schools that they want, uh, and even though like learning educational materials is important for like the foundation in order to work in the working environment in the future but having an outlet to like put these skills to practice and not just relying on memory work


and like, with repetitively doing like the work in class , uh I think that would be a better way for them to actually, measure their skills and how how like they have developed with this knowledge that they have then it can help them better in the future in the working environment


, is it this ah


okay so for topic two the topic is chinese dialects should be offered as a mother tongue option so the proposition stand is that chinese dialects ya should be offered as a mother tongue so going back to singapore's history chinese dialect used to be spoken within the chinese community at the start of singapore's independence


so there there has been many different dialects such as Hokkien Teochew cantonese and Hakka being spoken among the different communities , but due to singapore's uh bilingual policy that they slowly launched they consolidated this different dialects and promoted the use of mandarin as a common language to bond the chinese community so


even though that was the original plan we can still see communication barriers within the chinese community but now instead of being, uh between different communities the barriers are within like the between the older and the younger generations


so as only the majority of the older generations are fluent in dialects whereas many of the younger generations are unable to speak dialects this creates some communication barriers and issues where grandchildren, often have difficulty communicating with their grandparents who


are unable to speak uh mandarin well, so, we uh so therefore chinese dialect should be offered as a mother tongue language to like bridge this gap between the older and the younger generation so that they have like a common language that they can use to talk to each other


so as we know like singapore's bilingual policy the main aim was to form like a common language within the chinese community so everybody can speak mandarin and communicate with one another therefore they eradicated dialects


so uh in twenty twenty we can actually see that this plan has worked very well because like, most of the chinese have at least a basic command of mandarin and they can like communicate with one another using the mandarin language but then uh at the expense of that we we lost like the ability to speak dialects so


so therefore chinese dialects can be offered as a mother tongue option because uh, this is to rectify like the previous policy , so besides having a good, uh a good command of mandarin uh we can then also learn


dialects on top of it so we can actually communicate better because we have already seen the success of the previous policy so now we can actually, start to go further from that policy and then learn dialects in order to communicate better with like the older generation


and dialects are also considered very important for us to retain our cultural heritage and traditions this can actually uh add to a deeper understanding of our mandarin as well and enable a more robust and holistic chinese identity so this will allow us to reconnect with the elderly in singapore


so , currently according to I think the statistics only one in five singaporeans are able to speak dialects and that is really really low, it's around it's twenty percent so this actually hinders communication between generations so therefore chinese dialect should also be offered as a mother tongue option in my opinion ya


so even though I feel that it is it has been difficult for some students to master mandarin in school uh we cannot assume the same case for chinese dialects because some students may actually find dialects easier to learn instead since it is mostly spoken instead of written


and then schools and teachers can also be provided with more resources to make learning dialects easier for students and also with more practice of dialects outside of the classroom for example using it while communicating with one's grandparents


students will definitely be able to master the dialect effectively so , it might be even easier or, than learning mandarin in schools I would say for uh moreover mandarin is also essential due to its economic value and social capital as you mention just now especially when singapore is working together and doing business with major countries uh like china for instance


so however certain rural areas in china are still using dialects instead of mandarin and even though singapore is working mainly with Shanghai and Beijing which are the well developed modern cities of china where people are mostly speaking mandarin


uh singapore is actually expanding, our businesses which like business which to rural areas as well, and therefore having a good command of dialects can actually improve our connection with businesses between singapore and like china's rural areas so this can be used like so dialects can actually be used to communicate with others abroad


like in this case where like in china's rural areas, and, in areas where people learn dialect as a third language, so some people may say that it is unfair to offer chinese dialects to like the chinese community and not dialects of the other ethnic groups but actually MOE have already provided like flexibility for students to learn like


uh other indian languages in schools such as hindi bengali and punjabi, as their mother, tongue since the early nineteen nineties so the same flexibility should be encouraged and allowed for students to learn about chinese dialects in order to promote more knowledge and understanding about


their chinese identity


so I agree that actually uh some may find like learning dialects even harder than mandarin so uh, so instead of having dialects as a third language I feel that, I understand, you're concerned that you're worried that if they learn dialect instead of mandarin then their command of mandarin will get even worse so maybe we can uh the schools can implement a system whereby students who have obtained a certain level of mandarin like command of proficiency than they can


attempt to take dialects as a mother tongue, so this will prevent like them not having a good proficiency of mandarin yet they try to tackle uh dialect so it should be like uh enriching, program it's, it's like uh if you have a good command of mandarin then you can


go on further to try to learn dialects as a second language that accepted okay and also , so I also agree that uh what if like other races, uh like such as malay they do not have the flexibility to learn dialects so


therefore if singapore were to implement this by having like, chinese be able to learn their dialects then I think the same kind of flexibility should be given to all the races in singapore so malays should be able to learn their dialects chinese should be and indians as well


so this will ensure that everybody has a fair opportunity and exposure to their culture and their dialects, furthermore like, oh , uh, oh sorry oh okay so even though dialects


ya they often have little emphasis on the written language therefore they do not have a like a system to learn it I agree so maybe in this case like teachers should be given extra like resources from the government or something like they can go through


uh more lessons so that they know exactly what is the for example what is the right pronunciation for certain words or like, the right way to use the words in a in a sentence so to like to create a system based on, like


this like knowledge that they gain from the extra resources provided, uh moreover like different dialects in singapore like cantonese Hakka they all have different cultures and in a like racial harmony like society in singapore, so it's very crucial to integrate these different cultures together as you could actually help the society progress further therefore it is crucial that each uh students can get to learn more about their dialects therefore they can


uh integrate all these different cultures together and dialects are also becoming extinct as I mentioned just now only one in five singaporeans are able to speak dialects and therefore if we do not, uh try to act now and save it then dialects might become like extinct in the near near future like in a few more years time or like


when I have my kids I don't my my children will definitely not know how to speak dialects because even I cannot speak dialects


so actually malays they also have, like, a few dialects even though they're not as commonly used but some families they still use it like within the household so I feel that, having dialects as a second mother tongue language for minorities can be of their choice so like if they're using the mother tongue as in if they're using the dialect in their family then they can opt to learn that dialect as their mother tongue but


of course it's uh like I mentioned I feel that uh there should be like a system, so they should be tested on their, like command, of the main mother tongue language first like malay or mandarin or tamil then if they, uh they have proven that they are able to


do well and they have a good command of the basic mother tongue language then they can go on to take, up like dialects , ya so that's why they won't like forgo their their main mother tongue language in order to learn dialects


oh ya so so ya I think that that's more or less the points we have for debate topic two so there are like pros and cons where, uh whereby chinese dialect should be offered as a mother tongue language or not and then uh


more should be put into consideration if we really intend to put this into place in singapore


part three debate, topic three, okay so the proposition directs that for debate topic three learning outside the classroom is better


as students gain the opportunity to gain experience and apply theoretical skills in real work situations so learning outside the classroom, is getting opportunity to learn other areas which can be defined like such as industry attachments field trips and et cetera


so there are multiple benefits to learning outside the classroom so firstly students get to develop their interpersonal skills and the ability to act independently as they have to as they're not under like the, guidance of the teacher twenty four seven and they have to


think think like, of actions by themselves it provides an opportunity for students to take a breather from their usual intense studying and memorizing inside the classroom, and this may make learning even more engaging for students by providing them with different learning methods and a rich sensory environment that one can only get by being outside which is different from their usual studying methods that requires memory


memory work reading and writing of the information being taught so , when children are young and they're being and they're able to learn outside this actually enriches their sensory perception perception and then they get to learn things in different ways which like enhances their left brain


and right brain more than it's just like, purely depending on memory work and this actually enhances their creativity and, there are soft skills and being able to communicate with one another, uh, ya which is very important for like developing ones


, brain and skills and character in the long run


so although I agree that it's important to learn the foundations and theories in the classroom with minimal distractions uh I feel that it is also important to make sure that students are able to put the theories that they learn into practice, so uh while they're more distractions outside uh we have to acknowledge that there are also more uh resources and opportunities outside so resources can include like interactive


digital resources like ipads or like going on field trips or having internships so this actually makes learning more engaging and relevant to the students instead of forcing them to just rely on memory work and to absorb the theoretical content they're taught in schools


so uh learning outside classroom provides them with an avenue to , put what they learned into practice so for example in this case for example uh when we talk about internships so it actually helps to develop students as educated individuals which is ultimately the aim of education


and to prepare them for uh to enter the workforce so as education becomes more and more accessible and saturated what sets individuals apart are, their interpersonal skills so uh for example employers are more inclined to search for candidates who possess skills outside of their academic domain so by learning outside the classroom students can actually develop


uh this soft skills and interpersonal skills as they step out of their comfort zone and have to interact with people that, are not their classmates or teachers that people who aren't their who they are not as comfortable or close with , so this actually become develops their interpersonal skills and soft skills which are actually crucial as deciding factors for employment in like singapore's contemporary economic landscape moreover as I mentioned earlier so they're more


uh learning outside provides more opportunities and resources so there is a limit to the number of resources which students can leverage on in the classrooms however with the development of the internet in the last few decades resources are plentiful on the web and sometimes


learning through such methods could give rise to more informative and better learning as compared, to in a classroom setting and even though uh them there might be more distraction distractions outside the classroom, uh there's still like the teacher who will be there with them just not guiding them through every single step so uh ya so teachers can also


control certain parts of the distractions that the students have access to to ensure that uh they are still learning and absorbing what they are experiencing outside the classroom


so I agree that like teachers are crucial in educating students and guiding their behaviors so that they can grow up to have the correct values and morals, however it's actually not as easy because uh in primary and secondary schools uh usually one teacher has to attend to a class of around thirty students so not enough attention can be given to each


uh student so some students might be neglected so they do not often get like the, amount the amount of guidance that they need, moreover different students have different styles and methods of learning and by confining them to a classroom environment it'll actually limit them to uh one particular style of learning


dictated by the teacher so it's a known fact that different people learn in different ways for example visual auditory reading writing or kinaesthetic unfortunately through our teachings in classrooms we are actually limiting our students to the methods of teaching set by the teacher


which in most case involves the teacher just, formally teaching the students so this would not be an optimal studying and learning experience for students who depend on, uh other forms of learning such as writing , uh and kinaesthetic methods


so on the other hand outside of outside the classroom students would have more flexibility to adopt their preferred methods of studying and like, the ways that they can study the best and (ppc) this will allow them to pick up new information more efficiently and more effectively so instead of just memorizing the


uh knowledge and the the information being taught by the teacher some people may work better by just looking or just uh listening so by having their own methods of learning they can actually learn at a shorter time


with lesser the effort but gets the same thing done so for example, in a classroom with like one teacher tending to thirty people as mentioned earlier so some students will find the pace of teaching too slow so the learning takes that takes place would be inefficient while some students actually struggle to keep up with the teacher and they end up falling behind so they have to do like extra work when they


get home just to be on the same level as their peers, so by allowing learning to occur outside the classrooms it allows students themselves who knew their own abilities and their own pace of learning to study and learn at their own comfortable pace which will maximize the outcome of learning for all students


so while I agree that uh studying is, best in the classroom where there are no distractions but it does not, work for everybody and even though like weaker students they have to attend remedial lessons to get to the same level as their peers but I find that it is very unfair because it is based on a standardised uh method of learning which is learning within the classrooms


and this only benefits certain students who are able to thrive in the environment but for those who are, unable to thrive in the environment then they have to like learn even more they have to use even more time on studying when one simple method uh can be like taking them out outdoors to learn where they can actually learn in a shorter amount of time to reach the same level of their as their uh as their peers


and also while I agree that learning some some of learning should be within the classroom so I'm not saying that learning should be entirely out of the classroom that everyday we have to go outside , but uh it should be a balance of both so while on one hand uh we have students learning the basic foundations in classrooms without distractions beside their peers who are all working hard together but also


learning should also include like after they learn this foundations they should be able to go outside to learn even more where they can put their theory into practice where they can, uh mingle with one another interact with other individuals other than their classmates and teachers so this is to develop their communication and interpersonal skills as I mentioned earlier so even though these skills are


uh mostly needed after, like in secondary education or tertiary education like internships while we're getting nearer to entering the workforce but uh these skills should be developed from a young age and therefore like by exiting the classrooms uh students get to develop these skills of theirs and then


they can enhance their teamwork abilities which are like the basic basic life skills that are arguably more important than any other academic knowledge because that is what they would rely on in the future where they have to work with people from all like different ages and life stages


so uh I actually agree so it's not that all students are suitable for home based learning because of, like the different, home environments that everybody, goes through but then , while some people may experience domestic violence at homes some students actually also undergo bullying in schools which is a serious problem


and then uh, so by allowing learning to occur outside of classroom such as home based learning this could actually significantly reduce the amount of bullying that certain students face and also, studying at home give students increased flexibility in their studying so it also works better for students who find it too stressful to be in the school for seven


long hours to be beside, people who bullies them or beside like peers who, , are very competitive and gives them more stress so actually studying at home in this case could give certain students who face difficulties in school


to actually uh learn better have a conducive learning environment at home and this also reduces the time taken to travel to and from school and this time can instead be spent on studying and, enhancing the learning that they have so as some students have to travel for very like two hours from the east to the west just attend their schools so studying at home give them these increased flexibility and more time


and instead of forcing students to wake up at like seven AM just to go to school early in the morning which might not have like the, best results as they are not even wide awake yet giving them the opportunity to study at home so they can


uh allocate their own time and decide when is the best time for them to study and to better absorb all the information that they have


okay


okay debate topic one, technology create more problems, sorry , sorry technology create more problems than benefit for the society okay so


and the proposition so technology has been an integral part of our lives like finding information to seeking enjoyment, we could all do it in a in a stationary place in our homes from the comfort of our so fast to using uh gadgets such as ipads and iphones this has introduced dormancy into our lives like there's no real need there's no real physical need to


to gather information outside of your uh outside of the comfort of your home for example COVID has proven that we can actually most of the jobs we can actually work from home uh such as doing conferences are using Webex or skype


uh whereas conventionally before COVID they they these are conferences were done in in a meeting room or in convention centre centres such as in marina bay, so not only does this induce dormancy also uh reduces physical ah activity so this leads to increases uh increase uh prevalent diseases such as heart disease and stroke


, not only that it also ah introduces some kind of ah, introversion in people meaning ah meaning since people do not need to communicate uh face to face there's no there's no element of body language there's no element of facial expressions there's only uh for texting case there's only words and in uh in video conferencing there's uh there's only audio


which is which doesn't eh which is which is not comparable to to sound that you hear live to their own ears, so uh I feel it also can lead to uh depression mental depression because due to the due to the restricted proximity to other individuals


so , uh ya so, uh recent uh medical study done by uh MOH uh said that uh said that in twenty thirty or in twenty thirty from like which is like in ten years for twenty years from now uh depression will be the number one disease


mental disease that that would that would affect many people's lives, in singapore so technology is is ya it creates more problems than benefit not in our society


so touching on the restricted proximity point so given the example of seeing texting which is quite prevalent among all walks of life all ages individual of all ages, it is testing, uh it's a form of communication yes I agree but the thing is I say restricted proximity is because it it uh mix the element of body language it makes the element of emotions it makes it makes the element of uh it makes the element of


you know that that, that kind of feeling that you get when you interact with humans in real life, it it, it makes the element these elements obsolete, so that is why I mentioned the point restricted proximities yes nowadays we have emojis and all that but it doesn't


it's not comparable to to having a facial emotion of being happy of being sad or being shocked or being surprised, so that is what I mean by restricted proximity, ya so (ppc), so this is how it leads to dormancy in your life like in terms of communication and social interactions with other people one other point is that you mentioned that uh


it it uh it reduces the need for commitment with other people , okay and reduce the need for commitment ya can sometimes translate, to to to, to reducing social interactions with that people


uh, so that that again leads to my, point of uh uh leading to the element of introversion and, pressure and so on and so forth, uh one more point that I would like to bring up is , uh, the prevalence of technology actually has increased our dependence on nah


on on technology itself so from doing daily uh task, all the way to to, to searching information gaining knowledge uh it has been all dependent on technology nowadays you can see infants


uh, infants are being engaged on uh gadgets to to distract their, attention away uh in previously uh previously, parents used to have those toys shake those shaken


toys and to distract that attention and prevent the baby from crying but nowadays they use ipads and iphones , I feel, see see that is a scenario itself that that shows that there's no there's no social interaction between the parents and the child


as as as opposed to using uh using a shaken toy or you know distracting the the child's attention so that that's what I mean by savoring the social interactions and increasing our dependence on technology, ya that's it


thank you


okay thank you vivian , yes uh michelle venture this uh debate into other areas uh yes you said talked about how technology has made , err has met , free up uh human capabilities but


you see that that's a good point but the problem now is the high dependence of technology has actually focused, uh the world's attention to how to what extent are we are we allowing technology to, to replace our our senses our own human capabilities at for example to think to to memorise like you said to to to have things in our memory to work to


to to remind ourselves to exercise to eat and all that so, how much are we allowing technology to disrupt all this, uh in my opinion I feel it's highly disruptive because of like what you said technology developed like robots machine learning with even a simple reminder app in your in your iphones uh it is actually not uh free up our mental capability but it has actually reduced


our our our our want to increase our memory our our, our opportunity to to increase memory , ya so so, so having these reminders and and all that uh has


has given us less of an incentive less of an motivation to really increase our memory and do things, uh out and about okay then our second uh on your second point about technology uh technology, uh


aiding a manufacturing industries yes you're right uh it, it reduces manual labor it uh it frees up job but uh again it comes back to that point how much of technology are we allowing , to uh fulfill our needs in terms of labour and manufacturing right now yes it has freed up labor but right now there's another emerging problem not only employment but how can we connect


people with a certain uh certain nah, certain number of skill sets to industries so for example if a person is freed up of labour in manufacturing how can we , , redeploy or re-employ him into uh sectors such as uh medical tourism service sectors how can we do this


so ya technology can, can uh make things efficient but it disrupts human's way of life, so I feel, , it should be at a control it should be at a control yes we are developing technology but it should not be to an extent to replace uh human needs and human jobs


yes, because this is like a one person benefit another person doesn't benefit for example the creators of the technology with benefit whereas the the the the the workers at the manufacturing firm who have been working for like twenty thirty years suddenly lose their job because of


uh technological advancements, so , ya it it's it's a it's a game of balance it's uh how much you're allowing technology into our lives as humanity err I hope robots don't replace us one day, uh don't replace emotions those in need to humans like for example emotions they don't replace I hope they don't replace


such in need stuff in us, because then we will lose our identity as humanity and, that's it ya okay over to you vivian


okay uh, several comments about the aviation part you do note that uh the technology introduce are going to be introduced in the future is going to be created by humans so inevitably uh, a a a technology cannot be flawless if if


if a if a human being, who already has flaws is creating it right so that is that is precisely why we still me, having human pilots in the cockpit because, if, the majority of a task is being overtaken by technology


and we are so highly dependent and, there's something that we cannot control due to our lack of technological knowledge or due, because knowledge is is something something in the unknown and not all human beings have the capability and have the talent to


to really you know to to, to handle that technology and if anything goes wrong accidents can can be more severe and more , uh, more prevalent than it is now so I feel again is the balance so the at the end of the day it is the game of balance like I said


okay so debate topic two machines make humans and their jobs obsolete, ya so I agree uh yes machine do make it obsolete


the key feature of our machines is that it is inanimate and is programmable with uh logic, but the problem again as , it it


it doesn't, it has been used okay machines are being used to, alleviate humans uh human's effort and load a problem is, it has replaced some, not some ya majority of the jobs


out there, uh out there like like uh like what vivian mentioned, so, by job replacement and actually replacing someone's livelihood it actually uh derails destabilises, the the everyday living of an individual


like for example right uh in Changi airport uh recently due to uh, due to the COVID outbreak partially encouragement of the COVID outbreak in terminal one and three they are rolling out this uh think called contactless kiosks


uh in in the immigration building as well as well as at the boarding ticket area uh they're using proximity sensors where you don't actually have to use your fingers to touch the screen, and you know to tap your name and all that so they're using proximity sensors so you can just float around near the screen and you know you will just automatically click it for you


and ya and and boarding passes are e boarding passes now we can just flash it and just go inside , , you see the problem here is right Changi airport not only has pride itself in technological innovation but also has pride itself in in service


uh in surveys in customer service customer relations and all that, uh not only in in in Changi airport's case but also in airliners, uh all these cabin crews stewardess as stewards stewardesses, use uh the element of emotion use the element of uh hospitality to to welcome passengers which has a more which has which has a more I give effect in a in a person's subconscious mind


you know you know to to to travel to feel to feel good to feel welcome in that airline to feel welcome in the in changi airport, so making making, these humans and and their jobs obsolete really mix


the element of emotion obsolete, so ya so, ya so I agree that it makes uh humans and their jobs obsolete, over to vivian


uh yes I do I think I think you I think I'll I'll let you know uh current affairs now lah so for due to the COVID pandemic where so before this the first-class suites they usually were presented with uh, presented with uh the menu of the day being at uh being uh you know explain one by one what each dish and tales


but now due to the COVID pandemic they use uh this uh if I not wrong with the ipad or just a screen or something to just uh you know screen that entire e-menu with the description there and whatever you prefer you just click on it and that's it, so you see if so these


this machine which is, the ipad or whatever they are using to screen it has replaced, that human interaction that service element of it and made that aspect of that, job, obsolete for that cabin crew, so that is what I'm trying to say


but if you haven't gotten the point so that's what I'm trying to say that that service element has, has, becoming more and more obsolete and, on the ground on the checking terminals all that , it has become totally obsolete because,


because there's no need to you know print the print the boarding tickets uh yes there's still one or two if there's any problems with the machines , but, as opposed to previous years that were like you know there are like ten checking agents now only that's about two or three to handle all this


uh discrepancies, so it does make make uh it has to this point where machines yes make it make humans and their jobs obsolete, ya


ya uh so , you actually proved my point quite well so the first uh point about serve is, and you're right so the different classes of uh travel economy business and first-class suites, all differ not only in the space of chair or the comfort of the chair but actually the the quality of service and that amenities available that is which was presented by the cabin crew themself like human to human interactions


so if I were to replace by machines I takeaway a big integral part of service in these three tiers making these, the the the the you know the differentiating factor in these three tiers obsolete so not only does this make the job of the cabin crew the service and element obsolete not only does this make the cabin crew themselves with the majority of the job which a huge part of their job entail service obsolete but also makes


uh disrupt certain uh certain you know uh ways of travel certain norms of travel obsolete, you see that that then again brings my argument back to the game of balance how much are we going to allow machines into our lives because you see now only this discussion topic is is you know can is is is focused on two elements humans and jobs but


you can actually see how it propagates into different effects different uh areas where you can where where machines can actually make those elements obsolete, so which which are adds more grounding to this uh to this uh view of opposition


and to the second point about the competing, yes I do agree yes I do agree that uh machines are needed to to to you know integrate the human capabilities that is that is why that is what I'm actually trying to preach


uh what I'm, not preaching is how technology can overtake humans you know because because recently uh from the from from recent news if you can see that are the sanctuary seven max crashes actually happen due to technological teachers and in aviation history


we can see uh apart from human errors we can also see how technology technology uh has uh led to airline crashes the seventy-seven max issue was uh, on the on the on the


auto-correction of the angle attack of the aircraft so, so this has led to many certification issues and until today till today as we speak boeing has a boeing has tried to rectify the issues but it could not fulfil FA's regulations to release the aircraft back into service


so which again, uh makes the point of how machines are flawless which again it makes uh which which which gives evidence to the point of how we shouldn't make machines uh we shouldn't sorry we shouldn't leach uh machine is making humans and their job obsolete


simply to the fact that machines are flawless and we need a human element then actually you agree with me, one more point is about uh a point that has made in the previous ah, uh argument you see the there are certain areas that uh we shouldn't make machines obsolete


certain areas that require uh close uh intimate uh relationship with the other human being for example counselling for example uh psychiatrics for example uh psychological assessment of criminal psychological assessment of uh government uh workers


we need, we we can't use machines we can't, use the uh the programming of logic or or or or you know like like programming languages to to to discern emotions discern uh instincts discern intentions of what they say


uh so ya so ya again it brings back to the topic of uh balance and how to what extent it uh, going to going, to make this the only talk about uh in, in the in the uh


in the aviation industry we didn't talk about , in for example in uh let's say automation industry like uh cars and all that , previously previously it


there was there are certain uh US uh automotive makers that tried for that pushed for self-driving cars, although certain uh some companies succeed that certs there are notably some I believe that did not uh pass their safety standards because of uh because


purely that that that technology failed to to to act decisively to to act rationally in the scenario that was posed during the test so, again we shouldn't we shouldn't meet you know, humans and their jobs obsolete


there must be a mix of machines and humans


yeah, err not my argument is uh machines are making humans and their job obsolete


to the point that I that I actually affecting them and in certain circumstances it actually doesn't serve the purpose it's supposed to serve, for example right in japan they use robots to to, fulfill uh romantic desires of men there


this idea was heavily frowned upon and heavily frowned upon in nations such as uh Amsterdam, where they believe in uh human to many interactions that, that that notion of love like you know like like why we have known in previous years so


and also uh in japan they're they're uh it a study also shows that uh although a small group of men find that they are desire to be fulfilled most of the men, at the end of that experience you know that with the robots and and and putting them and all that


they actually found out that they go back to go back to square one me meaning diff they sub in their mind they they they come to realise they're living in in some sort of a lie whereby their you know they're flirting a robot and they realised that !hey! this not a human I can't you know have


you know have that have that emotional connection with with a machine that is programmed to to to say things, you know which are all you know fixed beforehand before meeting the person as not you know uh, uh involuntary so ya you hints to


make the job obsolete it doesn't serve the purpose that's what I'm trying to say


ya, ya


okay, okay I guess it's uh it's uh it's uh I guess it is a issue of what standpoint or what angle are you approaching this debate


I am approaching this debate on how it makes, the, machines made the the the the jobs obsolete and hence the effects you know I mean I'm trying to prove I'm actually proving machines make human and jobs obsolete and hence


is you know it is disrupting our way of life however your approach is, ah no uh machines are not making uh humans and their jobs obsolete and it it it it it is on the focus on what we are trying to focus on if you are focusing on how machines can you know uh make things more efficient and all that


yes there's some credit to argument however if you make uh the the standpoint or the view whereby machines make humans that, on jobs obsolete and hence it couldn't serve certain purposes it couldn't I it it it you know disrupt a, the likelihood and then my argument has some credit so it it it is a matter of how you approach this debate topic


, moving on to the boeing seventy-seven crash you can see in two ways ah first way, is yes technology uh uh comes in and makes the element of you know correcting the pitch of the aircraft


that that that job that specific element of that pilot job obsolete however right, okay, uh it it will debate from that how you will debate how you will debate is , if, if the pilots are not familiar with the technology


if, if the technology makes an uncommanded move, unknown to the pilot which is what happened in the seventy-seven max crash, uncommanded by the pilot and makes the move, are unknown to the uh pilots it actually and they just like which has credit to my argument now coming back to your argument why do you try to say is that I need to you know balance the balance humans and the the aspect technology but with regards to this specific issue right


don't you agree that a simple, move of reducing the pitch down by controlling the controlling this the the control column will be much easier than having an uncommanded move and an unknown move made to the pilot, because you see


they need to be in command of machines and not machines in command of us, eh yes so , ya so the


yes but not no yes but I'm I'm focusing on this specific issue, this this specific on, ya


no what I'm trying to say is that if this, element came in and it makes the pilot obsolete then hence it led to the crash, I hope that it doesn't make it obsolete, so, doesn't make that element of the job obsolete and hence he could have just you know pitch down and that's to and you would have lived now


okay, okay so, sorry, debate topic three uh, euthanasia should be uh, legalised


I agree 'cause , K the, I give you a scenario , I let's say a person is on his death bed and he is on his


immense pain and he and he is basically on his final stage of his life and medically they run some tests and those test laboratory results are actually show that they you know he is actually you know, he's going to live by he's going to go through a lot of pain a lot uh a lot of worsening of its internal human conscience


so I feel uh he should have that he should exercise his right to you know die peacefully, , instead of you know suffering from the pain and and and, and the mental pain as well that you know that his family seeing him suffer that is that his mental realization that his internal organs are failing and suffering so I feel


he should uh he should he should be legalized so that you can you know exercise the right, for him to peacefully die end his life and you know , uh, and returned to the afterward peacefully, I would like to hear your thoughts first prevent, about this it's a very interesting topic


ya ya it's it's perfect and


okay thank you for the insightful uh depiction of the entire argument about euthanasia I only picked up the last point about the, uh the the, you know the the the the the point of all the, the point about right to live the point of god the point of uh


the point of all the suicides okay I will address all these points together rather we need to have a focus in our argument, rather we can we can venture into an ethical argument since that's what you are ensuring, what we can venture, those that uh say say the okay that okay in in some of the patient's cases like uh not control cancer but there are some like cases where


by the person uh has the the person you know they have been tested uh, they've been intensive tested like like what you say euthanasia has a lot of regulations there's a lot of requirements you can't just exercise euthanasia since that's not a yes or no question is not uh a matter of thirty minute one hour explanation session it is


a lot of deliberation it is a lot of consideration ethically uh using uh scientific results and all that, , so prior to the process uh, there are let's say, there are some patients there are


they have, due to the complicate due to the disease they have been brain dead so this brain dead is not pronounced by the doctor himself he uses all the medical results all the laboratory results visual inspection visual you know assessment uh level a medical assessment to to to to you know


to support that point and also you know explains the family what these results mean, so how how do you want a person to live, when he is actually brain dead, when the actual right thing to do is for him to pass on for the family to to come to a closure that you know that person has actually uh passed on and you know let let him go to the afterlife if if that what he believes in let him go to the afterlife or whatever that he


he has to venture on after this uh life on earth, why why can't he just why can't he or, can he exercise his uh, uh right to to let go of his life and venture on to to whatever he's believed in or why can't his family members let's say he's unable to speak unable to think


let's say why can't his uh family members exercise the right to , to die when when he's already like you know brain dead, ya basically he's in literally dead which is supported by medical uh assessments and let him pass off


your your your turn vivian


ya ya ya continue


uh I think I think we are veering away from the argument or the focus that we set at the start of this uh debate because we are practically we are talking about the right to live assess the right to die but this, tire emotion of depression and assisted suicide is a whole lot thing because


we are away from a medical perspective, on whether or not whether, ya actually the crux of this to to to debate before whatever you mentioned just now was , how how, how do we know what we know about


about the person's like a likelihood of living or die, you know what I mean so, and ya how do we know what we know about the the the, patient's decision to live or die so that's the thing however right the argument about depression assisted suicide is not that


it's something far beyond its, it's something you eat, it's very difficult to to to generalize that concept of depression and assisted suicide because it each individual has his or her own story and the causes of depression and hence how much


you know how how can we link their depression to assisted suicide differs from person to person so you can't just generalize that in in a broad sense or in, in a in a in a in a in in this type of general argument or debate, uh


so before that you said about, , the wait, you said about let me recall you said about uh, ah yes yes yes right right thank you for reminding me the the the the patients like you know like guilt


and and, guilt and how much of it how much he he or she is a burden to, to the family emotionally financially all that you see, you see if he knows that uh I mean obviously acknowledges that he has a condition and he


if has, to go to euthanasia which means he knows that , medical reports or medical labs or scientifically uh, it is is it is like scientifically uh depicted that he


his likelihood of uh dying on the the uh dying is you know higher it's not like it's not like say I, fever oh I do not know I would die or live die or you know it is not that kind of argument it's it's more towards whether whether I'll live or not but the medical reports suggest that


you know death could be, could be you know I'm uh my my condition is so so so, it it it it is so much worse that I there's no there's no chance of you know normal life back again that that that normal that they had before all these uh complications so I feel if they are at that self realisation in their life plus like what you said


if they realise that they're burdening their family emotionally financially and all that if they can realize that, I think they should, exercise the right to you know, to to to to, to be euthanized that you know to let go of themselves and venture on to the next part of their life so that their family members are at peace I address


they are , you know they can have some form of closure first of emotionally I'm tackling emotion first emotionally they have some form of closure that the person has passed on instead of coming , to the hospital everyday seeing the person whom use


spend countless, invaluable memories with them suffering on the pain you know , like what you said not able to move not able to express what they want to do or you know or simple things saying hi hello , these are really really you know


things that words can't describe like how sad, that thing is , so I feel, emotionally they should have the right to pass on so that they could, uh alleviate all these emotional aspects and make, make make that pain


pain to prevent the pain from worsening that's one can say financially financially financially, financially and resources wise , yes human life is invaluable but how far are you going to meddle with something in unknown you and I can


agree that only god or if if you believe in religion not only god or or or or or, science or or or or the fact or some kind of, science or god is going to determine whether your own live or not or whether you if even leave you're not euthanized you are not going to you know you are going to improve your condition if uh euthanized


we don't know then is why there's so much, , so much argument behind this so much uh you know paperwork basically that is why so, I feel uh if there's so much paperwork and he has come to this emotional realisation like what you said I think there should be a right to pass on so that


so that we can, you know , we can move on from this tsunami, we are talking hypothetically you just one scenario what if this is a more everywhere like there's hundreds of patients like this just uh are baning on that euthanasia argument medical resources will be so taxed it'll be so and the and the doctors will be so taxed that they couldn't focus their attention into other stuff


you know like euthanasia is just, one part in the whole broad medical work, I think that sums up the argument pretty well


alright