So last week, I came across this article talking about an incident that was witnessed between a student from a reputable JC and a foreign worker. What happened was that this 17-year-old student sat next to a foreign worker on the bus, and then proceeded to cover his nose and say to his friends, "I feel like vomiting." He then went on to unabashedly stare at the worker, who was fully aware of the student's actions throughout. 

The student's appalling actions led the author to wonder if youth nowadays lack EQ and the ability to show respect to others who are not of a similar socioeconomic standing, as well as the values that are being taught nowadays. That got me thinking. And then, I came across another article, which inspired me to write this post because it's something I feel rather strongly about. I strongly recommend you to read this one because not only is it very well-written, it definitely leaves you something to chew on. In the article, the author discusses why youth of today don't think that moral facts exist, and he attributes this to our conception of fact and opinion. Because "facts" are things that are "true" and can be empirically proven, while "opinions" are what someone thinks, feels, or believes and cannot be empirically proven, youth nowadays have begun to associate moral claims with the latter as they can't be scientifically proven. 

The thing is, this definition is flawed: something can still be true, even if it cannot be proven scientifically. For all we know, there may be a parallel universe that runs alongside ours, only that we can't prove it. People used to believe that the Earth was the centre of the universe. As McBrayer (the writer) wrote, it's "wrong to confuse truth," which is a feature of the world, "with proof," which is a feature of our mental lives. 

Another thing he pointed out was that we are taught that facts and opinions are mutually exclusive. But can't some claims be both fact and opinion? Worse, schoolchildren are taught at a tender age on how to distinguish between the two, and in this scientific age of information, if it's not tangible, it's not a fact. So statements like "It is wrong to cheat during a test." and "Drug dealers belong in prison." (taken from McBrayer's example) are classified as opinion, not fact. Since opinions are merely "one one thinks, feels, or believes," there is no such thing as a moral fact (it being intangible), and hence moral truths don't exist. #philosophy 

Our society has evolved to become obsessed with the tangible and material, and it's clear that such indicators are used to determine how successful we are. The intangible, being unquantifiable and unmeasurable, thus becomes "impractical" in a materialist society. They are discarded. We become so absorbed in our materialist world to the point where we belittle the importance of values and moral character. And it shows. 

This is where we return to the example of the JC student. Yes, maybe you could say he's simply being immature, but he's 17. The student isn't a kid anymore. On what grounds can he justify his actions? Does his more privileged background and higher socioeconomic status give him the right to despise others? Can we write off another as inferior simply because he/she less educated and not as well-off as we are?

Some may say, "Of course not, it's never fair to do that! A person's worth is measured by his/her integrity and character, not what kind of job he/she has or how much money he/she makes." Take a look at the words in that sentence: fairness, worth, integrity, character. Notice something? You can't measure those with numbers. In our society, success must be quantifiable. In school, a student who gets straight 'A's is an outstanding specimen, while those who get a smattering of 'B's and 'C's are seen as mediocre and are denied many opportunities. In the workforce, a morally upstanding person who doesn't earn much isn't considered successful, but someone (morally upstanding or otherwise) who rakes in large sums of money is. 

Looks as if we need to nip this problem in the bud so as to retain our humanity, don't we? Perhaps it'd be best if we educated our kids on the importance of values and morals. The thing is, even moral education can't solve this issue, because it's not graded, now is it? And I'm certain that if it were to be graded, there'd be significant backlash because this is "not something one can study for" and because "different people have different values." Fact VS opinion once again.

All is not lost though. On Saturday, I read in the papers that MOE was looking at revising the education system in Singapore to place more emphasis on "deep skills" and "strong values" rather than focus on "a paper chase." The trend here is that students are learning for grades, and not for knowledge. The government aims to rectify this through initiatives such as the SkillsFuture programme, which aims to expose and guide students to a diversity of career possibilities and opportunities so they can find what suits them, as well as apply these skills in their daily lives in the future, rather than just choose the route that can make them the most "successful." Instead of focusing on materialist values, the emphasis is shifting towards post-materialist values (à la Robert Inglehart #oohdamn #polscienceisawesome). Of course, this may end up being another paper chase, but it's a good start nonetheless.

That being said, I feel the best way is to let one's kids know that society' definition of success is not all that matters in life, and to inculcate some values in them. That's what I'll be doing ^^

Whew, that was a long post, wasn't it? Thank you for reading to the end! Next time I promise to write something shorter/less heavy haha. AND PHOTOS, of course. Till next time! 

Yours truly,
Viv