A couple of days ago, I had a face-to-face meeting with someone I met at a face-to-face networking event.
We discussed an initiative that he first mentioned in passing during that networking event - to bring business education to a number of Asian countries.
That in itself may not sound novel, but the method model with which he wants to do it is.
And I got to briefly meet a couple of his business partners, who have very interesting backgrounds and ways of thinking about things.
So does the person with whom I arranged the meeting.
I'll be doing some hard ideation and connecting in the coming days, to come up with something to contribute to this initiative.
Thinking back, this incident was a stark reminder to me that this is all different, with new ways of thinking, and of doing things.
Just look at my first sentence. 2 years ago, I wouldn't have had to add "face-to-face" to that sentence. Twice.
It's a new world out there. And I'm gearing up to meet it.
Science and Research Have Trends Too. I Think It's Problematic. This is Why.
In view of the current pandemic, I imagined that there would be a surge of interest in the fields of microbiology and immunology.
And there was. To a certain extent.
Unfortunately, unlike about 15 years ago, biology and biotechnology are no longer ‘trendy’.
It’s most visible in the way the term STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) is used by schools (in Singapore) today.
Today, it is almost always used to refer to AI, programming, and robotics.
And if this is what the students grow up with, they will continue to automatically associate STEM with these areas.
There is no doubt that these are important fields to advance in and educate the next generation in.
At the same time, I wonder why there is so much focus on them and so few resources dedicated to other areas of STEM - chemical sciences, biological sciences, etc.
And then, I heard a comment on a program on TV that mentioned that science, like all other fields, goes through trends. And this happens because the scientific landscape is heavily influenced by the mighty dollar.
Whatever makes money becomes what the scientific community is pushed towards.
This is why I have great respect for scientists who work in fields that are “non-money-making”.
Think scientists deep in the rainforests collecting and cataloguing beetles, or out for weeks at a time on research vessels peering at fuzzy screens for signs of elusive denizens of the deep, or maintaining and attempting to grow endangered plants.
They may be poking into the quantum mysteries of the universe, tinkering with substances to come up with better insulating material for jackets, even testing new ways of preparing bouncy, sustainable fishballs.
Some research seems mundane, others feel incomprehensible.
Whatever the case, I feel that science should really be less about money and more about exploration and testing.
Yes, by all means bolster efforts to advance in the "current" things, but give some coverage and attention to the other areas of science as well.
There are so many, you'll never run out of things to be awed by and fascinated with.
I'm Leaving the School Enrichment Market. Here's Why.
If the market you've been in for over 10 years is deteriorating into a race to the bottom, and showing increasing instability, on top of a refusal to do things in new ways (i.e. innovate), would you stick it out?
Or would you look into a new one, possibly even create your own?
This was a dilemma I started to ponder upon 3 years ago. Things were so unpredictable, that I sometimes went months without substantial projects.
And then, the pandemic hit. And projects vapourised, with only vague promises, constant postponements, and non-committal nods.
This was the kick I needed to decide to get out of a market that I'd been clinging on to, both because of fear of the unknown and fond memories.
And thus, I am exiting the school enrichment market (in Singapore).
I would have loved to stay, but there are too many things wrong with it, and too little being done to rectify them.
Perhaps I'll expound on these things in a future post and hope for improvement for the sake of those still in it, but, for now, I'm looking towards a future that is, though still clouded, full of potential.
To those I've worked with, and are still in it, I wish I didn't have to go, but I cannot be part of this swirling maelstrom anymore.
Take heart. Things will eventually look up.
And I'm sure we'll meet again, though likely in different capacities.
This isn't really goodbye.
Winning a Person Over or Winning an Argument? They Aren't The Same.
If you're trying to win an argument, you need facts.
If you're trying to win a person over, you need far more than that.
Even though we like to think we make our decisions based on facts, the final deciding factor is very often based on an emotion.
A person can have all the information pointing towards a certain action, but still not want to do it.
For example, you can present scientific evidence to a smoker about how harmful smoking is, show them statistics of diseases and deaths caused by smoking, even impose fines and penalties on them.
But they're not going to stop smoking.
Some even argue back, that their uncle or someone they know lived to nearly a hundred years old despite being a smoker, that they have always been healthy and have no illnesses, that they can afford to pay if they have to.
Mere facts aren't going to change their behaviour.
And facts aren't going to sustain them through the difficulties they'll be going through should they change their behaviour.
In the case of smokers, that may include the withdrawal symptoms, the perceived "loss of face" for always previously refusing to quit, the loss of time spent with their smoke buddies, etc.
To truly change their behaviour, something has to strike them emotionally.
It can be nearly any emotion:
Fear of getting sick after they see a beloved relative get ill, or of dying after getting sick themselves.
Anger at wanting to prove their friends wrong, after being told that they will always be a slave to tobacco.
Love for their newborn child, with a desire for him/her to grow up in a healthier smoke-free environment.
That emotion is not only a stronger force for change, it is a greater sustaining force for the difficulties they'll experience while they are changing.
And you can be sure that manipulative people and groups know this well. Why do you think they keep bringing up emotional arguments, instead of factual ones?
So, if you really want to make positive change for yourself and/or those around you, appealing to emotions, backed up by some solid facts (because some of us really do want / need them) is the strongest way to go.
It isn't a one-or-the-other thing, it's a co-operative thing. Both work best in tandem.