1. The earlier psychologists use 'autonomous inner man' to explain human behaviour. It is the source of human behaviour. It has absolute freedom and thus fully responsible for all actions, good and bad. Because it is hidden from public views it has always been attacked for having no scientific status.
2. Then came the American behaviourists. Watson is acknowledged as the greatest during his time. To him human behaviour is a kind of action and reaction, stimulus and response. Human mind plays no part in human behaviour. Reflex action is taken as the standard; introduce an electric shock to a man's hand, he would immediately respond by quick withdrawal of the hand. Human instinct also has no place in his system.
3. Without involving human mind and instinct, Watson's system slowly losing its popularity.
4. B.F.Skinner is another great American behaviourist. Human mind and instinct come back as part of the source of human behaviour. Skinner's main focus is on environments.
5. To Skinner, Environment and not the Autonomous Man that controls human behaviour.
6. Conflict? Apparently. But if we recognise the varieties of human behaviour, we could assign different source to different categories of behaviour. Some to environment, some to 'inner man' and some to instinct.
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
Tuesday, May 31, 2016
CHAOS FROM TWO SEPARATE JUDICIAL SYSTEMS
1. In Malaysia lately an attempt has been made by PAS to amend the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 giving more power to the Syariah Court (except the death penalty).
2. Objections came immediately from non-Muslims political parties like MCA, MIC, Gerakan etc.
3. To have two separate judicial systems without being under the jurisdiction of a common Appeal Court is absurd. The dispute between the two Courts could never be settled.
4. The non-Muslims do not submit to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court. How do they protect their right?
5. To have a right without the executive power from the Court is useless.
2. Objections came immediately from non-Muslims political parties like MCA, MIC, Gerakan etc.
3. To have two separate judicial systems without being under the jurisdiction of a common Appeal Court is absurd. The dispute between the two Courts could never be settled.
4. The non-Muslims do not submit to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court. How do they protect their right?
5. To have a right without the executive power from the Court is useless.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
1MDB and GOOD STAR
1. It is not in dispute that sometime in 2009 1MDB paid RM4.2 billion to a company called Good Star.
2. The money was to be paid to a Joint-Venture Company (JV Co) for the purchase of its equities.
3. JV Co asked that the money be paid to PetroSaudi as repayment of loan from PetroSaudi.
4. The money was eventually paid to Good Star.
5. It is now become a dispute as to who was the owner of Good Star, PetroSaudi or some other stranger?
6. If it was some other stranger, then theft had taken place. RM4.2 billion became crime money. The movement of this money would give rise to money laundering.
2. The money was to be paid to a Joint-Venture Company (JV Co) for the purchase of its equities.
3. JV Co asked that the money be paid to PetroSaudi as repayment of loan from PetroSaudi.
4. The money was eventually paid to Good Star.
5. It is now become a dispute as to who was the owner of Good Star, PetroSaudi or some other stranger?
6. If it was some other stranger, then theft had taken place. RM4.2 billion became crime money. The movement of this money would give rise to money laundering.
Friday, May 20, 2016
1MDB-A Victim of Fraud?
1. 1MDB has to make payment to IPIC for being a guarantor. 1MDB has also to make payment to IPIC as compensation for termination of an option granted in favour of IPIC.
2. Therefore payments were made. USD 3.5 billion. Between 2012 and 2013.
3. The said USD 3.5 billion was paid to a company called Aabar BVI.
4. However there is a big problem. IPIC denied to have any link whatsoever with Aabar BVI. Meaning, IPIC said they have yet to receive the money from 1MDB.
5. Where has USD 3.5 billion gone?
6. Aabar BVI was said to have been closed in the middle of 2015. All monies were gone.
7. Many parts of the world have started investigations on corruption and money-laundering. Presumably the monies must have been moved from bank to bank, as the amount is too big to be physically moved around.
8. Arul Kanda of 1MDB did not discount the possibility of fraud.
9. Prime Minister of Malaysia said it is too early to conclude fraud.
2. Therefore payments were made. USD 3.5 billion. Between 2012 and 2013.
3. The said USD 3.5 billion was paid to a company called Aabar BVI.
4. However there is a big problem. IPIC denied to have any link whatsoever with Aabar BVI. Meaning, IPIC said they have yet to receive the money from 1MDB.
5. Where has USD 3.5 billion gone?
6. Aabar BVI was said to have been closed in the middle of 2015. All monies were gone.
7. Many parts of the world have started investigations on corruption and money-laundering. Presumably the monies must have been moved from bank to bank, as the amount is too big to be physically moved around.
8. Arul Kanda of 1MDB did not discount the possibility of fraud.
9. Prime Minister of Malaysia said it is too early to conclude fraud.
Sunday, May 8, 2016
SARAWAK ELECTION 2016
1. The Sarawak Election 2016 has caused crashing defeat to Peninsular-based political parties.
2. DAP lost badly (12 to 7). PAS gets 0. Amanah gets 0. Keadilan remains at 3.
3. The focus on the battle cry of 'Sarawak for Sarawakians' has brought great victory for Sarawak BN. This is essentially the continuation of the fight for more autonomy for Sarawak.
4. This battle cry has the effect of blocking all opposition parties-they are all from the peninsular Malaysia.
5. Flexibility of religion, the importance of English language is openly recognised, Chinese Independent Schools is no longer an issue....is a departure from the Federal Policy.
6. Whether it would just be a battle cry is a different issue. Now that the Sarawakians have made their decision clearly known. They must be respected.
2. DAP lost badly (12 to 7). PAS gets 0. Amanah gets 0. Keadilan remains at 3.
3. The focus on the battle cry of 'Sarawak for Sarawakians' has brought great victory for Sarawak BN. This is essentially the continuation of the fight for more autonomy for Sarawak.
4. This battle cry has the effect of blocking all opposition parties-they are all from the peninsular Malaysia.
5. Flexibility of religion, the importance of English language is openly recognised, Chinese Independent Schools is no longer an issue....is a departure from the Federal Policy.
6. Whether it would just be a battle cry is a different issue. Now that the Sarawakians have made their decision clearly known. They must be respected.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
ANOTHER EVIL OF UNLIMITED TENURE
1. Development would be a victim.
2. Unlimited tenure is a system of government where no limit is fixed for a person to be in power. He could stay in power for as long as possible provided that he wins the elections. But election is an illusion when the institutions are tamed.
3. In order to stay in power for as long as possible, he needs a lot of money. Money could easily come from corruption and abuse of power.
4. The ancient kings were known to defend their throne by keeping a strong army and by having a lot of money. The people were being taxed for this purpose.
5. If the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister were to get his support from the rural area but not from the urban area why must he develops the rural area into an urban and lost his power? Naturally he would resist change and would keep the status quo.
6. Limited tenure then is a great benefit to the people but not to those in power.
2. Unlimited tenure is a system of government where no limit is fixed for a person to be in power. He could stay in power for as long as possible provided that he wins the elections. But election is an illusion when the institutions are tamed.
3. In order to stay in power for as long as possible, he needs a lot of money. Money could easily come from corruption and abuse of power.
4. The ancient kings were known to defend their throne by keeping a strong army and by having a lot of money. The people were being taxed for this purpose.
5. If the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister were to get his support from the rural area but not from the urban area why must he develops the rural area into an urban and lost his power? Naturally he would resist change and would keep the status quo.
6. Limited tenure then is a great benefit to the people but not to those in power.
Sunday, April 24, 2016
CONDITION OF WAR-THOMAS HOBBES
1. According to Thomas Hobbes, at the beginning men were living in the state of nature before they decided to shift and lived in the Commonwealth.
2. In the state of nature, men were constantly invading and causing violence to each other. Even the strongest man could not run away from this, as he would be weak when he has to face a number of men united together.
3. In that condition of endless invasion and violence men were said to be under the condition of war. This is because there was no common power to put them in fear.
4. Finally came Commonwealth. The Government was created to put an end to the condition of war.
5. What about the international community, are we still living in the condition of war?
2. In the state of nature, men were constantly invading and causing violence to each other. Even the strongest man could not run away from this, as he would be weak when he has to face a number of men united together.
3. In that condition of endless invasion and violence men were said to be under the condition of war. This is because there was no common power to put them in fear.
4. Finally came Commonwealth. The Government was created to put an end to the condition of war.
5. What about the international community, are we still living in the condition of war?
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
SEXTUS EMPIRICUS
1. Sextus Empiricus is a well known sceptic. He has chosen the course of suspension of judgment.
2. He has demonstrated in his argument for suspension that there is a natural gap between appearance and reality. And this gap is by nature could never be closed. To him all things are non-evident.
3. A further evidence that all things are non-evident is the endless dispute among the philosophers. Any book on History of Philosophy could convince you on this point.
4. But why didn't he says "All things are non-evident (except this)" ?
5. Probably because of this. He said to the effect that: When you have no answer to a question, you could still dispute by saying that you would have the answer in the FUTURE.
6. Since all assertions would attract dispute, the only logical thing to do is to suspend judgment.
7. However if you are still being attacked, escape to the natural safe heaven: Inner Self. I am unable to decide, therefore I suspend judgment.
8. Of course there is nothing to stop you from getting out from the safe heaven from time to time provided that you remember to run back into the safe heaven when danger is being detected.
2. He has demonstrated in his argument for suspension that there is a natural gap between appearance and reality. And this gap is by nature could never be closed. To him all things are non-evident.
3. A further evidence that all things are non-evident is the endless dispute among the philosophers. Any book on History of Philosophy could convince you on this point.
4. But why didn't he says "All things are non-evident (except this)" ?
5. Probably because of this. He said to the effect that: When you have no answer to a question, you could still dispute by saying that you would have the answer in the FUTURE.
6. Since all assertions would attract dispute, the only logical thing to do is to suspend judgment.
7. However if you are still being attacked, escape to the natural safe heaven: Inner Self. I am unable to decide, therefore I suspend judgment.
8. Of course there is nothing to stop you from getting out from the safe heaven from time to time provided that you remember to run back into the safe heaven when danger is being detected.
Monday, April 18, 2016
THE RISE OF CHINA
1. China appears to be involved lately in activities which would expand its sphere of influence.
2. We would see that in nature it is common for lions trying to expand their territorial boundaries. In the case of lions it is done for food, shelter and the right to procreate.
3. Men being rational animals are different.
4. The biggest power of China in international politics is the veto power in the UN Security Council.
5. China is moving around the World with money helping other countries and investing at the same time. Unlike the US, China do not try to teach other regimes how to rule their countries. This is another great advantage for China.
6. China's military might could equal the US and Russia.
7. What China is doing in South China Sea could not be considered as an attempt to expand its physical territory. China has said that it is for the protection of its sovereignty.
2. We would see that in nature it is common for lions trying to expand their territorial boundaries. In the case of lions it is done for food, shelter and the right to procreate.
3. Men being rational animals are different.
4. The biggest power of China in international politics is the veto power in the UN Security Council.
5. China is moving around the World with money helping other countries and investing at the same time. Unlike the US, China do not try to teach other regimes how to rule their countries. This is another great advantage for China.
6. China's military might could equal the US and Russia.
7. What China is doing in South China Sea could not be considered as an attempt to expand its physical territory. China has said that it is for the protection of its sovereignty.
US INTERVENTION
1. After Vietnam the US appears to be more selective in their act of foreign intervention.
2. The first victim of non-intervention after Vietnam was the Shah of Iran.
3. Jeane Kirkpatrik was strongly against this non-intervention. She believed that the US should keep a friendly regime even if it is offensive in other respects, like a regime of dictator. She was of the view that trying to bring in democracy by regime change would only benefit the Socialist Bloc.
4. With the collapse of Soviet Union some say that Jeane's argument may not be relevant any more. But that may not be the case in view of the fact that of late Russia and China are moving aggressively to expand their field of influence
2. The first victim of non-intervention after Vietnam was the Shah of Iran.
3. Jeane Kirkpatrik was strongly against this non-intervention. She believed that the US should keep a friendly regime even if it is offensive in other respects, like a regime of dictator. She was of the view that trying to bring in democracy by regime change would only benefit the Socialist Bloc.
4. With the collapse of Soviet Union some say that Jeane's argument may not be relevant any more. But that may not be the case in view of the fact that of late Russia and China are moving aggressively to expand their field of influence
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)