Monday, 21 March 2011

Does Ralph have Leadership?

As we touched on in class this morning, and as several of my review comments suggest, I'm not sure that Ralph does "have leadership", as most people seem to think he does. If I see something like (and I'm making this example up) "Ralph is a strong leader because he has good leadership", I'm not sure that the writer has even said anything.

What do you think?

  • Does Ralph have leadership? 
  • Is he a leader?
  • Are these questions the same or different? 
Having just done a quick  Google, I disagree with most of the online rubbish on this: it seems to me superficial and lacking solid support. Perhaps you can do better, either to support or to correct, what seems to be the majority view online. 

__________
References
Golding, W. & Epstein, E. (1954). Lord of the Flies. New York: Perigee

Should Game Over?

The activity that is very popular among school children is playing game online. However, it is not the activity for relaxation after they finish their schools, but it is thing that can make them become addict and harm their life. Having realized this problem, The government of Vietnam did something to deal with the problem, as reported in “Game Over?”.

The Vietnam government forces the internet service providers to block the access to online games during 10.00pm to 08.00am. They concerns that their children will get addict to the games that also include games in social networks, such as Facebook. However, the ban is in the start term, it has to take for a while to make the ban completely and effectively implemented.

It is normal to see Internet café open overnight with packed teenagers in Thailand. This does not include those who spend night time playing game online at home as the Internet at home is more easily available than before. It is well known that playing online games is a serious cause to make children addict to. Therefore, I think that the policy to ban access playing online game in appropriate time is really beneficial to children. The time period that is restricted for accessing gaming online (10.00pm to 08.00am) is proper for student. When children go out late at night, their parents may not be aware of where they go or what they are going to do. This can result in many further problems, such as involving in illegal motorcycle racing or even committing juvenile crimes. Moreover, the internet cafés are regularly renovated to be more comfortable; they have very nice and comfortable chairs to serve their customers, so the youngsters are more likely to spend more time there. Therefore, this can make the children become more unhealthy, sitting and eating junk foods there all night. Even though, nowadays, the Thai government has enforce a ban that not allow children less than 18 years old go out after 10.00 pm. But I think that is not the best solution to reduce social problems from them.    
__________
References
H.C., Game Over?, (04 March 2011), Economist. retrieved March 21, 2011 from http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/03/online_games_vietnam

Sunday, 20 March 2011

Are transgender people normal? What sex are they?

Although the writing isn't very good, I do usually browse through The Bangkok Post before class for coverage of local news. Today's edition contains a report on yet another episode of inept fumbling by the Thai military. In "Army Renames Transgender Conscripts" the general issue the annually recurring one of how best to force unwilling Thai citizens to serve the excessive number of generals who need servants (2011). The specific problem is, what to do with transgender people; that is women who used to be men, and perhaps men who used to be women, and maybe some who are somewhere in between.

The author says that the army is trying to avoid offending people and to increase the pool of available conscripts by stopping its former practice of labelling transgender people as having a "psychological abnormality" or a "gender identity disorder" (¶ 5). The army's "solution" is to start labelling people as Type 1, Type 2 and Type 3.

The army's director of the academic resources seems to rather miss the most important point here, which is exactly the one that is competently raised in "What is Abnormal?" in Quest 2, where the What is Abnormal Behaviour? section sensibly address the far more fundamental issue over the course of three full paragraphs (Hartmann, 2007, p. 173 - 175).

As I read and reflected on "Army Renames Transgender Conscripts", I thought that there were really two basic questions that need sorting out here.
  1. What sex are transgender people?
    and
  2. Are they normal? 
What do you think? Is a woman who used to be a man a man or a woman? Is that person normal or abnormal? (And what is largely irrelevant to these questions?)

__________
References
Army renames transgender conscripts. (2011, March 20). Bangkok Post. Retrieved March 20, 2011 from http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/227594/army-renames-transgender-conscripts
Hartmann, P. (2007). Quest 2 Reading and Writing (2nd. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Download from https://sites.google.com/site/aepwritings/copied-texts/Quest2WhatisAbnormal3p.doc?attredirects=0&d=1 [MSWord doc] or https://sites.google.com/site/aepwritings/copied-texts/Quest2WhatisAbnormal3p.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1 [pdf file]

Friday, 18 March 2011

Racism in UCLA

It happened one day when I viewed the Youtube video of The Young Turks' channel, the Turkish-American corespondents that has posted various interesting stories around the world for an internet geek, like me :p, one of them is about the controversy about Alexandra Wallace's comment regarding Asian student in UCLA. Click here to see. None of them is really positive thing to say but I was attached to the story and later found the reliable source from New York Times article U.C.L.A. Student’s Video Rant Against Asians Fuels Firestorm.

This concerning video has been posted in Youtube less than four days ago and has achieved more than a million views just over three minutes, with mostly responsive negative comments followed. The owner of this infamous video is Alexandra Wallace. She is a third-year political science student of UCLA who while working her final project in the library of UCLA facility, was frustrated by Asian student, using cell phones in the library. She soon expressed her anger on Youtube, “The problem is these hordes of Asian people that U.C.L.A. accepts into our school every single year, which is fine,” said Ms. Wallace, “But if you’re going to come to U.C.L.A., then use American manners.” (P5) She also, at one point, mimics the Asian speaking language. The rant was responded with rage, Alexandra Wallace has received many negative feedback including dead threats via phone call and e-mails, she soon apologized and deleted the video immediately. However, the controversy continues, the officials said the university was looking into possible disciplinary action against Ms. Wallace.(P9)

At first, as an Asian I felt offended, but when I had seen that she has deleted her video and stated her regret about her remarks, I felt sorry for her because this internet phenomenon would not be stopped easily. There is no argument, what she has done is wrong. First she stereotyped Asians as unmannered people. I believe generally, Asian people are socially taught and trained as much as every races even more so, but the truth is there must be someone who slips and make inappropiate behavior just like every other races to use a cellphone in movies or libraries. I also feel alarmed that she made a decision to post a video about her outrageous ideas. I would feel frustrated too if I worked on final exam and was interrupted by noise of people talking via cellphone in a library but I wouldn't dare post a video stereotyping their race behavior and lifestyle in front of millions of people's computer! It was not a good decision of hers; because internet bullying can get too rough and too hurtful for one more than it should be, with dead threats and all are now sending through the wireless line toward her rushed minutes of an unthoughtful decision. I think Ms.Wallace has accepted her consequences and I think soon enough this issue soon will be passed but for sure it will not be forgotten. This too is a lesson for me to learn that no matter differences we possess, we are all human and only education will eradicate those ignorant thoughts in our mind. And of course, if you have inappropriate thoughts, it is better to keep it to yourself .


__________
References
U.C.L.A. Student’s Video Rant Against Asians Fuels Firestorm.(2011, March 16). NY Times. Retrieved March 18, 2011 from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/us/16ucla.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=alexandra%20wallace&st=cse

Choosing a topic - How? What? Why?

You now have a list of nine different questions from which to choose one to answer for our next writing assignment (Filicietti, 2011).

You have probably already guessed from the "Understanding the Question" section at the end that all nine questions have something in common. We will discuss what they have in common on Monday, but please feel welcome to share your ideas here in advance.

What I really wanted to discuss here is how you should choose your topic.
  • How are you going to choose your topic to write about?
    What are important factors to consider when you are choosing which question you will write an essay on? Why are these important? 
  • Why would you not choose a particular question?
    What are not so important factors? Why aren't they very important? 
As you are making your own choice over the weekend, how are you making that decision? Please feel welcome to share your ideas in a comment.
__________
References
Filicietti, P. (2001, March). 110314a Definition essay topics.doc. Available from  https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxhZXBjbGFzc25vdGVzfGd4OjE1OWNkYTYyOWFkNWI3MDk [view] and https://sites.google.com/site/aepclassnotes/essays-and-paragraphs/110314aDefinitionessaytopics.doc?attredirects=0&d=1 [download]

Thursday, 17 March 2011

Barbary macaques recognise photos of their friends

In my free time, I like to look through photos in the past which remind me of time in my life with friends and family. Have you done like what I do? Can you remember those people in your photos? Surprisingly,reading"Barbary macaques recognise photos of their friends" from BBC news there’s one kind of animals does and they also can distinguish difference between familiar face and face that, that kind of animal not familiar with. You might now wonder “what kind of animal I’m talking about?”. Let’s see what it is in the following-up information.

The researchers did the research and experiments about monkeys, primates, and found out that Juvenile monkeys have the ability of understanding the representation of faces. Professor Julia Fischer did the experiments by letting group of monkeys see through photos on a scrapbook. The reaction to the picture of monkey is quite different between adult monkeys and juvenile ones. "Adult animals spent more time looking at unfamiliar animals, suggesting that they recognize their group members from the pictures" said Professor Fischer. "The juveniles didn't show any difference - they were very interested in all the pictures."

After I read about the intelligence of monkey remind me of the experiment the people do on animals ,for example, injecting serum in to animals body to see if it works and many experiments that do any good for animals. As you see from the experiment that shows monkey’s intelligence, I don’t think it’s a good idea to do harmful and risky experiments on those animal especially primates which considered the smartest animal not counting human. Also, I think the researchers and scientists you think forward about the use of this experiment in some ways in the up coming future.

__________
References
Barbary macaques recognise photos of their friends.(2011, March). BBC News. Retrieved March 17, 2011 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9422000/9422157.stm

Extra security with HTTPS

Today people use social to connect and keep in touch with friend, actors and actress use social network, such as Facebook, twiter, to chat and up date their story to their fans. As a technology make people more comfortable and convenience, there is one thing that we shouldn't overlook that is the security of personal information. This lead Twitter to apply new system to their website; BBC news reported Twitter users get extra security with HTTPS.

"Twitter users are being given the option of logging on to the site through a secure connection" (P1). Twitter make a decision to use HTTPS (Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure) technology, which is the technology that use with internet banking, in order to protect user's information from hacker. Even though it does not sound like a big problem because using Twitter doesn't concern with money, but if you are a celebrity with plenty followers, hacker could send spam or malware or phishing to you which is not good.

Security is very important for internet provider, this must be the first thing internet providers think about. Internet is infinite world, we can access to every thing we want by one click. It likes to side of coin, one side is the advantage of internet which make our life easier, another side is disadvantage of internet, as every one can access to whatever data they want, it's also easy for bad guy to access to your data too. Internet provider should look carefully to this problem. Although some personal information aren't so important but I believe that no one this world would love to see a stranger steal your information; it could be even worse when you saw that stranger use your information and pretend to be yourselves, which is the current problem of some social network users. I think it is better to protect than let problem become worse to the point that we can't solve it any more. As we are users, we should take care of our personal information by ourselves too.

References
Twitter users get extra security with HTTPS.(2011, March 16). BBC News. Retrieved March 17, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12759922

Wednesday, 16 March 2011

'Radiation' text message is fake

Yesterday, I received SMS from one of my friends that we should be careful about the rain because the rain contaminated the radioactive things from the explosion of the nuclear plants in Japan. Therefore, when I read this article,Radiation' text message is fake, it's worse than I think. Now the rumours spread to everywhere especially in Asia.

I would like to begin with the full fake email from BBC News

FAKE E-MAIL IN FULL

BBC Flash news : Japan Government confirms radiation leak at Fukushima nuclear plants. Asian countries should take necessary precautions. If rain comes, remain indoors first 24 hours. Close doors and windows. Swab neck skin with betadine where thyroid area is, radiation hits thyroid first. Take extra precautions. Radiation may hit Philippine at around 4 pm today. If it rains today or in the next few days in Hong Kong. Do not go under the rain. If you get caught out, use an umbrella or raincoat, even if it is only a drizzle. Radioactive particles, which may cause burns, alopecia or even cancer, may be in the rain.

Some media reported that not only fake e-mails but also fake SMS, facebook, and malwares influence people life. The US Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT) warned the computer users to consider all stuff in the Internet or any communication which is regarding to the earthquake and tsunami crisis in Japan because they are unreliable. According to the Japan officials said the danger zone should be warned is the area within 30 km around there for staying indoors.

I think there are two points of fake rumours. First, people would like to prevent and protect themselves from radiation. Besides, they also worry about people in other countries, they spread the fake messages then. In spite of, they are not sure about the rumours they released. On the other hand, the second point is playing joke. For children and teenagers, the fake news usually happen many time for a while. Some believe but some know it's just a joke. In this case, I disagree with it because people feel worried about this situation that may cause anxiety or depression in some group of people. Although it's just the joke , it can make people feelig get worse and scared. Then, it's very difficult to live with happiness. For example, if it rains, everyone is afraid to go outside despite there is nothing dangerous.

__________
References
'Radiation' text message is fake (2011, March 12) BBC News. Retrived March 16, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12745128

Tuesday, 15 March 2011

Not tomorrow's exam question.

Because the beast is so important in the novel, a fact you will realise yet again as you read "Gift for the Darkness" this evening, I had thought of giving you the following question to answer tomorrow morning. However, since it took me almost 50 minutes to write my answer, I decided it might not be the best for an exam question. But you might like to share your ideas on it here.


Question:
In Lord of the Flies, Golding first introduces the beast in chapter 2, where the small, disfigured boy who speaks so fearfully of it is later consumed by the raging fire the boys let loose on the mountain. From that time on, the snake-thing, the beastie, or some other form of the beast is always present on the island; for example, in "Hut's on the Beach", Ralph tells Jack that as much as for protection in case of storms, they "need shelters because of the – ?" (Golding & Epstein, 1954, p. 50), which leads Jack to confess his own fears on the same topic.
Discuss how the beast is further developed by Golding in chapters 5 and 6, which are named in its honour. How does the beast evolve? How real is it? How do the boys react to it? 

__________
References
Golding, W., & Epstein, E. (1954). Lord of the Flies. New York: Perigee.

Laughing is the best.

Did you laugh today? If not,you can do it after reading this article "Laughing is better than latest technology for leg ulcers". As we know,laughing is good for mental and physical health.Recently,scientists found that laughing is also promote physically for patients too.

The experts said that good nursing and the occasional laugh was are better way to get a body healing that using the latest technology. Having a really hearty chuckle can help patients because laughing gets the diaphragm moving and this plays a vital part in moving blood around the body.

I think this news is very useful.We have known that laughing has many benefits such as reduces stress,lowers blood pressure and so on. Nowadays, scientists found that laughing is good for patients especially patients with leg ulcers.It's unbelievable that laughing is better than the latest technology. So,we don't necessary spend a lot of money with high technology for treatment.Just laughing! it can help patients ,and it is an easy way without spend any money. In addition, laughing is useful for everybody.Because of laughing, it can help you relieve stress,increases muscle flexible.So ,if you get nerve,you should make yourself relax by find some fun activities,enjoy and laughing.


__________
References
Laughing is better than the latest technology for leg ulcers.(2011,March 10).BBC news.Retrieved March 15,2001 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12699016

Monday, 14 March 2011

What does it mean: III - a real and controversial example = the First Precept of Buddhism

Nid's example this morning helped us to see how very important definitions are in real life. Her example centred on the First Precept of Buddhism, something that all Buddhists believe is an important guideline for both monks and lay Buddhists to follow. There is no controversy about what the words are. The precept says, in a standard English translation, that Buddhists should "abstain from taking life" ("Five Precepts", 2011).

There is, however, great disagreement within Buddhism about whether and when it might be acceptable for Buddhists to eat meat in accordance with this precept. That is, there is a a great deal of controversy about what the words mean. Most Thai Buddhists think that eating meat is generally OK, and does not violate the First Precept, although the Santi Asoke Buddhists believe that they should normally follow a vegetarian diet. Outside of Thailand, most Buddhists are Mahayana followers and believe that the First Precept means they should not eat meat. There is a very real disagreement here. Both groups cannot be right - at least one group of Buddhists is wrong in their understanding of their First Precept. Who is right and who is wrong? What is the correct way to understand the words of the First Precept, "abstain from taking life"?

I won't present my argument here, but my own opinion is that a correct understanding of the Buddhist precept that followers "abstain from taking life" means that in most cases, although not all, Buddhists cannot eat meat. To make it a bit more real and specific, I think it does mean that Buddhists living in Bangkok should not eat meat because doing so causes both serious suffering and needless killing of animals and therefore violates the First Precept.

I suspect that at least some people disagree with me, so please feel welcome to present your reasons. And if you agree with me that Buddhists should not normally eat meat, please also present your reasons. I didn't give my reasons here because I would prefer to wait and see what reasons people have for opposing my thesis, which I will then support. Another reason is that my supporting reasons are in a 2,571 word essay I've written, which is much too long to paste in here. I also have one more reason, which will become apparent over the next few days, for not including my support in this post.
__________
References
Five Precepts. (2011, March 11). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 13:24, March 14, 2011, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Five_Precepts&oldid=418377121

What does it mean: II - a real and controversial example = 9/11 terrorism insurance

From Ko's recent blog post "New video of 9/11" (2011) and the comments, I am sure that we all still vividly remember that terrorist attack which demolished New York's World Trade Centre and killed over 3,000 people. What is not so generally well known are the legal battles that followed it.

The lessees (the people who had a 99 year lease on the buildings from the owners) had insured the buildings that were destroyed, and the insurers agreed that they had a legal obligation under the contracts to pay out a lot of money. However, they disagreed about how much to pay out, and it took several court cases over more than five years to finally settle the main disagreement. The insurers for the main lessee, Robert Silverstein, thought that they had to pay him 3.5 billion US dollars (US$3,500,000,000.00), but he thought that they had to pay out twice that amount, or 7 billion dollars. This is not a small difference. A seriously large amount of money was at stake in the argument. Why the argument? What was it about? The insurance contracts obligated the insurer to pay the insured lessee an amount up to 3.5 billion dollars for each occurrence leading to the destruction of the property (Samut, 2006).

The dispute hinged on the meaning of the word occurrence. The insurance companies argued that occurrence meant "one event which might have two or more parts", so that the terrorist attack with two planes was only one occurrence. The lessees argued that occurrence meant "a physically distinct event", so that the terrorist attack with two planes was two occurrences. The US Court system spent a lot of time over five years listening to lawyers, and their expert witnesses, argue about the correct meaning of the words occurrence and event. In the end, an appeals court gave a somewhat mixed verdict based on the meanings and the context of the individual contracts - you can read the details in Robert Samut's summary, United States: 9/11 – An Occurrence That Changed The World.

Words and their definitions matter a lot in every area of life, not just in academic fields. As well as the lawyers, the expert witnesses included professors of English, philosophers and other academics, all of whom are the sorts of people that the US Supreme Court regularly hears opinions from when it is considering a case. (Supreme Court decisions are commonly about what a word or phrase means.)
__________
References
Ko. (2011, March 8). New video of 9/11. Class Blog - AEP at AUA. Retrieved March 14, 2011 from http://peteraep.blogspot.com/2011/03/new-video-of-911.html

Samut, R. (2006, November 1). United States: 9/11 – An Occurrence That Changed The World. Retrieved March 14, 2011 from http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/article.asp?articleid=43762 (This summary by a lawyer gives a reasonable account of the most important points in the legal dispute between the insurers and the insured after the 9/11 terrorist attack)

What does it mean: I - the important but easy examples

A couple of times this term, we have seen that it's often necessary to stop and clarify, and agree on, what a term means before it is possible to answer a question. We had a good example this morning of what that can entail:

  • Milk gave us a definition of the term adverbial conjunction as "a conjunction which joins two clauses". This was a good start, but it also had a serious weakness: it did not allow us to distinguish the different types of conjunction. 
  • Correcting this weakness both gave us a more useful definition, and also showed us how we might go about building on an idea that stated something right, but wasn't the best idea. And that process helped us all to gain a clearer and more complete understanding of adverbial conjunctions by looking at their functions, both what they do do and what they don't do. 
Another recent example was when we discussing the comprehension check question on "The Sound of the Shell", and there was some confusion in the discussion about which "boys [knew] each other before" (class handout, March 2011). The confusion in our discussion was caused by the fact that people had different ideas about what the question meant, and the only way to come to an answer that we could all accept was to discuss the meaning of the term "know each other before". Once that definition was settled, the facts in the novel could be applied to the agreed definition of the term to answer the question. And as happened this morning, the discussion about what the term know each other before meant required us to address an opposing idea that was believed to be wrong, and giving reasons to persuade some people to change their minds.

These examples might seem relatively straight forward, and they were. They also had the advantage of not being too controversial, of having what we might call one "correct" answer. The example that Nid kindly suggested this morning more effectively made the point that defining terms is often crucial because her example involves real life issues where something that matters very much to some of us hinges on the definition of what a term means. And since Nid's excellent example is so complex, and significantly different to the easy examples that can be solved by checking a dictionary reference work, I'll write a  new post to present that topic for discussion.

The warning system in Thailand

As soon as the news of Japan’s earthquake hit all news media, I had paid close attention to this news with interested mind. Not only the highly magnitude earthquake but it was also the consequent massive tsunami that struck afterward and swept all structure near coastline out, causing serious devastation throughout Japan. A report on the topic of "Japan earthquake: Can you tsunami-proof a country?" shows that despite having the most advanced technology in disaster warning and preventing systems in the world, Japan still encounter such high impact of natural disaster. This is very important for us to become concerned about the measures of preparation for any disasters that may strike our country any times.

Although the most technological advance for earthquake and tsunami warning system has been developed and installed in Japan, it seems the human’s attempt cannot overcome the natural power. Such advance warning systems are able to detect the arrival of an earthquake as well as tsunami very early. The warning systems together with the effectively broadcasting networks can make people get ready for an upcoming disaster. Moreover, there are policies aiming to instruct the people about how to get ready for the disasters and encourage them to adoption of the earthquake-proof building structure. However, the carefully protective policies are not always as effective as they expected because of the limited time to prepare the evacuation and limitations in structural construction.

This news reminded me of what happens in Thailand in the last New Year period. In "Tsunami warning make problem for Phuket tourism industry", Thai fortune teller release rumor of the possibility of tsunami impending in the southern part of Thailand. This rumor has a damaging impact on tourism activities in the area. Since Thai culture has been involving astrological prediction for a long time, whatever a famous fortune teller said seems to significantly influence most of Thai people. This also seriously affects Thailand’s economy. In each New Year season, our country receives a lot of income from tourism activities, so the rumor without using any discretion will definitely affect our country. However, having considered, I would like to attribute the influence of this effect to the following causes. Firstly, the waning system of Thailand is not as effective as those of developed countries, resulting in unreliability of this system. The example of this problem is as reported in "Tsunami drill causes concern". The waning system made several errors in the test, causing many chaos amount people in the community. After having several mistakes in warning system, people have never believed such warning system anymore. They then turn to find another prediction source that seems more likely. This makes them become to more believe in any prediction from a fortune teller. Another cause is that media attempt to raise the program rating by invite famous fortune teller to make predictions for Thailand. Whatever that seems to be true according to the prediction will be picked up to present to the public again, while any wrong prediction will disappear from public attention, never be discussed any more. Therefore, whatever predicted by any fortune teller seems to be true because the public is always informed only what is matched with the prediction, never remember other wrong predictions. Whoever can predict correctly in the last year is likely to be believable in the following year. If the prediction becomes wrong, that fortune teller will be replaced by another one, who can “guess” more correctly. This became the issue among scientific community in Pantip.com. The group of people in the online community challenged a fortune teller who predicted that tsunami would strike the south part of Thailand in the last New Year period that, if the prediction was correct, they are willing to give one million baht to that fortune teller. However, no any fortune teller dared to take such a challenge. Of course, no tsunami occurred as the prediction. “I think these people should take responsibility for their fortune teller, because this is making an impact on tourism in our southern provinces” said president of the Phuket Provincial Administrative organization (¶ 4, Jaktmeiter). I think so.  If we have the more reliable warning system and help together to picks up every case of wrong predictions to be under serious discussion, we would be likely to have much less impact from any disaster.
__________
References
Japan earthquake: Can you tsunami-proof a country?, (11 March 2011), BBC News. retrieved March 14, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-12711173

Jaktmeiter, Tsunami warning make problems for Phuket tourism industry, (11 Dec 2010), retrieved March 14, 2011 from http://jaktmeister.com/2010/12/tsunami-warning-make-problems-for-phuket-tourism-industry

Fredrickson, Terry, Tsunami drill causes concern, (14 September 2010), retrieved March 14, 2011 from http://www.readbangkokpost.com/generalnews

BOJ pumps $183bn to calm markets as stocks tumble

On last Friday, there is a big natural disaster that shock the world. Japan was hit by earthquake and tsunami. This situation leads to a big loss in business sector. I have read the article from BBC news " BOJ pumps $183bn to calm markets as stocks tumble"

Japan is facing upheaval on a huge scale as it grapples with the massive clean-up operation, a potential nuclear meltdown, power shortages and huge disruption to the economy. The Bank of Japan is to inject 15 trillion yen into the banking system to stabilise financial markets. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index fell 6.2% on the first day of trading after Friday's quake as the market assessed the full impact of the devastation. Analysts say that the central bank is making sure there is no panic in the market by ensuring enough liquidity in the bank system.

Any crisis that occur within the country cause a negative impact to many sectors of industry including business sector. Japan which is a member of the group of 8 (G8) has more influence to the world economy. If Japan's economy collapse, it will send a bad signal to the world market. As a result, it is necessary to solve this problem as soon as possible. One of the monetary policy that can ease its economy is injection money to the japan's market in order to increase a liquidity in market. In addition, there should be many policies that is about to launch ;however, everyone ,not only Japanese, has to be a part to heal the world.
__________
References
,BOJ pumps $183bn to calm markets as stocks tumble, (14 March 2011), retrieved March 14, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12729295

Japan crisis 'worst since WWII'

When some countries get into scrapes, what should you do?  Today, I read the BBC News "Japan crisis worst since WWII' remindes me that people should help Japan to overcome natural disaster.

This article mainly talks about Japan is experiencing its greatest hardships since World War II as it tackles the aftermath of an earthquake, tsunami and a growing nuclear crisis. Many people said " We as Japanese people can overcome these hardships".

After I read this article, the bad news always disquiet me. Of course, it is the hardest time for Japan. They are faced with a lot of problems. For example, food and water pressed, power shortages, many people died in earthquake and so on. In my opinion, No matter what countries you are in and what nationalitiles you are, both of us have responsibility to help Japan turn the corner. As a government, they can provide money, food ,water to Japan, give Japan essential requirements.Besides, as an individual, we can collect money for Japan, and also we can pray for Japanese people that hope them can turn the corner. When people facing the natural disaster, human being are inappreciable. So,we have to join together, we must can overcome these hardships. Finally, I hope Japan will turn the corner as soon as possible.  
__________
References
"Japan crisis 'worst since WWII" (13 March 2011) Last updated at 16:36 GMT from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12726297  

Sunday, 13 March 2011

Free Speech: Protecting the ugly side of religious and other beliefs

Because it is so important for any strong democracy, and so lacking in many countries, I generally read articles on free speech, and two reports on court cases that neatly reflect the differing approaches in the UK and the US were recently published in Britain's Guardian newspaper and the US's New York Times respectively. What "Burning Poppies is a Lesser Evil" and "Freedom's Price" have in common is that both favour strong protection for speech.

In "Freedom's Price", Nadine Strossen (2011) argues that the US Supreme Court has made another right decision in holding that the US Constitution protects the right of groups such as the extremely offensive Christian group the Westboro Baptist Church to turn up at funerals and blame the death of soldiers who died fighting for their country on US society's tolerance of homosexuality and other unbiblical social trends. As Strossen argues, "even when expression stirs emotions that are overwhelmingly negative ... that cannot justify suppressing it" (2011, ¶ 1). Strossen goes on to remind us that even highly negative emotions can lead to change for the better, so that banning anything simply because it is offensive, even deeply offensive to most people, cannot be good for a society that pretends to be democratic and accept differences of opinion.

Charlotte Gore, on the other hand, argues that the UK Court that found Emdadur Choudhury, who was inspired by his Moslem beliefs, guilty and fined him for burning poppies and chanting equally offensive slogans as the American Christians was wrong because it stopped the sort of free speech that is essential for a healthy democracy (2011). She reminds readers of the situation in Pakistan where free speech is severely limited so that, for example, any negative comment about Islam or Mohammad is illegal and severely punished, which means that social and political progress is impossible to correct that immoral situation because there can be no legal discussion on the topic. She concludes that it is better for the UK to follow the just US example, not the oppressive Pakistan example of religiously inspired suppression.

I liked both articles because they also acknowledge the serious opposing arguments: the very popular idea that people should not be allowed to do things like burn national flags, insult religions or religious leaders and the like. And they then explain why these reasons are very bad reasons to legally limit free speech. I agree with them. If causing offence were a sufficient reason to ban a comment or action intended to make a statement, such as burning a flag, a bible or a Koran, then almost everything would have to be banned - atheists find most religious claims to be offensive in their intolerance, their falseness and their immoral desire to control other people, and it's hard to think of anything that many would not find offensive.

But I think there is a much stronger reason why free speech must be strongly protected: it is as essential for knowledge as it is for the social, political and moral progress that are the reasons Strossen and Gore assert in its favour. Knowledge requires that an opinion or belief about something be well founded, and that means that opposing views must be heard and addressed. If it is legally impossible to state an opinion about a topic, then people's beliefs and opinions on that topic become detached from reality so that even if they are right, it is impossible to know that they are right. For example, if it is illegal to say or suggest that there is corruption in Thailand, then there will be no evidence of any corruption because presenting it would be illegal. As a result, most people are likely to believe that there is no corruption, and if the government claims there is no corruption, it will be legally impossible to contradict that claim. Most seriously, it is irrelevant what the facts are. If there really is corruption, but no one can say that, then obviously the common belief is false and not knowledge; however, the problem is much more serious: even if it were true that there was no corruption, that opinion of belief could never be knowledge because it could not have the right sort of support. It would in fact be a true belief, but only true by accident, and accidentally true beliefs cannot be knowledge. Even if it were false, the belief would have to be the same because the restriction of free speech makes any other belief impossible. This is why laws that censor a topic by making negative comments illegal necessarily result in ignorance on that topic. Knowledge on that topic becomes impossible. And in a democracy, that is not usually a good thing. In most cases, knowledge is better than ignorance.

There are of course some situations where ignorance is actually preferable to knowledge. We do not, for example, want people knowing how to make nuclear weapons or where to steal them, so there are good grounds to making it illegal to freely state that sort of idea. The reason for those sort of restrictions on free speech is that ignorance really is better than knowledge on those topics. However, for any topic where knowledge is better than ignorance, laws banning free speech unjustly and immorally enforce ignorance and should be opposed as both Strossen and Gore argue in their articles.

And this is why free speech is so important in academic work: if people cannot explore possibilities and look at competing ideas, they cannot acquire any knowledge about a topic. If you have strong opinions on a topic, you surely prefer the possibility of knowledge to the certain ignorance that comes from laws making free speech illegal and enforcing censorship. I can understand why religious and political fanatics oppose free speech to protect their cherished beliefs, but what they prove is that they prefer ignorance about their most important beliefs to even the possibility of well-founded knowledge about them, and that seems weird to me. If they respected their religious or political ideas, they would surely think that those beliefs could withstand opposing arguments and some mockery, but apparently they think that their most important ideas are too weak to stand up to any negative comments, and that suggests to me that they have no faith in their own beliefs. That sounds like a very weak and worthless sort of respect for a supposedly important belief.
__________
References
Gore, C. (2011, March 8). Burning poppies is a lesser evil. The Guardian. Retrieved March 13, 2011 from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/08/burning-poppies-extremist-50?INTCMP=SRCH

Strossen, N. (2011, March 4). Freedom's price. The New York Times. Retrieved March 13, 2011 from http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/03/03/picketing-funerals-when-free-speech-feels-wrong/the-price-of-freedom

Reducing hospitals

Have you, your family , relative or maybe your friend have a chance to come across the situation that you go into one hospital but that hospital but that hospital doesn’t have facilities to cure yourself or your loved ones? Reading this article 'We don't need so many hospitals' reminds me of poor victims ,those who don’t get cured in time,.

This article mainly talks about closing and reducing the hospitals in order to improve the health service to be effective and efficient service by using money which could be spent on alternative, cheaper and more appropriate services. “Of course we need hospitals, but not nearly as many as we have currently” says Dr Greg Parston. The researchers also stated that those budget that use to spend on the hospital can be used on the chronic conditions of older people over 1000 people.

I disagree with Dr Greg Parston idea of reducing hospitals ,because even though there’re some hospitals that don’t have good-enough facility but still some deceases or syndromes need to be heeled immediately. Doctors not only heel patients but also their job is to give advice to the patient to get better recovery as well. As a result of that, if the hospitals are closed down ,ones who have low cost of living and doesn’t want professional treatment might need to pay higher because there’s no more low-cost hospitals exist. In my point of view, all hospital should remain the same because of patients’ convenient and the purchasing power. And if the facilities are not good enough, the patient can be sent to any other professional hospitals.
__________
References

'We don't need so many hospitals' (March 4, 2011) Retrieved on March 11, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12634111

Friday, 11 March 2011

Facebook adds suicide help system

It was the one incident that has inspired Facebook to promote the system to help preventing suicide. After I read Facebook adds suicide help system article from BBC I think it is a great idea to have facebook users interacting with this problem and help each other out.

It was last year Christmas, when Simone Beck posted her suicidal message on facebook to her friends who ignored to respond. The incident took Facebook to consider launching the system that will encourage facebook uses to report any suicidal post from friends, family or just someone who is on friend list; such report will be responded by the co-operation or the suicide-prevention organization (Samitarian) calling the person to check if they are alright. The feature is being run in conjunction with the Samaritans, which said several people had used it during a test phase(p3).

For sure, if I have my friend posting suicidal comment, the best way for me to come up is to call her/him. However, the new facebook system will be a great way for people to find help for their friend. According to the news, this system is popular particularly among student who usually use facebook as their window for excessive stress. I really think it is a good idea for Facebook to open the channel for reached-help users, because nowadays with everyone becoming more separated and more tied up with works, exams etc, they don't have time to take care of or be unaware of their emotional burnt-out, or sometimes depression. I took time to explore on Facebook if the new system is already in use, although i found the page that contains useful information of how you can help people who post suicidal message click here to see on facebook website. After rolling the handful information in my head, I realized that there is an organization called Samaritans. It is an organization which its goal is reduce the incidence of suicide by befriending individuals in crisis and educating the community about effective prevention strategies and it is all around the world, including Thailand. check out their site! It is encouraging to see that people always looking out for each other even in the cyberspace community which sometimes can be very superficial and unkind.


Reference
Facebook adds suicide help system (March 7, 2011) Retrieved on March 11, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12669664

Millions sardines and mackerel were killed in US

Do you believe one million sardines and mackerel in a California marina were killed by polluted water? I don’t believe that because why some carcasses of fish do not show in different time. Another reason is that there is not a canal, so it is hard to have pollution in the sea and also sardines and mackerel is deep aquatic animal. In addition, scientist cannot give a good reason to us. Maybe, doomsday may happen on someday in the future like some movie presented.


According to the article “One million dead sardines clog Redondo Beach marina” in BBCNEWS.com that approximately one million sardines and mackerel in a California marina were killed. Andrew Hugman, spokesman for the California fish and wildlife department said that “We’re confident that it is a naturally occurring, but unusual event’’ Officials said that they would recycle the fish carcasses into fertilizers as soon. Carcass is going to create a terrible pollution and public health issue if we don’t get rid of them as soon as possible. Interestingly, local officials said that “they had found no traces of toxin or pollutants, and they believe vast of fish were died because fish had used up all the oxygen.


After I finished this article I doubted what’s the exactly causing of massive fish were killed in the same period. Previously, US scientists believe fireworks may have caused thousands of birds without wound to fall from the sky over an Arkansas town on New Year's Eve. Some experts said the red-winged blackbirds probably flew low to avoid explosions and collided with objects. However, they stopped short of declaring the mystery solved, saying further tests on the dead birds are planned. (Fireworks may have caused Arkansas bird deaths, 2011). Unusually, a vast of animal were killed around the world without a good answer by scientists. Most of answer are from global warming, climate change, pollution, earthquake, firework, and maybe the impact of some advance experimental of researchers. Are the answer is a good enough to support in your mind? For me, it is not, but I have to try to believe because experts cannot explain about that phenomenon now.


I am someone who believes in doomsday may happen, but it is not happen in 2012. Sometimes the globe cannot forgive the problem by human are did to it anymore. We can see the effects by human are done to the earth such as glaciers are melting faster than the past, green houses effect is inducing as well. Furthermore, a cruel disaster is a sever increasing in each year; for instance, flood in Australia, earthquake in Haiti, landslide in Brazil, and tsunami in Thailand. When disaster happen that animal can know before human sometimes. For example, some ants always move to their nets before raining. Animal can connect with the nature and environment more than people. However, human have no a good sense to connect with nature as animal, they can do another thing that animal cannot do. Therefore, people have to save the world as soon as possible before they cannot have opportunity anymore. Firstly, stop deforestation to increase jungle for the earth. In addition, avoid use plastic bag to decrease garbage. Last but not least, try to decrease pollution by yourself such as turn off air-conditioner intermittently or use public transportation more than your own car to reduce air pollution and energy as well.

However, millions of fish were died by whatever, people should take care the earth like it look after us too. The globe gives life to human such as oxygen, food, nature, and everything that make people life. If we don’t save the world as soon as possible sometimes we don’t have home to live anymore.



References

One million dead sardines clog Redondo Beach marina. (2011, March 9). BBC News. Retrieved March 1, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12249080.

Fireworks may have caused Arkansas bird deaths. (2011, January 4). BBC News. Retrieved March 10, 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12105157.

Thursday, 10 March 2011

Suicide

Several days ago while I was reading my friends’ posts on Face book, one of my friend’s post caught my attention. That post was about “Japan's suicide rate for job seekers jumps”.

CNN News reported on” Japan's suicide rate for job seekers jumps”. Japanese National Police Agency reported on last Thursday that the number of suicide rate in Japanese children who couldn’t find the job increased by 20 percents from year 2009. The health, labor and welfare ministry said the suicide rate of people in Japan has been over 30,000 in the past 13 years (¶9). On World Suicide Prevention Day Japanese government had launched the campaign in order to decrease the number of suicide rate but I doesn’t really help out.

Even though Japan is one of a highest developed country in this world but Japan has a big problem on suicide rate of people. High developed country came with stress and high competition in society. I know some of Japanese friends when I was talking to them on how they spent their life when they were young, their answers were the same, and they have to study really hard in order to enter top universities in Japan. Every day after school they have to study extra class in order to prepare themselves for university’s test and when they went back home they had to study again. After I listened to that I just thought back to Thai children especially my child life, my child life was full of fun and happiness. I studied hard but not as hard as the Japanese did. At that time I thought that were they happy with that way of life. Stress is good but too much stress is not good because it would harm your health. I think Japanese life is full of stress since they were young that may be the cause of suicide because you always compete with each other, you must be the best and the more you can be the best the more you can success in your life. But I think this kind of thinking is wrong, sometimes we couldn’t compare ourselves to the others because different people have different preference and different talent. I might good at studying English but I’m not good at drawing while the others might good at drawing but not English. You see this is not something we can compare to the others. I think just do the best in what we love is the best.

__________
References

Japan's suicide rate for job seekers jumps. (2011, March 3). CNN News. Retrieved March 10, 2011 from http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/03/03/japan.suicide.rate/index.html