In recent weeks, the local media reported prominently the unedifying spectacles of a Singaporean money changer allegedly cheating hundreds of Chinese workers of their hard-earned savings here.
Then there was a cruel Singaporean employer inflicting serious bodily harm on her Indonesian maid and a gruesome murder and robberies committed cowardly against elderly and disabled Singaporeans.
Against such depressing backdrop, the news report of the prestigious Raffles Girls' School placing the welfare of a student with learning disability above its academic excellence shone as a beacon worthy of emulation by others.
By allowing this student to sit the O-level examination, the school failed to repeat its proud record of 100% passes.
This humane decision came as a surprise to many, especially those who view Singapore as a rigid rules-bound society, and that Singaporeans generally lack independent thinking and the conviction to question government policies and established norms, even if they disagree with them.
Is the shinning example shown by RGS a mere flash in the pan, or is it the harbinger of a more caring society, in which human kindness is valued no less than material success or scholastic achievement？
What are some of the attributes of a compassionate community, and how does Singapore measure up？
By any yardstick, we can be proud of our long-standing record of philanthropy for charities and education. This contributes significantly to the success of our public institutions.
Nowadays, more Singaporeans from all walks of life, including students, would volunteer their services to care for the less fortunate among us.
But a truly compassionate society transcends beyond philanthropy, helping the handicapped, being public-spirited or kind to others.
Singapore is a highly paper qualification-oriented country, and nothing succeeds here like success. The world-renowned academic failures like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs might not have found fame as computer geniuses, had they been raised locally.
As an illustration, when some of us were appointed to government committees some years ago, we were required to furnish our educational credentials, including subjects and grades from O-level onwards, as though we were applying for government jobs！
In other words, our culture abhors failures and worships academic achievements.
Sadly, many late developers and worthy failures were often denied a second chance to redeem themselves, whether in business or employment.
This would stifle initiative, creativity, entrepreneurship and overlook other qualities for success, and ultimately deprive these hapless people an opportunity to attain their chosen goal.
Fortunately, there is now a belated recognition that “failure is the mother of success”, and that it should not be held against talented people.
Instead, they should be given every encouragement and financial assistance to help them succeed and make their contributions to society.
Notwithstanding that our social services are now better than ever before, by First World standard, we need to set aside more resources to provide enhanced public facilities and amenities and more specialised schools and vocational training for our disabled people, so that they can lead a life more approximating that of their normal brethren.
Likewise, we should extend a firmer hand of friendship and encouragement to them, not just sympathies and avoidance, in order that they would have a rightful place here.
Our employers, both public and private, can and should adopt a more flexible approach towards the handicapped and those with criminal records seeking employment.
Take the case of Professor John Nash, who, despite being stricken with severe schizophrenia, was allowed to teach at America's Princeton University because of his mathematical prowess and who eventually won a Nobel Price for economics in 1994.
Now 75, he still teaches there. His story is told poignantly in the film, A Beautiful Mind, now showing here.
The day that the likes of John Nash, or those with lesser mental ailments, are allowed to teach in our educational establishments because of their merits, will, in my view, be the day that we can proclaim proudly that Singapore is truly a compassionate nation.
（The writer is a retired lawyer.）
最近,本地媒體顯著的報道了一名新加坡錢幣兌換商,被控欺騙數(shù)以百計的中國客工辛苦工作存下來的血汗錢的新聞。一名新加坡雇主殘酷虐待印尼女傭的事件,也非常引人注目。另外,還有一宗謀殺和數(shù)起搶劫案,受害者不是老人就是殘疾人士。
全是一些令人感到沮喪的負(fù)面報道。所幸還有一則有如黑暗中指引明燈,令人感到鼓舞的正面新聞。萊佛士女子中學(xué)以學(xué)生的福利為重,為了讓一名患上計算障礙癥的學(xué)生,和其他同學(xué)一起參加“O”水準(zhǔn)考試,導(dǎo)致學(xué)校無法保持往年100%的驕人及格率。
這個富有人情味和值得仿效的決定,讓許多人感到驚訝,尤其是認(rèn)為在新加坡一切都要照章行事的人。這些人認(rèn)為新加坡人普遍缺乏自由思考的能力,即使不同意政府的一些政策和辦事準(zhǔn)則,也沒有堅定的立場和提出疑問的勇氣。
萊佛士女子中學(xué)的例子只是曇花一現(xiàn),還是預(yù)示一個充滿愛心的社會將要到來？在一個具有愛心的社會里,除了追求物質(zhì)生活和學(xué)術(shù)成就,人們所表現(xiàn)的善心也同樣會得到珍惜。
一個大家相互關(guān)懷的社會要具備什么條件？我們的社會合格嗎？
不論以什么標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來衡量,我們長期對慈善和教育事業(yè)的奉獻,都值得我們引以為榮。這是我們的福利機構(gòu)成功的一個重要原因。另外,也有越來越多來自不同背景的新加坡人,充當(dāng)義工照顧較為不幸的國人。
但是,一個真正具有愛心的社會,不應(yīng)該只是一個人們好善樂捐、熱心公益、愿意幫助殘疾人士或關(guān)懷他人的社會。
我們的社會非常重視一紙文憑,大家都希望通過優(yōu)異的成績出人頭地。學(xué)業(yè)欠佳的比爾蓋茨和喬布斯,如果在新加坡成長,可能不會成為舉世聞名的電腦奇才。
多年前當(dāng)我和一些人被委任為一些政府委員會成員時,我們必須呈上從“O”水準(zhǔn)開始的學(xué)業(yè)成績供審查,好像我們是在申請政府部門的工作！
我們的文化只崇拜成功人士,失敗的人得不到尊敬。一些較遲發(fā)展的人和情有可原的失敗者,不論是就業(yè)或者創(chuàng)業(yè)人士,也沒有第二個機會證明自己。
這種情況會扼殺進取心、創(chuàng)意和創(chuàng)業(yè)精神。也會忽略成功的其他素質(zhì),并最終使這些不幸的失敗者沒有機會達到他們的目標(biāo)。
幸好,我們已經(jīng)意識到“失敗為成功之母”,對于有天分和才干的人,一次的失敗并不代表他們不會在下一次的嘗試成功。事實上,我們應(yīng)該鼓勵和給予他們資金協(xié)助,幫助他們成功和回饋社會。
我們的社會福利已經(jīng)大有改進。但是,以發(fā)達國家的水準(zhǔn)來看,我們還需要為殘疾人士提供更多的公共設(shè)施、特別學(xué)校和職業(yè)訓(xùn)練,讓他們也能過正常人的生活。我們不應(yīng)該只是同情他們,應(yīng)該鼓勵和向他們伸出友誼之手,讓他們覺得他們也是社會的一分子。
政府部門和私人機構(gòu)雇主應(yīng)該對尋找工作的殘疾或有犯罪記錄人士,采取較有伸縮性的態(tài)度。
以數(shù)學(xué)天才約翰納薛教授為例,他雖然曾患精神分裂癥,卻能夠在美國普林斯頓大學(xué)教學(xué),并在1994年獲頒諾貝爾經(jīng)濟學(xué)獎。目前75歲的他依然在大學(xué)任教。以他的故事拍成的電影《美麗境界》,正在本地上映。
依我看,有類似約翰納薛教授的背景,或患有比他更輕微的精神病,但在學(xué)術(shù)上有優(yōu)異表現(xiàn)的人才,有一天如果能夠在我們的學(xué)府任教,我們才能驕傲的說新加坡是一個真正有愛心的社會。
。作者是一位退休律師。葉琦保譯
Then there was a cruel Singaporean employer inflicting serious bodily harm on her Indonesian maid and a gruesome murder and robberies committed cowardly against elderly and disabled Singaporeans.
Against such depressing backdrop, the news report of the prestigious Raffles Girls' School placing the welfare of a student with learning disability above its academic excellence shone as a beacon worthy of emulation by others.
By allowing this student to sit the O-level examination, the school failed to repeat its proud record of 100% passes.
This humane decision came as a surprise to many, especially those who view Singapore as a rigid rules-bound society, and that Singaporeans generally lack independent thinking and the conviction to question government policies and established norms, even if they disagree with them.
Is the shinning example shown by RGS a mere flash in the pan, or is it the harbinger of a more caring society, in which human kindness is valued no less than material success or scholastic achievement？
What are some of the attributes of a compassionate community, and how does Singapore measure up？
By any yardstick, we can be proud of our long-standing record of philanthropy for charities and education. This contributes significantly to the success of our public institutions.
Nowadays, more Singaporeans from all walks of life, including students, would volunteer their services to care for the less fortunate among us.
But a truly compassionate society transcends beyond philanthropy, helping the handicapped, being public-spirited or kind to others.
Singapore is a highly paper qualification-oriented country, and nothing succeeds here like success. The world-renowned academic failures like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs might not have found fame as computer geniuses, had they been raised locally.
As an illustration, when some of us were appointed to government committees some years ago, we were required to furnish our educational credentials, including subjects and grades from O-level onwards, as though we were applying for government jobs！
In other words, our culture abhors failures and worships academic achievements.
Sadly, many late developers and worthy failures were often denied a second chance to redeem themselves, whether in business or employment.
This would stifle initiative, creativity, entrepreneurship and overlook other qualities for success, and ultimately deprive these hapless people an opportunity to attain their chosen goal.
Fortunately, there is now a belated recognition that “failure is the mother of success”, and that it should not be held against talented people.
Instead, they should be given every encouragement and financial assistance to help them succeed and make their contributions to society.
Notwithstanding that our social services are now better than ever before, by First World standard, we need to set aside more resources to provide enhanced public facilities and amenities and more specialised schools and vocational training for our disabled people, so that they can lead a life more approximating that of their normal brethren.
Likewise, we should extend a firmer hand of friendship and encouragement to them, not just sympathies and avoidance, in order that they would have a rightful place here.
Our employers, both public and private, can and should adopt a more flexible approach towards the handicapped and those with criminal records seeking employment.
Take the case of Professor John Nash, who, despite being stricken with severe schizophrenia, was allowed to teach at America's Princeton University because of his mathematical prowess and who eventually won a Nobel Price for economics in 1994.
Now 75, he still teaches there. His story is told poignantly in the film, A Beautiful Mind, now showing here.
The day that the likes of John Nash, or those with lesser mental ailments, are allowed to teach in our educational establishments because of their merits, will, in my view, be the day that we can proclaim proudly that Singapore is truly a compassionate nation.
（The writer is a retired lawyer.）
最近,本地媒體顯著的報道了一名新加坡錢幣兌換商,被控欺騙數(shù)以百計的中國客工辛苦工作存下來的血汗錢的新聞。一名新加坡雇主殘酷虐待印尼女傭的事件,也非常引人注目。另外,還有一宗謀殺和數(shù)起搶劫案,受害者不是老人就是殘疾人士。
全是一些令人感到沮喪的負(fù)面報道。所幸還有一則有如黑暗中指引明燈,令人感到鼓舞的正面新聞。萊佛士女子中學(xué)以學(xué)生的福利為重,為了讓一名患上計算障礙癥的學(xué)生,和其他同學(xué)一起參加“O”水準(zhǔn)考試,導(dǎo)致學(xué)校無法保持往年100%的驕人及格率。
這個富有人情味和值得仿效的決定,讓許多人感到驚訝,尤其是認(rèn)為在新加坡一切都要照章行事的人。這些人認(rèn)為新加坡人普遍缺乏自由思考的能力,即使不同意政府的一些政策和辦事準(zhǔn)則,也沒有堅定的立場和提出疑問的勇氣。
萊佛士女子中學(xué)的例子只是曇花一現(xiàn),還是預(yù)示一個充滿愛心的社會將要到來？在一個具有愛心的社會里,除了追求物質(zhì)生活和學(xué)術(shù)成就,人們所表現(xiàn)的善心也同樣會得到珍惜。
一個大家相互關(guān)懷的社會要具備什么條件？我們的社會合格嗎？
不論以什么標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來衡量,我們長期對慈善和教育事業(yè)的奉獻,都值得我們引以為榮。這是我們的福利機構(gòu)成功的一個重要原因。另外,也有越來越多來自不同背景的新加坡人,充當(dāng)義工照顧較為不幸的國人。
但是,一個真正具有愛心的社會,不應(yīng)該只是一個人們好善樂捐、熱心公益、愿意幫助殘疾人士或關(guān)懷他人的社會。
我們的社會非常重視一紙文憑,大家都希望通過優(yōu)異的成績出人頭地。學(xué)業(yè)欠佳的比爾蓋茨和喬布斯,如果在新加坡成長,可能不會成為舉世聞名的電腦奇才。
多年前當(dāng)我和一些人被委任為一些政府委員會成員時,我們必須呈上從“O”水準(zhǔn)開始的學(xué)業(yè)成績供審查,好像我們是在申請政府部門的工作！
我們的文化只崇拜成功人士,失敗的人得不到尊敬。一些較遲發(fā)展的人和情有可原的失敗者,不論是就業(yè)或者創(chuàng)業(yè)人士,也沒有第二個機會證明自己。
這種情況會扼殺進取心、創(chuàng)意和創(chuàng)業(yè)精神。也會忽略成功的其他素質(zhì),并最終使這些不幸的失敗者沒有機會達到他們的目標(biāo)。
幸好,我們已經(jīng)意識到“失敗為成功之母”,對于有天分和才干的人,一次的失敗并不代表他們不會在下一次的嘗試成功。事實上,我們應(yīng)該鼓勵和給予他們資金協(xié)助,幫助他們成功和回饋社會。
我們的社會福利已經(jīng)大有改進。但是,以發(fā)達國家的水準(zhǔn)來看,我們還需要為殘疾人士提供更多的公共設(shè)施、特別學(xué)校和職業(yè)訓(xùn)練,讓他們也能過正常人的生活。我們不應(yīng)該只是同情他們,應(yīng)該鼓勵和向他們伸出友誼之手,讓他們覺得他們也是社會的一分子。
政府部門和私人機構(gòu)雇主應(yīng)該對尋找工作的殘疾或有犯罪記錄人士,采取較有伸縮性的態(tài)度。
以數(shù)學(xué)天才約翰納薛教授為例,他雖然曾患精神分裂癥,卻能夠在美國普林斯頓大學(xué)教學(xué),并在1994年獲頒諾貝爾經(jīng)濟學(xué)獎。目前75歲的他依然在大學(xué)任教。以他的故事拍成的電影《美麗境界》,正在本地上映。
依我看,有類似約翰納薛教授的背景,或患有比他更輕微的精神病,但在學(xué)術(shù)上有優(yōu)異表現(xiàn)的人才,有一天如果能夠在我們的學(xué)府任教,我們才能驕傲的說新加坡是一個真正有愛心的社會。
。作者是一位退休律師。葉琦保譯