IS “kiasu” a commendatory epithet, or a derogatory one？ After much deliberation, I have decided to label it as neutral.
There are always two sides to a coin, which is the essence of dialectical thinking. Generally, Singaporeans are kiasu —— they fear to lose out. This can be a positive mentality if it spurs people on to more careful planning, greater efforts, and stronger commitment while trying to achieve the ideal result in their pursuits.
In this way, kaisuism helps one to exert oneself further for excellence and success.
When applied wrongly, however, kiasuism can become a negative mindset, which tends to stifle imagination and suppress creativity. Kiasu people are likely to shirk work or responsibilities for fear of failure, and adopt a“work less, err less” mentality.
Human society keeps moving forward as new things replace those dying out. Yet there can be no perfect designs for the emergence of new things. So, to ensure progress, it is crucial to strike a balance between the positive and negative aspects of kiasuism.
I would like to suggest the idea of “experimental fields” as a protection for policy-makers. In such fields, the general public —— mass media included —— agree that experimenters be allowed to make mistakes. The latter will be given options and allowed time to try them out, which is long enough for at least one test interval.
People will not jump rashly to the conclusion that something must be wrong out there, and the experimenters will not be under pressure. Such experimental fields are meant to find out where shortcomings are and what can be done as a remedy.
Recently, the chairman of Singapore Sports Council Ng Ser Miang suggested that special classes be set up in schools to help bring up young sportsmen and sportswomen. He is a great experimenter, and I applaud his bright idea. It will be a good start to map out an experimental field for lots of budding athletes in Singapore.
Shortcomings and mistakes are sure to crop up, but there is no need to panic. Suppose one round of tests takes five years, then the experimenter has two intervals' time because Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong has set the goal of a world-class Singapore soccer team in 2010.
With the suggested special classes, sports talent will be recruited internationally, and subsidies will be given out according to the young trainees' performance and potentialities. This will be a more viable system than the current practice of indiscriminate subsidies.
I would also like to call on my fellow Singaporeans to be reasonable in making comments on our policy-makers. Don't force them into the “work less, err less” mentality.
In reality, a pro-active policy-maker is likely to make more mistakes than an idle one. Keeping this in mind, how are we going to treat the consciencious working type？
怕輸?shù)恼嬉饬x
“怕輸”這個詞是褒義還是貶義,筆者反復(fù)的思考,后認(rèn)為還是用中性詞來形容它較為恰當(dāng)。
凡事都存在正負(fù)二個方面,可謂物極必反,就是所謂的辯證。就新加坡人普遍存在的怕輸心理,運用得當(dāng)就是正的一面,大于負(fù)的一面的褒義詞。正面的怕輸心理,會促使某人在處理某項事物的方法上,為達(dá)到理想目標(biāo),考慮的更加仔細(xì)與周密,為此而做更多的功課,并且增加很多的責(zé)任感。
這個怕輸?shù)倪^程其實就是努力的過程,奮斗的過程。反過來說,運用不當(dāng),就是負(fù)的一面大過正的一面的貶義詞,負(fù)面的怕輸心理卻能抹殺某人對某事的想象力,嚴(yán)重的干擾到他自身的創(chuàng)造力,導(dǎo)致多一事不如少一事的“無過論”這種負(fù)面的怕輸心理。
社會進(jìn)化就像逆水行舟,不進(jìn)則退。由新生事物取代陳舊的事物,社會才會發(fā)展,可新的事物的出現(xiàn)都沒有一個完美無瑕的答案搬來給我們,所以如何平衡怕輸?shù)恼?fù)兩個方面,使這個界限保持在一個良性的水平是十分重要的。
我想在新的事物上借用一個“試驗田”的名詞將會對決策者起到一個正面的保護(hù)作用。在試驗田里大家（包括媒體）允許試驗者出錯,給他建議、給他時間,而這個時間一定是一個試驗周期的時間,看官千萬不要一語定性,加以否定,造成試驗者承受巨大的輿論壓力,因為開辟試驗田就是以找出不足,加以改進(jìn)為目的的。
近聞體育理事會主席黃思綿談關(guān)于開辦體育高才班的設(shè)想,我想為這個試驗者打打氣,開辟一塊為新加坡多出、快出體育人才的試驗田的出發(fā)點是正確的,即使在試驗中有不足也是必然的,不必驚慌。
假定以5年一個周期,吳作棟總理給的足球時間2010年,這有二個周期的時間呢！
體育高才班招生國際化,并按成績和發(fā)展前途分開等級施以補(bǔ)貼,這樣的競爭機(jī)制會比一刀切的全額資助來的合理些。
后呼吁國人的表態(tài)與見解要專業(yè)一些,理智一些,別把我們的決策者逼上“無過論”的道路上去。事實上是,做為兩種類型的決策者,做事的決策者比不做事的決策者失誤機(jī)率要高得多,了解這一點,那你將怎樣對待真正做事的決策者？
There are always two sides to a coin, which is the essence of dialectical thinking. Generally, Singaporeans are kiasu —— they fear to lose out. This can be a positive mentality if it spurs people on to more careful planning, greater efforts, and stronger commitment while trying to achieve the ideal result in their pursuits.
In this way, kaisuism helps one to exert oneself further for excellence and success.
When applied wrongly, however, kiasuism can become a negative mindset, which tends to stifle imagination and suppress creativity. Kiasu people are likely to shirk work or responsibilities for fear of failure, and adopt a“work less, err less” mentality.
Human society keeps moving forward as new things replace those dying out. Yet there can be no perfect designs for the emergence of new things. So, to ensure progress, it is crucial to strike a balance between the positive and negative aspects of kiasuism.
I would like to suggest the idea of “experimental fields” as a protection for policy-makers. In such fields, the general public —— mass media included —— agree that experimenters be allowed to make mistakes. The latter will be given options and allowed time to try them out, which is long enough for at least one test interval.
People will not jump rashly to the conclusion that something must be wrong out there, and the experimenters will not be under pressure. Such experimental fields are meant to find out where shortcomings are and what can be done as a remedy.
Recently, the chairman of Singapore Sports Council Ng Ser Miang suggested that special classes be set up in schools to help bring up young sportsmen and sportswomen. He is a great experimenter, and I applaud his bright idea. It will be a good start to map out an experimental field for lots of budding athletes in Singapore.
Shortcomings and mistakes are sure to crop up, but there is no need to panic. Suppose one round of tests takes five years, then the experimenter has two intervals' time because Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong has set the goal of a world-class Singapore soccer team in 2010.
With the suggested special classes, sports talent will be recruited internationally, and subsidies will be given out according to the young trainees' performance and potentialities. This will be a more viable system than the current practice of indiscriminate subsidies.
I would also like to call on my fellow Singaporeans to be reasonable in making comments on our policy-makers. Don't force them into the “work less, err less” mentality.
In reality, a pro-active policy-maker is likely to make more mistakes than an idle one. Keeping this in mind, how are we going to treat the consciencious working type？
怕輸?shù)恼嬉饬x
“怕輸”這個詞是褒義還是貶義,筆者反復(fù)的思考,后認(rèn)為還是用中性詞來形容它較為恰當(dāng)。
凡事都存在正負(fù)二個方面,可謂物極必反,就是所謂的辯證。就新加坡人普遍存在的怕輸心理,運用得當(dāng)就是正的一面,大于負(fù)的一面的褒義詞。正面的怕輸心理,會促使某人在處理某項事物的方法上,為達(dá)到理想目標(biāo),考慮的更加仔細(xì)與周密,為此而做更多的功課,并且增加很多的責(zé)任感。
這個怕輸?shù)倪^程其實就是努力的過程,奮斗的過程。反過來說,運用不當(dāng),就是負(fù)的一面大過正的一面的貶義詞,負(fù)面的怕輸心理卻能抹殺某人對某事的想象力,嚴(yán)重的干擾到他自身的創(chuàng)造力,導(dǎo)致多一事不如少一事的“無過論”這種負(fù)面的怕輸心理。
社會進(jìn)化就像逆水行舟,不進(jìn)則退。由新生事物取代陳舊的事物,社會才會發(fā)展,可新的事物的出現(xiàn)都沒有一個完美無瑕的答案搬來給我們,所以如何平衡怕輸?shù)恼?fù)兩個方面,使這個界限保持在一個良性的水平是十分重要的。
我想在新的事物上借用一個“試驗田”的名詞將會對決策者起到一個正面的保護(hù)作用。在試驗田里大家（包括媒體）允許試驗者出錯,給他建議、給他時間,而這個時間一定是一個試驗周期的時間,看官千萬不要一語定性,加以否定,造成試驗者承受巨大的輿論壓力,因為開辟試驗田就是以找出不足,加以改進(jìn)為目的的。
近聞體育理事會主席黃思綿談關(guān)于開辦體育高才班的設(shè)想,我想為這個試驗者打打氣,開辟一塊為新加坡多出、快出體育人才的試驗田的出發(fā)點是正確的,即使在試驗中有不足也是必然的,不必驚慌。
假定以5年一個周期,吳作棟總理給的足球時間2010年,這有二個周期的時間呢！
體育高才班招生國際化,并按成績和發(fā)展前途分開等級施以補(bǔ)貼,這樣的競爭機(jī)制會比一刀切的全額資助來的合理些。
后呼吁國人的表態(tài)與見解要專業(yè)一些,理智一些,別把我們的決策者逼上“無過論”的道路上去。事實上是,做為兩種類型的決策者,做事的決策者比不做事的決策者失誤機(jī)率要高得多,了解這一點,那你將怎樣對待真正做事的決策者？