Change of heart needed
I believe that the sentiment in the Liberty Times editorial (“The fundamentals of education,” Sept. 11, page 8) is a good one.
However, there are some ideas I would like to submit for deep consideration.
First, I agree that there should be some type of moral or life education implemented in the Taiwanese school system. However, it is important to first establish what that is and what that means.
I strongly believe that we all have our own ideas of what the best kind of moral/life education is, which inevitably leads to a discussion about what we believe to be fundamentally right and wrong regarding human behavior. There is probably agreement that there should be some kind of universal standard for morality.
However, how can one implement such a standard unless it is first based on something that is external and separate from one’s own feelings, ideas and personal experiences of what one thinks is right or wrong, or good or bad? This creates a problem, because what I might think is good for “life education” could be different from the person sitting next to me. It seems to me that there should be some discussion about this topic specifically.
Second, life education needs to be taught and should be taught. However, it is not enough for it to be taught to a group of students.
This kind of education, whatever it might end up being, needs to be taught, understood, accepted, practiced, reinforced and then formed into habits.
What good is education if it is not understood? What good is understanding if it is not accepted?
In addition, if we are going to suggest to the next generation that this type of behavior needs to be practiced, then those of us making the suggestion should be modeling and encouraging the behavior ourselves. Furthermore, if we are going to encourage a certain type of behavior, we should also be so bold as to discourage the exact opposite.
Third, the editorial mentioned the country’s education system and characterized students as “exam-taking machines.” Clearly, we are all aware of the current education system and what it emphasizes. We have also all witnessed how the parents of these students emphasize and reinforce the standards of the system.
Even if the statement regarding parents is false — and I am almost certain it is not — change clearly needs to happen not just at an institutional level, but at a cultural and sociological level.
The unfortunate truth is that we live in a culture that seems to care more about a child’s test scores than all other areas of their character.
My central case is not that performance does not and should not matter. Both are important and both should be prioritized, but it is clear that as a society, we are beginning to recognize the deficiencies with the current system and the problems resulting from it and conclude that change is not only being suggested, but demanded.
There would be no reason for serious consideration of the proposal unless we already thought that the system has flaws.
So, yes, I agree and think that some kind of “life education” is appropriate and mandatory to resolve some of the disturbing trends and behavior we see and hear about nowadays.
However, the implementation of this education in the current system is not sufficient, because it is peripheral and incomplete.
The educational institution, the culture and society as a whole need a change of heart and orientation. I do not think education alone can so easily fix that.
Stephen Wang
Changhua County
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry