hm.

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/206218.asp

---

What is it that gives us the ability to give others?

The author of this article speaks of going on a community trip with some local students to teach English to teenagers at a small village school in Southern China. He also speaks of them as being very different from the Singaporean students he has encountered. Giving several examples about the Chinese students being very willing to help, generous with what they had as well as being open, he gives the reader an impression of these Chinese students as being carefree, happy, and kind. The writer also compares them to our students of today, and what they’re both missing out on respectively.

Of course, the author does mention that not all the students or villagers “possessed the same measure of open-heartedness”.

Two issues are key here, namely how generosity of the Chinese students was much greater than that of their Singaporean counterparts, as well as whether our efforts at self-promotion have turned into self-indulgence. They are linked because self-indulgence is achievement for one’s selfish gain, but self-promotion promotes oneself in a bid to serve. This will be explained later.

In my opinion, I feel that this sort of environment is highly encouraged by having nothing to lose. Comparing these two groups of students is basically comparing those who are well-off in terms of material indulgences to those who do not possess much of these material benefits. This is related to my reason where the children who have nothing to lose are more easy-going with what they have. Naturally, our commonsensical reaction would be to expect that the students who have little are afraid to lose what they have, but this is clearly not the case. In fact, those who have more than naught, but not excessively more, are more selfish with what they have. And these, of course, are people like us.

Our breed is different because of the competitive environment that we grow up in. From young, we have been taught to score better than our classmates, to do well in CCAs, to look after our needs before others. This is the crunch part, the typical Singaporean kiasu attitude, where we are told to take care of ourselves before bothering about others. Now, how about the students in China that the writer talked about? I doubt a competitive environment exists over there, and perhaps they are taught to share because they live in smaller communities, which are much closer-knitted than our large social groups over here. If everyone does not grapple to be top of everything, the ground is level, and everyone helps everyone.

The other issue is whether our efforts at self-promotion have turned into self-indulgence. Here, I must say, the scenario varies from people to people, and therefore so does this issue. What the majority of us are doing is of course self-indulgence already. In fact, if I had never read this article, I would never have noticed. As the writer has mentioned, “students are encouraged to discover their assets and market them, chalking up awards and qualifications”. When we think of what we want to achieve, it is all about ourselves. We are all aware that accolades are important currency in the world out there, and a qualification is going to do us good. However, when we get an academic testimonial or work profile, does it talk about us on an individual level, or the “whole” level? The point is that when we contribute, we do not contribute for ourselves; we contribute because we want to give others what we have.

And that should be just the case with doctors, scientists, writers; doctors should never give consultations for the money involved, scientists should make discoveries for the good of the world and not for personal fame and fortune, writers write to share their fiction and not for fame and fortune. Not even the cleaners should be working for their profit but for everyone who uses what they clean, not even the construction workers should be working for their profit but for everyone who uses what they build, not even the gardeners should be working for their profit but for everyone who looks at what he sows.

This might sound a little far off from what we have today, but this scenario is where everyone wants to be: it’s utopia to have everyone wishing you to be happy.

Not even Achilles should have fought for Greece in a bid to immortalize his name, and for nothing else.