Universal Truth/ Nature

Is there such a thing as a universal truth? Is there a universal standard as what is natural? My view is that yes, if something is true, it's true. If a tree falls in the forest and nobody knows about it, it doesn't mean that the tree didn't fall. Is there a set of moral values that all humans agree to, is there a single value that all humans agree that is important? Are we all working towards something besides purely survival? Are we all working towards happiness, just that we haven't found a system where everyone can be happy? If there is a universal standard of what is natural and it's embedded somewhere us, why is there so much conflict between individuals?

How one is brought up determines a lot of how he thinks. I'm sure that if I've been brought up in a religious environment, I wouldn't be as atheistic as I am now. Talking about ghosts and souls yesterday, wonder why the topic came up, probably because of Halloween. Acc to some Chinese traditions (maybe it's part of Buddhism? Taoism?), 人有三个魂。在人死后，一个会去投胎；一个会跟祖先的魂混在一起；还有一个会留在人世，但是会慢慢消失。在人刚死不久时，很容易碰见鬼。讲这些的人讲得一本正经，好像真的有这一回事。而且觉得不相信的人实在是太不相信现实了。What do I say to that? BS. But if I was his daughter, I would probably think all these are true.

What is my point? I don't know. I wanted to make some point but nothing seems very pointy here. Maybe some point will come up when I can think clearly.

About the issue that caused the recent hoohaa over singapore blogging scene. Read this and this. What do I think? A characteristic with all governments or all forms of management is that policies are made aimed at the good of the society/ group as a whole, which because the people at the top of the society make a larger influence, the policies happen to side those people. And then the management decides that the people at the lower end of the group are marginalised, so they put in measures to help these people. As a result, the top end and bottom end of the group are both at an advantage. The majority, the middle part of the group, is ignored. Mr derek's complaints are completely valid, a view into what the middle part of the group thinks. Some comments by other people gives a look into what the top are getting, fast promotions, guaranteed success. As for the bottom, incentives have always been given to them, even if they're not much. More people visit old people in hospitals and nursing homes than people visiting healthy old people living on their own. Come on, healthy old people need people's care and concern too. The rich people have lots of money, the poor has social security, the middle people are left slogging and paying high taxes. Anyway the point is, the middle part of the group is always neglected even though they are the majority. Machiavelli says that the people must always be oppressed to a certain extent for the authorities to maintain sufficient control over the state, so I guess it's inevitable that the majority is not in the best position possible.

Professor induced temporary threshold shift in our audibility threshold in class. Siao, I still want my hearing lor.

So many classes I want to take next quarter.. which to choose?