"Little love for A*Star scientist's bond gripe - My Paper Dec 03, 2014
THE scientist and dancer who is protesting against her six-year scholarship bond because her job is "not aligned with her interests" has drawn flak for her remarks in a blog post.
The Straits Times reported last week that Eng Kai Er, an Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) scholarship holder, had criticised the bond in a blog and set up a grant to give $1,000 a month from her salary to support arts projects for a year."
Did not realise this story has such long 'marketability'.
Maybe Dr Eng can explain herself better though it was reported her original posting on her FB had been withdrawn or 'edited' to be more 'reasonable'?
Dr Eng is obviously VERY talented. Her supervisors at A*Star obviously believe that she has what it takes to complete a PhD that she is NOT INTERESTED IN. And she DID.
She wants to be a director and dancer. She CAN BE. She is THAT TALENTED.
So, again, I encourage her to think BIGGER and do the medical science and the theatre and dance well at the same time.
Of course, IF we MUST measure her based on the CONVENTIONAL wisdom and standard of the society we live in, she is in the WRONG because:
1. she was paid to study. She agreed to that. Not once but twice! The 2nd time obviously at an age that supposedly she is able to exercise independent thinking and decision making! Yes?
2. some were perplexed at WHY she took up the scholarship the 2nd time? One possibility may be she was simply TRYING to get out of her 1st job in A*Star after the Cambridge degree program ended. Yes?
Bigger picture and impact on society of her 'case':
1. is she selfish and full-of-herself? is she FULLY entitled to seek her OWN happiness and interest without regard to DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, HONOUR and OTHERS WHO MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN THAT PhD scholarship?
Ans: it has to be YES she is VERY SELFISH. NO she CANNOT just seek her happiness without regards to others. At least not in the next 4 years (2-year done!). IF SHE is any, or REALLY, good, she will STILL shine and enjoy theatre/dance and whatever till she is 85 years old! There are PLENTY of life after the A*Star stint! Yes?
Notes: her 'No Star Arts Grant of S$1k/mth is welcome by the way. Just wonder how would she react if the person who got and used her grant turnaround and tell her in her face: I hated arts and want to do medical science NOW!
2. for those WHO want to be 'liberal' and 'more understanding', it is like many Singaporeans happily gives to foreigners who suffered a misfortune while in S'pore without knowing WHAT is RESPONSIBLE GIVING.
If the society CONDONE such selfish behaviours or ENCOURAGE this 'entitlement' or 'ME ME and ME ONLY' mentality in our young and 'educated', can you imagine what type of society it will be?
Dr Eng needs TOUGH LOVE to get her 'permanent head damage' fixed!
p/s: I guessed someone else had pointed out, where did we go wrong with the scholarship selection process?
THE scientist and dancer who is protesting against her six-year scholarship bond because her job is "not aligned with her interests" has drawn flak for her remarks in a blog post.
The Straits Times reported last week that Eng Kai Er, an Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) scholarship holder, had criticised the bond in a blog and set up a grant to give $1,000 a month from her salary to support arts projects for a year."
Did not realise this story has such long 'marketability'.
Maybe Dr Eng can explain herself better though it was reported her original posting on her FB had been withdrawn or 'edited' to be more 'reasonable'?
Dr Eng is obviously VERY talented. Her supervisors at A*Star obviously believe that she has what it takes to complete a PhD that she is NOT INTERESTED IN. And she DID.
She wants to be a director and dancer. She CAN BE. She is THAT TALENTED.
So, again, I encourage her to think BIGGER and do the medical science and the theatre and dance well at the same time.
Of course, IF we MUST measure her based on the CONVENTIONAL wisdom and standard of the society we live in, she is in the WRONG because:
1. she was paid to study. She agreed to that. Not once but twice! The 2nd time obviously at an age that supposedly she is able to exercise independent thinking and decision making! Yes?
2. some were perplexed at WHY she took up the scholarship the 2nd time? One possibility may be she was simply TRYING to get out of her 1st job in A*Star after the Cambridge degree program ended. Yes?
Bigger picture and impact on society of her 'case':
1. is she selfish and full-of-herself? is she FULLY entitled to seek her OWN happiness and interest without regard to DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, HONOUR and OTHERS WHO MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN THAT PhD scholarship?
Ans: it has to be YES she is VERY SELFISH. NO she CANNOT just seek her happiness without regards to others. At least not in the next 4 years (2-year done!). IF SHE is any, or REALLY, good, she will STILL shine and enjoy theatre/dance and whatever till she is 85 years old! There are PLENTY of life after the A*Star stint! Yes?
Notes: her 'No Star Arts Grant of S$1k/mth is welcome by the way. Just wonder how would she react if the person who got and used her grant turnaround and tell her in her face: I hated arts and want to do medical science NOW!
2. for those WHO want to be 'liberal' and 'more understanding', it is like many Singaporeans happily gives to foreigners who suffered a misfortune while in S'pore without knowing WHAT is RESPONSIBLE GIVING.
If the society CONDONE such selfish behaviours or ENCOURAGE this 'entitlement' or 'ME ME and ME ONLY' mentality in our young and 'educated', can you imagine what type of society it will be?
Dr Eng needs TOUGH LOVE to get her 'permanent head damage' fixed!
p/s: I guessed someone else had pointed out, where did we go wrong with the scholarship selection process?
No comments:
Post a Comment