Albert Ip

Melbourne, Australia

About Albert

Areas of Expertise

online role play simulation

Talk to me about

religion, atheism, education, finance, health, global warming, climate change, water, sustainability, philosophy, peak everything, ....

People don't know I'm good at

People don't know that I'm good at nothing but know a little of almost everything.

Comments & conversations

Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
We can learn by exchanging and discussing our own lists of "10 Things I Know to be True."
Living in the moment once a while is good, but a mentality of ignoring the future, over-indulge of the moment's satisfaction, never learn from the past and never consider the future consequences are not good guidelines for proper living. Don't we want to leave a better place for our children and grand children? I cannot agree that living with an eye into future is giving up one's power. There are choices to make and there are consequences with the choices. Ignoring any consequences and blindly pick choices which satisfy a moment's sense of power is hardly a good recommendation. Yes, there is a lot of chances and unexpected events in the future, because of these, we do not plan for future? Is that a guideline for living? Can we live in the past? No, we cannot. We have already lived the past and there were past actions which affect current choices and there are past burdens which we need to carry onwards until the day we die. Past is the foundation of intuition which you treasure so much. Without the past experience, you would not have the intuition. Time is a one way street, you can look back, but you cannot go back. You can only move forward, at the pace determined by time, you cannot jump forward too.
Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
We can learn by exchanging and discussing our own lists of "10 Things I Know to be True."
Vivek, "Wisdom of the body" - I think we are into semantics here. At what level do we call something "responsive", "thinking", then "wisdom"? I acknowledge that some of our organs, say the heart, can beat by itself without guidance from our brain. Is that wisdom? Can we call our body having wisdom, or should we call our collective (body and brain together) as capable of having wisdom? Can our body think? Is the thinking done at the brain or at parts-level? If you have said we should listen to our intuition, instead using "wisdom of the body", I would have understood a little better, don't you think? Is there any difference between intuition and "wisdom of the body"? Should we listen solely on our intuition? Yes, our intuition - built via all the past life experience - can be a good guide for making most daily decisions. At certain level, it is totally inadequate because there is just no equivalent previous experience for the task at hand. The huge progress afforded by science in the past 200 to 300 years is the result of painstakingly removing personal bias, observational bias and application of strict logic deduction. Intuitively, we know that to put out a fire, we can put water onto the fire. However, if this intuition is applied to fire caused by burning oil, pouring water over the boiling oil will result in explosion and making the situation much worse. Intuition is useful only up to a certain point and we should not take it as all time truth. I agree, living in the moment does not imply living beyond our means. What has happened in the last 150 years is that a small fraction of the world's population is consuming disproportionate amount of world's resources and dumping a large amount of green house gas into the atmosphere which every human being share. It would be a hard thing to link the mentality of living at the moment with such irresponsible deeds. ... - to be cont'd
Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
Unify universities into networks that take advantage of each other's expertise.
Traditionally, university took a dual role - as knowledge keeper (and developer) and dissemination of knowledge. The side effect is of course the award of degrees and hence has been co-opted as a gate-keeper and sorting of people. In a world of increasing automation, repetitive work is decreasing at alarming rate. Automation means reliable repeat of work. If the work requires low skill level, they tend to be out-sourced to area of the world where living standards are lower. For citizens in developed world, if we want to maintain living standard, we *have* to engage in cutting-edge knowledge development, trouble-shooting and/or high-value work. What are these? That may be the billion dollar question the answer of which every politician is looking for. In my ideal world, there should be no intellectual property right. (I should have patented my surname - that would make me rich!) Knowledge is openly shared, tested, modified, improved and shared back. Universities and research institutes are tasked to continue to work on costly cutting edge work. Knowledge dissemination can be automated (through OCW initiatives etc) and people's qualifications are obtained via criteria-based public testing. In the above discussion, I have missed one of the MOST important value one can get from an on-campus education - the building of human network, of like-minded people with similar skill set.
Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
Unify universities into networks that take advantage of each other's expertise.
Confucius's idea of education is not passing on knowledge nor enhancing career opportunities. It is about the development of personal character and potential. I think he was right 2500 years ago and is still valid. We are transitioning into an information era (some may argue we are at the information era already) - where information are just clicks away. The frontier of knowledge is hard work and today's first degree hardly equip anyone to do any of that sort. Research institute is definitely needed for any country to remain competitive. For those aspired to do frontier work in knowledge, there is a long road ahead. For most people, we want a good life. A decent job and a decent reward, to live in peace, without hunger and a shelter. Does a university qualification lead to that? It used to be, but I think it is more and more likely that a university qualification cannot. That said, can a common people do some original work? Definitely, but... I think R&D should stand for "repeat and duplicate". The first step for innovation is to understand the current frontier and be able to do what those at cutting edge can do. That's the "repeat and duplicate" part. Only after one can repeat and duplicate, one can embark on improving the process, the theory and/or methodology. That's the cutting edge. There are areas in which the cutting edge are very costly and need to be well funded. Universities and research institutes are places for that to happen. Other cutting edge can be low cost, like theoretical physics - you just need a piece of paper, a pencil and good books. In these cases, are the cutting edge still clicks away? - to be continued
Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
We can learn by exchanging and discussing our own lists of "10 Things I Know to be True."
Louise, Please read the opening statement again. It said, "We can learn by exchanging and discussing our own lists". What I have done is in the spirit of discussion. As for my list, I don't have one. Life experience cannot be listed as 10 "truths". I am yet to see any evidence that there is any "truth" in all the lists. Yes, many posters have put up insightful viewpoints and I am learning and taking notes. However, delusion are plentiful too. The fact that Carol's list has 6 "thumb ups" so far reflects either the feeling that she was a victim of my dissection or that delusion is widespread. So far I have only focused on the last one the list. Here is my full dissection. re: 1 Carol is lucky to be born in the right place at the right place. Not everyone has loved and has been loved. About 30,000 children died of starvation everyday. Are these children loved? re: 2 We have valued our own life too much. Life in fact is cheap. See how political leaders are willing to send other people's children into war, but not their own. Letting 30,000 children die of hunger everyday also illustrates how cheap life is. By placing our own life too high, we lost our compassion to our fellow human being. re: 3 Yes, our biological need is to reproduce. But are we too successful as we shall have the 7 billionth child by the end of this month? My wife and I together have one child. That's more than enough. re: 4 - totally agree. re: 5 I suggest if there is another chance of rebirth, try being born at the wrong time at the wrong place. You won't feel so lucky. re; 6, 7 and 8 - agree. Laughing is also good for the physical health too. Laughing loudly helps in oxygenation. re: 9 I agree life is short. Human existence is only about 100,000 to 200,000 years out of 4.5 billion years of Earth's existence. While we are here, try not to damage the environment too much and leave a better place for the future. re:10 I have said too much already.
Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
We can learn by exchanging and discussing our own lists of "10 Things I Know to be True."
Carol, I am so sorry for you. Whatever education you may have, you have demonstrated that you failed to use your logical rational mind to see the delusion of the myth of "one true god". I am not asking anyone to believe there is a god or there is no god. That's not the point. I am asking everyone to make decisions based on evidence, not wishful thinking nor voodoo. Humanity is at a cross road right now. My grand child, if I have one, may be the last generation of human unless we, humanity at a whole, recognize the damage this generation has made to the planet and quickly rectify the wrongs. The atmosphere has CO2 level leading to a minimum of 2 deg rise in average global temperature - and we are still accelerating the rate of dumping CO2 into the atmosphere! I am afraid a 4 deg rise in average global temperature is inevitable and that would trigger unstoppable positive warming effect. A mass extinction is around the corner.
Noface
Albert Ip
Posted almost 3 years ago
We can learn by exchanging and discussing our own lists of "10 Things I Know to be True."
Obviously, we are off the tangent here, but let's just indulge ourselves a little. The issue of suffering and justice are human values. How we judge whether a situation is a suffering or whether something is just based on our values and emotions. Saying that we are too simple to understanding god's will is simply brushing the problem under the carpet. As social animals and with the "mirror neurons" in our brain, we can feel (in the shoes of the other) how other is feeling. That's where suffering comes in. We can feel and see suffering from the expression of the person. Young child, starved to dead by simply being born at the wrong place at the wrong time - to an atheist - is just part of chance. For the theists, they have a big problem to simultaneously claim their god to be good, loving and just. For a loving god with all the power it has and yet allows suffering to occur, by any argument no one could call it a loving god. For allowing this randomness of luck to occur, again if god has all the power to prevent and yet does not do so, is unjust. Can we judge god? Sure we can, just like we can judge other and show our approval or rejection. God is a concept and most people really do not have a good definition of it. As seen in this thread, there are many equating nature as god. To them, I ask why don't we just say nature. Obviously, there are more than just nature when theists use the word god. I am yet to see anyone clearly articulate his/her version of god. I can only refer to god in the bible - the Jew's god as a representation of god.