Screw our roots
November 29, 2011
Baya nervously meeting with Arthur's Parents
I always love the comical characters in the french movies. They are like the princes and princesses in Disney fairy tales which shows us how perfect the world could be, yet, with the compelling story telling and acting by French actors, writers and directors, French dramas are able to connect the protagonists with reality and give us a sense of hope in envisioning a better and romantic future, whether it’s for love or politics.
The Names of Loves (Le nom des gens) is a story about roots. Baya, a modern day hippy and Arthur, an articulate liberal professor, constantly question the reason of their being and the history of their family. There are limitless factors to account for how we came into being they way we are right now, for instance where did our grandparents come from? how did our mom and dad meet? what did our teachers teach us? It is impossible to account for each and everyone of them but knowing them comforts us because it reinforce our identity as a member of a family with roots, an organization, a city, a nation. It indoctrinates us with a set of value that are worth protecting and fighting for. As the Chinese proverb says: Never forget the past for it could be a teacher in the future.
Nevertheless, it is dangerous not to question history and take it as it is. Endless atrocities in history have proven us the danger of having a single-story of history: fascism, totalitarian regimes and genocides. Arthur, our protagonist which was born into a very French family with right-winged parents, had a constant struggle between his roots of being a noble French countryman and his left-leaning political philosophies, not to mention his political avant garde girlfriend Baya. That’s why Arthur were always having these imaginary conversations with his young-self and his late parents. It is with these dialogues that he has finally overcome the struggle and saw her mom was in fact just having whipped cream for the first time in the Taxi instead of being molested by German soldiers as he imagined. History shall be understood in tandem with continuous questioning so that we could learn from the past and move forward at the same time. How could this be done? Baya’s answer: I’m an atheist, but Muslim is my culture.
History is important, but screw our roots.
Book: When A Billion Chinese Jump
November 8, 2011
Despite the occasional display of eurocentric arrogance of Guardian correspondent Jonathan Watts, most of observation and assertions he made in his book When A Billion Chinese Jump: How China Will Save Mankind – Or Destroy It are supported with concrete evidence and should not be dismissed at once.
The disturbing fact I learnt from Watts’s’ Book is not that in China they still eat lions, crocodiles, peacocks, snakes or tigers (which I found acceptable if they are not endangered, what’s the different between them and chickens or pigs anyways). What shocked me to the core from Watt’s 10-year-long investigation is how we (Chinese) have mutated from a civilisation that founded on Confucian’s Nature-and-man-harmony philosophy, to a nation that finds its pride in bending the rules of nature.
The so called animal “reserves” in China serves no purpose in preserving the endangered species. For many of these reserves, including the world-famous Giant Panda breeding ground in Xichuan, their main purpose is to become the number one for-profit tourist attraction, conservation always comes second. The “scientists” in these reserves do not have a plan on how to repopulate them in the wild. Their major focus is to breed as much as they can so that the numbers look good on the books, and hence generates more profits from tourists.
In China we are used to Beijing love for world’s first, world’s biggest, world’s fastest and everything that would put us in the “world’s x” category, and we understand that pursuit comes at the cost of our environment. Still, Watts’s observation blew my mind, and for the first time, I am seriously considering the fact that many of the floods or earthquakes happened in China is nature’s revenge on our constant exploitation of the environment over the past decades. As Watts travelled across the northeastern provinces, communist comrades told Watts that they could shift rain patterns by “milking the mountains” (by adding coal dust on snow to absorb heat to melt the snow caps of the mountains) and “shoot down the clouds” (by adding Silver Iodide in the troposphere to enhance condensation). The world’s biggest dam promised to become the mightiest irrigation and flood control project, but in the mean time created the world’s biggest lake that generated the world’s greatest human-induced pressure on the earth crust. If “harmony” is as vital as Beijing has always preached us, nature would be in desperate need for an earthquake-like-event to harmonize what we did to her.
For Chinese readers, his words might sound condescending, in particular, his critique on consumerism in China, considering that fact that his nation was the one pioneered the industrial revolution. But he always reminded us that he felt sympathetic towards the fishermen, farmers, local cadres, ministries chiefs and even the Chinese leaders, for one simple reason – you cannot deny people a happy life. This gives a humanistic touch and universality to the book, and make it a must-read for all who is concerned about the current state of environment of China, and our planet.
Lance Corona
September 7, 2011
Poor Larry
Before Larry Crowne was fired from U-Mart, he was voted as the employee of the month six times in a row. The reason for him getting fired – he didn’t go to college. It seems sensible to get rid of the least educated employee first when a company downsizes. Management and human resource theories would tell you the same. But this attention to the hard facts – grading employees with a simple and ruthless mathematical scores according to their education level, ignores the human connection – one’s devoted services to customers, loyalty to the company and the inevitable bonds between colleagues that is built over the years. Certainty talent acquisition specialists (who came up with this fancy job title anyway?) would argue that these factors could well be rated with a 10-pt scale to give a more accurate reflection of an employee’s value to the company. But I believe that the hunger for endless quantifiable facts for decision-making is taking its toll on our common sense and slowly driving us away from humanity.
Ryan Bingham - What
Downsizing a company is a complicated matter that an average person like me could never wrap my mind around it. Yet I could still take total control in downsizing my life. After getting the pink slip, Larry decided to downsize his life to help repay his loan. The logic behind is – you own less, you use less (not useless). It reminds me of Ryan Bingham (Clooney) in Up in the Air. Bingham travels around the country to give “what’s in your backpack?” seminars and reminds people of their ever-increasing possession are dragging their feet. He doesn’t like the idea of owning something, not even a house, a wife or a family. It seems that everything he owns could be fit in the handy, standard-sized luggage box that he carries with him as he speeds through the security checks. Larry Crowne lives Bingham’s philosophy, though out of very practical reasons – he switched from a SUV to a scooter to save gas and moved to a smaller house to save money. It is ironic that we always think about ways to save money using coupons and discounts, while in fact the most effective way is not to use those coupons and spend at all – you own less and you will spend less. I must take control and start downsizing my life today! Thanks, Hanks and Clooney! (Smart people are handsome! Or is it actually the other way round?)
Care
Other than downsizing life, Larry took other measures to cope with unemployment. He went to college and attended Miss Tainot’s Speech 217: The Art of Informal Remarks. Tainot’s motto – do it only if you care. It seems simple enough, but on second thought, it’s more easily said than done. Think about the last time you slept in a class, skip a class, miss an appointment, went to a party you don’t really want to be in, submitted some substandard work. Think about them again and Miss Tainot will tell you: if you care, work harder; if you don’t, then why bother? Some may consider this idea cruel and mean, but this all-or-nothing perspective to life could actually save you a lot of time and make way for the things you really care about. Miss Tainot’s not only tells us to care, but to care for the little things in life – the informal remarks. Larry started the semester with his bold and dull description of how to make the perfect french toast, but he moved the class with heartwarming yet concise tale of his life at the end of the semester. By mastering the ability to appreciate the tiny bits in life, generate a sense of admiration and fun out of those bits, one would be able to find happiness – no matter how much you own, downsized or upsized.
Chained Food
May 23, 2011
Angel León
Came across this amazing Chef in the lastest issue of TIME.
I’m not a big fan of Michelin-stars or molecular gastronomy. The Michelin Bible to restaurants has turned the restaurant industry into show business, creating fans that is willing to stand and wait for 3 or 4 hours just to get a glimpse of a star. Molecular cooking, which serves you a fish with elephant’s meat in it, has turned kitchen into laboratory and their patrons into guinea pigs. These two things share one similarity – they take the soul out of the food. Food used to be a human necessity, an enjoyment, a celebration of local cultures, a gift from nature and a part of a bigger cycles in nature.
Chef Angel León re-engineers his food in his kitchen and runs a Michelin-star restaurant. But he is making good use of the technology and his star charisma. Having brought up in a coastal town and fished with his father since he was a little boy, he is now a renowned chef trying to get tasty seafood onto the dining table, and at the same time, preach his philosophy – “tell a story about what happens in the sea”.
The menu of his restaurant, Aponiente in Santa Maria, Spain, has a page giving detailed description of the seafood. The interesting fact about this page is that it is laid out in a high-school science-textbook style – with elaborate diagrams showing you the ecosystem of the ocean (see image below). To fulfil his mission to let customers understand the story of the sea, he has created a “food chain” menu. It starts with a salad made by seaweed and gradually you’ll be eating food along the ocean food chain: shrimp, fish, etc. The final dish of the menu is a fish fillet covered in a sauce made of planktons. It signifies the death of the fish on the ocean floor, where the fish becomes the source of food for the micro-organism plankton. To eat and knowing the story about what you’re eating at the same time, as León has demonstrated in his menu, is definitely a more gastronomical and inspiring experience than tasting eggs cooked in nitrous oxide.
The pursuit of technology is good. But you know what’s better? The technological development with a soul. By soul here I mean an understanding of the human condition. Steve Jobs has always said that, at the end of every major presentation of Apple’s latest gadgets, “technology alone is not enough, it’s technology married with the humanities that yields us the result that makes our heart sing.” It’s the consciousness that we are human, that earns Apple and Chef León their statuses.
Technology is the means, not the end.
Aponiete's Menu
Steve at the iPad 2 Launch
理直氣壯的同理心
May 11, 2011
何偉龍飾演的Jimmy曾經是一個水手，環遊世界各地，人生閱歷豐富。晚年流浪街頭，患上癌症，要孤獨地面對病魔。他有一個夢想，就是「找個人和我上火星」。我想火星就像徵在他幻想中的一個小小鳥托邦吧。他四處奔波，豎起他小小的一支望遠鏡，探索火星位置。追尋火星的路把他帶到旺角的一個公園，這個公園每晚都有很多人來放狗。Jimmy漸漸與他們建立起一種關係。
Jimmy性格自我，不善社交，跟放狗的人又話不投機。唯有Dorothy(區嘉雯飾)每晚都會跟他聊天。Dorothy是一個單身老人，她希望說服Jimmy參加她所領導的老人小組。每次Jimmy都會回應﹕「我不需要你可憐我。」有一次，Dorothy終於觸動了他的神經，Jimmy一怒之下說﹕「就算你在輪椅上滾下去亞皆老街，被貨車撞倒再彈回我面前，我都不會可憐你！」這段話，對著一個一番善意的慈祥姥姥說，好像太麻木不仁了吧！為什麼Jimmy可以那樣理直氣壯地去羞辱一個關心自己的人﹖
Jimmy漂泊一生，歷盡滄桑，以為苦盡甘來，癌魔卻要奪去他的生命； Dorothy雖然半身不遂，但家景富有，偏愛音樂劇《綠野仙縱》(The Wizard of Oz)，最愛唱 Over the Rainbow。Dorothy見到Jimmy露宿街頭，觸動她的同理心，或，用孟子的語言，令她的惻隱之心作祟。感受到Jimmy比自己不幸，Dorothy希望可以幫助他。然而，從Jimmy的角度來看﹕一個中產老婦，帶著一隻受主人呵護備至的狗來散步，終日沉醉在《綠野仙縱》的世界而不吃人間煙火的這麼一個人，跟本連理解我生活、身世的能力都沒有的人，又有什麼資格可憐我﹖我想這就是Jimmy「理直氣壯」的一點解釋。
有時候，看見我們都市裡的人，假期到中國山區、東南亞去「扶貧」，我又會思考類似的問題。究竟我們「 扶貧」的對象在想什麼呢﹖我並不否定那「 扶貧」是出於善意，而且這善意值得鼓勵。但我們有沒有想過我們的善意可能是對其他人尊嚴一種粗暴的踐踏呢﹖蔣勳說過﹕我們最大的敵人不是惡，是善。因為你是不能拒絕善的。
(二之一)
Attenberg
April 18, 2011
Attenberg (2010) - A film by Athina Rachel Tsangari
Set in a slow, coastal and industrial Greek town, Attenberg is a coming-of -age movie that explores sexuality and human nature.
The name, Attenberg, comes from the mispronounced name of the British naturalist Sir David Attenborough, who narrates many of the BBC’s documentaries. The protagonist under study, Marina, is a fan of Attenborugh’s series. She is fascinated by chimpanzees walking in the jungles and gorillas fighting in the woods. As a teenage girl, she is also confused about her sexual orientation, or if she has an orientation at all – being disinterested in boy’s and girl’s, or even her own, genital. To me, Marina’s character is, almost, schizophrenic – a person who likes to observe animal having her most basic animal instinct, sex, sterilized.
Marina’s interests in animals and disinterest in sex make me ponder – to what extent should/would we suppress our animal instincts or nature to qualify us as “human beings”? We use the word “animal” to describe people with immoral or outrages behaviours. But aren’t we all animals after all? What animals do that we shouldn’t? Do animals deserve to be disrespected like that with that adjective?
Why have so many animal instincts been stigmatized in our world? Sex, sleep, eating raw food, having a connection with nature… and I am sure the list go on and on. I am not saying that we should all practice them as, for instance, a tiger does. But what is line that we shouldn’t cross? I should say that Marina’s sexual interest/disinterest is definitely a distorted one. Distorted by our human establishment (media, school, book, religion, political system, etc).
Is the suppression of our animal instincts a form of evolution, or devolution for us as a species – the homo sapiens?
The current state of the (Social) Media
April 11, 2011
By John Darkow
Lately, the social media is celebrated as the greatest innovation that mankind has ever made. In 2006, “You” was named the TIME person of the year with the inception of YouTube and the creator of Facebook Mark Zuckerburg earned that title at the end of last year. Unlike Enron or the .com craze in beginning of the last decade, the inventors of social media websites are the real leaders in the tech revolution – they have all become billion-, and soon, zillionnaires.
The “social” part of social media is indeed revolutionary. It changed that way human being interacts with each other, it made physical distance a non-issue in communication and it has made information travels faster than ever. This is where the “media” part comes in. With social media, information, namely news and knowledge, is no longer being disseminated through centralized and top-down channels. Anyone who are plugged into to the ever-growing expanse of the world wide web is able to publish information and create knowledge. The media are no longer dominated with the views of the reporters, columnists or pundits – increasingly, viewers are able to feedback through tweets and facebook, views of the minority gets heard, neighbourhood singing talents get discovered. These are positive changes. With the ingenious invention of social media, some even say that democracy as the Greeks envisioned it could finally be realized – the view of everyone should be heard and cared for.
This has created a shock to the convention news organizations. Major news organizations cope with the shock with “citizen journalists”, aka – us. As we send in our videos, photos, tweets and facebook comments, what viewers “like” (as in the Like button of facebook) has suddenly become an indispensable factor for a news organization to decide which story to run and which not to. Columnists, once express their OWN views on certain news events, would now report to you the social media’s take on certain news events and try to explain the reason for people on facebook or twitter having such a view.
Reporters and columnists could once, using their paid analytical minds and conscience for the society, direct the public’s attention to things that matter. But as the wall between conventional and social media crumbles down, the authoritative ability for media to lead the public discourse and rhetoric, is now lost. Compartmentalized, or worst, bigoted, visions of individuals could now get published or broadcasted in the mainstream media 24/7. Some would argue that the breakdown of the conventional media infrastructure is good news for democracy because ordinary people finally get to hold their government accountable with the help of facebook comments or tweets. But I would argue otherwise. One of the vital condition for a thriving democracy is an informed public, and for that, it requires fair and trustworthy news organizations.
When the trivial-est of trivia could make headlines (Charlie Sheen, Rebecca Black, Mr. Stanley Ho, Mr. Chan Chun-chuen, “Dangerous” Japanese food with normal/safe level of radiation) in the most trusted name in news (CNN, Ming Pao, etc.), the public is obviously far from well-informed. An ill-informed public is certainly ill-equipped to hold their own government accountable or even to hold anyone accountable as their opinions are mixed with personal sentiment and confined in a tunnel vision.
I am not putting the blame on the public, nor the social media. I am not suggesting that everyone should be expressing their views in an objective, analytical and comprehensive fashion like a columnist or a reporter; and the social media can do good, and I believe, with conviction, that it could provide tremendous assistance in perfecting democracy. However, what I am disturbed about the current state of the media in the “socialization” of the mainstream media, i.e. when the conventional news organization employ an ever-increasing amount of information from facebook, hkgolden forums or youtube as their source of news, or even, source of their so-called “opinion”. It is certainty not a good sign when what I read from the news is the same as what I over heard from a conversation of people sitting at the next table in a tea restaurant. (Watch the interview of Jon Stewart by Larry King, as Jon blasts the mainstream media for their increasing use of twitter materials.)
I won’t go so far as to deny the value of ordinary people’s conversation, as Jon did. Those conversations are to be heard in the media, and they should always be the primary source of news. But I believe the media has the responsibility to filter and to analyse that information for us, to inform us with the conversations that matter, especially in the age of information flooding. What is the point of reading the news when it becomes increasingly similar to what I get from facebook, twitter, youtube or discussion boards?
The problem with the sole dependence of information from the social media is that one would only hear from like-minded people. You read the news that your friends share, the video that a friend’s friend posts, and so on, you get the idea. It is true that in the age of Web 3.0, the internet has become diverse as never before; but sadly, the vision of internet users has become narrow as never before. Like-minded people could get together easily and create a “group” that is not interested in hearing a single piece of different opinion. However biased the opinion of these “groups” might be, I believe their voices should well be heard because they are a member of our community. It is, however, irresponsible behaviour to broadcast these opinions, unfiltered and unanalysed, to the public 24/7 for they would promote a sense of fear, hatred and discrimination. It would erode the basis of a well-oiled democratic society – trust, tolerance and love.
Is socialization of the mainstream media inevitable? I don’t know. But what I know is the consequences of that. I still believe that social media can do good, at least I am still using it to make a point.
East vs. West (cont’d)
April 10, 2011
A continuation of the previous post.
Way of Life (Blue: west; Red: east)
Networking
At a party
2. Mobility
Mobility here refers to the easiness for one to move to another place to live. In both Hong Kong and mainland China, people tend to have lower mobility when compared with those in the west (the west here mostly means the English-speaking word: UK, US, Canada, Ausralia etc, due to my limited understanding of the rest of the west)
In Hong Kong and China, children live with their parents before they are married. In the west, that might not be the case. For those who are lucky enough to make it to uni/college, most of them would move out and start building their own homes after they graduate. For those who are not able to get into tertiary education, moving out is still the option for staying with the parents is a sign of weakness. The difference in what I’d like call the “parental distance” in the upbringing means that the coming-of-age process in the east is less adventurous than the west.
To add to that factor of family attachment, there are physical limitation to mobility in the east. In Hong Kong, a city having the highest housing prices in the world, it is impossible for anyone (except investment bankers, of course) to own a decent 500-sq-foot apartment before their thirties. In China, the hukou system (everyone is registered a hukou in certain city or province and he/she is only entitled to the social security from there) means that choice concerning where to live in is limited to one’s home city or province. Being free from the rocket-high house prices and restrictive population control measures, our western counterparts enjoy a higher degree of personal mobility.
I am not suggesting this is the case for every person in the east or west, however, I believe what I’ve described paints a general picture of what the majority in both sides of the world is doing.
The difference in mobility has profound consequences. The longer time it takes for people to “individualize” in the east means that they feel the constant need for solidarity. Parties tend to be more organized and people, in certain sense, are more connected. However, the lower mobility also means that people are less adventurous and less exposed to things that are out of the ordinary. Possible consequences: conservative personalities and low tolerance (not so much to different cultures/ethnicity/race, but to things that are out of one’s definition of “normal”).
I am not trying to say that the western way is better than the eastern one, or the other way round. I just want to keep the conversation going between the east and west so that people on both side of the aisle knows more about each other. For ignorance can sometimes hurt, even kill.
East vs. West
April 4, 2011
The following series of picture compares culture of the east and the west. They may look eurocentric to some, but the objectivity of these comparisons is substantiate by the background of the artist who created them – Yang Liu, born and raised in Beijing, moved to Germany and has been living their since her 20s.
Expressing Opinion (Blue: west; Red: east)
Self
Problem Solving
(See the rest of the collection here)
There is no tendency in her works whatsoever about the superiority of either culture, and it is perfectly okay for not doing so. Nevertheless, for the audience, it is instinctive that we would fall for one (either the east or the west) over another, not necessarily because we think one is better than the other, but in doing so we give meaning to the art and ourselves, which, after all, it is ultimate purpose of art.
Being born and raised in Hong Kong, a city that takes pride in its east-meets-west cultural identity, I am instantly connected to Liu’s works as soon as soon as I laid eyes on them. But what I’m interested is not writing a “oh-yeah-this-is-so-true” kinda opinion about her art pieces. I am more into thinking about the “why” of her work. Why is there such a difference between between the east and the west? I have come up with several explanations.
To explain the difference in culture, one could never ignore the history of the people who embodied that culture, in this case – the Chinese people. However, due to my limited knowledge in history and the limited attention-span of blog readers (thank you for bearing with me), I am just gonna use my experience and understanding of the eastern society today to explain.
1. Personal space
Unlike in Europe and America, most cities in Asia are densely populated. While most of the people in the west live in spacious 2- to 10-storey houses or apartments, the majority of people in the east, most notably Hong Kong, live in apartments on 20th floor of crowded residential condos. This means that eastern people, in general, have less personal space compare to their western counterparts. The lack of personal space alone is responsible for many of the differences we saw in Liu’s work.
Having less personal space means that “me” often takes a back seat because “me” is constantly under surveillance. The expression of “me” that does not conform with the family’s values, tradition or culture is both consciously and subconsciously suppressed. That’s why the eastern people tends to have small egos. This limitation in the modern living environment has also reinforced the preference for collectivism over individualism deeply rooted in eastern philosophy.
This lack of person space tend to spawn conflicts between family members, for obvious reasons. However, the concept of piety has long been preached by many Chinese philosophers and it is still considered as one of the most important features of the Chinese culture. Challenging your own family members, especially when they are your seniors (and even more especially when they are your mom and dad) is declared a taboo in the face of moral imperatives of piety and family integrity. Again, the thoughts and emotions of “me” take a back seat. Easterners will do everything they could to avoid confrontation with the family, and in doing so, undermines one’s ability to express him/herself. To extrapolate this philosophy into problem-solving ability in everyday life, we could easily explain why easterners tend to work around a problem but not face it head-on.
All these just because of the lack of personal space….
(to be continued)
讓座記
March 28, 2011
我每天都坐火車上班，在紅磡總站上車，通常都可以找到座位。到了九龍塘，都會遇到帶著紅白藍膠袋的公公婆婆，跟著從地鐵隧道內鑽上來的上班族一起擠進車廂。凡遇到此等情況，我都會讓座給公公婆婆。不過，很多時候，走進來的，都是公公跟婆婆，或婆婆跟婆婆。縱使我讓了座位給婆婆，公公仍要無奈承受「年紀大，身體壞」對他的懲罰，而在坐著的年輕朋友就繼續可以坐享他/她「上車時間比你早」的成果。OK，我已經沉著氣，盡量不去鄙視或仇視那些仍然坐著的朋友，我只怪香港的教育不能培養出一個有同理心的人，我只怪三線劇集已把「人不為已，天諸地滅」的無線教義刻在每個人的心靈上，我只怪我的身體力行仍然不能感化我身邊的人。活在這個年代 — 當月台上「請先讓車上乘客落車」及巴士上「請讓坐予有需要的乘客」的廣播已淪為背景噪音的年代，我仍然希望教育可以改變一切。
然後，下班，走上了觀塘線的列車，它是一列「 優先座列車」。 「優先座列車」是地鐵宣傳讓坐意識的一個教育運動，車廂內外都貼滿了Smiley，及寫滿了押韻的宣傳字句。我認真地看了那「讓坐小貼士」幾眼，心頓時沉到了大陝谷谷底那條河的河床。
「減肚腩 好容易 只要讓座畀有需要人士」
「常讓座 精神好 因為站立有助血液循環 消除疲勞」
「有時企下 就唔怕訓到過哂籠……..過哂站啦！」
「見到有需要既人坐得開心 自己都十萬個開心！」
「讓座企一企 比坐係度消耗多一倍卡路里。」
(見圖，頁底)
我不知道應該從那裡開始說起。不過我肯定，創作以上幾句口號的那位Smart ass，上個星期五一定有去Startbucks買咖啡。(背景資料﹕上星期五Starbucks發起義買活動，公司將下午所賣出咖啡的所有收益全部捐出，協助日本救災) 「嘩，捐完錢仲有咖啡送，梗係捐啦！」那位Smart ass 說。
讓座就是出於一顆無私的心，建基於對比自己不幸的人的一份尊重、一份體諒。而香港鐵路有限公司宣揚的讓座運動，就是建基於一顆自私的心，它宣揚的是短視的個人利益最大化。港鐵，你要知道，即使有人因為讀了口號而讓座，那「座」並不是「讓」出來的，你根本沒有教育你的乘客，你只是利用了人性的陰暗面 —「自私」去把座位迫出來。在行政的層面看來，目的達到了，你的讓座運動是一個十分有效的行政手段；在教育的角度來看，你就是「為求目的，不擇手段。」你是「不擇手段」，因為你忽略了教育的本質 — 價值。你不但沒有向你的乘客灌輸一套正確的價值觀，還強化了問題的根源的腐敗價值 — 自私。
我們要繼續努力去宣揚的，是「請讓坐予有需要的乘客」的正面信息，並不是「企比坐更好」的無稽之談。
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
