Viva Forever

Two days ago, which happened to be a very rainy day, Tim and I were travelling in his car towards his house. We were just coasting relatively slowly down a suburban road, the slowness due to the speed limits as well as the bad weather.

All of a sudden, a little girl came running out onto the road and hit our car.

It happened so quickly. Out of nowhere, between a stationary bus and a car, the girl had ran straight out onto the road, hit the front left corner of Tim’s car (breaking the headlight there) before tumbling backwards like a ragdoll. By the time we parked to rush out, we already heard her screaming in pain and probably fear, and the bus driver and passengers rushing out to attend to her.

Thankfully, she wasn’t very injured. I called for an ambulance and they arrived a short while later, after the bus driver thought it would be a good idea to move the kid onto the bus and out of the rain (as I tried to tell him, you’re not supposed to move injured people in these situations, just as well the injuries were minor). Basically she just had scraped/bruised knee and shoulder, more so from hitting the pavement than the car. No visible broken bones or concussion though she was taken to the hospital for xrays. The police arrived soon after, took statements from Tim and basically confirmed that he was not at fault as the 12 year old evidently (as well as admitted to) running out onto the road without checking properly.

Still, pretty nerve-wracking experience.

In better news, our house is finally officially sold. We’ll need to vacate by around 30 January next year. Since two weeks of January will be completely taken up by full-time study, I’m going to have about the remaining 2 weeks to find a place to rent. Here’s to hoping that I can make it happen!

A few weeks back I had to go work on a daily basis to the heart of the city by train. On the first day, while I was jostling around with the hundreds of professionals and white-collared workers, it was a startling observation that everyone was clothed in almost entirely monochromatic shades of grey and black, with the occasional coloured scarf or work shirt peeking out (this was more or less in the middle of winter). Even I was decked out to blend with my black coat, white sweater, grey woollen pants and sensible black shoes. Then it hit me; this throng of people and I, riding expressionless on the crowded trains, are the very epitome of the man of the Clapham omnibus!

The man on the Clapham omnibus was one of the first legal analogies that I learnt in law school and forms a significant foundation for the notion of “reasonableness”, a yardstick and standard used in countless legal principles. In no way do I think it’s a perfect way to measure reasonableness, but it certainly is the measure used in law, even though it is probably a little less elitist now.

And here I, and the monochromatic travellers around me, were the modern versions of such a “man”. We were the potential equivalent brought to the minds of judges when picturing the reasonable person. I wondered, would a law student back in the days when such a concept was fresh and newly taught, whom travelled on the Clapham omnibus, would he have felt the excitement that I did, to know that such an important legal concept referred to an activity that he habitually engaged in? Either way, such thoughts certainly brightened my day.

It’s good to know that I’m not the only law student who has wondered about this legal concept.

Argh so hungry now. Must microwave some pizza from last night.

I’ve finished my exams (results coming out in 4 days x_x) and the first thing that I do is catch a cold. Nice. Coughing, scratchy throats, lethargy and sore backs are annoying setbacks to attempts at relaxation after an incredibly stressful three weeks of assessments. Also, it’s bloody freezing here (I take back what I say about wanting to go to cold countries and to see the snow; having fully come to terms with how much of a pussy my body is, I think I’ll keep to the warmer climes) which is just darn uncomfortable. The good news is that Uni doesn’t start back until August 4th. However, I’ll probably be working a lot of it, definitely full time for two weeks at the very least.

In other news, I received an awesome birthday package from Amanda in the mail the other day. In it was three items of clothing; a lovely long, black dress with a long, mocha-coloured ribbon sash at the waist; a summery blue and white patterned dress that’s uber comfortable and a snazzy babydoll work shirt. MANY THANKS TO HER! They all fit nicely and very wearable. :D

Time for some learnin’! Yesterday I came across this absolutely FASCINATING documentary about people who compulsively hoard stuff, the condition also known as disposophobia (if the video loads slow or you want to conserve bandwidth, click on the “HD” button to turn HD off). It’s a thoughtful and well presented documentary, with the only talking done by the interviewees. I thought it was interesting how the film was ordered in terms of the neatness of the hoarders.

What was most fascinating were the insights given by the hoarders to why they hoard. I thought it was interesting how so much of it is about being in control in a material way (through the buying and hoarding) and yet they are being controlled by the very stuff they buy (I guess that’s what the title of the documentary is referring to). The last segment involving the man who was simultaneously digging through a mountain of worthless junk while talking about his dead mother was chilling to say the least, and quite saddening.

More Links
- Lots of pictures of another hoarder
- Psychology of Hoarding

Such visual insights into the very private lives of individuals whose activities deviate from the norm, makes me feel guilty for being so indulgent in my curiosity. Many hoarders seem to lead private lives, who value their privacy like anyone else, and it seems kinda intrusive and voyeuristic to be so fascinated with their different way of living. I hope there’s a difference between simply wanting to know more about something and actually intruding on people and demanding to know.

Today’s discussion: opinions. This is mostly fuelled by a recent entry by someone who had a rather strong opinion about, well, opinions. I not going to directly quote from what was said because the entry was taken down, and I assume that’s because the author didn’t want the public to read it. While my comment on said entry consequently is no longer accessible either, it certainly got me thinking about the whole topic. Here be my thoughts!

I have seen on more than one occasion, people have expressed the belief that opinions cannot be right or wrong, and as some have said, there are only favourable/unfavourable opinions. This is mostly based on the idea that because opinions are beliefs and judgements of something uncertain (paraphrased from dictionary.com’s definition), then opinions cannot be right or wrong. Another way to look at it is that many believe that opinions are purely subjective, therefore they are immune to judgement about their correctness. However, this is an incomplete and superficial conclusion as to what opinions are. There are subjective opinions and there are opinions that are based on objective premises.

Subjective Opinions
Subjective opinions usually refer to one’s own cognitions. For example consider the statement,

“I like fish”.

This cannot be “wrong” because the truth of it comes from yourself, i.e. it would be nonsensical for someone to retort with, “no, you DON’T like fish” because they are not you, and hence not the source of the claim. Other examples could be like, “I feel hungry” or “I hate the rain”. These statements can only be false when the person speaking is lying about the internal state they’re experiencing.

Objective Opinions
Of relevance, objective opinions distinctly have two elements. There is the,
1) The “I believe…” or “I think…” part (which may be expressed or implied), and
2) The actual claim.

For example,

“I think Asperger Syndrome is a fake condition”

This is an opinion about some aspect of the world, and I argue that it can be said to be right or wrong. However, I must stress that the rightness or wrongness has NOTHING to do with that first aspect, the “I think” part. To say the opinion is wrong is not to say “I don’t think that you actually think Asperger’s is a fake condition”, or that it’s not true that you hold that opinion. Saying an opinion is wrong is not to say that you’re not entitled to voice the opinion or that you don’t hold the opinion. Rightness or wrongness refers to the actual claim you’re making.

Of course there are some topics out there that are debatable and are not settled facts. I have heard people opine that Asperger’s is not real, however, just because it’s their opinion, it doesn’t mean such opinions exist in an untouchable void. The existence of Asperger’s is supported by a large body of empirical research, and to contradict the conclusions of such research with no legitimate evidence is to make a claim that is (for all intents and purposes) incorrect, or “wrong”. Such a claim does not stop being incorrect by virtue of being someone’s expressed opinion. It is different when you have an opinion about the world that is backed up with reason or evidence. Then you have an argument, and when confronted with a different view, then perhaps discourse on the subject matter can ensue.

It surprises me whenever people express their opinions about something, and when someone asks them why or presents alternative explanations or some such, the first person gets all huffy and says something along the lines of “well that’s my opinion!”. Okay, so what? If you’re making claims about the world, and if you don’t have a good enough reason to back it up compared to a different claim, then why are you even defending it? Why are people so defensive and get so personal when their objective opinions are demonstrably based on something that is not correct? No one is trying to remove one’s right to an opinion just because they’re based on a less correct premise. You have the right to be wrong, but everyone else retains the right to tell you so.

It’s not always possible to get a “right” opinion when compared to its alternative, because the foundation of the opinions might be different. A Christian who might say “premarital sex is immoral” has a valid opinion, because it follows logically from their belief that there is a God who mandates that premarital sex is immoral. Someone who doesn’t believe in a God in the first place would also come to an equally valid opinion that premarital sex is not immoral. There’s no right and wrong to these two opinions because they work on different premises. However, at least through discussion people can work out what different premises they’re working with, if they have established that both opinions make sense.

Hence, opinions about the world are not immune to objective scrutiny. They can be engaged with like any argument or assertion or belief, and can be deemed good, bad, right or wrong. It has nothing to do with the right to have opinions, or the people making them.

P.S. On an unrelated matter, I found Alex’s entry on education to be particularly enlightening. For another perspective on things, Amanda has her view on the matter. Food for thought!

P.P.S. I just found that Sarai has coincidentally written about opinions too. Seems like we’re on the same wavelength, though she said it with fewer words. ^^;

P.P.P.S. I’m aware that my link list isn’t working (damn plugin) on my blog, and only the script that rotates my dailies on the front page works. I’m trying to get the list back up ASAP.