How Our Society Is Shaped by the Framing of Collective Thinking

by Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos

Promoting, understanding and analyzing “thinking” is an important endeavor of the Rapera movement.  This is because the power of collective thinking is often underestimated and overlooked in its influence on shaping societies. I believe society in general is unaware of its pervasive influence. Our thoughts, beliefs, and values as a society are not merely individual constructs but are deeply influenced by the way they are framed collectively. The framing of collective thinking embodies the narratives, ideologies, and perspectives that shape our understanding of the world. In this article, I will explore how our society is profoundly affected by the way our collective thinking is framed and the implications this has for our social, political, and cultural landscape.

One of the most important conduits through which collective thinking is framed is the media. Mass media, including television, radio, newspapers, and digital platforms, have an unparalleled impact on shaping public opinion. The way issues are presented, the narratives that are emphasized, and the voices that are amplified all play a pivotal role in shaping our collective understanding of the world. This is an important fact for policy makers, reformists and organizations involved in change dynamics to keep in mind.

Media outlets can frame issues in various ways, emphasizing different aspects of a story, and thereby influencing public perception. For instance, the framing of a behavior done in the name of religion as either a dangerous extreme behaviour or a normal religious behaviour can lead to starkly different public reactions. The way media frames these events has a direct impact on how society perceives them, often influencing support or opposition to the causes at hand.

Furthermore, the media's selection of news stories and their placement within the news can prioritize certain issues over others. This can lead to a lopsided focus on certain topics, while ignoring others that may be equally or more important. Such framing choices can have far-reaching consequences on societal priorities, influencing public discourse and policy decisions.

Politics is another area where the framing of collective thinking is particularly potent. Politicians and political parties use framing techniques to influence public opinion and garner support for their agendas. This often involves framing issues in ways that resonate with their base or appeal to a broader audience. Politicians may try to create the kind of thinking they want to achieve their agenda by using the framing technique. For example, a party that is race based or religious based may frame diversity of race and religion as a threat to their own race or religion.

One common framing strategy is the use of emotionally charged language and rhetoric. By framing issues in a way that elicits strong emotional responses, politicians can mobilize their supporters and galvanize public opinion. This can sometimes lead to a polarization of society, as different political factions use opposing frames to advance their own interests. The Nation of course may be split asunder merely to accommodate the political quest for power.

In addition to emotional framing, the selective presentation of facts and statistics is another powerful tool in political framing. Politicians and interest groups may cherry-pick data that supports their positions while ignoring or discrediting data that contradicts their narratives. This selective framing can make it difficult for the public to make informed decisions and contributes to the spread of misinformation.

Collective thinking is also framed by cultural and social influences. Our cultural norms, values, and traditions shape our worldview and influence our beliefs and behaviors. These cultural frameworks are often deeply ingrained and can be difficult to challenge or change. Social institutions, such as family, schools, religious organizations, and community groups, also play a role in framing collective thinking. These institutions transmit values and beliefs from one generation to the next, reinforcing societal norms and expectations. For example, the way history is taught in schools can frame the collective understanding of a nation's past and its impact on the present. It is not exaggerative to say that the nature of the collective thinking will determine whether the society will progress or regress in the future. 

In the digital age, technology and social media platforms have become significant players in framing collective thinking. Social media algorithms often prioritize content that aligns with a user's existing beliefs, creating echo chambers where people are exposed to information that confirms their preconceptions. This reinforcement of existing beliefs can contribute to polarization and limit exposure to diverse perspectives.

Furthermore, the rapid spread of information on social media platforms can lead to the viral dissemination of both accurate and false information. The way a piece of information is framed can determine whether it goes viral or is debunked. This phenomenon has significant consequences for public opinion, as false or misleading information can spread rapidly and shape collective thinking.

Undeniably, our society is influenced by the way our collective thinking is framed. From media and communication to politics, culture, and technology, various factors contribute to the framing of our collective consciousness. Recognizing the power of framing is essential for understanding how societal norms, beliefs, and values are shaped and perpetuated. 

As individuals, it is important to critically evaluate the framing of information and be mindful of the influences that shape our thinking. By engaging with diverse perspectives, questioning dominant narratives, and seeking out reliable sources of information, we can contribute to a more informed and balanced collective consciousness. Additionally, holding media outlets, politicians, and institutions accountable for the way they frame issues can help ensure a more transparent and equitable shaping of our society's collective thinking. Let’s not forget that as a Nation, we become what we think we are.

END.

Should I blog again?

 I recall, when I first started blogging, I did so because that gave me an opportunity to unload much of my thoughts on diverse subjects. It was sort of like a self therapy.  

I could write on topics which I thought were important or current.  I wrote passionately and honestly. The good thing about your own blog is that you can decide what you want to write and how you want to write it. 

There are no editors editing your thoughts or ideas.

For  a while I was lucky to be given an opportunity to write for newspapers and other news portals.It has its advantage because of its reach. The disadvantage is that you may not have the complete freedom, understandably, to write what you wish, how you wish.  In other words, when you write for others, you may be constrained by their policies and worse, their mindset or mental limitations, which can be frustrating. 

I want to write as objectively as possible on topics that I think need to addressed. Or simply to express my thoughts on something at that particular moment in my life.

Now I am wondering......should I go back to blogging my thoughts?

Whats your views?

Thanks. 

END.

Tegak Maruah Rakyat #Rakyat #Maruah #Rapera

Who Am I?

Be You & Not A Slave

Raperas are more urgently needed now !

I have spoken and written many articles over the years where I tried to provoke the Rakyat into taking responsibility for the well being of the Nation.  I was deeply concerned that the general rakyat who are generally good and decent people were illusioned that they are helpless in shaping the destiny of the Nation.

Whatever the impetus was, I am glad that the Rakyat now know that they can change the government if they are determined to. I hope that this makes the politicians realize that the Rakyat’s mindset has changed. They no longer fear the powers that the politicians wield.

I would like to remind the Rakyat that while the Rakyat’s mindset and imagination with regards to politics may have changed, they must remember one thing - power still has a druggish effect on the politicians and their servants.  Hence, they must not assume that just because the baton has been passed to the member of parliaments and state assemblymen on the other side of the fence, all must necessarily be well - they are still politicians.

Hence, our focus should still remain the same - we want a stable, peaceful country where each of us and our children have the opportunity to prosper based on the efforts that we put into life. Every Malaysian has a right to feel safe, useful, appreciated as a citizen with a sense of belonging and respected as a human being.

While the some or most of the Rakyat may still be caught up with the elections that have ended, the Raperas must put on their thinking caps while being balanced by their compassionate hearts.

While some or most of the Rakyat may think that their responsibility has ended by casting their votes, Raperas must know that duties and responsibilities to ensure that this Nation progresses comprehensively continues. Raperas must be ever vigilant.

Believe me when I say this: most people are unable to free themselves from vested interests that may actually run counter to national interests. Do not for a second think that a change of government automatically means that human nature itself has changed.

While we must give the trust, the benefit of doubt and support the government of the day, the Rapera must be vigilant of the human nature which may only want to act in its own interests.

Let us together unite, as Malaysians, to ensure that the key institutions in our country are strengthened not to act against ordinary citizens but to empower them so that they are protected and assisted in their quest to contribute in making this nation greater.

I pray that we have a great journey ahead.

Peace !

What in the world is “liberal Islam” ???

Image thanks to here

This is one of the “latest” terms being bandied about in our society – some use it in a positive way and some use it in a negative way.  In most cases, most people use this term so carelessly in any way that they please which serves to demonstrate the mental confusion.

Any discussion of “Liberal Islam” is always liked to the criticism of “liberalism” by the critics. This is yet another term that has many meanings and being used by many in different ways. At the end of the day, the discussion descends into how the term is being used rather than the substance of the argument.

Liberalism is not necessarily a “bad thing”. The Latin word “liber” itself means “free” and what is wrong with the “soul” being free? Surely we do not support the opposite of being free which is being enslaved? 

The online Encyclopaedia Britannica defines Liberalism as follows:

“liberalism, political doctrine that takes protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual to be the central problem of politics. Liberals typically believe that government is necessary to protect individuals from being harmed by others; but they also recognize that government itself can pose a threat to liberty. As the revolutionary American pamphleteer Thomas Paine expressed it in “Common Sense” (1776), government is at best “a necessary evil.” Laws, judges, and police are needed to secure the individual’s life and liberty, but their coercive power may also be turned against him. The problem, then, is to devise a system that gives government the power necessary to protect individual liberty but also prevents those who govern from abusing that power”.  

Looking at the definition above, one can agree that Liberalism is not “bad” after all. It is true that one of the major roles of governments is to protect individuals from being harmed by others. However, governments themselves may exert harm on its citizens through abuse of power. Another philosophy central to Liberalism is the upholding of the human dignity and this is characterised by the notion that human beings are inherently good and hence they should generally have the freedom to decide for themselves on various aspects of their lives. There is of course a balance of “freedom” that is sought to be achieved and not as the critics suggest that Liberalism seeks absolute freedom for the individual.

On another note, the word “liberal” itself has both positive and negative connotations. Generally, in the first world and progressive countries, it is seen as a positive trait while in the third world and so-called “Islamic countries” it is seen in a negative light. One wonders why this is so – is it because of the differences in educational levels and economic levels or due cultural and religious factors?

In third world and “so called Islamic” countries, the word “Liberal” appears to mean “doing as you wish, being free without basis or deviating from a set of established fundamental understandings or behaviours”.

What has all the discussion above has to do with “liberal Islam”? Once again, even this term seems to have different meanings to different people.

In Malaysia, the term “Liberal Islam” has a very negative meaning among the mainstream conservative Muslims. They see “Liberal Islam” as a “deviationist” movement away from “true” and “accepted” understanding of what Islam is. Such general accusations without going into the substance of what the proponents of so called “Muslim Liberalists” are arguing does not augur well for the maturity of the Muslim population.

I want to digress a bit and take up a different argument. For the sake of argument let’s say we use the word “liberal” to mean the “act of departing from the original principles or the fundamental of something” and apply this to how Islam is being understood. Based on this understanding, we may have the following scenarios:

1)      No one can deny that the first and fundamental source of Islam is the Quran.  This was the revelation to the Prophet Muhammad who himself would have been guided by it and not his own personal whims and fancies. In this scenario, would not any references to his so-called acts and utterances (collectively called the “hadiths and/or sunnah of the Prophet”) to shape the understanding of Islam be considered a “liberal act” especially if the “Islam” that emerges is different as contained in the Quran?

For the sake of argument, it would appear that the Muslim who sticks only to the Quran to get his understanding of Islam is a “fundamentalist” but the one who seeks extra sources is a “liberal”. However, in today’s mainstream Muslim community, a Muslim who primarily wants to be guided by the Quran alone is labelled as “anti-hadith”, “anti-prophet” and even a deviant in law. The fact that the world of hadith is replete with debate seems irrelevant to the ostracisation of the “Quran alone” group either by societal pressure of by State laws.

In other words, the Muslim who wants to stick only to the Quran either has to be “closet Quranist” or he is compelled by law and society to adjust his behaviour and belief to that of the mainstream belief. Otherwise, he has to be prepared to suffer for his beliefs – imposition by coercion and possible oppression.

2)      It is generally accepted that the main source of Islam is both the Quran and the Hadith/Sunnah of the Prophet. However, even this scenario also seems to pose problems because many also insist that while the hadith explains the Quran, the clergy is the expert group that explains both the Quran and the Hadith. Hence, they come up with a third category called the “consensus of the ulema” or “ijmak” ulema. The consensus of the ulema is actually the juristic reasoning and exposition of many things today that represents and shapes what Islam is. In this type of thinking, it becomes almost mandatory of the ordinary Muslims to accept unquestionably the “collective views” of the clergy as part of their faith.

Again for the sake of argument, if we take the position that Quran and Sunnah are the two fundamental sources of what Islam is, then would not the mandatory acceptance of clergy views be an act of being “liberal”?

3)      If one studies Islamic jurisprudence or usul al fiqh as it is called in Arabic, one will find that there are many other “sources” which the clergy or jurists rely on to arrive at an understanding of “what Islam is”. This is the juridical process of exegesis and reasoning which in reality shapes mainstream Islam. Would this be argued as being "liberal"?

From the above discussion, it should be clear that it is pointless to hurl and be influenced by labels such as “anti-hadith”, “liberalists” and so on without understanding the substance of the argument or philosophy. It is even worse when one has the subservient attitude of accepting what the clergy, however learned and sincere they are, as the absolute truth without cross referencing with the Quran itself or without examining the thought processes of the clergy or the ulema.

The end question is – does the society itself allow the Muslim to seek out the answer for himself or is he expected to be a blind follower since it has all been decided by “some learned folks”?

Peace.

NOTE: This article is not an indication that the author supports “liberal Islam” or “anti hadith”. No one is expected to agree with the views of the author and this article is intended to raise questions rather than to formulate conclusions. You make your own conclusions based on the level of passion you have for the truth and facts.

Kau in bagaimana Atau Aku harus bagaimana?

Rintihan-rintihan Rakyat di perkatakan
Harapan Rakyat di suarakan
berkurun kurun lamanya
berdekad dekad lamanya
sepanjang sejarah kehidupan manusia
sepanjang sejarah pemerintah dan diperintah

Namun
tidak berubah-ubah sikap pemerintah
kecanduan kuasa dan harta lebih mengcekam pemeirntah
daripada kesengsaraan serta kepercayaan Rakyat jelata.

Gus Mus seorang Rapera
beliau tahu untuk pemerintah berubah
Rakyat perlu berubah dahulu !

-jahamy
180114




Salam.

Chapter 3: The Devil’s Statistics

"

Even numbers have meanings. They have meanings that are. They have meanings that were never meant to be. The Real confused with the illusion. The illusion becoming the Real. In some languages, 4 is a bad number. It means death.

Death is an inescapable  reality.

An end to all madness and tyranny.

A way home,

 so how can it be bad?"

You can continue reading it in the link below:

http://bendahara-thethirdeye.blogspot.com/2013/12/chapter-3-devils-statistics.html

Peace !

Tengku Razaleigh 2010 - "It's Time To Wake Up"

One of the best speeches I have heard from a political leader in this country !

 It is like a Rapera mindset !



Peace !

Melayu di hina lagi? Kata Siapa?

Kalau betullah lapuran Utusan Online yang dipetik dari sini yang juga melapurkan seperti berikut:-

“Azran menerusi akaun Facebook dan Twitternya baru-baru ini bertindak mencerca Utusan Malaysia sebagai sebuah akhbar rasis hanya kerana menyiarkan artikel berbentuk pertanyaan bertajuk 'Apa lagi Cina mahu' pada 7 Mei lalu.

Menerusi akaun Facebook beliau, Azran menulis: "I am Malaysian. I am anti-racism. I am disgusted by Utusan's editorial stance. (Saya rakyat Malaysia. Saya antiperkauman. Saya meluat dengan pendirian pengarang Utusan),"

UMNO Veteran marah dengan pandangan dan kritikan Azran terhadap artikel yang dimuatkan dalam Utusan Malaysia. Kritikan ini dianggap sebagai satu tindakan biadab oleh Azran. Pendekata, bagi Veteran UMNO, mengeritik Utusan Malaysia adalah satu tindakan biadab.

Bukan itu sahaja, tindakan Azran mengeritik Utusan Malaysia juga dianggap sebagai “perbuatan Azran mencerca Utusan Malaysia bermakna beliau menghina kaumnya sendiri ketika kaum Melayu turut ditekan dari pelbagai sudut”.

Dari pemahaman minda Veteran UMNO, kritikan terhadap Utusan Melayu disamakan dengan penghinaan terhadap kaumnya sendiri. Disini lah cabaran untuk memahami lonjakan logik bagaimana kritikan terhadap satu artikel yang ditulis didalam satu surat khabar boleh dirumuskan sebagai satu peghinaan kepada satu kaum yang besar yang semestinya terdiri daripada anggota yang berlainan tahap pemikiran (dan pemahaman) serta pelbagai pandangan yang berbeza.

Bukankah kepelbagaian pandangan terhadap satu isu itu melambangkan kematangan satu kaum dan ekoran itu memuliakan kaum tersebut? Ini menunjukkan bahawa Melayu berupaya untuk melihat kepada satu artikel atau satu isu dengan pandangan dan kupasan yang berbeza.  Pada masa yang sama, keupayaan anggota dalam kaum itu untuk menerima dan berhujah berkaitan dengan pandangan yang berbeza secara berilmiah dan berasaskan fakta juga melambangkan peningkatan ketamadunan kaum itu. Mustahil satu kaum itu boleh maju kalau masih bergantung pada satu pendirian, atau fahaman atau kaedah yang telah ketinggalan zaman.

Didalam dunia keintelektualan, ada satu ungkapan yang sering diutarakan iaitu “those with brains can argue in a civilised manner but those with brawn will just flex their muscles”. Orang atau kumpulan yang yakin diri serta mampu berhujah balas tidak pernah gentar dengan pendirian orang lain yang berbeza, apatah lagi menggunakan kaedah pemikiran songsang dimana direspon balik dengan menggunakan taktik sentimen perkauman dan tunjuk kuasa. JIka ada pandangan yang berbeza, haruslah kumpulan itu memberi hujah balas yang boleh direnungi dengan akal. 

Veteran UMNO harus berhujah dengan fakta dan logik mengapa pendirian Azran terhadap Utusan Malaysia itu dikatakan sebagai “menghina Melayu”. Kalau pun kita andaikan dia menghina Utusan, bagaimana ianya boleh ditafsirkan sebagai menghina Melayu?

Jika benar Azran telah “menerusi akaun Facebook dan Twitternya baru-baru ini bertindak mencerca Utusan Malaysia sebagai sebuah akhbar rasis hanya kerana menyiarkan artikel berbentuk pertanyaan bertajuk 'Apa lagi Cina mahu' pada 7 Mei lalu” dan jika ini dianggap sebagai satu tindakan memfitnah, maka Utusanlah yang seharusnya mengambil tindakan undang-undang terhadap Azran.  Undang-undang Negara kita mantap dan jelas dalam hal ini. Dimana pula peranan Veteran UMNO dalam hal ini dan apakah locus mereka bercakap bagi pihak Utusan kecuali mereka sekadar melaksanakan hak bersuara mereka?

Ini yang saya kerap tidak faham dengan ”perjuangan” beberapa kumpulan dalam Negara ini. Utusan tidak mengambil sebarang tindakan undang-undang. Lembaga Utusan tidak berkata apa-apa namun Veteran UMNO yang tidak ada kaitan korporat atau undang-undang atau moral pula bertindak sebagai pelindung Utusan!

Memang pihak-pihak tertentu boleh berhujah bagi pihak lain yang dianiayai. Namun pembelaan haruslah berdasarkan hujah-hujah bernas, munasabah dan yang tidak menghina akal orang yang mendengarnya. Dizaman ini, ramai sudah kurang sabar dengan taktik-taktik yang menggunakan ungkapan sebagai “Melayu dihina”, “tidak kompromi dalam isu Melayu” dan ungkapan-unkapan yang seangkatannya yang tidak diiringi dengan hujah bernas atau fakta.

We have to evolve and therefore we have to learn to present our case. It is becoming embarrassing to use sentiments and superlatives to cover up our lack of thinking ability.

Saya berpendirian Veteran UMNO tidak perlu gusar. Melayu hari ini tidak mudah latah atau mudah terasa terhina dengan pandangan orang lain apatah lagi pandangan berbza daripada ahli kaumnya sendiri. Melayu hari ini lebih bersenjatakan maklumat dan fakta serta mempunyai keyakinan diri yang lebih tinggi. Mereka tidak perlu orang lain, apatah lagi orang-orang politik untuk melentur emosi mereka. Yakinlah kepada keupayaan Melayu untuk menilai sesuatu dan Insha Allah, mereka akan menilai dengan baik. Lagipun, kita bangga ada anak Melayu yang maju, kenapa pula kita nak taburkan pasir dalam periuk nasi Azran pulak kerana berbeza pendapat dengan dia?

Salam.

Listen Listen and The Quran

Listen Listen Listen !

THE ORIGINAL:

LISTEN LISTEN LISTEN NAMAWEE STYLE

THE PARODY SONG

THE DANCE  REMIX !!!!

MY VOTE GOES TO.....LISTEN BY BEYONCE !!!!

My comments : res ipsa loquitor. Dont understand? Well, as Sharifah says...I have a degree and you have O Levels! (reminded me of a Muslim Convert Academic who keeps reminding people that his ideas has to be accepted because he has a PH.D even when his arguments are all flawed !!!)  he he he

Salam @ Peace

Which Hat Are You Wearing?

Many people fail to realise that roles in life takes over your life most of the time - as I said, without you realising it or not wanting to realise it. Of course it seems almost trite to say that we take on many roles in life – parent, worker, friend, citizen and so on. That’s trite and is of no problem. It does not cause you or others any problem by itself. We are naturally multi-tasking creatures even before the word “multi-tasking” was commercialised.

However, when I say “people fail to realise that roles in life take over their life”, I indicate something sinister, something that is not so nice and can be monstrous most of the times. People always have a main role that they invest of their life in, relative to the other roles that they play. Many a times, for the ordinary person who thinks he is going on with his life blissfully; his main role has been forced upon him – only because he has chosen to NOT think and/or to be a slave of others in life.

When I was 16 and in form 4, I was troubled by the adults’ insistence about a lot of things. Ranging from how one should bersalam or handshake to the “importance” of schools and higher education. Quite frankly, even then I could not see how those things are important as they exist and even now I think I am correct. Just to digress for a bit, take the handshake or the bersalam, which require physical contact between your palms and the others’ palms, which is projected as an “accepted” way of greeting someone. I used to be paranoid about it (and still am) because I have seen many times what happens in the men’s toilets! This is over and above all the scratching, touching here and there and then transmitting to you the bacteria on the pretext of “good social behaviour”! To top it all, some even go so far as to sell the idea that a firm handshake marks self-confidence – this would put Tun Dr Mahathir as a person with no confidence as he has a gentle handshake (which I approve).

As I was saying, in form 4, I realised that adults are very preoccupied in “forcing” onto you roles that you should play and some of my peer-mates were already subtly indoctrinated. Some of the kids will play the role of bullies and some others will have to play the role of the victim. When you belong to a group (as you must in school), you are expected to take on certain roles too. You are either the one making fun of the other members or the one who is being made fun of. This role stays so long as you want to be part of the group. If you beong to one group, you cannot belong to others. I recall I never belonged exclusively to one single group but belonged to many, diverse groups, including the ones considered the “best” and “worst” in school.  This was a taboo but I got away with my charm, my tongue and my understanding of perceptions of “reward and punishment”.  Ah-hem. Ah-hem. Furthermore, Geminis get bored with uniformity and familiarity very fast!

This obsession with playing a role to the extent of it being completely unrealistic, “unidealistic”, damaging and mostly ludicrous continues into most people’s adult’s life. It has become so common that this sickness has been accepted as normal, acceptable behaviour.

Hence, if you have a strong interest in religious issues and religious studies, you are not “allowed” to dance, sing and have a good time in public. This interest in things “godly” is supposed to divorce you from things “worldly”. What if you happen to believe that everything, I mean everything is indeed godly and hence, you want to talk about God in the pub? Sure, this is going to cause discomfort on both sides, I mean to those who say “tsk, tsk” and those other who say “er…I am feeling guilty” but that proves my point.

BUt this sickness has reached a societal scale such that the whole society frowns upon a “religious” person dancing on stage. Frankly, one of my many fantasies has been to do a moon walk on stage as an introduction or an interlude while I am talking about the beauty of the Quran as a guidance for humankind. I am so sure, those who can’t even pronounce “Michael Jackson” will be on my case saying I am insulting the religion! Why must I allow these misfits to undermine my multi-talents???

It is both a blessing and a tragedy of life that you often meet people with whom you cannot have fun talking intellectually nor can you have fun just being silly. Often, people do not get it that there is a big difference between choosing to be silly for fun and being stupid as a matter of ignorance. Too many try to impose roles out of ignorance but appear to succeed because the ignorant are usually in the majority – victory by brawn not by brains. Are these not school bullies grown up into positions of power?

So many will themselves into “adult behaviour” by sheer imitating of other adults who themselves have never thought about what is “adult behaviour”. Hence, you have ignorant adults creating values and modes of behaviour for others to follow. Being an ardent reader of history and human behaviour all my life, this worries me – the sub standards set by sub-standard minds when they are in the majority! We have to wait a lifetime or more for them to understand and mature. In the meantime, the cast us into the role of a “rebel” or a “trouble maker” or an “impractical person”.

Needless to say, politicians are always the best examples of what is wrong in society or examples of anomalies of human behaviours. They not only are role-players, they are comical at that. They become comical because they forget what they say or was asked to “stand for” (by their advisers) when they play different roles. So, you have a politician for example, talking about press freedom at the Press Association dinner and then passing laws in parliament literally restricting any form of freedom of expression. You have them talking about democracy and then denying freedom of faith. And the list goes on. This is not surprising because, most of what they say does not come from their heart nor from knowledge. It is all about populist stances and protection of vested interests.

The sick obsession with dominant role playing that I cannot understand is among Muslims. They play the “role of Muslims” faithfully when they are in the mosque or at a “religious function” or attending “religious rituals”. However, they become very different when they play other dominant roles, for example at their work or business or profession or career. For instance, is there or should there be any difference in behaviour between a Muslim enforcement officer and a non-Muslim one? How about Judges, businessmen, lawyers, doctors, civil servants, politicians, and so on? Should there be a difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim one? Or does the role matter? Being a Muslim, I cannot help but feel completely irked whenever I have to deal with a Muslim enforcement officer or civil servant who behaves in a very “unIslamic way”.  To me this is a result of confusion about roles.

Anyway, there is so much more to write on roles, especially something which, at 16 years old, I labelled as “the victim of categorisation”. I now know that this label can be aptly applied to analyse how we relate to classification and stereotyping of races and so on. But that has to wait another day – if.

But for now the question is – why are we not free to wear all the hats that we choose?

Peace !

Owning Earth, By Whose Authority?

Raperas, watch this video and deeply reflect on it.




Peace !

Ruang Befikir Semakin Menyimpit ???

Memang kebanyakkan manusia malas berfikir. Kalau kebanyakkan manusia mmembenarkan diri mereka untuk berfikir, maka tidak wujudlah penindasan dari segi fizikal dan rohani. Hakikat bahawa begitu ramai manusia tidak sedar tentang penindasan ini membuktikkan bahawa sememangnya mereka telah selesa dalam zon kejahilan mereka. Begitu juga jika manusia memang rajin berfikir, tidak lah Al-Quran itu mengandungi berpuluh-puluh ayat yang mengajak, mengajar dan memujuk mansusia untuk berfikir. Malangnya dalam bidang agama pun mereka telah menggadaikan minda mereka kepada segelintir manusia lain yang kononnya mempunyai monopoli hidayah Allah. Namun itu persoalan yang lain.

Walaupun manusia amnya malas berfikir, malangnya diNegara tercinta ini kemalasan berfikir bukan sahaja luimrah tetapi telah diinstitusikan sebagai satu budaya yang harus dipertahankan. Kelesuan dan kengganan untuk berfikir telah menular kesegenap lapisan kehidupan kita.

Kita bangga dengan pemimpin-pemimpin yang boleh mengeluarkan kenyataan yang bukan sahaja tidak masuk akal tetapi menghina pemikiran manusia waras. Kenyataan-kenyataan mereka itu dengan bangga disiarkan dalam TV dan media arus perdana seolah-olah kita mahu mensejarahkan kebodohan kepimpinan kita. Begitu kerap sekali saya lihat kebodohan kempimpinan politik diraikan seperti pesta diringi oleh tepuk sorak badan-badan bukan kerajaan (NGO) dan blogger-blogger upahan yang semestinya "allergic" kepada kebolehan berfikir. Seperti ayat dalam Al-Quran, masing-masing gembira dengan kenerakaan masing-masing dengan memikirkan bahawa itulah syurga!

Lebih teruk daripada dahulu, hari ini kita dapati begitu ramai "cendikiawan-cendikiawan" yang tumbuh sebagai cendawan tanpa sebarang kebolehan berifkir secara berilmiah atau pun mempunyai kebolehan intelektualisme walaupun masing-masing tanpa segan silu memakai gelaran "Dr" dihadapan nama mereka. Saya tidak harian perkembangan ini kerana saya sudah pun menjangkanya berlaku sewaktu saya masih belajar diUKM bertahun-tahun dahulu. Saya sudah  melihat dahulu bahawa satu budaya baru yang menghormati kelulusan daripada ilmu semakain berkembang didalam negara tercinta ini. Kelulusan formal atau rasmi disamakan dengan keupayaan intelektualisme. Malangya juga ramai "cendikiawan" yang tidak faham maksud "intellectualism". Ini lah antara sebabnya yang telah menahan saya daripada belajar sehingga keperingkat PhD kerana saya tidak dapat bayangkan diri saya dinilai oleh puak-puak "superficial" ini walaupun saya begitu cinta dengan ilmu dan proses pemikiran.

Hari ini ramai bangga dengan adanya berpuluh-puluh universiti yang tumbuh bagai lalang yang tidak terjaga dan kehadiran hampir 2000 professor-professor dalam negara tercinta ini. Memandangkan kita mengagungkan dan memartabatkan kejahilan, maka tidak pernahlah kita tanya apakah sumbangan professor-professor ini kepada perkembangan ilmu dan masyarakat? Berapa banyakkah buku-buku ilmiah yang telah diterbitkan oleh cendawan-cendawan ini? Apakah teori atau falsafah yang telah mereka "profess" dalam kerjaya mereka sehingga layak digelar professor? Hari ini, professor adalah jawatan bukanya melambangkan keupayaan pemikiran. Perkara yang sama ini telah saya bincang dengan Allahyarham Professor Syed Hussein Al-Atas, bekas VC Universiti Malay dimana beliau mengelar golongan seperti ini sebagai "educated barbarians".

Apabila kita memartabatkan guru-guru dan pensyarah-pensyarah jahil, adakah kita harapkan penuntut-penuntut keluaran universiti tempatan akan berkembang sebagai pemikir, reformis dan berguna?

JIka kita membuat satu kajian rambang, kita akan dapati bahawa kebanyakkan kita seolah-olah menganggap berfikir itu satu dosa besar yang harus dihindari. Kita katakan "boring". Buku-buku yang memerlukan seseorang itu untuk berifkir dipandang sebagai satu virus yang tidak harus didekati. Kalau ada rakan yang membuahkan satu topik yang memerlukan perbincangan menggunakan akal, kita anggap dia sebagai gila atau ganjil. Mereka lebih minat untuk bercakap-cakap kosong mengenai kejadian didalam kehidupan mereka yang juga sama-sama kosong - hal ofis mereka, gelagat orang lain, wayang yang dilihat, masalah-masalah kecil-kecilan dalam kehidupan mereka yang dilihat besar oleh minda mereka yang kecut, dan lain-lain "mundane topics". 

Sebenarnya bagi orang yang boleh berfikir, topik-topik ini lah amat membosankan kerana ianya dapat dijangka.  Sememangnya boleh jadi "stressful" bagi seorang yang boleh berfikir hidup dalam masyarakat yang menganggungkan kebodohan dan kejahilan.

Paling ketara sekali penyakit tidak mahu berfikir ini adalah dalam hal yang bersangkutan dengan ketuhanan. Amat anih sekali bahawa mereka yang kononnya menganggap agama itu penting tidak mahu meluangkan masa untuk mengkaji atau memikirkan tentang apa yang mereka anuti. Kemalasan mereka itu cuba ditutup dengan alasan bahawa mereka tidak mahir dalam hal-hal agama dan oleh itu membiarkan orang yang leibih "berilmu" itu mengupas bagi pihak mereka. Apakah asas-asas pun tidak tahu? Begitu yakin sekali mereka ini dengan golongan yang dikatakan "berilmu"?  Saya yakin ramai yang tidak akan faham maksud saya disini kerana kita sudah pun di indoktrinasikan  dengan tanggapan bahawa mereka yang berkelulusan daripada universiti semestinya pakar dalam bidang tertentu. Maka, kita tidak pernah mahu berfikir atau menilai mengenai "kelulusan" pakar yang kita idolakan itu. Memang susah ke mendapat kelayakan formal universiti hari in?

Pada saya, masyarakat yang membudayakan kebodohan dan kejahilan mengundang musibah keatas dirinya sendiri. Padahnya akan tiba walaupun mengambil masa yang lama.

Namun mereka yang sudah lazim dengan candu tidak mahu berfikir akan ketagihkan kebodohan dan kejahilan. Seperti semua ketagihan yang merosakkan, kesudahannya amat jelas.

Salam.

Murtad Dan Bandar Oxford

Oleh Prof Madya Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin

"Saya menganggap Bandar Oxford ini jauh lebih indah dari kebanyakan bandar lain di UK dan Eropah, termasuk London. Bahkan tiada bandar yang seumpamanya di dunia muslim kita. Ia sebuah bandar ilmu. Kebanyakan mereka yang sibuk berjalan pantas di jalan-jalan Oxford ini ialah pelajar, pengajar dan pengkaji.

Lebih empat puluh kolej ilmu bersejarah lagi berprestij di bandar ini. Penuh sejarah, penuh sumbangan melahirkan tokoh-tokoh besar. Bandar ini penuh dengan aktiviti ilmu di sana-sini setiap hari; seminar, diskusi, forum dan pelbagai. Dalam pelbagai perkara dan bidang, yang mungkin sebahagiannya terlarang dalam negara kita disebabkan unsur ke’jais’an kita. Amat rugi jika ada sesiapa yang datang ke sini tetapi tidak mengambil peduli tentang aktiviti ilmu yang pesat."

Anda harus membaca artikel sepenuhnya dengan klik disini.

Salam.

Perbincangan masalah Melayu

Beberapa hari yang lalu, sempat kami bersembang sembang mengenai beberapa perkara. Diantara yang hadir pada sessi teh tarik itu terdiri daripada pelajar tempatan dan luar negeri, beberapa peniaga, beberapa orang politik serta orang biasa. Semua nya Melayu maka kami sembang mengenai sikap Melayu yang mungkin berperanan untuk membantut kemajuan mereka dalam hidup. Diantara perkara-perkara yang dibincang termasuk yang berikut;-

1) Melayu mudah teruja dengan kelulusan akademik tanpa menilai kredibiliti atau kebolehan berfikir orang yang memiliki kelayakan akademik tersebut. Perkara ini dirasakan jelas dalam bidang agama. Mereka yang mempunyai kelayakan formal agama diandaikan semestinya seorang yang mempunyai ilmu berasas dalam bidang agama. Segolong kertas izajah disalah faham sebagai hikmah dan ilmu!

2) Melayu terlalu takut untuk meluahkan pandangan dan perasaan sebenar atas alasan kesopanan walaupun meluahkan pandangan itu membantu.

3) Budaya memperhambakan diri kepada mereka yang berpangkat atau kaya. Menghormati seseorang tidak sama dengan memperhambakan diri sehingga membongkok badan sambil mencium tangan.

4) Dalam bidang-bidang agama, tidak mahu melakukan usul periksa dan membenarkan hidung di tarik kekiri dan kekanan oleh orang lain yang diandaikan lebih berilmu. Penilaian serta sikap pertanggungjawapan diri (self acountability) dikorbankan.

5) Tidak rajin membaca buku-buku berilmiah.

6) Mudah diperalat dengan penggunaan sentimen bangsa, atau agama walaupun menyusahkan diri sendiri.

7) terlalu mudah meniru budaya kaum lain dalam bidang agama yang tidak membantu walaupun ada budaya sendiri yang konsisten dengan ajaran Islam.

Apa pandangan saudara-saudari?

Salam

CHANGE OR NOT TO CHANGE?

By Osman Hj. Kamaluddin

Off late, there has been a lot of hue and cry for changes in many parts of the world. The call for the changing of leaders, changing of government, changing of system, changing of policies and so forth could be seen happening everywhere, either by democratic action or by undemocratic actions. Nevertheless, these changes would only bear positive results if oneself change. Take for example of a student. We can change the school and the teachers but if the student doesn’t change, the results would still be the same i.e. back to square one!

To really change oneself is not that easy unless you acquire certain knowledge and/or intelligence. However, in Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), there is a ‘tool’ called NEUROLOGICAL LEVELS.

The levels are as follows:

1. Environment – the where and the when

It is the place, the time and the people involved. You may be successful only in specific circumstances or with particular people – ‘being in the right place at the right time’.

2. Behavior – the what

It is what we do. It includes thoughts as well as actions. Sometimes behavior is difficult to change because it is closely connected to other levels.

3. Capability – the how

It is skill – behavior that is consistent, automatic and habitual. It includes both thinking strategies and physical skills. Capability at an organizational level manifests as business process and procedures. Capability is only visible in the resulting behavior because it lies within you.

4. Beliefs and values – the why

They are the principles that guide our actions – not only what we say we believe, but what we act on. Beliefs give meaning to what we do. Values are the why we do what we do. They are what is important to us – health, wealth, happiness and love. On an organizational level, businesses have principles they act on and values they hold. They are part of the culture of the business. Beliefs and values direct our lives, acting both as permissions and prohibitions on how we act.

5. Identity – the who

It is your sense of yourself, the core beliefs and values that define you and your mission in life. It is built throughout your life and is very resilient. We express ourselves through our behavior, skills, beliefs and values, but we are more than all or any of these. In business, organizational identity is the business culture. It emerges from the interaction of the other levels.

6. Beyond identity – connection

It is the realm of ethics, religion and spirituality – your place in this world. For a business it means vision and how the business connects with the community and other organizations.

 

Neurological levels are not a hierarchy. They all connect to each other and all influence each other.

So, how to use the Neurological levels to effect changes? Below is a simple example.

Assuming you are not handsome or pretty since the day you were born! (Sounds familiar!) Because of this, you may feel timid, inferior and you may want to avoid interacting with others. It may also affect your confidence and this may create problem when attempting to learn and/or acquire certain skills. Bottom line, you may be having a miserable life!

From the above example, it would appear that the origin of all the problems is with your Identity – the who. Well, to solve the problem, if you have plenty of money, go for a plastic surgery! But, there again, it may not solve the all the problems and may create other problems. In NLP, you use – change other neurological level.

How? Let say you take up a hobby like bowling. You start playing, alone of course! Later, as you play more and more, you begin to like it. As you like it more and more, you notice, you also good at it. Maybe, some of your friends (you got to know at the bowling alleys) encourage you to joint a bowling competition. You later join and win. It didn’t stop there. You joint more competition and you win more. You competed in a major competition and you won. You are famous. Reporters rushing to interview you, photographers snapping pictures of you and your fans gathering around to get your autographs! At that stage, you are not BOTHERED WHETHER YOU ARE HANDSOME OR PRETTY! WALLA……ALL SOLVE!

How’s that for a change!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Osman Hj. Kamaluddin is a marine surveyor who has for the past many years researched and observed on accelerated learning techniques. He is also a Certified Practitioner of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) & NLP Coaching.