From: rezal@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rezal Adzly Abdul Rahman)
Subject: Re: MRT in KL debate
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 06:33:57 GMT

In article <54799@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6737b@prism.gatech.EDU (JAAFAR,EMERIZAL AHMAD) writes:
>Oh yes!  Finally Malaysians are getting the brains altogether...like
>educated society should do...well done people.  Keep that ideas pouring.
>(hopefully nobody will start making some racial comments in this
>discussion of ours!).
>
>But I need to clarify some things.  I just want to weed out some
>Mr.Everything, and remind them that they cannot go on and become the
>spokesperson for the M'sian authorities because all they've been
>saying are their own opinion of what's going on.  What can they
>possibly know about the decision making process and the reasons for
>some gov't policies?  Who gave them the rights to speak and justify
>certain actions taken by gov't agencies?            
>
	Whoa! Let me get this straight. First you want us to contribute
        ideas and discuss issues that may help our country.

        And while recovering from this compliment, I read the next
        paragraph that infers that we shouldn't start planting ideas
        into the Malaysian government and saying that they were dumb
        by not doing what we suggested in the net since obviously
	these ideas have been thought out by the government and since
	they have a whole bunch of people with degrees in the various
	fields, their say has more merit than some of us.

	Well, I deeply regret that I am not majoring in poli sci, public
	policy, city planning etc. What do I know? Maybe I should stick
	to what I'm working on now and hope that s.c.a will eventually
	come up with a topic that involves chemical plant designs and
	reaction control rates etc.

	I regret that I cannot justify what I have written and therefore
	have my rights to speak pulled out from under me since I am not
	"authoratative" enough.

	Fine!! Then maybe we shouldn't have any discussions going on
	in s.c.a. and should only participate if the topic is our
	specialty.

	Reminds me of the traditional mentality that azran and I were 
	strongly disagreeing with (i.e. Anwar going to Finance although
	he doesn't have a finance degree).

	get real! There are certain knowledge which cannot be applied
	unless one is a specialist in that field. I.e. I cannot design
	a VLSI chip nor can I write a sajak as touching as Usman Awang's.
	But then, there are certain issues that can be discussed from
	the logical point of view. For example, although we may not
	know what plants may grow in the Amazon, by logical deduction, we
	should be able to tell what they might be since we have the same
	climate and therefore the Amzaon might have the same plants.

	The bottom line is, there is a difference between applied theory
	and applied intelligence. The analogy is simple. In the former,
	one succeeds by pure mugging and memorization of facts. According
	to the latter method, one succeeds by understanding the basic
	concepts and apply them to a larger picture.

>By saying that I'm giving my ideas plainly out front...people can
>critize me without I have to justify why certain gov't agencies
>behave not ideally.  Saves me from flaming certain packs in this net.
>That's all.
>
	Oh come on! Are you saying that we need a disclaimer before
	we start a discussion. Ie we are dumb. these are our dumb opinions.
	Unless one comes up with various reverences as azran once did
	our comes up with facts that we know are completely true ie
	the sun rises in the east, we obviously can assume that the person
	is writing based on his opinions.

	Even then, I am willing to give the opinions some thought if
	supporting arguement is both persuasive and strong. Who knows,
	it may even be true and is an idea that was overlooked by our
	authorities.

	As far as authorities are concerned, they may not be entirely
	correct in the sense that rarely a big staff can communicate with
	each part. Ie. suppose an automotive engineer suggests a change in
	the engine due to overheating problems, there is a chance that
	the  manager in the middle might dismiss the idea and present a cheaper
	alternative to the board of directors thus saving the company money
	and impressing the director with his own money saving idea
	with no regard for the consumer.

	I know of at least one public policy major who passed up a chance
	to engage in a very formal discussion on the future of Malaysia
	and ASEAN in his/her own university due to the "tidak kisah, I just
	want my degree" attitude. This is not a generalization nor should it
	be interprested that way but I certainly our "future experts"
	don't up having the same attitude.

	Oh well, I have been babbling to much. Forgive me. What the hell should
	I know about the utilization of knowledge and the analyzation of
	character for I am neither an education major nor am I a shrink.

>See people...Malaysians do know how to discuss properly and we do
>have certain better things to talk about other that cursing at each
>other.      
>
	The cursing can stop. S'fine with me.
	The discussion from various "dumb people" in topics that may
	benefit our country may continue.

>Have to run...so people...you made me proud to be a Malaysian.(...if only
>the other kind of discussion could be stopped....).
>
>_______________________________________________________________________________
>|**EMERIZAL AHMAD JAAFAR, ATLANTA.  HOME OF THE GEORGIA TECH YELLOW JACKETS**|
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-Rezal


Organization: Sophomore, Social & Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA