“Statistics measure everything but prove nothing”. Discuss.

We use statistics every day, knowingly or unknowingly. Statistics is an important tool as it is often used to analyse the ever-changing situations around us. Every few seconds, a life is lost to disease; every day, several thousand people die in car accidents; every year, millions of babies are born. Many believe that statistics prove nothing. However, there is no doubt that statistics is an oracle that gives us much insight.

Statistics are important because we never stop going back to statistics to ‘prove’ our points in arguments. It plays an integral role in that particular area as we consider facts as truths that cannot be argued against and we consider statistics as facts. For example, if we compare the results of two different schools in a national exam, obviously we have proven that the school with a higher average score does have a higher average score than the other school. What statistics do, in this case, is to prove a fact is, in fact, a fact and that is all. What it does not, or cannot do is to prove that school A will always do better than school B in national examinations for example. If school B does better than school A in the following year, the statistics only prove that school A beat school B in the first year and the opposite in the second year.

The statistics reassure us. Statistics show that most people in Singapore live past the age of 70 years at least. This fact assures people that they still have time to do what they want to do, time to find a relationship perhaps, start a business or maybe travel the world. Critics might suggest that statistics prove that we will be one of those people who live past 70. But that argument is flawed in itself. If we take precautions and lead reasonable lifestyles, it is possible for us to be part of the statistics. Actuarial science provides much statistical data to insurers to ensure that they run a profitable business. That proves itself that statistics measures and proves general lifespans.

Statistics measure everything that can be measured – the number of people in a country, each person’s height, the number of accidents that occur in a period of time, the number of times our heartbeats per minute and so on. But critics opine that statistics cannot measure feelings and emotions, selflessness or selfishness. One could say that the critics have a weak understanding of statistics. With statistics, we can determine patterns of behaviour in society and we can study them. Statistics alone really prove nothing but statistics with some level of inference can give us insights into the world around us. If we were to use statistics blindly, we would be running into some very serious problems as a society. Just because certain prisons in the US have a greater number of ‘blacks’ or ‘Latinos’ in their prisons does not prove that these races have a higher tendency of becoming criminals. Unchecked, such ideas could worsen into even more severe racial discrimination. Many nowadays, troublemakers especially, use statistics as a means to distort the truth. There is much value statistics can bring, and if used correctly, statistics can prove regression, deviation, reliability and validity of the information.

Everything that can be quantified is quantified or at least being quantified. We turn to statistics to prove our theories of the world around us in an attempt to have a better understanding of our surroundings. We use statistics to justify the impact on surveys, business operations and even obscure issues like best ice-cream flavour. Statistics are a useful measuring tool and has provided significant evidence for issues that we seek insights and opportunities for remediation.

‘The world is shrinking fast but not necessarily coming together.’ Discuss.

The world has been shrinking fast in part due to globalization. Other factors that may have made the world smaller is telecommunication, transport and cheap budget travel. However, there are still international disputes and arguments that continue to plague the globe. Some might argue that there have been instances where countries have established some forms of cooperative ties with each other, but the reality is that there are massive divisions in the world of today. Therefore, the world is not coming together.

Technological advancement in transportation and communication has led to increased international trade between countries. This has allowed countries to be more integrated economically which has contributed to more trade. Countries have established free trade agreements with each other and have also formed supra-national bodies to serve their economic interest leading to more economic integration. One such international organization would be the Organisation of Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD). The OECD improves trade and cooperation not just among its own members but with several dozen countries who are not members.

Announced in 2013, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, also known as One Belt, One Road) by China aims to strengthen trade connectivity in the world. It combines new and old projects, covers an expansive geographic scope, and includes efforts to strengthen hard infrastructure, soft infrastructure, and cultural ties.  While this initiative is primarily designed to help China’s economy, the plan impacts 138 countries with a combined Gross Domestic Product of $29 trillion and some 4.6 billion people. It would be myopic to say that the world is not coming together for mutual prosperity and benefit.

But surprisingly, there are many political leaders that embrace a noxious brew of nationalism and authoritarianism. The mix varies from place to place but typically entails the rejection of international institutions and rules. There is little new in the critique of an unjust global order. But if once that critique tended to be rooted in international solidarity, today it stems chiefly from an inward-looking populism that celebrates narrow social and political identity, vilifies minorities and migrants, assails the rule of law and independence of the press, and elevates national sovereignty above all else. Myanmar’s mass expulsion of 700,000 Rohingya, the Syrian regime’s brutal suppression of a popular uprising, the Cameroonian government’s apparent determination to crush an Anglophone insurgency rather than tackle the grievances fueling it, the Venezuelan government’s economic warfare against its own people, and the silencing of dissent in Turkey, Egypt, and elsewhere are but a few examples. It would be difficult to accept the view that the world is coming together.

If the above view is to be dismissed as idiosyncratic geopolitics, let us not forget the annexation of Crimea by Russia and how China obstructs the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea and arbitrarily detains Canadian citizens—including the international crisis workers. Saudi Arabia has pushed the envelope with the war in Yemen, the kidnapping of a Lebanese prime minister, and the gruesome murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi in its consulate in Istanbul. Iran plots attacks against dissidents on European soil. Israel feels emboldened to undermine ever more systematically the foundations of a possible two-state solution.

The world may have come together to defeat a common enemy like Al-Qaeda and ISIS, but let us not forget who supplied them with weapons in the first place. The world may have come together to solve the environment problem, but let us not forget that little has been done to set large polluters like USA and China straight. To boot, Japan is the biggest consumer of fossil fuels in the world and the fifth-largest emitter of greenhouse gases.  While the world has come together to solve the Covid19 problem, there is a lot of finger-pointing. The world is shrinking as communication and transport systems bridge the chasm, but the truth is that geopolitics has prevented real lasting close relationships.

Has the increased interaction between countries amplified world problems?

It is almost a characteristic of modern society that when progress takes place, a myriad of issues with regard to the purpose, the means as well as the implications of that progress would emerge. One such means in which progress has taken place is that of increased interaction between countries. The tendency for such activity is merely due to the fact that countries have realised the importance of interdependence; such interconnectedness between countries is a consequence of globalisation. However, alongside the successes of the interconnectedness between countries, we have undoubtedly experienced downturns; the adverse effects of globalisation are simply ubiquitous. International challenges and difficulties faced in the past have grown into hardships that haunt leaders and many people on a daily basis. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that increased interaction between countries has also helped to diminish certain problems that plague an array of countries. Consequently, it is my stand that increased interaction between countries has amplified, yet diminished, certain world problems.

One of the foreseen and inevitable results of increased interaction between countries is that of the amplification of conflicts between nations. Although ironic, globalisation and the interconnectedness of countries have indeed resulted in increased division between nations and societies. One such conflict is that of power struggles. As countries tend to interact, they tend to form allies and enemies. In the late 19th century, the effects of the Industrial Revolution was omnipresent; it was clear that industrialisation of economies was necessary for the development of countries. However, such a noble act of improving the quality of life of citizens within countries started to become a competition. Countries attempted to outdo each other as they realised the strength and weaknesses of other countries via interaction. Tension built up and alliances were made. Tension was so high that the assassination of the Austria-Hungarian prince resulted in a devastating war that involved the majority of countries in Europe- World War 1. Every country wanted to be dominant and have a say in international politics. Their economy had to be the best. It was observed that such international competition and the alliance among a select group of people resulted in forms of elitism; such were the effects of increased interaction. Consequently, tension was amplified; war was created. The divisions in the world were amplified by increased interaction between countries.  

Still related to the topic of politics, the division between countries is amplified due to the spread of varied ideologies via increased interaction between countries. On the international stage, what nations care about is power. From North Korea’s missile trials to Beijing’s grand staging of the 2008 Olympics, there are a plethora of ways in which countries make their presence felt. The stiff nature of competition in the world and the complicated dynamics that play out in relationships between countries require countries to assert themselves and gain ascendancy in order to have power to bring out situations that are favourable to their interests. In the late 1900s, one such mode of assertion was via the spread of ideologies. Immediately after World War 2, there was an immense competition between the United States of America (USA) and former USSR to spread their ideologies of democracy alongside capitalism and communism respectively. Via the increased interaction between these two superpowers and other countries, several countries were influenced to take up the various ideologies. Most of Eastern Europe was communist; North Korea and North Vietnam favoured communism as well. Both Korea and Vietnam were split up such that two exclusive societies were created to oppose each other in every way possible. The Cold War was inevitable. Nuclear weapons were built; an arms race was initiated. Such increased tensions based on the reality of mutually assured destruction were merely due to conflicting ideologies and increased interaction between countries. Again, increased interaction between countries resulted in increased divisions in the world; the adverse relationship between countries were amplified.

Increased interaction between countries has also resulted in the strengthening of far-reaching effects of terrorism. Transnational terrorism prospers based on the interconnectedness of our international society. Acts of terrorism are carried out for the spread of messages to a large population, especially via the media. For instance, the main aim of terrorism by Al-Qaeda, a Muslim extremist group, is to force US troops out of all Muslim States, with special reference towards Iraq and Afghanistan. Via the Bali and London bombing, they have incontrovertibly been successful in striking fear within the hearts of the general international populace and made the leaders of countries wary of groups from other countries. Such terrorism has consequently resulted in increased tensions as certain countries ally one another to stereotype other countries as the birthplace of terrorism; this was the main reason why America attacked Afghanistan and Iraq. As such, it can be said that increased interaction allowed the flourishing of transnational terrorism that has resulted in tensions and enemies made between countries.

Such an action has had far-reaching effects. For instance, the authoritative, military regime in Iraq by US soldiers has been utterly counter-developmental and detrimental to the survival and progress of Iraq. This has consequently led to the exacerbation of the situation as people not only suffer from overt violence but from destitution and increasing crime rates as well. The mere ability of certain countries to dominate over other countries has resulted in further inequalities and counter-productivity. The world thus cannot progress as a whole.

Other than that, the increased interaction between countries has resulted in income inequality. The dominant players in the international world economy tend to overexploit the weaker participants. Even China has resorted to expanding their market to Africa; they intend to take advantage of the labour force and resources present. Indeed, Africa will benefit from trade with China; however, China will reap the lion’s share of benefits. At the same time, the USA exploits the labour market in China. The entire world realises that the cost of labour in China is extremely low. Undeniably, this has benefitted the entire world. Increased interaction between China and the rest of the world has benefitted all active participants in the macroeconomy at large. However, looking at the micro-level, we face a problem that has been greatly amplified by such increased interaction-income inequality. Most labourers in China earn less than US$300 a month. In Singapore, the Gross Domestic Product is as high as US$32,000 annually. Within countries themselves, there is the presence of inequality which can simply be measured by the Gini coefficient. Throughout the entire world, due to our complex and extensively interconnected economies, the rich 20 per cent of the world have possession of 80 per cent of the world’s resources. The poorest 50 per cent of our international population only has access to 1 per cent of the world’s resources. As interaction increases, such a pressing problem will continue to grow exponentially as the tune of capitalism is promoted.

Nevertheless, increased interaction has also helped to diminish world problems. Via increased interaction, there was the initiation of the League of Nations- the brainchild of Woodrow Wilson. However, it failed terribly to effectively address world issues; this problem ended off with World War 2. Nevertheless, such intense interaction between countries, especially during World War 2 allowed us to appreciate world problems better. Consequently, the United Nations (UN), as an international body to unite nations and allow constructive interaction, was proposed. The UN was much more effective than its predecessor mainly due to the efforts between countries to increase their interaction with one another. Consequently, the UN was a success and its activities have been a great testament to its progress. For instance, it sent down peacekeeping troops to countries affected by the 2004 tsunami so that the problem was not amplified and the situation could be improved quickly. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991, coalition forces were sent to the Middle East as well. Such efforts by the UN has made our world today a better place for tomorrow’s world by promoting healthy interdependence between countries and reducing tensions and adverse relationships between societies.

Besides that, increased interaction between countries has also improved racial and religious harmony. As countries attempt to forge ties with one another, there is the interaction between the people of those countries. For instance, the Southeast Asian countries have come up with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as a form of regional, multilateral diplomacy. One of its stated aims is to promote cultural awareness of the various ethnic groups and countries; this is often done through overseas educational trips organised by the Ministry of Education. International events such as the 2008 Beijing Olympics also are a platform for increased interaction between countries; at the same time, there is religious and racial appreciation as well. Consequently, interactions between countries have assisted in the diminution of racism and other forms of dehumanisation which is detrimental to the very basic fabric of society.

In conclusion, increased interaction has amplified various problems. However, they have also successfully reduced and diminished certain problems as well. Whatever the case may be, we have to accept the fact that globalisation and its effects have contributed more towards the amplification rather than the diminution of problems. As members of the international society, it is our responsibility to reduce the amplification of world problems to ensure sustainable development and a better place for future generations to live in. We should aim to build a world in which the future of civilisation does not experience the aftermath of our selfish actions which consequently results in the exacerbation of world problems.

‘Rules are meant to be broken.’ Is such a perspective justifiable?

People feel the presence of rules everywhere. Oppressive presence of rules, both written and unwritten are a norm in some societies. Rules are prescribed to dictate people’s every move and keep their behaviour in check. Many believe that rules are an affront to their freedom, and argue that they are there to be broken. However, rules are necessary for any society so that it can run smoothly and progress in a stable manner. Increasingly, many hold the view that rules are usually meant to be followed but, in some cases, when rules hinder progress and are unjust, then the rules can be broken.

Rules are the building blocks of a harmonious society. Rules in society are meant for the well-being of the individual and society as a whole. As such rules in society must be followed so that everyone can stay peacefully. In society, rules are in the form of laws that help society to progress. For example, many developed nations have rules and laws in place that make education compulsory for children. As good education is the sign of a progressive society, with responsible citizens. Similarly, there are laws or rules against crimes like murder, robbery, bribery and other so that people can be protected from practices that oppress them in any way. Even following the simplest rules in a society leads to harmony and smooth functioning of that society. For example, not smoking near schools, following the traffic signs, queueing in an orderly manner, not littering are all rules that are meant to prevent society from falling into anarchy. Therefore, rules must not be broken in society as they are there for protecting the well-being of the individuals and communities that stay within that society.

However, sometimes people need to break rules to achieve success and revolutionise people’s lives. Most influential people all had to break rules to initiate change and bring on multitudes of new ways to people’s lives. If people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had stuck to following the rules, then we may not have the technological advances like we do and thrive on today. Similarly, if Galileo did not propose Heliocentricity, people would have never established that Earth is not the centre of the universe. There is a need to strive for more especially when people are innovating. Rule-breaking in innovation helps to make a positive impact not only for an individual but also the lives of others in society. Therefore, to create something path-breaking rules need to be broken.

Societal and cultural norms need to be broken when they prove detrimental to the well-being of society. Unspoken rules are responsible for many of the atrocities that happen in society. Honour killing in countries like Pakistan and India is due to the rule in which the perpetrator believes that the victim has violated the principles of a community or a religion. Similarly, in China, the foot-binding practice was considered a status symbol as well as a mark of beauty. However, the cultural practice was painful and limited the mobility of women, resulting in lifelong disabilities for most of its victims. With many campaigns in China, the practice finally came to an end in the early 20th century. In many parts of the world, discriminatory practices are entrenched into the cultures.  Thus, breaking rules is necessary when it comes to discriminatory practices rooted in cultural and traditional norms.

Rules in most cases should be followed, however when it comes to discriminatory practices or creating something new rules need to be broken. Individuals and societies, face a continual battle over rules, however, what needs to be understood is that rules are meant for the benefit of the society. Only rules that hinder innovation and lead to discrimination should be condemned.