How it begins...(9 - Final)

Author: Adam Fok

Seems that the largest obstacle to prevent ppl joining the club is the requirement of "everyone has to give a talk at least once". Such fear is probably due to the worry that they cannot have a sound background about the topic they propose.

First is that we do not require the speaker has to be very familiar to the topic. I myself am not very familiar with those topics proposed (except ＜我為什麼這樣孤寒＞). The point is we provide you an opprotunity to speak in front of people, and facilitate intellectual exchange among us. I think this is the crucial skill for us to get prepared for the future's challenge. Second, in order to 'neutralize' Auknife's seem-to-be-very-formal topics I propose something more experience-based and daily-example-based topics so as to broaden the choice and reduce the "formality" of the topics. I think all of you should have something special during your life which you are proud of to present to the others, right? 

Frog wrote:

On the other hand, limiting each person to give at most 2 talks seems too stringent.

If we decided to have meetings weekly, and over 1~2 months, we will quickly exhaust auknife, sun0, Adam and Clare.

From MRC performance, auknife is undoubtedly among the best speaker out of us.

Our strategy is to set a good example ourselves, and raise it as an attraction to others, but as soon as everything runs smooth, we lost the best speakers.

Just cancel it.

I think we don't have to worry about that. If the speaker cannot hold the talk well we audiences are responsible to make it alive by throwing out more ideas. Bear in mind that this is not a seminar. This is a group discussion. The speaker bears the role of facilitator rather than "speaker". Also we cannot urge Auknife to be the frequent speaker since he is good; read his reasoning on the restriction about each person to give at most 2 talks.

If that really does not work then we can set a buffer period: People are allowed to attend the conference without proposing any topic. After 2 or 3 times as the people understand how the club runs they will know whether being the speaker is comfortable for them so they have to propose at least a topic in order to stay in the conference. (but I admit that it is difficult to enforce that so it is rather like 不成文規定) Again we do not mean to form a "small circle" not to let others in but I think as a participant he or she has to contribute sth. I do also believe that we are university students and we are willing to give such contribution. Auknife Helic Clare and I etc will do our best to make the conference attractive, thought-provoking and worth-attending.

How it begins...(8)

Author: Frog Lam

You should not mind my late reply.

This idea came to me as a surprise and my first impression was mostly resistant.

However, over time, I have gained confidence by seeing the enthusiasm from the organizers.

Let me express my best wishes to each of you, including any other potential participant, that we will all open our eyes through this activity.

My main concern is about the expansion in size: we want it grow, not to vanish after 4 or 5 times.

About the rules of the UBC, I share most opinions with what sun0 said in email.

I tend to be more conservative on the strict regulations which will discourage participants, especially the requirement to give a talk.

I spent time to search my brain for anything I can talk about, but found nothing special.

Even if we allow talks on subjects they were not familiar with, I don't think they will be motivated to do so.

As a result, such people like me, who think they don't know many things and are eager to learn from others, may retreat from us.

Frankly I remain doubtful whether my dumb head has got anything to share.

If I am still too idiotic, too disappointed, or simply too lazy to prepare my talk, I am ready to leave.

And the same may apply to other lazy participants.

On the other hand, limiting each person to give at most 2 talks seems too stringent.

If we decided to have meetings weekly, and over 1~2 months, we will quickly exhaust auknife, sun0, Adam and Clare.

From MRC performance, auknife is undoubtedly among the best speaker out of us.

Our strategy is to set a good example ourselves, and raise it as an attraction to others, but as soon as everything runs smooth, we lost the best speakers.

Just cancel it.

I am with Clare that bi-weekly meetings are too sparse, while weekly meetings are, to me, too harsh.

Would we consider holding it every 10~11 days?

As an example:

  1st Meeting Aug 31 (Tue)

  2nd Meeting Sep 11 (Sat) @ Lunch time, etc.

  3rd Meeting Sep 21 (Tue)

  4th Meeting Oct 2 (Sat) @ Lunch time, etc.

Though coming back to school on weekends is unfavourable, it won't make huge different: we already have to prepare for a talk, do reading for other people's talks, etc.

Saturday meetings also allow flexibility in time and format.

Everything else makes good sense.

This is perhaps all we can plan before the show begins.

Special thanks to Helic's coordination.

祝發揚光大

本會介紹

凡物皆有理，物格然後知天理。
作為(大)學生，修身齊家治國之先，務當時刻對萬事萬物的知識和背後蘊含的道理，抱有熱衷及崇敬的態度。
無奈，今時今日的社會過份著重專材教育，本港的教育制度要求學生必須博覽而專攻一藝，奈何一藝未至於登峰造極，閒餘時間。即使是大學各研究院舉辦的各種會議 及學術交流活動（seminars, conferences and workshops on specific topics)，廣招四海賢能來訪，內容專一集中，以至艱深難懂，非此道中人難以涉獵其精蘊。更有甚者，一般conference和seminar的講員 都是資深學者教授，當中大有不善辭令者，致令一室之中為數甚多，被逼為出席率而出席的學生大釣其魚。偏偏學生能夠站在台上的機會太少，而中大也絕無好比UC Berkeley的本科生授課組織Decal教授諸如starcraft等專門技藝。大家只能透過修通識課自選簡題報告作匯報，對於推廣自己的志趣亦需依賴網上論壇和學會組織。唯在論壇或學會所交涉的皆同道中人，非志同道合者則不足議天下，此亦何苦。
為了促進「基層學術」以及「業餘興趣」各領域之間的普及交流，本會召集人仿效各種校內主持的形式性學術會議，以自發自助的組織性設立一系列自主講座。本會承傳先賢道德重整委員「海納百川，有容乃大，尊崇道德，樂發文章」的宗旨，將於中大賤標之巔招覽天下群雄，務以學術交流論劍切磋為己任。

How it begins...(7)

Author: Clare Huang


I have been reading your emails. Concerning the rules. I also agree with Auknife and Adam that preparation is required before attending the talk as:
1) 望乎其上，取乎其中。
2) it shows respect to the speaker also.

I think we don't have to worry too much about the rule being too strict. Let's see how things turn out for the first few times. Helic is right that we should not assume anything before the meeting starts. If the majority find the rules too unbearable, they will be adjusted in order to sustain the meeting (naturally?).

By the way, I strongly wish to join the group because you guys eventually are willing to organise something REGULARLY and NOT TOO LATE AT NIGHT. XD I'd like to give talks also, but I suppose I'll be learning from you guys more than contributing. (Hopefully I have something new to share.)

I am now in Leipzig and have no books around. Shall I suggest my topic first and give primary and secondary reading materials later?

1. 說話的藝術 (This is motivated by a guy sharing his tutoring experience with me. Though seems you guys are more suitable to be the speakers, let me grab this chance.)
2. 探討極權主義──從《盛世：中國2013》、《Brave New World》與《1984》說起(Have not finished the last book yet. Give me some time)
3. 當代愛情小說 (Few excerpts from books will be selected for discussion. I'll decide that after I come back)

Adam suggests that we may talk about music and I'm interested. Shall we discuss after the holiday?

Sosad I have to go to school now. Please let me know if my topics are feasible.

Ah. Lastly, I'd wish the meeting to be weekly since bi-weekly meetings really die out easily. However, I am afraid I may not be able to attend every meeting. (bi-weekly<my capacity<weekly)

Thanks! I look forward to your emails.

How it begins...(6)

Author: Helic Leung

Thanks Auknife and Adam for further elaboration and explanation of their views about the study group. As I am one of the founders of the study group and everything is still in early stage, I may be too subjective to assume anything like "what will happen if we do this or that". Actually we cannot predict what will happen and what do all the audience really express. So it is always good to hear about everyone's ideas and thought before we establish the rules and run the group. 

To me, most of the items and briefs are negotiable. As Auknife has mentioned what is unacceptable for him , on my bottom line, I personally do not want to see the below happened:

(1) The study group cannot start after all.

(2) The study group closes down in a short period after only 1-3 sections.

(3) Only 3 people or below come each time.

(4) Some people actually don't want to come but they come because they bare the responsibility to do so.

Besides, I do have ambitions to invite many friends to join, and to arouse their interest of self-learning and exposure to unfamiliar stuff. 

However, I have no idea about how would the above happen, since everything depends on participants, and I am not good at understanding everyone's mind. Now it is good that Adam and Auknife have expressed their view. And neither they nor I am able to represent everyone. Before rapid promotion of the study group, I would like to kindly invite people in this mailing list (like Frog, Clare, Max, Wolf, Melvin) to speak up about your concern. To be simple, I may state some questions below that one may think about.

(1) Would you like to join the group?

(2) If yes, how frequent would you expect to come to the meeting?

(3) What would you expect to get in the meeting?

(4) Do you have any opinions about the rules?

(5) Do you like to give a talk?

(6) If yes, which topic do you want to give talk to?

Of course, you can say anything other than answering our questions, but I will be happy if I can see your reply even with only a few words. Thanks for everyone's attention.

How it begins...(5)

Author: Adam Fok


I am with Auknife's proposal concerning the rules about previous preparation.


Before promoting this so-called reading group to others, we as the participants at the foundation stage need to set a good environment/rules/model etc for this group. Those rules proposed by Auknife make a difference between a blow-water group and reading group. I also hope that everyone can contribute and get something from the meetings. 


At this stage we don't have to worry about "barring audiences due to the need of prior preparation and demanding rules". Let's see it in another way. Once we set up good examples, words travel fast and interested ppl will surely join. And I am confident that we founders can influence other participants; let them know how a reading group should be run. Note that the rules are set to maintain the functionality of the meeting rather than barring newcomers to join; they are required to prepare in advance for a small amount of time only. In my opinion good attitude is the only prerequisite.


Also setting strict rules (though from my perspective they are not strict at all) do not imply that the meeting will be too formal/academic/etc. The rules are set so as to make sure everyone does prepare sth before we meet, for the sake of the atmosphere and potential gain of the meeting. The topic itself can be informal but preferrably thought-provoking. 


All in all I hope this meeting will be different from friend's chat, which we can always do impromptu during free time. And I agree that auknife's rules can achieve this goal. 


Concerning the rules about no. of presentation each member should hold: I have no opinion on that. But I guess for those who are willing to join this group are also willing to hold the meeting right?

How it begins...(4)

Author: Auknife

It is nice that before everything start we already have some meaningful discussion about the reading group itself. It comes from the different view on the reading group between sun0 and I.

(I hope I do not have any misunderstanding or miss out anything important) To sun0, the reading group is a platform of knowledge exchange. The motivation of knowledge exchange comes from one's will to share his view on some particular topics, especially those seldom appear in formal academic environment. Equally important is the need to be taught by others, who may have thought of something one has no idea on, or may have special insight on problems everyone concerns. To maximize the effect of this platform, we should try our best to have more participants to join us.

I understand the rules I suggested are highly demanding. The requirement of at least one speech per person will definitely stop many potential participants from joining. On the other hand the upper limit of two speeches per person will discourage those who want to talk a lot, where I am one of them. But I insist this rule, with all other changes negotiable. Why?

Allowing someone not to speak is to limit the scope of knowledge I can receive.

Allowing someone speaking too much is to let myself submerged by a particular set of bias.

Allowing myself not to speak means complete give up.

Allowing myself speaking too much is an indulgence of satisfying on current state of mind.

All these conditions are unacceptable.

According to my experience, many people, including several people in the mailing list and I myself have very limited curiosity. Sometimes we find something highly interesting and would like to be taught on that subject. But we are quickly satisfied after getting some very basic/superficial idea on that subject. Similarly we like free discussion because we know nothing about what we say, which means we bear no responsibility on it; and it seems that we know a lot after talking. All these are valuable, but we are able to gain much more with reasonable effort.

Another serious problem is most of us lack motivation to learn. I never boast too much, but I would like to point out that I called more than 90% of MRC meetings and took at least 30% of speaking time in it. Though I am someone who have a lot to say, enjoy speaking and being listened, I hate this condition very much, not only because making and receiving phone calls are annoying. The lack of motivation in using reason on our own, combining with the habitual reliance on external guidance forms the greatest enermy on the road towards knowledge and democracy. Such consequence was recognized for a long time, say for example mentioned in Kant's 'What is Enlightenment' which I am going to introduce in one of our reading sessions.

But laziness sounds invincible. Therefore I have no choice but appeal to rules to minimize its effect. It is contradictory to the democratic ideal, again mentioned in Kant's 'What is Enlightenment'. It simply aims as a little push for those who actually have something to say, but lack self confidence or simply regard what they think as trivial or unimportant. In some other cases people may not be able to think of anything to talk about. Therefore preparing for a speech becomes a good chance for them to organize what they know and what they find important.

The last piece of advice to speech preparation is, you can talk about something even if you do not know it very well. You can learn something completely new just for the speech. For example I read Kant's 'What is Enlightenment' and its related articles just five days ago. I decided to talk about it in my first presentation just because I find this series nicely written and we can have a lot of discussion on it.

Up to now I saw more than 10 proposed topic and it is completely out of my expectation. Some of them are creative while the others are old fashioned. But they all set good examples on what a person think in response to the external world.

sun0

• 從槍、病、鋼細訴人類文明演化
• 從《反斗奇兵》看故事創作
• BANG the 3 Kingdom Kill  從BANG及《三國殺》分析到遊戲設計探討
• Are your IQ good? 由邏輯IQ題看計算科學 
• 從量子世界到宇宙穹蒼

adam

• 為什麼我這樣孤寒
• <心靈雞湯>帶來什麼感動？
• 甚麼是教育（一）教育本質的探討（二）香港教育出了什麼問題（三）我為什麼要成為中學教師
• The joy of making music  
• My Mphil project made easy --- perspectives from biostatistics

auknife

• Enlightenment -- forever 50% completion
• 三島由紀夫短篇傑作

Some of you may find my suggestions similar to the way tutorials in Department of Philosophy are carried out. Yes, it is. Tutorials in Department of Philosophy made me understand the importance of speaking and deep thinking. Without those tutorials, I may never realize how limited a single person's thought is, and how to make it possible to expand my capacity on thinking. Preparation can help oneself to acquuire better understanding and mermory on the matter of discussion; while on the other hand everyone can learn much more if others have knowledge on the topic you are talking about in comparable level. To achieve this goal, some courses even require every student hand in his own summary on the article of discussion before class. We need not be so harsh. But we should no longer rely on improvisation, since the sudden flashes of thoughts are temporary and unreliable, though appealing.

The process of speaking is also highly different from pure thinking in the sense that what you find appealing in thinking may not sound so good when speaking it out. For similar reason, those who have the ability would never be satisfied by making music in the brain. They will surely play it and quickly discover how far away from ideal their imagination is. One can get too much more if he participate in the discussion instead of just passively listening. This is the reason why I insist everyone speaking, for his own sake.

The word 'preparation expected' is much stronger than 'it is better to prepare' or 'we recommend preparation'. Using the later ones simple means saying 'you need not do it'. Everyone should be able to understand it clearly, after being a student for more than 16 years.

So I have presented what sun0 and I hope the reading group to achieve. Those careful readers will have already noticed that it is a dilemma of quantity and quality. We should try our best to achieve both. But I would choose the later one if we really have to choose. It is because I find the former one still stick onto conventional way of education, which separate teaching and learning. Though learning in higher quality is difficult, it provides a sustainable way of studying, which should be adopted long before entering university.

How it begins...(3)

Author: Adam Fok My suggestion is, the topic can be experience-based and personal-based besides reading-based (or both). It may be more interesting as most of the human beings are curious about other's personal experience and belief. Experience-based topic provides a chance for us to evaluate our own values and thoughts. Of course the prerequisite is that we are comfortable to share such things among us. My proposed topics are the following. More details will be provided once selected by the groupmates. 1. 為什麼我這樣孤寒  reading material: TBC  things to be prepared by groupmates: their rough expense in a month, preferably in the form of a spreadsheet 2. <心靈雞湯>帶來什麼感動？  reading material: one or two passages in "The chicken soup for the soul" 3. 甚麼是教育（一）教育本質的探討 4. 甚麼是教育（二）香港教育出了什麼問題 5. 甚麼是教育（三）我為什麼要成為中學教師  reading material: TBC 6. The joy of making music  --can be jointly prepared with auknife and clare as they can share their experience of phyband. I have some personal experience to share also. 7. My Mphil project made easy --- perspectives from biostatistics.  reading material: TBC (probably one readable/short paper regarding building up maths models for diagnostic studies) Just noticed the website made by Helic. Thanks for your rapid action. Adam

How it begins...(2)

Author: Helic Leung

First of all thanks for you to setting up those rules for the conference. I like rules and I would be happy with most of the rules here. But as Melvin mentioned, some are really too harsh, I necessarily need to some of them due to the reasons below:

point 4: This highly discourage participants coming to be an audience as so many people is afraid to give a talk. So they simply do not join. This leads to resistance of promotion and expansion of the group which is not good. It also does not make sense if we tend to invite guests.

point 7: Previous preparation of audience should be advised but not expected. I would be fine if people come without preparation and waste their time in the meeting (that is their own lost), but I do mind if everybody just simply don't come as they are too lazy to read, then the meeting break down. (BAD END)

point 10: Believe me, it is much easier for a workshop to break down if it is biweekly compared to weekly. Weekly is not very demanding as you think, If you are busy you may simply skip one. If the meeting is biweekly, anyone skip one meeting would try to skip all the latter ones forever. It is much easier to gather people around too.

Besides, I don't think anyone waste their time even without understanding anything or saying a word in the discussion section, it is at least worth for them to just sit and listen and have friends gathering rather than staying at home watching TVB soup drama of playing facebook game. So don't worry too much about their effectiveness of learning, "being late is always better than not coming". 

OK, about the conference, I temporarily named it as "Unified Conference without Boundary". I set up a temporary webpage for this and upload all of my own proposed topics  and abstracts. I would set up a new account for this and open a facebook group after everyone agrees with the details and everything get settled.

I did propose five topics for myself, in order to let you guys to choose the most interested one or two (others are for spare). They are all posted online.

Regards,

sun0

How it begins...(1)

Author: Auknife

Dear all,

As sun0 proposed, a reading group will be started in the coming semester. My proposed aims and rules are as follow:

1. It is nothing like MRC (if you don't know what MRC stands for, just forget it), as there are no phase 1, phase 2 or phase 3, and no free drifting in talking material.
2. Each session has a WELL DEFINED topic. It is everyone's responsibility to avoid side tracking.
3. Each session is held by one person (group presentation also possible). The speaker has to hold the session till the end, without interruption from other participants.
4. Throughout the semester, each member should hold at least one, and not more than two sessions.
5. Point 3 and 4 aim to force everyone to say something, while at the same time avoid anyone dominating the speaking time (including the lecture and discussion).
6. We always find speakers boring. But boring is not the only criteria to judge whether something is meaningful. Therefore the audiance should not be too impatient to boring talks. However comments on presentation skills of the speakers are always welcomed. It may be even more important than comment on the content of the talk.
7. The topic is set by the speaker. It is not a free show. Reference material should be provided in advance. Participants are therefore expected to have some knowledge on the topic before coming to the reading session. Otherwise the session will be nothing more than a normal lecture.
8. The speaking part needs not to be long. Just say as much as you find necessary is good enough. But it is better to have it more than 20 minutes in order to gurantee some depth of analysis.
9. Similarly, the reference material needs not be long. To me, I will try my best to find something we can finish reading within 2 hours (quite reasonable for preparation right?), and give a handout in 1 page of A4 paper.
10. The group meeting is held bi-weekly. Hopefully the first one will be at the first week of September.

I do not reagard reading the reference material before coming over-demanding, as it is too much better than unprepared reception and discussion. But it is STILL not enough. There is nothing more dangerous than reading on a topic you have never considered carefully, as Schopenhauer taught us. Therefore the best way to learn is to have some brainstorm on the topic first, then try to put things into a organized way. After that we are qualified to see what other people think on that topic. I understand such process is difficult and time consuming. We need not find ourselves under pressure. But we must make reasonable effort to achieve it, in order to learn a way of learning in higher quality.

Anyone who will join please reply and suggest the topic you are going to discuss (subject to change of course), in the following format:

Speaker	Topic	Primary reading material	Secondary reading material
Auknife	Enlightenment	"What is enlightenment" by Kant (just 2600 words)	"The Painter of Modern Life" by Baudelaire
Auknife	三島由紀夫短篇傑作集	孔雀 –選自三島由紀夫短篇傑作集	施食餓鬼舟 – 選自三島由紀夫短篇傑作集

We will then discuss the order of presentation. Those who proposed more than one topic will have their topic of first presentation decided by others, according to their interest.

Thank you for your participation.

AU, LAP HANG