Alvin! Aaron! Chern Wei! Wai Lumn! Liang En! Yong Zi! Adrian! Katrina! Niklas! Jane! Irvin! Chia Ming! Kai Herng! Jaime! Sean! Benjamin! Shir Li! Andrew! Jin Rong! Miao Jing! Soon Huat!

Sunday, 7 May 2006


Since I have nothing else to do, and since the class blog is desperately crying out for new posts and stuff, I will therefore spend some time typing a meaningless filler. Woohoo. So, if you have any pressing issues, and you don't have all that much free time, or you simply can't stand mindless blabber, don't bother reading on.

Disclaimer: Any loss of IQ or EQ or AnyQ from reading the following text is in no way the fault of the author, and is entirely your fault. You have the right to close this window. You have the right to keep quiet. Any complaints can and will not be acknowledged. Flying ninjas will not ambush you for reading this. Death to frostbite is however, possible, if however improbable.

Assuming you have read the above disclaimer, I will now proceed to continue on to the filler, of which I will attempt to talk about as little as possible and fill up with as much smoke as possible. It is a good practice which should be encouraged as much as possible, because chain-smoking will allow one to fill up pesky GP essays, and generate mindless blabber at will. It is one of the greatest arts that academics have spent eons to refine and master, and is the mark of a refined society and a cultured scholar. It forms the fundamentals of literature, art appreciation, civilized conversation and almost anything you can think of. Indeed, for are not literary works based upon fictatious events created by the mind which seem to talk about alot (whole books even!) when actually they mean very little? Is art not a bunch of doodles which is given meaning by the artist through smoking? Smoking refers to the a skill where a person is capable of generating large amounts of text, speech or other mediums in which homo sapiens are capable of transmitting ideas to each other. Ideal smoke should appear to contain alot of information, packaged excessively with terms that will befuddle other homo sapiens to some extent, causing them to think that the said smoke is in fact highly informational and extremely intelligent. If packaged enough, said recipients of smoke will be unable to discern smoke from intelligent communication even with analysis. High-quality smoke should be powerful enough to even convince the said individual that the smoke is highly philosophical, and even be convinced enough to adopt the said viewpoint of the smoke as his own. It is this epitome of smoking that all individuals aspire to, because once one is capable of producing such brilliant smoke, it is no longer considered smoke, and transcends the mortal realms into the realm of philosophy.

Good smoke must have a type of flow, and with experience, it allows one for continuous writing once the generation of smoke has started. Like real smoke, it's indiscernable individually, but as a whole, it looks impressive. It should waft and waver as text, apparently holding a multitude of ideas but impossible to grasp. It should dissipate across a multitude of subjects and touch on as many subjects as possible. If the spread of information is great enough, it will seem like a great deal, because it works like volume. Breadth multiplied by depth. If you are broad enough, you don't need any depth. The trick to having good smoke is always having a backup plan. If you run out of things to say on a certain subject matter, just switch topics as smoothly as possible, and no one might even notice that you did. That is the essence of smoke, large quantities as fast as possible and with no pauses. Conversations are quickly started and dragged, and effective smokers can confuse and confuddle their listeners with smoke, even wrapping them around their fingers as they hang onto every word the smoker is giving, while still attempting to comprehend the previous. It is a continuous cycle, that once entered, the listener is completely ensnared within the smoky grip of the smoker, because no time is given for him to attempt to process the smoke intelligently, while being bombarded with complex terminology and excessively bombastic words. Adjectives and other redundant words should and will be used freely in great abundance, as they buy time allowing the intelligent smoker to drag and stall time, covering his tracks and giving ample time for him to plan and execute his next stage. Brilliant smokers should never be in the here and now, they should be ahead, in the future, already contemplating their next point and terminology they might consider using. Bombastic words are buffers, insurance if the flow ever lapses and give him something to fall back on. Even when he has nothing to say, flowery language can be used generously to fill the blanks, because flowery language is exactly that, a filler, designed to impress, while not meaning anything much.

That however, does not mean that the smoker should base his entire argument on nothing whatsoever. Once again, like smoke, a form of fuel is needed. It can however, be expanded to much more then it's original size, like a piece of wet wood, it will smoke and billow for aeons while the original piece is much smaller then what it generates. The ideal smoker should have small points peppered throughout the smoke, to keep the reader interested and ensure that the smoke is not easily seen through. While it is obviously more effective if the whole thing comprised of no smoke, smoke serves as the medium to buff up points, and to fill space when all else fails. In the process of smoking, it is even possible to chance upon other random points, such as a smoking piece of wood might catch something else on fire. In theory, this smoke-fuel should also be not commonly known. It should be abstract, allowing for the said smoker to be capable of defending his view point regardless of how it is assaulted, because a fort of smoke is invulnerable, impossible to pin down, and impervious to any attacks. It can be manipulated later on as the author's viewpoint changes, it can cover loopholes in arguments, and it can be argued in many ways. Ultimately, it can even destroy an opponents argument by switching one's own point of view, and arguing that the attacker is in fact arguing against a point of view highly similar to his own. Such defences are effective, as they work like the emperor's new clothes effect, where the attacker will eventually be unwilling to surrender to an opponents absurd and confusing arguments, afraid that it might mean that he is unable to comprehend his opponent's language and argument, and afraid to give any new points for fear of them being warped against oneself. Hence it is imperative to ensure that smoke is bulked up as much as possible, for the longer the text the harder it is to find specific points to rebut and to attack, and the easier it is to counter another's comments. Convincing smoke will even confuse the opponent to the point where he or she believes that the smoker is in fact smarter then oneself, and afraid that a continuation in the argument will eventually lead to their own downfall. They will therefore seek to reach a mutual agreement; a compromise where they can back off. When the smoker senses the opponent is reaching this stage, it presents two options. The first, is to accept the compromise, and shift it in one's own favor, which should be done if you sense that the opponent is nearly onto your smoke's loopholes and inherent flaws that are unavoidable with the generation of smoke, or secondly, to continue the argument, refusing to give in until the opponent is totally annihilated and destroyed in a bombardment of logical fallacies and relentless theories and opinions. This can be done, because an opponent at this stage is generally already in a state of semi-awe and fear, and will no longer question your assumptions with as much vigor as the initial stages, and logical fallacies and conclusion jumping is in fact tolerated and encouraged, and if ever questioned, easily claimed to have been argued earlier and insult the opposition's memory and comprehension abilities.

These are just some of the basic fundamentals and tricks to smoking, and they are, as mentioned earlier, a deadly effective tool of humanity in arguing, for it is not everyone who is blessed with smoke detectors, nor are many people confident enough to stand firm in the barrage of irrelevant arguments and random digressions alongside thinly veiled implied questions, which, if one has the intellectual fortitude, is easily able to brush aside to assault the seed of smoke, whereas weaker ones, those who are afraid or not confident, will spend their time fighting the uncountable demons and monstrous legions of invulnerable logic that are contraptions of one's own imagination and comprehension. The author never actually reveals his own opinions explicitly, he merely hides it in the clouds of smoke and fog of logic, leaving others to interpret it as they wish, and to argue concepts which they have dreamed up themself. And it is precisely because these logical arguments are figments of their own imagination, they will find them ever more convincing then an opinion that you actually made yourself.

And now it is 11:15 pm, and a lengthy filler has been completed. I hope your brains are not leaking out of your nostrils yet, nor nails hammered into into thy ears in frustration. Good bye, adieu, auf wieder sehen and good night.



  1. Der war ein leuchtender Artikel! Sehr Puder voll!

  2. Je ne sais pas comment est-ce qu’il peut penser à quelquechose de brillante mais aussi de stupide. Ah...c’est le “smoke” dont il parle.

    Pardon my french if it's wrong. :P

  3. Vos connaissances impeccables en langue française laissent me la crainte frappée. Je crois que vous êtes l'épitomé de la perfection linguistique pour le Français !

  4. omg... nice PhD thesis

  5. Word Count: 1601

  6. Not enuff for MRP :(