Much Ado about the ST FORUM I

This was posted on the online ST forum today.

Youngsters today lack loyalty to and respect for teachers

I am prompted to write this letter after reading 'Encourage students' loyalty to teachers' (ST, Feb 27) by Mrs Joanne Chia and 'Promote visits by ex-students' (ST, March 1) by Ms Alicia Yeo Soh Khim.
I graduated from Tampines Primary School 17 years years ago. All the while, I've been keeping contact through greeting cards and e-mail with three of my primary school teachers. Two of them had retired and the third is teaching at St Nicholas Girls' School.
Other than using high technology (that is, SMS and e-mail), I even meet one of them occasionally for a meal or tea and catch up on each other's lives. Over the years, this 'mentor~student' relationship has grown and we are now 'mutual friends'.
It seem that many youngsters today lack this loyalty to and respect for our teachers.
Wan Yin Hwa (Miss)

Now i do not know ST policies. Do they decide on the title of the posts or is the title decided by the poster? For if u look at the title, and read the post, it appears that the content does not have any relevance to the post. However, this post is proceeding on the premise that the writer decides the title. This is because of the line "It seem that many youngsters today lack this loyalty to and respect for our teachers. " Unless Straits Times has decided to add sentences in a person's post, i will make a reasonable assumption that the title was the writer's.

Which brings me to the main point. As i said earlier, it appears to me that there is no correlation between the title and what is written. If she is trying to make a point that youngsters are disrespectful, then i must say she has not succeeded, notwithstanding the fact that i believe such a statement is totally bollocks.

Take a look at her examples. She talks about how she has been keeping in touch with her teachers and all, and then goes on to conclude that youngsters lack loyalty and respect. This i believe is an example of a logical fallacy, known as the non-sequitor, it does not follow. Just because one doesn't visit teachers or keep in contact with them does not necessarily imply any lack of respect on part of the fella. Furthermore i fail to understand why the word "loyalty" is being bandied about. I find it abit funny that the word "loyalty" is used with regards to a teacher-student relationship.

Thus, while it is good that she keeps in touch with her teachers, i do not see her point in using her example to criticise the young fellas today. If she had wanted to do so she could have used other evidences, for example, students going out of control in classes and so on so forth. Of course no one expects her to write a GP essay on the Forum but at least provide a logical statement. At least the letter did not appear in the Main papers.

ST forum is something of a joke with people treating it as a "Uncle Agony" for all sorts of problems. If the editors in ST want to compete with the internet, then they should start to publish more logical letters rather than the usual fare that they are dishing out. Since Singapore wants to be First World then i believe the ST forum should also strive to be first world. If not, then they should not cry foul should Mr Wang and KTM become more popular than them. As some people like to say," There is no free lunch in this world". If they want to compete, than they should work for it.