Examining Dominant Templates with Alternative Sources: My Journey into Philosophy
In USE2304: The Making of a Nation, we explore how Singapore came to be, and how we became Singaporeans. Through critically examining the state-issued narratives about nation-building with the use of alternative sources by Singaporean academics, students are expected to form their own opinions on a variety of topics, from education to housing policies. Our opinions can be expressed through the response essays we craft, where we summarize the dominant template (“main text”) prescribed by the state and use alternative sources to uncover underlying assumptions made by the state. For myself, learning to write a response essay proved to be valuable subsequently when I struggled with my decision to minor in Philosophy.
In class, Dr. Quek, the instructor of USE2304, introduced “dominant templates” – a concept used to label widely known narratives that are typically uncontested. In her slide below, she shared on why dominant templates are important to scholars, and particularly, historians. As dominant templates in history are carefully constructed narratives by those in power, alternative sources by the oppressed are often marginalized. By contrasting dominant templates against alternative sources, a clearer understanding is gained by revealing hidden assumptions underlying dominant templates. These assumptions may be revealed as inadequate in understanding the narrative presented.
For our first assignment, we had to write a response essay about discourses surrounding Singapore’s nation-building and identity formation. Using only four sources, we needed to identify the dominant template espoused by the government for nation-building and highlight how the alternative sources value-added to our understanding of the dominant template.
In this excerpt of my essay, I first identified that the dominant template for Singapore’s nation-building is built on economic primacy and pragmatism.
By examining an alternative source below, Terence Chong’s article, “Fluid Nation”, we gain a clearer understanding behind why the Singaporean government adopted a realist view – we are a small city-state with limited resources.
With Chong’s input, we can infer that the hidden assumption made by the Singaporean government was that an economy-first mentality can help Singapore survive and prosper. In another alternative source appended below, Catherine Lim’s article, “A Great Affective Divide”, she suggests that this excessive emphasis on our economy has created an “affective divide” between the government and Singaporeans.
In my essay’s conclusion, I acknowledged the importance of having an economy-first paradigm for Singapore to survive but argued that Singaporeans now desire a community-first focus (heart-ware), over a economy-first paradigm (hardware) as we have achieved economic stability.
Through this module, I learned that a critical examination of the dominant template alongside alternative sources allows us to discover hidden assumptions underlying the former and question their sufficiency, or the lack thereof.
While this structure was useful for critically examining state-prescribed dominant templates, it was also useful for questioning societal expectations. In the same semester, I took an introductory Philosophy module (GET1029: Life, the Universe and Everything), where I found myself contemplating to minor in Philosophy. While I was interested in it, I shared with a friend that I felt I was “not talented enough” to minor in Philosophy, especially since I was struggling with the introductory module.
Here, a dominant template that I acquired from societal expectations is presented: to pursue something, such as a minor in Philosophy, you must be talented in it. The hidden assumption is that individuals who are talented will surpass those who are not, and natural abilities are preferred over those who have to work hard to achieve the same results. This societal expectation was entrenched in me since primary school, when I discovered the state’s “Gifted Education Programme” for those who display above average intelligence. This was a distant reality for me as I struggled to pass subjects in primary school – which I attributed to my lack of academic talent.
With this dominant template, I lacked an alternative source to cross-examine its origins and the underlying assumptions of it. I came across a book by Angela Duckworth, titled Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance. The book was about grit, and how perseverance and passion was the most significant predictor of success, beyond talent. Duckworth shares about the “naturalness bias” where we are inclined towards individuals with innate talents as we believe that they would be more successful. I realized that my dominant template of needing to be talented to pursue Philosophy stemmed from this. I was discounting my own ability to excel in Philosophy because if I was struggling in an introductory module, it must be because I was not talented.
With this new revelation, I was ready to confront my own dominant template. While I was on exchange, I took another philosophy module, PHIL261: Ethics in Practice which was on applied ethics. Each seminar involved intensive debates across various contentious issues, crafting response essays to in-class debates and finding ways to further the debates.
While I struggled initially to articulate my arguments and ethical considerations, I found myself enjoying classes and looking forward to extra debate sessions. At the end of the module, I felt well-prepared and cognizant of how to tackle ethically contentious issues. At the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl, my classmates and I represented the University of North Carolina (UNC) and placed 4th among 16 teams. Before leaving UNC, I was pleasantly surprised to receive an email from my Philosophy instructor affirming my efforts. This was yet another alternative source that illustrated that grit is indeed a better predictor of success. Additionally, I realized the assumptions underlying my dominant template – that I was untalented and therefore could not excel in Philosophy – was lacking.
In retrospect, I realized how I subconsciously applied my USE2304 learnings to my personal choices. In both experiences, I started with a dominant template – either determined by the state or society. Through cross-examinations with alternative sources, I uncovered underlying assumptions within the dominant templates. Beyond that, examining these assumptions revealed their inadequacy, and allowed me to push for a paradigm shift. Whether it was about arguing for a community-first instead of economy-first approach by the state, or to be grittier instead of relying on talent, both takeaways provided a clearer understanding of the dominant template.