In my business forecast for 2008, I initially predicted that there will be no huge political mudslinging that will have an impact in the economy. I was wrong.
The Philippines is at it again! Calls for the President to step down have once again gained momentum on charges of alleged corruption as a result of the ZTE-NBN broadband deal.
The name "Jun Lozada" has become so popular and has always been associated with the ZTE-NBN broadband deal controversy.
By now most webmasters and bloggers are exploiting the key word "Jun Lozada" considering it's being high-trend, low-dense keyword.
This is not an article on optimizing the "Jun Lozada" keyword. This article seeks to answers only this question that is, whether Jun Lozada is a Hero or a hypocrite.
Jun Lozada's words and actions tell his story on why he decided to testify against the administration. These are his reasons:
1.) Jun Lozada could not bear the burden anymore. He became guilty of being a party to the anomalous act that he helped facilitate. He repented of his sins and decided to testify. 2.) Somehow his deep love for his country reminded him of his responsibility to become patriotic.
On the other hand the administration and other people paint Jun Lozada as somebody who is a hypocrite because of the following reasons and circumstances:
1.) Jun Lozada's own testimony proves that initially he helped in the alleged commission of the offense before his alleged "repentance"; 2.) Jun Lozada never had the intention to testify in the Senate, this is evidenced by his going to Hongkong to evade Senate inquiry. But because of the pressure that he has been receiving from the Senate and his being away from his family, he decided to tell all. In other words his "telling" all is not because he was guilt-stricken or because he was patriotic but because he was pressured to do so.
So is Jun Lozada a hero or a hypocrite?
Scientist have a way of choosting as to which theory or hypothesis is correct when they are confronted with two strong opposing theories or hypothesis. We know this to be the principle of "Occam's razor." According to Wikipedia this principle simply states "the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory." To make it more simple, what is saying is that "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."
Applying Occam's Razor to this situation, all things being equal, did Lozada testify because he moved by guilt and his love for his country or did he do so because of pressure? Don't forget, the simplest explanation is the best. Jun Lozada - Hero or hypocrite? You are the only one that can answer it for yourself.
The Philippines is at it again! Calls for the President to step down have once again gained momentum on charges of alleged corruption as a result of the ZTE-NBN broadband deal.
The name "Jun Lozada" has become so popular and has always been associated with the ZTE-NBN broadband deal controversy.
By now most webmasters and bloggers are exploiting the key word "Jun Lozada" considering it's being high-trend, low-dense keyword.
This is not an article on optimizing the "Jun Lozada" keyword. This article seeks to answers only this question that is, whether Jun Lozada is a Hero or a hypocrite.
Jun Lozada's words and actions tell his story on why he decided to testify against the administration. These are his reasons:
1.) Jun Lozada could not bear the burden anymore. He became guilty of being a party to the anomalous act that he helped facilitate. He repented of his sins and decided to testify. 2.) Somehow his deep love for his country reminded him of his responsibility to become patriotic.
On the other hand the administration and other people paint Jun Lozada as somebody who is a hypocrite because of the following reasons and circumstances:
1.) Jun Lozada's own testimony proves that initially he helped in the alleged commission of the offense before his alleged "repentance"; 2.) Jun Lozada never had the intention to testify in the Senate, this is evidenced by his going to Hongkong to evade Senate inquiry. But because of the pressure that he has been receiving from the Senate and his being away from his family, he decided to tell all. In other words his "telling" all is not because he was guilt-stricken or because he was patriotic but because he was pressured to do so.
So is Jun Lozada a hero or a hypocrite?
Scientist have a way of choosting as to which theory or hypothesis is correct when they are confronted with two strong opposing theories or hypothesis. We know this to be the principle of "Occam's razor." According to Wikipedia this principle simply states "the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory." To make it more simple, what is saying is that "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."
Applying Occam's Razor to this situation, all things being equal, did Lozada testify because he moved by guilt and his love for his country or did he do so because of pressure? Don't forget, the simplest explanation is the best. Jun Lozada - Hero or hypocrite? You are the only one that can answer it for yourself.
About the Author:
Zigfred Diaz does not only write about Jun Lozada in his blog. He writes about other interesting including money management, investments, business, law, leadership, SEO, theology, faith, live and living. Why don't you visit his blog today !
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment