Being a part of a civilisation inadvertently forces you to be governed by multiple sets of laws. Your country would have its legal system and your social group might have its own moral code. Your culture might have acts considered taboo and your family might forbid their own version of wrongdoings. Oh, and I almost forgot, your religion could also have a code of its own.

You know how you might've heard the phrase 'think before you act'? Well, given the divers considerations one might have to endure, it most definitely is easier said than done. So which do you adhere to? Unlike many multiple-choice questions we students have faced, it's not as simple as a one is correct, the rest are wrong. At best, your reason behind the preferred choice would be arguable.

The current answer to your question would be a no. However, I wouldn't blame myself if I change my mind when faced in an unexpected circumstance. Some people regard their ideals and opinions as sacrosanct, but the fact of the matter is that whether large- or small-scale, people might change their minds as often as you or I might change the direction our heads are facing. How do you live in a world like this? How do you then make things easier for yourself by classifying people by adhered ideology? Well, you can't. And that probably makes life a little more interesting.

I'd say, the more the merrier. I'm sure you might want some clarification on the aforementioned sentence that although sounds clichéd, might be soaked in more profundity than one might initially ascribe to it.

Singapore is crowded. Walk along Orchard Road on the weekend and you'd probably feel it too. Then again, many people gathering in one specific location might not paint an accurate picture of the apparent population growth in the country. Weekends is just when people get out of their houses, and what else is there to do besides going to town. MRTs are crowded as well, but only particularly so during peak periods when white-collared workers commute to and fro their workplaces mostly situated in the central area. I'm not entirely sure whether the forecasted population target is entirely a bad thing. Not many people in Singapore would be satisfied with a job as a construction worker I'm sure, hence, a need to bring them in to further develop the country. If anything, change is inevitably. I don't think the government would have to mandate it specifically for it to happen.

Today, I was walking back to the office room from my lunch hour ans an Indian male came up to me and told me I have a wonderful face. Wasn't entirely sure what it would entail but I threw him a bone. Alas, he s started throwing sentences at me that sounded as if he was predicting my future. Actually, he was predicting my future. He said that I would 'get promoted' and would 'earn lots and lots of money'. He followed up with what looked like a magic trick of sorts. He asked me to think of a number between 1to 5, an international flower and the number of siblings I had, etc. To cut the story short, he tried to predict all my answers onto a piece of paper. He succeeded of course, but way beyond the moment I saw through his poorly constructed 'sleight of hand'.

If a larger Singaporean population would result in me having more of these sorts of coincidental happenings, I'd be torn. It was a strange occurrence, but it definitely splashed a little more colour onto my routinely corporate dronic lifestyle.

The more the merrier.

Comes up to about AUD2500 - AUD3500 per unit, depending on the units I choose. Every semester I'd have to take 4 units, so you do the math!

Buy the book from Kino. If I assume correctly that there's where you purchase your paperbacks. You'll find out if you look close enough.

I think most people (myself included) would choose the cold but clean toilet.

I'm sure everyone experiences the first sharp sensation of a chill toilet seat, but it gradually subsides after your body heat compensates for it and warms it up.

To put things in perspective, it would look as if the cold but clean toilet would be something you find in an upscale shopping mall, whereas the warm and dirty would be typical of one you'd find in a coffee shop.

The idea of sitting on years and years of accumulated misplaced urine residue is extremely repulsive for many, I think I'd rather hold my 15 minute dump (if it's not exceptionally urgent, that is).

I wasn't aware that just by being born in this country I could potentially take advantage of those few things. Now that you've mentioned it. I feel I need some advice seeing as those things involve money, something which I'd like to have more of.

I'm just doing my studies here, I haven't particularly thought of anything beyond that yet.

Yup. Melbourne, Victoria.

I remember attending those Food Expos at the Singapore Expo where you'd walk one round and receive enough food samples to fill you up as a substitute for dinner. Didn't really know what they put inside the food because I'd always end up spending precious time in the restroom afterward. I'm also not exactly sure whether they've stopped holding those Food Expos but they were interesting, so you could look out for the next newspaper advertisement and head down for some 'candy' given out by 'strangers'.

If, however, you're talking about having accepted random sweets from random people along random streets, then I think you should be careful. It's a good thing you're still alive after (I assume) having eaten some of these sweets. They could've been lined with poison or something, you'd never know. If strangers were your only source of candy then might I suggest you check out the nearest supermarket or convenience store. I'm sure they stock some sweets on their shelves.

Please be careful of strange people you've never met before. Later they murder you or something ah, wah si liao. Knn, they give you sweet they sahnly they take out knife stab you, wah siao. Or they push you into their van then bring you some secluded spot to rape you. Lai yi ge surprised only la. Definitely getting yourself into a lot of trubber. Quite a big prahbrem.

I think it's because I attempt to answer them in a serious manner that makes it seem as though my Formspring account has a really solemn vibe to it. Easily mistaken for tension but, in any case, good question! Love answering these sorts.

Let's assume for the sake of the question that this situation requires that I either scratch, or don't scratch and that the hot girl is a stranger. There's no running to the sidelines and scratching which would mean I have to excuse myself from the hot girl and risk never having the opportunity to interact with her ever again. There's also no subtly scratching my balls by putting my hands my pocket and hoping that she doesn't notice.

The fact that I can choose whether or not to scratch would mean the irritation is not so unbelievably itchy that I absolutely have to scuff at it. If this is so, then it begs the question, "Why would anyone ever scratch their balls in front of a hot girl if they could choose not to?"

Firstly, let's tackle the simple part. The act of scratching one's balls in public can be seen as rude, even barbaric. Part of the unwritten laws of social conduct dictates that you shouldn't ever be gnawing at your genitals in public no matter what the circumstance. So the obvious reason to not scratch your balls would be the fear that the hot girl might take offense and completely dismiss you as a viable candidate as a mate (am I going too far?).

However, it would seem as though certain circumstances allow us to relieve ourselves of the desire to scratch, at the same time pushing ourselves into a favourable position in terms of the hot girl's perspective. Although not often, it's possible that doing it to attain a comedic effect would generate a positive response in favour of you. For example:

HG (Hot Girl): I like talking about myself and other shit that concerns me.

AG (Average Guy): I'm sorry I need you to hold that thought while I scratch my balls.

*HG being completely taken aback by the irrationality of the situation bursts out into laughter.*

*AG scores*

Obviously, there are many assumptions that have to be taken into account for this particular situation to ever happen. Firstly, there has to be a certain level of attraction. And secondly, the conversation has to be reasonably entertaining and interesting for both parties in order to be mistaken as some sort of spark (I think some people call this 'Chemistry'). Also, numerous other things like AG's personality, confidence, hesitation, anticipation, and other factors of conversation that play a part in execution of the punchline.

Going back to the question, I probably would not ever be able to attain that situation with a hot girl that I've just met (I would, on the contrary, be simultaneously breaking out in cold sweat and stuttering). So no, I won't scratch my balls in front of a stranger who happens to be a hot girl, ever in a million years.

Haha, it's nice to know that the previous question wasn't conjured out of spite. Thanks, I guess? :D

I feel that those are some interesting choices of words.

I'm not sure whether to be flattered by the use of the word 'demure', or be saddened that it is a word often used to describe a woman's behaviour. This has caused me to simultaneously think back and examine my conduct while constructing this answer out of thin air. In any case, it could be a valid point and maybe I should take this into consideration as I reflect on the way I carry myself. Frankly speaking, demure isn't a word that I'd like to have associated with me, I'd rather have calm, or cool. Words like 'breathtaking' and 'magnificent' would also be welcome but I don't expect those.

The second part of the sentence is quite upsetting though. As I read it, It seemed as though there was a slight pinch of spite peppered across the words; but I might be imagining things. To be honest, I had hoped that my 'style' of writing would not have offended anyone as much as it has apparently offended you. In retrospect, I don't think that my writing style reflects my personality or character. If anything, the mild ramblings in answer to seemingly short questions should be taken as entertainment value and nothing more.

The second part of the entire question is plain patronising. It's sort of worrying as I never intended for my answers to these questions to be of any worth. If you're using these extremely verbose answers as a key to understanding me as a person, then I'd highly suggest you stop. These answers are really long-winded and come close to the point of verbal diarrhoea. They aren't really much of a reflection of my actual thoughts. Okay, maybe slightly. But they should be dismissed.

This dichotomy you speak of is interesting. I've heard people tell me that I'm unapproachable and carry myself in a way that might repel others. That is unintentional, and I'm still working on that. But if my writing reflects an 'inflated sense of self importance', it should tie in really well with that 'distant' perception of me. But I get how if you were to see me as a 'demure' person, you'd think there's a great disparity between that and this entire formspring account.

I haven't actually answered your question though, and I don't intend to because I feel that the basis of the question might be inaccurate. I do hope that this answer doesn't stop you from asking me more questions though. This questions has prompted me to think about how I perceive myself and how others would perceive me and maybe whether I should change. Change is good and I, for one, hope that I will never be content with my personality and own personal growth as an individual.

Lastly, I hope that you get to know me as a person, not as a Formspring account.

This question is actually quite surprising for myself.

Since time immemorial, people have been arguing about the existence about this all-powerful, omnipresent God, from which stems views such as creationism, orthodoxy, fundamentalism and so on.

Let's talk about the literal meaning of the question. The fact that you, anonymous person, are asking whether or not this God of which you speak of has passed away, implies that you partially or fully believe that He exists in the first place. If you didn't believe that, then questioning the mortality of Him is redundant. Then of course, we could talk about your definition of 'dead'. If only mortals can die, then this entity you speak of is not a god, but is God only in name. Like how for example, if I were a ruthless uncaring father, I'd name my son God Khoo, prompting him to change his name when he reaches the ripe age of 21. Needless to say, your definition of 'dead' could also be referring to extinction or being defunct, which would be a better way to interpret the question.

So, for the sake of answering the question, let's assume you're a conniving person constantly in deep thought, speaking in a profound and abstract manner. When you say 'God' with the capitalised 'G', you are referring to Christianity, Judaism or Islam as a religion. Thus, when you posed the question, 'Is God Dead?', you meant, 'Is religion obsolete?'.

If you look at my previous answers to these random questions people have posed to me, I've almost always responded with a certain degree of political correctness; an eccentric style of argumentativeness similar to how I answered my GP questions when I took my 'A' level examinations. If a question like 'Is religion obsolete?' is to be answered with that same parley of 'on one hand', 'on the other', then you should be prepared to be faced with an army of words. So many, I might add, that you might imagine them to have swords and shields if I were to figuratively describe your intimidation.

But because I see myself as an amiable person, coupled with the fact that you probably asked this question in passing, not expecting such a long answer, I shall summarise my hypothetical essay in a few words: 'No, I don't think so.'

Yes, it is.

I, for one, feel that the vast majority of questions like these should almost always be answered positively. For some reason, the 2008 romantic comedy 'Yes Man' spoke to me in a weirdly profound manner, one that might've subconsciously shaped a part of me that, although small, is crucial in understanding the methods in which I answer questions.

You know, when I think back on how events have shaped me, I've realised that I do enjoy the little things. Not the little things that many people refer to in their 'about me' sections on Facebook - usually to do with small scale acts of romance that have ironically made an impact in their lives when it 'should' be larger scale ones that make an impact on them - but small, seemingly random, for lack of a better word, things.

Things like concentrating my urine on stubborn fecal residue in toilet bowls when not flushed properly; things like walking on a checkered concrete sidewalk akin to how a knight on a chessboard would. Things like mindlessly highlighting paragraphs of words with my cursor while reading sizable blocks of texts; things like twisting my back when I feel I haven't done it in awhile just to be greeted by that satisfying 'crack' when the synovial fluid cavitation gets released.

It's funny how when you get to know a person, you'd recognise the idiosyncrasies that plague and inadvertently shape an individual. And, although I'm not exactly making much sense, I'm going to make certain assumptions and guess that I don't really hang out, or speak with you much, anonymous question-poser. The logic I'm following has something to do with the fact that I don't spell the portmanteau of 'is' and 'it' as 'issit', but rather with the letter 'z' to dramatise the pronunciation (e.g. izit). As far as I'd like to think, people whom I often speak with also share the same mindset and hence, spelling as me.

Although this definitely didn't answer your question. I'm going to leave you with the following quote that would undoubtedly cause further confusion if you even bothered to read such a long, un-called for, essay as an answer:

"The purpose of art is to lay bare the questions which have been hidden by the answers." - Google

The difficulty in learning a new language depends on a variety of reasons. The first, of course, is the language you're learning itself. I think there's a sort of ranking system in the difficulty of various languages with the top hardest ones including Japanese, Mandarin and Korean. So if you've selected those to learn, I assume you've mentally prepared yourself since they're already inherently difficult in complexity of syntax and other stuff.

Of course, another difficulty one would face would have to do with the native language one already speaks. If you speak English as your native language, you're pretty fortunate as it gives you access to many phonemes and a limited exposure to loan words from French and German, etc. Assuming your native language was Japanese for one, it would be pretty difficult to take up English as many phonemes present in the English language isn't part of the Japanese language. For example, the Japanese alphabet doesn't have the 'F' as in 'fuck', and also doesn't differentiate between the 'R's and 'L's as in 'rim job' and 'lesbian sex' which would suck if they wanted to say those words. I don't think people would understand if a Japanese person came up to them and asked, 'Can I huck you?'

Thirdly, if I'm not wrong, the optimum age to learn a new language would be around 6 to 7 which I assume you're not since I don't think 6 to 7-year-olds would be asking me anonymous questions on Formspring. In any case, try not to fret, since many non-6-to-7-year-olds have succeeded, so can you.

Lastly, for sustainability of a language you've just learnt, practice and frequent exposure is key. Don't be afraid to go up to a random stranger and rain down a torrent of foreign words you've just learnt, they'd appreciate that people nowadays have found it a need to embrace a foreign culture. Tips for success also include booking yourself a one-way ticket to the country which speaks the language you wish to learn as a native language, and also lots and lots of foreign films.

Learning a new language is not easy, I've half given up myself, But I do hope you succeed. Rain down a torrent of foreign words on me, please, I insist.

Akin to the number of grains of sand on the smallest beach, or the number of hairs on my head, whichever number is smaller (one still has to maintain humility when faced with these sorts of questions).

I never really thought of freudian slips as a real thing. Most of the time I just dismiss it as being what it is: a slip of the tongue.

To be honest, I feel half of the things Sigmund Freud deems as psycho-analysis seems to me as complete bullshit. Like how I just read "The Psychopathology of Everyday Life" and thought it to be extremely technical and close to over-thinking. Then again there were some points that I thought applicable to daily life. But I can't be too negative, since I plan on studying psychology in the near future.

If I'm not wrong, freudian slips are supposed to be an unintentional misuse of words that often can have something to do with what you're suppressing deep down in your subconscious.

I would assume that this happens often when a person of a group has some sort of physical defect or some sort of history that you consciously force yourself not to talk about. It then comes out unintentionally when you're trying to say something else. For example, when someone has an extremely disproportionate (big) nose, instead of saying pass the salt, you say pass the nose.

Another common occurrence would be calling out an ex-girlfriend's name during sex or like calling your wife by your mistress' name. That sort of thing.

But then again, I feel it's important to not interpret every unintentional slip-up as freudian. Because if you do, then you'd probably be analysing unnecessarily.

I don't really have much to say on this topic because this happens so occasionally that I automatically disregard such thoughts. Maybe I would have to embarrass myself in front of strangers or an important person in my life for it to strike me harder. I would assume that having such emotional feedback to such occurrences be it anger, shame or remorse would better contribute to my memory of such situations.

But for now, I'd probably have to go read the whole textbook on psychoanalysis before I think of something more insightful to say.

Any different from zombies? Probably. One obvious differences would be the fact that zombies can be classified as being 'undead', but babies can't.

So now that that's out of the way, let's try to find the similarities between babies and zombies.

1. Babies and zombies both make funny noises when they don't get what they want. Babies cry, and zombies grunt and stuff.

So, that's basically all I could think of as my brain hasn't functioned due to lack of use for roughly 2 and a half years. It's quite interesting though, that zombies and babies both suck the life out of adult people. Literally speaking for the zombies, figuratively speaking with respect to babies. In other words, at some point of time, having a baby would cause you to act like a zombie in some ways.

Lack of sleep can cause people to go about their daily routine having dulled senses and a lower propensity to participate in social regimen such as conversation or even greetings. Not sure about other people but lack of sleep makes me slightly irritable and inherently agitated; similar to a zombie which has a hostile nature of sorts.

I'm not exactly sure why zombies in films tend to consume human flesh and are always so hungry all the time. I'm pretty sure that if one turns into a zombie, one would instead be reduced to a state simliar to a wild animal. I mean they just keep eating and eating and are never content or satisfied. If they are reduced to instinctive acts, then they should stop killing once they're full, not become a crazed killing machine and hunt humans every waking minute like how they are portrayed on film. If they're so concerned with live meat anyway, animals would be a lot easier target rather than humans. Just heading out to the nearest poultry farm and spam pork and chicken eat should satisfy their craving.

Sigh, Hollywood. Be a bit more realistic can?

"Yes. Please. I beg you."

"Omg, I was kidding. Do you think I'd really make out with someone like you?"

Story of my life.

I wish I were a god whenever.

But one can only dream.

I assume you're referring to an desert island with no humans, mainly sand, some palm trees, and a dense mini-forest. Well at least that's how I imagine an island I'm stranded on to be. If so, it still depends on my intention. i.e., What I plan to do after I realise I'm being stranded on an island. It is sad to say that I wouldn't exactly know how I would react to such a drastic situation.

If I were stranded on that sort of island, and I wanted to stay, I'd bring a Swiss Army Knife, a large metal container and a DVD player containing all seasons of Man Vs. Wild and enough battery for me to watch most of it. The large metal container is mainly for me to distil the salt water around the island.

If I were stranded and I wanted to leave, I'd bring a satellite phone, Swiss Army Knife and a DVD player containing the same stuff. Hopefully rainwater will suffice. FML if there's no rain.