Opinions on The IPS Survey on Religion, Morality, and Conservatism in Singapore (Part 2)

INTRODUCTION

This post is to continue on my review of the IPS Survey on Religion, Morality, and Conservatism in Singapore, conducted by Mathew Mathews, Leonard Lim, and Shantini Selvarajan from the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), National University of Singapore. In my previous post, I commented on the respondents' views on various moral issues, paying close attention to gay sex and gay marriage. I concluded that while progressive steps have been made towards the acceptance of LGBT in Singapore, much more work still needs to be done. Not only does the pro-LGBT camp need to gain more in numbers, they also need to successfully influence the religious groups (Christians, Catholics, and Muslims) in particular for any chance at having LGBT rights legalized in Singapore.

My previous post can be found at this link, and the IPS Survey report can be found here.

In the second half of the report, the respondents were asked to give their stances on various conservative-liberal statements that correspond to various 'big picture' social issues today. In total, 11 questions were asked, and the responses were again analysed by age, race, and education background. Of course, I will not be commenting on all the data sets, but instead will be covering the more interesting findings. I will also not focus on one or two issues, but rather cover any out-of-the-ordinary findings. I will also give my personal take on the issues.

1) Who is responsible for our financial success?

An interesting observation to make here is that while most religions (including no religion) stand on the stance that the individual's responsibility of their finances outweighs government and community intervention, the Islamic community disagrees. 29.2% of Islamic respondents view that it is the individual's responsibility, and 37.5% view that the community and government should provide help to the less successful.

While I find this 'dissent' from the Muslim community rather perplexing, I think that this comes down to a few factors. The first being that there are probably (I will not present evidence here, and this is just my opinion) a greater proportion of Muslim families who are less well to do in Singapore. Therefore, the government's financial assistance schemes, as well as the availability of MENDAKI, apply more to the Muslim community. While one may argue that the Chinese and Indians do have their own self-help groups in CDAC and SINDA, I do suspect that more Malays benefit from MENDAKI that the other races from their own self-help groups. The survey results project that more Muslims are probably reliant on help from the government and their community.

Another suspicion I may have (personally, from my experience) is that perhaps the Islamic/Muslim community is a very closely knit community who help each other when one is in a difficult situation. Therefore, they will place an increased emphasis on community assistance rather than personal responsibility. This is also not necessarily a bad thing, and reflects well on the community that they are always charitable and kind hearted towards one another.

The findings from Table 40 seem to imply that there is a slight correlation in age and the response towards the question. There are less people in age group 18-25 who view financial success as dependent on the individual rather than community and government help as compared to other age groups. The report also suggests that this is because of the demographic of these respondents, who are either new to the workforce or are still studying. 

Perhaps if I may suggest, as a person in this age group, that why my age group feels this way is that we are the cohort that has had an increased focus in extra curricular activities and CIP/VIA points. We are the 'generation' that has been exposed to more community work and hence look favourably upon the idea that the community helps each other out to improve as a whole, rather than individual pursuits to become well off ourselves. While it is certainly illogical to say that our elders are not community-minded, but the education system they grew up in prizes mostly, if not solely, academic merit, and hence people who succeed will think that they got to where they are because they worked hard or studied hard. Furthermore, the whole issue of privilege and inequality only stemmed in the recent few years, while my batch is still studying.

On a personal note, I would lean slightly, but not fully, towards individual responsibility.

2) On Religion and Society

In essence, this question is asking whether religions should adapt to society, or should society adapt to religions. The overall results tended towards society having to adapt, with 31% of respondents supporting society adapting as compared to 23.3% supporting religions adapting, with the remaining 45.7% staying neutral. The table I posted above states the distribution of responses by religions.

The results are generally not surprising, with those practicing Islam, Catholicism, and Christianity coming out strongly to preserve their own religions, which the report rightly attributed to the strong religious teachings for practitioners of these religions to conform to the fundamentals of religious texts.

Personally, as a non religious individual, I will choose to side towards religions adapting instead of society, but to a small extent. My reason is that society can only bend and change so much in order to accept the practices of various religions. This may not be too difficult in, say, the US, where a vast majority of citizens are Christians. However, in Singapore, there is a pool of religions that society has to accommodate. As hard as we try to accommodate, there will come a point in which the (potential) clashes in beliefs for 2 religions makes it simply impossible for society to accommodate, and hence in this case the religions themselves need to change. Society can change in terms of mindsets such as acceptance and tolerance of the characteristics of various religions, but when it comes to actual policies and legislation, perhaps religions need to adjust too.

3) Spending Thrifty or YOLO?

This next interesting finding is on whether one identifies with saving up for a rainy day through spending thriftily on a daily basis or rewarding themselves for their hard work with more spending (as compared to the first option).

In general, an overwhelming number of individuals sided with living thriftily (51.1%) against the "work hard play hard" mentality (15.0%), with the remaining 33.9% remaining neutral. In the table above, which the responses are further broken down by age, it is clear that the older one is, the more that they are for spending thriftily. For the age group 18-25, around 38.3% lean towards spending thriftily, while 58.5% of those above 65 lean towards it. However, for the proportion of those who "work hard play hard", while the age group of 18-25 has the highest proportion (18.2%), it's worth noting that the age group with the lowest proportion, aged 56-65, stood at 13.7%, which is really not much a difference. The key separation came in many youths voting neutral on the matter.

This issue is perhaps highly linked towards the upbringing of the various age groups. Those above 65 are likely from the Pioneer Generation or the Merdeka Generation, who have seen Singapore grow from third world to first. They were the ones who lived on tight budgets and grew up in a time when life was a struggle. Many eventually lifted themselves out of poverty, but remember the tough times they've been through. Their children, the middle aged ones from 36-55, also have been through a lot of trials and tribulations while growing up. Some still grew up in Kampongs, and been through 2 major financial crises, the 1990 Asian Financial Crisis and the 2008 Global Economic Crisis. Evidently, money is something very important to them.

That is, of course, not to say that the youths today "anyhow spend money". Our parents have also taught us not to "waste money". In fact, I identify with the Neutral option. I believe many youths choose to abstain on taking sides because the question is rather subjective. Different situations call for different responses. For example, if I were alone on an ordinary day, I wouldn't spend too much on myself. However, if I just received good news or I'm going out with close friends, I'm sure to "whack" on whatever I'm spending on, because I believe that the friendships and experiences are more precious than the money made. But of course, I have to admit, the YOLO instinct comes in once in a while.

4) Lower Education = More Neutrality???

In the last part of this post, I would just like to comment on the rather interesting findings that when the responses are broken down based on education level, those who are less educated (Secondary school and below) tend to opine 'neutral' on most statements as compared to those with higher education (University degree and above). One example is as follows.

As a personal opinion, I would think that those with lower education generally are neutral on the issues because they have not given much, or any, thought on these matters. These are issues which relate more to the individual and self thoughts, which are done through extensive reflections and personal experiences.

While one can argue that those with higher education have more resources and have read up more to arrive at an 'educated' stance, which is certainly correct, I believe we can look at the other end, why people with less education don't have a stance. 

The reason is probably simple, these issues don't affect them that much. The issues that affect them are the more bread-and-butter issues such as ways to improve their quality of life and making ends meet. Some may have stances on the matter, but most will probably have other things to worry about than thinking about whether societies should adapt to religion or their rooted-ness in Singapore values.

CONCLUSION

The report has been given me nothing short of enjoyment, intrigue, and reflection over the past few weeks. I am glad to be able to share some of the findings of the report on my blog, accompanied with my personal opinions and analysis. I definitely did not cover everything while writing these 2 blog posts, and hence I encourage my readers to find time to look through the entire report in their own free time. Or at least, the parts that interest you, be it the statistical bit or the qualitative analysis bit.

Thank you for reading another long post on Waydespectives.