A Non-Car Enthusiast's Review of Tesla Model 3

My wife and I are in our 30s and we own a 2018 Mazda 6 (full size sedan) as well as a 2019 Honda Odyssey VTi-L 7-seater. We have a 4-year-old and a 4-month-old. 

I do not count myself a car enthusiast; I don't spend my day lusting over the latest luxury or sports cars or researching each car's spec. However I am a technology enthusiast, and as with every other geek in the world I have been excited by Tesla's futuristic electric cars for their form, function and the long-term benefit of electric vehicles to the carbon footprint. I have watched various reviews of Tesla Model S and Model 3 on YouTube, and found myself engrossed by its crazy acceleration, the futuristic controls and just the overall sleekness. I have also observed TSLA's spectacular share performance in bewilderment. 

When I discovered a relatively affordable Tesla rental service in Australia, I jumped at the opportunity and decided to hire a Model 3 for a 3-day road trip with my family. I joined the Australian Tesla Model 3 Facebook group to learn more about the car and the charging facility, and made sure I am fully equipped with the know-how of the car. I even downloaded its user manual.  

My verdict? (a) It is fun. (b) I am not buying it at least in the near future. 

Performance

The Model 3 we hired was a 2020 Standard Range plus which is the base model of Tesla Model 3. It was purchased for 74,000 AUD in early 2020. 

The car is fast. Now I have not driven performance cars and the Mazda 6 is already a reasonably powerful car compared to everything else I have owned / driven; but it still only does 0 to 100 km/h in 8.2 seconds. This Tesla does it in 5.6. On paper it is only around 2.6 second difference, but the moment I floored the pedal for the first time I thoroughly loved how fast it picked up its pace. Bear in mind that this is only the base model, the two higher trim levels (long range and performance) do it in 4.4 and 3.3 seconds respectively. Even at highway speed, it takes just a press of the pedal for the car to pick up plenty of additional speed, making overtakes a piece of cake. This makes it such a joy to drive, and one can't help but to engage in some lighthearted traffic light drag-race. (Spoiler: You usually win)

Handling

The Tesla is very responsive for a 1.6-ton car, we drove through some winding roads and the car managed them with ease. At no point did it feel like we were driving a heavy car. 

I have known about regenerative braking from reading, but driving it still takes a bit of getting used to. Normally when you let a car coast by releasing its pedal, it will gradually slow to a stop. Not with the regenerative braking - releasing the pedal means that the car will noticeably brake immediately (as it uses the braking energy to recharge the battery). I got the hang of it within the first hour, but even by the last day of my road trip I still couldn't quite get the car to slow smoothly by controlling how I release the pedal slowly. Perhaps this would come after even more experience, I don't know. It makes for slightly uncomfortable braking at each of the stops whenever I am not using the car's autopilot (which I will come to later). 

Driving Enhancement 

Tesla cars are famed for their futuristic self-driving feature. In Australia, you are given the option of standard lane-keeping and traffic-aware cruise control; versus a "full self driving" add-on (worth an additional ten thousand dollars) which is able to change lane to overtake in the freeway, and for the car to park itself in a spot or come to you in a parking lot.

The car I hired only has the former, and to be honest it turned out to be a bit of a letdown. Adaptive cruise control and lane-keeping are becoming standard features for most of the newer cars (both my Mazda and Honda have it), and I greatly cherish their ability in reducing the mental strain of a long drive in highways. 

The Tesla's version of cruise control and lane-keeping (called "autosteer") works well but they are nothing to call home about. It maintains a safe distance from the car in front, keeps itself in its lane when there is clear marking, and stays on even in a bad congestion with stop-start traffic. My Mazda and Honda both refuse to work when the traffic is fully stopped; although they are relatively functional for normal traffic (Mazda's version being a lot more comfortable than the Honda's jarring braking). 

What turned me off though are the phantom-braking and bad decision-making in crossing traffic. In my three days of driving, the Tesla phantom-braked at least four times, which means that it decides to brake emergently for no good reason. Only once was there even a slightly plausible reason (another car in the same direction is turning right, but I am in a separate lane which is clear); in other cases there were zero reason for the car to brake. These make for uncomfortable, and sometimes frankly nerve-wrecking moments. For crossing traffic, when there's a car crossing the road a safe distance away, the Tesla would brake hard even though it's pretty obvious that we would not have collided if we kept our speed. Both Mazda and Honda's cruise control are smart enough to not slow down in those circumstances, and Tesla, for its famed auto-driving, is over-conservative. 

What I do like about Tesla's cruise control is its ability to recognise speed signs and adjust the cruising speed with just a tiny input (a one-second tap on the driving stick to tell the car to update cruising speed after a speed limit change). When the speed limit returns to the previous higher number, the cruise control goes back to that speed automatically. It was nifty and smart. 

Overall though, the smart-ness of the auto-steer let me down, and I found that they are not much of an improved experience to what I already experience in my slightly more affordable cars. In other words, I don't imagine my 40-minute commute being a lot more fun or stress-free in the Tesla, compared to my current Mazda.

Battery and Range

This is unfortunately still a major issue for EVs like Tesla in the context of a road trip. This particular Model 3 has a claimed range of 460km, though the real-world range is closer to 250-300km depending on driving speed, air-conditioning and the use of a few other features. The battery capacity is 50kWh, and the charging speed of various chargers are:

- Regular home socket: 2kW - meaning that it takes 25 hours (50 divided by 2) to fully charge the battery

- Home Tesla charger: 11kW

- Fast DC charger: 50kW mostly, some faster versions e.g. 320kW now becoming available. 

- Tesla superchargers: 120kW in most Australian stations. There is ONE supercharger station in Western Australia currently, 170km south of Perth, though one is being planned at Perth CBD. 

 

Note that these charging speed are all "maximum" values which only apply when the battery state of charge is low; when the state of charge is higher e.g. 80%, the charging speed is designed to slow significantly even at the supercharger to lengthen the long-term battery life. 

In practice, this means that I had to:

- plot my trips to coincide with fast chargers - right now these are spaced approximately every 50km at my standard Margaret River tourist route (Perth all the way down to Augusta). 

- at the fast chargers, I usually have to charge at least 30 minutes to get meaningful charges e.g. from 40% to 90%. 

- usually there is only one or two parking spots at the fast charger (except the one Tesla supercharger which has 6 chargers). This means that if the charger is currently occupied, you might end up waiting for 30 to 60 minutes before the current car leaves, and that is assuming that the owner is a responsible owner who returns to the car as soon as the car is ready. 

- one of the fast chargers failed (at Augusta) and I had to use the slower backup charger which took longer and provided much lower charge (24% of battery capacity after one hour). 

As I mentioned in the first paragraph of the section, these drawbacks are in the context of a road trip; the usual 250-300km range would have been sufficient for most commute or short-distance travels. However, before fast chargers become commonplace (e.g. found in all regional town's shopping centre parking lot), there remain a lot of range anxiety for road trips, and you have to be either by yourself and have a spirit of adventure, or have very understanding travel partners in order to make it work (i.e. a 4 month old is a bit of a stretch). 

Luxury

Model 3 is a mid-sized sedan, and it shows. The backseats were cramped after a booster and a capsule. The front seats are noticeably less spacious than the Mazda 6 the moment I sat down. We had to leave behind the pram for our 4-month-old as it wouldn't fit in the trunk after two medium-sized luggage. It has heated leather seats, excellent speaker system, a 15-inch touch screen to control almost every feature (down to opening the glovebox!) and a grill-less design of air-conditioning vents, which again is controlled with the touchscreen. It all looks super slick.  

Travelling in the middle of summer means that we could put the car's comfort to the test. One of the nice features was the ability to turn on the air conditioner remotely prior to entering the car - this proved extremely handy in the summer heat. The air conditioner usually cools down the cabin sufficiently within 5 minutes (and you could see the cabin temperature live as it does that!). The glass roof is extremely effective at blocking the thermal heat, such that we always had a clear panoramic view of the sky yet did not feel warm even at midday. 

The built and sound-proofing of the car however turned out to be a bit of a let-down. I am not sure whether it's just the optics and the sounds, but closing the car doors and the trunk all gave me the impression of slamming rather flimsy metal, not the impression one would associate with closing the door of a 70k luxury car. The soundproofing of Model 3 is also lacklustre, despite the much quieter motor (compared to a normal internal combustion engine), at highway speed the wind and tyre noise is quite significant and it is noticeably louder than my Mazda 6. Again, a bit of disappointment given the price point. 

Entertainment

I did not have enough time to explore all the Easter eggs but I played with a few. There are the fart sounds, Christmas jingles, and even a fireplace mode where the 15-inch screen displays a cracking fireplace while a romantic couple enjoy their private time in the parked car. One could also play some classic games like solitaire, or enjoy a Netflix show. 

Safety

The car has top safety rating including 5-star for Australian ANCAP standard. You could always see the GPS location with your phone app. There is a built-in dash cam feature where the car records visuals from all directions of the car. There is even a sentry mode when the car is parked, such that any curious strangers trying to touch the car will be warned that they are being recorded on the screen. 

Running Cost

From a road trip perspective, I did not manage to save any money from electricity compared to an ICE car. For the 832km trip I needed to pay for 158 kWh of electricity, which cost me 71.59 dollars (a combination of rates e.g. 0.52 per kWh for supercharger, 0.45 per kWh for fast charger, and 0.30 per kWh for home charger). 

I looked up a similar trip I did last year on Mazda 6. Using the fuel efficiency figure from that trip of 7.4L/100km, this trip would have required 61.57L of fuel which would cost me anywhere from 61.47 to 86.20 depending on which price point I fill the car in Perth's crazy fuel price cycle (1.00 to 1.40 per L currently). 

Outside the context of road trip, however, a Tesla would cost a lot less to drive than my Mazda. Home charging costs 0.30 per kWh (and lower if you have solar panels). You would also achieve better energy efficiency in general. There are also some free "destination chargers" around where you essentially get to charge your car for free, though at a relatively lower charging speed. 

EDIT: The home charging cost is much lower than 0.30/kWh if one uses off-peak electricity which is 0.15/kWh from 9pm to 7am here. 

Environmental Cost

This has been a huge reason behind EV's increasing popularity especially amongst the environmentally conscious. Many people erroneously label EV as "emission free driving" - this is of course false as it greatly depends on how clean your source of electricity is. If you charge your car using mainly coal-derived electricity, your car is still producing some carbon footprint - the  only major difference is you are now producing greenhouse gas at the coal generator rather than in your own engine. There is also significant carbon footprint involved in the mining of the lithium used for the battery, however over the lifespan of the EV this higher footprint is usually offset by the lower footprint during actual driving. 

In WA renewable energy is now overtaking fossil fuel as the main source of electric energy, so the equation tips heavily towards EV being more carbon-friendly. Besides, the lack of emission directly from the car is also extremely noticeable. When I was parked at local shopping centre, I immediately noticed exhaust gases from the adjacent idling cars a lot more when I was driving the Tesla. One wonders just how much we put up with in our modern society with these fumes, especially in areas where children hang out e.g. schools, shopping mall etc. The redirection of emission away from vehicle has to be advantageous for our children. 

Conclusion

As I alluded to in the beginning, despite my enthusiasm, I am not interested in owning this car (at least in the near future). And don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed my three-day road trip, and electric cars are definitely the future of personal vehicle. 

If the Model 3 costs the same as my Mazda 6 (38k 2 years ago) or only slightly more expensive, I would have bought it two years ago. At this point, however, it is still not a sound financial or practical decision for me. It is not a family car due to the smaller size (and if I wanted a more equivalent-sized car it would have to be a Model S which begins at 140k), and for my regular commute to work I still do not see it improving my driving experience enough to justify the much higher cost. If the price drops further, when I have had more savings and investments, when my kids grow out of the car seats, and when the chargers become more ubiquitous then it would make a bit more sense to own this car. On the balance of all these factors it is still not justified. 

You should try it out though if you have a chance. It's fun. 

Credit for photos 1 & 6: Matt Kocaj (from whom I hired the car).

Fatherhood Again

Against the backdrop of the worst pandemic in 100 years, Xuan Ni and I welcomed the arrival of our second child Thomas. 

We are no longer the tentative parents who were afraid of holding our baby the wrong way, and a second child isn't as much of a "forever change" compared to when we first welcomed Tara. 

However, the overwhelming feeling of joy remained the same as four years ago. We adored you the moment you arrived, and had so much joy watching you grow from a scrawny 00000 late-preterm infant to the chubby wide-eyed baby in mere weeks. 

Thomas is a common name, meaning "twin" and "leader". It is also the name of many people who have achieved great things in history. 

Your Chinese name is 靖衡 (jìng héng). 

靖 - 平安、恭敬。(Calm and peaceful - a generational name you are sharing with your sister)

衡 - 平衡、对等。(Balanced and equal)

May you be safe in this uncertain time and grow up to be a man of justice and reason. We can't wait to watch you grow and shower you with love. 

Malaysian Races are Stuck in Prisoner's Dilemma

Let's talk about prisoner's dilemma and how this relates to Malaysia's interracial relationship.

You and your partner-in-crime are arrested and imprisoned. You are both in solitary confinement with no means of communicating with each other.

Each of you is given the opportunity either to betray the other by testifying that the other committed the crime, or to cooperate with the other by remaining silent. The offer is:

• If you betray each other, each of you serves two years in prison 
• If one betrays another but the other person remains silent, the traitor will be set free and the silent partner will serve three years in prison. 
• If you both remain silent, both of you will serve only one year in prison. 

Think about what you would do, and what would have been the best self-serving strategy.

• If you think your partner was going to betray you, then your best strategy is to betray him (as you would serve 2 instead of 3 years) 
• If you think your partner was going to stay silent, then your best strategy is still to betray him (as you would serve 0 instead of 1 year). 

Therefore, if both you and your partner are "smart", the most likely outcome would be that you both betray each other, and you both end up with two years. This unfortunately is non-ideal, as it turns out that both people remaining silent would have been the best case scenario, however the lack of information and the mutual distrust has driven you to choose the worst options.

Let's talk about how this relates to politics in Malaysia. Many of the more politically conservative Malays are holding the sanctity of the Malay special rights as the key to the race's survival and success in the country. Politicians continue to toy with this sentiment and encourage the continued affirmative action and discrimination of non-Malays in matters such as scholarship, business ownerships and other policymaking. They are keen to keep most non-Malays out of MARA and UiTM.

Chinese, on the other hand, have long had the besieged mentality. They fight to keep the vernacular school, and many continue to practise racial discrimination in employment and trades. Some major Chinese-owned companies discriminate against the Malays, citing "government already helps them, we have to protect our own people". On the topic of separate schooling system being a source of racial segregation, they say "you have to abolish UiTM and religious schools first before we even think about it".

Both Malays are Chinese are choosing the suboptimal strategy due to the distrust of each other. Any clear-thinking person could see that the best strategy for everyone is for all of us to abandon our own shields and mutually pointed spears, and start helping each other regardless of skin colour. However, almost every single day we continue to be disillusioned by betrayal of our leaders - people continue to speak of DAP's failure to protect the Chinese interests or PPBM's ability to protect the Malays.

In other words, we are like the two prisoners who choose to betray each other, unable to recognise that cooperating with each other is in fact the optimum strategy that we need.

Unfortunately mutual attack and "tit-for-tat" remains the "optimum" survival strategy in this racial game in Malaysia. Until a huge revolution or a brave leader is able to get us to play a different game altogether, it’s hard for us to leave this age-old game of survival between races in this country. This is the disappointing reality I have come to witness

Malaysian General Election - A Reflection From A Malaysian in Australia

Everyone likes to feel that we have a calling for something bigger than ourselves. During the election season, this manifests as engagement in all things election such as spending ridiculous amount of money to fly home to vote, commenting on social media about the state of affairs and joining political campaign trails. It energises us, gives us a sense of solidarity and a sense of meaning. It gives us hope, however tenuous it may be. 

Even though we think we are doing these for altruistic "patriotism", deep down we are all doing it for selfish reasons. We want to live in a country where the leaders do not rob money from their people and where people are entitled to voice dissent. We want our kids to grow up on a level playing field, where they will be judged by the content of their character but not the colour of their skin. We want a better life for ourselves and our loved ones. 

I have now lived the vast majority of my adult life in Australia. I first came here because of an opportunity, and I have since stayed put. I have now started a young family with a daughter who's turning two soon. My daughter will hold both Malaysian and Australian passport until she turns 18, but she will not speak a word of Malay language, nor will she ever learn the delights of dropping marbles into the wooden vessel in a good game of congkak. Instead she will grow up speaking ABC-accented English while playing a game of Aussie-ruled footy. 

My brother-in-law who has migrated to US once gave a nice analogy about people like us. He said that our great grandfather left China for Malaysia in search for a better life, but a few generations later we have now embarked on a new journey as we migrate to Singapore, Australia, USA and many other countries. Like our great grandfather, we left our family behind and try to claim the new country as our home. 

But where is home? To this day, I still can't answer this very simple question with conviction. 

Whenever I spend a couple of weeks back in Malaysia, I would tell my Australian friends and colleagues that "I am going home". However for all intents and purposes, Australia is now home. This is where my little girl attends daycare and plays with her little friends. This is where I stream my Netflix and Youtube after work. This is where I live my professional life where I find some sense of purpose in providing quality care to my patients. 

In the last five years I spent a mere 114 days in Malaysia - I had to count that when I applied to be a postal voter for the Malaysian General Election. That 114 days qualified me for postal vote (only 30 days minimum required), however it also made me more a tourist than a citizen. I used to be a keen follower of political news in high school and university, but today I get my Malaysian news through Facebook walls and BBC's "also in the news" section - whenever a Malaysian politician makes a name for themselves via embarrassing gaffes. It is only this year that I realised Tun Mahathir is now the opposition leader. 

In some ways though, Australia is also not home. 

I am just a permanent resident, which means that I do not have the voting right in state and national election. Partly because of that I am fairly distanced from Australian politics, and until recently I didn't even know which party was the ruling party in my state. I am lucky that I feel mostly comfortable in my own skin everyday - Australian hospitals are extremely multi-racial so we fit in nicely. Outside work we hang out with some social groups occasionally and it make us feel like part of the community. I love the outdoor barbies (that's barbeque in Australian English) and am starting to occasionally fit Bunnings into our weekend schedule. I love some outdoor hiking and join the ranting about various first world problems. Unfortunately there are still some odd occasions like when a random mad man barged into a Vietnamese restaurant and commanded us to return to where we came from. Such incidence only happens rarely but it dampens our spirit somewhat. 

Some of my Malaysian friends in Australia have either already obtained an Australian citizenship, or in the process of obtaining it. Given our permanent residency status, this is actually a relatively easy process. Because of the Malaysian law, however, this requires relinquishing the Malaysian citizenship.  Over the years, I have held on to the Malaysian passport and will probably do so in the foreseeable future. There's one huge reason behind this - I still want to vote in the Malaysian election. It's the one thing that still connects me and the country where I spent the first 19 years of my life. Over the last two elections, I have painstakingly ensured that I join the voting process through postal vote. It may not amount to much, and there's always the risk of my ballot being sabotaged, but at least I am doing the best I could. 

This election Malaysians will vote for the lesser of two evils. 

Barisan Nasional and Najib has been called out for numerous corruption and mismanagement, and Najib somehow managed to survive despite a scandal which would have easily toppled the national leader in any other country. On the other hand though the opposition is now led by the ex-PM Tun Mahathir, a 92-year-old man who is made the figurehead for the respect he still draws even amongst many opposition supporters. In my mind though Tun M is not much of a better option. People somehow forget that over 22 years, he singlehandedly built this political hegemony by ruthless oppressing his political foes, delegitimising the separation of power, institutionalising cronyism and normalising kleptocracy. The ruling party he now opposes furiously today is essentially his own legacy. He's now chummed up with Anwar and his wife Wan Azizah, and has promised to release Anwar from jail to become PM if he wins, but we all know that he most likely just wants to pave the way for his own son's political future in his last years on earth. 

Given that they are both rotten apples, there's a movement called "undi rosak" which a few of my contacts are part of. Essentially they argue that if we remove the current government only to install someone else that is equally bad, it's no different than if an ex dumps you only to immediately hook up with someone who's no better. 

My personal opinion is that even assuming that they are “equally bad”, the optimum move is still to change the status quo, i.e. to vote for Mahathir's Pakatan Harapan (PH). The biggest incentive for any politician is the fear of losing power, not the fear of losing votes. If these two sound the same to you, I beg you to give some thought about it. By causing a shift in power, it will send the strongest fear to all politicians that losing grip of power in Malaysia is possible, even for a party that has ruled for more than 60 years. That is a strong message, and can only be good for the structural strength of the country’s political tapestry. By undi rosak and allowing BN to hang on to status quo, we are not changing anything or sending any message. Do you think the PH will care that 15% electorate put in an undi rosak this election because of Mahathir? No they won’t. 

To be honest, I am growing slightly more disillusioned as time goes by, and I am not as enthusiastic and optimistic this election. I read through some of my old Facebook posts from the last election, and felt really nostalgic seeing the younger, more enthusiastic version of myself and my friends. A few friends flew home from overseas, gathered and sang Setia ("demi negara yang tercinta...") together the night before election. I also read through the black, depressed posts and profile photos posted days after the election. However we have all gone back to living our lives, despite the despair and anger. Five years is a long time, and we all look very different now. We are at a very different stage of our lives, many of us now have a young child, and we live a very different life. In another five years these children will be attending primary school, another five they will be in high school. We just don't have that many five years in our lives. 

I have taken the very selfish decision of living in Australia and continuing to believe that I am a Malaysian. I selfishly chose what I believe would provide the best quality of life for myself and my children. I will continue to vote in Malaysian election, in hope that it amounts to a small trickle of change that the country requires. In five years I may be writing a very different reflection, but for now that's the part I am doing. 

Fatherhood

On the winter solstice of Tasmanian winter, Xuan Ni and I welcomed the arrival of our beloved daughter Tara.

The days will be longer, and life as we knew it is changed forever.

In Irish Gaelic language, Tara is taken to mean "Queen". In Sanskrit, Tara means star.

Your Chinese name is 靖玟 (jìng mín).

靖 － 平安、恭敬。
(Calm and peaceful)

玟 － 古同“珉”，意为像玉的石头, 或玉的纹理。
(Stone resembling jade, or streaks in jade)

The word 玟 is also in honour of your mother's name 璇, which means 美玉 (beautiful jade).

May you be at peace and beautiful, my little Tara. May you grow up to be a strong and beautiful woman like your mother. May you be showered with love in every day of your life, as you deserve nothing less.

I Am A Runner

Not a good one, but I am a runner.

Back in 2007 and 2008, as a lazy bum I joined my friends in Melbourne's yearly fund-raising "Run for the Kids".

In 2007 I clocked 1:50:07 for 15.2km  (7:14 pace or 8.28km/h).

In 2008 I clocked 1:41:54 for 14.14km (7:12 pace or 8.33km/h).

In 2014 I decided that my BMI was a bit too high for comfort and started running regularly. At first it was 2k. Then I started running 5k. Then I started training for a 10k race.

In 2015 I clocked 52:27 for 10.0km (5:14 pace or 11.4km/h).

I think I will keep running.

Of Terrorism, Delusion and Faith

This week, the killing of two innocent Australians by a Muslim gunman in the Sydney hostage crisis has shoved reluctant Australians right into the spotlight of global terrorism. Prior to this, Australians have always felt like a safe spectator due to the country's seclusion from the rest of the world. Terrorism is something you associate with USA, Afghanistan and the Middle East; not with the laid-back, easy-going country where an excellent welfare system keeps most people at peace. Despite the relatively low mortality count in the context of the macabre history of terrorism, this Sydney chapter is turning into a watershed incident. It heralds the era of Australia finally facing Islamic terrorism in its own soil.

Now, religion extremism is nothing new; in fact, wars waged in the name of religion are as old as religion itself. There is a popular sentiment that our generation is living through the brunt of religion extremism in recent years, however I argue that this merely reflects the globalised and decentralised nature of the modern warfare, and perhaps the freshness of our memory.

Australia has done as well as any country could have done in the face of the crisis. While there are the unavoidable Islamophobes who lambast the entire religion, most people have aligned themselves with the #illridewithyou sentiment, a grass-root movement which started with a woman offering to walk with a Muslim woman who removed her religious headdress to avoid becoming a target of Islamophobic sentiment in the wake of the hostage situation. Islamic leaders in Australia unanimously voiced their renouncement of the terrorist act, while a few mosques around the country organised interfaith vigils attended by people of all faiths.

All these are truly positive development towards the resolution of religious conflicts. Even though we might not see it directly, someone somewhere who might grow up to become a terrorist, is being touched by the gesture of human kindness, and would now be a moderate human being with appreciation of unfettered empathy.

This, however, does not address the core question: Why does religion make people kill, and what can we do to stop it? Many answers have been offered, ranging from the defensive "religion does not kill, people kill using religion as the pretext", to the outright accusation of Islam being based on violent tenets, while blissfully ignoring the similarly violent verses in other major religious scriptures. Some militant atheists go as far as claiming that religion is inherently bad for our civilisation.

Throughout the years, I have had my fair share of dabbling with religion-talks, mostly through online forums. I grew through different phases. From the uninitiated pseudo-Buddhist, I morphed variously into the undecided, the almost-militant atheist, and finally becoming the comfortable agnostic. Through the exchanges I had with people of various faiths and non-faiths, I became fascinated by the concept of "faith".

Faith is at the core of almost every religion. It means complete trust. It means a strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof. In some cases, it even means a persistent belief despite evidence to the contrary. The latter also happens to be the definition of the word "delusion".

Within the context of religions, faith is seen as a virtue. In many settings, the unshakable belief is indeed the most valuable thing about religion. In the face of uncertainty, knowing that the heavenly Father is up there hearing your prayer and guiding you into the light would give anyone unbelievable power and hope. In a similar scenario, a militant materialist atheist could only count on the emotionless statistics and probability, in a universe governed only by the ruthless laws of physics. We are just a bag of molecules with some neural synapses forming this thing we call "consciousness", evolving through generations just to propagate our genes, apparently. How boring and how meaningless.

All of us would have heard some versions of sermons where we are encouraged to hold strong to our faith even when it is shaken, to believe when the belief is challenged. Time and again, we are drilled into our minds that only the faithful is a good believer. Apart from some rare exceptions such as Buddhism, few religions in this world encourage its believers to question the veracity of its teaching.

Unfortunately, faith can sometimes transform into delusion, and delusion is the father of much human depravity. One could argue that even if one's faith turns out to be ultimately untrue, there's no harm in believing in something good. And this is right most of the time. Even if Christianity, Islam, Judaism, or any other religion turn out to be a huge fairy tale and there's no God or afterlife, many good things would have come out from the good followers of major religions during their times on Earth, as they live their lives based on faith.

On the other hand, living our lives based on absolute faith could also make us do horrible things. It is no secret that both the Bible and the holy Quran contain verses which condone and encourage the alienation and killing of non-believers. In response to these violent verses, the peaceful believers often quote other verses which encourage acceptance and co-existence; but this does not prevent some other "faithful" believers to interpret the violent verses literally and act accordingly. Suicidal terrorists' willingness to kill themselves in the act is unthinkable for many of us, but to them it is all natural as they KNOW that they will be rewarded with martyrdom and bountiful awards in the eternal life. Through a lifetime of indoctrination, these people have lost the innate ability to think "what if I am wrong".

I argue that absolute faith is bad and should be discouraged. Even though we do not outright promote it or admit it, rational believers already renounce absolute faith. When you do not attack your neighbour of different faith, you are no longer blindly faithful - you allow the secular ethics of "thou shalt not harm others" to trump the many verses which ask you to kill the non-believers. Even the moderate religious leaders openly admit that they sometimes question the existence of God. Questioning is not a bad thing, it is what make us human, and it is what makes us good.

In the face of religious extremism, we are so used to religious moderates from both sides claiming that "these terrorists do not represent my religion". I think that saying so is not truly honest - yes, the terrorists do not represent the moderate brand of your religion, but it still is an expression and interpretation of the religion. We only call them "extremists" because we the moderates have decided to gloss over the violent aspects of our religions with our peaceful intentions.

At the end of the day, I am not arrogant enough to tell people how and what to believe. However, I do hope that we start teaching our children to question, and to always accept the possibility that "I could be wrong". Bertrand Russells hit the nail on the head when he said, "Not to be absolutely certain is, I think, one of the essential things in rationality." If he is alive today, I imagine he could have also said that "Not to be absolutely certain is the key to curbing religious fanaticism, and to reduce blood shed in the name of Gods".