A professor conducted an unexpected “experiment” — putting a live goldfish into a blender and asking for a volunteer to press the button — at a summer camp for high-school students. It startled the students and sparked controversy and a public discussion.
The incident occurred on early this month, in a course about critical thinking given by a professor at National Cheng Kung University’s Department of Foreign Languages and Literature, as part of a 14-day National Taiwan University humanities and social science camp. It became public knowledge after a student wrote about it on an online forum, saying that the professor took out a blender and told the class about an art installation at the Trapholt museum in Denmark in 2000.
The student said the professor pressed the button to show that the blender was working, and later put a live goldfish into it, which startled the students, some of whom screamed or gasped. He then told the students that they could leave the classroom if they were scared, and about 20 of the 200 students did so.
The professor reportedly encouraged the remaining students to press the blender’s button, offering a book he wrote as a gift to volunteers. He asked the class to applaud when a student walked up to the stage to press the button. Fortunately, the blender had been secretly unplugged, and the fish was unharmed.
The student said they felt that they were the subjects of the experiment, and that many of them broke down and cried, as they experienced a combined feeling of shock, remorse, discontent and discomfort, while the professor laughed as if he seemed pleased with his successful experiment.
While the professor on July 12 apologized for any emotional distress he might have caused to the students, he also said that his goal was to use the “event” and “feelings” to inspire them to engage critically and discuss life’s meaning, and values and attitudes towards it.
The professor said the aim was not to kill the goldfish, but to inspire the students, and that he had asked the class to applaud those who left before the experiment, as they had followed their conscience and had the courage to listen to their own feelings.
Despite its goal of stimulating critical thinking, whether the experiment achieved its intended effect is questionable, as many students suffered emotionally, but were left confused about the experiment’s purpose, and only remembered applauding the volunteers, instead of those who opted out.
Ethical issues were also involved: The experiment was conducted without the students’ fully informed consent, and the possible risks were not carefully considered, despite the students being given the option to opt out and being repeatedly told that the experiment would benefit them.
Moreover, the experiment was conducted using deception, which, according to the institutional review board policies that govern research with human participants, can only be allowed after a careful review of whether it is necessary, of the appropriateness of the study population and of the potential harms — including damage to self-esteem and leaving the participant feeling ashamed, guilty, stressed or embarrassed.
However, while the professor praised the students who opted out for following their conscience, the experiment could have also induced conflicted insight (the unexpected realization of their flaws, causing emotional pain, such as shame, guilt and anxiety) among the students who remained in the classroom, which was not addressed afterward.
It is crucial that students learn critical thinking and that they be encouraged to think about the meaning of and respect for life, but educators must align their educational goals and methods, or courses might leave a deep (and possibly negative) impression on students, while the intended lesson might remain unlearnt.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of