Masuk, keluar. Input, output. Minda. Mind.

Have you ever wondered what reviews do to yourself other than telling/educating/informing you on a certain something?

If you ask me, the one doing the review should not on any basis be bias, not reviewing based on personal tastes, factors, drives and everything that ignites and affects one's affections. In other words, be on the fence. I know it is utterly impossible to be absolutely in between, but at least there's and initiative to do so.

Reviews could be so personally biased and one-sided. But yet, people put trust on reviews - like books, food, movies, plays, music and such on the formal side. Informally however, is by the word of mouth.

First and foremost, reviews put a certain template in your mind, on your perceptions towards things. Its like saying A should have three lines in it, you see, one slanting to the left, the other to the right, and the third line in between the legs. Its like, molding your mind into "trying" to believe something. It has already created a certain early impression on what you're supposed to expect from it, and at the end of the day, the judgment is all yours.

Mostly would agree to the reviews. Conforming to the majority voice. If you're from a collectivist country, it's nature that you're afraid to disagree, it's written in your traits, or rather, norms.

If you're a Malaysian that is caught between America's individualists notion and China's collectivist idea, then, you are simply caught in between, you have to think and re-think and re-think. You'd say the society would want you to follow the norm, take Yasmin Ahmad's movies. Some are just afraid to voice out, because it goes against the bloody norm. Like that Imam touching that dog in Gubra. Some just think its ridiculous because its the norm.

The other side to it is that they stand out from the crowd. They hold on to their beliefs and fight with and for it. After all, fighting for your self is the most noble thing in the individualism beliefs.

But some would just think its selfish.

Anyway, the idea is that are these reviews really worth believing and on any basis do they actually serve well to one's mind?

Like I said, it creates a certain template, a certain blueprint onto making you believe what has been written in the review. But of course, it all falls back to yourself - to conform or not. Its all based on your judgments.

Because reviews could be so bias as I mentioned earlier, the writer could be reviewing solely based on their personal biases - emotionally, mentally, spiritually, religiously. Then again, if they were to write driven by their personal biases, they are not professional enough. They do not know how to decipher work and personal life.

Come to think again, you can't really be in an absolute state of self, mind and whatever that comes in between because we humans have been receiving inputs, drives, ignitions since day one. Take religions, norms, culture, educations, politics and all. They are all root down to your surrounding, your society.

Right where you are standing now, don't tell me you did it all on your own because we can never be absolute on something. We can never truly be absolute in perceptions as they are all based on every, and I mean it, EVERY single thing in your entire life. Even in milliseconds, even if that means its the size of a bloody molecule.

The next time you hear a review on the radio, or read a review; remember, do you want to start believing (and conforming) what the person has to say on that something? Or do you want to make sure that what the person has said is actually true? You see, the latter even suggested that the reviews had created a blueprint in your mind.

What? I was driving home and I heard a review on Wasabi Prawns on the radio. I could not think of the food, but instead, I was wondering whether I should believe him or not because he was trying so hard to persuade people its good, in fact, "the tastiest fluffy thing.. you'd be sure to order another platter."

Right?