By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following remarks made at a commencement ceremony that were interpreted as advocating for suicide, Shih Hsin University President Chen Ching-ho announced he will take a two-month unpaid leave of absence. Chen stated his comments, intended to encourage graduates to develop life and workplace skills, were not carefully expressed due to a tight schedule. The university has apologized for the incident, and Vice President Lin Heng-chih will act as president during Chen’s leave, which begins June 8.
Read the original article here
It’s rather alarming when someone in a position of authority, tasked with guiding and inspiring young minds, chooses to dispense advice that leans towards the utterly grim. The recent pronouncements from a Taiwanese university president, urging graduates to “end themselves” if they struggle in their careers, is a stark reminder of how a certain kind of rhetoric can be incredibly damaging. The core of his message, as reported, was a demand for graduates to manage their time and emotions, and for those who couldn’t, he suggested they “quickly end themselves” because “this world no longer needs your existence.” This is not just unhelpful; it’s dangerously prescriptive and deeply offensive.
Instead of offering support, encouragement, or practical advice for navigating the inevitable challenges of entering the workforce, this president’s words actively promote a destructive outcome. Most new graduates will, at some point, face difficulties, whether it’s finding a job, adjusting to workplace demands, or dealing with career setbacks. To suggest suicide as a response to such struggles is not only unimaginably cruel but also completely misses the point of education and mentorship. It implies a zero-tolerance for imperfection, a stance that is profoundly out of touch with the realities of human experience and professional development.
The irony is not lost on many that this president, who delivered such a harsh directive, has himself reportedly taken unpaid leave. This situation raises immediate questions about his own capacity to manage his workload and emotional well-being, especially when compared to the expectations he placed on his graduating students. If he is indeed struggling, it begs the question: will he now apply his own chilling advice to himself? This hypocrisy is glaring and undermines any semblance of credibility he might have once held. It fuels the perception that his pronouncements were not born of wisdom but perhaps from his own unresolved issues or a profound lack of empathy.
The immediate reaction to such statements is a mix of disbelief and outrage, and rightfully so. It’s natural to question why someone in such a public and influential role would feel comfortable voicing such intrusive and harmful thoughts. This is not just a poor choice of words; it’s an incitement to self-harm, coming from a figurehead who should be a beacon of encouragement. Such sentiments can have a devastating impact, particularly on young people already grappling with anxiety and pressure. The call for the university to be investigated by the ministry of education is a sensible one, highlighting the serious nature of the president’s remarks and the need for accountability within educational institutions.
The broader implications of this incident are significant, especially when viewed against the backdrop of declining birth rates in Taiwan and other East Asian countries. A society that fosters such bleak outlooks and offers such destructive “solutions” to common human struggles is unlikely to encourage its citizens, particularly young ones, to start families and contribute to its future. The pressure cooker environment suggested by these remarks, where failure is met with an expectation of self-annihilation, is the antithesis of what is needed to foster a thriving population. It paints a picture of a society where the demands are impossibly high and the support systems are non-existent, or worse, actively detrimental.
It is crucial to emphasize that struggling in one’s career does not equate to a failure of existence. The message that must be conveyed to graduates, and indeed to everyone, is one of resilience, learning from mistakes, and seeking help when needed. There are always avenues for support, whether it’s through professional counseling, mentorship, or simply leaning on friends and family. The idea that one’s worth is tied solely to immediate career success, and that failure warrants oblivion, is a dangerous and outdated perspective. This president’s pronouncements are a stark contrast to the supportive and encouraging tone that graduation speeches typically aim for, and certainly a far cry from what is needed to combat societal challenges like demographic decline.
The unpaid leave taken by the president adds another layer to this already disturbing narrative. It suggests that perhaps the pressure and demands of his role have indeed become a struggle for him. The world of academia, like any other, can be demanding, and leaders are not immune to facing their own challenges. However, the way these challenges are handled, and the message that is communicated to others, is what truly defines leadership. Instead of taking a temporary leave, the president’s past words now hang over him, inviting scrutiny and fueling speculation about his own capacity to cope. His current situation ironically provides him with the opportunity to reflect on the advice he so readily dished out, and perhaps, to consider a more constructive path forward, for himself and for others.