If you don't turn to yourself, it also means that I have no responsibility. All responsibility belongs to others, and I can find many excuses to shirk it. I am at odds with the times, follow the trend of the times, and be a wise person. I have no other way, but there is also a Chinese philosophy that can be written in a book.
However, Confucius did not speak in this way, and Mencius did not speak in this way either. That is why there is the saying 'knowing what cannot be done', and that is why there is the saying 'although there are millions of people, I have gone'.
All of these philosophies are Chinese philosophy of freedom, and the principle is the same, that is, the premise is that people can make their own decisions, otherwise everything is not discussed. Sometimes don't talk to me about argumentation, this is freedom.
Some people say that Kant's greatest contribution is that he ultimately led to the unity of the self and the object, which cannot be determined as a goal, nor can it be a vulgar solipsism.
He said that generally speaking, in the process of measuring social laws, subjective factors are added. The measurement result we obtained already includes it, and then he quoted a physicist, Bohr's viewpoint, which is classical mechanics, and another physicist later believed that it should be done. He said it couldn't be measured accurately, not even because of physical measurements, but because the laws of matter itself cannot be measured.
When speaking in this way, there is actually a problem. If it is uncertain, it has nothing to do with people, but is an inherent property of matter itself. The viewpoint that you and I are the same cannot be established. Because that is the property of matter, do you have anyone who is like this. So, being the same as yours cannot be established.
This is one. The second point is that even if he returns to classical quantum theory, things cannot be measured. Because in our measurement of him, we incorporate our interference, with the interference of our subjective measurement factors. The nature of things themselves cannot be accurately measured, and the premise of uncertainty is that things are different, which is why it is said that something cannot be measured.
If I don't want anything else, it's me. It doesn't matter if it's not allowed.
When you are talking, have you ever thought about it? When things cannot be accurately measured, the premise is still that we are one entity, otherwise it doesn't matter if the measurement is accurate.
But the problem, I think it's too low for me to criticize him. The problem is that we have learned Kant's philosophy up to now. Do we approve of his process? Do you think he's solving the problem of the unity of things and me as a whole?
I think the problem, you can think about it, this is a very important issue. The problem has not been completely solved by humanity to this day, including in Chinese philosophy, which advocates for the unity of heaven and man. Strictly speaking, this is not possible and is completely different from the concept of "thing and I" in Western philosophy.
But one thing they have in common is that heaven refers to something different from us. At this point, we can say that there should be both, because if two people are me, without me being the same, there is no meaning. Whether we talk about the same or unity, their premise is that they have differences, and differences cannot be eliminated.
But why is it that humans are once again talking about unity?
We will think about it later, because when we talk about Hegel and Schelling, we have to deal with the problem. There is no classmate who said it seems like Hume denied the necessity of the existence of the external world. He never denied it, he just said that necessity is something we don't know. If you must turn it into knowledge, but Hume would say that as an object of our natural faith, because he believed that natural faith precedes our knowledge, and that for human life and existence, natural faith is to some extent more important than knowledge.
Because in most cases, people rely on natural images to derive their natural beliefs, rather than knowledge, which is an afterthought. Nature is present, and when hungry, one must eat. These things are not knowledge at all, they are natural experiences. Even including our parents sending their children to school, which is a natural experience. The natural training that people need to receive education has a natural rationality for them.
It's because there is such a thing that he exists like this, and I have this belief that I can do it everywhere, just by reason. We all know things mostly based on natural beliefs. When we see acquaintances, we naturally reach out and shake hands, without thinking about whether they are acquaintances, real or fake, whether someone else is impersonating us, whether we should shake hands or not. We don't think like this. Then, naturally, we see teachers nodding to them and saying hello, which is fundamentally a natural belief.
I didn't think there was such a relationship between teachers and students, so I naturally didn't even think about it and just said hello. We people are like this.
In fact, this is Hume's great contribution. He proposed the level of natural belief, which is more fundamental to human life and social existence than our knowledge. This is his contribution.
Later on, Dewey was not called a natural belief, but rather a habit of the mind. He believed that the world is like this, otherwise, I still think a natural belief is better because the world is like this. If I do this, it can be unimpeded in the world. Others will not consider me crazy, fools, or abnormal.
This is a natural belief, and then we can do it everywhere. Hume is indeed right, but what is knowledge?
We can only rely on knowledge when it has reached a relatively advanced level. For example, if you're not polite to me, a considerable portion of humanity doesn't need too much knowledge in their lifetime, and they just lived their entire life like this. Knowledge is necessary, but very little is needed, and not too much knowledge is needed. Most of it relies on natural beliefs.
This lifetime has passed. Only a small portion of people primarily deal with knowledge, but even professors from a certain university are like this. They only engage in knowledge activities that account for at most one-third of their lives. They spend a lot of their time dealing with others, or doing things themselves, such as driving a car and knowing that they must not park their car randomly when they go to a place. They must park their car in the parking lot, or say where they go and what they can buy in any store.
Of course, his accumulated life experience is not wrong, and before that, there was a natural belief that let him know what experience gave him was right. I hope that when we look at Hume, you will say that Hume does not acknowledge the external world, which is not correct. There is probably no serious philosopher in the world who can say whether the world exists or not, not in a general sense, but in a specific issue. There is no such person.
Because our most fundamental belief in nature as modern people has become that humans and nature are not the same thing, and that humans are completely valuable, nature has little value. The value of nature exists for us humans and is based on human needs, which is why we now have no reverence or fear for nature.
Every time I think of this kind of thing, I feel a faint sadness. What kind of sadness is it?
Once beautiful things are lost, they will never exist again. And now many of us lower class people, if you look up their education, whether it's true or false, they are all PhDs, what we call the leaders now. They have the right to make decisions, and they also have the right to contribute to the implementation of these guys. The whole group has no culture.
Of course, it's not just China, the West is also like this, causing massive destruction of nature. Over a decade ago, there was a private gathering with a delegation of Taiwanese writers, and I asked, 'Where were you yesterday?'? You've arrived in Shanghai, where are you going?
They said we were going to find Zhang Ailing's Shanghai. I laughed heartily and said that Zhang Ailing's Shanghai doesn't exist anymore. I'm not lying, the house on Changde Road is there, but the whole Shanghai is no longer Zhang Ailing's Shanghai. Then, there's Xi Murong, a Mongolian man who looks like a five big and three thick iron tower. When you look at him from the grasslands, he's wearing a long robe. In fact, he hasn't stayed in Inner Mongolia for a whole day.
He stayed in Shanghai for 20 days. In 1949, when retreating with the Kuomintang, he stayed in Shangshang Garden in Changshu for 20 days. Changshu Port is not far from my home since I was young. I know it is the most elegant area in Shanghai. It's not elegant for you to go now. They ran out of a subway station and it's not elegant anymore. You can't see it anymore.
Last time, Bi Xiaoyan, who graduated from the history department, came to me to ask for a manuscript. Which publishing house is he currently studying? I said you need to know about Old Shanghai, and he said where can you still see Old Shanghai? I said there are some scenes in "Today I Rest", and Old Shanghai has not been destroyed or Shanghai. He said where to find them, what does "Today I Rest" mean? He doesn't know about movies. I said you are still a graduate student in the history department, and it doesn't matter what we are studying now. Reading history is not something that I am interested in history, you are not interested in. I want to find a way out, so I went to study history. Why?
Because I didn't score well enough in the past and was transferred to the History Department. I graduated from the History Department with a bachelor's degree, so I could only take the History Department. It wasn't because I was interested, unlike me who should have gone to the History Department because I loved history. I told him about it, and of course, there were also some very leftist movies, such as those of the younger generation. It is estimated that Xu Jingxian and others consider the writing class to be located on Kangping Road. He filmed Hengshan Road, Yongjia Road, Fuxing Road, Fengyang Road, Huaihai Road, which is a very elegant place. Now they have all been turned into real estate.
I am from Shanghai, and our family has been from Shanghai for five generations. One of our family histories is the history of Shanghai's changes. Initially, how did we get to Shanghai from outside? Then, our family was the earliest ancestral home, located in the so-called Old West Gate, Old North Gate, and Small East Gate, in the old city of the French Concession. How we later moved to the French Concession is also related to several historical events in China. The biggest historical event was the War of Resistance Against Japan. The Chinese Concession was not peaceful, so we were people with some money. We had houses in the Concession and went to the Concession. However, the houses in Huajie suffered heavy losses from then on, and those stone gates were so big.
Sorry, if you go back after the War of Resistance Against Japan, it will be unbearable to look back on your homeland. People are like this, because one cannot forget their roots. Only in this way can we have feelings for the world and the earth. Now these guys, you can check when their ancestors came. Of course, they don't have feelings for Shanghai, and some people are simply new Shanghainese. Of course, I don't look down on them here. The real estate developers here are all bastards. He has a mind, but those who do bad things have no culture.
网友评论