2013年7月15日 星期一

Ethics: Golden Rule vs Silver Rule


黃金定律 - 「推己及人」,重行善,同理心之積極表現。
白銀定律 - 「己所不欲,勿施於人」,戒行惡,同理心之消極表現。

世俗人視黃金要比白銀貴重,難道世俗人就認為「推己及人」要比「己所不欲,勿施於人」可取?

不同人對何謂善、何謂惡,本有不盡相同的標準

按照黃金定律,倘甲某人認為被施以丙某事是好的,甲某人便應「推己及人」,施丙某事乙某人。或許乙某人」跟「甲某人」一樣也認為被施以丙某事是好的,那麼甲某人丙某事乙某人」便成善事,誠為大幸。現以丙某事= 「虐待」為例,「甲某人認為被「虐」是好的,而乙某人」跟「甲某人」為「同道中人」,也一樣認為「虐」是好的,那麼甲某人「虐」乙某人」便成善事。又或許乙某人」跟「甲某人」不一樣,不但不認為被施以丙某事是好的,反認為被施以丙某事好的,那麼甲某人丙某事乙某人」頓成惡事,誠為大憾。現再次以丙某事= 「虐待」為例,「甲某人認為被「虐」是好的,而乙某人」跟「甲某人」不一樣,不但不認為「虐」是好的,反認為「虐」好的,那麼甲某人「虐」乙某人」便成惡事。黃金定律 maximises both 幸福&遺憾。

按照白銀定律,倘甲某人認為被施以丙某事好的,己所不欲,勿施於人」,甲某人便不應施丙某事乙某人。或許乙某人」跟「甲某人」一樣也認為被施以丙某事好的,那麼甲某人」不丙某事乙某人」便免於行惡,免卻一宗憾事。現再三以丙某事= 「虐待」為例,「甲某人認為被「虐」好的,而乙某人」跟「甲某人」一樣也認為「虐」好的,那麼甲某人」不「虐待」乙某人」便是少做一宗惡事。又或許乙某人」跟「甲某人」不一樣,不但不認為被施以丙某事好的,反認為被施以丙某事是好的,那麼甲某人」不丙某事乙某人」卻是少做了一件善事。最後仍以丙某事= 「虐待」為例,「甲某人認為被「虐」好的,而乙某人」跟「甲某人」不一樣,不但不認為「虐」是不好的,反認為「虐」是好的,那麼甲某人」不「虐」乙某人」就是少做了一件善事。白銀定律 minimises both 幸福&遺憾。

幸福&遺憾 maximising真的要比幸福&遺憾 minimising可取嗎?何以見得?

2013年5月6日 星期一

憂患、恐怖、驚怕

憂患[as Mou Zongshan said, this term was started in 徐復觀's 人性論:(先秦篇)]
恐怖
驚怕
How to translate the above 3 terms?
I try as follows:-
憂患意識 (ANXIETY)- my interpretation
恐怖意識(DREAD, according to Mou Zongshan)
驚怕意識(FEAR and TREMBLING, please refer to Kierkegaard's works)

Which of the above relate to God and religion?
Which need not refer to God's belief?
Which probably might be due to disbelief in God's care of our miserable life?
Which arises with sense of helpless self?
Which arises from sense of positive self and being?

孔孟思想:格物

明、清学人金聖嘆言:「格物」以「忠恕」為要門。何解?
與西方Schopenhaur and Kant, 或新儒学有何共通?
請教!

2013年4月30日 星期二

覺不覺覺之為不覺、不覺之為覺

Why in Chinese, "asleep" is "睡覺" and "awake" is "醒覺", both with "覺" as second in the compound word/term even though the same word is pronounced differently in the two situations?

In the first, "目垂"下, 卻又有覺, 此覺是什麽覺?
In the second, "酉" 伴有星(star)然後有覺, 則此覺又是什麽覺?

2013年4月16日 星期二

East & West in Common

Many "Meaningful" English words

Hong Kong is a horrible city.
Drilling here and there!
The drilling noise is the ugliest that always drives you crazy!
But it is not forbidden, seldom or never. Why?
Are Hong Kongers crazy?

Even the sight of the word is irritating!
Why not?
Look at it carefully.
It spells:
DR... ILL...ING
Being ILL even in the presence of a doctor (DR.)!!

If you are a girl, avoid the name J...ILL, avoid it please!
No wonder the Cantonese impolite language has such a word which sounds "D'...ILL"!

2013年4月9日 星期二

Remarkable Nietzschean Insight

Failure of human reasoning: The error of confusing cause and consequence AND what Nietzsche calls- the original sin of reason- "Immortal unreason"

To quote Nietzsche's words in his Twilight of the Idols and The Anti-Christ, page 59, Penguin, 2003:

"The newspaper reader says: this party will ruin itself if it makes errors like this. My [Nietzsche's] higher politics says: a party which makes errors like this is already finished- it is no longer secure in its instincts. Every error, of whatever kind, is a consequence of degeneration of instinct, disgregation of will..."

Is "this party" the "Birthday Party" nowadays?
Please need not ask me. Think about it yourself. Do not insult your own wisdom by asking anyone.

2013年4月4日 星期四

Words said- full stop

Words said are not to be claimed:

In explaining her translation of Plato's Symposium, a lady translator says that Socrates always starts a debate by asking the opponent first and then introduces his alternative views and arguments afterwards to win.

If we believe that it is difficult to back up a new assertion but always easy to attack and crush an argument by simply offering a counter-example, we should really reassess the contribution made by the unlucky opponent and by Socrates. Who is more constructive in the sense?

And then when all the young kids appreciate his wisdom, Socrates claims his own ignorance however, indirectly mocking everybody including his admirers and followers. Is he irritating? Is he nasty and disgusting?

And then we have another character, Plato, who never claims and discloses his own thoughts but keeps quoting, repeating, and reporting what Socrates is supposed to have talked about. Whenever Plato opens his mouth, he would start: "Socrates says...." and then again: "Socrates says...."

His authority comes from his knowing Socrates. Is he irritating? Is he a coward?

A lot of words should actually be his words, but he dares not say: "I say.... "

To him, "I say..." has no market. "I say..." is weak without power. "I say..." perhaps appears blasphemous for without God, without Socrates, and then without Plato himself.

God make Socrates speak and Socrates makes him (Plato) speak on Socrates' behalf. Nobody is entitled: "I say... " in the whole respectable Western and religious world, it seems.

In this world, so many religious people never hesitate to claim whenever they open their mouths, like Plato: "God say... " and then again: "God say... " If you ask them: "what about you, what do you say?" They will stop, and stare at you as if you were a devil or a skin disease carrier.

When we learn Greek philosophy, we really should be more critical, rethink why and whether it should be justifiable that we followers should praise Socrates so much and thank Plato so much. Are they really 100% respectable mentors and masters?

And then the tradition of "he says...", "God say... ", "Mao say... ", "Michael Jackson says... ", "[Except me and never I] say... ".... Who should be responsible for promoting, extending, and accepting such irresponsible way of talking?

Unless religious people are "God's Gods", no way are they capable of knowing what God say. Forgive me to say, these religious people whose lips always stick with "God say" are insulting God, if any. By the same analogy, Plato insults Socrates. And many are insulting their icons.

Nature and Nurture

Discovery and Invention

Things in existence may be discovered by other species of living beings but not human beings. These things include physical objects, signs, phenomena, concept and even rules and laws of nature... Therefore discovery is not human monopoly except that perhaps only human beings know how to put down in record their achievements provided the process and outcome of discovery is regarded as achievemnets.

What about invention? How different is it from discovery, with reference to discussions above?

Are they co-dependent or independent? Or are they mutually exclusive?

Was Newton a discoverer or an inventor, or both?
Are mathematicians discoverers or inventors, or both?

2013年4月3日 星期三

Philosophy of Law and Language

Is Omission Positive or Negative, if there is such an act?
What is a Double Negative Act, if there can be negative act?

An act of omission is a legal term supposed to be "definable" and "meaningful". Such an act may constitute also an act of negligence depending on the situation.

How to perceive a situation, if any and if possible, of a guy's omitting omission? Can anyone help illustrate such a possibility with a live example in reality? What will be the probable legal implication to such guy?

If an act of omission may be caused by oversight, recklessness, poor memory, attitude of indifference, or sentiment of coldbloodiness, involving possibilities of both intentional and unintentional mentalities (i.e IM and UIM), then "to omit omission" is to do what?

Interested parties please let us be enlightened. Thanks.

Mathematical Philosophy

Foundation of Mathematics and Geometry:

How many points are there on any line?
How many points are there on an infinitely long line?
How many points are there on an infinitesmally short line?

How many lines can there be in a defined area?
How many lines can there be in an infinitely large area?
How many lines can there be in an infinitesmally small area?

How many points are there in a defined volume?
How many points are there in an infinitely large volume?
How many points are there in an infinitesmally small volume?

How to define the simplest and most basic space unit, if any?
If there is an answer to the above, does it mean space is "constructable" and vice versa, "destructable"? How?
If there is really an answer to the above, then how do we perceive Kant's a priori "space"?

When we talk about a point, we know nothing about it except a defined "negation" being "no length".
When we talk about a line, we invent another 'negation" being "no area".
When we talk about an area (surface), we again come up with another "negation" being "no volume".
When we talk about a volume, what "negation" should we expect, assuming we may follow similar inductive process from the above by extension of the same logical thinking, or shouldn't we? Yes or no, and then why?

How will you deal with a person who only repeats: "Oh, no big deal... no big deal!" ??

2013年3月25日 星期一

Liar Paradox and Logic

A class just starts, and the classmates are asked to do an experiment together. In one whole week, everyone must choose a role as either a truth-teller or a liar consistently.

On the first day, a student called "Doggie" met 3 classmates (A, B, and C) sitting on the terrace together.

Doggie asked A: Are you a truth-teller or a liar?
A answered with his back turned.

Doggie did not hear clearly A's answer, so Doggie asked B: What did he say?

B answered: A says that he is a truth-teller.

C then immediately said: B is lying!

Doggie was confused. In his heart, he wondered: Is C a truth-teller or a liar?
In fact, is B a truth-teller or liar?
What about A?

Can anyone helps Doggie?

[The above puzzle is extracted from a funny and interesting Maths. puzzle-solving book- Averbach and Chein: Problem Solving Through Recreational Mathematics, Dover. There are hints given which Doggie have not read. Doggie tend to believe the authors' hints perhaps may not be sufficient enough to cover and explain the situations and paradoxes. ]

2013年3月23日 星期六

始創儒家並非孔子?


以下是2013314 星期四 明報網上即時新聞的一篇報導:
韓教授:始創儒家並非孔子 (20:06)
韓聯社報道,韓國祥明大學中國文學系教授金經一(55)認為,儒家思想的創始人並非孔子。
金經一13日接受訪問時說,儒家思想的創始人並非孔子,甚至儒家學說的核心,仁這一個字,在孔子生活的年代還沒有出現。
金經一教授在新書《儒家思想誕生的秘密》中,以甲骨文、青銅器銘文和竹簡文字為基礎,從學術的角度介紹了儒家文化的起源與發展。金教授認為,儒家思想是在當時的政治和社會環境下逐漸形成的,並非由孔子或者某一個人創造和整理而成。雖然在中國也有部分學者知道這一事實,但只有寥寥幾名年輕的學者敢於委婉地提出來。
金經一教授曾於2005年出版過《孔子死了,國家才能生存》的書籍,書中列舉了儒家思想給韓國社會發展造成的不利影響,在當時引起了廣泛爭議。
(韓聯社)
在下自知中哲史基礎知識薄弱,未能對金教授的見解作深入評論,還請具較高造藝之士挺身賜教。

2013年3月18日 星期一

最艱深的邏輯難題

以下是一道學界公認為可能是最艱深的邏輯難題:

3個神 -- 老實神蠱惑神」,非按序下分左中右並排而坐,閣下未知3個神誰是誰。3個神皆有問必答,其中老實神」言出必真,「蠱惑神」只講反話,「」每一次說話均隨機選擇說真話或反話。閣下的任務是透過向神發問3道只須答「對」或「錯」的問題,而1道問題只可向1個神發出(當然,閣下可以向同一個神發多於一道問題,亦即是不一定須要每一個神都要問勻),並只由被問的神作答,然後根據神方給出3道問題的答案,去確認3個神到底誰是誰。雖然3個神都聽得懂閣下的說話,但是3個神只會說閣下聽不懂的神語。神語中,「對」、「錯」的發音是「哪」、「吒」,但未知「哪」是「對」、「吒」是「錯」,還是「哪」是「錯」、「吒」是「對」。

在下在過度強烈的好奇心驅使下,已先行參閱過答案(現在多少感到有點後悔)。誠然,要「一鋪過」具體地給出完整的答案,即使對一個受過正式邏輯訓練的人而言,也非易事。然而,先嘗試構想發問3道問題應採取的方向與策略、問題需要先後獲取甚麼的資料以助作出相應的邏輯推理,相信還是可以及挺有趣的。

Enjoy.

2013年3月8日 星期五

Are there philosophers in HK? Should they be silent or Socratic as stingy flies?

Someone on newspaper challenges that we are lacking philosophers in Hong Kong. And that partially explains why the cross border "milk powder" delivery trade issue has been dealt with introduction of new penalties under new laws without satisfactory solutions, causing complaints, controversies, and cross border debates and conflicts.

Is such issue philosophical?
If so, why indeed there appears barely any opinion so far from any philosopher in Hong Kong?
Or indeed as this critic has said, there is really a lack of philosopher in Hong Kong?

Why are philosophers silent in Hong Kong?

2013年3月1日 星期五

手錶廣告續編

暫時放下廣告口號的討論,近日亦注意到該手錶廣告將廣告系列作出延續,亦以微電影方式放在網上,現將連結與大家分享。

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv9comp0lqw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYDHEnv-cH8&list=PLXPxjQ0-pdfnD6Egg_0D_92jMKIusWMEA

同時有感而發,康德超驗哲學中,利用了時間及空間兩大元素。因應科技的發展,空間這元素明顯地產生改變,網絡的發展,已經將人對於空間的概念大大伸展,在電子時代,我們可以與地球另一面的人進行差不多的即時接觸。但在時間方面,雖然年紀日近長大的我,是感到時間是越來越快,但以乎時間這元素在實質上仍然未有多大的變化。

可能我們仍要探討我們可以學習如何好好利用時間。

2013年2月18日 星期一

蔣介石的哲學

最近在書局看見一本新書叫 "蔣介石....一個毅行者的....",才知道原來蔣介石都玩哲學. 於是親有機會就去台北蔣中正紀念堂, 看看他有什麼哲理及高見:

"生活的目的在增進人類全體之生活"

"生命的意義在創造宇宙繼起之生命"

小弟才疏學淺, 最後都係唔知佢講什麼! 可悲!

孫中山的烏托邦

剛從台北回來,感覺孫中山的烏托邦實在太廣闊,永無邊際,都犯了與馬克思相同的錯誤 - 沒有計算人類的"利他"不足. "大道之行也,天下為公,選賢與能,講信修睦" 都免強同意; "不獨親其親,不獨子其子" 就比較難; "使老有所終,壯有所用,幼有所長,矜寡,孤獨,廢疾者皆有所養" 這些都只是制度的問題, 梁振英都識得做啦. "男有分,女有歸", 現代社會來說, 不一定是好事. 致於, "貨惡其棄於地.............故外户而不閉, 是謂大同", 目前來看,人類是不可能, 動物世界反而有可能,可悲!

"養天地正氣, 法古今完人"
在我看來,只可能在科幻電影找到. 可悲!

2013年1月6日 星期日

New year dinner

dear friends,

wish you a blissful new year.  it should be great to kick off a new year with dinner gathering.  as promised, i organize a dinner gathering on jan. 19.  let me know your availability & i'll book a table.

cheers.

carolyn