For much of human history, the source of human intelligence and individual character was thought to have been the heart, the liver, or the spleen—not the brain. Before and after the mind was linked to the brain, the supposed significance of the organ has shaped how it is represented—both as a body part and as the locus of the self. Images of the brain have for the most part been, and still are, speculative, thanks to the opaque relationship between the organ and its functions. The subjective experience of consciousness—dynamic, diachronic and synchronic—cannot readily be transposed onto the brain's physiology. The kidney, by contrast, filters and secretes a fluid with properties that can be correlated and classified according to smell, color, and sedimentation, leaving traces of a time-based process with a clear beginning and end. Diagnosis from urine, practiced for many centuries, is a deductive process based on the commonsensical intelligibility of this process: intake, excretion, repeat. We tend to think of contemporary, digital images of the brain—the beguiling, arresting concoctions derived from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) machines—as evidence of “activity,” regardless of the complicated mathematical operations involved in their production. We encounter them in reports about “your brain on poker” or “your brain on sex.” The use of brain scans to trumpet what are often insignificant and sensational studies has demystified the discipline and helped provoke a backlash against so-called neurophrenology, and against the use of neuroscience as an explanatory panacea.more from Isabelle Moffat at Triple Canopy here.
2013年7月31日星期三
WHERE IS MY MIND?
6 LESSONS DISNEY COULD LEARN FROM PAKISTAN'S 'BURKA AVENGER'
Lindsey Davis in the Huffington Post:
She's called the Burka Avenger, and she's the defender of girls' education and women's rights.
The brainchild of Pakistani pop star Aaron Haroon Rashid, the cartoon was created as a way to combat the Taliban's intense opposition to educating girls, AP reports.
We think Disney could learn a thing or two about what a female protagonist should look like from the fearless Burka Avenger.
1. She fights villains with Takht Kabaddi -- a form of karate that uses books and pens as weapons, because she's all about emphasizing the importance of education.
More here.
2013年7月30日星期二
THE CHARITABLE-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
Peter Buffett in the New York Times:
Philanthropy has become the “it” vehicle to level the playing field and has generated a growing number of gatherings, workshops and affinity groups.
As more lives and communities are destroyed by the system that creates vast amounts of wealth for the few, the more heroic it sounds to “give back.” It’s what I would call “conscience laundering” — feeling better about accumulating more than any one person could possibly need to live on by sprinkling a little around as an act of charity.
But this just keeps the existing structure of inequality in place.
More here.
A RESPONSE TO PZ MYERS
Jesse Marczyk in Psychology Today:
Kicking off his reply, PZ has this to say about why he dislikes the methods of evolutionary psychology:
“PZ: That’s my primary objection, the habit of evolutionary psychologists of taking every property of human behavior, assuming that it is the result of selection, building scenarios for their evolution, and then testing them poorly.”
Familiar as I am with the theoretical commitments of the field, I find it strange that I overlooked the part that demands evolutionary psychologists assume that every property of human behavior is the result of selection. It might have been buried amidst all those comments about things like “byproducts”, “genetic drift”, “maladaptiveness” and “randomness” by the very people who, more or less, founded the field.
More here.
50个塑造今日商业的观念
50个塑造今日商业的观念——序言
FT总编辑巴贝尔：由FT牵头的一个评委会选出了“50个塑造今日商业世界的观念”。这些观念非常多元，从“条形码”、“全球化”到“中国市场改革”都榜上有名。我们希望与读者共同探究：如何让商业变得更高效、更有价值。
奥巴马医改或成功，共和党慌了神
克鲁格曼：奥巴马医改或成功，共和党慌了神
奥巴马医改或将成功，让共和党人陷入焦虑，他们采取极端行动，企图再度进行财政敲诈。共和党为何愿冒经济危机风险，剥夺百万同胞医保权利？
HOW TO REGROW YOUR HEAD
From Nature:
Scientists already knew that the Wnt genes are expressed in a gradient along the worms' bodies — from high at the tail to low at the head — and suspected that the genes were involved in directing stem cells during healing. In the latest studies, researchers wanted to find out if a lack of Wnt gene expression was responsible for the poorer regenerative abilities in particular worm species. When these species are sliced apart at a point more than halfway to their tail ends, they can regenerate a tail from the head piece, but the tail section is unable to form a new head. However, if the wound is closer to the head — not more than about one-third of the way from it — then both parts will fully regenerate. To explain the disparity, Jochen Rink, a molecular biologist at the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics in Dresden, Germany, sliced a worm called Dendrocoelum lacteum at different positions along its body. He and his team then sequenced RNA from the various wounds1. The researchers found that, in wounds that did regrow heads, genes coding for a series of enzymes involved in the Wnt pathway had their expression turned up. But in the pieces that couldn’t regrow, the Wnt genes “didn’t even twitch”, Rink says.
More here. (Note: For dear friend and fellow scientist Dr. Stavroula Kousteni whose brilliant insights into the b-catenin signaling in cancer cells is helping me develop novel and individualized therapy for my MDS patients)
WHAT THE PHYSICS OF LOVE LOOKS LIKE
From PopSci:
Ma and her collaborators, Chris Parker and Lola Kalman, have posted two more videos you can check out here. One involves fire! What Love Looks Like, video one of six from Tangible Graphics on Vimeo.
More here.
SEXY SPRING: HOW GROUP SEX WILL LIBERATE IRAN, CHINA
Katherine Frank talks to anthropologist Pardis Mahdavi on changing sexual mores in Iran and China and what it means for politics, in Salon:
[T]he new sexual culture in Iran, Mahdavi believes, is not simply an embrace of Western consumerism and morality nor merely an escapist hedonism, a “last resort.” Urban young adults, the focus of Mahdavi’s inquiry, made up about two-thirds of Iran’s population; they were mobile, highly educated, underemployed, and dissatisfied with the political regime at the time. Some were directly involved in politics. Many used the Internet to make connections, blog about their frustrations, and peer into youth cultures elsewhere around the world. Willingly taking risks with their social and sexual behavior, as these Iranian young people were doing, was viewed as a step toward social and political reform—not just a means of escape and excitement. After all, the consequences of partying in Tehran were different from in Los Angeles, despite similarities in flashy dress, electronic music, and group sex. Iranian youth had “restricted access to social freedoms, education, and resources (such as contraceptives or other harm-reduction materials)” that might minimize the risk of some of their behaviors. If caught, the punishments many young people would receive from their parents would likely be harsh. The punishments meted out by the morality police could be harsher. If caught drinking, for example, youth could be detained and sentenced to up to seventy lashes. Premarital sex could be punished by imprisonment and lashings; unmarried men and women caught in a car together could receive up to eighty-four lashings each. Although physical punishment has decreased in recent years, Mahdavi notes, young people are still detained and harassed by the morality police.
Yet stories of being apprehended and arrested by the morality police were sometimes told with pride; occasionally, even parents were pleased that their children stood up for their beliefs. Some young adults courted run-ins with the morality police in the name of activism, boredom, or both. One couple caught having sex at a party were arrested and forced to marry. When Mahdavi talked with the twenty-two-year old woman involved, the woman explained that she and her new husband were trying to annul the marriage. Despite her ruined reputation, however, the young woman mused that her experience was “almost worth it”: “The sex was great, and the excitement and adventure of doing what we know we aren’t supposed to be doing, then being caught! Well, and it makes a great story.”
Mahdavi’s informants claimed that they were living the social and sexual changes they desired, reminding her that their “revolution was not about momentary acts” but was “a way of life.” This way of life included social gatherings and behavior that “could be viewed as hedonistic” but were also “a necessary part of constructing a world over which they had control, a world they could live in rather than in the world of the Islamists, who would have them stay home and obey.
IT'S ALL ABOUT THE BENJAMINS: GRAPPLING WITH FEARS OF INFLATION
by Akim Reinhardt
I belong to a credit union. It's been fifteen years since I kept my money in a for-profit bank.
Nearly one-third of Americans also belong to credit unions, and for most of us, the reason is obvious: for-profit banks suck. They nickle-and-dime you to death, looking for any excuse to charge fees. And that makes perfect sense. After all, banks aren't designed to do you any favors. They're designed to make money off of your money.
Credit unions, however, are non-profit cooperatives. So they're not out to fuck ya. People who keep money with them are shareholders, not targets of exploitation. And when a credit union does charge fees, the reason and amount always seem sensible, to me at least. So not only do I keep my money in a credit union, I also took a home mortgage with one and run my credit card through one.
The financial meltdown of 2008 only reinforced my decision to avoid for-profit banks at all costs. As profiteering financial institutions hit the skids, and were either bailed out with public money or put down altogether, the credit union industry was relatively unscathed by comparison. Reasonable regulations and responsible banking practices ensured that most credit unions never gambled away their shareholders' money.
In fact, no retail (a.k.a. consumer or natural person) credit union, the kind that operates like a bank for regular people, has ever been bailed out with taxpayer money. Ever. Furthermore, compared to banks, only a fraction of retail credit unions went under, although it should be noted that the financial meltdown did substantially damage the wholesale (a.k.a. corporate or central) credit union industry, which offers investments and services to the retail credit unions, not their patrons.
Fewer fees and peace of mind are nice perks, to be sure. However, there are certain disadvantages. One inconvenience that plagued me for several years has to do with the relatively sparse physical presence of credit unions, compared to the monstrous for-profit banks that loom large on the landscape; it seems you can't spit without hitting one of the latter, while the former is far less ubiquitous.
With fewer branches and outlets, credit unions can't offer nearly as many automated tell machines as do the big boys. Of course the credit union would never charge me for using someone else's ATM. Again, they're not looking for excuses to screw me over. But the non-credit union ATMs that I did occasionally use invariably charged me for using their machine.
So to avoid fees, I had to take care to make withdrawals only from the relatively few credit union ATMs, none of which were near my home. Either that, or I had to suck it up and pay the piper.
Fortunately, my credit union came up with a solution. They cut a deal with 7-11. As a result, I can withdraw money with my credit union ATM card at any of their stores and pay no fees. And it just so happens that there are two 7-11s within a few blocks from my home.
Nearly one-third of Americans also belong to credit unions, and for most of us, the reason is obvious: for-profit banks suck. They nickle-and-dime you to death, looking for any excuse to charge fees. And that makes perfect sense. After all, banks aren't designed to do you any favors. They're designed to make money off of your money.
Credit unions, however, are non-profit cooperatives. So they're not out to fuck ya. People who keep money with them are shareholders, not targets of exploitation. And when a credit union does charge fees, the reason and amount always seem sensible, to me at least. So not only do I keep my money in a credit union, I also took a home mortgage with one and run my credit card through one.
The financial meltdown of 2008 only reinforced my decision to avoid for-profit banks at all costs. As profiteering financial institutions hit the skids, and were either bailed out with public money or put down altogether, the credit union industry was relatively unscathed by comparison. Reasonable regulations and responsible banking practices ensured that most credit unions never gambled away their shareholders' money.
In fact, no retail (a.k.a. consumer or natural person) credit union, the kind that operates like a bank for regular people, has ever been bailed out with taxpayer money. Ever. Furthermore, compared to banks, only a fraction of retail credit unions went under, although it should be noted that the financial meltdown did substantially damage the wholesale (a.k.a. corporate or central) credit union industry, which offers investments and services to the retail credit unions, not their patrons.
Fewer fees and peace of mind are nice perks, to be sure. However, there are certain disadvantages. One inconvenience that plagued me for several years has to do with the relatively sparse physical presence of credit unions, compared to the monstrous for-profit banks that loom large on the landscape; it seems you can't spit without hitting one of the latter, while the former is far less ubiquitous.
With fewer branches and outlets, credit unions can't offer nearly as many automated tell machines as do the big boys. Of course the credit union would never charge me for using someone else's ATM. Again, they're not looking for excuses to screw me over. But the non-credit union ATMs that I did occasionally use invariably charged me for using their machine.
So to avoid fees, I had to take care to make withdrawals only from the relatively few credit union ATMs, none of which were near my home. Either that, or I had to suck it up and pay the piper.
Fortunately, my credit union came up with a solution. They cut a deal with 7-11. As a result, I can withdraw money with my credit union ATM card at any of their stores and pay no fees. And it just so happens that there are two 7-11s within a few blocks from my home.
ENCHANTMENT AND THE NINE BRONZE TRIPODS 九鼎
by Leanne Ogasawara
From Xia to Shang
And from Shang to Zhou....
And from Shang to Zhou....
You know the story: Nine bronze tripods-- cast back in the mists of great antiquity-- were treasured by ancient Chinese Kings as a symbol of their right to rule.
Passed down from dynasty to dynasty-- for nearly 2,000 years (or so the story goes) until the time when the First Emperor, Shihuangdi, finally toppled the last Zhou King-- and rather than see their transfer to Shihuangdi’s new dynasty-- the last Chu King flung the nine bronzes forever into the River Si
(English wikipedia suggests it was the Qin king; Japanese wikipedia has it as the Qin king who did the flinging).
Given their symbolic significance, Shihuangdi actively attempted to dredge up the sacred bronzes from the river, but it was to no avail; and scholars of later dynasties saw this as further evidence of the lack of moral virtue of the First Emperor.
There is a well known story about these matters, which supposedly took place at the start of the Eastern Zhou Period (770-256 BC). Severely weakened by external and internal threats, the Zhou kings came to rule in name only. Although the Zhou dynasty was the acknowledged recipient of the Mandate of Heaven and therefore possessor of the Nine Tripods, the real political power was held by the kings and generals of various surrounding kingdoms, chiefly those of the Qin, Qi, Chu, Wei and Yan.
The Chu were especially troublesome, and after some showy military displays near the Zhou capital of Luoyang, the worried Zhou king dispatched his trusty Minister, Wáng-sūn Mǎn (王孫満), to negotiate for peaceful relations with their southern Chu neighbors.
Arriving at the military camp outside the capital, the belligerent Lord of Chu immediately asked Minister Wang about the size and weight of the Nine Tripods (問鼎之輕重)-- thereby implying that with their transfer to the House of Chu, the Mandate of Heaven would also be transferred to Chu.
Minister Wang--always quick of wit-- sharply responded that unless it could be shown that the Will of Heaven had in fact changed, then it was forbidden to inquire after the weight of the tripods. He then went on to explain that the actual weight of the tripods was beside the point--for in fact, their weight corresponded directly to the virtue of the king who had them in his possession; that is, if the ruler truly held the Mandate of Heaven then the tripods would be immovably heavy. However, should a ruler lack virtue, the tripods would become weightless and therefore meaningless as a political and psychological symbol.
He then drove in his point: The tripods do not matter, virtue does.
2013年7月29日星期一
孔子的心理学
“最后的儒家”梁漱溟认为，凡一个伦理学派或一个伦理思想家，都有他一套心理学为基础。孔子的学说主要是伦理学。如果不能把孔子的心理学先找出来，去讲孔子即是讲空话。
《人心与人生》是梁先生自认他一生中最重要的一部著作，讲的就是他建树起来的孔子的心理学。
人类心理的发展史
梁先生笃信达尔文的进化论。他提出的这套心理学的一个重要的论点是：他认为人心在人类史上不是一成不变的，随着人类物种的进化，人心也有一个发展的过程。他在《人心与人生》这本书中，相当详细的论述了人类心理进化的机制。
首先，人类心理的进化，是一个从身到心的过程。人心的发展皆见于身，身心发展相应不离。
心的活动主要在大脑神经。其演化途径，可以从人脑“三合一”的结构看出：最底层的是爬虫类的脑干，然后是原始哺乳动物的边缘系统，最后加上灵长类与人类复杂的的新皮质层。这个新皮质层，使人类能够运用语言、进行抽象逻辑思考。
更重要的是，新皮质层的出现，让人类脱离了本能的羁绊。动物对外界刺激的反应，基于本能，可以说是不由自主的，只能够作出被本能规定了的刻板反应。而人类却有了选择的自由，可以做出创造性的回应：
(动物) ：剌激 > 反应
(人类) ：剌激 > 选择的自由 > 回应
取得了这基本的自由之后，随着身心的进化，人类逐步争取到越来越多的主动性，灵活性与计划性.
从本能到理智而理性
换言之，人类逐渐发展出了理智与理性。而人之所以为人，就因为人类有了动物没有的理智和理性。
动物依赖本能生活，人类则从本能的生活中获得解放，凭借理智创造工具以改善生活。梁先生相信，人类的理智越发展，越远离本能，就越趋向生命的本真境地，即“理性”之域。
梁先生对“理性”一词的定义，不同一般。他所说的“理性”与理智既有联系又有区别。 “理性、理智为心思作用之两面：知的一面曰理智，情的一面曰理性，二者本来密切相联不离。譬如我们计算数目，必求其正确。算错了会从新再算，就算感到烦厌，也不容自昧。计算之心是理智，而求正确之心便是理性。”
两者都是人类生命的显现，但具有不同的功能和地位。借助理智，人们认识到的是客观的物理；借助理性，人们认识到的是主观的情理与道德上的应当。如果说理智的作用在于通过知识、技术与工具的进步促进生活，那么，理性的作用在于引导人超越了利益层次，而进入“无所为而为”的精神境地。理性高于理智，前者是体，后者是用。
从这里可以看到，人心的演化是有一定的方向的：从本能到理智而理性；从功利到“无所为” - 一个服膺真善美，罗素称之为“无私的感情”（ impersonal feeling ）的精神境界。人心进化的过程即是理性( 生命本体)的逐步显现的过程。
什么是生命的本体？
梁先生说万物同源。如果我们从大爆炸（Big Bang ）理论的角度，可以这样看：大爆炸轰然一声，宇宙从无到有。然后宇宙开始演化，从物质演化出生命，后来更出现了心智。那在有以前的无，就是宇宙的本体。万物皆来自宇宙本体，所以兴都徒相信万物皆有神性；而佛教徒也相信万物皆有佛性。
梁先生一生不离佛教，他的看法其实和谢林（ Schelling ）、黑格尔 （ Hegel ）、奥罗宾多（ Aurobindo ）等东西方演化理论家相当接近，将演化视为创造中的神性/佛性 ( Spirit – in – action ) 或形成中的神/佛( God in the making )。所以他预测，演化的最终结果是，历史上真实不虚的宗教（佛教）将会复兴。他说，到了最后，“人类将不是被动地随地球以俱尽者，人类将主动的自行消化以去。此在印度人谓之还灭，佛家谓之成佛。”也就是说，人类将得到终极的自由。
“道德之真”
梁先生还预言，世间在抵达“真宗教”的时代之前，必须先经过“真道德”的阶段。庸俗的道德是那些限于一时一地的礼俗规范。儒家的道德则是直指性命的真道德。他坚信，儒家或类似儒家的道德将会复兴。
儒家的道德，从个人的角度看，是“践形”。从群体的角度看，是“尽伦”。
孟子说 “形色，天性也。唯圣人乃可践形。”形色是指身体。人身（包括人脑）原为人心（生命）开豁出路道来，人在生活中能实践此生命本性，便是真道德。如果盲目追随社会礼俗，缺乏独立自主：如古人说“乡愿，德之贼也。”就不是真道德。所以王船山说，“俗便是恶”。
能够做到“践形尽性”才算是真正得（德）道之人。生命本性即是“道”，其本质是自觉向上，以身从心。
“尽伦”亦即务尽伦理情谊。他说。“伦理就是人对人的情理。其理如何？即彼此互相照顾是已。”
梁先生还说，“善本于通，恶本于局”。那是因为演化的方向是通向宇宙生命本体的。“局于一身固然是自私，然若其范围虽大于此身，如局于一家一国者，仍然是自私。往往有人把较大范围的自私也看成是道德，那是错误的。
”人心的进化与社会发展的交互影响
人类不能离开群体而生存，是群居的动物。人心实资籍于社会交往以发展起来的，同时，人的社会亦即建筑于人心之上，并且随着社会形态构造的历史发展而人心亦将自有其发展史。简言之，人心的发展与社会的发展，虽然是社会在先，却是交互影响的。
梁先生接受马克思社会发展史分五阶段之说。他还认为，道德的适用与否，必须配合社会的经济与政治结构。例如，孔孟论调太高，只能用之于人类文明高度发达之共产主义社会。以往儒家在中国之所以会变质为吃人的礼教，就是因为其经济科技能力，尚未能支持一个物质资源充沛，人人不愁衣食的社会。只有发展到“各取所需，各尽所能”的共产主义社会这个阶段，民众才会脱离功利、个人本位，转而以伦理为本位，尽量发挥人的潜能，追求和谐互爱的群体境界。
整合古今中外的学术是今日学界的趋势
梁先生认为他的《人心与人生》一书沟通了古今中外的学术。确实如此。达尔文，马克思和佛陀的影响，在书中尤其显著。
不过，在梁先生没有看到的西方，继后现代主义之后，一股整合西方学术与东方智慧传承的新潮流亦已在学术界兴起。威伯尔 （Ken Wilber）的整合理论，堪称代表。他与梁先生的看法基本一致。认为宇宙的演化有一定的方向。不同的是，他比梁先生幸运得多。所处的生活环境与掌握的研究资源，都优越丰富得多。加上科技发达，通过互联网，古今中外各种资料，顺手拿来，方便得很。所以，他所建构的系统，比起“人心与人生”，远为庞大严谨。
梁先生自从在1953年得罪了毛泽东之后，就被冷落在一个角落，三十多年无人敢闻问。在文革时期，他多年搜集的参考资料，遭受严重毁坏。在这极端恶劣又封闭的环境里，他尚能写出《人心与人生》这样一部不同凡响的儒学著作，用现代知识创造性的诠释了孔孟学说，为新儒家开拓了一个新的方向。思之令人既钦佩又心酸。
《人心与人生》是梁先生自认他一生中最重要的一部著作，讲的就是他建树起来的孔子的心理学。
人类心理的发展史
梁先生笃信达尔文的进化论。他提出的这套心理学的一个重要的论点是：他认为人心在人类史上不是一成不变的，随着人类物种的进化，人心也有一个发展的过程。他在《人心与人生》这本书中，相当详细的论述了人类心理进化的机制。
首先，人类心理的进化，是一个从身到心的过程。人心的发展皆见于身，身心发展相应不离。
心的活动主要在大脑神经。其演化途径，可以从人脑“三合一”的结构看出：最底层的是爬虫类的脑干，然后是原始哺乳动物的边缘系统，最后加上灵长类与人类复杂的的新皮质层。这个新皮质层，使人类能够运用语言、进行抽象逻辑思考。
更重要的是，新皮质层的出现，让人类脱离了本能的羁绊。动物对外界刺激的反应，基于本能，可以说是不由自主的，只能够作出被本能规定了的刻板反应。而人类却有了选择的自由，可以做出创造性的回应：
(动物) ：剌激 > 反应
(人类) ：剌激 > 选择的自由 > 回应
取得了这基本的自由之后，随着身心的进化，人类逐步争取到越来越多的主动性，灵活性与计划性.
从本能到理智而理性
换言之，人类逐渐发展出了理智与理性。而人之所以为人，就因为人类有了动物没有的理智和理性。
动物依赖本能生活，人类则从本能的生活中获得解放，凭借理智创造工具以改善生活。梁先生相信，人类的理智越发展，越远离本能，就越趋向生命的本真境地，即“理性”之域。
梁先生对“理性”一词的定义，不同一般。他所说的“理性”与理智既有联系又有区别。 “理性、理智为心思作用之两面：知的一面曰理智，情的一面曰理性，二者本来密切相联不离。譬如我们计算数目，必求其正确。算错了会从新再算，就算感到烦厌，也不容自昧。计算之心是理智，而求正确之心便是理性。”
两者都是人类生命的显现，但具有不同的功能和地位。借助理智，人们认识到的是客观的物理；借助理性，人们认识到的是主观的情理与道德上的应当。如果说理智的作用在于通过知识、技术与工具的进步促进生活，那么，理性的作用在于引导人超越了利益层次，而进入“无所为而为”的精神境地。理性高于理智，前者是体，后者是用。
从这里可以看到，人心的演化是有一定的方向的：从本能到理智而理性；从功利到“无所为” - 一个服膺真善美，罗素称之为“无私的感情”（ impersonal feeling ）的精神境界。人心进化的过程即是理性( 生命本体)的逐步显现的过程。
什么是生命的本体？
梁先生说万物同源。如果我们从大爆炸（Big Bang ）理论的角度，可以这样看：大爆炸轰然一声，宇宙从无到有。然后宇宙开始演化，从物质演化出生命，后来更出现了心智。那在有以前的无，就是宇宙的本体。万物皆来自宇宙本体，所以兴都徒相信万物皆有神性；而佛教徒也相信万物皆有佛性。
梁先生一生不离佛教，他的看法其实和谢林（ Schelling ）、黑格尔 （ Hegel ）、奥罗宾多（ Aurobindo ）等东西方演化理论家相当接近，将演化视为创造中的神性/佛性 ( Spirit – in – action ) 或形成中的神/佛( God in the making )。所以他预测，演化的最终结果是，历史上真实不虚的宗教（佛教）将会复兴。他说，到了最后，“人类将不是被动地随地球以俱尽者，人类将主动的自行消化以去。此在印度人谓之还灭，佛家谓之成佛。”也就是说，人类将得到终极的自由。
“道德之真”
梁先生还预言，世间在抵达“真宗教”的时代之前，必须先经过“真道德”的阶段。庸俗的道德是那些限于一时一地的礼俗规范。儒家的道德则是直指性命的真道德。他坚信，儒家或类似儒家的道德将会复兴。
儒家的道德，从个人的角度看，是“践形”。从群体的角度看，是“尽伦”。
孟子说 “形色，天性也。唯圣人乃可践形。”形色是指身体。人身（包括人脑）原为人心（生命）开豁出路道来，人在生活中能实践此生命本性，便是真道德。如果盲目追随社会礼俗，缺乏独立自主：如古人说“乡愿，德之贼也。”就不是真道德。所以王船山说，“俗便是恶”。
能够做到“践形尽性”才算是真正得（德）道之人。生命本性即是“道”，其本质是自觉向上，以身从心。
“尽伦”亦即务尽伦理情谊。他说。“伦理就是人对人的情理。其理如何？即彼此互相照顾是已。”
梁先生还说，“善本于通，恶本于局”。那是因为演化的方向是通向宇宙生命本体的。“局于一身固然是自私，然若其范围虽大于此身，如局于一家一国者，仍然是自私。往往有人把较大范围的自私也看成是道德，那是错误的。
”人心的进化与社会发展的交互影响
人类不能离开群体而生存，是群居的动物。人心实资籍于社会交往以发展起来的，同时，人的社会亦即建筑于人心之上，并且随着社会形态构造的历史发展而人心亦将自有其发展史。简言之，人心的发展与社会的发展，虽然是社会在先，却是交互影响的。
梁先生接受马克思社会发展史分五阶段之说。他还认为，道德的适用与否，必须配合社会的经济与政治结构。例如，孔孟论调太高，只能用之于人类文明高度发达之共产主义社会。以往儒家在中国之所以会变质为吃人的礼教，就是因为其经济科技能力，尚未能支持一个物质资源充沛，人人不愁衣食的社会。只有发展到“各取所需，各尽所能”的共产主义社会这个阶段，民众才会脱离功利、个人本位，转而以伦理为本位，尽量发挥人的潜能，追求和谐互爱的群体境界。
整合古今中外的学术是今日学界的趋势
梁先生认为他的《人心与人生》一书沟通了古今中外的学术。确实如此。达尔文，马克思和佛陀的影响，在书中尤其显著。
不过，在梁先生没有看到的西方，继后现代主义之后，一股整合西方学术与东方智慧传承的新潮流亦已在学术界兴起。威伯尔 （Ken Wilber）的整合理论，堪称代表。他与梁先生的看法基本一致。认为宇宙的演化有一定的方向。不同的是，他比梁先生幸运得多。所处的生活环境与掌握的研究资源，都优越丰富得多。加上科技发达，通过互联网，古今中外各种资料，顺手拿来，方便得很。所以，他所建构的系统，比起“人心与人生”，远为庞大严谨。
梁先生自从在1953年得罪了毛泽东之后，就被冷落在一个角落，三十多年无人敢闻问。在文革时期，他多年搜集的参考资料，遭受严重毁坏。在这极端恶劣又封闭的环境里，他尚能写出《人心与人生》这样一部不同凡响的儒学著作，用现代知识创造性的诠释了孔孟学说，为新儒家开拓了一个新的方向。思之令人既钦佩又心酸。
札记 - 惠能修行的法门
- 近来与老同学们吹牛，提到六祖坛经，兴起找来读了一遍。读后，对修行方法的见解，隐然成形。简单记录于下，方便日后查阅。
- 六祖主张明心见性。
- 怎样才能见性？不只是禅坐，不只是念佛。而是要口念而心行。
- 如何心行？六祖以无念为宗。但是无念并非一念不起。他说，若百物不思，当令念绝，即是法缚，即名边见。
- 何名无念？若见一切法，不取不舍，亦不染著，是为无念。
- 换言之，念是有的，但应尽量在日常生活中做到念念不愚。
- 要做到念念不愚，首先要对自己的心念有所察觉，也就是所谓观心。
- 对自己的思想感觉情绪要了了分明。
- 看到了，才有选择自己回应的空间。
- 不像动物，遇到外界刺激，立即作本能反应。
- 必须看到别人的作为，也看到自己的内心反应，这样才有选择下一步的空间。
- 可以选择反击，也可以选择原谅，最后当然也可以选择不取不舍，心不染著。
- 如果最终能够不取不舍，心不染著，就是真性自用。
- 这里要注意的是，观心是极高度的诚实，而不是自欺，不是压抑。
- 如果能这样，行深般若波罗蜜多时，就有望照见五蕴皆空， 度一切苦厄。
- 诸恶莫作，诸善奉行。自净其意。是诸佛教。
2013年7月24日星期三
WHAT HAPPENS DURING THE DYING PROCESS?
From HowStuffWorks:
During the dying process, the body's systems shut down. The dying person has less energy and begins to sleep more and more. The body is conserving the little energy it has, and as a result, needs less nourishment and sustenance. In the days (or sometimes weeks) before death, people eat and drink less. They may lose all interest in food and drink, and you shouldn't force them to eat. In fact, pushing food or drink on a dying person could cause him or her to choke -- at this point, it has become difficult to swallow and the mouth is very dry. As the person takes in less food and drink, he or she will urinate less frequently and have fewer bowel movements. The person may also experience loss of bladder and bowel control. People who are dying may become confused, agitated or restless, which could be a result of the brain receiving less oxygen. It can be disconcerting and painful to hear a loved one so confused in his or her last days.
More here.
WOODY ALLEN'S 30 BEST ONE-LINERS
From The Telegraph:
'My brain: It`s my second favorite organ.'
'Life is divided into the horrible and the miserable.' (What Woody Allen's character Alvy Singer says to Annie Hall (1977) in an Oscar-winning screenplay Allen co-wrote with Marshall Brickman. In the full speech, Singer says: 'Life is divided into the horrible and the miserable. That's the two categories. The horrible are like, I don't know, terminal cases, you know, and blind people, crippled. I don't know how they get through life. It's amazing to me. And the miserable is everyone else. So you should be thankful that you're miserable, because that's very lucky, to be miserable.')
'I failed to make the chess team because of my height.'
More here.
2013年7月19日星期五
悟道
因为我见过鬼（神？），所以知道这个物质世界绝对不是故事的全部。为了了解宇宙的真相，一度曾经很努力的去了解各种宗教。相信是因为我脑里的hard disk不够大，虽然读了很多各种各样的理论，沉淀下来的看法却非常简单。在这里与寻道的同路人分享一下。
这里要先申明的是，我其实还没有开始灵修，这里所讲的都是一些纸上谈兵人云亦云的看法，野狐禅是也。
灵修的最大障碍是我们的自我（ego）。所以各式各样的灵修法门的第一步，目的多在缩小消灭这个碍事的自我。
方法基本上有两个：
一，完全接受并信赖上帝，要旨在一个“信”字。当你完完全全的被“圣灵”充满之后，自我就没有存在的空间了！
一，完全接受并信赖上帝，要旨在一个“信”字。当你完完全全的被“圣灵”充满之后，自我就没有存在的空间了！
二，自我其实就是我们的欲望。如果我们能够寡欲，舍弃。欲望一个一个没有了，那个制造麻烦的自我，也跟着不见了。
当自我不见掉之后，我们就能看到我们的本性了。“本性”是不可言说的。无以名之，就叫它“空”。
据说，“空”是永远存在的。也有人称之“无”，所有的“有”都来自“无”。故云，无中生有。
所以，人的问题是认错身份，把这个我当成是我。
读过生物学的人都知道，生物的细胞，每几年就全部换过，五年前的你跟现在的你是不同的两个人。所以认同身体，把它当成是我，是有问题的。
我们可以觉知我们的感觉，思想或情感。站开来看他们，所以我们不是我们的感觉、思想或感情。
那么我是谁呢? 据说，我就是那个空或无。一旦悟到空性，就可以回应禅师的发问：“把你未生之前的本来面目给我看。”
认错身份，这真是一场很大的误会.
由于这场误会, 人人煞有其事的“活” 着，恋生惧死。欲望无穷，没有的东西，朝思暮想希望拥有。拥有了之后，十分执着，日夜担心, 害怕失去。
当自我不见掉之后，我们就能看到我们的本性了。“本性”是不可言说的。无以名之，就叫它“空”。
据说，“空”是永远存在的。也有人称之“无”，所有的“有”都来自“无”。故云，无中生有。
所以，人的问题是认错身份，把这个我当成是我。
读过生物学的人都知道，生物的细胞，每几年就全部换过，五年前的你跟现在的你是不同的两个人。所以认同身体，把它当成是我，是有问题的。
我们可以觉知我们的感觉，思想或情感。站开来看他们，所以我们不是我们的感觉、思想或感情。
那么我是谁呢? 据说，我就是那个空或无。一旦悟到空性，就可以回应禅师的发问：“把你未生之前的本来面目给我看。”
认错身份，这真是一场很大的误会.
由于这场误会, 人人煞有其事的“活” 着，恋生惧死。欲望无穷，没有的东西，朝思暮想希望拥有。拥有了之后，十分执着，日夜担心, 害怕失去。
更有人说，要达到最高的境界不仅要认出这个世界空的身份。还要体认到 “色就是空, 空就是色”。这就是所谓“不二”、“一味”的境界了。色和空，是一个东西，或者都不是东西。
既然“色就是空, 空就是色”，那么那个自我（小我）也不是问题，只要知道它是什么，就可以了。
既然“色就是空, 空就是色”，那么那个自我（小我）也不是问题，只要知道它是什么，就可以了。
哈哈
2013年7月18日星期四
THE SURPRISING ORIGINS OF EVOLUTIONARY COMPLEXITY
Carl Zimmer in Scientific American:
Consider the human eye. It is made up of many parts—a retina, a lens, muscles, jelly, and so on—all of which must interact for sight to occur. Damage one part—detach the retina, for instance—and blindness can follow. In fact, the eye functions only if the parts are of the right size and shape to work with one another. If Darwin was right, then the complex eye had evolved from simple precursors. In On the Origin of Species, Darwin wrote that this idea “seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.” But Darwin could nonetheless see a path to the evolution of complexity. In each generation, individuals varied in their traits. Some variations increased their survival and allowed them to have more offspring. Over generations those advantageous variations would become more common—would, in a word, be “selected.” As new variations emerged and spread, they could gradually tinker with anatomy, producing complex structures.
More here.
2013年7月17日星期三
中国与印度，哪个后劲大？
巴丹：中国与印度，哪个后劲大？
短期看，中国在改善人民物质条件方面会做得更好；中期看，中国和印度的经济增速会接近；长期看，究竟哪个国家会做得更好，将取决于它们政治体制改革的成败。
THE LIFE OF KARL MARX: BERFROIS INTERVIEWS JONATHAN SPERBER
In Berfrois:
Historians are notoriously reluctant to give yes-or-no answers to any question, and this one is a particularly apt candidate for an ambivalent response. Marx certainly made lots of hostile comments about Jews in his correspondence, whether about his encounters with obscure individuals or in regard to his relations with his pupil and rival Ferdinand Lassalle. In his 1844 essay “On the Jewish Question,” he denounced Judaism as a religion encouraging haggling, greed, obsession with money and a whole host of obnoxious capitalist attitudes. A post-capitalist regime would be, Marx went on, one in which the Jewish religion and Jewish identity would come to an end. Such assertions certainly sound, by today’s standards, distinctly anti-Semitic. From such remarks, many authors have concluded that Marx was a self-hating Jew, that he saw Jews as embodying capitalism and so hated them, making his ideas precursors to both the Nazis’ and the communists’ anti-Semitism.
There is another side to Marx’s attitude, though. In that same essay on the Jewish Question he insisted, in no uncertain terms, on the emancipation of the Jews, that is on their having the same citizenship and civil rights as Gentiles, asserting that such emancipation was a central element in the development of a democratic and republican form of government. Marx’s attitude toward his Jewish ancestry appears in the letters he wrote to his uncle Lion Philips, his mother’s sister’s husband, a person he admired and who was rather a father figure for the adult Marx. In one such letter writing about the development of the higher criticism of the Old Testament, he stated that, “Since…Darwin has proven our common descent form the apes, scarcely any shock whatsoever can shake ‘our pride in our ancestors.’” In another Marx described the Tory leader Benjamin Disraeli, (whom Marx greatly admired, regarding, as the smartest man in British politics) as “our tribal comrade.”
A CHAT WITH AUTHOR AND FORMER PORNOGRAPHER DAVE POUNDER
Gad Saad in Psychology Today:
GS: What led you to pursue a career in pornography?
DM: I decided to follow a career in pornography because I wanted to align myself with an industry that was unnecessarily stigmatized. I never saw an issue with sex, yet many people did. Whenever I would ask people why they had an aversion to sex, they never really had a concrete, valid answer. Gandhi once said, “Be the change you wish to see in the world.” I figured if I could use my desirable background (e.g., educated, well-spoken, no criminal history, etc.) and align it with the adult media business, then I could start having conversations with people about the adult industry (and sex more generally) and begin a process of social change.
More here.
2013年7月16日星期二
民主和自由不是一回事
民主和自由不是一回事FT专栏作家拉赫曼：自由和民主似乎已被捆绑在一起，但埃及目前的政治动荡表明，自由与民主并非总是一回事，有时两者可能互为敌人。西方自身的历史表明，选举权可能是民众最后赢得的自由，而非最先赢得的自由。
果真存在一本传记，真实再现卡夫卡？
果真存在一本传记，真实再现卡夫卡？
07:25
卡夫卡本人和他的作品一样，本身已是寓言。他诞辰及忌日之际，数本关于卡夫卡的传记出版。这些传记缺乏富有想象力的洞察，或者卡夫卡身上的变异感为传记设置了屏障。
多国政府与黑客交易
多国政府与黑客交易
从黑客手中购买计算机系统漏洞
, 07:59
全球黑客目前生意兴隆，他们出售Windows等软件的漏洞，令买主能侵入对方系统，多国政府都在买家之列。想购买并修复漏洞的科技企业财力却不敌政府。
HOW SIMPLE CAN LIFE GET? IT’S COMPLICATED
Carl Zimmer in The New York Times:
Scientists have long wondered how much further life can be stripped down and still remain alive. Is there a genetic essence of life? The answer seems to be that the true essence of life is not some handful of genes, but coexistence. E. coli has fewer genes than we do, in part because it has a lot fewer things to do. It doesn’t have to build a brain or a stomach, for example. But E. coli is a versatile organism in its own right, with genes allowing it to feed on many different kinds of sugar, as well as to withstand stresses like starvation and heat. In recent years, scientists have systematically shut down each of E. coli’s genes to see which it can live without. Most of its genes turn out to be dispensable. Only 302 have proved to be absolutely essential. Those essential genes carry out the same fundamental tasks that take place in our own cells, like copying DNA and building proteins from genes. And yet the 302 genes that are essential to E. coli turn out not to be life’s minimal genome. Scientists have come up with lists of essential genes in other microbes, and while the lists overlap, they are not identical.
More here.
订阅：
博文 (Atom)