可能 或許 說不定
人生似乎老充滿了像這樣的東西
read more...
February 10, 2003
February 04, 2003
短篇
失焦
忘記什麼是朋友而什麼不是
不覺得大家共同的記憶是我的
似乎逞強過說我就是不適應這群體
偶爾也其實迷惘自己到底是不是有這麼厭惡
只發現
沒有共同的生活
朋友會漸漸遠離......
小學的同學至今聯絡
是很難得的
我知道
想關心L退伍之後的工作或進修 前途如何
希望W新的工作與戀情 一切安好
找C吵架總是很嘔氣又很愉快的經驗
也不知道是被A寵壞還是被自己的幻想催眠
我以為我有個永誌不渝的朋友
當然並非說他現在不是
只是
我或許需要一些生活中確切陪著我的人
O 我們都驚訝過
"你不是我最好的朋友 為何陪我最長最久"
其實 我到現在 還是驚訝
常常失去現實感
不懂珍惜身邊的人
寧願在網路上找人說話
而鮮少試過打電話求救
不希望牽扯下來的人
難道躲就躲開了嗎?
以為可以救贖我的人
是不是真的幫助了我呢?
其實自己並不如自己幻想中深奧
也其實我的確是很狷介彆扭的人
說跟人"不熟"的習慣 到現在都還會被唸
親暱生狹侮的習慣 也還是在
不懂什麼是不需要客套的朋友
或許一個人讓我失望過一百次. 一千次之後
我才能真正和那人成為"朋友" (undefined)
不為其他
為這爛個性的女人苦笑了一下
read more...
忘記什麼是朋友而什麼不是
不覺得大家共同的記憶是我的
似乎逞強過說我就是不適應這群體
偶爾也其實迷惘自己到底是不是有這麼厭惡
只發現
沒有共同的生活
朋友會漸漸遠離......
小學的同學至今聯絡
是很難得的
我知道
想關心L退伍之後的工作或進修 前途如何
希望W新的工作與戀情 一切安好
找C吵架總是很嘔氣又很愉快的經驗
也不知道是被A寵壞還是被自己的幻想催眠
我以為我有個永誌不渝的朋友
當然並非說他現在不是
只是
我或許需要一些生活中確切陪著我的人
O 我們都驚訝過
"你不是我最好的朋友 為何陪我最長最久"
其實 我到現在 還是驚訝
常常失去現實感
不懂珍惜身邊的人
寧願在網路上找人說話
而鮮少試過打電話求救
不希望牽扯下來的人
難道躲就躲開了嗎?
以為可以救贖我的人
是不是真的幫助了我呢?
其實自己並不如自己幻想中深奧
也其實我的確是很狷介彆扭的人
說跟人"不熟"的習慣 到現在都還會被唸
親暱生狹侮的習慣 也還是在
不懂什麼是不需要客套的朋友
或許一個人讓我失望過一百次. 一千次之後
我才能真正和那人成為"朋友" (undefined)
不為其他
為這爛個性的女人苦笑了一下
read more...
January 30, 2003
短篇
美好
房間的窗戶拆下來洗過了
雖然洗完隔天 台北就下了一場大雨
怕冷 總是緊關著窗睡覺
但這兩天 天氣都很好
早上醒來
毛玻璃透進來的光
是黃色的陽光. 藍色的天
糊成一片那種baby yellow和baby blue的春天顏色
沒有事好做
總是賴在床上躺個幾十分鐘
就對著那畫般景象發呆
許久沒有的美好時光
read more...
房間的窗戶拆下來洗過了
雖然洗完隔天 台北就下了一場大雨
怕冷 總是緊關著窗睡覺
但這兩天 天氣都很好
早上醒來
毛玻璃透進來的光
是黃色的陽光. 藍色的天
糊成一片那種baby yellow和baby blue的春天顏色
沒有事好做
總是賴在床上躺個幾十分鐘
就對著那畫般景象發呆
許久沒有的美好時光
read more...
January 08, 2003
December 03, 2002
Subjective truth-- reflection on Kierkegaard
Subjectivity is directly related to human existence in the world. It can neither be abstracted nor mediated. It is something personal and originating from heart-feelings rather than logic or observations through perceptions, which Kierkegaard named as the inwardness. Kierkegaard emphasized more than once that there does exist objective truth nice and all, it’s just that they’re not of great significance since they are merely cold, detached facts and cannot be life-transforming as can subjective truth. To Kierkegaard, “the thing is to find a truth which is true for me, to find the idea for which I can live and die,” that is, too seek for one’s own subjective truth.
“No theory can adequately embrace the concrete.” is probably the harshest note to all sciences. Kierkegaard pointed out the richness of reality which the theories can never attain. Through perceptions and logic, we establish objective truth. The fascinating scientific discovery of the ‘Uncertainty Principle’ is really an impact on both science and philosophy. It is very similar to the ‘approximation-process’ idea proposed by Kierkegaard in the text— but a substantial difference is that it is a support from the science. Another is the theory of statistics of possibilities about “even the proposition with the highest probability may happen to represent no actual event.” These collectively suggest similar ideas that 1) in some cases, we may infinitely approximate something but never get it, and 2) no matter how we presume a certain thing in totality, by chance it may not appear. These facts point out the uncertainty of objective truths.
Then, what about subjective truths? Is there more certainty in it? Does it provide a definitely correct association? Kierkegaard’s answer is simple and short—negative. But even if in those cases, as he indicated, “the individual is in the truth even if he should happen to be thus related to what is not true.” Why? Because the criteria are different. For objectivity, its criteria of value are correspondence and coherence; in subjectivity, they’re authenticity and sincerity. The infinite ‘approximate process’ defeats science but not the subjectivity.
Similar to the Christian example Kierkegaard provided, there is a fable in Buddhism as followed: a man who sincerely wants to become a monk tried to find a mentor. On his journey, he met a devil-figure and falsely followed him in his moral practice. At last, he still became a Buddha because though he was receiving all the inspirations from a wrong model, his subjective apprehension is still on the right path. And thus Kierkegaard defined ‘the highest truth attainable for an existing individual’ as “an objective uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most passionate inwardness...”
Other than questions on religion, subjective truth also applies to almost all except the construction of science. For example, love is a typical subjectivity as truth. As long as you love someone, it is definite already. You can neither observe through perceptions nor deduce through logic—you simply keep the faith and that’s all. Devotion is prior to any other judgment in such cases.
read more...
“No theory can adequately embrace the concrete.” is probably the harshest note to all sciences. Kierkegaard pointed out the richness of reality which the theories can never attain. Through perceptions and logic, we establish objective truth. The fascinating scientific discovery of the ‘Uncertainty Principle’ is really an impact on both science and philosophy. It is very similar to the ‘approximation-process’ idea proposed by Kierkegaard in the text— but a substantial difference is that it is a support from the science. Another is the theory of statistics of possibilities about “even the proposition with the highest probability may happen to represent no actual event.” These collectively suggest similar ideas that 1) in some cases, we may infinitely approximate something but never get it, and 2) no matter how we presume a certain thing in totality, by chance it may not appear. These facts point out the uncertainty of objective truths.
Then, what about subjective truths? Is there more certainty in it? Does it provide a definitely correct association? Kierkegaard’s answer is simple and short—negative. But even if in those cases, as he indicated, “the individual is in the truth even if he should happen to be thus related to what is not true.” Why? Because the criteria are different. For objectivity, its criteria of value are correspondence and coherence; in subjectivity, they’re authenticity and sincerity. The infinite ‘approximate process’ defeats science but not the subjectivity.
Similar to the Christian example Kierkegaard provided, there is a fable in Buddhism as followed: a man who sincerely wants to become a monk tried to find a mentor. On his journey, he met a devil-figure and falsely followed him in his moral practice. At last, he still became a Buddha because though he was receiving all the inspirations from a wrong model, his subjective apprehension is still on the right path. And thus Kierkegaard defined ‘the highest truth attainable for an existing individual’ as “an objective uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most passionate inwardness...”
Other than questions on religion, subjective truth also applies to almost all except the construction of science. For example, love is a typical subjectivity as truth. As long as you love someone, it is definite already. You can neither observe through perceptions nor deduce through logic—you simply keep the faith and that’s all. Devotion is prior to any other judgment in such cases.
read more...
Internet-- reflection on Kierkegaard
I was especially impressed by the following two descriptions made by Kierkegaard on the society and totality. He wrote that “It is selfish within the individual and it results in the selfishness of the society around him, which thus works against him.” and that “[Publicity is] an all embracing something which is nothing” and is “less than a single real man however unimportant.” Not only do they apply to our present age here and now but the situation has gone from bad to worse compared to that in Kierkegaard’s age.
How could living in the totality make people feel even more alienated? Most people live in the crisis of having an undefined self-image. People try harder and harder in their daily life to imitate each other in the illusory public, which appears in the form of fashion among many others. In reality “human nature needs variety” and are born with the impulse to assert himself. As a results, we are often playing the roles not even close to our true selves.
People go on the internet to do crazy things that they won't ever dare in reality or to express their real feelings simply because it is safe there— “nothing really happens” there. This escape is now more convenient to practice than in Kierkegaard’s age. At then, people may create an illusionary world of forms in their deliberation. Now, we made an improvement by providing one readily available— the virtual world built on wires and wares. If Kierkegaard could have seen the situation here and now, he may very likely become willing to agree more with Hegelian for at least they think (no matter how empty those ideas are detached from real life, they do think).
Kierkegaard's message remains true for all of us. You have to look at things in perspective, to be aware of the trick the totality (including the public, mass media and the society) is playing before us and to recognize the real precious thing— our individualities. No matter how accessible a world of unknown has become and how much fun there is to just intake, we should hold onto what’s intimate and long-lasting to us. We should be aware of the fact that though there are things that are convenient, they are seldom necessary to our existence. Maybe we actualized ourselves through them, but the invaluable still lies in our self-fulfillment rather than in those dead wires and wares.
read more...
How could living in the totality make people feel even more alienated? Most people live in the crisis of having an undefined self-image. People try harder and harder in their daily life to imitate each other in the illusory public, which appears in the form of fashion among many others. In reality “human nature needs variety” and are born with the impulse to assert himself. As a results, we are often playing the roles not even close to our true selves.
People go on the internet to do crazy things that they won't ever dare in reality or to express their real feelings simply because it is safe there— “nothing really happens” there. This escape is now more convenient to practice than in Kierkegaard’s age. At then, people may create an illusionary world of forms in their deliberation. Now, we made an improvement by providing one readily available— the virtual world built on wires and wares. If Kierkegaard could have seen the situation here and now, he may very likely become willing to agree more with Hegelian for at least they think (no matter how empty those ideas are detached from real life, they do think).
Kierkegaard's message remains true for all of us. You have to look at things in perspective, to be aware of the trick the totality (including the public, mass media and the society) is playing before us and to recognize the real precious thing— our individualities. No matter how accessible a world of unknown has become and how much fun there is to just intake, we should hold onto what’s intimate and long-lasting to us. We should be aware of the fact that though there are things that are convenient, they are seldom necessary to our existence. Maybe we actualized ourselves through them, but the invaluable still lies in our self-fulfillment rather than in those dead wires and wares.
read more...
July 20, 2002
等不到
自願的等
是不設期限的
比較悠哉
還在控制範圍以內
因為當時
還沒有瘋狂
不自願的等
教人無奈
"可惡 我要設期限!"
喊著喊著
但是辦不到
有時候
一點點悲傷
雖然
也還在控制範圍以內
但是
我討厭這樣
我討厭沒有信用的人
一封你永遠不會寫的信
一通你永遠不會打的電話
就不要告訴別人
你會
read more...
是不設期限的
比較悠哉
還在控制範圍以內
因為當時
還沒有瘋狂
不自願的等
教人無奈
"可惡 我要設期限!"
喊著喊著
但是辦不到
有時候
一點點悲傷
雖然
也還在控制範圍以內
但是
我討厭這樣
我討厭沒有信用的人
一封你永遠不會寫的信
一通你永遠不會打的電話
就不要告訴別人
你會
read more...
July 16, 2002
June 22, 2002
老師說沙特
我怎覺得聽起來
他所說的 反對"bad faith"
像是 事實唯真
也就是說
你身體裡facticity與transcendence
(你的身體和你真正是的樣子 與 你的道德克制和你所希望你是的樣子)
永遠流動平衡
你任何 想趨向其中一邊.否認另外一邊 的想法
都是一種"bad faith"
是很無謂的
在所謂流動. 你改變自己的能力上
他的說法
又很像是 絕對自由意志
老師特地給我們看沙特的照片
嗯......
果然人如其學說啊
read more...
他所說的 反對"bad faith"
像是 事實唯真
也就是說
你身體裡facticity與transcendence
(你的身體和你真正是的樣子 與 你的道德克制和你所希望你是的樣子)
永遠流動平衡
你任何 想趨向其中一邊.否認另外一邊 的想法
都是一種"bad faith"
是很無謂的
在所謂流動. 你改變自己的能力上
他的說法
又很像是 絕對自由意志
老師特地給我們看沙特的照片
嗯......
果然人如其學說啊
read more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
