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...
January 30, 2003
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...
May 25, 2002
短篇
too high an expectation?
會嗎?
背靠著背讀著書
或許熱情會讓我們不專心
或許衝動的情感讓字句無法進入思緒
然而
有一天
當熱情消退
至少背靠著背的我們
還能夠各自看各自的書
安靜地
平和地
too high an expectation?
read more...
會嗎?
背靠著背讀著書或許熱情會讓我們不專心
或許衝動的情感讓字句無法進入思緒
然而
有一天
當熱情消退
至少背靠著背的我們
還能夠各自看各自的書
安靜地
平和地
too high an expectation?
read more...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
