Views: 368
出處﹕
牟宗三：《五十自述》第五章 客觀的悲情（一）
嘉言﹕
契爾克伽德說：“沒有一個世代的人能從前一代學知真正的人生，由這方面來看，每一世代都是原始的。它所負的工作並無與前一代的有什麼不同，它亦不能勝過前一代而更進步。例如沒有一個世代能從前一代學知如何去愛，除從頭做起外，也沒有一個世代能有任何其他開始點。同樣，信仰亦是如此。沒有一個世代能從前一代不同的一點做起，沒有一個世代能不從開頭做起，同時也沒有一個世代能勝過前一代。”真正的人生都要從頭做起，前聖後聖，其揆一也。這是人格完成的重複，而無所謂進步。
啟悟﹕
人類的物質進步可以累積；但精神文明卻要靠每一代人，甚或每一個人從頭做起。是故物質進步幾乎是必然的，但道德卻可以進也可以退！
Humanistic philospher.
[版主回覆12/24/2007 08:12:00]The important thing is: we can't take for granted there will be progress on all fronts for the humankind. Science and technology almost guarantees material progress, because once a new, better device is invented, we won't go back to an old technology (unless you can't afford it). But not the "mind". This is a primitive, pristine piece that has to be worked by every mind to reveal its true promise. The failure to do this will guarantee not evolution, but "Devolution". Are we not talking about this age of ours?
Yes, working along the Maestro's line, this strategy will be very self-improving. A couple of days ago, a fellow blogger compared and discussed about Pomeraz and North about the evolution of devolution of our world. It seemed interesting to kmow 牟宗三 could fall within the Pomeraz camp for more randomness of life, ie devolution, if we willed that way.
[版主回覆12/31/2007 17:50:00]I'm not sure if I followed you, as they seem to be talking about very different things.
Yes, very different. In terms of randomness of the occurences-could be-but I am stretching too far. Pomeraz wrote that the world is not evoluting. It just drindles. Look at China of the 19th Century, as an example.
Still remember the cultural lag theroies in school days? Revolution seems to be the only solution, just like I have to embrace traumatic decision during my career? It could be too challenging for the 'mind' to pick up the pace of this material world. The Bible could help.
[版主回覆01/25/2008 18:10:00]Pomeranz and a lot of others (Marx, Weber, industrialism vs capitalism debate, etc.) want to find out why the West overtook China and the East. Some day, people will perhaps debate why China later overtakes the U.S. and the West …
But they were only explaining "progress" in the material world! The important issue raised by Kierkegaard and 牟宗三 , via my interpretation, is this does not necessarily translate into "progress" in the spiritual sphere.
Does the Bible help? There are so many "bibles" out there, and which one do you follow?
Interesting. Understood. I really was assuming progress in the material world, when I quoted the classical theorists; spiritually, we may not be progressing at all.