曾問現代史上誰獲最多人紀念
每五十年的生忌和死忌, 即一百年有四次, 其家鄉薩爾斯堡, 整個奧地利, 全歐洲甚至全球亦為他紀念
Amadeus 莫札特傳http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086879/
由另一音樂家 Salieri 帶出 Mozart 一生
由震驚, 欣賞, 嫉妒, 憤恨, 問天何生亮 (電影橋段, Salieri 真人倒不是這樣)
神童, 對我來說不是形容詞, 是名詞, 神的兒童...
三歲露才能, 六歲便寫曲, 十一歲歌劇
對比現今彈琴彈得叻便稱作神童, sorry, 也許彈琴匠較貼切
李察兄, 你認為還會有新的古典音樂面世麼? 還是只能繼續反覆彈奏蕭邦舒伯特等古人作品? :<
說回電影, 片中描繪莫札特為人鹹濕瘋狂無視權貴, 我可沒意見, 也許天才便該不受人世規範, 但"大細超"就好怪了...
當中喜愛有一幕少年莫札特於宴會上表演高超琴技, 蒙眼反手差在未用脚來彈, 眾人皆只懂讚嘆 (全Ｏ嘴也), 唯獨不遠處有一白頭曲髮豆皮臉小童對他微笑, 猶如一位誤墮塵世天使問 :"原來... 你都是跌下來..."
另一小場面小情節, 於奧地利皇宮遇到尚未為法國皇后的 Marie Antoinette 公主, 輕輕帶過己足夠, 大人物的小事件
關於這位皇后的名言 "沒有麵包吃, 何不吃蛋糕", 要為她澄清一下, 歷史上並非她所說
說這話倒真有其人, 在遠東的晉惠帝 "何不食肉糜?"
古代拉至現代亦有, 電視上"一百萬窮人的故事" 中女星問 "生日點解沒有生日蛋糕?" 古今中外皆如此
此電影最後說到莫札特的死亡, 最後的晨光猶如神的召喚, "天使, 係時候了"
很多人惋惜早逝, "如果"有其徒弟 Beethoven 般長命一點, 世界也許不同
我倒覺其一生要走的路已走過, 這才是他, 短的蠟燭卻有射至月球的光芒, 蠟燭已徹底溶掉昇華至空氣中
儲錢到其家鄉走走去 :>
下回說另一套電影
狐狸
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Thursday, July 31, 2008
A Response to the Guardian Article by Khaled Diab
Here we have a Hong Kong response to the Guardian Article by
Khaled Diab
guardian.co.uk,
Friday July 25 2008
Title:
Back to basics on climate change
Here are the main points from that article:
★mainstream thinking has focused on the idea that a low-carb Kyoto energy diet will save our obese societies.
★ I don't believe that our oil-based economies are sustainable and I think that switching to renewable energy is essential to our future.
★ According to a 1999 estimate by the American Petroleum Institute, the world's oil supplies would be depleted between 2062 and 2094.
★This was based on estimated proven reserves of 1.4 to 2 trillion barrels and consumption at 80 million barrels per day.
★in 2005, daily oil consumption already passed the 83.5 million barrel per day mark.
★Coal at current production levels is likely to run out within 150 years. If it is used as an oil substitute, many decades would be knocked off this projection.
★At the current rate of deforestation, all tropical forests in the world might disappear by 2090.
★more than half of Papua New Guinea's rain forest – the third largest in the world – could disappear by 2021.
★we will be facing a global food and wood shortage pretty soon, as well as the collapse of the farming land that will replace the forests, due to soil erosion and depletion.
★Droughts and desertification are also threatening millions of people. The Sahara desert is growing at a rate of up to 30 miles a year;
★Within a couple of generations, the global economy will have outgrown the globe.
★There is a desperate need to rethink our attitudes to consumerism, the disposable culture, overpopulation and the economic growth orthodoxy
This article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Friday July 25 2008. It was last updated at 19:00 on July 25 2008.
The Response from a Hong Kong based observer:
Dear leechard,
The article about the environmental problems of earth that people now face is nothing of interest to me. It has been talked round the clock in many media sites. What interests me more, is a comment to this article. To let you have a picture on it, I have attached these two documents which both of them are in doc form.
This article is really interesting, as this gentleman has found a special way to view the modern society problem. I consider this writing as the representative of all essays telling us that the present environmental deterioration is not as serious as what we think, monetary methods can solve all crisis, just like The film made by Channel 4 in UK( I will talk about that later). I would not agree with much of the points given in this article, and I shall explain it one by one.
The first mistake, I think, is his belief that money is so powerful that could help us to solve any energy problem, water problem, and metal shortage problem. That is what he said: “The more expensive they are, the more we will find.”,” Wealth insulates us from the worst” I cannot deny that, in a short time, man, driven by the strong monetary power behind the discovery of new resource, shall use their ability to the hilt to find these resources. Also, man, being motivated by large monetary reward, shall try to modify what he did to minimize the waste generated and maximize the volume of output. But if it were successfully solving all the problems of the world, why, according to the result revealed by the research, the resource that we now have is more scarce, compared with that we had 20 years ago? I think he would not answer it using his logic. He may have mistaken the focus that problem of scarcity we now have, which is the demand for that product, has outstripped the supply of that resources and the situation is going to get worse nowadays. Where can people find another source of resources so that the supply of resource can still be consistent with the demand? Apart from known source which their produce is decreasing rapidly, the unknown sources, claiming themselves to be rich of oil and food, shall find it hard to be able to produce enough resources for human in long term if the present trend of consumption continues. They would soon run off one day. It is just like the son of a wealthy man spent all his money one day and finds that he is now in heavy debt and finds it difficult to maintain the basic standard of life.
The monetary forces, or the inevitable hand (in Adam’s view), is of no use in solving the problem but to make the problem more severe. Only those tycoons would still have the power to buy these resources for their own uses and the poverty people can find no means to survive. If such situation appears, I do not think that it is a society that man can still live, and it is the biggest threat that human would face soon. And I believe that even money can buy all the guarding apparatus for themselves, they can never buy a thousand, and even, hundred years of safety. You and many philosophers said, Money is just a tool for exchange
The second mistake is his negligence of the impact of environment when trees in developing world are cut. His words are “The West has more (trees) than ever “and “the Developed World we have more forest than we did in 1900. What is the difference?” when answering the wood shortage problem I am very sad to hear so, as the trees there shall help to regulate the climate of the world by controlling carbon dioxide content in atmosphere. If there were no trees, these places shall become a desert and the people living there shall move, which creates, in turn, the immigration pressure on developed world. He is also in doubt with the rate of deforestation in Panama forest, but I think it is highly likely the present trend shall continue. As he has pointed out earlier, if man understands that cutting all forest in his country shall bring him good fortunate, he shall be happy to cut all of them out, and, it would take a long time to let trees to grow into a forest again in these regions . I consider that his saying” If wood is worth something it is worth planting.” the most astonishing one I have seen. Were he on the right side, then all government and the green organizations’effort to plant the trees is surely a waste of time. Is that the case? Woods are not only the climate regulator, it is the habitat of many animals, the source of so many things necessary for human. From these,I think he should not deny the importance of these wood.
The third mistake is found in this statement: “Or more likely it is just a natural cycle of no interest. Notice that no one much suffered much less died” which is his perspective towards the matter mentioned in these lines in the essay: “:Even in more temperate Europe, droughts have dramatically increased over the past three decades – the areas affected have gone up by a fifth between 1976 and 2006. The 2003 drought affected about 100 million Europeans and southern Spain might become desert in the coming decades. I have seen so many expressions saying there is no link between global warming and the drastic climate change, and this one is the typical one, but I, you and many loving the Earth, shall find it impossible to support this, as we know that the Earth has deteriorated, and at a rate that is out of the expectation of these people. I shall not dwell at that point as I think I have talked a lot on it.
The only good point I found is” We have our intelligences which make the resources we have more and more valuable all the time. So we can increase economic growth simply by using the same amount of resources but more intelligently.” I have a strong conviction that we are so intelligent in solving many problems of the world, but I am still doubtful whether economic growth shall occur if we have faced a severe shortage of resources, and there is still a heavily dependent on the traditional methods that would waste a large amount of them, in industries and any daily practice by man. He should bear in mind that the intelligent way of using resource is not simply the modification of the techniques, but to change the way that people think in production, and more important, the world. As far as I know, most people are not prepared to do so though the time remaining for us to adapt the new condition of world is very little before any disaster occur.
If he were allowed to read your blog, he could understand the biggest problem that human now face is, and could understand what the problem of his article is. He could also learn that the best solution is to create a society with new network of thinking and I hope he could support it.
I wish that you would like this article. I have no objection to make this article in public. I welcome any comment if you have.
Best regards,
william
Khaled Diab
guardian.co.uk,
Friday July 25 2008
Title:
Back to basics on climate change
Here are the main points from that article:
★mainstream thinking has focused on the idea that a low-carb Kyoto energy diet will save our obese societies.
★ I don't believe that our oil-based economies are sustainable and I think that switching to renewable energy is essential to our future.
★ According to a 1999 estimate by the American Petroleum Institute, the world's oil supplies would be depleted between 2062 and 2094.
★This was based on estimated proven reserves of 1.4 to 2 trillion barrels and consumption at 80 million barrels per day.
★in 2005, daily oil consumption already passed the 83.5 million barrel per day mark.
★Coal at current production levels is likely to run out within 150 years. If it is used as an oil substitute, many decades would be knocked off this projection.
★At the current rate of deforestation, all tropical forests in the world might disappear by 2090.
★more than half of Papua New Guinea's rain forest – the third largest in the world – could disappear by 2021.
★we will be facing a global food and wood shortage pretty soon, as well as the collapse of the farming land that will replace the forests, due to soil erosion and depletion.
★Droughts and desertification are also threatening millions of people. The Sahara desert is growing at a rate of up to 30 miles a year;
★Within a couple of generations, the global economy will have outgrown the globe.
★There is a desperate need to rethink our attitudes to consumerism, the disposable culture, overpopulation and the economic growth orthodoxy
This article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Friday July 25 2008. It was last updated at 19:00 on July 25 2008.
The Response from a Hong Kong based observer:
Dear leechard,
The article about the environmental problems of earth that people now face is nothing of interest to me. It has been talked round the clock in many media sites. What interests me more, is a comment to this article. To let you have a picture on it, I have attached these two documents which both of them are in doc form.
This article is really interesting, as this gentleman has found a special way to view the modern society problem. I consider this writing as the representative of all essays telling us that the present environmental deterioration is not as serious as what we think, monetary methods can solve all crisis, just like The film made by Channel 4 in UK( I will talk about that later). I would not agree with much of the points given in this article, and I shall explain it one by one.
The first mistake, I think, is his belief that money is so powerful that could help us to solve any energy problem, water problem, and metal shortage problem. That is what he said: “The more expensive they are, the more we will find.”,” Wealth insulates us from the worst” I cannot deny that, in a short time, man, driven by the strong monetary power behind the discovery of new resource, shall use their ability to the hilt to find these resources. Also, man, being motivated by large monetary reward, shall try to modify what he did to minimize the waste generated and maximize the volume of output. But if it were successfully solving all the problems of the world, why, according to the result revealed by the research, the resource that we now have is more scarce, compared with that we had 20 years ago? I think he would not answer it using his logic. He may have mistaken the focus that problem of scarcity we now have, which is the demand for that product, has outstripped the supply of that resources and the situation is going to get worse nowadays. Where can people find another source of resources so that the supply of resource can still be consistent with the demand? Apart from known source which their produce is decreasing rapidly, the unknown sources, claiming themselves to be rich of oil and food, shall find it hard to be able to produce enough resources for human in long term if the present trend of consumption continues. They would soon run off one day. It is just like the son of a wealthy man spent all his money one day and finds that he is now in heavy debt and finds it difficult to maintain the basic standard of life.
The monetary forces, or the inevitable hand (in Adam’s view), is of no use in solving the problem but to make the problem more severe. Only those tycoons would still have the power to buy these resources for their own uses and the poverty people can find no means to survive. If such situation appears, I do not think that it is a society that man can still live, and it is the biggest threat that human would face soon. And I believe that even money can buy all the guarding apparatus for themselves, they can never buy a thousand, and even, hundred years of safety. You and many philosophers said, Money is just a tool for exchange
The second mistake is his negligence of the impact of environment when trees in developing world are cut. His words are “The West has more (trees) than ever “and “the Developed World we have more forest than we did in 1900. What is the difference?” when answering the wood shortage problem I am very sad to hear so, as the trees there shall help to regulate the climate of the world by controlling carbon dioxide content in atmosphere. If there were no trees, these places shall become a desert and the people living there shall move, which creates, in turn, the immigration pressure on developed world. He is also in doubt with the rate of deforestation in Panama forest, but I think it is highly likely the present trend shall continue. As he has pointed out earlier, if man understands that cutting all forest in his country shall bring him good fortunate, he shall be happy to cut all of them out, and, it would take a long time to let trees to grow into a forest again in these regions . I consider that his saying” If wood is worth something it is worth planting.” the most astonishing one I have seen. Were he on the right side, then all government and the green organizations’effort to plant the trees is surely a waste of time. Is that the case? Woods are not only the climate regulator, it is the habitat of many animals, the source of so many things necessary for human. From these,I think he should not deny the importance of these wood.
The third mistake is found in this statement: “Or more likely it is just a natural cycle of no interest. Notice that no one much suffered much less died” which is his perspective towards the matter mentioned in these lines in the essay: “:Even in more temperate Europe, droughts have dramatically increased over the past three decades – the areas affected have gone up by a fifth between 1976 and 2006. The 2003 drought affected about 100 million Europeans and southern Spain might become desert in the coming decades. I have seen so many expressions saying there is no link between global warming and the drastic climate change, and this one is the typical one, but I, you and many loving the Earth, shall find it impossible to support this, as we know that the Earth has deteriorated, and at a rate that is out of the expectation of these people. I shall not dwell at that point as I think I have talked a lot on it.
The only good point I found is” We have our intelligences which make the resources we have more and more valuable all the time. So we can increase economic growth simply by using the same amount of resources but more intelligently.” I have a strong conviction that we are so intelligent in solving many problems of the world, but I am still doubtful whether economic growth shall occur if we have faced a severe shortage of resources, and there is still a heavily dependent on the traditional methods that would waste a large amount of them, in industries and any daily practice by man. He should bear in mind that the intelligent way of using resource is not simply the modification of the techniques, but to change the way that people think in production, and more important, the world. As far as I know, most people are not prepared to do so though the time remaining for us to adapt the new condition of world is very little before any disaster occur.
If he were allowed to read your blog, he could understand the biggest problem that human now face is, and could understand what the problem of his article is. He could also learn that the best solution is to create a society with new network of thinking and I hope he could support it.
I wish that you would like this article. I have no objection to make this article in public. I welcome any comment if you have.
Best regards,
william
Sunday, April 20, 2008
無用的樹
李察兄好
本來想用一條問題來帶出電影
"哪位人士得到世人最多紀念? 耶穌除外"
見無用的樹故事, 忍不住要講兩句先
故事內容可作些少修改
強樹壯樹直樹因為對人有用, 起屋造船乘凉,
人便覺"有用"
怪樹雖弱, 又曲, 也許一碰便斷, 沒人來砍來理而得以長壽
但這長壽並不是"有用"的理由
以上最關鍵字眼是"人"
人覺用得到謂之"有用", 用不到謂之"無用"
但主宰(叫大自然, 大生命也可) 眼光可不是人般短淺,
壯樹可讓老鷹鵬鳥鳳凰等大志之士站腳,
怪樹亦可讓小麻雀等小輩作息, 毛蟲成長, 於壯樹漂白水殺蟲水充斥環境下活不下去的害蟲(人的觀點), 扒糞蟲, 不見光之菇菌齊齊有個歇腳地
沒有食物鏈底層, 上層如何活下去?
壯樹不因能服待大鳥而自誇, 做其本份而己, 也不小看其他小樹怪樹
怪樹亦不因只討好小毛蟲而自悲, 更應能有機會做其本份而自傲, 卻不是以不用辛苦服待大鳥而暗暗偷笑
儍怪樹正以自己不被砍而偷笑, 卻不知一場山火把全個樹林燒清光, 大家最後君體也相同只剩下炭灰, 歸入泥土成養份為下一波幼苗出力
大蠟燭請自覺盡所能燃燒為世放大光, 卻不應以自己是最長最粗最久最乜最物入史冊成紀錄, 為保自我保紀錄保生命而吹熄蠋火, 才為真正"無用"
不在乎長壽短壽, 直曲強弱, 大國小國, 人多人少, 活著便有用, 也許不用活著, 只要存在便已有用了.
(唔... 那不存在, 虛空又有無用呢, 這個要想想 :>)
小燭
狐
p.s. 剛有穩定國家報告, 梵蒂岡聖馬利諾列支敦斯登荷蘭等小國列前茅, 只要燃燒得宜, 何需追求高大威
李察回應：
真莊子並非討論樹的有用無用。
真莊子也不是提出大和小的對立。
真莊子的目的，只是提出一種境界。
如果落進了大小或有用無用的辯論中去，
就會忽略了「境界」這意念了。
本來想用一條問題來帶出電影
"哪位人士得到世人最多紀念? 耶穌除外"
見無用的樹故事, 忍不住要講兩句先
故事內容可作些少修改
強樹壯樹直樹因為對人有用, 起屋造船乘凉,
人便覺"有用"
怪樹雖弱, 又曲, 也許一碰便斷, 沒人來砍來理而得以長壽
但這長壽並不是"有用"的理由
以上最關鍵字眼是"人"
人覺用得到謂之"有用", 用不到謂之"無用"
但主宰(叫大自然, 大生命也可) 眼光可不是人般短淺,
壯樹可讓老鷹鵬鳥鳳凰等大志之士站腳,
怪樹亦可讓小麻雀等小輩作息, 毛蟲成長, 於壯樹漂白水殺蟲水充斥環境下活不下去的害蟲(人的觀點), 扒糞蟲, 不見光之菇菌齊齊有個歇腳地
沒有食物鏈底層, 上層如何活下去?
壯樹不因能服待大鳥而自誇, 做其本份而己, 也不小看其他小樹怪樹
怪樹亦不因只討好小毛蟲而自悲, 更應能有機會做其本份而自傲, 卻不是以不用辛苦服待大鳥而暗暗偷笑
儍怪樹正以自己不被砍而偷笑, 卻不知一場山火把全個樹林燒清光, 大家最後君體也相同只剩下炭灰, 歸入泥土成養份為下一波幼苗出力
大蠟燭請自覺盡所能燃燒為世放大光, 卻不應以自己是最長最粗最久最乜最物入史冊成紀錄, 為保自我保紀錄保生命而吹熄蠋火, 才為真正"無用"
不在乎長壽短壽, 直曲強弱, 大國小國, 人多人少, 活著便有用, 也許不用活著, 只要存在便已有用了.
(唔... 那不存在, 虛空又有無用呢, 這個要想想 :>)
小燭
狐
p.s. 剛有穩定國家報告, 梵蒂岡聖馬利諾列支敦斯登荷蘭等小國列前茅, 只要燃燒得宜, 何需追求高大威
李察回應：
真莊子並非討論樹的有用無用。
真莊子也不是提出大和小的對立。
真莊子的目的，只是提出一種境界。
如果落進了大小或有用無用的辯論中去，
就會忽略了「境界」這意念了。
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
海遠論岳飛
海遠論岳飛
岳飛是一個悲劇英雄.
當他接到十二道金牌之後,他已知道必死無疑.但他沒有選擇的餘地.
一: 投降金國 ?
二. 落草為寇 ?
三. 回臨安受死 ?
全部都是死路.頭兩條路,他或許會多活幾年,但歷史會記他為[賊]. 第三條路,歷史會記他為[忠]. 迫不得已,他選擇了回杭州受死. 無奈的心情,有詞為証.
小重山 (岳飛)
昨夜寒蛩不住鳴。驚回千里夢，已三更。起來獨自繞階行。人悄悄，簾外月朧明。 白首為功名。舊山松竹老，阻歸程。欲將心事付瑤琴。
知音少，弦斷有誰聽 .
可注意的有三句:
一: 驚回千里夢 : 千里夢迴,人之常情. 但他加了個[驚]字.
二: 舊山松竹老，阻歸程 : : [有家歸不得]
三: 欲將心事付瑤琴。知音少，弦斷有誰聽 : [有怨無路訴.]
李察能為岳飛想到更好的選擇嗎?
海遠
Dear Dear 海遠：
今天剛剛寫完那句：「自己不也是神功戲裡的一個小配角嗎？
為甚麼還要把這一場無良鬧劇演下去？」立即就看到了你的問題。
真好像是五雷轟頂。是的，誰也不能為岳飛想到更好的選擇。
自然，「低層次」的答案，是早己有了的。許多人說，不能
離開歷史背景，「逼」歷史人物接受現代人的觀點。不同網絡，
判斷不同，云云。如果岳飛能夠看穿這是一場歷史的騙局，他
早己乘坐時光飛車，飛來今日中國，與我們一起看煙花共享太平了。
但這是低層次。
上一層看，我們也許會看到，我們和岳飛之間相同的地方。
是的，「弦斷有誰聽」？當你的手指拼盡全力，力透kewboard
，你的手指斷了，Blog 中文字，有誰看？
而我們是幸運的。因為，我們有了全新的莊子和現代網絡的
各種知識。我們知道，「弦斷了，我們全都在聽。」而世界上的
知音，是有很多的。知音都是超時代的。且讓我們再聆一次，岳穆武的
《滿江紅》，還有他的《小重山》。我們都在聽哪，天堂上的岳飛爺爺，
你知道嗎？當然，他是知道的。
寒冷的遠山上，忽然驚起了一聲悽厲的鴉鳴。小動物們，會忽然受
驚，噤若寒蟬嗎？或者會的。不過，幾秒鐘之後，又千音和唱了。
Dear 海遠，是的，還沒有回答你的問題呢。
你問：李察能為岳飛想到更好的選擇嗎?
當然可以的。李察能為岳飛，或者任何一現代人，想到更好的選擇。
或者，你也曾看過李察所寫「野雞學飛」的故事。那是在「莊子原理」裡面的。
雞本來是沒有出路的。雞本來是不會飛的。雞的出路，只是nowhere。雞唯一
只會受宰。但是，當我們靜下來，看穿了這一種網絡的限制，看到了人的
「自由」，看到了岳飛不能忘記的「功名」)(白首為功名)(三十功名塵與土)，
都是真的塵與土，那就可能看到，野雞的出路，有一條。
唯有真正自由的人，能夠找到自己的出路。那時，毅力也來了，創意也來了，
付出生命，就能夠得到生命。而我們大約不會忘記，發揮自己的長處，就是
「出路」。雞的長處是飛。岳飛的長處，亦是飛。可惜，絕大多數的雞們，
都無法看見自己的長處。
親愛的海遠，相信你是必定同感的。
李察謹上
2008. 2.13
岳飛是一個悲劇英雄.
當他接到十二道金牌之後,他已知道必死無疑.但他沒有選擇的餘地.
一: 投降金國 ?
二. 落草為寇 ?
三. 回臨安受死 ?
全部都是死路.頭兩條路,他或許會多活幾年,但歷史會記他為[賊]. 第三條路,歷史會記他為[忠]. 迫不得已,他選擇了回杭州受死. 無奈的心情,有詞為証.
小重山 (岳飛)
昨夜寒蛩不住鳴。驚回千里夢，已三更。起來獨自繞階行。人悄悄，簾外月朧明。 白首為功名。舊山松竹老，阻歸程。欲將心事付瑤琴。
知音少，弦斷有誰聽 .
可注意的有三句:
一: 驚回千里夢 : 千里夢迴,人之常情. 但他加了個[驚]字.
二: 舊山松竹老，阻歸程 : : [有家歸不得]
三: 欲將心事付瑤琴。知音少，弦斷有誰聽 : [有怨無路訴.]
李察能為岳飛想到更好的選擇嗎?
海遠
Dear Dear 海遠：
今天剛剛寫完那句：「自己不也是神功戲裡的一個小配角嗎？
為甚麼還要把這一場無良鬧劇演下去？」立即就看到了你的問題。
真好像是五雷轟頂。是的，誰也不能為岳飛想到更好的選擇。
自然，「低層次」的答案，是早己有了的。許多人說，不能
離開歷史背景，「逼」歷史人物接受現代人的觀點。不同網絡，
判斷不同，云云。如果岳飛能夠看穿這是一場歷史的騙局，他
早己乘坐時光飛車，飛來今日中國，與我們一起看煙花共享太平了。
但這是低層次。
上一層看，我們也許會看到，我們和岳飛之間相同的地方。
是的，「弦斷有誰聽」？當你的手指拼盡全力，力透kewboard
，你的手指斷了，Blog 中文字，有誰看？
而我們是幸運的。因為，我們有了全新的莊子和現代網絡的
各種知識。我們知道，「弦斷了，我們全都在聽。」而世界上的
知音，是有很多的。知音都是超時代的。且讓我們再聆一次，岳穆武的
《滿江紅》，還有他的《小重山》。我們都在聽哪，天堂上的岳飛爺爺，
你知道嗎？當然，他是知道的。
寒冷的遠山上，忽然驚起了一聲悽厲的鴉鳴。小動物們，會忽然受
驚，噤若寒蟬嗎？或者會的。不過，幾秒鐘之後，又千音和唱了。
Dear 海遠，是的，還沒有回答你的問題呢。
你問：李察能為岳飛想到更好的選擇嗎?
當然可以的。李察能為岳飛，或者任何一現代人，想到更好的選擇。
或者，你也曾看過李察所寫「野雞學飛」的故事。那是在「莊子原理」裡面的。
雞本來是沒有出路的。雞本來是不會飛的。雞的出路，只是nowhere。雞唯一
只會受宰。但是，當我們靜下來，看穿了這一種網絡的限制，看到了人的
「自由」，看到了岳飛不能忘記的「功名」)(白首為功名)(三十功名塵與土)，
都是真的塵與土，那就可能看到，野雞的出路，有一條。
唯有真正自由的人，能夠找到自己的出路。那時，毅力也來了，創意也來了，
付出生命，就能夠得到生命。而我們大約不會忘記，發揮自己的長處，就是
「出路」。雞的長處是飛。岳飛的長處，亦是飛。可惜，絕大多數的雞們，
都無法看見自己的長處。
親愛的海遠，相信你是必定同感的。
李察謹上
2008. 2.13
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
"如何向老闆請求减人工"
李察兄哈囉
猜想上封韓信為題電郵沒有寄失吧
今次講講這先前說過的題目 (本狐太懶, 望沒 outdated)
此題可從幾個層面看, 哲學, 經濟學, 心理學上探討也可以
...
經常聽長輩說當年如何如何
當年一亳子一碗麵呀, 細路!
斗零一份報紙呀
我個陣得五十蚊一個月人工呀, 你現在幾千蚊仲嫌三嫌四
一千蚊一間屋之類之類
本狐剛成功向老闆爭取加少少人工, 心喜了一陣卻發現身邊乜都加價,
其實結果都一樣...
此世界也許就這般步入通脹惡性循環, 低額硬幣受淘汰, 低額紙幣轉
成高額硬幣, 又或帶一箱紙幣只夠買一條香蕉, 最後都指向將鈔票
'冥通化'-面額越整越大
好像沒有哪國家地區逃得這漩渦, 如何是好? 如何解决通漲? 不是
解决過熱, 而是如何追求成為零通漲? 十年前, 一百年前, 一千年
前的一百蚊到今天還是一百蚊...
嘻, 你解决得到的話也許李察兄有諾貝爾經濟學獎啊!
"如何不收多一分錢", 啓發了一些思為......
大學時上過一課通識課, 基本經濟科, Introduction of Economy ECON 1000 之類
最基本的 Supply and Demand, 供求關係
麵粉供應少, 加價, 市場决定無話可說
但大量存貨時亦應相應减價, 簡單道理
市場渴求作家, 人工自然高
太多人爭做畫家自然少人工
為公司進修課程公司獲益好該加我人工, 好了, 垓心問題來到......
我能力下降了, 如有病, 年老, 失憶, 又或"懶散咗", (又或是我
沒改變, 但身邊人, 全世界人都大進步時, 比較上來我便大落後)
"如何向老闆請求减人工", 其他人不加人工亦可保持社會上優勢,
世界得以平衡, 不致膨脹, 當所有人"不收多一分錢", 甚至自動
減收, 能力高人的一百蚊還是一百蚊, 但買到能力低人更多產品服務
而不是惡性循環
零和, 也許蘋果價錢天天, 秒秒都不同以反映實際值
所有價值將會浮動, 世界變得極其麻煩, 也許人類做不來
那主宰應有所有數據, 步入資料室即時得到最新價值, 超越金錢,
便得到客觀公平評價了如何
狐 :>
李察回應
為免你真的向老闆申請自動減人工，請參考附後之文章：
為甚麼不可多拿一文錢？
(問到底 No.6928 2008 0201 Friday)
(親愛的狐，這篇小文，是為你而寫的。)
這問題，本來就是很容易引起誤會的。如果有個
小店老闆，終日為多收了顧客的一文錢而惴惴不安，
那笑話就不好笑了。
茲引述幾句《莊子原理》(第二部，第五章)上的
話：
「誰能一分錢都不多拿？誰能拒絕名和利的終極
誘惑？誰能永遠葆持人生目標？誰就真正掌握金
錢。」
「只有把金錢徹底絕緣，明確規定了金錢的正面
工具用途，絕對不讓金錢變成為目的，這樣，金錢的
陰影就可以消失，就可以一往無前的大賺。」
「金錢永遠是你的奴隸，是你的工具，不是你的
主人。你可以努力賺錢，你可以擁有很多奴隸。但你
自己，絕對不是奴隸。因為，你的奴隸是要來用的：
你的奴隸是屬於你的，是屬於你認為有意義的「意義」
的，是屬於宇宙主宰的。一文錢也不多取，就是這意
思。」
這問題本來就是一個哲學問題。
問題之一：到底心是物的主人，還是物是心的主
人？
問題之二：人生的目的，是不是絕對的？多拿一
點錢，把人生目的淡化一些，有何不可？
問題之三：人生除了基本動力之外，尚有輔助動
力。如果基本動力不足，可不可以用輔助動力補救？
如果我的生命目標不那麼明確，我希望多賺一些錢，
可不可以？
以上問題，如果全部否定，那麼，這人世界就不
再是人世界了。因為，人類世界已經變為天堂。當然，
任何人如果想多拿一文錢，也不算是甚麼罪惡。雖然
大貪是罪，但小便宜是不可以放過的。是不是？
在心和物之間，有很寬闊的中間地帶，也有很多
人自願作金錢的奴隸。而當一個人的基本動力不足，
一點額外的輔助動力，也會使他好過得多。
問題只是，這樣的人，很容易失去平衡。就算小貪
沒有變為大貪，人生目的也是十分遙遠的。中宵自問，
會發覺生命似乎沒有甚麼意思。如果稍為遇到挫折，
也不容易應付。
所以，「一文錢不多取」，不是為小市民而設的，
也不是叫你自動減薪。這句話，只是希望少數有志之
士，能夠經常警惕自己，使生命的目標更加明確，不
要誤落塵俗的圈套，僅此而己。而正確的金錢觀念，
也肯定會使我們的社會更加健康，進步更快一些。
Every Thing Comes in Parables
The mystery of the kingdom of God has been given
to you. But for those outside, everything comes
in parables, so that the more they see, they don't
perceive; the more they hear, they don't
understand; otherwise they would be converted and
pardoned.
猜想上封韓信為題電郵沒有寄失吧
今次講講這先前說過的題目 (本狐太懶, 望沒 outdated)
此題可從幾個層面看, 哲學, 經濟學, 心理學上探討也可以
...
經常聽長輩說當年如何如何
當年一亳子一碗麵呀, 細路!
斗零一份報紙呀
我個陣得五十蚊一個月人工呀, 你現在幾千蚊仲嫌三嫌四
一千蚊一間屋之類之類
本狐剛成功向老闆爭取加少少人工, 心喜了一陣卻發現身邊乜都加價,
其實結果都一樣...
此世界也許就這般步入通脹惡性循環, 低額硬幣受淘汰, 低額紙幣轉
成高額硬幣, 又或帶一箱紙幣只夠買一條香蕉, 最後都指向將鈔票
'冥通化'-面額越整越大
好像沒有哪國家地區逃得這漩渦, 如何是好? 如何解决通漲? 不是
解决過熱, 而是如何追求成為零通漲? 十年前, 一百年前, 一千年
前的一百蚊到今天還是一百蚊...
嘻, 你解决得到的話也許李察兄有諾貝爾經濟學獎啊!
"如何不收多一分錢", 啓發了一些思為......
大學時上過一課通識課, 基本經濟科, Introduction of Economy ECON 1000 之類
最基本的 Supply and Demand, 供求關係
麵粉供應少, 加價, 市場决定無話可說
但大量存貨時亦應相應减價, 簡單道理
市場渴求作家, 人工自然高
太多人爭做畫家自然少人工
為公司進修課程公司獲益好該加我人工, 好了, 垓心問題來到......
我能力下降了, 如有病, 年老, 失憶, 又或"懶散咗", (又或是我
沒改變, 但身邊人, 全世界人都大進步時, 比較上來我便大落後)
"如何向老闆請求减人工", 其他人不加人工亦可保持社會上優勢,
世界得以平衡, 不致膨脹, 當所有人"不收多一分錢", 甚至自動
減收, 能力高人的一百蚊還是一百蚊, 但買到能力低人更多產品服務
而不是惡性循環
零和, 也許蘋果價錢天天, 秒秒都不同以反映實際值
所有價值將會浮動, 世界變得極其麻煩, 也許人類做不來
那主宰應有所有數據, 步入資料室即時得到最新價值, 超越金錢,
便得到客觀公平評價了如何
狐 :>
李察回應
為免你真的向老闆申請自動減人工，請參考附後之文章：
為甚麼不可多拿一文錢？
(問到底 No.6928 2008 0201 Friday)
(親愛的狐，這篇小文，是為你而寫的。)
這問題，本來就是很容易引起誤會的。如果有個
小店老闆，終日為多收了顧客的一文錢而惴惴不安，
那笑話就不好笑了。
茲引述幾句《莊子原理》(第二部，第五章)上的
話：
「誰能一分錢都不多拿？誰能拒絕名和利的終極
誘惑？誰能永遠葆持人生目標？誰就真正掌握金
錢。」
「只有把金錢徹底絕緣，明確規定了金錢的正面
工具用途，絕對不讓金錢變成為目的，這樣，金錢的
陰影就可以消失，就可以一往無前的大賺。」
「金錢永遠是你的奴隸，是你的工具，不是你的
主人。你可以努力賺錢，你可以擁有很多奴隸。但你
自己，絕對不是奴隸。因為，你的奴隸是要來用的：
你的奴隸是屬於你的，是屬於你認為有意義的「意義」
的，是屬於宇宙主宰的。一文錢也不多取，就是這意
思。」
這問題本來就是一個哲學問題。
問題之一：到底心是物的主人，還是物是心的主
人？
問題之二：人生的目的，是不是絕對的？多拿一
點錢，把人生目的淡化一些，有何不可？
問題之三：人生除了基本動力之外，尚有輔助動
力。如果基本動力不足，可不可以用輔助動力補救？
如果我的生命目標不那麼明確，我希望多賺一些錢，
可不可以？
以上問題，如果全部否定，那麼，這人世界就不
再是人世界了。因為，人類世界已經變為天堂。當然，
任何人如果想多拿一文錢，也不算是甚麼罪惡。雖然
大貪是罪，但小便宜是不可以放過的。是不是？
在心和物之間，有很寬闊的中間地帶，也有很多
人自願作金錢的奴隸。而當一個人的基本動力不足，
一點額外的輔助動力，也會使他好過得多。
問題只是，這樣的人，很容易失去平衡。就算小貪
沒有變為大貪，人生目的也是十分遙遠的。中宵自問，
會發覺生命似乎沒有甚麼意思。如果稍為遇到挫折，
也不容易應付。
所以，「一文錢不多取」，不是為小市民而設的，
也不是叫你自動減薪。這句話，只是希望少數有志之
士，能夠經常警惕自己，使生命的目標更加明確，不
要誤落塵俗的圈套，僅此而己。而正確的金錢觀念，
也肯定會使我們的社會更加健康，進步更快一些。
Every Thing Comes in Parables
The mystery of the kingdom of God has been given
to you. But for those outside, everything comes
in parables, so that the more they see, they don't
perceive; the more they hear, they don't
understand; otherwise they would be converted and
pardoned.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
To save the earth
Dear Leechard,
I sent you the article about mixing of Japanese and Indian culture, written by Tao kit (issued on 7-1-2008), and a letter arguing whether it is possible for Chinese to alter their thinking in order to search for a solution to all problems ahead, namely diseases, the energy deficiency, at the same time. Why I do so is that I want you to think in a different perspective to the current problems on Earth.
We all agree that the Earth is facing a problem never happened before: The severe effect of global warming, indicated by the significant rise in temperature of places around the world. The pollution on environment, like the water, the air, has caused disastrous damages to all parts of the world, particularly in developed world. The cause of this problem should be the expansion of the consumption of natural resources in human activities driven by strong human desire in the past century, as you and many philosophers have pointed out. The Western people, and Indian, Japanese people, who are alarmed by these adverse effects of the world, has done a lot to conserve the environment. While Chinese, along with other greedy people, has done nothing significant to save the earth. Many Chinese, as many observers said, are more concerned about their money and what they can enjoy during their life time. They have a common fear that contribution to conserve the environment would erode their interests. This is why the conservation policies adopted in China and other places would be much difficult to implement due to the strong resistance of such people.
I realize that these people, love money more than anything in the world, would not listen to philosophical advice to save the world, just like yours. This is a sad thing but we must admit it. There are many easier and quicker paths that we can choose if we have to save the earth. I think introducing your idea to India and Japan would certainly be a good method. Many intellectuals there, wishing to save the earth immediately, would be willing to hear your advice and carry out them effectively. This is the idea I got from Tao Kit’s articles about Japan and India cultural exchange. If this idea could be adopted by you, the danger of doomsday would be slower to come than expected. I do not meant to abandon these greed Chinese, but these people now, still have difficulties in understanding you and many philosopher’s idea on how to live peaceful and effectively on earth. I think we should put less effort on them at this moment, and hold the discussion for them when these people are prepared.
Yours sincerely,
William
(PS. I think that the people that would take part in discussion shall not be Indians and Japanese, but people from all races with a common morale: they love the world and would do as much as they can to save the world.)
I sent you the article about mixing of Japanese and Indian culture, written by Tao kit (issued on 7-1-2008), and a letter arguing whether it is possible for Chinese to alter their thinking in order to search for a solution to all problems ahead, namely diseases, the energy deficiency, at the same time. Why I do so is that I want you to think in a different perspective to the current problems on Earth.
We all agree that the Earth is facing a problem never happened before: The severe effect of global warming, indicated by the significant rise in temperature of places around the world. The pollution on environment, like the water, the air, has caused disastrous damages to all parts of the world, particularly in developed world. The cause of this problem should be the expansion of the consumption of natural resources in human activities driven by strong human desire in the past century, as you and many philosophers have pointed out. The Western people, and Indian, Japanese people, who are alarmed by these adverse effects of the world, has done a lot to conserve the environment. While Chinese, along with other greedy people, has done nothing significant to save the earth. Many Chinese, as many observers said, are more concerned about their money and what they can enjoy during their life time. They have a common fear that contribution to conserve the environment would erode their interests. This is why the conservation policies adopted in China and other places would be much difficult to implement due to the strong resistance of such people.
I realize that these people, love money more than anything in the world, would not listen to philosophical advice to save the world, just like yours. This is a sad thing but we must admit it. There are many easier and quicker paths that we can choose if we have to save the earth. I think introducing your idea to India and Japan would certainly be a good method. Many intellectuals there, wishing to save the earth immediately, would be willing to hear your advice and carry out them effectively. This is the idea I got from Tao Kit’s articles about Japan and India cultural exchange. If this idea could be adopted by you, the danger of doomsday would be slower to come than expected. I do not meant to abandon these greed Chinese, but these people now, still have difficulties in understanding you and many philosopher’s idea on how to live peaceful and effectively on earth. I think we should put less effort on them at this moment, and hold the discussion for them when these people are prepared.
Yours sincerely,
William
(PS. I think that the people that would take part in discussion shall not be Indians and Japanese, but people from all races with a common morale: they love the world and would do as much as they can to save the world.)
Thursday, January 3, 2008
屠殺者之心理
李察兄好
廢話少講, 直入正題 - 研究屠殺者之心理
歷史事件細節大可從課本找到, 討論其心理可更為有意義
適逢南京屠殺七十年, 社會有很多討論, 不細說
十幾年前鄰近地區那場也不說, 免得累你被拉人封網
先說冷門一點的來比較
秦將白起與楚將項羽
戰國時長平之役秦軍俘虜趙國四十萬降卒, 秦將白起害怕叛變一夜間殺盡四十萬趙兵, 也許受此心理震撼, 他臨終前對其當天屠殺還心存歉疚
秦末巨鹿之戰項羽大破黑衣秦軍, 俘虜二十萬, 識英雄重英雄厚待主將章邯, 但視普通兵卒如螻蟻, 不夠糧食作理由便一夜坑殺二十萬秦降兵. 事後卻沒什麼反應, 也許認為對付眼前秦皇/劉邦/韓信才緊要, 戰爭中踐踏(大量)生命為必然, 犧牲小你完成大我, (可惜往往犧牲大你也做就不了小我)
這個心態與邱吉爾差不多, 收到珍珠港將被偷襲的情報, 為激起美國反應而視若無睹, 相信他到地獄面對那批美兵也後不歉疚
講起希特勒屠殺, 為何用毒氣而不其他
那一 "one meeting, six million lives"討論
用刀太慢, 亦浪費氣力, 身為軍人, 槍殺婦人兒童, 會嚴重打擊士氣, 毒藥令人發紫面黑, 炸藥珍貴不可亂用
最後决定用一氧化碳, 理由是死後會面色紅潤 (?!)
開次準備用大批大貨車排放廢氣, 但效果大慢
建立沖涼為名毒氣為實, 一小時可殺幾千人, 將領雙眼發光立時拍板, 比殺螻蟻還要爽快
另一超級屠殺, 由歐洲殖民美洲開始, 為黃金與白銀而展開, 西班牙的天花與軍隊消滅了阿玆克與印加- 手上只拿石頭木棍對抗的二千萬人口
問題在哪
敵人的定義在哪
又如何可避免
辦法在於如何將"自己"的範圍擴大
不以家族, 階級, 宗教, 部落, 民族, 國家, 人種, 文明作為统冶者心中"自己人"的單位
將"自己人"的圈畫大一些, 君可有見過有人左手恨右手至要斬下來的地步
十幾年前那單問題在於统冶者想同國不是自己人, 同階級才算
有比我更偉大的論者連豬隻都畫入自己人圈內就更值得敬重 (哎, 覺得自尋遺臭萬年實在可憐)
那莊子就更大, 不只地球人畫進圈內, 所有地球生物, 甚至火星人, 死物, 全世界也畫入"自己人"圈內, 這圈可無限大
越講越興奮, 好像說得太grand了
:>
狐
廢話少講, 直入正題 - 研究屠殺者之心理
歷史事件細節大可從課本找到, 討論其心理可更為有意義
適逢南京屠殺七十年, 社會有很多討論, 不細說
十幾年前鄰近地區那場也不說, 免得累你被拉人封網
先說冷門一點的來比較
秦將白起與楚將項羽
戰國時長平之役秦軍俘虜趙國四十萬降卒, 秦將白起害怕叛變一夜間殺盡四十萬趙兵, 也許受此心理震撼, 他臨終前對其當天屠殺還心存歉疚
秦末巨鹿之戰項羽大破黑衣秦軍, 俘虜二十萬, 識英雄重英雄厚待主將章邯, 但視普通兵卒如螻蟻, 不夠糧食作理由便一夜坑殺二十萬秦降兵. 事後卻沒什麼反應, 也許認為對付眼前秦皇/劉邦/韓信才緊要, 戰爭中踐踏(大量)生命為必然, 犧牲小你完成大我, (可惜往往犧牲大你也做就不了小我)
這個心態與邱吉爾差不多, 收到珍珠港將被偷襲的情報, 為激起美國反應而視若無睹, 相信他到地獄面對那批美兵也後不歉疚
講起希特勒屠殺, 為何用毒氣而不其他
那一 "one meeting, six million lives"討論
用刀太慢, 亦浪費氣力, 身為軍人, 槍殺婦人兒童, 會嚴重打擊士氣, 毒藥令人發紫面黑, 炸藥珍貴不可亂用
最後决定用一氧化碳, 理由是死後會面色紅潤 (?!)
開次準備用大批大貨車排放廢氣, 但效果大慢
建立沖涼為名毒氣為實, 一小時可殺幾千人, 將領雙眼發光立時拍板, 比殺螻蟻還要爽快
另一超級屠殺, 由歐洲殖民美洲開始, 為黃金與白銀而展開, 西班牙的天花與軍隊消滅了阿玆克與印加- 手上只拿石頭木棍對抗的二千萬人口
問題在哪
敵人的定義在哪
又如何可避免
辦法在於如何將"自己"的範圍擴大
不以家族, 階級, 宗教, 部落, 民族, 國家, 人種, 文明作為统冶者心中"自己人"的單位
將"自己人"的圈畫大一些, 君可有見過有人左手恨右手至要斬下來的地步
十幾年前那單問題在於统冶者想同國不是自己人, 同階級才算
有比我更偉大的論者連豬隻都畫入自己人圈內就更值得敬重 (哎, 覺得自尋遺臭萬年實在可憐)
那莊子就更大, 不只地球人畫進圈內, 所有地球生物, 甚至火星人, 死物, 全世界也畫入"自己人"圈內, 這圈可無限大
越講越興奮, 好像說得太grand了
:>
狐
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
