數字人生

近日對『數字化』這現象極為反感。無論討論些甚麼﹐提問些甚麼﹐甚至是閒談也好﹐人們總是以數字回答。

『他學識淵博嗎﹖』答曰﹕『當然﹗他會考高校拿多少多少分﹐大學畢業學分又是如何如何的高。』

『他事業有成嗎﹖』答曰﹕『當然﹐他有多少份工要見﹐起薪點又有多少多少。』

『他人品好嗎﹖』答曰﹕『不錯呀﹐他時常大宴親朋﹐一擲就是多少錢﹐毫不吝惜。』

姑且不論以上答案的邏輯荒誤。難道除了這些虛無和沒意義的數字以外﹐已沒有東西值得人們去著緊了嗎﹖學識難道已被淪為拿學分的工具﹖事業難道是為了金錢而存在﹖如此數字化﹐為數字而生存 ﹑為學分而學習﹑為金錢而求職﹐簡直是本末倒置。

再者﹐人性變得數字化﹐美術﹑思哲﹑文藝等不能數字化的東西就難免被棄置一旁。然而﹐抒發情感和表達思想卻是人性的根源。以此觀之﹐數字已慢慢蠶食我們的人性﹐逐漸把人類機械化。橫觀一眾同窗﹐他們形形役役所為何事﹖他們只懂追逐那些虛無的數字﹐早已忘掉除成績和求職外還有天地衡宇和人性﹔他們更沒有意識要去追求智慧﹑摸索人生。久而久之﹐他們便淪為空有學識和金錢﹐沒有思想文化與智慧的蠻夷。

這個也許是社會的錯﹐而非他們的錯吧。但錯在誰並沒有關係。我還是被困在這群膚淺的白痴高才生之中。說他們膚淺其實已經便宜了他們。若實說實話﹐我會以『空洞』二字去形容這群蠻夷。

作為堂堂思想家﹑滿腔文化﹐卻被逼與這些戎狄共處一堂﹐言語﹑文化﹑人生理念﹑思維等全然不通。而跟這些戎狄打交道更可說是對文化和智慧的莫大侮辱。所以嘛﹐我還是對月自酌﹐把棧跟長夜談天算了。

當然﹐也不是所有人都是如此。我自己既是例外﹐女友亦然。所以也難怪我這麼喜歡她。孤獨路上﹐總還會有知音作同路人的。

流星追月

「我是天邊的流彗﹐我的征途是星辰大海。」


幾年前﹐我門生曦儀這麼的對我說。幾年後的今日﹐她還在彼方漂泊﹐讀書﹑工作﹐未定下來。但最近她也有點兒累了﹐常跟我說孤獨﹑寂寞﹑讀了博士學位卻不知是為了何事。唉﹐流星追月﹐還是有力窮的時候。與其逐於天際﹐不如堅守晚空﹐站著去為他人領航。我所發出的光芒雖不及她﹐但卻是可以依賴﹑恆久不滅的。畢竟那種剎那的光輝﹑煙花的燦爛不適合我呢。

Niagara Falls

問征夫以前路

舟搖搖以輕颺，風飄飄而吹衣，
問征夫以前路，恨晨光之熹微。
-- 節錄自《歸去來辭》

命之船不能無止息的在浪海中頭出頭沒，而要有一可停泊歸依之所；而這必起於對生命原鄉的嚮往，生命之船當航向此生命之原鄉，否則生命之船即不成為一生命之船。無生命原鄉之嚮往則輕舟之搖亦將成動盪，有生命原鄉之嚮往，則迴返之機既露，則雖動盪亦只是輕舟之搖，何所罣礙？如此說來，亦可以是乘風而行，亦可以是為風所阻，端看生命之帆操在何處也。

生命原鄉契機既起，遂有此「問」，如此一問，而以前之路竟是異化之途，悚然驚懼，生命的異化所挾帶而出的竟是漆黑一團。不免恨悔，即此恨悔，生命終在漆黑一團中開啟了新的可能。「可能」即漸邁向自由。由這個「可能」，故得見堂堂之宇，得見坦坦之門，生命由是而歡躍。「可能」帶來了「希望」，「希望」邁向了「自由」。「自由」是回到生命的原鄉。生命的原鄉不是形上的荒原，而是生機洋溢的存在交往。這裡有的是純真樸實的生命之酣暢，童僕歡迎，稚子候門。

生命存在的交往途徑雖已荒蕪，但生命之本根仍然存在，既然存在，其交往之可能當下即可展開。生命當下實存的交往，使人回到自身隨即擁有生命提攜的勇氣，有此提攜，生命當下便是豐盈的。生命之甘泉由是而開啟，自己開之、引之、酌之，因此，生命生出一分閒情，這分閒情使得自家生命能有一分悠游自得之樂。原屬「迷執」，故不可依倚；「覺、解」既至，則當下自由。此自由是生命束縛之解開，此是形而上之解開。如此解開，當下平易而安然。

「迷執」在身，往而不返，如此把捉雖多，亦是貧困。當下「覺解」，居處雖小，以其平易，是以能得「安居」。安居何處，只是「生命與生命的真實存在交往」而已。能擺脫迷執而安居者﹐何說是復歸養生培元之道矣。

楓樹下

諸神的黃昏

我一向喜歡希臘的神話。喜歡它們不是因為那亂七八糟﹐例如誅父娶母﹑與牛通姦﹑殺女求風等的人物關係﹐而是因為神話中的神明一樣有人性。祂們會感受喜怒哀樂﹐會愛美也會妒忌﹐會爭榮也會吵架。祂們不是全能的﹐也不是全善的。祂們有做不來的事﹐也有邪惡和私慾。簡單地說﹐祂們是擁有超越人類力量的神明﹐但卻脫離不了人性的框子。所以祂們造出了諸般喜劇悲劇﹐在反應出人類與神明的界限之餘﹐也清楚表達了一個訊息﹕就是力量無端的天神﹐一旦有了人性﹐就算怎麼強都擺不脫命與運。

多可愛的神明呀。連神也不能事事如意。據說太陽神亞波羅曾愛上了美麗的樹精卻被拒絕﹐樹精寧可枯死都不肯接受太陽神。也有說諸神之母哈拉與大地女神和愛神比美﹐卻輸了給亞堤密斯。就算是神﹐也有失意﹑絕望之時﹐隨之而生出嫉忌﹑哀傷﹑憤怒等諸般感情。是的﹐神也有感情。在永恆的奧林匹克山上﹐諸神會永永遠遠地被這些感情束縛著。這就是祂們的命﹐就如人類的命一樣。

菲蒂斯的冷球﹐不知道是為人類而捲﹐還是為神明而捲呢﹖

植物情緣

認識我的人普遍都知道我為人爽快﹐雖有文情卻不會多愁善感無病呻吟拖泥帶水﹐喜怒愛惡分明。也因此人們總以為我只會以文載道嘻笑怒罵﹐鮮有人知道我文靜恬退的一面。

跟我住過的人應該都會發現我桌上那花瓶兒吧﹖跟五六年來我有放鮮花的習慣。起初買花是為了素描繪畫﹐但後來發現畫的花比不上真的花﹐而且畫技經年沒長進﹐一怒之下放棄素描﹐乾脆買真花算數。如是者幾年來每隔四五日我會買半打花給自己﹐來到奧斯汀後才因交通困難而間斷。

放些植物在檯頭故可以增添生氣﹐令人精神。但真正令我生動精神的應該是買花插花那過程吧。幾年來養成了隔數日會買花的習慣﹐就算怎麼忙怎麼麻煩也得撥備時間去逛花店﹐這本身已是絕妙的減壓措施。買回來後又要花半小時去除刺﹑修剪﹑擺插﹐這些工夫既要耐性和精神﹐也要充份發揮藝術細胞和線條美學。到花插好了﹐有花有葉﹑顏色配對均勻﹐人也清靜下來。未來兩三日生活枯燥或悲情失意時﹐只要望著盤花就會勾起買花弄花的情景﹐足夠把心緒平靜下來了。

也是這個緣故﹐我向來只買淺色的花。充滿濃情的紅薔薇﹑燦爛的彩蘭﹑橙黃鮮明的天堂鳥等我都不愛﹐卻獨愛淡黃雪白的花。寂寞失意置黃菊白菊﹑文情溢發抱白玫瑰﹑情濃伴百合﹑清靜時或水仙或青竹﹐淡色的花更顯清幽恬靜﹐且更香遠益清呢﹗這樣才不失我風格。

遲些我一定會重拾這習慣。女孩子們如果想收花﹐大可以找我這個品花插花老手。呵呵﹐說笑而已。

日本相片分享

海洋狄士尼
鋼牙﹑蒙姐與我

新宿街頭﹐小田急前

六日戰役之﹕東京登陸戰

美加之遊畢回港稍竭兩天﹐連行李也未收拾好又起機去東京了。六日五夜的購物兼海洋狄士尼團可謂盡興而歸。三十六萬日元只用剩六十﹐折實港幣二萬三用餘四元一角。在我這隻魔鬼的鼓勵下﹐蒙小姐充份發揮了她女性的購物潛能﹐橫掃日本秋裝。六日苦戰後﹐新宿池袋涉谷原宿加上狄士尼的戰利品充斥著六大件行李﹐內有眾多陶瓷﹑無數的鋼牙與大鼻﹑一大袋的鬼太郎﹑名牌手袋銀包﹑格仔名牌日本線的女裝冬季大衣﹑以及不少衣物﹐其瘋癲程度可見一班。假以時日略作栽培﹐定能達至我媽那PhD in Shopping的水平。Miss Mong﹐加油喔﹗

北國不知年月去 又見飄雪落人間

回港八個月有餘﹐也是時候回家去探探親了。今日下午十二點機經溫哥華回多倫多去﹐既探親又避暑﹐更重要的﹐是帶我女友回家見家長去。一舉數得﹐賺左。

談及我女友﹐終於能舒一口氣了。她是我同事﹐在同一所學校裡教英文﹔唯因工作緣故﹐我倆的關係被逼不能公開。幸而她年轉校去別處教﹐我倆不必保持這不健康的半地下情。這次帶她回家﹐希望她能成功抵禦我媽的「無極嫦娥功」和「雞蛋挑骨功」。老實說﹐這兩門絕學﹐普天之下就只有我那「太極歸元功」配以輕功「萬里回流」能勉力與之抗衡。希望沒出甚麼大事﹐那我們一兩年後就可以派帖了。

不說了﹐未收拾行李。還有一小時就要起行了。

弊...大件事

話說今日逛奧海城﹐被我自己班的學生撞個正著。在短短兩秒內﹐她先報以驚覺的眼神﹐隨即垂下眼裝作看不見。那鬼馬神情我盡收在眼簾裡。這躺大件事了。她是我班數一數二的天文台長之一。

點算.......

伯溫算不盡 唏噓三世緣

有時候有些事情﹐就連孔明也算不盡﹐只能順著自己的路﹐讓上天替人主宰。這或許就是緣份吧。緣來緣去的離愁別緒﹐這許多年來把我嚇怕了。人變得內向﹐每每把自己隱藏起來﹐到最後連自己原來的樣都忘掉了。

這次﹐我也不知道怎麼搞的。每天見著她﹑見著學生﹐想起都令人不知點算。或許﹐這就是這段感情的可愛之吧。

天下有風

天下有風... 姤。

拍拖月餘彼此思潮不斷﹐最後發現我還是過於嚴肅﹐過份刻意執著於本體和意識而忽略了外在的形態與情趣。或許我始終是方外之士﹐也或許我骨子裡就是自鳴清高﹐更或許我經年遊歷早已喪失了自我情感。又或者﹐我這半年的生活模式轉變得太快﹐儘管意識和思想已然調節﹐身體和精神還未能適應。先不理原因﹐這眼前的問題還是要正視。

要多注意外在形態和包裝﹐這個我雖不擅長但勉力尚可為之。最多還可以找遠在加拿大的美術指導﹐我親愛的妹妹求些意見。但情趣這方面卻是我弱項。我一向慣重思想﹐把彼此的形神和情感建築在精神和思想上﹐而往往忽略了對女孩子最應有最基本的情趣。結果弄成一開始拍拖就清淡如水﹐有如病倒了﹑未對症下重藥就開始調理身子。這點我得好好反思﹐甚至要請教請教易打鹿社團內的一眾兄弟們。

唉﹐做個普通人﹐我還要好好學學呢。對不起得很。

近況

最近忙得要命﹐用十二成努力勞力教書之餘﹐晚上還要撈外快。每日朝七晚九點半﹐已有點精神透支。號稱鐵人的我﹐終於也有兩聲咳嗽頭作暈眼花花。這星期考試﹐上星期替學生死補課爛補課﹐換來的是失聲失眠﹐連女友也患上氣管炎﹐好像被我傳染弄病似的﹐令我萬分內疚。

日來細心咀嚼品味著自己的感情﹐對人生和情感有更深的體會﹐也令自己更謙卑﹑更會尊重別人。愛上了從清淡中品味﹔所謂飄風不終夕﹐驟雨不臨朝﹔天地尚不能久﹐而況於人乎﹖我不要煙花的剎那燦爛﹔我寧願對著簡簡單單的幽幽清溪﹐每日聆聽那變化無端的水聲﹐看著不同季節和天氣之下不同的境致。淙淙流水有秋冬的清虛雅靜﹐也有春雨的纏綿﹑仲夏的激情﹔一生到老慢慢地珍惜﹑品味﹑學習﹑欣賞﹐這才算是恆久不變的愛情吧...

Time and Space

it is said that time and space are criterions for phenomena, and phenomena are basis for all dialectic axioms. and thus, time and space are necessary limitations for all things. this, of course, comes from Kant's transcendental idealism in his book Critique of Pure Reason.

yet i do not agree. there are things that cannot be bound by space and time. spirit and thoughts, affections and loyalty, values and justice.. these things transcend time and space, and would exist independent of phenomenal abstractions. the reason is simple: these "things" preceed logic and are axioms in themselves. it is with these tools and precognitions that man make judgments and dialectic syntheses. like time and space, these qualities of reality exist prenatally. and along with them and space, these qualities are used and exercised for daily phenomenal abstractions. another way to look at it is that these qualities are measurements and precepts and not phenomena, and are hence not available for abstraction.

and so it is. time and space can only limit phenomena, but not spirits and love. never, little baby.

Love

as promised, i am taking a stab and writing a little treatise on love. throughout my many years i have felt different aspects of love. familial love, brotherly love, elderly love, obsessive love, emotional and erotic love, and many more. the many facets of love, all or them real and genuine, would often contradict each other. and thus frankly, i cannot tell you what love is. i cannot tell you what love means. but i can tell you what love isn't, and what love does not mean. and from those excluded impossibilities, i can tell you what love should encompass, what it should include and what beauty it should hold therein.

this very question had been asked by the ancient greeks aeons ago. modern people would probably scorn at that notion, dispensing love as a mere personal taste and affection, and a spur of "feelings". while love may include those affections and feelings, do you not think that love is very limited and dry if that is all that love means? if love means exactly that, would we not use "love" and "feelings" interchangably as synonyms? but no, we don't. and that very fact points to the obvious truth that love is much much more than mere feelings and affections.

in c. s. lewis' book "the four loves", he attempts to reemphasize the ancient greek notion of love. for the ancients, love has four main facets: philia, storge, eros, agape. it is a comprehensive and umbrella encompassment of love, rather than a linguistic and succinct definition. the ancients know that love is not a matter for dialectic discussions. it is more or less a subject of empirical experiences. and so, the greeks outlines four possible types of experiences and relationships that would incur that notion of love. and these four types of experiences then become what is known as the four pillars of love. they are pillars because a long-lasting and genuine love must have each of the four facets within. they are fundamental and reinforce each other.. as i shall discuss in the following..

philia is a love of familiarity. while it can also be used in the context of "i love chemistry" or "i love my pillow", it is usually used in the context of knowing a person and having an affection towards each other because of that habitual understanding. it is a love that is built on time, habits, understanding, and thus imply mutual respect and tolerance.

storge is brotherly/sisterly love. it is a love that is founded on metaphysical bonds. it is a love that is shared because of a formal state of relationship (including friendship). that is to say, a person loves her boyfriend exclusively because he is her boyfriend, and therefore no others. storge thus imply fidelity and bonds, followed by a set code of responsibilities and ethics.

eros is the facet of love that is most comprehensive for modern people. eros is the emotional affections, the burning feelings and passions (well, the ancient greeks actually meant sexual love by eros), between a couple. while it signifies the feelings and passions, it also implies the frail nature of such carnal affections. this is why storge and philia preceeds eros, providing it a structural and formal basis. without these basis, men and women are no different from beasts on all fours, hunting for or flirting to the next prey for mating. this is exactly why i abhor the concept of regarding love as a mere affection, and then proceed to measure every relationship by a matter of "feelings". it is only a small part of love, and definitely not the entire context of love.

agape is the greatest love of all, according to the greeks. originally intended to decribe the love of the city state or nation, agape is the love for which a person is willing to take up arms and sacrifice himself. in medieval era, this facet of "selfless, self-giving love" is used to describe the theological love that Christ has shown. it is then extended to describe a devoted love, wherein a person is willing to sacrifice herself and become one in spirit with love itself. it is a concept that had eluded most modern people...

in a nutshell, love should encompass all four facets: philia, the love of familiarity and understanding; storge, the love from bonds and fidelity and trust; eros, the exclusive feelings and affections between two people; and agape, the selfless devotion each person renders to another, which fulfills the physical kinship or relationship with a metaphysical commitment. so.. next time when you think you are in love, think again. can you envision yourself sharing all these four facets with the person you are looking at? was it a mere familiarity? was it just simple kinship? was it mere feelings and a spur of passion? think clearly, before you wake up and realized you have erred, and have permanently marred your conscience as well as someone's heart.

Time, Constancy and Change

both Kant and Russell define time as a constraint for the identification and classification of phenomena. and yet time itself is meaningless unless there is something that abides the constraints that it imposes. that is to say, unless there are variances with respect to time, time itself is a trivial and meaningless property, and not a constraint.

and there are variances that depends on time. namely, all changes and constancy imply a time span. when we see something and define something, we assume constancy. when we describe something and expect something, we assume change. and so, time is an inherent and prenatal concept rooted in our cognitive and epistemological faculty - because we live in either constancy and change, and we need to define them and make use of them to live and to think.

and yet, very few people are aware of this little logical fact. people often assume that the world is eccentric, or even solipsic. in doing so, they deny the flow of time, and redefine constancy and change as "phenomena that revolve around their petty cognition and comprehension". and so, for these people, time means little, and they fail to grow. we call this the stasis.

for the sage, things revolve as they are. time flows, and even the self is a subject of these torrents. humility is the first step to acknowledge the presence of time. and yet, few people have such courage and wisdom to admit this obvious fact. they would think that man is invincible. pah! nay. neither the pyramids nor the ziggurats last longer than the sands of time. pride has always been mankind's undoing.

now, back to the first question: are you in a stasis, or are you aware of the constancy and changes around you?

尋找幕後更卑劣的策劃者

何俊仁因拒助申請綜援被毆一案﹐法官說幕後有更卑劣的策劃者﹐因此易打鹿仝人決定尋找這位密謀申請綜援而不惜重金禮聘打手的真凶。這星期六﹐會去替何俊仁報仇雪恨﹗

新浦京﹐我舉族來找你算賬﹗

Change and Metamorphorsis

change is an indicative alteration of a subject's property over a time span. metamorphorsis, on the other hand, is an indicative transformation of a subject's entity. the two process are different per se. and yet, they often have the same kind of root and cause. I shall write about their causes in this passage; their differences in nature shall be discussed later.

it is apparent that man is a creature who loves complacency and stability. for this reason, change is something of great abhorrence, and time something to be feared and fought against. here is a simple fact: most people fear death, because it is the finite constraint of time, and it embodies uncertainties beyond the change of life and death. most people prefer to have the future just like now, and have a peaceful and stable stasis that never changes.

for this reason, human character and human mentality seldom change. there is no need to. the only way the human ming and character can change is under compulsion; that is to say, people change only when they must change. and so it is: we see people change when they are prompted and stimulated.

yet, the human wish for complancency is great, and this stimulus must be equally great if not greater, to prompt such change. in short, such "stimulus" ought to be castastrophic, if not detrimental. this sudden check of reality is called "meteor strike", analogous of a rock falling from the sky and hitting the subject's head.

such is the way of the weak, and the way of the herd. for the wise, contemplation and realization are the reality checks. will power and determination are the compulsion in lieu of pressing needs for survival. the sage anticipates what is to be, and grows and changes with the flow of time.

so.. are you resting and rejecting changes now, or are you contemplating and looking into the future?

Goodbye Dr. MacDiarmid

Farewell, Dr. MacDiarmid. I will always remember your kindness and generosity. In fond memories of your polyacetylene and iodine vapour, may you rest in peace.

Welcome!

新年新開始 ^O^