Chapter 2 The foundation of the theory is to hit single-celled organisms

Interviewer: Zheng Xiong Time: January 6, 2009 Teacher Wu, let me read a passage to you first.Teacher Qian Liqun of Peking University wrote an article "Writing in Conflict and Confusion" a few years ago.In this article, Teacher Qian said: "I found that I can only say 'no' to the modernization of the country, nation, and society, as well as the modernity of literature in my professional field-I refuse, deny What, for example, I can't agree with the modernization model we once had, and its corresponding literary model, and I don't want to copy the Western modernization model and its corresponding literary model; but I can't say what I 'want' , what I pursue and affirm. To put it bluntly, I do not have my own philosophy and history, nor my own literature and literature history. Therefore, I cannot form, at least in a short period of time, an understanding of Chinese literature in the 20th century. My own, stable and explanatory overall grasp and judgment, my own value ideals are in chaos. I just try my best to write in the midst of contradictions and confusion. This is not just because of the growth of age, but It is because the political, economic, ideological, and cultural changes between China and the world in the 1990s were too great, and the problems we faced were too complicated, and we were too unprepared for all these. I paid the price for my innocence in the 80s."

What do you think of what Teacher Qian said? Overall I agree with this description.What he said was probably the feeling of a generation: the very clear outlook on the world, life, history, and art in the past has now collapsed.After the collapse, a new value system was not established, so there was chaos deep in the mind.I think that may have been the case from around 1978 until now.However, there are a few differences between me and Teacher Qian. The first point is that he said that he paid the price for his simplicity in the 1980s, which I think is short.The source wasn't in the 80s, it was earlier - we've been paying the price.We once took a detour. We took the wrong path first, and when we couldn't go on, the reform and opening up began to turn around.Looking back, the original set of propositions, concepts, and theoretical systems all collapsed, and our worldview collapsed accordingly.

It seems that the Chinese have paid the price for almost thirty years.In fact, if we go further away, we have a wider and deeper background.All over the world, starting from the world economic crisis in the 1930s, all intellectuals began to "turn to the left", and socialist countries such as the former Soviet Union with Marxism as their theoretical guidance "prospered day by day", and the capitalist world felt a powerful threat until the former Soviet Union After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, starting from the 1990s, liberalism moved forward again.Humanity has come full circle.

Putin said that the Soviet Union took a big detour.As for us, we are also paying the price for a period of human history and the innocence of all human beings. The second difference is that Mr. Qian said that he could not form his own judgment.I've been trying to form my own judgment. Teacher Qian said that he knew where to say "no" to those things in the past.In fact, knowing where to say "no" is itself constructive.If the original one doesn’t work, I want to build a new one. If it feels right, I will go on. Once I go astray and feel wrong, I will explore a new direction.He actually affirmed something—the affirmation contained in the negation.He is constantly negating, and after negating a circle, the gap left in the middle may be something that needs to be affirmed.

We can now talk about what the gap in the middle is.I can’t say clearly about the literary view, but I think there is something to be said about the historical view.That is to say, when the old view of history collapses, where is the foundation for the new view of history? A few pillars, a few beams, first one or two floors, and finally seven or eight floors. I think basically It can be seen.I think I can say six or seven out of ten. I know that what you are doing now is to set up the basic framework of this new view of history.So, if we take Teacher Qian’s statement as a spiritual phenomenon in today’s society, do you think this phenomenon is mainly due to our knowledge preparation problems, or is it because of our lack of life experience?

It is not a question of knowledge preparation.Without experience, there is no knowledge at all.If you don't even have basic experience, let alone. It is unprecedented for human beings to go from primitive to industrial civilization, to develop capitalism, and then to have economic crisis, etc. It is unprecedented for all human beings to carry out socialist construction and modernization according to the model of the former Soviet Union or Stalin experience. Stalin walked ahead, Mao Zedong followed.He felt he could go a little better.It is indeed better in some places, at least it is not as incoherent as it was in the former Soviet Union when it was building the people's commune.But immediately after that, he encountered a bigger problem-the Great Leap Forward... This series of things were all advanced without previous experience, so the requirement of knowledge preparation cannot be said.You cannot say that you are not well-prepared for knowledge, because knowledge cannot be prepared.Haven't done it before, where can I learn that kind of knowledge without that period of historical experience?I can only feel my way.

Therefore, I don't think it is a problem of insufficient knowledge preparation.We can also see that Stalin and the others did not think that they lacked knowledge. They felt that they had grasped the truth and mastered the laws of history, and they could not be opposed at all, showing extreme conceit.So, what is the problem?In the face of questions that have no fixed answers in history, whether it is humility or arrogance, trial and error and adjustment should be allowed. If arguments are not allowed, let the arrogant rulers go all the way to the black, this is the big problem, and it is China and China. Deadly disease in Russian history.Therefore, the core question is: our historical problems and practical problems are caused by the lesions in human history.

In a general sense, what kind of concept do you think "faith" is? It should be said that the extent of human life is the extent of belief.For example, what kind of social system, economic system, political system we believe in, and even what kind of marriage relationship, gender relationship, and so on.You believe that is the best, that is faith.This is a broad belief.But when we usually talk about faith, what we talk about is the so-called ultimate concern level, which is the core thing: where is the ultimate meaning of life?How to settle down?How to maximize the meaning of life?As far as this point is concerned, faith is where to find a place to settle down and find a way to maximize the meaning of life, so that you can die without regret.I think this kind of belief is the highest level of belief that we usually talk about.

Many Westerners believe that God is infinite and eternal.Approach God, assimilate to God, and you enter into immortality, into eternity and infinity. Chinese Confucianism also has a set of sayings.The most standard answer is what is expressed in Zhang Zai's "Xi Ming": Gan is called father, Kun is called mother, and I am here to despise Yan, which is in the middle of chaos. ... The people and my compatriots, and things and things. ...Save, I will go along with it, no, I will rather.That is to say, when living, follow the principles of heaven and earth, communicate with the spirit of all things in heaven and earth, and praise the cultivation of heaven and earth; die in a down-to-earth manner.He found a way to settle down, just live like this, just die like this.He pursues the highest state of integration between me and others, me and the universe, and me and Tao in the set of relationships between heaven and earth, human relations, and things and me. According to Mr. Feng Youlan, it is the realm of heaven and earth.

After Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought became popular in China, God and the Way of Heaven were replaced by the cause of communism or the law of history.People believe in Lei Feng's widely circulated saying: Human life is limited, but serving the people is infinite, and we must devote our limited life to serving the people infinitely.If serving the people is replaced by a "communist cause", it becomes Paul's words: the most precious thing in life is life, and life belongs to people only once.A man's life should be spent in this way: when he recalls the past, he will not regret for wasting his years, nor be ashamed for being inactive; when he is dying, he can say, my whole life and all my energy, All have been dedicated to the most magnificent cause in the world - the struggle for the liberation of mankind.

These are all answers to questions of the highest value, highest meaning, and ultimate concern of life. Just now you mentioned the field of history, can you be sure what kind of basic viewpoint you have in the field of history?This point of view is a real value or spiritual realm.In addition, is there something more transcendent on top of this point of view?Using the analogy in Wang Xiaobo's article, for the "pigs in the pen", belief issues and spiritual issues may not be a problem.But for those who take thinking as a hobby or even a profession, can this kind of more transcendent thing command the view of history and literature at a higher level? I think so.You want me to tell you what this stuff looks like, right? That is to say, there is such a ready-made theory—if not, we will build a set of theories, the so-called philosophy of philosophy, which can be used to govern all disciplines.Do you think this is possible? possible.Because all organisms on the root are originally derived from single cells.The problems that exist in single-celled organisms and the problems that arise after life unfolds can all be attributed to that root cause.Following the idea of ​​the evolution of single-cell life, material problems, social problems, and economic problems can all be explained. Of course, after the emergence of the human species, a new problem arose, that is, how to settle down the human spirit.Eat and drink enough, why is he alive? That is to say, Creation starts from a single cell, moves forward, and finally creates something that Creation itself does not include. It is a spiritual question-what is "I" doing?What use am I?Why am I alive?Originally, the reason for living is very clear at the level of genes, that is, to live forever, to create new genes and more lives.That's it.But people still have to ask questions, and they won't be satisfied with this answer.However, looking for new answers, answers to spiritual problems, and genetic problems are consistent in thinking and direction, and may eventually be attributed to one source. So, is it possible for us to find a way to analyze this single-cell life now? possible.All social sciences are actually the unfolding of a fundamental problem, and the fundamental problem is contained in the single-cell life. What is the problem with single cells?Single-celled life, such as paramecium, is placed in water, and a drop of salt water is added, and the paramecium will avoid the salt water.It can sense that highly concentrated salt water is harmful, and the highly concentrated solution will suck up its body fluids.But if the dripping is sugar water, it will perceive that this is a kind of energy, and it will move over there to get what it needs.Even though it is a single-celled organism, it already has an instinctive reaction of seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages.It compares and calculates in fact.If it is too far to obtain this kind of benefit, the concentration of that kind of energy is very weak, and it cannot be stimulated to act, so it will not go.As long as the gain outweighs the loss, it will not go—single cells have the ability to calculate benefits.Of course, its calculation does not use mathematical symbols, it is an instinctive reaction.If it doesn't have this instinct, doesn't know the benefits, doesn't count gains and losses, doesn't know how to hide from harm, and doesn't know how to benefit, can you imagine that such a thing won't be eliminated?It cannot survive. Therefore, the more accurate the calculation, the higher the efficiency of obtaining benefits, and the more prosperous that species will be.Whether it is sunshine, sugar water or seaweed, in the same competitive environment, which species is the best at using resources, and the gains outweigh the losses, and the benefits outweigh the harms, that species will become more and more successful.This is the calculation method of single-cell life: weighing the relationship between giving and receiving, prosperity with a high "pay-to-pay ratio", decline with a low "pay-to-pay ratio", and stagnation with a medium "pay-to-pay ratio". The "to pay ratio" is a negative number, and you will die if you don't live for a few days. The same method can explain the emergence of species, the evolution of species, the rise and fall of species.The dung beetle, for example, has found a unique way to use its energy—dung is also a source of energy.The competition in nature is too fierce, it can't use anything else, it can only use excrement.Therefore, after a niche appears, as long as an appropriate way to utilize the energy of this niche can be found, the corresponding species will be born and will continue to exist. We humans are also such a species.The special skill of human beings is to be able to make tools, to recognize and distinguish the pros and cons in a wider environment, and to use more means to obtain more energy and resources in a wider range.We can use symbols to express and communicate, to make some inferences, to understand the environment in depth, and to make tools and understanding of the environment beyond the scope of personal experience and become a culture that can be accumulated.The core of human culture is how to use energy and resources more effectively, seek advantages and avoid disadvantages—for example, how to obtain food, how to avoid wildfires, wild beast attacks, and even attack wild animals in reverse, and so on.It's just that human beings no longer rely on instinct, but rely on cultural accumulation to complete this process. Well, we have jumped from computational methods of single-celled organisms, from biological evolution to human culture.Different civilizations of human beings have different survival strategies.In different environments, different survival strategies have different payoffs.For example, how much did you pay for the two production methods of gathering and hunting, and how much did you get?Do the math, if there is less and less food to gather and less and less game to hunt, maybe it will be more cost-effective for us to plant and raise livestock.Thus, agriculture, including crops and livestock, emerged as a survival strategy.It has a relatively high pay-to-pay ratio. Of course, looting is also a survival strategy.Someone robs you of food, robs his livestock-violent groups are born.If a violent group pays very little but earns a lot—in my words, it means blood pay is high, its benefits are huge, and it can be maintained for a long time, then this violent group will be born, no matter if it is a bandit, a warlord, an aristocrat, or an emperor .Violent groups are the carriers and incarnations of the survival strategy of violent plunder. Similarly, farmers are the embodiment of survival strategies such as farming and harvesting, hunters are the embodiment of hunting strategies, and shepherds are the embodiment of animal husbandry strategies. Each survival strategy has its own different payoffs.Some people say that the world is flat, but I say that "depay" in this world is flat.If there is a particularly high-paying job—little pay, big pay, say, being an official—people will flock to the job.At this time, a barrier must be established to prevent people from entering easily.The Chinese invented the imperial examination.If you want to be an official, you have to take the exam.When you pay the price of ten years of hard work and become an official, the pay ratio is basically balanced.In fact, after ten years of hard work, few people have the luck to be an official.If a person is not born to study, he may not pass the exam in twenty years, and he may be blind in this life.With this talent, they surpassed the barriers of officialdom and entered, and they made money.But for those who are stupid in reading, they may never be able to climb in. Even if they climb in, they may be like Fan Jin, and they will only pass the exam when their hair turns gray. Then do you think he has lost money or made money overall in his life?In fact, it would be better to be a butcher.Life is better, not so miserable.Fan Jin passed the exam in the end, but what if he was five years later?Or did it not go so smoothly after he got hit?Or was he too greedy and was arrested as a corrupt official?That is to say, he is still at a loss in his life. The whole society has a balanced pay-to-pay ratio.We use this equilibrium to explain many problems according to the pay-to-pay ratio.For example, cost-benefit calculation in political science or law is to calculate obligations and rights.If you have too many obligations and too few rights, you are an oppressed class—you have a heavy burden of corvee, but you do not have the right to all kinds of social benefits.If you are an aristocrat, then eat hard-core crops. If you don’t do it, you will have your share every year. You will have more rights and fewer obligations. The view of history or social evolution I want to talk about basically starts from here.It's all a calculated calculation.For single-celled organisms, it is the balance of how much benefit to avoid and how much harm to avoid, which is the evolution of organs and instincts that seek to benefit and avoid harm; in the legal sense, it is the calculation of rights and obligations; in terms of the market, it is the cost , The calculation of income; for bandits, it is the calculation of life casualties and blood rewards.In this way, the fields of politics, economy, military, and law can all be linked together.Behind all domains is a comparably computational problem.The pay-to-pay ratio is ultimately balanced and flat. Could this be the foundational part of the house you're "building" right now?What is the situation further up? This is the basement part, the foundation is laid, and the foundation must be hit by single-celled organisms to be considered a hard bottom.If we go further to "building a house", we have to start from the first page of Chinese history. The first page is the Yellow Emperor.Why the Yellow Emperor fought with Emperor Yan, why he conquered various tribes, and why he fought with Chi You, all must be explained from the perspective of investment and income.The core concept is the investment and income of violence, that is, the law of blood reward.Historically, the dominant class or dominant ruling group in society are those who conquer the world and dominate the country.The same is true of the Yellow Emperor.As soon as he comes out, he will dominate the princes.When people refused to accept it, he started to fight.After the princes were convinced, they first fought Emperor Yan and then Chi You, and won three battles.This is the beginning of Chinese history.You don't like violence, expecting them to sign a contract to bind each other, that can only be a kind imagination.The history of China has always been that if you don’t accept it, you will fight. If you win, you have to obey, and you have to obey if you don’t obey. This is the foundation of the ruler. Another example is the establishment of the Xia Dynasty.Originally, Yu wanted to pass the throne to Yi, but Xia Qi refused to accept it, so he fought and defeated Yi, so that Xia Qi became the founder of the Xia Dynasty.Originally, it was still an "official world", but when he came to him, he started a "family world".Then, Shang Tang destroyed Xia, and King Wu defeated Zhou, all by violence. After the establishment of the new dynasty, it began to "divide the world", telling relatives and friends: this piece of land is yours, and that piece of land is his.I will distribute the land to you, and you have to manage it according to the order I made.According to this order, you can decide the life and death of the people on this block, and let them contribute what you need. At this time, producers and violent groups also started a game.Producers will rebel and be lazy.Well, use the well field system.If there is a public land, the grain planted belongs to the public; and I will give you a piece of private land.But people work hard on their private plots and are lazy on public land.Simply, let's make a big contract, I will give you all the land, and you can pay the rent.The tenancy system replaced the well field system. The rulers and producers are playing games, but in any case, the rulers and violent groups have the final say.The violent group began to calculate what kind of management method to use has the highest benefit and the lowest cost.This can explain the changes in production relations.The relationship between the violent group and the production group has gradually changed from the simple, brutal relationship that treats people like cows and horses.Violent groups are slowly finding ways to mobilize the enthusiasm of producers and make the cake bigger.In this way, the relative amount of deprivation decreases, but the overall benefit increases.Anyway, it is going in the direction of "big contract", and finally stabilized: individual farmers pay the imperial grain, pay taxes, and pay rent to the landlord; the landlord also pays the imperial grain and national tax.Maintain a boundary where the benefits of both parties are maximized. Relations within violent groups are also changing.From independent kingdoms to county systems.A group of agents or several department managers are hired under a chairman; instead of a group of small chamber of commerce bosses under a big chamber of commerce boss, it is such a pattern from the feudal system to the county system.This is the relationship within the violent groups in China.The pattern of scattered violence is evolving into a pattern of concentrated violence. The general pattern of Chinese civilization has been determined in this way, and it has lasted for two thousand years. Taking the calculation of violent groups as the main axis, from the perspective of the rulers, and using the standards they can tolerate to calculate costs and benefits, we can analyze the economic and social systems of different dynasties and stages in Chinese history. In Chinese history, the concentration of violence was originally very high.Like during the Warring States period, the population was less than 60 million, and the standing army was 4 million.Half of the 60 million people are men, 30 million.After deducting 15 million for the elderly and children, there are 15 million left.Of the 15 million people who can fight, 4 million are the standing army, which shows that violence can reach a concentration of nearly 30%, and 30% of the strong labor force is born to fight, and his profession is to fight.By the time of the Ming Dynasty, the population of the entire country was probably hundreds of millions, but the total number of troops at that time had decreased.By this time, the concentration of violence was much lower. Therefore, compared with feudalism (note: this refers to the system of dividing the world in the Zhou Dynasty. It should be said that starting from Qin Shihuang, the Chinese social form is the prefecture and county system), the prefecture and county system, or what I call the official system. Much less looting.This shows that the level of civilization has improved, and history is moving in a bright direction.Similarly, the well field system evolved into the tenancy system, and the freedom of producers also increased. What I mean by "darkness" is that your theoretical framework connects thousands of years of history into a line, all the way through. I am telling the truth.How should the color of the narrator be evaluated?In my opinion, the narrator who conceals or distorts the truth is the one whose heart is dark.It is obvious that darkness insists that light is darkness. As for human nature itself, I fully affirm that benevolence and righteousness, that is, sympathy and a sense of justice, are innate in everyone's heart.Many people laugh at the theory of good sex.I don't think so.I think people are inherently kind. When do you think your theory will be invalid?Is there such a possibility? When is it invalid?I think you should change the question.It should be asked: when does it become redundant. My set of theories begins directly with the calculation of violence.The most important thing in the calculation of interests is the calculation of life and death.So I'll do the math first, the benefits and costs of violent plunder. I think that in capitalist society, the bourgeoisie has the final say, controls violence, controls the state apparatus, controls the army, courts, and has legislative power. At this time, my calculation may be redundant.Because at this time, as the commander of the production group, the bourgeoisie does not rely on plunder for a living, but he controls the armed forces and the plunderers, so he can determine the superstructure.The blood reward history concept is still valid at this time.Why does it work?Because the most violent still has the final say. It's just that violence has been controlled by the bourgeoisie at this time, and it is displayed in a relatively peaceful way. right.At this time, it is enough to explain history with historical materialism—productivity determines production relations, the economic base determines the superstructure, and the superstructure serves the economic base—it is enough to explain it to this level, and there is no need to start with Pangu. , Said how the bourgeoisie controlled the state apparatus, controlled violence, and made it serve itself.There is no need to go around in such a big circle.At this time, what I just said is superfluous. But soon, it couldn't be explained by historical materialism.Because later the trade unions became stronger, workers also participated in legislation and voted, and blacks and women also had the right to vote. Do you think it is still the capitalists who have the final say?Workers sometimes have more votes than capitalists, and sometimes they can even make legislative policies in favor of laborers, and restrict competition if the development of productivity goes against the interests of laborers.At this time, historical materialism seems to be unable to fully explain it.A good way is to use Kant's conception of free history to explain.Every free person affects the development of the world through his own vote. The set of blood-reward historical views centered on the calculation of violence that I mentioned has become superfluous when explaining today’s Western society, but it does not mean that it is invalid.It didn't fail, it just turned too many turns and stretched too far. In a free and democratic society, the word "violence" for violent groups may become less popular, and it will become a word for "profit" to balance forces from all sides. At that time, violence became the word for armed.Wu, stop fighting, is a way to restrain illegal violence.In a free and democratic society, everyone is free, and personal rights and property rights are not violated. If you want to use violence to violate others, I will use violence to lock you up. This violence actually acts as a pesticide.For example, our crops are growing well, don’t you bugs come, if you come to spoil the crops, I’ll spray them.But in fact, no pesticide is a natural state, and pests are a natural state, and there is a price to pay for spraying pesticides.In other words, violence is a natural state, and there is a price to be paid for eliminating violence. So, although I don't talk about the benefits of violence and plunder, and the impact of violence on history, violence still affects us everywhere-when the country makes a budget, there must be a sum of money dedicated to this: to create a peaceful , Everyone's rights can be guaranteed environment.This environment is not a natural state where people consciously abide by after reaching a contract, but a state that requires violence to maintain.It reminds us of the natural state of violence in human history. In an article, talking about the unspoken rules in the ancient officialdom, you said: "The supervisors have learned well, and they can stop the soup more effectively. Leaders who are worried about China's future and destiny have learned well, and they can be more effective." Let’s take a drastic step to improve the soil thoroughly, so as to avoid the mistakes that the dynasties from the Qin and Han Dynasties to the Ming and Qing Dynasties could not avoid.... But why must the supervisors learn? Many people can grow old in high positions themselves, and their descendants can get a piece of paper. Green card, do they really need to care about the fundamental and long-term interests of the nation? What can they do if they don’t care about the common people? It is our long-standing tradition that the fate of the entire nation hangs on the conscience of a few individuals. The historical experience shows that the common people have no good way to deal with it.” Is this your basic view on the direction of Chinese society? I'm talking about history.This is the case in Chinese history, regardless of whether this world is the world of the Zhao family or the world of the Liu family, it is the world of the family anyway.The world belongs to their family.If others advise him and he refuses to listen, what can others do?The later world is not the world of a certain family, but it is not the world of the common people either.Power still comes from the conferring of higher powers.But this person who gained power was very different from the emperor.The emperor must consider future generations.This person came down in ten or eight years, and the world does not give him a son. There is no need to make long-term plans and plans for future generations. Long-term plans can only be guaranteed by personal sense of historical responsibility.That is to say, the later society was weaker in strengthening the sense of responsibility of the supreme ruler or creating an incentive mechanism for them than when the empire was a family.Up and down are agents, and both can be short-term behaviors. Back then, an emperor in Rome expressed emotion, talking about the four or five top ministers under him, saying that if I didn't pay attention, they would join forces to deceive me.Think about it, if the person in power is not the emperor, but just one of these four or five people, then it is possible for everyone to discuss and share the loot together, right?With the emperor, they can't share the spoils, because it is the emperor's money; if there is no emperor, the four or five people have the final say, and purely from the perspective of profit calculation, the most cost-effective is to share the spoils.Of course, there is one person who may have a particularly strong sense of justice, or a strong sense of mission, and we firmly disagree—we have put the fate of the nation on this person again; if there are two, then our nation’s luck is very good; if all five Yes, then we are almost angels - we took a gamble and won the jackpot.But under normal circumstances, even if those four people are good, the people below them still want to divide, just like Zhao Kuangyin said that he doesn't want to be emperor, but his subordinates put yellow robes on you, what should you do?All the subordinates want to be high officials.If you change from a commander of a military region to an emperor, then the deputy commanders of these military regions can become the minister of defense, and the head of the regiment can become the commander of the army at once. Therefore, I think this state is not getting better but getting worse. It is more beneficial to violent groups. right.When sharing benefits, there are fewer restrictions on the calculation of benefits.In the past, we had to consider long-term interests, but now we only need to consider my short-term interests.Those things belong to everyone, why should I offend others?I can't wait to get some more.As long as it's passable and not too ugly, it's fine.This is a very problematic system.Therefore, the "official world" in China's past dynasties did not last long.If the abdication system does not change, the world will be unstable, and in the end it will only be stabilized when it comes to the home world, or it will be stabilized when it comes to the "people's world".In this sense, we are in an unstable transitional state. When we look back at the past, we will find that it was a common mental state to firmly believe, be convinced, and even fanatically superstitious.And now, believing in something seems difficult.Facing the current mental state, it seems difficult for people to find a common value goal.So, do you think our society should have a value that everyone believes in? It's not a question of should.I don't discuss whether it should be done or not.Of course, people should find a system of ideas to settle down, and there is nothing to discuss about this.For thousands of years, the Chinese have been looking for it, and many have found it. The answer provided by Confucianism allows people to live a very stable life. The so-called "life, I will go along with it; no, I will rather."Live peacefully, without the confusion of so-called beliefs.Taoism and Buddhism also have a very complete set of sayings.Even in contemporary times, there are, and the words of Lei Feng and Paul provide us with the answer.In short, there are all times, it is nothing more than different people have different answers. The problem today is that there is no idea that everyone can agree on, like Confucianism or Mao Zedong Thought, which became the mainstream spirit in a historical stage of Chinese culture.Not now, but it will definitely be.People are looking for it.There is always a saying that is more competitive and will be accepted by everyone. Can you make a hypothesis now, what does it look like? I don't know what it looks like in detail, but I guess that on the whole it must meet several conditions: the top point is in line with the law of nature, the bottom point is in line with people's hearts, and the middle point is in line with daily human relations. How is Hetianli understood? There is a saying in Chinese philosophy called "Extremely brilliant and Dao moderate".Mr. Feng Youlan used these two criteria to measure the level of each theory. "Extremely brilliant" means to provide people with an explanation of the ultimate meaning, and to make this explanation reach the realm of heaven and earth.The moral realm is not enough, the utilitarian realm is not enough, let alone the animal-like natural realm.To be one with the heaven and the earth, communicate with the spirit of the universe, as the Taoists say, wandering infinitely, this is the highest state, and solves the ultimate problem of human beings. What is "the golden mean"?Let me make an analogy first. A person is "extremely brilliant" and can communicate spiritually with heaven and earth like a Taoist, but every day he "becomes with the light and dust", being a good old man at work, watching TV at home all day long, and going to bed when he is full , This does not show his brilliance.His spiritual life and secular life are separated, "extremely brilliant" is there, but "daozhongyong" is not.How to do it?To be like Confucianism, as I said just now, Gan is called father, Kun is called mother-heaven is my father, earth is my mother, and I am in the middle, the emperor is my elder brother, and everyone in the world is My compatriots, everything in the world including pigs, horses, cows, and sheep are my friends, and I treat them as such.In this way, his daily life implements the relationship between daily ethics and ethics, and there is a strong support of heavenly principles and ultimate meaning behind it.In this way, "extremely brilliant" and "daozhongyong" are well combined. Is what you said close to the level of religion? Confucianism does not talk about religion, Confucianism only talks about human nature, and later Taoism, preaching, is also "the Tao of willfulness". Of course, human nature comes from the principles of heaven.In Mao Zedong or Marxism-Leninism, Taoism has become the law of history—as long as you follow the law of history and join the great struggle for human liberation, your life will enter immortality, and you will be like a drop of water that melts into The entire historical trend, together with the historical trend, creates history.But I think that we have encountered so many obstacles in China, if we still stay at this level, it means that our pursuit of "extreme excellence" has not progressed. Do you think it is pursuing too high or too low? Too low, not high enough.Because whether it is Dao, the principles of heaven, or the laws of history, they can be grasped by human beings.If you master the laws of history, I have to go with you.Or if I master the laws of history, I can command you.我是“奉天承运”，我就要“皇帝诏曰”，我成了道的一部分，我就是道的代表，你就得听我的。这是皇权统治的根基。每一个皇帝，拿出来的诏书，一定是“皇帝诏曰”，或“皇帝制曰”，其前面一定是“奉天承运”。 这个时候，所谓的“道”已经成了一种手段。 是他们统治正当性的证明。道可以被他们利用。他说按照历史规律，我们一定要，一定可以怎么怎么样。你认为你是历史规律的掌握者，你代表了历史规律，那我们就得听你的。我们历史上栽了那么多跟头，我们还要这样来尊重道吗？还信这种东西吗？我们要把它看低点，要超越这种东西。 什么概念能够超越它呢？汉语中有一个概念，就是“造化”，可以超越它。造化比道大。如果你说你掌握道了，无非是造化之中多了一个自称掌握道的人，而造化还是造化。你掌握不了造化，你就在造化之中，多了一个自称掌握造化的人，无非让造化变得更复杂而已。但决不能说你就是造化。 造化，它接近于自然？ 那个词应该叫存在。因为自然不包括人。存在特别大，只要在，什么都包括在内。只要在那儿都可以说是存在。但存在是一种静态的感觉。没反应，木头木脑的。 造化是一直在运动着的。 right.并且造化是能够报应你的。你干了什么坏事它能惩罚你，你干了什么好事它能奖赏你。它比较灵动，似乎是有灵魂的。但存在作为一个整体似乎没有灵魂。没灵魂我们怎么信仰它？所以我觉得“极高明”这一部分要超越道。具体办法就是进入到造化的层面。this is one. 然后，“道中庸”，日常生活中的人伦关系，君君臣臣，父父子子，在过去都得到了道的支持。但现在我们发现，它有问题。我们就不服气。不服气，就要调整这个边界。 怎么调整？我们现在所给予的解释一般是来自西方的自由、民主，权利、义务——这些概念界定了所谓人伦的边界。 权利、义务要在古汉语里找对应的话，就是“分”。安分守己、本分，不要“逾分”，都是这意思。“分”这个词其实比“权利”、“义务”好。它有形象感。它告诉人们，“分”是可以看出来的。到底有几平方米，就在这儿，它给画出来了。众多的“分”在法律支持下，叠加起来，就成了一个立体化了的“礼”。它叫名教，也叫礼教。核心内容就是对于“分”的规定和证明。 这套新结构，上面的依据就是天理。下边的支持就是人心。它在中间，即中庸之道，分寸恰当之道，是一种礼义结构，或者叫名分结构。 说到“分”，我曾经写过一篇文章。我认为，当年丁韪良翻译英文right这个词时，不应该译成权利，而应该译成“权分”。对于“权利”这种翻译方法，严复当年就批评它“以霸译王”——“权”是霸道的，“利”也是霸道的，而right本身带着合乎王道的正当性——这么一译，哪有什么正当性？把“权利”译成“权分”不就有正当性了吗？同样，把“义务”译成“义分”不就完了吗？ 译法一改，我们说的权利、义务结构就改成权分结构了，而权分结构的分际和中国古代的名分规定相比，有很多改变。怎么解释这个改变呢？从造化的高度就能解释。造化之中，哪股力量强了，比如说，官权总是堕落，就应该抑制它，让各种力量之间互相制约、制衡，调整官民之分。再从另一个角度看，人类有柴油了，有化肥了，有农药了，生产者的力量变强了，跟自然界的关系就变了，对环境的伤害能力提高，对环境的权分就要重视起来。造化之中引进了新的力量，整个生产关系也就跟着有了调整。相应的，生产的组织者，那些资本家们，他们的权分也会增长起来，相对官府，他们有了更大的发言权，同时，社会其他阶层的权分也要成长起来，比如工人就要组建工会。社会各方面的权分都要跟着调整。 这样，中间的层面，就已经改了。 下边的这一层面是人心。从儒家的观点看来，恻隐之心，人皆有之。At the beginning of human beings, nature is good.你如果追问，人为什么会有这种向善之心呢？我们从单细胞生命可以一直追过来。有同情心的人能够体谅别人的喜怒，有更强的合作能力，于是他有更多的生存机会，能更有效地躲避风险或者联合起来抗击风险，于是就有了生存竞争的优势，生存率更高，死亡率更低。这个解释也合乎我们前边对单细胞生命趋利避害的解释。进化论也能支持我们说的权分结构。 其实，每一个人日常生活都有可能形成这么一种结构。下面是本性，上面是造化，中间，不仅仅是洒扫庭除，也是一种深合天理，深合人心的伦理生活。单个人的行为，日常生活中一些简单的行为，已经包含了无限的东西。我们无须外求就可以又一次感受到“存，吾顺事；没，吾宁也”的那种踏实。我们找到了安身立命的基础。它沿着向外、向内两个方向去寻找，它有着日常生活中的一套东西，也包含超越天理的知识。从单细胞生物开始，它一直延续下来，顺着先贤的足迹走来，又超越了前人的高度和深度。这就是我所想象的未来的信念体系。这个体系为我们提供了参赞造化的高度，诚恳地合乎本性生活的深度。 我注意到，无论是你在跟我谈话，还是你在写文章的时候，都显得非常“冷静”，几乎是做数学题的一种方式，好像感觉不到你有来自情感方面的影响。它让我想起来，现代小说写作中有一个概念叫“零度叙述”——叙述人不把个人的主观感情渗透到字里行间。但有人因此而批评你说，吴思是“不道德的”，把这些东西说得这么明白，给一些贪官提供了活教材，使潜规则成了社会的毒药。你自己怎么看待这个问题？ 历史的进退跟道德关系很少，它主要是利害计算的结果。要是看多了历史或者更深地卷入过历史，就会非常清晰地认识到，道德的力量是存在的，但力量是有限的，我们给它百分之二三十的权重就很可以了，如果想用它来解决百分之七八十的问题，必定失败。给道德的负担太重了，是在戕害它，最后让人对它失望。 批评我的人大概没看明白我写的东西。我从来没有说没道德，无非是你别用道德来解释一切，用利害关系去解释百分之七八十的事挺好。如果用利害关系就能解释百分之百的事，干脆就别说道德。 这不等于道德不存在。饥荒时候，人吃人，道德吗？不道德。可也能看出一些道德。有一个最明显的可计算办法。据说人肉和牛羊肉味道差不多。李自成围困开封时，市场上有人肉卖。按说，味道差不多，应该价钱一样。可还是牛羊肉贵，人肉便宜。人性、道德就隐藏在这里呢。我没有不讲道德，无非是想给它适当的权重。你不同意这个权重，那咱们可以讨论，你说多少权重更好？总不能100%吧？ 其实我觉得，说我的计算“不讲道德”也好，或者你说我是“零度写作”也好，都没说确切。重要的是，我说出了事实，说出社会是怎么运行的，利害是怎么计算的。我觉得，批评我的人，对于那些贪官污吏有用这点他算出来了，这只是其一。但还有其二。其二是什么呢？要知道，被伤害者也会算。他们原来觉得，清官、父母官、好心的领导，天使一样，蒙着温情脉脉的面纱。但用我的方法一算，知道了，哦，他们其实不是这么回事，得防范了。或者再算算，我们如果跟他死磕，我们可能损失惨重，最后还得失败。权衡过了，磕得过就磕，磕不过就先让步。最后一算成本和收益，可能是所得大于所失。还有其三——我们可以用成本收益计算的方法，从根本上解决不正之风的问题。 对于“潜规则”这个病根子，道德的药一副一副用下去，几千年都治不好。那些鼓吹道德的人为什么不去看看这些药管不管用？我们不停地进行道德教育，整风，搞先进性教育，推出一些英雄模范人物，总之，基本路子就是思想政治工作吧。你不能说它没用。但是有百分之二三十的用就不错了——可能就这还高估了。更多的百分之七八十的分量应该是让他的乌纱帽攥在公众手里。你欺负我，我们大家投票让你下台。这样，这个机制就变成一种利害计算的机制。潜规则有什么大不了的？潜规则对上面来说没法办，但是每一个潜规则的受害者都是明白人。你潜规则我，我就投你的反对票，你就得下台。这一下，所谓风气不正的问题，腐败的问题一下子变成实实在在的利害计算了。你干的那个事你可能丢百分之多少的选票，你的竞争者会不会揪住你不放，一下子就算得清清楚楚。这一来，整个是釜底抽薪，改良了土壤。你把这产生潜规则的土壤改成一个民主的投票的土壤，那这些东西不都没了吗？至于还有些人，确实坏，但我们已经解决了百分之七八十的问题，只剩下百分之二三十的问题了，到这时候再用道德这剂药。 批评我的人只知其一，就是人关在屋里看书可以学坏；不知其二，就是老百姓看书可以学精；还不知其三，就是如果我们把病根子找到了，给它改了，就不会有那种潜规则了。 如果把这三条都算上来，我觉得我不是“零度”。如果最高温度是一百度，我怎么也得有“六十度”。我不知道“一百度的叙述”是什么，“一百度的叙述”可能是热情洋溢的诗歌，用来写历史恐怕反而让人看不下去。 ：在学校里你曾经做过学生干部，插队时你当过生产队长，如果用你现在的角度来看，你也曾经是暴力集团的代表或者是一个代理人。现在回忆当年，你心里边是真诚地想呢还是有别的利害计算？ ：当时我意识中浮现的计算都是堂堂正正的。比如说我们生产队要成为学大寨的标兵、模范，要成为县里的模范，省里的模范，如果有余力的话争取成为全国的模范，可以和大寨有一比。反正这目标越高越好。即使有个人计算也藏在潜意识里。 现在回忆起来，你当时有没有想过，这样的目标实现了以后对谁会有利？为什么要这样来做？ 当时是全国学大寨，成功了当然对国家和人民都有利。但当时的人不会问这个问题。 就是坚信？ right. 那你现在觉得当时那种精神状况是不是它也算是一种信仰？ 是，强烈的信仰。就是觉得如果中国普及大寨县了，那么中国的农业问题全解决了。中国一下就变成了一个富强国家了。这就像号召学雷锋的时候，就想，学好了雷锋，中国就是一个到处是天使的国家。 当时也没有想到要追究一下？ No.不仅我不追究，中央领导恐怕也没有人想到去追究一下。我详细看过昔阳县的档案，当年，毛泽东派纪登奎去昔阳考察，调查的是普及大寨县具体的实现途径。陈永贵陪着纪登奎到昔阳各处去，见各种各样的人，讨论普及大寨县的问题。那已经是最高层决策了。但他们只是讨论怎么干，至于该不该干，甚至可行性如何之类的问题，根本就没有问到。 你生活在北京，在著名的杂志社当总编辑，在全国又有广泛的影响，按照普通人的理解，这应该是一种非常值得羡慕的生活。但你似乎觉得简单生活才是自然的。我看到有人写文章，说你不开车，上班时就走半小时的路，住在一间三四十平方的蜗居里。一般人看来，这种生活，说得好听点是特立独行，说得不好听的就是这人有点毛病。为什么中国人想要追求一点特立独行的生活方式就这么难？对那些东西你真的就不动心？ 我向往过。我1982年大学毕业，1984年年底就是副处级了，在《农民日报》当总编室副主任，刚当上这个官儿，觉得腰杆子很直，不一般。但是当官的生活是什么样的呢？每天晚上上夜班，有点什么差错都是你的事，还要把大家拢好，把活干好，你要自己想干点事反而没时间了。慢慢地就有一种强烈的为他人做嫁衣的感觉，觉得当官就必须为他人做嫁衣裳，无论你是否喜欢那个人，是否喜欢当裁缝。自己有很多想干的事没法干，自己想看的书没时间看，想写的东西没法写，内心就吵嚷起来了，觉得我的才能不在这儿，我最想要的东西不是这个。后来我就要求给我换到一般人都不愿去的群工部。再后来报社成立机动记者组，我努力进了机动记者组。这一来，爱去哪儿去哪儿，爱写什么写什么，干的事都是自己喜欢的。我觉得这种选择对我来说，太正常了。不这样做，我才觉得是因小失大，因名失实。 生活中我们看到的，更多的是跟你相反的选择。现在回想起来，你是不是觉得自己“老谋深算”？当时你有没有感觉到将来会过现在的生活？ 我觉得我更喜欢自己选择的生活。我躲避的东西对我来说是得不偿失的。 我非常清楚那些当官的人日子是怎么过的。所谓高官厚禄的日子，对我来说不是想象，就是熟悉的一部分，对我来说没有神秘感，没有诱惑，反而让我看到它内在的简陋和苍白。他们付出的代价我不愿意付。他们身不由己，难得自由自在，让我拿机动记者的生活来换我都不愿意，那我为什么要奋斗那么多年去追求那样的未来呢？ 和你的父辈比起来，你觉得你的怀疑更多一些还是他们的怀疑更多一些？你更清醒一些还是他们更清醒一些？ 父辈们并不一样。比如说我们杂志社的社长也可以说是我的父辈了，他都八十多了。他们那一辈人，有的人怀疑不深，有的人怀疑极深，而且比我们还要痛苦，因为他们陷得比我们深。我们陷到二十岁出头就拔出来了，他们是一直陷到四五十岁才开始往外拔，所以他们痛苦、怀疑，痛彻心扉的感觉远远超过我们。拔得也更吃力，不容易像我们这么快。所以和他们比较起来，也就难说，看看跟谁比了，不能一概而论。 ：将来，如果人们能够拥有一个类似于你所讲的信仰体系的话，在多大程度上能够得到解脱？ 如果人们找到了可以安顿身心的清晰的理论体系，知道自己要什么，就不会被很多身外之物比如浮名、虚利迷惑得那么深。他们会更踏实。当个扫大街的也好，当个卡车司机也好，当个编辑、记者也好，当个省长、部长也好，都会自尊、自得。有一双巧手，就当一个好钳工；有一个好头脑，当一个好教授、好研究员；有一支好文笔，当一个好编辑或者好作家，都会觉得活得很尽性。那时候人们就会心安理得，就会不那么敬仰高官厚禄发大财。 你有没有觉得你是一个叛逆的人？ 我觉得我是一个缺乏叛逆性的人。 你觉得你不叛逆，但是你没有发现你那种“零度叙述”的方式就像一把刀子一样，就像一个正在往前走的人，忽然转身，向走来的方向刺了一刀。你自己有这种感觉吗？我第一次看你的文章，是在《上海文学》上。那时候你的文章在那里连载。当时我并不知道谁是吴思，但我就觉得，这个人的文章，把感情控制得特别好，有一种力量，是一种“杀人不见血”的感觉。你这样写文章是有意的还是天生就这种“冷漠”的叙述方式？ 我认为，我在遵循传统和前辈要求我们实事求是的教导，是遵从而不是叛逆。我遵从得甚至有些刻板。至于不露声色，那是因为事实和道理复杂微妙，不容我爱憎分明。其实很多叙述还是带情绪的。比如说我讲李自成造反，老百姓喊，吃他娘穿他娘，闯王来了不纳粮。我要是那时候的老百姓我也一样高兴。终于吃一顿饱饭，太幸福了，这时候我就直接跳出来说话了。忍不住啊。再比如说，崇祯皇帝，为他那个帝国，不近女色，每天都兢兢业业干十几个小时。放我在他那个位置，凭良心说我做不到。我就讲——皇帝也不容易啊。这种说法你说是调侃吧，其实也不完全是，我是真心地对他表示同情。其实这个味道都在里面，也不是所有的时候都不露声色。