Chapter 2 Chapter 1-2

once.Several friends asked him, "Lin Yutang, who are you?" He replied, "I don't know who he is, only God knows." Another time, he said, "I'm just a contradiction, but I think Take pleasure in contradicting yourself." He loves contradictions.He likes to see traffic safety publicity vehicles get into an accident and hurt people. Once he went to a temple on Xishan in the western suburbs of Beiping to see the son of an eunuch.He described himself as a pagan, but he was a Christian at heart.Now he was absorbed in literature, but he always thought it was a mistake not to study science in his freshman year.He loves China and the Chinese people, and his frankness and truthfulness surpasses all other Chinese people.He doesn't like fascism. He thinks that the ideal tramp in China is the person with the most status. This kind of extreme individualism is the most terrible enemy of the tyrant and the enemy who will fight hard to the end.He admires the West very much, but despises Western educational psychologists.He once called himself a "realistic idealist."He also called himself a philosopher who "sees life with a cold eye".He loves writers with eccentric ideas, but he also loves plain and appropriate understandings.He was interested in literature, pretty country girls, geology, atoms, music, electronics, electric razors, and all sorts of new scientific inventions.He used clay and dripping wax to make colorful landscapes and portraits, and put them on glass to amuse himself.He loved walking in the rain; swimming about three yards; enjoying debating theology; and blowing soap bubbles with the children.Seeing the secluded place with thick weeping willows by the lake, I feel sad, but I am at a loss for the beauty of the ocean.All mountains are loved by all.When getting along with her boyfriend, she loves to swear, but she is extremely upright with women.

There is no book in my life that I don't read.Greek, Chinese, and contemporary writers; religion, politics, science.Love to read the Topics column of New York "Time Magazine" and the "Fourth Editorial" of "London Times"; there are also all the news framed around it, as well as scientific and medical news; despise all statistics - think that statistics is not to obtain the truth A genuine approach; also despises academic terminology - thinking that terminology is just a cover for a lack of insight.Extremely curious about everything; has a complacent view of women's clothes, can openers, and chicken eyelids.He has never read Kant's philosophy, he said it is unbearable; he hates economics.But love Heine, Stephen Leacock and Heywood Broun.Very obsessed with "Mickey Mouse" and "Donald Duck".There are also male stars to Weng Na. Barrymore (LionelBarrymore) and actress Katherine. Hepburn (KatherinHepburn).

He sat at the same table with diplomatic ambassadors or ordinary people, and he didn't care at all, but he couldn't bear the restraint of etiquette.He never intends to give anyone any impression.He hated wearing a tuxedo. He said he looked too much like a Chinese servant in it.He didn't want to publish his own photo, because the reader's vision of him was an old oriental philosopher with a fluttering beard, and he didn't want to destroy the illusion in the reader's mind.He loves a crowd as long as he is at ease among them; otherwise, he leaves.When he heard Chen Youren's English, he was moved, so he joined the revolutionary government in Hankou and served as the secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I am not a carnivorous animal, and I am good at governing myself, but not good at governing others." He once wrote: "For me, following my nature is like being in heaven."

Extremely faithful to his wife, who allowed him to smoke in bed."That's always been the hallmark of a perfect marriage," he said. Excellent for his three daughters.He always thought that his beautiful girlfriends were closer to his wife than to him.When his wife expressed admiration for him, he was not stingy with self-admiration, but he refused to write "To my wife..." in front of his book, which would be too public. He prefaced himself as a disciple of Taoist Lao Zhuang, but he claimed to be the hardest worker in China.He couldn't bear to stand still; if the train hadn't come in, he would walk all over the platform, looking at the sweets and magazines in the shops.I'd rather walk up three flights of stairs than wait for the elevator.Washing dishes is fast, but it is always inevitable to damage a few.He said Edison's 24-hour sleeplessness was nothing; it was all a matter of concentration on work. "Five minutes after the U.S. senator gave a speech, Edison would doze off and fall asleep, and so would I, Lin Yutang."

His only activity was walking the streets and lying on the grass in New York's Central Park when the police couldn't see him. He smoked cigarettes whenever he was awake and not asleep, and claimed that his prose consisted of nicotine.He knows which page of his book has the most nicotine.I get dizzy after drinking a glass of beer, but I think I can't forget about wine. In a short essay.Describe your ideals in life like this: "If there is a Coke here, I will have nothing to fear." "I wish I had a room where I could work. The room didn't need to be particularly clean, nor too tidy. No need for Agathe's rag from the Story of San Michelet Scrub it clean wherever she can go. As long as I feel comfortable, familiar, and familiar with this room, hang a Buddhist oil lantern above the bed, the kind you see on Buddhist or Catholic altars. Smoke, musty books, other inexplicable smells..."

"I want some gentlemanly clothes, but I've worn them a few times, and a pair of old shoes. I need the freedom to wear as little as I want... if it's ninety degrees Fahrenheit in the shade At five degrees I must have the right to be half naked in my house, and I am not ashamed to do so in front of my servants. They must be as pleasing to the eye as myself. In summer I need a shower, in winter I want wood for a comfortable fire." "I need a home where I can be free and easy... I need some really boyish kids who can play in the rain with me, who can take showers as much fun as I do."

"I would like to hear the rooster crowing in the morning. I would like to have several tall trees nearby." "I want friends who are as friendly as everyday life, who can be familiar and informal. They have some troubles, whether they are marriage problems or other problems, and they can tell them frankly. They can quote the Greek comedian Aristophanes ( Aristophanes comedies, and dirty jokes, they must be spiritually rich, and can be frank and natural in their swearing and philosophy, they must have their own idiosyncrasies, they must have their own opinions about things. These people Each has its own beliefs, but respect mine as well."

"I want a good cook who can cook vegetables and good soups. I want a very old servant who thinks of me as a great man, but doesn't know what I'm great about." "I want a good study, a good pipe, and a woman. She needs to be smart and solve things. When I have to do things, she can not disturb me and let me do things with peace of mind." "Before my study, I have to repair several poles. In summer, I have to have rainy days, and in winter, the weather has to be clear. Thousands of miles are as blue as the sea, just like the winter when I was in Beijing."

"I want to be free to show my true colors and be natural, without having to be fake." "According to the habit of Chinese scholars giving their study names, I call my study 'There is no such thing as a study'." In a short essay he explained himself: "I hate power, and I will never sit on a wall; I don't do somersaults, neither physically, mentally, or politically. I don't even know how to be fashionable and watch the limelight." "I've never written a line to try to please the authorities or seek the favor of the authorities. I've never said anything to please anyone; I don't even think about it."

"I have never donated a penny to the China Aviation Foundation, and I have never donated a penny to the disaster relief meeting hosted by the Chinese Orthodoxy Association. But I have given a few dollars to lovely poor old farmers." "I have always loved revolution, but I have never loved revolutionaries." "I've never been successful, or comfortable, or complacent; I've never looked in the mirror without feeling numb with shame." "I hate petty politicians. No matter what institution I'm in, I don't bother to fight them. I always avoid them. Because I don't like the way they look."

"I can never be cool and detached and unsentimental, or tactful and well-rounded, when discussing the politics of my country. I can never be scholarly, never have weak knees, never be hypocritical." "I have never rescued a young girl from prostitution, nor persuaded a heathen to return to the Lord Jesus. I have never felt a crime." "I thought I was as moral as others, and I thought that if God loved me half as much as my mother loves me, he wouldn't send me to hell. If people like me don't go to heaven, the earth will not suffer No wonder." "I said in it that the ideal man is not a perfect man, but just a lovable and reasonable man, and he is only trying to be that kind of man." One of the most obvious facts that philosophers refuse to acknowledge is that we have a body.Our preachers, tired of seeing our human imperfections, and our savage instincts and impulses, sometimes wish us to be born like angels, but we can never imagine what an angel's life is like.We either think that angels have a body and shape like ours—except for an extra pair of wings—or that they don't have bodies.Regarding the shape of an angel, the general idea is still that it has the same body as a human being, with an additional pair of wings: this is very interesting.I sometimes feel that having a body and five senses is advantageous even to angels.If I were an angel, I would like to have a girlish appearance, but if I don't have skin, how can I get a girlish and charming appearance?I'll still enjoy a tomato juice or an iced orange juice, but how can I enjoy an iced orange juice if I don't feel thirsty?Also, how can I enjoy food when I can't feel hungry?How can an angel paint without paint?How can I sing if I can't hear the voice?How can you smell the fresh morning air if you don't have a nose?If his skin doesn't itch, how can he enjoy the supreme satisfaction of scratching it?What a loss in the ability to enjoy pleasure!We should have a body and all our bodily desires should be fulfilled, otherwise we should become pure soul, completely unsatisfied.All satisfaction comes from desire. I sometimes feel that a ghost or an angel without a body is a terrible punishment: seeing a stream of clear running water without feet to stretch down to enjoy a pleasant cold sensation, seeing a plate of Beiping or Long Island (Long Island——USA) place-name) without a tongue to taste it, to see a scone without teeth to chew it, to see the lovely faces of our dear people without emotion to show them.What if our ghosts came back to this world one day, and slipped quietly into our children's bedrooms, and saw a child lying in bed, and we had no hands to touch him, no arms to hug him, no breasts to feel him How sad it would be to have no round indentation between cheek and shoulder to press him against, no ear to hear his voice, the warmth of his body. If anyone defends the "angel incorporeal theory," his reasons must be extremely vague and insufficient.He might say: "Oh, yes, but in the world of the gods we don't need such satisfaction." "But what have you got in place of it?" The answer was complete silence; perhaps: " Emptiness--peace--quietness." "What do you get in such a state?" "No toil, no pain, no trouble." I admit that such a paradise was very attractive to the ship's prisoner.This negative ideal and concept of happiness is too close to Buddhism, and its source is not so much Europe, as it is Asia (in this case, Asia Minor). Such a theory is necessarily unhelpful, but I can at least point out that the idea of ​​having no "sentient gods" is quite unreasonable, since we increasingly feel that the universe itself is a sentient being.A characteristic of the gods might be motion, not stillness, and the pleasure of an incorporeal angel might be to revolve like a positron, which revolves around its nucleus at a rate of twenty or thirty thousand revolutions per second.Angels may get great happiness here, which is more interesting than taking a small train touring famous places in the amusement park.There must be a feeling here.Perhaps the incorporeal angel would be radiating like rays or cosmic rays, in waves of the ether, at a velocity of 183,000 miles per second, around the curved space.There must be spiritual paints that angels can paint, to enjoy a certain form of creation; there must be etheric waves, for angels to feel as tones, sounds, and colors; there must be etheric breezes to blow angels' cheeks.Otherwise, the gods themselves would stagnate like water in a cesspool, or as one would feel on a sweltering summer afternoon with no fresh air.If there is life in the world, there must still be action and emotion (no matter what form); and it must not be a state of complete rest and insensibility. The feast of life is before us, and the only question now is how we will eat.The problem is appetite not feast.The hardest thing to know about man is, after all, his conception of work, the work which he assigns to himself or to which society assigns him.Everything in the world is living in leisure, only human beings are working for life.He worked because he had to, because as culture progressed, life became more complex, full of duties, responsibilities, fears, obstacles and ambitions that were not produced by nature but by man. produced by society.As I sit here at my desk, a pigeon flies outside my window around a church steeple, not worrying about what I'm having for lunch.I know my lunch is much more complicated than that pigeon's lunch, and I also know that the few things I'm going to eat are the result of the work of thousands of people, an incredibly complex process of growing, trading, transporting, delivering and The system of cooking, for this reason, is more difficult for man to obtain food than for animals.Even so, if a wild beast in the jungle comes to the city and knows the purpose of the haste of human life, then it will definitely have great doubts about this human society. The first thought of the beast of the bush must have been: Humans are the only animals that work.Apart from a few pack horses and buffalo at the mill, not even the livestock had to work.Police dogs rarely have the opportunity to perform their duties; most of the time for housekeeping dogs to play, they always have to sleep comfortably when the sun is warm in the morning; the aristocratic cat does not work for a living , endowed with a flexible body, it can jump over the neighbor's fence at any time, and it doesn't even feel that it is a prisoner-it can go wherever it wants.Therefore, there is only this hard-working human being in the world, locked in a cage tamely, but without food support, forced by this culture and complex society to work and worry about his own support.I know that human beings have their strengths too—the pleasures of knowledge, conversation, and fancy, for example, in a stage play.But we can't forget a fundamental fact, that is: human life is too complicated, and the problem of directly or indirectly supporting ourselves already requires more than nine-tenths of our human activities.Culture is largely a matter of finding food, and progress is a development that makes food harder and harder to come by.If culture did not make it so difficult for humans to get food, humans would never have to work so hard.Our crisis is that of over-civilization, of working too hard to get food, and in the process of getting food, we lose our appetite for food—we have indeed reached this point now.From the eyes of a beast of the bush or a philosopher, this may seem to make little sense. Every time I see a city skyscraper or a stretch of rooftops, I always feel horrified.It was an amazing sight.Two or three water towers, two or three copper frames for billboards, one or two spiers, and a stretch of connected asphalt roofing material and bricks, forming some square, standing, vertical outlines, without any organization or order at all, Dotted with dirt, faded chimneys, and a few clothes-drying ropes and crossed radio antennas.I looked down the street and saw again a wall of gray or faded red brick, with rows of small, uniform, dark windows, half open and half shaded, and perhaps a bottle of milk on the sill. , and on the other window sills were pots of tiny sickly flowers.Every morning, a girl came to the roof with her dog and sat on the roof stairs to bask in the sun.When I looked up again, I saw row after row of roofs, miles apart, forming some ugly boxy outlines stretching away into the distance.Another water tower, another brick house.Humans live here.How will they live?Does every family live behind such a dark window or two?What do they do to live?It's astounding to say the least.Behind two or three windows there is a married couple who go to sleep in their coop every night like doves; Bread, the wife is constantly, desperately trying to sweep the dust out of the house and make the little place clean.At four or five o'clock in the afternoon, they ran to the door to meet their neighbors, chatting and breathing fresh air. At night, they went to bed with tired bodies.That's how they live! There are other, more well-to-do families, living in better apartments.They have more "artistic" rooms and shades.The room is more organized and cleaner!There is a little space in the room, but only a little.Renting a seven-room apartment is a luxury, let alone owning a seven-room apartment!But this does not necessarily lead to greater happiness.Fewer financial worries and less debt, that's true.But at the same time, there are more emotional disputes, more divorces, more unfaithful husbands not coming home at night, or couples going out to have fun together at night.All they need is entertainment.God, they have to get away from these drab, cookie-cutter brick walls and shiny wooden floors and find entertainment!Of course they go to see naked women.Therefore more people suffer from neurasthenia, more people eat aspirin cakes, more people suffer from aristocratic diseases, more people suffer from colitis, appendicitis and dyspepsia, more people suffer from softening of the brain and liver disease. More people were hardened, more were duodenal ulcers and intestinal lacerations, more were overworked stomachs and overburdened kidneys, more were inflamed bladders and damaged spleens More people suffer from enlarged heart and nervous disorders, more people suffer from flat chest and high blood pressure, suffer from diabetes, nephritis, beriberi, rheumatic arthralgia, insomnia, arteriosclerosis, hemorrhoids, fistula , chronic dysentery, chronic constipation, poor appetite and boredom of life more people.This is not enough, we must have more dogs and fewer children.Happiness depends entirely on the nature and temperament of the men and women who live in elegant apartments.Some people do have happy lives, but others don't.On the whole, however, they are probably less happy than those who toil; they feel greater boredom and weariness.Yet they had a car, and perhaps a country house.Ah, country houses, that's their salvation, so that people who toil in the country hope to go to the city and earn enough money in the city to go back to the country and live in seclusion. When you walk in the city, you see a beauty parlor, a flower shop, and a delivery company on the main street, and a pharmacy, a grocery store, an iron shop, a barber shop, a laundromat, a small restaurant, and a newsstand on the next street.You wander around for an hour, and if it's a big city, you're still in the city; you just see more streets, more drug stores, grocery stores, iron shops, barbershops, laundromats, small restaurants and newsstands.How do these people live?Why are they here?The answer is simple.The laundress washes the clothes of the barber and the waiter, the waiter serves the washer and barber, and the barber cuts the hair of the washer and waiter. That is culture.Isn't that amazing?I dare say there are laundresses, barbers, and waiters who have never left the place where they work ten blocks in their lives.Thank goodness they at least have movies, and you can see birds singing on screen, and trees growing and swaying.Turkey, Egypt, the Himalayas, the Andes, storms, sinking ships, coronations, ants, caterpillars, muskrats, lizards and scorpions fighting, hills, waves, sand, clouds, even the moon - all in On screen! O wise man, utterly wise man!I praise you.People toil, work, worry about living until their hair turns gray, forget about playing: what an incredible culture! The enjoyment of life includes many things: the enjoyment of ourselves, the enjoyment of domestic life, the enjoyment of trees, flowers, clouds, winding rivers, waterfalls, and all kinds of nature, besides that of poetry, art, contemplation, friendship, conversation, reading. Enjoyment, the latter enjoyments are all different manifestations of spiritual communication.Some enjoyments are obvious, such as the enjoyment of food, joyful social gatherings or family reunions, field trips on a sunny spring day; others are less obvious, such as those of poetry, art, and contemplation.I do not find it possible to divide these two classes of enjoyment into material and spiritual, partly because I do not believe in the distinction, and partly because I am always at a loss when to make such a classification.When I see a company of men, women, and children having a merry picnic, how can I tell what part of their merriment is material and what part spiritual?I saw a child jumping on the grass, another child weaving a small wreath out of daisies, their mother was holding a piece of sandwich, the uncle was biting a juicy red apple, and the father was lying on the ground looking out. Clouds in the sky, grandfather with a pipe in his mouth.Maybe someone was playing a phonograph, and there was the sound of music and the roar of the waves in the distance.Which of these joys is material and which is spiritual?Can the difference be easily distinguished between enjoying a sandwich and enjoying the scenery around us (the latter is what we call poetry)?The enjoyment of music we call art, the smoking of a pipe we call material enjoyment: but can we say that the former is a nobler pleasure than the latter?So, in my opinion, this distinction between material and spiritual joy is confusing, inexplicable, and unreal.I suspect that this classification is based on a false philosophical theory, which makes a strict distinction between the soul and the flesh, and does not make a deeper and more direct study of our true joys. Am I going too far in assuming, and using as an argument the undecided question of the proper purpose of life?I have always believed that the purpose of life is the true enjoyment of life.I am a little hesitant to use the term "purpose".The purpose of this true enjoyment of life is probably not an intentional purpose, but a natural attitude towards life. The noun "purpose" implies attempt and effort.In this world, the problem he encounters is not what goal he should aim for, and how he should achieve this goal, but how to use this life, the fifty or sixty years that he is gifted with.The answer that he should adjust his life so that he can get the most out of it is as practical as the answer to how to spend his weekends, and not as metaphysical as to what mysterious purpose life has in the plan of the universe. class, then only abstract and vague answers can be made. On the contrary, it seems to me that philosophers, when they try to solve the problem of the purpose of life, assume that life must have a purpose.The reason why Western thinkers take this issue so seriously is undoubtedly because of the influence of theology.I think we assume too much about plans and purposes.People try to answer this question, argue about it, and confuse it, which just proves the futility and unnecessaryness of this effort.If life had a purpose or a plan, it wouldn't be so confusing, so remote, so hard to find. This question can be divided into two questions: the first is about the purpose of the gods, which is the purpose determined by God for human beings; the second is about the purpose of human beings, which is the purpose determined by human beings themselves.With regard to the first question, I do not want to discuss it, because what we think God thinks is really a thought in our own mind; that is what we imagine to exist in the mind of God, but it is guessed by human intelligence. The intelligence of the gods is indeed very difficult.The result of our conjectures is often to make God the Sergeant in our army who guards the banner, and makes him as patriotic as we are; we think that God has absolutely no "divine purpose" or "desire" for the world or Europe. , only our motherland has "spiritual purpose" or "definite number".I believe that the God in the eyes of the German Nazis must also wear the armband with the word B.This God is always on our side, not theirs.But the people in the world who hold this concept are not only Germans. As for the second question, the point of contention is not what the purpose of life is, but what the purpose of life should be; so this is a practical rather than a metaphysical question. Can have his own concept and value standard.This is why we argue about this issue, because our value standards are different from each other.As far as I am concerned, my ideas are more practical than abstract.I thought life didn't necessarily have purpose or meaning.Whitman said, "It is enough that I am a human being." It is enough that I am alive—and may live for decades—human life exists.From this point of view, the question becomes very simple, and there is only one answer.What is the purpose of life other than enjoying life? It is strange that this question of happiness, which is of great concern to all non-religious philosophers, has been completely ignored by Christian thinkers.The great concern of the theologian is not the happiness of man, but his "salvation"--"salvation" is such a miserable term.This term sounds harsh to me, because I hear people talking about "saving the country" every day in China.Everyone wants to "save" China.This kind of talk creates a feeling of being on a sinking ship, a feeling that everything is off and everyone is thinking about the best way to live their lives.Christianity—what some have called "the last sigh of two fallen worlds (Greece and Rome)"—retains this quality today because it still frets over the question of salvation, the And worrying about the problem of salvation, the problem of living is also forgotten.If human beings do not have the feeling of being on the verge of perishing, why should they worry so much about the issue of salvation?Theologians pay so much attention to the problem of salvation and so little attention to the problem of happiness, so they can only tell us that there is a vague heaven in the future; when we ask: What shall we do there, what shall we do in heaven? For happiness, they can only give us some very vague concepts, such as singing hymns, wearing white clothes and so on.At least Muhammad paints us a picture of the future happiness with wine, juicy fruit, and dark-haired, big-eyed, amorous maidens, as far as we laymen can comprehend.If the theologians do not make the vision of heaven more vivid and realistic, then we really don't want to sacrifice this earthly life to go to heaven.Someone said: "An egg today is better than a chicken tomorrow." At least when we are planning how to spend our summer vacation, we also have to take some time to find out where we are going.If the travel agency is very vague on this question, I don't want to go; I'll spend my holidays where I am.Are we fighting in heaven?Want to work hard? (I dare say that those who believe in progress and hard work must continue to struggle and work hard) But when we are already perfect, how can we work hard and how can we make progress?Or, can we live a life of idleness, doing nothing, and carefree in heaven?If this is the case, wouldn't it be better for us to live a life of idleness on this earth than to prepare for the future life of eternal life? If we must have a view of the universe, let us forget ourselves and not limit our view of the world to the sphere of human life.Let's expand our cosmology a little to include the purpose of the whole world—stones, trees, and animals.There is a plan in the universe (the word "plan," like "purpose," is a term I don't like)—I mean, there is a model in the universe; The idea—though the idea is not the last fixed idea—then takes our place in this universe.This idea of ​​nature, of our place in nature, has to be natural, because we are an important part of nature in life and return to it after death.Astronomy, geology, biology, and history all give us a lot of good material on which we can form a pretty good idea (if we don't make hasty extrapolations).It does not matter if, in the larger idea of ​​the purpose of the universe, the place occupied by human beings diminishes their importance a little.It is enough that he occupies a position, in harmony with his natural surroundings, to form a practical and reasonable conception of life itself. I have never liked boring philosophical theories and philosophical terms, such as Plato's "image", Spinoza's "essence", "noumenon", "attribute", Kant's "supreme command" and so on, which always make me Thoughts of skeptical philosophy have turned to the horns.Once the system of philosophical theories is too pleasant and the logic is too fascinating, I will inevitably be suspicious.Philosophical systems that are self-satisfied and logically dull, such as Hegel's philosophy of history and Calvin's theory of the fall of human nature, just make me laugh.And so on, political doctrines, such as popular fascism and communism.However, between the two, communism still attracts my respect more, because in terms of ideals, after all, its main purpose is to love the common people; as for fascism, it basically looks down on the common people.Both are products of Western intellectualism, and both seem to me to lack the spirit of self-control and self-denial. I am quite patient in scientific research and analysis of trivial matters in life; but I am very tired of analyzing philosophical theories that are too detailed.Although, no matter science, religion, or philosophy, if expressed in simple words, it can fascinate me.In fact, to put it more briefly, science is nothing more than curiosity about life, religion is reverence for life, literature is appreciation for life, art is appreciation for life; an attitude towards life based on one's understanding of the universe , is called philosophy.When I first entered university, I didn't know what was called liberal arts and what was called science, but it was a pity that I had to choose one of the two.Although I chose liberal arts, I always felt that this was a mistake.I have always been fond of science, so I also pay attention to scientific inquiry to make up for my lack.If it is true that science is a sense of curiosity about life and the universe, then I can also be said to be a scientist.At the same time, I am devout, so the so-called "religion" often confuses me.Although I am the son of a pastor, this difference cannot fully explain my attitude. As an ordinary educated person, I have tried to adopt a harmonious and consistent attitude towards life, life, society, the universe and creation.Although I naturally distrust the theoretical system of philosophy, this does not mean that I cannot have a harmonious and consistent attitude towards life-such as money, marriage, success, family, patriotism, politics, etc.But I thought that knowing the inadequacy of a solid philosophical system made it easier to adopt a more realistic, consistent, and harmonious view of life. I know that science has its limits, but I worship science, and I always let scientists work carefully and conscientiously. I firmly believe that he is honest and reliable.I let him seek for me to discover the universe of matter, the universe of matter that I long to know.But once scientists try their best to acquire the knowledge of the material universe, I remember that people are always greater than scientists. Scientists can't tell us everything, he can't tell us the most important things, and he can't tell us the things that make people happy.I still have to rely on "conscience" (bonsens), that eighteenth-century term that seems worthy of resurrection.Call it "conscience", common sense, intuition or touch, but in fact it is just a kind of sincere, heartfelt, half-humorous and half-arrogant, somewhat idealistic and somewhat boring but interesting. thinking.Let the imagination run wild a little, and then sneer, like a kite with its strings.A human history is like flying a kite: sometimes the wind is too strong, and the rope is shortened; sometimes it gets caught in a branch, and the kite just goes straight up into pleasant space—oh, maybe not so well. Since Galileo, the influence of science has been so wide and deep that no one of us has been immune to it.Modern human beings on creation, the universe, on the basic nature and structure of matter, on human creation and its past history, on human good and evil, on immortal soul, on crime, punishment, God's reward and punishment, and on human animals The notions of the relation of human beings, etc., have undergone great changes since Galileo.In general, I can say: In our minds, God is getting bigger and bigger, and people are getting smaller; while the body of people becomes purer, the concept of immortality is also blurred.Important concepts related to religious belief, such as God, man, sin, and eternal life (or salvation) must therefore be re-examined. I cannot help seeking, not because I am impious, but because I am deeply interested in religion, how the advances in scientific knowledge have come to blow against the red tape of religion.Although the teachings on the Mount of Christ and the beauty of morality and the virtuous life are still deeply rooted in the hearts of the people, we must boldly admit that the instruments of religion - the ideas on which religion operates, such as sin, hell, etc. - have become scientific. It's devastated.I think that among today's college students, there may not be one person who can really imagine hell, or even one person in a thousand.Now that these basic concepts have been greatly changed, religion itself, at least in the church, is of course inevitably affected. When I said just now that God is bigger in our minds than before, but people are smaller, I meant the material aspect.Because God can only be as vast as the universe at best, and modern astronomy tells us that the material universe is becoming more and more vast, so we naturally feel a sense of dread in our hearts.The greatest enemy of religion and anthropocentric beliefs is a 200-inch telescope.A few weeks ago, I read an article in a New York newspaper saying that an astronomer had recently discovered a cluster of stars 250,000 light-years away from the earth. That's ridiculous.The influence of these things on our beliefs cannot be said to be insignificant.A long time ago, I felt how small and humble I was in the eyes of the creation universe, and how perverse and arrogant methods such as destruction, punishment, and redemption were.God punishes people for their shortcomings, just as humans make laws to punish maggots and ants, or make them repent and atone for their sins, which is equally absurd and unfounded. The concepts of retribution for good and evil, and the value and necessity of human atonement have all been changed by the progress of science and modern knowledge.The idealized antithesis of good and evil is no longer credible.Knowing that human beings evolved from lower animals and inherited animal instincts, I feel that the debate between good and evil in human nature is quite meaningless.We can no more accuse a human being of lust than we can blame a beaver for lust.Therefore, the mystical idea of ​​the sin of carnality on the basis of Christianity obviously loses its meaning.So the attitudes towards the body and material life that were characteristic of the medieval, priestly, and religious religions disappeared, and were replaced by a more sound and reasonable view of people and everything in the world.It's frivolous to say that God is angry with human beings for their shortcomings or because they are halfway through evolution and have not yet reached perfection. One of the aspects of religion that irks me the most is its emphasis on sin.I don't feel comfortable with deep sins, and I don't feel that there is anything that is not tolerated by heaven.If most people can calm down, they must have the same opinion as me.Although I am not a sage, I am quite well behaved.I am perfect legally; I am not perfect morally.But I have moral shortcomings, such as lying and spreading filth from time to time, and I will give him a general account and ask my mother to go to trial. At best, she can only sentence me to three years in prison. He would say that I was sentenced to throw myself into the frying pan of Hades.This is not bragging; there are very few of my friends who deserve five years in prison.If I could see my mother in the ground and be ashamed, what fear should I have before God!My mother couldn't send me to the frying pan of hell, that's all I know.I firmly believe that God must be equally sympathetic and discerning. At the other end of the spectrum of Christian teaching is the idea of ​​the highest good.The so-called supreme good is the realm of people in the Paradise of Eden; it is also the realm of the future kingdom of heaven.What's the best?I really don't understand.The so-called ultimate good is not actually produced by the instinct of beauty.The concept of perfection is a product of the logic of Asia Minor hundreds of years after Jesus was born. It means that if we want to be with God, and if we want to enter the kingdom of heaven with God, then we are not at the point of perfection. No.Therefore, it is just a product of the thought of entering the blissful state of heaven, without any logical basis, it is purely a mysterious thought.I sincerely doubt that if Christians are not granted the kingdom of heaven, would they still wish to be a perfect person?In practical everyday life, the so-called supreme good has no meaning.Therefore, I do not create the idea of ​​"perfect man".The ideal person is a fairly well-behaved person who can judge right from wrong with his own opinions.In my opinion, the ideal person is nothing more than a kind person who is willing to admit his mistakes and correct his mistakes, that's all. A belief of the kind just mentioned is too disturbing to the sincere Christian.But we are not fit to speak of the truth unless we are bold enough to speak the truth without formality.In this regard, we should learn from scientists.In general, scientists are unwilling to give up old material definitions and accept new theories, just as we are unwilling to give up old beliefs.Scientists often quarrel with new theories, but they are enlightened after all, so they finally obey their conscience to reject or accept new theories.New truths are always unsettling, as sudden lights are always unnerving to our eyes.But after our mental or material eyes are adjusted, we feel that the new situation is not so bad after all. So what is left?There are still many, the appearance of the old religion has changed to blurred, but the religion itself is still there, and will always exist in the future.The so-called religion here refers to the sum of belief based on emotion, basic devotion to life, and people's belief in justice and purity.Some people may think that by analyzing Hauni, our confidence in the Lord will disappear, and our world will become a world of no faith.But no, the beauty of neon is as solid as ever.Hauni or Brook Breeze have not lost one iota of their beauty and mystery. We also have a world of simpler beliefs.I love this belief because it is simpler and more natural.我所说的得救的“工具”已没有了；其实对于我“得救”的目的也已没有了。那严父一样的上帝，对于我们的琐事也要查问的上帝，也没有了。在理论上互有关联的人本善说、堕落、定罪、叫人代理受罚、善性的回复，这些也被击破了。Hell is gone, and heaven is gone with it.In such a philosophy of life, heaven has no place.This may make people who have heaven in their minds at a loss.In fact, it is not necessary.We still have a wondrous world, apparently physical, yet moving almost spiritually, as if divinely motivated. Human spirituality was not affected either.The realm of morality is beyond the reach of the power of the laws of physics.对霓虹的了解是物理学，然见霓虹而欣喜则属于道德的范围了。Understanding cannot, should not, and cannot destroy the joy of the heart.这便是信仰简单的世界，既不需用神学，亦不乞助于无据的赏罚，只要人的心尚能见美而喜，尚能为公道正义慈爱所感动，这样也就够了，规规矩矩地做人，做事以最高贵最纯洁的本性为准绳，原是应该的。In fact, this is also in line with the doctrine.Since we have the animal nature inherited from our ancestors—the so-called evil in the process of human evolution—we have a higher self and a lower self according to common sense.We have noble instincts and base instincts.吾人虽不信我们的罪恶是由撒旦作崇，然此非谓我们行事须依顺兽性也。 孟子说得好：“恻隐之心，人皆有之；羞恶之心，人皆有之；敬畏之心，人皆有之；是非人心，人皆有之。”孟子又说：“养其大者为大人，养其小者为小人。” In theory, materialism does not necessarily follow the disappearance of old religious concepts, but in fact materialism does follow.Because human beings are illogical animals, and human affairs are peculiar and ridiculous, in general, modern society is becoming more materialistic and farther away from religion.Religion is a consistent set of beliefs sanctioned by God, which is an involuntary emotional impulse, not a product of reason.Cold, reasonable belief is no substitute for religion.Again, religion has a long history, is deeply rooted, and has the power of tradition. If this traditional norm is lost, it is not a good thing; but in fact it has been lost.This era is not the era of Protestant leaders.We love to criticize too much.However, the power of personal belief in reasonable behavior is not as powerful as that of great religions.这种私人的信念，以语上也者之君子则有余，对于下也者之小人则不足应付也。 我们已处于对于行为的规范均与以宗教的意味，徇智慧的办法也。But in modern society we can neither produce a Moses nor a Confucius, we can only take the path of mysticism in a broad sense, such as the one advocated by Lao Tzu.In a broad sense, mysticism is to respect the natural order between heaven and earth, let everything go its own way, and the individual melts into this natural order. 道教中的“道”即是此意。Its meaning is so wide that it includes the most advanced cosmology of modern times and the future.It's both mysterious and realistic.Taoism adopts a lenient attitude towards materialism.From the point of view of Taoism, materialism is not evil, it is just a little dull.As for the hatred and jealousy, they are washed away with wild laughter.对于恣意豪华之辈道教教之双简朴；对于度都市生活者则导之以大自然的优美；对于竞争与奋斗则倡虚无之说刚克柔之理以救济之；对于长生不老之妄想，则以物质不灭宇宙长存之理以开导之。For those who go too far, teach them to use inaction as tranquility.As for the creative business, it is reconciled with the art of living.For rigidity, use softness to overcome it.For the worship of force in modern times, such as modern fascist countries, Taoism says that you are not the only smart guy in the world. Principles will eventually lead to evil results.As for Daoism's efforts towards peace, it starts with cultivating harmony. In other aspects of the religious reformation, I think the result will not be very satisfactory.My definition of religion, as I have just said, is reverence for life.All beliefs are always changing.Faith is the content of religion, so the content of religion must vary from time to time. Religious tenets are also timeless. “遵守神圣的安息日”此教条往昔视为重大非凡，不得或违，在今人看来则殊觉无关紧要。时处今日，来一条“遵守神圣的国际条约”的信条，这倒于世有益不浅。 “别垂涎邻居的东西”这条教条，本含义至广，然另立一条“别垂涎邻国的领土”而以宗教的热诚信奉之，则较妥善多多，并更为有力量矣。 “勿得杀人”的下面再加“并不得杀邻国的人”这几个字，则更为进步了。These creeds should have been obeyed, but in fact they were not.于现代世界中创造一个包含这些信条的宗教殊非易事。We live in an international society, but there is no international religion. We are living in a cruel age.People today are more pessimistic about themselves and mankind than the French encyclopedia 150 years ago.Compared with the past, we believe in freedom, equality and fraternity less.我们真愧对狄德罗及达.郎贝耳诸人。International morality has never been so bad. “把这世界交给一九三○——一九三九年的人们真是倒霉！”将来的历史学家必是这么写的。只以人杀人一端而论，我们真是处于野蛮时代。野蛮行为加以机械化就不是野蛮行为了么？In this cruel age, only the detached cynicism of Taoism is not cruel.然而这个世界终有一天自然而然地会变好的。Look farther away, and you won't be sad.