Chapter 22 Chapter 20 The Fourth Level of Reading: Thematic Reading

So far we haven't talked in detail about reading two or three books on the same subject.We mentioned earlier that when discussing a particular topic, more than one book is often involved.We have also been repeatedly reminded informally that there are even related authors and books in other fields related to this particular topic.In doing topical reading, the first requirement is to know that there is absolutely more than a book involved in a particular problem.The second requirement is: To know, in general, which books should be read?The second requirement is more difficult to fulfill than the first.

Difficulties arise when we examine the sentence: "Two or more books related to the same subject".What do we mean by "same subject"?This is clear if the subject is a single historical period or event, but in other fields it is difficult to make such a clear distinction.Both are novels about the Great War—but that's where the similarities end.The Napoleonic Wars that Stendhal talks about in The Charterhouse of Parma are also the wars that Tolstoy talks about.But neither of these books is of course about the war, nor about war in general.In these two stories, the war just provides an environment or background, and the story itself is about the survival and struggle of human beings, and the war is just a way for the author to attract the attention of the readers.We may learn something about the battle—indeed, Tolstoy said that he learned a great deal about it from Stendhal’s account of Waterloo—but if our The theme is to study war, so there is no need to read these novels.

You might expect this to happen in a novel.Because of the nature of the work, the method of communication in novels is different from that of expository works.However, expository works have the same problem. For example, say you are very interested in the concept of "love" and want to read related books.Because the literature on love is so extensive, it can be a little difficult for you to put together a relevant bibliography to read.Suppose you consulted an expert, searched for a bibliography in a well-established library, compared it with the papers written by a good scholar, and finally got the bibliography.Suppose further that you abandon the subject of poets and novelists, and seek answers only in expository writings (we shall see why this is wise later on).Now you start reading these books according to the bibliography.what did you find

Even with just a quick browse, you'll find a ton of relevant material.There is hardly any human action that is not called an act of love—just in a different way.And love is not limited to humans.If you read further down, you will find that there is love in everything in the universe.That is, anything that exists can love and be loved—or both. The stone is love because it is the center of the earth.The flame will rise because of the function of love.Iron knives attract magnets and are described as the result of love.There are books devoted to the love lives of amoebas, paramecia, snails, ants.Not to mention some of the higher animals, which love their masters and each other.Speaking of human love, we find authors speaking and writing about their love for men, women, a man, a woman, children, themselves, humanity, money, art, family life, principles, causes, vocations or professions, Adventure, security, ideas, country life, love itself, the love of steak or wine.In some texts, the movement of the celestial bodies is said to be inspired by love.The difference between angels and devils lies in the quality of love.As for God, of course he came to love.

Faced with such a large amount of relevant data, how do we decide what the topic of our research is?Can we be sure there is only a single theme in this?When one person says, "I love cheese," another says, "I love football," and a third says, "I love humanity," do all three of them mean the same thing by using the same love word? ?After all, cheese is edible, not football or humans.One can play football but not cheese or anything else.And whatever "I love humans" means, it's not the same love as cheese or football.But all three of them use the same love word.Is there a deep reason for this?Some reason that doesn't immediately come to mind?As difficult as the question itself is, can we say we've confirmed "the same theme" until we find the answer?

Faced with such confusion, you might decide to narrow it down to human love—love between people, same-sex or opposite-sex, same-year or year-old love, and so on.The rules are different from the three love methods we mentioned earlier.But even if you only read a small number of books on a topic, you'll still find a heap of relevant material.For example, you will find that some authors say: Love is just a possessive desire, usually a sexual desire, that is to say, love is just an attraction that all animals have when facing the opposite sex.But you will also find that another author's love does not include the desire to possess, but a kind of charity.If possessiveness always implies a desire for good things for oneself, benevolence implies a desire for good things for others.So is there anything in common between the desire to possess and charity?

At least between the desire for possession and benevolence share a common tendency to long for something very abstract.But your research on the subject soon leads you to discover that some authors maintain that love is spiritual, not carnal.These authors consider love to be an intellectual act, not an emotional one.In other words, knowing that someone is worthy of admiration will always trigger a desire, no matter what kind of desire mentioned above.Such authors do not deny that there is such a longing, but they do not admit that it is love. Let's assume—indeed, we think it can be done—that you can find some common meaning among so many conceptions of human love.Even so, your problem is still not solved.Think about it again, between people, the way love is manifested is actually quite different.Is the love between a man and a woman the same during a relationship, after marriage, in your twenties, in your seventies?Does a woman love her husband the same as she loves her children?Does a mother's love for her children change as they grow up?Does a brother love his sister the same as he loves his father?Does love for parents change when a child grows up?Does a man love a woman—whether a wife or another woman—the same as he loves a friend?Does his relationship with different friends—who goes bowling with him, who is a work buddy, who is an intellectual buddy, etc.—be different? Do "love" and "friendship" have different names because of the emotions involved (if that's why they're named)?Can two people of different ages be friends?Can two people who have a clear gap in wealth and knowledge be friends?Is there really friendship between women?Can brothers and sisters really be friends?If you borrow money from people, or lend money to people, will your friendship last?If not, why?Can a boy fall in love with his teacher?And whether the teacher is male or female, will it make any difference?If there were robots like people, would humans love them?If we found intelligent beings on Mars or other planets, would we love them?Do we fall in love with someone we've never met before, like a movie star or a president?If we feel we hate someone, is that actually a sign of love?

You have only read a small amount of discursive writing on love and these questions will come to your mind, and there are many more questions that will come up.Anyway, we've gotten to the point.When doing thematic reading, there will be a very contradictory phenomenon.Although reading at this level is defined as reading more than two books on the same topic, it also means that the topic has been confirmed before the reading begins, but from another perspective, this topic also follows the reading. rather than being determined in advance.In the case of love, you may have read hundreds of books about it before you decide what you want to read.After you've read them all, you'll find that half of the books have nothing to do with the subject at all.

※ In thematic reading, the role of inspection reading We have said many times that the levels of reading are cumulative.The previous, or lower-level, readings are also included in higher-level reading.In the topic reading, we will explain this. You may recall that when explaining the relationship between inspectional reading and analytical reading, we pointed out that there are two steps in inspectional reading—the first is browsing, and the second is rough reading—that is, the first two steps in analytical reading .Skimming can help you prepare for the first steps in analytical reading: you can identify what topic you are reading, explain what kind of book it is, and draw up an outline structure.Superficial reading is also helpful for the first steps in analytical reading.Basically this is the preparation for entering the second step.In the second step, you must be able to reach a consensus with the author, explain his main purpose, and follow his exposition, in order to be able to interpret the content of the entire book.

Similarly, inspectional reading and analytical reading can also be regarded as pre-work or preparatory actions for entering thematic reading.In fact, at this stage, inspectional reading is already the reader's main tool or method when reading. For example, you have a bibliography of hundreds of books that seem to be all about love.If you read all with analytical reading, not only will you know exactly what themes you are working on—the "same theme" in thematic reading—you will also know that the books you are reading, which have nothing to do with the theme, are the ones you don't know. book needed.But to use analytical reading to finish reading a hundred books,.It will take you ten years.Even if you can put your heart and soul into this research, it will still take many months.Coupled with the contradictions that can arise in thematic reading we talked about earlier, it is obvious that there must be some shortcuts.

This shortcut is established by your inspectional reading skills.After you have collected your bibliography, the first thing to do is to go through all the books on your list.Never read analytically before doing inspectional reading.Inspectional reading won't make you understand all the intricacies of the subject, or all the insights of the author, but it serves two basic functions.First, it will give you a clear idea of ​​the topic you want to study, which will be of great help when you analyze and read certain books.Second, it will simplify your bibliography to a reasonable degree. For students, especially graduate students, we can hardly think of a more effective way than this.As long as they follow through, it will help.According to our experience, there are indeed some students who can read actively and read analytically at the graduate level.This is not enough for them, they may not be perfect readers, but at least they know how to grasp the point of a book, can articulate the main points of the book, and make these ideas part of their research topic.But more than half their efforts are wasted because they don't know how to read faster than others.They spend the same amount of time and effort on every book or article, and as a result they don't read well the books they should be devoting their attention to, and spend their time on less noteworthy books. Readers who are proficient in inspection reading can not only classify books in their minds, but also have a rough understanding of the content.He will also find out in a very short time whether the content of this book is important to the subject of his research.It may not be clear to him at this point which materials are the most important—this may not be discovered until the next book.But there were two things at least one of which he already knew.That is, he either finds the book must go back and read it again for inspiration, or he knows that no matter how interesting and rich the book is, it is uninspiring and therefore not worth re-reading. There is a reason this advice is often ignored.We said that in analytical reading, skilled readers can use many techniques at once, but beginners must separate the steps.Likewise, the preparation for thematic reading—the examination of all the books in the bibliography, before beginning the analytical reading—can be done during the analytical reading.But we do not believe that any reader, no matter how skilled, can do it.This is also the mistake many young graduate students make.They think they can combine the two steps into one, and they end up reading any book at the same speed, either too fast or too slow for some particular works, but at any rate, for most of the books they read, Such methods are wrong. Once you've checked to make sure that certain books are relevant to the topic you're researching, you can start doing topical reading.Note that we didn't say "start doing analytical reading" as you might think.Of course, you need to study each book and assemble the material relevant to your topic, skills that you already learned when doing analytical reading.But never forget that the technique of analytical reading applies only to a single work, and the main goal is to understand the book.As we shall see, the goals of topical reading are quite different. ※ Five steps of topic reading Now we are ready to explain how to do topic reading.Our assumption is that you've reviewed a fair amount of books, that you have at least some idea of ​​what some of them are talking about, and that you have topics you want to research.What should you do next? There are five steps in topic reading.We shouldn't call these steps rules—although perhaps we would—because just one of them is missed and the topic becomes difficult, if not impossible, to read.We will briefly describe the order of these steps, but these steps can replace each other. · Topic reading step one: Find the relevant chapters.Of course, we assume that you have learned to read analytically, and if you want, you can thoroughly read all relevant books.But you might put reading a single book first and your own subject second.In fact, the order should be reversed. In topical reading, you and the topic you care about are the primary focus, not the book you read. After you've identified which books are relevant, the first step in topical reading is to examine and read the books as a whole.Your goal is to find chapters in the book that are extremely relevant to your topic.It is unlikely that the book you choose will be entirely relevant to your topic or problem.Even so, there must be a minority, and you should read this book quickly.You should not forget that you are reading with an ulterior motive—that is, you are reading to solve your own problems—and not for the sake of the book itself. It seems that this step is the same thing as the inspectional reading mentioned above in order to find out whether the book is relevant to your topic.In many cases this can indeed be done.But if you think you can do it forever, you're probably not very smart.Remember, the first step of inspectional reading is to focus on the topic of your further thematic reading.We said that unless you have reviewed most of the books on your list, you cannot fully understand this question.Therefore, while confirming which books are relevant, it is actually very dangerous to confirm which chapters are relevant.Unless you are already skilled and have a good idea of ​​the topic you are going to study, you are better off doing the two parts separately. In topical reading, it is important to be able to distinguish the first books you read from the many books you read later on the topic.For the later books, you may have a good idea of ​​your subject, at which point you can combine the two types of inspectional reading.But at the beginning, it must be clearly distinguished, otherwise you will make serious mistakes in finding the relevant chapters, and it will take a lot of time and effort to correct these mistakes later. In conclusion, remember that your primary job is not to understand the entire book, but to find out what the book does for your topic, which may be far removed from the author's own purpose.At this stage of the process, it doesn't matter.The author may have helped you solve the problem unintentionally.We have already said that in topical reading, the book serves you, not you the book.Therefore, thematic reading is the most active reading method.Of course, analytical reading also requires an active reading style.But when you read a book analytically, it is as if you are using the book as a master at his beck and call.But when you are doing thematic reading, you must be the master of the book. Therefore, there are different approaches at this stage in terms of reaching consensus with the authors. Topic reading step 2: lead the author to reach a consensus with you.In interpretive reading (the second step of analytical reading), the first rule is to agree with the author, that is, to be able to find the key words and how he uses them.But now you're dealing with many different authors, and they can't all use the same words, or have the same consensus.At this point it is up to you to build consensus, to lead your authors to a consensus with you, not for you to follow them. This can be the most difficult step in topical reading.The real difficulty lies in forcing the author to use your language, not his.This is different from our general reading habits.We have also pointed out many times that we assume that the authors we want to read with analytical reading are better people than we are.This is especially likely if it is a great book.No matter how much we try to understand him, we tend to accept the meaning of his words and the thematic structure he arranges.But in thematic reading, if we accept the terminology proposed by any one of the authors, we will soon be lost.We may understand his books, but not others.It is also difficult for us to find information on the topics we are interested in. We not only have to be able to firmly reject any author's vocabulary, but we have to be willing to face the fact that none of the authors' vocabulary may be useful to us.In other words, we have to accept the fact that it is just a coincidence that our vocabulary coincides with any bibliographic author.In fact, such a coincidence is quite troublesome.For if we use one sense or group of words of a certain author, we may go on citing other senses in his book, and this will only cause us trouble, no other help. Simply put, topical reading is a lot of translation work.We are not translating one language into another, like French into English, but we are imposing a common vocabulary on many authors, whether they speak the same language or not Concerned about the problems we want to solve, whether we have created the ideal vocabulary for us to use. That is to say, when we do thematic reading, we need to build up a vocabulary that first helps us understand all the authors, not just one or two; and second helps us solve our problems.This realization takes us to the third step. Topic reading step three: Clarify the problem.The second rule of interpretive reading asks us to find the author's key sentences.Then gradually understand the author's main idea from it.Themes are made up of word meanings, and of course we have to do the same in theme reading.But since we are building our own vocabulary at this point, we also have to create a set of unbiased themes.The best way is to first list some questions that can make our problem more clear, and then let those authors answer these questions. It's also hard work, and the questions have to be stated in some form, in some order, to help us solve the questions we ask, and questions that most authors can answer.The difficulty is that what we think is a problem, the author may not think it is a problem.They may have quite different views on the topics we identify. In fact, sometimes we have to accept that the author may not be able to answer a single question.In such a situation, we have to see him as silent on the issue, or undecided.But even if he doesn't discuss this question very clearly, sometimes we can find indirect answers in his books.We will draw such a conclusion: if he considered this question, how would he answer this question.A little self-restraint is required here.We cannot impose ideas on the minds of authors, nor put words into their mouths.But we cannot completely rely on their interpretation of the problem.If we could really rely on any one of these authors to explain the problem, perhaps we would have no problem to solve at all. We said that the questions should be arranged in order to help us in our research.Of course, this order is related to the theme, but there is still a general direction to follow.The first question usually has to do with the existence or quality of the concept or phenomenon we are studying.If an author says that the phenomenon does exist, or that the concept has a quality, then we have to ask further questions about his book.The question may have to do with how the phenomenon was discovered, or how the concept manifested itself.The last part of the questions is related to the impact of answering the previous questions. We should not expect all authors to answer our questions in the same way.If they did, we would have no problems to solve again.That question will be resolved by consensus.Because every author is different, we now face the next step in thematic reading. Topic reading step four: define the topic.If a question is clear, and if we are also sure that various authors will answer it differently—for or against—then the issue is defined.This is an issue between authors who answer questions in this way, and authors who answer questions in another (possibly opposite) way. If, after examination, all authors provide only positive and negative answers, then the question is considered easy.Often, there are more than two answers to a question.In this case, we have to find out the relationship between different opinions, and then classify according to the author's point of view. When two authors with considerable knowledge of the same question give completely opposite or contradictory answers, this is a truly engaging issue.But such phenomena don't happen as often as we'd like.Usually, the different answers come from different views on the subject, but in many cases it also comes from different perceptions of the problem itself.Therefore, readers who are reading on the topic should try their best to ensure that the topic is shared by everyone.Sometimes this forces him to be careful not to take the approach that any of the authors clearly took when listing the problems. The issues we deal with may come in many different categories, but they can usually be grouped together.For example, when considering the characteristics of a certain concept, there will be a bunch of related issues.Controversy on this topic is formed when many issues revolve around a set of closely related issues.Such controversies can be complex, and it is up to the reader of the thematic reading to put all the controversies into context—although none of the writers do.After clarifying the disputes and sorting out the relevant issues, we will enter the final step of thematic reading. Topic reading step five: analysis and discussion.So far we have examined the work, identified relevant chapters, formulated an unbiased consensus that applies to all authors examined, and formulated a set of questions, most of which can be found in Find the answer in the author's note.Then define and arrange issues with respect to the different answers.What to do next? The first four steps complement each other with the first two sets of rules for analytical reading.These rules, applied to any book, ask us to answer the question: What is the book about?How is it explained?In thematic readings, we also answer similar questions for discussions related to our question.In an analytical reading of just one book, two questions remain to be answered: Is this real?What does this have to do with me?In topical readings, we are prepared to answer the same questions for discussions. Let us assume that the reading question at the outset is not simple, but is a long-standing question that has disputed many thinkers for centuries, and which many disagree with and will continue to disagree with.In this assumption, we recognize that, as readers of the topic, our responsibility is not just to answer these questions ourselves—these are questions that we have carefully sorted out so that it is easy to explain the topic itself and what is discussed.The truth about such matters is not easy to find.It would be rash to expect truth to lie in the answers to a certain set of questions.Even if an answer can be found, it is to find convincing evidence in the conflict of some contradictory answers, and there are definite reasons to support itself. So far as truth can be found, so far as we can find answers to questions, rest not so much on any set of themes or claims as on the well-ordered discussion itself.So, in order for our minds to accept this truth—and for others to accept it—we have to do a little more than just ask and answer questions.We need to ask questions in a certain order, and we need to be able to recognize why this order is.We must account for the different answers to these questions and explain why.We must also be able to find evidence in the books we have examined to support our classification of answers in this way.Only when we do all this can we claim to have analyzed the discussion of our problem, and we can claim to really understand it. In fact, we probably do more than that.After a complete analysis of a problem, when other people want to do research on the same problem in the future, our analysis and discussion will provide him with a good research basis.That would remove some of the barriers and chart the way for an original thinker to break through.Without this analytical work, this cannot be done because the layers of the problem cannot be revealed. ※ Objective necessity To analyze an issue or a topic in its entirety, it is necessary to identify the main issues in the discussion, or some basic intellectual objections.This is not to say that opposing views always dominate in all discussions.On the contrary, opinions for and against always coexist with each other.That is to say, in most issues, there are always a few positive and negative opinions, and even many authors support it.Rarely do we see a lone supporter or opponent on a controversial position. The idea that humans agree on the qualities of something in any field creates an assumption that their shared opinion represents truth.And a different point of view builds another counter-assumption — none of the points in these debates may be entirely true, whether you participate or not.Of course, it is also possible that one of these conflicting views is completely true while the others are false.But it is also possible that both sides express only a small part of the whole truth.Aside from a few monotonous or isolated arguments (which, from what we've read about the issues here, are unlikely to be discussed), it's likely that both the pros and cons are wrong, as all may agree took a wrong view.And other opinions that are not expressed may be true, or nearly true. In other words, the purpose of topical reading is not to provide final answers to the questions developed during the reading process, nor to the questions at the beginning of this project.This is especially clear when we are writing a reader's report on such a topic.If this report were to claim or prove the truth or falsity of a point of view on any of the important issues defined and analyzed, it would be too dogmatic and would lose the meaning of dialogue.If this is done, thematic reading is no longer thematic reading, but just another voice in the discussion process, losing its alienation and objectivity. What we are saying is not that we think that having one more voice on important issues of human concern is of little importance.What we are saying is that we can and should contribute a different form in our quest for understanding.And such a form must be absolutely objective and fair.The quality sought after by thematic reading can be summed up in this sentence: "dialectical objectivity." To put it simply, topic reading is to be able to cover everything without presupposing a position.Of course, this is a strict ideal, and ordinary people cannot achieve it.And absolute objectivity is not something humans can do.He may be able to not presuppose a position, present any point of view without prejudice, and remain neutral to different opinions.But it's easier to be neutral than to be exhaustive.In this respect the reader of thematic reading is bound to fail.There are so many different views on an issue that it is impossible to list them all in detail.Even so, readers should try their best. While we say it's easier to be neutral than to be comprehensive, it's still not that easy.Readers of topical reading must resist some temptations and clear their minds.Avoiding making clear judgments about the authenticity of certain conflicting views does not guarantee complete impartiality and objectivity.Prejudice can enter your mind in all sorts of subtle ways—it might be in the way you summarize a statement, it might be the weight of emphasis vs. The order in which the different answers to key questions are listed. To avoid such dangers, there is one obvious device the prudent subject reader can take, to make the most of it.That is, he has to keep going back to the original texts of many authors and re-read the relevant chapters.Moreover, when he wants more people to apply his research results, he must quote his views or discussions according to the original author's original text.Although it seems a bit contradictory, this does not affect what we said earlier. When analyzing problems, we must first establish a set of neutral vocabulary.Such a neutral language is still necessary, and when summarizing an author's exposition, this neutral language must be used instead of the author's language.But along with the summary, there must be a careful citation of the author's original text, so as not to distort the meaning of the text, so that the reader can judge for himself whether your interpretation of the author is correct. The reader of thematic reading must be able to resolutely avoid this problem, so as not to deviate from the standpoint of impartiality and objectivity.To achieve such an ideal, one must be able to maintain a balance among various opposing issues impartially, let go of all prejudices, and reflect on whether one has a tendency to go too far or not enough.In the final analysis, whether a written report on the topic reading achieves the objectivity of the dialogue form can also be judged by the readers, but only the person who wrote the report really knows whether he has met these requirements. ※ Practice example of topic reading: Theory of progress An example can illustrate how topical reading works.Let's take the concept of progress as an example.We did not pick this example at random.We've done quite a bit of research on this issue.Otherwise this example won't be very useful to you. We have spent a long time working on this important historical and philosophical question.The first step is to list the chapters related to the research topic—that is, to list the bibliography (the final list appears with more than 450 titles).To do this, we use a series of inspectional readings.Numerous inspection readings were done for many books, articles and related works.对于讨论“进步”这个概念来说，这是非常重要的一个过程。同样的，对其他的重大研究来说这也是很重要的过程。许多最后被判定为相关的资料多少都是无意间发现的，或至少也是经过合理的猜测才找到的。许多近代的书籍都以“进步”为书名，因此要开始寻找资料并不困难。但是其他的书并没有标明进步这两个字，尤其是一些古书，内容虽然相关，却并没有运用这个词句。 我们也读了一些小说或诗，但最后决定以论说性的作品为主。我们早说过，在主题阅读中，要包括小说、戏剧与诗是很困难的，原因有很多个。第一，故事的精髓在情节，而非对某个议题所秉持的立场。其次，就算是最能言善道的角色也很少对某个议题清楚表达出立场—譬如托马斯·曼的(Magic Mountain)中，斯坦布林尼就对进步发表过一些见解—我们无法确定那是不是作者本人的观点。是作者在利用他的角色对这个议题作出反讽？还是他想要你看到这个观点的愚蠢，而非睿智？一般来说，要将小说作者的观点列人议题的某一方时，需要作很多很广泛的努力。要花的努力很多，得到的结果却可能是半信半疑的，因此通常最好放弃在这方面的努力。 可以检验进步这个概念的其他许多作品，一如常见的情况，显得一片混乱。面对这样的问题，我们前面说过，就是要建立起一套中立的语言。这是一个很复杂的工作，下面的例子可以帮助我们说明这是如何进行的。 所谓“进步”一词，不同的作者有许多不同的用法。这些不同的用法，大部分显示的只是意义的轻重不同，因而可以用分析的方法来处理。但是有些作者也用这个词来指出历史上某种特定的变化，而这种变化不是改善的变化。既然大多数作者都用“进步”来指出历史上某种为了促进人类朝向更美好生活的变化，并且既然往更改善的状态的变化是这个概念的基础，那么同样的字眼就不能适用于两种相反的概念了。因此，本例我们取大多数人的用法，那些主张历史上“非关改善的进展”（non meliorative advance)的作者，就只好划为少数派了。我们这么说的目的是，在讨论这些少数作者的观点时，就算他们自己运用了“进步”这样的字眼，我们也不能将他们纳入“进步”的概念中。 我们前面说过，主题阅读的第三步是厘清问题。在“进步”的例子中，我们对这个问题一开始的直觉，经过检验之后，证明是正确的。第一个要问的问题，也是各个作者被认为提供各种不同答案的问题，是“历史上真的有'进步这回事吗？”说历史的演变整体是朝向改善人类的生存条件，的确是事实吗？基本上，对这个问题有三种不同的回答：(1)是；(2)否；(3)不知道。然而，回答“是”可以用许多不同的方式来表达，回答“否”也有好几种说法，而说“不知道”也至少有三种方式。 对这个基本问题所产生的各式各样相互牵连的答案，构成我们所谓关于进步的一般性争议。所谓一般性，是因为我们研究的每个作者，只要对这个主题有话要说，就会在这个主题所界定的各个议题上选边站。但是对于进步还有一种特殊的争论，参与这种议题的，都是一些主张进步论的作者—这些作者主张进步确实发生。身为进步论的作者，他们全都强调进步是一种历史的事实，而所有的议题都应该和进步的本质或特质相关。这里的议题其实只有三种，只是个别讨论起来都很复杂。这三个议题我们可以用问题的形式来说明：(1)进步是必要的？还是要取决于其他事件？(2)进步会一直无止境地持续下去？还是会走到终点或高原期而消失？(3)进步是人类的天性，还是养成的习惯—来自人类动物的本能，或只是外在环境的影响？ 最后，就进步发生的面向而言，还有一些次要议题，不过，这些议题仍然只限于在主张进步论的作者之间。有六个面向是某些作者认为会发生，另外有些作者虽然多少会反对其中一两个的发生，但不会全部反对（因为他们在定义上就是肯定进步发生的作者）。这六个面向是：(1)知识的进步；(2)技术的进步；(3)经济的进步；(4)政治的进步；(5)道德的进步；(6)艺术的进步。关于最后一项有些特殊的争议。因为在我们的观点里，没有一位作者坚信在这个面向中真的有进步，甚至有些作者否认这个面向有进步。 我们列举出“进步”的分析架构，只是要让你明白，在这个主题中包含了多少的议题，与对这些讨论的分析—换句话说，这也是主题阅读的第四及第五个步骤。主题阅读的读者必须做类似的工作才行，当然，他用不着非得就自己的研究写一本厚厚的书不可。 ※ 如何应用主题工具书 如果你仔细阅读过本章，你会注意到，虽然我们花了不少时间谈这件事，但我们并没有解决主题阅读中的矛盾问题。这个矛盾可以说明如下：除非你知道要读些什么书，你没法使用主题阅读。但是除非你能做主题阅读，否则你不知道该读些什么书。换句话说，这可以算是主题阅读中的根本问题。也就是说，如果你不知道从何开始，你就没法做主题阅读。就算你对如何开始有粗浅的概念，你花在寻找相关书籍与篇章的时间，远超过其他步骤所需时间的总和。 当然，至少理论上有一种方法可以解决这个矛盾的问题。理论上来说，你可以对我们传统中的主要经典作品有一番完整的认识，对每本书所讨论的各种观念都有相当的认知。如果你是这样的人，就根本用不着任何人帮忙，我们在主题阅读上也没法再多教给你什么了。 从另一个角度来看，就算你本身没有这样的知识，你还是可以找有这种知识的人帮忙。但你要认清一点，就算你能找到这样的人，他的建议最后对你来说，在帮助的同时，几乎也都会变成障碍。如果那个主题正好是他做过特殊研究的，对他来说就很难只告诉你哪些章节是重要相关的，而不告诉你该如何读这些书—而这一点很可能就造成你的阻碍。但是如果他并没有针对这个主题做过特殊的研究，他知道的也许还没有你多—尽管你们双方都觉得应该比你多。 因此，你需要的是一本工具书，能告诉你在广泛的资料当中，到哪里去找与你感兴趣的主题相关的章节，而用不着花时间教你如何读这些章节—也就是对这些章节的意义与影响不抱持偏见。譬如，主题工具书（Syntopicon）就是这样的一种工具。出版于1940年，名为《西方世界的经典名著))(Great Books of the Western World）的这套书，包含了三千种话题或主题，就每一个讨论到的主题，你可以按照页码找到相关的参考资料。某些参考资料长达多页，某些则只是几段关键文字。你用不着花太多时间，只需取出其中的某本书，动手翻阅便行了。 当然，主题工具书有一个主要的缺点。这仍然是一套书目的索引（尽管是很大的一套），至于这套书没有包含的其他作品里什么地方可以找到你要的东西，则只有一些粗略的指引。不过，不管你要做哪一类主题阅读，这套书至少总能帮助你知道从何处着手。同时，在这整套名著中的书，不论是关于哪个主题，也都是你真的想要阅读的书。因此，主题工具书能帮助成熟的学者，或刚开始研究特定问题的初学者节省许多基本的研究工具，能让他很快进人重点，开始做独立的思考。因为他已经知道前人的思想是什么了。 主题工具书对这种研究型的读者很有帮助，而且对初学者更有助益。主题工具书能从三方面帮助刚开始做研究的人：启动阅读，建议阅读．指导阅读。 在启动阅读方面，主题工具书能帮助我们在面对传统经典作品时，克服最初的困难。这些作品都有点吸引力，我们都很想读这些书，但往往做不到。我们听到很多建议，要我们从不同的角度来阅读这样的书，而且有不同的阅读进度，从简单的作品开始读，再进展到困难的作品。但是所有这类阅读计划都是要读完整本书，或是至少要读完其中的大部分内容。就一般的经验来说，这样的解决方案很少能达到预期的效果。 对于这类经典巨著，使用主题阅读再加上主题工具书的帮助，就会产生完全不同的解决方案。主题工具书可以帮读者就他们感兴趣的主题，启动他对一些经典著作的阅读—在这些主题上，先阅读来自大量不同作者的一些比较短的章节。这可以帮助我们在读完这些经典著作之前，先读进去。 使用主题阅读来阅读经典名著，再加上主题工具书的帮助，还能提供我们许多建议。读者一开始阅读是对某个主题特别感兴趣，但是会逐渐激发出对其他主题的兴趣。而一旦你开始研究某位作者，就很难不去探索他的上下文。就在你明白过来之前，这本书你已经读了一大半了。 最后，主题阅读加上主题工具书，还能从三种不同的方向指导关系。事实上，这是这个层次的阅读最有利的地方。 第一，读者阅读的章节所涉及的主题，能够给他一个诠释这些章节的方向。但这并不是告诉他这些章节是什么意思，因为一个章节可能从好几个或许多个方向与主题相关。而读者的责任就是要找出这个章节与主题真正相关的地方在哪里。要学习这一点，需要拥有很重要的阅读技巧。 第二，针对同一个主题，从许多不同的作者与书籍中收集出来的章节，能帮助读者强化对各个章节的诠释能力。有时候我们从同一本书中依照顺序来阅读的章节，以及挑出来比对阅读的章节，相互对照之下可以让我们更了解其中的含意。有时候从不同书中摘出来的章节是互相冲突的，但是当你读到彼此冲突的论点时，就会更明白其中的意义了。有时候从一个作者的书中摘出来的章节，由另一个作者的书的某个章节作补充或评论，实际上可以帮助读者对第二位作者有更多的了解。 第三，如果主题阅读运用在许多不同的主题上，当你发现同一个章节被主题工具书引述在许多不同主题之下的时候，这件事情本身就很有指导阅读的效果。随着读者针对不同的主题要对这些章节进行多少不同的诠释，他会发现这些章节含有丰富的意义。这种多重诠释的技巧，不只是阅读技巧中的基本练习，同时也会训练我们的头脑面对任何含义丰富的章节时，能习惯性地作出适当的调整。 因为我们相信，对想做这个层次的阅读的读者来说，无论他是资深的学者或初学者，主题工具书都很有帮助，因此我们称这一阅读层次为主题阅读。我们希望读者能原谅我们一点点的自我耽溺。为了回报您的宽容，我们要指出很重要的一点。主题阅读可以说有两种，一种是单独使用的主题阅读，一种是与主题工具一起并用。后一种可以当作是构成前一种阅读计划的一部分，一开始由这里着手，是最聪明的做法。而前一种主题阅读所应用的范围要比后一种广义许多。 ※ 构成主题阅读的原则 有些人说主题阅读（就上述广义的定义来说）是不可能做到的事。他们说在一个作者身上强加一套语言，即使是最“中立”的一套词汇（就算真有这回事的话），也是错的。作者本身的词汇是神圣不可侵犯的，因为阅读一本书时绝不能“脱离上下文”，而且将一组词汇转成另一种解释总是很危险的，因为文字并不像数学符号那么容易控制。此外，反对者认为主题阅读牵涉的作者太广，时空不同，基本的风格与性质也不同，而主题阅读就像是将他们都聚在同一个时空，彼此一起讨论—这完全扭曲了事实的真相。每位作者都有自己的天地，虽然同一位作者在不同时空所写的作品之间可能有些联系（他们提醒说即使这样也很危险），但是在这位作者与另一位作者之间却没有明显的联系。最后，他们坚持，作者所讨论的主题比不上讨论的方法重要。他们说风格代表一个人，如果我们忽略作者是如何谈一件事，却只顾他谈的是什么事，结果只会两头落空，什么也没了解到。 当然，我们对所有这些指控都不同意，我们要依序回答这些指控。让我们一次谈一个。 第一，是关于词汇的问题。否认一个概念可以用不同的词汇来说明，就像否认一种语言可以翻译成另一种语言。当然，这样的否认是刻意制造出来的。譬如最近我们阅读的一个新译本，前言一开始便说要翻译是不可能的事。但是因为译者接着又解释他是如何完成的，所以我们只能假设他的意思是：要翻译这样一本被众人视为神圣的典籍，是一件极为困难的事。我们也同意。不过困难并不代表做不到。 事实上，所谓作者本身的词汇是神圣不可侵犯的说法，其实只是在说要将一种说法翻译成另一种说法是非常困难的。这一点我们也同意。但是，同样的，困难并非不可能做到。 其次，谈到作者各自区隔与独立的特性。这就像说有一天亚里士多德走进我们办公室（当然穿着长袍），身边跟着一位又懂现代英语又懂古希腊语的翻译，而我们却无法听懂他讲什么，他也无法听懂我们讲什么一样。我们不相信有这回事。毫无疑问，亚里士多德对他看到的许多事一定觉得很讶异，但我们确信在十分钟之内，只要我们想，我们就能跟他一起讨论某个我们共同关心的问题。对于一些特定的概念一定会发生困难，但是只要我们能够发现，就能解决。 如果这是可行的（我们不认为任何人会否认），那么让一本书经由翻译—也就是主题阅读的读者—与另一本书的作者“谈话”，并不是不可能的事。当然，这需要很谨慎，而且你要把双方的语言—也就是两本书的内容—了解得越透彻越好。这些问题并非不能克服，如果你觉得无法克服只是在自欺欺人。 最后，谈到风格的问题。我们认为，这就像是说人与人之间无法作理性的沟通，而只能作情绪上的沟通—就像你跟宠物沟通的层次。如果你用很愤怒的腔调对你的狗说：“我爱你！”它会吓得缩成一团，并不知道你在说什么。有谁能说：人与人之间的语言沟通，除了语气与姿势外就没有其他的东西？说话的语气是很重要的—尤其当沟通的主要内容是情绪关系的时候；而当我们只能听（或者看？）的时候，肢体语言中可能就有些要告诉我们的事情。但是人类的沟通，不只这些东西。如果你问一个人出口在哪里？他告诉你沿着B走廊就会看到。这时他用的是什么语气并不重要。他可能对也可能错，可能说实话也可能撒谎，但是重点在你沿着B走廊走，很快就能找到出口了。你知道他说的是什么，也照着做了，这跟他如何说这句话一点关系也没有。 只要相信翻译是可行的（因为人类一直在做这件事），书与书之间就能彼此对谈（因为人类也一直在这么做）。只要愿意这么做，人与人之间也有理性客观的沟通能力（因为我们能彼此互相学习），所以我们相信主题阅读是可行的。 ※ 主题阅读精华摘要 我们已经谈完主题阅读了。让我们将这个层次的阅读的每个步骤列举出来。 我们说过，在主题阅读中有两个阶段。一个是准备阶段，另一个是主题阅读本身。让我们复习一下这些不同的步骤： 一、 观察研究范围：主题阅读的准备阶段 (1)针对你要研究的主题，设计一份试验性的书目。你可以参考图书馆目录、专家的建议与书中的书目索引。 (2)浏览这份书目上所有的书，确定哪些与你的主题相关，并就你的主题建立起清楚的概念。 二、 主题阅读：阅读所有第一阶段收集到的书籍 (1)浏览所有在第一阶段被认定与你主题相关的书，找出最相关的章节。 (2)根据主题创造出一套中立的词汇，带引作者与你达成共识—无论作者是否实际用到这些词汇，所有的作者，或至少绝大部分的作者都可以用这套词汇来诠释。 (3)建立一个中立的主旨，列出一连串的问题—无论作者是否明白谈过这些问题，所有的作者，或者至少大多数的作者都要能解读为针对这些问题提供了他们的回答。 (4)界定主要及次要的议题。然后将作者针对各个问题的不同意见整理陈列在各个议题之旁。你要记住，各个作者之间或之中，不见得一定存在着某个议题。有时候，你需要针对一些不是作者主要关心范围的事情，把他的观点解读，才能建构出这种议题。 (5)分析这些讨论。这得把问题和议题按顺序排列，以求突显主题。比较有共通性的议题，要放在比较没有共通性的议题之前。各个议题之间的关系也要清楚地界定出来。注意：理想上，要一直保持对话式的疏离与客观。要做到这一点，每当你要解读某个作家对一个议题的观点时，必须从他自己的文章中引一段话来并列。