食人柳吃人真实视频:沙滩上的哲学家们

19世纪是属于德国哲学家的年代，他们抢着将代表各自理念的浴巾铺在沙滩上的一个个躺椅上。这是一场惊心动魄、超级混乱的躺椅争夺战：第一个来到沙滩上的是康德，他淘气地将自己那张巨大的夜空般深蓝色的浴巾铺在了几乎所有的躺椅上。但是没多久，穿着沙滩短裤的黑格尔就狂奔了过来，准备搞点儿大动静。不过最先要干的事情，当然是把睡着的康德身下的那块浴巾给抽出来了。如果此时黑格尔认为他已经hold住了整个沙滩的话，他就大错特错了。他没想到叔本华这货也叫嚣着参与到了这场混战之中，并且把黑格尔的很多浴巾掀翻在地，换上了自己的浴巾，然后一个人坐下了。至于尼采刚到这儿的时候，二话不说就把自己的浴巾顺手铺在叔本华旁边，然后一边呲牙咧嘴地笑着，一边往康德和黑格尔身上扔沙子。2

As you can see, the 19th century is by no means a time of philosophical uniformity or even passivity. On the contrary, it saw an incredible rollercoaster ride in the mood, views and style of philosophical activity. It was a time when some of the greatest philosophers of the Western tradition utterly disagreed, contradicting each other, at times trying to unravel and to ridicule each other’s theories.

正如上面谈到的情形，19世纪的哲学从来就不是一个大一统或者被动接受的年代。恰恰相反，我们似乎可以看到哲学活动的气氛、观点和风格都被一辆神奇的过山车所驾驭着，大起大落、风起云涌。这是一个西方各大哲学家分庭抗礼、针锋相对的年代，大家都寻思着要拆对方的台。

Immanuel Kant is no doubt a difficult and, as Peter Rickman argues in his article, often misunderstood philosopher. Only narrowly counting as a 19th century philosopher (he died in 1804) he both produced a monumental philosophical structure and ripped the world apart in his Critical Philosophy: into what is knowable and what isn’t, into what is achievable and what can never be done, into what we can be and what we’d like to but will never be. Humans are forever torn between wanting to know yet being unable to know, wanting to make the most of themselves as civilised humans yet being constantly reduced to a more base existence by their nature.

伊曼努尔•康德无疑是个刺儿头，正如彼得•瑞克曼在文章中讨论的那样，他经常误导其他哲学家们。作为一个只能算是打了19世纪擦边球的哲学家（他死于1804年），他以他的“批判哲学”建立了一套里程碑式的哲学系统并且重构了整个世界，深入讨论了：什么可知，什么不可知；什么可行，什么不可行；我们可以是什么，以及我们想成什么，但不可能做到。人们总是纠结于“想知道”那些“不可能知道”的东西，想成为文明的人，但经常又因为他们的本性而沦为再低级不过的一种“存在”罢了。

Hegel disagreed: like many of his fellow 19th century system builders, such as Schelling and Fichte, he could not bear these Kantian tensions, and sought a resolution. For Hegel, this resolution came from history. Even if human individuals could not achieve absolute knowledge or any other kind of human perfection, the processes of history would allow them to get there. Hegel explains in meticulous detail how thought and reality emerge together, such as in the case of human self-consciousness, demonstrated in Roger Duncan’s article. Hegel thus defines philosophy as “its time grasped in thought.” Robert Wallace emphasises that not even God is excused from history and shows how this can help us make new sense of the phenomenon of religion.

于是黑格尔就不高兴了：跟那些试图构建系统的同道中人们（如谢林和费希特）一样，他不能忍受康德主义的这种不爽的结论，试图寻求一种解脱。对黑格尔来说，这个解脱便来自于历史：就算作为个体的人无法获得绝对知识或其他“完人”的属性，历史的进程也会使人类逐渐到达那个境界。黑格尔仔细地从细节上推敲并解释了思想和现实是如何同时出现的，例如罗杰·邓肯文章中关于人类的自我意识论证。于是黑格尔将哲学定义为：“被把握在思想中的它的时代”（《法哲学原理》）。罗伯特·华莱士在其文章中指出，甚至是上帝也不能凌驾于历史之上，并提供了一个帮助我们理解宗教现象的新感受。

Arthur Schopenhauer, lecturing at the University of Berlin at the same time as Hegel, though to much less popular acclaim, refered to his rival as “a flat, uninspired, disgustingly-revolting, ignorant charlatan”, who he deemed responsible for the “detriment of an entire scholarly generation.” In his article on Schopenhauer, Roger Caldwell reveals more about what made this charming but irresistibly fascinating individual tick. Rather than seeing a pattern, logos or even rationality in the process of reality, Schopenhauer believed the world to be driven by an a-rational ‘will’. When the cholera came to Berlin, the optimist and believer in the logical workings of the world, Hegel, died, whereas, Schopenhauer, the pessimist and irrationalist, escaped.

亚瑟·叔本华与黑格尔同时任教于柏林大学，尽管坐了很久的冷板凳。他这样描述他的对手：“一个平庸、毫无主见、令人做呕、不学无术的江湖骗子。”他认为黑格尔“毁了整整一代人”。在罗杰·考德威尔关于叔本华的文章中，他揭示了到底是什么使这位可爱的、迷人的、令人无法抗拒的哲学家坚持走自己的路的。与其他哲学家观察世界的运行模式、并对现实进行理性分析的角度不同，叔本华认为整个世界都是被一种非理性的“意欲”所驱动的。当霍乱席卷柏林的时候，那位奉行乐观主义并相信世界按照某种逻辑运行的黑格尔挂掉了，而叔本华这位悲观主义、非理性主义者活了下来。

“Nothing is true, all is permitted,” announces Friedrich Nietzsche, and thus snubs most great thinkers of the past. Where Kant had sought to discover the timeless foundations of morality, Nietzsche recommends a repeated “re-evaluation of all values”. Where Hegel had believed in an absolute truth to be revealed in the course of history, Nietzsche believed that which we call ‘truth’ to be nothing but our “irrefutable errors.” Uncompromising yet complex and subtle, Nietzsche never ceases to captivate his readers, both as a philosopher and as an individual, of whose passion and drive Eva Cybulska gives us an enlightening glimpse.

“万物皆虚，万事皆允，”弗里德里希·尼采如是说，以此给过去的大多数思想家泼了一盆冷水。康德力图寻求永恒的道德基础，而尼采提出要反复“重估一切价值”；黑格尔相信存在于历史之中的绝对真理，而尼采认为我们所谓的“真理”只不过是“暂时不能驳倒的错误”罢了。尽管尼采有一种决不妥协的性格，但是他那些丰富而精妙的作品一直吸引着大量的读者。同时作为一名哲学家和一名被尼采的激情所感染的忠实读者，伊娃·赛布尔斯卡将给我们打开一扇通往尼采的大门。

I leave you here on the beach with the four greats, perhaps sitting in between deckchairs, perhaps equipped with a towel, perhaps joining in Nietzsche’s sand throwing. In any case I hope you’ll have fun and the more time you spend here, the more you may discover that if you want to understand the 21st century it can be a very good idea to look to the 19th century.

现在，我就把你们留在沙滩上跟这四个巨人待着吧，你可以在这些躺椅之中找个地儿坐着，也可以自备一条浴巾，还可以跟尼采一起“扔沙子”。总之，我希望你们在这里玩的开心。在这里花的时间越多，你的发现也就越多。如果你想读懂21世纪，那么回头看看19世纪绝对是一个好主意。

 undefined

By jiongcaicaiundefined

Arts Tower, Sheffield, UK

2011-9-20