|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 提上来回应云儿 |
 |
芦笛
[博客]
[个人文集]
论坛管理员
.gif)
加入时间: 2004/02/14
文章: 31803
经验值: 519161
|
|
|
作者：芦笛 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
提上来回应云儿
芦笛
我脚得，云儿楼下那帖子非常有道理。“清者自清，浊者自浊”当然是个人的神圣选择，并不存在什么违反言论自由的问题。
其实，我早就在何清涟演说案发时说过，文明社会中发表言论时必须体现对在场者的尊重：一个无神论者跑到教堂去破除迷信，算什么事儿？
问题是，公众论坛不是某派教堂，是五湖四海各门各派的杂居之地，虽然也不是什么社会公器，具体坛规由各网站自定。但本网站既然立意海纳百川，就不能不把言论底线放到最低点，只限于禁止攻击网友。
这不但是我们对言论自由的理解的道义问题，也是个功利问题----非如此不能保证网站的活力，所谓“清者自清，浊者自浊”不过是近亲通婚，必然会导致思维能力萎缩，正如喜欢忌嘴的人营养绝对不良一样。对此我们在国内已经见得够多了。其实哪怕光从道义上看，按云儿的理论，似乎也无法指责国内具体某个传媒机构：难道那些实行严格检查和自律的地方报纸、网上论坛也是国家社会不成？人家自己掏钱办的机构，当然要考虑是否offend网友和施主，是不是？
最重要的还是，云儿的帖子恰好忽略了这个功利问题，没有看到“清者自清”其实是清流们自己的损失而不是别人的。
例如随便乃是清流屁股上的疼，主要是他这人毛病很多，专门对别人进行基于造谣基础上的道德指责和批判，却动辄指责别人根据事实对他的不道德行为的批评。我在楼下跟帖中指出，他自吹武功如何了得，但我从来没见过他依据“事实和逻辑”在严肃论战中打败了谁，看到的尽是“抛档案”、指责别人“向党写求爱信”一类的奇门遁甲。有如说是他把清流们打跑，不如说是他把人家恶心跑了。
但那又怎么样？我虽然论证过随便“天良丧尽，无羞耻心”，但我照样能从他的文章中受到启发，例如目前我写的<我们的民主和他们的民主>就受到了他的启发。例如他说民主只会带来灾难，“论据”是文革的大民主，又如他说“民主是暴力”，“少数服从多数”就是强暴他人的自由，等等，等等。这当然是谬说，但如果我不看到这种高度浓缩、非常具有代表性的谬说，我还真悟不出中国人的民主观究竟出了什么问题，和西方民主观的本质差别究竟在哪里。对西方民主的认知也不会有现在的清晰。
我敢说，鲁肃老夫子大概也在和他的论战中获了益。起码我觉得他俩的对答非常富有启示性，当时就让我盛赞这是我上网四年半见到的最有水平的讨论，让我获益匪浅。
因此，如果我们想保持自己思维的活力，关键还是得让自己的脑袋开放，竭力压下违背己意的言论引起的恶心感，去想想对方的说道究竟有无道理，如果错了，到底错在何处，只有这样我们才能获得对事物的全面认知。这就是我上网以来最大的收获。五年前我曾是老马的死敌，也曾写过文章痛驳汉奸日奴林思云----作为父母教育出来的仇日派，我真是在感情上和他不共戴天，但后来我发现这么作非常愚蠢，如果我不看他们的文字，不是他们的损失而是我的损失。
这当然只是功利上的价值判断，并不存在道义上的是非问题。任何人都有权害忌食症，以此指责对方不相信言论自由是没有道理的，云儿的文字已经把这点说清楚了。
此外还想解释一下我为何写那呼吁清流回归的帖子。从我个人好处来说，我的智力发育和思想成熟根本不需要清流们的滋润----因为政见和他们的类似，我早知道他们能卖点什么大路货了。不客气地说一句，这些人的大多数还没到我当年20郎当的水平。所以我其实基本不看他们的文字。
我作那呼吁的目的无非是三重：第一，从网站海纳百川的宗旨考虑；第二，为他们的智力成熟着想；第三，驳斥NOEQ那种心地卑污无人能及的“清流”的诬蔑 ( 请云儿用文章搜索查找被网友从塞上转贴到众议院的他诬蔑我们是共特经费供养的间谍组织的帖子，以开眼界，看看所谓“清者自清”、“同声相应，同气相求”的战友可以是什么好东西)。如果清流们拒绝回归，who care？(说明，此处抄袭11岁来美的草庵居士的标准英文)。
最后把我用broken English 写的给加人的一个帖子附在下面，供有兴趣者参考。
--------------------------------------------
加人, let me teach you how to 崇洋媚外
芦笛
Thank you ever so much for your complimentary words. I am literally flattered (not flattened as those poor Caucasian girls or single-mothers who are fortunate or unfortunate enough to have fallen prey to you lusty claws).
Now that you call me “Great Teacher” or “Great Guide” ( I don’t really know how to translate “da shi”. Perhaps “Huge Corpse” is more precise. What’d ya say?), it has become my obligation to teach you one or two things.
Can you tell me, my dear disciple, what the greatest difference between the Chinese and Westerners is?
I know you cannot answer the question, otherwise how could you end up handling the huge dead body? Ha! Ha!
Let me tell you, my sunshine boy, it’s pretty simple: The minds of the Chinese people are closed whist the Westerners always keep their minds open. That’s exactly where their real strength and our weakness lie. More importantly, it is because of this that we have suffered a lot in the past. The most unforgivable crime the Commies have committed is forcing everyone to close his/her mind toward the abundant diversities of the world.
Now the so-called “freedom-warriors” have taken over to carry on the Commies criminal activities. Just go and have a look around. You would immediately find that they are forcing people to see the world with their eyes, to think in their way, and to speak in one single tone that they have set. In other words, they are shutting peoples’ minds as well as mouths by forceful propaganda, savage personal attacks and insults.
Sadly, you are not really a good student of mine, because you have learned their way of reading an article. In general, what strikes you most in an article is not the author’s way of thinking, or even his arguments, but his political stand. If you find him pro-commie, then your brain will be automatically shut, refusing to absorb any useful ideas or information the piece may provide.
That’s why you don’t like Suibian’s pieces, isn’t it? The funny thing is that you reject him emotionally, not rationally. Insteadof considering whether and where his reasoning is faulty, you find his arguments emotionally unacceptable!
I must say this is really weird. You see, you are reading a political essay. Yet, you treat it as a literary piece and let yourself get carried away by your picky stomach. Don’t you think this is a bit girlish or childish?
Allow me to repeat the gist of what I am trying to say here: The vigor of Western civilization lies in its liberalism. Like an ocean, it never rejects any tiny stream, even though it is dirty. Your Great Teacher is heavily influenced by English liberalism. That’s why he can think independently as he tries to keep his mind as open as those foreign devils. Thus, he really believes in what George Orwell, the English writer he respects the most, has taught him:
“If liberty means anything at all, it is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
To this, he would add:
“It is an intellectual suicide (or self-castration) to shut your brain, only because others’ political stands are different from yours. The loss is yours, not theirs.”
作者：芦笛 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
