On stereotype

0. The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.

1. Rationality therefore shows its power only when things are properly named (languagized).

2. Things can be properly named only when they are properly classified.

3. A not-well classified opinion on a group is called prejudice.

3. Prejudices grow to stereotypes when they gain popularity.

5. Statistically speaking, people are bad at classification.

6. Hence, the said people who like classifying others become discriminaters and who dislike classifying others give up their power of rationality.

Deductive Formalism of Jungian Cognitive Functions

(Draft)

Abstract

Jungian cognitive functions were first came up with by psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Carl Jung in his book Psychological Types in 1921, based on which Isabel Myers and Katharine Cook Briggs created Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), which enjoys great popularity in commercial use and causal self-testings by people. While MBTI has been refuted and discarded by academia due to its problematic statistical validity and test validity, the core theory behind it, Jungian cognitive functions, still has profound meaning and serves as an insightful tool in analyzing personalities and understanding people’s motivation and reasons behind their decisions and behaviors.[1] In this article, I attempt to deduct 16 psychological types as described by Jungian cognitive functions using a series of assumptions, which explains why there are sixteen, rather than other numbers of, psychological types, and why these sixteen types are the way they are (as described by certain permutations of Jungian cognitive functions) rather than other seemingly possible permutations. This article is not an discussion of the definition of Jungian cognitive functions, nor does it attempt to prove its validity. Readers are assumed to have prior knowledge in Jungian cognitive functions.

Key words: Jungian cognitive functions, MBTI, psychological types, personality

Continue reading

Phil 375 Assignment 2

Note: This was a work in rush, thereby not of good quality.

Ultimate philosophy — cope with suffering. – Do not worry, there will be a day when all people are dead and everything will be equally unimportant.

On knowledge. – All knowledge seekers are essentially information collectors, and vice versa.[1]

The power of music. – The power of music to emotional arousal is unparalleled: It is not merely that music has the most intensive effect on emotional arousal, but also that only music can easily change one’s mood into the desired one as one wishes.

Philosopher’s pity. – The pity of a philosopher is that he cannot debate with philosophers before his birth or listen to the critiques from philosophers after his death.

Loneliness. – If no live person can understand you, then turn to the dead!

Immortality. – If time is infinite and a man can be immortal, then for any of his past decisions and actions if he does not completely forget them, he is bound to regret them.[2] If he is a homo economicus, he should not believe in anything other than absolute truths unless he can guarantee that he will forget what he believes before regret. He will have a day when he starts to love what he used to resent most and resent what he used to love most. His memory will be infinitely thin such that it is almost unmeasurable, just as rational numbers sporadically spread on the number line. He will gradually forget who he is, unless he records everything that happens on him, until his forgetfulness surpasses his recording speed. He lives forever and dies ceaselessly. Essentially, he no longer owns his memory, and he is no longer a human being. If all this is the case, the heaven that the devout believers long for will become an existence that is infinitely more terrifying than the hell, and I would rather the universe be short-lived so that all nightmares will end in the inevitable destruction.[3]

An Immortal man. – An immortal man is destined to commit suicide.

Do not be worldly. -Being worldly, including, but not limited to,  focusing on or paying attention to politics, society, news, money, fame, and career, makes one stupid, unsettled, shortsighted and mediocre. Beware that it does not mean one will become noble if one does not do so, but what one should do instead is focusing on his internal spiritual world.[4]

Suspicious Amor fati. Amor fati is such a good and enchanting faith; it is just such a pity that I cannot see the logical reasoning behind it — why should I believe, why should I believe, why should I believe, and what if I just do not believe?

Complaint from a writer. – Writing philosophical works in one’s second language destroys one’s ability to elaborate his thoughts and convey the exact meaning, which is especially a disaster for someone who is very picky about word choices and must always differ the nuances between words before writing.

On thinking. – Recalling oneself’s thinking process is an annoying thing, for not only is it not as entertained and thrilled as thinking per se, but also that one has to worry about whether any inspiration is missed.

On beauty. – Everyone likes beauty. It is a pity, however, that instead of beauty, what most people pursue are beautiful things. I used to think that I was more foresightful than most people in that I did not pursue beautiful things but beauty itself. Nevertheless, I gradually found that the action of pursuing beauty per se is suspicious, and even beauty itself is also suspicious[5]. Hence after consideration I decided to no longer pursue beauty.

On misfortune. – Life is filled with misfortune, while there are always some misfortunate people who like being mean to those who are more misfortunate.

Knowledge and gold. – From knowledge seekers’ perspective, knowledge is like gold. Just as some people can find happiness without using gold, but only by occupying gold, some others can feel content without using knowledge, but only by having knowledge.

The farsighted and the shortsighted I. – The farsighted tend to be pessimistic, while the shortsighted tend to be misfortunate, for the former are able to see all the possible hardship in the future and realize their incompetence, while the later tend to make shortsighted decisions which bring them misfortune.

The farsighted and the shortsighted II. – The farsighted tend to be fortunate, while the shortsighted tend to be happy — they are all adorable.

Final thoughts. -Very soon, the day will come, when all of us will be dead, with our skeletons buried under earth and scary skulls never unmoved as if being lost forever in thoughts. The grades of this course will no longer matter, and what I have written here will be lost to the world. Nobody will know we ever existed; not even in the most humble way can someone tell our stories, the great debates that took placed in class, the small talks I had with classmates…… Very soon, the day will come, when human beings will extinguish, and there, in the whole universe, will not even have a tiny trace that can show there was an intelligence called human that has flourished somewhere in the cosmos, along with their grand stories……


[1] I am too lazy to lay out a detailed and well-defended argument, but let me give a concise one. For knowledge seekers (or we can define knowledge seekers as the followings, if you disagree), their sole ultimate mission is having all knowledge about this world, including both priori and posterior knowledge, which is essentially a sort of information (or at least, belongs to information). When time is limited, instead of trying to get all knowledge about the world, he should try to gain knowledge as much and as quick as possible before his death (deducted from the definition of knowledge seekers). Since some knowledge are more informative (i.e., the knowledge from which you can deduct new knowledge) than the others, for a rational knowledge seeker, he should try to gain those knowledge (instead of the others) if possible, since gaining as much knowledge as possible before his death is his mission. When the most valuable knowledge is gain, he should turn to the second most valuable knowledge, which by the definition, is less informative, i.e., contains less information. When the second most valuable knowledge is gained, he should turn to the third…… The process keeps going, which from the information collection’s perspective, is a process of collecting the biggest part of information out of all information at the first stage, followed by the second biggest one at the second stage…… Here, an isomorphic relation is built between knowledge and information, as they both goes from the “most” stage monotonically to the “least” stage. Finally, to obtain all knowledge about this world, the knowledge seeker must collect all information about this world, regardless of how trivial it might sound, for as long as there is some information can be collected but remains unknown, the knowledge seeker has not yet finished his mission, since he has not known about that part (i.e., the missing information) about the world.

The same argument can also be applied to the reversed direction: All information collectors are essentially knowledge seekers. (Hints: To collect as much information as possible before an information collector’s death, he must become a knowledge seeker and start with the most valuable knowledge if possible, since the most valuable knowledge contains most information.

[2] If he “revises”, “corrects” or “improves” his past decisions or actions, it means he regrets what he has done in the past — no matter how light his regret is.

[3] Memory belongs to information. Within a limited space, the information can be stored is limited, otherwise the materials storing the information will collapse to a blackhole and thereby lose all information. For a being to be smart enough at least at human’s level, the materials constructing it must have some not small mass density, which limits the space the being can occupy, otherwise the being will also collapse to a blackhole. Hence, both the space that a being occupies and the information that can be store in that space is limited, which results in the memory a being can have is limited.

[4] Yes, even people like Confucius, Alexander, Shakespeare, Ben Franklin, Gandhi,…, are stupid, unsettled, shortsighted and mediocre to some extent by my standard as discussed in the aphorism — it is not necessarily a shame. Or for a better word if you want, they are not wise, settled, foresightful, and good enough.

[5] We need to assume beauty is a subjective feeling/assessment rather than an objective existence, which is too big a topic to discuss or prove here (though I can prove it) — let’s just assume it as true for now. Since beauty is a subjective feelings/assessment, it totally depends on the aesthete’s aesthetic system. This means beauty is changeable over space and time — the beauty you “obtain” now is not necessarily still beauty in the future, and if time is long enough, it must be not, since given infinite amount of time anything possible to happen will happen by math. If the beauty your pursue is no longer beauty in the future, your effort is wasted during the process — or in a more precise word, your effort has a low return. Hence I no longer pursue beauty, a short-lived illusionary thing.

美、丑与自由

今天去711的时候,看见了一个女人穿着性感的黑丝袜,于是我便想起了几年前在中大上的福柯与法,想起了他的《规训与惩戒》,想起了他的《性史》,还想起了尼采的权力意志。女人性感精致的打扮,说到底是社会驯化的结果,然而,她是不自觉的:人即是这种无时无刻不被社会规范和基因约束与操纵然而又不自觉地以为拥有自由的动物。

你也许会争辩,认为她这样打扮只是为了追求美;并且,她追求美并不是为了给谁看,而只是让自己赏心悦目——正如知乎上“女人打扮的社会原因是什么?”和“女生打扮得漂漂亮亮,是为了彰显自己独立自信,还是为了迎合男权社会审美?”的某些答案所讨论的那样。如果你这样想,请你先别激动,我并无意论证她的打扮究竟是不是为了给谁看,我也更无意证明这样做是否是可鄙的——你可能认为这种迎合他人口味的展示一定是可鄙的,然而这并非你想象的那样显而易见,甚至,就连可鄙这个词本身都非常可疑。

让我们从发问开始吧:她为什么要打扮?如果是为了给别人看,所谓的“展示”自己,无疑她已经掉进了社会规范设置的陷阱,不论她意图展示的对象是同性还是异性。这很好理解:当她按照她的方式所打扮(而非随意穿着)的时候,她即认为这样的打扮是好的,而好是一个价值判断,一旦什么牵扯到价值判断,事情就开始变得主观起来了。人并非天生就知道什么是好的,而是在后天身处这个社会中所习得的,于是她将不可避免地要受到周围世俗观念的影响。当然,世俗不会直接告诉她,女人就应该穿黑丝,而是通过她身边的人、她所见到的广告、她所从电视上所知道的名流的行为展示着某一类女人都穿黑丝潜移默化地影响她的,直到社会氛围要么渐渐地说服她她也应该并且喜欢上了这么做,要么给她施加某种隐约的压力,当她不这么做时她会因为感觉到被排除了这类女人的圈子而产生的压力而感到不适,而这种不适最终导致她这么做。注意,这是一个非常因人而异的事情,如果你是一位女性而你不喜欢穿黑丝并且准备反驳我,我并不接受你因此而产生的反驳,更有可能的是,即使你不在这方面受到社会规范的驯化,你也很有可能在其他方面——比如,所谓的高跟鞋,所谓的长发,所谓的温柔……几乎所有由性别产生的刻板印象都在可能范围之列。

另一方面,如果这种打扮只是为了取悦自己,那么,一个恐怕并不为多数人所想到的问题是,为什么取悦你的是这个而不是其他什么?而为什么它又能取悦你,而不是让你产生其它什么感觉?为什么她,或者说,主流的穿丝袜的女人,穿的是黑色而不是红丝绿丝?如果说,人人都随机地拥有某种偏好,并且社会上展现出平均的概率分布时,我们大概可以安心的说,这真的只是个人偏好罢了,然而当事情倾向于某种或者某几种情况时,我们便不得不变得谨慎起来。事实上,通过穿着来取悦自己或者别人本身包含着一种审美过程,而审美本身是非常主观并且严重受一个人的经历与环境影响的。唐代的时候女人以微胖为美,而春秋战国的时候则有“楚王好细腰,宫中多饿死”,当一个人精心打扮自己,并声称这么做只是为了让自己赏心悦目时,他实际上于无意识中陷入了社会规范所设置的陷阱:是他身处的社会潜移默化地告诉他这样是美的,那样是丑的,于是他选择了美的妆扮,并且在镜子前欣赏自己而感到满足。如果哪天社会潮流变了,昔日的美变成了今天的丑,那么他便会摒弃从前的妆扮而另谋他样。

亲爱的读者,也许你会说你是一个独立、倔强且谨慎的人,拒不服从社会规训,并处处提防世俗的审美对自己的影响而选择自己独立的审美(比如,你的打扮独树一帜),你可能会说自己通过某种方法免除了社会规范的约束与影响,并且最终告诉我,你的打扮仍然只是为了取悦自己。让我们先不讨论这件事情在理论上是否可能,而是先大方地假设你声称的事情是真的,即使这样,这并不代表着人在打扮,或者说审美这件事上,是自由的。

让我们依然从发问开始:何为美?美意味着什么?从进化的角度讲,美即健康。人们追求美丽或者英俊的人,因为这种美丽或者英俊表明着一个人很健康,健康即意味着更强的生存和生殖能力,而更强的生存和生殖能力即意味着更有可能保留后代的能力。于是,自然选择便会保留那些能够识别这种美的基因,拥有这些基因的人也就能在挑选繁育后代的对象时获得优势因而脱颖而出。斗转星移,有一天终于进化为几乎人人都爱美,他们不仅在选择对象时喜欢挑美的人,甚至在镜子前欣赏自己的美都能沾沾自喜。如此看来,人不过是基因操纵的玩偶罢了:基因决定人应该爱美,于是人人都爱美;基因让人在欣赏美时感到愉悦,于是便有人想方设法让自己变美,不仅愉悦自己顺便也在与他人的互动中获取某些优势。然而人是不自知的,并且基因用美让人感到的满足,简直就好像大人拿一些简单而粗糙的玩具就可以轻易让小孩感到的满足一样。

一旦你认可了我上面所说的事,追求美这个行为便变得可疑起来:基因决定了我会喜欢美,我便一定要追求美吗?我一定要追求基因让我追求的东西吗?诚然,欣赏美的体验是好的,它能给我们带来愉悦感,从快乐的角度来讲我们似乎没有什么理由拒绝美。然而追求美是费力的,它需要很高的成本,时间上的、金钱上的、心理上的,甚至有时候会招致灾祸。太美的人可能会被同性嫉妒,而不够美的人却会因为缺乏外在美而苦恼,追求美的人在追求美的过程中花费了本可以花在其他事情上的时间,诸如此类。不仅如此,一旦你决定追求什么,你变会被它所牵制:你追求美时也即丧失了选择不美的自由。也许你会争辩,即使丧失了这种看起来没什么用处的自由你也无所谓,如果美是客观存在的,那么你的争辩听起来多少有点道理。然而一旦你意识到或者认可美是主观的[1],事情便变得棘手起来,这意味着今日你所求可能就是明天你所恶,而在这之间,除了收获了半衰期很短的愉悦感以外,你的精力都浪费了,而你并没有在这个过程中积累到什么长期的东西。

让我们暂时撇开话题来讨论一个有意思的思想实验:有没有可能存在这么一个世界,那个世界里人人都追求丑?你也许会说,如果人人都追求丑,那么那个世界的丑就变成了他们的美,因此他们还是在追求美。这里我并不打算玩这种文字游戏,我们知道,美的一个核心特点便是它能给人带来愉悦感,我们因此不妨定义丑的核心特点是它能给人带来厌恶感。那么,有没有可能存在这么一个世界,那个世界人人都追求能给他们带来厌恶感的丑?每个人都希望自己越丑越好,从而能恶心到尽可能多的人;而最丑的那个人在最大程度上恶心到所有人的同时也成为了所有人所嫉妒的对象。也许你会觉得这个例子很荒谬,然而它并不是你想象的那样荒谬。比如,在动物世界,动物可能会追求一种凶狠的面貌以恐吓异类以及同类,尤其是同性的同类。在我们看来,老虎头上的王字以及它的外貌与斑纹可能显得很酷,然而在它的同性同类眼里,那样的面貌可能不仅凶狠还使那些力量不够强大的同性感到厌恶和恐惧,与此同时,每一只老虎又渴求自己能够像他们之中最凶神恶煞的老虎那样凶狠。这里我并没有暗示老虎拥有进行这些思考的能力,我只是举一个例子罢了,然而这种例子其实不是不可能的,比如在远古时期的人类中可能就有这种追求凶狠的社会氛围存在,只是现代的法律最大程度上保障了人的安全,因此这种恐惧才渐渐消除。

综上所述,人其实远没有自己想象的那样自由;人不仅时时刻刻地受社会规范的影响和约束,也被基因影响着一举一动。那么,我们有没有可能打破这种桎梏,追求更大的自由?我们又要如何打破这种桎梏?问题一旦谈到追求,正如在我前文所讲的那样,我们便不得不变得谨慎起来。一旦我们追求什么,我们其实就预设了那样东西对我们是好的,而好又是这样一个主观的判断,它因时因地可能都会变化,它可能不会长久甚至会反转,比如今天的好可能就是明天的坏。那自由是好的吗?答案并非你想象的那样显而易见,至少,证明它为真要比想象的要困难得多!因此,不仅追求美是可疑的,甚至追求自由也变得可疑起来:人为什么要追求自由?人为什么会追求自由?人一旦追求自由,是不是就丧失了保持现状或者保持不自由的自由?这些都是非常值得讨论的问题。而问题回到桎梏:如果我们设法“打破”了这种桎梏,那么我们想方设法打破桎梏这个过程本身,是否被诸如“人要勇于反抗”这类我们被教导的精神所控制着,以及被人渴望自由这种刻在基因里的本性所牵制着,以至于我们陷入了一个新的总是要打破加在我们身上的桎梏的桎梏?如果确实如此,是否意味着人永远无法挣脱这种束缚,因为挣脱旧束缚本身其实是陷入新束缚的开始?

————————

[1] 我并不打算论证美是主观的,这是一个太大的话题,需要太多篇幅。

Phil 375 Assignment 1

Ultimate philosophy — cope with suffering. – Do not worry, there will be a day when all people are dead.

Ultimate psychology. – All human beings are essentially utilitarians.[1]

On knowledge. – All knowledge seekers are essentially information collectors, and vice versa.[2]

The power of music. – The power of music to arise one’s emotion is unparalleled.

Philosopher. – One without one’s own philosophy do not deserve to be a philosopher.

Philosopher’s pity. – The pity of a philosopher is that he cannot debate with philosophers before his birth or listen to the critiques from philosophers after his death.

Loneliness. – If no live person can understand you, then turn to the dead!

Immortality. – If time is infinite and a man can be immortal, then for any of his his past decisions and actions if he does not completely forget them, he is bound to regret about them. If he is a homo economicus, he should not believe in anything other than absolute truths unless he can guarantee he will forget what he believes before he regrets. He will have a day when he starts to love what he used to resented most and resent what he used to love most. His memory will be infinitely thin such that it is almost unmeasurable, just like how rational numbers sporadically spread on the real axis. He will gradually forget who he is, unless he record everything happens on him, until his forgetfulness surpasses his recording speed. He lives forever and dies ceaselessly. Essentially, he no longer owns his memory, and he is no longer a human being. If all these are the case, the heaven that the devout believers long for will become an existence that is infinitely more terrifying than the hell, and I would rather wish the universe be short-lived so that all nightmares will end in the inevitable destruction.

An Immortal man. – An immortal man is destined to commit suicide.

Do not be worldly. -Being worldly, including but not limited to,  focusing on or paying attention to politics, society, news, money, fame, and career, makes one stupid, unsettled, shortsighted and mediocre. Beware that it does not mean one will become noble if he does not do so, but what one should do instead is focusing on his internal spiritual world.

Foresightful Morality. – Foresight! Foresight! Had one had a bit more foresight, one would have known the real morality had never existed at all!

Suspicious Amor fati. Amor fati is such a good and enchanting faith; it is just such a pity that I cannot see the logical reasoning behind it — why should I believe, why should I believe, why should I believe, and what if I just do not believe?

Complaint from a writer. – Writing philosophical works in English, some writer’s second language, destroys his ability to sophisticatedly elaborate his thoughts and convey the exact meaning, which is especially a disaster for someone who is very picky on word choices and must always differ the nuances between word and word, and syntax and syntax, before writing.

Final thoughts. -Very soon, the day will come, when all of us will be dead, with our skeletons buried under earth and scary skulls never unmoved as if being lost in forever thoughts. The grades of this course will no longer matters, and what I have written here will be lost to the world. Nobody knows our ever existence; not even in the most humble way can someone tell our stories, the great debates taken placed in class, the small talks I had with classmates…… Very soon, the day will come, when human beings will extinguish, and there, in the whole universe, is no even a tiny trace that can show there was an intelligence called human that have flourished somewhere in the cosmos, along with their grand stories……


[1] I have a great argument to prove this, but that will take many pages.

[2] Ditto.

An Information Sharing-based Classification Model of Interpersonal Relationship

(draft)

Abstract

For those who are inexperienced and not good at dealing with interpersonal relationship, especially intimacy relationship, sorting different people around them into groups of different intimacy in an unambiguous way can be difficult and struggling. I thereby proposed an information sharing-based classification model to help sort people into groups of different intimacy under clear standards, the application of which can reduce the entropy of one’s social circle and keep it clean and neat. In this model, interpersonal relationships are classified into 7 levels in rising intimacy order depending on the information that is shared or can be shared interpersonally without hesitation and uncomfortableness: Strangers, Acquaintances, Friends, Good Friends, Close Friends, Best Friends, Zhiji. This classification may sound familiar and trivial to you, but what really matters is not the classification itself but a clear, practical, simple and well-motivated standard that can be put into use, which will be discussed in details in this paper.

Continue reading

欣颖其人

欣颖是我的一个高中同学,我的前桌,也是我的上铺。虽然我并不习惯叫他“欣颖”,但是这里考虑到保护他的隐私,请容许我只称其名而省其姓。至于欣颖这个名字听上去虽然像是女孩子的,但他确实是个男生。

要说到关于他什么事,首先我便得说欣颖是我见过的性格最古怪的几个人之一。这里的古怪其实我并不把它作为贬义词用,只是用来表示常人既不容易理解也不容易与他相处罢了。如果我没有记错的话,当初认识他是因为我们座位被安排在了一起。那时,班里的座位大都是两个两个连在一起,左右互为“同桌”;但唯独有一列为单列,没有左右桌而只有前后桌,他便是我单列的前桌。因为没有左右桌,坐在单列的同学自然而然地会更加多地与前后桌交流。于是我跟他的互动便变得不可避免起来。

起初我好奇他为什么要坐在单列。那时还是高二,没有高三那样严肃压抑,不论上课还是晚自习班里都不安静,虽然坐在单列可以很大程度上避免身边很多人的喧嚣而独享一份宁静,然而人毕竟是社交动物,在每天三点一线绝无变化的高中生活里,缺少一个人聊天确是一个问题。有一次他告诉我,他不能跟人同桌,因为他同桌肯定会受不了他。我感到既好奇又好笑。他是得怎样,才会那么有自信地说他的同桌肯定会受不了他?他又说,他从来没有朋友;更准确地说,他既不认为任何人是他的朋友,也不认为在未来自己会交到任何朋友,他是一个与孤独为伍的人。呵!多么有趣的一个人,我当时就想,既然如此,就由我来当你的第一个朋友。

刚坐在一起的时候,我觉得他除了比较独来独往以外,跟其他人也没什么区别。看来他的信誓旦旦不过如此嘛。不过相处了一段时间以后,我是渐渐地感觉到了他的毛病。比如,他特别墨迹。有时候晚修,他反过头来问我问题,会首先把他的解法详细地给我说一遍,然后问我哪里有错。一开始只是觉得这样问问题效率低,后来次数多了我便开始受不了了。我的爷爷,我只能告诉你我是怎么解的,题目那么多,我哪有时间一个一个跟着你的思路走一遍给你看你哪儿做错了。而且你讲得又不清不楚,蚂蚁大的字写在草稿纸上我也看着累。可是碍于情面我又不好捅破,于是只好每次假装认真听他讲完然后沉思片刻说我也不懂。到后来,连听他讲完的耐心也没有了。前面说过了他特别墨迹,有的时候对于我一眼就能想到解法的题他要花几分钟长篇大论地阐述他的思路。在忍无可忍之后,我只好拿出我的当时的招牌敷衍法,告诉他这道题高考是不会考的啦,没有必要浪费时间专研。次数多了,他便终于不怎么来烦我了。不过他这人似乎脾气也特好,纵使我表现得这样嫌弃他,他也一点也不责怪我,好像什么事都没发生一样。这便是他古怪的第二点:他似乎没有喜怒哀乐七情六欲。拿我自己来说吧,虽然我被一些人认为是nerd,但是其实我还是很有幽默感滴,至少我自己认为我有。我开心的时候跟其他人一样心情也是挂在脸上滴,与人打交道的时候也是能体察到、至少我自以为能体察到别人的情绪滴。不过对于欣颖来说嘛,上面讲的他统统没有。他是我见过唯一一个幽默感为零的人,不仅不能表达幽默,甚至也不能感受幽默。除此之外,在我的印象里,我也似乎既没怎么见到他特别开心的时候,也没见过他有愁眉苦脸的时候,说难听点就是像个“面瘫”。而他跟我交流的时候也丝毫不能体察到我不耐烦的情绪,哪怕我觉得我已经表现得很明显,跟其他人也是如此。

不过话说回来,即使他有上面所说的种种缺点,在我看来也没什么大不了的嘛,最多算是性格有点缺陷,也不是什么很致命的问题,他也不至于就因此没朋友吧?有一次我决定应该换一种方式跟他沟通。所谓“日省其身,有则改之,无则加勉”,他有那么多他自己也许意识不到的问题,既然他不能改之那么就由我来告诉他,帮他改。于是,(在我印象里)我就告诉了他应该怎样正确的问问题。那时候我发现他很喜欢钻研数学,经常拿着一些数学旧书看上面的题目看的津津有味,里面的问题大都是高考不会涉及的趣味问题,或者更深的问题。有时我做不出来的数学问题他也能用他的方法告诉我怎么做。于是我就鼓励其他科成绩比较差的他以后搞数学。我们也聊过职业理想和未来规划,我发现他好像没有什么强烈的职业理想,便鼓励他应该有一个,诸如此类。聊得多了,我便发现他这人有点固执、不听劝,说干这个他也说不行,说干那个他也说自己干不来,建议他尝试往更好的方面改变他也拒绝。好吧。既然如此我也不好再多说什么。

终于,一件让我印象深刻、也让全班对我俩关系印象深刻的事情来了。有次我们瞎聊,内容大概是说随机扔一枚硬币到地上,没有人见到硬币到底是正面朝上还是反面朝上,那么地上硬币的状态到底是随机的还是确定的。我记得当时我的观点是“确定的”,因为硬币已经到地上了嘛,其实到底是正面朝上还是反面朝上这件事已经确定,只是无人知道而已;他认为硬币的状态是随机的,当然他的论证其实我已经记不清了。就这样一个看起来很小的问题,我们从中午争论到下午,期间还转移了战场,从硬币的确定性问题争论到了其他问题。争论时,有时我觉得他不是装傻就是太笨,连这么显而易见的东西都不承认;有时我又会故意抬杠,提出一个我自己也没思考周全,后来我觉得是有缺陷的观点,再或者就是有意无意使用我的诡辩之术试图说服他。我当时是觉得和他辩得很爽,然而周围的同学却被我们噪音给遭了殃。后来我们讨论的重心转移到了一个偏政治的问题,班上的同学忍无可忍,便劝我们待会儿找要来上课的政治老师一辩是非。我们如是做了,结果已经记不清,不过那次讨论便结束了。那次讨论是我印象最深刻的辩论,即使放到现在来看也是。不过从此以后我和他的“基情”关系也便在班里众人皆知,以至于时不时有妹子来劝我们应该“在一起”。

实话讲,自那以后,我对他的固执、坚持、与智慧便变得敬佩起来,开始喜欢跟他日常抬杠,期待他能有什么犀利的言语能让我眼前一亮。不负我所愿,令我十分意外、又惧又怕同时心里又佩服不已的一件事是他剖析人特便准。有一段时间,出于他性格的古怪,我经常会戏谑地问他童年是不是有“心理阴影”,他在被我捉弄很多次之后终于开始反击,然后毫不留情地指出我的缺点、缺陷、看穿我的意图想法以至让我哑口无言,我有时只好嬉皮笑脸跟他缓解矛盾,算是变相妥协,求他“手下留情”。直到那时,我才了解为啥他说他自己交不到朋友:一般人在他这样的冷嘲热讽,犀利言辞下被当面揭开错误,早就受不了了。还好我跟他相处也是有一段时间,心理早就做好了准备,才算是像没事人一样过来了。不过,自此却对他一针见血不留情面的言辞留下了非常深刻的印象。

后来,到了下学期,班主任见我们关系这样好,便把我们安排成了上下铺,他上我下。刚开学那时候,我像上学期一样喜欢“调戏”他。他不喜欢别人拍他照片,认为会侵犯他的隐私,特别是对于我拍照,他尤其抱有敌意,认为我会拿着照片去做不法的事情。其实我只是把他看成我的一个有趣朋友,希望能拍几张他的日常照片作为留念,也许是因为我平时“调戏”多了他,让他以为我打算拿着照片去做不好的事,比如放到同城同性交友网上之类的。一开始我拍了几次照,在他的坚持下我都把照片删了;后来有一次我决定调戏到底,坚决不删。我给出的理由也算是有理有据:东西是我的,我拿着照了像,按照肖像权法我既没拿着照片干坏事也没用其从事商业活动,凭什么你叫我删我就得删,那样岂不是显得我很没有面子?于是我跟他怼到了底。他在抢夺几次无效之后,便给我下了最后通牒,说只要照片一日不删就一日不跟我讲话。我当时也是犟,没有理会他的最后通牒。于是,他便在成为我的上铺、因此我自以为以后会有更多交流的几天之后,真的再也没跟我讲话。虽然他即是我的前桌也是我的上铺,平时完全无法避开与我接触,却真能做到视我如空气。见到我时他会面无愠色,好像什么也没发生过。有几次我嘻嘻哈哈地尝试过去和解,他坚持只要照片一日不删便一日不和解。我没删。于是,我和他之间的沉默便持续了大半年,从高二下刚开学到高三开始。要知道在班上,我即使不是唯一一个,也是仅有的两个之一愿意主动和他交流的人;而能像我这样和他聊学习之外的事情的人,恐怕真的找不出第二个。他能面不改色的这样过来,他的确是、也是目前我唯一认可的真正能且愿意与孤独为伍的人。关于这件事,除了有一点点愧疚,其实我心里是非常敬佩的,世界上能有底线的人不多,而能如此坚持自己底线的人更是少之又少。他能这样坚持自己的原则,我不得不说“敬他是条汉子”。但是,这也体现了他的另一个古怪。通常有情商的人,即使对被拍照这件事十分顾忌,如果真的被朋友拍了照并且朋友坚持不删,那也就生气几天就过去了。毕竟,被拍照怎样来看也算是一件小事,被朋友拍照则更加不是不能接受。而他却能因为这样一件小事,以完全抛弃与我交流为代价,坚持自己至少在一般人看来并不值得坚持的底线。也许,这也是他其实从来没有把我当作一个朋友的表现吧。欣颖诚不我欺也。

后来高三了,学习气氛越加紧张,我也没了调戏的心情和心态,便跟他和解把照片都删了,于是他又开始跟我讲话。经过大半年的沉默,我和他的关系又有点退回到了刚认识的时候,比较生疏。当然,另一个原因也是高三学习紧张,没那么多时间考虑学习之外的事。于是高三我和他便没有发生什么能让我记起来的事。

再后来毕业了。有几次回学校看老师,他和我如果遇见了还是会选择走在一起,聊聊天什么的。我心里是把他当成我的一个好朋友的,不知道他怎么想。也许,我是他在那所学校里唯一一个朋友,尽管他多半会矢口否认;也许,他真的依然不把我看作他的朋友。不管怎样,我想他嘴里是一定不会承认的。其实我对这点挺高兴,这才是我认识的欣颖嘛。如果哪天他真的承认了我是他的朋友,我虽然大概会很高兴,但是那样才不好玩了呢!

后来,他去了一所一般般的211读了应用化学,而不是他喜欢的数学。我对这点挺失望的,我突然想起来他好像跟我说过他的梦想是当一位中学数学老师,为什么他不坚持他的梦想呢?自从毕业以后,除了刚开始回学校探望老师,我与他便再也没有其他的联系,时间大概有四年了。不知道他现在过得怎么样。顺便一提,他现在成我了的一个范本。自毕业以后凡是我遇见性格古怪的人我都会立刻想起他,然后拿他们做对比。

祝他好运。

随笔 其三

事情来的有点突然。就在前天,我的两个好朋友、一对相处三年的情侣分手了。这分手来得如此迅速又平静,以至于让在分手前一天还和他们一起嘻哈的我不知所措。他们早不是第一对我认识的分手的情侣了。从中学时代的苹果和振豪、蚊子和嘉豪,到大学时代的茜子与儒师兄,放羊和羔羊,还有文洁、以及我的好基友……身边的情侣似乎没有多少能长久。只是这一次分手的两个人我都非常熟,我跟他俩三人呆在一起的时光加起来恐怕有一个月了吧,见到身边曾经那样要好的情侣分开,难免令人唏嘘不已。

其实我并不是完全没有考虑到这种事发生的可能性。毕竟,还有异地的考验,生活的琐屑,三观的磨合,理想的分歧嘛……然而我远没有预料到有这么快,甚至在上面所说的一切来得及张牙舞爪之前。刚得知事情发生的时候, 我实在是困惑为什么看起来那样好的他们会分手,并且是由一方主动提出,而另一方竟然没怎么挽留。后来我想到了可能的多种猜想,然而都被自己一一否决了。毕竟自己对他们了解也算很多,他们怎么可能因为这些不堪一击的理由分手呢。

事实证明我的想法并没有错。说来也讽刺,一向对自己推理周全非常有信心的我愣是没有猜出他们分手的原因是因为一件看上去那样不经意的小事,我倒是真希望事情是另有隐情。当然有人认为那不是小事,其实我完全同意,毕竟我说的是“看上去”嘛,并不一定就是“事实上”;然而我那句话真正想说的是,当我以为英雄要手持宝剑,披荆斩棘,与恶龙搏斗的时候,英雄却因山路险阻踉跄摔地而死。我以为会难倒英雄的是恶龙的利牙烈焰,是它的纠缠不休,是它脚下的深渊万丈,没想到却是英雄脚下一块不起眼的绊脚石。我承认只有步伐稳健的英雄才有可能打败恶龙,然而即使只从旁观者的角度来讲,“英雄死于绊脚石”这个故事是不是也太扫兴了一点。诶。可惜英雄花了那么多时间磨砺他的宝剑。他磨剑的时候,一定非常期待有朝一日他手上的钝剑能变得锋利无比吧?他练剑的时候,一定憧憬过他怎样与恶龙殊死搏斗、斩下龙头的时刻吧?他即将出门远征的时候,也一定担心过万一身死恶龙之手奈何的问题吧?他有没有考虑过自己有可能死于一个纯粹的、自己几乎从未认真考虑的意外?如果他多一点谨慎,多一点远见,早点探明路情,是不是便有可能凯旋而归,至少不辜负当年自己的磨剑练剑的那春秋数载?还是说他只是一个逍遥客,不关心成败,只要自己曾经去试着杀过恶龙便好?

好吧。也许是我的期望太高,我只是没有想到有的时候爱情可以如此的脆弱。我记得小学的时候,我妈曾经责斥我不应该这样不应该那样,否则以后会找不到朋友,我当时反驳说不会,因为我只会找能容许我这样做那样做的朋友;今天我依然坚持当时的看法,并且在找女朋友时也是如此。所以我一直最在意的其实是三观,理想,动机,性格这些东西。有人说找伴侣应该找尽量性格不同的,那样互补不无聊,我不以为然;我觉得还是得找三观理想动机相近的,性格匹配的,这大概便是所谓的“门当户对”吧。满足这样的条件而成就的爱情,是不是会稍微坚强那么一些?如果从这点推理,你就不得不相信,所谓寻找对象其实只是找另一个自己罢了;找到的那个人越像自己,以后大概便会越顺利越幸福。我以前曾经向人半开玩笑的说,我的标准太高,我觉得这一辈子都找不到我喜欢的人;其实他们都没听懂我的意思,我是在说,恐怕我这一辈子都找不到另一个自己。

我发现关于爱情,人们至少有两种不同的态度。一种人怀着开放的态度,只要觉得有机会有可能就要去尝试;另一种人谨慎得多,他们不急不缓,要确定遇到了于自己而言最好的才会去爱。我无法确定哪种更好,但是我更偏爱后者。大概是因为,人生除了爱情之外,还有太多重要的事,把时间全都放在爱情上了,哪有时间去干其他事。也因为,不想让自己承受每次失恋带来的为伊消得人憔悴。

其实关于爱情我早就想写一篇文章来探讨探讨了。作为一个理论家,也许这一篇文章可以作为一篇“纸上谈兵”的热身。

最后,祝愿另一对也是最后一对我熟识的情侣,尧尧和他女朋友能一直快乐的在一起。也祝我那两个分手的好朋友各自好运。