民主就是两只狼和一只羊投票决定午饭吃什么

53 views
Skip to first unread message

wanghx

unread,
Jun 30, 2008, 5:53:39 AM6/30/08
to salon-...@googlegroups.com, lih...@googlegroups.com
民主就是两只狼和一只羊投票决定午饭吃什么 而自由就是一只武装的羊反对这次投票 --本杰明-富兰克林

刘荻的签名档[1]。我一看就怀疑是 Franklin 的话,因为不符合其政治思想。一查,果然:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

Misattributed
  • Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
    • Widely attributed to Franklin on the internet, sometimes without the second sentence. It is not found in any of his known writings, and the word "lunch" is not known to have appeared anywhere in english literature until the 1820s, decades after his death. The phrasing itself has a very modern tone and the second sentence especially might not even be as old as the internet. Some of these observations are made in response to a query at Google Answers.
      A far rarer but somewhat more credible variation also occurs: "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner." Web searches on these lines uncovers the earliest definite citations for such a statement credit libertarian author James Bovard with a similar one in the Sacramento Bee (1994):
"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner."
This statement also definitely occurs in the "Conclusion" (p. 333) of his book Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (1994) ISBN 0312123337
而且即便是这句话的原作者的语义,也被反民主的人歪曲到完全颠倒的程度。从这里可以看出赞赏这句话的刘荻们的思想谬误,从受迫害者发展为犬儒主义,进而怀 疑民主,乃至用虚假的自欺欺人的“自由”原则去反民主。表面上是反专制的异议者,而实际成为专制暴政的赞助者。

[1] 杯葛奥运掀起高潮,北京面临功亏一篑 http://zyzg.us/viewthread.php?tid=174262&page=2###

wanghx

unread,
Jun 30, 2008, 6:24:49 AM6/30/08
to salon-...@googlegroups.com, lih...@googlegroups.com
比如,类似的还有根本上歪曲语录原文的含义到相反的程度:

* The Way to see by /Faith/, is to shut the Eye of /Reason./
o This incomplete quote has the opposite meaning of the
original which reads:

"*The Way to see by /Faith/, is to shut the Eye of /Reason:/ The
Morning Daylight appears plainer when you put out your Candle.*"

这表现出篡改者对信仰的漠视,却没发现自己对“理性”的“信仰”,本身就是一种
Faith,而不是 Truth 。Truth 和 Faith 的边界,在遇到人类社会的价值问题的
时候,已经无法分辨。而在最本源的认识论上用“理性”去思考,也会发现“理性”不
能自我解释,是不完备的。这是 Immanuel Kant 对我们最大的贡献之一。不认识
到理性的缺陷,就无法摆脱谬误。

理性,科学,只是认识真理的许多工具的一部分,而决不能成为人类精神的主宰。
唯科学主义,唯理主义,绝对化的人本主义,都是现代主义给我们带来的迷信。而
所谓后现代的许多反智主义,反理性主义等等这些思潮,则如同共产主义对于社会
民主主义的极端化背叛一样,也是对批判的理性主义和批判的经验主义的极端化背
叛。这话听起来仿佛“中庸之道”,反极端主义。然而,其逻辑并不依赖于对“极
端”,“绝对化”的经验批判,而是对这些极端化,绝对化思想的内在逻辑的理性批判。

唯科学主义,我称之为科学教,方是民就是一个典型。但是根本上他也是一个虚假
的唯科学主义者,和何诈麻,司马南们一样,而是科学教政客。

Immanuel Kant 是我最佩服的哲学家,因为他让我认识到对理性和经验,都需要既
有理性,也有经验方法的批判态度。在道德/伦理和人性,信仰和知识的关系这些
方面,对我都是基础性的启蒙。

wanghx

unread,
Jun 30, 2008, 6:36:13 AM6/30/08
to salon-...@googlegroups.com, lih...@googlegroups.com
看了 Benjamin Franklin 的原话,就更佩服他的睿智了。

理性不是自在的,而是人为的。人为的就必然难免谬误。那么人类如何发现理性的
谬误?经验是一种检验。而很多时候,信仰就是最好的检验。

比如,发明共产主义的马克思,一定是因为信仰人人生而平等,所以才厌恶剥削阶
级。但是如果马克思主义者看到他们的理论导致的悲剧性结果,
还执迷于其“理性”的剩余价值,历史唯物主义理论,这种理性和经验的冲突,本质
上已经发展为和其本原信仰的冲突了。对照《共产党宣言》的
内容,和共产主义的实践内容,足以论断共产主义运动早就违背了其自身的信仰,
其后任何的理论家,都不是在维持信仰,而是在维持功利,是为
谎言添砖加瓦的技术活罢了。用中国人的俗话来说,就是“歪理十八条”。:)

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages