最高相似度示例 · 非人工确认结果
目标片段拥有这种想法的人，我们通常会以为他们一定是反对普世的民族主义者，他们一定不相信人性中有可能存在任何普世的共性。我觉得这个观点是完全错误的。我们可以很谨慎的说，不同民族因为历史语言、文化传统的不同，导致很多具有普遍性的问题上，是不能够一概而论的。但是这并不意味着对于一些最深刻的崇高的对于伟大的渴望之上之间是没有共性的。我觉得朵斯特耶夫斯基就是一个同意我刚才这句话的人，我们去看他的所有作品，他的每一个角色不会让你觉得这是一个法国人，
来源片段had the same standard of living as the average American, we know that the carrying capacity of the earth would be completely overwhelmed and it's unsustainable. And yet we're promoting all around the world this idea that our average standard of life in America is universalizable. Well, I'm sorry. It takes a philosopher. It doesn't take a philosopher, but a philosopher could certainly add some authority to saying that you cannot universalize something like that because we just know what the limits are, materially speaking. I don't disagree with what you say.
查看片段位置
8 个展示片段 · 共 9 个展示片段（含上方示例）— 点击展开
S1：4 个窗口回退
来源片段
He's an observer of humankind, granted humankind in a very particular social milieu. And humankind within a certain nationality and within a certain language of culture. So this is, you know, he's making observations specifically about upper class France. But nevertheless, he seems to have possessed a mind that allowed him to abstract certain general ideas about people and more specifically about the way that people think and the way that people think about themselves by watching them and interacting with them and conversing with them.
目标片段
至少当我们指着一个人说，你是一个知识分子的时候，哪怕他对于当今的文化政治没有影响他的愿望，也应该是他希望他可以影响到他所在社会的文化和政治。所以下面这个问题很有意思，那就是知识分子作为一股文化社会力量，它是在何时出现在人类历史上的对吧？并不是每一个人类社会在每一个历史节点都有知识分子这个概念。儒家社会的士大夫不是严格意义上的知识分子。欧洲传统大学的教授剑桥牛津、意大利那种中世纪就已经建立的以研究神学为主要目的的大学。这里面的教授也不是知识分子。德国的教育家洪宝建立的第一所现代德国研究型大学洪宝大学里面雇佣的黑格尔，这种教授也不是严格意义上的知识分子。
来源片段
The key point really is that the similarity in the way Nietzsche thinks about human psychology to La Roche-Foucault and how the Maxims helped shape the way he approached the human psyche. So while we've already said that Roche-Foucault thinks self-love is the real motive, but we often like to conceal this motive from ourselves and imagine something virtuous instead, what we have in that explanation is something very fascinating. There's something that's implied by that sort of view of human nature. Because that explanation demands that we entertain the idea that people are strangers to themselves, which is to say that we don't understand our own motives, which is a very frightening thought.
目标片段
朵斯托耶夫斯基不否认人性？很多人性问题在每一个社会都具有共性？不然的话，为什么我们在一百多年之后读他小说里的罪犯他小说角色中对于人性沉沦的和救赎的纠结，我们仍然能够感同身受呢？所以他不否认这个共性。与此同时，他严厉的批评那些试图为全人类创造一些他们想象中的普遍理想性格的知识分子，他们崇拜的是自己的理性，而不是人类的理性。在他的眼中，在朵斯托耶夫斯基的眼中，俄罗斯人拥有一些自己独特的民族精神。
来源片段
So while we've already said that Roche-Foucault thinks self-love is the real motive, but we often like to conceal this motive from ourselves and imagine something virtuous instead, what we have in that explanation is something very fascinating. There's something that's implied by that sort of view of human nature. Because that explanation demands that we entertain the idea that people are strangers to themselves, which is to say that we don't understand our own motives, which is a very frightening thought. And as much as that might be old hat now, we've had a century or more of the psychoanalytic tradition to cook up hypotheses about the subconscious or the ego and the id or the collective unconscious, all of that.
目标片段
他们无法理解伟大，比他们更进一步的后来出现的后现代主义看似瓦解了理性对于美的束缚，但是他们也连理性也不愿意承认了他们定义中的美，同样失去了普世的道德维度和精神维度。他们也无法理解伟大。我觉得我们有一种很普遍的误解，让我现在退一步用我自己的声音来说，我们会觉得批判抽象理论的人。比如说上一段那些认为，俄罗斯知识分子不应该在俄罗斯语境中强制引入先进的西方普世问题的人，拥有这种想法的人，我们通常会以为他们一定是反对普世的民族主义者，他们一定不相信人性中有可能存在任何普世的共性。
来源片段
So the sexplanation that self-love is the true cause of human behavior, but that we are able to somehow deceive ourselves as to the cause of our own behavior. This sort of flies in the face of that clean delineation between good and evil, or between God's grace and man's sinfulness, or however the conflict has been defined throughout the history of the world. And so this little notion ends up being the first step on the road leading to the creation of the discipline of psychology. And by that same token, the maxims of Rosh Foucault threaten the moral narrative.
目标片段
主张人是由生理结构和环境决定的，这也是一种科学主义思想，对吧？人的行为可以被描绘成对于外界刺激的反应，人类只是寻求快乐，避免痛苦的动物。所以，人的行为是受到不同外界刺激影响产生的结果。这种观念带来了决定论，将不再认为人本质上能够为自己的行为背负什么道德责任？犯罪只是由物质、贫困、社会不公平以及制度压迫带来的后果。哲学唯物主义这个世界观。
来源片段
When you go in for either religion or philosophy, that interest may survive or it may be eclipsed by other things, but it's not a problem that all human beings necessarily have and the people who never experienced it are not subhuman or clods, they're just people with different tastes. Yeah, no, I can understand that, but as Vicenstein says in the philosophical investigations, the world of the happy is not the world of the unhappy and the world of the happy is alive and well and when one looks at human cultures historically, globally speaking, it seems that there's hardly one on earth that has not had a religion of sorts.
目标片段
对于文化，对于哲学、对于艺术的批评，他认为，这种世界观源自西方的知识传统，没有考虑到复杂的混乱的现实，甚至拒绝去考虑现实的复杂和混乱，从而对这个现实提出一些理论上的批评，因为现实永远不可能符合整洁的知识体系，甚至也在短期内可能不符合人性的需求。
来源片段
People in El Salvador and Chile, for example, meant at the moment in Iraq. That's the way some people hated Russian communism and Poland, Hungary, Romania, and so on. If the Russians had always been good guys and if the Americans had always been good guys, the funniest entry would have gone very differently. And we wouldn't have nuclear weapons to worry about anymore. Is capitalism for you a neutral phenomenon, morally speaking? Or is it a do you take it to be the most efficient way of maximizing economic wealth, even though it's badly distributed in capitalism?
目标片段
在他眼中，你永远没有办法把俄罗斯人变成英国人，变成法国人，变成德国人，俄罗斯社会可以变成变得更好。但是俄罗斯社会不可能变成英国社会而天真的信奉西方激进理论的很多知识分子想让俄罗斯社会变得更好，更公平、更自由，在他们眼中能够达到这种目的就是一件好事。如果能够达到这种目的，他们不在乎俄罗斯人是否仍然还是俄罗斯人？我们且不说这种不在乎是否危险，这种不在乎，哪怕它不危险，它也是愚昧的。
S3：2 个窗口回退
来源片段
When we use reason to arrive at knowledge it's not indiscriminate, it is by its very nature anthropocentric and humanistic. It's always us trying to understand nature so that we can control it and use it to our benefit. But here's the thing, human beings are also a part of nature. And there are no way exempt from this process of using reason to try to understand them better so that we can control them. And this has been a good thing historically speaking. When John Jacque Rousseau makes the claim that the true nature of human beings is to be noble savages that are then corrupted by certain aspects of civilization. That is him using reason to arrive at an understanding about human beings so that he can build his political philosophy on top of it and arrive at a system of government that yes controls human beings in some ways, but benefits everyone overall.
目标片段
朵斯托耶夫斯基不否认人性？很多人性问题在每一个社会都具有共性？不然的话，为什么我们在一百多年之后读他小说里的罪犯他小说角色中对于人性沉沦的和救赎的纠结，我们仍然能够感同身受呢？所以他不否认这个共性。与此同时，他严厉的批评那些试图为全人类创造一些他们想象中的普遍理想性格的知识分子，他们崇拜的是自己的理性，而不是人类的理性。在他的眼中，在朵斯托耶夫斯基的眼中，俄罗斯人拥有一些自己独特的民族精神。
来源片段
This is the explanation for how it was possible for the world to be technologically and culturally more advanced than we'd ever been in human history, only to devolve into the most inhuman crisis in history in World War II. That the natural in-game of enlightenment-style, reason-based thinking is fascism. The more enlightened of a person that you become, the more you use reason to ground your beliefs in things, the less you believe in a cosmically determined way that human beings must behave. This is nothing new, God is dead, right? In a post-enlightenment world, this world where there are no moral substrates and people have a tendency to harness control over nature in a way that benefits them, all it takes is one Adolf Hitler, one person that had a bad childhood and never went to therapy that likes the idea of people chanting their name and giant posters of their face and controlling people, all it takes is one of those for fascism to potentially emerge.
目标片段
我们且不说这种不在乎是否危险，这种不在乎，哪怕它不危险，它也是愚昧的。因为任何一个智慧的现代哲学家都意识到，孟德斯、丘卢梭、黑格尔尼采这些南辕北辙的政治思想，完全不同的哲学家都意识到了一个地方的国家，一个国家的文明历史语言、气候环境会在人性上造成对一个民族不可磨灭的影响，会在人性之上形成属于民族的人性，会在nature之上形成second nature,而这种属于民族的人性，它在最高层面的意义上不是排外的最高层面的意义上不是狭隘的排外，而是甚至是可以是一种普遍性。