阅读习惯决定我们是一种什么样的人？阅读使我们成为象尼采那样的人？
发布时间：2008-09-21 12:14
分类名称：默认分类
分类名称：默认分类
是读好书就可以来治人治国呢？还是我越多读书，我越无法来做人上人，做导师，做深刻的思想者了？阅读使我们成为象尼采那样的人？阅读是狄奥尼索式的行为？阅读通向疯狂？
欧洲现代启蒙传到了中国，科学式理性成为一种追求目标，结果就是钱学森因为会造原子弹，所以，他一定也是水稻技术权威了。我们在大学里，到底是去求用还是求是？还是去做尼采？
阅读是是去追求那一种终极理性的手段？教材叠在一起，不是科学解决的阶梯？
但罗蒂说，阅读实际上不是帮我们去找到一种能判断一切的标准，也不是带着一种严格的判断标准去读一切，而是使我们入野！让我们at large！我们读我们冒着险去读的东西，是象教徒冒着险地读那些文本一样地热心沸腾：But to say that the novels are morally rather than, or as well as, aesthetically important seems to leave something out. What it leaves out, I have suggested, is the sense of exaltation that readers of these novels share with religious people who come away from reading devotional literature with a sense of having visited a better world. This sense of exaltation is not the same thing as being bowled over by the sheer rhetorical or poetic power of one’s favorite passages. Such passages play the role that their favorite passages in sacred scripture play for the religious. They become mantras, and reciting them brings very present help in time of trouble. Thus secular Russian intellectuals, en route to the Gulag, exchanged quotations from Pushkin and Byron, or sang Mozart arias, in order to remind themselves that cold and hunger and wretchedness were not all there was to human life. The religious intellectuals at the other end of the same freight car were fulfilling the same need by reciting their favorite psalms. The sense of exaltation I am trying to describe is, instead, a result of reading books as wholes, of following plots through to the end, rather than with being rendered momentarily delirious by a startling poetic figure, a perfectly crafted couplet, or a splendidly balanced antithesis。
所以，照着罗蒂的说法推，阅读终究是一种自我打败的游戏（self-defeatism）？爱因斯坦越多阅读，就越不对自己的相对论有把握，如果他还是一个有自我改造和自我克服可能的人？我们越多读，就越对我们习惯的那些观念的机构有或没有信心。阅读是在发动我们自己，是我们在创造性地自我克服？
照我们读到的东西去生活是错误的，我们的阅读不应该去指导我们的生活。但你去看看，我们的中产阶级世界里，到处都是说教，也就是说，人人都拿着一本书，点着告诉你，该怎样生活才舒适甚至幸福。你读了报纸和媒体来过生活。说教进入我们的日常生活，而原来，我们以为只要不理教士和大学辅导员那样的马克思主义老太太就可以的。
所以，可以说阅读就是为了反对说教，你被周围的那些照着书本来说教的人弄烦了，你才去阅读的！结果，你冒险是为了不冒险，你阅读是为了将你自己放进更漂亮的金丝笼里！
思想因其颠狂因其职业化而成为哲学。我们不是读哲学而让我们去思想，相反，我们是怕我们身上的那种象汉语资质那样的哲学能力的衰退和阻塞，才去阅读，来锻炼它。阅读这种精神练习，本身是为了操练我们的这种哲学能力，而不是我们要在阅读中找到评判所有的书和我们的文化传统的标准，来规范我们的哲学能力！这是象老鼠晚上要乱咬东西来磨牙那样的事情！评判我们的阅读的标准也是在阅读中去寻找到，次次都要推翻重来的！
以道德、宗教、科学和哲学的标的来要求我们的阅读的人，和想通过阅读来冲破道德、宗教和科学和哲学对于我们的束缚的人（The person who hopes to render more confident moral judgments as a result of the study of religious or philosophical treatises is usually hoping to find a principle that will permit of application to concrete cases, for an algorithm that will resolve moral dilemmas. But the person who hopes for greater sensitivity just wants to develop the know-how that will let him make the best of what is always likely to be a pretty bad job—a situation in which people are likely to get hurt, no matter what decision is taken. 《詹姆士和普鲁斯特作为精神练习》），两路大军都潜伏在大学里。这种阅读政治在中国大学里总有一天会象在美国大学里那样你死我活起来。
回顾里，我们看到，一边是鲁迅式的捂着鼻子的猛读传统，周作人的对一切文本写读后感，和陈寅恪的石油勘探式的读历史，一边是顾准式王元化式的找真理找标准找根据地式的李大钊式的扑向式、然后一声炮响被送到的阅读集装箱。我们的传统里真的允许一个人读到癫狂？经学，注经，假斯特劳斯分子的B读柏拉图，海德格尔德里达专家一大堆，我们还没怎么革命性的解放式的阅读，这些捞什子倒先已经不少了！
什么时候我们会不见到阅读这事上有这么多势利小人？阅读什么时候在中国真的成为自我解放自我克服的途径？
