Are We Would Prevent Become Puppet?
Who use the methods of archaeology to do their studies and then come to some interesting conclusions. For example, humans evolved from apes, or the earth had clear human activities 100,000 years ago, but why? So early human beings have no writing left? The only explanation people have is that people at that time were all animals and did not evolve to the level of language.
Based on the analysis and guesswork of physical materials. When a person picks a shell, he thinks that he has mastered the whole sea, because the information about the sea is hidden in the shell. This way of thinking is called empiricism in epistemological propositions. Science is on this path. Therefore, it cannot be said that these words are meaningless, but man is also a carrier of discourse. It is impossible to imagine that a cat without discourse ability will see the meaning of the sea in a shell.
Therefore, another important analysis method is the spiritual inheritance of human beings based on discourse.
Looking at the Bible, God revealed to mankind in words and texts, and nothing else. That is to say, all the codes of human civilization are in the ability of human beings to speak. If there is no corresponding content in the inheritance and evolution of words or things that cannot be described by words, human beings should learn to be silent. This was Wittgenstein’s wisdom, and he was right.
History that promises to describe our life 2 billion years ago is a little conjecture of beings shells. We can do it hardly.
Attempting to curiosity; trusting your guesses too much is conceited, even stupid.Curiosity should be the astonishment created by the Word of God. Yes, that’s it, when a man is faced with the creation of God’s word, we can’t do anything but stare blankly.
Statements relate to how we understand the meaning of time when we contemplate. To understand the meaning of time, you must first train yourself to understand history, because all historical and archaeological narratives are trying to pull us back to the past.
Sense of time we misunderstanding have been working this way for years. A problem in society living environment , It’s go back to history finding similar historical material. The method of scholars has never been in history, but in nature at this moment. Both the past and the future appear as the present, time in present, history is contemporary, different from way around. Just thinking about the present can be a person’s true the majority penetrating thinking. Knowing oneself life is always the greatest proposition.
The Trinity model of time looks so simple:
— past
— Now
— future
But we have to remember that among the three-dimensional time concept, the time concept with real transcendence is now. rather than past and future. If you don’t understand this, think about the meaning of the phrase “Immanuel”. God is with us. God is all the time, God is now. If you understand this, you won’t be as sad as Chen Ziang. You don’t see the ancients before and the newcomers later. This is the sadness after a serious error in the understanding of time. When the poet sings like this, he forgets himself, Or he could not understand how broad his imagination as a person was.
What I’m trying to say is that, for finite beings, when our imaginations are broad enough that our sense of time expands enough, our understanding of suffering is surprisingly updated. Let me be direct. Thinking about suffering is about the meaning of our lives. The reason why young literary and artistic people cry in the face of suffering, the biggest problem is that the imagination of time is not enough, and they blame God for ignoring the suffering of human beings, and they are helpless and helpless. This is a very superficial literary tone, and because the problem is pushed to God, the young literary and artistic people are very stupid and very short-sighted. It belongs to the ignorant act of burying oneself in advance with one’s tears.
When you see suffering lingering, you see a possibility, an opportunity, for your life and wisdom. But the premise is that you need to doubt your state of mind and knowledge at this moment and doubt your stupid literary accent at this moment.
There are at least four questions for us to think about:
The first is the order of free choice. Man is the carrier of a complex soul, so man must have both the right to choose happiness and the right to choose to suffer. If there is no suffering in this world, it means that people lose the right to choose freely. It is inconceivable that on the one hand, it means that the world does not exist, and on the other hand it means that man is a machine, a puppet.
The second is the meaning of human existence in the ethical sense. On the first point, man is a man of free action. A person who has free behavior is naturally in the “order of reward and punishment” in the ethical sense. When a person performs a righteous act, that person has the reward of happiness; when a person performs an evil act, the person has the punishment of suffering. This order of “deserving rewards and punishments” is evenly distributed in human society and constitutes the greatest ethical balance in human society. That is to say, if there is no suffering in this world, the “deserving order of rewards and punishments” will lose its balance, which also means that the world does not exist, and it also means that people are already machines and puppets.
The third is the value of suffering. Everyone can understand this. For example, the wisdom at the market level has always emphasized that people should endure more hardships when they are young. For example, the education of children should be strict rather than indulgent. That’s what Jeremiah said in his confession, “What a blessing it is for a man to bear the burdens in his youth.” The suffering that no other nation has endured makes the Israelites very wise and very tenacious. Because European artists have understood the spirit of tragedy since childhood, the tragic texts they present in various arts show a great profoundness in the aesthetic affairs of human society. Adam Smith believed that considering that God is all-powerful and all-good, God can’t ignore the suffering of this world, so for humans, it means that God allows suffering to happen in this world, it must be for the sake of this world’s more prosperity. So, those who try to push suffering away, and never even think about it, either do not understand the world at all or are some machines, some puppets.
The fourth is thinking about the meaning of death. Death is the greatest suffering in life. But through death, those who believe in God move toward resurrection, toward eternity. So Tolkien said that death is God’s greatest gift to mankind and the best gift. If a person believes in the resurrection on the proposition of death, it means that human life has acquired eternal meaning. Conversely, if a person does not believe in resurrection, then one has not understood the world, the purpose of life, a person who flashes into this world and then disappears, his meaning is the meaning of a machine, the meaning of a puppet. significance.
If a person does not believe in resurrection, then he does have a reason to cry, and crying and gnashing of teeth is the greatest cause of literary youth. You can say that your cries and laments are art and good art, but the great artists of this world don’t understand that. In this sense, I firmly believe that there are no real literary works in the Chinese world, and our so-called literary tradition is either the grumbling after the officialdom is frustrated or the self-praise amid the accumulated suffering.
In the process of translating the Bible recently, I found a sentence that moved me the most, 2 Corinthians (7.10): “For a godly sorrow, through the work of repentance, leads to redemption, not just a Remorse. But the sorrow of the world does the thing of death.”
What I want to say is, that I think of the weeping words of the past, the sad and pitiful poems I have read, and the sentences written by the literati in the Chinese world with their closed and angry lips, due to the lack of an ultimate look-up, so they are all death-related wails, meaningless, and misleading. However, to gain the praise of the world and to have meaning for themselves, the literati even put the labels of sadness, grief, resistance, bravery, anger, and even justice on themselves.
This implies a major fact that Chinese literati have not even figured out what the spirit of tragedy is. The vast majority of literati are in two emotions. The first is that they are not able to become emperors and teachers, and they have the anger of underappreciating their talents; the second is to pretend to live in Taohuayuan and see Nanshan leisurely. If there is a third type, it should be a comparison between literati. You say I am too bad, and I say you are not getting started.
So I want to say that a young literary and artistic youth is always crying. This is not God’s will, but the most wrong free choice made by people in a state of ignorance. Death is the middle station in life, not the final funeral. This is what Dante said. Death is not the end, not the end, death is the beginning of life. This is what Elliott said.
Musically, Mozart or Brahms’ Requiems are always dedicated to those who are alive. It is common sense to remember that dead people cannot hear the music because they are already dead. Only those who are eternal, those who have risen from the dead, can understand the meaning of the Requiem.
Real thinking will be involved in a huge intellectual history, but many people, especially many Chinese and many people in the modern sense have never thought deeply. This is also the life of a puppet. Considering that death is the greatest suffering in life, we can summarize “the value of suffering” and “the meaning of death” into one proposition, that is, the “death meaning proposition”. Then, thinking about the proposition of suffering is presented as a complex and simple Trinity model:
- people’s right to free choice
- the ethical order of man
- the meaning of death
Who exists should spend his whole life thinking about these three propositions at the same time, holding on to his free value, his ethical meaning, and his imagining of death, and understand these three issues as a “synthetic” problem. title”.
