马骝：一滩稀泥（续）

上次说想好了一个题目叫“一滩稀泥”，为啥叫稀泥而不叫黏泥呢，那是因为稀泥糊不上墙，比较符合我尽量不上雷达视频的性格，而黏泥捣匀后倒进模子里能成型，再加上合适温度焙烧能成砖。砖，很坚硬，能砌成长城，能结成大厦，但是，泥成了砖之后就不能再回到泥了。我一不想被成型，二不想被焙烧而变硬，所以我选择了稀泥，再所以，有心成砖的朋友可以就此打住，因为下文基本只说泥不说砖。

记得N年前我就在小站说过我推崇这样的说法：道德是用来约束自己而不是指责他人的。其实这不是我的原创，而是源于老祖宗。古人言：礼义廉耻，可以律己，不可以绳人。律己则寡过，绳人则寡合，寡合则非涉世之道。故君子责己，小人责人。换成今天的话就是“礼义廉耻，可以用来要求自己，不可用来要求别人。要求自己则能少犯过失，要求别人则难以与人和睦相处，难以与他人相处就不合乎处世之道。所以君子只严格要求自己，小人则对别人求全责备。”（见中国古典文著《小窗幽记》）

听起来很老奸巨猾，很没底线，很酱缸，我觉得也是，鼓吹不分是非嘛。不过再想想，除开法律定义了的什么可干什么不可干之外，这些是是非非其实蛮主观的。每个人都有自己的行为准则和思想追求，甚至可以认为自己的思想更接近真理而希望得到他人认同，这些都很自然。问题在于如何对待于己不同的思想追求，这个就很值得商榷。如果老祖宗的东西腐朽味太重的话，这里我引用几段普利斯顿大学哲学教授 Kwame Anthony Appiah 在一次电台访谈时的发言。在“to be living by standards that you believe in.”这个话题时，Mr. Appiah说道：“Forcing people to do what you think is the right thing when they don't is a kind of violation, and that means that the way you have to deal with people with whom you disagree about what's right and wrong is to try and persuade them unless they pose a threat. I mean, a threat of harm to somebody when obviously you have to stop people who pose direct threats of harm, but that's also part of the liberal tradition, the thought that the state is entitled to protect people from harm from other people, but it isn't entitled to enforce a view about all these central being questions. We don't want a state that tells us what the right answer is to the question of what God is like. We want a state that has some, you know, respect for our conscience that thinks that it matters whether people are living by the standards they believe in. That means that agreement is fine, but it matters how you get it.”接着他还说：“We have to respect one another, and respecting one another means understanding that people can conscientiously come to a different view.”

当然人们会说“我有什么能力强迫他接受我的观点，我只是觉得说轻了他是糊涂，说重了他是故意来挑衅良知。”

朋友，其实我并不反对所谓的思想碰撞，我反对的只是那种认为“我的思想比你高明，因而如果你不同意我，你的认知或道德一定有问题”的态度。一旦你被这种想法主导，你就很容易从传播你的想法转换成贬损你的对手，而这种做法我认为除了增加一个社区内部的对立之外对为广泛争取你的思想同行者并无帮助。

Mr. Appiah 在那个访谈节目最后这样说道：“Look, one of the great privileges of a free society is that you don't have to spend all your time thinking about the government. So you can easily have a life in which you do almost nothing except vote to participate in the life of the republic. I understand why that is, but if we were to spend more of our time on the life of the republic not directly, you know, by focusing on having more and more political conversations in town halls and some, but by getting together with people in our communities and talking about these things in a way that brought us to a deeper understanding of each other, that would be well worth it, I think. And the republic would work better because you would be thinking about Joe and Mary and not about conservative Republicans or liberal Democrats and you would know that you knew some awfully nice people who were, for some bizarre reason, not convinced that you are completely correct about every political question.”

我很赞赏Mr. Appiah的这种包容态度。说到底，我们大多生活在民主社会多年，我们也应该有这种胸怀，大家交谈的时候能视对方为张三李四而不是五毛奴才民运带路党。

随带把那个访谈节目的拎客放在这，感兴趣者可以选择听录音（点击右侧的RadioShow/Podcast）或scroll down读文字摘要。

http://www.onbeing.org/program/sidling-difference/transcript/2369

这是我稀泥论的一个泡，谢谢你的阅读。