評(píng)論
打印
And that's not so bad. Embedded in all of the major religions are profound truths. Schopenhauer, who despised belief in transcendent things, nonetheless thought Christianity to be of inexpressible worth. He couldn't believe in the divinity of Jesus, or in the afterlife, but to Schopenhauer, a religion that had as its central emblem the figure of a man being tortured on a cross couldn't be entirely misleading.
而這樣并沒(méi)有壞處，各大宗教都蘊(yùn)含著深刻的真理。叔本華雖然不相信超然事物，卻承認(rèn)基督教有著道不明的價(jià)值。他不相信耶穌的神性，也不相信來(lái)生，但是叔本華認(rèn)為以一位男性形象釘在十字架上受難為中心標(biāo)志的宗教不會(huì)是完全誤導(dǎo)性的。
One does not need to be a Schopenhauer to understand the use of religion, even if one does not believe in an otherworldly god. And all of those teachers and counselors and friends—and the uncles and aunts, the fathers and mothers with their hopes for your fulfillment—or their fulfillment in you—should not necessarily be cast aside or ignored. Families have their wisdom.
—個(gè)人就算不相信超俗的神明，也不需要像叔本華耶樣犀利地明白宗教的用途。所有的那些老師、輔導(dǎo)員和朋友——以及(樂(lè)于預(yù)言的)叔叔和（猶豫不決的）嬸嬸，那些（抱著熱切期望的）父母?jìng)儯Ｍ銈兡軐?shí)現(xiàn)自己的理想，或者希望你們能為他們實(shí)現(xiàn)當(dāng)初沒(méi)能實(shí)現(xiàn)的理想——沒(méi)有必要對(duì)他們的想法棄之不顧或是置之不理。家族有家族的智慧。
The major conservative thinkers have always been very serious about what goes by the name of common sense. Edmund Burke saw common sense as a loosely made, but often profound, collective work in which humanity has deposited its hard-earned wisdom—the precipitate of joy and tears—over time. You have been raised in proximity to common sense, if you've been raised at all, and common sense is something to respect, though not quite—peace unto the formidable Burke—to revere.
大保守思想家對(duì)什么是常識(shí)總是非常嚴(yán)肅。埃德蒙·伯克認(rèn)為常識(shí)是松散的，但常是深刻的群體性成果，是隨著時(shí)間推移人類(lèi)得來(lái)不易的智慧——?dú)g樂(lè)與淚水——的沉淀。如果你們受到過(guò)家庭教育，這些教育相當(dāng)于常識(shí)教育，常識(shí)是一種應(yīng)該尊重的東西，不過(guò)不該向它頂禮膜拜。
You may be all that the good people who raised you say you are; you may want all they have shown you is worth wanting; you may be someone who is truly your father's son or your mother's daughter. But then again, you may not be.
你們可能會(huì)成為撫養(yǎng)你們長(zhǎng)大的好人們所期望的那種人；你們可能追求所有他們告訴你們值得追求的東西；你們可能成為真正的父親的好兒子或是母親的好女兒。不過(guò)，話說(shuō)回來(lái)，你們可能并不會(huì)。
For the power that is in you, as Emerson suggested, may be new in nature. You may not be the person that your parents take you to be. And—this thought is both more exciting and more dangerous—you may not be the person that you take yourself to be, either. You may not have read yourself right, and college is the place where you can find out whether you have or not. The reason to read Blake and Dickinson and Freud and Dickens is not to become more cultivated, or more articulate, or to be someone who, at a cocktail party, is never embarrassed (or who can embarrass others). The best reason to read them is to see if they may know you better than you know yourself. You may find your own suppressed and rejected thoughts flowing back to you with an "alienated majesty." Reading the great writers, you may have the experience that Longinus associated with the sublime: You feel that you have actually created the text yourself. For somehow your predecessors are more yourself than you are.
正如愛(ài)默生所說(shuō)，你們所擁有的力量可能本質(zhì)上是全新的，你們可能不會(huì)成為父母眼中的樣子， 而且——另外一個(gè)想法更加刺激也更加危險(xiǎn)——那就是你們也可能不會(huì)成為自己眼中的自己。你們可能并不了解自己，而大學(xué)就是你們正確解讀自己的地方。閱讀布萊克、狄金森、弗洛伊德和狄更斯的作品不是為了更加有文化，也不是為了更加有口才，不是為了成為那個(gè)在雞尾酒會(huì)上從不難堪的人(或讓別人難堪的人）。閱讀他們的作品最好的理由是看看他們是否比你們更了解你們自己。你們可能會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)自己曾遭到壓制和排斥的思想現(xiàn)在有點(diǎn)像“遭貶國(guó)王”那樣莊嚴(yán)回朝。閱讀偉大作家的作品可以讓你們體驗(yàn)宏偉壯麗的朗基努斯神跡：你們會(huì)覺(jué)得真正創(chuàng)造文本的人是你們自己，不知為何，前人比你們更像你們自己。
