|
哈佛大學神學院的傑出神學家哈維‧考可斯稱現代美國的精神狀況為：「我們正處於文化大混亂狀態，而這只是西方文明大規模地因拜金與崇尚權力而衰落之一環。我們眼見著人群社會被腐蝕，真知灼見不復出現於世。這種生活模式完全建立在金錢上，將人與物商品化的基礎上。簡單地說，整個文明都建立在一個概念上：貪欲。」
所以，年輕的亞裔美國人在努力融入社會，在一個自身充滿矛盾與不健康傾向的環境中為成功而奮鬥。此外，在對異性感受最強的發育階段，周遭的商業與廣告既刺激他們這些欲望，又使他們覺得自己要追求的就是這些成功、跟隨主流、地位、被接受的虛幻般的滿足。然後從父母與官方，他們卻聽到相反的聲音：克制與壓抑，愛滋病的恐怖等等。這又增加了一層壓力。
同樣令人感到矛盾的是對成功、興盛、發財、獲勝的強調。他們被灌輸要盡一切手段來達到目的。在遇到道德危機時，他們依何標準行事呢？我們告訴他們說「要切實際」；現實世界就是如此。同時，又告誡他們要有道德、善良、正直。沒人注意到，對孩子們而言，最令他們痛苦的就是在多數情況下、二者不可兼顧。同時要富有、成功、出名，還要善良，有道德是極為困難的。這在個別情形下或有可能，在多數情況下是無法做到的。他們依何行事呢？多數時候，他們被灌輸最深的價值觀行事：成功、適應、向上爬。
許多美國青年，尤其是亞裔青年，其困苦不是因為為人忽視、排擠，而是因為成功、陷入不知足的危機——使他們痛苦的，由於「過多」而不是「過少」。許多出於善意的父母不斷地逼迫孩子，卻未曾停下來想想自己是將相互矛盾的期望及價值觀灌輸給孩子，而引起對他們的壓力。
我想以對上述問題提出一些可能的解決辦法做為結論。湯馬斯‧何伯曾提到，只要不與人們的利益快樂相牴觸，人總是樂於傾聽的。我恐怕今天我自己違反了這個原則；我的話不一定與利益快樂相隨順，但無論如何是應講出來的。正如美國的古格言所說：「不能又想吃餅，又想保有餅。（又要馬兒好，又要馬兒不吃草。）」我們常常必須在成功與正義；富有與道德；成就與心安之間做抉擇。有時兩者可以得兼，但大多數情況下不行。因此我告訴學生孔子所說的：「德者本也；財者末也。」
因為以貪欲為生活的動力，是捨本逐末，會使整株生命之樹枯萎。至於根「本」，就是孔子所說的「仁」。
第二點。雖然人們可能會將它當成耳邊風，我還是相信教育的意義在於教化，並非只是訓練。孔子曾說：「君子不器。」君子並不是一種工具如電腦一樣。教孩子像電腦一樣一心想賺錢、求職，這是教而非教化，僅是訓練而已。我們不應將教育僅視為敲門磚——為謀取職業成功與物質利益的踏板。進一步講，適應，至多只能與該文化達到一致；如果社會文化和正道相牴觸，其結果就如亞洲的一句古語所料：「世間的成功，便是道業的失敗。」
好的教育應使學生能明辨善惡，而非跟著群眾走；使學生具智慧勇氣知所抉擇，而非附庸流俗；是促成其變，不是順從而是領導。否則，人類就注定會將眼前已造成的過失保留下去。
順便一提，我剛聽說生物科技已經能讓父母預先決定嬰兒的性別。在亞洲地區此項技術非常重要，從此很可能男性嬰兒的比例會佔很大優勢。更進一步，科學家預言將來父母不但能先決定嬰兒性別，而且還能預定其所有特徵。你要甚麼樣的孩子？要他溫順、聰明，GRE和SAT測試考高分？我最擔心的不是這項預言成真，而是那時父母就會利用此項技術來滿足個人私欲。我擔心，因為只有當孩子不是父母的複製品或幻想的模子時，我們才有未來可言；一旦生育中失去了或然的因素，我們就將在保留一個靜態的社會，眼前的過失會將保留到將來。
最後，情愛將有條件與無條件之分。如果你僅將自己的情感、讚許繫於孩子的學業等外在因素，而不顧其內在品格的話，你就打擊了他的自尊。並非每個人都要成為大學問家、富翁，作工程師，出名，當醫生。如果孩子心中的目標是他力所不及的，那時就會自暴自棄，而對自己失去信心。因為他們根本無法達到心中預定的目標，結果當然就自認是失敗者，自己不行。
這遠比失去自信心還要可怕，這是對其心靈的根本傷害，這也是我認為當前的問題所在。有問題的青年往往好敘說大人如何、環境如何，卻很少談及他們自己。至於對治方案，我想提一提兩千年前中國大社會哲學家孔子的話：「欲明明德於天下者，先治其國；欲治其國者，先齊其家；欲齊其家者，先修其身；欲修其身者，先正其心；欲正其心者，先誠其意；欲誠其意者，先致其知。」
在當前多元性文化高度複雜的社會中，有理性的人或許對人生真正的目標有著不同理解。但是我相信有理性的人都會同意，在當前這個社會，自殺為 15至25歲青年的第二大死因，這種現象距我們人生真正目標的距離一定是很遠的了！
多謝大家請我來，並耐心地聽我這些話。
全文完
|
|
A very prominent theologian, Harvey Cox, of the Harvard Divinity School, has defined the current spiritual state of America in these words:
We are in a large, cultural malaise (illness), part of a large-scale degeneration of Western civilization toward profit and power...a debilitation in which we see the erosion of human community and the evaporation of genuine experience. It is a way of life based on money; commodification of people and of things...in short, the organization of a whole civilization around one concept: greed.
Thus, young Asian-Americans find themselves trying to fit in and excel in an environment riddled with contradictions and unhealthy tendencies. Moreover, just as they enter the most sexually-charged period of their development, they are confronted with advertising and marketing that both stimulates those desires and equates their pursuit and illusory satisfaction with success, with fitting in, with status, with acceptance. Yet, from parents and officials, they get the opposite message: restraint, even repression, fear of AIDS, and so forth. Here is added another level of tension and stress.
Equally conflicting is the emphasis on success, prosperity, getting rich, winning—almost at any cost. They are told, be practical. They are told, do what you have to do to get by. When they face moral crises, by what criteria do they choose? "Well, the world is like that. Get real! Welcome to the real world," we tell them. At the same time, they are being exhorted, "Be virtuous; be good; be up-right in character." Nobody seems to be noticing what is most painfully obvious to the child: one cannot, most of the time, do both. It is extremely difficult to be rich, successful, and famous while at the same time being good, virtuous, and kind. In rare instances it can be done, but most of the time it cannot. By what determining factors will they make their choices? Most often their choices will be determined by the values that are most strongly instilled in them: success, fitting in, advancement.
Many American youths—and especially Asian American youths—are in trouble, not because of neglect or exclusion, but because of success and the danger of not knowing when to stop. They suffer from too much, rather than from too little. Many are pushed and pressured by well-meaning parents who themselves fail to pause and consider the often contradictory values and expectations they instill in their children.
In conclusion, may I suggest some possible answers to these problems. Thomas Hobbes once said something to the effect that people enjoy listening to anything that does not oppose their profit or pleasure. I am afraid that today I have not been following that maxim. My words today do not necessarily go along with the ideas of profit and pleasure. Nevertheless, these words need to be said. As the old American adage asserts: "You can't have your cake and eat it too." We often must make choices between success and integrity; between wealth and virtue; between achievement and contentment. Sometimes we can obtain both, but most oftentimes we cannot. This is what I tell my students. Even Confucius maintained:
Virtue is the root; wealth, the branches.
For greed to be our sole driving force in life is to neglect the root and cause the whole plant to wither. And that root, Confucius said, is
ren—human goodness; the innate human capacity for understanding and benevolence.
Second, though this may fall on many deaf ears, I believe that education is concerned with
transformation, and not merely training. Confucius had an expression:
jun zi bu qi, "the superior person is not a tool," like a computer. To teach children to be like computers, to focus and isolate on making money and a career, is to teach not for transformation, but for training. We cannot view education only—or even primarily—as a vocational stepping-stone to success and material gain. Moreover, fitting in is only as good as what you are fitting into. If the culture itself is in opposition to the Way, as they say in the Asian tradition—that is, to the better qualities of humanity—then success actually amounts to failure.
A good education would empower young people to discriminate between what is truly beneficial and what is not, rather than simply to follow the crowd. It would empower them to choose wisely and to have the courage and convictions not simply to accommodate, but to facilitate change; not simply to follow, but to lead. Otherwise, humankind is doomed to perpetuate the errors of the present.
As a side-note to this, I have just learned that biotechnology has gotten to the point that parents can predetermine the gender of their offspring. In the context of Asia, this becomes particularly important, because to begin with it is highly likely this situation will produce a predominance of Asian males. Moreover, scientists predict that, and this is only a question of time, not only will parents be able to predetermine the gender of their offspring, but they will be able to determine all the qualities as well. What kind of child would you like to have? Do you want your child to be very compliant, intelligent, able to score high on the GRE's and the SAT's? My greatest fear is not that this prediction will become a reality, but that parents will actually use such technology to fulfill their personal desires. I fear this because the only hope we have for the future is that children would not come out as carbon-copies of their parents nor as models of their parents' fantasy. Once we lose the indeterminant factor in procreation, we will perpetuate a static society, and the errors of the present will be perpetuated into the future.
Finally, there is conditional versus unconditional love and affection. If you tie affection, approval, acceptance, and respect to a child's academic performance and other extrinsic factors, rather than to the internal or intrinsic qualities of a child, you are undermining that child's self-respect. Not everyone is meant to be a great scholar, to be rich, to be an engineer, to be famous, or to be a doctor. If children internalize an image, a notion, or an ideal that they cannot really accomplish, then they can only end up hating themselves and not believing in themselves, because what is expected of them is impossible. As a result, their self image would be: "I've failed. I'm no good."
This is far more serious than merely a loss of self confidence. This is a fundamental injury to the spirit. And this is what I believe the issue is today. Troubled youth often tell us more about the adults and the society surrounding them, than they do about themselves. I come back to a formula proposed well over 2,000 years ago by Confucius, China's most preeminent social philosopher:
If one wishes to make the world better, one must first put in order one's own state. To straighten out one's own state, first one must attend to one's own family. To put one's own family in order, one must first cultivate one's own person. This self-cultivation means straightening out one's own
xin, "heart/mind." To do that, one must be sincere; one must probe to the very root of what it means to be a person.
In a highly sophisticated and pluralistic society such as ours, reasonable people might disagree as to what being a real person ultimately is. Nevertheless, I doubt that any reasonable person would disagree that in a society where the second leading cause of death among fifteen to twenty-five-year-old people is suicide, we are a long way from being there.
Thank you for your patience and for inviting me.
The End
|
