靠！阿波，俺敢打赌，国人就是被这类水平的著作给残害的，当然帐也不能都算该书作者头上。照这种思路思考下去，几辈子都没法理解西方。国内汉译西方哲学名著，真正领悟了西方思想精髓的没超过个位数。

哈哈哈，哈哈哈……，哈哈哈，哈哈哈~~~！
我这挨千砖的追求低，又不琢磨啥淡艺术，有点非系统的就足够用了。
啥也不读了，就在那千砖堆里找一两块不带角儿的，往你脑瓜儿上扔~！

艺术家和科学家在他们各自的领域不断地开启着对世界的新认识，并以他们各自的方式表达着对世界的探索和理解，科学深化和丰富人类对人的世界和外在世界的知识，艺术不断地开辟我们观看和理解世界的新途径，拓展人类理解自身和理解世界的新视野。艺术家、哲学家和自然科学家所描述的图画，都能给人带来一种给人以慰籍的宁静和安全，或者用爱因斯坦的话说是一中“在家的感觉”。艺术家以一种富有魅力的表现形式描绘一种关于我们自身的情感图像，科学家用一种超越常识的理论描绘一种理解我们生存于其中的宇宙世界的理性图像。在某种非常深刻的意义上，科学的理论给予了人类生存的物质世界的理性可靠性感觉，艺术给予了人类内在存在的想象的、情感的和精神的依托。艺术与科学探讨的问题不同、表达的方式不同，建构的图像不同，然而，科学是一种智慧，艺术也是一种智慧，它们以不同的方式赋予人类一种深刻的“在家感”。

P19

在相当长的※※过程中，人们并不认为艺术中有真理，真理只属于科学或者哲学。退一步说，即便艺术追求和表达真理，那它所追求和表现的，也必定不是像科学那样的真理

P17

你这挨千砖的，读啥也没用，，，

就是这样粗暴对待像我这样好学的孩子的?

哈哈哈，哈哈哈……，你说就这样德行这样智力的……读啥，能有用？

回家问问※※

这句话是啥意思?
我很感兴趣.

故曰：至人无己，神人无功，圣人无名。      ---庄子“内篇”

从前，人们以正直高贵的态度鄙视从事金钱交易的商人，尽管他们也少不了这种人，承认每个社会都必须有自己的内脏。现在，商人是支配现代人类心灵的力量，成了现代人类最令人羡慕的一部分。

一位能支配自己的艺术家，即使他本无此意，他也会征服所有其他艺术家。只有对于他，这些被征服者，他的朋友和信徒们，才不会重新成为危险和羁绊；反之，性格怯弱的人一味依赖朋友，往往因为朋友而丧失自己的自由。

因为，在这个世界上无处容身，无家可归，却又必须向它说话，对它有所求，蔑视它却又不能缺少这被蔑视的世界，这样的生活当然充满痛苦和羞辱，---这是属于未来的艺术家的真正困境。

一般来说，艺术应该明丽温暖如太阳，以其光芒照亮卑微可怜者的心灵，融化求知者的自负。

天子的痛苦及其价值。----艺术天才愿给人快乐，但如果他站在一个很高的水平上，他就很容易曲高和寡；他端出了佳肴，可是人家不想品尝。这有时会使他产生可笑的伤感的激动；因为他根本无权强迫人家快乐。他的笛子吹起来了，可是没有人愿跳舞：这会是悲剧吗？---也许是吧。但作为对这种缺憾的补偿，比起别人在所有其他种类的活动中所具有的快乐，他毕竟在创造中有更多的快乐。

尼采如是说。摘自“尼采美学文选”周国平译。

可欲望性公理变式：真最终依赖于信念，甚至更终极地依赖于表达情感的态度。

只有美的艺术作品才是天才的作品，只有天才才能创作出美的艺术作品。天才具有科学家、理论家、手工艺人和普通的人所没有的创造性的想象力。科学家被实证的东西所束缚，理论家被概念的知识所规范，手工艺人被实用目的所限制，普通人被功利目的所钳制，这些人缺乏创造性的想象力。而天才的艺术家们则在想象力中把理解、理性、情感和谐地组织在一起，并创造出丰富的、深刻的、言有尽而意无穷的艺术作品。

P126

怎么进来都看不明白 ，都用英文讨论了 /呵呵 ！～～～～

快有十年没有买书读了.

山里的土鸡煲只要几十块钱,非常好吃.
还有野猪肉,也很好吃.
还有肉饼,也很好吃.
还有鱼头,也很好吃.
都很有营养.
口水别滴出来啊,哈哈

哈哈哈。5D不错啊，不用5D，450也行啊。

我去饭馆点了一个老鸡汤（我知道要达到老鸡汤的营养用一点蛋白粉加点维生素也行）

跑堂给端上来，我一唱味就不对，问他们方知是用一块鸡精调的。论营养确实可能跟老鸡汤差不多而且省事。但我花的是老鸡汤的钱啊，一块鸡精才几毛？明摆着骗人。

我认识的几个外国人不爱喝中国的汤，他们认为就是味精水，不理解什么是煲汤。

那是一本艺普读物，适合我这种初学者。哈哈。

睡前，

相关主题的

哈哈哈。

/showthread.php?threadid=683717

；－0

说说你那本《艺术让人成为人》吧

读书好啊。

好开端

网络的过度交流容易亏空大脑
阅读成了一种越来越难得的补养，尽管也带有快餐的特点，总能激起人对营养的追求

写这封信时还没有。有时我觉得，艺术上的狂热跟宗教的狂热离得不是太远，尽管两者不同。里尔克也无法完全摆脱宗教。

我今晚喝了不少scotch，加melot

明天再看!

钢管摁嘶要得

“Body am I, and soul”

Avator。might

You want to know whether I love you, so that everything can be cleared up once and for all. Isn't that what you you wrote to me yesterday? It is too big a question to be answered by a 'Yes' or a 'No'. Still, I will try to do that, so you'll no longer accuse me of always being evasive. I hope that today you'll at least be fair: you don't spoil me in that respect.
    For me, love is not and should not be in the foreground of life; it should remain in the back room. Other things in the soul take precedence over it - things which seem to me nearer the light, closer to the sun. So, if you look upon love as the main dish of existence, the answer is No. As a seasoning, Yes.
    If you mean by 'loving' to be exclusively preoccupied with the loved one, to live only through him, to see, of everything there is to see in the world, only him, to be full of the idea of him, to have your heart overflow with him, the way a little girl's apron is so full of flowers that they continually overflow even though she holds the corners in her mouth and squeezes it tightly with both hands - to feel, in a word, that your life is tied to his life and that this has become an integral organ of your soul - then, No.
    If you mean by 'loving' the desire to take, from this double contact, the foam that floats on the surface, without stirring the dregs that may be at the bottom; a union combining affection and pleasure; meetings filled with delight and partings free of despair (if the truth be known, even one kisses, in their coffins, those one has loved the best, one doesn't 'despair'); the ability to live without one another - since it is quite possible to live severed from everything one covets, orphaned of all one's loves, bereft of all one's dreams - yet when together experiencing moments of rapture that make you smile as though you were being tickled in some strange way; in short, the feeling that this happened because it was fated, and will end because everything must end (it being solemnly agreed, in advance, that neither will blame the other), and the determination, in the midst of this joy, to go on living as before, or perhaps a little better than before, with this additional resting-place for your heart when it is tired (not that it makes you feel any happier at facing the world each morning); - if you grant that it is possible to be in love and yet realize how immensely pitiful are the rewards of love as compared with the rewards of art, and feel an amused and bitter scorn for everything that drags you down to earth; - if you admit that it is possible to be in love and yet feel that a line of Theocritus is more intoxicating than your most precious memories, and feel too that you could easily make your sacrifices ( I mean of the things generally considered most precious: life, money) whereas small compromises are difficult - then: Yes.

                                    A Letter From Flaubert to Louise Colet

看来纹森特还是没完全摆脱宗教

人性，自然，及其社会属性

It is mad that success is supposed to be worth more than the beautiful possibility which was still there immediately before.

    Do we after all seek rest, peace and pleasure in our inquires? No, only truth - even if it be the most abhorrent and ugly.

    Here the ways of men part: if you wish to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be devotee of truth, then inquire...

    Live dangerously.

                              
    Thus speaks Nietzsche