they were, in the course of a discussion, proving to be too reasonable and too logical.

因為他們在對話過程中過於理性與邏輯

We are used to thinking highly of reason and logic. We are not normally enemies of evidence

我們習慣推崇理智及邏輯 我們通常不會與證據及理性作對

and rationality. How then could these ingredients become problematic in the course of love?

那麼為何這些元素在愛裡卻變得有問題呢？

But from close up, considered with sufficient imagination, our suspicion can make a lot

但仔細一想，再加上足夠的想像， 我們的懷疑似乎合理許多

of sense. When we are in difficulties what we may primarily be seeking from our partners

當我們有困難時

is a sense that they understand what we are going through. We are not looking for answers

我們期待伴侶理解我們正經歷了什麼

(the problems may be too large for there to be any obvious ones) so much as comfort, reassurance

我們不是尋求理性的答案 （問題可能大到並非顯而易見）

and fellow-feeling. In the circumstances, the deployment of an overly logical stance

而是尋找安慰、再保證及同情

may come across not as an act of kindness, but as a species of disguised impatience.

在這些情況下，過於理性的態度 將不會被視為友善，而是包裝後的不耐

Let’s imagine someone who comes to their partner complaining of vertigo. The fear of

想像某人向他的伴侶說他感到眩暈

heights is usually manifestly unreasonable: the balcony obviously isn’t about to collapse,

懼高通常沒有明確的原因： 陽台並未即將塌陷、

there’s a strong iron balustrade between us and the abyss, the building has been repeatedly

鐵製的欄杆防止我們墜落、 建築結構已被專家反覆測試

tested by experts. We may know all this intellectually, but it does nothing to reduce our sickening

我們理智上理解前面所述， 但這並無法減緩我們的噁心及焦慮

anxiety in practice. If a partner were to patiently begin to explain the laws of physics

若伴侶開始解釋物理原則， 我們不會感激

to us, we wouldn’t be grateful: we would simply feel they were misunderstanding us. Much that troubles us has a structure akin

我們只覺得他們誤會了我們

to vertigo; our worry isn’t exactly reasonable but we’re unsettled all the same. We can,

許多困擾我們的事情就像因懼高產生的眩暈

for example, continue to feel guilty about letting down our parents, no matter how nice

我們的擔憂不見得「合理」， 但我們依然被困擾

to them we’ve actually been. Or we can feel very worried about money even if we’re objectively

我們可能持續因讓父母失望而感到罪惡， 不論實際上我們對父母有多好

economically quite safe. We can feel horrified by our own appearance even though no one else

我們可能擔心錢不夠， 即使客觀來說我們經濟無虞

judges our face or body harshly. Or we can be certain that we’re failures who’ve

我們可能害怕自己不夠好看， 即使沒有人嚴格看待自己的外表

messed up everything we’ve ever done – even if, in objective terms, we seem to be doing

我們可能覺得自己是搞砸一切的魯蛇， 即使實際上我們似乎做得挺不賴

pretty well. We can obsess that we’ve forgotten to pack something even though we’ve taken

我們可能一心想著打包時遺漏了什麼， 即使我們已經十分留意

a lot of care and can, in any case, buy almost everything at the other end. Or we may feel

而且萬一忘了，也能在目的地買到所需的物品

that our life will fall apart if we have to make a short speech even though thousands

又或是，需要進行演講時，我們覺得崩潰

of people make quite bad speeches every day and their lives continue as normal. When we

即使每天有數千人進行失敗的演講， 而他們依然生活如昔

recount our worries to our partner, we may receive a set of precisely delivered, unimpassioned

當我們將擔憂告訴伴侶時， 我們可能會獲得精確、不參雜感情、具邏輯的答案－

logical answers – we have been good to our parents, we have packed enough toothpaste

我們孝順父母、我們帶夠牙膏...等

etc. – answers that are both entirely true and yet unhelpful as well, and so in their

這些答案雖符合事實，但卻也毫無幫助 因此也莫名地使我們憤怒

own way enraging. It feels as if the excessive logic of the other has led them to look down

伴侶過度有邏輯使他們看似高高在上

on our concerns. Because, reasonably speaking, we shouldn’t have our fears or worries,

理智上我們不該有那些害怕與擔憂

the implication is that no sane person would have them; our partners make us feel a bit

因為任何理智的人都不應有那些情緒

mad. The one putting forward the ‘logical’ point of view shouldn’t be surprised by

其實「有邏輯」的一方 不該為我們不愉快的反應感到奇怪

the angry response they receive. They are forgetting how weird and beyond the ordinary

他們忘記人類情緒是多麼無常， 包括他們自己

rules of reason all human minds can be, their own included. The logic they are applying

他們所認為的「理所當然」其實未考慮到心理狀態

is really a species of brute common-sense that refuses the insights of psychology. Of

我們的心靈當然易受幻影、錯覺、 心理投射、神經質影響

course our minds are prey to fantasms, illusions, projections and neurotic terrors. Of course

我們當然會害怕那些不存在於「現實」的事物

we’re afraid of many things that don’t exist in the so-called real world. But such

但這些狀況並沒那麼「不理智」， 也值得以深度邏輯，加上情緒複雜性的考量

phenomena are not so much ‘illogical’ as deserving of the application of a deeper

我們對於自己外表是否有魅力的標準， 與我們實際看起來如何無關

logic based on a sympathy for the complexities of emotional life. Our sense of whether we’re

而可「邏輯 」地追溯至童年及重要他人對待我們的方式

attractive or not isn’t about what we actually look like, it follows a so-called logic that

害怕公開演講則是和 害怕與他人競爭、面對他人嫉妒情緒有關

goes back to childhood and how loved we were made to feel by those we depended on. The

過於邏輯及理智的回應方式便是無視這些情緒來源

fear of public speaking is bound up with long-buried and tortuous emotions of shame and a fear

卻集中在我們「不應該」有這些情緒

around competing and dealing with another’s envy.

在我們痛苦時，這種回應方式很令人惱火

An excessively logical approach to fears discounts

我們並不是要伴侶不理智

their origins and concentrates instead on why we shouldn’t have them: which is maddening

我們希望他們能將他們的理智轉化成安定的力量

when we are in pain. It’s not that we actually want our partner to stop being reasonable;

我們希望他們進入我們「奇怪」的情緒， 正如他們也有自己奇怪的情緒一樣

we want them to apply their intelligence to the task of reassurance. We want them to enter

我們希望當自己像是瘋掉的怪獸時能被理解

into the weirder bits of our own experience by remembering their own. We want to be understood

並且被安慰說：一切（大概）都會沒事的

for being the mad animals we all are, and then comforted and consoled that it will (probably)

話說回來，過於邏輯理性不見得是出自意外或愚蠢

all be OK anyway. Then again, it could be that the application of excessive logic isn’t

而有可能是報復的表現

an accident or form of stupidity. It may just be an act of revenge. Perhaps the partner

或許伴侶給予簡短理性的回答， 是因為他們先前的同理及同情白費了

is giving brief logical answers to our worries because their efforts to be more sympathetic

我們或許忽視了他們的需求

towards us in the past have gone nowhere. Perhaps we have neglected their needs. If

如果兩人都適度並有深度地具有邏輯理性－－ 也就是說真正意識到情緒複雜性

two people were being properly ‘logical’ in the deepest sense of the word – that

而不是環繞著「你為什麼在我痛苦的時候這麼理性？」 的話題爭吵

is, truly alive to all the complexities of emotional functioning – rather than squabbling

被「邏輯理性」對待的一方應該溫和地轉換方式並問： 「我是不是傷害或忽略你了？」

around the question of ‘Why are you being so rational when I’m in pain?’, the person

這，才是真正的邏輯理性

on the receiving end of superficial logic should gently change the subject and ask:

‘Is it possible I’ve hurt or been neglecting you?’ That would be real logic.

If you liked this film, download our app. Where you can view all our videos, read articles from The Book of Life and chat with other students of The School of Life.