Squarespace: share your passion with the world.

Squarespace：分享你的熱情給全世界。

What gives your life meaning? God? Love? Money? Work?

你的生命因什麼而有意義？上帝？愛情？金錢？工作？

Fanfiction? Football? Shopping? Sherlock?

同人誌？足球？購物？還是福爾福斯？

You might have your own personal sense of purpose in your life,

你對於自己生命的意義應該有自己的想法，

or maybe you’re hoping this course will help you find one.

或者你正期待這門課可以幫助你找到一個人生目的。

Or you might believe that you were created with a certain essence as a human being, with a purpose given to you by God.

又或者，你相信你生來就被賦予某個作為人類的本質，也就是上帝已給你一個目的。

Whatever the case is, no one would fault you for wanting your life to have meaning.

不論情況如何，沒有人可以責備你想要自己的人生有意義。

A sense of meaning is something that we all crave – maybe even need.

每個人都在追求，或甚至需要人生有意義。

And as we move out of our unit on the philosophy of religion,

隨著宗教哲學的單元結束，

we should spend some time talking about how we understand our lives as being meaningful.

我們也應該花點時間談談我們如何認定自己的生命是有意義的。

Because when you think about it, a lot of us devote a ton of energy to the task of finding meaning in our lives.

因為當你細想，許多人花費大量的精力去尋找人生的意義。

Maybe you find it through religion, or by fighting for social justice, or educating others, or seeking beauty in artistic expression.

你可能透過宗教、藉由捍衛社會正義、教育他人，或憑藉藝術性的方式來尋找美，去挖掘人生的意義。

No matter how you do it, there’s a group of philosophers, the existentialists,

無論你怎麼探索，那裡有一群哲學家，也就是存在主義者，

who say that any, or all, of these things can give your life meaning.

他們認為任何，或所有這些東西，都可以給你的人生意義。

But at the same time, they say: None of them can.

但同時，他們聲稱，沒有東西可以。

As you know by now, philosophy is about the dialectic:

你現在大概知道了，哲學就是一個辯證的過程：

Someone puts forth an idea, and then someone else responds to it.

某人提出一個概念，然後另一個人回應。

Sometimes, the response comes right away. In other cases, it takes thousands of years.

有時候，回應很快就出現了；在其他情況下，這需要耗費幾千年的時間。

Way back in ancient Greece, Plato and Aristotle took it as given that everything has an essence

追溯到古希臘，柏拉圖和亞里斯多德理所當然地認為凡事都存在「本質」，

– a certain set of core properties that are necessary, or essential – for a thing to be what it is.

所謂本質，指的是「一套必要或重要的核心概念，使某物得以成為某物」。

If those properties were missing, then that thing would be a different thing.

如果缺乏這些要素，這東西可能就變成其他東西了。

For instance, a knife could have a wooden handle or a metal handle – it really doesn’t matter.

舉例來說，一把刀可能有木製的刀柄或鐵製的刀柄，但這其實不重要。

But if it didn’t have a blade, it wouldn’t really be a knife anymore.

但如果一把刀沒有刀鋒，它就不是一把刀了。

The blade is the essential property of the knife, because it gives the knife its defining function.

因此，刀鋒是一把刀的重要元素，因為它賦予了刀子最重要的功能。

Now, Plato and Aristotle thought that everything has an essence – including us.

柏拉圖和亞里斯多德認為凡事都存在本質，當然也包括人類。

And they believed that our essences exist in us before we’re even born.

同時，他們也相信我們的本質早在出生前就存在了。

So by this thinking, part of what it means to be a good human is to adhere to your essence.

所以按照他們的邏輯，要做一個好人的方法，就是遵從你的本質。

Now, you may or may not know what your essence is,

你不一定知道你的本質是什麼，

and you might be great at living up to your essence, or you may be awful at it.

你可能很擅長依循自己的本質而生活，或你可能做得很糟。

But the important thing is that your essence gives you a purpose.

但重要的事情是，你的本質給了你一個目的。

Because you were born to be a certain thing.

因為你是生來要成為某個東西的。

This belief, known as essentialism, was the standard view of the universe all the way up until the late 19th century,

這樣的概念被稱為本質論，在 19 世紀末期以前，人們都是這樣看待世界的，

and it’s still accepted by many people today.

而且現在許多人也如此相信著。

But in the late 1800s, some thinkers started to challenge the idea that we are imbued with any essence or purpose.

但在 1800 年代晚期，「人類生來就擁有本質或目的」的看法受到一些思想家的挑戰。

German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, for example,

以德國的哲學家弗里德里希．尼采為例，

embraced nihilism, the belief in the ultimate meaningless of life.

他擁護的是虛無主義，也就是生命的終極是毫無意義的。

But by the mid-20th century, the path had been paved for French thinker Jean-Paul Sartre

但在 20 世紀中期，尼采的思想為法國哲學家尚．保羅．沙特鋪路，

to return to the question of essence and ask:

他回到有關本質的疑問，並且提出：

What if we exist first?

有沒有可能人類的存在優先呢？

What if we’re born without any hard-wired purpose? And then it’s up to us to find our own essences?

有沒有可能我們生來根本沒有什麼目的，而自身的本質要由我們自己去探索呢？

Well this became the framework for what we now know as existentialism.

這就成為存在主義的基本框架。

And its mantra is the claim that “existence precedes essence.”

而它的口頭禪就是「存在先於本質」。

In other words, our existence – our birth – happens first.

換句話說，我們的「存在」，也就是人類誕生，是優先的。

Then, it’s up to each of us to determine who we are.

接著，我們才去決定我們生命的意義和價值。

We have to write our own essence, through the way we choose to live.

我們必須藉由我們選擇的生活方式，來書寫我們的本質。

But we have no actual, predetermined purpose – there’s no set path that we’re supposed to follow.

但我們並沒有一個確切且命定的目的，並不存在一條固定的道路要我們去跟從。

It’s hard to express how radical this idea was at the time.

你一定無法想像這個思想對那個時代而言有多激進。

Because, for thousands of years, you didn’t have to choose a path, or find your purpose.

因為幾千多年來，你無須選擇一條道路或尋找人生的意義。

God did it for you.

上帝都幫你做好了。

But it’s important to note that existentialism is not synonymous with atheism.

這裡我們必須要說明，存在主義和無神論並不能畫上等號。

Plenty of existentialists are atheists, but some are theists, like Kierkegaard.

的確有許多存在主義者是無神論者，但有些卻是有信仰的，例如齊克果。

What theistic existentialists deny is any sort of teleology –

有神論存在主義者反對的是所謂「目的論」，

that is, they refute the notion that God made the universe, or our world, or us, with any particular purpose in mind.

也就是說，他們反駁上帝在創造宇宙、世界或人類時，是懷抱某個特定目的的。

So, God may exist – but instilling you, or your life, or the cosmos, with meaning

所以上帝可能存在，至於在你或你的生命中，乃至於在宇宙萬物間賦予意義，

– that’s just not in his job description.

這並不是他的職權範圍。

As a result, we are each born into a universe in which we, and our world, and our actions, lack any real, inherent importance.

因此，這個我們存在的宇宙中，人類、世界以及我們的行為，都缺乏任何真實且先驗的重要性。

This is a fundamental component of existentialism.

這是存在主義的基本理念。

And its adherents refer to it as “the absurd.”

而存在主義者們也稱之為「荒謬」。

You and I think of absurdity as something that’s just silly, or preposterous.

我們所認為的荒謬，指的可能只是愚蠢或是荒誕不經的東西。

But for existentialists, absurdity is a technical term.

但對存在主義者來說，荒謬是個專有名詞。

It’s how they describe the search for answers in an answerless world.

這個詞代表的，是在沒有答案的世界中尋找答案的行為。

We are creatures who need meaning, but we’re abandoned in a universe full of meaninglessness.

人類是需要意義的生物，但我們卻被遺棄在一個缺乏意義的宇宙中。

So we cry into the wilderness, and get no response.

所以我們在荒野裡大聲哭嚎，但卻毫無回應。

But we keep crying anyway.

但總之我們仍繼續哭泣。

That, for an existentialist, is the definition of absurd.

這，對存在主義者來說，就是荒謬一詞的定義。

Since there’s no teleology, the world wasn’t created for a reason, and it doesn’t exist for a reason.

既然目的論不存在，這個世界的生成是毫無意義的，而它也不是為了一個理由而存在。

And if there’s no reason for any of this, then there’s also no absolutes to abide by:

如果這一切都沒有理由，那就不存在可供遵循的價值或信條：

There’s no cosmic justice, no fairness, no order, no rules.

不存在宇宙間的正義，不存在公平，不存在秩序，也不存在規則。

Now, existentialism has its roots in late-19th-century thinkers like Kierkegaard and Nietzsche.

存在主義萌芽於十九世紀晚期的哲學家，如齊克果和尼采。

But it really came into its own during and after World War II,

但它真正開始發展要到二次大戰期間，

as the horrors of the Holocaust led many people to abandon any belief in an ordered world.

隨著大屠殺所帶來的恐懼，人們不再相信這個世界是有秩序的。

And who could blame them?

誰又能責怪他們呢？

When Nazis became possible, meaning became much harder to find.

當納粹開始出現，意義就變得更難追尋了。

But Sartre faced meaninglessness head-on, and explored one of the most agonizing aspects of existentialism.

但沙特卻直視這世界的毫無意義性，並且發展出了存在主義中最令人焦慮不安的面向。

Not the world’s lack of meaning. But its terrifying abundance of freedom.

世界缺乏意義並不恐怖，真正的駭人之處在於它充滿了自由。

To most of us, freedom sounds pretty great. But Sartre thought that we are painfully, shockingly free.

對大多數人而言，自由聽起來是件美好的事。但沙特認為我們擁有的是痛苦且令人不安的自由。

After all, if there are no guidelines for our actions,

畢竟，如果我們的行動沒有準則可供追尋，

then each of us is forced to design our own moral code, to invent a morality to live by.

每個人就被迫定義自己的道德準則，我們必須為自己的人生發明一個道德觀。

Sartre took this to mean that we are “condemned to be free,” a fate that he found to be quite awful.

沙特用這樣的觀點來解釋人類是「被詛咒而自由」，這個命運對他來說是相當糟糕的。

You might think that there’s some authority you could look to for answers, Sartre said,

沙特說，你可能認為你可以向某個權威尋找答案，

but all of the authorities you can think of are fake.

但所有你認為的權威，其實都是假的。

You can do what your parents say, or your church, or your government,

你可以遵從父母、教會，或是政府的命令，

but Sartre said those authorities are really just people like you,

但沙特說，這些所謂的權威，充其量也是像你一樣的人而已，

people who don’t have any answers, people who had to figure out for themselves how to live.

他們也沒有任何答案，他們也必須自己去尋找該如何生活。

So the best thing you can really do, he determined, is to live authentically.

所以他認為，最好的辦法就是確實地活著。

Sartre used this to mean that you have to accept the full weight of your freedom in light of the absurd.

沙特的意思是，你必須認知到這個荒謬的世界裡，你的自由蘊含了無限的責任。

You have to recognize that any meaning your life has, is given to it by you.

你必須了解，你生命中所有的意義，都是由你自己給予的。

And if you decide to just phone it in, and follow a path that someone else has set

而如果你打算求助，決定照著別人給定的道路走，

– whether it’s your teachers, your government, or your religion –

不管那個別人是你的老師、你的政府，或是你的信仰，

then you have what he called bad faith, a refusal to accept the absurd.

那你就擁有沙特所謂的「惡信」，也就是拒絕接受荒謬。

If you live by bad faith, you’re burying your head in the sand

如果你依循惡信而活，你就是把頭埋在沙子裡，

and pretending that something out there has meaning – meaning that you didn’t give it.

並且假裝外頭的世界是有意義的－你並沒有主動給予的意義。

Which brings us to this week’s Flash Philosophy. Let’s go to the Thought Bubble.

接下來要進入的就是本周的短片時間，來看看思想泡泡裡有什麼內容吧。

Sartre explained these ideas through an anecdote about one of his students, who faced a difficult decision.

沙特用他一個面臨困難抉擇的學生的軼事來解釋這些觀念。

This young man was at a crossroads in his life.

這個年輕人正站在人生的十字路口。

He could join the military during wartime, and go off to fight for a cause that he believed in.

他可以在戰爭期間投身軍旅，並且為了他堅信的開戰原因而戰。

And he wanted to do this. He thought it was right.

他想這麼做，他認為這是正確的決定。

But he also had an elderly mother who was all alone, except for him.

但他也有一個年邁且孤單的母親，膝下只剩他一人。

If he went to war, he’d leave her behind. And that seemed wrong.

如果他從軍，他就必須割捨下老母親。而這好像是不對的。

So he could stay with her, and let others fight for justice.

所以他可以留下來陪她，讓其他人去為正義而戰。

Or he could go off to war, and leave his mother to herself, and likely never see her again.

或者他可以去打仗，讓母親自己照顧自己，而且可能母子再也無法相見。

The young man felt a sense of duty to both his cause and to his mother, but he could only serve one.

這個年輕人對開戰的原因，以及對他的母親，都有深深的責任感，但他只能選擇其中之一。

Moreover, if he went to war, he’d be just a very small part of a really big cause.

此外，如果他決定到前線作戰，他只是一個大原因中的極小一部分。

His contribution probably wouldn’t be great,

他的貢獻可能不大，

but he would be contributing to something that would affect millions of people.

但他可能為了會影響幾千萬人的事情奉獻自己。

But if he stayed behind, he’d make an enormous difference in just one person’s life.

但他如果待在後方，他可能會大大地影響一個人的一生。

Thanks Thought Bubble. So, what’s the answer?

思想泡泡的時間結束啦。那，答案是什麼呢？

Sartre said that the whole point of this young man’s decision was that no one could give him an answer.

沙特說，有關這個年輕人的抉擇最重要的是，沒有人可以給他一個答案。

In fact, there was no answer, until the man chose one for himself.

事實上，在我們做出選擇之前，根本沒有答案可言。

No moral theory could help him decide,

沒有一個倫理學理論能幫助他做決定，

because no one else’s advice could lead him to a decision that was truly authentic.

因為他人的意見無法帶領他做出「真正的」抉擇。

So his choice – no matter what it was – was the only true choice, provided that he made it authentically,

所以只要他是真正地自己做出抉擇，不論他決定投向何者，都是唯一正確的決定，

because it was determined by the values he chose to accept.

因為這個決定是奠基於他所選擇接受的價值。

A lot of people think existentialism paints a pretty bleak picture of the world.

很多人認為存在主義描繪出這世界很灰暗的一面。

In fact, the French philosopher and novelist Albert Camus went so far as to say that

也的確，法國哲學家暨小說家艾伯特．卡謬甚至說出：

the literal meaning of life is whatever you’re doing that prevents you from killing yourself.

「『生命』字面上的意思就是，你為了避免自殺而所做的一切。」

But most existentialists would remind you that the world, and your life, can have meaning,

但大多數的存在主義者會提醒你，這個世界和你的生命都是可以有意義的，

but only if you choose to assign it.

只要你選擇賦予。

If the world is inherently devoid of purpose, you can choose to imbue it with whatever purpose you want.

如果這個世界生來就是缺乏目的的，你可以選擇用你喜歡的方式給它目的。

So, no one can tell you if your life isn’t worth anything if you, say, don’t have children,

所以，沒有人可以說，你的人生毫無價值，如果你沒有小孩，

or don’t follow a lucrative career path, or achieve whatever standards your parents hold you to.

或是不走一條賺大錢的路，或是達到任何你父母期望你達成的要求。

And this works not just on an individual scale, but on a global one too.

這些不單單在個人的層面適用，對整個世界亦然。

If the world is going to have any of the things most of us value

如果這個世界有一個大多數人都珍視的東西，

– like justice and order – we’re going to have to put it there ourselves.

像正義或秩序，我們必須親身實踐這些價值。

Because, otherwise, those things wouldn’t exist.

因為不這樣的話，那些東西根本不會存在。

So, a worldview that looks bleak to some, may to others seem almost exhilarating.

所以說，一個對某些來說很灰暗的世界，對另一些人而言可能是令人愉悅的。

Today I hope you enjoyed as much as I did learning about essentialism and its response: existentialism.

今天我希望你和我一樣享受學習本質論和它的回應：存在主義。

We talked about Jean-Paul Sartre and his ideas about how to find meaning in a meaningless world.

我們談到尚．保羅．沙特和他如何在一個無意義的世界中尋找意義的方式。