加拿大华人论坛 加拿大生活信息耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions th

在加拿大

Members of the class of 2011, I am delighted to join Dean Salovey in welcoming you to Yale College. And I want to extend a warm welcome also to the parents, relatives, and friends who have accompanied you here. To parents especially, I want to say thank you for entrusting your very talented and promising children to us. We are delighted to have them with us, and we pledge to do our best to provide them with abundant opportunities to learn and thrive in the four years ahead.Three weeks ago, as you were beginning to prepare yourselves for your journey to New Haven, I spent a very pleasant weekend reading a new book by one of our distinguished Sterling Professors, the former Dean of the Yale Law School, Anthony Kronman, who now teaches humanities courses in Yale College. I had one of those experiences that I hope you have time and again during your four years here. I was disappointed to finish reading the book. It was beautifully written, closely reasoned, and utterly transparent in its exposition and its logic. I was disappointed because I wanted the pleasure of my reading to go on and on, through the lovely summer afternoon and well into the evening.Professor Kronman’s book, Education’s End,1 is at once an affirmation of the essential value of the humanities in undergraduate education and a critique of the humanities curriculum as it has evolved over the past forty years. Professor Kronman begins with a presumption that a college education should be about more than acquainting yourself with a body of knowledge and preparing yourself for a vocation. This presumption is widely shared. Many who have thought deeply about higher education ? including legions of university presidents starting most eloquently with Yale’s Jeremiah Day in 1828 ? go on to argue that a university education should develop in you what President Day called the “discipline of the mind” ? the capacity to think clearly and independently, and thus equip you for any and all of life’s challenges.2Professor Kronman takes a step beyond this classical formulation of the rationale for liberal education. He argues that undergraduate education should also encourage you to wrestle with the deepest questions concerning lived experience: What constitutes a good life? What kind of life do you want to lead? What values do you hope to live by? What kind of community or society do you want to live in? How should you reconcile the claims of family and community with your individual desires? In short, Professor Kronman asserts that an important component of your undergraduate experience should be seeking answers to the questions that matter: questions about what has meaning in life.Professor Kronman then divides the history of American higher education into three periods, and he argues that the quest for meaning in life was central to the university curriculum during the first two, but no longer. In the first period, running from the founding of Harvard in 1636 to the Civil War, the curriculum was almost entirely prescribed. At its core were the great literary, philosophical and historical works of classical Greece and Rome, as well as classics of the Christian tradition ? from the Bible to the churchmen of late Antiquity and the Middle Ages to Protestant theologians of the Reformation and beyond. In the minds of those who established Harvard and Yale and the succession of American colleges that were founded by their graduates, the classics were the ideal instruments, not only for developing the “discipline of the mind,” but also for educating gentlemen of discernment and piety. In this era, Kronman argues, the proposition that education was about how to live a virtuous life was never in doubt. Through their mastery of the great texts, the faculty, each of whom typically taught every subject in the curriculum, were believed to possess authoritative wisdom about how to live, and they believed it their duty to convey this wisdom to their students.After the Civil War the landscape of American higher education changed dramatically, as new institutions like Johns Hopkins, Cornell, and the University of California took German universities as their model. For the first time, the advancement of knowledge through research, rather than the intergenerational transmission of knowledge through teaching, was seen to be the primary mission of higher education. As faculty began to conceive of themselves as scholars first and teachers second, specialization ensued. No longer did everyone on the faculty teach every part of a prescribed curriculum; instead the faculty divided into departments and concentrated their teaching within their scholarly disciplines.Amidst this transformation, explicit discussion of the question of how one should live was more or less abandoned by the natural and social sciences and left to the humanities. Humanists, like scientists, became specialists in their scholarship, but they recognized that the domain of their expertise, the great works of literature, philosophy and history ? modern as well as classical ? raised, argued, and re-argued the central questions about life’s meaning. And they continued to see their role as custodians of a tradition that encouraged young people to grapple with these questions as a central part of their college experience. But humanities professors no longer had the moral certainty of their predecessors. They saw the great works of the past not as guidebooks to becoming a steadfast and righteous Christian, but rather as part of a “great conversation” about human values, offering alternative models of how one should live, rather than prescribing one true path. Engagement with the “great conversation” remained an important component of college education in the century between the Civil and Vietnam Wars, a period which Kronman labels the era of “secular humanism.”Kronman goes on to argue that since the 1960s, the tradition of secular humanism has been eroded ? he would even say defeated ? by two forces. The first of these forces is a growing professionalization, discouraging humanists from offering authoritative guidance on the questions of value at the center of the “great conversation.” The second is politicization, challenging the view that the voices and topics engaged in the “great conversation” of western civilization have any special claim to our attention and arguing for increased focus on the voices and topics, western and non-western, that have been excluded from the western canon.Kronman’s argument about the contemporary state of the humanities will be welcomed by some and met with fierce resistance from many others. But the inevitable controversy about the current state of the humanities should not obscure for us this most important point: that the question of how you should live should be at the center of the undergraduate experience, and at the center of your Yale College experience.The four years ahead of you offer a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to pursue your intellectual interests wherever they may lead, and, wherever they may lead, you will find something to reflect upon that is pertinent to your quest for meaning in life. It is true that your professors are unlikely to give you the answers to questions about what you should value and how you should live. We leave the answers up to you. But I want to make very clear that we encourage you to ask the questions, and, in seeking the answers, to use the extraordinary resources of this place ? a brilliant and learned faculty, library and museum resources that are the equal of any campus anywhere, and curious and diverse classmates who will accompany you in your quest.Because of their subject matter, the humanities disciplines have a special role in inspiring you to consider how you should live. But I also want to suggest to each of you that questions that bear on the shaping of your life will arise in whatever subjects you choose to study. You will find that virtually every discipline will provide you with a different perspective on questions of value and lead you to fresh insights that will illuminate your personal quest.Your philosophy professors, for example, aren’t likely to teach you the meaning of life, but they will train you to reason more rigorously and to discern more readily what constitutes a logically consistent argument and what does not. And they will lead you through texts that wrestle directly with the deepest questions of how to live, from Plato and Aristotle to Kant and Nietzsche and beyond.Your professors of literature, music, and art history will not tell you how to live, but they will teach you to read, listen, and see closely, with a keener appreciation for the artistry that makes literature, music, and visual art sublime representations of human emotions, values, and ideas. And they will lead you through great works that present many different models of how, and how not, to lead a good life.Neither will your professors of history instruct you on the values that you should hold most close, but, by giving you an appreciation of the craft of reconstructing the past, they will lead you to understand how meaning is extracted from experience, which may help you to gain perspective on your own experience. And history, too, provides models of how one should, and should not, live.In your effort to think through how you wish to live and what values matter most to you, you will find that challenging questions arise not only in the humanities. Long ago, I taught introductory economics in Yale College. I always began by telling the students that the course would change their lives. I still believe this. Why? Because economics will open you to an entirely new and different way of understanding how the world works. Economics won’t prescribe for you how society should be organized, or the extent to which individual freedom should be subordinated to collective ends, or how the fruits of human labor should be distributed ? at home and around the world. But understanding the logic of markets will give you a new way to think about these questions, and, because life is lived within society and not in abstraction from it, economics will help you to think about what constitutes a good life.Dean Salovey has already given you some insights gleaned from his study as a professor of psychology. His discipline probes many fundamental questions. What is the relationship between your brain and your conscious thoughts? To what extent is your personality ? both in its cognitive and emotional dimensions ? shaped by your genetic make-up, your past experiences, and your own conscious decisions. The answers to these questions have an obvious bearing on the enterprise of locating meaning in life.Your biology and chemistry professors will not tell you how to live, but the discoveries made in these fields over the last century have already extended human life by twenty-five years in the United States. As the secrets of the human genome are unlocked and the mechanisms of disease uncovered, life expectancy may well increase by another decade or two. You may want to ponder how a longer life span might alter your thinking about how to live, how to balance family and career, and how society should best be organized to realize the full potential of greater human longevity.Finally, it is at the core of the physical sciences that one finds some of the deepest and most fundamental questions relating to the meaning of human experience. How was the physical universe created? How long will it endure? And what is the place of humanity in the order of the universe?For the next four years, each of you has the freedom to shape your life and prepare for shaping the world around you. You will learn much about yourself and your capacity to contribute to the world not only from your courses, but also from the many friends you make and the rich array of extracurricular activities available to you. Your courses will give you the tools to ask and answer the questions that matter most, and your friendships and activities will give you the opportunity to test and refine your values through experience.Let me warn you that daily life in Yale College is so intense that it may sometimes seem that you have little time to stop and think. But, in truth, you have four years ? free from the pressures of career and family obligations that you will encounter later ? to reflect deeply on the life you wish to lead and the values you wish to live by. Take the time for this pursuit. It may prove to be the most important and enduring accomplishment of your Yale education.Welcome to Yale College. 1 Anthony T. Kronman, Education’s End: Why Our Colleges and Universities Have Given Up on the Meaning of Life, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2007.2 Reports on the Course of Instruction in Yale College. New Haven: The Yale Corporation, 1828, p. 7.About OPA | Contact UsCopyright © 2005, Yale UniversityLast modified: 09/04/2007 15:54:32

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter沙发。。。

评论
赏 to reflect deeply on the life you wish to lead and the values you wish to live by.点击展开...

评论
“幸福隔着玻璃 看似很美丽 却无法触及 也许擦肩而过的你 只留下 一段痕迹在我生命里……”回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter长，拷下来慢慢学习。。。

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that MatterI think it is more important to learn the meaning of life outside of the ivory tower.

评论
My grandmother used to say, "Always do good to others." She was right. I do good to others (and Nature). I sense the happiness I give them, and their happiness makes me happy.回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter2007 Freshman AddressThe Pursuit of HappinessDean of Yale CollegePeter Salovey September 1, 2007 Dean Peter Salovey President Levin, Provost Hamilton, colleagues who have joined us on the stage today, families, and members of the Class of 2011: I am delighted and honored to address you this morning. It is, indeed, a great privilege to welcome 1,322 freshmen to Yale. In doing so, I am going to reflect for a few moments on something the founders of this nation called a self-evident truth, the unalienable right to pursue happiness. To the students of the Class of 2011 who are about to embark on an adventure unlike any that has come your way before, I ask this morning, “what makes for a satisfying and fulfilling life?” Throughout history and across many cultures this simple question has produced complex and sometimes contradictory responses. I suspect the search for an answer will be on your minds throughout your Yale years.Let me begin with a story from my own time as an undergraduate student. I recall the fall day during my sophomore year in college, when I decided I would major in psychology. My social psychology professor was describing a study that would soon appear in the scientific literature. It is a modest study by today’s standards. Nonetheless, the findings captured my attention in a way that I still remember.A team of psychologists at Northwestern University had interviewed 22 winners of large sums of money in the Illinois State Lottery and compared them to 22 individuals selected randomly from the telephone directory. The average windfall was about a half-million dollars; seven had won a million dollars each. And here is the amazing finding: They were no happier than the random sample of their fellow citizens drawn from the phone book. Sure, they could now afford first-rate vacations, fancy cars, and large homes – remember, this was back in the 1970s – but the impact of this pleasant surprise on happiness did not endure. In fact, their pleasure in everyday activities such as talking with a friend, eating breakfast, or reading a magazine actually dropped. The investigators also reported data showing that there was nothing special or unusual about people who play the lottery. They were very similar to the comparison group in nearly all other respects. 1Now, if these findings don’t impress you, consider the following. These psychologists also studied 29 accident victims who had lost the use of their arms or legs as a result of their misfortunes. These individuals reported feelings that were symmetrical to the lottery winners: Although they rated their present happiness a bit lower than those selected from the phone book (but still quite positively on the happiness scale), they expected to be just as happy in the not distant future. The injured group did not appear nearly as unhappy as the investigators expected them to be. So the first psychological lesson about happiness is this: Longer-term emotional states are not as powerfully affected by events in your lives as you might expect. Money does not seem to buy happiness but neither does serious and permanent injury necessarily produce misery.Of course, I am oversimplifying. It is the case that earning enough money to lift one’s family out of poverty produces greater happiness. Additional earnings beyond that, however, do not seem to add much more to life satisfaction. Families with incomes of about $50,000 per year are, indeed, happier than those making $10,000. But families with annual incomes over $5,000,000 are not much happier than those earning, say, 5% of this amount.2 People quickly become accustomed to whatever it is they have, and more of it does not make them much more content, although they believe it will. As a psychologist, I might call this habituation, whereas an economist such as President Levin would refer to it as declining marginal utility. The investigators who conducted the study of lottery winners and accident victims labeled it the hedonic treadmill.3You can also find evidence for this phenomenon by comparing the relative happiness of the citizens of various nations. While there certainly is a stable trend in which the citizens of wealthier nations express greater life satisfaction than those of poorer nations, this trend levels off more quickly than expected. There are almost no differences in happiness between nations of average wealth and those that are most affluent. And, there are many anomalies: The purchasing power of the average citizen in the People’s Republic of China or in Brazil is relatively low, but their self-reported happiness is quite high, for example.4 At minimum it is fair to say that the relationship between money and happiness is not linear. Or, as Woody Allen once put it, “Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.”5Now I am not arguing that every Yale College student should, upon graduation, give away all of his or her worldly possessions and take a vow of poverty. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with making money. But it is what you do with what you earn (and how you go about earning it) that, in part, determines whether you are satisfied with your lives. And, of course, versions of this problem have perplexed philosophers from ancient to modern times. In considering a happy life, Plato focused on harmony among one’s desires, aims, and goals. Aristotle grappled with the ethical responsibility to flourish through devotion to excellent activity. And many thinkers through the ages, from Augustine to Descartes, have claimed that happiness requires virtue.6 (But I get ahead of myself here; I seem to have put Descartes before d’ horse!)Given the data relating winning money or being injured in an accident to happiness, perhaps it comes as no surprise to you that we are especially inaccurate when predicting the emotional consequences of outcomes and events in the future. We are not very skilled at what is called affective forecasting.7 For instance, just before a presidential election, when Americans are asked how they would feel if the candidate they are supporting won or lost, they (not surprisingly) describe the intense joy or profound unhappiness anticipated. But they don’t quite feel this way the day after the election. Those people who voted for the winning candidate are happy, but not nearly as happy as they thought they would be. And those whose candidate lost the election, while sad, are not nearly as miserable as they predicted they would feel just a few days earlier.8 Similar findings have been reported when college students are asked to predict how they would feel if their football team won or lost on the next Saturday afternoon.9 They forget that even if the football team wins, there are still papers to write and exams to study for the next day. And even if the team loses, they still have plans to hang out that evening with their close friends. And here’s some good news: Even the break-up of a romantic relationship isn’t as sad as college students expect it to be (not that it is pleasant, of course).It is not just students who have difficulty predicting their future feelings. Surveys of adults across this country suggest that most believe, for example, that folks who live in California are happier than everyone else, and that they themselves would be happier if they picked up and moved to California.10 But what’s the reality? Californians are about as happy as those from Kansas or Connecticut but no happier. So, why the bias? Well, when you ask people to imagine a California life, the scenes that come to mind are of perfect weather, beautiful people, and clean sandy beaches -- a Hollywood fantasy world. The reality of course is more complex: It also includes heavy traffic, expensive homes, and occasional earthquakes; not what the Mamas and the Papas (or even Phantom Planet) imagines when they are California dreamin’, especially on a winter’s day. So, hedonic pursuits and material pleasures do not reliably produce greater happiness. Even if they did, we still would not be very skilled at predicting the events that are actually going to make us feel good.So, what does make us happy? One psychologist describes three kinds of happiness: the pleasant life (based on hedonism), the good life (based on engagement), and the meaningful life (based on belonging to and serving something larger than oneself).11 We’ve already dealt with the elusiveness of the first kind of happiness, the pleasant life. But, what of the other two – the good life and the meaningful life?This psychologist – Martin Seligman – claims that there are six virtues endorsed essentially by every major religious movement and cultural tradition of the last 3000 years: (a) wisdom and knowledge, (b) courage, (c) love and humanity, (d) justice, (e) temperance or moderation, and (e) transcendence.12 He argues that by finding and developing our personal strengths, we can live a life characterized by these six virtues. And when we find opportunities to engage in those strengths around which we define our identity – he calls these signature strengths – we experience authentic positive emotions like joy, pride, satisfaction, and fulfillment. Some of you may find your signature strengths in your curiosity and open-mindedness or your integrity or leadership abilities or your modesty or your ability to express gratitude in appreciation of others. A good life, characterized by the six virtues is more readily attained, to use a cliché, by going with one’s strengths. Individuals whose lives are characterized by these virtues also find it easier to form strong connections to other people. And a robust predictor of happiness, as it happens, is having rich and satisfying social relationships.13In the early days of my career as a social psychologist, I conducted experiments showing that when people feel joyful, they are more likely to engage in selfless acts of altruism. And, conversely, when they help others, they are more likely to feel happy. We called this – not very creatively – feel good, do good and do good, feel good, respectively.14 In the laboratory, we could stage-manage an opportunity for helping someone (e.g., another student would drop a pile of papers he or she was carrying in the hallway outside the room). Happier research participants were more likely to offer help, and helping bred happiness.The lessons from this line of research are, I think, profound, even if the experiments were a bit contrived. A happy life is one in which we find ways to transcend our own needs and desires and work on behalf of someone or something else that is larger than ourselves. You will find many such opportunities at Yale, and I urge you to take advantage of them. Merely participating in a group activity pursuing some goal that cannot be accomplished alone – consider performance ensembles or athletic teams – can generate feelings of fulfillment. For some of you, opportunities will present themselves through immersion in a different culture, such as by living with a roommate from Peking University when you enroll in our joint program there. Taking another step and engaging in something that improves the lives of others or repairs the world can help to build a happy life as well. And I hope it is clear that living a life that transcends oneself is possible no matter what one’s political outlook. You can work on behalf of others by creating jobs and opportunities on Main Street as well as by lobbying for human rights in the developing world. As Bob Dylan sings, “you’re gonna have to serve somebody,” and the critical element is finding meaning in that effort.One last finding from the social psychology laboratory: People believe they will feel more regret by doing something inappropriate than by not doing something that would have turned out to be a good thing. Most of us suspect that nothing would make us more unhappy than trying and failing. But, when you actually measure their feelings, people report much more regret due to inaction than if they had actually done something that went sour. Missed opportunities do, indeed, produce unhappiness.15So here you are on your first day at Yale, surrounded by loving families, and dressed – not for the last time – in your blue blazers and non-flip-flop footwear. And, perhaps you are asking yourself the question, “What is college for?” Is it merely a way to acquire a credential to help one attain “the good life?” I am arguing today that this answer is narrow and likely misguided. Rather, college seems to be the time to begin cultivating an “examined life.” This begins with a sophisticated consideration of virtues and strengths. But isolated reflection is not enough. Here at Yale you will have opportunities to transcend yourselves, and by forming deep relationships with others and working selflessly to promote a greater good, you will develop the habits of mind and behavior that can lead to fulfilling and happy lives.Here’s to hoping that the keys to a truly satisfying future await you at Yale. Welcome Class of 2011! 1 Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff-Bulman, R.J. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 917-927.2 This example is from Gilbert, D.T. (2006). Stumbling on Happiness. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. For a more thorough explanation, see Layard, R. (2005). Happiness: Lessons from a New Science. New York: Penguin. For different conclusions, see Easterlin, R.A. (2005). Diminishing marginal utility of income? Caveat emptor. Social Indicators Research, 70, 243-326.3 Brickman, P., & Campbell, D. T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In M. H. Appley (Ed.),Adaptation Level Theory: A Symposium (pp. 287-302). New York: Academic Press.4 Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2002). Will money increase subjective well-being? A literature review and guide to needed research. Social Indicators Research, 57, 119-169.Diener, E., & Seligman, M.E.P. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1-31. The data analyzed in these articles are collected in part by the World Values Survey Group (see http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org).5 Allen, W. (1983). Without Feathers. New York: Ballantine Books (p. 109).6 McMahon, D.M. (2006). Happiness: A History. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press.White, N. (2006). A Brief History of Happiness. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.7 Daniel Gilbert at Harvard University and Timothy Wilson at the University of Virginia have conducted dozens of experiments on biases in affective forecasting. Gilbert’s excellent book summarizing these and many other findings, Stumbling on Happiness (2006, New York: Alfred A. Knopf), provides a memorable and amusing tour through this literature. 8 Gilbert, D.T., Pinel, E.C., Wilson, T.D., Blumberg, S.J., & Wheatley, T.P. (1998). Immune neglect: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 617-638 (see Study 3).9 Wilson, T.D., Wheatley, T.P., Meyers, J.M., Gilbert. D.T., & Axsom, D. (2000). Focalism: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 821-836.10 Schkade, D.A., & Kahneman, D. (1998). Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 9, 340-346.11 Seligman, M.E.P. (2002). Authentic Happiness. New York: The Free Press. Seligman, M.E.P., & Royzman, E. (2003). Happiness: The three traditional theories. http://www.authentichappiness.sas.upenn.edu/newsletter.aspx?id=49.12 Seligman, M.E.P. (2002). Authentic Happiness. New York: The Free Press. 13 Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The Structure of Psychological Well-being. Chicago: Aldine. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Very happy people. Psychological Science, 13, 80-83.14 Salovey, P., Mayer, J.D., & Rosenhan, D.L. (1991). Mood and helping: Mood as a motivator of helping and helping as a regulator of mood. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 12, 215-237.15 Gilovich, T., & Medvec, V.H. (1995). The experience of regret: What, when, and why. Psychological Review, 102, 379-395. About OPA | Contact UsCopyright © 2005, Yale UniversityLast modified: 09/06/2007 15:38:25

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that MatterHappiness is the problem of the Western philosophy. They do not understand by pursuing happiness, they actually open the door of pain. They do not understand getting away from pain is more important than obtaining happiness. Releasing other people from pain is more important than bringing other people happiness. And finally, they do not understand harmony means no pain and no happiness.

评论
My grandmother used to say, "Always do good to others." She was right. I do good to others (and Nature). I sense the happiness I give them, and their happiness makes me happy.Happiness is the problem of the Western philosophy. They do not understand by pursuing happiness, they actually open the door of pain. They do not understand getting away from pain is more important than obtaining happiness. Releasing other people from pain is more important than bringing other people happiness. And finally, they do not understand harmony means no pain and no happiness.点击展开...说话要有EVIDENCE.

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter你看人家上面一篇演讲有这么多引用和出处.你这全盘否定来自哪里?

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter你看人家上面一篇演讲有这么多引用和出处.你这全盘否定来自哪里?点击展开...Peter Salovey引用了一连串的科学调查，证实了金钱未必能换取快乐，而快乐与否亦经常不如一般人所逆料，但总结却是鼓励同学们去创造一个快乐的人生，并把这个追求扩展到创造多数人的快乐人生或帮助别人获得快乐人生。他引用了很多典籍，我没有一一查阅。以一篇形式上的演讲词来说，鼓励别人追求快乐，并非大错，我们不必深究其论据与总结之间的逻辑关系；但一经有了快乐的执着，在找不到快乐，或失去快乐时，便会感到痛苦。 佛家四法印的教义说：诸行无常，诸法无我，一切皆苦，寂静涅盘，心与中道。简单地解释：就是一切事物，包括快乐，都不是永恒的，一切事物的发生，包括快乐的发生，都不是因为有了自我而发生的，有了执着，便有了痛苦，不生不灭，不苦不乐，便达至涅盘（nirvana）。主观的心包括了一切事物的实体，但又超越一切物体而成为空。 这是小弟不才所能了解，希望有高人加以指点。

评论
My grandmother used to say, "Always do good to others." She was right. I do good to others (and Nature). I sense the happiness I give them, and their happiness makes me happy.Peter Salovey引用了一连串的科学调查，证实了金钱未必能换取快乐，而快乐与否亦经常不如一般人所逆料，但总结却是鼓励同学们去创造一个快乐的人生，并把这个追求扩展到创造多数人的快乐人生或帮助别人获得快乐人生。他引用了很多典籍，我没有一一查阅。以一篇形式上的演讲词来说，鼓励别人追求快乐，并非大错，我们不必深究其论据与总结之间的逻辑关系；但一经有了快乐的执着，在找不到快乐，或失去快乐时，便会感到痛苦。 佛家四法印的教义说：诸行无常，诸法无我，一切皆苦，寂静涅盘，心与中道。简单地解释：就是一切事物，包括快乐，都不是永恒的，一切事物的发生，包括快乐的发生，都不是因为有了自我而发生的，有了执着，便有了痛苦，不生不灭，不苦不乐，便达至涅盘（nirvana）。主观的心包括了一切事物的实体，但又超越一切物体而成为空。 这是小弟不才所能了解，希望有高人加以指点。点击展开...没有痛苦，何来快乐。如果不生不灭，不苦不乐，人活着又有什么乐趣。还要五官干吗？还要思想干吗？和死了又有多少差别。追求快乐的过程肯定有痛苦。信佛干吗？佛都不存在。不过是一种哲学思想。为了传播，就说是佛讲的。人生短暂，该爱就爱，痛苦，欢乐，酸甜苦辣届尝遍，才不枉人生走此一遭。 你没回答我全盘否定西方Western philosophy来自何处。你那段话。

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that MatterPeter Salovey引用了一连串的科学调查，证实了金钱未必能换取快乐，而快乐与否亦经常不如一般人所逆料，但总结却是鼓励同学们去创造一个快乐的人生，并把这个追求扩展到创造多数人的快乐人生或帮助别人获得快乐人生。他引用了很多典籍，我没有一一查阅。以一篇形式上的演讲词来说，鼓励别人追求快乐，并非大错，我们不必深究其论据与总结之间的逻辑关系；但一经有了快乐的执着，在找不到快乐，或失去快乐时，便会感到痛苦。 佛家四法印的教义说：诸行无常，诸法无我，一切皆苦，寂静涅盘，心与中道。简单地解释：就是一切事物，包括快乐，都不是永恒的，一切事物的发生，包括快乐的发生，都不是因为有了自我而发生的，有了执着，便有了痛苦，不生不灭，不苦不乐，便达至涅盘（nirvana）。主观的心包括了一切事物的实体，但又超越一切物体而成为空。 这是小弟不才所能了解，希望有高人加以指点。点击展开...你想说与其有痛苦，不如不追求快乐了。是吗？那你移民加拿大是一个错误。你该去少林，峨嵋，九华，普陀。青灯古佛伴一生。

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter忒长了，大哥！点击展开...很有意思的。它还提到了北大。For some of you, opportunities will present themselves through immersion in a different culture, such as by living with a roommate from Peking University when you enroll in our joint program there.

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that MatterI am lucky to be not reading a Permanent Head Damage course in Yale Univeristy!

评论
东北农家小笨鸡，不喜欢长头发的男生！我的国歌I am lucky to be not reading a Permanent Head Damage course in Yale Univeristy!点击展开...PHD不管你在哪读,总得STUDY吧.READ是READ不出来的.

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matter哈哈！007就是喜欢read, 不喜欢study..

评论
个人卖车！ http://forum.iask.ca/threads/2009-toyota-yaris-sedan-卖车.712400/敢问路在何方，路在脚下。――――――――――――――――――――――――――回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that Matterit likes a guidance for us and it's a good lecture to study.

评论
回复: 耶鲁校长莱文致2007年新生演讲-----The Questions that MatterPHD不管你在哪读,总得STUDY吧.READ是READ不出来的.点击展开...呵呵。

  ·中文新闻 一名球迷的言论让 AFLW 明星流泪，联盟已介入调查
·中文新闻 47 岁的詹姆斯·范德贝克 (James Van Der Beek) 在有机会与家人分享这