文學放不開？只有鄧小樺放得開！評論香港港台節目「五夜講場」《文學放得開》
戈登探長
260 回覆
128 Like
0 Dislike
原來唔係睇慣鍾偉民對佢有偏見 原來條友真係cls
//大家背景可能不同。在國際學術界而言，如果有人質疑「為何只讚賞男性，對女性則表現冷待或苛刻」，都是需要解釋的。//
邊度嘅國際學術界？
講到佢壟斷晒國際咁
鄧小樺正正經經反駁 我個人而言就冇咩所謂
唔會話咩態度唔好
但呢d廢話可免則免
叫人地唔好誅心論 自己都唔好誅心論吧
邊度嘅國際學術界？
講到佢壟斷晒國際咁
鄧小樺正正經經反駁 我個人而言就冇咩所謂
唔會話咩態度唔好
但呢d廢話可免則免
叫人地唔好誅心論 自己都唔好誅心論吧
佢接觸開果D「文化研究」、「女性研究」既「國際學術界」真係玩開呢種遊戲 果D人會批鬥人地D reference唔夠黑人、女人同同性戀
但好多人都覺得呢種遊戲係on9
年輕時，不斷投稿字花同文學館，一篇都無被錄用
講真我唔覺得自己文學底子差成咁 總覺得係佢地圍威喂
講真我唔覺得自己文學底子差成咁 總覺得係佢地圍威喂其實鄧小樺講柏拉圖對話錄 好似d人淨係識附和老師唔係錯
但只係事實嘅一部分
一般會分柏拉圖對話錄 做前中後三期 甚至會有人分做四期
去到中期後期嘅對話錄 先愈來愈多呢種附和式對話
而鄧小樺引 Repulic, 都係柏拉圖後期寫嘅野
但一般相信，入面嘅蘇格拉底，唔係真係歷史上嘅蘇格拉底
而係反映返柏拉圖自己嘅哲學觀
所以佢唔做咁多文學修飾
詳見：https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1778&context=aulr
The dialogues are often grouped into three chronological periods—early, middle, late— which have attendant philosophical pre-occupations.
Generally, both Meno and Gorgias are placed among the early or early-middle dialogues. The significance of the chronological grouping to which a dialogue belongs is manifold: as Plato progressed in his writing of dialogues, a number of changes occurred.
For the purposes of this discussion, the two most important of those changes are: (1) the depiction of the character of Socrates in the Platonic dialogues seems to stray further and further from what are believed to have been the philosophical views of the historical Socrates; and (2) the dramatic form of Plato’s dialogues loses some of its vitality, e.g., the dialogue form becomes more purely formalistic, with most interlocutors serving as no more than “yes” men, and Socrates as a dramatic character is eventually eclipsed by the Athenian stranger, such that in Plato’s later dialogues, the Sophist, Statesman, and Timaeus, Socrates is present but plays no significant part in the dialogue, and is entirely absent from what is almost universally regarded as Plato’s last dialogue, Laws
但只係事實嘅一部分
一般會分柏拉圖對話錄 做前中後三期 甚至會有人分做四期
去到中期後期嘅對話錄 先愈來愈多呢種附和式對話
而鄧小樺引 Repulic, 都係柏拉圖後期寫嘅野
但一般相信，入面嘅蘇格拉底，唔係真係歷史上嘅蘇格拉底
而係反映返柏拉圖自己嘅哲學觀
所以佢唔做咁多文學修飾
詳見：https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1778&context=aulr
The dialogues are often grouped into three chronological periods—early, middle, late— which have attendant philosophical pre-occupations.
Generally, both Meno and Gorgias are placed among the early or early-middle dialogues. The significance of the chronological grouping to which a dialogue belongs is manifold: as Plato progressed in his writing of dialogues, a number of changes occurred.
For the purposes of this discussion, the two most important of those changes are: (1) the depiction of the character of Socrates in the Platonic dialogues seems to stray further and further from what are believed to have been the philosophical views of the historical Socrates; and (2) the dramatic form of Plato’s dialogues loses some of its vitality, e.g., the dialogue form becomes more purely formalistic, with most interlocutors serving as no more than “yes” men, and Socrates as a dramatic character is eventually eclipsed by the Athenian stranger, such that in Plato’s later dialogues, the Sophist, Statesman, and Timaeus, Socrates is present but plays no significant part in the dialogue, and is entirely absent from what is almost universally regarded as Plato’s last dialogue, Laws
當然 佢係節目好似只係問左一句咁解
其實都算係合理嘅問題來
其實都算係合理嘅問題來
係咁將個重點spin落去性別層面度，真係唔洗再講野喇
將探長同佢嗰幾篇文平排擺出黎，係人睇得出係咩事
將探長同佢嗰幾篇文平排擺出黎，係人睇得出係咩事
時間太少 哲同科學都只可以輕輕帶過啲理論
// 痴線，鄧又回應左，完全係不知所謂//
//佢接觸開果D「文化研究」、「女性研究」既「國際學術界」真係玩開呢種遊戲
好多人都覺得呢種遊戲係on9//
//年輕時，不斷投稿字花同文學館，一篇都無被錄用 講真我唔覺得自己文學底子差成咁 總覺得係佢地圍威喂//
依類言論，其實已經係欲加之罪
戈登你話自己既回應方式係「知其不可為而之」、「對事不對人」
我唔知你既「不可為」係無效果，定個效果唔會好
但從依個post既反應黎講 我反而覺得 有意無意都好 你既「策略」係「成功」既
明知對方唔會接受（而且唔接受後會「為人不齒」）但仍然選擇「據理力爭」咁唔係真係以事論事 咁只係挖個潭比人地踩
我地對政府會咁做 因為政府真係衰格
文化人係多蠢人 又成日自以為是 但心地唔係真係咁差
邊個文青後生果時唔覺得成班老屎忽阻鳩住哂，但到自己坐莊時何嘗唔係變左新箭靶
我又唔信你本意係想引人去批鬥 不過恐怕你「據論直筆」時 心裡多少享受緊道德快感
依種感覺我都試過 但無非只係經驗淺、唔為人設想而已
題外話：依方面，我唔想講死，但外國人係依類事情上，無論批評定被批評一方，分寸似乎掌握得比中國人好 ——所以點解中國永遠係牆倒眾人推
//佢接觸開果D「文化研究」、「女性研究」既「國際學術界」真係玩開呢種遊戲
好多人都覺得呢種遊戲係on9//
//年輕時，不斷投稿字花同文學館，一篇都無被錄用
講真我唔覺得自己文學底子差成咁 總覺得係佢地圍威喂//依類言論，其實已經係欲加之罪
戈登你話自己既回應方式係「知其不可為而之」、「對事不對人」
我唔知你既「不可為」係無效果，定個效果唔會好
但從依個post既反應黎講 我反而覺得 有意無意都好 你既「策略」係「成功」既
明知對方唔會接受（而且唔接受後會「為人不齒」）但仍然選擇「據理力爭」咁唔係真係以事論事 咁只係挖個潭比人地踩
我地對政府會咁做 因為政府真係衰格
文化人係多蠢人 又成日自以為是 但心地唔係真係咁差
邊個文青後生果時唔覺得成班老屎忽阻鳩住哂，但到自己坐莊時何嘗唔係變左新箭靶
我又唔信你本意係想引人去批鬥 不過恐怕你「據論直筆」時 心裡多少享受緊道德快感
依種感覺我都試過 但無非只係經驗淺、唔為人設想而已
題外話：依方面，我唔想講死，但外國人係依類事情上，無論批評定被批評一方，分寸似乎掌握得比中國人好 ——所以點解中國永遠係牆倒眾人推
我覺得佢未必真係知（就好似讀古典文學、子學既人好少理經史咁 ） 不過咁正正反映佢對文本都係敏感既
都係要個好主持姐 又唔係要睇大佬表演 依d細節就算啦
） 不過咁正正反映佢對文本都係敏感既都係要個好主持姐 又唔係要睇大佬表演 依d細節就算啦
講起 Xenophon都寫過蘇格拉底 
羅素係佢本哲學史話Xe "a military man, not very liberally endowed with brains, and on the whole conventional in his outlook”
當時心諗 屌 你咁聰明 試下帶the 1000s 殺出波斯丫
西方哲學家似乎唔識欣賞太過樸實既野 咁可能係佢地睇唔起中哲既原因
羅素係佢本哲學史話Xe "a military man, not very liberally endowed with brains, and on the whole conventional in his outlook”
當時心諗 屌 你咁聰明 試下帶the 1000s 殺出波斯丫
西方哲學家似乎唔識欣賞太過樸實既野 咁可能係佢地睇唔起中哲既原因
應該唔知嘅
關灝泉回佢 舉左《會飲篇》做反例
話入面唔係蘇格拉底一面倒 對話者做 yes man咁
不過《會飲篇》其實都係比較早期嘅對話錄
讀哲學都大概唔會記得咁多柏拉圖咁多對話錄 唔同嘅細節變化嘅
關灝泉回佢 舉左《會飲篇》做反例
話入面唔係蘇格拉底一面倒 對話者做 yes man咁
不過《會飲篇》其實都係比較早期嘅對話錄
讀哲學都大概唔會記得咁多柏拉圖咁多對話錄 唔同嘅細節變化嘅
羅素好多偏見嘅 冇乜哲學家會認為佢本哲學史好公允
唔係個個西方哲學家好似佢咁
冇乜哲學家會認為佢本哲學史好公允唔係個個西方哲學家好似佢咁
我係大學接觸既中文/中哲仔（淨係計有心讀果班啦）唔多唔少都有類似傾向
有時後生既AP都係咁
有時後生既AP都係咁
我唔知西方學界普遍點睇中哲
但最近睇過 hku 嘅 Chad Hansen 寫道家嘅野
我覺得比好多華語界嘅討論 有過之而無不及
但最近睇過 hku 嘅 Chad Hansen 寫道家嘅野
我覺得比好多華語界嘅討論 有過之而無不及
經史子集 係一個好過時嘅圖書分類
偏讀任何一樣 都係有問題
偏讀任何一樣 都係有問題
經史子集過時係好多文科愛好者常有的偏見
我兄可以翻下目錄學既書、或《四庫提要》
留意下小類、同提要部分
四部分類對於理、工、醫等現代學科或是過時 甚至社科、現代文哲都唔洗理
但對古典文史哲黎講仍然極有價值 （尤其係因為三者係古代係互通的）
詳細的 放工返到屋企再講下
我兄可以翻下目錄學既書、或《四庫提要》
留意下小類、同提要部分
四部分類對於理、工、醫等現代學科或是過時 甚至社科、現代文哲都唔洗理
但對古典文史哲黎講仍然極有價值 （尤其係因為三者係古代係互通的）
詳細的 放工返到屋企再講下
但有時鍾偉民都太狂妄自大，踩到粵語入文一文不值，但又畀唔到咩實質理據去反，一味謾罵。
好心痛，佢套雪地企鵝系列係我細個追嚟睇嘅兒童文學
好心痛，佢套雪地企鵝系列係我細個追嚟睇嘅兒童文學
分類就係為左方便處理資料
如果咁「相通」，唔可以分門別類，就唔應該咁分類
你講嘅野 正正係支持緊呢個分類有問題
如果咁「相通」，唔可以分門別類，就唔應該咁分類
你講嘅野 正正係支持緊呢個分類有問題
最撚怕同d類人講0野,你明明講緊a,佢係都要屈你講b
呢幾日好忙
忙完再會覆大家
忙完再會覆大家