基督教思想史 – 序章﹕教義的慨念

六月開始我參加了基文會舉辦﹐為期約半年多的網上閱讀小組。這次閱讀的書藉如以往一樣﹐皆是艱深的學術著作﹐今回讀神學大師田立克(Paul Tillich)的基督教思想史(A History of Christian Thought)。這部書是田立克在芝加哥大學的講義收編而成﹐很有系統地從早期教會開始﹐整理各家各派的神學論說﹐讓讀者明白今天的基督教是從何而來。依照平常我的閱讀習慣﹐是看完整本書後才寫篇讀後感。不過這本巨著的內容甚廣博湛深﹐恐怕半年後我己忘記很多讀過的知識。雖說只是組上閱讀小組﹐但有不少博士級的前輩帶頭討論﹐學習程度可以比媲大學的遙距課程。我想比較認真地讀這本書﹐不想水過鴨背看完便忘記了﹐所以我決定整理閱好每個星期讀筆記﹐一來可以幫助自己溫習﹐二來可以和來這裏的朋友分享閱讀心得。

序章是全書的簡介﹐教義(dogma)的慨念。說起教義或教條﹐一般人會對此有負面反應。認為教義是死板板﹐與生活脫節﹐教徒盲目地守著的過時規矩。其實教義(dogma)一字是源於希臘文dokein一字﹐是指思考﹐想像和意見的立場。中世紀黑暗年代政教合一﹐教會用政治手段以教條迫害異己﹐才造成啟蒙年代以後的人對教條的反感。

田立克用把從功用的角度去解釋教條﹐教條只不過是用來分辨教派之間信仰的不同。若沒有教條的話﹐人們就不能分辨不同的宗教或教派。從廣義的角度來說﹐不單只宗教﹐每一個哲學學派也是一套教條。基督教中也有很多不同的教義﹐教義本身也隨著歷史不停在變遷。教義並不是像十戒一樣﹐神給摩西刻了在石上後就不曾改變﹐而是經由歷代神學家不停發展。

教條的產生是因為教會內部有爭議﹐必須一錐定音統一口徑才確立教條。所以從歷史的角度上看﹐每一條教條也是在否定某一個想法﹐用來保障教會信仰的一致性。田立克認為教徒可以在接受教條的同時質疑教條﹐對教條從來不質疑只是盲目的信仰。透過對教條的質疑﹐才可以認識教條確立的原意﹐我們才能夠尋找到自己信仰的身份。

若果從純學術的考古社會學的角度去看﹐教條的定義只就是用來把教徒分類。但是若從神學的角度去看﹐把不同教派互相不乎的教條並列的話﹐田立克並沒有告訴我們應該 信那一套教條。這本書 的主旨只客觀陳述教義的來龍去脈﹐並不對每一教條強加形而上的對錯判斷﹐不知會不會變成教條相對主義呢﹖

全書網上版本

Micrsoft Surface

Surface

Microsoft just revealed a new concept computer. As usual, it comes with lots of hype and the PR machine boasts that it is the next big invention, something will revolutionize computer. To keep things simple, it is merely a table with a touch screen. That’s all.  Computer as a table is nothing new, the very first generation of arcade games, such as ping, space invader or pac-man are in form of a a table.   The new Surface may serves as gimmicks in some classy restaurants, it is fun and more convenient ordering your food without having to wait for the waiter to come around. The special effects maybe cool for the first time, but soon the novelty will wears off, and people will simply ignore it.  Just like first generation of arcade games are used in restaurants as attractions.  The Surface has little use at home. The promotion video shows some possible applications, obviously the designer obviously doesn’t take usability into account. One example is the Surface is used as drawing board for kids. Why would kids draw on a computer screen instead of good old fashion paper and crayon. It is so unreal. Then the next example is sharing and viewing photos. For digital photo takers, Surface can’t replace photoshop, and for photo viewers, isn’t TV a better way to show pictures. Then the next example is searching a map and synchronize and upload it to your cell phone. The Surface connects to the cell phone wireless once the cell phone is placed on the screen. Wireless is a great idea but why would you waste precious screen space and covering the information underneath with a cell phone? You can just replace the cell phone with an transparent icon on the screen. The surface probably will only success in niche markets like graphic designs. Microsoft is not going to dominate the living room with Surface, they better come up with something much better.

Boston Legal

Boston Legal 香港無記以律師為題材的電視劇的劇情總是千遍一律﹐主菜永遠是隨意配對的愛情線和婆婆媽媽的親情線﹐妨忽法庭戲只是配菜﹐替主菜伴碟讓整碟菜好看點爾。經公司的同事和老闆的強力推薦下﹐我接觸Boston Legal這套令我耳目一新律師電視劇。我很少追看外國的電視劇集﹐這是除24外少數我會由第一集開始直追看至季尾的劇集。更難得是這套並不是連續戲﹐每集基本上是一個獨立單完﹐沒有非要追看不可的心理因素。吸引我一集接一集看下去﹐就是演員出色的演出﹐編劇精彩幽默的對白﹐以及劇中每宗刺激觀眾思維﹐沖擊觀眾價值觀的官司。

Boston Legal的幕後班底是由另一套長壽律師電視劇集The Practice原班人馬移師過來。事實上Boston Legal的主角曾在The Practice客串演出最後一季﹐角色大受歡迎電視台才為他獨立開拍一套新的電視劇集。Boston Legal在二零零五年首播﹐旋即贏得艾美獎和金球獎多個獎項﹐其中最受矚目的當然是獲得最佳男主角獎的冷面笑匠James Spader。 除了男主角是好戲之人外﹐其他佔戲頗重的配角均是影壇老前輩。星空奇遇(Star Trek)中當Captain Kirk的William Shatner﹐ 在劇中飾演律師行的冠名合伙人。曾經是法律界的奇材﹐一手創立在波士頓首屈一指的律師樓王國﹐不過因為患上老人痴呆而記憶力衰退﹐近年能力已大不如以前。可是他依然自視甚高死不認輸﹐兼且為老不尊貪威好色﹐每集必定給身邊的人帶來不少麻煩﹐亦給觀眾帶來很多笑話。他與主角的關係亦師亦友﹐二人在露臺談天是每集完結前的指定動作。看起來只是兩個中年男人飲酒食雪咖互相吐嘈﹐細心留意對白卻會體會出一絲絲的人生哲理。劇中律師行的另一冠名合伙人由Candice Bergen飾演﹐她就是八十年代紅極一時Murphy Brown電視劇中的Murphy Brown。在Boston Legal裏﹐她仍然保持Murphy Brown那份女強人本色﹐不論是對下屬對其他律師﹐在嘴巴上絕不饒人。她字字珠璣的搶白讓觀眾看得過癮﹐只有轉數超高的男主角才能與她針鋒相對﹐兩人唇槍舌劍擦出不少火花。

法庭戲份是這套電視劇吸引觀眾焦點﹐每集也有至少一個多則數個官司平行交錯地進行﹐每宗官司的結案陳詞更是讓人 拍案叫絕﹐與香港電視劇的法庭戲根本屬於不同層次。香港電視中的法律觀念很簡單﹐凡事也黑白分明﹐給觀眾說清楚那個是殺人犯﹐那個是無辜受冤枉的好人。好律師的責任就是申張正義﹐讓壞人惡有惡報﹐奸律師則走法律罅讓壞人消遙法外。大慨這根深蒂固觀念﹐自中國民間傳奇包青天﹐到清朝的狀師故事﹐一直到現代香港也沒有改變過。Boston Legal的背景是美國社會﹐法律精神比香港進步不知多少倍。法律是平衡社會上各方利益的制度﹐不同人有不同的價值觀﹐不同的價值觀對公義也各有不同的理解。控辯雙方不是只單純的找出被告有沒有犯罪﹐還是不同價值觀的較量﹐去解釋現有的法律條文﹐說服法官和陪審團作出判決﹐成為影響社會民生的案例。法律程序不只是判辨一個人有沒有犯罪﹐更重要的是分辨究竟什麼才算是犯罪。寫在紙上的法律條文是死的﹐要依靠由人組成的法庭去解釋﹐決定在什麼情況應用什麼條文。到底冒警擄人用私刑迫供去救被綁架的小朋友是正確的決定。還是就算會眼白白看著小朋友給被殺害﹐也要保障知情的第三者﹐限制警察不能對之濫刑呢﹖在學校科學課中應否教授創造論﹐還是校長有權解顧不合作的老師呢﹖醫生的責任是給病人最佳的醫療選擇﹐還是醫生可以把他的宗教道德觀強加病人身上﹐拒絕給強姦受害人開事後丸呢﹖劇中的官司涉獵範圍甚廣﹐上至死刑環保等重要議題﹐下至學校搞萬聖節化妝舞是否構成對宗教不尊重﹐冷藏復活的新科技算不算是變相安樂死也有。原來我們日常生活中在就算是一件很小事情的立場﹐也有源於我們道德價值觀的影響。劇中每一集每一單官司﹐除了讓律師雄辯滔淫增加劇情張力外﹐也同時給觀眾一個反思自己價值的機會。細心聆聽分析控辯雙方的理據﹐看看自己一直抱著的價值觀﹐能不能經得起理性的考驗。

Boston Legal己經播完兩季﹐正在上映的第三季儘管走勢依然凌勵﹐不過始終還是第一季最好看。這套電視劇拍了三季卒之逃不出所有法律劇集的通病﹐就是劇中角色有太多官司纏身﹐怎麼整間律師行大部份時間用來處理自己人的案件﹐不用賺錢接街外人的生意嗎﹖劇中除了幾個重要角色保持不變外﹐配角如走馬燈般的轉換﹐多則一季少則數集就會換人﹐保持觀眾的新鮮感。Boston Legal輕鬆惹笑背後藏著嚴肅議題的風格有別於一般的律師劇﹐不知道能否超越同一班底製作的The Pratice的八季或Ally McBeal的五季記錄呢﹖想著Boston Legal中的男主角Alan Shore善用人性黑暗面的結案陳詞﹐不知道他會對今日香港烏煙障氣的司法制度有什麼話說。對著不尊重法律精神強調行政主導的香港政府﹐大慨他也無能力改變那些惡法的既定判決。香港現實中沒有法律精神的土壤﹐在電視螢幕中虛疑世界自然沒有出色的律師劇集。不可能對編劇們有這樣高水平的要求了﹐還是給我們用法律花紙包裝的愛情戲就收貨算了。

Kidney reality show

This is new a real survivor reality show coming up in Dutch. The players are patients waiting for kidney transplant, the prize is a kidney transplant.  Put it simple, the winner can live and the losers are very likely be dead while waiting for a kidney from the national donor list.  Just like other reality show, the audience will vote off constants one by one.  Just that the audience are not choosing who can will a million dollars but decide who can live.  Some critics say the show is unethical, disrepect human life.  I think it would be a good show, since the players life is on the stake. 

Let’s face the truth, we don’t have enough fresh kidneys for transplant and artifical kidneys is still a few years away.  People will die from kidney malfunction unless we start harvesting kidneys from prisoners.  The question is how to allocate the limited supply of kidneys and save a few lifes.  The current system is on first come first serve basis mixed with somekind of kidney lottery.  Literally, the patients have no control of their fate, they can just wait in line until it is too late or hope being lucky.  We can’t say a system with inderterministic result and no inputs from the patients is fair.  In this contest, the patients take control of their fate into their own hands.  As long as the rule of the game is fair, the allocation of the kidney is also fair.  If  you are the patient, which way do you prefer to get your new kidney, sit back waiting for luck or strive you best to win your life?

Sea of documents

Those who have worked with me know I love paper documents.  Everytime I transfer to a new project, I will tax the printer heavily by printing every document I may need.  My friends say that I am killing too many tree, and question me why can’t I just read the document on screen.  First of all, I use recycle paper, and the document will go back to the recycling bin when the project is done, so no tree is killed in the process.  Moreover, trees are just like vegetable, you grow them, cut them and then grow them back again.  Using more paper is good for BC economy, which is hugh in the forrestry sector.  Reading on screen can never compare with the convinience reading on paper.  Your eye is much more comfortable reading something real, you highlight the text, mark the paper and comment the document.  You can flip through the pages quickly without waiting the for the screen to reload.  You can carry the paper document around easily and it looks good.  In case you disagree on some certain thing in the document with someone else, you can simply point to the page and settle the dispute.   Paper document carries a mysterious authority that people tends to listen.  It is much harder to convince someone open a document, search for the information to prove them wrong.  Let alone it save you the embrassment if they are actually right.