| 强权政治是今天具有了民主意识的大众们所普遍厌恶的，但是许多滋生强权政治的文化却又是不论什么政治倾向的大众们所喜好的，而人们所景仰的强者的光环就是这种文化的基本要素之一。对于强者的光环的推崇在华语文化中好象尤为突出，这是因为传统的黑白色的文化至今在华语文化圈仍有着极大的影响。历史上或现实中的名人在众人心目中是两极式的人物：毫无瑕疵的强者和一无是处的坏蛋。对于强者，人们发自内心地要给他们戴上光环，如果有人胆敢给这光环抹黑，那是一定要对之进行谴责的；而一旦那个原先的强者被证明了有很不好的劣迹或弱点时，他就会从强者的地位一落千丈，一下子跌倒一无是处的坏蛋的地位。 这种对于强者的光环的崇拜实际上对于人们的日常生活以及社会的政治文化的发展是有着人们所普遍忽视了重大负面影响的。其主要要害是通过对于不具有光环的普通人的压抑来强化社会固有的竞争机制，使得人们所追求的不是真理和对社会的实际贡献而是那个光环。这是因为现实中的真实的人不论他的智慧能力或品行有多高超，都是有瑕疵的，因而都不具备人们心目中的那种理想的强者光环，人们唯独通过社会的强势才可以为自己戴上光环。这就导致了为了争夺光环的人更在意的不是真理，不是实际的社会贡献，而是如何通过权势的争斗而给自己戴上光环，这必然加重社会原有的竞争的惨烈程度。 过去几个星期里，我抽空在读杰斯帕斯（Karl Theodor Jaspers 23 February 1883 – 26 February 1969）的一些文章，从中看到一些与上述的推崇强者光环的文化相反的例子，比如本文将选择介绍的杰斯帕斯对柯克加德（Søren Aabye Kierkegaard，5 May5, 1813 – November 11, 1855）和尼采（Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche，October 15, 1844 – August 25, 1900）的一些评论。 柯克加德被普遍认为是西方近代存在主义的创始人而尼采则是大家所熟悉的可以说是与康德齐名的西方近代哲学家，这两个人都是杰斯帕斯心目中的强者，但这并不妨碍他在对两个人进行非常正面的评论的同时看到他们的人性上的弱点。我这里将有选择地介绍杰斯帕斯对柯克加德和尼采的相对来说不那么“光环”的评论。 杰斯帕斯本人生于1883年2月23日，他因自出身于富裕家庭而不认为自己具有成为哲学家的先天条件。他曾选择了不同的专业，成为一名临床心理医师，但是，最终他的作为哲学家的本能还是让他走上了哲学的道路并成为近代欧洲存在主义的代表人物之一。下面的介绍节选自他的“Reason and Existenz”的英译版（http://www.olimon.org/uan/jaspers_reason_and_existenz.pdf）。 。。。。 Their being as exceptions They were exceptions in every sense. Physically, their development was in retard of their character. Their faces disconcert one because of their relative unobtrusiveness. They do not impress one as types of human greatness. It is as if they both lacked something in sheer vitality…. 他们（柯与尼）自己的不正常的存在： 从任何意义上来说他们俩都是不正常的。生理上来说，他们的发 育与人们心目中的他们的形象不符。他们的长相相对不起眼到让人不舒服。他们不会让人觉得有任何伟大的气质。他们都好象缺乏一点让人觉得与（人们心目中的）他们的身份相符的东西。。。 ….. In the circumstances of their lives, one finds astonishing and alien features. They have been called simply insane. They would be in fact objects for a psychiatric analysis, if that were not to the prejudice of the singular height of their thought and the nobility of their natures. Indeed, then they would first come to light. But any typical diagnosis or classification would certainly fail. 人们倒是可以在他们的人生方面找到令人刮目和不平凡之处。他们俩都被人们当作精神病人。实际上，即便不对他们与众不同的思想高度和傲慢的人格有所歧视和偏见，他们也确实可以作为精神分析的对象。实际上，这正是他们的闪光之处。但是，对他们进行任何常规的诊断和分类都注定是不会成功的。 They cannot be classed under any earlier type (poet, philosopher, prophet, savior, genius). With them, a new form of human reality appears in history. They are, so to speak, representative destinies, sacrifices whose way out of the world leads to experiences for others. They are by the total staking of their whole natures like modern martyrs, which however, they precisely denied being…. 他们不能被归为任何已知的类别（诗人，哲学家，先知，救世者，天才）。人类由于他们而具有了史无前例的新的类别。他们是未来的代表，是用他们自己在人世间创出的路为他人积累经验的牺牲品。以他们自身的素质来说，他们是人类现代的真正的卫道士，但是，他们却恰恰是作为离经叛道者而被世界所抛弃。。。 …… Both made literary reputation in their first publications; but then their new books followed unceasingly, and they had to print what they wrote at their own expense. 他俩都主要因自己的第一部著作而获得写作的声誉；但他们随后的新书就接踵而来，而且他俩都不得不自己掏腰包来出书（看来那两个人还是挺有钱的J---博主注）。 …… One of the motives in common for the comprehensive expression of their self-understanding is the will not to be mistaken for someone else. This was, they said, one of their deepest concerns….. 他俩努力表达对他们自己的认识的一个共同的原因是为了让别人不会错将他们当作他人。他们说，那是他们心中最深处的一个愿望。。。 Their consciousness of failure, of exceptionality, of loneliness But this well-grounded self-consciousness, momentarily expressed and then suppressed again, is always with Kierkegaard moderated through the humility of his Christian attitude and, with both, is tempered by the psychological knowledge of their human failure. The astonishing thing with them again is that the precise mode of their failure is itself the condition of their greatness. For this greatness is not absolute greatness, but something that uniquely belongs to the situation of the epoch. 他们对于失败，不正常，孤独的自我意识 但在柯克加德那里，这种很有基础的自发地表达出来又随即压抑下去的自我意识，总是能得到他作为基督徒的谦卑的态度的调整，而对于他们俩共同的一点是，他们又都喜欢寻找他们作为人而失败的心理原因。令人注目的是，他们这种失败感正是导致他们的伟大的一个条件。因为这种伟大不是绝对的，而是属于他们的时代的特殊之处。 It is noteworthy how they both came to the same metaphors for this side of their natures. Nietzsche compared himself to the “scratching which an unknown power makes on paper, in order to test a new pen.” The positive value of his illness is his standing problem. Kierkegaard thought he indeed “would be erased by God’s mighty hand, extinguished as an unsuccessful experiment.” He felt like a sardine squashed against the side of a can. The idea came to him that, “in every generation there are two or three who are sacrifices for the others, who discover in frightful suffering what others shall profit by.” He felt like an “interjection in speaking, without influence upon the sentence,” like a “letter which is printed upside down in the line.” He compared himself with the paper notes in the financial crisis of 1813, the year in which he was born. “There is something in me which might have been great, but due to the unfavorable market, I’m only worth a little.” 值得注意的是，他们俩对自己的本质都得出了相同比喻。 尼采将自己比喻成“一个神秘的力量为了实验一种新的笔而在纸上涂的鸦。”他的疾病的阳性反应是他的永存的问题。柯克加德则认为他自己“将被上帝的大能之手抹去，如一个不成功的实验一样地消失。”他觉得自己象一只挤压在罐头壁上的沙丁鱼。他有这样一种想法，“每一代人中都会有两三个人作为他人的牺牲品，他们用非常的痛苦得来的发现将为他人日后获利。”他感到自己就象“一篇演讲中的象声词，对整个句子没有任何影响，”象一个“在句子行中印反了字母。”他把自己比作1813年，即他出生的那年，的经济危机时期的纸币。他说，“我身上可能有什么伟大之处，但是因为不好的市场，我只值很少钱。” Both were conscious of being exceptions. Kierkegaard developed a theory of the exception, through which he understood himself: he loved the universal, the human in men, but as something other, something denied to him. Nietzsche knew himself to be an exception, spoke “in favor of the exception, so long as it never wants to become the rule.” He required of the philosopher “that he take care of the rule, since is the exception.” 他俩都意识到自己不正常。柯克加德发展出了一套关于不正常的理论并用来认识他自己：他热爱他人身上的普通的正常的人性，但那对他自己来说是一种不属于他的异类。尼采知道自己不正常，且为“不正常说好话，只要这种不正常不成为一般的法规。”他并因此要求哲学家们“让他来制定规则，因为他不正常。” Thus the last thing either wished was to become exemplary. Kierkegaard looked upon himself as “a sort of trial man.” “In the human sense no one can imitate me….I am a man as he could become in a crisis, an experimental rabbit, so to speak, for existence. ” Nietzsche turned those who would follow him: “Follow not me, but you!” 所以他俩最不愿意做的一件事就是成为他人的榜样。柯克加德把自己看作是“一种用来实验的人。”他说，“按照人的意义，没有人能够象我。。。我是一个人们只有在危机时才能成为的人，可以说是作为一个被实验的兔子而存在。”尼采拒绝想要学他样的人说，“不要学我，学你自己！” ….. A terrible loneliness, bound up with their exceptionality, was common to both. Kierkegaard knew that he could have no friends. Nietzsche suffered his own growing loneliness in full consciousness to the limit where he felt he could endure it no longer.... 与他俩的不正常相伴的是他俩共同的孤独。柯克加德知道他无法有朋友。尼采则被不断增加的孤独感折磨得无法忍受。。。 。。。。。。 相关链接：老子的坦荡与失落 | 
