“IT SHOULD NOT BE DENIED THAT BEING FOOTLOOSE HAS ALWAYS EXHILARATED US.
IT IS ASSOCIATED IN OUR MINDS WITH ESCAPE FROM HISTORY AND OPPRESSION AN LAW AND IRKSOME OBLIGATIONS.
ABSOLUTE FREEDOM.
AND THE ROAD HAS ALWAYS LED WEST”
“我想那么年轻，干净 ，那么寂寞地生活着。直到自己可以毫无防备的突然失踪在马路上的那一天。”

早在brett anderson歌唱the wild ones，黑塞的卡门德青畅游乡间，塞林格书写麦田守望者，兰波杀死作为诗人的自己跑到非洲追逐太阳玩儿的时候起，对非人类之物与逃逸这种行为本身的深切向往就成了所有历史悠久的情结之一.

圣经上说人不能独自生存，极致的自由意味着极致的孤独.我在反复念诵这句话的时候，想到的只是孤独的不同种类，在人群中感到的孤独与在荒 野中感到的孤单究竟哪种更加难以忍受?当古龙笔下的剑客带着行走于荒野之中的神情穿过满是高手的厅堂，我不再知道荒野和现实的区别，却只体会到了所谓强 者，就是能够不理会不想理会的一切， 仍能没有后顾之忧地沉浸在自己世界中的人.

事实是我们只有在自己的世界中才不会孤独.可问题是我们在只有自己的世界中却难以生存，于是我们苟且偷生，生吞了孤独，却又被它活剥.
因此对每一个憎恨吃屎的人来说，与社会决裂前都有一个要问自己的问题 : 你是否已经强到了对这一切说fuck off ?
我们是不举的衰神，我们自己掂量了一下自己，决定还是把头默默的低下去继续，其间用很多精神食粮和爱情信仰调调味，让它容易下咽一些.
而成为了传奇的人物们却不接受这样的活法，他们说，即使活不下去，也要活的happy.

Our culture worships planning. Everything must be planned in advance. Our days, week, years, our entire lives. We have diaries, schedules, checklists, targets, goals, aims, strategies, visions even. Career planning is the most insidious of these cults precisely because it encourages a feeling of control over your reactions to future events. As that interview question goes: where do you see yourself in five years time? This invites the beginning of what starts as a little game and finishes as a belief built on sand. You guess what employers want to hear, and then you give it to them. Sometimes this batting back and forth of imagined futures becomes a necessary little game you play in order to ‘get ahead’.

“We want to make a decision all of our own, based on our own values and preferences.”

In reality, people frequently don’t know what they want and psychology has proved it. That’s why career planning, or at the very least just deciding what you’re going to do next, is so unpleasant. It’s no fun at 18 years old when people ask what you want to do. There seem to be so many different options, each with myriad branching possibilities, many of which lead in opposite directions, but all equally tempting. Surrounded by these endless spiralling futures, it is no wonder that many a school-leaver sticks with what they know and follows in parental footsteps. But we don’t all want to trust the tried and tested, whether for good reasons or bad. We want to make a decision all of our own, based on our own values and preferences.
Read the rest of this entry »

这部典型好莱坞温情片，关于天才，关于音乐，关于寻找的电影，不豪华，不深刻。。。
整个故事用音乐演绎着。由英国童星弗莱迪·海默主演，另外还有超级喜欢的罗宾·威廉斯：）
片中的弹唱、合奏、背景的配乐都很不错。看来明天就要去找原声了

The definition of idealism in common currency holds that it is a sufficient condition for one to be an idealist about X’s that one thinks there is a modal dependence of X’s upon mental states, be they experiences or thoughts. The modal dependence is the claim that necessarily, if X’s exist then appropriate mental states exist.

But this modal definition sems to miss the deeper point of idealism, for it has the consequence that everyone is an idealist about mental states. One way of getting around this is to specify the mental states upon which X’s depend to be experiences of, or thoughts about, X’s. Then idealism would be false of a given mental state (type) if there is a possible world in which a creature has that state but does not have any higher-order state which is an experience of or thought about it. And the existence of creatures with a mental life but no psychological concepts, such as dogs, would establish that possibility.

This will do for most of us, but it would seem that at least two of the staunchest realists about qualia, Searle and Chalmers, are in trouble here. They both think that consciousness brings with it awareness of one’s conscious states. Searle is a bit vague about what this awareness consists in, but Chalmers is explicit: knowledge by acquaintance. Knowledge by acquaintace is not propositional and does not involve concepts, hence if I am acquainted with my pain, so is my dog acquainted with his pain, whether or not he has the concept of pain. Idealism about qualia threatens.

It would be much better not to use modal dependence as one’s criterion of idealism. I have argued elsewhere that Berkeley has a concept of ontological dependence, but that has no place in our conceptual scheme. We need a new idea about idealism.