Russell's Conquest of Happiness

終於讀完 Bertrand Russell 的 Conquest of Happiness. 用"終於"因為我實在不享受這本書，但因要歸還給同事，總要把他完成。連同之前的 Marriage and Morals 與　Russell's Best 一口氣讀了三本 Russell 的著作。

雖然不少人對這本書的評價很正面，但我讀完後整體的感覺是：沒有甚麼特別，沒有新的insight，也不覺得他對Happiness有甚麼獨到的看法。可 能因為我比較喜歡讀有關self-help的書籍，書中所述的概念對我來說一點也不新鮮。在我看來，他的分析甚至過於簡單，過於common sense。畢竟，這是一本三十年代的書，而且作者對基督教充滿偏見，有不少的地方是建基於他對清教徒禁慾主義的反感而立論的(Russell 是 "Why I am not a Christian" 的作者)。我對清教徒式的禁慾主義也十分不認同，但我認為聖經中對人生的看法遠較Russell所描述的積極。我相信這和Russell的成長經歷和他當 時所見的基督教的狀況有莫大關係。書中有點心理分析的味道，但可能我讀過些近代的心理分析的作品，總覺得Russell寫的有點不對勁。我尤其對他怎樣看 人的負面情緒(envy,guilt,shame)十分不認同。他簡單化地把人的情緒分為正面與負面的二分法，實在把人看得太過平面，完全怱畧了人負面情 緒的積極意義。

在網上找到的這個summary把書中的重點列出，並以較為現代的用語表達，總結得不錯
Tim LeBon’s Top 10 Self-Help Classics
http://members.aol.com/timlebon/conquest.htm

另外，以下引述的一段comments我也頗為認同
http://www.gurus.com/dougdeb/Courses/Happy/Conquest/Conquest.html
"In short, I think that Russell inappropriately universalizes his childhood experiences of Christianity and Christian contemplation, and enlarges these experiences to encompass religion and the contemplative life in general. His desire to see nothing of value in the contemplative life causes him to draw the line between the internal and external world in an unusual way."

Sex and Moral

最近和朋友談論起性道德，當中自然一定會談到同性戀。同性戀的存在一向使我十分費解。若然你相信進化論的話，同性戀似乎很明顯是進化的死胡同。近年的同志 運動所引述的數據卻使我十分不明白，若然同性戀真的如他們宣稱的普遍，為什麼要到了近年才要為他們爭取「正常化」？不是應該老早就已經為大眾接納了嗎？

最近關啟文於《基督教週報》有一系列有關同性戀的文章，這些文章仍可於香港性文化學會或《基督教週報》的網站讀到：

http://www.sexculture.org.hk/index.php?page=articles

另外，一套有關 Alfred Kinsey 的電影已於美國上映，不知這影片所引發的討論會否如 Passion 熱烈？

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/041122/opinion/22john.htm
The movie stresses how relentlessly nonjudgmental Kinsey was. But as the late evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould once wrote, Kinsey's absence of judgment was itself a form of judgment. Kinsey wrote: "What is right for one individual may be wrong for the next; and what is sin and abomination to one may be a worthwhile part of the next individual's life." That certainly defined Kinsey's own sexual demons out of existence, but it left the field of sexology with a taboo-breaking, anything-goes legacy.

有關 Alfred Kinsey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Kinsey

有人認為 Kinsey 的兩本報告是 60 年代性革命的主因﹝另一個主因是口服避孕丸的發明﹞.近年 RSVPAmerica 正致力於指出 Kinsey 報告的種種問題:
http://www.rsvpamerica.org/

An alternative theory of oil formation

There is an interesting theory that petroleum are not formed by dead organic matter but from deep down the mantle through inorganic means.

Abiotic Theory of Oil Formation
http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/1130.html

CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT RECENT PREDICTIONS OF IMPENDING SHORTAGES OF PETROLEUM EVALUATED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF MODERN PETROLEUM SCIENCE
http://www.csun.edu/%7Evcgeo005/Energy.html

Gas Origin Theories to be Studied
http://www.aapg.org/explorer/2002/11nov/abiogenic.cfm

The theory was proposed by some Russian scientists. If it were true, oil supply would be limitless. However, most US scientists and geologists do not agree with them. Below is an article that refutes the abiotic theory:
http://www.museletter.com/archive/150b.html