想太多

暢銷作家Jonah Lehrer請辭《The New Yorker》，其專欄《Frontal Cortex》在華文傳媒渺無聲息的回響下終止了，卻在西方報業界帶來一點小風暴。美國新聞行業是否對自我抄襲的處罰程度輕於捏造名人引言，多位專欄寫作人為此議論紛紛。幾個月前我讀了羅素的《The Problems of Philosophy》，曾在別處寫過其中論述哲學價值的章節，引述了一段落。現在碰巧遇上Lehrer的「錯失」，不如順着潮流，「自我抄襲他人言論」一次，相信華文讀者不會見怪。

羅素書中的一段是這樣的：

The value of philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its very uncertainty. The man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or his nation, and from convictions which have grown up in his mind without the co-operation or consent of his deliberate reason. To such a man the world tends to become definite, finite, obvious; common objects rouse no questions, and unfamiliar possibilities are contemptuously rejected. As soon as we begin to philosophize, on the contrary, we find… that even the most everyday things lead to problems to which only very incomplete answers can be given. Philosophy, though unable to tell us with certainty what is the true answer to the doubts which it raises, is able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and free them from the tyranny of custom. Thus, while diminishing our feeling of certainty as to what things are, it greatly increases our knowledge as to what they may be; it removes the somewhat arrogant dogmatism of those who have never travelled into the region of liberating doubt, and it keeps alive our sense of wonder by showing familiar things in an unfamiliar aspect.

這段文字的重點，總括來說，就是「凡事別只看一面、背後有百樣可能」。學習哲學，便是取得這百樣可能的思路之匙。

如果你在遠東某個自稱「國際城市」的地方――先不要提哲學這個殺蟲水般的名詞――告訴人家「凡事不要只看表面」，再提出幾個你聯想出來的邏輯上成立的可能性，會有甚麼後果？大伙兒先是一陣沉默，然後一把聲音劃破寧靜：「你會不會想太多了？」

想太多，在此國際城市，至為罪大惡極。做事的時候，不要想。發問的時候，不要想。思考的時候，不要想。想的時候，不要想。那麼甚麼時候才該去想？事過境遷時，無人再討論時，我們舊事重提，我們要「反思」。

近年華文媒體漸流行用這個詞。我一直不解。英語中沒有相對應的詞，Contemplate？Speculate？Retrospect？通通不對，不是多了一分考量，就是少了一分做作。中文「反思」，並不是指「反轉來思考」，而是整個社會一起高潮地事後孔明，採各種Kama Sutra的姿勢，即高難度的矯揉造作，一起達至身心亢奮狀態。

一個社會，從幾時開始愛上反思？當你在社交場合為討論做一點點理性分析，不，甚至只需不隨波逐流，對事情有點自己的想法，然後，大家一起用帶鄙笑口吻說：「Relax，老友，你會唔會諗多咗？」沒有「想太多」，就沒有「反思」。兩者就像雙胞胎，互為表裏，事件時間分毫不差。凡事若多考慮一點，作判斷時想到其背後百樣可能性，那麼事後反思不反思，何值一提？

西方科普文壇小生Lehrer的殞落，是否揭示美國新聞行業對寫作人捏造名人引言的處分遠比自我抄襲苛刻？是。會不會有其他――不會，不要想，一年後我們來反思。