After watching this movie, I naturally have a lot of thoughts. It seems that the initial and the final should be a pair of relative propositions. The two are relative, and it seems that one can understand the other and draw conclusions accordingly.
I still remember that the first constitution class in the university taught a case like this. Several people who died at sea were crowded on a sampan, and the food was gradually exhausted. Several people decided to draw lots to decide their life and death, and those who were selected would be killed. eaten by others. It's an old-fashioned case, but at the time when we didn't have any legal basis, most people agreed with this approach, and the reasons also mentioned something like freedom of contract, sacrificing the minority for the benefit of the majority. At the time, I didn't know what the final answer was, but I vaguely felt that this seemed wrong, but there seemed to be no reason to object to it except that it seemed to be contrary to human nature.
It seems that after modern positivism, people are more and more disgusted with transcendental things, especially in our socialist society, law and morality have been stripped of layers of skin and flesh, let us see the so-called skeleton, and speak loudly to us Say, look, before the propaganda of capitalism, religion, and propaganda were all hypocritical, and only socialism can only touch the essence. I was terrified to think that people seem to be just a bunch of cells, and the spirit is just brain electricity. The purpose of life seems to be only to build a communist society, people's material life and spiritual life are satisfied, but after this? I can't imagine.
I also don’t understand why the so-called eye-for-an-eye-for-a-tat is wrong to understand rationally, but it seems that there is a voice inside that is saying forgiveness, tolerance and so on. Some people may say that this is a kind of instinct that human life likes to accumulate and inherit, or that it is in the interest of more people and cannot take revenge, or that it is a kind of friendship and so on. I don't understand.
A few days ago, I read Zhou Guoping’s book about Nietzsche. The book said that things like religion are hypocritical, because people can’t formalize the meaninglessness of life. In the end, Nietzsche’s theory of the will to life does not seem to get rid of the constant suffering of life. Cyclic cycle.
Some things seem to be insoluble according to my current intelligence and knowledge, such as love for others, and sacrificing myself for others, etc. It is always very utilitarian to think about it, although I know that there may be more explain.
In short, maybe it's just to be lazy now, anyway, if I encounter a problem in the movie, I'm thinking, why not sacrifice myself.
After reading it in the middle of the night, my brain fainted, but I wanted to write something. . . . A mess. Or you should read books on philosophy in their entirety to systematize your thoughts. . . . . . . . . . . . .
View more about The Road reviews
