SAE Action Theory · Special Study: Adversity / SAE 行动论 · 逆境专论

The nine papers of Action Theory have already answered most of the questions that come up in adversity. This paper is a special study within Action Theory: from the single angle of adversity, and staying close to what readers most often meet, it walks along one line through what lies scattered across the nine papers. Adversity is the feeling in a person when a purpose he takes as his own does not match the situation outside. That this feeling occurs is a fact, and it can enter judgment as a reason; it is a clue, not a criterion; it can be larger than the facts, and it does not decide for him what his law is; its presence does not show whether that purpose is his own, and neither does its absence. Read through the structure of the Laughter series, this feeling lies on the side of the construct: attention falls on the purpose he takes as his own being threatened or coming to nothing; in the same situation he can also laugh, and laughter does not decide whether that purpose stays or goes. Adversity in this paper is not dire straits: when a person can no longer sustain even himself, that is another matter. As long as a person has a purpose he takes as his own, no way of living can rule out adversity in advance: where the world is going, he cannot foresee; others are ends too, each with his own law; and his own law gives what presses in from outside something to run into. That it cannot be avoided does not show that others are wrong, does not show that he has taken a wrong road, and is not an assignment handed to him. Adversity often falls on a person in three layers: on the body, in memory and prediction, and in his recognizing it as his own; the three can be present at once and are not a ladder. Adversity is the outside world's questioning of a person, landing on him; this is questioning in the broad sense, for the world is not a subject that asks, and what is questioned is the purpose he takes as his own. It opens an entry for turning back to ask: whether the mismatch is real, whether that purpose is his own, whether the time has come, whether to change the means, whether his own judgment can be made more accurate. It only asks, and does not answer for him; turning back to ask can be done only by himself. After asking, he may hold on, or defer, change the means, revise or exit his avowal of that purpose, or stop before a real cannot; these are not mutually exclusive compartments, and none is right in advance; leaving a route is not exiting the purpose, and whichever is chosen is called by its name. Holding on rests on a person's own cannot-not, not on an "ought" that anyone assigns him; such cannot-nots are of two kinds, one facing his own matter and one facing others, and the source of both lies in himself; another person's own cannot-not can be set only by that person. When a matter of his own is blocked, it does not follow that his looking-toward others has stopped; holding on for others is holding on to one's own share: it stays within the limits of self-preservation, does not reach into the other's share, and does not settle the account in the other's thanks or response. In another person's adversity, those around him can change the conditions he faces; they cannot avow a purpose for him or complete his looking back. The nine historical events this paper cites all come before 1945; they tell of particular events and raise no statue to anyone.行动论九篇已经回答了逆境里的大部分问题;这一篇是行动论的专论,从逆境这一个角度,贴着读者最常碰到的事,把散在九篇里的东西沿一条线走一遍。逆境是一个人认作自己的目的与外面的处境对不上时,他身上的那个感受。这个感受的发生是一个事实,可以作为理由进入判断;它是线索,不是判据,可能比事实大,也不替他定什么是他的法;有它,说明不了那个目的是不是他自己的,没有它,也说明不了。借笑论的结构来读,这个感受落在构的那一边:注意力落在他认作的目的受威胁或者落空上;同一处境里也可以笑,笑不判那个目的的去留。本篇说的逆境不是绝境:连自身的维持都保持不住,是另一件事。只要一个人有认作自己的目的,就没有一种活法能预先排除逆境:世界往哪里走,他预料不了;别人也是目的,各有自己的法;他自己的法,也让外面压进来的东西碰得到它。躲不开,不说明别人错了,不说明他走错了,也不是派给他的功课。逆境落在一个人身上常有三层:落在身上,落在记忆与预测里,落在认出它是自己的那里;三层可以同时在,不是阶梯。逆境是外面的世界对一个人的追问落到了他身上,这是广义的追问,世界不是发问的主体,问的是他认作的目的;它给出回头问的入口:对不上是不是真的,那个目的是不是自己的,时机到了没有,法子要不要换,自己的判断能不能更准;它只问,不替他作答,回头问只能由他自己做。问过以后,可以坚持,也可以延迟、换法子、修订或退出对那个目的的认领,或者在真的不能面前停下;这几样不是互斥的分格,没有哪一样预先就是对的;退出一条通道不等于退出那个目的,选了哪一样就说哪一样。坚持凭的是一个人自己的不得不,不是谁派给他的「应当」;这样的不得不有两种,一种朝向他自己那件事,一种朝向别人,来处都在他自己;别人自己的不得不只能由别人自己立。自己的一件事受阻,推不出朝向别人的那份看向也停了;为别人坚持,坚持的是自己这一份,不越过自保,不伸进对方那一份,也不以对方的感谢或回应来结算。别人的逆境,旁人可以改变他面对的条件,不能替他认下目的、完成回看。这一篇举的九件历史上的事都在一九四五年以前,说的是一件件事,不是给谁立像。 Related identifiers Relation Identifier Resource References 10.5281/zenodo.22970747 What Action Is Not (SAE Action Theory, Prequel) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970752 Not Doing and Cannot-Not-Doing (SAE Action Theory, Paper 1) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970758 Anti-Colonization (SAE Action Theory, Paper 2) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970762 Is It Mine? (SAE Action Theory, Paper 3) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970769 Can and Cannot (SAE Action Theory, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970777 Not Legislating for Others (SAE Action Theory, Paper 6) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970781 Living by One's Law in Mixed Reality (SAE Action Theory, Paper 7) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970783 Finding One Another (SAE Action Theory, Paper 8) References 10.5281/zenodo.22970787 One's Own Share of Strength, and Guarding (SAE Action Theory, Paper 9) References 10.5281/zenodo.22050204 On the Dynamics of Value (SAE Value Theory, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.22652134 What Kind of Relation Meaning Is (SAE Meaning Theory, Paper 1) References 10.5281/zenodo.22731235 The Half That Is Not Mine to Settle (SAE Meaning Theory, Paper 3) References 10.5281/zenodo.22738709 The Carrier's Boundary (SAE Meaning Theory, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.22313628 SAE Conflict Treatise: How Subjecthood Is Not Swallowed by Conflict Itself References 10.5281/zenodo.20011018 Four Foundational Theorems of the Moral Law (SAE Moral Law, Paper 1) References 10.5281/zenodo.20262737 The Institutional Architecture of Mixed Reality (SAE Moral Law, Paper 9) References 10.5281/zenodo.23286244 Judgment and Laughter (SAE Laughter, Overview) References 10.5281/zenodo.23287629 Purpose Enters the Construct Laughed At (SAE Laughter, III)