Tag Archives: 李旺陽

國民教育?咪玩啦

好久沒有亦不多寫時事的文章,因為自己的墨水實在有限。

但今日好想寫,事源是不愛看報紙的我在出大恭時看到一篇名為「洗腦?咪玩啦」的社論,我覺得可以用來作一個例子去了解邏輯推理是什麼一會事,沒有邏輯推理,便沒有討論的價值。

 

首先引述「洗腦?咪玩啦」這篇文章的開首的內容:

「習慣性質疑証」已成反對派喉舌慣用的伎倆,總之,只要新政府有甚麼新政策,未經深入調查,甚至未看要綱要,就必先擘大喉嚨,質疑其「陰謀」,像德育及國民教育,儘管教育局局長吳克儉撰文,表明「中國模式」並非一成不變,而國情亦容許兼容不同意見,培養獨立自主學生……

然而,反對派喉舌硬要炒作德育及國民教育是「洗腦教育」 — 在一個開放的社會,觀念經常隨時代潮流而轉變,真要「洗腦」,談可容易!

我不知道醫學上有沒有「習慣性質疑証」,但以上內容絕對稱不上有任何討論價值,因為那位作家所稱呼的“反對派”己經主觀地被標明為逢政府必反,這些“反對派”只有「伎倆」,沒有理據。在此情況下,基本上沒有討論的空間和必要。

我在討論的技巧 @ 1提及過,討論時要留意自己主觀的情感,非理性地標籤別人只會阻礙討論的空間。上述作家說“反對派”德育及國民教育炒作為「洗腦教育」,他又可嘗不是將“反對派”炒作為「習慣性質疑証」呢?這不是討論而是嗌交。
Continue reading 國民教育?咪玩啦

Paul Mooney – Self-censorship in SCMP

On April 22, Wang Xiangwei, the new editor-in-chief of the South China Morning Post,informed me that my contract with the newspaper would not be renewed when it expired on May 21. I can’t say I was surprised.

Sitting in a hotel restaurant in Hong Kong on a hot April day, Wang stared down at the table as the conversation began, seemingly unwilling to make eye contact. After a few minutes of chit chat, I asked him directly about my contract. He fidgeted and said he would not be able to renew it due to budget problems.

To me it was clear that this was a political decision. For seven months, he had basically blocked me from writing any China stories for the newspaper. During that period, I only had two stories in the China pages of the newspaper–one on panda bears and one on compensation for AIDS victims. Some two dozen other story suggestions went unanswered by the China Desk–in one case a story was approved, but the editor told me Wang had overruled him. A half-dozen emails to Wang pleading to write more for the newspaper went unanswered.
Continue reading Paul Mooney – Self-censorship in SCMP