Reading note: Sapiens: a brief history of humankind (final)

Totally mind-blowing.

This is one of the few books that changed how I looked at the world. However, the book is so complex and profound that it is impossible to write some reading notes without writing another small book.

That being said, I can still put some points here for reference. One's happiness is subject to chemical reaction. Certain chemicals such as dopamine, can affect how one perceives happiness. Does that mean, in order to achieve happiness in life, we should just obey the chemical system and try to secrete/inject as much dopamine as we can? Non-sense. Happiness consists not only the chemical reaction, but is also decided by whether one is doing something meaningful that satisfies one's life. A recent research showed that it is decided by several factors, the most important being one's expectation of his/her life. If one's expectation is low, he/she is more likely to be happy, and vice versa. Other things, including the community that supports him/her, his/her family, and money of course, also matter to certain extent. This remotely resembles Lao Tzu's saying "See and think frugally".

But it is opposite to the culture we live in. People are brought up in an education that encourages us to be ambitious, entrepreneurial, adventurous. Take my company's culture for example. We brand slogans like "Be bold", "What would you do if you weren't afraid?"and "Do things and ask for forgiveness later", and people love those slogans. Unfortunately, in the historical perspective, those are just the brainchildren of our generation, whereas never had a previous generation advocated those spirits as much as we do. They wanted good citizens to be modest, lenient and meek. Well, not so much. That is true only to certain generations in certain regions of the world, while in other regions and other times, cultures are completely different. If you place yourself in a cosmic historical settings, what you believe firmly today would be bullshit tomorrow. Nothing is forever true. You like free market? Sure. It wasn't even a thing a thousand years ago. You think love is the goal of life? And honesty is the essential goodness? And we should respect science? Each statements only hold true in a certain period of time, but never from the start of time, and may not be true in a hundred years.

Homo sapiens broke the natural selection, which is the norm of evolution for millennials. Creatures survive if they adapt to their environment better than others, so they are more likely to pass their genes to inheritors. The bird's ancestor didn't think about having feathers because they would help it to fly. All happened by random mutation. This may no longer the case, because Homo Sapiens invented gene engineering, so they can direct the evolution of living things, even themselves. They may one day introduce cyborgs, hybrid beings of the organics and the inorganics, or make superhuman. Gene engineering may fundamentally change how we think, how the society is structured, and how human relationship functions. Oh did I mention "human"? Will we still be the same species then? The future is beyond imagination. All our imaginations are simulations of our thoughts, and reflection of the reality. When things become completely different, how do we want what we want?

I don't see a definite blueprint of the future in 100 years, nor does anyone. All I know, however, is to live within the current time. 活在当下。

读记：柴静《看见》

读《看见》只用了两天，思考与反刍却耗费了两周。放下书的千万种感慨，总算在淬铁的冷静中，逐渐凝固成文字的实体。

其实本不愿写读后感。柴静的一本小书中反应的社会传统以来独善其身的冷漠，弱势少数群体在夹缝中的苟活，作者个人的反思与成长经历，历十年，我短短为文草草结之，总是有些轻率。然而书中字里行间的那种关怀与责任感，以及掩卷闭目心头的沉重感，又使我不得不扫来几笔，不吐不快。

鲁迅当年弃医从文，为拯救国民秉性的麻木不仁。当一个社会，对一个丑陋的现象漠视麻木，是一件可怕的事。何必提当年那张百姓围观同胞被杀害而拍手称快直呼万岁的幻灯片呢？柴静提供了很好的一个例子：一个小区，业主委员会为了减少物业费，在小区内发起投票，结果大部分人支持，于是业委会向物业公司发起诉讼。胜诉。物业公司非但不减免物业费，反而将小区水电停了。于是业主大闹委员会，认为是委员会多管闲事才导致这种状况，甚至扬言要杀掉委员主任。结果发现，闹事的业主之前并没有参与投票，既没有赞成，也没有反对，只有漠视。不寒而栗。我的妈妈是自家小区业委会一员，而我，也见识过业主只要不驯自己意见了，便匿名举报放冷箭，至于别的单元的影响百户居民的事，则选择性失明。这是自私，是公共利益观念的缺失。然而，何管别人瓦上霜，是我自小接受的教育，可我更怀念墨家的侠义精神，急人之所急；怀念孟子的天下为己任的大儒；也怀念船山的天下兴亡，匹夫有责。为什么咱们在个人的僻径上失道渐远？

柴静记者很可爱，因为她对于那些已经被社会边缘化的群体，甚至是看似罄竹难书罪无可赦的恶人，也能尽量已客观态度，去理解与宽容。如前些年踩猫事件的主人，她能从经济利益，以及特殊的受众群体角度去采访他人，揭示对象的内心感受，而非痛打落水狗。如非典时期，一家甲级医院院长，为了达到国际卫生部的评价优等，在检查时派遣医疗车带着非典病人在北京市区游荡。他做错了事吗？是的。他是坏人吗？无解。世上有做好事坏事的人，而没有坏人与好人。柴静记者冒生命危险，采访病人，采访院长，深层揭露院长的悔恨，与当初决定的草率。文字中，没有谴责，没有诅咒，没有怨言，而有的，是对事实真相的客观写照，与对院长的内心深度写照。她并没有给他人贴上善恶的标签，发配到恶意的荒原，永世不得翻身。同样的，同性恋，误判犯，流浪中国的德国“废人”，僻远乡村集体自杀的小学生，汶川地震灾区的难民，社会众生，在柴静的笔下，都是需要被了解与关注的群体。

掩卷，心情依然压抑，却有着希望。谢谢柴静，谢谢陈虻，谢谢如此这般的记者。