【推文】James Lindsay - The simplest axioms of Classical Liberalism

這是 James Lindsay 最近寫的長推文（但不算很長），翻譯馬克思主義神學實在太花時間找點其他東西翻譯休息一下

連結

• 原推文 - x.com/conceptualjame...

• Thread Reader App版本（一頁版本） - threadreaderapp.com/...

原文及個人翻譯

The simplest axioms of Classical Liberalism are:

1) Reality/Creation exists objectively, not subjectively, and separately from the divine;
2) It is rationally comprehensible;
3) None of us being divine, we only have political authority over others that we can earn w/o coercion.

古典自由主義最簡單的公理是：

1）現實/創造是客觀存在的，而不是主觀的，並且與神聖分開；
2）它是可以合理理解的；
3）我們都不是神聖的，我們只有對他人擁有政治權威，我們可以在不強迫的情況下獲得這種權威。

(1) No matter how tough or privileged your life is, reality is objective. It's external to us all. Yes, we're part of reality, but it would carry on almost exactly like it is (and with the same physical laws) without us. Truth is not a subjective affair.

That is, reality is objective, and that means it is also universal. Though our faculties are limited, each one of us has the capacity to "do the experiment" to attempt to understand how reality works, and no one's theory, no matter how great, is right by dint of anything else.

Nothing in the universe cuts down arbitrary and illegitimate power like this simple fact. Literally anyone can interrogate reality or check someone else's interrogation of reality for quality and present their results for any and all to see. Wrong will be shown wrong.

（1）無論你的生活多麼艱難或多麼優越，現實都是客觀的，它對我們所有人來說都是外在的，是的，我們是現實的一部分，但如果沒有我們，現實也會幾乎一模一樣地繼續下去（並且具有相同的物理定律），真理不是主觀的事。

也就是說，現實是客觀的，這意味著它也是普遍的，儘管我們的能力有限，但我們每個人都有能力「做實驗」，試圖理解現實是如何運作的，沒有任何理論，無論多麼美好，僅憑實驗以外的任何其他東西就能被證明是正確的。 （Pika: 只能以實驗來證明理論，就像科學）

宇宙中沒有什麼比這個簡單的事實更能削弱任意和非法的權力了，從字面上看，任何人都可以質疑現實或檢查其他人對現實的質疑的質量，並將他們的結果展示給所有人，錯誤就會被顯示為錯。

(2) This tells us that, for whatever reasons, religious or just 'cause and beyond the reaches of what we can know, reality can be comprehended. It also tells us that our emotions, including our sincere beliefs or personal stakes, have nothing to do with truths about reality.

Reality is comprehensible and, for some (maybe inscrutable) reason, knowable. That means not only can we know about Nature, but we can learn about ourselves, including that we are limited and finite and that among our (epistemic) limitations reside our emotions and passions.

Drawing back to Greek thinking, the architects of Classical Liberalism realized that the passions must be restrained by reason, not the other way around, if we are to navigate objective reality successfully. Passion is great for many things but not for authenticating truths.

Thus Classical Liberalism eschews not only special standing, special authority, and final say but also emotional reasoning where matters of truth and falsity are on the table (social experience can be different to this). Reality is knowable by the intellect, and with difficulty.

Put another way, understanding reality requires restraining Pathos in order to comprehend some parts of Logos. In this way, Classical Liberalism doesn't make self-flattering assumptions about man but rather very sober analyses about our shortcomings and solutions for them.

(2) 這告訴我們，無論出於什麼原因，宗教的或正義的原因，以及超出我們所能知道的範圍，現實都是可以理解的。它也告訴我們，我們的情感，包括我們真誠的信仰或個人利益，與現實的真相無關。

現實是可以理解的，並且出於某種（也許難以理解的）原因，是可知的。這意味著我們不僅可以了解自然，還可以了解我們自己，包括我們是有限的（Pika：limited和finite翻成中文都是有限），以及我們的（認知）限制中存在著我們的情感和激情。

回到希臘思維，古典自由主義的創造者意識到，如果我們要成功地駕馭客觀現實，激情就必須受到理性的抑制，而不是相反。熱情對於很多事情來說都是好的，但對於驗證真理卻並非如此。

因此，古典自由主義不僅迴避（eschew）特殊地位、特殊權威和最終決定權，而且迴避涉及真偽問題的情感推理（社會經驗可能與此不同）。現實是可以用智力來認識的，但也很困難。

換句話說，理解現實需要抑制Pathos（希臘詞，激發情感的特性？），才能理解Logos（希臘詞，話語、理性、事物的本質，在此指本質）的某些部分。這樣，古典自由主義就不會對人們做出自我吹捧的假設，而是對我們的缺點和解決方案進行非常清醒的分析。

(3) Thus, we come to the matter of how to assign political authority, as every polis (organization of people) must. There must be hierarchy and order, but how can it be determined where none can be said to have divine right, hidden insight, Gnostic Election, or any such thing?

The starting place is that none of us automatically deserve any political power over others except in exactly one domain: parents over their own children up to some age of legal adulthood. All other political power on any level must somehow be earned with consent from others.

Another way of phrasing that idea is this:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

You have probably heard that before, or I hope you have, and it goes beyond government.

In a Classical Liberal system, there is no just authority of one man over another, save parent over child, without the consent of both parties to the arrangement, which would, lacking coercion or force, have to be decided on perceived merits relevant to the relationship.

Certainly perception could be wrong, but in the Classical Liberal system, both parties to an arrangement of hierarchy have to consent to their role in the hierarchy, and that consent is provisional and temporary, meaning it must continually be assented to.

You have heard that idea in the specific case of just government as well: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government."

Liberal consent is always provisional.

The reason is simple: we are all limited, so there is no default hierarchy of men over men. All hierarchy among men must arise from consent granted on merits perceived, or for other reasons all parties involved consent to, again, save parents over their children.

(3) 因此，我們談到如何分配政治權力的問題，就像每個城邦（人民的組織）必須的那樣。一定有等級制度和秩序，但是如果沒有人可以說擁有神聖的權利、隱藏的洞察力、真知選舉或任何類似的東西，那麼如何確定如何分配呢？

首先，我們中沒有人自然而然地應該擁有對他人的任何政治權力，除非在某個領域：父母對自己的孩子（直到法定成年年齡）。任何級別的所有其他政治權力都必須以某種方式在獲得他人許可的情況下獲得。

表達這個想法的另一種方式是這樣的：

「為了確保這些權利，政府是在人類之間建立的，其正當權力來自於被統治者的許可。」

您以前可能聽說過，或者我希望您聽說過，而且它超出了政府的範疇。

在古典自由主義體系中，除了父母對孩子的權威之外，一個人對另一個人正當的權威建基於經雙方對該等級制度安排的許可、並且沒有強制或武力被使用，及須根據與該關係（如政治權力分配但不限於）相關的能力評價（perceived merits）來決定。

當然，看法可能是錯的，但在古典自由主義體系中，等級制度安排的雙方都必須同意他們在等級制度中的角色，而這種許可是臨時的和暫時的，這意味著它必須不斷地得到許可。

你可能也聽說過這個想法：「每當任何形式的政府對這些目標產生破壞性時，人民就有權改變或廢除它，並建立新的政府。」

自由的許可（Liberal consent）永遠是暫時的。

原因很簡單：我們都是有限的，所以不存在預設的人與人之間的等級制度，人與人之間的所有等級制度都必須源於建基在能力評價（perceived merits）上給予的許可，或者出於其他原因令所有被涉及人士都給予的許可，除了父母對孩子的權威

In other words, Classical Liberalism is a political philosophy founded upon the notion that we should recognize our humility and organize our society around it, rather than around the proud foolishness that anyone might declare themselves fit to rule over others and be obeyed.

Classical Liberalism is therefore a political philosophy that is aware of and allergic to the human tendency to usurp, wield, and abuse arbitrary power (tyranny), and that's why it generates more freedom and prosperity than any other system in the history of mankind.

換句話說，古典自由主義是一種政治哲學，其基礎是我們應該認識到我們的謙卑並圍繞它組織我們的社會，而不是圍繞著任何人都可能宣稱自己適合統治他人並被服從的驕傲愚蠢。

因此，古典自由主義是一種政治哲學，它意識到人類篡奪、運用和濫用專制權力（暴政）的傾向，並對之過敏，這就是為什麼它比人類歷史上任何其他制度都產生更多的自由和繁榮。