----------https://paw.princeton.edu/article/place-idea-idea-place
簡譯The Place of the Idea; The Idea of the Place -Toni Morrison’s keynote address from Princeton’s 250th-anniversary convocation
Features
The Place of the Idea; The Idea of the Place
Toni Morrison’s keynote address from Princeton’s 250th-anniversary convocation
Toni Morrison in 2003 (Photo: Timothy Greenfield-Sanders/Countour RA/Getty Images)
......我個人對如何將傳統和歷史轉化為宜居的當下和文明的未來抱持著濃厚的興趣。我也對歷史被顛覆的方式，以及干預如何抹殺文化記憶或將其轉入地下以避免被遺忘的方式感興趣。
因此，高等教育領域這一「實驗」250年的發展軌跡對我意義重大。我著迷於獨立思想——即對正統觀念的異議——如何隨著時間的推移而演變；它如何被保存或改變；以及它的誕生地如何既被保留又被賦予新生。在這個國家，存在著與此類似的歷史，它們有著相同的起源，有著相同的自由目標，但不同的地域也在為保護和新生而奮鬥。
I have a personal interest in the translation of tradition, of history, into a livable present and a civilized future. I have personal interests in methods by which histories are disrupted, how intervention can extinguish cultural memory or drive it underground to avoid eclipse. Thus the 250-year trajectory of this “experiment” in higher education has great significance for me. I am intrigued by the ways in which the independent idea — the dissent from orthodoxy — plays out over time; how it is preserved or altered; and how the place of its birth is both conserved and made new. There are in this country parallel histories of the same nativity, with the same agenda of freedom, with other landscapes struggling for preservation and for new life.
大學扮演著強大的記憶載體。它們的校園裡點綴著青銅、石頭和大理石製成的雕像和牌匾——還有植物群落來維繫記憶。但大學並非紀念品，也並非陵墓。因此，儘管普林斯頓大學依然對「理念之地the place of the idea,」抱持著濃厚的興趣，但它也必須同樣忠於「地方之理念the idea of the place.」本身。
Universities play a powerful mnemonic role. Their fields, their campuses, are dotted with figures and plaques of bronze, stone, and marble — with botanical life to keep memory alive. But universities are not memorabilia; they’re not mausoleums. So while Princeton remains legitimately enthralled with the place of the idea, it must continue to be equally faithful to the idea of the place.
「地方的理念The idea of the place」是富有遠見的，是改變的化身，是充滿活力的，是勇於探索的。它深入理論和概念的核心，將目光投向宇宙的無限，不僅引領未來，在某些情況下更能引領未來。它鄙視學術機構中那些懼怕獨立思考、畏懼挑戰的勢力，他們寧願被遺忘、被邊緣化，也不願承擔改變的重任。
The idea of the place is visionary, is change, throbs with life and leans toward the edge. The idea of the place is burrowing into the heart of a theory, of a concept, casting its gaze toward the limitlessness of the universe, not merely moving toward the future but in certain instances driving it. The idea of the place despises those forces in academic institutions so fearful of independent thought, so alarmed by challenge they prefer oblivion, irrelevance, rather than shoulder the hard responsibilities of change.
「理念之地The place of the idea」代表傳統和獨立的價值；而「地之理念」則體現了其對未來的深刻洞察。在保守與變革這兩種理念之間尋求平衡絕非易事。這需要付出艱辛的努力；它需要最高水準的智慧和卓越的才能。而且它們不一定是相互對立的觀點，即使它們看起來是相互對立的，不可調和性也是激發探究和促進知識的衝突。
The place of the idea represents the value of tradition, of independence; the idea of the place is its insightful grasp of the future. Negotiating those two ideas, conservation and change, is no small matter. It demands work; it demands work and intelligence of the highest order. And they’re not necessarily adversarial ideas, and even when they appear so that irreconcilability is the clash that stirs inquiry and fosters knowledge.
除了頂尖大學之外，如今已寥寥無幾，真的所剩無幾了，在這些地方（借用我之前引述的內容），先賢的智慧與生俱來的質疑精神都得到了大力鼓勵和接納，並成為教育的本質、教學的脈搏、研究的引擎、學習的成果。任何一位稱職的教師都不會將自己所學的一切視為理所當然的真理或教條。我們這個職業的本質在於質疑、拓展、提升、反思和探究。但沒有哪位教師能夠脫離現實地質疑，也沒有哪位教師會因為想要抹殺學科的傳統和權威而受到激勵去創新和創造。
There are few places, very few places left, other than great universities, where (to paraphrase my earlier quote) both the wisdom of the dead coupled with the doubt of the living are vigorously encouraged, welcomed, become the very stuff of education, the pulse of teaching, the engine of research, the consequence of learning. No faculty member worth the profession has ever taken for granted as fixed truth or fiat all he or she has learned. The nature of our profession is to doubt, to expand, to enhance, to review, to interrogate. But no faculty member is able to question in a vacuum or is fired to innovate, to create because she or he is interested in erasing the inheritance, the authority of her discipline.
學生不應滿足於獲取數據和資訊。他們被要求超越已知領域的停滯，探索可知領域，追求更多樣化的知識，這些知識或許有一天能豐富過去的智慧。
No student is expected to be content with the acquisition of data, of information. It is demanded of her to move beyond the stasis of what is known to what is knowable, toward more and other knowledge, knowledge that might one day contribute to the wisdom of the past.
傳統並非為了束縛我們，而是為了我們。它並非為了阻礙我們；它的存在是為了喚醒我們。這就是延續；這就是傳統與未來的調和。
Tradition is not there to bedevil us. It is there for us. It is not there to arrest us; it is there to arouse us. That is the continuum; that is the reconcilability of tradition and the future.
由於250週年校慶的日期與2000年如此接近，由於本屆學生的學業將於2000年結束，因此，校慶日標誌著新世紀的開始。所以，我們要思考千禧年－宏大的千禧年。普林斯頓在五百週年校慶時會是什麼樣子？屆時，它將迎來第三個千年的250年。
Because the date of this celebration of 250 years is so close to year 2000, because the tenure of a class already enrolled will end at year 2000, this Charter Day marks the beginning of a new century. It is appropriate, therefore, to have millenniumistic thoughts — large millenniumistic thoughts. What will Princeton be at its Quincentennial celebration? By then it will have seen 250 years of the third millennium.
屆時，這所大學的概念將呈現何種面貌？它引以為傲的為國服務的傳統是否會變得狹隘，淪為擔任公職和行使私人權力？那些享有特權的人是否還會為自己的特權而憂心忡忡？校門會不會再緊閉？學校的使命是否會因為學生群體的改變而受挫？教學是否會僅依靠精密新機器的孤立操作，在孤獨中進行？各系所和學者是否會封閉自己，對未來那些重大而動盪的問題視而不見？那些受聘指導學生應對挑戰的人，是否會因困難而退縮，轉而重現他們所渴望的死氣沉沉的世界？他們是否會因為將這片土地和理念封存在琥珀中而沾沾自喜？那一代教育者是否會告訴學生，不僅在他們出生之前一切都更好，而且在他們出生之前的一切也永遠更好；他們對未來所能抱有的最好期望，就是複製前人的過去？
What form will the idea of the place have taken then? Will its proud legacy of service to the nation be narrowed by then, narrowed to holding public office and wielding private power? Will the entitled still be worried about entitlements? Will gates again be locked? Will the mission have stumbled because the constituency has changed? Will instruction be executed solely in solitude by the isolated handling of sophisticated new machines? Will departments and intellectuals have closed themselves off from the great and tumultuous issues of that future day? Will those hired to guide students to meet those challenges recoil from the difficulty and re-create instead the moribund world of their desire? Will chests swell at the success of having preserved the place and the idea in amber? Will that generation of educators be telling students that not only was everything better before they were born, but that everything before their birth will always be better; that the best they can hope for their future is to clone a former generation’s past?
或者，普林斯頓大學會繼續做它在過去一個半世紀中屢次展現出的卓越成就？是否會為它紮根於公民異議的洪流，並在嚴謹的學術研究和對關於世界主流哲學觀點的多元論述的尊重中茁壯成長而感到自豪？
Or will Princeton continue to do what it has done so brilliantly, so often in the past century and a half? Revel in the fact that its taproot was fed by the waters of civil dissent, has been nurtured by sound learning and respect for heterogeneous discourses on the dominant philosophical views of the world.
從已發表的各項舉措、研討會和會議的品質以及展出的藝術作品來看，這些慶祝活動的成果令人信服。普林斯頓大學在五百週年校慶之際，仍將秉承其最高尚的辦學宗旨，繼續為解放權力而非僅僅轉移權力而奮鬥。它將繼續做那些使其在眾多頂尖大學中脫穎而出、成為傳奇的原因：堅定不移地堅持認為，一流的博雅教育要求學生和教師進行面對面的交流，正如伍德羅·威爾遜所描述的那樣，進行“私人會面和深入探討”。
The evidence of these celebrations, based on the initiatives announced, the quality of the symposia and conferences held, the arts on display — the evidence is convincing. Princeton at its Quincentennial will still follow its principal and noblest dictates and continue to wage war for the liberation of power, not just its transfer. It will continue to do what has made it legend and unique among the country’s great universities: remain steadfast in its insistence that a premier liberal arts education requires students and faculty to face each other in what Woodrow Wilson described as “personal conference and intimate counsel.”
近年來，在現任和前任領導層的領導下，普林斯頓大學的各項舉措都無可辯駁：學校將竭盡全力，確保普林斯頓大學在造福每一位學生（無論其經濟狀況如何）的同時，也能為更廣泛的社會做出建設性貢獻；確保為教職員工和學生提供最佳的學習和工作環境；匯聚世界頂尖的學者和藝術家；並提升其全球影響力。
The evidence of these recent years and under recent and current leadership is unassailable: No priorities will go unmet in enabling this institution to make as constructive a difference in the larger community as it does in the lives of each and every student, regardless of that student’s resources; in assuring the best physical environment for staff, faculty, and students; in assembling the best scholars and artists in the world; and in enhancing its global influence.
另一方面，如果普林斯頓大學背離了新澤西學院的建校原則，那麼站在這座宏偉歷史大廳前參加五百週年校慶的各位，談論的將是一所「虛擬」大學：一包源於紀念品、影像和渴望的態度與偏好。在這種情況下，自滿的領導不僅不適合國家子弟的教育，而且對他們來說更是危險的。
On the other hand, if Princeton University has abandoned the principles upon which the College of New Jersey was founded, then whoever stands here in front of this great, historical hall at the Quincentennial, will be speaking of a “virtual” university: a package of attitudes and preferences emanating from souvenirs and images and longing. Where complacent leadership proved not only unsuitable for the education of the nation’s children; it proved dangerous to them.
正如阿爾弗雷德·諾斯·懷特海所言：“那些無法將對象徵的敬畏與修正的自由結合起來的社會，最終要么走向無政府狀態，要么因被無用的陰影所窒息而逐漸衰敗。”
In the words of Alfred North Whitehead: “Those societies which cannot combine reverence to their symbols with freedom of revision, must ultimately decay either from anarchy, or from the slow atrophy of a life stifled by useless shadows.”
(This famous quote by philosopher Alfred North Whitehead comes from the final paragraph of his 1927 book, Symbolism: Its Meaning and Effect. It serves as a foundational warning on how civilizations balance stability with progress. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
- Symbols represent a culture's shared values, laws, and constitutional foundations.
- Anarchy: This happens when a society revises everything but respects nothing. Without shared symbols or core principles to unite people, social cohesion breaks down entirely. [1]
- Constitutional Law: Democratic countries preserve reverence for their founding documents while utilizing an amendment process to keep laws relevant. [1, 2]
- Technology and AI: Modern societies must honor ethical baselines (human rights symbols) while rapidly revising legal frameworks to handle AI and automation. [1]
}（這句出自哲學家阿爾弗雷德·諾思·懷特海的名言，出自他1927年出版的著作《象徵主義：其意義與影響》的最後一段。它對文明如何在穩定與進步之間取得平衡提出了根本性的警告。[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
核心意義
懷特海認為，一個健康的社會需要在傳統（對象徵的敬畏）和適應（修訂的自由）之間保持微妙的平衡。 [1]
象徵代表一個文化的共同價值、法律和憲法基礎。
修訂意味著隨著社會獲得新的工具、知識和見解，對這些規則進行更新。 [1, 2, 3, 4]
衰敗的兩條路徑
懷特海警告說，如果一個社會無法將這兩個要素結合起來，它將以兩種方式之一崩潰：[1]
無政府狀態：當一個社會修訂一切卻不尊重任何事物時，就會發生這種情況。如果沒有共同的象徵或核心原則來團結人們，社會凝聚力將徹底瓦解。 [1]
萎縮（停滯）：當一個社會崇尚過去卻拒絕改變時，就會出現這種情況。文化變得僵化，被「無用的影子」——不再服務於人類需求或邏輯的過時法律和習俗——所束縛。 [1, 2, 3]
現代案例
憲法：民主國家在尊重其建國文獻的同時，也利用修正程序來維持法律的時效性。 [1, 2]
科技與人工智慧：現代社會必須在尊重倫理底線（人權標誌）的同時，快速修訂法律框架以應對人工智慧和自動化。 [1]
普林斯頓的沉穩源自於其獨立傳統。普林斯頓的精妙之處在於其自我革新的能力。它的力量在於它深諳其創始人的智慧：服務於個人、服務於政府、服務於世界，需要對思想自由堅定不移，需要對那些已被冷漠所侵蝕的美德——例如正直、榮譽、公平競爭和勇氣——抱有強烈的信念。
Princeton’s poise rests on its tradition of independence. Princeton’s subtlety lies in its ability to revise itself. Its strength is knowing what its founders knew, that service to the individual, to the government, to the world requires unwavering commitment to intellectual freedom, a fierce commitment to virtues already being debased by apathy: virtues such as integrity and honor and fair play and courage.
在未來的歲月裡，從現在到我所設想的五百週年校慶之前的250年，世界或許會被恐懼與平庸、仇外心理與謊言所淹沒。屆時，只有大學才有可能成為自由思想、獨立探究和純粹關懷的最後堡壘。
In the years to come, between now and the 250 years that will pass before the Quincentennial that I am imagining, the world may be overwhelmed by fear and mediocrity, by xenophobia and mendacity. Then universities alone may very well be the last preserve of free thought, of independent inquiry, of simple caring for.
普林斯頓引以為傲的歷史在於，它是這類避風港的先驅。它光明的未來在於，它將永遠如此。
Princeton’s proud history is that it was the first of such havens. Its bright future is that it will always be.
請與我一同慶祝並重申對這片土地、這理念的奉獻。
Please join me in celebration of and rededication to ... This place. This idea.
沒有留言:
張貼留言