參考其他評論 待查
+++++
2026年9月刊的《國家地理》雜誌以一篇題為「老化的終點？」的封面故事作為重點。該專題由記者D.T. Max撰寫，Robert Clark拍攝照片，深入探討了備受矚目、資金雄厚的長壽科學領域。 [1] (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine), [2] (https://www.ebay.com/itm/137633000872), [3] (https://www.facebook.com/natgeo/posts/what-if-aging-were-optionalin-the-cover-story-of-our-new-september-issue-out-now/1635561327941291/) 核心主題：細胞重編程 文章主要關注細胞重編程。這是一項尖端醫學技術，科學家試圖透過這項技術來逆轉細胞的生理時鐘。 [1] (https://www.instagram.com/p/DcCuhOQIMnp/), [2] (https://www.facebook.com/natgeo/posts/what-if-aging-were-optionalin-the-cover-story-of-our-new-september-issue-out-now/1635561327941291/)清除軟體：這項研究將老化視為軟體損壞，而非硬體故障（DNA損傷）。它利用特定的遺傳因子清除DNA上的舊化學標記，使細胞重置到更年輕、更健康的狀態。 [1] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPEJ1khUN2w&t=86), [2] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4vYbpfDr8g)人體試驗已經開始：這項研究正從實驗室老鼠轉向真正的人體。一項大型試驗涉及一種名為ER-100的基因治療化合物，該化合物正在接受測試，用於修復青光眼患者受損的視神經。如果它對眼睛有效，科學家認為它最終可能用於逆轉器官、肌肉和大腦的衰老。 [1] (https://www.instagram.com/p/Dc4pHykCQkM/), [2] (https://www.instagram.com/p/DcCuhOQIMnp/), [3] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPEJ1khUN2w&t=86)秘密資金：該專題報導重點介紹了這項快速發展的研究是如何被掩蓋在秘密之中，並由世界上一些最富有的人提供巨額資金支持的。 [1] (https://www.facebook.com/natgeo/posts/what-if-aging-were-optionalin-the-cover-story-of-our-new-september-issue-out-now/1635561327941291/) 公眾態度：美國人如何看待了長壽。 120 歲的看法。調查顯示，許多人對此猶豫不決：[1]
- Wiping the Software Clean: The research views aging not as broken hardware (damaged DNA), but as corrupted software. It uses specific genetic factors to wipe away old chemical marks on DNA, resetting cells to a younger, healthier state. [1, 2]
- Human Trials Have Begun: The science is moving from lab mice to actual humans. A major trial involves a gene therapy compound called ER-100, which is being tested to repair damaged optic nerves in patients with glaucoma. If it works on eyes, scientists believe it could eventually be used to reverse aging in organs, muscles, and the brain. [1, 2, 3]
- Secretive Funding: The feature highlights how this fast-paced research is cloaked in secrecy and heavily financed by some of the world's wealthiest people. [1]
+++++
文基·拉馬克里希南的著作《我們為何死亡》從循證的角度探討了衰老的生物學機制，評估了細胞損耗的根本原因。 《紐約時報》等媒體都曾重點介紹這項研究，認為它有助於理解這些機制，並評估干預措施是否能切實延長健康壽命。
Venki Ramakrishnan’s book [Why We Die] offers an evidence-based perspective on the biology of aging that evaluates the underlying cellular wear-and-tear. Publications like The New York Times have highlighted the work for contextualizing these mechanisms and assessing whether interventions can realistically expand healthspan.
explores the science of aging and life extension.
A groundbreaking exploration of the science of longevity and mortality
「一本引人入勝、出人意料地充滿希望的書。」——《思考》（NPR附屬電台KERA）
「作為一本關於死亡的書，文基·拉馬克里希南的《我們為何死亡》卻充滿了生機。他講述的故事是關於衰老和死亡，但在此過程中，他涵蓋了生物學、進化論、遺傳學、化學和醫學等諸多領域。這是科普寫作的典範：通俗易懂、權威可靠、發人深省。 ——史蒂夫‧布魯薩特，愛丁堡大學教授、古生物學家，《紐約時報》暢銷書《恐龍的興衰》作者
「《我們為何死亡》一書文筆簡潔明了，引人入勝，對死亡及其戰勝方式進行了冷靜而深刻的剖析。從飢餓飲食、年輕血液和人體冷凍技術的研究，到裸鼴鼠的長壽，諾貝爾獎得主文基·拉馬克里希南帶領我們認識了一連串非凡的人物，探索壽命的彈性。
「這本書引人入勝。文基‧拉馬克里希南能夠將最複雜的主題闡述得清晰易懂、引人入勝、充滿洞見，令我嘆為觀止。」— 比爾‧布萊森，《紐約時報》暢銷書《人體奧秘》作者
「上個世紀，我們在延緩死亡方面取得了顯著的成功。我們能否更進一步，延長壽命？這本博學、細緻入微且富有洞見的著作，講述了一個關於衰老和死亡原因的精彩探索故事，一路揭露了一些江湖騙子，並為永生帶來了一絲希望。」——馬特·里德利，《紐約時報》一路揭露了一些江湖騙子，並為永生帶來了一絲希望。」——馬特·里德利，《紐約時報》一路出版了《基因時報》作者。
「只有像他這樣才華橫溢的天才，才能直面死亡，直到它吐露一些高度加密的秘密……這是一部精妙絕倫的著作……它的結構幾乎就像一部引人入勝的懸疑小說，各種問題和假設相互碰撞，有的站不住腳，有的經受住了考驗，然後引領我們繼續探索……它以簡潔明了的文筆《新印度快報》
「本書以簡潔精闢的視角，對生命科學進行了令人欽佩且清晰的概括性闡述……書中講述了那些致力於生命科學研究的人們的故事——其中大多數人在科學上收效甚微——拉馬克里希南巧妙地運用了敘事技巧，使本書生動起來。」——《印度電訊報》
「《我們為何死亡》一書穿插著引人入勝的軼事、奇特的人物和寶貴的歷史視角，使其超越了對現有技術的簡單總結，更具深度。」——《自然》雜誌
「傑出之作……我饒有興致地讀完了這本書。」——艾瑞克‧托波爾，《真理之路》Substack
「拉馬克里希南因『對核醣體結構和功能的研究』榮獲2009年諾貝爾化學獎。令人惱火的是（我這麼說並非惡意），他似乎也是一位才華橫溢的作家。」— 文學中心
「能將科學、政治、回憶錄和醫學輕鬆、優雅、清晰地融合在一起的書籍實屬罕見。拉馬克里希南的這本書恰逢人們對永生的熱情和希望達到白熱化的程度，它完美地做到了這一點，並帶領讀者踏上一段奇妙的旅程，探索圍繞死亡和臨終的科學、神秘和形而上學的已知與未知。
「一本令人驚嘆的書：兼具深刻的哲學思考、幽默的筆觸和嚴謹的科學性。」— 伊迪絲‧赫德，歐洲分子生物學實驗室主任
「我非常喜歡這本精彩絕倫的書——它充滿了希望、趣味和非凡的研究。它完美地解答了每個人生命的核心問題：理解我們為何終將死亡，有助於我們理解我們該如何生活。它改變了我對整個生命世界的看法，但更重要的是，它改變了我對自身以及我餘下時光的看法。」——《紐約時報》作者。
「引人入勝。」— Big Brains 播客
「[一本]引人入勝的書。…永生這個主題充滿爭議，很難將炒作與現實區分開來。拉馬克里希南旨在幫助讀者理解億萬富翁的種種行徑、令人瞠目結舌的新聞稿以及引人注目的科學進展。他希望讀者能夠理解我們為什麼會衰老、為什麼會死亡，以及在現實中我們能做些什麼。
---"A fascinating, counterintuitively hopeful, book." - Think (NPR affiliate KERA)
"For a book about death, Venki Ramakrishnan's Why We Die is joyfully alive. The story he tells is one of aging and death, but along the way he covers a huge range of biology, evolution, genetics, chemistry, and medicine. This is science writing at its finest: readable, authoritative, and impactful. The vignettes of important discoveries and the scientists that made them enliven the text, and show the personal side of the science of aging. As a scientist who studies dead things, this book gave me a whole new perspective on that one inevitable thing in every organism's life." - STEVE BRUSATTE, professor and paleontologist at the University of Edinburgh and New York Times bestselling author of The Rise and Fall of the Dinosaurs
"Why We Die is a crisply written, captivating and clear-eyed view of death, and how to defeat it. From research on starvation diets, young blood and cryonics to the longevity of naked mole rats, Nobelist Venki Ramakrishnan introduces us to a cast of extraordinary characters in his quest to fathom how elastic lifespan could prove to be. I believe Why We Die will be his enduring legacy, yet deep down, suspect most of us would still rather achieve immortality through not dying." - ROGER HIGHFIELD, author and science director of the Science Museum Group, London
"Utterly fascinating. Venki Ramakrishnan's ability to take the most challenging subjects and make them clear, enthralling and packed with insights fills me with awe." - BILL BRYSON, New York Times bestselling author of The Body
"The conquest of premature death has been remarkably successful in the past century. Can we go one better and extend life? This erudite, nuanced and insightful book tells a rich tale of discovery about why we age and die, skewers some charlatans along the way and offers just a glimmer of hope about immortality." - MATT RIDLEY, New York Times bestselling author of Genome
"It takes a prolific genius to take a bull by its horns, to stare down death until it gives up some of its highly encrypted secrets. ... An exquisite exposition. ... Structured almost like a page-turner of a whodunit, questions and hypotheses fly at each other, flop or survive and then usher us further on this quest. ... A panoramic view of the unfolding of the secrets of ageing and death in crisp cogent writing that unfolds as a journey, delightful at every pitstop." - The New Indian Express
"Provides succinct insights [in] what is admirably and clearly a generalist account. ... In the human stories of the people who worked on the science of living — most of them ineffectual from the scientific angle — a storytelling opportunity Ramakrishnan relishes, the book comes alive." - Telegraph India
"Why We Die is peppered with fascinating anecdotes, peculiar personalities and valuable historical perspectives, giving it an extra dimension beyond a summary of the state of the art.” - Nature
"Outstanding. ... I read this book with fascination." - ERIC TOPOL, Ground Truths Substack
"Ramakrishnan won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2009 'for studies of the structure and function of the ribosome.' Annoyingly (I say this with love), he seems to also be a knockout writer." - Literary Hub
"It is rare to find a book that manages to combine science, politics, memoir, and medicine with ease, grace, and lucidity. Ramakrishnan's book, which comes at a time when the hype and hope around immortality has ascended to a febrile pitch, achieves precisely all of this, while taking readers on an incredible journey that encompasses the knowns and many unknowns that surround the science, mystery, and metaphysics of death and dying. This is a book for many generations, about many generations." - SIDDHARTHA MUKHERJEE, author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Emperor of All Maladies and the #1 New York Times bestseller The Gene
“An amazing book: profoundly philosophical, funny, and scientific, all at once.” - EDITH HEARD, Director General of the European Molecular Biology Laboratory
“I have so enjoyed reading this spectacular book—it’s full of hope and fun and extraordinary research. It beautifully answers the question at the core of every life. Understanding why we must die helps us understand how we must live. It changed my perspective on the whole living world but most of all myself and the time I have left.” - CHRIS VAN TULLEKEN, New York Times bestselling author of Ultra-Processed People
"Fascinating." - Big Brains podcast
“[A] fascinating book. … With a topic as charged as eternal life, it’s hard to separate hype from reality. Ramakrishnan aims to help readers make sense of billionaire antics, breathless press releases, and splashy scientific advances. He wants his reader to understand why we age, why we die, and what, realistically, can be done about it. … Colorful and memorable. … Entertaining. … [Ramakrishnan’s] writing is clever and approachable. He strives to demystify these high-context ideas for the average reader.” - Undark Magazine
"For anyone overwhelmed by the discourse around longevity and the seemingly constant 'breakthroughs' in the quest to vanquish the march of time, Why We Die is meant to help make sense of it all. ... The appeal of Why We Die is evergreen. But the book also comes at an opportune moment." - GQ
"Why We Die asks whether it is possible to arrest the decay of body and mind. ... [Ramakrishnan] has a jauntily accessible style. He likens a breakdown in vital proteins to an orchestra playing discordantly. When discussing how the energy-generating mitochondria in cells degrade over time, he pictures them 'rusting from within.' ... Boosting your lifespan may beguile the imagination but could rob your existence of meaning, because there is no urgency to make every day count. Perhaps, after all, life’s transience is the key to its beauty." - The Economist
"A dispassionate journey through current scientific understanding of aging and death." - The Harvard Gazette
"[An] expert voice. ... Ramakrishnan is merciless in his debunking of such 'crackpot' promises like cryogenics. ... But other avenues such as caloric restriction and targeting senescent cells for destruction are more plausible." - The Straits Times (Singapore)
"Ramakrishnan weaves a story that illuminates this existential topic from so many angles – brilliant!" - TOM CECH, Nobel Laureate and former president of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute
"[Ramakrishnan's] status as a knowledgeable outsider to the field allows him to evaluate aging science objectively and explain key concepts lucidly. ... Optimistic, yet tempered, he believes that medical research has the potential to improve human aging and that we need to be mindful of how advances are deployed so as not to magnify societal inequities. ... A rewarding path to better understand the biology of aging." - Science
"Wonderfully readable. ... Vivid. ... Extraordinary." - Financial Times
"This timely book... seeks to transform our understanding of why we grow old and die." - Irish Independent
"Delves into the nitty-gritty of just what happens when a body dies, why some age more slowly than others, and the ethics of employing science to create a kind of immortality (if you’ve got the money), among many other things. Oh, and he says some good things about red wine. Accessible, and strangely entertaining. - Sydney Morning Herald (Non-Fiction Pick of the Week)
"Ramakrishnan is a fine writer, so readers will enjoy his expert if intensely detailed overview of genetics and evolution as it applies to aging. ... Fascinating. ... An illuminating account of the science of life extension with a more critical eye than most." - Kirkus Reviews
"[Ramakrishnan] has a knack for making biology accessible, and he brings a searching philosophical sensibility when considering the wisdom of seeking to extend life. ... The result is a strikingly pensive exploration of how bodies decline and whether efforts to slow that process are worth the cost." - Publishers Weekly (starred review)
*A NEXT BIG IDEA CLUB MUST-READ BOOK FOR MARCH 2024* **A FINANCIAL TIMES BEST BOOK OF SUMMER 2024**
"A wide-ranging look at the changes that take place inside our cells as we age, the prospects for being able to prevent them, and the possible consequences of doing that. An engrossing read." - SARAH GILBERT, creator of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine
“Highly accessible. ... Poetic. ... Throughout this authoritative book there is a sense of our bodies as complex systems in delicate balance—a balance we still barely understand.” - The Times (London)
"Why We Die is both an engaging, accessible overview of the science of aging and a barbed takedown of the immortality crowd. It is also a love letter to our fleeting existence. ... Ramakrishnan has a flair for lucid explanation... fusing deep scientific insights with thoughtful reflections on society—and delivering a velvet-gloved pummeling to some of the most prominent figures in aging research. ... An exhortation to dine well during our brief appearance at the feast of life." - New Statesman
“Why We Die brilliantly captures the essentials of current understanding of the aging process. This is an enjoyable romp through molecular and cell biology—and thought-provoking about ethical issues.” - LINDA PARTRIDGE, Founding Director of the Max Planck Institute for the Biology of Ageing
“This book explains, in an accessible and entertaining manner, the science behind one of the great themes of humanity. Excellent." - MICHAEL HALL, discoverer of TOR, recipient of the Lasker Award and the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences
"This riveting and revealing book is for all of us who wonder whether aging and mortality are the next frontiers for human science to cross. Has the first person destined to live to two hundred already been born? Can we really extend our longevity further and further until … until what? Immortality? Why We Die takes us on a thrilling ride through the science of aging. Meet naked mole rats, lugworms, budding yeast and creepy human charlatans on the way. Venki Ramakrishnan has an extraordinary gift for explaining science with clarity, wit, and enviably entertaining narrative flair. A must read." - STEPHEN FRY, comedian, actor, writer
"Why We Die is a candid, wide-ranging, and hype-free survey of the latest in longevity research, from tortoises to telomeres. With his delightful gift for storytelling, Venki Ramakrishnan breathes life into the biology of death. If you want to know what science tells us about lifespan, Why We Die is the only book you need." - SAFI BAHCALL, bestselling author of Loonshots: Nurture the Crazy Ideas That Win Wars, Cure Diseases, and Transform Industries
"Enthralling and eminently accessible. ... [Ramakrishnan] probes the essential ethical question that runs through it all. Even if we could live forever, should we?" - Bookseller (London)----
朱敬一 評Why We Die 老化可以改變嗎
這是一本關於「老化」的科普書，作者有專業，也有傲慢
作者是 2009 年諾貝爾化學獎得主，做的是核糖體的研究。由於生物的老化從個體面而言涉及許多體內蛋白質的變化，所以作者權威的生化研究背景，是最適合做「老化」科學分析的。要了解老化，這是一本非常好的科普讀物。以下，我要從不同的角度，對這本書做補充、解說，也做一些評論。以下所述，除了 4、5 兩段，都是我自己演化學研究的整理，與本書內容的關連比較小。
1. 關於生物為什麼會「老化」的研究，其實可以大致分為兩類。其一是「總體面的」，其二是「個體面的」。本書的前兩章，談的是「總體面」的理論。總體面理論不涉及任何細胞、器官哀老的微觀觸因與機制，而是純粹討論邏輯、機率、推理。例如其中之一是 disposable soma 理論：生物個體每期可用的總能量有限，他們必須把這些能量用於繁衍後代（例如製造卵子）與修補損壞細胞。由於天擇會挑選「極大化繁衍後代」的物種，因此生物個體的最適能量分配策略，通常不會是「極大化細胞修復」。久而久之，身體累積了不少未能修補的細胞，當然漸漸造成生物體的老化。
2. 第二種總體面老化理論，則是 deleterious mutations. 這個理論說：有若干基因突變是一刀兩刃的。這些突變可能有利於年輕時的競爭（例如年輕時骨骼長得快，個頭強壯，可以打敗競爭對手），但是不利於年老時的存活（例如骨質疏鬆，容易斷裂）。但因為年輕時競爭順利、繁衍昌旺，為天擇所喜，於是這樣（年少生猛）的突變基因會存活下來，久而久之就累積成年老時（因骨質疏鬆）死亡率上升的原因。deleterious mutation 理論不需要找個體證據，因為幾十億年基因的突變次數上兆，大數法則下 deleterious mutation 絕對是對的。
3. 以上這些總體面老化理論，都言之成理，在數學推演上絕無瑕疵，頗能幫助我們理解「為什麼生物體會老化」。這樣的總體理論把生物個體想像成一個「極大化繁衍後代」的數學解題，除了能夠解釋老化，也能解釋許多其他的生命現象（例如停經、孔雀開屏、雄性動物通常比雌性動物大）。但由於總體演化理論不涉及微觀的分子生物學，未能觸及個別細胞、器官、疾病的觸因與影響機制，所以完全無助於「修復」。本書 3-11 章全是老化的「個體理論」。這些個體理論系出多元，包括細胞端粒在複製中縮短、飲食控制如何減少活性氧化物、粒線體如何因氧化而受損、為什麼老化的生物個體到處「發炎」、人能不能「先冷凍，將來再活回來」等等。每一個問題，都有分子生物學的細緻推理與白話解說，足見作者功力深厚。
4. 個體老化論有什麼重要結論呢？我們「人」能夠「拒絕老化」嗎？本書 236-237 整理了若干結論，大致說來不怎麼樂觀。a) 即使消除所有與老化有關的死因，預期壽命頂多增加 15 年。b) 人類長生不死的可能，與以往一樣渺茫。c) 沒有證據顯示抗氧化劑可以改善人類老化。d) 一個人不可能「變回年輕」，所以老賊沒辦法變成小賊。e) 換腦或重新改寫腦程式，像是科幻小說的題材，沒有科學根據。f) 沒有證據顯示端粒縮短對於人類壽命有決定性的影響。⋯ 我想不必繼續了。想要抗拒老化？死了這條心吧。
5. 作者下筆幽默，絕大部分的撰寫都幽默風趣。但在 232 頁，因為批評「一位」學者，作者說此人「展現了許多物理學家與電腦科學家在面對生物學家時特有的傲慢」。這樣「由對一人的厭惡」拓展到「物理學家與生物學家」之間的廣泛矛盾，讀起來像是江湖宿怨，而缺乏論述基礎。在 12 章，作者甚至對於「少子女化」所造成的人口減少表示讚許，認為這「帶來極大益處，尤其是對環境與自然的影響。我很困惑為什麼經濟學家會把這種現象視為問題，特別是談到中國人口的下降⋯這讓我覺得荒謬。」這樣的說法，我也曾聽到一位台灣的化學諾貝爾奬得主提起。我不敢說這是學科與學科間的宿怨，但似乎呈現這兩位化學諾貝爾獎得主對於自己不熟悉知識的武斷與傲慢。底下，讓我補充一些人類社會特有的「演化」。
6. 對於絕大多數物種而言，「演化」就只是生物學：物競天擇，適者生存。但是對於複雜一點的群聚物種，例如蜜蜂、螞蟻、獵狗、殺人鯨、海豚等，他們的演化除了生物特徵的改變，也必然包括群體組織架構的改變。例如殺人鯨都是由年輕鯨媽媽出去獵捕，由祖母鯨負責看護小鯨，然後三代同堂一起食用趕集回來的魚群。有學者發現，已經停經的祖母鯨居然還能分泌乳汁餵養小鯨。這樣的「跨代分工」，數理生物學家還勉強可以用模型予以解釋，但是已經有點困難，因為背後有不少「不知道如何解釋的數學條件」。人類社會的群聚比蜜蜂、螞蟻複雜千萬倍，其支撐的機制絕對無法用生物學解釋。
7. 回到前段作者所說的「人口」問題。兩位諾貝爾化學獎得主都認為，「人口減少」是好事。Well, 人口少減少二氧化碳排放，對減緩全球暖化確實是好事。但是「人」是有「下標」(subscripts) 的。除了人口總數量之外，人類社會的演化，必須搭配不同（下標）人的組成，這樣才能構成一個完整的、足夠支撐力的 supporting network. 人類社會最重要的 subscripts 之一，就是年齡。社會上一萬個 40 歲的小賊與一萬個 90 歲的老賊，就算他們的二氧化碳排放相同， social support 的意義卻截然不同。此外，形成或是修改這個年齡結構的 gap，需要很長的時間。例如如果我們今天 40 歲有經驗的勞動力不足一萬人，即使政府一聲令下能夠立刻令媽媽生下一萬個寶寶，也要等到 40 年後，他們才能成為 40 歲有經驗的勞動力。兩位化學諾貝爾獎不了解 age-specific social support 的重要性，單純從一個切入點看問題，可能是因為通識的缺陷，也可能是因為學科的傲慢。其實除了年齡下標，人還有許多別的 dimensions, 其組成的 social support, 複雜度絕對不亞於蛋白質。
8. 既然談到人口，就讓我再對中國或是台灣的「人口問題」補上一堂課。各位同學：已開發國家的所謂人口問題，不是指人口的數量過多或過少，而是指「人口的年齡結構與若干社會 infrastructures 所搭配的年齡結構，產生 mismatch.」。例如，台灣 15-20 歲的小孩人數太少，但是 1996 年教改會「廣設高中大學」之下設立了太多學校，於是學校的空位與適齡學童人數產生 mismatch. 再如，台灣科技產業蓬勃發展，需要大批 22-30 歲的大學理工畢業生投入職場，偏偏台灣這個年齡層的畢業生人數少，又是 mismatch. 又如，台灣各種福利制度的繳費人是壯年，享受福利的是老年，結果人口老化下繳費的人太少、領福利的人太多，造成資金大缺口，又是 mismatch. 各位同學：人口問題的關鍵是 mismatch, 而不是二氧化碳排放。
9. 我扯遠了嗎？其實沒有。年金制度、教育制度、科技產業，都是支撐人類複雜演化的必要制度設計。「微管仲，吾其披髮左袵矣」那是孔子的嗟嘆。今天我們大概可以說：「若無種種社會制度之搭配，我們不可能有廣泛婦女勞動參與、普遍的教育、平權實踐、學術自由、社會保險 ⋯」。前文提到，若國家想用生育政策解決 mismatch，通常緩不濟急，因為嬰兒至少要廿年才能長大成人，成為緩衝 infrastructure 的助力。那麼，國家能夠改變 infrastructure 以解決 mismatch 嗎？那也一樣困難，因為任何一個 infrastructure 背後，都有許多的 vested payment （例如已經繳了幾十年的年金保險費）或是 vested investment (例如學校的校舍與已經聘任的老師）。既然年齡結構難以改變、社會 infrastructure 也難以改變，就僵住了，往往形成「社會架構反而形成社會進步的阻礙」。經濟學家看到中國人口結構對該國經濟發展的阻礙，作者其實根本沒有了解 mismatch 的問題。
10. 當研究者利用國家社會提供的種種經費、種種自由、盡情探索自然、發掘老化之謎、享受知識喜悅的時候，我們研究者也需要有同等的謙卑。這個謙卑的起點，就是對於社會百工百業、貧弱愚下、不同領域兢兢業業貢獻者的理解（appreciation)。任何人「瞧不起」其他人或其他學科，庶幾近乎傲慢矣。台灣社總是有些令人厭煩的學科沙文主義，平常還稍加遮掩，一旦得到些獎項肯定之後就原形畢露。「學科沙文主義」，也許是 1996 年教育改革最該改卻沒有改的盲點。
牟中原
最長壽的哺乳類動物是座頭鯨。可以活到250 歲以上。為什麼？第一當然是牠們太巨大了，沒有天敵。第二，就是我個人的看法了。座頭鯨不僅會唱歌，而且是海洋中最著名的「首席聲樂家」。 牠們所發出的聲音具有固定、可預測且不斷重複的規律，結構極其複雜，因此生物學家將其定義為「歌曲」。牠們可能是最安全感又最快樂的動物。怎能不長壽呢？
沒有留言:
張貼留言