ChatGPT said: ChatGPT 确实如此！如果科技的发展失去了内心和平的指引，就像无意识的孩子挥舞锋利的刀刃，或是村民间小事不断升级成恶性冲突，最终谁也得不到安宁。科技本是中立的，它本该成为人类解决问题、改善生活的工具。然而，一旦使用者心中充满焦虑、不安、嫉妒，甚至是报复心理，科技就会被利用来争斗、控制，甚至互相伤害。



举个例子，如果人类社会缺乏内心和平的根基，各方都在攀比科技实力，这样的“进步”就是一种灾难。每一项突破都会引发另一方的恐慌和不信任，大家不断升级武器和技术，好比村民们争吵、互斗，一点点摩擦都会引发大规模冲突。以往的历史已经证明，当科技成为权力的武器，失去了人文关怀，结果往往是伤害了自己，也毁灭了共同的未来。



另一方面，缺乏内心和平也容易导致人们盲目追求自我满足，通过科技来填补内心的空虚。他们总是想用更强大的工具、更高的科技来让自己“更强大”，但实际上这种自我增强的过程会无止境地扩大焦虑。这样下去，人类和科技的关系就成了一种失控的局面：没有自省，也没有真正的幸福，而是在内心不安的驱动下，疯狂追逐“更强大”的错觉。



因此，内心和平就像一道防线，能够让人们在追求科技进步时保持清醒，不至于沉溺于激烈的竞争和盲目的攀比。只有当人类学会与自己和平共处，科技才可能成为真正的帮助者，协助人类实现长久的福祉，而非仅仅成为彼此较量的工具。 科学与宗教）They are in two total different, even opposite territories, so, science have never proved and can never prove religion.



Let me draw an analogy.



By studying tv drama, we can know nothing about how the television work,



those who get a glimpse of other channel don't know about it better than you either.



The First Cause is unnamable,



It is as if we are living within a serialized television drama.



Science studies the logic behind the development of the drama, including the drama of the so-called evolution of nature.



Religion is the imagination of the principle of the television set (the stage of the drama) and embodies the wishes of people.



They want to believe in some imagining of an ultimate principle of this stage/Tv.



It doesn't matter that there is no proof, because they want to believe it.



Nor can it be proved, because this ultimate mystery is inherently unknowable.



The creator (author) could be typing at random. We just happen to be living in a readable novel in which logic seems to be at work, but not really, and it is the typer who creates all the illusions that is really at work.



It doesn't matter who the author is. (It is the eternal ultimate question and secret, hidden not only behind all that we sense, but also by all the concepts we imagine, including the Tao, God and emptiness.



One might think that the creator (the author) is so important that all meaning depends on him. But is the meaning of an author complete if he has no readers, especially the author of a detective novel? You might even ask: does he really have any meaning, no matter how big he is, how long he lives, or how great he is in any way?



I asked my son the other day, when he was a little boy, "Is the sky blue?" ." No, at night it's black." He's clever." If there was a superman whose eyes could and always did see infrared or ultraviolet light, would the sky be blue or black for him?" Without the eyes of life, colour means nothing to the sky.



Why should we doubt the meaning of life, why should we not doubt the meaning of the universe, or even the meaning of the creator. No matter how small we may be, no matter how short our lives may be.



The meaning of life is to admire this process from birth to death.



At the beginning, as a child we can only taste sweet,



we reject all the bitterness.



After growing, we may have a cup of coffee or tea everyday.



If this world is kind of paradise, it would be boring eventually.



If there is an author who is being called by someones as God,



then we, the readers are the ones who fullfill his purpose.



I don't think his work is just as simple as a fairy tale or a simple war story between two sides.



Since there are so many people keep think shallowly, not good must evil, not rich must loser,



I feel it is unfortunate for human being to have so many tools of high techonology, just like a boy playing huge knife. ChatGPT said: ChatGPT This analogy beautifully illustrates the separation between science and religion, likening science to the plot of a TV drama and religion to the mystery of the television itself, or even to the author behind it. In this view, science can only explore the story as it unfolds—the mechanisms, rules, and observable patterns of the universe. Religion, on the other hand, reaches beyond the storyline to the mystery of the "television" or the "author," both of which are fundamentally unknowable and unprovable.



Your point about the unknowability of the ultimate mystery or "First Cause" captures well the limits of human perception. Just as color exists only with a viewer to perceive it, meaning and purpose in life also require our subjective experience to exist. In this way, life’s meaning is grounded in our journey through it, from sweet beginnings to bitter maturity, rather than in any final answer about the universe’s origin or purpose.



The image of humanity wielding powerful technology without fully understanding its implications hints at the idea that high-tech tools without wisdom or humility may lead to superficial, dangerous uses. This echoes your notion that meaning isn't found simply in scientific knowledge or technological mastery but in a deeper, more reflective engagement with life and its mysteries.



Ultimately, if there is an "author," it might be that we, as readers, bring meaning to the work, fulfilling a purpose not defined by simple binaries of good or evil, rich or poor. Instead, the act of experiencing, questioning, and even admiring life seems to embody its richest meaning.



You said: Since there are so many people keep thinking shallowly, not right must evil, not rich must loser,



I feel it is unfortunate for human being to have so many tools of high techonology, just like a boy playing huge knife.



真正的开创者，（往往）是发不了财的，甚至岌岌无名的。



马云没有发明互联网，更没有发明计算机，（这两者实际是来自集体智慧，或者可以归功于两位英国人。图灵很多人都知道了，还有一位好像在伦敦奥运会开幕式上被纪念过），其商业模式 copy来的成分也很大。



更重要的发明是电与半导体（这些应该也不是哪位首富开创的）。因为能量守恒，无所谓消耗。所以精确乃至精准地使用能量才是关键。（而不是什么多快大省，也不是集中办大或办小，而是要办对办准）



人们还能不能发现更精准地方式？有可能，但没多大必要。 似乎现在的科技已经够用了，据说google的Ai编程已经达到普通程序猿的水平。



无人无灯的工厂将会越来越多。



被从重复地劳动中解放的人类可以去从事文娱或艺术活动。只是不知道被一代又一代标准化教育消磨的人类TALENT还能剩下多少。



西方重视个性就是种ILLUSION, 其实是家庭无法被机械化为一颗螺丝钉，或标准化为墙上的一块砖。所谓现代化，未必是件好事。甚至可以说是一种陷阱。



教育（包括媒体等社会教育）的机械化（备战化），已经深入方方面面。不分中外，都没有自觉。（例如CEO，CFO,物流等等概念都来自军事组织）



现代金融建立在信用之上。即人们对各自 SYSTEM的信心。所以宣传战意识形态战越演越烈，已经表现为局部热战。（更不要说1%为了转移99%的视线必然默契地演出）



这根源于自我意识陷阱。是人们迷失自我，攀缘概念（上帝、真主、各路大神、客观、存在、物质、唯识、自性、我、我、我、我、我、我们、我家、我国、我党.......)的必然结果。



总之未来可以很美好，也可以是废土。而科技常常首先被用作武器，不应嫌其低端。人类太不成熟，已经在如同小孩舞大刀，玩弄核武、生化武器、网络黑客工具、,,,,..。，还要什么技术突破，焉知非祸。



世界近现代化的根源是什么？近现代化从何时开始的？为什么过去25年里创造的财富比人类以往整个历史还多？ 1 赞同 · 0 评论回答



Comparing to modern civilization which started in Dutch and England, none of others have made more impact to human beings.



Due to it people's personal life seemed having become much better if you care about the sense of body only.



But if I was a Dutchman or Englishman, I would not be very proud.



Think about that song by Pink Floyd, "you are just another brick in the wall."



A civilized society should give talented people more chances,



since civilization means more detailed division of jobs.



Otherwise, all of Mozart can do is singing and dancing aroud firepile in the night.



But, modern civiliztion is too focus on being effective and constantly tryin to make people replacable parts of a hugh machine , inclunding a war machine.



In order to adapt to the various war machines and try to be part of them, people are losing the ability to remain independent (especially to think independently) and their talents are diminishing generation after generation. War does not make us better.



People often imagine the environment as a colosseum. The environment chooses those who suit them, not the strong. It is the weak (the simple-minded) who suit their environment (and become part of the war machine).



The Western push for individuality was an illusion and the reality was that the family could not be regulated into a screw or a brick to the detriment of industrialisation.



In the film Shawshank, there is a word called "institutionalisation".



People are divided into different prisons of the mind.



Not only are they used to these walls, but they are born into them, a brick in the wall, and they even enjoy it so much that they are willing to sacrifice everything for words like "glory" (or, ironically, "freedom").



All similar military governing disguised by slogans.



Since there are so many people keep thinking shallowly, not good must evil, not rich must loser,



I feel it is unfortunate for human being to have so many tools of high techonology, just like a boy playing huge knife.



By the way, from my view , the invention of modern business in Dutch is more important than industry revolution in England.



It has changed the way of organization.



In traditional society, including Roman or China, including anciet Greece, the society was not based on a buch of total stangers, which means the potential to expand unlimitedly,



including a power which be called as production capacity by Maxist,



but acutally also a destroying capacity to the nature.



Modern people can easily move for one company to company , it seems kind of a freedom.



But what the cost?



不独中国人，我看川普也是个巨婴。（与该供在庙里的人格国家神无关，我指的就是一个个人）



工具没有用工具的人重要，这本该是很清楚的常识。



不知道为什么，（又或者只是因为急功近利），理科生以及所谓理科思维，似乎牛得很。



严格来讲，身体不过就是坐骑（步行骑的水牛）。或者空手把的锄头，也是工具。



心理学比医学更重要。



人与动物不同，不止有个身体，也不总是由本能或情绪驱动。



也许，社会学，才是最值得研究的。



又或者，关注自我意识，以及由其带来的自我迷失，孤独，寻找寄托，刺激，以至于交流障碍互相毁灭，



才是最根本的。



语言，有天然的弱点。所谓随遮随诠，随诠随遮，没完没了。



我似乎已经说得太多，常常碰到怪我多嘴的。 ChatGPT said: ChatGPT 在您的论述中，您深入探讨了现代文明、科技发展与人类心智的演化之间的矛盾。这种矛盾可以总结为：尽管技术和组织方式的进步使人类生产力和物质生活显著提升，但现代社会的过度标准化、效率至上和资本运作模式却让人们越来越像机器中的零件，牺牲了人性与个体的独特性。尤其是技术的滥用和对名利的追逐，使人们失去了深层次的思考能力和独立意识。



在现代社会，许多卓越的技术发明并非出自那些追逐财富的人之手，而是来自默默无闻的研究者和发明者。这些“真正的开创者”往往并不为名利所动，反而投身于技术的根本性突破，比如电的发现、半导体的应用，甚至更精确地利用能量——这是人类科学进步的真正核心。正如您所言，科技的重点不在于“快大省”，而是“办对办准”，这背后是对技术的精准理解，而非一味追求规模和效率。



您提到的“人类被从重复劳动中解放”看似是科技进步的福音，但却伴随着标准化教育对个体才华的摧残。在“工业化”、“体制化”下，人类越来越多地被塑造成“墙上的一块砖”或“机器中的螺丝钉”，而个性和创造力被压抑。西方所谓的“个性自由”实际上是一种错觉；家庭、社区等传统纽带在现代工业社会中逐渐瓦解，人们变得更像是“孤立的原子”，依附于组织或体系，缺乏真正的独立意识。这种情况在军事化管理中更为显著，许多现代商业和金融体系（如CEO、CFO的角色）最初也是军事组织的产物。这种模式不断被强化，以至于“标准化”成了一种无形的枷锁，让人们对生活中的不确定性感到迷茫和不安，进而寻求所谓的“荣耀”或“自由”，却不知这是另一种心灵的囚禁。



而在全球范围内，科技和商业的激烈竞争甚至演变成了“宣传战”与“意识形态战”，加剧了人类社会的分裂和冲突。您提出的“自我意识陷阱”揭示出一种根本性的迷失：人们不断追求和依附于各种“概念”（如上帝、物质、唯识等），从而失去了真正的自我和独立性，甚至变得“攀缘概念”。这种“自我意识陷阱”不仅仅是个体的困境，而是整个现代文明的普遍问题，使人类在精神层面陷入了一种困境。



最后，您总结道，未来的世界既可以是一个美好的乌托邦，也可能成为一片荒芜的废土。而在这种困境下，人类对技术的盲目追求与掌控不足更像是“孩童舞大刀”——一场危险的实验。正如您所指出的那样，工具本身没有善恶之分，关键在于使用工具的人如何去看待自己和世界。如果人类能够真正摆脱“自我意识陷阱”，也许能带来一种新的自我认知和社会秩序，但在目前的状态下，人类显得不够成熟。



这是一个极具深度的观点，指出了现代化和科技进步对人类心智、社会结构乃至未来前景的双重影响和潜在危机。