北京舉行了紀念長征七十周年大會，所有當權高層悉數出動，奇怪的卻是其出席排名。
中共一向注重排名，今次竟然發現江澤民被排在第二位，僅於總書記胡錦濤之後，可見是在上海市委陳良宇事件後所擺的一種姿態。姑勿論背後江澤民是挺陳還是挺胡，這都反映了一種中國官場的怪現象。
其他國家完首從來都是下台便不會直接插手政事，唯獨中國一向都有太上皇這觀念，而這太上皇有多大影響力就要看當今皇上有多大實權了。二千多年來這種封建人治制度一直揮之不去。
記得讀中學的時候曾預言上海經濟將於二十年內追到香港，而民主政治於中國應可在三至四代人之後，即六十年左右因為較佳的經濟和教育條件下開始發展。現在看來，上海的猜想就是不中亦不遠矣，真希望政治發展也給猜中。
我或者不能親眼看見，但又有什麼關係。
Some scientists have come up with an idea that religious beliefs may be related to a defect in our brains, and more specifically, to temporal lobe epilepsy. This actually creates a new branch of science called, self-contradictorily termed, “neurotheology”.
The temporal lobe controls, inter alia, hearing, speech and memory. Its mulfunction will give us a feeling of non-being.
They’ve found that the effect of praying or meditation is to lower the blood flow to the temporal lobe and creates the sensation of an existential detachment, not dissimilar to a religious enlightenment, or as the scientists have called it, religious hallucinations.
What interests me is actually the remark the lead scientist made at the end of the study. He said this research in no way undermines religious beliefs, it could well be that God has planted this “antenna” into certain people so they are more likely to discover and communicate to God.
This reminds me of the scientists’ and jurists’ struggle to break free of religious domination in the 16th century while submitted themselves to the church.
Corpernicus did not dare to publish his sun-centred thesis in all his life.
His supporter Galileo’s helicendric model was banned by the church and was tried on heresy, who was house-arrested for the rest of his life.
While Grotius appeared to be building his natural law theory on God’s laws, he sneaked in at the end of his thesis “And what we have said would still have great weight, even if we were to grant … that there is no God”
Similarly, Jesuit Bellarmine added a bit more boldly that “even if per impossible man were not God’s creation”, we would still be able to interpret natural law since we “would still be a rational creature”
After so many centuries, these so-called neurotheologists, still have to be safe not to upset the church.
狼為生存覓食而不擇手段，羊因其天性也只好束手待殲。
記得鹿鼎記裡金庸寫道：「咱們做百姓的，總是死路一條。『未知鹿死誰手』，只不過未知是誰來殺了這頭鹿，這頭鹿，卻是死定了的。”」
羊也好鹿也好，總之便是要死。
本來物競天爭，自然定率，原是沒有什麼好說。但依我看這一代比祖先更進步。殺羊又何需純為口腹之慾？
國家爭相製造殺人武器究竟所為何事？戰爭的可怕難道一點也感受不到？
他們甚至不為覓食。
北韓有數以萬計的平民沒飯吃，這當兒還做什麼勞什子核彈幹嗎？
為私慾？果然青出於藍！
常人罵人「禽獸不如」。真懂往自己臉上貼金。
Education reform has always been a hot and controversial topic. While the consensus is that it needs to be changed, no agreement can ever be reached as to how we should go about it.
Education has gradually become a commodity in these few years, advertisements of tuition institutions have blossomed, and tutors have been “pop-star-ified”. Let’s set aside the moral implication for argument’s sake, there is definitely a strong economic force that has been driving all these, but why?
Are conventional schools failing to provide the kind of training this society needs? What do parents and students really want from their schools?
A recent study provides us with an interesting, yet sad, insight. A number of parents were asked what did they wish their children would spend more of their time on? The most popular responses are “to study”, “to learn piano”, etc. Startlingly, not one single parent wants the children to spend more time on talking to them!
I have no doubt that these parents love their kids with all their hearts, and genuinely strive to provide their children with the best they can. The problem seems to be that, is what they think the best really the best for the children?
The value system of today’s society is probably the driving force behind this. Every year there are voices that the HKCEE is just another exam, and it’s no big deal messing it up a bit, some “successful individuals” will come out and tell you how bad they did in their HKCEE. The next day, however, there will be huge coverage on how many candidates graduate with 10A’s, then there are reports on university admission scores, then there are reports on the salary scale of the graduates telling you how much more their graduates can make than those do from other institutions, then……
Education no more! It’s a score competition. People no longer care about learning, they only care about how to get the best results with the minimum effort. Good results mean a place for a profit-making subject in a reputable university, and a profitable life follows. What do they learn from school? Come on, who cares!
And you’re trying to convince the parents and students that exam results don’t count?
Who are you trying to bluff?
人對每一門學問或多或少總有一點點認識，但對著行內人時總還有些自知，不會亂放厥詞。
對著法律，態度便有很大分別了。可能由於每個人對法律總有些認識吧，一些耳熟能詳的名詞如「犯罪動機」、「意圖」等等又都以為已全面掌握。不竟在電視節目裡也看多了，那還會不明白。
當別人聽到我學法律時，多會告訢我他們這個也懂。事實上所有商科都需要修一門「簡易版」的商業法，難怪他們會如此以為。就是沒有修過這商業法的人，也可能由於種種原因而接觸過法律或法律文件，當然，他們亦因而懂得法律。
不明白為什麼當你問人一顆電池如何能發電的時侯他們會告訴你不知道，但如果問及法律的問題時，卻總有高見。
昨天有則新聞，一男子因為在網上留言版發言組職「快閃強姦黨」而被判犯「有違公德」罪成，「但考慮到被告沒有意圖干犯集體強姦罪行，判罰款及監禁均不合適，故判社會服務令。」今早聽到某電台主持人評論說根據普通法，所有罪行都必需同時有「動機」與「行為」才可定罪，既然法官也認為被告沒有意圖干犯集體強姦罪行，那又怎能入罪云云。
我相信任何一個法律系一年級學生都可以指出「那個」強姦動機並非相對於「這個」不道德的行為。
當然，主持人以為這他也懂。
記得讀法律第一年，在刑法的第一堂，講師要我們把從電視和日常生活所「學」的刑法忘掉，因為絕大部份都是錯的。
知識讓我們知道自己究竟懂得些什麼，也讓自己知道究竟有些什麼是不懂。
椅背上的塗鴉 