吴金闪在《读书人》上介绍的书们

最近在一个推荐公众读书的平台上讲了几本书。自己觉得还不错。分享给大家。

《链接》

《爆发》

《网络科学》

网络科学的两个补充例子

《教育的目的》、《如何阅读一本书》、《教的少学得多》

其中,教的少学得多,是我自己的书,如果需要下载,可以访问吴金闪的书们

还有一个公众科学报告,稍后也会发布在读书人平台。

国务院规定《弟子规》进课堂

网上看到这个消息,看起来挺真:2017国务院重大国策:全面复兴传统文化

真希望是谣言啊。一个中央政府尽然需要规定上什么课用什么教材,要不要规定上课讲什么啊?例如,录好视频各个学校播放不是更好?让懂的人的做懂的事情,让真正明白的人发挥其创造性。

另外,好选不选,偏偏选了《弟子规》,为什么?《论语》《孟子》毫无疑问是更好的选择,《史记》、《左传》、《通鉴》毫无疑问是更更好的选择。传统文化里面的太史公的风骨和毅力,屈原的一片赤心,这些才是真的需要我们现代中国人学习和捡起来的,而不是什么”尊长站着,你就不不能坐着“,”尊长训着,你就只能听着“,”尊长要求,你就必须当做命令“。这些都是什么玩意儿。

看看人家亚里士多德的“吾爱吾师,但更爱真理”,看看笛卡尔的“我从来不把我自己没有完全想明白的事情当做进一步思考的基础”,以及罗素的批判性思维是现代科学发展的基础。我们需要的,是解放生产力,是科学的进步,然后开始独立思考。不是吗?

当然,如果有人愿意讲有人愿意学,商业和自愿行为,学什么都行。但是,政府真的打算来鼓励这个?根本上,《弟子规》就没有讲过道理。论语和孟子不是,每次孔孟两位夫子可是都要面对大家的问题,并且企图讲清楚道理的。

言之有物和概念地图

很多人说话喜欢言之无物,也就是通常不是一个statement(陈述、命题):一个命题通常包含两个不同的具体事物或者概念,然后指出来这两个东西之间的某种联系。例如三角形的内角和是\(180^{0}\)表示“三角形”具有一种“内角和是\(180^{0}\)”的性质,或者说“三角形的内角和”具有“等于\(180^{0}\)”的性质。但是由于这个例子用了数学的知识,有可能人又会觉得仅仅在数学或者科学上,有必要通过概念和命题来传递信息,而在日常生活中是没有必要的。昨天晚上和今天的两个例子刚好可以说明,在日常生活中,言之有物有多重要。

第一个例子是百度八卦,说,伊能静的婆婆对于伊能静向婆婆状告她和她丈夫吵架的事情,说了一句很有“哲理”的话:夫妻相处一定要有“根”。好像挺有道理,但是,由于没有交代这个“根”是什么,成了一句完全没有意义的话。如果联系到伊能静的孩子的多么不容易获得,可以用“孩子”来解释或者替代“根”,那么,意思就是,夫妻相处一定要有孩子。不管这句话是否正确,至少,这是一个陈述,可以有对错的陈述。如果用“情感”来解释和代替“根”,那也说得过去。但是,如果不给“根”一个具体的指代,那么这句话就成了“夫妻相处一定要有夫妻相处的基础或者道理!”废话,同义反复而已。就好像说三角形一定是三角形,或者说三角形一定要有三个角(同时注意到三角形本来就是通过三个角来定义的。如果三角形本身是通过三条边来定义的,那么,三角形有三个角也算一个陈述)。看八卦作者的意思,好像还很欣赏这句有哲理的话。大范围的喜欢甚至使用言之无物的话,是中国人说话和写文字的一个习惯。方舟子说这样的文风要通过几代人在写作中引入科学,甚至通过写说明文之类的方式来改变。有一定道理。但是,不够,更深层的原因是思维上的。需要通过写议论文,而且是不许引用他人说法当做论据(当做批驳对象目标可以)的,一定要有自己的观点的议论文来改变。同时,还需要学习概念地图这个工具,通过概念和概念之间的联系的方式来表达思想。还需要学点什么是科学——成系统的原则上可以是错的但是迄今为止还没有被(实验、观察、逻辑)证明是错的命题的集合。具体的科学知识,例如“玻璃为什么容易碎”不重要,什么是科学才是最重要的。

坐在马桶上看到的这个八卦(不是好习惯),搞得本来“其乐也泄泄”也不乐了。

第二个例子就是我家逸儿问我“玻璃为什么容易碎”以及我的回答。由于具体的答案比较复杂,我也不确定我能够说的好以至于六岁的孩子能够听懂,我就回答,“那是因为玻璃比较脆”。于是,逸儿就开始了不断地追问,“脆是什么意思”, “为什么玻璃比较脆”,“为什么脆的东西就是容易碎”这些问题。忽然之间,我意识到,我同样言之无物了。在这里,我实际上就是用“脆”的概念偷换了“容易碎”,还希望模糊过关,希望逸儿暂时对这个答案感到满意。非常感谢逸儿的追问。实际上,我必须首先对脆有一个“独立于容易碎”的定义,然后,说明为什么玻璃脆再说明脆容易碎,然后才是一个可以被理解被思考的答案。否则,就是一个同义反复,就是一个希望逸儿死记硬背直接接受的答案!

于是,刚才,我想了一个粗糙的但是能够被理解的方式重新解释了一下。完了逸儿说大概能够想明白了。具体这个说法一点也不重要,不过,我也试着提供在这里。我说玻璃或者其他岩石甚至金属里面其实都有一些小颗粒,比如昨天在地质博物馆看到的那样。这些小颗粒需要用某种方式连在一起才能形成咱们看到的玻璃岩石金属,就好像今天早上我用胶水把断开的石头粘起来。不同的东西小颗粒和小颗粒之间的“胶水”都是不一样的。有一些小颗粒更容易粘的牢,有的胶水也更容易把小颗粒粘牢。有一些就不太牢。于是,有的就容易一片一片剥下来,有的就容易一块一块敲断,有的就更加不容易。至于什么样的胶水什么样的颗粒的组合会更牢和更不牢就只能以后解释了。这个时候,心儿插入解释“逸儿,这个的胶水不是真的胶水,就是说胶水你更容易明白”。没想到心儿不仅听懂了,还做了自己的思考。

总结:
* 言之无物很普遍,有的时候我自己也犯。
* 言之有物可以参考命题(不是同义反复,不是模糊过关)的形式。概念地图——主要关注概念和概念之间的关系和什么是科学什么是数学可以帮助实现言之有物。
* 我们传达意思思想是为了启发思考,而不仅仅是接受。

unity-panel-ser 吃内存

安装了Ubuntu16.10,经常死机(慢,不反应,重启就会好)。top查看发现是这个叫做“unity-panel-ser”的程序再吃内存。google之后发现是owncloud和qt-5的问题。检索到解决方法如下,记下来,下次遇到可以用。

  • apt install appmenu-qt5
  • in your ~/.profile, add ‘export QT_QPA_PLATFORMTHEME=appmenu-qt5’
  • reload your session

来自于https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/1635577

顺便vmware安装和启动遇到问题。安装需要下载vmware的workstation player的新版本。启动的时候,每次都需要重新编译内核,解决方式是:

sudo apt-get install linux-headers-3.8.0-19-generic
sudo /usr/bin/vmware-modconfig –icon=vmware-workstation –appname=VMware

来自于http://askubuntu.com/questions/292049/vmware-workstation-error-modules-must-be-compiled-how-to-fix

终于不用经常重新启动了。

Feynman有意思的话

从来反对记忆名言警句——想我所想,问我要问,说我要说即可,管他谁说过呢,类似就是佐证,不同就是创新,但是,刚好看到别人整理好的Feynman在各个书各种场合说的有意思的话,摘下几句留在这里:真的说了我想说的话,还说的挺好。

Science Quotes by Richard P. Feynman

goodreads上的检索——关键字Feynman——结果

关于理解型学习

“I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something.”
― Richard Feynman

“They didn’t put two and two together. They didn’t even know what they knew. I don’t know what’s the matter with people: they don’t learn by understanding, they learn by some other way — by rote or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!”
― Richard Feynman

“What I cannot create, I do not understand.”
― Richard Feynman

“Study hard what interests you the most in the most undisciplined, irreverent and original manner possible.”
― Richard Feynman

“Nobody ever figures out what life is all about, and it doesn’t matter. Explore the world. Nearly everything is really interesting if you go into it deeply enough.”
― Richard Feynman

“The highest forms of understanding we can achieve are laughter and human compassion.”
― Richard Feynman

“When it came time for me to give my talk on the subject, I started off by drawing an outline of the cat and began to name the various muscles.
The other students in the class interrupt me: “We know all that!”
“Oh,” I say, “you do? Then no wonder I can catch up with you so fast after you’ve had four years of biology.” They had wasted all their time memorizing stuff like that, when it could be looked up in fifteen minutes.”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character

“Words can be meaningless. If they are used in such a way that no sharp conclusions can be drawn.”
― Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist

“You see, I get so much fun out of thinking that I don’t want to destroy this pleasant machine that makes life such a big kick.”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character

“That was a very good way to get educated, working on the senior problems and learning how to pronounce things.”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character

“I learned from my father to translate: everything I read I try to figure out what it really means, what it’s really saying.”
― Richard Feynman, ‘What Do You Care What Other People Think?’: Further Adventures of a Curious Character

关于批判性思维(和第一部分“理解型学习有联系”,和独创性有联系)

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”
― Richard Feynman

“Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.”
― Richard Feynman

“I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”
― Richard Feynman

“Of course, you only live one life, and you make all your mistakes, and learn what not to do, and that’s the end of you.”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character

“What Do You Care What Other People Think?”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman

“In general, we look for a new law by the following process: First we guess it; then we compute the consequences of the guess to see what would be implied if this law that we guessed is right; then we compare the result of the computation to nature, with experiment or experience, compare it directly with observation, to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It does not make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it does not make any difference how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is — if it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong.”
― Richard Feynman

“We absolutely must leave room for doubt or there is no progress and there is no learning. There is no learning without having to pose a question. And a question requires doubt.
― Richard Feynman

“Curiosity demands that we ask questions, that we try to put things together and try to understand this multitude of aspects as perhaps resulting from the action of a relatively small number of elemental things and forces acting in an infinite variety of combinations”
― Richard Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics vols 1-2

“Have no respect whatsoever for authority; forget who said it and instead look what he starts with, where he ends up, and ask yourself, ‘Is it reasonable?'”
― Richard Feynman

关于科学和艺术、生活

“I have a friend who’s an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I don’t agree with very well. He’ll hold up a flower and say “look how beautiful it is,” and I’ll agree. Then he says “I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing,” and I think that he’s kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe. Although I may not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is … I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. I mean it’s not just beauty at this dimension, at one centimeter; there’s also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don’t understand how it subtracts.”
― Richard Feynman

“A poet once said, ‘The whole universe is in a glass of wine.’ We will probably never know in what sense he meant it, for poets do not write to be understood. But it is true that if we look at a glass of wine closely enough we see the entire universe. There are the things of physics: the twisting liquid which evaporates depending on the wind and weather, the reflection in the glass; and our imagination adds atoms. The glass is a distillation of the earth’s rocks, and in its composition we see the secrets of the universe’s age, and the evolution of stars. What strange array of chemicals are in the wine? How did they come to be? There are the ferments, the enzymes, the substrates, and the products. There in wine is found the great generalization; all life is fermentation. Nobody can discover the chemistry of wine without discovering, as did Louis Pasteur, the cause of much disease. How vivid is the claret, pressing its existence into the consciousness that watches it! If our small minds, for some convenience, divide this glass of wine, this universe, into parts — physics, biology, geology, astronomy, psychology, and so on — remember that nature does not know it! So let us put it all back together, not forgetting ultimately what it is for. Let it give us one more final pleasure; drink it and forget it all!”
― Richard Feynman

“Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars – mere globs of gas atoms. I too can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more? The vastness of the heavens stretches my imagination – stuck on this carousel my little eye can catch one – million – year – old light. A vast pattern – of which I am a part… What is the pattern, or the meaning, or the why? It does not do harm to the mystery to know a little about it. For far more marvelous is the truth than any artists of the past imagined it. Why do the poets of the present not speak of it? What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?”
― Richard Feynman

“Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that’s not why we do it.”
― Richard Feynman

“Physics is to math what sex is to masturbation.”
― Richard Feynman

“– and pompous fools drive me up the wall. Ordinary fools are alright; you can talk to them and try to help them out. But pompous fools – guys who are fools and covering it all over and impressing people as to how wonderful they are with all this hocus pocus – THAT, I CANNOT STAND! An ordinary fool isn’t a faker; an honest fool is all right. But a dishonest fool is terrible!”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character

“… it is impossible to explain honestly the beauties of the laws of nature in a way that people can feel, without their having some deep understanding of mathematics. I am sorry, but this seems to be the case.”
― Richard Feynman, The Character of Physical Law

“I believe that we must attack these things in which we do not believe. Not attack by the method of cutting off the heads of the people, but attack in the sense of discuss. I believe that we should demand that people try in their own minds to obtain for themselves a more consistent picture of their own world; that they not permit themselves the luxury of having their brain cut in four pieces or two pieces even, and on one side they believe this and on the other side they believe that, but never try to compare the two points of view. Because we have learned that, by trying to put the points of view that we have in our head together and comparing one to the other, we make some progress in understanding and in appreciating where we are and what we are. And I believe that science has remained irrelevant because we wait until somebody asks us questions or until we are invited to give a speech on Einstein’s theory to people who don’t understand Newtonian mechanics, but we never are invited to give an attack on faith healing, or on astrology — on what is the scientific view of astrology today.”
― Richard Feynman, The Pleasure of Finding Things Out: The Best Short Works of Richard P. Feynman

可惜没有找到关于系联性思考(这个应该算
“They didn’t put two and two together. They didn’t even know what they knew. I don’t know what’s the matter with people: they don’t learn by understanding, they learn by some other way — by rote or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!”
― Richard Feynman
)的。另外,独创性我觉得比创新性好,只要独创就行,不一定是新的,例如旧的东西的新的角度的理解和看法,完全重新发明一遍旧的东西,在学习过程中,都是很有意义的。

附几个小品

“After reading the salary, I’ve decided that I must refuse. The reason I have to refuse a salary like that is I would be able to do what I’ve always wanted to do- -get a wonderful mistress, put her up in an apartment, buy her nice things.. . With the salary you have offered, I could actually do that, and I know what would happen to me. I’d worry about her, what she’s doing; I’d get into arguments when I come home, and so on. All this bother would make me uncomfortable and unhappy. I wouldn’t be able to do physics well, and it would be a big mess! What I’ve always wanted to do would be bad for me, so I’ve decided that I can’t accept your offer.”
― Richard Feynman

“I think the educational and psychological studies I mentioned are examples of what I would like to call cargo cult science. In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they’ve arranged to make things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas—he’s the controller—and they wait for the airplanes to land. They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn’t work. No airplanes land. So I call these things cargo cult science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they’re missing something essential, because the planes don’t land.”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman! Adventures of a Curious Character

“It was a kind of one-upmanship, where nobody knows what’s going on, and they’d put the other one down as if they did know. They all fake that they know, and if one student admits for a moment that something is confusing by asking a question, the others take a high-handed attitude, acting as if it’s not confusing at all, telling him that he’s wasting their time… All the work they did, intelligent people, but they got themselves into this funny state of mind, this strange kind of self-propagating “education” which is meaningless, utterly meaningless.”
― Richard Feynman, Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a Curious Character

展示Feynman的思考方式的视频