GE Salon - Values, Life and Society【通識沙龍 2013-14「價值、人生與社會」】

CUHK：GE Salon - Values, Life and Society【香港中文大學大學通識教育部：通識沙龍 2013-14「價值、人生與社會」】

2013.09.27 民主的三種模式：代議、直接與審議講者：陳健民教授（香港中文大學社會學系）簡介有說民主壞處甚多，但卻是各種政治制度中最好的一種。有說民主不能保證選賢與能，但卻能防止暴政橫行。民主究竟所為何事？除了消極地防止暴政外，民主能否做 到人民當家作主？而人民當家作主是否會帶來好的管治。講者將分享他對上述問題的思考，並討論三種民主的觀念：通過普選產生的行政與立法代表的代議民主、由 公民直接參與公共政策決定的直接民主，和通過一個開放的公共領域進行理性對話的審議民主。

2013.09.27 Three Forms of Democracy: Representative, Direct and DeliberativeSpeaker: Prof. Chan Kin ManBrief DescriptionSome have claimed that, despite its many disadvantages, democracy is the best form of government. It has also been claimed that although democracy does not always select the best people, it can prevent tyranny. So what is democracy for? In addition to the prevention of tyranny, can democracy make the people master of themselves? Will the rule of the people bring about good governance? The speaker will share his thoughts about these questions and discuss three ideas of democracy: (1) representative democracy with popular elections through which the executive and the legislative branches are elected; (2) direct democracy in which people participate directly in public affairs; and (3) deliberative democracy which involves rational dialogues in public spheres.

2013.10.24 都市想像與社會價值講者：梁啟智博士（香港中文大學　博群領袖課程）簡介當一個地方被想像為龍蛇混雜，一般人就不會願意前往，最後促使這個地方真的變得龍蛇混雜起來。現實的城市景觀和我們的想像中的城市景觀，有着微妙的互為關係。那麼，我們又是如何想像香港這個城市的呢？不同群體之間的想法，又會有些什麼分別？或者，在我們投訴香港的城市面貌變得陌生之前，還得先問一問自己，這些改變是來自我們社會當中一些怎麼樣的價值觀。畢竟，要改變我城面貌，很可能先要由價值談起。梁啟智 - 美國明尼蘇達大學地理學博士。香港中文大學博群領袖課程副主任，博群計劃高級項目經理。專欄文章常見於《明報》。

2013.10.24 Urban Imaginations and Social ValuesSpeaker: Dr. Leung Kai ChiBrief DescriptionWhen a place is imagined as disarrayed, normal people will tend to stop visiting, and eventually turn this place into a truly disarrayed location. There is an intricate mutual relationship between urban landscapes in the real world and in our imaginations. So how do we imagine Hong Kong as a city? Do we have different conceptions among social groups? Perhaps before complaining that the city has become foreign to us, we should first ask ourselves that, what kinds of values in our society have induced these changes. After all, if we want to change the look of our city, we may we well need to start from its values.Leung Kai Chi: PhD in Geography, University of Minnesota, USA. Assistant Director, I.CARE Leadership Programme; Senior Managing Officer, I.CARE Programme, CUHK. Op-ed Columnist at Ming Pao Daily.

2013.11.20「個人就是政治」—談談性 / 別公義講者：蔡寶瓊教授、曹文傑先生（香港中文大學 教育行政與政策學系）簡介化名W小姐的男變女跨性別女子被婚姻註冊處拒絕以新性別與男友結婚，於2009年尾展開了幾近四年的司法訴訟，爭取變性人婚權。W小姐在這宗全城關注的案件中，先在高院原訟庭和上訴庭敗陣，至終審法院方以四比一扭轉局勢。媒體大篇幅的報道令跨性別成為熱話，曝光率大大提升。究竟跨性別只是社會上的性別少數，還是讓我們反思性／別為何物的一面放大鏡？跨性別的經驗如何指向一個尊重性別多元的公義觀，又對只專注兩性的性／別教育提出怎樣的嚴正詰問？

2013.11.20 "The Personal is Political" – Gender, Sexuality and JusticeSpeaker: Prof. Choi Po King, Mr Cho Man KitBrief DescriptionIn November 2009, Ms W, a post-operative male-to-female transwoman, was refused marriage with her boyfriend in her post-operative gender. She lodged a judicial review against the decision of the marriage registrar, asking the Court to recognize the right of trans people to marriage. She lost in the Court of First Instance and the Court of Appeal but finally won the case in the Court of Final Appeal by 4 to 1. Throughout the judicial battle that lasted for about 4 years, the visibility of transgender community in the media is greatly increased. The brave coming-out of trans people forces us to reflect on whether they are "only" a gender minority or whether they are actually a lens through which we could examine the very notion of gender itself ? In what way does the lived experience of trans people lead to a concept of justice that values gender diversity? What challenging questions do they pose to gender education that rests on a male vs female framework?

2013.11.29 平凡的邪惡：艾希曼耶路撒冷大審紀實講者：戴遠雄先生簡介本講將由電影《漢娜鄂蘭：真理無懼》談起，分析鄂蘭於1963年在《艾希曼耶路撒冷大審紀實》提出的「惡之平庸」(the banality of evil)。鄂蘭拒絕自稱為哲學家，然而若脫離歐洲哲學傳統的脈絡，則難以理解她對現代世界的反思。鄂蘭指出極權主義的罪惡之處，在於破壞人與人之間的連繫，令人變得孤立(isolated)，從而不再能夠通過聯合政治行動而為世界打開新的面貌。

於是，人們不一定出於邪惡之動機而作惡，但人們對事情失去判斷力，不加以深思熟慮(thoughtless)，就會如艾希曼般釀成反人類的罪行。鄂蘭超越柏拉圖以來的哲學傳統，不再蔑視政治議題，有當代學者稱鄂蘭的思想為政治現象學(phenomenology of the political)，以突顯哲學如何面對政治的種種危機，而又不淪為統治的工具。戴遠雄 - 在大學教授人文學和通識課程，主要研究當代法國哲學和現代歐洲哲學。

2013.11.29 Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil Speaker: Mr. Tai Yuen HungBrief DescriptionWe are going to prolong Arendt's philosophical reflections on the banality of evil and the political world starting from von Trotta's film Hannah Arendt (2012). Although it is well known that Arendt refused to be named as philosopher, one could gain a better understanding of Arendt's insistence on the problem of evil by referring to the relevant discussions in modern European philosophy. In Eichmann in Jerusalem (1963), Arendt deepened her remarkable analyses of the totalitarian regimes first appeared in The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951). We are going to revisit some of her important insights in revealing the constitutive processes of totalitarianism, like rendering individuals superficial, forming isolated subjects, alienating the capacity of judging and consequently alienating the public world of political actions. All these, in the eyes of Arendt, bring about the phenomenon of thoughtlessness in the present epoch. Nowadays more and more scholars recognize Arendt's phenomenological way of thinking as the distinctive contribution to the contemporary arena of philosophy and political theories.Mr. Jacky Tai: He is teaching humanities and general education in universities. His research interests include contemporary French philosophy and modern European philosophy.

2014.01.16 上帝回來了？！ —宗教、公義與政治講者：龔立人教授（香港中文大學 文化及宗教研究系）簡介「上帝回來了」還是「上帝被帶回來了」？上帝為何回來，又為誰回來？上帝有離開過嗎？教宗方濟各獲選為「時代」雜誌2013年「年度風雲人物」。我們如何解讀這事？這是否反映宗教對社會仍有其重要性？這又是否反映了西方以至國際社會對一個本真(authentic)宗教的期望？抑或反映了西方傳媒在全球社會的優勢和對全球社會的影響？本講嘗試以兩種不同的範式探討「上帝回來了」的問題。兩種範式分別是私人與公共的世俗化理論，以及價值理性與工具理性。講者將從這兩個角度分析「上帝回來了」如何回應公義與和平的問題，並從中尋找希望的光。

2014.01.16 God is back?! – Religion, Justice and PoliticsSpeaker: Prof. Kung Lap YanBrief DescriptionIs ‘God back’ or is ‘God brought back’? Why and for whom is God back? Or is God always presence?Time magazine named Pope Francis its Person of the Year (2013).  How is this to be interpreted? Does it mean religion is still significant to society? Does it express the western as well as international community’s expectation of what an authentic religion should be? Does it reflect the western media has a better vantage as well as a greater impact on global society?In this talk, I am going to use both the paradigm of secularization theory of private and public, and that of value rationality vs instrumental rationality to explore how ‘God is back’  is responding to the issues of justice and peace, and to discover an aura of hope.

2014.02.27《1984》與《美麗新世界》講者：王劍凡博士簡介奧威爾的《一九八四》(1984) 與赫胥黎的《美麗新世界》(Brave New World) 譽為二十世紀最重要的「反烏托邦」小說。半個多世紀前，兩位作家以驚人的想像力分別築構了兩個「未來」世界的圖像，雖然兩人立場不同，取材各異，但所描述的未來世界卻有一個共通點，就是充滿各式各樣的操控與宰制。奧威爾所描述的是人類被迫受到高度的政治壓迫，而赫胥黎所描繪的是人類甘願受到科技和娛樂的支配。有論者認為，可能成為現實的，是赫胥黎的預言，而不是奧威爾的預言。事實是否這樣？我們身處的世界到底愈來愈自由？還是愈來愈不自由？悲觀背後，兩位作者又有沒有為我們提供任何出路？藉著這個講座，希望跟大家分享這兩部書的智慧。

2014.02.27 1984 and Brave New WorldSpeaker: Dr Wong Kim Fan

2014.03.13 手機、公義、與社會運動講者：邱林川教授（香港中文大學 新聞及傳播學院）簡介手機已是現代人的「第五肢」。它與公義有何關聯？「阿拉伯之春」以來，一種流行觀點認為，手機使社會運動所向披靡，因而是維護公義的有效利器。這種看法對嗎？有哪些偏頗、局限？特別當我們用更長的歷史眼光和更廣的全球視野來看這個問題？本次沙龍將較全面地梳理手機、社運與公義的關係，從13年前菲律賓「第二次人民力量」運動和12年前的韓國總統大選，到近年的「佔領華爾街」、中港兩地的勞工抗爭運動，以及斯諾登事件。原來社運不一定促進公義，手機也不一定推動進步。新技術手段終將達成怎樣結果？答案不在手機裡面，而在使用手機的你我ta。

2014.03.13 Mobile, Justice and Social MovementsSpeaker: Prof. Qiu Linchuan

2014.04.04 經濟學與社會公義講者：趙耀華教授（香港大學經濟金融學）簡介數年前世界資本主義從它的最發達地區爆發了一場「百年一遇」的金融危機，製造無數的受害者。從1970年代開始，世界各國的貧富懸殊日益嚴重。對這些現象的不滿容易令人產生對經濟學的不滿，也有人認為經濟學應該在提供更平等而安全的社會這個問題上扮演更重要的角色。這個講座討論在什麼意義上這個呼籲是合理的，在什麼意義上它是不合理的，最後會聯繫到凱恩斯在一個有名的演講中對百年之後的大膽預測。

2014.04.04 Economics and Social JusticeSpeaker: Prof. Chiu Yiu WahBrief DescriptionThe past decade has witnessed the most serious global economic crisis in the last half century, causing great sufferings among the public. Income inequality has also been worsening in most countries in the last few decades. There is an urge from the public for economics and economists to provide more informed discussions or even an activist role in leading to more equitable and secure society. This talk discusses to what extent such an urge is justified and to what extent it is not. It ends with some reflections on some of the predictions John Maynard Keynes made in his talk “Economic Possibilities of Our Grandchildren”.

2014.06.06 《學海湧泉》：臭皮匠與諸葛亮講者：陳天機教授（香港中文大學 大學通識教育部 - 陳天機教授惜別演講簡介語云：「三個臭皮匠，一個諸葛亮。」這話與希臘哲學家亞里士多德提出的謎樣名言：「整體大於各部分之和，」前後、東西，互相交映，指出一個系統往往擁有眾成員所無的「湧現特性」。我們慣用的線性數學在這裏黯然失效，必需讓位給簡單扼要的「非線性數學。」後者輕易地擴充了亞里士多德名言的領域到所有現象的「量變。」但他完全沒有提出的「質變，」例如許多物理現象、所有化學反應、一切生命狀態，都也是湧現的常例。本講取材於講者的通識教育新作：《學海湧泉》，從系統科學出發，企圖以平易的文字、中、小學程度的數學，鳥瞰今日的科學，也簡略地介紹複雜性科學裏分形的詭奇、混沌的啟示、自我組織的湧現與套疊、大自然的演變和群體社會的協調運作。

2014.06.06 The Flowing Spring of KnowledgeSpeaker: Prof. Chen Tien ChiBrief DescriptionThe Chinese proverb,    Three smelly coblers make one Juge Liang.corresponds well with the riddle-lie saying by Aristotle two thousand years earlier,    The whole is greater than the sum of the parts,despite the difference between East and West, the present and the past. Both point out that a system often possess “emergent property” not found in the constituent parts. The linear mathematics we usually rely upon here sadly fails, and must yield to simple “nonlinear mathematics” which in addition easily extend the domain of validity of the philosopher’s saying to all “quantitative changes.” But he never did raise the question of “qualitative change,” found in many physical phenomena, all chemical reactions and all life processes. These are also common of emergence.This talk is based on the speaker’s forthcoming general education book, Geyser from the Sea of Knowledge, which start from simple systems theory, attempts with plain language, primary school and high school mathematics, to give a birds-eye view of science, and briefly introduce the intriguing beauty of fractals, the revelations of chaos, the appearance and nesting of self-organizations, the evolution of Mother Nature, and the operational harmony of mass societies.