2008年05月29日

格林威治的景观系学生的毕业展!
呵呵,大家看看吧,听听那些学生说一下!其实有的也不是很自信!
和和!

这哥们有点恶心!不过真的勇气可嘉!呵呵!

2008年05月28日

hom Mayne (b. January 19, 1944 in Waterbury, Connecticut) is a widely recognized Los Angeles based architect. Educated at University of Southern California (1969)[1] and the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Mayne helped found the Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-ARC) in 1972. Since then he has held teaching positions at both SCI-ARC and UCLA. He is principal of Morphosis, a renowned architectural office located in Santa Monica, California. Mayne received the Pritzker Prize in March 2005.

Design Philosophy

Morphosis’s design philosophy arises from an interest in producing work with a meaning that can be understood by absorbing the culture for which it was made. This is in opposition to typical architectural philosophies which overlay meaning from outside influences and are distant from the question at hand.

The word “metamorphosis” (from which the name Morphosis is derived) means a “change in form or transformation.” For Morphosis this reflects a design process intuitively embedded within an increasingly groundless modern society that is exemplified by the shifting landscape of Los Angeles (the firm’s home). Their working method values contradiction, conflict, and change, and understands each project as a dynamic entity.

The work of Morphosis has a layered quality. The designs often include multiple organizational systems which find unique expression while contributing to a coherent whole. Visually, the firm’s architecture includes sculptural forms which often appear to arise effortlessly from the landscape. In recent years this has been increasingly made possible through the use of computational design techniques which simplify the construction of complex forms.

2008年05月26日

What is Philosophy?

什么是哲学?

by Professor Walter Sinnott-Armstrong

Well, what do you think philosophy is? Most people can’t answer this question. It’s too abstract. It’s also controversial. Philosophers themselves can’t agree on any answer. Sure, the name "philosophy" derives from the Greek for "love of wisdom", but what’s that? There has been a long and glorious history of people called philosophers, but they talk about all kinds of topics in all kinds of ways. It is not clear what, if anything, they have in common that makes them all philosophers.

好,你认为什么又是哲学呢?大部分不能回答这个问题?这个太抽象了,也具争议性。哲学家们自己都不能同意所有的答案。当然,“哲学”这个字来之与希腊“聪明的爱”,但那是什么呢?这是一个很长且光荣的历史,当人们谈论不同问题用不同的方法时,人们称呼那些人为哲学家。这是不清晰的,如果所有问题,有一点是共同使他们所有的哲学家

Still, though many philosophers would dispute what I say, I will give you one model of philosophy. For me, philosophy is defined by a goal and a method.

虽然许多哲学还是像我说的这样存在争议,我还是要给你一个模式的哲学。对我而言,哲学被定义为一个目标和一个方式。

Philosophy’s goal is nothing less than a systematic world view. Other fields study particular kinds of things. Philosophy asks how it all fits together. For example, if you want to learn about bodies, take a course in physics or biology. If you want to learn about minds, take a course in psychology. But if you want to learn about how minds are related to bodies, or how physics is related to psychology, then philosophy (of mind) is for you. Similarly, economics, political science, and art and music courses study different values (welfare, justice, and beauty). Then moral philosophers ask how these values are similar or different, when one may be traded off against another, and where any of these values fit into the physical world. Again, historians try to discover knowledge of the past and astronomers try to discover knowledge of stars and planets, but only philosophers ask what makes any of these beliefs knowledge, and how (or whether) we can have any knowledge at all. Such philosophical questions are very abstract, but that is what enables them to cover so many different fields at once.

哲学的目标是不亚于一个有系统的世界观。特别是在学习在别的领域。哲学告诉如何将这些(各种领域)联系在一起。举个例子,你想学习身体,参加一个身体或物理的课程。但是如果你想学头脑如何联系身体或者身体上如何联系心里,那么哲学将回答这些。类似的,经济,政治科学,艺术和音乐课程学习的不同的价值观(福利,正义,美感)然而道德哲学告诉这些价值如何类似与不同。当一个人可以被收买去进攻另一个人,然而这种价值观便融入了这个物质世界。再者,历史家尝试去发现过去的知识和天文学家想试着发现恒星与行星,但只有哲学家告诉什么使上述信仰的知识和我们如何(或是否)总是拥有这些知识。这些哲学问题都很抽象,但是什么使他们能够一次过覆盖这么多不同领域。

This goal also means that you can study anything under the name of philosophy. Philosophy encompasses subfields called philosophy of religion, of law, of economics, of biology, of physics, of mathematics, of computers, of psychology, of art, of music, of literature, and so on. Any and all of these topics can be studied in a philosophical way when one asks how they are related to each other in an overall world view.

这个目标还意味这你可以在哲学的定义下学习任何东西。哲学包含的子目录 信仰哲学,法律哲学,经济哲学,生物哲学,数学哲学,电脑哲学,心理哲学,音乐哲学,物理哲学,和文学哲学等等。当一个人问他们如何在一个整体的世界观被相互联系在一起时,所有的题目都可以用哲学的方法去回答。

When such disparate topics are raised, conflicts and paradoxes are bound to arise. One famous example is the paradox of freedom: Science, including psychology, leads us to believe that (1) Every act is determined by a prior cause. Law and common practices of blaming and punishing wrongdoers then lead us to believe that (2) Some acts are free. But the very definition of "free" suggests that (3) Nothing that is determined is free. Unfortunately, (1)-(3) cannot all be true, so any world view that includes all three of these claims is incoherent.

当如此不相干的议题提出,冲突和悖论必将出现。一个著名的例子关于悖论自由:科学包括哲学,使我们去相信,1』每一个活动都是事先事物所决定的。法律和指责和惩罚肇事者的普通方法使我们去相信。2』一些活动是自由的。但是”自由“的非常定义建议那些,3』没有定西是被定义是自由。1』-3』不能都是正确的,所以包括以上三个主张的一些世界观是不相关的。

Paradoxes like this are both loved and hated by philosophers. Philosophers love them for their stimulation but hate them for their incoherence, so philosophers try hard to get rid of paradoxes. One prevalent way to resolve paradoxes is conceptual analysis. In response to the paradox of freedom, for example, some philosophers try to analyze freedom in a way that makes it compatible with determinism and thereby undermines (3). Other philosophers give accounts of blame and punishment that do not presuppose freedom, so they can reject (2). Still others analyze determinism and causation in ways that cast doubt on (1). One of these claims has to go. Conceptual analysis tries to help us decide which claim to give up.

悖论就像这些一样被哲学家们爱着与恨着。哲学家为他们(悖论)的激情所爱,但为他们的不调理所恨。所以哲学家们努力去摆脱悖论。一个去解决悖论的流行方法是概念性分析。举个例子,在回答悖论自由时,一些哲学家试着用一个使得它兼容宿命论和破坏的方法去分析自由。3』其他的哲学家,让帐目的责任和处罚不假定自由,所以他们可以否决它。2』还有一些分析宿命论和因果关系的方式,令人怀疑。1』这些主张必须进行,概念性分析试着帮助我们去决定那个主张去放弃。

The method of conceptual analysis might sometimes seem picky, but unclarity or imprecision in our concepts is often what leads us into paradoxes and incoherence in our world views. That is why the philosophical goal of a coherent overall world view makes philosophers adopt the method of conceptual analysis.

Philosophers use other methods as well. Many philosophers employ empirical discoveries in psychology, biology, and physics to illuminate traditional philosophical issues. (Can our moral beliefs be understood as a product of evolution?) Others use formal developments in logic and mathematics. (Does the incompleteness of arithmetic, proven by Gödel, show that computers cannot think in the way humans do?) Still others turn to literature and first-person narratives to express their ideas. (Is the position of oppressed groups best understood by listening to their own stories?) Since it is puzzling how the abstract world of numbers or the lived world of personal experience is related to the physical world of subatomic particles, the variety of methods used by philosophers reflects the issues that must be faced in formulating a coherent overall world view.

One feature is shared by almost all methods used by philosophers: Philosophers question authorities. Whereas legislators or judges have the authority to declare what the law is, and specific texts determine what is required by some religions, philosophers do not grant any special authority to anyone or anything. Every claim, no matter where it comes from, is subject to scrutiny. Even common sense is not taken for granted, which leads philosophers to put forward some very weird views.

In place of authorities, philosophers try to justify their views with arguments. Indeed, philosophers love arguments. One of the earliest examples of philosophy was an argument by Zeno, which runs like this: "The slow runner [a tortoise] will never be overtaken by the swiftest [Achilles], for it is necessary that the pursuer should first reach the point from which the pursued started, so that necessarily, the slower is always somewhat in advance." If you think about it for a while, Zeno’s argument should be clear. What is not clear is how to respond. One popular reaction is, "That’s silly. Of course, Achilles can overtake a tortoise. It happens all the time." Philosophers retort, "Everybody assumes that Achilles can overtake the tortoise, and it does appear that swift runners overtake slow runners, but how do you know what is really going on? And what is wrong with Zeno’s argument to the contrary? You cannot reject the argument just because you don’t like the conclusion." In such debates, philosophers try to uncover our basic assumptions, evaluate our reasons (if any) for these assumptions, and speculate on what our world view would be like if we gave up those assumptions. This process can be liberating and fascinating, even when (or maybe because) it leads to results that seem hard to believe.

In seeking this goal through these methods, philosophers address a wide variety of problems, which can be classified into three main areas:

Metaphysics or the theory of existence addresses the questions of whether God exists, whether we have free will, how our minds are related to our bodies, what reality is, and so on. Epistemology or the theory of knowledge asks whether and how we can know or be justified in believing anything; and it also investigates particular areas or sources of (supposed) knowledge, such as perception, memory, and science. Ethics or moral philosophy studies which acts are morally right or wrong and which people or character traits are morally good or bad; then other values, such as beauty, are studied in other areas of value theory, such as aesthetics. Some of the most exciting philosophical issues (such as those raised by existentialists, phenomenologists, feminists, and philosophers of language) do not fit neatly under any of these traditional categories.

True philosophers will not rest until they combine theories about all of these various topics into a single coherent system of thought that is justified without appeal to authority. Because this ideal is so demanding, the process of doing philosophy can be frustrating, but it is also something that can fill and fulfill one’s entire life.

2008年05月25日

由百度搜索得知:
哲学
Philosophy)传统包括了形而上学、知识论、伦理学的研究。这些学科试图回答对于世界起源,知识如何获得,以 及善恶等观念的问题。基本上,哲学的基本方法是运用理性对于这些问题提出论证。但是,哲学的实际范畴与定义到现在还没有一个确定的答案,“哲学是什么?” 在哲学传统之中是充满分歧与倍受争议的。
(一堆废话,没找到有用的)
简单来说,哲学研究就是在抽象的层面上反思世界、人生及思维之种种问题。大多数人都曾思考过哲学问题,可能只是不察觉自己在作「哲学思考」而已。兹举数例,或许你亦曾对以下问题感到困惑:
◆ 人生的目的是什麼?某些生活方式是否真的比另一些好?我为什麼要努力读书或工作?除了赚钱给自己享受之外,我还应该关心其他事情吗?什麼是幸福?
◆ 生存有什麼价值?一个常常遇到挫折的人,真的比一头快乐的小狗幸福吗?何以活著好过死去?
◆ 我们为何要遵循道德规条?道德规条由哪里来?是谁颁定的?
◆ 我们应该相信科学教科书或医生说的话吗?为什麼?我们又应否相信风水和星相学呢?
◆ 为什麼要有国家与政府?国家有没有权利干涉个人的私生活?人是为国家而生存的吗?抑或国家是为了保护公民的利益而存在?
◆ 神存在吗?如果神存在,为什麼这个世界上还有那麼多惨事发生?
 每个人对这些问题的回答却未必相同,这些答案可能来自父母或朋友的意见、师长与课本的教诲、宗教的启迪以至出自个人的思考。然而,这些答案是否正确?是 否有所根据?根据又能否成立?如果我们不反覆及认真反省自己的见解,想法就会变得武断,一些信念会变成教条,社会亦会因此变得僵化,甚至令文化陷入困境。 哲学探究的目的,就是以理性的批判精神,反省及审察生活的种种事物及价值。
(以上激发了我对哲学的兴趣?不管我提出什么答案,都会有为什么这个东西?)

由此可见,哲学主要是一种批判的思考活动。批判思考就是审慎考察我们的信念、价值及行动背後的理据。这种考察是很基本的哲学思维。具体而言,批判思考首先 要釐清一种见解究竟有什麼内容,或先弄清一个行动所为何事,并找出这些见解和行动的理据,继而考虑理据是否可靠。然後,我们可以再追问这些理据是否足以支 持那些见解或行动?或者这些理据本身是否合理或已充分确立,不用其他理由来支持?
(这里的哲学仅仅是哲学,不是马克思哲学。但从意义上来说哲学就是帮助我们去了解与认知这个社会,可是我不懂为什么是一种批判的思考方式??难道质疑就是批判嘛?可是难度质疑就不是批判嘛?有时候觉得世界就有一个圈◎!饶老绕去就是无法出来)

回答这些问题就等於在评估和反省自己的理据、看法、信念及行动;我们也可藉此尝试对这些理据和看法作出修正。如此一来,钻研哲学能助人确立信念、价值和作明智合理的抉择,令我们成为有理智自主的人,最终使人生更有意义。
(有意义的人生在乎你的感悟有多少,对世界,对生命? 对一样事物了解的多少,可是使意义的大小都有所变化!人不应糊里糊涂就活一辈子,时代与人是双向选择的)

哲学的基本问题

1、思维与存在的关系问题是哲学的基本问题

(1)所谓哲学的基本问题,是指这一问题贯穿于包括社会历史观在内的所有哲学问题之中,是人们认识世界的出发点,也是哲学的起点,其他所有哲学问题都是从这个问题中派生出来的。

(2)思维与存在的关系问题是哲学的基本问题,这是因为:

①这个问题是任何哲学派别都必须回答的问题。哲学作为世界观的理论,必然要对思维和存在(或意识与物质)两大类现象及其关系提出自己的看法。

②对这个问题的不同回答决定着一派哲学的基本倾向和性质。哲学作为一种理论体系,它的出发点和理论前提对它的思维方向起着至关重要的作用,规定着它的基本性质。而对基本问题的回答,就具有出发点和理论前提的意义。

③思维和存在的关系问题是人类实践的基本问题。

(3)把思维和存在的关系问题确定为哲学的基本问题的重要意义:

①它揭示了哲学作为世界观理论体系的根本特征。

②它揭示了哲学的根本路线和方向。

③它揭示了哲学斗争的焦点,给了我们理解哲学历史的线索。

④它揭示了人类实践的基本矛盾。

2、哲学基本问题的内容

哲学的基本问题,包括两个方面、两个层次:

(1)第一方面是关于思维和存在(或意识和物质)谁是第一性、何者为本源的问题。即物质决定意识,还是意识决定物质的问题。哲学基本问题的第一个方面,是划分哲学史上唯物主义与唯心主义两条路线的根本依据。
『首先,思维是人的思维?这使我想到一个主题?2个问题?思维与存在应该也就是唯物主义与唯心主义,主观与客观,感性与理性。 哲学也反映事物一般规律的,帮助我们认识世界的,在一定程度上说它是从事物规律总结的,是靠什么总结的,人的思考,人的发现,人的总结___是思考总结归纳得出的!不过,不同的人在不同角度得出的规律(哲学)不同罢了,个人觉得虽然哲学是反映物这个本体,但是经过人提炼(意识)的,“哲学”没有人的发现(意识的觉醒),是不可能有规律上升到哲学的。』

(2)第二个方面是物质和意识是否具有同一性的问题,即人的意识能否认识和反映物质世界的问题。这是哲学基本问题的“认识论”方面,是划分哲学史上的可知论和不可知论两条认识路线的根本依据。

(3)哲学基本问题的两个方面,是从不同侧面阐明了思维与存在的关系。

What is Philosophy?(什么是哲学?)

 

Quite literally, the term "philosophy" means, "love of wisdom." In a broad sense, philosophy is an activity people undertake when they seek to understand fundamental truths about themselves, the world in which they live, and their relationships to the world and to each other. As an academic discipline philosophy is much the same. Those who study philosophy are perpetually engaged in asking, answering, and arguing for their answers to life’s most basic questions.

不少从字面上说,哲学的意思就是“聪明的爱”,在广义上说,哲学就是一个人类总结概括的活动,当人类去寻找理解根本上的真实的他们居住的世界,与这个世界和其他人与自身的关系情感。在一个学术严谨上说,哲学是很相似的,学习哲学就是一个长期问,答和辩论以给予他们答案(回答生命中的基本问题)。

Metaphysics: At its core the study of metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality, of what exists in the world, what it is like, and how it is ordered. In metaphysics philosophers wrestle with such questions as:

形而上学:真正的自然存在这个世界

  • Is there a God?神的存在?
  • What is truth?什么是真实?
  • What is a person? What makes a person the same through time?
  • 什么是人?什么给予一个人相等的渡过时间?
  • Is the world strictly composed of matter?
  • 这是世界上严格组成的事?
  • Do people have minds? If so, how is the mind related to the body?
  • 人类有思想?如果有,如何联系我们的身体?
  • Do people have free wills?
  • 人类有自由的意愿?
  • What is it for one event to cause another?
  • 什么是可以使一件事件联系到另一件?

Epistemology: Epistemology is the study of knowledge. It is primarily concerned with what we can know about the world and how we can know it. Typical questions of concern in epistemology are:

认识论:知识的学习。这是初级的概念我们懂得这个世界和如何去了解它。

  • What is knowledge?
  • 什么是知识?
  • Do we know anything at all?
  • 我们知道所有的知识吗?
  • How do we know what we know?
  • 我们如何知道我们所知道的?
  • Can we be justified in claiming to know certain things?
  • 我们可以有理由在自称知道某些东西?

Ethics: The study of ethics often concerns what we ought to do and what it would be best to do. In struggling with this issue, larger questions about what is good and right arise. So, the ethicist attempts to answer such questions as:

伦理:关于我们应该做和我们最好怎么做!关于正义与正确。

  • What is good? What makes actions or people good?
  • 什么是正义?什么使得行为或人正义?
  • What is right? What makes actions right?
  • 什么是正确?什么使活动正确?
  • Is morality objective or subjective?
  • 是道德的客观或主观?
  • How should I treat others?
  • 我如何应该对待别人?

Logic: Another important aspect of the study of philosophy is the arguments or reasons given for people’s answers to these questions. To this end philosophers employ logic to study the nature and structure of arguments. Logicians ask such questions as:

逻辑:另一个学习哲学重要的一面就是原因与讨论给人类答案去回答这些问题?为此哲学家聘请的逻辑来研究的性质和结构的论点

  • What constitutes "good" or "bad" reasoning?
  • 什么构成正义和邪恶的原因?
  • How do we determine whether a given piece of reasoning is good or bad?
  • 如何去决定是否一个因素是正义还是邪恶?

History of Philosophy: The study of philosophy involves not only forming one’s own answers to such questions, but also seeking to understand the way in which people have answered such questions in the past. So, a significant part of philosophy is its history, a history of answers and arguments about these very questions. In studying the history of philosophy one explores the ideas of such historical figures as:

  • Plato     柏拉图
  • Aristotle 亚里士多德
  • Aquinas阿奎那
  • Descartes笛卡儿
  • Locke洛克
  • Hume 休谟
  • Kant康德
  • Nietzsche 尼采
  • Marx马克思
  • Mill轧机
  • Wittgenstein维特根斯坦
  • Sartre萨特

What often motivates the study of philosophy is not merely the answers or arguments themselves but whether or not the arguments are good and the answers are true. Moreover, many of the questions and issues in the various areas of philosophy overlap and in some cases even converge.

  • Philosophy of Law 哲学法学
  • Philosophy of Religion哲学信仰
  • Philosophy of Mind哲学思想
  • Political Philosophy政治哲学
  • Philosophy of History哲学历史
  • Philosophy of Feminism

    女性主义

  • Philosophy of Science哲学科学
  • Philosophy of Literature哲学文学
  • Philosophy of the Arts哲学艺术
  • Philosophy of Language哲学语言

回答为转移的。

2008年05月20日

写了这么多,眼也酸了。由于能力有限还请大家多多包含阿!『请大家支持原创,复制请声明』

在此先对汶川地震的同胞悼念默哀!!!

这几天,从新闻,网站以及各个渠道得知的信息使我想了很多,除了关心受灾人民的身体,精神状况以及家园重建以为,还想了想我们景观设计,中国景观设计的未来。

一个新时代的到来是是经过长期时间的演变,包括时代背景,突发事件等,但我想说的是旗帜口号!从一个大家都比较熟悉的例子开始,三国刘备,一个自己没有什么本事(实实在在的能力)但身边却有到时天下最勇猛之人(五虎大将)与最智慧之人(诸葛庞统);想想当时的曹操袁绍,他们本来就具有硬实力(名声,财富,人才),刘备又是如何成功成为三份天下之一呢?我看关键是他打起了旗帜,喊起了口号。(复兴汉室)先是说自己是宗室(我估计有假,当时汉刘姓子孙不说几万也有几千,中国古语“三代不往来”),然后用自己的“仁义”与“一哭二闹三上吊”开始积累民声与人才。慢慢后来成为了蜀王——三国中第一个称帝的人(曹操到死还都是挟天子的丞相)。在这里我不想说那些三顾诸葛亮与长坂坡不忍心丢弃人民的战术话题,只是想强调在实行战略中,打起旗帜是多么重要!大家现在可以想想我们景观行业的旗帜问题了,等我说之前,还要说一个现在的故事。比亚迪汽车,一个1995年成立做手机电池为主的公司从2002年收购汽车模具,到2005年进军汽车市场,然后在短短一两年间突破万辆,跟着2006年高官竟然喊出了“2025年要成为世界第一的汽车企业”。这就是口号,打出了旗帜。别人可能认为他是喊空话,出风头,但是早在2003年,比亚迪还没有生产一部车的时候,已经动员了400名技术人员开始研究汽车电池技术。也就在去年车展上,展出了混合动力汽车与电力汽车。电力车在一次充电后可以行使100公里,看看目前世界第一汽车企业丰田也只能行使25公里。关键我想说的是,在判断市场形势与未来,果断抓出前进方向,打出了前进方向。(汽车世界里,大家都知道汽油就是制约汽车界发展的瓶颈,只要解决这个问题,汽车就会有另个时代的到来了;想要解决这个问题,比亚迪又聪明地选择了自己的强项电池,而且还是自主研发,等这个口号喊出来,科员人员拼了,谁不想在创造新时代贡献自己;原型车拿出来,政府也乐了,“为国争光”,提供一切可以的支持。)就这样,比亚迪成功了。
现在可以说说我们景观行业了,在说到时代问题,我想俞孔坚先生的出现是一个时间点,在此之前,我们的景观也就是园林,那是一个很古老且很牢固的体系与传统,当然也有一些有识之士,但在考虑稳定改革,尊重资历,讲究辈分也只能默默的贡献。古时很多时,一些默默的战士都是在挑战名将或是猛人后一战成名的,先不说要成为这样的人多难,可打败击倒一个名将,名声,地位仲要比跟随一个名将要来的快的多!俞孔坚先生在选着跟着自己老师长辈与另起小灶果断选择与老头们对着干。这就是战术,下面我又要说旗帜问题了。开辟新的时代不是不行,也不是没有新的东西,美国的景观世界第一阿。可要没有门徒阿,只能选择让我们容易接受的事务。——提出了“世外桃源”才是我们中国景观的追求,从而从这个具有中国文化的诗文中引申自己对中国农耕文化的看法,而在后面的设计作品中又去反正它,“沈阳建筑学院”那个校园就是一个例子。这样即在国外国内的行业尖端树立了旗帜,又成为了新一代的偶像。
从莫种意义上来说,他是借用“民族主义”把国外先进理论,设计方法引入国内。这个旗帜好阿!使得人才觉得跟着他就有前途,这个与刘备与比亚迪的例子一样,只要满足别人的小小的想法,别人就会跟着你走,媒体也是。我们年轻的人才可都是被压的没办法阿,精神生活十分匮乏。跟着俞孔坚又开始给市长送书,寻求与政府对话,(想想刘备在积累了一些实力后,马上寻求更大的发展,与皇上人亲——刘皇叔;比亚迪也是,得到政府(当权者)的帮助使得人才更坚定与信任旗帜)
个人觉得,这几年,随着我们国家实力越来越强,人民生活过的一天比一天好,在过上温饱日子的之后,大家就想通过一些事情来表达自己的感情——“民族主义,民族情感”在这个时候可以特别容易地被唤醒,大家开始关心“文化流失”,“文化倾入”,“洋文化对抗”“国民在国外的生活对待”等,在国家崛起,民族自豪感在每个中国民族的心里被唤起,这时候任何行业打出的民族旗帜都容易得到响应与获得成功。特别是今年天灾人祸——年初的雪灾,三月西藏,还有火车事故,火炬传递在国外不公对待,包括现在四川的地震都使的我们民族团结一心,共同渡过难关。我想在等8月的奥运,民族自豪感将达到空前的宣泄;而且还会持续相当长的一段时间。我们行业在2008年奥运这个机遇下已得到相当大的发展,现在谁打出了民族的旗帜,谁就不会敗。我想俞孔坚先生们等会在相当长的时间内将中国景观发展下去,毕竟是我们民族自己的景观。
大家肯定目前会有个目标和方向了,要向俞靠齐或是跟随他,这很好,至少有了方向,有了动力。可我要说的,做人要有超前意识,超前思维,要有战略性思考,要不你只能为此别人的兵了。记得我前面讲过的“一战成名”的故事吗?与其跟随别人不如击败别人。
这时,就需要一个旗帜。可是有朋友要说要问了。刚不是分析了“民族主义”吗?我只是说这个阶段是,可下个阶段呢!等我来分析一下,看能不能找个可以开小灶的旗帜来。首先看看当今地球的形势,无非是2个一个是资源短缺,一个是环境恶化。其他什么地区冲突,疾饿,疾病等都是这2个主题所引起的,看看最近说有条河上游是在中国,下游在印度,中国要将在上游建水坝这个项目上马,印度不管是政府还是民众都强烈反对,并且说要用举国之力与中国斗争,这个什么,水资源争夺阿!还有美国为什么老盯着中东阿,不就是石油。还有环境恶化所导致的全球变暖,灾难,疾病等!这些都是一个个与人类生存息息相关的问题阿,我们政治书上的当今世界的主题是“和平与发展”早已过时了。且不说资源会引起战争,生存都成问题了,还怎么发展阿。
世界上每个国家都想着自己的国家利益却忘记了,大家都是人类阿,都是生活在一个地球。所为占世界人口最大比重的中国,当我们真的在20年后可以与美国相提并论呢,能不能重新树立一个旗帜呢(关心我们自己人类的生存)。那时我们可能已经得到了全球人民的认可了,可是我们更要兼顾起作为地球人的责任阿!
所以,很明显,我们景观也是这样,在与环境恶化这个问题上,我们可以做的更多,我们的旗帜也要打起来,请关心我们地球村!
这才是我们的未来!!!
(如何从景观领域来打起旗帜)

写了这么多,眼也酸了。由于能力有限还请大家多多包含阿!『请大家支持原创,复制请声明』