中文 English

Letter of 4th Dec 2008 from reader Wu Zhenyu

(Note: this is a letter sent by Wu Zhenyu, a reader, on 4th Dec 2008. I was too busy to answer him then)

I casually read your work Greatest Problem in the bookstore today, and I was very glad to read it.

There are many opinions shaking people of the whole world, and I feel suspicious too. For example, human beings are doomed to die out, so we should limit further developments of sciences and technologies so as to avoid annihilation of human beings. An ideal society should be peaceful, friendly, non-competitive and unified. The actual eternal nature or intrinsic character of human beings is to compete and contradict, while the origin of unification is from humane wars.

My confusion is from your concerns about human beings. I believe that your mission, obligation, value and ambition are to care about all human beings and the future and fate of human beings. Is this a utopian fancy? Is this unnecessary concern? It is inevitable for human beings to come to annihilation just like a mud cow swimming in the sea. The individual is too weak to prevent this. I think the most important thing for one individual is to finish his works well, and humane society will be saved naturally. Presently Professor Yi Zhongtian, lecturer of special program in CCTV, gave a famous opinion of Daoism as follows: "If each person won't do even small bad things and never benefit from the society, the whole world will be managed well." He believed that the reason for a society to be out of order was because somebody did a lot of unnecessary things because he thought he was a redeemer. In fact, he should finish his own things well at first and then he has the qualification and abilities to control things of others and the whole world. What do you think about this?

As for origin, my confusion originates more from conflicts between public and private benefits and relevant resolutions. Will we start our action from private benefits or the opposite? Which one is more realistic and suitable for the choice of human beings? I'm still confused by these questions. So I inquire you and hope you can answer me.

Your loyal reader.