談?wù)勥@個時代的“玻璃”心

丁力

When I ask veteran1） college teachers and administrators to describe how college students have changed over the years， I often get an answer like this： “Todays students are more accomplished than past generations， but they are also more emotionally fragile.”

That rings true to me. Todays students are amazing， but they bathe one another in oceans of affirmation and praise， as if buttressing2） one another against some insecurity. Whatever one thinks of the campus protests3）， the desire for trigger warnings4） and safe spaces does seem to emanate5） from a place of emotional fragility.

And if you hang around with the middle aged， you hear a common story line to explain the rise of the orchid generation. Once upon a time， the story line goes， kids were raised in a tough environment. They had to do hard manual chores around the house and they got in fights on the playground. Then they went off to do grueling6）work in the factory or they learned toughness and grit7） in the military.

But today， helicopter parents8） protect their children from setbacks and hardship. They supervise every playground conflict， so kids never learn to handle disputes or deal with pain.

Theres a lot of truth to that narrative， but lets not be too nostalgic9） for the past. A lot of what we take to be the toughness of the past was really justcallousness10）. There was a greater tendency in years gone by to wall off emotions， to put on a thick skin—for some men to be stone-like and uncommunicative and for some women to be brittle11）， brassy12） and untouchable.

And then many people turned to alcohol to help them feel anything at all.

Perhaps its time to rethink toughness or at least detach it from hardness. Being emotionally resilient13） is not some defensive posture. Its not having some armor surrounding you so that nothing can hurt you.

The people we admire for being resilient are not hard； they are ardent14）. They have a fervent commitment to some cause， some ideal or some relationship. That higher yearning enables them to withstand setbacks， pain and betrayal.

Such people are， as they say in the martial arts world， strong like water. A blow might sink into them， and when it does they are profoundly affected by it. But they can absorb the blow because its short term while their natural shape is long term.

There are moments when they feel swallowed up by fear. They feel and live in the pain. But they work through it and their ardent yearning is still there， and they return to an altered wholeness.

In this way of thinking， grit， resilience and toughness are not traits that people possess intrinsically15）. They are not tools you can possess independently for the sake of themselves. They are means inspired by an end.

John R. Lewis16） may not have been intrinsically tough， but he was tough in the name of civil rights. Mother Teresa17） may not have been intrinsically steadfast， but she was steadfast in the name of God. The people around us may not be remorselessly18） gritty， but they can be that when it comes to protecting their loved ones， when it comes to some dream for their future self.

People are much stronger than they think they are when in pursuit of their telos19）， their purpose for living. As Nietzsche put it， “He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how.”

In short， emotional fragility is not only caused by overprotective parenting. Its also caused by anything that makes it harder for people to find their telos. Its caused by the culture of modern psychology， which sometimes tries to talk about psychological traits in isolation from moral purposes. Its caused by the ethos of the modern university， which in the name of “critical thinking” encourages students to be detached and corrosively20） skeptical. Its caused by the status code of modern meritocracy21）， which encourages people to pursue success symbols that they dont actually desire.

We are all fragile when we dont know what our purpose is， when we havent thrown ourselves with abandon into a social role， when we havent committed ourselves to certain people， when we feel like a swimmer in an ocean with no edge.

If you really want people to be tough， make them idealistic for some cause， make them tender for some other person， make them committed to some worldview that puts todays temporary pain in the context of a larger hope.

Emotional fragility seems like a psychological problem， but it has only a philosophical answer. People are really tough only after they have taken a leap of faith for some truth or mission or love. Once theyve done that they can withstand a lot.

We live in an age when its considered sophisticated to be disenchanted22）. But people who are enchanted are the real tough cookies23）.

這些年大學(xué)生有什么變化？每次讓資深大學(xué)教師和管理人員描述一下時，我得到的往往是這樣的回答：“現(xiàn)在的學(xué)生比前幾代人更有成就，但情感更脆弱?！?/p>

我覺得確實如此?，F(xiàn)在的學(xué)生令人贊嘆，但他們互相肯定，互相稱贊，一同沐浴在溢美之詞的海洋中，仿佛是要相互支撐著對抗某種不安全感。不管人們?nèi)绾慰创@里的抗議活動，但從學(xué)生對“敏感警告”和“安全空間”的需求來看，大學(xué)的確是一個感情脆弱的地方。

如果你經(jīng)常和中年人接觸，就會發(fā)現(xiàn)他們說到“蘭花一代”如何崛起時，故事情節(jié)基本都是這樣的：很久之前，孩子們的成長環(huán)境非常艱苦，在家里要做繁重的體力活，在游戲場所還經(jīng)常跟人打架，然后他們要么到工廠做苦工，要么參軍在軍隊里學(xué)會如何才能堅忍而勇敢。

如今，“直升機式父母”時刻保護著孩子，不讓他們經(jīng)歷挫折和困苦。他們監(jiān)控著游戲場所發(fā)生的每一次沖突，以至于孩子們永遠都學(xué)不會應(yīng)對爭端和傷痛。

這種論調(diào)不無道理，但我們也不要太過懷舊。過去人身上很多被我們當作是“堅忍”的東西其實只是“冷漠”而已。在過去的歲月里，人們更傾向于隱藏情緒，戴上厚厚的面具，所以很多男人鐵石心腸、不善言談，很多女人冷若冰霜、花哨淺薄、拒人于千里之外。

很多人進而訴諸酒精來尋求存在感。

或許我們該反思一下這種“堅忍”了，或者至少應(yīng)該將堅忍與冷酷剝離開來。感情上的堅忍不拔并不是一種防御姿態(tài)，也不是為了不受傷害而穿上盔甲。

我們所佩服的那些堅忍的人并不冷漠，反而充滿熱情。他們對某項事業(yè)、某種理想或某種感情充滿熱忱。這種更高的渴望讓他們得以戰(zhàn)勝挫折、忍受痛苦、無懼背叛。

這種人，就像武俠世界里說的那樣，堅忍如水。擊打他們的力量可能深入肌體，如果那樣的話，他們也會深受傷害，但他們可以經(jīng)受住擊打的力量，因為擊打是暫時的，而他們自然的狀態(tài)卻是長久的。

如水一般堅忍的人有時也會被恐懼吞噬，也會感到痛苦，活在痛苦之中。但他們最終會挺過痛苦，依舊帶著熱忱的渴望，找到一個經(jīng)過改變的完整自我。

這樣想來，勇敢、堅忍和頑強并不是一個人與生俱來的特質(zhì)，也不是人為了勇敢而勇敢、為了堅忍而堅忍、為了頑強而頑強時使用的工具，這些品質(zhì)并不獨立存在，而是為了某個終極目標而存在的手段。

也許約翰·R·劉易斯并非天生就堅忍，是公民權(quán)利讓他變得堅忍。也許特蕾莎修女也不是生來頑強，為了上帝她才變得頑強。我們身邊的人可能不像磐石一般堅毅，但為了保護自己心愛的人，為了成就自己未來的夢想，他們就可以堅如磐石。

人們在追逐自己的終極目標，實現(xiàn)自己的生存目的時，往往比自己想象的更堅強。就像尼采說的那樣：“知生之意義者善忍世間任何苦痛?！?/p>

簡而言之，感情脆弱并不只是因為父母的過分保護，也起源于任何使人們難以找到自己終極目標的事?，F(xiàn)代心理學(xué)有時試圖教導(dǎo)我們脫離具體的道德目的空談心理特征，現(xiàn)代大學(xué)理念打著“批判性思維”的旗號鼓勵學(xué)生超然于事外，刻薄無情地懷疑一切，現(xiàn)代英才教育的模式鼓勵人們追逐自身并不渴望的成功符號。這些都會導(dǎo)致感情脆弱。

如果沒有人生目標，如果沒能全力投身某一社會角色，如果沒有為了某些人全心全意地付出，如果感覺自己像在無邊無際的海洋中沉淪，我們都會變得非常脆弱。

如果真想讓一個人堅強，那就讓他為了某種事業(yè)充滿理想，讓他對某些人滿懷柔情，讓他形成放下眼前痛苦、著眼更大希翼的世界觀。

感情脆弱看似是一個心理問題，要解決它卻只能從哲學(xué)入手。只有對某種真理、某項使命、某份愛情充滿信心地去冒險，人才能真正堅強。一旦邁出了這一步，他們就能忍受很多磨難。

生活在這個時代，不抱有幻想被看作是成熟。但往往是那些心存幻想的人才是真正的強者。

4. trigger warning：敏感警告。美國多所大學(xué)規(guī)定，網(wǎng)上論壇、書本、視頻或其他媒體中的某些內(nèi)容可能對學(xué)生產(chǎn)生負面影響時，教師有責任在課堂上做預(yù)先提醒。

5. emanate [?em?ne?t] vi. 發(fā)源，發(fā)出

6. grueling [?ɡru??l??] adj. 使人筋疲力盡的

7. grit [ɡr?t] n. 勇氣，堅毅

8. helicopter parent：“直升機式父母”，指對孩子過度關(guān)注、時時刻刻監(jiān)管與干涉孩子一舉一動的父母。

9. nostalgic [n??st?ld??k] adj. 戀舊的，懷舊的

10. callousness [?k?l?snis] n. 無情，淡漠

11. brittle [?br?t（?）l] adj. 不友好的，冷漠的

12. brassy [?brɑ?si] adj. 花哨的；華而不實的

13. resilient [r??z?li?nt] adj. 堅忍的，適應(yīng)性強的

14. ardent [?ɑ?（r）d（?）nt] adj. 熱心的，熱切的

15. intrinsically [?n?tr?ns?kli] adv. 與生俱來地；本質(zhì)上，本來

16. John R. Lewis：約翰·R·劉易斯（1940～），與馬丁·路德·金同時期的黑人民權(quán)運動人士，美國學(xué)生非暴力協(xié)調(diào)委員會創(chuàng)始人之一，后當選為國會議員。

17. Mother Teresa：特蕾莎修女（1910～1997），是世界著名的天主教慈善工作者，于1979年獲得諾貝爾和平獎。

18. remorselessly [r??m??（r）sl?sli] adv. 不屈不撓地；無休止地

19. telos [?tel?s] n. 終極目的

20. corrosively [k??r??s?vli] adv. 刻薄譏刺地；惡毒地

21. meritocracy [?mer??t?kr?si] n. 英才教育制

22. disenchanted [?d?s?n?t?ɑ?nt?d] adj. 不抱幻想的

23. cookie [?k?ki] n.〈口〉家伙，人