To Faustus

李博士果然無講錯 不如等你有拖拍時再回應？

任何事情都有意義 我覺得任何事情都有其意義的，有愛情有有愛情的意義，沒愛情亦有沒愛情的意義。 最怕聽到失戀的人說「人生冇晒意義！」其實失戀都有失戀的意義的。

沒有愛情的生命，沒有意義 沒有愛情的生命，沒有意義。 廿歲人, 仲未有拖拍，無物出奇呀 ! 繼續去搵啦。 紀住有拖拍，都唔一定代表係有愛情。 .................................. Love is a smoke raised with the fume of sighs; Being purged, a fire sparkling in lover's eyes; Being vex'd a sea nourish'd with lover's tears: What is it else? A madness most discreet, A choking gall and a preserving sweet. ……Romeo and Juliet

你認為愛情就是一切? 只剩下愛情的生命，算的上有意義嗎?!

我認為，一件事物在你賦予他意義之前，本身並無意義。所以對我來說，如果問生命有什麼意義，這個問題需要自問自答的。

清風問： 只剩下愛情的生命，算的上有意義嗎?! 有。自足的。

一顆心，能年輕幾回 一雙眼，能燃燒到幾歲 .......... .......... 一顆心，能年輕幾回？ 答案啊答案 在茫茫的風裡.........余光中 ............................ 清風啊清風， 我有閒情逸緻與您在此三言兩語， 因為我一點也沒有甚麼"末世近了"的恐懼。 生命各有所求，莫衷一是。 有時如果生命真的只剩下愛情，就死也無憾。 我只是說：沒有愛情的生命，沒有意義。 您不要把話扭轉，好嗎？

Love? If I couldn't find a lover in my "entire" life, I would agree that life is meaningless. But if you don't have a lover at "this moment", it is certainly not a problem.

That' s Life !! To : Faustus If finally you couldn't find your "love" in your entire life, would you really regard your life as "meaningless" ? After all, what's the meaning of life ?

廿歲無拖拍好正常jei 證明你要求高囉！ (果d「少年得拖」既人都未必明白咩係愛情) by the way,到我地三十歲時，又會唔會話「三十歲都未結婚/事業……人生仲有咩意義呀？」 四十歲時「四十歲都未有仔女/事業/物業……」……etc.

千萬個可能 我們慨嘆20歲沒拖拍、30歲未結婚，可能因為我們給自己太多限制了，覺得某個年紀一定要去到那個階段。其實，20歲拍拖或是30歲拍拖，實際上關係不大，重要的是究竟所謂的"拍拖"是一種怎樣的關係。 我總認為，人生有多太可能了，即使現在未拍拖，人生的意義還是可以很豐富的。

to欣 千萬個同意

大有意義 沒有愛情的生命當然大有意義!那意義就是更加努力去尋求愛情. 雖是說笑,但這想法可令人更積極,何樂而不為?

To Live is to Love To Soul mate “After all, what's the meaning of life?” I don’t really know how to answer this big and heavy question. I think that my entire life (at least until this moment) has been devoted to answering this question. I have not yet got a completely satisfactory answer. But I can certainly answer this: “If finally you couldn't find your "love" in your entire life, would you really regard your life as "meaningless"?” Yes, life, I think, would be meaningless without love. At this moment, the meaning of life, as I see it, is to make myself and the people around me happy. And the reason why I would want to do so is that I LOVE them. “To live is to love” is my email’s signature profile. I am neither a bible scholar nor a Christian, but I think that the crux of Christianity is the message Jesus sent out on the cross: “to love others (including thy neighbours and enemies)”. (Aside: This idea is similar to 佛家的慈悲﹐儒家的仁). Jesus is the ultimate exemplar of this message. I am inclined to agree with him regardless of whether he is the son of God. P.S. Certainly, love, when narrowly defined, is about “romantic love”. Even if we are talking about this narrow definition, I still think that life is meaningless without love. At least you have to find a “soul mate” to share your ideas and feelings (happy or otherwise). Right?

Faustus，生命，也不要恨，對嘛？ 我不關心自己「現在是否在生存？」，倒關心「將來如何去生活？」

To森 “生命，也不要恨，對嘛？” Certainly so. As I understand it, that is why Jesus told us to LOVE our enemies. If we can love them, they are not our enemies anymore. “仁者無敵”亦應作如是觀﹖

“我不關心自己「現在是否在生存？」，倒關心「將來如何去生活？」” 同意﹐既然已經存在﹐“現在是否在生存？” 以變得無關痛癢。但如果不懂“將來如何生活”﹐存在也沒有意思。

Faustus，我真的很感激你的回應、真誠的留言！ 知識固之言重要，但何妨更多談那些價值上的問題？！如我認為「真誠」之於我的生命、對人對事，都是很重要的。

森, 十分同意你的講法﹐“我認為「真誠」之於我的生命、對人對事，都是很重要的。” 所以除了愛﹐親情､友情以及一夥真誠的心﹐都是生命不可缺少的。生命的意義由此而來﹖

To Faustus 我都好鐘意睇你d留言㗎，我覺得好同意，並且亦學倒好多野，多謝晒。希望你繼續講野！

胡思亂想 若說沒有愛情(romantic love)的生命沒有意義，那麼 生命的意義會不會和賀爾蒙有密切關係 ?

科學家真有創意﹐那愛情､賀爾蒙和生命的意義之間的神秘關係﹐就有待科學家先生找出來吧。

厚德載物 風兄過譽﹐小弟剛才翻看了幾則留言﹐不無感概。朋友反目﹐網友交惡﹐看來各人對這“友” 字的理解不大相同。看世界之大､學海之廣﹐有誰不是井底蛙﹖即使宇宙間有“絕對真理” ﹐都不是凡人能得吧﹖脅真理自居者就是看不到自己身在井中﹐要進步就先要“破執” ﹐要“破執” 先得謙卑。這不是包裝﹐而是做人的基本態度。看來﹐孔夫子所說的“誠” 今天有點“落伍” 了。 有網友提議在中小學､甚或幼兒園開哲學科﹐“背頌唐詩宋詞論語莊子等古籍” ﹐小弟舉腳贊成。當年不求甚解的章句﹐今天意味深長。 天地之道，博也、厚也、高也、明也、悠也、久也。 《中庸》第二十六 地勢坤，君子以厚德載物。 《易經》 這“厚” 字應須要點歲月來體會吧。

Faustus，同意，是真心同意！ 其實，人和社會是互相影響的，人的言行思想意識影響著社會、也取之社會，社會反過來又加深、肯定著我們。 所以好的基礎務必要打好，而「德性」便是人和社會的基礎了。除了知識上的灌輸，「德育」也是很重要，政府當責無旁貸。

仍是胡思亂想 那我想三者的排列次序應是：賀爾蒙--愛情--人生意義。賀爾蒙最重要，因為沒有賀爾蒙便沒有人生意義。我想的對嗎？

我不是科學家 to科學家： 我沒做科學研究，不敢說你的說法對不對。不過我認為即使「賀爾蒙」真的如你所說那樣，便可謂其神秘奧妙之極，人類竟能掌握其「人生意義」……也許會令人類更自大狂妄。我也是胡思亂想。

Thanks very much for Dr. Lee’s comment, especially the humorous discussion at the end. I can also think of a similar example about resurrection. It is held that since Jesus became alive again three days after he was crucified, he had risen from the dead, hence, he is the son of God. But if “death” means “the end of life” and Jesus was still alive three days after he was crucified, it also follows that he had never died on the cross in the first place. It seems that the concept of resurrection is contradictory in itself.

浮士德斯,難得之至 網友如此,幸何如之。