首先声明：作为一个物理学至上主义者，我不相信哲学能指导物理学研究！

尽管如此，我喜欢具有哲学修养的科学家! 而这个哲学又不是被我们玩坏了的那种空头学问，而是能外化成为具有生命力知识的深刻洞察力。例如，爱因斯坦因为马赫的哲学的启发而创立了广义相对论，不是吗?

今天早晨，收到了那位杰出德国年青物理学家对我关于王阳明哲学小语《花》进一步讨论的邮件，全文附后。这封邮件给了一下子把我的大脑激发到了发散态，良久不能收敛。

近代中国挨打太多了，被打怕了，普遍患有现代化焦虑症。但是在追赶世界一流水平时，又重症肌无力。1999年，周光召自问如下问题“德国在20世纪初成为世界科学的中心德国为什么能在本世纪初成为世界科学的中心?”，给出的第一个原因就是“哲学的突破和指导作用”。其它三个原因依次是：理论联系实际；数学领先；优良的学术传统。(周光召:历史与重大科学发现的启迪,1999?)

在如下的邮件中，物理学家提到了Berkeley(柏克莱)以及他的名言：“存在就是被感知”和“心外无物”等。而我们这一代知道柏克莱，是一个被贴了“唯心主义”的反动哲学家。我记得有过一副讽刺柏克莱的漫画：“只要我闭上眼，这个世界就没有悬崖”。是不是偏废了?

对于物理学家来说，哲学的用处似乎很小。但是，伟大的物理学家，都相信一些非常虚的东西！这些虚的知识或者意识，属于哲学！而这种哲学就是对世界的认识，比物理学要深刻。这些知识的外化，才是好的物理。例如说，虚位移就是一个现实中并不存在、也没有实验直接给出迹象的概念。给出这个虚位移概念，需要的不仅仅是物理，还要人文的、王阳明和柏克莱一类的知识。由于这个虚位移，才有Feynman的路径积分。这些路径，可以缠绕如花，可以超过光速。如果没有王阳明和柏克莱的滋养，能想象吗?

总之，我理解的哲学，是从至虚处看待物质世界的艰深学问。而物理学家，如果不能进入极虚无的境界，遑论无穷小、位移电流、规范场等概念，甚至连理想气体都没有，也就没有今天的物理学。

————————

Hi Quanhui,

finally back from my trip to Japan, I come to answer your last mail. To my opinion, the lines by Wang are still poetic, also in the second translation.It is certainly not a rational or deductive statement, although it has the form of a syllogism, going from premise to conclusion. But the premises are in this case just metaphorical paraphrases and would qualify in any western language as poetry.
The philosophical content is certainly extractable but an interpreting conceptualizationis by itself an act of philosophy. Doing this with Wang Yangming's aphorism, I would say that it belongs more to Berkeley than to Descartes. Berkeley's position is usually summarized as
esse est percipi
"to be is to be perceived" and this sums up Wang's statement but clearlywithout the poetry which makes his "flower" so nice. Berkeley himself has stated many times that "everything is in the mind" and uses this eventually for a type of proof for God's existence (he was a bishop).
So, the difference between Berkeley and Wang is the artistic quality, not the philosophical content. This, of course, concerns only the present aphorism and not Wang's other writings, which I don't know yet.
These short aphorisms are generally oscillating between poetry and philosophy,and in the west we do not make sharp divisions.
As an example, I mention the following poem by Angelus Silesius (i.e. JohannesScheffler, 1624-1677) in German:
Die Ros'ist ohn warumb sie blühet weil sie blühet
Sie acht nicht ihrer selbst fragt nicht ob man sie sihet
My english translation, without keeping the meter, reads
The rose is without why she blooms because she blooms
She does not care for herself and does not ask whether someone sees her
This translation has, I think, a striking similarity with the style of Wang's proposition (the content is just the opposite) but the German original is considered as lyric poetry with philosophical implications.
I have not yet spoken to my Japanese friends whether they know Wang Yangming but on my next trip I shall ask them.
Regards,

XXXX

——————

延展阅读：

在2000年前后，周光召先生对中国科学技术如何发展进行了深入的研究。在一些地方报告过，但是报告地方不同，版本略有差异，网络上遍有流传。这里有两个文字稿:

1，历史与重大科学发现的启迪.pdf

2，历史的启迪和重大科学发现产生的条件.doc