論工業社會及其未來-工業-技術社會不能被改革

B version

111

前述原則有助於展示改革工業系統以避免其漸進的限縮我們的自由空間是多麼令人絕望的困難。至少從工業革命起，科技以付出個人自由以及地方自治的高昂代價來強化這個體系已成趨勢。因此任何旨在保護自由免於科技的改變將會違反我們社會的基本發展趨勢。結果，如此的改變要不是僅是短暫的 — 很快地被歷史的洪流淹沒，就是改變我們整個社會的本質，若此改變夠大到可持續不輟。此即第一及第二原則定。此外，因為社會會被以一種不能被事先預測的方式改變（第三原則），此會有極大的風險。大到可以造成持續影響的那種促成自由的改變將不會被起始，因為可以了解這樣的改變會嚴重地干擾這個體系。所以任何改革的嘗試會太微弱以至於沒有效果。即便大到足以造成持續影響的改變被施行，這些改變也會因其破壞性的效果變得明顯而被撤回。因此，促進自由的永久改變僅能由那些準備接受激進、危險且不可預測的改變整個社會的人所實現。換句話說，是革命者而非改革者。

INDUSTRIAL-TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY CANNOT BE REFORMED

111

The foregoing principles help to show how hopelessly difficult it would be to reform the industrial system in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing our sphere of freedom. There has been a consistent tendency, going back at least to the Industrial Revolution for technology to strengthen the system at a high cost in individual freedom and local autonomy. Hence any change designed to protect freedom from technology would be contrary to a fundamental trend in the development of our society. Consequently, such a change either would be a transitory one — soon swamped by the tide of history — or, if large enough to be permanent would alter the nature of our whole society. This by the first and second principles. Moreover, since society would be altered in a way that could not be predicted in advance (third principle) there would be great risk. Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would be realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words by revolutionaries, not reformers.

我懷疑就算有革命者推動這樣支持自由地改變是否可能成功。二十世紀中末葉有很多哲學家及社會學家意識到當代資本主義社會的運作模式對人造成的異化，例如一票法蘭克福學派的哲學家，但今天在讀他們的作品竟然只會有這種感覺在現代社會竟然如此的深刻，甚至比起二十世紀更加深刻，看來這些社會觀察和批判沒有辦法修正這體系運作的方向，反而更像是對於未來的清晰預言。

在臺灣有一些族群非常喜歡提起鄭南榕先生為了言論自由而做出的奉獻，但顯然因為訊息的氾濫使得體系的運作產生一些問題，言論自由就得被限縮。因此，整個社會為了體系的運作不得不進一步的限縮各種自由。