情爱 Affection
[英]伯特兰·罗素
傅雷译
缺少兴致的主要原因之一，是一个人觉得不获情爱；反之，被爱的感觉比任何旁的东西都更能促进兴致。一个人的觉得不被爱，可有许多不同的理由。他或者自认为那么可憎，以致没有人能爱他；他或者在幼年时受到的情爱较旁的儿童为少；或者他竟是无人爱好的家伙。但在这后面的情形中，原因大概在于因早年的不幸而缺少自信。觉得自己不获情爱的人，结果可能采取各种不同的态度。他可能用拼死的努力去赢取情爱，或许用非常热爱的举动做手段。然而在这一点上他难免失败，因为他的慈爱的动机很易被受惠的人觉察，而人类的天性是对最不要求情爱的人才最乐意给予情爱。所以，一个竭力用仁慈的行为去博取情爱的人，往往因人类的无情义而感到幻灭。他从未想到，他企图获得的温情比他当作代价一般支付出去的物质的恩惠，价值要贵重得多，然而他的行为的出发点就是这以少博多的念头。另外一种人觉得不被爱之后可能对社会报复，或是用煽动战争与革命的方法，或是用一支尖刻的笔，象斯威夫特那样。这是对于祸害的一种壮烈的反动，需要刚强的性格方能使一个人和社会处于敌对地位。很少人能达到这样的高峰；最大多数的男女感到不被爱时，都沉溺在胆怯的绝望之中，难得遇有嫉妒和捉弄的机会便算快慰了。普通这样的人的生活，总是极端以自己为中心，而不获情爱又使他们觉得不安全，为逃避这种不安全感起计，他们本能地听任习惯来完全控制他们的生活。那般自愿作刻板生活的奴隶的人，大抵是由于害怕冷酷的外界，以为永远走着老路便可不致堕入冷酷的外界中去。
凡是存着安全感对付人生的人，总比存着不安全感的人幸福得多，至少在安全感不曾使他遭遇大祸的限度之内。且在大多数的情形中，安全意识本身就能助人避免旁人必不可免的危险。倘你走在下临深渊的狭板之上，你害怕时比你不害怕时更容易失足。同样的道理可应用于人生。当然，心无畏惧的人可能遇着横祸，但他很可能渡过重重的难关而不受伤害，至于一个胆怯的人却早已满怀怆恫了。这一种有益的自信方式的确多至不可胜数。有的人不畏登山，有的人不畏渡海，有的人不畏航空。但对于人生一般的自信，比任何旁的东西都更有赖于获得一个人必不可少的那种适当的情爱。我在本章内所欲讨论的，便是把这种心理习惯当作促成兴致的原动力看待。
产生安全感觉的，是“受到的”而非“给予的”情爱，虽在大多数的情形中是源于相互的情爱。严格说来，能有这作用的，情爱之外还有钦佩。凡在职业上需要公众钦佩的人，例如演员，宣道师，演说家，政治家等等，往往越来越依靠群众的彩声。当他们受到应得的群众拥护的报酬时，生活是充满着兴致的；否则他们便满肚皮的不如意而变得落落寡合。多数人的广大的善意之于他们，正如少数人的更集中的情爱之于另一般人。受父母疼爱的儿童，是把父母的情爱当做自然律一般接受的。他不大想到这情爱，虽然它于他的幸福是那末重要。他想着世界，想着所能遭逢的奇遇，想着成人之后所能遭逢的更美妙的奇遇。但在所有这些对外的关切后面，依旧存着一种感觉，觉得在祸害之前有父母的温情保护着他。为了什么理由而不得父母欢心的儿童，很易变成胆怯而缺乏冒险性，充满着畏惧和自怜的心理，再也不能用快乐的探险的心情去对付世界。这样的儿童可能在极低的年龄上便对着生、死、和人类命运等等的问题沉思遐想。他变成一个内省的人，先是不胜悲抑，终于在哲学或者神学的什么学说里面去寻求非现实的安慰。世界是一个混乱无秩序的场合，愉快事和不愉快事颠颠倒倒的堆在一块。要想在这中间理出一个分明的系统或范型来，骨子里是由恐惧所致，事实上是由于害怕稠人广众的场合，或畏惧一无所有的空间。一个学生在书斋的四壁之间是觉得安全的。假如他能相信宇宙是同样的狭小，那末他偶然上街时也能感到几乎同样的安全。这样的人倘曾获得较多的情爱，对现实世界的畏惧就可能减少，且也毋须发明一个理想世界放在信念里了。
虽然如此，绝非所有的情爱都能鼓励冒险心。你给予人的情爱，应当本身是强壮的而非畏怯的，希望对方卓越优异的心理，多于希望对方安全的心理，虽不是绝对不顾到安全问题。倘若胆怯的母亲或保姆，老对儿童警告着他们所能遇到的危险，以为每条狗会咬，每条牛都是野牛，那末可能使孩子和她一般胆怯，使他觉得除了和她挨在一起之外便永远不安全。对于一个占有欲过分强烈的母亲，儿童的这种感觉也许使她快慰：她或者希望他的依赖她，甚于他有应付世界的能力。在这情形中，孩子长大起来，或竟会比完全不获慈爱的结果更坏。幼年时所养成的思想习惯可能终身摆脱不掉。许多人在恋爱时是在寻找一个逃避世界的庇护所，在那里他们确知即在不值得钦佩时也能受到钦佩，不当赞美时也能受到赞美。家庭为许多男人是一个逃避真理的地方，恐惧和胆怯使他们感到结伴之乐，因为在伴侣之间这些感觉可以抑压下去。他们在妻子身上寻找着从前在不智的母亲身上可以得到的东西，可是一朝发觉妻子把他们当作大孩子看时，他们倒又惊愕起来了。
要把最妥善的一种情爱下一界说，决不是容易的事，因为显而易见其中总有些保护的成分。我们对所爱的人受到的伤害不能漠不关心。然而我以为，对灾患的畏惧，不能和对实在灾患表示同情相比，它应该在情爱里面占着极小的部分。替旁人担心，仅仅比替自己担心略胜一筹。而且这种种是掩饰占有欲的一种烟幕。我们希望引起他们的恐惧来使他们更受自己控制。当然这是男子欢喜胆怯的女人的理由之一，因为他们从保护她们进而占有她们。要说多少分量的殷勤关切才不致使受惠者蒙害，是要看受惠者的性格而定的：一个坚强而富有冒险性的人，可以担受大量的温情而无害，至于一个胆怯之士却应该让他少受为妙。
受到的情爱具有双重的作用。至此为止我们把它放在安全一块讨论着，但在成人生活中，它还有更主要的生物学上的目标，即是做父母的问题。不能令人对自己感到性爱，对任何男女是一桩重大的不幸，因为这剥夺了他或她人生所能提供的最大的欢乐。这种丧失几乎迟早会摧毁兴致而致人于孤寂自省之境。然而往往早年所受的灾祸造成了性格上的缺陷，成为日后不能获得爱情的原因。这一点或在男人方面比在女人方面更真切，因为大体上女人所爱于男人的是他们的性格， 而男人所爱于女人的是她们的外表。在这方面说，我们必得承认男人显得不及女人，因为男人在女人身上认为可喜的品质，还不如女人在男人身上认为可喜的品质来得有价值。可我决不说好的性格比着好的外表更易获得；不过女人比较能懂得获致好的外表的必要步骤，而男人对获致好的品格的方法却不甚了解。
至此为止，我们所谈的情爱是以人为客体的，即是一个人受到的情爱。现在我愿一谈以人为主体的，即是一个人给予的情爱。这也有两种，一种也许最能表现对人生的兴致，一种却表现着恐惧。我觉得前者是完全值得赞美的，后者至多不过是一种安慰。假如你在晴好的日子沿着秀丽的海岸泛舟游览，你会赏完海岸之美，感到一种乐趣。这种乐趣是完全从外展望得来的，和你任何急迫的需要渺不相关。反之，倘使你的船破了，你向着海岸泅去时，你对海岸又感到一种新的情爱：那是代表波涛中逃生的安全感，此时海岸的美丑全不相干了。最好的情爱，相当于一个人的船安全时的感觉，较次的情爱，相当于舟破以后逃生者的感觉。要有第一种情爱，必须一个人先获安全，或至少对遭遇的危险毫不介意；反之，第二种情爱是不安全感的产物。从不安全感得来的情爱，比前一种更主观，更偏于自我中心，因为你所爱的人是为了他的助力而非为了他原有的优点。可是我并不说这一种的温情在人生中没有正当的作用。事实上，几乎所有真实的情爱都是由上述两种混合而成的，并且只要温情把不安全感真正治好的时候，一个人就能自由地对世界重新感到兴趣，而这兴趣在危险与恐怖的时间是完全隐避着的。但即使承认不安全感所产生的情爱在人生中也有一部分作用，我们还得坚持它不及另一种有益，因为它有赖于恐惧，而恐惧是一种祸害，也因为它令人偏于自我集中。在最好的一种情爱里，一个人希望着一桩新的幸福，而非希望逃避一件旧的忧伤。
最好的一种温情是双方互受其惠的；彼此很欢悦的接受，很自然的给予，因为有了互换的快乐，彼此都觉整个的世界更有趣味。然而，还有一种并不少见的情爱，一个人吸收着另一个的生命力，接受着另一个的给予，但他在这方面几乎毫无回报。有些生机旺盛的人便属于这吸血的一类。他们把一个一个的牺牲者的生命吸吮净尽，但当他们发扬光大时，那些被榨取的人却变得苍白，阴沉而麻木了。这等人利用旁人，把他们当作工具来完成自己的目标，却从不承认他们也有他们的目标。他们一时以为爱着什么人，其实根本不曾对这个人发生兴趣；他们只关心鼓舞自己活动的刺激素，而所谓他们的活动也许是完全无人格性的那种。这种情形显然是从他们性格的缺陷上来的，但这缺陷既不易诊断也不易治疗。它往往和极大的野心相连，且也由于他们把人类幸福之源从单方面去看的缘故。情爱，在两人真正相互的关切上说，不单是促成彼此福利的工具，且是促成共同的福利的工具，是真正幸福的最重要因素之一。凡是把“自我”拘囚在四壁之内不令扩大的人，必然错失了人生所能提供的最好的东西，不论他在事业上如何的成功。一个人或是少年时有过忧伤，或是中年时受过侵害，或是有任何足以引起被虐狂的原因，才使他对人类抱着愤懑与仇恨，以致养成了纯粹的野心而排斥情爱。太强的自我是一座牢狱，倘你想完满地享受人生，就得从这牢狱中逃出来。能有真正的情爱，便证明一个人已逃出了自己的樊笼。单单接受情爱是不够的；你受到的情爱，应当把你所要给予的情爱激发起来；唯有接受的和给予的两种温情平等存在时，温情才能完成最大的功能。
妨碍相互情爱的生长的，不问是心理的或社会的阻碍，都是严重的祸害，人类一向为之而受苦，直到现在。人们表示钦佩是很慢的，因为恐怕不得其当；他们表示情爱也是很慢的，因为恐怕或者他们向之表示情爱的人，或者取着监视态度的社会，可能使他们难堪。道德教人提防，世故也教人提防，结果是在涉及情爱的场合，慷慨和冒险性都气馁了。这一切都能产生对人类的畏怯和愤懑，因为许多人终身错失了真正基本的需要，而且十分之九丧失了幸福的必要条件，丧失了对世界的胸襟开旷的态度。这并非说，所谓不道德的人在这一点上优于有道德的人。在性关系上，几乎全没可称为真正情爱的东西；甚至怀着根本敌意的也有。各人设法不使自己倾心相与，各人保留着基本的孤独，各人保持着完整，所以毫无果实。在这种经验内，全无重大的价值存在。我不说应该小心避免这等经历，因为在完成它们的过程中，可有机会产生一种更可贵而深刻的情爱。但我的确主张，凡有真价值的性关系必是毫无保留的，必是双方整个的人格混合在一个新的集体人格之内的。在一切的提防之中，爱情方面的提防，对于真正的幸福或许是最大的致命伤。
Affection
by Bertrand Russell
One of the chief causes of lack of zest is the feeling that one is unloved, whereas conversely the feeling of being loved promotes zest more than anything else does. A man may have the feeling of being unloved for a variety of reasons. He may consider himself such a dreadful person that no one could possibly love him; he may in childhood have had to accustom himself to receiving less love than fell to the share of other children; or he may in fact be a person whom nobody loves. But in this latter event the cause probably lies in a lack of self-confidence due to early misfortune. The man who feels himself unloved may take various attitudes as a result. He may make desperate efforts to win affection, probably by means of exceptional acts of kindness. In this, however, he is very likely to be unsuccessful, since the motive of the kindnesses is easily perceived by their beneficiaries, and human nature is so constructed that it gives affection most readily to those who seem least to demand it. The man, therefore, who endeavours to purchase affection by benevolent actions becomes disillusioned by experience of human ingratitude. It never occurs to him that the affection which he is trying to buy is of far more value than the material benefits which he offers as its price, and yet the feeling that this is so is at the basis of his actions. Another man , observing that he is unloved, may seek revenge upon the world, either by stirring up wars and revolutions, or by a pen dipped in gall, like Dean Swift. This is an heroic reaction to misfortune, requiring a force of character sufficient to enable a man to pit himself against the rest of the world. Few man are able to reach such heights; if they feel themselves unloved, sink into a timid despair relieved only by occasional gleams of envy and malice. As a rule, the lives of such people become extremely self- centred, and the absence of affection gives them a sense of insecurity from which they instinctively seek to escape by allowing habit to dominate their lives utterly and completely. For those who make themselves the slaves of unvarying routine are generally actuated by fear of a cold outer world, and by the feeling that they will not bump into it if they walk along the same paths that they have walked along on previous days.
Those who face life with a feeling of security are much happier than those who face it with a feeling of insecurity, at any rate so long as their sense of security does not lead them to disaster. And in a very great many cases, though no in all, a sense of security will itself help a man to escape dangers to which another would succumb. If you are walking over a chasm on a narrow plank, you are much more likely to fall if you feel fear than if you do not. And the same thing applies to the conduct of life. The fearless man may, of course, meet with sudden disaster, but it is likely that he will pass unscathed through many difficult situations in which a timid man would come to grief. This useful kind of self-confidence has, of course, innumerable forms. One man is confident on mountains, another on the sea, and yet another in the air. But general self-confidence towards life comes more than anything else from being accustomed to receive as much of the right sort of affection as on has need for. And it is this habit of mind considered as a source of zest that I wish to speak about in the present chapter.
It is affection received, not affection given, that causes this sense of security, though it arises most of all from affection which is reciprocal. Strictly speaking, it is not only affection but also admiration that has this effect. Persons whose trade is to secure public admiration, such as actors, preachers, speakers, and politicians, come to depend more and more upon applause. When they receive their due meed of public approbation their life is full of zest; when they do not, they become discontented and self-centred. The diffused good will of a multitude does for them what is done for others by the more concentrated affection of the few. The child whose parents are fond of him accepts their affection as a law of nature. He does not think very much about it, although it is of great importance to his happiness. He thinks about the world, about the adventures that come his way and the more marvelous adventures that will come his way when he is grown up. But behind all these external interests there is the feeling that he will be protected from disaster by parental affection. The child from whom for any reason parental affection is withdrawn is likely to become timid and unadventurous, filled with fears and self-pity, and no longer able to meet the world in a mood of gay exploration. Such a child may set to work at a surprisingly early age to meditate on life and death and human destiny. He becomes an introvert, melancholy at first, but seeking ultimately the unreal consolations of some system of philosophy or theology. The world is a higgledy-piggledy place, containing things pleasant and things unpleasant in haphazard sequence. And the desire to make an intelligible system or pattern out of it is at bottom an outcome of fear, in fact a kind of agoraphobia or dread of open spaces. Within the four walls of his library the timid student feels safe. If he can persuade himself that the universe is equally tidy, he can feel almost equally safe when he has venture forth into the streets. Such a man, if he had received more affection, would have feared the real world less, and would not have had to invent an ideal world to take its place in his beliefs.
By no means all affection, however, has this effect in encouraging adventurousness. The affection given must be itself robust rather than timid, desiring excellence even more than safety on the part of its object, though of course by no means indifferent to safety. The timid mother or nurse, who is perpetually warning children against disasters that may occur, who thinks that every dog will bite and that every cow is a bull, may produce in them a timidity equal to her own, and may cause them to feel that they are never safe except in her immediate neighbourhood. To the unduly possessive mother this feeling on the part of a child may be agreeable: she may desire his dependence upon herself more than his capacity to cope with the world. In that case her child is probably worse off in the long run than he would be if he were not loved at all. The habits of mind formed in early years are likely to persist through life. Many people when they fall in love look for a little haven of refuge from the world, where they can be sure of being admired when they are not admirable, and praised when they are not praiseworthy. To many men home is a refuge from the truth: it is their fears and their timidities that make them enjoy a companionship in which these feelings are put to rest. They seek from their wives what they obtained formerly from an unwise mother, and yet they are surprised if their wives regard them as grown-up children.
To define the best kind of affection is not altogether easy, since clearly there will be some protective element in it. We do not feel indifferent to the hurts of people whom we love. I think, however, that apprehension of misfortune, as opposed to sympathy with a misfortune that has actually occurred, should play as small a part as possible in affection. Fear for others is only a shade better than fear for ourselves. Moreover, it is very often a camouflage for possessiveness. It is hoped that by rousing their fears a more complete empire over them can be obtained. This, of course, is one of the reasons why men have liked timid women, since by protecting them they came to own them. The amount of solicitude of which a person can be the object without damage to himself depends upon his character: a person who is hardy and adventurous can endure a great deal without damage, whereas a timid person should be encouraged to expect little in this way.
Affection received has a twofold function. We have spoken of it hitherto in connection with security, but in adult life it has an even more essential biological purpose, namely parenthood. To be unable to inspire sex love is a grave misfortune to any man or woman, since it deprives him or her of the greatest joys that life has to offer. This deprivation is almost sure sooner or later to destroy zest and produce introversion. Very frequently, however, previous misfortunes in childhood have produced defects of character which are the cause of failure to obtain love in later years. This is perhaps more true where men are concerned than it is as regards women, for on the whole women tend to love men for their character while men tend to love women for their appearance. In this respect, it must be said, men show themselves the inferiors of women, for the qualities that men find pleasing in women are on the whole less desirable than those that women find pleasing in men. I am not at all sure, however, that it is easier to acquire a good character than a good appearance; at any rate, the steps necessary for the latter are better understood and more readily pursued by women than are the steps necessary for the former by men.
We have been speaking hitherto of the affection of which a person is the object. I wish now to speak of the affection that a person gives. This also is of two different kinds, one of which is perhaps the most important expression of a zest for life, while the other is an expression of fear. The former seems to me wholly admirable, while the latter is at best a consolation. If you are sailing in a ship on a fine day along a beautiful coast, you admire the coast and feel pleasure in it. This pleasure is one derived entirely from looking outward, and has nothing to do with any desperate need of your own. If, on the other hand, your ship is wrecked and you swim towards the coast, you acquire for it a new kind of love: it represents security against the waves, and its beauty or ugliness becomes an unimportant matter. The better sort of affection corresponds to the feeling of the man whose ship is secure, the less excellent sort corresponds to that of the shipwrecked swimmer. The first of these kinds of affection is only possible in so far as a man feels safe, or at any rate is indifferent to such dangers as beset him; the latter kind, on the contrary, is caused by the feeling of insecurity. The feeling caused by insecurity is much more subjective and self-centred than the other, since the loved person is valued for services rendered, not for intrinsic qualities. I do not, however, wish to suggest that this kind of affection has no legitimate part to play in life. In fact, almost all real affection contains something of both kinds in combination, and in so far as affection does really cure the sense of insecurity, it sets a man free to feel again that interest in the world which in moments of danger and fear is obscured. But while recognizing the part that such affection has to play in life, we must still hold that it is less excellent than the other kind, since it depends upon fear, and fear is an evil, and also because it is more self-centred. In the best kind of affection a man hopes for a new happiness rather than for escape from an old unhappiness.
The best type of affection is reciprocally life-giving; each receives affection with joy and gives it without effort, and each finds the whole world more interesting in consequence of the existence of this reciprocal happiness. There is, however, another kind, by no means uncommon, in which one person sucks the vitality of the other, one receives what the other gives, but gives almost nothing in return. Some very vital people belong to this bloodsucking type. They extract the vitality from one victim after another, but while they prosper and grow interesting, those upon whom they live grow pale and dim and dull. Such people use others as means to their own ends, and never consider them as ends in themselves. Fundamentally they are not interested in those whom for the moment they think they love; they are interested only in the stimulus to their own activities, perhaps of a quite impersonal sort. Evidently this springs from some defect in their nature, but it is one not altogether easy either to diagnose or to cure. It is a characteristic frequently associated with great ambition, and is rooted, I should say, in an unduly one-sided view of what makes human happiness. Affection in the sense of a genuine reciprocal interest of two persons in each other, not solely as means to each other’s good, but rather as a combination having a common good, is one of the most important elements of real happiness, and the man whose ego is so enclosed within steel walls that this enlargement of it is impossible misses the best that life has to offer, however successful he may be in his career. Ambition which excludes affection from its purview is generally the result of some kind of anger or hatred against the human race, produced by unhappiness in youth, by injustices in later life, or by any of the causes which lead to persecution mania. A too powerful ego is a prison from which a man must escape if he is to enjoy the world to the full. A capacity for genuine affection is one of the marks of the man who has escaped from this prison of self. To receive affection is by no means enough; affection which is received should liberate the affection which is to be given, and only where both exist in equal measure does affection achieve its best possibilities.
Obstacles, psychological and social, to the blossoming of reciprocal affection are a grave evil, from which the world has always suffered and still suffers. People are slow to give admiration for fear it should be misplaced; they are slow to bestow affection for fear that they should be made to suffer either by the person upon whom they bestow it or by a censorious world. Caution is enjoined both in the name of morality and in the name of worldly wisdom, with the result that generosity and adventurousness are discouraged where the affections are concerned. All this tends to produce timidity and anger against mankind, since many people miss throughout life what is really a fundamental need, and to nine out of ten an indispensable condition of a happy and expansive attitude towards the world. It is not to be supposed that those who are what is called immoral are in this respect superior to those who are not. In sex relations there is very often almost nothing that can be called real affection; not infrequently there is even a fundamental hostility. Each is trying not to give himself or herself away, each is preserving fundamental loneliness, each remains intact and therefore un-fructified. In such experiences there is no fundamental value. I do not say that they should be carefully avoided, since the steps necessary to this end would be likely to interfere also with the occasions where a more valuable and profound affection could grow up. But I do say that the only sex relations that have real value are those in which there is no reticence and in which the whole personality of both becomes merged in a new collective personality. Of all forms of caution, caution in love is perhaps the most fatal to true happiness.
