Human Traitors of Humanity (from reading of Liu Cixin's the Three-body Problem)


Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
[FONT=&quot]What if the writer and the translator are one person?


[FONT=&quot]罗素当年言:“吾等当自立于世,观世以公正,善恶美丑兼顾;如实知世,无所畏惧”(“何以吾非基督徒”一文 结语译文);而则,世间人,多无自立于世之能,是故,屈膝事主或事地外智能者,比比皆是。[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]书中叛逆人类者,读者多以“无知、天真”而不齿,而观其书,叛逆者多为人类精英;子言“学而不思则罔,思而 不学则殆”;读书人,自非学而不思之书柜(今日,则为U盘、硬盘、云端盘),而其思量纵广,亦 为有限。[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]世间邪教,亦颇有知识分子追随,由此可知,学历不同明理。 [/FONT]


Now, the writer's own translation again! Let's check if it is better than Google translate.

We are often compatible of humans who betray humanity; even so, traitors of humanity in the Three-Body Problem: The Past of Earth have rather complicated backgrounds.
Why is this the case?
Discussions of the case of Ye Jiewen are plentiful already; there is no more to add.
How do members of the ETO (Earth Three-Body Organization) lose hopes for humanity?
Should we think about our hopeless actions today?
Bertrand Russell once stated in "Why I am Not a Christian" that "we want to stand upon our own feet and look fair and square at the world—its good facts, its bad facts, its beauties, and its ugliness; see the world as it is, and be not afraid of it." In spite of this, many humans lack the ability to stand upon their own feet, and many become servile servants of God or extraterrestrials.
Bertrand Russell might be optimistic; even he wrote Has Man a Future?
Readers may consider human traitors of humanity ignorant and naive; meanwhile in the novel, most of the human traitors belong to the elites. Confucius states: "learning without thinking means confusion; thinking without learning means danger". Intellectuals may not be bookshelves (or in contemporary terms, USB drives or hard drives); then, even they can be limited in scope.
Due to their thoughts and knowledge, academics are even more likely to go astray than common folks.
Cults of the world also have followers who are intellectuals; therefore, academic credentials do not mean reason.
(a side note here: I once want to name myself "Reason"; currently, I have an unofficial title of 慧慎, or wisdom with prudence.)
It is quite laughable to consider "this is an interplanetary civilization; therefore, it must be good".
Or is it a case of "seeking any possible treatments for emergent conditions"? Humanity may be in crisis; it is not a matter of survival.

We have consistent discussions about the current time, whether it is the time of prosperity or the end of time.
Are there any reasons for the ETO, if so, what are the reasons?


Ad Honorem
Mar 2013
I read the later books in the series but skipped the Three Body Problem so I should read it first before I commented much. Generally the issue is how humans make group decisions to represent myriad individuals.

Philopher Kings who make unbiased decision with the best knowledge and ability to think as clearly as humans can is perhaps a known defective ideal but practicality demands some messy answers.

Confronted by overwhelming technology even today most people make decisions without realizing the full consequences even in their own lives let alone the lives that intersect and reverberate.