Chapter 323

He tried his best to lead Faust astray and make him fail, which is the epitome of the reactionary forces trying to block and destroy the trend of the progressive era. But the devil himself is a nihilist, although he can guide Faust to make mistakes, and use his mistakes to do all kinds of bad things, and Faust, who is opposite to him, is the representative of creative spirit, and he is immortal.

Since Faust achieved the overall victory through numerous local failures, many local victories could not guarantee the overall failure of Mephisto, which became his inevitable destination.

In fact, every destructive action of Mephisto contributed to the development of Faust from the opposite side. This is the logic of dialectics. The idea expressed by Goethe in the book has something in common with Engels's historical role of evil.

But like Faust, the image of Mephisto is not single. In his contradiction, besides the main aspect of "negative spirit", there is also a positive secondary aspect. With sharp eyes, he saw many corruption phenomena in the real court and exposed and satirized them.

After all, Faust came out of the medieval study, and there are still obvious traces of the old on his body. His character is full of contradictions, just as he dissected himself: "there are two kinds of spirit in my mind, one is persistent in the world, indulging in love, the other is to transcend the world, to the lofty spiritual realm.

It is no doubt that he led the way to the lofty realm, but he indulged in lust, that is, he was greedy for immediate enjoyment, so that he did not hesitate to go along with the court to suppress the uprising.

This fully reflects the small and mediocre side of him. It was this side that the kind and pure Gretchen and her family became his victims. These dark sides of Faust reflect the inherent shortcomings of the bourgeoisie, and indicate that this class will inevitably turn to the opposite side, which is sharply opposed to the working people.

Faust wants to experience the feelings of the world, through the study life, love life, political life, the pursuit of classical beauty and achievements in five stages.

These five stages are based on reality. They highly concentrated the spiritual course of German and European bourgeoisie's exploration and struggle from the Renaissance to the early 19th century. Here, Faust can be said to be a symbolic artistic image, and Goethe portrays him as an embodiment of the fate of all mankind.

Of course, the so-called "all mankind" is actually the expansion of the typical image of an advanced intellectual in the period of rising bourgeoisie. Like other bourgeois thinkers in the age of enlightenment, Goethe also regarded his class as the main representative of all mankind.

Faust walked out of the dark study and went to nature and broad real life, which reflected the anti feudal spirit of awakening bourgeois thought, negating religious theology and criticizing the dark reality from Renaissance, religious reform to the violent advance movement.

The love tragedy of Faust and Magan's tears is the reflection and negation of the narrow pursuit of personal happiness and hedonism.

The failure in politics shows that the political ideal of enlightened monarch is illusory. The unfortunate ending of the combination with Helen declares the disillusionment of the humanitarianism ideal of aestheticizing modern people with classical beauty.

In the end, Faust found the truth of life in the grand cause of mobilizing the masses to transform nature and create a paradise on earth. It is not difficult to see the shadow of the kingdom of reason repeatedly described by the enlightenment in the 18th century, and vaguely hear the voice of utopian socialists calling for the future in the 19th century.

Soon the police came and took the old lady and the middle-aged uncle to take notes. However, the old lady and the middle-aged uncle insisted that Zhang Xiaofeng had hurt her and never let go. The police had no evidence to arrest them. Zhang Xiaofeng told the police officer what he thought and the police officer told him that he could consider his suggestion.

For example, two members of a criminal gang, a and B, were arrested. They were completely separated from each other, and there was absolutely no way to exchange information with each other. At present, the police lack evidence to convict them of the main crimes they have committed. However, the police have some secondary evidence in their hands, which can give them one year for each of them on a lighter charge. So the police put forward the terms of Faust transaction to them at the same time.

In the first case, if both the old lady and the middle-aged uncle have confessed their crimes, they will each be sentenced to two years.

Second, if the old lady confesses and the middle-aged uncle does not, the old lady can be released. The middle-aged uncle will be in prison for three years, and vice versa.

In the third case, if the old lady and the middle-aged uncle do not make a confession, then each of them will be fined.

Explain more clearly. The middle-aged uncle and the old lady know the three terms of the above transaction very clearly. In other words, they know that the evidence in the hands of the police is only enough to sentence each person for one year. If there is no such transaction, they will each serve one year in prison.

With this deal, as long as both of them do not plead guilty, or as long as they are fined or sentenced to one year, there is no deterrent force for them.

It's not the first time that they have done such a thing. They are all very smart people. In other words, each of them will make decisions for the purpose of maximizing their own interests. In this game, if a criminal's choice is not to confess, then we call his choice cooperation.

OK, let's take a look at their choice. If you are an old lady, you don't know how the middle-aged uncle will choose, so you must consider the possible consequences of every choice made by the middle-aged uncle.

If the middle-aged uncle chose silence, which choice would be more cost-effective? If you are silent, you will be in prison for one year; If you make a statement, then you don't have to go to jail. So if the middle-aged uncle is silent, the old lady should choose not to confess.

If the middle-aged uncle chooses to confess, what are the consequences of your two choices? If you are silent, you will be in prison for three years; If you confess, you're going to be in jail for two years. Two years is better than three.

Therefore, no matter which choice the middle-aged uncle makes, he should know that the choice of confession is more cost-effective. Therefore, "confession" is the only reasonable and rational choice for Party A to maximize benefits and minimize losses.

In the same way, the middle-aged uncle would choose to confess. In this way, our clever policeman will get two confessions the next morning. This no suspense ending is the only answer to the classic prisoner's dilemma. When the prisoner's dilemma is changed by other conditions, the answer will also change.

Two prisoners are forced into a miserable dilemma by this game. It is clear that there is a possibility that you and I are good, but the result is that you are not good and I am not good. The inevitable outcome is the famous Nash equilibrium.