Author: Menglong Xiong
On February 14, 2020, I interviewed Zhou Lian on behalf of a certain newspaper, but due to various reasons, the interview content was finally published on Zhou Lian's WeChat public account "Buguzai Gechang" on March 1. Two hours after the publication, the original article was deleted by WeChat officials. This article is an edited version.
On the evening of February 6, after 8 years, Zhou Lian became active again after basically quitting Weibo.
"When you need to tell the truth, do you still choose to remain silent or even associate with lies? When you need to resist, do you still choose to evade or even collaborate with the enemy? When the time comes, can you be as straightforward as Li Wenliang?" He wrote on Weibo on February 7.
Zhou Lian is now a professor at the School of Philosophy of Renmin University of China. He is one of the few scholars in the ivory tower who has a strong sense of reality and awareness of problems. He was born in Suichang, Zhejiang in 1974, graduated from Peking University (Bachelor's and Master's degrees in Philosophy) and the Chinese University of Hong Kong (PhD in Philosophy). His research areas include moral philosophy, political philosophy, and philosophy of language. He has written books such as "Open: Zhou Lian's 100 Western Philosophy Classes", "Justice and Happiness", and "You Can Never Wake Up a Pretending Sleeper".
Regarding why he restarted Weibo, Zhou Lian said, "Because in extraordinary times, I want to express my views in a more direct way." And those two days were actually a turning point in his mentality. Previously, due to the sudden death of his father, Zhou Lian fell into self-isolation and depression, "almost losing the desire to express himself."
"It can be said that this epidemic has made me start to care about the world again and gradually shift my attention outward. Because of the pain of losing my father, I can empathize more with the experience of separation and death." He said.
During the COVID-19 epidemic, he has been paying attention to the progress, but as a political philosophy scholar, he currently cannot make some fresh and publicly available observations, so he has declined many invitations to contribute.
However, like many others, he has many doubts in his mind: "For example, the information about the first confirmed patient is very limited. What exactly happened to him? There are reports that he has no connection with the Huanan Seafood Market, so where did he get infected with this virus? These key pieces of information seem to have no particularly credible explanation so far."
The following is an excerpt from Zhou Lian's interview.
Movie "Contagion" still
Reflecting on the relationship between citizens and the state, institutions and human nature, and humans and nature
Q: How did you spend your days during the epidemic?
Zhou Lian: Before, I followed a routine. I would send my child to school in the morning, then go to the office or a café to work, and pick her up in the afternoon. Now, because of the home quarantine, we have to take care of our child all day, so we divide the tasks. Teacher Liu takes care of our child during the day, and I read books and prepare lessons. In the afternoon, I take over and accompany her in studying and playing.
Q: Did you not go back home during the entire Spring Festival?
Zhou Lian: I returned to Hangzhou on January 19 and returned to Beijing on the 27th. Then I have been under home quarantine.
On the day I returned to Hangzhou, Zhong Nanshan had not yet been interviewed by CCTV, and Wuhan had not been locked down. But we already felt that the situation was not good. I found 10 masks at home, but when I arrived at the airport, I found that almost no one was wearing masks. So I doubted whether I had overreacted, and driven by the psychology of conformity, I finally "ran naked" back to Hangzhou.
Originally, I planned to bring my mother to Beijing after the Chinese New Year, but the situation in Hangzhou deteriorated during my stay there, disrupting all our plans. We changed our itinerary several times during that period, and finally decided to return to Beijing alone on the third day of the Lunar New Year, while my mother continued to stay at my brother's house in Hangzhou. Our judgment at that time was that there would be fewer people returning to Beijing on the third day, so it would be relatively safe. However, for the elderly with underlying diseases and relatively low immunity, the journey was too risky.
Q: How are the elderly at home now?
Zhou Lian: My mother has gallstones, and when they act up, she is in a lot of pain and can't sleep all night. She has had three episodes in the past month, and each time she needs to go to the health center for intravenous drips, which takes two to three days each time. Before the outbreak, people didn't have awareness of prevention, so they didn't wear masks when they went for drips, and the crowds were crowded. Looking back now, it's really scary. I had actually scheduled surgery for her at Beijing People's Hospital after the Lantern Festival, but now this plan has to be postponed.
Q: Looking back, do you feel any changes in your mentality during this time?
Zhou Lian: My situation is quite special. My father passed away suddenly on December 18, which had a great impact on me. I fell into self-isolation and depression, and almost lost the desire to express myself. At the beginning of the epidemic, although I watched TV and read WeChat, my main concern was still how to complete various rituals during the mourning period, how to comfort my mother's emotions, and how to psychologically guide myself. It can be said that this epidemic has made me start to care about the world again and gradually shift my attention outward. Because of the pain of losing my father, I can empathize more with the experience of separation and death.
Q: When did this change happen?
Zhou Lian: The night Li Wenliang died, I posted on Moments and Weibo. This event had a great impact on me.
Q: Can you talk about this impact in detail? Including why you restarted Weibo after so many years?
Zhou Lian: Weibo fragments people's lives and thinking. There are many channels for public expression, and Weibo is not the only platform. I am not good at commenting on current events, nor do I intend to maintain a public image, so naturally, I chose to quit Weibo in 2012.
But Li Wenliang's unfortunate death inspired me to start using Weibo again. Because in extraordinary times, I want to express my views in a more direct way.
Li Wenliang was not the "first" whistleblower, and he was not even a true "whistleblower" in the true sense. The warning he issued in the WeChat group on December 30 was more like something a "whisperer" or "leaker" would do. When faced with danger, he would tell his family and friends to "stay safe"; when under pressure, he would feel fear and anxiety, and although unwillingly, he would still sign "understood". All of these are very natural reactions for ordinary people.
For me, the moment when Li Wenliang radiated the light of humanity was not on December 30, but on January 31 when he posted the reprimand on Weibo and said, "The truth is more important than mediocrity" and "A healthy society should not have only one voice." It was at these moments that his cognition rose to a higher level and entered a state of intense self-reflection, which is something I particularly value. I hope that more and more people can start to reflect on the relationship between citizens and the state, institutions and human nature, and humans and nature through this epidemic and Li Wenliang's experience.
Zhou Lian's Weibo
The simulation exercise for responding to sudden infectious diseases in Wuhan is more like a performance of diligent governance
Q: During this time, what books are you reading?
Zhou Lian: I have been reading "Plague and People" recently. I hope to have an overall understanding of the role plagues have played in human history, rather than being completely captivated by the sudden emergence of the novel coronavirus.
Another book is "Post-Truth Era" by Paul Bloom. This book is highly readable and has many vivid examples. The analysis of certain concepts also helps us understand what is happening. For example, the author believes that there are three types of communicators. The first type is advocates, who use competitive truths to create relatively accurate impressions of reality in order to achieve constructive goals. There is also a type of communicator called the misinformer: unintentionally spreading distorted truths. The last type is the misleader, who deliberately uses competitive signs to create impressions of reality that they know are incorrect.
If we classify Li Wenliang, the police officer who reprimanded him, the onlookers who cheered at the time, and the netizens who are now reflecting on the incident according to the above criteria, it will be very clear that Li Wenliang is definitely not a misleader or a misinformer, but an advocate.
Q: Have you watched any movies recently that left a deep impression?
Zhou Lian: I watched "Contagion" a few days ago. It is an atypical Hollywood disaster film. Although it features a star-studded cast, it does not have a true protagonist or deliberately create thrilling moments. The narrative style is quite restrained, even a bit plain, but it has astonishing foresight for the current epidemic. Many characters and details can be directly related to the current situation.
While watching the movie, I couldn't help but wonder, what would my feelings be if I had watched this movie before the outbreak of COVID-19? Furthermore, if I had watched Bill Gates' TED talk from 2016 before the outbreak, what would my thoughts be? Would they sound the alarm for me, prepare me mentally, and help me cope with this sudden public health event more calmly? Unfortunately, the answer is no. In fact, if it weren't for this epidemic, I wouldn't have cared about this information at all, and even if I did, I wouldn't have taken it seriously.
This reminds me of a news article I read a few days ago. In June and July 2019, Wuhan conducted a simulation exercise for responding to sudden infectious diseases. Obviously, from the chaotic and inconsistent response of the Wuhan government, it can be seen that the simulation exercise did not have real practical significance. It was more like a performance of diligent governance.
Q: Are you currently writing or translating any works?
Zhou Lian: Recently, I have been mainly reading books and preparing lessons, without writing or translating. Next semester, I will be teaching a graduate course at Renmin University called "Contemporary Political Philosophy." I plan to have students read literature on "Political Realism" and "Social Justice in the Age of Identity." These have been the main themes I have been thinking about for the past three years. Last semester, I had students reread John Rawls' later work "Political Liberalism." After reading it, I want to reexamine various criticisms and opinions of "Political Liberalism," repeatedly verify and validate opposing views, and then develop my own thoughts and perspectives.
Actually, it is difficult to calm down because you will occasionally check the news, making it difficult to fully focus on work and maintain continuity.
Q: Regarding the epidemic, what do you think needs to be discussed or reflected upon?
Zhou Lian: My confusion should be the same as many people's confusion. For example, the information about the first confirmed patient is very limited. What exactly happened to him? There are reports that he has no connection with the Huanan Seafood Market, so where did he get infected with this virus? These key pieces of information seem to have no particularly credible explanation so far.
Another example is that in mid-January, frontline doctors clearly stated that the diagnostic criteria set by the expert group were too high and would miss a large number of suspected patients. These suspected patients were scattered in communities, hospitals, and markets, which would cause further cross-infection. Why did it take until February 13 to lower the criteria, and then there was a sudden increase of 14,840 confirmed cases in Hubei in one day? After the outbreak, the public health system in Hubei faced tremendous pressure, and medical resources were extremely scarce. Severe patients could not receive effective treatment, and mild patients isolating at home led to worsening conditions and transmission to family members. Non-pneumonia patients were further affected due to resource occupation, causing secondary disasters. These questions could be foreseen based on common sense, so why did the response from relevant departments lag behind? Is it a problem with individual leaders or a structural problem in the entire bureaucratic system? How many critical moments have we missed during this period?
If we cannot determine the pathological origin and institutional origin, we cannot truly grasp the truth of this epidemic.
Q: Do you have any advice for ordinary people? For example, I was deeply touched by the following words you said on social media: "When you need to tell the truth, do you still choose to remain silent or even associate with lies? When you need to resist, do you still choose to evade or even collaborate with the enemy? When the time comes, can you be as straightforward as Li Wenliang?"
Zhou Lian: This sentence is first and foremost for myself. Li Wenliang is just like us, an ordinary person. Why can ordinary people also illuminate the world? Because a faint light of humanity shines on him. What are the lowest and highest expectations for a person? To be a human being. This is the deepest feeling Li Wenliang has given me. If we rewind time by six months, I guess he wouldn't have said, "A healthy society should not have only one voice."
Q: But there is something special. He had a Weibo post about the Wenzhou high-speed train incident involving Wang Qinglei.
Zhou Lian: I don't know about that Weibo post. This involves another topic. Li Wenliang's unfortunate death on February 6 did indeed touch the hearts of many people, but after that, how many people can transform this touch into the perseverance of certain values and beliefs, and reshape their basic conceptual framework for observing and understanding the world? I am not optimistic about this. Every time a major public event occurs, it makes many ordinary people start to reflect and dare to use their reason to express their anger. However, after the passage of time, the enormous psychological inertia and social inertia will pull them back into their comfort zone.
Everyone needs to constantly exercise their thinking, consciously forge and strengthen their hard-won cognition, and make efforts to remind themselves not to forget. But at the same time, there will be another force constantly forcing you to forget, telling a completely different story, and competing for the right to interpret the truth.
Li Wenliang's Weibo
Combining empathy and reason to form a perfect combination
Q: From the perspective of political philosophy, "anger" was the issue you were most concerned about in 2019, and recently you also said on Weibo, "Dare to use your reason, dare to express your anger." Can you talk about the appropriateness of anger? How do you understand the relationship between anger and justice, and anger and action?
Zhou Lian: I have reflected on myself, and for a long time, I have gradually lost the ability to be angry. Because there are too many things that cannot be said, and there are also many things that are useless to say. However, this epidemic has made many people start to express their anger again, which is a very positive signal. But relying solely on anger cannot lead us to a constructive future. We also need to use reason and professional thinking to restrain and guide anger.
Speaking of the appropriateness of anger, there is a very important dimension of thinking, which is that when the weak express anger towards the strong, seeking a just consequence and a better future, they often face a strong counterattack from the strong. In other words, in real life, anger often backfires and further worsens the situation for the weak. So we not only need to consider the moral justifiability of anger, but also the practical strategy.
Not all anger is morally justifiable. People may be angry based on incorrect premises or self-understanding. However, I think practical strategy may be a more important consideration. When the weak want to fight against the strong, you need moral support, wise strategies, and even though they may be small, necessary strength. Without these three elements, I can't see any strong person voluntarily accepting constraints from the weak out of pure moral guilt.
Q: Can you recommend some books or movies that help with thinking and understanding this epidemic?
Zhou Lian: In addition to "Post-Truth Era," I also want to recommend "Against Empathy" by Paul Bloom.
I used to think that there are only two ways to make the world better or prevent it from getting worse: one is to enhance people's rational abilities, and the other is to increase their empathetic abilities, which may be more important than the former.
However, this book tells us that empathy may not expand our world, but rather trap us in a more narrow situation. Bloom's main points are as follows: 1. Empathy is like a spotlight, allowing people to only see and care about a few people in front of them. 2. Empathy is biased and tends to promote narrow localism or even racism. 3. Empathy is short-sighted and makes people only focus on the present, leading to actions that may have many immediate benefits but catastrophic consequences in the future. 4. Empathy is not cost-effective and can make people harm the interests of more people in order to take care of one person. 5. Empathy slowly erodes interpersonal relationships, making people overwhelmed and weakening their ability to be kind and love others. 6. Empathy can also inspire violence. The powerful force of caring for one's own family and kin often leads to war and cruel treatment of others.
I am most interested in the sixth point. Bloom believes that in an environment of conflict and war, empathy plays more of an accelerator than a brake, because the powerful force of people caring for their own family and kin often leads to war and cruel treatment of others. Some people may argue that we should try to empathize with our enemies, so as to reduce violence and harm! Bloom's response to this is clear: "The working mechanism of empathy is not like this. Asking a person to care for an enemy as they care for their own child is like asking a person to love eating dog feces as much as they love eating apples. It makes sense logically, but it goes against the working mode of human cognition."
The title of the book "Against Empathy" is misleading. Bloom does not completely deny empathy. His basic conclusion is that people often exaggerate the role of empathy and have too many unrealistic fantasies about it. However, this does not mean that we should completely abandon empathy, but rather abandon the misuse of empathy, or in other words, let empathy and reason form a perfect combination. Only in this way can individuals who are separated and do not understand each other establish connections. Even if consensus cannot be reached, at least mutual understanding can be achieved.