任何善都是有土壤的,具体的，所以没有任意存在的普世的价值。 （中英文版）

我这么说很多人会反驳道，古希腊、古罗马法律中就有保护生命财产的法律，但是保护生命财产的法律，与明确的平等、自由等普世价值相差实在太远。古希腊的自由，不单单是限制在城邦公民的范围内，而且公民内贵族与平民的身份差别也很明显，即使梭伦的改革，也是以承认财产权为基础的阶层来进行的，而不是否认。而古罗马的自由也只限于共和国公民，同样他们内部元老、贵族、平民的差别十分明显，而且由于有一个私法的存在，使古罗马共和国内人与人之间的关系更加复杂，更加远离自由、平等这些概念。我们还论述过由于人性的贪婪堕落，这些朴素的人权概念在不长时间后就沦丧了，古希腊被马其顿帝国所灭，古罗马共和国也亡于古罗马帝国。古希腊、古罗马灭亡后，一千多年以来人类一直在君主制、等级制社会里挣扎，更不要想出现自由、平等、人权这些概念，不，是字眼也不会出现。

我们简略回顾下本书第二章冗长的内容，作些铺垫，因为我们接下来将从最根本的角度，阐述世俗社会不可能产生自由、平等这些普世价值。这一章的主要内容是，人类依靠本身的力量无法抑制贪婪堕落的本性，人类只有通过信仰才能够获得道德，这里可以理解为人类只有通过信仰，才能获得平等、自由、人权这些概念，而不是理性，所以世俗社会产生不了这些概念的。二千多年前的亚里士多德、柏拉图等理性主义者认为人类根据理性而行事，可是实践中人类从来不是如此，于是从皮浪的怀疑主义开始，就对理性主义进行批判。近代以来功利主义认为人凭感觉行事，根据趋利避害的感觉行事，这才是慢慢触及人类生活的本质，之后是，叔本华的人是意志的表象世界，将人类的思想深入到更深层次的意志，人受意志控制而行事，于是在叔本华的基础上，有了尼采的强力意志、超人，尼采认为人类受强力意志驱动，正是超人引领人类前进，于是人类传统的道德哲学体系，在尼采的最后一击下轰然倒塌，我个人认为尼采之后人类道德哲学已死（如果想了解详情，可以参照本书第二章的内容）。世俗社会的道德哲学，连基本的道德都无法建立？怎么可能产生更先进的，自由、平等这些概念？所以世俗社会根本就产生不了普世价值。

与这些世俗道德哲学相对应的是基督教道德观，对于基督教道德我们在这一章中总结出如下特点，它以信仰为基础，认为道德是天堂、伊甸园的神圣秩序，人们只有奉行美德才能获得拯救，才能获得永生、永恒。并且基督教道德以罚入地狱作为违背道德的惩罚手段，使人们心存敬畏之心，不敢胡作非为。同时基督教道德是绝对真理，不允许辩驳质疑，它以绝对命令的形式要求人们信守，要求坚定地执行，不允许任何的犹豫、游移不定，使执行道德如本能一般的自发与及时，社会秩序也得以有效的建立。由于基督教道德是绝对真理，所以是神圣、不可亵渎的，是责任与义务，是不可推脱的，这些都是世俗道德哲学无法做到的，所以基督教道德观很容易成为社会的基础，而且一直以来都是西方社会的基础。人类几千年历史中其他无数的事实也证明了，人类是在信仰的驱使下行事的，人类所有的行动，都是为了永生、永恒，进入终极世界这个终极目的，这也正是我所认为的，信仰才是这个世界真正的推动力，人类只有在信仰的层面上，才可能建立普世价值，通过信仰才可能获得平等、自由、人权这些概念。我们知道这些概念实际上对应地来自于，基督教的兄弟之爱、上帝之下人人平等、宗教自由，在基督徒眼里，这些是进入天堂的钥匙，正因为如此神圣庄严，他们才会不懈地去追求，甚至冒着牺牲生命的危险。而非基督教世界没有这种追求，又怎么能得到这些普世价值呢？

但是我这么说大家不要误解，这么说并不是要求每一个人都要去信奉基督教，而只是阐明一种事实，而且现在就有很多种宗教，还可能产生新的宗教，我只是认为，如果每一个信徒都能吸取基督教的优点，将兄弟之爱、自由、平等这些概念，融入自己的宗教信仰中，那么这将是一个更美好的世界。

我们可以发现，所有这些引领潮流的左派思想家，都生活在逐渐世俗化的基督教国家里，这些国家中仍然有大量的基督徒，将这些概念从土壤中拨出普遍、抽象化后，暂时并没有影响到它们的存在，大多数人都认为这些概念无论是不是来自于上帝，都是理所当然的事。不过这些概念与基督教这片土地是密不可分，是兄弟之爱结出的硕果，他们在逐渐世俗化的基督教国家中，还能暂时存活，也是应该的事，我们假设将它们移植到非基督教的社会里，这些基督教土壤结出的硕果还能够存活吗？答案是否定的。

These leftist thinkers did not know that there was no so-called universal and abstract good. Schopenhauer criticized Kant’s moral concept from this point and created the philosophy of will. Kant thinks morality is good, far from a specific good but a universal and abstract good. This definition is, of course, impeccable rationally, but it is useless in practice. Because all the good in life has specific content, there is no universal and abstract good. Therefore, Kant’s moral philosophy is complacent in philosophy and useless in real life.

Similarly, the leftist thinkers put the nation as universal and abstract concepts, such as universal freedom, equality, human rights, etc. As a result, the so-called universal values are also extraordinarily void and groundless. Because in real life, these universal values have actual contents and profound soils. They all come from the ground of Christianity. They come from the brotherly love of Christianity, the equality of all people under God, and the religious freedom of all sects. For more than 5000 years in human history, apart from the Christian world, other human societies have never had such concepts of equality and religious freedom, all of which come from the Christian world. And even in Christian countries, these concepts appeared very late. As for religious freedom, we know that although the separation of church and state was widespread in the middle ages, the concept of religious freedom came into being only to ensure fair competition among all sects after the birth of Protestantism. The concept of equality was also formed after Protestantism’s “everyone is equal under God.” Jefferson put forward that all people are created equally in the declaration of independence. Then the concept of equality was widely accepted. The concept of human rights was even later until Hegel abstracted a universal and abstract concept of human rights. Before the emergence of these concepts, brotherly love lay widely in the Christian world, which was the only soil that could create these concepts. The universal values of equality, freedom and human rights were also the gradual evolution of brotherly love.

The love of brothers makes us impossible to be superior to our brothers and restricts brothers’ freedom. When it develops to a certain extent, the concepts of equality and freedom come into existence naturally. Of course, I am just briefly discussing it here. If you want to know more about how brotherly love evolved to equality and freedom, you can re-read Chapter 7 of this book, “Ruth and Calvin.” In the five thousand years of history since the existence of humans in ancient Egypt, the concept of equality and freedom has never appeared in other societies. The soil full of brotherly love is unique to the Christian world, and other human societies never have such similar soil, so it is impossible to bear these concepts. Equality, freedom, and other universal values are not generated and abstracted from empty, but the fruits of the soil of brotherly love, the fruits of which developed to a certain extent. Even today, it is a problem whether these universal values can exist universally and whether these concepts can survive in non-Christian society?

When I say these, many people may retort that there existed laws to protect life and property in ancient Greek and Rome, but the laws to protect life and property are far from clear universal values such as equality and freedom. The freedom of ancient Greece was limited to the citizens of the city-states, and the status difference between nobles and civilians was noticeable. Even Solon’s reforms were carried out on the basis of the recognition of property rights rather than denial. The freedom of ancient Rome was also confined to the citizens of the Republic. Similarly, the differences among the 

elders, nobles, and civilians were very obvious.

Moreover, due to the existence of private law, the relationship between people in the Republic of ancient Rome was more complex and far away from the concepts of freedom and equality. We have also discussed that due to the greed and depravity of human nature, even these simple human rights concepts were lost in a short time. The Macedonian Empire annihilated ancient Greece, and the ancient Roman Empire also abolished the ancient Roman Republic. After the fall of ancient Greece and Rome, human beings had been struggling in the monarchy and hierarchical society for more than a thousand years, let alone the concepts of freedom, equality, and human rights. Not only that, their words did not appear.

Let’s briefly review the lengthy content of the second chapter of this book and make some preparations because we will explain from the most fundamental perspective and infer that a secular society can’t produce universal values such as freedom and equality. The main content of this chapter is that humans can not restrain the nature of greed and degeneration by their own power. Only through faith can humans obtain morality. It can be understood here that only through faith can humans get the concepts of equality, freedom, and human rights rather than through rationality. Therefore, secular society can not produce these concepts. More than 2000 years ago, Aristotle, Plato, and other rationalists believed that humans acted according to reason, but it was never exercised by humans practically. So people began to criticize rationalism from Pirang’s skepticism. In modern times, utilitarianism believed that people act by senses and follow the sense to seek benefits and avoid damage. Such theories slowly touch the essence of human life.

Then, Schopenhauer thought that humans are the representational world of the will, which deepens human thought to a deeper level of the will; people are controlled by will. Therefore, based on Schopenhauer’s view, Nietzsche’s will to power and Superman emerged. Nietzsche believed that humans were driven by the will to power, and Superman leaded humans forward. Thus, the traditional moral philosophy system collapsed before the last blow of Nietzsche. I personally consider that after Nietzsche, human moral philosophy is dead (if you want to know more, please refer to Chapter II of this book). The moral philosophy of the secular society can’t even establish basic morality? How can it produce more advanced concepts of freedom and equality? Therefore, the secular society can not produce universal value at all.

Comparison to these secular moral philosophies is Christian morality. As for Christian morality ( I summarize its characteristics in the following chapter, the third chapter of this book) , it is based on faith, and It believes that morality is the Divine Order of heaven and Eden. Only by pursuing virtue can people be saved and obtain eternal life. Moreover, Christian morality warns that violating morality will be punished in hell, making people feel awed and daren’t do anything wrong. At the same time, Christian morality is an absolute truth that can not be refuted and questioned. It requires people to obey and execute firmly. It does not allow any hesitation and vacillation, so that the execution of morality is automatic and timely, and social order can be effectively established. Since Christian morality is an absolute truth, it is sacred and inviolable. And it also is a responsibility and obligation for the believer and is inescapable for them. All these can not be achieved by secular moral philosophy. Therefore, Christian morality can easily become the foundation of society and has founded Western society all along. Countless other facts in five thousand years of human history have also proved that humans are driven by faith. All human behavior is for the ultimate purpose of immortality and eternity. This is also what I think; belief is the real driving force of the world. Only based on belief can humans establish universal values; only through faith can we obtain the concepts of equality, freedom, and human rights. We have discussed that these concepts actually come from Christian brotherly love, equality under God, and religious freedom. In the eyes of Christians, these are the keys to access to heaven. Because of such holiness, they will pursue Christian morality unremittingly and even risk their lives. How can the non-Christian world get these universal values without such pursuit? What can drive non-Christians to get them?

However, I don’t want to be misunderstood. I don’t mean that everyone should believe in Christianity, but clarify a fact. There are many religions now, and new religions may emerge. I just think that if every believer can absorb the merits of Christianity and integrate the concepts of brotherly love, freedom, and equality into their own religious belief, Then it will be a better world.

We can find that all leftist thinkers leading the trend live in Christian countries that are gradually secularized. There are still a large number of Christians in these countries. Thus, these concepts can be pulled out of the soil and generalized and abstracted to universe concepts. Their existence has not been affected for the time being. Most people believe that whether these concepts come from God or not, they are all taken for granted. These concepts are inseparable from the soil of Christianity; they are the fruits of brotherly love. Therefore, they can survive temporarily in the gradually secularized Christian countries, which ought to be. However, when we transplant them into non-Christian society, can the fruits of the Christian soils survive? The answer is negative.