radical essence

radical essence

       对于radical essence的问题，我有些许经验和知识储备。希望我的回答能够为您提供一些启示和帮助。

1.抗衰老紧致护肤品哪个品牌好(从品牌口碑、成分配比、使用效果三方面评测)

2.牛津教授Nick Bostrom《超智能Superintelligence》（英文节选）I

3.克里希那穆提的核心思想是什么

抗衰老紧致护肤品哪个品牌好(从品牌口碑、成分配比、使用效果三方面评测)

       随着年龄的增长，皮肤逐渐失去弹性，出现皱纹和松弛。为了延缓衰老，许多女性开始使用抗衰老紧致护肤品。但是市面上的品牌繁多，该如何选择？本文将从品牌口碑、成分配比、使用效果三方面评测抗衰老紧致护肤品，为您提供参考。

       品牌口碑评测

       在品牌口碑方面，我们选取了以下三个品牌进行评测：兰蔻、雅诗兰黛、SK-II。

       兰蔻：作为法国著名的护肤品牌，兰蔻一直以来都备受女性喜爱。其抗衰老紧致系列产品，如RénergieMulti-LiftUltra、AbsoluePreciousCells等，都有着较高的评价。用户反馈称，使用后皮肤更加紧致有弹性，细纹和皱纹有所改善。

       雅诗兰黛：作为美国著名的护肤品牌，雅诗兰黛也是抗衰老紧致领域的佼佼者。其系列产品，如ResilienceMulti-Effect、Re-NutrivUltimateDiamond等，都备受好评。用户反馈称，使用后皮肤更加紧致有弹性，细纹和皱纹有所改善。

       SK-II：作为日本的护肤品牌，SK-II以其独特的Pitera成分而闻名。其抗衰老紧致系列产品，如R.N.A.PowerRadicalNewAge、FacialTreatmentEssence等，也备受好评。用户反馈称，使用后皮肤更加紧致有弹性，肤色更加均匀。

       成分配比评测

       在成分配比方面，我们选取了兰蔻和雅诗兰黛的RénergieMulti-LiftUltra和ResilienceMulti-Effect进行评测。

       RénergieMulti-LiftUltra：该产品主要成分包括Pro-Xylane、LinseedExtract、Jasmonate和HyaluronicAcid等。其中，Pro-Xylane能够促进胶原蛋白的生成，LinseedExtract和Jasmonate则能够提高皮肤的弹性和紧致度，HyaluronicAcid则能够保湿滋润皮肤。

       ResilienceMulti-Effect：该产品主要成分包括ExclusiveRevitaKeyTechnology、MoringaExtract、Collagen、HyaluronicAcid等。其中，ExclusiveRevitaKeyTechnology能够促进皮肤细胞的更新，MoringaExtract能够清除自由基，Collagen和HyaluronicAcid则能够提高皮肤的弹性和紧致度，保湿滋润皮肤。

       使用效果评测

       在使用效果方面，我们选取了SK-II的R.N.A.PowerRadicalNewAge进行评测。

       使用步骤：

       1.洁面后，取适量R.N.A.PowerRadicalNewAge涂抹于脸部。

       2.用指腹轻轻按摩至完全吸收。

       3.可以搭配使用其他SK-II产品，如FacialTreatmentEssence等。

       使用效果：

       经过4周的使用，我们发现皮肤的弹性和紧致度有所提高，细纹和皱纹也有所改善。同时，肤色更加均匀，皮肤更加滋润有光泽。

牛津教授Nick Bostrom《超智能Superintelligence》（英文节选）I

       Love

       by?Toni?Morrison

       She's?dead?now,?so?I?can?say?that?she?laughed?like?us,?played?like?us,?and?her?adult?life?turned?out?okay?–?so?I?heard.?But?then,?when?we?were?all?twelve?or?less,?it?seemed?as?though?she?floated?behind?a?scrim.?Markedly?pretty,?she?had?eyes?full?of?distance?–?a?smile?made?more?attractive?by?what?it?withheld;?some?knowingness?it?appeared?unwilling?to?share.?In?the?early?forties,"cool"?was?our?word?to?describe?her,?although,?at?the?time,?I?thought?she?was?simply?sad.?Something?treasured?had?been?irretrievably?lost,?and?there?was?nothing?to?be?done?about?it.?Her?attitude?reminded?me?of?what?I?saw?in?the?eyes?of?scary?old?people?sitting?in?rocking?chairs?on?the?porch?or?leaning?on?a?fence?looking?at?us?as?though?in?a?little?while?we?would?know?the?doom?and?catastrophe?they?already?knew."Uh?huh,"?they?murmured?when?we?tripped?over?the?door?saddle?or?ruined?our?clothes.?"Where?is?your?mind?"?they?asked?when?we?dropped?the?milk?bottle,?let?the?coal?fire?go?out.?Seriously?asking?a?serious?question,?they?showed?no?surprise.?They?knew?we?would?always?fall?down,?drop?things,be?ruined,?and?forget.?And?that?it?was?possible?to?lose?your?mind.?She?too?seemed?aware?of?our?haplessness,?but?she?did?not?wear?their?frown.?A?mournful?sympathy?infected?her?smile.

       The?big?thing?–?the?most?obvious?sign?of?her?behind-the-scrim?life?–?was?that?she?didn't?like?boys.?That?is,?she?was?indifferent?to?our?giggle?and?babble?about?who?was?"sharp"?or"fine"?or?who?"liked"?whom.?She?made?no?contribution?to?such?talk.?Very?grown?up,?I?thought,?for?a?twelve-year-old?who?had?no?reason?to?be.?When?I?learned,?later,?what?separated?her?from?us?(from?the?world,?perhaps)，I?became?afraid?of?wakefulness?as?well?as?of?sleep.?Trying?to?picture?the?acts?foisted?upon?her?by?her?father?was?impossible?–?out?of?range.?Nothing?came?clearly?into?view.?They?were?literally?unimaginable.?What?was?easily?imaginable?was?the?implacable?danger?brought?on?by?the?things?those?scary?old?people?recognized?in?us.?Ruin,?falling,?losing,?mindlessness?were?not?only?in?our?nature?now,?they?signaled?our?future.?Before?we?even?knew?who?we?were,?someone?we?trusted?our?lives?to?could,?might,?would?make?use?of?our?littleness,?our?ignorance,?our?need,?and?sully?us?to?the?bone,?disturbing?the?balance?of?our?lives?as?theirs?had?clearly?been?disturbed.

       When?the?gossip?about?her?surfaced,?the?deepest?scorn?was?for?the?complicit?mother?who?apparently?never?heard?of?lye,?ground?glass,?or?a?baseball?bat.?The?women?seethed;?the?men?turned?their?lips?down?in?raw?disgust.

       People?tell?me?that?I?am?always?writing?about?love.?Always,?always?love,?I?nod,?yes,?but?it?isn't?true?–?not?exactly.?In?fact,?I?am?always?writing?about?betrayal.?Love?is?the?weather?.?Betrayal?is?the?lightning?that?cleaves?and?reveals?it.

       I?liked?so?much?the?challenge?that?writing?Jazz?gave?me:?breaking?or?dismissing?conventional?rules?of?composition?to?replace?them?with?other?,?stricter?rules.?In?that?work,?the?narrative?voice?was?the?book?itself,?its?physical?and?spatial?confinement?made?irrelevant?by?its?ability?to?imagine,?invent?,?interpret,?err,?and?change.?In?Love,?the?material?(forms?of?love,?kinds?of?betrayal)?struck?me?as?longing?for?a?similar?freedom?–?but?this?time?with?an?embodied,?participating?voice.?The?interior?narrative?of?the?characters,?so?full?of?secrets?and?partial?insights,?would?be?interrupted?and?observed?by?an"I"?not?restricted?by?chronology?or?space?–?or?the?frontier?between?life?and?not-life.?Thus?the?character?called"L"?is?meant?to?exhibit?and?represent?the?imaginative?and?transformative?nature?of?her?name?along?with?its?constructive?and?destructive?talents.

       The?first?scene?that?came?clear?to?me?involved?a?boy?new?to?his?neighborhood,?eager?to?belong.?Hostage?to?the?needs?of?his?own?flesh,?he?nevertheless?disobeys?his?body's?command?and?keeps?faith?with?his?heart.?In?an?environment?where?immediate?and?brutal?gratification?reigns,?his?want?on?tenderness?for?a?stranger?humiliates?him.?From?that?initiation?into?the?mysteries?and?terror?of?social?arrangements?evolved?the?stories?of?other?characters?whose?vulnerability?is?turned?into?shame,?into?loneliness?–?the?clear?sense?of?having?no?one?on?whom?one?can?safely?rely.?The?most?bitter?betrayal,?of?course,?does?not?come?from?an?enemy?whose?deceit?one?expects.?It?comes?most?chillingly?from?a?friend,?a?trusted?one?–?or?one's?own?self.?While?marveling?at?that?bromide,?I?could?hardly?avoid?the?parallels?between?those?specific?lives?and?wider?cultural?ones.?I?became?interested?in?the?manner?in?which?African?Americans?handled?internecine,?intraracial?betrayals,?and?the?weapons?they?chose?in?order?to?survive?them.?The?decades-long?civil-rights?revolt,?like?other?radical?changes,?required?consensus?(mutual?love)?for?success?.?Dissension,?healthy?or?malign,?was?frequently?understood?as?betrayal,?as?lethalas?apathy.?While?the?move?away?from?or?toward?social?cohesion?is?by?no?means?unique?to?any?single?people,?racial?politics?(like?religion)?certainly?heightens?the?stress?.?Beneath?(rather,?hand-in-hand?with)?the?surface?story?of?the?successful?revolt?against?a?common?enemy?in?the?struggle?for?integration?(in?this?case,white?power)?lies?another?one:?the?story?of?disintegration?–?of?a?radical?change?in?conventional?relationships?and?class?allegiances?that?signals?both?liberation?and?estrangement.?Heed?and?Christine?live?in?the?easy?weather?of?precivil?rights?intimacy?until?they?are?explosively?interfered?with.?The?fault?line?between?them?was?drawn?by?the?ability?of?power?to?satisfy?its?whimsand?ignore?the?consequences.?The?sundering?of?their?natural?alliance?was?met?by?fear,?compliance,?resistance,?flight,?and?iron?clad?distrust.?Unmediated?and?left?to?its?own?devices,?distrust?–?personal?or?political?–?can?have?predictable?consequences?:?irrational?contempt,?violence,?self-delusion,?exceptionalism,?hatred,?and?the?renunciation?of?a?shared?language,?all?of?which?play?out?among?those?of?the?novel's?population?who?believe?they?are?irrevocably?cut?off?at?the?root.?For?among?the?things?Christine,?Heed,?and?Junior?have?already?lost,?besides?their?innocence?and?their?faith,?are?a?father?and?a?mother,?or,?to?be?more?precise?,?fathering?and?mothering.?Emotionally?unprotected?by?adults,?they?give?themselves?over?to?the?most?powerful?one?they?know,?the?man?who?looms?even?larger?in?their?imagination?than?in?their?lives.

       What?could?possibly?scour?away?their?excuses?for?maintaining?the?false?face?they?wore?for?protection?from?further?abandonment,?further?betraval?What?is?the?raw?material?of?reconciliation?

       It?was?not?just?a?feisty?mother,?a?supportive?father,?and?insatiable?reading?habits?that?kept?me?later?on?from?giving?myself?over?to?a?life?of?girlish?submission?–?some?form?of?smiling?or?frowning?female?resignation.?It?was?the?comfort?of?learning?from?those?countering?sources?that?there?were?weapons?–?other?kinds?of?baseball?bats:?defiance,?exit,?knowledge?;?not?solitude,?but?other?people;?not?silence,?but?speech.?An?arsenal?could?begathered?against?whatever?threatened?our?future?well-being.?Adroitness,?of?course,?would?have?to?be?cultivated?to?know?what?and?how?to?defend;?what?and?how?to?cherish.

She?chose?humility?and?bowed?to?violation.?Having?lost?respect,?even?the?frail?status?of?a?child,?what?else?was?there?to?lose?She?was?properly?judged;?silently?condemned.?So?what?if?she?had?used?her?tongue?and?spoken?To?whom?Us?Hardly.?Back?then?,?in?the?forties,?we?believed?we?were?already?forsaken,?destined?to?fall?down,?drop?things,?forget,?and?misplace?our?minds.?I?suppose?we?could?have?loved?her.?Somehow.?I?suppose.

克里希那穆提的核心思想是什么

       History shows that superintelligence – a technology more intelligent than any human being – is fast approaching.

       What fundamentally sets us apart from the beasts of the field? Well, the main difference between human beings and animals is our capacity for abstract thinking paired with the ability to communicate and accumulate information. In essence, our superior intelligence propelled us to the top.

        So what would the emergence of a new species, intellectually superior to humans, mean for the world?

        First we’ll need to review a bit of history. For instance, did you know that the pace of major revolutions in technology has been increasing over time? For example, improving at the snail’s pace of a few hundred thousand years ago, human technology would have needed one million years to become economically productive enough to sustain the lives of an additional million people. This number dropped to two centuries during the Agricultural Revolution in 5,000 BC. And in our post-Industrial Revolution era it shrunk to a mere 90 minutes.

        A technological advancement like the advent of superintelligent machines would mean radical change for the world as we know it. But where does technology stand at present?

        We have already been able to create machines that have the capacity to learn and reason using information that’s been plugged in by humans. Consider, for example, the automated spam filters that keep our inboxes free from annoying mass emails and save important messages.

        However, this is far from the kind of “general intelligence” humans possess, and which has been the goal of AI research for decades. And when it comes to building a superintelligent machine that can learn and act without the guiding hand of a human, it may still be decades away. But advancements in the field are happening quickly, so it could be upon us faster than we think. Such a machine would have a lot of power over our lives. Its intelligence could even be dangerous, since it would be too smart for us to disable in the event of an emergency.

       克里希那穆提教导的核心，包含在他1929年表述的命题中：“真理是无路之国。”人不可能通过任何组织、任何信仰、任何教义，牧师或仪式、任何哲学知识或者心理技巧，来达到它。他需要通过关系的镜子，通过理解他自己心灵的内容，通过观察而不是理智的分析或者内省式的剖析，来找到它。人为自己建立了各种形象，以充当安全的围墙-宗教的，政治的，个人的。它们以符号、思想、信仰的形式出现。这些形象的包袱，支配着人的思想，他的关系，以及他的日常生活。这些形象是我们问题的源泉，因为它们把人与人分割开来。他对生活的感知被他头脑中已经确立的概念所左右。他意识的内容就是他全部的存在。这个内容是整个人类共有的。个性只是名与形，以及他从传统与环境中所获得的表面的文化。人的独特性不在于表面，而在于从意识的内容中完全解放出来，而这些内容是整个人类共有的。所以他不是一个个人。 自由不是反应，自由不是选择。人自欺地认为，因为他有选择，所以他是自由的。自由是纯粹的观察，没有方向，没有对回报与惩罚的恐惧。自由是没有动机的，自由不是在人的进化的结尾，而是在他存在的第一步。在观察中你开始发现自由的缺乏。自由是我们对日常生活的无选择觉知中找到的。 思想是时间。思想产生于经验和知识，而经验和知识是与时间和过去分不开的。时间是人类的心理敌人。我们的行动是基于知识，从而是基于时间的，所以人总是过去的奴隶。思想永远是局限的，所以我们生活在无休止的冲突与挣扎中。心理的进化是不存在的。 当人开始觉知到自己思想的运动时，他会看到思想者与思想、观察者与被观察者、经验者与经验之间的分裂。他会发现这个分裂是一个幻觉。只有此时，才有纯粹的观察，它是没有任何过去及时间阴影的洞见。这个超越时间的洞见，带来一种深刻的，根本的心灵突变。 完全的否定是肯定的精髓。在否定了所有那些思想所带来的心理上的东西时，只有在此时，才有爱，也就是慈悲与智慧。译者注：有人让克里希那穆提总结他教导的核心。他写出了上面这几段话，作为答复。 The Core of Krishnamurti's Teachings

       (written by him 21 Oct 80)

       The core of Krishnamurti's teaching is contained in the statement he made in 1929 when he said: "Truth is a pathless land." Man cannot come to it through any organization, through any creed, through any dogma, priest or ritual, not through any philosophic knowledge or psychological technique. He has to find it through the mirror of relationship, through the understanding of the contents of his own mind, through observation and not through intellectual analysis or introspective dissection. Man has built in himself images as a fence of security -- religious, political, personal. These manifest as symbols, ideas, beliefs. The burden of these images dominates man's thinking, his relationships and his daily life. These images are the causes of our problems for they divide man from man. His perception of life is shaped by the concepts already established in his mind. The content of his consciousness is his entire existence. This content is common to all humanity. The individuality is the name, the form and superficial culture he acquires from tradition and environment. The uniqueness of man does not lie in the superficial but in complete freedom from the content of his consciousness, which is common to all mankind. So he is not an individual. Freedom is not a reaction; freedom is not choice. It is man's pretense that because he has choice he is free. Freedom is pure observation without direction, without fear of punishment and reward. Freedom is without motive; freedom is not at the end of the evolution of man but lies in the first step of his existence. In observation one begins to discover the lack of freedom. Freedom is found in the choiceless awareness of our daily existence and activity. Thought is time. Thought is born of experience and knowledge which are inseparable from time and the past. Time is the psychological enemy of man. Our action is based on knowledge and therefore time, so man is always a slave to the past. Thought is ever-limited and so we live in constant conflict and struggle. There is no psychological evolution. When man becomes aware of the movement of his own thoughts he will see the division between the thinker and the thought, the observer and the observed, the experiencer and the experience. He will discover that this division is an illusion. Then only is there pure observation which is insight without any shadow of the past or of time. This timeless insight brings about a deep radical mutation in the mind. Total negation is the essence of the positive. When there is negation of all those things that thought has brought about psychologically, only then is there love, which is compassion and intelligence.

       好了，关于“radical essence”的话题就讲到这里了。希望大家能够通过我的讲解对“radical essence”有更全面、深入的了解，并且能够在今后的工作中更好地运用所学知识。