第21页 Chapter One

    This adherence to a static cultural ideal has a surprising and presumably unintended consequence: not only does it ground certain permissible forms of debate but it also permits and perhaps even encourages the day-to-day subversion of norms. This comes about because the very rigidity of outward forms provides some actors with a mask with which to conceal a variety of messages, just as a strict morality may sometimes enable--through the mastery of its codes--remarkable freedom of individual action. This is why official ideologies generally deny semantic lability: acknowledging that lability would lead to the realization (p.22) that official meanings were themselves unstable. 
     这种对静态文化理想的坚持，产生了一种令人惊讶的、可能是意想不到的结果:它不仅为某些可允许的辩论形式奠定了基础，而且还允许、甚至鼓励了对规范的日常颠覆。之所以会出现这种情况，是因为外部形式的严格性为一些行为者提供了一个面具，用来隐藏各种各样的信息，正如严格的道德有时可能通过掌握道德规范，使个人行动获得非凡的自由。这就是为什么官方意识形态普遍否认语义的不稳定性:承认语义的不稳定性会导致意识到官方意义本身是不稳定的。(有道翻译）
    想想卷帙浩繁浩如烟海的典籍，想想中华文明五千年的积累，那些被束之高阁的、当做门面和点缀的仁义道德，随着历史累计，在现实生活中落实到具体的社会行动者、历史主体的传承、理解和具体是世上究竟起到什么作用。教条是死的，而人是活的。活人不会被教条束缚，就像不会被尿憋死一样。怎样发挥出富有创造性的解读和实践，事在人为。这就跟带着镣铐跳舞一样，越是表面等级森严、法度严明的过度和文明，其实在某些方面，人们享有的自由度不必所谓的“自由国家”、“民主国家”差。当这些国度的百姓去往强调个人主义和自由的过度，或许往往会激发更大的潜能，发挥更大的作用。