圍棋之深奧幽玄 The Mystery of Go

圍棋是一門經濟學，也是一門政治學。	Go is of Economics and of Politics.
棋盤縱19路，橫19路，共有361個交叉點。人工智慧必須計算361!、將近10^768個變化圖才能必勝，可是，動用宇宙所有資源，也不可能計算完畢，因此，圍棋沒有必勝法。不過，在局部範圍內，譬如：一個小角落的變化，則可能計算完畢。	A Go board has 19 vertical lines, 19 horizontal lines, and 361 cross points. If there is an artificial intelligence, it shall compute 361!, about 10^768 possibilities in order to certainly win the game, therefore, Go has no sure-fire way. However, in a local region, for example, in a small corner, we can still complete our computation of all possibilities.
由此可見，圍棋包括2種特性： 局部的確定性。 全局的不確定性。	This shows that, Go includes 2 properties: Local certainty. Universal uncertainty.
分別對應到圍棋的2種技能： 細算力，有賴於清楚的邏輯，以計算出唯一必然的路徑。 大局觀，有賴於豐富的經驗，以嘗試出可能最佳的變化。	Corresponding to 2 techniques for Go: Calculation, which depends on one's clear logic, in order to compute the only and the necessary route. Conception, which depends on one's plentiful experience, in order to discover a probably best possibility.
細算力和大局觀，即邏輯及經驗，都屬於經濟學的範疇。	Calculation and conception, logic and experience, all belong to Economics.
至於政治學，乃是「從眾多選項收斂為一」的抉擇過程。	While Politics is a choosing process which makes several choices converge into one.
若是老手對抗生手，由於邏輯及經驗相距懸殊，經濟學主導了全局的走勢，政治學便隱而不彰。唯有當雙方實力相當時，尤其當一方「局勢落後」時，圍棋的政治學就悄悄現身了。	In the case that a master versus a freshmen, since they are badly mismatch in the aspects of logic and of experience, Economics dominates the tendency of the game, and Politics tarnishes. Only when two parties are well-matched, but one is "in an inferior situation", can we feel Politics' influence.
試問，何謂「局勢落後」呢？固然是邏輯上絕望、經驗上也悲觀的情況，亦即，經細算力計算是死路一條、由大局觀判斷也是無力回天的情況，申言之，經濟學徹底失靈的情況。	What does it mean "in an inferior situation"? Without doubt, it means a situation which is logically desperate and experientially pessimistic, or a situation which is, by calculation, death and, with conception, doom, furthermore, a situation which Economics fails to work.
雖說邏輯與經驗已無用武之地，我們仍必須抉擇： 是爽快認輸？ 是繼續掙扎？ 是循規蹈矩，無疾而終？ 是不按牌理，放手一搏？ 是有勇無謀，橫衝直撞？ 是運籌帷幄，暗藏機關？	Even if logic and experience are invalid, we still have to make decisions: to resign at once? to keep struggling? to stick to the rules, and finally get lost? to make a breakthrough, and now bet on it? to ramp around? to deliberate a plot?
經這一連串的抉擇，便使「從眾多選項收斂為一」，故為政治學的範疇。而如何抉擇，則關係到當事人的價值觀： 認輸是一種解脫，卻難道不會遺恨千古嗎？ 掙扎是一種奮鬥，卻難道不懂善罷甘休嗎？ 如是種種。	Through such decisions, several choices converge into one, so the process belongs to Politics. And the way to make decisions is related to one's values: Resign is a kind of relief, but is it not regrettable? Struggle is a kind of endeavor, but is it not shameful? Something like that.
是故，學棋之人，思路之清晰，可想而知。他們在棋盤上思考著，在棋盤外也忖度著；在比賽中使勁，在人生中也賣力。你若不順著他們的眼光看向未來，你就休想看懂他們。	Therefore, we can expect that, those who learn Go shall be considerably considerate. They think much on the board, and also have many ideas out of the board; they try their best in their games, and also do all they can in their lives. If you do not look along their sight to the future, you cannot completely understand them.