|
|
应要求重开新贴讨论爱因斯坦信不信上帝，此为爱因斯坦自己署名文章。
呵呵，初步判断许多人连下面文章中文翻译的部分都没读就Over了。
我发此帖的目的是说明爱因斯坦是一个不信有位格的神的人。
他的话也不适合引用来说明我们的宗教信仰和科学不冲突。
他那句“没有宗教的科学是跛脚的，没有科学的宗教是盲目的”名言的原意可不是说我们的信仰好。
"没有科学的宗教是盲目的(blind)", 宗教没科学眼睛都瞎了（=失去理解力，判断力)
主耶稣时代就没有现在意义上的科学，可是使徒们的信仰可不能说是盲目的。
Article by Albert Einstein appeared in Science,
Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium, published by the Conference on
Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way
of Life, Inc., New York, 1941.
爱因斯坦的署名文章
It would not be difficult to come to an agreement as to what we
understand by science. Science is the century-old endeavor to bring
together by means of systematic thought the perceptible phenomena of
this world into as thoroughgoing an association as possible. To put it
boldly, it is the attempt at the posterior reconstruction of existence
by the process of conceptualization.
But when asking myself what religion is I cannot think of the answer so
easily. And even after finding an answer which may satisfy me at this
particular moment, I still remain convinced that I can never under any
circumstances bring together, even to a slight extent, the thoughts of
all those who have given this question serious consideration.（大意：宗教是什么我不明白。就算现在我找到了什么满意的答案，我仍然确信，在任何情况下，我也永远不会理解，哪怕是一点点，那些把这个问题当回事的人的思想）。
At
first, then, instead of asking what religion is I should prefer to ask
what characterizes the aspirations of a person who gives me the
impression of being religious: a person who is religiously enlightened
appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated
himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with
thoughts, feelings, and aspirations to which he clings because of their
superpersonalvalue. It seems to me that what is important is the force
of this superpersonal content and the depth of the conviction
concerning its overpowering meaningfulness, regardless of whether any
attempt is made to unite this content with a divine Being, for
otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as
religious personalities. Accordingly, a religious person is devout in
the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of
those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are
capable of rational foundation. They exist with the same necessity and
matter-of-factness as he himself. In this sense religion is the age-old
endeavor of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these
values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect.
If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions
then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only
ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain
value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other
hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it
cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts.
According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between
religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a
misapprehension of the situation which has been described.
For example, a conflict arises when a religious community insists on the absolute truthfulness of all statements recorded in the Bible. This means an intervention on the part of religion into the sphere of science; this is where the struggle of the Church against the doctrines of Galileo and Darwin belongs.
On the other hand, representatives of science have often made an
attempt to arrive at fundamental judgments with respect to values and
ends on the basis of scientific method, and in this way have set
themselves in opposition to religion. These conflicts have all sprung
from fatal errors.（大意：坚持圣经无误论是宗教团体干涉科学的原因，因此教会才会反对伽利略和达尔文）
Now,
even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are
clearly marked off from each other, nevertheless there exist between
the two strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies. Though
religion may be that which determines the goal, it has, nevertheless,
learned from science, in the broadest sense, what means will contribute
to the attainment of the goals it has set up. But science can only be
created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward
truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from
the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the
possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are
rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a
genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. （没有宗教的科学是跛脚的，没有科学的宗教是盲目的，这就是那句名言）
Though
I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict between
religion and science cannot exist, I must nevertheless qualify this
assertion once again on an essential point, with reference to the
actual content of historical religions. This qualification has to do
with the concept of God. During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man's own image, who,
by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any
rate to influence, the phenomenal world. Man sought to alter the
disposition of these gods in his own favor by means of magic and
prayer. The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a
sublimation of that old concept of the gods. Its anthropomorphic
character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the
Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes.（大意：人类在早期精神进化时，通过人类的想象按人的样式创造了神）
Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an omnipotent,
just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man solace,
help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is accessible
to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which
have been painfully felt since the beginning of history. That is, if
this being is omnipotent, then every occurrence, including every human
action, every human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is
also His work; how is it possible to think of holding men responsible
for their deeds and thoughts before such an almighty Being? In
giving out punishment and rewards He would to a certain extent be
passing judgment on Himself. How can this be combined with the goodness
and righteousness ascribed to Him?（大意：没有人能证明神不存在，但是有神的观点自己很脆弱. 如果人的行为是神的工作，那么神的惩罚或者奖励不可避免地会给自己带来审判。祂怎样把这审判和自己的公义集于一身呢？）
The
main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of
religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God. It is
the aim of science to establish general rules which determine the
reciprocal connection of objects and events in time and space. For
these rules, or laws of nature, absolutely general validity is
required--not proven. It is mainly a program, and faith in the
possibility of its accomplishment in principle is only founded on
partial successes. But hardly anyone could be found who would deny
these partial successes and ascribe them to human self-deception. The
fact that on the basis of such laws we are able to predict the temporal
behavior of phenomena in certain domains with great precision and
certainty is deeply embedded in the consciousness of the modern man,
even though he may have grasped very little of the contents of those
laws. He need only consider that planetary courses within the solar
system may be calculated in advance with great exactitude on the basis
of a limited number of simple laws. In a similar way, though not with
the same precision, it is possible to calculate in advance the mode of
operation of an electric motor, a transmission system, or of a wireless
apparatus, even when dealing with a novel development.
To be
sure, when the number of factors coming into play in a phenomenological
complex is too large, scientific method in most cases fails us. One
need only think of the weather, in which case prediction even for a few
days ahead is impossible. Nevertheless no one doubts that we are
confronted with a causal connection whose causal components are in the
main known to us. Occurrences in this domain are beyond the reach of
exact prediction because of the variety of factors in operation, not
because of any lack of order in nature.
We have penetrated far
less deeply into the regularities obtaining within the realm of living
things, but deeply enough nevertheless to sense at least the rule of
fixed necessity. One need only think of the systematic order in
heredity, and in the effect of poisons, as for instance alcohol, on the
behavior of organic beings. What is still lacking here is a grasp of
connections of profound generality, but not a knowledge of order in
itself.
The more a man is imbued with the ordered regularity of
all events the firmer becomes his conviction that there is no room left
by the side of this ordered regularity for causes of a different
nature. For him neither the rule of human nor the rule of divine will
exists as an independent cause of natural events. To be sure, the
doctrine of a personal God interfering with natural events could never
be refuted, in the real sense, by science, for this doctrine can always
take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet
been able to set foot.
But
I am persuaded that such behavior on the part of the representatives of
religion would not only be unworthy but also fatal. For a doctrine
which is able to maintain itself not in clear light but only in the
dark, will of necessity lose its effect on mankind, with incalculable
harm to human progress. In their struggle for the ethical good,
teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a
personal God, that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in
the past placed such vast power in the hands of priests. In their
labors they will have to avail themselves of those forces which are
capable of cultivating the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in
humanity itself. This is, to be sure, a more difficult but an
incomparably more worthy task. (This thought is convincingly presented
in Herbert Samuel's book, Belief and Action.) After religious teachers
accomplish the refining process indicated they will surely recognize
with joy that true religion has been ennobled and made more profound by
scientific knowledge.（大意：我确信宗教这么做（按：信有位格的神）不值得，是致命的。这样的教义对人类危害极大，最终会失去对人类的影响）
If
it is one of the goals of religion to liberate mankind as far as
possible from the bondage of egocentric cravings, desires, and fears,
scientific reasoning can aid religion in yet another sense. Although it
is true that it is the goal of science to discover rules which permit
the association and foretelling of facts, this is not its only aim. It
also seeks to reduce the connections discovered to the smallest
possible number of mutually independent conceptual elements. It is in
this striving after the rational unification of the manifold that it
encounters its greatest successes, even though it is precisely this
attempt which causes it to run the greatest risk of falling a prey to
illusions. But whoever has undergone the intense experience of
successful advances made in this domain is moved by profound reverence
for the rationality made manifest in existence. By way of the
understanding he achieves a far-reaching emancipation from the shackles
of personal hopes and desires, and thereby attains that humble attitude
of mind toward the grandeur of reason incarnate in existence, and
which, in its profoundest depths, is inaccessible to man. This
attitude, however, appears to me to be religious, in the highest sense
of the word. And so it seems to me that science not only purifies the
religious impulse of the dross of its anthropomorphism but also
contributes to a religious spiritualization of our understanding of
life.
The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances,
the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity
does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind
faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. In this sense I
believe that the priest must become a teacher if he wishes to do
justice to his lofty educational mission.
[此贴子已经被作者于2010-4-7 7:35:32编辑过]
|
|
|小黑屋|手机版|恩友之光
( 桂ICP备2023005629号-1 )
雷达卡
发表于 2010-4-7 05:22
沉默卡
变色卡
显身卡
楼主