“. . . I had no desire to purge my religious feelings. They were bred in me, they suffused the wellsprings of my creative life. I also retained a *** all measure of common sense. To wit, people must belong to a tribe; they yearn to have a purpose larger than themselves. We are obliged by the deepest drives of the human spirit to make ourselves more than animated dust, and we must have a story to tell about where we came from, and why we are here. Could Holy Writ be just the first literate attempt to explain the universe and make ourselves significant within it? Perhapes science is a continuation on new and better-tested ground to attain the same end. If so, then in that sense science is religion liberated and writ large.
“Such, I believe, is the source of the Ionian Enchantment: Preferring a search for objective reality over revelation is another way of satisfying religious hunger. It is an endeavor almost as old as civilization and intertwined with traditional religion, but it follows a very different course -- a stoic’s creed, an acquired taste, a guidebook to adventure plotted across rough terrain. It aims to save the spirit, not by surrender but by liberation of the human mind. Its central tenet, Einstein knew, is the unification of knowledge. When we have unified enough certain knowledge, we will understand who we are and why we are here.
“If those committed to the quest fail, they will be forgiven. When lost, they will find another way. The moral imperative of humani *** is the endeavor alone, whether successful or not, provided the effort is honorable and failure memorable. The ancient Greeks expressed the idea in a myth of vaulting ambition. Daedalus escapes from Crete with his son Icarus on wings he has fashioned from feathers and wax. Ignoring the warnings of his father, Icarus flies toward the sun, whereupon his wings come apart and he falls into the sea. That is the end of Icarus in the myth. But we are left to wonder: Was he just a foolish boy? Did he pay the price for hubris, for pride in sight of the gods? I like to think that on the contrary his daring represents a saving human grace. And so the great astrophysicist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar could pay tribute to the spirit of his mentor, Sir Arthur Eddington, by saying: Let us see how high we can fly before the sun melts the wax in our wings.“ (Consilience, Edward O. Wilson, Ch. 1, Pg. 7; Knopf Press.)
警惕崇奉先行的翻译
·方船子·
我前面已指出，田洺的翻译之所以错误百出，除了他不具有及格的英语阅读
才能外，一个因素是因为他戴着“反科学”的有色眼镜异想天开，所以能一再把
“科学主义”的内容翻译成“反科学主义”。在一大堆要来矫正我的翻译的来函
或张贴中，很大一部门也属于那种崇奉先行的异想天开。此中较典型的是一位基
督徒写的。他带着“基督教”的有色眼镜，如斯评判我的两处翻译：
I found it hard to accept that our deepest beliefs were set in
stone by agricultural societies of the eastern Mediterranean more than
two thousand years ago.
田译：
我发现很难相信我们最深层的自信心要根据两千多年前近东农业社会中
石头上铭记的文字来决定。（p.5）
方译：
我发现很难承受那个看点：我们最深厚的崇奉是在两千多年前，由地中海
东部的农业社会固定死了的。
其实田的曲译例如船子的意译可能更准确。那里做者用stone那个字是暗指
摩西在西奈山上承受了天主写在石版上的教诲，既后来成为许多西方人崇奉的一
部门的“摩西十诫”。
可惜方看来是没有弄大白那个典故，只好发扬本身的想象了。
“set in stone”是一个非经常用的成语，用google检索，可查到八万多条。
其意思就是“固定死了”、“不克不及再改”，没有任何宗教意味。那位基督徒不
知那个成语，本身在异想天开，却责备我“只好发扬本身的想象”，那种自认为
是，原来也是基督徒的本质。假设威尔逊在那里是暗指摩西十诫的话，那么他应
该用“set in the stones”，然后面的“农业社会”也应该改用单数，而不应
用表达泛指的复数。显然那位基督徒对英语欠缺语感。
再看他的另一个矫正：
还有那句：
I like to think that on the contrary his daring represents a
saving human grace.
田译：我喜欢从相反的角度来根究，他的勇猛代表了一种要求挽救人类的高
贵。（p.7）
方译：我认为，相反地，他的斗胆代表了一种可取的人品。
田译是不合错误，可方将“saving human grace”译成“可取的人品”也欠妥。
“grace”的一个次要意义是神的膏泽，因为十字架上的耶酥用他的血洗清了人
的功责。只要信他的人即可以得救。那个字的另一个相关意思是来自神的美德。
那里用human grace大约是指人本身所具备的能够将本身从功责中挽救出来的德
性，好比仁慈，同情，无私等道德。因为人是双向度的，一半是人（天使），一
半是兽（恶魔）。
“saving grace”也是一个常用成语，意思是“用于弥补缺点的可取道德”、
“救赎的特征”（a quality that makes up for other generally negative
characteristics; redeeming feature. Random House Unabridged Dictionary）。
威尔逊是在提到古希腊的一个神话时写下那句话的：用蜡做的同党飞翔，因为
飞得太靠近太阳，同党熔化，摔死了。传统上认为此人不知天高地厚、轻举妄动，
而威尔逊则认为他的斗胆代表着一种能弥补人道缺陷的可取的人品，和什么
“神的膏泽”、“来自神的美德”、“将本身从功责中挽救出来”那些基督教
的老生常谈毫无关系。威尔逊不是在布道。
我写此文的意图，是为了提醒各人在读那些有强烈的崇奉的译者的译文时，
要多留一个心眼，警惕他们会有意无意地根据本身的崇奉歪曲原文。对“反科学”
人士要如斯，对基督徒也要如斯，特殊是，基督徒在翻译与进化论有关的文章时
歪曲原意，是不足为奇的。
我已经说过，我供给“方译”的目标，只是为了搀扶帮助那些不懂英文或英语
程度不高的人大白“田译”的荒唐。假设你自信本身的英语程度足以看得懂原
文，完全能够跳过“方译”。我并非要供给一个译文范本，更不是要夸耀自
己的翻译程度（现实上假设我本身译书，也未必都句句曲译。当然，“信”是
必定要做到的），所以跟我议论对详细某句话应该怎么翻译较好，纯属多此一
举。据那些“方译”评判甚至进攻我的翻译程度，更是好笑（想研究我的翻译
程度，能够看我不久前在网上登出过的《达尔文的求助紧急看念》第三章，欢送指
正）。对现代做家写的普及做品，我不太可能犯读不懂原文的错误。当然，有
时候读得太快，误读是有可能的，就像我们也会误读了中文书一样。今天我又
查了一下“方译”，发现只要一处无关紧要的误读，把“常识分子的乐趣”误
读成“思惟的乐趣”，当即在网站上做了矫正。考虑到已传播了开往，在此也
做个阐明。
2003.2.20.
(XYS20030221)
◇◇新语丝()◇◇
雨落琴弦
雾遮青山
静待繁花