.
http://blog.udn.com/SCFtw2/2625901
| |
| 2009/02/07 18:43:17 瀏覽324｜回應11｜推薦7 |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
.
3樓. Lohengrin2009/04/05 20:01Religious experience is universal.
Religious experience is universal across culture and time. It is then not a stretch to hypothesize that there might be some biological basis. The alternative is to suggest that there is really some deity who is influencing people's minds. Or one can argue that this universality is a coincidence, but I think that is a stretch.
I am not saying that the various religious doctrines are factually and scientifically true. Only that the religious experience is universal and as such it merits study. The Jungian concept of universal archetypes is a very interesting idea.
.
又寫長了，衹能另貼，在這裡~~~
http://blog.udn.com/SCFtw2/2823921
[2009-4-6] 關於宗教經驗/體驗
2009/04/06 22:48:10再補充一下。
容格有兩樣東西很出名：集體潛意識、普遍原型。年青的時候武俠小說最能吸引我，所以容格一手貨二手貨我也都沒讀過，不過那兩樣東西略有所知，一直衹是略有所知。 ^_^
『人同此心，心同此理』這兩句話很好用。可以再加四句話：『口無同嗜，則無易牙。目無同美，則無子都。』有一些很基本的事象大家的看法差不多，感覺差不多，這就是人同此心心同此理，不過『人同此心』在基本道理上在基本知識上比『心同此理』重要這一點好像比較少有人重視，『人同此心』在道理上應該是『普遍原型』的根源。在一個不受外來影響的社會裡，易牙和子都是一定存在的，這個事象說穿了還是『人同此心』。穿越時空、文化、和社會的宗教經驗的普遍原型到底是什麼樣子？心腦專家會努力研究的，不過我看那個普遍原型之存在 -- 如果確實存在 -- 應該還是那些少數人『人同此心』的結果。 ╯∩﹏﹏∩╰
.
SCFtw2 於 2009/04/06 23:47回覆-
2樓. Lohengrin2009/04/01 12:35Continue
Noam Chomsky proved (at least to my satisfaction) that the structure of language is hardwired into the brain. I agree that there is no gene of religion just as there is no gene of language, but I think faith has evolutionary advantage and would not be surprised if there is a similar genetic predisposition.
Watch Melvin Konner's presentation in
http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-science-religion-reason-and-survival/session-9-1Konner's presentation starts about 50mins into the session and you can skip to it if you like.
If that is the case, then it is not a matter of choosing religion or no religion, but religion or better religion. To have a better religion, one can either start from scratch or reform the old and existing ones. I submit that the first choice, namely starting from scratch, is not really feasible. This leaves us with reformation (pun intended), hence, my interpretation/re-interpretation of the story of the Apple. ^_^
* * *
UDN is complaining about my essay being too long again. Apparently, if the essay is in English, it counts letters rather than words!!!
我知道Chomsky的那番論說很多人同意，不過我沒讀過，也沒讀過二手貨。我早就不讀書了~~~ ^_^
語言是一種邏輯產物。不合邏輯的語言不可能被發展出來，因為不能用於溝通。人腦有邏輯能力，因為邏輯能力糟糕的人腦對擁有者的實際效應是明顯的選擇劣勢。^_^
沒有什麼宗教基因，也沒有什麼語言基因，因為沒有什麼思維基因。腦細胞的生理活動產生一切，造成一切。黑猩猩的腦細胞的生理活動跟人類的差不多，有些黑猩猩對單純事象的記憶力甚至比人強，但黑猩猩沒法記憶複雜的事象，也不能從事稍微複雜些的思考，這純粹是聰明程度(也就是智能高低)的問題。人類的大腦構造演化程度(尤其是額葉皮質)比黑猩猩高，所以人腦的思維能力遠比黑猩猩的大腦的思維能力強大，如此而已。人的思維變得複雜，產生高級文明，那是"文化演化"，不是"生物演化"，這一點很多生物學家搞不清楚。
你對生物演化學欠瞭解，所以時發怪論。我實在不知道你為什麼一直被"宗教信仰的演化優勢"這個意念黏住~~~ ^+++++^
關於伊甸園裡的那個造孽的蘋果，見我的新帖~~~
http://blog.udn.com/SCFtw2/2817728
[2009-4-5] 伊甸園故事裡的罪與罰.
SCFtw2 於 2009/04/05 04:35回覆 -
1樓. Lohengrin2009/04/01 12:30On poetic language.
I don't dispute your factual analysis, except to quote Dobzhansky:
"The Koran and the Bible do not contradict Copernicus, nor does Copernicus contradict them. It is ludicrous to mistake the Bible and the Koran for primers of natural science. They treat of matters even more important: the meaning of man and his relations to God. They are written in poetic symbols that were understandable to people of the age when they were written, as well as to peoples of all other ages."
Then there is Socrates' analysis in "Apology":
"...not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them."
In this situation, it is not a stretch to interpret the story of the Apple the way I (as well as many other) did..
Socrates:『...not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them.』
『詩人寫詩並不靠智能，而是靠一種天稟與靈感；占卜預言者也會說出許多好東西但是不瞭解那些好東西的意義，詩人跟占卜預言者很像。』蘇老先生的這幾句話並不完全對。靈感是一種天賦智能的“半自動”操作狀態，這個天賦智能需要訓練。寫詩需要技巧，技巧來自學習和訓練。天賦智能不夠，那麼不管怎麼訓練，“像樣的”靈感都不會出現。他說的diviners or soothsayers如何如何指的應該是這些人的起乩狀態。希臘的神諭經常有解讀的問題。
很多神話故事的內容 -- 不是語句 -- 詩意盎然。至於語句，舊約裡有一堆文學可觀的讚美詩。And in a sense, they knew what they were doing. ^_^
附帶說一下。生物演化學家Theodosius Dobzhansky不是宗教信徒，此事已述明~~~
http://blog.udn.com/SCFtw2/2817703.
SCFtw2 於 2009/04/05 03:52回覆
