今晚與主題有關的重要的一點是我們要明白那時美國的形勢。十九世紀九十年代美國發生了什麼大事?美國當時正處於「精神危機」的頂峰。這種精神危機是我們所稱的「現代科學」所帶來的社會變化的結果。達爾文的物種進化論對於正統的宗教理論有極大的沖擊,孺婦皆知。簡單說,那就是不敢肯定說上帝是不是在天堂上,以及世上的一切都是對的的理論,進而引出尼采的一句話:「上帝死了」。
許多有頭腦的飽學之士,都經歷了很深的精神危機,我的祖父母就是其中的兩位。他們原成長在正統宗教思想的薰陶中,突然要他們面對一大堆地理、生物和天文原理。
關於這一點弗洛伊德說得很精闢:「科學,曾經給人類的自愛三刀。」也就是說我們人的我見與自我曾經被科學傷過三次。他指哥白尼的理論革命,緊接著又是加利略的理論說此地球不是宇宙的中心,許多人在這個地方都轉不過彎來。對他們來說,地球一直是宇宙的中心,萬物都圍繞著它轉,現在這個理論突然出了一個小瑕疵。隨著我們認知的界限不斷開拓,我們至今還在發現地球越來越小,人類想找到宇宙的邊,越找越無邊;越無邊越找,如是不斷。
弗洛伊德沒有把他自己包括在這三刀裡面,但我把他包括進去了。他說人類是無法自主的;人類不是自己命運的主宰,衝動與欲望將我們推到我們理性——潛意識——範圍之外,這對人的自我就是一刀。這種理論很險惡的,弗氏稱之為「伊德」。這種觀念倏地將人類從至尊的地位扯了下來。
緊跟著的是達爾文,他說人與動物的差距並不像人所想像的那麼大。根據他的觀點,事實上我們也許是從動物演變而來的,這實在是夠「恭維」的了!一系列的自然學科都是在這個理論基礎上建立起來的,而「上帝造人」的論調則猶如突然挨了雷殛一般。達爾文的理論真是沖擊到許多人。
下一刀是馬克斯和他的馬克斯主義。我認為那是屬於社會層面的。依馬克斯的理論,我們人類突然都成了受經濟欲望支配的動物。這在社會與經濟層面的沖擊力與弗氏理論可說是旗鼓相當,這也就是說仁愛利他主義的本能對我們不起任何作用。光是達爾文是不足以置宗教於死地的;馬克斯又加上一刀,說:「仁愛之心,人是有;但那只不過是一種鴉片——麻醉劑罷了。」
弗氏、馬氏與達氏三家聯手共創人類心靈三傷。現在歷史學家談論精神與物質的不幸分離,我們可以用好幾種方法來加以分類。我們可以說物質與精神的分離;也可說信仰與理性的分離;或者說宗教與科學的分離;價值觀與現實的分離,放到更為個人的水平上,是身心的分歧。不管你如何分類,在十九世紀末二十世紀初那時都是非常重要的,我認為至今還是如此,猶如一場噩夢至今還縈繞著。
目前的一些治療法、宗教,甚至「新時代」現象都試圖以各種方式來調和彌補這種不幸的分裂,可以說這就形成了一個現代問題。因此約翰‧杜威——十九世紀末二十世紀初的實用主義哲學家說:「現實與價值、物質與精神的病態分離成了現代生活中最深的一個問題。」以他的定義說,這種分離正好是所有的宗教和哲學起步的地方。如果我們不將此傷癒合,人類永遠不可能得以完整,永遠不可能恢復到原來的狀態。
更重要的是阿夫雷德‧懷海德對此事的觀點,他以自己的話來說:「歷史將來的歷程將會圍繞著這一代人(指我們這一代人)如何來調整科學與宗教的適當關係。宗教標誌是最為基本的;藉著宗教,人類的生活才具意義。科學知識是如此地力量廣大,藉由科學,人類可以塑造控制自己的人生」。所以你可以看得出這兩樣東西至關緊要。
待續
|
|
What's important about this for the topic tonight is to understand what was going on in the U.S. at that time. Essentially what was happening in the U.S. in the 1890's? We had reached a peak of what's called the "spiritual crisis of America." This spiritual crisis was the result of the changes and transformations that were brought about by what was then called "modern science". The impact of the Darwinian theory of evolution had a major effect on religious orthodoxy, as everyone knows. In short, it wasn't for sure that God was in his heaven, and that all was right with the world, which led to Nietzsche's expression that perhaps "God is dead."
Many thinking people who were well read and educated went through a deep personal spiritual crisis, my grandparents being two of them. After having been brought up in an orthodox, traditional religious framework, they suddenly met principles of geology, biology, and astronomy.
Sigmund Freud captured it really well when he said, "the self-love of mankind has been three times wounded by science." That is, our view of ourselves, or the ego, was three times wounded by modern science. He was referring to the Copernican Revolution, followed by Galileo, who said, "Hey, this isn't the center of the universe." And a lot of people had trouble with that. The Earth had been the center of the universe for them, and everything revolved around it; suddenly it was just a tiny speck. We are still finding out that this world is getting less and less significant, as we probe further and further into what people think is the end of space, which they never seem to find. So it goes on and on.
Freud didn't include himself in one of the wounds, but I will. Freud wounded our ego in the sense of saying that we are not in control. We are not the masters of our own fate; impulses and desires drive us beyond the reach of our rational minds: the unconscious. And it's quite nasty in there. He called it the Id. That realization really took Man out of his exalted state of measurable things and the rational animal.
Following that came Darwin, who stated that the gulf between animal and man isn't as wide as we had thought, either. In fact, it may be that we descended from animals—that is, according to the Darwinian view—which was less than flattering. Thus whole fields of study began to develop along those lines, and the idea that we were an especially created species divinely touched by God alone underwent a shock. The Darwinian shock was the one that really hit many people.
The third wound was Marx and Marxism. That was on what I would consider the social dimension. In the Marxian world we were suddenly animals driven by economic desires. It is the Freudian equivalent at the social and economic level. That means we are not driven by humanistic, altruistic impulses—not even religious ones. And of course if Darwin wasn't enough to do in religion, Marx would come in and say, well you can have it, but it is a kind of opium.
Thus the combination of Freud, Darwin, and Marx three times wounded the human psyche. Now historians talked about this unfortunate split between matter and spirit and there is a number of ways we can categorize it. We can say it's a split between matter and spirit, a split between faith and reason, a split between science and religion, a dichotomy between fact and values/ethics. At a more personal level, it is the mind-body dualism. However you want to characterize this split, this is what's really significant about the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and I would argue it's still with us today. This is something that still haunts our psyches.
Much of today's therapies, religions, and even the "New Age" phenomena are attempts in one way or another to reconcile and bridge this unfortunate split to which we are heirs. This becomes, in a sense, the problem of the Modern Age, so much so that John Dewey, the pragmatic philosopher of the late 19th and early 20th century said, "The pathological segregation of facts and value, matter and spirit, or the bifurcation of nature, this integration [the problem of integrating this] poses the deepest problem of modern life." He defined this split as the beginning of where all philosophy and religion takes off. If we don't heal this split, we will never be whole; we will never get it back together again.
Even more significantly, Alfred North Whitehead looked at this thing and made a paraphrase, "The future course of history would center on this generation's [meaning our generation's] resolving the issue of the proper relationship between science and religion; so fundamental are the religious symbols through which people give meaning to their lives [being religion] and so powerful the scientific knowledge through which we shape and control our lives." So you see, these two things are going to be the most important.
To be continued
|