萬佛城金剛菩提海 Vajra Bodhi Sea

金剛菩提海:首頁主目錄本期目錄

Vajra Bodhi Sea: HomeMain IndexIssue Index

《菩提田》

 

BODHI FIELD

科學與性靈(續)
Science and Spirituality (continued)

馬丁‧維荷文博士講於1997年11月加州柏克萊世界宗教研究院
A talk by Martin Verhoeven, Ph.D., at the Institute of World Religions, Berkeley Buddhist Monastery, November 1997
黃山山 中譯 Chinese translation by Huang Shanshan

現在有了量子物理的新物理學,這種理論不再描述「現實」,而是描述「或然現實」。這種新物理學追尋「可能的現實」,而且很模稜兩可,所以沒有哪一個理論模子是可以「放諸四海而皆準的」。這種「不定論」理論模子取代了早期的「固定」論,因而過去科學的「一發現機制原理,便以為可以一勞永逸,外在世界也在這原理的控制之下」的說法,越來越難以令人相信了。有思想的人對生命最基本的知識越來越持「不確定」的態度。因此現在有一種說法,就是「我們生活的時代是一個什麼都可能,但沒有一樣是確定的」;這也是所謂的「後現代之矛盾」。

這種「固定論」的崩潰,尤其是宗教信仰的迷失,弗洛伊德亦促其成。他說了一句很模稜兩可的話:「如果說科學無法給我們的束西,我們可以從他處得到,這是一種錯覺。」在這裡,「他處」自然指宗教了!可是他的精神分析理論也已經成為激烈爭議的話題;甚至原本他認為可以佐證他的思想的那套科學體系,也一直以十分懷疑的態度在驗證他的理論。

從對外部對客觀世界的研究,到對內部主觀研究者研究,這種轉移是新科學的一大特色。正像海申伯格所說的:「即使在科學裏,研究對象已不只是自然,而是人對於自然的研究。」一位古文人寫道:「世上沒有新的事情;所有的事情本即存在,只是我們遺忘了。」因此,海申伯格對於吾人所經驗的一切事,都認為是我們自己主觀上的一種感受罷了。這種論說早在中世紀時的托馬斯‧阿基諾就已經這樣說過「仁者見仁;智者見智。」這是大多數哲學家與心理學家一向就奉持的真理名言。但是,我們似乎忘了這一道理,而將自己的思想及欲望、自己自以為是的假設和執著,就當真了,認為外在真實的世界就是這樣的,而且永恆不變的。所以,當海申伯格重述這一道理的時候,我們聽起來反倒覺得更深奧。我們自認是在觀察自然,其實我們觀察的是自己的心所起的作用;我們正在觀察自己所使用的方法。佛說的話更是如此,而且比阿基諾或是海申伯格早了不知道多少。《華嚴經》第二十品中,佛說:「心如工畫師,能畫諸世間……若人知心行,普造此世界;此人則見佛,了佛真實性。」所以,這種「科學便是朝著真理做客觀性的進展」的概念,到了本世紀中頁及末期開始受到像托馬斯‧庫恩這樣的科學理論哲學家的質疑。庫恩先生在他1962年出版的〈科學革命的結構〉一書中認為,科學也像宗教一樣,揹上了種種非理性的程序的沉重包袱。在教科書中呈現於世的科學,帶著比我們所知道的更多的假設、教理、甚至唱自家的反調。

所以科學是朝著真理不偏不倚地前進這一純邏輯性的經驗論,基本上是被庫恩先生一筆勾銷了。庫恩先生認為科學是一系列推陳出新,不斷修改調整的模式;這種模式在一定時期內行得通,但當一場革命性的新觀念一來時,舊的理論倏地就被沖跨了。這些模式都呈封閉性和自我延續性;在保守並延續其思想模式這一點上,很像宗教。在一些革命性的思想家來引發一場大變革之前,一切看起來都很安定。例如十七世紀早期的加利略出來說:「哥白尼是對的。地動日不動;日為天河心。」羅馬教廷指責他散播異端邪說,顛覆正信。在宗教法庭審判下,他們逼著加利略收回他的話。雖然加利略當眾被迫認可當時的科學模式,但是加利略還是抗拒當局。當他起跪時,據說曾喃喃而言:「地還是動的啊!」他是在軟禁中度其餘生的。但是這種新的世界觀模式卻慢慢為世人所接受。落後的倒是羅馬教廷,對於哥白尼學說在1616年所加的戒禁,教廷一直到1992年纔解禁。愛因斯坦則是另外一個證明;他的相對論學說一問世,便滿遭人懷疑和潑冷水。所以,對固有模式作挑戰的人總是被人看成是異端分子而遭到攻擊,在別人眼裏他們是騙子和怪人。但是當最後證據充足時,他們的理論便又成為新的教條,我們也就如此接受這些理論,直至再有人把這個模式加以更動為止。

待續


Now we have the new physics with quantum theory, which is no longer describing "reality." It is describing probable realities. The new physics looks for possible realities, and they are so elusive that no one model can exhaustively account for everything. The indeterminacy of models has replaced earlier certainties. Thus, it grows increasingly difficult to believe in an external world governed by mechanisms that science discloses once and for all. Thoughtful people find themselves with this very up-in-the-air kind of feeling regarding the most basic facts of life. Thus, it is now said that "we live in an age when anything is possible and nothing is certain." This is what some call the "post-modern dilemma."

Sigmund Freud also contributed to the undermining of certainty, especially religious certainty. He stated quite unequivocally that, "An illusion would be to suppose that what science would not give us, we can get elsewhere." Elsewhere, of course, refers to religion. And yet, his own psychoanalytic the­ory has become a matter of intense debate; has come under the critical scrutiny of the very scientific system he felt would validate his ideas.

This shift away from the study of the "outside" so-called objective world of nature to the "inner" subjective world of the observer, is a hallmark of the new science. As Heisenberg observed, "Even in science, the object of research is no longer nature itself, but man's investigation of nature." As an ancient writer observed, "There is nothing new except what is forgotten." Thus, Heisenberg's insight into the subjectivity of experience was already expressed in the Middle Ages by Thomas Aquinas who said: "Everything which is perceived is perceived in the manner of the perceiver." This is axiomatic; something most philosophers and psychologists take for granted. And yet, we tend to forget this truth; we reify our thoughts and desires, our presuppositions and attachments, and mistake it for a hard and fixed external reality. So, when Heisenberg just says the same thing all over again, it seems even more profound to us now. We think we are observing nature, but what we are observing is our own mind at work. We are observing our own methodology. The Buddha of course, said something quite similar long before Aquinas or Heisenberg. In the Avatamsaka Sutra, the Buddha said:

The mind is like an artist
It can paint an entire world...
If a person knows the workings of the mind
As it universally creates the world
This person then sees the Buddha
And understands the Buddha's true and actual nature. (Chap. 20)

So, by the mid to late 20th century philosophers of science, like Thomas Kuhn, were beginning to question the notion of science as an objective progression towards truth. In his The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), Kuhn observed that science, like religion, becomes heavily encumbered with its own baggage of non-rational procedures. Science much more than we are led to believe by its portrayal in textbooks, comes with its own set of presuppositions, of doctrines, and even heresies.

Kuhn essentially demolished this logical empiricist and purist view that science was the impartial progression to­wards a universal truth. Instead, he saw it as a series of "paradigms"—a global way of seeing things which is rela­tively immune from disconfirmation by experience—that were constantly being established and shifting back and forth. One paradigm would hold sway for awhile, only to be bumped out in a "revolution" by another conceptual world view. These paradigms were self-contained and self-perpetuating; they tended to conserve and perpetuate their own ideas, just like religion tends to conserve and perpetu­ate its own ideas. Everything seems steady and fixed until some revolutionary thinker comes along and causes a radical shift. For example, Galileo, came out in the early 1600's and declared that Copernicus was correct: the earth moves, and the sun is the center of our galaxy. The Church denounced such views as heresies and dangerous to the faith. They forced Galileo to recant during a trial of the Inquisition. Al­though he was publicly compelled to affirm the existing scientific paradigm, Galileo still defied the authorities. After getting up from his knees, he is said to have mumbled "E pur si muove" (nevertheless it still moves). He was put under house arrest and lived out the rest of his life in seclusion. The world, of course, shifted paradigms to accept the new worldview. The Church, however, lagged behind, and only in 1992 lifted the 1616 ban on the Copernican teaching. Einstein, is another example. His theory of relativity at first was met with skepticism and doubt. So, at first the challengers to the entrenched paradigm are considered heretics. They are denounced; they are seen as quacks, as weirdoes. Finally, however, the evidence becomes overwhelming; their theories became the established dogma or doctrine and we go on until someone else shifts it again.

To be continued

▲Top

法界佛教總會Dharma Realm Buddhist Association │ © Vajra Bodhi Sea