<极简欧洲史> 第二章 神性到理性，科学到浪漫

CHAPTER 2 Europe Modern

第二章 神性到理性，科学到浪漫

近代欧洲

THE MIXTURE THAT FORMED European civilization was an unstable one. It lasted for a long time—through the Middle Ages, a thousand years—but its elements were not in harmony with each other. Around the year 1400, the mixture began to come apart. This occurred first in the Renaissance.

    构成欧洲文明的混合体是个不稳定的组合。虽然它延续了很长一段时间——整个中世纪，一千年左右，但组成元素之间并不调和。时至公元1400年，这个混合体开始分崩离析，它的分裂首先始于文艺复兴。

The Renaissance is often depicted as the discovery or rediscovery of Greek and Roman learning. But it wasn’t so much that the learning had been lost and had to be rediscovered, though some new discoveries were made at this time. What had changed was that instead of the church’s using ancient learning to support its theology, now there were scholars, chiefly outside the church, who were interested in imagining the Greek and Roman world as it existed when the learning was produced. They wanted to make art like the ancient artists did, to build buildings like theirs, to write Latin like they did, to think like they did.  They were thinking themselves back into a previous world that was un-Christian and pagan—something that the church had hidden as it had used this learning for its own purposes.

    文艺复兴常被描述为古希腊罗马学术的发现或再发现。不过，这并不是说这些智识成就曾经遗失，而今重新被找回，虽然当时确有若干新的发现问世。它的改变在于使用古代知识来支持基督教会的神学，而是有许多学者，主要是在教会体系之外，向往希腊和罗马在创造这些知识时的世界样貌而意图加以拟造。他们希望像古代艺术家那样从事艺术创作，希望建造出类似他们的建筑，跟他们一样读写拉丁文，所思所想俱与他们相同。他们想回到过去那个非基督教的世界——但这样的世界已被教会藏匿起来，因为教会只把这些知识利用于遂行自己的目的上。

It was also a more “worldly” world. The ancients had been far more concerned with men and their doings on this earth than with their life after death. The ancients had celebrated man’s capacity and powers and they hadn’t dwelt on his depravity. It was a very open-minded world that the Renaissance scholars now entered. There was a huge variety of views among the ancient philosophers and moralists on how best to live and what best to think. Their debates and speculations had not been carried on within the sort of straitjacket that the church had imposed on thinking.

    这也是一个比较“入世”的世界。古典时代之前的 对死后的生命其实没有那么看重，对人在地球上的所作所 为关注更多，他们对人的力量和能耐欢喜拥抱，不会满脑子想的尽是人的邪恶堕落。文艺复兴学者现在进入了一个思想奔放的世界。怎样生活最好，想些什么最好，古代哲学家和道德家早就百花齐放，在观点上百家争鸣，但他 们的辩证和推论并没有被传承下来，因为基督教会已经给人民的思想紧紧裹上了束缚衣。

However, the scholars of the Renaissance did not directly attack Christianity. They varied in their individual attitudes, but broadly they took a view of the Christian religion that was similar to the ancients’ own view of religion. That is, religion was something unproblematically present, it was broadly a good thing or a necessary thing, but there were many other things to be interested in. Religion was not to control all of life and thought, which had been the church’s aim. Once that control had been broken, European thought became much more adventurous, more broad-minded, and less given to certainty than it had been previously.

•文艺复兴的古典主张

    不过，文艺复兴学者并没有直接攻击基督教。他们的 个人态度或有不同，但大致上对基督教采取的观点颇类似于古人的宗教观，那就是：宗教是个基本的存在，大体而言是件好事或者说有存在的必要，只是世界上还有更多的事情值得关注。宗教不该钳制生活和思想的一切，而这正是教会一贯的目的。这样的钳制一旦被打破，欧洲的思想反而变得比过去更大胆开阔、天马行空。

With the Renaissance begins the long process of the secularization of European society. A secular world is one in which religion might exist, but it exists as a private business or as an association of people who are attached to certain beliefs—as in our world. Religion doesn’t dominate society; it does not impose its rules and rituals on everyone, or control thought.

    随着文艺复兴来到，欧洲社会开启了它漫长的世俗化过程。在世俗的世界里，宗教可以存在，但是属于私人事 务，或是一群人受到某些信念所吸引的结社团体——就像我们今天的世界。宗教不能左右社会，不能强制每个人遵守规定和仪式，也不能宰制思想。

What happened in the Renaissance was that the people of one culture and tradition thought themselves into another culture and tradition. Once you’ve done that, you are never the same again. Nothing ever seems as certain and fixed.  Not for the last time, European thinkers had jumped out of their own skin.

    文艺复兴的结果是，身处于某种文化和传统的人，靠着思想让自己迈入另一种文化和传统。一旦跨过这条分界线，你就永远不一样了。任何东西都不再是不变的。欧 洲的思想家们震撼于文艺复兴时期所带来的冲击，而这并不是它最后一次发生。

The men of the Renaissance were the first to call the age of Greece and Rome the classical era. Classic here means the very best: a classic catch, a classic performance, something that cannot be surpassed. They believed that the achievements of the ancients in literature, art, philosophy, and science were unsurpassed and unsurpassable. They themselves would do well if they could come close to equaling it. So the Renaissance disrupted the mixture with the message: the classics are supreme.

    最开始把希腊和罗马年代称为古典时代的，就是文艺复兴时期的人。古典在此处意味着经典、最优，例如我们说经典的接球、经典的演出，是种无法超越的精彩。他们相信，古人在文学、艺术、哲学和科学方面的成就一直无人超越，未来也无可超越。至于他们自己，能够庶几近之也就不错了。如此这般，欧洲这个组合体就因为“文艺复兴”的这个信息——古典的东西是无与伦比的——受到了干扰。

Our system of time works on two different bases， which is a constant reminder of the mixed nature of our civilization.  We date years from the birth of Christ and in that sense we still acknowledge ourselves as a Christian civilization. AD is an abbreviation of the Latin Anno Domini， “in the year of the Lord” (who was actually born not in the year 1 AD but more likely 6 or 4 BC). However， the way we divide time into eras —classical， medieval， and modern—has nothing to do with Christianity. It is the Renaissance view， which says that the classical world reached a peak of perfection and then mankind wandered and lost touch with its heritage. This period of “time-out” is the so-called Middle Ages， which is the very time when the church reached its preeminence in intellectual and social life. So classical， medieval， modern is a very un-Christian formulation.

    西方人现在计算年代的方法是建立在两个不同的基准上，这不啻是代表：这个文明的本质是个混合体。制定 公元年份是从基督诞生的那年起算，这表示西方人依然承认自己是基督教文明的一部分。AD是拉丁文Anno Domini的缩写，意思是救世主出世之年（事实上耶稣并非诞生于公元元年，生于公元前6年或前4年更为可能)。 不过，我们把历史划分为几个时代——古典时期、中世纪、 近代，就跟基督教毫无关系了。这是文艺复兴时期的观 点，意指古典世界已臻于完美的巅峰，之后人类逐渐偏离了正道，就此跟宝贵的遗产失却了联系。这段“暂停”时期就是所谓的中世纪，也就是基督教会在智识和社会生活上实现全面操控的时期。因此，古典时期、中世纪和近代的区分，和基督教是不相干的。

Three sculptures can illustrate the threefold movement of classical, medieval, and modern. The first is an ancient Greek sculpture, which is why one of the arms no longer survives. Not many of the original Greek sculptures survive； what we have are usually Roman copies, which are not nearly as good. This is the god Hermes with the infant Dionysus by Praxiteles. The human body as a thing of beauty and perfection is a Greek invention. As the art historian Kenneth Clark says, the nude is to be distinguished from the naked body. The nude is sufficient in itself, very properly in this state； the naked body is without clothes and reduced by their absence. Of course, most male bodies don’t look like this: The aim of the Greeks was not to represent a particular body. They worked to find perfection in the body and they used their mathematics to establish the proportions that are most pleasing and beautiful.

    有三件雕塑作品可以显示古典时期、中世纪和近代这三个进程的转折(见下页)。第一件是一尊古希腊雕像，留存至今的希腊原始雕像屈指可数；我们今天看到的通常是罗马人的复制品，品质很难和真迹相比。这尊雕像出自普拉克西特列斯(Praxiteles)之手，雕的是赫尔墨斯(Hermes) 握抱着婴儿酒神狄俄尼索斯(Dionysus)。人体是完美的，这个观念是希腊的发明之一。一如艺术历史学家肯尼斯克拉克(Kenneth Clark)所言，裸体像和裸露的身体是有分别的。裸体像本身展现的是丰富的力与美，它是一种恰到好处的状态；裸露的身体就只是没穿衣服而已，而且因为没穿衣服而显得自曝其短。当然，大部分的男体看起来并不像那尊雕像；希腊人的 目的不是要展现哪个人的躯体，他们的用心是从人体中找到完美，并且利用数学算出至为赏心悦目的比例和线条。

Hermes by Praxiteles

God confronts Adam and Eve， from the bronze doors at Hildesheim

David by Michelangelo

The second sculpture is a medieval view of the human form； these figures are on the cathedral doors at Hildesheim in Germany. This is Adam and Eve after they have eaten the fruit that God said they should not eat. Adam is blaming Eve； Eve is blaming the serpent； both are ashamed of their nakedness， which in part they cover. These are very definitely not nudes； they embody the Christian teaching that the body is evil， a source of sin.

    第二件雕塑作品呈现出中世纪的人体观。这是德国希尔德斯海姆（Hildesheim）教堂大门上的人物画，它刻画的情景，是亚当和夏娃吃下了上帝告诫他们不能吃的水果。亚当在责怪夏娃，夏娃在责怪毒蛇，两人都为自己的赤身露体感到羞愧，拿手遮遮掩掩。这明显不是裸体作品，它们是基督教义的具体展现，表示身体是邪恶的，是罪恶的根源。

The third is Michelangelo in the Renaissance, modeling himself on the Greeks and returning to their idea of the nude. He renders his David as a human form of perfection: man as the embodiment of something high-spirited, noble, and beautiful—as Hamlet says, “in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god.”

    第三件是文艺复兴时期的米开朗琪罗(Michelangelo)的作品，他将自己投射为希腊古人，重拾他们对裸体的概念。他所雕刻的大卫像是公认的完美人类形貌；人类是尊贵、高尚和美的化身-如哈姆雷特所形容：“行动多么像天使！悟性多么像神明!”

From nude to naked to nude can stand for the movement from classical to medieval to modern, which is how the Renaissance understood itself.

    从裸体作品到罪恶的赤身露体再回归裸体作品，可以代表古典时期到中世纪再到近代的意涵演变，而这正是文艺复兴对它本身的理解。

THE RENAISSANCE WAS THE first great disruption of the medieval world； the second was the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century. This was a direct attack on the church. Its aim was to return the Christian church to what it was like before it became Roman. As we have seen， the church acquired its Roman features because it grew up within the Roman Empire； when the empire collapsed， the church continued with its pope， who was like an emperor figure， and archbishops and bishops， who were like the administrators of the old Roman Empire， and beneath them in every locality the priests. This holy body had its laws， its punishments， its jails， and its system of taxation.

•耶稣早就警告过……

    文艺复兴是中世纪世界遭遇的第一个重大冲击，6世纪的宗教改革运动是第二个，这回是对基督教会的直接攻 击。宗教改革的目的，是要基督教会回复到尚未罗马化之前的样貌。我们说过，基督教会因为跟着罗马帝国一起成长，各种特性深得罗马真传；在罗马帝国灭亡后，教会的教皇依然屹立，地位俨然君王一般，而各教区的主教和大主教，也犹如古罗马帝国的行政百官，辖下更有不计其数的地方神父教士。这个圣职体制不单有自己的法律、刑罚和监狱，还有自订的税收制度。

The pope and the bishops ruled the church and determined its teaching. The church offered you salvation but only by means that it controlled. You needed priests and bishops in order to be saved. You had to take the communion， the mass， and you needed a priest to create the magic of turning the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Jesus. You needed a priest to hear your confession， to grant forgiveness， and set the penance for your sins. The priest might instruct you to say so many Hail Marys or to go on a pilgrimage or， for a severe offense， to allow yourself to be whipped before the altar. If you were rich and dying， the priest might tell you very firmly that you would not go to heaven unless you left a good deal of your wealth to the church.

    教皇和主教团掌理着整个教会，教义也由他们制订。教会可以给你救赎，可是必须透过它所掌握的东西来运 行。你要得救，非得靠神父和主教不可。你必须领圣餐、 参与弥撒，还需要神父替你变魔术，把面包和酒变成耶稣基督的血和肉。你需要神父听你忏悔，赐你宽恕，教你如何赎罪。神父可能要你念百遍千遍的圣母玛丽亚或指示你去朝圣，或者如果犯行重大，会要你到圣坛之前乖乖接鞭笞。如果你是有钱人却快死了，他可能会斩钉截铁地告诉你，除非你把大笔财富留给教会，否则你进不了天堂。

In the Middle Ages， most priests， bishops， and archbishops did not enter the church because they were particularly pious or religious； men joined the church because it was the largest and richest organization of the day. You took holy orders for the same reasons as today you would go into the civil service or a large corporation or politics or to a university： to get a secure job， to get interesting work， to get a high salary， to live well， and to exercise power. In the church there was plenty of opportunity for enriching yourself and giving jobs to friends and relatives.

    在中世纪，大部分的神父、主教和大主教加入教会，并不是因为宗教情怀或特别虔诚；他们加入教会，是因为它 是当时最庞大也最有钱的组织。领圣职就跟今天你去当公务员、进大公司、进政坛或进大学没有两样，可能是为了一份稳定的差事、有兴趣的工作或高薪，也可能是为了吃香喝辣、施展权力。在教会里，你有的是机会捞油水、发横财，还能替亲戚朋友谋职找事，让他们鸡犬升天。

Yet this rich， plundering， corrupt organization was also the preserver of the teachings of Jesus and the accounts of the early Christians. Jesus and his followers had been humble people but now popes and bishops lived in palaces. Jesus had warned against the dangers of riches， and the early Christians had simply met in each other’s houses. All this is recorded in the Bible， so the church’s holy document could be dynamite in the hands of its critics. How did the church manage to escape for so long from a devastating critique?

    可是，这个巧取豪夺、富有又腐败的组织，却也是耶稣教诲以及早期基督徒言行记录的保存者。耶稣和他的门徒出身卑微，如今教皇和主教们却高居于庙堂之上。耶稣早就警告过拥有财富的危险，而早期基督徒聚会都是在自家或别的信徒家里。《圣经》上对这些都有明文记载，因此，教会保存的圣典文献若是落入了反对基督教的批评者之手，很可能会变成引爆的炸药。那么，教会是靠什么手法，可以避开这种破坏性的批判这么久？

As the Bible was in Latin, very few people could read it.  The church said it was the first and final authority for interpreting the Bible. If anyone used the Bible to criticize the teaching or the practice of the church and made a real nuisance of themselves, they were burned as heretics—that is, as false believers, a danger to themselves and to Christendom. But then in the sixteenth century, with the Reformation, there was a heretic who got away. His name was Martin Luther.

■马丁•路德之时势英雄

    由于《圣经》是以拉丁文书写，极少人能够阅读。教会说，它是第一个也是最后一个解读《圣经》的权责单位。任何人要是利用《圣经》去批评教会的训示或作为，就会被当成异教徒绑在木桩上烧死；换句话说，你要是非信徒，不但会害了自己，对基督教也会造成威胁。可是，到了16世纪，有个“异教徒”却逃过了一劫，他的名字是马丁•路德。

p1- Martin Luther by Lucas Cranach， 1532.

Luther was a monk who took his religion very seriously.  He agonized over his own salvation: What could he do, he who was so sinful, to be saved? Then his mind was suddenly put at rest while reading in the Bible Paul’s letter to the church in Rome. Here Paul says your faith in Christ will save you. From this, Luther deduced that you didn’t have to do anything to be saved, in particular, you didn’t have to put yourself in the hands of the priests and follow their instructions. All you had to do was to believe, to have faith； faith alone will save you is the central Lutheran message.

    马丁•路德是个修士，对自己的宗教非常认真。他对自己的救赎充满煎熬：“我，一个满身罪恶的人，必须怎么做才可能得救?”一天，他读到《圣经》中保罗写给罗马教会的书信，顿时豁然开朗。保罗说：“你只要相信耶稣基督就能得救「马丁•路德从这句话里做出推论：你根本不必做任何事就能得救，尤其不必对神父的指示言听计从。你只要相信上帝、抱持信仰就行了。

Believe in Christ and you will be saved. Now as a believer, of course, you will want to do things to please God, to do, as the church says, good works, to act as Christ says we should act. But those works in themselves will not help you to be saved. This is where Protestant and Catholic teaching differed fundamentally. The Catholics emphasized good works as part of the process of salvation. Going on a pilgrimage, giving your money to the poor: That will help your cause with God. Luther said it will not—how could anything we do, we who are so sinful and corrupt, make us pleasing in God’s eyes? The only thing we can do is to believe, and if we believe, God has promised that we will be saved.

    “因信称义”，是路德教派的中心教义。只要相信基 督，你就能得到救赎。当然，作为信徒，你会乐于去做让上 帝高兴的事，一如教会所说，要行善积德，去做一些耶稣说我们该做的工。可是，行善积德本身并不能帮助你得救。 这是新教和天主教教义的基本分野。罗马天主教强 调，行善积德是得救的一个过程；朝圣、施舍钱财给穷人， 都有助于你的最终目的——与上帝同在。但马丁 •路德说不是这样的；就凭我们，浑身罪恶又腐败的我们，哪有可能做出什么让上帝高兴的事情来？我们唯一能做的就是崇信上帝，而只要我们崇信他，上帝就会让我们得救，这是他做过的应许。

This is a sort of do-it-yourself religion； all that huge apparatus that the church had built up over the centuries, Luther said, was unnecessary. This view did not go down well in Rome. The pope rejected Luther’s criticisms of the church and his new teaching about salvation. Luther replied with fierce denunciations of the pope. Who does this man think he is? He is the representative of Christ on earth, so we are told, yet he is really the enemy of Christ, the antiChrist. He lives in pomp, wears a triple crown, when you come into his presence you have to kiss his toe, when he moves he is carried shoulder-high by his servants—and yet we know from the Bible that Christ went around on foot. The Bible: That was the key to Luther’s criticism of the church. If something was not in the Bible, the church was not justified in insisting on it or practicing it. The Bible was the sole authority. After his break with Rome, the first thing Luther did was to translate the Bible into German so everyone could read it and become the managers of their own salvation.

    这算是一种反求诸己的宗教。马丁•路德说，罗马教廷花了几世纪建立的一个庞大机制，根本毫无必要，但罗马教廷对这个观点并没有虚心受教。教皇驳斥了马丁•路德对教会的批评以及他对救赎的新见地，而马丁•路德也强烈谴责教皇作为回复：这人以为他是谁啊？他告诉我们，他是耶稣基督在世间的代表，但他其实是耶稣的敌人，是个反基督之道而行的人。他过着奢华的生活，头戴着三重皇冠，你来到他面前必须亲吻他的脚趾头，要行动还得仆人高举过肩，而我们从《圣经》上知道，耶稣基督都是靠着两条腿行走四方。《圣经》，是马丁•路德据以批评教会的关键。如果《圣经》上没写的，教会就没有理由去坚持或执行哪个训令。《圣经》是唯一的权威。和罗马教廷决裂后，马丁•路德第一件事就是把《圣经》翻译成德语，使得人人都能阅读、成为自己得救的主人。

The Protestant Reformation was the movement to reform the church by basing teaching and practice on the Bible. It wanted to recover the life of the early church. The message of the Reformation was Christianity is not Roman.

    宗教改革运动，是以《圣经》的训示和教诲为据，对罗马教廷进行改革的运动。它希望重塑早年的教会生活。宗教改革所带来的信息是：基督教并不是罗马人的宗教。

How did Luther escape being burned as a heretic? There are a number of reasons. One was the invention of printing. All Luther’s criticisms and denunciations of the church were immediately put into print and circulated widely through Europe. Printing was a new invention, only fifty years old when Luther began his attack on the church. Before the pope could organize to defeat Luther, everyone knew of him, everyone was reading his criticisms. This was not a heretic with just a few followers in one country, as there had been many times before; this man very quickly had an international following. The other reason Luther survived is that some of the German princes welcomed his attack on Rome. Germany was not one country; it was a collection of many states. Partly because of this the church exercised more influence in Germany than in the unified countries of France and England. It held an immense amount of land, almost half in some places, collected large sums of money from the people, and the pope appointed bishops without the princes’ having a say. By following Luther, the princes were able to seize the church lands, appoint their own bishops, and stop the flow of money to Rome. The princes became the protectors of Luther, and in their realms the Lutheran church began. The Lutheran church was established in about half of Germany, and from Germany Lutheranism spread north into Sweden, Denmark, and Norway. England adopted its own brand of Protestantism, the Church of England.

    既然异教徒必须受火刑烧死，马丁•路德是如何逃过这个劫数的呢?有好几个原因。第一，拜印刷术发明之赐。马丁•路德对教会的批评和谴责立刻被印成文字，传遍了整个欧洲。马丁•路德开始抨击教会之时，印刷术还是个新发明，问世不过五十年；教皇要打压马丁•路德的计划还没成形，他的大名已是尽人皆知，每个人都在拜读他的批评文章。在过去，也曾有许多异教徒在一国之内带领着一小撮跟随者，但马丁•路德不一样，他很快就拥有了大批随众，国内国外都有。马丁•路德攻击罗马，一些德意志王侯见猎心喜，是他能幸免于难的另一个原因。当时的德意志并不是一个单一制国家，它是一个由许多小国组成的邦联。罗马教廷在德意志的影响力要大过在英国、法国，这即是部分原因——英国和法国是统一的国家。在德意志，教会握有广大的土地，有些地区甚至占据泰半；剥削人民、聚敛钱财不说，各教区的主教也由教皇任命，这些王公贵族全无置喙余地。若是跟着马丁•路德走，他们便可占据教会土地，任命领地内的主教，对罗马停止金钱捐输，于是，这些王族成了马丁•路德的保护者，并在领土内广建路德的新教教会。日耳曼民族有一半的土地都设有新教教会，路德派教义也从现在的德国北传到了瑞典、丹麦和挪威。英国则是创立了自有的新教品牌，称为英国国教。

Quite quickly there was more than one rival of the church of Rome. The Protestant churches took a number of forms, a different one in each country. They were self-sufficient within their countries, a series of national churches, whereas the Catholic church was an international organization. Once people began to read the Bible for themselves, as Luther and the other reformers encouraged them to do, they soon found reasons in it to criticize Luther too. The Protestant movement kept spinning off new churches because there was no longer a central authority to interpret the Bible and to police belief.

•两派人马从相残到相容

    罗马教廷的敌人很快就变得不止一个。新教教会的形式不一而足，因国家而异。它们在自己的国家里自给自足，建立起一系列教会，天主教会则是个跨越多国的庞大组织。平民百姓在受到马丁•路德和其他改革者鼓励而自己阅读《圣经》后，不久也从中找到批评马丁•路德的理由。在宗教改革运动中，由于再也没有一个统一的权威去诠释《圣经》、监督信仰，新教会不断增设，也不断被淘汰。

For over a hundred years, Catholics and Protestants fought each other, literally fought each other, in wars. Each regarded the other as totally wrong, not as a different sort of Christian, not even as non-Christian, but rather as antiChristian, as the enemy of the true church. The true church could only be preserved if the other side was eliminated, and that murderous doctrine led to slaughter. It was better that a Catholic or a Protestant be killed than that they preach a doctrine that was absolutely offensive to God and damaging to his church on Earth. Yet after fighting each other for a hundred years and neither side winning, the two sides arrived at a sort of long truce, and gradually the notion of toleration arose. First, it was accepted that there can be Protestant countries and Catholic countries, and then —a big jump—that perhaps different sorts of Christians can live peacefully in one country, something neither Protestants nor Catholics believed at first.

    一百多年间，罗马天主教和新教就这样互相攻伐，甚至不惜兵戎相见。两方都认为对方大错特错，都不认为对方只是不同种类的基督教，甚至不只是非基督教而已，而是以反基督、真正教会的敌人视之，唯有另一方被消灭，真正的教会才能存续，这种认可杀人的教义引发了屠杀—— 与其让天主教徒或新教徒去传扬一种完全抵触上帝的训示，而使得他在世间的教会受到伤害，不如把对方给杀了来得好。不过，在互相残杀、谁也没胜过谁的百余年后，两方终于达成长期的休兵协议，包容的观念也逐渐成形。 首先，双方同意某些国家可以信奉新教，某些可以信奉天主教，接着——这是一大跃进——同一国里不同的基督教派也可和平共处，虽然一开始，新教徒和天主教徒对这个可能性都不敢置信。

The Renaissance and the Reformation were both backward-looking movements; they were trying to separate one part of the founding mixture from the rest. The Renaissance was looking backward to Greek and Roman learning. The Protestant reformers were looking backward to the Christian church before it assumed its Roman structure.  The Catholic church had harbored the documents that were central to both movements. It had preserved Greek and Roman learning, which the Renaissance used to escape its intellectual authority, and it had created and sanctified the Bible, which the Protestant reformers used to disrupt its theology and unity.

    文艺复兴和宗教改革都是向过去看齐的运动,两者皆是意图将欧洲这个混合体的某个部分独立分离出来。文艺复兴着眼的是古希腊和罗马的智识成就,新教改革者则是频频回顾罗马教廷承袭罗马习性之前的基督教会。天主教教会保存的文献在这两个运动中都占有核心地位。它所保存的希腊和罗马学术,被文艺复兴运动拿来规避它对知识的钳制,而它所创造并予以神圣化的《圣经》,则被新教改革者拿来颠覆它的神学和单一性。

WE NOW HAVE TO LOOK AT the process by which European culture became forward-looking; how it came to believe in progress, that things over time will get better, which is a very odd thing to believe. The belief in progress came about as a result of the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century. This is the period when our modern science begins.

•牛顿、达尔文让谁低头?

    现在,我们要来看欧洲文化是如何从“回顾”演变为 “前瞻”,看它何以开始相信进步,相信假以时日世界会变得更好一这是一种很奇特的信念。相信进步,是17世 纪科学革命的结果。这段时期是现代科学的发轫期。

At the beginning of the seventeenth century, the Greeks were still the authority on the universe and how it worked.  Their central teaching was that the Earth is at the center of the universe and around the Earth go all the other planets, including the moon and the sun. The Earth, according to the Greeks, was still; it did not appear to move—what force could possibly move it? It is stationary. The Earth is the impure realm; on Earth things change and decay, but the heavens are a pure, perfect, and unchanging realm. Why do the planets go in circles? Because the circle is a perfect form. It is one of the teachings of Greek geometry that there are perfect forms: The square is one, the circle is another.  So the planets go in circles and because this is the perfect realm; they do not need any force to move them. They are spinning in perfect circular harmony.

    17世纪伊始，希腊人在解释宇宙及其运行方面依然是 权威。他们的基本观念是：地球是宇宙的中心，其他所有星球都是环绕地球运行，包括太阳和月亮。根据希腊人的说法，地球是静止不动的；它看来不像在动——有什么力量可能动得了它呢？所以它是静止的。而地球是个不纯净的境域：地球上的东西会改变、会腐朽，天空却是纯净、完美、永恒不变的。而其他星球为什么要以圆周绕行地球呢？因为圆形是个完美的形状。这是希腊几何学说的一部分，认为世上有完美的形状存在，正方形是其一，圆形也是。因此，星球会以圆周绕行地球， 而既然天空是个完美境域，它们并不需要任何外力推动。星球以完美的圆周绕行，和谐自得。

In the seventeenth century, that view was overthrown by what we still regard as the truth. The sun is at the center of the system; the planets go around the sun, not in circles but in ellipses; the Earth is one of the planets going around the sun, and around the Earth goes the moon. The system is a single system; gone are the separate realms, impure Earth and pure heavens. It is one system throughout, and one law or one series of laws explains the whole thing.

    这个观点在17世纪被推翻了；太阳才是这个天体系统的中心,各个星球环绕着它运行,但不是以正圆形而是 椭圆形运行；地球是环绕太阳旋转的星球之一,而月亮是绕着地球旋转。这个天体系统是单一的体系；所谓的不同界域、不纯净的地球和纯净天空之说已成过去。它从头到尾就是一个体系,只要一条法则或一套定律,就可解释全部。

What makes the Earth and the planets move? The answer, said Isaac Newton, is that everything in the universe will continue to move in a straight line unless something else acts on it. A something else that is always present is the attraction between every body that exists in the universe. All bodies are attracting each other： This book is being attracted to the Earth, the moon is attracted to the Earth, the Earth is attracted to the sun. The water on the Earth is pulled up and down in tides because of the changing force of attraction between Earth and moon. It is the one system that holds all matter together. We can now determine why the planets move as they do. There are two forces acting on them： the tendency to move in a straight line and the tendency to be attracted to the sun. The result of the two tendencies is that the planet is tipped into its elliptical course around the sun.

    是什么在推动地球和其他星球呢？根据科学家牛顿 (Isaac Newton)的说法，答案是：宇宙的万事万物，除非受到外力作用，否则都会以直线状态持续运动下去。而宇宙所有物体之间都有一股互相吸引的重力作用其间，就是一种永远都存在的引力。所有的物体都会互相吸引：这本书被地球吸引，月亮被地球吸引，地球被太阳吸引。地球上的海潮起起落落，也是因为地球和月球之间的引力变化所 致。这个单一体系把所有的物质都吸聚在一起。我们现在知道，星球为什么那样运转。有两股力量在 运作，一是它本身以直线行进的倾向，一是被太阳吸引的倾向。两种倾向拉锯的结果，星球的运转就变得倾斜，绕行太阳的轨道因此是椭圆形状。

To this attraction between all bodies， Newton gave the term “gravitation，” and he was able to work out the force of the gravitation between any two bodies with his Universal Law of Gravitation. The law is expressed as a mathematical formula. It says the force of gravitation will grow stronger as the bodies get bigger： It will relate directly to their mass.  The force of attraction will become weaker as the distance between the bodies increases： It relates in inverse proportion to the distance between them. So the attraction increases as the mass of the two bodies gets larger， and it decreases as they get further apart. In fact， it decreases very rapidly as the bodies move apart； the force of attraction weakens by the distance between the two bodies squared. So a doubling of the distance makes the force four times as weak (2 x 2). Here is the formula， the only equation I will trouble you with. Newton used it to measure the attraction between the Earth and the sun.

    牛顿把这个存在于所有物体之间的吸引力称为“万有引力”（或称地心引力、重力），利用万有引力定律，可算出任何两种物体之间的引力。这个定律可以用数学公式来表示。这个定律说，物体体积越大，引力就越强——它跟 物体的质量呈正比关系。而物体之间距离越大，引力就越弱——它跟物体之间的距离呈反比。 因此，若是两个物体的质量增加，引力就变大，两者越 离越远，引力就减少。事实上，当两个物体分开，引力会以极快的速度减少；降幅是两个物体之间距离的平方。因此 距离如果加倍，会让引力减弱四倍(2 x2)。 以上是它的公式。牛顿利用它算出了地球和太阳之间的引力。

An equation like this reminds us that math is at the center of science and that the Greek hunch turned out to be true： The world is simple and the laws governing it will be mathematical in form. The scientists of the seventeenth century overturned Greek learning on the universe but they did so with the Greek method of mathematics.

    这样的等式提醒我们：数学确是科学的中心，希腊人的直觉果然是对的——这个世界是简单的，它的运行规则 可以用数学来表达。17纪的科学家推翻了希腊的宇宙 说，但他们之所以推翻得了，用的还是希腊的数学方法。

What a magnificent achievement it was to find out from where we are—on Earth, which is the third planet from the sun—how the whole system works! How natural it was for humans to put themselves at the center of the universe.  How natural to follow the evidence of their senses and assume that the Earth was still. How proper to respect the learning of the magnificent Greeks. Against all these tendencies, science in the seventeenth century had its triumph.

    从我们的位置——地球,距离太阳第三远的星球—— 却能发现这整个天体系的运作,是何等伟大的成就！在过去,人类把自己放在宇宙的中心位置,根据自己的直觉断地球恒常静止不动,是多么理所当然,对一流希腊头脑思索出来的学说尊崇有加,又是多么恰当；但17世纪的科学却与这种种趋向反道而行,获得了最后的胜利。

The message of the Scientific Revolution was the Greeks were wrong. The great reverence for the classics was broken. We have done better than equal them； we have surpassed them.

    科学革命带来的信息是：希腊人错了。对古典的极力尊崇就此打破，我们不但追平了他们，甚且超越了他们。

How clever these scientists were， but where had their cleverness gotten them? They had discovered that humans were marginal， that they were not at the center of the universe. This is a common Western predicament； we are very clever but we keep discovering we are insignificant. Worse was to come in the nineteenth century when Darwin advanced the view that we share a common ancestor with the apes. This was a further demoting of man and his presumption. We are not at the center of the universe， we are not a special creation， we are descended from the animal kingdom by a system of chance happenings.

    这些科学家多么聪明啊，可是他们的聪明带来了什么？他们发现，人类并不是宇宙的中心；人类其实微不足道。这是西方普遍面对的困境：我们很聪明，可是我们不断在发 现自己的无足轻重。但更惨的还在后头，19世纪，达尔文把这个论点延伸得更远：人类跟猿猴来自同一个祖先。这对人类本身和人类的傲慢来说，都是更大的棒喝。我们不是宇宙的中心，不是什么特别的生物，我们只是借由一种偶然机制，从动物王国里繁衍出来的后代。

The church, in both its Protestant and Catholic forms, opposed the new teaching that the sun was at the center of the universe and the Earth revolved around it. God made the Earth, said the Bible, and then set the sun and moon and stars above it. Eventually the church had to give way and declare that the scientists were right—as it did again after first contesting Darwin, with a great loss of authority on both occasions.

    对于太阳是宇宙中心,地球围绕着它旋转的新学说, 不管是新教或天主教教会,一开始都抱持反对的立场。 《圣经》说,是上帝创造了地球,接着在地球上空装置了太 阳、星星和月亮,但教会最后也不得不低头,宣布这些科学家才是对的——就跟他们最初驳斥达尔文一样,结果两次都威望大失。

The generation after the Scientific Revolution did not consider that its discoveries had reduced the significance of man. On the contrary， they thought if we can do this—if by our reason we have worked out how the whole system operates and described it exactly with our math—then we can use our reason to go further； we can bring that reason to bear on human life and improve it out of all recognition.  This desire to make reason sovereign is what animated the Enlightenment， an intellectual movement of the eighteenth century that aimed to apply reason to the reshaping of society， to government， to morality， and to theology.

・法国启蒙运动---你会在哪里找到“上帝”?

    科学革命之后，那个时代的人并不认为科学的种种发 现贬低了人的重要性。恰恰相反的是，他们认为，如果人类做得到这一步——借由理性思索出整个自然体系的运作，又能用数学精确表达，当然就可以利用理性更上层楼。 我们可以把这份理性用于人类生活，让它得到脱胎换骨的改善，这份以理性为尊的渴望，就成了启蒙运动的驱动力。这场18世纪的智识运动，目的是发挥理性，将它运用在政府、道德观念、神学和社会的改造上。

The Enlightenment began and was strongest in France.  The scholars of the Enlightenment saw the world as governed by ignorance and superstition. The two great irrational forces in the society were the church, that is, the Catholic church, and the king, the absolute monarch of France. The church and the king maintained their positions by relying on the ignorance of the people. The church peddled stories of miracles and everlasting punishment in hell to keep the people in order. The kings peddled claims that they were ordained by God and that it was irreligious to question their authority； that people had no choice but to obey. One of the men of the Enlightenment summed up its program in this way： “I should like to see the last king strangled with the guts of the last priest.”

    启蒙运动从法国发端，声势也最为壮大。在启蒙运动的学者看来，这是个受无知和迷信宰制的世界。社会有两股非理性的强大势力，一是教会，即天主教廷；一是法国国王，那位绝对专制的一国之君。教会和法国国王的地位之所以屹立不摇，靠的就是人民的无知。教会到处兜售奇迹故事，为了让人民听话，恫吓要让 他们永远在地狱受苦；法国国王指称自己治国是奉上帝的神谕，质疑王权就是违反教义，人民除了乖乖服从别无选择。启蒙运动的一位推动者如此归结该运动的诉求：“我 希望看到最后一个国王被最后一个神父的肠子给绞死。”

Admittedly, that was an extreme view. The Enlightenment was not a revolutionary movement； it was not even a political movement. It was a collection of scholars, writers, artists, and historians who believed that as reason and education spread, superstition and ignorance would fall away and people would cease to believe in such nonsense as miracles or kings ruling by God’s permission. Once you educate the people, enlightenment will follow. But the leading figures of the Enlightenment were not democrats； they were quite happy to see an enlightened ruler begin to implement their plans for a society governed by reason.  Some of the monarchs of eighteenth-century Europe were, as it is said, enlightened despots. They got rid of barbaric punishments and torture； they codified their laws； they began to do something about educating the people.

    无可否认，这是很极端的看法。启蒙运动不是革命运动，甚至不是政治性的运动。它是由一群学者、作家、艺术家和历史学家推动，这些知识分子相信，一旦理性与教育变得普及，迷信和无知自然会消弭于无形，人民也就不会相信神迹或君权神授这类的胡说八道。只要人民得到教化，民智自然开启。不过，启蒙运动的领导人物并不是民主主义者；若是哪个开明的君主愿意开始推行他们规划出的理性社会，他们乐见其成。18世纪欧洲有几位君主，确实做到了世称的 “开明专制。他们废除了野蛮刑罚和酷刑，将法律诉诸明文，开始以具体的作为教育人民。

The great work of the French Enlightenment was the production of an encyclopedia. It is the first great modern encyclopedia and is notable because it was not, as we think of encyclopedias today, a staid authority written by established scholars. This was a radical encyclopedia because it applied reason to everything and it gave no hierarchy within knowledge. It did not start, as the church would like, with theology and God. Where do you find God in this encyclopedia? Under D (for Dieu) and R (for Religion).  This is an alphabetical index to knowledge, and that very act of making it alphabetical was a defiance of the church and its claims to possess the highest truths. All knowledge was treated in the same way and all was subjected to the same test. On adoration, the encyclopedia advised： “The manner of adoring the true God ought never to deviate from reason, because God is the author of reason . . .”

    法国启蒙运动的伟大成果，是汇整出一部百科全书。 这是第一部具有现代概念的杰作，而它之所以著称于世， 并不是因为一些学有专精的学者，将它写成一本四平八稳的权威著作，一如我们今天对百科全书的认知。它的根本不同在于将理性用于一切事物，让知识领域里没有层级之分。它并不是像教会原本希望的，从神学和上帝写起。在这本百科全书里，你会在哪里找到上帝呢？在D（Dieu， 神）和R（Religi叫宗教）字首的条目下。这是一套以字母为索引的知识库，光是以字母排序这个动作，对号称掌握最高真理的教会来说就是一大冲撞。它对所有知识一视同仁，施予同样的理性测试。 举例来说，谈到崇敬（adoration），这套百科全书的建言是：“对真神的崇敬应该不偏离理性，因为神是理性的创始者……”

The editors had to be very careful of direct attacks on church or king because there was still a censorship operating in eighteenth-century France， though the censor was sympathetic and once suggested that the safest place to hide the plates for the next edition was in his own house!  We can see how the encyclopedia navigated difficult territory by looking at the entry on Noah’s Ark. It begins by asking how big Noah’s Ark was. It must have been quite large. It had to accommodate not only two of each of the animals of Europe but also those of the rest of the world.  And not just the animals， because being on the Ark for a long time， they needed fodder to stay alive. Two sheep would not have been enough； there would have to have been hundreds of lambs in order to feed the lions. This must have been a huge ship and yet the Bible says only four people worked to make it. How big and strong they must have been! By seeming to make a genuine inquiry the encyclopedia showed the story to be an absurdity.

    对于直接冒犯教会或国王之处，这套书的编者必须非常小心，因为18世纪的法国还是有审查制度，虽然主事的审查官对编著抱持同情，曾经建议他们将印版藏在审查官的家，因为那里是最安全的地方！只要看“诺亚方舟”这一条，就知道这套百科全书踩了多少地雷。它劈头就问：诺亚方舟有多大呢？ 一定很大很大。它必须容纳不只欧洲所有成双成对的动物，连世上其他品种的动物也得在船上。而且不止是动物，方舟里必须装载许多饲料，动物才能存活。两头羊不可能足够；要养活那对狮子势必得有数百头绵羊。这艘船一定非常巨大，《圣经》却说只要四人就能操控。这些人想必是力大无穷、三头六臂！透过这些看似正经八百的提问，这套百科全书突显出了故事的荒谬。

The men of the Enlightenment were not necessarily opposed to God as a creator or moving spirit at the beginning of the universe. They objected to what they called superstition and how the church used it to gain control over men’s minds. They hated the church’s telling people that they would burn in hell if they were disobedient. The message of the Enlightenment was that religion is superstition. So religion, which was once central to European civilization, must be sidelined. Reason will take its place. If we follow reason and science then there will be progress. The arrow takes us off the page, away from darkness, toward the light.

•相信进步或相信循环

    说上帝是创世者或在宇宙开天辟地之初是推动者，启蒙学者不见得会反对这样的说法。他们反对的是现在被世人斥为迷信的东西，以及教会以迷信来宰制人民思想的行径，教会告诫人民，不服从就要下地狱遭火烧，他们对此深恶痛绝。启蒙运动的信息是：宗教是迷信。因此，尽管宗教曾是欧洲文明的核心，现在也不得不靠边站，由理性取而代之。跟着理性和科学走，未来就有进步。这个箭头（见下页）带我们跳出了这一页，也带我们脱离黑暗，走向光明。

Progress was a new idea. The ancients did not believe in progress； they believed that there was a cycle of growth and decay； that institutions and society would be fresh and vigorous in their youth and then a process of corruption would set in. History would move through cycles. The church did not believe in progress, or at least not in progress by human effort independent of God, because it believed that humans were basically wicked. Humans guided solely by reason could never produce a perfect society.

    进步是个新观念。古代的人不相信有进步这回事。 他 相信天道循环，有荣就有枯；所有组织和社会在青壮之年都是蓬勃焕发、朝气十足，但之后就自然进入腐朽过程。 历史的推进就是一个个这样的循环。教会也不相信进步，或者说不相信人类可以不靠上帝，光凭自己的努力就能进步，因为它相信人类基本上是邪恶的，光靠理性作为人类的导引，绝不可能创造出完美的社会。

THE IDEAS OF THE ENLIGHTENMENT had their first tryout in the French Revolution at the end of the eighteenth century.  Sadly for the high hopes of what reason could do, the French Revolution did not bring in a new era of enlightenment when king and church were swept away； it brought bloodshed, tyranny, and dictatorship. But before that happened, the last element of the odd mixture was pulled from its moorings. This occurred with the Romantic movement of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.

・ “浪漫”源自德意志?

    启蒙运动种种理念受到的第一个试炼，是18世纪末的法国大革命。遗憾的是，尽管对理性抱持高度期望，法国大革命在国王和教会双双被扫除之后，并没有带来一个民智洞开的新纪元，反而带来流血、暴政和独裁。不过，这个怪异混合体的最后一个元素在此之前便已失去了停泊的依靠，这是18世纪末期至19世纪初叶，浪漫主义运动的结果。

The Romantic movement believed in feelings, emotions, and all the passions. In this it was directly contrary to the Enlightenment, which put its faith in reason. It was a Europe-wide movement, but strongest in Germany, where its ideas were worked out most fully. These men of the Romantic movement did not want reason to control our emotions and passions. They thought of a great writer or a great artist not as reworking in an elegant way an old theme from the classics； instead a writer or an artist should be baring his soul, bringing his passions, his anguish, and his despair to the forefront. Art should be emotional, expressive, and highly charged.

    浪漫主义运动崇尚感受、情绪以及所有的强烈的情感。在这方面，它和一心一意信奉理性的启蒙运动形成截然的对比。这场运动延烧整个欧洲，但尤以德意志地区 （今日的德国）为烈，理念在此也得到最充分的发挥。浪漫主义的信徒并不想用理性去控制情绪和激情。在他们心目中，光是优雅地将古典曲调重新演绎出来，称不上是伟大的作家或艺术家；穷尽灵魂，掏心剖腹地将热情、痛苦、绝望赤裸裸地摊在第一线的才是。艺术应该是情感激荡、表达淋漓、惊天撼地的。

These German ideas developed in conscious opposition to the French ideas of the Enlightenment. The Germans declared that you cannot talk about man and society in the abstract because humankind is different depending on the country you are in. We are shaped, said the Romantics, by our language and our history; they are embedded in us. So the Germans, having their own history and their own language, are always going to be different from the French.  There is no such thing as universal reason, which these intellectuals in French salons believe in. We are Germans and we want to find out about the Germanness of being German. The German Romantics wanted to know what the German warriors were like before they got mixed up with civilization and with Rome and Christianity. They were pulling the Germans away from the mix. They liked these men of the woods, their vigor and vitality, and their crudity.  They did not want to follow weak intellectuals. They honored Germans who had lived close to the soil and who knew what being German was all about.

    德意志发展出的这些观念,是刻意针对法国启蒙运动观念而发。德国人说,你不能拿抽象的语汇空谈人类和社会,因为人是不一样的,端视你生长在什么国家而定。浪漫主义的信徒说,我们的语言和历史塑造了我们,这些东西深植在我们体内。因此,有自己历史和语言的德国人, 永远都跟法国人不一样。在沙龙里谈天论地的法国知识分子相信一种普世的理性,但那是不存在的。身为德国人,我们要把德国人的特质找出来。 德国人希望知道,早期日耳曼民族在跟文明、罗马以 及天主教会混合之前是什么模样。他们想把日耳曼民族从这个组合当中抽离出来。他们喜欢这些出身草莽的祖先,喜欢他们的活力、生命力和朴拙,他们不想跟着软趴趴的知识分子走,他们以过去那些亲近土地、深谙德国人原本面貌的日耳曼先祖为荣。

Our modern interest and respect for culture begins at this point, when intellectuals first began collecting folk culture.  The answer to the prattle about reason by arrogant French intellectuals was to put on your boots and go hiking. Go to the German people, go to the peasants, record their stories and songs: That is where you will find true enlightenment.  The message of Romanticism was that civilization is artificial; that it cramps and constrains us. It is within traditional culture that life is fully lived.

    现代社会对文化的兴趣和尊重就发端于这个转折点上，历史上头一遭，知识分子开始搜集民俗文化。对于傲慢自大的法国知识分子关于理性的夸夸之言，他们的答复 是:穿上你的靴子去走走路吧，走向平民百姓，走向农村耕民，记下他们的故事和歌谣，从中你会找到真正的启迪。 浪漫主义的信息是:文明是人为的，它束缚了我们、局限了 我们，唯有活在传统文化当中，你才算是活得完整。

This view has been strong in Western society ever since.  There was a great eruption of it in the 1960s. One form it takes is the cry for liberation: Let’s not have any rules, let’s live in a simple, direct, plain way, let’s grow our own food and weave our own clothes. Let’s wear our hair long, let’s live in communes, let’s be frank with our own feelings and frank in our dealings with each other. And let’s borrow from more authentic people—from workers or peasants or “noble savages.”

    从此，这个观念就一直深植在西方社会里。19世纪有 一次重大的爆发，采取的形态之一是呐喊自由解放：让我 们甩掉所有的规范，让我们活得简单、直接、自在，让我们自己耕种、自己织布；让我们蓄发蓄胡、住在公社里，让我们诚实面对自己的情感，人与人之间坦诚相见。还有，让我们借镜更真实的人——劳工、农民或是“高贵的野蛮人”。

The Romantics also provided the ideology—the formal thinking—for nationalism， which remains a huge force in the modern world. Nationalism proclaims that distinct peoples having their own culture and language must live together and have their own government. It is not enough to work out in the abstract what makes for good government； if the government is not the government of your own people it cannot be a good government. Serbs must live together and have a Serbian government； Croats must live together and have a Croatian government. A country where Serbs and Croats live together will mean that we， as Serbs and Croats， cannot fully express ourselves. The essence of being Serb will not be able to flower unless we have our own state： This is the ideology of nationalism.

    浪漫主义运动也催生了民族主义的意识形态，这个观念在当今世界里依然是一股强大的力量。民族主义主张， 拥有不同文化和语言的民族必须生活在一起、成立自己的 政府。光是闭门造车、空想好的政府是不够的；而如果这个政府不是由你自己的民族所组成，它也不可能是个好政府。塞尔维亚人必须住在一起，成立塞尔维亚政府；克罗地亚人必须住在一起，自组克罗地亚政府。要是一个国家有塞尔维亚人又有克罗地亚人，这表示不管是塞尔维亚人或克罗地亚人都无法充分表达自己。塞尔维亚民族的精髓不可能开花结果，除非它有自己的国家。这是民族主义的意识形态。

The Romantic movement believed in emotion， culture， nationalism， and liberation， an arrow moving off the chart in the opposite direction from reason， science， and progress.

    浪漫主义崇尚情感、文化、民族主义和自由解放，图中和这个箭头背道而驰的是理性、科学和进步。

Our chart is complete. You can see what has happened in the years since 1400. There is a hole in the center where the church, which was at the center of civilization in the Middle Ages, once was. The Renaissance, the Reformation, the Scientific Revolution, the Enlightenment, and the Romantic movement: all in different ways reduced the authority of the church.

    我们的图到此完成。你可以看到，公元1400年之后发生了什么事。在图的中央，曾经贵为中世纪文明中心的教会，现在是一片空白。文艺复兴、宗教改革、科学革命、 启蒙运动、浪漫主义运动，各以不同方式削减了教会的权威。

The church, that is, the Catholic church, still has some authority today, and if you are an enlightened person you might still think it worthwhile to attack the pope. Surely every enlightened person believes that birth control is a good thing, but the pope says it is against God’s teaching and no pragmatic consideration can make it right. It remains wrong even if most Catholics in the West ignore the pope on this matter. But overall we have been following a great process of secularization.

    这个教会，也就是如今的罗马教廷，至今依然拥有些许权威，而如果你是个思想开通的人，说不定还是认为教皇受到抨击不无道理。每个思想开通的人都知道节育是 好事，可是这位教皇说，节育违背了上帝的教示，任何现实的考量都不能让它成为正确，就算西方大部分的天主教徒在这件事情上没理会教皇的意见，教皇还是一直认为节育是错的。不过，大体说来，我们一直走在一个重大的世俗化过程中。

The twin forces of science and progress on the one hand and emotion and liberation on the other are still very strong.  Sometimes they can reinforce each other; sometimes they are opposed to each other. Consider how these two forces still divide us. First, read the account in the Bible of the creation of humankind.

欧洲的宿命：分裂、撕扯、困惑

    一边是科学和进步，一边是感情和解放，这两股孪生力量迄今依然强劲，有时彼此强化，有时互相对立。我们且来看看，这两股力量是如何分裂我们。首先，来看《圣经》这段创造人类的记载。

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground， and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life； and man became a living soul. And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden； and there he put the man whom he had formed. And the Lord God said， “It is not good that the man should be alone； I will make him a suitable helper.” And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam， and he slept； and he took one of his ribs， and closed up the flesh instead thereof. And the rib， which the Lord God had taken from man， made he a woman， and he brought her unto the man. And Adam said， “This is now bone of my bones， and flesh of my flesh: She shall be called Woman， because she was taken out of Man.” Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother， and shall cleave unto his wife: And they shall be one flesh.

    耶和华用地上的尘土造人，把生命的气吹进他的鼻孔，他就成为有生命的人。耶和华在东方开辟伊甸园，把他造的人安置在里面。耶和华说：“那人独居不好，我要给他造一个配偶帮助他。”耶和华使他沉睡，他就睡了；于是取下他的一条肋骨，又把肉合起来。耶和华用那人身上所取的肋骨，造成一个女人，领他到那人跟前。那人说：“这是我骨中的骨，肉中的肉，可以称他为女人，因为他是从男人身上取出来的。”因此，人要离开父母，与妻子联合，二人成为一体。

What would you say if I were to suggest that we drop biology and evolution and teach this account in schools?  “No， no，” you would say， for you are an enlightened， progressive person. This is education we are talking about; if parents want their children to learn this， they can teach it to them themselves. What if we retain biology and evolution and teach the Christian account as well? “No， no.” Science shows that we evolved from animals; that’s all that can be taught. There are mad creationists about; we cannot afford to allow them any opening into schools.

    要是我提议，我们抛开生物学和演化不谈，在学校里专教这段章节，你觉得怎样？ “不行不行。”你一定会这么说，因为你是个进步的文明人，这就是我们所说的教育的功能；要是父母希望自己的小孩了解《圣经》的这段记载， 他们可以自己教。那要是我们在学校里既保留生物学和演化的课程，同时也教上述这段章节，你觉得如何？ “不行 不行。”科学显示我们都是从动物演化而来，而且这世上到处都有笃信上帝造人的疯狂信徒，让他们趁着这个缺口进入学校殿堂，代价我们负担不起。

Now read another story, an Australian Aboriginal one.

    现在，来看看以下另一个故事，这是澳大利亚土著人的传说。

There was once an old man who had a nephew whom he loved dearly. The young man, his nephew, went into a far country where he fell in love with a young woman. The couple ran off together, but the elders of the tribe followed them because the young woman had been promised to one of the old men of the tribe. They speared the young man and killed him.  When the old man, his uncle, heard of this he was very sad for he loved his nephew dearly. Though he was old he traveled to that country to bring the body home. The body was a great burden for the uncle, for he was truly old and the young man was almost fully grown. But he managed it; he brought the body home and it was properly buried. You can still follow the path that the old man took. Where he halted and laid the body on sandy ground, there you will find a spring. And where he laid the body on rocky ground, there you will find a rockpool, filled with the old man’s tears.

    很久很久以前，有个老人非常喜爱他的侄儿，年轻侄儿远赴异国，爱上了一个女孩。这一对情侣后来私奔，可是被当地部落的长者追到， 因为女孩已经被许配给部落的一个老人，于是他们用矛射死了年轻人。老人听到噩耗后非常伤心，因为他非常爱他的侄儿，虽然他很老了，还是跋涉到那个国家，打算把尸体带回故乡。 尸体对这位叔叔来说是个重负，因为老人家年事已高，而他的侄儿已近成年。可是他办到了；他把尸体带回故乡，好好埋葬了。直到今天， 你依然看得到老人行脚的踪迹。在他中途将尸体放在沙地歇息的地方，你会发现喷泉；在他放尸体的岩地，你会发现水潭，装满了老人的泪水。

Traditional Indigenous Australians live in an enchanted world. Every part of their land has its story that links their ancestors to their lives now. Do you think such stories should be preserved? “Yes，” you will say. Should they be taught to Aboriginal children? “Yes， of course.” Should they be taught in schools? “Yes.” And they are.

    传统土著人住在一个魔幻世界里，他们土地上的每样 67 68 东西都有一个故事，将他们的生活和祖先串连在一起。你认为这样的故事应该保存吗？ “应该。”你会说。应该讲给土著人的小孩听吗？ “当然应该。”学校应该教他们这些吗？ “应该。”而学校确实有教。

Playing the role of a man of the Enlightenment, I might say, “If children want to learn about the origins of springs and rockpools, they should study geology.”

    假装我是启蒙时代的人，我会说：“如果孩童想知道喷 泉和水潭的来源，他们应该去读地质学。”

“What?” you will reply. “That’s not the point.”

    “什么? ”你会大声反驳我，这不是重点。”

If I say， pretending still to be a man of the Enlightenment， “Indigenous Australians lived in fear of the dark and of sorcery，” you are not listening. You are enchanted. The Indigenous Australians seem to have lives that are more complete， more wholesome， and more natural. You are lost to romantic feeling.

    如果我继续假扮启蒙时代的人，我会说：“土著人活在黑暗和魔法的恐惧当中。”你不会听得进去，因为你已经被故事迷住了。从这些故事听来，土著人的生命似乎更完整，更健全，更贴近自然，因为你迷失在浪漫情怀里。

You seem to be divided. For our children you want them to have only science; yet you seem envious of those people without science， whose traditional beliefs have not been disrupted.

    你似乎被分裂成两半。对我们的孩童，你希望他们懂 得科学就好，可是你也羡慕那些传统信仰没有断裂的人。

It is our fate to be torn, divided, and confused. Other civilizations have a single tradition and not this odd threesome. They are not so liable to the turmoil, overturnings, and confusion that we have had in our moral and intellectual life.

    被分裂、被撕扯、被困惑，是欧洲的宿命。其他的文明只有单一传统，不是这种具有三重元素的大拼盘，欧洲在道德和智识生活上一直受到煎熬、困扰和瓦解。

We come from a very mixed parentage and there is no place we can call home.

    欧洲的血统来自一种非常混杂的渊源，没有一个可以称为“家”的地方。

INTERLUDE The Classic Feeling

间奏篇 古典情怀今犹在

IN THE RENAISSANCE, scholars and writers thought the art, literature, and learning of Greece and Rome might perhaps be equaled but never excelled. That is why they labeled it classic： the best. For two centuries men debated the achievements of the ancients as against the moderns. The debate was settled in the seventeenth century, when Greek science was shown to be wrong about the sun, the Earth, the planets, and the stars. From then on, there has been less reverence for the classics and more hope in what we moderns might achieve. But in some fields, our starting point remains the writers of Greece and Rome. It is still possible, as we look at these giants, to get “the classic feeling.”

    文艺复兴时代的学者和作家们认为，他们或许做得出能与古希腊罗马匹敌的艺术、文学和学术，但绝不可能超越。他们因此称之为古典，意思就是经典的、最优的。 古人与现代人的成就孰优孰劣，世人辩论长达两百年之久，直到17世纪，希腊关于太阳、地球、星球和星宿的科学观被证明是错误的，这场争辩才告停息。自彼时起，大家对古典就减少了尊敬，转而把更多希望放在现代人可能有的成就上。不过，就某些领域而言，我们的起点依然是希腊罗马的书写者。当我们注视着这些巨人，还是可能油然而生“古典情怀”。

The three great philosophers of Athens—Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle—are still great forces in philosophy. It has been said that all Western philosophy is a footnote to Plato. The three men were intimately connected. Plato recorded the words of Socrates, who conducted philosophy as a discussion with his companions; Aristotle was Plato’s pupil.

    希腊雅典的三大哲人：苏格拉底、柏拉图、亚里士多德，在哲学方面举足轻重。有人说过，整个西方的思想传统无非是柏拉图的注脚。这三人之间关系密切，苏格拉底借由“思辨”宣扬哲学观点，柏拉图是他的弟子，将老师的思想与对话记录下来，亚里士多德则是柏拉图的学生。

Socrates did not claim to teach the truth. He set forth the method to reach it, which was fundamentally to question everything, accept nothing at face value, and assume that ordinary opinion will have no rational basis. Socrates would ask a seemingly simple question： What is the good man?  One of his companions would give a reply, which Socrates would proceed to show had a great hole in it. So this man or someone else would have another stab—but more carefully this time. There would be more questioning and more refining. Socrates believed that if your mind was clear and sharp, you could reach the truth. You didn’t have to seek it out or conduct research. The truth exists; you have to cultivate your mind to grasp it.

•苏格拉底的问答

    苏格拉底并没有说他教的是真理，他只是奠定了迈向真理的方法，基本上就是质疑一切、任何事物不能只看表面，他认为一般人的意见并不具备理性基础。他会问这种看似简单的问题：什么叫做好人？弟子回答后，他就告诉 对方，这个答案哪里有个大漏洞。对方或许会再次反驳， 不过这次比较谨慎；接着是更多的询问、更多的修正。苏格拉底认为，如果你的心智清明而敏捷，终究会掌握到真理。不必上穷碧落下黄泉，或是做什么研究。真理是存在的，但你必须耕耘你的心智，才能掌握它。

This method still bears his name: the Socratic method. It is meant to be what happens in university tutorials, where the professor is not there to lay down the law but to help students think clearly and have a fruitful discussion. So there might be an exchange like this:

    直到今天，这种方法依旧冠有他的大名：苏格拉底问答法。照理说这应该是大学教师的教学指南——老师的角色不是制定规则，而是帮助学生清楚思考，从讨论中得到丰硕的成果。因此，一段师生的对话可能类似这样：

Professor： Amanda， what is a revolution?

Amanda： The overthrow of a government by force.

Professor： What if there is a state ruled by a king and the king’s brother murders him and becomes king in his place—is that a revolution?

Amanda： Oh， no!

Professor： So not all cases where force is used to change governments are revolutions?

Amanda： Well， no， not all cases.

Professor： So what else is required， besides the use of force， to make a revolution?

    老师：艾曼达，什么是革命？

    艾曼达：以武力推翻政府。

    老师：如果这个国家本来由某个国王统治， 结果国王的弟弟杀了他篡位为王，这算是革命吗？

    艾曼达：噢，那不是。

    老师：这么说，并不是所有以武力推翻政府的情况都是革命？

    艾曼达：呃，对，不是所有这样的情况都算是革命。

    老师：那，除了武力推翻之外，还需要什么条件才能造成革命呢？

There is a trap to this method. Clever people can do well in it without having to know very much.

    这种问题是有陷阱的。头脑灵光的人不必懂太多，就 能对这一套得心应手。

Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle lived in Athens when it was a democracy, in the fifth and fourth centuries BC. They were all critics of democracy and Socrates fell foul of democratic Athens. He was put on trial for neglecting the gods and corrupting the morals of the young. His defense was that he had not insisted that anyone adopt his views； he merely questioned people so that they would have reasons for their beliefs. He was found guilty by a jury of 501 citizens, but it was a close vote. The jury then had to decide what penalty to impose. The prosecution asked for death. At this point, the accused was meant to become apologetic, to bring forward his wife and children and plead for leniency.  Socrates refused to grovel. What, he asked, would be the appropriate penalty for someone who has encouraged you to improve your mental and moral well-being? Perhaps a pension for life! You might impose banishment as the penalty, but if thrown out of one town I would do the same in the next. Wherever I am, said Socrates, I cannot live without questioning： “The unexamined life is not worth living.” You might impose a fine, but I have very little to offer； I am not a rich man. His followers, who had been despairing at this performance, jumped up and offered to pay a hefty fine. But the jury, not surprisingly, opted for death.

    苏格拉底、柏拉图和亚里士多德是公元前4至前5世纪的人，住在当时奉行民主的雅典。他们都是民主制度的批判者，苏格拉底因此得罪了雅典的统治者，以藐视神明 和腐蚀年轻人道德的罪名被送上法庭接受审判。他的答辩是：他又没有硬要什么人接受他的想法，他只是提出质疑，好让他们以理性为依据去相信自己的信念。由501位市民组成的陪审团判他有罪，不过正反两方人数相当接近。 接下来，陪审团要决定该对他处以何种刑罚。检察官要求判处死刑。这时候，大多数被告都会赶紧表达歉悔， 甚至把妻儿都搬出来，恳求轻罚，但苏格拉底却拒绝屈膝求饶。他问，对于一个鼓励你追求心灵和道德进益的人，什么是适当的刑罚？或许你该供养他一辈子才对！你们也 许可以选择流放我作为惩罚，可是把我逐出这个城市，我到其他城市还是会这样做。苏格拉底说，不管我在哪里， 不提出质疑，我就活不下去，“没有省思的生活不值得活”。你们也可以对我处以罚款，可是我什么也拿不出来，我不是有钱人。他的弟子对他的态度心急如焚，跳出来说愿意替他缴交高额的罚金，不过，不令人意外地，陪审团判了他死刑。

Usually executions in Athens were immediate， but this one was delayed because of a religious festival. Socrates could have escaped and the authorities probably half wished he would. But he refused this option. Why scramble， he asked， to hold on to life if I can’t live forever? The aim is not to live， but to live well. I have had a good life under the laws of Athens and I am ready to accept my penalty. He remained very philosophical to the end. When his chains were taken off， he commented how close pain and pleasure are.

    在雅典，死刑通常都是立刻执行，这次却往后推迟了， 因为宗教庆典的关系。苏格拉底大可趁机潜逃，说不定那些官员还暗自希望他逃之夭夭，但他却拒绝逃跑。他问： “既然我不能永远活着，那又何必苟且偷生？活着不是目的，好好活着才是。我曾在雅典的法治下过着很好的生活，如今我已准备好接受惩罚。”直到最后一刻，他还是充 满了哲学思辨。直到他的镣铐被取下，他还在发表高论， 说痛苦和享乐只是一线之隔。

Execution was by the drinking of the poison hemlock. His companions pleaded with him for delay; the poison had to be drunk by the end of the day and the sun was not yet behind the hills. Socrates replied that he would make himself ridiculous in his own eyes if he clung to life. He took the poison quite calmly and with no sign of distaste. It kills very quickly.

    他被判处服毒芹汁自绝，必须在一日将尽时服下毒药，他的弟子求他晚点再喝，现在太阳还没下山呢！苏格拉底回复道，要是他这样偷生，自己看了都觉得荒谬，他平静地接过毒药一饮而尽，全无半点神伤，很快就药效发作而亡。

I have told of the death of Socrates in a way that is sympathetic to the philosopher. Is it possible to tell the story so that your sympathies are with the prosecution? The prosecutor’s son had attended Socrates’s philosophical discussions and become a dropout and a drunk. Wasn’t the prosecutor right to say Socrates was dangerous? If everything is questioned， people lose their bearings； we can’t live by reason alone； there has to be custom， habit， and religion to give direction to individuals and make society possible.

•柏拉图的经典譬喻

    我刚才叙述苏格拉底的死亡经过，用的是同情这位哲学家的语气。我可不可能换个方式述说这个故事，好让你转而同情检方呢？那位检察官的儿子曾经加入苏格拉底的哲学论坛，结果成了酒鬼。检察官因此说苏格拉底是个危险人物，谁能说不是呢？对一切事物充满质疑，人会迷失方向；我们不能光靠理性过日子，一定要靠风俗、习惯和宗教对个人指点迷津，才可能成就一个社会。

This is a hard case to argue. The bias in our culture is for Socrates. It has not always been so， but Plato’s account of his death has survived to make him the patron saint of questioning.

    只是以上这个论点很难赢得认同。我们的文化多半偏袒苏格拉底这边，因为柏拉图将这段死亡历程记述并留存下来，结果把他捧成了最高典范。

Plato is still the starting point for a central question of philosophy： Is the experience of our senses a true guide to reality? Plato believed that what we see and experience in the world are only shadowy representations of what exists in perfect form in another exalted， spiritual realm. There are ordinary tables here but there is also a table in perfect form elsewhere. Even abstract ideas like the just and the good exist in perfect form elsewhere. Humans have come from this realm； they now， by the exercise of their mind and spirit， have to rediscover it. Plato is the great idealist philosopher： He rejected a materialist account of the world.

    直到今天，柏拉图依然是一个哲学核心问题的起点：我们的感官经验是不是真能引导我们走向真实？柏拉图相信，我们在世间的所见所感，只是存在于另一个崇高灵魂界中的完美形体的影子。世界上有普通的桌子，但有一张完美形体的桌子一直存在于某个别处。即使是个抽象的观念，例如正义和良善，也是以完美的形体存在于某个他处。人类便是来自那个灵魂界，必须透过心智和精神的锻炼，才能重新发现这个完美。 柏拉图是伟大的理想主义哲学家，他拒绝以物质观点 来解释这个世界。

Plato knew that common-sense people would reject his teaching； for them， he had an answer that is still powerful.  Imagine a group of people shackled in front of a cave. They can’t see behind them， they can only look into the cave.  Behind and above them is a road and beyond the road is a large fire， which casts its light into the cave. As people， animals， and carts pass along the road， they will cast shadows on the back wall of the cave as they block out the fire’s light. The shackled people will see only shadows； they will name them and discuss them； they will reason about them； they will think these shadows are the reality. Then， take one person from the cave into the open air. He will be blinded at first by the light， then confused and astounded by color and objects having three dimensions. But down there， he says， we thought . . . Yes， down there you could not see the truth.

    柏拉图知道，一般见识的人会排斥他的观念，于是回以一个迄今依然生动有力的譬喻。想象一群人，被囚禁于一个幽暗洞穴之中，而且全部被锁链绑住手脚。他们背对高墙镇日坐着，看不到背后，只能面对另一面的穴壁。洞穴外头有一条路，路的尽头有一个大火炬，路上若有其他人、动物和车辆经过，火炬就会将这些 东西的影子投射在他们面对的穴壁上。这些穴居人看到的唯一事物就是这些影像；他们替阴影命名、品头论足；针对它们推理辩论；他们相信，这些影子是世间真实的存在。后来，其中一人意外被解开锁链，从山洞走到露天处。一开始，强烈的光线照得他睁不开 眼，等他看到阳光下五彩缤纷、美好的立体世界， 不禁又惊又疑。可是，他说，在山洞里，我们以为……没错，当你身在洞里，你不可能看到真相。

Aristotle， Plato’s pupil， was the great systematizer of knowledge about the natural world and the universe， both the Earth and the heavenly realms. In the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century it was his teaching， which had the Earth as the center of the universe， that was overthrown. However， Aristotle’s rules about clear thinking survive. He gave us the syllogism， a three-part statement， which begins with two premises (a general and a specific statement) and then draws a conclusion. Here is an example：

•亚里士多德的三段论

    亚里士多德是柏拉图的学生，将自然世界和宇宙——不只是地球，也包括天文领域——的知识做了极好的整理。认为地球是宇宙中心的宇宙观即是他的学说，于17世纪的科学革命中被推翻，不过他关于清晰思考的理论迄今犹存。他提出三段论，也就是一个叙述分成三段，从两个前提（一是概述，一是明确叙述）出发，推出结论的方法。举个例子：

All cats have four legs

Milligan is a cat

Therefore： Milligan has four legs

每一只猫都有四条腿

米利根是一只猫

所以米利根有四条腿

Is this a correct conclusion? For a syllogism to have a correct conclusion， the two premises must be true and the argument valid. In this case， cats do indeed have four legs and Milligan， shall we say， is a cat. So the premises are true.  But is the argument valid? Yes—if Milligan is a cat， and if all cats have four legs， Milligan must indeed have four legs.  Here’s an invalid argument about Milligan：

    这个结论正确吗？三段论要得到正确结论，两个前提必须真确，逻辑要站得住脚。在上例中，猫确实都有四条腿，而米利根，已经说过是一只猫，因此，这两个前提是真确的。而它的逻辑站得住脚吗？答案是肯定的——如果米利根是一只猫，而所有的猫都有四条腿，那米利根一定也有四条腿。 接着举个站不住脚的论点：

All cats have four legs

Milligan has four legs

Therefore： Milligan is a cat

每一只猫都有四条腿

米利根有四条腿

所以米利根是一只猫

The conclusion is incorrect， even if the premises are true， because there is no link drawn between Milligan and cats (he could well be a dog). It is possible to have a valid argument but an incorrect conclusion； this would happen if either of the premises were not true. For example：

    虽然两个前提皆为真确，但这个结论并不正确，因为米利根和猫之间并没有联结（米利根也可能是狗)而如果前提之一并不正确，那么即使逻辑站得住脚，结论也可能不正确，例如：

All cats are black

Milligan is a cat

Therefore： Milligan is black

所有的猫都是黑色的

米利根是一只猫

所以米利根是黑色的

This argument is valid but the conclusion is incorrect because the first premise is not true. There are formal rules for identifying and naming all the ways that syllogisms can embody faulty reasoning. You can see why it is said that the Greeks taught us how to think rationally.

    这个逻辑站得住脚，但结论并不正确，因为第一个前提并不真确。三段论可能导致各式各样的错误推理，但只要按部就班遵循规则，都可以找出漏洞来。由此可知，为什么大家会说是希腊人教会我们如何理性思考。

Modern Western medicine traces its origins to the Greeks and in particular to Hippocrates， who lived in Athens in its golden age， the fifth century BC. His writings have survived， though almost certainly they are a compilation of several authors working according to his methods and principles.  Hippocrates applied reason to the understanding of disease， assuming that it had natural causes and separating it from magic， witchcraft， and divine intervention. He made a close study of the courses of diseases and the circumstances in which people caught them. In attempting to see patterns in the occurrence of disease， he was the first epidemiologist.  He laid a heavy obligation on doctors to be moral， discreet people committed to the well-being of their patients； in fact， his work defined the profession of medicine. Medical students took an oath that he developed and which bore his name： the Hippocratic oath. It incidentally reveals the state of medicine in Hippocrates’s day：

•医生的行规

    现代的西方医学也可远溯到古希腊，尤其是生于公元前5世纪，雅典辉煌时期的市民希波克拉提斯(Hippocrates)。他的论著迄今犹存，不过想必是好几位遵照他的医疗方法和原则行医的作者编撰而成。希波克拉提斯秉持理性去解释疾病，认为罹病自有原因，和魔法、巫术及天谴无关。他仔细观察疾病的发展和染病的环境，试图从疾病发生的过程中看出模式，就这点而言，不啻是史上第一位流行病学家。他对医生的责任严格要求：谨慎、有医德、时时以病人的福祉为念。事实上，他的著作界定了 “医药”这门行业的意涵。现在进入医学院的学生都要宣誓遵守他所揭集并且以他命名的誓词：希波克拉提斯誓约。这套誓词无意间揭露了他那个时代的医学环境：

The regimen I shall adopt shall be for the benefit of the patients according to my ability and judgment， and not for their hurt or for any wrong. I will give no deadly drug to any， though it be asked of me， nor will I counsel such， and especially I will not aid a woman to procure abortion.  Whatsoever house I enter， there will I go for the benefit of the sick， refraining from all wrongdoing or corruption， and especially from any act of seduction， of male or female， of bond or free. Whatsoever things I see or hear concerning the life of men， in my attendance on the sick or even apart therefrom， which ought not be noised abroad， I will keep silence thereon， counting such things to be as sacred secrets. Pure and holy will I keep my life and my art.

    我要竭尽全力采取我认为有利于病人的医疗措施，不能给病人带来痛苦与危害。即使有人要求，我也不会把致命毒药给任何人，也绝不授意别人使用它，尤其不帮女人堕胎。无论进入谁家，只是为治病，远离任何不当作为，不接受贿 赂，尤其不勾引人，无论对方是男是女，也无论已婚未婚。治病期间甚至离开之后，对看到或听到不应外传的私生活谨守秘密，绝不泄漏宣扬。我要清清白白地行医生活。

But Hippocrates also burdened Western medicine with a great error that arose from the Greek search for simplicity.  He taught that the health of the body depended on the correct balance of four elements， or humors： blood， phlegm， yellow bile， and black bile. Until the nineteenth century， this was the authority for applying leeches when too much blood was identified as the source of illness. In this regard， Hippocrates was accepted as a classic for too long.

    不过，希波克拉提斯也因为追求希腊人崇尚的简单而 犯了一个大错，让西方医学背负了很久的包袱。根据他的生理观，人体含有四种主要液体：血液、黏液、黄胆汁与黑胆汁，身体健康与否就系于这四种体液的平衡。在19世纪之前，医生若是判定病人是因血液过多而患病，会施以水蛭吸血治疗法，根据的就是他的权威说法。在这方面， 希波克拉提斯被奉为经典的时间的确太久了点。

The Greeks were superior to the Romans in nearly all branches of learning， but not in law. Roman law grew organically， with the rulings of judges and the commentaries of legal experts becoming part of what constituted the law.  Though the Romans were more down-to-earth people than the Greeks， their legal thinking had more than a touch of Greek idealism. As they examined the laws of the peoples they had conquered， they were interested in finding the commonalities. What did all people agree should be the law? This line of inquiry led to the notion that there was a natural law—law in perfect form—that should be used to refine the laws of any particular society and that no society committed to justice should flout.

•《查士丁尼法典》保障谁?

    希腊人几乎在所有学问上都胜罗马人一筹，只除了法律。罗马人按部就班扩充律法，将法官的裁决、司法专家的意见都囊括于内，作为法律的组成元素。罗马人的民族性虽比希腊人务实得多，法学思维却带有浓厚的希腊理想主义色彩。他们征服其他民族之后，会仔细研究对方的律法，冀图找出它们的共同点。所有人对法律的共识是什么？这个提问催生了自然法的概念——所有致力于公义的社会都应该遵循这套以 自然为源的终极规范，用以修订它的律法。

The most complete compendium of Roman law was assembled in the sixth century AD by the order of Emperor Justinian， who ruled the Eastern Empire， which had survived the assault of the Germans. Justinian’s Code， when it was rediscovered in the eleventh century， was immensely influential. This was less so in England， whose own common law was already well established， but the English law of contract was influenced by the code. Here are two questions that relate to contract.

    东罗马帝国没有被日耳曼人侵亡。公元6世纪，这个帝国的统治者查士丁尼大帝(Emperor Justinian)下令汇编一本《查士丁尼法典》(Justinian's Code)，是公认最完整的罗马法典。这套法典于11世纪重见天日，造成了深巨的影响。它对英国的影响较小，因为英国已有齐全的普通法，不过英国的契约法还是受到这部法典影响。下面讨论两个关于契约的问题。

Consider the contract for hire. If a horse out on hire is stolen， what is the liability of the hirer? Answer： He must pay the cost of the horse to the owner because he should have taken care of it. (We now deal with this by insurance， which the Romans did not have.) But if the horse was stolen by violence， the hirer was not liable. He did not have to put himself in danger to protect someone else’s horse. But if the hirer had kept the horse beyond the stipulated time， he was responsible for the loss， even if the horse was taken by violence.

    先来看聘雇契约。如果一匹租来的马被人偷走，租马的人该负什么样的责任？答案是：他必须赔偿这匹马的价钱给马主，因为他应该好好照顾这匹马。（我们现在都是交由保险公司解决，罗马人可没这一套。）不过，如果这匹马是遭人以暴力夺走，租马的人就不必负责；他不必为了保护别人的马而陷自己于危境。但是，如果租马的人过了约定时间没有归还而丢失了马，即使马是被人强行夺走， 他也要负赔偿责任。

Consider a goldsmith’s being engaged to make a ring. Is this a contract for sale of the ring or a contract for hire of the goldsmith? Different rules applied to these different contracts. The answer depended on who supplied the gold.  If the customer supplied the gold， the contract was for hire of the goldsmith. If the goldsmith supplied the gold， it was a contract for sale.

    再来看这个例子：有人雇用一个金匠打造一枚戒指。 这是戒指的买卖契约还是金匠的雇用契约？不同的契约性质所适用的规定不同。答案是：要看金料的供应者而定。如果是顾客提供金料，这就属于雇用契约；如果是金匠自己提供金料，就是买卖契约。

You can see how comprehensive and detailed the law was and the determination of the compilers to establish just principles in all the variety of human transactions. We might choose to do things differently， but whatever problem we face， we know that it has already been considered. Before this great intellectual edifice—the work of many minds over centuries—we feel small. That’s the classic feeling.

    你可以看到这套法典包罗之广、涵盖之细，也看得出编者的决心，要为所有种类的人为交易订下公平公正的原则。我们现在的处理方式或有不同，但不管面对什么样的疑难杂症，我们知道，前人都已经想到过了。面对这个伟大的知识宝殿——多少世纪众多心血的结晶，我们会自觉渺小。这就是古典情怀。