论文部分内容阅读
当我们否认自然界有目的时,我们就会被导向一种古怪的自相矛盾中去。赫胥黎没有提出任何理由说明,为什么生物界初看上去似乎充满了目的,但是进化中的目的只是表面的。当达尔文说他在把“生存斗争”当作广义和比喻的意义来用时,却使我们陷入困境。坦率地说,任何人主张自然界为某种目的而活动,都应当意识到这个立论有其显著的困难。譬如说,有人断言,(?)为了尚未出生的后代筑巢,并且完全无意识地去筑,那末一个尚未存在的东西怎样会变成既成原因,尤其是作为一个盲目作用者来说,究竟是不明白的。自然界的有目的活动也容易说成过分简单化,对人来说,有一双手显然是好的,但这并没有证明人是怎样获得手的。
When we deny that there is a purpose in nature, we are led to a weird contradiction. Huxley did not give any reason why the biological world at first appeared to be full of purpose, but the purpose of evolution is only superficial. When Darwin said that he was using the term “struggle for existence” in a broad and metaphorical sense, it put us in trouble. Frankly speaking, anyone who advocates that nature acts for a certain purpose should realize that this argument has significant difficulties. For example, one asserted that (?) Nesting for unborn offspring and completely unconsciously building, how an unsolved thing can become an established cause, especially as a blind actor, is not understandable. Purposeful activities in nature can easily be said to be simplistic. It is obviously good for both men and women, but this does not prove how people get their hands.