DARWINS DANGEROUS IDEA
DARWINS DANGEROUS IDEA
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/j.2326-1951.1995.tb03633.x
复制
发表时间：
1995-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
DENNETT, DC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
DENNETT, DC
当我还是个小学生的时候，我和我的朋友们常常幻想一种我们称之为通用酸的虚构化学物质来取乐。我不知道它是我们发明的，还是与西班牙蝇和硝石一起继承的，作为地下青年文化的一部分。通用酸是一种腐蚀性很强的液体，它会腐蚀任何东西。当然，通用酸的问题在于如何保存它。它像溶解纸袋一样容易溶解玻璃瓶和不锈钢罐。如果你不知何故遇到了一团通用酸，会发生什么？整个星球最终会被毁灭吗？如果没有的话，还剩下什么呢？当一切都因遭遇万能酸而改变后，世界会是什么样子？我们的猜测只是一个有趣的玩笑。我们谁都不会接触到这种腐蚀性物质。然而，在短短几年内，我就会遇到一种与任何人都希望的与通用酸非常相似的东西。它不是一种化学物质，而是一种理念，它几乎吞噬了所有传统概念，留下了革命性的世界观，大多数旧地标仍然可以辨认，但已经发生了根本性的变化。这是查尔斯·达尔文 (Charles Darwin) 于 1859 年向一个毫无戒心的世界提出的想法。我并不是第一个意识到我正在处理危险事物的人。从《物种起源》出版那一刻起，达尔文的基本思想就引起了强烈的反应，从猛烈的谴责到欣喜若狂的效忠，有时甚至等同于宗教狂热。达尔文的理论遭到了朋友和敌人的滥用和曲解。它被滥用来为令人震惊的政治和社会学说提供科学的尊重。它受到了反对者的讽刺嘲笑，其中一些人希望它在学校里与“创造科学”竞争，这是一种虔诚的伪科学的可悲大杂烩。几乎没有人对达尔文漠不关心，也不应该有人如此。达尔文理论是一种科学理论，而且是一个伟大的理论，但这还不是它的全部。如此强烈反对它的神创论者在一件事上是正确的：达尔文的危险思想对我们最基本信仰结构的影响比许多老练的辩护者甚至他们自己所承认的要深得多。即使在达尔文去世一个多世纪后的今天，许多人仍然没有接受它令人难以置信的含义。他们认为，也许人们可以区分
When Iwas A SCHOOLBOY, MY FRIENDS and I used to amuse ourselves with fantasies about an imaginary chemical we called universal acid. I have no idea whether we invented it or inherited it, along with Spanish fly and saltpeter, as part ofunderground youth culture. Universal acid is a liquid so corrosive that it will eat through anything. The problem with universal acid, of course, is what to keep it in. It dissolves glass bottles and stainless-steel canisters as readily as it does paper bags. What would happen ifsomehow you came upon a dollop ofuniversal acid? Would the entire planet eventually be destroyed? If not, what would be left? After everything had been transformed by its encounter with universal acid, what would the world look like? Our speculations were a diverting joke; none ofus expected to come in contact with such corrosive material. Yet in only a few years I would encounter something bearing as close a likeness to universal acid as anyone could wish. It was not a chemical but an idea-one that eats through virtually every traditional concept, leaving in its wake a revolutionized world view, with most of the old landmarks still recognizable but transformed in fundamental ways. It was the idea that Charles Darwin, in 1859, unleashed on an unsuspecting world. I was not the first to realize that I was dealing with dangerous stuff. From the moment ofpublication of The Origin ofSpecies, Darwin's fundamental idea has inspired intense reactions, ranging from ferocious condemnation to ecstatic allegiance, sometimes tantamount to religious zeal. Darwin's theory has been abused and misrepresented by friend and foe alike. It has been misappropriated to lend scientific respectability to appalling political and social doctrines. It has been pilloried in caricature by opponents, some of whom would have it compete in the schools with" creation science," a pathetic hodgepodge ofpious pseudoscience. Almost no one is indifferent to Darwin, and no one should be. The Darwinian theory is a scientific theory, and a great one, but that is not all it is. The creationists who oppose it so bitterly are right about one thing: Darwin's dangerous idea cuts much deeper into the fabric of our most fundamental beliefs than many of its sophisticated apologists have yet admitted, even to themselves. Even today, more than a century after Darwin's death, many people still have not come to terms with its mind-boggling implications. Perhaps, they think, one can distinguish the