バートランド・ラッセル 宗教と科学 第1章 (松下彰良 訳)- Religion and Science, 1935、by Bertrand Russell
第1章 闘争の原因
宗教は,社会的にみると,科学より複雑な現象である。いずれの歴史上の偉大な宗教も,(次の)三つの側面を持っている。(即ち,)(1)教会,(2)教義,(3)個人道徳の掟,である。これらの三つの要素の重要性は,時代や場所の違いによって,大いに変化してきている。ギリシアやローマの古代宗教は,ストア学派により倫理的なものにされるまで,個人道徳に関しては言うべきことはあまりなかった。(また)イスラムにおいては,教会は世俗の君主と比較して(聖職ではない君主ほど)重要ではなかった。近代のプロテスタンティズム(清教徒主義)には,教義の厳しさを緩やかにする傾向がある。それにもかかわらず,これらの三つの要素は全て,その比重には差があるが,社会現象としての宗教には欠くことができないものであり,それは(その社会現象)は,科学との闘争に主に関わりをもっているものである。純粋に個人的な宗教は,科学が反証があげることができる(反駁しうる)主張を避けることに満足する限り(科学的な主張に異議をたててやりあわない限り),科学が最も進歩した時代にも邪魔されずに生き続けるにちがいない。 (宗教の)教義は,宗教と科学との間の闘争(争い)の(起こる)知的源泉であるが,その(宗教と科学の両者の)対立が激しいのは,教義の教会や道徳律との関連のせいである。教義を疑った者は(教会の)権威を弱め,聖職者(教会関係者)の収入を減少させた可能性がある。さらに,その者は道徳を壊していると考えられた。というのは,道徳的義務は聖職者によって教義から導き出されたからである。従って,世俗の支配者は,聖職者同様,科学者たちの革命的な教えを恐れるに足る充分な理由があると思った(感じた)のである。 |
Chapter 1: Grounds of ConflictReligion and Science are two aspects of social life, of which the former has been important as far back as we know anything of man's mental history, while the latter, after a fitful flickering existence among the Greeks and Arabs, suddenly sprang into importance in the sixteenth century, and has ever since increasingly moulded both the ideas and the institutions among which we live. Between religion and science there has been a prolonged conflict, in which, until the last few years, science has invariably proved victorious. But the rise of new religions in Russia and Germany, equipped with new means of missionary activity provided by science, has again put the issue in doubt, as it was at the beginning of the scientific epoch, and has made it again important to examine the grounds and the history of the warfare waged by traditional religion against scientific knowledge.Science is the attempt to discover, by means of observation, and reasoning based upon it, first, particular facts about the world, and then laws connecting facts with one another and (in fortunate cases) making it possible to predict future occurrences. Connected with this theoretical aspect of science there is scientific technique, which utilizes scientific knowledge to produce comforts and luxuries that were impossible, or at least much more expensive, in a pre-scientific era. It is this latter aspect that gives such great importance to science even for those who are not scientists. Religion, considered socially, is a more complex phenomenon than science. Each of the great historical religions has three aspects ; (i) a Church, (2) a creed, and (3) a code of personal morals. The relative importance of these three elements has varied greatly in different times and places. The ancient religions of Greece and Rome, until they were made ethical by the Stoics, had not very much to say about personal morals ; in Islam the Church has been unimportant in comparison with the temporal monarch ; in modern Protestantism there is a tendency to relax the rigors of the creed. Nevertheless, all three elements, though in varying proportions, are essential to religion as a social phenomenon, which is what is chiefly concerned in the conflict with science. A purely personal religion, so long as it is content to avoid assertions which science can disprove, may survive undisturbed in the most scientific age. Creeds are the intellectual source of the conflict between religion and science, but the bitterness of the opposition has been due to the connection of creeds with Churches and with moral codes. Those who questioned creeds weakened the authority, and might diminish the incomes, of Churchmen ; moreover, they were thought to be undermining morality, since moral duties were deduced by Churchmen from creeds. Secular rulers, therefore, as well as Churchmen, felt that they had good reason to fear the revolutionary teaching of the men of science. |