我们讲到“文化”，讲到一个人的修养，似乎联想到更多的是音乐、美术、文学、哲学等等，太少人appreciate the beauty of science。谁关心波粒二象性、宇宙曲率、时间起源、人如何成为人？社会越来越对人进行明码标价。换句话说，不能够直接创造经济价值的，越来越被视为无用。我的那些好高骛远不切实际的兴趣就是活生生的例证。
这让我不由自主想到了Virginia Woolf的“A Room of One’s Own”。书中一段话，大概可以作为我最近思维活动的一个总结：
All I could do was to offer you an opinion upon one minor point — a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction; and that, as you will see, leaves the great problem of the true nature of woman and the true nature of fiction unsolved.
难道我真要过那种内心彪悍外表落魄的流浪生活吗？再给我一点时间！
achie 发表评论于
俺也相信生命有神秘和奇迹存在。。。
对于宇宙大爆炸假说，进化论的细节，以及Intelligent Design(ID)，乃至宗教的要义，俺都是门外汉（女？）行外人。真是学无涯，学到无牙也不够。刚孤狗了一下Edwards v. Aguillard的高院案子，大概了解了一下。根据维基词条正文，其实ID倒是因该案子的审定而起的（参见consequences一节）。案子里被（主？）告一方涉及的更确切地说是creation science(该主张被判为有宗教意图）. 当然CS和ID也许没有本质的区别。看看维基词条的讨论页也很有意思 - 有人指出应该删除consequences一节，因为它只是POV（point of view):
One side in this debate claims that the other side is just creationists in disguise who are trying to get around court rulings by not mentioning God. The other side, however, includes (besides an unknown number of such cryptocreationists) people who sincerely believe that random mutations and natural selection alone cannot explain the evolution of life, and who don't think that this implies the existence of a personal God, let alone a specifically Christian one, let alone a literal reading of Genesis. So the intelligent design movement can't be described as merely a consequence of the effect a certain ruling had on Christian creationists.
我不是搞进化的，但是接触到很多证据是来自支持进化和支持intelligent design 双方的辩论。具体到眼睛的例子，你的引用是不错，但是不完整。Darwin的确说眼睛看起来似乎很难是进化出来的，但是接着又说如果眼睛的进化是渐进的，而且每一步都是有选择优势的，那么 the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection can hardly be considered real.也就是说，达尔文自己只不过说眼睛“貌似”不能进化出来。关于眼睛的进化因为研究了很久，证据相当多而翔实（wiki 上有个 evolution of eyes的词条写的还不错，我上面就copy了），太容易搜索到，所以搞intelligent design的人都不好意思拿来当例子。在著名的最高法院案子 Edwards v. Aguillard 里面，支持intelligent design的一方用的好像是一个鞭毛的例子。 弄到分子生物学里面去，一方面让老百姓觉得他们是用科学在说话，一方面懂得人也不多，更容易被说服。当然，在这个案子里，为这一方陈词的“科学家”显然在对方列出的scientific evidence 面前相当没面子。
很多人是因为生命太奥妙了，觉得这不可能进化出来。如果因为近化论的细节不完善而倾向不可知（agnostic）我还比较理解，如果用造物主来解释，简直跟大地是巨龟驮着一样：巨龟下面是什么啊？我们人类太复杂，所以不能自发地由进化产生，非得有个上帝来造，精心设计，上帝得比人还复杂了吧？特定的，有personalized的宗教到这里，必须引入"信"这个概念，也就是说，问题必须到头。神龟下面不许问了。当然，不是特定宗教的，相信一个”冥冥中”什么东西的，可以解释为：所谓神就是 big bang. 那之前怎么样？科普还没搞到这一步。
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 175.
f it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, p. 179.
我们讲到“文化”，讲到一个人的修养，似乎联想到更多的是音乐、美术、文学、哲学等等，太少人appreciate the beauty of science。谁关心波粒二象性、宇宙曲率、时间起源、人如何成为人？社会越来越对人进行明码标价。换句话说，不能够直接创造经济价值的，越来越被视为无用。我的那些好高骛远不切实际的兴趣就是活生生的例证。
这让我不由自主想到了Virginia Woolf的“A Room of One’s Own”。书中一段话，大概可以作为我最近思维活动的一个总结：
All I could do was to offer you an opinion upon one minor point — a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction; and that, as you will see, leaves the great problem of the true nature of woman and the true nature of fiction unsolved.
