文章The Rainbow of Knowledge的原文翻译
答案:1 悬赏:0 手机版
解决时间 2021-02-15 16:08
- 提问者网友：轮囘Li巡影
- 2021-02-15 00:55
文章The Rainbow of Knowledge的原文翻译
最佳答案
- 五星知识达人网友：撞了怀
- 2021-02-15 02:19
For more than 3/4 of my life——39 of my 50 years——I've either studied or taught in a school or a college in New York.
You might think , then after all this time I'd have some grasp of the situation , that I'd have some positive sense of assurance of certainty,about knowledge and about life. But I don't. In fact, the more I know the more I know I don't know.
To say that the more I know, the more I know I don't know is , of course, contradictory. But then, modern physics tells us that reality itself is contradictory. The more scientists look into our physical reality, the more it slips away from them. In a way, the more they learn, the less they know.
Knowledge itself is contradictory. For example, picture your knowledge as a dot, as perhaps the period at the end of this sentence. Notice the tiny circumferenceof that period, and let that represent the interface of the known with the unknown——in other words, your awareness of what you don't know.
But now imagine that little period growing, its blackness consuming more and more of page. As it grows, so does its circumference. And if that growing blackness represent knowledge, then as it grows, so does the awareness of what remains unknown. In other words, the more you know, the more you know you don't know.
No doubt you have experienced this yourself in your own personal quests for knowledge. At first, you don't even know a field of learning exists. Its been there all along, of course; you just haven't noticed it before. When I got my first computer in 1988, I walked down to the magazine store, hoping to find something about computing and was amazed at the number of choices. Likewise when I lucked into an opportunity to teach film analysis, I found myself dazzled at the sheer number of books devoted to the subject.
Let's say you decide to learn about this topic. You but one of these books, the best and most complete one you can find(or so you think), or perhaps you borrow it form the library. But you quickly find that your reading, rather than answering questions, only creates more of them.
Earlier this year, for example, i nor only had no idea that i had any interest at all in the relationship of technology to freedom; I didn't even realize that a connection between them might exist. So I started reading books ans became more and more aware of the relationship between technology and freedom. Then, on the one hand, I now know much more about this topic than I did a few short months ago. But on the other hand, all this reading has made me see how little I really know and how much more I need to read and think and write. Once I've finished reading a book, I always feel that I need to read three more to gain a better grasp of the topic. And I think and write at the same time. In fact, it is my writing that has led me into it. We think often that only people who know and who are sure of them selves write. For me, however, it's just the opposite. Writing doesn't close things off—— it opens things up.
For a long time, I, as a writer, was paralyzed by this paradox —— the more I know, the more I know I don't know. I was very aware of the teaching from Taoism that said "those who know don't speak; those who speak don't know." I wasn't sure I should write at all, and even if I did, I didn't know more first, It took me a long time not to let this paradox freeze me and to believe that it was my writing that would qualify my knowledge, and not the other way around. I think of my work not as articles or as columns but as essays —— a word from French, meaning "to try." I do not know truth. I only try to find it.
I don't mean, of course, to suggest that we should not learn, or that we should not read and write and think and talk. I do not mean to suggest that we should not try. An infinite quest is not hopeless one. I only suggest that an understanding willinevitably and doubtlessly lead us away from the force and rigidity of dogmatism ans toward the flexibility ans freedom of the individual. As Taoism teachers, " thestiff and unbending is the disciple of death. The gentle and yielding is the disciple of life."
We must temper our pride in knowing with the humility of not knowing. The truth, as they say , is out there , but , maybe like the rainbow, we can never really grasp it, never hold it in our hands and truly know it, We can only, as William James said, "live today by what truth we can get today and be ready to call it falsehood tomorrow.
我这辈子四分之三以上的时间（50年中有39年）是在纽约的中小学或大学里度过的，不是在上学，就是在教学。
于是，你或许会认为，经过这么长一段时间，我应该了解一些情况，确实知道一些东西，对知识和对生活该会积极地予以把握和肯定了。可是，我却没有做到这一点。事实 上，我知道的东西越多，反倒越觉得自己无知。
当然，说自己知道的东西越多，反倒越觉得自己无知，这种说法是矛盾的。然而，现代物理学告诉我们，现实世界本身就是矛盾的。科学家们对物质现实世界研究得越多，就越无法对它进行把握。在某种意义上，他们了解的越多，知道的就越少。
知识本身就是矛盾的。打个比方，假设你的知识是一个点，就像这个句子末尾的句号一样。请注意这个句号微小的圆周，假设它代表我们已知和未知的分界——换句话说，就是你对自己不知道的东西的认知。
但现在想象一下那个小小的句号在渐渐扩大，它的黑色部分占据页面越来越多的地方。随着它的扩大，它的周缘也跟着扩大。如果那个正在增大的黑色部分代表你的知识的 话，在知识增长的同时，你会意识到自己有许多不知道的东西。也就是说，你知道的越多，就越觉得自己无知。
毫无疑问，你已经经历过这种自己在自己的个人任务的知识。起初，你甚至不知道现场的学习存在。它是当然，还有一直以来，;你只是以前没有注意到这一点。当我得到了我的第一台电脑在1988年，我走到杂志店，希望能找到一些关于计算和很惊讶的选项数。同样，当我幸运地有机会教电影的分析，我发现自己在眼花缭乱的书籍致力于这一问题的数量之多。
比方说，你决定来了解这个话题。你，但这些书，最好的和最齐全的企业之一，你可以找到（或让你觉得），或者你借它形成的库之一。但你很快就会发现，你的阅读，而不是回答问题，只会造成更多的人。
今年早些时候，例如，我也只有不知道，我不得不在所有的技术，以自由的关系，任何利息;我甚至没有意识到它们之间的连接可能存在。于是我开始看书ANS越来越意识到技术与自由之间的关系。然后，一方面，我现在知道更多关于这个话题比我做了短短几个月前。但在另一方面，这一切阅读，使我看到我有多么少知道多少，我需要阅读和思考和写作。当我读完一本书，我总觉得我需要阅读三个更好地把握主题。而且我觉得，写在同一时间。事实上，这是我写这使我进去。我们通常认为，只有谁知道，谁的人肯定他们的自我书写。但对我来说，这是正好相反。写作不关闭的事情off--它打开的事情了。
在很长一段时间里，我，作为一个作家，就瘫痪了这个悖论 - 我越知道的越多，我知道，我不知道。我心里很明白，从道家认为教学“谁知道那些不说话;那些谁说话不知道”我不知道我应该写可言，即使我没有，我不知道更多的第一，我花了很长的时间，不要让这种矛盾冻结了我，并认为这是我的写作，将我的资格知识，而不是周围的其他方法。我觉得我的工作没有文章或列，但作为散文 - “尝试”来自法国的一个词，意思是我不知道真相。我只是试图找到它。
我不是说，当然，建议我们不应该学习，或者说我们不应该读，写，思考和说话。我的意思不是说我们不应该尝试。无限的追求是没有希望的。我只能建议的理解难免会和无疑使我们远离教条主义的力量和刚性答向着个人的灵活性答自由。道教教师“的僵硬和不屈是死亡的弟子的温柔与顺从是生命的弟子。”
我们必须锻炼我们的骄傲在明知与不知道的谦卑。事实上，正如他们所说，是摆在那里，但是，也许像彩虹，我们永远不能真正掌握它，永远不要拿在我们手中，真正了解它，我们只能作为威廉·詹姆斯说，“今天的生活由什么实际上，我们可以得到今天准备把它称为虚假的明天。
You might think , then after all this time I'd have some grasp of the situation , that I'd have some positive sense of assurance of certainty,about knowledge and about life. But I don't. In fact, the more I know the more I know I don't know.
To say that the more I know, the more I know I don't know is , of course, contradictory. But then, modern physics tells us that reality itself is contradictory. The more scientists look into our physical reality, the more it slips away from them. In a way, the more they learn, the less they know.
Knowledge itself is contradictory. For example, picture your knowledge as a dot, as perhaps the period at the end of this sentence. Notice the tiny circumferenceof that period, and let that represent the interface of the known with the unknown——in other words, your awareness of what you don't know.
But now imagine that little period growing, its blackness consuming more and more of page. As it grows, so does its circumference. And if that growing blackness represent knowledge, then as it grows, so does the awareness of what remains unknown. In other words, the more you know, the more you know you don't know.
No doubt you have experienced this yourself in your own personal quests for knowledge. At first, you don't even know a field of learning exists. Its been there all along, of course; you just haven't noticed it before. When I got my first computer in 1988, I walked down to the magazine store, hoping to find something about computing and was amazed at the number of choices. Likewise when I lucked into an opportunity to teach film analysis, I found myself dazzled at the sheer number of books devoted to the subject.
Let's say you decide to learn about this topic. You but one of these books, the best and most complete one you can find(or so you think), or perhaps you borrow it form the library. But you quickly find that your reading, rather than answering questions, only creates more of them.
Earlier this year, for example, i nor only had no idea that i had any interest at all in the relationship of technology to freedom; I didn't even realize that a connection between them might exist. So I started reading books ans became more and more aware of the relationship between technology and freedom. Then, on the one hand, I now know much more about this topic than I did a few short months ago. But on the other hand, all this reading has made me see how little I really know and how much more I need to read and think and write. Once I've finished reading a book, I always feel that I need to read three more to gain a better grasp of the topic. And I think and write at the same time. In fact, it is my writing that has led me into it. We think often that only people who know and who are sure of them selves write. For me, however, it's just the opposite. Writing doesn't close things off—— it opens things up.
For a long time, I, as a writer, was paralyzed by this paradox —— the more I know, the more I know I don't know. I was very aware of the teaching from Taoism that said "those who know don't speak; those who speak don't know." I wasn't sure I should write at all, and even if I did, I didn't know more first, It took me a long time not to let this paradox freeze me and to believe that it was my writing that would qualify my knowledge, and not the other way around. I think of my work not as articles or as columns but as essays —— a word from French, meaning "to try." I do not know truth. I only try to find it.
I don't mean, of course, to suggest that we should not learn, or that we should not read and write and think and talk. I do not mean to suggest that we should not try. An infinite quest is not hopeless one. I only suggest that an understanding willinevitably and doubtlessly lead us away from the force and rigidity of dogmatism ans toward the flexibility ans freedom of the individual. As Taoism teachers, " thestiff and unbending is the disciple of death. The gentle and yielding is the disciple of life."
We must temper our pride in knowing with the humility of not knowing. The truth, as they say , is out there , but , maybe like the rainbow, we can never really grasp it, never hold it in our hands and truly know it, We can only, as William James said, "live today by what truth we can get today and be ready to call it falsehood tomorrow.
我这辈子四分之三以上的时间（50年中有39年）是在纽约的中小学或大学里度过的，不是在上学，就是在教学。
于是，你或许会认为，经过这么长一段时间，我应该了解一些情况，确实知道一些东西，对知识和对生活该会积极地予以把握和肯定了。可是，我却没有做到这一点。事实 上，我知道的东西越多，反倒越觉得自己无知。
当然，说自己知道的东西越多，反倒越觉得自己无知，这种说法是矛盾的。然而，现代物理学告诉我们，现实世界本身就是矛盾的。科学家们对物质现实世界研究得越多，就越无法对它进行把握。在某种意义上，他们了解的越多，知道的就越少。
知识本身就是矛盾的。打个比方，假设你的知识是一个点，就像这个句子末尾的句号一样。请注意这个句号微小的圆周，假设它代表我们已知和未知的分界——换句话说，就是你对自己不知道的东西的认知。
但现在想象一下那个小小的句号在渐渐扩大，它的黑色部分占据页面越来越多的地方。随着它的扩大，它的周缘也跟着扩大。如果那个正在增大的黑色部分代表你的知识的 话，在知识增长的同时，你会意识到自己有许多不知道的东西。也就是说，你知道的越多，就越觉得自己无知。
毫无疑问，你已经经历过这种自己在自己的个人任务的知识。起初，你甚至不知道现场的学习存在。它是当然，还有一直以来，;你只是以前没有注意到这一点。当我得到了我的第一台电脑在1988年，我走到杂志店，希望能找到一些关于计算和很惊讶的选项数。同样，当我幸运地有机会教电影的分析，我发现自己在眼花缭乱的书籍致力于这一问题的数量之多。
比方说，你决定来了解这个话题。你，但这些书，最好的和最齐全的企业之一，你可以找到（或让你觉得），或者你借它形成的库之一。但你很快就会发现，你的阅读，而不是回答问题，只会造成更多的人。
今年早些时候，例如，我也只有不知道，我不得不在所有的技术，以自由的关系，任何利息;我甚至没有意识到它们之间的连接可能存在。于是我开始看书ANS越来越意识到技术与自由之间的关系。然后，一方面，我现在知道更多关于这个话题比我做了短短几个月前。但在另一方面，这一切阅读，使我看到我有多么少知道多少，我需要阅读和思考和写作。当我读完一本书，我总觉得我需要阅读三个更好地把握主题。而且我觉得，写在同一时间。事实上，这是我写这使我进去。我们通常认为，只有谁知道，谁的人肯定他们的自我书写。但对我来说，这是正好相反。写作不关闭的事情off--它打开的事情了。
在很长一段时间里，我，作为一个作家，就瘫痪了这个悖论 - 我越知道的越多，我知道，我不知道。我心里很明白，从道家认为教学“谁知道那些不说话;那些谁说话不知道”我不知道我应该写可言，即使我没有，我不知道更多的第一，我花了很长的时间，不要让这种矛盾冻结了我，并认为这是我的写作，将我的资格知识，而不是周围的其他方法。我觉得我的工作没有文章或列，但作为散文 - “尝试”来自法国的一个词，意思是我不知道真相。我只是试图找到它。
我不是说，当然，建议我们不应该学习，或者说我们不应该读，写，思考和说话。我的意思不是说我们不应该尝试。无限的追求是没有希望的。我只能建议的理解难免会和无疑使我们远离教条主义的力量和刚性答向着个人的灵活性答自由。道教教师“的僵硬和不屈是死亡的弟子的温柔与顺从是生命的弟子。”
我们必须锻炼我们的骄傲在明知与不知道的谦卑。事实上，正如他们所说，是摆在那里，但是，也许像彩虹，我们永远不能真正掌握它，永远不要拿在我们手中，真正了解它，我们只能作为威廉·詹姆斯说，“今天的生活由什么实际上，我们可以得到今天准备把它称为虚假的明天。
我要举报
如以上回答内容为低俗、色情、不良、暴力、侵权、涉及违法等信息，可以点下面链接进行举报！
点此我要举报以上问答信息
大家都在看
推荐资讯