《软件与思维机械论神话及其影响》（绪论之机械论神话）翻译项目报告.pdf

'雜翻体感據／ｉｆ巧译专化学位硕击论文《？Ａ种Ａ廢难？輪娘於神巧Ａｎｉ》乂黄ｌ＾ｆ諸化么棘栽给种＃；４ｎ种巧Ｈ報４冯一巧巧＃＆两＊路客細教巧々化名巧ｔ巧译巧女巧巧巧向：《巧巧译论文提巧財闽》２０巧年４月论文巧辩好间：２０化年５月论义编号：如化３５４ SichuanInternationalStudiesUniversityATranslationProjectReportofSoftwareandMind:TheMechanisticMythandItsConsequences(Introduction:TheMechanisticMyth)byFengYiboAthesissubmittedtotheGraduateSchoolinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthedegreeofMasterofMasterofTranslationandInterpretingunderthesupervisionofAssociateProfessorChenXirongChongqing,P.R.ChinaMay2016 i 《软件与思维:机械论神话及其影响》（绪论之机械论神话）翻译项目报告摘要本文是一篇翻译项目报告。所选翻译项目的原文是安德烈·索林所著《软件与思维:机械论神话及其影响》绪论中的“机械论神话”部分。作者安德烈·索林试图通过总结当今社会主要问题无法解决的原因，分析人类社会发展的规律，大胆提出他的社会神话观点，从而启迪人们思考未来的前进方向。翻译报告主要分为五部分：第一、翻译项目介绍，包括项目的背景、意义和翻译报告的结构；第二、所选章节背景介绍，包括作者简介、主要内容介绍和文本分析；第三、翻译难点，原文讨论的对象是抽象的社会概念，加上文化背景的不同，会出现一些比较难以翻译的专门术语。此外，英文常见的长句也是一个翻译难点；第四、翻译原则和翻译方法，翻译过程中用到的方法主要包括倒译法和拆译法，并参考了平行文本；第五、总结，包括翻译经验和教训以及仍待解决的问题。关键词：机械论神话；平行文本；倒译法；拆译法ii ATranslationProjectReportofSoftwareandMind:TheMechanisticMythandItsConsequences(Introduction:TheMechanisticMyth)AbstractThisisaprojectreportonthetranslationofSoftwareandMind:TheMechanisticMythandItsConsequencesbyAndreiSorin,andthe“Introduction:TheMechanisticMyth”isthesourcetext.TheauthorAndreiSorintriestofindthereasonfortheunsettledproblemsinmodernsocietythroughtheanalysisofthedevelopmentofhumansocieties,andputsforwardhistheoryofsocietybasedonmyths,thustoinspirethoughtsonthedirectionoffuturesocialdevelopment.Thereportconsistsoffiveparts:thefirstpartistheintroductiontothetranslationprojectreport,includingitsbackground,significanceandstructure;thesecondpartisthebackgroundinformationofthesourcetext,includingtheintroductiontotheauthorandthetextcontent,andthelinguisticfeaturesofthesourcetext;thethirdpartisaboutthetranslationdifficulties.Theauthorismostofthetimetalkingaboutabstractconceptsinfieldsofphilosophy,sociologyandanthropology,andthedifferentculturalbackgroundalsoaddstothedifficulty;thefourthpartisthetranslationprinciplesandsolutions.Thetranslationsolutionsmainlyincludeparalleltext,inversionanddivision;thefifthpartistheconclusionofexperience,lessonsandunsolvedproblemsinthetranslationprocess.Keywords:mechanisticmyth;paralleltext;inversion;divisioniii AcknowledgementsIwouldliketoexpressmygratitudetoallofthosewhodirectlyorindirectlyhelpedmeduringthewritingofthisthesis.Firstandforemost,Iwouldliketoexpressmyheartfeltgratitudetomysupervisor,AssociateProfessorChenXirong,notonlyforherintellectualguidancebutforherwarmandconstantencouragementduringtheprocessofwritingthistranslationreport.Withpatienceandprudence,shelaboredthroughdraftsofthisreportandpointedoutdefectsinmywritingprocess.Withoutherconsistentandilluminatinginstruction,thisreportcouldn’thavereacheditspresentform.Therefore,Ioweallthemeritsinthisreport,ifany,toher,thoughIamfullyawarethatthereportmightstillcontainsomemistakes,forwhichIbearthewholeresponsibility.MycordialandsincerethanksgotoallteachersinCollegeofInterpretationandTranslation,fromwhosedevotedteachingandenlighteninglecturesfromwhichIhavebenefitedagreatdealandacademicallypreparedforthisthesis.AnyprogressIhavemadeistheresultoftheirprofoundconcernandselflessdevotion.Lastbutnottheleast,mythankswouldgotomybelovedfamilyfortheirlovingconsiderationsandgreatconfidenceinmeallthroughthesetwoyears.Ialsoowemysinceregratitudetomyfriendswhogavemetheirhelpandtimeinlisteningtomeandhelpingmeresolvemyproblemsduringthedifficultcourseofthethesis.iv CONTENTS摘要…………………………………………………………………………………..iiAbstract……………………………………………………………………………….iiiAcknowledgements…………………………………………………………………...ivChapterOneIntroduction……………………………………………………………...11.1Background………………………………………………………………...…...11.2Significance………………………………………………………………...…...21.3Structure………………………………………………………………...…........2ChapterTwoSourceTextBackground…………………………………………...…....32.1Author………………………………………………………………...…............32.2SourceText………………………………………………………………...…....42.2.1Content……………………………………………………...………...…..42.2.2LinguisticFeatures…………………………………………………...…...4ChapterThreeTranslationDifficulties…………………………………………….......73.1TechnicalTerms………………………………………………………...…...…..73.2DifficultSentences………………………………………………..…….……....8ChapterFourTranslationPrinciplesandSolutions……………………………...…….94.1TranslationPrinciples…………………………………………………………...94.2TranslationofTechnicalTerms………………………………………...……...104.2.1Translationof“myth”………………………………………………...…104.2.2Translationof“entity”…………………………………………...…...…124.2.3Translationof“charlatanism”…………………………………………...134.2.4Translationof“falsification”…………………………………………....144.3TranslationofDifficultSentences…………………………….…………….....144.3.1Inversion………………………………………………………………....144.3.2Division………………………………………………………………....16ChapterFiveConclusion………………………………………………………...…...195.1ExperienceandLessons…………………………………………………….....195.2UnsolvedProblems………………………………………………………........20References……………………………………...………………………………….....21AppendixISourceText……………………………………………………………....22AppendixII中文译文…………………………………………………..…………..43v ChapterOneIntroductionThischapterisanoverallintroductiontothetranslationproject.Itincludesthebackground,significanceandstructureofthetranslationprojectreport.Thetranslatortriestogiveabriefyetintriguingintroductiontothebackgroundofthemechanisticmythwithinformationaboutthebookandthesourcetextselected.1.1BackgroundPeopleallaroundtheworldseemechanismasanaturalphilosophy.Mechanismhasgreatlyinfluencedthedevelopmentofthemodernscience.Intheearliestandsimpleststageofmechanism,naturewasseenasamachineoradevice.Andpeoplehavebeenencouragedtoseetheworldasaninter-linkedtotality.However,mechanismdoesnotapplyintheexplanationoflivingorganicsortheirrelationshipswitheachother.Oftentimes,mechanismistalkedintheareasofscienceandtechnology,Marxismandnaturalview.MechanismhascontributedalottotheScientificRevolutionsinhumanhistory,especiallytotheIndustrialRevolution.InMarxism,however,mechanismisoftenseenasanegativeworldview,inwhichasetformulaisimposedonallthingswithoutconsiderationoftheirdifferenttime,placeandindividualfeatures.Domestically,mechanismismoretalkedasthemechanicnaturalview.However,mechanismisseldomseenfromthephilosophicalperspectiveorlinkedwithourculturaldevelopment.SoftwareandMind:TheMechanisticMythandItsConsequenceswaswrittenbyAndreiSorin.AnditwaspublishedbyAndsorBooks,Toronto,CanadainJanuary2013.Sorinarguesthattheusefulnessofmechanismhasbeenoutlived.Andmechanismhasbecomethenewmythology.AlthoughSorin"smainexpertiseandfocusareinprogrammingandcomputerscience,heconvincinglyarguesthatthesuccessofhierarchicalstructureshasspreadfromthehardsciencesofphysicsandengineeringtovirtuallyallfieldsofhumansociety.AndthetranslationofhisbookwillenrichtheknowledgeoftheChineseacademicandphilosophicalcirclesanduniversity-levelstudentsinvariousfieldsofstudy.1 Thetranslatorselectsthesectionof“TheMechanisticMyth”fromtheIntroductionasthesourcetext,totaling8502words.Andthetargettexttotals15,351Chinesecharacters.Asthetitleindicates,inthispart,theauthormainlytalksaboutmechanismintheformof“mechanisticmyth”.Thesourcetextaddressesgeneralreadersaswellassoftwarepractitioners,andthefallaciesofthemechanisticideologyandthedegradationofmindscausedbythesefallaciesarediscussedinthispart.1.2SignificanceInSoftwareandMind,Sorinismainlytalkingaboutthephilosophicaltransitionandthesocialdevelopmentwithcomputerscienceasthepointcut.Andthecomputersciencehasbeenseenasthemainrepresentativeofmodernscienceandtechnology.However,Sorin,withdecadesofexperienceinprogramming,pointsoutthatthecurrentsoftwareasweknowhasdescendedtothemodernspokespersonoftheage-oldmechanismormechanisticmyth,whichistherootofvariousexistingsocialproblems.Moreover,Sorincomesupwithpracticalsolutionstotheseproblems,oratleasthepointsoutthepossibledirectionsforpeople.Thus,thetranslationofthetextmayenlightenmoreChinesepeople,especiallytheuniversity-levelstudentstoseethemodernworldfromadifferentperspectiveandcontributetothedevelopmentofhumansociety.1.3StructureThisreportconsistsoffiveparts:thefirstpartistheoverallintroductiontothistranslationproject;thesecondpartisthetextanalysis,includingtheintroductionofthebookauthorandanalysisofthesourcetext;thethirdpartisthetranslationdifficulties;thefourthpartistranslationprinciplesandsolutionstothedifficulties,includingtheoreticalguidancecompliedwithandthestrategiesadoptedintranslation,andexamplestoexemplifythetranslationmethodsusedtosolvethedifficultiesintheprocessoftranslation;thefifthpartistheconclusionwhichcoversexperienceandlessonsofthistranslationpractice,aswellasproblemsthatstillremaintobesolved.2 ChapterTwoSourceTextBackgroundThischapterconsistsoftwoparts:theintroductiontotheauthoroftheselectedbookandthelinguisticfeaturesoftheselectedsourcetext.Thebasicknowledgeoftheauthorcanhelpthetranslatorgetthebackgroundinformationofthebook.Andbyanalyzingthelinguisticfeaturesofthesourcetext,thetranslatorcanuserelevantexistingtranslationtheoriesandmethodsduringthetranslationprocess.2.1AuthorThesourcetext,“TheMechanisticMyth”,isselectedfromtheintroductionpartofthebookSoftwareandMindbyAndreiSorin.Sorinhasbeenworkinginthefieldofprogrammingformorethanfourdecades.Hehasworkedonvarioustypesofhardware,fromfour-bitmicroprocessorstomainframes;andhehasdevelopedmanytypesofsoftware,fromprogrammingtoolstobusinesssystems.Hisresearchinterestsincludeapplicationdevelopmentandmaintenanceconcepts,datamanagementprinciples,andthephilosophyofsoftware.Hehasdevelopedtextandfilemanagementsystems,editors,andinterpreters.Inthebusinessfield,hehasdevelopedapplicationsinmanufacturingandutilities.SorinreceivedabachelorofscienceinElectricalEngineering(1970)andamasterofscienceinComputerScience(1971)fromtheTechnion,IsraelInstituteofTechnology,andadoctorofphilosophyinComputerScience(1975)fromtheImperialCollege,UniversityofLondon,U.K.Since1976hehaslivedinToronto,Canada,whereheisworkingasanindependentconsultantinsoftwaredevelopment,support,andresearch.Sorin’sprofessioniscomputerscience,sohehasarationalandrigorousmind.Thismakeshisbookratherstructuralandlogical.But,ashesaid,thebookisnotonlyforpractitionersincomputerscience,andithassomethingforreaderswithoutknowledgeinhisfield.Forthisreason,thelanguageofthesourcetextissomewhatplainandratherlogical.Specializedwordsmayappearinthetexteverynowandthen.3 Thesealladdtothedifficultiesforthetranslationwork,mainlyincludingspecializedwordsintermsofphilosophy,sociologyandanthropology,andcomplexsentences.2.2SourceText2.2.1ContentTheselectedpartfortranslationis“TheMechanisticMyth”fromtheIntroduction,totaling8502words.Asthetitleindicates,inthispart,theauthormainlytalksaboutmechanismintheformof“mechanisticmyth”.Theauthorexplainshowmechanismworkedinthepastwithalargenumberofexamples,comparisonsandmodels,andputsforwardhispersonalviewofhowmechanismorthemechanisticmythisstillworkingatpresentbutinanegativeway.Thatistosay,theconceptscoveredinthesourcetextissomewhatobscure.Thetranslatorneedstoseefromaratheroverallandhistoricalviewpointtounderstandthewholepicture.ThetranslatorhavetofollowSorin’swordstogethisideasandviewpoints.Sointerpretingthesourcetextisamajorchallengeforthetranslator.2.2.2LinguisticFeaturesThesourcetextisanacademicworkwhichtalksaboutthefallaciesofthemechanisticideologyaswellasthedegradationofmindscausedbythesefallacies.AccordingtoNewmark,thethreemainfunctionsoflanguageareexpressive,informativeandvocative.Expressivetextsareseriousimaginativeliterature,authoritativestatementsandessays,etc.AccordingtoNewmark,aninformativetextoftenhasastandardformat,suchastextbook,technicalreport,anarticleinanewspaperoraperiodical,etc.Vocativetexttypesaremainlyinstructions,notices,publicity,propaganda,andpopularfiction.Theauthormainlyexplainstheconceptofmechanisticmythandhumansocietieswhichhavebeenbasedondifferentmythsindifferenttimes.Throughhiselaboration,theauthorwantstoexpresshispersonalunderstandingaboutthemajorproblemsof4 thecurrentsocietyaswellastheunderlyingcauses.Soitcanbesaidthatthesourcetextismainlyinformative.Themainpointsofalanguage’sinformativefunctionsareexternalsituation,thetopicfactsandrealityofthelanguage,includingreportedideasandtheories.Thus,thestylisticcharacteristicsofthesourcetextaredeterminedbyitscontentandfunctionincludingformality,objectivityandlogicality.Thesefeaturesaredisclosedindifferentlevelsofthesourcetextincludingvocabulary,syntaxanddiscourse.Intermsofformality,documentarynarrationandobjectivereasoningarethemaincontentofthesourcetext.Therefore,thesourcetextisbasedonformal,rigorousandaccuratewords.Professionaltermsoftenappearinthesourcetextinfieldsofphilosophyandsociology,suchas“entity”,“doctrine”,“myth”,“mechanism”,and“totalitarianism”.Asforobjectivity,thesourcetextistheintroductiontothebook.ThebookusesKarlPopper"sfamousprinciplesofdemarcationbetweenscienceandpseudoscience,sayingthatthemechanisticideologyhasturnedmostofthesoftware-relatedactivitiesintopseudoscientificpursuits.Intheauthor’sopinion,softwareelitesarepromotinginvalidandevenfraudulentsoftwareideas,usingmechanismasdefense.Theauthoranalyzesthehumansocieties,andthebelieforthedrivingforcebehindeachstageofsociety.Hisexplanationisfromahistoricalandphilosophicalperspective,withalotoffactsandreasoning.Theseallmakethesourcetextratherobjective.Thesourcetextisalsologicallyconstructed.Theauthorfirstlyintroducesthenotionofthemechanisticmyththroughanalogiesoftheunderstandingofcomplexphenomenon,machine,asetofrelatedentities,linguisticcommunicationandsoftwareapplications.Inthesecondpart,hedisprovetheseeminglyuniversalmechanisticbeliefbyanalyzinghowmechanismdoesnotapplyintheabovementionedexamples.Inthethirdpart,theauthorexplainstheconceptofmyth,andarguesthatsocietiesinhumanhistoryhaveallbeenbasedondifferentmyths,whichcanbegoodorbadforhumansindifferentstages.Inthefourthpart,theauthorcriticizestheideologybehindmodernmechanisticmyth,totalitarianism.Inthefifthpart,hecomesupwithabadphenomenonengenderedbymechanism,charlatanism,5 whichisthemainprobleminvariousfieldsofmodernsociety.Inthesixthpart,theauthorproposespeopleneedanewmythtodependon.6 ChapterThreeTranslationDifficultiesThischapterwillcoverthedifficultiesthetranslatorencounteredduringthetranslationprocess,mainlyincludingthespecializedtermsandcomplexsentences.Duetoalackofprofessionalknowledgeinfieldsofphilosophy,sociologyandanthropology,thetranslatorwasconfrontedwithsomechallengeswhentranslatinganumberofspecializedtermsinthesefields.Also,thecomplexsentenceshavebeenoneofthebiggestchallengestranslatorsencounter,andtheprofessionalbackgroundalsoaddstothedifficulty.3.1SpecializedTermsJustaswhatthetranslatormentionsinanalyzingthefeaturesofthesourcetext,thelanguageofthesourcetextisquiteformalandstandardized.Sospecializedtermsareinevitable.Besides,theauthorofthesourcetextpreferstousecomplexsentencestomakethediscussionrigorous.ThesealladdtothedifficultyintranslatingthesourcetextduetoitstypeandthelinguisticdifferencebetweenChineseandEnglish.Thesourcetexthasmanyvocabulariesinfieldsofphilosophyandsociology.Someofthemaretranslatedconventionally,whileothershavenounifiedtranslations.Intheprocessoftranslation,thetranslatortriestoensuretheaccuracyandreadabilityofthetranslationmainlybycheckingtheirvariousparalleltexts.Paralleltextisalocaltextwiththesameorsimilarsubject,styleandfunctionindifferentlanguages.Broadlyspeaking,“paralleltext”canbeseenasanyreferencematerialwhichhasacontentclosetotheoriginalone.Byreferringtotheparalleltext,thetranslatorobtainprofessionalknowledge,learnmethodsofexpression,offsetthelackoflinguisticcompetenceandspecializedknowledge,andguaranteetheaccuracyandreadabilityofthetargettext.Theparalleltextsusedinthistranslationprocessincludetheexplanationindictionary(paperandcomputerdictionary)andfeaturearticles.Thepaperdictionary7 istheEnglish-ChineseDictionary(secondversion)byLuGusunandRandomHouseDictionary.ThecomputerdictionaryreferstoyoudaoandLingoes.OtherdataresourcesmainlycomefromGoogle,Wikipedia,CNKIandotherwebsites.Thegeneraltranslationprocessisasfollows:firstlythetranslatorconsultsthedictionarytogetthelexicalmeaningofspecializedterms.ThenthetranslatorsearchesmoreprofessionalbackgroundinformationonwebsitesincludingGoogleandBaidu.Finallythetranslatordecidesthebestversionoftranslationforthosewordsandsentences.Here,thetranslatoruses“myth”,“entity”,“charlatanism”and“falsification”fromthesourcetextasexamplestodemonstratethewholetranslationprocess.3.2DifferentSentencesDifferentlanguageconventionsareanotherchallengeforthistranslation,asisinthetranslationofanyothertypeoftextsbetweenEnglishandChinese,whichbelongtotwoentirelydifferentlinguisticsystems.EnglishisatypicalphoneticlanguagewhichbelongstotheIndo-Europeanlanguages;whileChineseisanideographiclanguageandanimportantpartoftheSino-Tibetanfamily.Syntaxdifferencesalsoexistbetweenthetwolanguages.Intermsofsentencestructure,Chinesemainlyconsistsofinitiativeandsimplesentences;whilepassiveandcomplexsentencesarefrequentlyseeninEnglish.Asforsentencesequence,oftentimes,thesemanticfocuscomesintheforeheadinEnglish,butitisusuallyinthetailofaChinesesentence.Also,manyadverbialclausesneedtobeplacedatdifferentpositionsofasentencetomakethetranslationsmooth.Thereareanumberofcomplexsentencesinthesourcetext,althoughtheauthortriestoexplainhisphilosophicalopinioninsimpleandplainwords.Andthesentencescontainingadverbialclausesalsoaddtothedifficultyintranslating.8 ChapterFourTranslationPrinciplesandSolutionsThetranslatorintroducesthemaintranslationprinciplesusedinthetranslation,Newmark’ssemanticandcommunicativetranslation.Thenthetranslatorlistssomeexamplesofthetranslationprocessofsomespecializedtermsaswellascomplexsentences.4.1TranslationPrinciples:SemanticandCommunicativeTranslationNewmark’sApproachestoTranslation(1981)andATextbookofTranslation(1988)havebeenwidelyusedintranslatortrainingcourses.Andtheycontainagreatmanyofusefulexamplesoflinguistictheorieswithpracticalapplicationsfortranslation.Newmarksuggestsnarrowingthegapbetweenthesourcelanguageandthetargetlanguagebyreplacingtheoldtermswith“semantic”and“communicative”translation.Communicativetranslationattemptstoproduceonitsreadersaneffectascloseaspossibletothatobtainedonthereaderoftheoriginal.Semantictranslationattemptstorender,ascloselyasthesemanticandsyntacticstructureofthesecondlanguageallow,theexactcontextualmeaningoftheoriginal.(Newmark1981:39)AccordingtoNewmark,thesemanticapproachcanbeadoptedinthetranslationofinformativetexts.Insemantictranslation,thetranslatorshouldtrytocorrectlyreproducethecontextualmeaningofthesourcetextwithfullconsiderationofitssemanticandsyntacticstructure.However,thisisnottosaythatcommunicativetranslationshouldnotbeusedatall.Infact,withinthesametext,thesemanticapproachshouldbeadoptedinthetranslationofsomepartswhilethecommunicativeapproachinothers.Theyalwayssupplementeachotherintheactualtranslationwork.Seeninagivenarticle,the9 semantictranslationmaybeusedmoreinsomeparagraphsorsentences,whilethecommunicativeapproachinothers.Thetranslatormustconveyinformationinlinewiththelinguistic,culturalandpragmaticstrategiesofthetargetlanguage,ratherthantrytofaithfullyreproducethesourcetext.Inotherwords,onthepremiseofaccuracy,thetranslatorcanusevariousflexibletranslationmethodstoavoidliteraltranslation,andthusensurethereadabilityofthetranslation.Itisthediscretionofthetranslatortoexplainthesourcetextinthetargetlanguage,adjustthestyleinthetargettextandavoidpossibleambiguityinproperways.4.2TranslationofSpecializedTerms4.2.1Translationof“myth”“Myth”isakeywordofthesourcetext.Itappears77timesfrombeginningtoend.Thedefinitionsof“myth”inEnglish-ChineseDictionaryare:1.Storythatoriginatedinancienttimes,especiallyonedealingwithideasorbeliefsabouttheearlyhistoryofarace,orgivingexplanationsofnaturalevents,suchastheseasons;2.Suchstoriescollectively;3.Thing,person,etc.thatisimaginary,fictitiousorimpossible.Andthedefinitionof“myth”byDictionary.combasedonRandomHouseDictionary,isshowninthepicturebelow:10 Amythisasacrednarrativeinthesensethatitholdsreligiousorspiritualsignificanceforthosewhotellit,anditcontributestoandexpressessystemsofthoughtandvalues.Useofthetermbyscholarsimpliesneitherthetruthnorthefalsenessofthenarrative.Tothesourceculture,however,amythbydefinitionis"true",inthatitembodiesbeliefs,concepts,andwaysofquestioningandmakingsenseoftheworld.Inpopularuse,amythcanalsobeacollectivelyheldbeliefthathasnobasisinfactaccordingtothespeaker.(1)“Inthisbookweareconcernedwithoneparticularmyth–themechanisticmyth;andweareespeciallyconcernedwithitslatestmanifestation–thesoftwaremyth.”Translation:本书中我们将关注一个神话——机械论神话，尤其是其最新表现形式——软件神话。(2)“…andifscienceisgroundedonmechanism,then,forus,mechanismservesthepurposeofmyth.”Translation:如果科学是建立于机械论之上，那么对我们来说，机械论就起到了神话的作用。(3)“Whatisleftistodecidewhatbeliefshouldreplacemechanismasmyth.”Translation:接下来要解决的问题是，什么信仰能代替机械论成为神话。“神话”isprobablythefirstChinesewordthatcomestoaChinesespeaker’smindwhenheseestheEnglishword“myth”.Thetranslatordecidesthat“神话”isalsothemostappropriateChinesetranslationfor“myth”.thFirstly,accordingtotheModernChineseDictionary(6edition),“神话”hastwomeanings:1.指传说中的神仙和古代神化英雄的故事。2.指不真实,荒缪的言论。Thoseexplanationsareveryclosetothedefinitionsof“myth”.Secondly,thenotionof“神话”inChineseculturegivespeopletwooppositefeelings.Oneisthatsomethingorsomeoneisextraordinarilygreat,totheextentthatitisconsideredalmostgodly;theotheristhatthisgodlythingmayprobablybeimaginary.Thesetworeactionsareexactlythenotionof“myth”expressedbytheauthorinhisbook.11 Fromtheabove,thetranslatordecidestotranslate“myth”as“神话”.4.2.2Translationof“entity”Thedefinitionof“entity”byDictionary.combasedonRandomHouseDictionaryisasfollows:(1)“……becauseeveryentityisnecessarilymadeupofsimplerentities,whichareintheirturnmadeupofevensimplerones,andsoon,downtosomebasicbuildingblocks.”Translation:“因为所有实体均由简单实体组成，而这些简单实体进一步由更简单的实体组成，以此类推，直到变为最基本的组成部分。”(2)“Theattributesofasoftwareentityaresuchthingsasfiles,variables,subroutines,andbusinesspractices.”Translation:“软件实体的属性包括文档、变量、子程序及商业惯例等。”(3)“wewilleventuallyreachsomeelementaryentities,whichcannotbefurtherdividedintosimplerones.”Translation:“一定会得到一些不可分割的基本实体。”Thenotionof“entity”inthesourcetextisclosesttotheseconddefinitionbyDictionary.com.TheChinesewordscorrespondingtoeachaspectofthenotioninclude“存在”，“实在物”，“个体”，“存在物”,“物质”,“实体”.Amongthesewords,thetranslatorprefers“实体”inthatitsmeaningcontainstwoaspects:“实”meansrealexistenceand“体”standsforindividualorobject.12 thThenthetranslatorlooksup“实体”intheModernChineseDictionary(6edition),andfindsthatoneofitsdefinitionsisinaccordancewithwhattheauthorintends:“实际存在的物体”.Fromtheabove,theauthordecidestotranslate“entity”as“实体”.4.2.3Translationof“Charlatanism”AccordingtoDictionary.combasedonRandomHouseDictionary,charlatanismisthepracticeormethodofacharlatan,oraninstanceofthis.Itsparonym“charlatan”,accordingtotheOxfordAdvancedLearner’sEnglish-ChineseDictionary,isapersonwhofalselyclaimstohavespecialknowledgeorskill,especiallyinmedicine.Andtheexplanationof“charlatan”onDictionary.comis“apersonwhopretendsorclaimstohavemoreknowledgeorskillthanheorshepossesses;quack.”(1)“Thus,whileknownasthemethodofscience,mechanismisnowlargelythemethodofcharlatanism.”Translation:“如此一来，美其名曰科学方法的机械论，如今很大程度上已经沦为江湖骗术。”(2)“Inbusiness,thecharlatanismisseenintheactivityknownasmarketing.”Translation:“商业中的江湖骗术可以在营销中找到。”(3)“Inuniversities,thecharlatanismisseenintheactivityknownasresearch.”Translation:“大学里的江湖骗术可以在所谓的研究活动中找到。”“庸医”or“江湖医生”hastheclosestnotionto“charlatan”.But,apparently,medicineisnottheauthor’sfocus.Andhisstressisonthedeceivingorfraudulentnatureofacharlataninotherfieldsofsociety,forinstance,philosophy,businessinthesentencesabove.Then,itseemsthat“charlatanism”canbetranslatedinto“庸医之术”or“骗术”.Butitismorethaninappropriatetodescribeabusinessbehaviorwithsomethingrelatedtomedicine.So“庸医之术”isabandoned.Asfor“骗术”,ifitisputtogetherwithbusinessagain,peoplewouldbeapttothinkof“businessfraud”,whichisdefinitelywhattheauthormeans.13 Fromtheabove,thetranslatordecidestotranslate“charlatanism”as“江湖骗术”.4.2.4Translationof“falsification”“Falsification”,accordingtotheOxfordAdvancedLearner’sEnglish-ChineseDictionary,means“falsifyingorbeingfalsified;orchangemadeinordertodeceive”.(1)“…bystudying,notthesuccesses,butthefalsificationsofanidea.”Translation:“……研究对象不能是一个理念所取得的成功，而应该是其对事实的歪曲。”(2)“Andwewillseethatwhatthemechanistsdoissimplyignorethefalsifications,justlikethetraditionalpseudoscientists.”Translation:“我们会发现，机械论者与传统的伪科学家没什么两样，只是有意忽略了这些歪曲。”(3)“Justasimportantishowpeoplereacttothesefalsifications.”Translation:“而人们对这些歪曲的反应也同样重要。”InChinese,peopleoftenuse“歪曲事实”or“扭曲真相”whentheyrefertoabehaviorthatfraudulentlyaltersthetruthorfact,especiallytodeceive.But,ifseenalone,“扭曲”willgivepeopleotherimaginationsbesideswhatissaidabove,suchasinphysics.AccordingtoModernChineseDictionary,“歪曲”means“故意改变或曲解”.And“扭曲”means“物体因外力作用而扭转变形,也用于比喻,把事实、形象等弄歪曲”.So,wecansee,thereisaslightdifferencebetween“歪曲”and“扭曲”.And“歪曲”fitsbetterhere.Thus,thetranslatordecidestotranslate“falsification”as“歪曲”.14 4.3TranslationofComplexSentences4.3.1InversionInversetranslationisatranslationsstrategyinwhichthetranslationbeginsfromthebacktothefrontofthesourcetext,whentheEnglishexpressionorderdoesnotconformtotheChinesehabit.(1)“Mechanismisthebeliefthateverythingcanberepresentedasahierarchicalstructure;thatis,asastructureofthingswithinthings.”Translation：“机械论认为，所有事物都能用一物套一物的等级结构表示。”Thissentenceconsistsofamainclause,anattributiveclauseandacomplementclause.Themainclauseis“Mechanismisthebelief”.Atfirst,thetranslatoradoptedthemethodofliteraltranslationtoinsurethatthetargettextisinaccordancewiththesourcetextintermsofform:“机械论是这样一种观念，它认为所有事物都能用一种等级结构表示，即一种一物套一物的结构。However,althoughthemeaningofthesourcetextisdelivered,thetargettextissomewhatbluntandunnatural.ItdoesnotconformtotheChineseexpression,andaffectsthereadabilityofthetranslation.Afterproofreading,thetranslatordecidestoadoptthemethodofinversetranslation.Themodifiedtargettextisnotonlysmoothandcoherent,butalsoinlinewiththelogicofthesourcetext.(2)“Sentencesappeartoformaneathierarchyofclausesandwordsonlyifwetakeintoaccountthesyntacticstructureandignorethemeaningofthewords.”Translation:“只有在忽略词语含义，只考虑句法结构的前提下，句子才能被视为一个由分句和词语组成的层次分明的结构。”Thissentenceconsistsofamainclauseandanadverbialclause.Themainclauseis“Sentencesappeartoformaneathierarchyofclausesandwords”.Andtheadverbialclauseis“onlyifwetakeintoaccountthesyntacticstructureandignorethemeaningofthewords”.15 IfliteraltranslationisusedintranslatingtheEnglishsentence,anunnaturalChineseversionwillbeproduced:“句子似乎形成了层次分明的分句及词语机构，但这只有在只考虑句法结构，而忽略词语含义的前提下才有可能。”Apparently,theadverbialclause,thepreconditionofthemainclause,shouldbeputbeforethemainclause.Sothetranslatordecidestouseinversionintranslatingthissentence.(3)“Formalreductionismstillclaimsthis,althoughtheideaissoabsurdthatmostscientiststodayavoiddiscussingit.”Translation:“虽然这一点很荒谬，当今大多数科学家对此都避而不谈，但形式还原论仍旧这样认为。”Thissentenceconsistsofamainclauseandanadverbialclauseofconcession.Themainclauseis“Formalreductionismstillclaimsthis.”Andtheadverbialclauseis“althoughtheideaissoabsurdthatmostscientiststodayavoiddiscussingit.”ThisisatypicalexampletoshowthedifferencebetweenChineseandEnglishintermsofthesemanticfocus.Asitssemanticfocus,themainclauseoftheEnglishsentenceisputinthehead,asisthehabitoftheEnglishexpression.Iftranslatedliterally,theChineseversionwouldbe“如今，形式还原论仍旧这样认为，尽管这一点很荒谬，当今大多数科学家对此都避而不谈。”ThisdoesnotconformtothehabitoftheChineseexpression,inwhichthesemanticfocusshouldbeputinthetail.Sotheliteraltranslationissomewhatlengthyandawkward,withtoomuchlaggingattributiveinformation.4.3.2DivisionInsomecomplexEnglishsentences,themainclauseandsubordinateclause,orthemainclauseandthemodifierarenotverycloselyrelated.Ifthetranslatorconveystheexactoriginalformofthesourcetext,thetranslationwillappearlengthyandjerky.Soclausesandphrasesinlongsentencescanbetranslatedasaseparatesentence.16 Even,thetranslatorcanaddsomeextrawordstomakethetranslationsemanticallycoherent.(1)“Then,wedivideeachcategoryintoseveralsmalleronesonthebasisofasecondattributeandsoonuntilwereachsomecategorieswheretheentitiessharealltheirimportantattributesandarethereforeverysimilar.”Translation:“在每个类别中，我们再根据另外一个属性继续划分，以此类推，直到同一类别实体的主要属性均相同，即实体彼此十分相似。”Itcanbeseenthatthebackboneofthissentenceis“wedivideeachcategoryintoseveralsmallerones…”,butthetwoattributiveclausesmaketheoriginalsentenceseeminglyverycomplex.Becausetheadverbialclausesofconditionaretoolong,sotheycanbebrokenupintoseveralparts:“wedivideeachcategoryintoseveralsmalleronesonthebasisofasecondattribute”,“untilwereachsomecategories”,“wheretheentitiessharealltheirimportantattributes”and“andarethereforeverysimilar”.(2)“Asocietymayreachapointinitsevolutionwhereenoughknowledgehasbeenaccumulatedtoattainbetterexplanationsthanwhatthemythscanprovide.”Translation:“当社会进化到一定程度时，人们已经积累了足够多的知识，可以做出比神话更好的解释。”Themainclauseofthesentenceis“Asocietymayreachapointinitsevolution...”Theword“point”ismodifiedbyanattributiveclausewiththeintroducer“where”.Thisattributiveclausehastwomeanings:a.knowledgeaccumulated;b.attainbetterexplanations.Astheattributiveclauseiscomparativelylongandcomplex,thewholesentencecanbetranslatedastwoseparatesentences.Someextrawordsincluding“人们”areaddedtomakethetranslationsemanticallycoherent.(3)“Theobsessionwithfindingamechanisticrepresentationforeveryaspectoftheworldisespeciallysillyinviewofthefactthatitisquiteeasytoseewhymechanismcannotexplaineveryphenomenon.”17 Translation:“机械论无法解释所有现象，原因显而易见，有鉴于此，那些痴迷于用机械论表现世界方方面面的做法就显得尤为愚蠢。”ThebackboneoftheEnglishsentenceis“Theobsessionissilly.”“Withfindingamechanisticrepresentationforeveryaspectoftheworld”isanattributiveclauseoftheword“obsession”.And“inviewofthefactthatitisquiteeasytoseewhymechanismcannotexplaineveryphenomenon”isanadverbialclauseofcause.ThisisyetanothertypicalexampletoshowthedifferenceChineseandEnglish.ThehabitofEnglishexpressiontendstoputallinformationintoonecomplexandlongsentence.Readersneedtosortoutthesentencestructuretounderstanditsmeaning.18 ChapterFiveConclusionInthischapter,thetranslatorconcludesthelessonshedrawsthroughthewholetranslationprocess,aswellasthegeneralchallengesencountered.Thenthetranslatorlistsanumberofunsolvedproblems,whicharemainlyspecializedtermswithaprofessionalbackgroundinphilosophy,sociology,etc.5.1ExperienceandLessonsFromthistranslationpractice,thetranslatorcangetacertainunderstandingofpoliticalscienceresearchabroadaswellasrelevantprofessionalvocabularies.Inaddition,asdeterminingthenatureofthesourcetext,thetranslatorneedstohaveanoverviewofthetexttypetheoryandthendecidethemaintranslationstrategiesaccordingly.AccordingtoNewmark’stranslationtheory,whenitcomestothetranslationofaninformationaltext,thetargettextreader-orientedcommunicativetranslationstrategy,whichusesacombinationoftranslationskillstoensuretheaccuracyandreadabilitywithanemphasisonthedeliveryofthecontentofthesourcetext,isrecommended.Thewholetranslationprocesscanbesummedupasthreestages:understanding,expressingandproofreading.Asmoothexpressionisbasedonthein-depthunderstandingofthesourcetext.Sothetranslatorthoroughlyreadthesourcetextforacoupleoftimestoseizeitscoreidea.Thenthetranslatoranalyzestheoverallstructureandplanningofthesourcetexttogetaholdoftheauthor"slogicinferenceability.Finallythetranslatorcheckstherelevantbackgroundinformationandmanagestotranslatethesourcetext.Agoodtranslationalsorequiresthetranslator’srigorousandseriousattitude,otherwiselow-levelerrorsareapttohappeninthetranslation.19 AlthoughthelanguageofthetargettextisChinese,thetranslatorstillfeelsalimitedabilityofChineseexpression,especiallyinhandlingphraseandsentencearrangement.Therefore,afurtherChineselearningisamusttoproduceabetterversionoftranslation.Proofreadingisanindispensablepartofthetranslation.Itincludesthereviewsbothbythetranslatorandothers.Althoughthetranslatorisverycarefulthroughoutthewholetranslationprocess,theremaystillexistpretermissionsandinappropriatewordsandexpressionsinthetargettext.Thetranslatormanagedtoavoidthesepossiblemistakes,andonestepfurtherdeepenedtheunderstandingofthesourcelanguageandelaborationofthetargetlanguage.Inaddition,teamworkisalsoimportantforagoodtranslation.Thetranslator’sdiscussionwiththeteachersandclassmatesismorethanhelpfulinsolvingandcorrectingsomeunderstanding-relatedproblems.5.2UnsolvedProblemsAsthetranslator’sabilityislimitedintermsoftranslating,gatheringrelatedbackgroundinformationandunderstandingthesource,thetargettextmayappearawkwardandstiff.Besides,semanticfuzzinessisapttohappenduetovaguedescriptions,ambiguousreferencesinthesourcetext.Forexample,inthefollowingsentence“Thetermmechanismderivesfromthefactthatintheseventeenthcentury,whenthisphilosophywasestablished,theelementaryentitieswerebelievedtobethesimplestmechanicalentities;namely,bitsofmatter”,and“Topreventtheenvironmentalproblems,therefore,wewouldhavetoreduceourprosperityevenmorethanwewouldhavetoinordertopreventourdehumanization.”Still,foralackofprofessionalknowledgeinphilosophy,sociologyandhistory,thetranslatorisnotcompletelysureaboutthetranslationofsomespecializedwordsandphrases.Andthosetranslationsaretoopentoquestion,including“entity”,20 “charlatanism”,“falsification”and“bitsofmatter”.Thetranslatorwelcomesanycommentsandcommunicationinthisconnection.21 ReferencesBassnett,Susan.(2010).TranslationStudies(thirdedition).Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.Jenny,William,&Chesterman,Andrew.(2004).TheMap:ABeginner’sGuidetoDoingResearchinTranslationStudies.Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguagesEducationPress.MarkShuttleworth&MoiraCowie.(2004).DictionaryofTranslationStudies.Shanghai:ShanghaiForeignLanguageEducationPress.Martin,J.(1993).PrinciplesofObject-OrientedAnalysisandDesign.NewJersey:PTRPrenticeHall,40.Munday,J.(2001).IntroducingTranslationStudies:TheoriesandApplication.London:Routledge.Newmark,P.(1981).ApproachestoTranslation.NewYork:PrenticeHall.Newmark,P.(1988).ATextbookofTranslation.LondonPrenticeHallInternational(UK)Ltd.Vermeer,H&Reiss,K.(1984).GroundworkforaGeneralTheoryofTranslation.Berlin:WalterdeGruyter.曹明伦.(2013).英汉翻译二十讲.北京:商务印书馆.何刚强.(2012).笔译理论与技巧.北京:外语教学与研究出版社.姬艳婷.(2014).论哲学文本翻译.英语广场,08(044),28-29.李长栓.(2012).非文学翻译理论与实践.北京:中国对外翻译出版公司.李冶.(2010).纽马克的文本分类及其翻译方法探讨.疯狂英语(教师版),3,197-201.廖七一.(2000)当代西方翻译理论探索.南京：译林出版社.石春让,王江超.(2012).西方哲学经典文本的翻译目标和策略.中国翻译,2,104-106.孙周兴.(2012).存在与超越：西方哲学汉译的困境及其语言哲学意蕴.中国社会科学,9,28-42.22 AppendixISourceTextTheMechanisticMyth11Inthisbookweareconcernedwithoneparticularmyth–themechanisticmyth;andweareespeciallyconcernedwithitslatestmanifestation–thesoftwaremyth.Mechanismisthebeliefthateverythingcanberepresentedasahierarchicalstructure;thatis,asastructureofthingswithinthings.Thisistrue,wearetold,becauseeveryentityisnecessarilymadeupofsimplerentities,whichareintheirturnmadeupofevensimplerones,andsoon,downtosomebasicbuildingblocks.Thus,ifwewanttounderstandacomplexphenomenon,allwehavetodo–accordingtothemechanisticdoctrine–isdiscoverwhatsimplerphenomenamakeitup.Then,foreachoneofthose,wemustdiscoverwhatphenomenamakeitup,andsoon.Clearly,ifwecontinuethisprocesstolowerandlowerlevelsofcomplexity,weareboundtoreach,eventually,phenomenasimpleenoughtounderstandintuitively.So,byunderstandingthosesimplephenomenaandtheprocessofsimplificationthatrevealedthem,wewillunderstandtheoriginal,complexphenomenon.Ultimately,workinginthisfashion,everythingthatexistsintheworldcanbeunderstood.Similarly,ifwewanttobuildacomplicatedmachine,allwehavetodoisdesignitasacombinationofsubassemblies.Becausethesubassembliesontheirownaresimplerthanthewholemachine,theyareeasiertodesignandmake.Then,wedesignthesubassembliesthemselvesascombinationsofsimplersubassemblies,thelatterascombinationsofevensimplerones,andsoon,downtosomesmallpartsthatcanbemadedirectly.Ifwewanttostudyasetofrelatedentities–thepeopleinanorganization,thepartsstoredinawarehouse,thevarioustypesofanimals–allwehavetodoisdepictthemwithahierarchicalclassification.Wedividethemfirstintoseveralcategoriesinsuchawaythatalltheentitiesinacategoryshareacertainattribute.Then,wedivideeachcategoryintoseveralsmalleronesonthebasisofasecondattribute,andsoon,untilwereachsomecategorieswheretheentitiessharealltheirimportantattributes23 andarethereforeverysimilar.Inthecaseofananimalclassification,forexample,wemaydividethemintowildanddomestic,thedomesticonesintotypeslikehorses,chickens,anddogs,andfinallyeachtypeintovariousbreeds.Ifwewonderhowlinguisticcommunicationworks,westartbynotingthatlanguageismadeupofsentences,sentencesaremadeupofclauses,andclausesaremadeupofwords.Wordscorrespondtothefactsthatexistintheworld–nounsforobjects,verbsforactions,adjectivesforproperties,andsoon.Thus,sinceeverythingintheworldcanberepresentedasahierarchicalstructure,itseemsthatwhatwedowhencommunicatingiscreatehierarchicalstructuresoflinguisticelementswhichcorrespondtothestructuresthatexistintheworld.Finally,ifwewanttocreatelargeandcomplexsoftwareapplications,wemuststartbybreakingthemdownintomodules.Wethenbreakdowneachmoduleintosmallerones,andsoon,untilwereachsomesimplesoftwareconstructs,whichwecanprogramdirectly.Thismethod,clearly,allowsustoimplementthemostcomplexapplicationswithskillsnogreaterthanthoserequiredtoprogramthesmallestconstructs.※Itappears,thus,thatthemechanistsareright:everythingintheworldcanindeedberepresentedwithahierarchicalstructure.Theexplanationforthisversatilityliesinthetwoprinciplesthatconstitutethemechanisticphilosophy:reductionismandatomism.Reductionismassuresusthateverythingcanberepresentedasacombinationofsimplerthings;atthesametime,atomismassuresusthatthereisanendtothisreduction,thatwewilleventuallyreachsomeelementaryentities,whichcannotbefurtherdividedintosimplerones.Together,therefore,theseprinciplesassureusthateveryproblemcanbesolved.Theterm“mechanism”derivesfromthefactthatintheseventeenthcentury,whenthisphilosophywasestablished,theelementaryentitieswerebelievedtobethesimplestmechanicalentities;namely,bitsofmatter.Allphenomena,inotherwords–fromthoseencounteredinthestudyofmechanicstothoseencounteredinthestudyofmindsandsocieties–werebelievedtobereducible,ultimately,tothephenomenaassociatedwiththemotionofbitsofmatter.Formalreductionismstillclaimsthis,althoughtheideaissoabsurdthatmostscientiststodayavoiddiscussingit.Inanycase,rigorousmechanism–thatis,a24 reductiontotrulyelementaryentities–istoodifficulttopractise,soitisaneasiervariantthathasbeenadoptedinuniversitiesas“themethodofscience.”Thisformofmechanismemployspartialreductionism,andacademicslikeitbecauseitcanmaketrivialactivitiesresemblescientificresearch.Thus,toexplainagivenphenomenonwenolongerhavetoactuallyreduceittosomebasic,indivisibleentities;wearefreetoendthereductionatanyconvenientlevel,andsimplycallthoseentitieselementary.Theoriesgroundedonthismethodexplainnothing,ofcourse;buttheylookscientific,sothemethodisverypopular.Mechanismisalsodescribedasamethodthatleadstopreciseandcompleteexplanations–mathematicalexplanations,inparticular.Itiseasytoseewhymathematicalmodelsarelogicallyequivalenttothehierarchicalstructuresofmechanism:Mathematicalsystemsarethemselvesbasedonhierarchicalstructures.Inagivensystem,acomplextheoremcanbeexpressedasacombinationofsimplertheorems,whichcanthenbereducedtoevensimplerones,andsoon,untilwereachthepremises,axioms,andbasicelementsuponwhichthesystemisfounded.Thus,sincewecanalwaysinventamathematicalsystemwhoseentitiescorrespondtoentitiesfromtherealworld,aphenomenonthatcanberepresentedwithahierarchicalstructurecanalsoberepresentedmathematically.Andindeed,thoseaspectsoftheworldthathavebeensuccessfullyexplainedthroughreductionismandatomismalsohaveexact,mathematicalmodels.Theyincludethesubjectsstudiedbyscienceslikephysics,chemistry,andastronomy,andtheirapplications–engineering,manufacturing,construction.Mechanismandmathematics,however,havebeenfarlesssuccessfulinotherareas.Scienceslikebiology,physiology,andmedicinebenefittosomeextentfrommechanistictheories,buttheirmainproblemsarenon-mechanistic.Asforthosesciencesthatstudyhumanphenomena–psychology,sociology,linguistics,economics,politics,history,anthropology–theirproblemsarealmostentirelynon-mechanistic.Finally,oursoftware-relatedactivities,despitetheirdependenceoncomputersandhenceonengineering,entaillargelynon-mechanisticproblems.Sothemechanisticprinciplesonlyappeartobeuniversal.Inreality,theyareusefulforsomephenomenaanduselessforothers.Inthreehundredyearsofmechanisticphilosophy,notonemechanisticmodelwassuccessfulinthehumansciences.Countlessmechanistictheorieshavebeenadvanced,andmorearebeingadvancedtodaythaneverbefore,butwhenatheoryfailsnoonetriestounderstand25 thereason.Theresponse,invariably,istostartworkingonanothermechanistictheory.Reductionismandatomismhavebeensosuccessfulinthosefieldswheretheydoworkthatscienceisnowuniversallyidentifiedwithmechanism.Formostofus,sciencemeanssimplytheattempttoextendthesuccessofmechanismtoeveryotheraspectoftheworld.Soanindividualisperceivedasscientistsimplyifpursuingamechanistictheory.Noonecareswhetherthetheoryworksornot,orwhethermechanismisvalidatallinthatparticularfield.Thus,whileknownasthemethodofscience,mechanismisnowlargelythemethodofcharlatanism.2Theobsessionwithfindingamechanisticrepresentationforeveryaspectoftheworldisespeciallysillyinviewofthefactthatitisquiteeasytoseewhymechanismcannotexplaineveryphenomenon.Allthattheresearchershavetodoisstudywithanopenmindanyoneoftheirfailures.For,whenmechanismfails,thereasonisalwaysthesame:thephenomenonistoocomplextoberepresentedwithaneatstructureofthingswithinthings.Wewillexaminethesefailuresinthefollowingchapters,butfromwhatwehavediscussedsofarwecanalreadyrecognizewhymechanismislimited.Inthehierarchicalstructurethatisthemechanisticrepresentationofaphenomenon,whatdeterminestherelationsbetweenlevelsisthetotalityofattributespossessedbythestructure’selements.Thus,forthestructuretoprovideanexactandcompleteexplanation,theelementsmustpossesstheseattributesinsuchawaythattherelationsweseeinthestructurearetheonlyrelationsbetweenthem.Butthisisrarelytrue.Theentitiesthatmakeuptheworldpossessmanyattributes,andarethereforeinterrelatedinmanydifferentways.Forcertaintypesofphenomena,though,afewoftheseattributes,andtheresultingrelations,aremuchmoreimportantthantheothers;and,sometimes,theseattributesalsohappentodefineahierarchicalrelationship.Thus,ifweagreetoignoretheotherattributes,ahierarchicalstructurewillprovideausefulapproximationofreality.Forthesephenomena,then,wenotethatmechanistictheorieswork.Puttingthisinreverse,forcertaintypesofphenomenatheotherattributescannotbeignored,sothephenomenacannotbeusefullyapproximatedwithahierarchicalstructure;forthosephenomena,then,wenotethatmechanistictheoriesfail.26 Recalltheearlierexamples.Hierarchicalclassificationsofthingsarepossibleonlyifwetakeintoaccountsomeoftheirattributes(oneattribute,orasmallsetofattributes,perlevel)andignoretheothers.Itisimpossibletoincludealltheirattributesinoneclassification.Thus,animalscanbedividedintowildanddomestic,intotypes,andintobreeds,aswesaw.Butthisisjustonewaytorepresentthem.Thebiologicalclassification–dividinganimalsintoclasses,orders,families,genera,andspecies–isbasedondifferentattributes,andtheresultinghierarchyisdifferent.Tigersandhorsesbelongtodifferentcategories(wildanddomestic)inoneclassification,buttothesamecategory(classofmammals)intheother.Clearly,therearemanywaystoclassifyanimals,allvalidanduseful;andeachclassificationcantakeintoaccountonlysomeoftheirattributes.Itisimpossibletorepresentalltheirattributesinonehierarchicalstructure.Thetotalityofanimalsandtheirattributesis,therefore,anon-mechanisticphenomenon.Amechanisticrepresentation–onestructure–isvalidonlyifweagreetostudyanimalsfromonenarrowperspective;itbecomesuselessassoonasweremembertheirotherattributes.Similarly,wecanrepresentanapplianceasahierarchyofpartsandsubassembliesonlyifwerestrictourselvestothoseattributesthatdeterminetheirpositionandfunctioninthatappliance.For,thesamepartsandsubassembliesformatthesametimeotherhierarchicalstructures,basedonotherattributes–theircost,orsupplier,orlifeexpectancy.Wepurposelydesignappliancesinsuchawaythattheotherattributescanbeignoredinthemanufacturingprocess.Buttheattributesareimportantwhenwestudytheappliancesfromotherperspectives.Andtheotherhierarchiesareusuallydifferentfromtheonethatrepresentsthephysicalandfunctionalattributes;forexample,partsmadebythesamesuppliermaybelongindifferentsubassemblies.Itisimpossibletorepresentthepartsandalltheirattributesinonehierarchicalstructure.Again,amechanisticrepresentationisvalidonlyifwecanrestrictourselvestooneview.Sentencesappeartoformaneathierarchyofclausesandwordsonlyifwetakeintoaccountthesyntacticstructureandignorethemeaningofthewords.For,thethingsrepresentedbywordspossessmanyattributes,andarethereforerelatedthroughmanystructures.Consequently,thewordsthemselvesarerelatedthroughmanystructures,whicharedifferentfromthesyntacticone.Itisimpossibletodepict,withasyntacticstructurealone,everythingthatasentencecanconvey.27 Finally,softwareapplicationsappeartoformperfecthierarchiesofsmallerandsmallerentities(modules,blocksofstatements,statements)onlyifwestudythemfromtheperspectiveofoneattribute.Theattributesofasoftwareentityaresuchthingsasfiles,variables,subroutines,andbusinesspractices.Softwareentitiespossessmanyattributes,andarethereforerelatedthroughmanystructures–onestructureforeachattribute.Theprogrammingtheoriesattempttosimplifyprogrammingbyforcingustovieweachapplicationasaneathierarchicalstructureofsoftwareentities.Thus,sinceapplicationsconsistinfactofmultiple,simultaneousstructures,itisnotsurprisingthatthetheorieskeepfailing.※Mechanism,then,isnotthesolidscientificconceptitisbelievedtobe.Itsprestigeisduelargelytoitsearlysuccessesintheexactsciences,andespeciallytoitssuccessesrelativetothescholasticdoctrinesoftheMiddleAges,whichitwasdisplacing.Justasthereligiousphilosophyhadbeenacceptedforcenturiesastheabsolutetruth,themechanisticphilosophywasseennowasanabsolutemethod–amethodthatcanexplaineverything.Mechanismbecame,ineffect,anewreligion.Itseemsthatsocietiescannotexistwithoutsomegreatideastoinspirethem–ideasthatpeoplecanacceptblindly.Mostofusperformbothrationalandirrationalacts,butthetwokindsappeartousequallyimportant.Intheeasierpursuits,whenourknowledgeguaranteessuccess,wearecompletelyrationalandfollowonlysoundandprovenprinciples.Butindifficultpursuits,whenourknowledgeisinsufficient,webehaveirrationally.Irrationality,thus,emergeswhenwehavenoproventheoriestorelyon:ifwewishtounderstandagivenphenomenonbutlackthenecessaryknowledge(andif,inaddition,webelievethatallphenomenacanbeunderstoodasweunderstandthesimpleones),weareboundtoinventafantasticconceptanduseitasexplanation.Thisishowmythsareborn.Peoplearealwaysinneedofmyths,becausethereisalwaysmuchthatisunknownorunpredictable,inanysociety.Consequently,peoplealwaysdisplayablendofrationalandirrationalthinking,rationalandirrationalactivities.Weliketojustifyouractsbybasingthemonacceptedconcepts,butwearelesskeenonjustifyingtheconceptsthemselves.Asaresult,weperceivethetwokindsofactivities,rationalandirrational,asequallyeffective.Theformerbecomepursuitslikescienceandbusiness,whilethelattermakeuppursuitslikemagicandsuperstitions.28 Buttheindividualactivitiesthatmakeupthesepursuitsareverysimilar:theyarealwayslogicalandconsistent,alwaysgroundedonanacceptedconcept.Thedifferenceisonlythattheconceptisavalidtheoryinonecaseandafantasyintheother.Thus,aswewillseeinthecourseofthisbook,itispossibleforaperson,andevenanentiresociety,toengageinactivitiesthatareperfectlylogicalindividually,whilethebodyofactivitiesasawholeconstitutesadelusion.So,tojudgewhetheracertainpursuitisrationalornot,itisnotenoughtostudythelogicoftheindividualactivitieswhichmakeupthatpursuit.Inchapter3wewilllearnthatthebestwaytodistinguishbetweenrationalandirrationalpursuitsisbystudying,notthesuccesses,butthefalsificationsofanidea.Justasimportantishowpeoplereacttothesefalsifications.Seriousresearchersreactbydoubtingtheidea.Mostpeople,however,reactbyignoringthefalsifications,orbycontrivingwaystocoverthemup.Theyneveradmitthattheideahasbeenrefuted.Thisshowsthat,forthem,theideaisnotarationalpursuitbutabelief.Astrology,forinstance,hasbeenaroundforthousandsofyears,andwecouldalwaysshowthatitdoesn’twork.Allwehavetodoisnotethepredictionsmadeinthecourseofayear,andthencounthowmanyactuallymaterialized.Believers,though,neverdothis.Similarly,todaywecannotethemechanisticclaimsinafieldlikelinguistics,economics,orsoftware,andcounthowmanyactuallymaterialize.But,again,believersneverdothis.Mechanismcontinuestobetrusted,regardlessofhowsuccessfulorunsuccessfulitis.Wewillseethatitispossibletodistinguishbetweenthetwotypesofthinking,thescientificandthepseudoscientific.Andwewillseethatwhatthemechanistsdoissimplyignorethefalsifications,justlikethetraditionalpseudoscientists.Thus,ourmechanistictheories–whileembracedbyfamousscientists,taughtinrespecteduniversities,andpractisedthroughoutsociety–forminrealityanewkindofpseudoscience.Theconclusionmustbethatmechanismdoesnotfunctionasscientificdoctrineinoursociety,butasmyth.Itispreciselythelackofdoubtsthatbetraysitsmythicalstatus.Whenamethodworks,wearenotafraidtodebateit,modifyit,orreplaceitwithabetterone.Onlyconceptsthatcannotbeprovedbecomeunquestionabletruths.Weremechanismperceivedmerelyasanimportantresearchmethod,wewouldrelyonitinthosefieldswhereitisuseful,andseekothermethodsinthosefieldswhereit29 fails.Butthisisnotwhatwesee.Mechanismisconsideredtheonlyvalidmethodofscience,inallfields.Academicsaretrainedtothinkmechanistically,andareexpectedtopursueonlymechanisticideas,regardlessofwhethertheseideasareusefulornot.Moreover,non-mechanisticideasaredismissedas“unscientific,”evenifshowntobeuseful.Wehaveredefinedscience,ineffect,tomeansimplythepursuitofmechanism.Andasaresult,ouracademicinstitutionshavedegeneratedintoaself-servingbureaucracy.Recalltheearlierquotations:modernsocietiesarefoundedonmyths,justliketheprimitiveones;mythsarethemostimportantformofcollectivethinking;mythsarethoughttoexpressabsolutetruth;mythsserveasmodelsandasjustificationforallhumanaction;andsoon.Thus,ifscienceanditsapplications–especiallythepursuitswecalltechnology–serveaswarrantforouractionsanddecisions,andifscienceisgroundedonmechanism,then,forus,mechanismservesthepurposeofmyth.Whenwejudgesomethingasimportantorunimportant,asusefuloruseless,asmoralorimmoral,asvalidorinvalid,simplybyinvokingascientificortechnologicalconcept,wejudgeitineffectbyinvokingthemechanisticmyth.33Mythscanbegood.Whenpeoplepossessonlylimitedknowledge,asinaprimitivesociety,mostphenomenatheyobserveareunexplainable.Theyhavenothingtolosethen,andmuchtogain,byattributingthesephenomenatosomemythicalpowers.Themythsreplacetheiranxietyandfearswithasenseofconfidenceandsecurity.Thefactthatthisconfidenceisbasedonfalseassumptionsdoesnotdetractfromthevalueofthemyths,sincetheprimitivescannotarriveatthecorrectexplanationinanycase.Iftheywishtounderstandwhatcausedacertaindisease,forexample,andtheyknownothingaboutmicroorganisms,theassumptionthatitwascausedbysins,ordemons,orblackmagic,isquiteeffective.Astheycannotcurethedisease,thesebeliefsprovideatleastthecomfortofknowingitsorigin.Withthiscomforttheyareinabetterpositiontofaceotherproblems,sotheycanaccomplishmoreinthosefieldsinwhichtheyareknowledgeable.Thankstotheimportanceofmyths,theindividualswhoprovidemythrelatedservices–magicians,shamans,astrologers–enjoygreatrespect.Theirknowledge,limitedasitistomyths,isnecessarilyspecious.Nevertheless,justasthemyths30 themselvesfulfilavitalfunctioninsocietywhilebeinginfactunreal,theservicesprovidedbytheseexpertsarecrucialevenwhilebeingspecious.Theexperts,asaresult,becomeapowerfulelite.Butthispositioniswell-deserved:ifasocietybenefitsfromitsmyths,andifthepracticeofmythsrequiresacertainexpertise,thentheindividualswhopossessthisexpertiseareasessentialtosocietyasthemythsthemselves.Thus,whenthemythsaregoodforasociety,anelitewhoseexistencedependsonthesemythsisagoodelite.Myths,however,canalsobebad.Asocietymayreachapointinitsevolutionwhereenoughknowledgehasbeenaccumulatedtoattainbetterexplanationsthanwhatthemythscanprovide.Mostlikely,thenewexplanationsincludemythicalelementsoftheirown,ratherthanbeingcompletelyrational.Evenso,beingclosertoreality,theyconstituteanimprovement.Inretrospect,then,thepracticalbenefitsofabandoningtheoldmythsareobvious.Buttheactualtransitionisdifficult.Theoldmythsareusuallypartofabeliefsystemthathadguidedsocietyforgenerations,andittakesmorethanthepromiseofanimprovementtoabandonthem.Sothesamemythsthathithertoservedsocietyarenowturningagainstit,bypreventingitfromenjoyingthebenefitsofthenewknowledge.Thegoodmythsbecomebad.Theelitetoo–thoseexpertswhoseprivilegedpositiondependsonthemyths–isnowturningagainstsociety.Becausetheywouldberedundantwithouttheoldmyths,theexpertscontinuetopraisetheirvalueevenassocietynolongerneedsthem.Whereasformerlytheywerepractisingthosemyths,nowtheyareenforcingthem.Theydescribethisstruggleasanefforttopreservesomeprovensocialvalues,butinrealityitistheirownprivilegesthattheywanttopreserve.Thus,whenthemythsturnfromgoodtobad,theelitetoobecomesbad.Thebest-knowntransitioninWesternhistoryistheRenaissanceandtheScientificRevolution,whichtookplacebetweenthefifteenthandseventeenthcenturies.Thisiswhenmodernscience,expressedthroughthemechanisticphilosophy,replacedthereligiousmythsthathaddominatedEuropeformorethanathousandyears.Oneofthemostremarkableaspectsofthistransitionistheferocitywithwhichthechurch–guardianoftheoldmyths–foughttopreventit.Previously,thechurchwasperhapsagoodelite,insofarasmythsliketheideaofsalvationcouldprovidesomecomfortinanagewhensciencehadlittletooffer.Butnowthattherealbenefitsofthegrowingknowledgeexceededtheemotionalbenefitsofmyths,theonlywaythechurchcouldmaintainitspowerwasbysuppressingthatknowledge.This31 wasthetaskoftheInquisition.Thus,regardlessofhowonefeelsaboutthevalueofthereligiousmythsinearliertimes,weallagreethatobstructingthetruth,andtorturingandburningaliveinnocentpeople,isnotsomethingthatagoodelitewoulddo.Themyths,andwiththemtheelite,hadbecomebad.※Theforegoinganalysisshouldhelpustorecognizethatasimilartransitionistakingplaceinourowntime.Whatisbeingdefendednowismechanism–theverymyththatwasbeingrepressedintheearliertransition.Andtheelitestrugglingtomaintainitspowerisembodiednowinoureducationalinstitutions–ouruniversities,inparticular.Theacademicbureaucratsarethegreatestbeneficiariesofthemechanisticmyth,asthismythaffordsthemaprivilegedpositioninsocietyregardlessofwhethertheiractivitiesareusefulornot.Soitisnotsurprisingtoseethemdefendthemechanisticideologyasfiercelyasthechurchwasdefendingearlierthereligiousone.Whenastrologywasimportant,astrologersretainedtheirpositionregardlessofwhethertheirpredictionswerecorrectornot;whenalchemywasimportant,alchemistscontinuedtobetrustedregardlessofwhethertheirtransmutingmethodsworkedornot;andwhenreligionwasimportant,thechurchbureaucracyretaineditspowerregardlessofwhetheritspromisesofsalvationmaterializedornot.Today,mechanismisimportant,sowecontinuetotrustandrespecttheacademicbureaucratsevenasthemechanistictheoriesarefailing.Aswewillseeinthefollowingchapters,itisquiteeasytoprovethatthesetheoriesarefraudulent;andyetwetreattheirdefendersasscientists,notascharlatans.Aspartofitspower,theacademicelitecontrolseducation.Andithasusedthismonopolisticpositiontoturntheprocessofeducationintoaprocessofindoctrination:allwearetaughtiswhatcanbeexplainedmechanistically.Thus,whilepromotingknowledge,intelligence,andcreativity,theacademicelitehasredefinedthesequalitiestomean,nottheutmostthathumanmindscanattain,butmerelytheskillsneededtofollowthemechanisticideology:knowledgeofthelatestmechanistictheories,theintelligencetoappreciatethemechanisticprinciples,andthecreativitytoaccomplishataskwithmechanisticmethodsalone.Mechanismisnotjustpractised–32 itisenforced.Togetherwiththecorporations(theotherbeneficiariesofthemechanisticmyth),andprotectedbyirresponsiblegovernments,ouruniversitieshavebroughtaboutasocialorderthatis,ineffect,anewformoftotalitarianism.Totalitarianideologiesdifferindetail,buttheirgoalisalwaysthesame:tocreateaperfectsociety.Forus,thismeansasocietyfoundeduponsolid,mechanisticprinciples.Wehavealreadyprovedthevalueoftheseprinciplesincertainareas–intheexactsciences,forinstance,andinmanufacturing–soallwehavetodonowisextendtheirusetoeveryotheraspectofhumanlife.Hereishowwecanaccomplishthis:Sinceeverythingcanberepresentedwithhierarchicalstructures,wecanimproveourperformancebybreakingdownallchallengesintosimplerandsimplerones.Intheend,wewillonlyneedtodealwiththeterminalelementsofthesestructures;thatis,withtrivialissues.Inpractice,thestructureswillbeembodiedintheoriesandmethods,andtheterminalelementswillbesomesimplerules.Thus,justbyobeyingtheserules,anyonewillbeabletoperformtasksthatpreviouslydemandedmuchknowledgeandexperience.Betterstill,oncewerepresentourproblemswithhierarchicalstructures,wecanbuilddevicesthatembodythesestructures.Then,tosolveagivenproblem,allweneedtoknowishowtooperateadevice.Theskillsrequiredtooperatedevicesareeasierthanthoserequiredtosolveproblems,sowewillallbemoreproductive:first,becausedeviceseliminatethelengthylearningperiodsweneededinthepast,andsecond,becausedevicesarefaster,moreaccurate,andmoredependablethanhumans.Finally,withourlatestinvention,computers,wecanimplementeventhosestructuresthataretoolargeortoocomplexforthetraditionaldevices.Thankstothepowerandversatilityofsoftware,practicallyeveryhumanendeavourcanbetranslatedintoaseriesofeasyacts–theactsrequiredtooperateasoftwaredevice.Fromsimplecalculationstodifficultdecisions,frompersonalconcernstobusinessissues,wecanhaveasoftwaredeviceforeverytask.Varioustypesofknowledgearenowbeingincorporatedintothesedevices,andmadeavailabletousthrougheasy-to-usemenus,lists,buttons,andthelike;inotherwords,throughahierarchicalstructureofselections,andselectionswithinselections,correspondingtothehierarchicalstructurethatistheknowledgeitself.So,justbypurchasingasoftwaredevice,wewillbeabletoperformalmostanytaskwithouthavingtodevelopthatknowledgeinourownminds.33 ※Ourideaofaperfectsociety,then,isonewhereallhumanaffairshavebeenreducedtothesimpleactsrequiredtofollowmethodsandtooperatedevices.Themethodsanddevicesaredevelopedbyvariouselites–expertswhoknowhowtotranslatethecomplexityoftheworldintoconceptssimpleenoughforustounderstand.Theresponsibilityoftheelitesistorepresenttheworldwithexact,mechanistictheories;andourresponsibilityistoobeythesetheories.Anythingthatcannotberepresentedmechanisticallyisunscientific,andhencedevoidofvalue.Thus,asourgoalisendlessprogress,wecannotaffordtospendanytimewithnon-mechanisticnotions,evenifwemightotherwiseenjoyit.Ifwedoubttheefficacyofthisscheme,weonlyneedtorecalltheprogresswehavemadeinourmanufacturingactivities.Fromthehandfulofsimpleconsumerproductsavailabletwohundredyearsago,andwhichfewpeoplecouldafford,wehavearrivedattoday’sastoundingarrayofsophisticatedproducts,whichalmostanyonecanafford.Andwehaveaccomplishedthis,notbyincreasing,butbyreducing,theknowledgeandskillsoftheworkerswhomaketheseproducts.Thesecretforthegreatprogressinmanufacturingisfound,aseveryoneknows,inconceptsliketheassemblyline(whichpermitsustoemployunskilledworkersandtocontroltheiroutput),divisionoflabourandnarrowspecialization(whichpermitustoreduceeachindividual’seducationandtraining,andhencethecostofemployment),and,ingeneral,fragmentationofthelabourprocess(whichreducesalltypesofworktosimple,routineactivities,eliminatingthedependenceonpersonalskillsorinitiative)andscientificmanagement(whichcreatesarigidenvironment,whereeveryoneisforcedtoworkinthemannerdictatedbyasuperior).Theseprinciplesare,clearly,anapplicationofthemechanisticideology:fromaratherhaphazardseriesofactivities,themanufacturingprocesshasbeenturnedintoanexactsystem–asystemthatcanberepresentedwithahierarchicalstructure.Inthisstructure,theelementsarethevariouscomponents,stages,persons,andactivities,andtheefficiencyofthisarrangementisassuredbythemechanisticconceptitself.Sotherecanbelittledoubtthat,tobeasefficientintheotherfieldsasweareinmanufacturing,wemustfollowthesameprinciples.Wemustmodifytheentiresocietytoresemble,sotospeak,agiantfactory:eachperson,eachact,eachthought,mustbedesignedtofunctionasanelementinagiantstructureofthingswithinthings.34 Wearecurrentlyintheprocessofimplementingthisideainoureducationalandbusinessactivities;andsoonwewillextendittoallsocialandpersonalaffairs.Thus,whilethismayseemparadoxical,itisafactthatifwewanttobecomemoreefficientwemustbelessknowledgeable,lessskilled,lessexperienced.Itisournaturaltendencytogainknowledgethatslowsprogress.Sowemuststoptryingtodevelopsuchold-fashionedqualitiesasexpertiseorindividuality,andadmitthatwecanaccomplishmorebybeinganinsignificantpartinagreatwhole.Wemustallowtheelites,whohaveprovedthevalueofthisideainfieldslikemanufacturing,todesignthatgreathierarchicalsocialstructureforus.Andwemustrestrictourselvestothoseactivitieswhichtheyprescribe.Thisideology–totalitarianism–isquiteold,infact,andwasalwaysappreciatedbyenlightenedleaders.Thereasonitseemsnewisthatonlyinthetwentiethcenturyitbecamepracticalonalargescale.Welearnedfromthesemistakes,however,andwerelynowonuniversitiesandcorporations,insteadofpoliticalinstitutions,toimplementit.Ourtotalitarianismisbetter,anditwillsucceed.44Despiteitsobviousbenefits,totalitarianismisnotwithoutcritics.Thefirstobjectionconcernstheprocessofdehumanizationthatinevitablyaccompaniesit.Thinkersofvariousoutlooks–philosophers,sociologists,science-fictionauthors–havebeenwarningusforahundredyearsthatwearebeingturnedintoautomatons.Thevisionofasocietywherehumanbeingsaretreatedaspartsofagiantmachine,andrestrictedtosomesimpleandrepetitiveacts,isnotveryappealing–evenifthisisdoneinthenameofefficiencyorprogress.Asanswertothisobjection,wepointtothegreatimprovementsinstandardoflivingandinlifeexpectancythatallsectionsofsocietyhaveenjoyedthankstototalitarianism.Thus,asinanysocialproject,ourdecisiontopursuethisideologyamountstoacompromise:wearetradingmoreandmoreaspectsofourhumanityforgreaterandgreaterprosperity.Thishasworkedoutwellsofar,andthereisnoreasontodoubtthatwecancontinuethistradeinthefuture.Besides,peopledon’tseemtomindthisdehumanization:followingrulesandmethodsiseasierthandevelopingexpertise,andmostofusarequitehappytobemerelypartsofawhole,asthisabsolvesusfromresponsibilityforouractsandchoices.35 Morerecently,asecondobjectionhasarisentothetotalitarianideology.Thisobjectionconcernstheenvironmentalproblemsassociatedwithinfiniteprogress.Specifically,weareremindedthat,evenifweagreetobecomefull-fledgedautomatonsinourunendingquestforprosperity,wemaynevergetthere.Growthislimitedbysuchfactorsasincreasingpollutionanddiminishingnaturalresources,sotheassumptionthatanideologywhichworkedinthepastwillcontinuetoworkinthefutureisinvalid.Inotherwords,ourideologyiswrong,notsomuchbecauseitdehumanizesus,butbecauseatthecurrentrateofgrowthwewilldestroyourselvesbyruiningtheenvironmentbeforewedoitbybecomingautomatons.Unlikethefirstone,thisobjectionisgaininginpopularity,owinglargelytotheeasewithwhichwecandeludeourselvesthatwecareabouttheenvironment.Allweneedtodoisreadbooksandarticles,watchtelevisiondocumentaries,anddiscusstheissuefromtimetotime–whilekeepingourlifestylesandexpectationsunchanged.Thisstratagempermitsustofeelconcernedandinvolved,withouthavingtogiveupanything.Inreality,anendlessincreaseinprosperityispossibleonlythroughanexponentialgrowthinproductionandconsumption.Topreventtheenvironmentalproblems,therefore,wewouldhavetoreduceourprosperityevenmorethanwewouldhavetoinordertopreventourdehumanization.Andwealreadysawwhatisourattitudeonthelatter.Peoplewhoagreetopayforprosperitybylivingtheirlivesasautomatonsarenotlikelytorenouncethesameprosperityforthebenefitoffuturegenerations.So,despiteitsapparentpopularity,thesecondobjectionwillnotstopthespreadoftotalitarianismanymorethanthefirstobjectiondidinthepast.Itisnotthesetwoobjectionsthatoughttopreoccupyus,however,butathirdone;namely,theriskthatthetotalitarianismwearebeingofferedmaynotbeatallwhatitissaidtobe.Webelievetheproblemissimplywhetherthepricewepayforprogressandprosperityistoohigh,whiletherealproblemiswhetherwearegettinganythingatallforthisprice.Theelitesjustifythetotalitarianideologybytellingusthatitisgroundedonmechanistic,andhencescientific,principles.Butiftheseprinciplesarebecominglessandlessuseful,theelitesaredeceivingus–regardlessofthepricewearewillingtopay.Thejustificationentailsasuccessionofideologies:mechanism,scientism,utopianism,totalitarianism.Thebeliefinmechanismleadstoscientism–theapplicationofmechanisticconceptsinthestudyofmindsandsocieties,wheretheycannotwork.Then,despitethefailureoftheirtheories,themechanistsconcludethat36 societycanbegreatlyimprovedbyactuallyimplementingthesetheories;so,scientismleadstoutopianism.Finally,everyoneagreesthattheonlypracticalwaytocarryoutthisprojectisthroughtotalitarianism:byallowinganelitetocontrolallaspectsofsociety.Totalitarianism,thus,isjustifiedbypointingtoitsorigin,mechanism.Ourinfatuationwithmechanismissostrongthatevenwhennoticingitsfailures,oritsharmfulconsequences,westilldonotquestiontheideologyitself.Soweacceptandrespecttheideaoftotalitarianism,evenwhencriticizingit,simplybecausewebelieveittobescientific.Wehavenoevidencethattotalitarianismworks,butwecannothelptrustingthosewhoadvocateit.55Thedecliningusefulnessofmechanismhasengenderedanewphenomenon:charlatanismpractisedinthenameofscienceorinthenameofbusiness.Thischarlatanismconsistsinthepromisetosolveanon-mechanisticproblemwithmechanisticmethods.Sincemechanismisuniversallyacceptedas“themethodofscience,”wetrustimplicitlyanyonewhoinvokesthemechanisticprinciples.Thus,oncewedecidedtomeasurethevalueofanideasolelybyitsmechanisticqualities,itbecameimpossibletodistinguishbetweenseriousmechanisticideasandmechanisticdelusions.Mechanisticdelusionshavealwaysbeenpartofourculture.Untilrecently,however,theirharmwasovershadowedbythemechanisticsuccesses.Today,fewerandfewerproblemshavesimple,mechanisticsolutions,sotheharmcausedbydelusionsexceedsthebenefitsderivedfromsuccesses.Totalitarianism,inparticular,isamechanisticdelusion.Weliketotalitarianismforthesamereasonwelikeallothermechanisticideas:becauseitofferswhatappearstobesimplesolutionstodifficultproblems.However,whilethepursuitofanordinarymechanisticdelusionmeansmerelyawasteofresources,thepursuitoftotalitarianismcanleadtothecollapseofsociety.For,iftheworldistoocomplextobeimprovedmechanistically,theclaimedbenefitsareafantasy,whilethepricewepayforthemisreal.Ourproblemsaregettingbigger,whileourmindsaregettingsmaller:ifwerestrictourselvestomechanisticthinking,weleaveournon-mechanisticcapabilities37 undeveloped;sowecopeperhapswiththesimple,mechanisticproblems,butthecomplex,non-mechanisticonesremainunsolved,andmayeventuallydestroyus.Inuniversities,thecharlatanismisseenintheactivityknownasresearch.Theruleissimple:anyworkthatfollowsthemechanisticprinciplesofreductionismandatomismisdeemedscientific,andisthereforelegitimate.Whethertheseprinciplesarevalidornotinagivenfield,orwhethertheresultingtheoriesworkornot,isimmaterial.Thus,whenfacedwithaprobleminthehumansciences,allonehastodoisperceiveitasahierarchicalstructure.Theproblemcanthenbebrokendownintosmallerandsmallerparts,untilreachingproblemssimpleenoughtodescribewithprecision.Butthismethod,borrowedfromtheexactsciences,failswhenappliedtohumanphenomena.Itfailsbecausehumanphenomenaconsist,notofonestructure,butofmultiple,interactingstructures.Sotheresearchersareadmiredfortherigourwithwhichtheystudythosesmallproblems,evenwhiletherealproblemremainsunsolved.Clearly,theironlydefenceisthattheyarefollowingthemechanisticprinciples.Butwhyshouldprinciplesthatareusefulinmodelingthematerialworldbeacceptedwithoutreservationinthestudyofmindsandsocieties?Assoonaswequestionthevalueofmechanisminthesefields,anyresearchprojectgroundedonmechanismchangesfromscientificpursuittomechanisticfantasy.Whatstandsbetweenperceivingtheseacademicsasscientistsorascharlatans,then,isonlyourblindacceptanceofthemechanisticideology.Inbusiness,thecharlatanismisseenintheactivityknownasmarketing.Theelites,wesaw,tellusthatourfuturemustbebasedonanendlessgrowthinproductionandconsumption,andthatthiscanonlybeachievedthroughmechanisticmethods.Butif,infact,thereislessandlessthatcanbediscoveredorimprovedmechanistically,theonlywaytoattaintherequiredgrowthisbyreplacingthemakingofusefulthingswiththemakingofwhatevercanbemademechanistically(thatis,efficientlyandprofitably).Toputthisdifferently,iftheoldexperts–scientists,inventors,entrepreneurs–cannotkeepupwithourdemandforgrowth,wemustreplacethemwithanewkindofexperts:charlatans,whoknowhowtomakeuselessthingsappearimportant,andtherebyhelpustodeludeourselvesthatoursystemisworkingjustasitdidinthepast.Thus,fromitsmodestoriginasacomplementtotrade,theprocessofsellinghasbecomemoreimportantthanthemerchandiseitself.Thefactthatitispossibletocheatpeople,topersuadethemtobuysomethingthatisnotwhatitappearstobe,is38 nowthedrivingforceoftheeconomy.Deceptiveadvertising–messagespurportingtoinformwhileinrealityexploitinghumanweaknessesandignorance–isnolongerlimitedtodomainslikefashionorcosmetics,butcoverspracticallyallproductsandservices.Dishonesttechniques(testimonialsandsuccessstories,backgroundmusic,picturesofhappyfaces,andthelike)arewidelyemployedinordertoinfluence,distract,andconfuse.Thesetechniquesarelogicallyequivalenttolying(theyareneededpreciselybecausetheusefulnessofthoseproductsandservicescannotbeproved),butwenolongernoticethis.Languageitselfhasceasedtobeameansofcommunication,andisusedasakindofweapon:wordsarecarefullychosen,nottoconveyinformation,buttodeceiveandtomanipulate.Finally,andmostdisturbingly,theideaof“selling”hastranscendedthedomainofcommerceandisnowfoundineveryactivitywherethereisanopportunitytoinfluencepeople.Fromwhatwesayinarésumétowhatgovernmentssayintheirpolicies,frombusinessmeetingstomilitarydecisions,fromlecturesandseminarstotelevisionnewsanddocumentaries,itisvitalthatweknowhowtopersuadeouraudience;thatis,howtomislead–howtousespecialeffectssoastomakeunimportantthingsappearimportant,andimportantthingsunimportant.Thefactthatwehavetoliesomuchoughttoworryus,oughttopromptustodoubtoursystem.Weneedmoreandmorelies,obviously,becauseourrealachievementsdonotfulfilourexpectations.WehaveexperiencedcontinuousgrowtheversincetheScientificRevolution,andourworldviewhasevolvedaccordingly:wehaveyettoacceptthefactthatthereisalimittodiscoveriesandimprovements.Wearestillmakingprogress,ofcourse,butataslowerandslowerrate.Sincetheexponentialgrowththatweareaccustomedtocannotbesustainedindefinitely,wearenowsupplementingtherealgrowthwithanimaginaryone,basedonfantasies.Butinsteadofinterpretingtheperpetualincreaseincharlatanismasevidencethatoursystemisfailing,weperceivethecharlatanismasanewsortofscience,oranewsortofbusiness,andhenceitsincreaseasprogress.Muchofthecurrentgrowth,thus,isactuallygrowthindelusions,andinthestupiditynecessaryinordertoacceptthesedelusions.Itisasif,havingrealizedthatthehumancapacityforintelligencedoesnotguaranteeinfinitegrowth,wearenowtryingtoachievethesamegrowthbyrelyinginsteadonthehumancapacityforstupidity.Likeoilandminerals,wetreatstupidityasakindofresource,assomethingthatwecanexploitandbenefitfrom.Tomakethemostofthisresource,though,39 humanbeingsmustbecarefullyindoctrinated,inordertoneutralizetheirnaturalcapacityforintelligence.Theincessantliesanddelusions,then,servetoreplacetherealitythatsurroundsuswiththefantasiesthat–accordingtotheelites–aretheworldwemuststrivetocreateinstead.※Tosummarize,themechanisticmythhasoutliveditsusefulness.Whatstartedasagoodmyth,helpingustoexpandourknowledgeoftheworld,hasbecomebad.Thesamequalitiesthatmakemechanismsuchausefulconceptarenowturningagainstus.For,mechanismcanonlyexplainsimplephenomena–thosethatcanberepresentedwithisolatedhierarchicalstructures;andintoday’sworldwearefacingmoreandmorecomplexphenomena,whichcanonlyberepresentedwithsystemsofstructures.Onereasonforthecomplexity,thus,isthattherearefewerandfewermechanisticphenomenalefttobeexplained.Ifwewanttoexpandourknowledgetoday,wemustincreasinglydealwiththosephenomenathatwechosetoignoreinthepast–whenthereweresomanysimple,mechanisticones,waitingtobestudied.Anotherreasonforthecomplexityisthat,aswekeepexpandingourknowledge,wearecreatingourselvesnew,non-mechanisticphenomena(thesoftwarephenomenaareanexample).Sothemechanisticmythworksagainstusbecauseitrestrictsustomechanisticthinkingwhileourmostimportantproblemsarenon-mechanistic.Thepastsuccessesofthemechanisticphilosophy,togetherwithitsirresistibleappeal,preventusfromnoticinghowlimitedmechanismreallyis.Wearetryingtoexplaineverythingmechanisticallywhilelessandlessismechanistic.Asaresult,wearewastingourresourcesonabsurdideas,neglectingtherealproblems.Onlymindscanprocesscomplexstructures.So,tocontendwithourcurrentproblems,wemustdevelopthehighestintelligenceandexpertisethathumanmindsarecapableof.Instead,themechanisticculturerestrictsustonovicelevels:wearetaughttotreateverychallengeassimple,isolatedstructures,soweareusingonlyourmechanisticcapabilities.Alongwiththemechanisticmyth,ourelitestoohaveturnedfromgoodtobad.Theelitesdefendthemechanisticmythbecauseitisthroughthisbeliefthattheyholdtheirprivilegedposition.Thus,aslongasweacceptmechanismunquestioningly,alltheyhavetodotogainourrespectispractisemechanism.Ifwejudgedtheminsteadbyassessingthevalidityorusefulnessoftheirideas,wewouldrealizehowlittleof40 whattheydoisimportant.Wewouldstoprespectingthem,andtheywouldlosetheirelitistposition.Soweshouldn’tbesurprisedthatourelitespraisethemechanisticideologyandcoverupthefailureofthemechanisticideas.Inthepast,whenmostmechanisticideaswereuseful,theelitesdidnothavetoresorttoliesanddelusions;theygainedourrespectthroughrealachievements.Today,themechanisticideasarebecomingincreasinglyworthless;sotheonlywayfortheelitestomaintaintheirpositionisthroughcharlatanism,byfoolingusintoacceptingmechanisticideas.Mechanism,moreover,hasbecometotalitarian:Weareaskednow,notjusttoacceptthemechanisticdelusionspromotedbytheelites,buttobecomedevotedmechanistsourselves.Liketheelites,wemustrestrictourselvestomechanisticthinkingandadheretothisideologyregardlessofwhetherouractivitiesaresuccessfulornot.Ourtotalitarianism,thus,istheultimatemechanisticfantasy.For,ifourproblemsstemfromthedecliningusefulnessofmechanism,itisabsurdtoattempttosolvethemthroughtotalitarianism,whichonlyaddstoourmechanisticpractices.So,whenlisteningtotheelites,wearemovinginthewrongdirection:weareaggravatingtheproblems.Theelitestellusthattotalitarianismisnecessaryinordertobecomemoreefficient.Butifitisbasedonmechanism,andifmechanismitselfislessandlessuseful,howcantotalitarianismhelpus?6Bywayofconclusion,letusspeculateonthealternativestomechanism.Wesawearlierthatallhumansocietiesarefoundedonmyths.Forus,sincetheseventeenthcentury,themostimportantmythhasbeenthemechanisticphilosophy.Usuallydescribedasashiftfromreligiontoscience,thetransitiontomechanismwasinfactashiftfromreligionmythstosciencemyths:allweaccomplishedwastoreplaceonekindofmythswithanother.Mechanismisnotanultimateconcept,butmerelyanimprovement,abetterwaytorepresenttheworld.Theusefulnessofmechanismhasbeenexhausted,however,anditcannolongerfunctionasmyth:ratherthanhelpingustoadvanceourknowledge,itholdsusbacknow,andallowsevilelitestoexploitus.Thereisanurgentneedtoabandonit.Butitishighlyunlikelythat,duringthenextfewdecades,wecanachievesomethingthatnohumansocietyevercould–learntolivewithoutmyths.Theonlypractical41 alternative,therefore,istoreplacemechanismwithadifferentmyth.Wemusteffect,inourlifetime,thenexttransition:fromthisnaive,seventeenth-centurymyth,toamodernone,adequateforourtime.Ifwemustbelieveinmyths,weshouldatleastchooseonethatcanhelpustosolvetoday’sproblems.Wewillcontinuetousemechanism,ofcourse,butonlywhereappropriate.Whatwewanttoavoidisthemechanisticdelusions.Inthosefieldswhereitworks,mechanismremainsthebestmethod,thebestwaytorepresenttheworld.Sowhatwemustdoisdemoteit:fromitspositionasmyth,toamoremodestposition,asmethod.Then,wemustturntothenewmythforinspirationinsolvingourcomplex,non-mechanisticproblems.Whatisleftistodecidewhatbeliefshouldreplacemechanismasmyth.Itisobviousthatthenewmythmustbemorethanjustamoresophisticatedvariantofthemechanisticmethod.Thegreatestchallengeswefacetodaydonotentailmerelyalargernumberofmechanisticproblems,ormoreinvolvedmechanisticproblems,butnon-mechanisticproblems.Andthereisonlyonewaytosolvethistypeofproblems:byusingourminds.Aswewillseeinchapter2,ourmindsexcelatsolvingpreciselythetypeofproblemsthatmechanismleavesunsolved.Inourinfatuationwithmechanism,wehavebeenneglectingtheseproblems.Moreover,wehavebeenneglectingourown,non-mechanisticcapabilities:wehavebeenusingonlyafractionofthecapacityofourminds,onlywhatweneedinordertothinkmechanistically.Thenextmyth,thus,mustbeabeliefintheunlimitedpotentialofourminds.Likeallmyths,thisisafantasy,sincethepotentialofourmindsisnotunlimited.Butwecanbelievethatitis;andtheverybeliefwillinspireus.Infact,weareusingnowsolittleofthispotentialthat,forallpracticalpurposes,itisunlimited.Onceacceptedasmyth,thenewbeliefwillmotivateustoappreciateandtouseournon-mechanisticcapabilities.Andwiththesecapabilitieswewillaccomplishmorethanwedonow.Thisprocesswouldbesimilartothewaymechanismitselffunctionedintheseventeenthcentury.Aswewillseeinchapter1,itwasitsroleasmyth,ratherthanitsusefulnessasmethod,thatimpartedtomechanismitsstrength.Itwasthebeliefthatitspotentialisunlimitedthatinspiredtheseventeenth-centuryscientists.Hadtheyperceivedmechanismasjustanewmethodofresearch,theywouldnothavehadtheconfidencetoproposethoseradicaltheories,andtheScientificRevolutionwouldnothavehappened.Todaytherearemoremechanisticdelusionsthandiscoveries,soitisobviousthatthepotentialofmechanismisnotunlimited.Butthisfactdidnotdetract42 fromitsvalueintheseventeenthcentury.Allwehavetodo,then,isundergoasimilarprocesswiththenewmyth.Andthiswillhelpustobringaboutadvancesofadifferentkind:innon-mechanisticknowledge.Ifitseemsimprobablethatwecanstarttobelievenowinanewmyth,wemustrememberthathumansocietiescanadoptanymyth.Thus,ifwemanagedtobelieveforthreehundredyearsthateveryphenomenoncanberepresentedwithaneatstructureofthingswithinthings(anideaeasilyshowntobefalse,aswesaw),itshouldn’tbesodifficulttobelievenowthatthepotentialofourmindsisunlimited.Butregardlessofwhichmythwedecidetoadoptnext,wemustendourdependenceonthemechanisticmyth,andontheelitesthatprofitfromit.Theblindbeliefinmechanismisdestroyingourminds,andispreventingusfromdealingwithourproblems.Themechanisticsoftwarebeliefs,inparticular,havepermittedapowerfulsoftwareelitetoarise.Injustafewdecades,organizationsthathaveinfactlittletoofferushaveattainedsomuchpowerthattheypracticallycontrolsociety.Aswewillseeinthecourseofthisbook,theirpowerrestsalmostentirelyonmechanisticsoftwaredelusions,andonthestupidityengenderedbythesedelusions.Software,thus,hasemergedasthemosteffectivemeansofenforcingthemechanisticdogma.Softwareshouldhavebeenourmostmodernpursuit;instead,degradedbythesoftwareelite,itisnowmerelythemostmodernwayofpursuingaseventeenth-centurymyth.43 AppendixIITargetText机械论神话1本书中我们将特别关注一个神话——机械论神话，尤其是其最新表现形式——软件神话。机械论认为，所有事物都能用一物套一物的等级结构表示。我们被告知这个观点是正确的，因为每个实体必然由简单实体构成，简单实体又由更简单的实体构成，以此类推，直到得到最基本的组成成分。那么，根据机械论理论，如果我们要理解复杂现象，只须找出构成它的简单现象，然后再找出这些简单现象是由哪些更简单的现象构成，并以此类推即可。显然，此过程若一直进行下去，该现象的复杂程度就会逐步降低，最终必将得到只需直觉理解的简单现象。因此，我们只须理解最终的简单现象，并找出其简化过程，就能理解最初的复杂现象。将此方法推而广之，世间存在的所有事物便都能理解。同样，如果我们要制造一台精密机器，只须将其设计成多个部件的组合，部件的构成较之整个机器要简单，设计制造也更容易。我们再把这些部件设计成更简单部件的组合，再把后者分解为更简单部件，直到分解为可以直接制作出的微小部件。如果我们的研究对象是一组相关实体，比如某机构的人员、仓库中的零件或者不同种类的动物等，我们只须用等级划分的方法来描绘它们。我们将这些实体分为几类，每个类别都有共同的属性；在每个类别中，我们再根据另外一个属性继续划分，以此类推，直到同一类别实体的主要属性均相同，即实体彼此十分相似。拿动物分类来说，我们将其分为野生动物和驯养动物两类，驯养动物可分为马、鸡、狗等等，最后，每种驯养动物可按品种继续进行划分。如果要了解言语交际的原理，我们知道语言由句子构成，句子由分句构成，分句由词语构成，而词语代表世间各种现实存在物：名词代表事物，动词代表动作，形容词代表属性等等。如此看来，既然世上所有事物均可用等级结构表示，44 那么，我们交际时似乎就是在生成与世上存在的各种结构相对应的语言元素的等级结构。最后，如果我们想制作复杂的大型软件应用程序，首先必须将其分解为不同模块，然后把这些模块继续细分，直到分成可以直接编写的简单软件架构。显然，用这种方法，我们只需最小架构技术就可以完成复杂应用程序的设计。这样看来，机械论者的观点似乎是正确的：世界上所有事物确实都能用等级结构表示。这种普遍性可以在构成机械论哲学的两个门类——即还原论和原子论中得到解读。还原论认为任何事物都能用更简单事物的组合表示；而原子论认为上述简化过程是有终点的，即一定会得到一些不可分割的基本粒子。两者的结合向我们证明，任何问题都可以解决。“机械论”这个名称的由来是因为17世纪该哲学流派刚建立时，人们认为最简单的机械实体，即微小物质就是最基本的实体。换句话说，从机械学学习到思维和社会学习，人们遇到的所有现象都认为是可以简化为微小物质现象。虽然这一点很荒谬，当今大多数科学家对此都避而不谈，但形式还原论仍旧这样认为。严格意义的机械论观点，即简化到真正意义上最基本实体的过程，在任何情况下都很难进行实际操作，因此多数大学都采用了它的简单版本——“科学方法”。这种机械论形式部分采用了还原论，它能使一些微不足道的活动看起来像是科学研究，因此得到众多学者的青睐。如此一来，我们在解释现象时事实上不必将其简化为不能再分的实体，只须让简化过程随意终止在我们方便的程度，再称其为基本实体即可。无疑，基于此方法的理论解释不了什么，但表面看来是科学的，因此该方法大行其道。机械论也被视为一种可生成精确完整解释的方法，尤其是数学解释。我们很容易看到为什么数学模型和机械论等级结构在逻辑上有相同意义：数学体系本身正是基于等级结构的。在特定数学体系中，复杂定理可以用一系列简单定理来表示，而简单定理可以分解为更简单的定理，以此类推，直到得到前提、公理以及该体系赖以成立的基本要素。因此，既然我们能建立一个数学体系，让其实体与现实世界实体相对应，那么，也就能用数学方法表示一个能用等级结构表示的现象。45 确实，人们通过还原论和原子论成功解释了世界的某些方面，它们也有其精确的数学模型。这些方面包含诸如物理、化学及天文学等自然科学研究对象及其应用——工程学、制造学及建筑学。然而，在其他领域，机械论和数学远没有这么成功。虽然生物、生理学、医学等自然科学一定程度上得益于各种机械理论，但其主要问题却不是机械问题。而对于研究人文现象的科学——心理学、社会学、语言学、经济学、政治学、历史学及人类学等——它们的主要问题几乎都不是机械问题。最后，虽然我们与软件相关的活动很依赖计算机，进而依赖工程学，但其主要问题依然不是机械问题。因此，机械论的各种法则只是看起来通用，而事实上，它们只对某些现象有用，对其他现象无用。在机械论哲学的三百年发展中，没有一个机械模型在人文科学里取得成功。人们已经提出了无数个机械理论，如今新产生的理论数量之多也史无前例，但当一个理论失败时却没人去思考其中的原因，相反却不约而同地转向另外一个机械理论。还原论和原子论在其适用领域取得的成功如此巨大，以至于现在人们普遍认为机械论就是科学。对大多数人来说，科学就是将机械论的成功推广到世界其他方方面面，仅此而已。故而，一个人只要追求机械理论，就被认为是科学家。然而，却没有人在乎机械理论本身是否有用，或者说机械论在某个特定领域是否有效。如此一来，美其名曰科学方法的机械论，如今很大程度上已经沦为江湖骗术。2机械论无法解释所有现象，原因显而易见，有鉴于此，那些痴迷于用机械论表现世界方方面面的做法就显得尤为愚蠢。研究者真正需要做的，是用一种开放的心态研究之前任意一个失败，因为机械论失败的原因总是相同的：研究现象复杂程度太高，不能用简单的一物套一物结构表示。在接下来几章中，我们会审视这些失败，而从目前讨论过的内容中，已经可以认识到机械论的局限性及其原因了。在用机械论表示现象的等级结构中，决定各等级之间关系的是结构中各元素属性总和。因此，能做出准确完整解释的结构，其元素属性之间的关系必须是固定的，但这几乎是不可能的。46 构成世界的各种实体拥有诸多属性，因此彼此之间通过很多种方式相互关联。话虽如此，对于某些类型的现象来说，其部分属性和所产生的关系比其他属性要重要的多；有时，这些属性也碰巧决定了等级关系。因此，如果我们同意忽略其他属性的话，等级结构就能提供一个有用的现实近似物。那么，对于这些现象来说，机械理论是适用的。反之，对于某些现象来说，其他属性是不能忽略的，所以这些现象不能用等级结构表示；那么，对于这些现象，我们说机械理论是不适用的。拿前面的例子来说，只有当我们只考虑某些属性（每个等级的一个属性或者一小组属性）而忽略其他属性时，事物的等级划分才有可能进行，要把它们的所有属性都包含在一个等级中是不可能的。我们之前看到，动物可以根据野生和驯养进行划分，进而进一步划分种类，再进一步划分品种。然而，这只是这些动物的一种表示方法。动物按照纲目科属种划分的生物分类法是根据不同的属性进行的，产生的等级也是不同的。按照一种分类法，老虎和马属于不同的范畴（野生和驯养），但按照别的分类法，它们却属于同一类型（哺乳动物纲）。显然，动物分类的方法有很多，并且都有效有用，但每种分类方法只能参考动物的某些属性。用一个等级结果表示动物的所有属性，这是不可能的。所以说，各种动物及其属性的总和，是非机械现象。我们只有从一个狭隘的角度研究动物时，机械表象（比如一个结构）才会有效；一旦参考了其他属性，这个表象或结构就失去了作用。同样，拿器械来说，只考虑决定零部件在整个器械中地位和作用的属性时，我们才能够用包含各种零部件的等级结构来表示这个器械。因为，根据成本、供应商、寿命等其他属性，同样的零部件同时也能构成其他等级结构。在器械设计制作过程中，我们有意忽略了其他属性，而如果要从其他角度研究器械，这些属性还是很重要的。通常，其他等级结构和表示物理和功能属性的结构不尽相同，比如，同一供应商制造的零件可能属于不同的部件。用一个等级结构表示各种零件及其所有属性，这是不可能的。再次，只有当我们从一个角度考虑时，机械表现方式才是有效的。只有在忽略词语含义，只考虑句法结构的前提下，句子才能被视为层次分明的分句及词语结构，因为用词语表示的各种事物有许多属性，能通过很多结构联47 系。因此，词语本身就通过很多与句法不同的结构相联系。只用一个句法结构描述句子传达的所有信息，这是不可能的。最后，软件应用似乎是一层层简单实体（模块、语句块、语句）结构的完美体现，但同样，只有当从一个属性研究时才是如此。一个软件实体的属性包括文件、变量、子程序及商业惯例等，它们通过多种结构相联系——每种属性都有一个相应结构。各种程序设计理论迫使我们把应用程序看作软件实体的等级结构，进而试图简化程序编制。由于各种应用程序事实上都同时包含多种结构，所以看到这些理论不断失败就不足为奇了。※那么，机械论就不是人们认识中货真价实的科学概念了。机械论的声望很大程度来自其早期在精密科学中取得的成功，特别是在中世纪学术信条方面，机械论本身也取代了这些信条。将宗教哲学视作绝对真理已有几个世纪的历史，如今机械哲学也被视为绝对方法——一个可以解释所有事物的方法。机械论实际上变成了一个新的宗教。如果没有卓越理念（伟大到能让人们盲从的理念）启迪社会，社会似乎就无法存在。大多数人都有理性和非理性行为，但二者的重要性是相同的。探寻简单事物时，我们的知识能够保证取得成功，这时我们就是完全理性的，也只会遵从经过验证的可靠法则；但当探寻复杂事物时，我们的知识就不够用了，这时我们就变得不理性了。因此，当我们没有经过验证的理论依靠时，非理性就产生了：如果我们想理解某个现象却又缺乏必要知识时（假如我们相信，所有现象和简单现象一样都能够被理解），我们必然会虚构出一个概念，将这个概念当作解释——神话就是这样产生的。在任何社会里，总有很多不可预测的未知事物，所以人们永远都需要神话。如此说来，人们总会有理性和非理性的混合思维方式，总会做出理性和非理性的事情。人们喜欢通过已接受的概念验证自身行为，而不愿意验证这些概念。结果，我们认为理性和非理性活动均行之有效，理性活动形成了科学和商业等事务，非理性活动形成了诸如魔术和各种迷信活动。然而，上述两种类型的个体活动是非常相似的：它们都符合逻辑，并且前后一致，都是基于已接受的概念。唯一的区别在于，理性活动理论是有根据的，而非理性活动理论是虚构的。48 在本书下文中我们会看到，个人甚至整个社会进行完全符合逻辑的个体活动是可行的，而这些活动的整个主体却构成了一种幻想。所以，只通过研究个体活动来判断一种事务理性与否，这种逻辑是远远不够的。在第三章中将看到，辨别理性和非理性事务的最好方法，研究对象不能是一个理念所取得的成功，应该是其对事实的歪曲，而人们对这些歪曲的反应也同样重要。严格的研究者会对这个理念持怀疑态度，但大多数人的反应是忽视或者想方设法掩盖那些歪曲，而绝不会承认这个理念已经遭到了反驳。这一点说明，对多数人来说，这个理念已经不是一种理性追求，而是一种信仰了。举例来说，占星学虽然已经出现了几千年之久，但是我们总能拿出它的失败范例。我们只须记录未来一年内的占星学预测，再统计应验的个数即可，但相信占星学的人绝不会这样做。同理，我们现在也可以记录诸如语言学、经济学或者软件领域的机械论预测，然后统计应验个数，但同样，相信机械论的人绝不会这样做。不管机械论多么成功或者不成功，它都继续被人们信任。将来我们会看到，要区分科学和伪科学思维是完全可能的，我们同样会发现，机械论者与传统的伪科学家没什么两样，他们只是有意忽略了这些歪曲。所以说，机械理论虽为一些著名科学家所接受，在一些德高望重的大学里也有传授，并且整个社会都付诸实践，但事实上已经变成了一种新的伪科学。这里必然会得出一个结论：机械论在我们社会中的作用并非是一种科学信条，而是一种神话，而恰恰是怀疑的缺失暴露了机械论的神话身份。一种方法如果有效，就不怕讨论，不怕修饰，不怕被更好的方法代替,而只有无法验证的概念才会成为毋庸置疑的真理。假若机械论只是被当作一种重要的研究方法，我们就只会将其应用在合适的领域，而在不适用的领域寻求其他方法。然而，我们看到的并非如此，机械论在所有领域都被奉为唯一有效的科学方法。很多学者都被训练出了机械思维，人们期望他们追寻机械理念，而不管这些理念究竟有用与否。非机械理念甚至被摒弃在了“不科学”的范畴，即使事实证明非机械理念是行之有效的。我们实际上已经重新定义了科学——科学单指对机械论的追求罢了。其结果是，很多学术机构都沦为了牟取私利的官僚机构。回想上文的引证会发现：和原始社会一样，现代社会同样建立于神话之上；神话是最重要的集体思维形式；人们认为神话表达了绝对真理；神话为人类行为提供了榜样和借口，等等。因此，如果科学及其应用——特别是我们所称的技术49 ——成为了我们行为和决定的根据，如果科学是建立于机械论之上，那么对我们来说，机械论就起到了神话的作用。我们在判断某物重要与否、有用与否、道德与否、有效与否的时候，如果援引了一种科学观念或技术观念，我们的判断事实上就使用了机械论神话。3神话有时是有益的。当人们的知识很有限，比如在原始社会，他们见到的大多数现象都是无法解释的，把这些现象归结为神话力量有百益而无一害。这些神话消除了他们的不安和恐惧，并带来了信心和安全感。这种自信确实是建立在一些不真实的假设之上，但这个事实并没有贬低神话的价值，毕竟原始人无论如何都无法做出正确解释。举例来说，如果原始人想找到某种疾病的原因而对微生物一无所知，只能认为它是由罪孽、魔鬼或者黑魔法引起的，而这样的效果也很好。鉴于他们不可能治愈这个疾病，这种假设至少带来了一丝安慰，至少他们知道了病因。有了这个安慰，会更有利于他们应对其他困难，在有相关知识储备的领域就能取得更多成果。1由于神话的重要地位，那些提供神话相关服务的人员——魔法师、萨满及占星家等——得到了人们极大的尊敬。由于他们的知识只是局限在神话范围内，所以肯定是徒有虚名的。虽然如此，正如神话虽然是假的，却在社会中有关键作用，这些专家提供的服务尽管是虚假的，但也至关重要。结果，这些专家就变成了有权势的精英阶层，但其地位是当之无愧的：一个社会如果能从神话中受益，如果神话的实际操作要求一定的专业知识，那么拥有这些专业知识的个人对于这个社会就和神话本身一样重要。所以说，当神话对社会有益时，依赖神话生存的精英阶层就是好的阶层。然而，神话也可能是有害的。当社会进化到一定程度时，人们已经积累了足够多的知识，可以做出比神话更好的解释。这些新的解释自身很可能也包含神话因素，并非完全理性，即便如此，它们更接近实际情况，因此是种进步。那么，回头来看，抛弃原有神话的实际利益是很明显的，但这个转变其实很难。通常，1“萨满”一词也可音译为“珊蛮”“嚓玛”等。该词源自通古斯语saman与北美印第安语shamman，原词含有：智者、晓彻、探究、等意，后逐渐演变为萨满教巫师即跳神之人的专称，也被理解为这些氏族中萨满之神的代理人和化身。50 老的神话已经成为信仰系统的一部分，在很多代人的时间内都引导着社会走向，要人们放弃旧神话，仅仅承诺要改进这个神话是远远不够的。这样一来，曾经对社会有利的神话现在开始变得不利了——如果社会要享受新知识带来的福利，旧神话就变成了阻碍，故而，曾经有益的神话变得有害了。精英阶层——即依靠神话取得特权地位的专家——现在也不利于社会了。如果没有了原来的神话，这些专家就多余的，所以尽管社会已不需要他们，他们仍继续颂扬自己的价值。从前他们是神话的实践者，如今他们必须强制实施这些神话。他们声称这是在维护已被证明的社会价值，但实际上他们想维护的是自己的特权。所以说，当神话由好变坏时，精英阶层也变得有害了。西方历史中最有名的社会转变是文艺复兴和科学革命，15世纪至17世纪间，通过机械哲学表现的现代科学代替了统治欧洲长达一千多年的宗教神话。这次社会转变最值得注意的是来自教会（旧神话的守护者）的阻挠力度之大。在此之前，科学并无大用，而诸如救赎之类的神话可以给人们带来一丝慰藉，这时教会也许是一个好的精英阶层。然而，现在知识日益增长带来的实际利益已经超过了神话的精神慰藉，教会为维护自身势力唯一能做的就是抑制这些知识——这是宗教法庭的任务。无论如何看待早期宗教神话的价值，对于妨碍真理，折磨活烧无辜群众的做法，我们认为好的精英阶层不会这么做。总之，宗教神话及其精英阶层已经变得有害。※通过上文的分析，我们可以认识到，同样的转变在我们这个时代也正在进行。现在被保护对象正是机械论——上次社会转变中那个遭到压制的神话，如今极力维护自身势力的精英阶层体现在我们的教育机构，特别是大学中。学术官僚是机械神话的最大受益者，不管其所作所为有用与否，机械神话都赋予他们社会特权地位。因此，看到他们那么拼命地维护机械论观念就不足为奇了，须知教会也曾经同样极力维护过宗教神话。当占星学风靡时，不管其预测是否准确，占星家都能保住自己的位置；当炼金术流行时，无论炼金方法是否管用，炼金师都继续得到人们的信任；当宗教大行其道时，不管其救赎承诺兑现几何，教会官僚机构仍然位高权重。而现在，机械论变成了新宠，尽管很多机械理论已经失败，但我们仍继续笃信并敬重那些学51 术官僚。在接下来的几章中我们会看到，要证明这些理论的欺骗性其实非常容易；然而，我们却没有把这些理论的捍卫者当骗子看待，却当作了科学家。学术精英控制了教育，这是他们的权力。他们利用自己的垄断地位把教育过程变成了教化过程：我们所学到的是如何用机械论方法做出解释。因此，这些学术精英虽然在宣扬知识、智力和创造力，但其实已经重新给它们下了定义，它们已不再表示人脑能达到的极限，而只是表示遵循机械论思想所要求的东西：最新机械理论知识、领会机械教条的智力以及单独使用机械方法完成任务的创造力。他们不仅是在实践机械论，更是在强制实施。在一些不负责任政府的保护下，我们的大学和企业（机械神话的另一个受益者）共同打造了一个社会规则，实际上就是一种新型极权主义。各种极权主义思想在具体方面各不相同，但它们的目的一致：创造一个完美的社会，对我们来说，这个社会是建立在真正的机械论法则之上。关于这些法则的价值，我们已经在一些领域（比如各种精密科学和制造业）得到了验证，所以，我们现在要做的就是把这些法则应用到人类生活的其他所有方面。下面是我们达成此目标的方法：既然所有事物都可以用等级结构表示，那么把所有任务分解为越来越简单的部分，我们就可以改善自身表现。最后，我们就只需处理这些结构中的终端元素；也就是说，只需处理一些琐碎问题。在实际操作中，这些等级结构将以各种理论和方法的形式体现，而终端元素则是一些简单规则。因此，只要遵循这些规则，任何人都能完成以前需要大量知识和经验才能完成的各种任务。更好之处在于，遇到的各种问题一旦用等级结构表示后，我们就可以制造各种装置让这些结构具体化。在解决一个特定问题时，我们需要知道的就是如何操作一台设备。操作设备比解决问题需要的技术要简单，所以我们都会变得高产：一是因为设备消除了我们过去冗长的学习过程，二是因为设备比人的速度更快，也更准确可靠。最后，随着人类最新发明——计算机的诞生，我们甚至可以处理对传统设备来说过于庞大冗杂的结构。由于软件的多样性和强大功能，实际上每种人类活动都能翻译成一系列简单行为——即操作软件设备的动作。从简单计算到复杂决策，从个人问题到商业事务，我们可以给每一项任务匹配一个软件设备。如今，各种知识正被整合到这些设备中，通过方便易用的菜单、列表、按钮，这些知识52 唾手可得；换句话说，这是通过一种等级结构，该结构包含许多选项，每个选项之中又包含许多子选项，而该结构也和知识本身的等级结构相呼应。因此，只消购买一台软件设备，我们就能够执行几乎所有任务，而不用在大脑中开发所需知识。※那么，我们对于完美社会的理解就变成了这样一种概念：在这个社会中，人类所有事务都被简化，变成遵循某些方法和操作设备的简单行为。这些方法和设备是由各种精英，即懂得如何把复杂世界翻译成易于理解的简单概念的专家开发的。这些精英的责任就是把世界用确切的机械理论表示出来，而我们的义务就是遵循这些理论。所有不能用机械论表示的东西都是不科学的，进而也是没有价值的。因此，由于人类的目标是不断取得社会进步，所以在非机械观念上不能浪费时间，即使在这段“浪费”的时间里我们可能会很享受。如果有人对这种方案（机械论社会）的有效性提出质疑，我们只需回顾人类在制造活动中取得的成就即可。两百年前，我们只有屈指可数的几种简单消费品，而且几乎没人能买得起；如今，我们拥有各种复杂产品，不但数量惊人，而且几乎人人都买得起。我们之所以能取得如此成就，靠的不是增加，而是减少产品制造工人的知识和技术。取得如此成就的秘密——所有人都知道——在于以下发明创造：流水作业线（它允许我们雇用非技术工人并控制他们的产量）、劳动分工和低专业化程度（它允许我们减少个人教育培训，进而降低雇佣成本）、劳动过程的大体分解（它把所有类型的工作都简化成简单的日常活动，从而消除对个人技术和能动性的依赖）以及科学管理（它创造了一个严格环境，每个人都被迫按照上级命令的方式工作）。显然，上述几项原则都是机械论思想的应用：过去，生产过程是一系列偶然活动，如今已经变成了一个可以用等级结构表示的精密系统。这个结构中的元素包括各种组件、阶段、人员及活动，保证该安排有效的正是机械论观念本身。所以，如果我们在其他领域想和制造业一样高效的话，就必须遵循同样的准则，这一点不容置疑。打个比方说，我们必须把整个社会改造成一个巨大的工厂：每一个人、每一个行动以及每一个想法都要经过设计，这样，他们的作用就如同一个巨大的一物套一物结构中的元素。目前，我们正在把这种观念向教育活动和商业活动中延伸，而且很快就会扩展到所有个人和社会事务中。53 因此，如果我们想要更高效，就必须有更少知识、更少技术以及更少经验，虽然看起来有点矛盾，但事实的确如此。减缓我们进步速度的正是人类获取知识的天性，所以，我们必须停止专业知识的学习和个性培养，它们都已过时，而且还要承认一点：成为大整体中无关紧要的小部分能让我们取得更多成就。精英分子已经在包括制造业在内的许多领域证明了机械论价值，所以必须允许他们再为社会设计一个巨大的等级结构，而且我们还必须把自己限定在他们规定的活动范围中。虽然极权主义思想已相当古老，但实际上仍会被许多“开明”领导者采用。极权主义之所以看起来新鲜，是因为它直到20世纪才在大范围内变得实用。对此，纳粹主义做出了最早尝试，但这项政治运动充斥着粗鲁和暴力，最终以失败告终。我们的确从这些错误中吸取了教训，不再依赖政治制度，但却把希望放在了大学和企业身上，让它们贯彻极权主义。我们现在的极权主义棋高一着，必将成功。4极权主义虽然也有一些明显优点，却不乏批评的声音。反对极权主义的第一个观点认为，它会不可避免地逐渐导致人性丧失。对此，很多人从不同角度做出了思考：哲学家、社会学家以及科幻作家一百年前就开始发出警告，称我们正被改造成机器人。（他们认为）人类被当作一台巨大机器中的零件，只能做一些简单重复动作，尽管这个社会打的旗号是高效和进步，但确实不具有吸引力。为反驳这些反对者，我们指出，多亏了极权主义，社会各阶层人民的生活水平才得以大幅度提高，人类寿命才得以大幅度延长。所以说，与进行任何社会工程一样，我们决定追求极权主义实际上是一种妥协：为了不断提高繁荣兴旺程度，我们交换了越来越多的人性。目前，这个交易的效果很好，将来也没理由不继续做。退一步讲，人们似乎也不介意这种人性丧失：遵循规则和方法总比开发专业知识容易的多，大多数人还是乐于充当整体中的一部分，因为这样可以免除各种行动和选择的义务。最近出现了反对极权主义思想的第二种声音，它担心社会的无限发展会带来许多环境问题。具体地说，该观点认为，即便我们愿意彻底变成机器人，也永远54 无法到达繁荣的彼岸。人类发展要受到诸如人口增加和自然资源减少等因素的限制，所以过去有用的意识形态将来也会继续有用，这个假设是无效的。换句话说，我们的意识形态是错误的，不仅因为它会剥夺人性，而且因为以目前的增长速度，我们在变成机器人破坏环境之前就会毁掉自身。与第一个观点不同的是，第二个反对观点正受到更多欢迎，主要因为它能让人们误认为自己关心环境，从而缓和心态。我们要做的就是阅读各种书籍文章，看电视纪录片，并不时讨论一下环保——然而我们自己的生活方式和目标却从未改变。用这种方法我们不用放弃任何东西，却有参与感和关注感。事实上，繁荣程度的无限提高只有通过生产消费的指数增长才能实现。因此，相比预防人性丧失，我们为预防环境问题要牺牲更多的繁荣。对于人性丧失，前边已经看到人们的态度了。那些愿意用机器人生活来换取繁荣的人，是不大可能为子孙后代的利益而放弃繁荣的。因此，第二种反对观点虽看似受欢迎，但和第一种一样，也不能更好地阻止极权主义传播。然而，我们的注意力不应该只放在这两点，还有第三个反对观点：目前极权主义的危险跟人们所说的完全不同。我们以为问题只是进步和繁荣的代价是不是太高，而真正的问题在于我们花这个价格究竟有没有买到东西。那些精英为极权主义思想辩护，告诉我们它是建立在机械原则，进而也是科学原则之上。然而，如果这些原则本身的有效性已越来越低，那么这些精英就是在欺骗我们——不管我们愿意出多高的价钱。这些精英的辩护引发了一连串思想形态：机械论、科学主义、乌托邦以及极权主义。机械论信仰带来了科学主义——即把机械论观念应用到思维和社会研究中（这是不适用的）。然后，不顾各种理论失败，机械论者认为应用这些理论能大力改善社会；因此，科学主义带来了乌托邦主义。最后，所有人都认为极权主义是最实际的办法，即允许一个精英阶层控制社会的方方面面。挖出它的本源——机械论之后，极权主义找到了庇护。由于人们如此痴迷机械论，哪怕看到了它的失败或有害后果也不会质疑。因此，人们接受并重视极权主义观点，即便是在批判它的时候，只因为我们相信它是科学的。我们没有证据证明极权主义有效，但总是忍不住相信它的鼓吹者。55 5随着机械论有效性的日益降低，产生了一个新的现象——即以科学或者商业之名进行的江湖骗术。它宣称能用机械论方法解决非机械问题。由于人们普遍把机械论当作“科学方法”，所以我们毫不怀疑地相信任何援引机械论法则的人。因此，一旦我们认定只能用机械特性衡量某种观念的价值，就不可能分辨出真正的机械思想和机械错觉。机械错觉一直都是我们文化的一部分，然而，我们直到最近才发现机械论在其成就掩盖之下的害处。如今，能找到简单机械解决方法的问题越来越少，所以，错觉造成的损害开始超过成就带来的效益。极权主义是典型的机械错觉。人们喜欢极权主义和喜欢其他机械观念的原因相同：针对复杂问题，极权主义似乎能提供简单答案。但是，追求普通机械错觉只会造成资源浪费，而追求极权主义则会导致整个社会瓦解，因为，假如不能通过机械方法改善过于复杂的世界，那么极权主义标榜的效益就是空谈，而我们为之付出的代价却是真实的。我们的问题越来越大，而大脑却越来越小：如果我们将自己局限在机械思维中，就无法开发非机械思维；所以，我们也许解决了一些简单机械问题，但那些复杂的非机械问题却一直没有解决，而后者可能最终摧毁我们。大学里的江湖骗术可以在所谓的研究活动中找到。其中的规则很简单：所有遵循还原论和原子论机械原则的工作都是科学的，进而是正当的。至于这些原则在特定领域是否有效，各种衍生理论是否有用，这些都不重要。因此，当遇到人文科学问题，我们只需将其看成一个等级结构，那么这个问题就会分解成越来越简单的部分，直到变为可以精确描述的简单问题，但这种适用于各种精密科学的方法应用到人文现象上时却失败了，原因在于人文现象不是由一个，而是由很多个相互影响的结构组成。虽然真正的问题仍未解决，但研究者研究小问题时的严谨还是令人钦佩。显然，他们唯一的辩词就是遵循了机械原则。但是，为什么模拟物质世界有用的法则会被全盘应用到思维和社会研究中呢？我们一旦要在这些领域寻找机械论价值，那么所有基于机械论的研究项目就由科学活动变成了机械幻想。这样说来，不管把这些学者看作科学家还是骗子，唯一不变的是人们对机械思想的盲信。56 商业中的江湖骗术可以在营销中找到。上文中我们知道，那些精英告诉我们人类的未来必须建立在生产消费的无限增长之上，而这只能通过机械方法实现。但是，假如能通过机械方法发现或提高的东西事实上已经越来越少，那么想要取得增长的唯一方法就是制造能用机械方法（即高效率高利润）制造的一切东西，而不制造有用的东西。换句话说，假如诸如科学家、发明家及企业家之类的老专家无法满足人们的增长需求，我们就必须用新的专家（也就是江湖骗子）代替他们，因为新专家知道如何让没用的东西显得重要，进而帮助我们欺骗自己，让我们认为现在的体制仍和过去一样有效。如此一来，最早只是作为贸易补充的推销，其重要性已日益超过了商品本身。欺骗人们购买名不副实的商品是行得通的，而如今这已经变成了经济发展的推动力量。虚假广告——那些声称要揭示人性的弱点和无知，实则是利用了它们的信息——不再局限在时尚和化妆用品领域，事实上已经涵盖了所有产品和服务。许多不诚实手段（客户评价、成功故事、背景音乐、欢乐笑脸等等）得到了广泛应用，以达到影响、转移及混淆注意力的效果。从逻辑上讲，这些手段等同于谎言（人们之所以需要这些手段，正是因为有了它们，产品和服务的有用性就无从证明），但我们对此视而不见。语言本身也沦为了一种信息传递方式，并被当作武器使用：所有用词都经过精挑细选，不为传递信息，只为欺骗操纵他人。最后，最让人不安的是，如今“推销”这个概念已经超越了商业领域，在任何有机会影响人们的活动中都能见到它的身影。从个人简历到政府政策，从商务洽谈到军事决策，从讲座研讨会到电视新闻纪录片，懂得如何说服受众最为关键；也就是说，要懂得如何误导——即用特殊技巧让不重要的东西显得重要，重要的东西显得不重要。人们不得不大量使用谎言，这个事实值得担忧，它应该提醒我们对体制提出质疑。显然，由于人们的真正成就达不到预期，所以将需要更多谎言。自科学革命以来我们已经取得了持续发展，人们的世界观也相应改变：但我们仍要接受一个事实——发现和进步并非永无止境。当然，我们现在仍然在进步，但速度已经越来越慢。由于我们习以为常的指数增长不可能永远保持下去，所以人们在实际增长量上添加了自己臆想的一部分。然而，江湖骗术的无限增加并未被视作体制失败的表现，相反，人们把江湖骗术当作了一种新科学或新商业，故而，骗术的增加也被视为进步。57 这样说来，如今社会发展的很大部分其实只是人们错觉的增加，以及相信这些错觉背后愚昧程度的增加。认识到人类智力无法保证无限发展的事实后，我们似乎试图依靠愚昧来获得发展。与石油和矿产一样，愚昧也被当成了一种资源，似乎同样可以开采利用。不过，在人类身上灌输愚昧必须小心谨慎，这样才能抵消他们的天生智力，从而充分利用愚昧这种资源。尔后，源源不断的谎言和错觉最终会让我们用幻想（用精英们的话说就是我们必须努力开创的世界）代替现实。※总之，机械论神话已经过了它的有效期。那个最初帮助我们增进对世界认识的好神话已经变成了坏神话，让机械论成为有用概念的特性如今对我们不利了。因为机械论只能解释简单现象——那些能用孤立的等级结构表示的现象；如今的世界，我们面临着越来越多的复杂现象，它们只能通过系统结构表示。这些现象之所以复杂，原因在于未被解释的机械现象已经越来越少。现在我们要想扩展知识面，必须解决更多过去故意忽视的现象——因为当时有太多的简单机械现象需要研究。这些现象复杂性的另一个原因在于，在我们不断拓展知识面的同时，也给自己创造了新的非机械现象（例如软件）。所以说，现在机械论神话对我们有害，因为它把我们的思想局限在了机械论上，而我们最主要的问题是非机械论问题。由于机械论哲学过去的成就及其不可抗拒的吸引力，我们无法看到机械论真正的局限性。我们正努力用机械方法解释所有东西，而和机械相关的东西已经越来越少了。结果是，我们把资源都浪费在了荒谬观念上，却忽视了真正的问题。能处理复杂结构的只有大脑，因此，我们必须把人脑的智力和专业知识能力开发到最高水平，才能解决目前存在的问题。但是相反，机械文化把我们局限在新手水平：机械文化教我们把每个问题都看作简单孤立的结构，这样我们就只能使用自身机械论能力。那些精英也和机械论神话一道变坏了，他们之所以为后者辩护，是因为他们的特权地位正由此得来。因此，只要我们无条件相信机械论，只要他们按机械论行事，就能获得我们的尊敬。假如通过检验其观念有效性来判断，我们就会意识到他们没做多少重要事情，这样我们就不会再尊敬他们，他们也会失去精英地位。因此，对于精英阶层颂扬机械论思想并掩盖其失败真相的行为，我们无需惊讶。过去，大多数机械论观念都是有用的，那些精英不需要求诸谎言和错觉；他58 们是用真实成就获得我们尊敬的。现在，机械论观念的价值变得越来越低；精英阶层维护自身地位的唯一方法，就是用骗术糊弄我们相信机械论观念。此外，机械论如今已经变成了极权主义：它不但要求我们相信精英阶层宣扬的机械幻想，还要求我们变成忠实的机械论者。和那些精英一样，我们也“必须”把思想局限在机械论上，而且不论从事的活动是否成功，都必须拥护机械论。所以说，极权主义就是终极的机械幻想，因为如果问题是由于机械论有效性降低而产生，那么试图用极权主义解决这些问题实属荒谬，这只会增加我们的机械实践经历。所以说，如果相信精英阶层，我们的前进方向就是错误的，这只会使问题恶化。精英阶层告诉我们，极权主义对于提高效率是必要的，然而，如果极权主义是建立在机械论之上，如果机械论本身的有效性已经越来越低，极权主义怎会有益于我们？6让我们用推论的方法思考一下，除了机械论还有何选择。前文中我们知道，所有人类社会都建立在神话之上。对我们而言，机械论哲学是自17世纪以来最主要的神话。人类社会的机械转变通常被描述成宗教到科学的转变，事实上，它是宗教神话到科学神话的转变：我们所完成的只是用一种神话代替了另外一种。机械论不是终极观念，只是一个进步，一个更好的表现世界的方法。机械论的有效性已经耗尽，已经无法起到神话的作用：它不能增加我们的知识，现在是一种阻碍，让我们被不好的精英利用——我们亟须放弃机械论。但是，从前人们在所有社会都没学会的东西，我们在未来几十年里基本也不可能学会——即如何在没有神话的世界生存。因此，唯一有实际意义的办法就是用其他神话代替机械论。我们必须在有生之年实现下一次转变：将这个17世纪的天真神话变为适合我们的现代神话。如果一定要相信神话，至少应该选择能解决当前问题的神话。当然，我们还会继续使用机械论，但只在它适合的地方，我们要避开的是机械论错觉。在适合的领域，机械论还是最佳选择，还是表现世界最佳方法。因此，我们必须把机械论从神话降低到一个适当位置（即看作一种方法）。尔后，我们必须从新的神话中寻找灵感，从而解决复杂的非机械问题。59 接下来我们需要决定让何种信仰代替机械论成为神话。有一点毋庸置疑，这种信仰不能只是基于机械论方法的复杂变体，因为当今社会的最大挑战不但包含众多机械问题，以及复杂程度更高的机械问题，而且包含更多非机械问题。解决非机械问题的方法只有一个，就是利用我们的大脑。人类大脑尤其擅长解决机械论无法解决的问题，这一点在第二章中会有详细介绍。当我们沉醉于机械论成果时，恰恰忽略了它无法解决的问题。进一步说，我们一直忽略的，是大脑本身具有的解决非机械问题能力，因为一直以来我们只开发了大脑的一小部分能力，即从机械论角度思考问题的能力。所以说，在下一个神话中，我们必须相信大脑具有无限潜能。从严格意义上讲，人脑的潜力并非不可限量，所以，跟历史上其他神话一样，下一个神话其实也只是一种幻象——但是我们不妨这样假设，因为它会鼓舞我们前进。事实上，人脑目前只开发了很小一部分，在许多实践领域还有待进一步开发，从这个角度来说，人脑的潜力确实是“无穷”的。一旦接受了这一点，新神话就会促进我们对大脑非机械能力的认识和使用，而这些“新能力”将使我们取得更多成就。上述过程和17世纪机械论的运作过程类似。当时赋予机械论生命的，不是它作为方法论的有效性，而是其扮演的神话角色。给17世纪科学家带来鼓舞的，正是机械论潜能不可限量这个信念，假设当时只把机械论看作一种新型研究方法，他们就不可能有足够自信提出各种激进理论，科学革命也就不可能发生。目前来看，有关机械论的错觉要多于已经取得的发现，显然，机械论的潜能并非无限，但它在17世纪的价值并不会因此打折。我们所要做的，就是让新神话经历同样的过程，而此举也将促使我们发展一个新领域，即非机械知识领域。诚然，现在要我们立刻相信一个新神话是不大可能的，但回顾历史会发现，其实人类社会能接受任何神话。因此，所有现象都能用一物套一物的简单结构解释，如果我们连这种明显错误的想法（见前文）都能相信300多年，那么现在让我们相信人脑的无限潜能应该不难。现在，暂且不谈下一个神话应该是什么，我们首先必须停止对当今机械神话以及从机械神话中牟利的“精英阶层”的依赖，因为对机械论的盲信正在侵蚀我们的大脑，正阻挠我们解决真正的问题。特别要指出的是，机械软件观如今已经催生了一大批软件精英，短短数十年间，这些精英团体产生的影响如此巨大，事60 实上已经控制了整个社会，但其实并没有给人们带来多少真正好处。下文中我们将看到，这种影响力的取得几乎完全得益于社会上各种机械软件错觉，以及人们受错觉影响产生的愚昧行为。当今时代，软件本该是人们追求的最先进的技术，但相反，它却在一部分所谓软件精英的手中沦落，变成了一个追求17世纪神话最摩登的工具，因此，软件事实上已经沦为机械论教条最有效的执行手段。61'