一个警示故事
即使拥有最精密测量工具的权威机构也无法在他们的事情中获得确定性。比如，考虑一下塔萨代部落对人类学家提出的挑战。当塔萨代人在60年代后期在菲律宾棉兰老岛屿上被发现时，他们生活在石器时代——居住在森林深处的洞穴中，对农业毫无所知，依靠狩猎和采集为生。当时独裁者费迪南德·马科斯的助手曼努埃尔·伊利扎尔多很快成为了他们的保护者、导师，并且为这个神奇的世界牵线搭桥。一些人类学家和其他专家访问了部落，研究了他们的手工制品、语言和社会结构。除了少数怀疑者，大部分学者判断他们是真正的石器时代居民。像《国家地理》这样有声望的出版物写到塔萨代人，对他们是这样天真、温和的人，语言中没有“武器"、“战争”、或者“敌意”这样的单词，而感到惊奇。
在1986，在马科斯政权垮台后，一位瑞士记者参观了塔萨代人，发现他们住在房子里。据报道，他们承认他们的故事是伊利扎尔多精心编制的骗局。据称，他告诉他们什么时候进入洞穴，对着记者和学者表演石器时代的生活方式。伊利扎尔多否认了这个指控，并且不断的获得一些科学家的支持。道格拉斯元，是一位人种生物学家和早期的塔萨代研究者，最初，试图将他们和周边的农业部落联系起来，但是现在他相信这个石器时代的环境是真实的。（他引用了一个案例，案例显示小孩们种植水稻，表现令人惊奇）。语言学家和早期塔萨代学者卡罗尔莫罗尼，也相信这是真的。她争论道，部落里的小孩和成年人必须是高超的演员才能消除他们语言中所有的农业社会的特征。一个当地的牧师和以前的怀疑论者，肖恩·麦克多纳爵士（ Fr. Sean McDonagh）同样相信塔萨代人是真实的，周边部落也同样是真实的。
一个持续争论的问题和塔萨代人的工具真实性有关。菲律宾人类学家宙斯萨拉查（Zeus Salazar）坚持认为石头上系着松弛绳子的使用方法，说明这是蹩脚的伪造石器时代的做法。但是考古学家伊恩格洛弗（Ian Glover）说在真正的石器时代发现了这样的做法。塔萨代人自己的陈述没有消除困惑。他们告诉NBC和菲律宾电视台他们最初的故事是真的，然而告诉ABC和英国电视台说故事是假的。
在所有这些复杂情况下，任何一个外来的观察者知道塔萨代人真实故事的可能性有多大？不大可能。这是为什么在这个或者类似复杂的案例中，负责任的人不声称知道发生了什么，相反，他们说在证据表明下，什么是最接近真实发生的事情。这就是为什么人类学家托马斯赫德兰（Thomas Headland）彻底研究塔萨代案例后说的话。他认为那可能没有骗局，但是有着显而易见的夸张和媒体的错误报道，以及人类学家自我实现的期望。他相信，更可能的是，塔萨代人曾经是农业部落周边的一员，数百年前逃跑了（可能是避免奴隶贸易），他们藏在森林里经过这么多代，他们不是退化到石器时代文明，而是丢失了他们先进状态的记忆。
Is Faith a Form of Knowledge?
信仰是一种知识类型吗？
有些读者，特别是信仰宗教的保守者，可能想知道在这之前讨论到的知识是否代表了对信仰的排斥。基于本世纪及数世纪以前不少知识分子将宗教驳斥为不过是迷信而已，他们的考虑是情有可原的。但是这里的指责并没有指向性。知识和宗教信仰之间的关系复杂而又微妙。术语“宗教信仰”的定义说明信仰是不能被证明的东西。这并不是说我们相信的事物不是真的，而是它的真实性无法被确定性地证明。犹太人（还有其他人）相信上帝给了摩西十诫，穆斯林相信穆罕穆德是阿拉的先知，基督徒现在耶稣是上帝之子。科学对于这些信仰不能简单适用。哲学家可以为支持或者反对他们补充论据，但是不能证明或者反证他们。
莫蒂默·阿德勒（Mortimer Adler）是一位卓越的哲学家，提供了一个对于信仰非常有用的洞见。
任何人要跨过分歧（在哲学和信仰之间）需要一个经常被称为“信仰的跨越”事物。但是一个信仰的跨越经常被误解为这样一个过程，从没有足够理由确信上帝的存在到彻底确信上帝存在的一个状态。事实并非如此。信仰的跨越包含了从几乎是哲学的神学的论断到对上帝的宗教信仰，相信上帝是这个宇宙博爱、公正、仁慈的创造者，是被爱、崇拜和祈祷的对象。
一个宗教保守者有关的顾虑可能是他们是否因为接受这一章表达的哲学态度而妥协他们的信仰。当然，我们每个人必须自己回答这个问题。然而，在决定前，我们要好好考虑下一位重要的福音派学者马克诺尔（Mark Noll）提出来的问题。他说，撇开哲学研究，信奉福音的人不仅仅从对所有人都是重要问题的讨论中逃离，而且失去了和“近两个世纪以来美国被定义为福音经验的思维习惯”。在他看来，这被证明是悲惨的错误。
原文：
A Cautionary Tale
Even authorities who have the most sophisticated measurement tools at their disposal fail to achieve certainty. Consider, for example, the challenge to anthropologists posed by the Tasaday tribe. When discovered on the Philippine island of Mindanao in the late 1960s, the Tasaday were living a Stone Age existence—inhabiting caves in the deep jungle, ignorant of agriculture, subsisting by hunting and gathering. Manuel Elizaldo, an associate of then dictator Ferdinand Marcos, quickly became their protector, mentor, and go-between with a fascinated world. A number of anthropologists and other experts visited the tribe and studied their artifacts, language, and social structure. Except for a few skeptics, most scholars judged them to be authentic Stone Age people. Prestigious publications like National Geographic wrote about the Tasaday and marveled at the fact that they were such an innocent, gentle people with no words in their language for “weapon,” “war,” or “hostility.”
In 1986, after the Marcos regime collapsed, a Swiss journalist visited the Tasaday and found them living in houses. They reportedly admitted to him that their story was an elaborate hoax perpetrated by Elizaldo. He supposedly told them when to go to the caves and put on the Stone Age act for visiting journalists and scholars. Elizaldo has denied the charge and has had the continuing support of many scientists. Douglas Yen, an ethnobiologist and early Tasaday researcher, originally sought to link the group to neighboring farming tribes, but he now believes the Stone Age circumstances were genuine. (He cites a case in which little children were shown cultivated rice and displayed amazement.) Carol Molony, a linguist and another early Tasaday scholar, is also a believer. She argues that the tribe, children as well as adults, would have to have been superb actors to eliminate all agricultural metaphors from their speech. Alocal priest and former skeptic, Fr. Sean McDonagh, also believes the Tasaday to be authentic and says neighboring tribes do too.
One continuing element of dispute concerns the authenticity of Tasaday tools. Zeus Salazar, a Philippine anthropologist, maintains that the loose straps attaching stones to handles suggest a poor attempt to fake Stone Age methods. Yet archaeologist Ian Glover says such looseness has been noted in authentic Stone Age implements. The Tasaday’s own statements have not simplified the puzzle. They told NBC and Philippine television that their original story was true and then told ABC and British television that it was false.
How likely is it that any outside observer knows the real story about the Tasaday, in all its complexity? Not very. That is why, in this and similarly difficult cases, responsible people do not claim to know what happened. Instead, they speak of what it is most plausible to believe happened, in light of the evidence. That is how anthropologist Thomas Headland, who exhaustively researched the Tasaday case, speaks of it. He suggests that there was probably no hoax but that there were gross exaggerations and false media reports, as well as some self-fulfilling expectations by anthropologists. It is likely, he believes, that the Tasaday were once members of the neighboring farming tribes who fled several hundred years ago (perhaps to avoid slave traders) and who hid in the forest for so many generations that they not only regressed to a Stone Age culture but lost all memory of their more advanced state.19
Is Faith a Form of Knowledge?
Some readers, particularly religious conservatives, may wonder whether what has been said thus far about knowledge represents a denunciation of faith. Their concern is understandable, given the number of intellectuals in this and previous centuries who have dismissed religion as mere superstition. But no such denunciation is intended here. The relationship between knowledge and religious faith is both complex and subtle. The term religious faith by definition suggests belief in something that cannot be proved. This is not to say that what is believed is not true, but only that its truth cannot be demonstrated conclusively. Jews (and many others) believe that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, Muslims believe that Muhammad is Allah’s prophet, and Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Science is simply not applicable to these beliefs. Philosophy can offer complementary arguments for or against them but cannot prove or disprove them.
Mortimer Adler, a distinguished philosopher, offers a very useful insight into the nature of faith:
What is usually called a “leap of faith” is needed to carry anyone across the chasm [between philosophy and religion]. But the leap of faith is usually misunderstood as being a progress from having insufficient reasons for affirming God’s existence to a state of greater certitude in that affirmation. That is not the case. The leap of faith consists in going from the conclusion of a merely philosophical theology to a religious belief in a God that has revealed himself as a loving, just and merciful Creator of the cosmos, a God to be loved, worshiped and prayed to.20 Arelated concern of religious conservatives may be whether they are compromising their faith by embracing the philosophical position expressed in this chapter. Each of us must, of course, answer this question for himself or herself. Before deciding, however, we would do well to consider the argument advanced by Mark Noll, a leading evangelical scholar. In spurning philosophical investigation, he says, evangelicals not only have removed themselves from the discussion of issues vital to all people but also have lost touch with “the habits of mind that for nearly two centuries defined the evangelical experience in America.” In his view, that has proved to be a tragic mistake.21
网友评论