The Inconsistency of Conciliation Plans
- The conciliators are not agreed among themselves and their plans are mutually destructive, resulting in inconsistency.
- The plain meaning of the Hebrew record is tampered with, causing the text to lose all meaning.
- Statements like these are detrimental to theology, religion, and morality.
- ベストアンサー
和訳お願い致します。
In truth,however,if we refer to the plans of conciliation proposed,we find them at variance with each other and mutually destructive.The conciliators are not agreed among themselves,and each holds the views of the other to be untenable and unsafe, The ground is perpetually being shifted as the advance of geological science may require.The plain meaning of the Hebrew record is unscrupulously tampered with,in general the pith of the whole process lies in divesting the text of all meaning whatever.We are told that,Scripture not being designed to teach us natural philosophy,it is in vain to attempt to make out a cosmogony from its statements. If the first chapter of Genesis conveys to us no information concerning the origin of the world, it's statements can't indeed be contradicted by modern discovery.But it is absurd to call this harmony. Statements such as that above quoted are,we conceive, little calculated to be serviceable to the interests of theology ,still less to religion and morality .
- mangifera
- お礼率62% (136/218)
- 英語
- 回答数1
- ありがとう数0
- みんなの回答 （1）
- 専門家の回答
質問者が選んだベストアンサー
こういう宗教論などが出てくる文章というのは、自分の専攻とはかなり違うので、難しいです。なかなか仕事の休み時間などに片手間で出来ないので、回答に時間がかかってしまいますがもし可能ならばしばらく締め切らずにお待ちいただくとなんとか回答できるのでは。と思います。それでも誤訳があるかもしれませんが、なにとぞご容赦を。長いので、一文ずつ切りました。 In truth, however, if we refer to the plans of conciliation proposed, we find them at variance with each other and mutually destructive. 「しかしながら実のところ、もし我々が提案された、折り合いをつける為の案を参照すると、それぞれの相反しており、相互にマイナスに影響しあうことがわかるのだ。」 The conciliators are not agreed among themselves, and each holds the views of the other to be untenable and unsafe. ↓ ご質問では、untenable and unsafe, The ground・・・とカンマで次の文と続いていましたが、原文と思われる文章では、ペリオドで切っていますので、それに従って訳しました。 「融和案は相互の同意のもとではなく、その上御互いは御互いをとても支持できず妥当とは思えないという見方を変えていない。」 The ground is perpetually being shifted, as the advance of geological science may require. 「地質学の進歩が必要なように、（知識や議論の）領域は絶えることなく変っていくものなのである。」 The plain meaning of the Hebrew record is unscrupulously tampered with, and in general the pith of the whole process lies in divesting the text of all meaning whatever. 「ヘブライ語で書かれた記録の平易な意味合いは、無節操に手が加えられており、一般的にプロセス全体の核心とは、意味するものがすべてなんであろうとその教本を捨てることから始まるのだ。」 We are told that Scripture not being designed to teach us natural philosophy, it is in vain to attempt to make out a cosmogony from its statements. ↓ ご質問文では、told that, Scriptureとカンマが入っていましたが、原文では入っていなかったのでそちらにそって訳しました。 「聖書は自然哲学を教えることを目的としておらず、その教えから宇宙進化発展論を証明しようとするのは無駄なことと言われている。」 If the first chapter of Genesis convey to us no information concerning the origin of the world, its statements cannot indeed be contradicted by modern discovery. 「もし創世記の第一章が我々に世界の始まりに関する何の情報も与えていないのであれば、確かにその教えの数々は現代の発見を持ってしても、なんら反論のしようがないのだ。」 But it is absurd to call this harmony. 「しかしこれをハーモニーと呼ぶのはばかげている」 Statements such as that above quoted are, we conceive, little calculated to be serviceable to the interests of theology, still less to religion and morality. 「上記で引用したような教えというものは、神学理論の利益において有意義であるとほとんど判断されておらず、いまだあまり信仰や倫理性と関連がないものとされていると我々は想像している。」 引用原文：http://biblehub.com/library/temple/essays_and_reviews_the_education_of_the_world/mosaic_cosmogony.htm
関連するQ&A
- 和訳お願い致します。
We pass to the account of the creation contained in the Hebrew record. And it must be observed that in reality two distinct accounts are given us in the book of Genesis, one being comprised in the first chapter and the first three verses of the second, the other commencing at the fourth verse of the second chapter and continuing till the end. This is so philologically certain that it were useless to ignore it. But even those who may be inclined to contest the fact that we have here the productions of two different writers, will admit that the account beginning at the first verse of the first chapter, and ending at the third verse of the second, is a complete whole in itself. And to this narrative, in order not to complicate the subject unnecessarily, we intend to confine ourselves. It will sufficient for our purpose to enquire, whether this account can be shown to be in accordance with our astronomical and geological knowledge. And for the right understanding of it the whole must be set out, so that the various parts may be taken in connexion with one another.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
In one respect the theory of Hugh Miller agrees with that advocated by Dr. Buckland and Archdeacon Pratt. Both these theories divest the Mosaic narrative of real accordance with fact; both assume that appearances only, not facts, are described, and that in riddles, which would never have been suspected to be such, had we not arrived at the truth from other sources. It would be difficult for controversialists to cede more completely the point in dispute, or to admit more explicitly that the Mosaic narrative does not represent correctly the history of the universe up to the time of man. At the same time, the upholders of each theory see insuperable objections in details to that of their allies, and do not pretend to any firm faith in their own. How can it be otherwise when the task proposed is to evade the plain meaning of language, and to introduce obscurity into one of the simplest stories ever told, for the sake of making it accord with the complex system of the universe which modern science has unfolded? The spectacle of able and, we doubt not, conscientious writers engaged in attempting the impossible is painful and humiliating. They evidently do not breathe freely over their work, but shuffle and stumble over their difficulties in a piteous manner; nor are they themselves again until they return to the pure and open fields of science.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳のお願いです。
意味論についての論文だと思いますが、和訳お願いいたします。自分でも訳してみましたが、読み返して見て分かりづらいため、和訳が上手な方の文章を参考にしたいと思います。よろしくお願いいたします。 (1)Whereas smoke is a natural sign of fire, causally connected with what it signifies, the red flag is a conventional sign of danger: it is a culturally established symbol. These distinctions between the intentional and the nonintentional, on the one hand, and between what is natural and what is conventional, or symbolic, on the other, play a central part in the theoretical investigation of meaning. (2)That the verb 'mean' is being employed in different senses in the examples that I have used so far is evident from the fact that Mary means trouble is ambiguous: it can be taken like Mary means well or like Smoke means fire. Indeed, with a little imagination it is possible to devise a context, or scenario, in which the verb 'mean' in Mary means trouble can be plausibly interpreted in the way that it would normally be interpreted in That red flag means danger. Most language-utterances, we shall see, depend for their interpretation upon the context in which they are used. And the vast majority of them have a wider range of meanings than first come to mind. Utterances containing the word 'meaning' (or the verb 'mean') are no different from other English utterances in this respect.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願いします
Think of it this way. Each of us is, more or less, an egg. Each of us is a unique, irreplaceable soul enclosed in a fragile shell. This is true of me, and it is true of each of you. And each of us, to a greater or lesser degree, is "The System". The System is supposed to protect us, but sometimes it take on a life of its own, and then it begins to kill us and cause us to kill others-coldly, efficiently, systematically.
- 締切済み
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
Without, therefore, entertaining the question as to the connexion between Body and Mind, it is enough to say that under any view concerning the nature of this connexion, we are justified in drawing a distinction between activities which are accompanied by feelings, and activities which, so far as we can see, are not so accompanied. If this is allowed, there seems, to be no term better fitted to convey the distinction than the term Choice ; agents that are able to choose their actions are agents that are able to feel the stimuli which determine the choice. Such being our Criterion of Mind, it admits of being otherwise stated, and in a more practically applicable manner, in the following words which I quote from " Animal Intelli gence :" — " It is, then, adaptive action by a living organism in cases where the inherited machinery of the nervous system does not furnish data for our prevision of what the adaptive action must necessarily be — it is only here that we recognize the objective evidence of mind. The criterion of mind, therefore, which I propose, and to which I shall adhere throughout the present volume, is as follows : — Does the organism learn to make new adjustments, or to modify old ones, in accordance with the results of its own individual experience ? If it does so, the fact cannot be merely due to reflex action in the sense above described ; for it is impossible that heredity can have provided in advance for innovations upon or alterations of its machinery during the lifetime of a particular individual".
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
From this statement of the case it will be apparent that our knowledge of mental activities in any organism other than our own is neither subjective nor objective. That it is not subjective I need not wait to show. That it is not objective* may be rendered obvious by a few moments' reflec tion. .For it is evident that mental activities in other organisms can never be to us objects of direct knowledge ; as I have just said, we can only infer their existence from the objective sources supplied by observable activities of such organisms.. Therefore all our knowledge of mental activities other than our own really consists of an inferential inter pretation of bodily activities — this interpretation being founded on our subjective knowledge of our own mental activities. By inference we project, as it were, the known patterns of our own mental chromograph [chromograph=chromolithograph] on what is to us the otherwise blank screen of another mind ; and our only knowledge of the processes there taking place is really due to such a projection of our own subjectively. This matter has been well and clearly presented by the late Professor Clifford, who has coined the exceedingly appropriate term eject (in contradistinction to subject and object), whereby to designate the distinctive character of a mind (or mental process) other than our own in its relation to our own. I shall therefore adopt this convenient term, and speak of all our possible knowledge of other minds as ejective.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 和訳お願い致します。
Now in this necessarily ejective method of enquiry, what is the kind of activities that we are entitled to regard as indicative of mind ? I certainly do not so regard the flowing of a river or the blowing of a wind. Why ? First, because the subjects are too remote in kind from my own organism to admit of my drawing any reasonable analogy between them and it; and, secondly, because the activities which they present are invariably of the same kind under the same circumstances : they therefore offer no evidence of that which I deem the distinctive character of my own mind as such — Consciousness. In other words, two conditions require to he satisfied before we even begin to imagine that observable activities are indicative of mind ; the activities must be dis played by a living organism, and they must be of a kind to suggest the presence of consciousness. What then is to be taken as the criterion of consciousness ? Subjectively, no criterion is either needful or possible ; for to me, individually, nothing can be more ultimate than my own consciousness, and, therefore, my consciousness cannot admit of any criterion having a claim to a higher certainty. But, ejectively, some such criterion is required, and as my consciousness cannot come within the territory of a foreign consciousness, I can only appreciate the latter through the agency of ambassadors — these ambassadors being, as I have now so frequently said, the observable activities of an organism. The next question, therefore, is, What activities of an organism are to be taken as indicative of consciousness ? The answer that comes most readily is, — All activities that are indicative of Choice; wherever wo see a living organism apparently exerting inten tional choice, we may infer that it is conscious choice, and, therefore, that the organism has a mind. But physiology shows that this answer will not do ; for, while not disputing whether there is any mind without the power of conscious choice, physiology, as we shall see in the next chapter, is very firm in denying that all apparent choice is due to mind.
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
- 生物論文を和訳２
下記の英文を訳してください 1)There is a residue on each chain every 3・4 A.in the z-direc-tion.We have assumed an angle of 36゜ between structure repeats after 10 residues on each chain,that is,after 34 A. The distance of a phophates atom from the fibre axis is 10 A. As the phophates are on the outside,cations have easy access to them. 2)The structure is an open nne,and its water contents we would expect the bases to tilt so that the structure could become more compact. 3)The novel feature of the structure is the manner in which the two chains are held together by the purine and pyrimidine bases.The planes of the bases are perpendicular to the fibre axis.They are joined together in pairs,a single base from one chain being hydrogen-bonded to a single bases from the other chain,so that the two lie side by side with identical z-co-ordinates.One of the pair must be a purine and the other a pyrimidine for bonding to occur.
- 締切済み
- 英語
- 英語の長文の和訳をお願いします。
途中、並び替えや空欄があります。(A)にはsaying，linguistic，way，somethingが、(B)にはwhich，what，how，whereのどれかが入ります。お願い致します。 Human beings learn to communicate with each other through nonlinguistic means as well as linguistic ones. All of us are familiar with the saying, “It wasn´t what he said ; It was the way that he said it”when, by using the word (A), we mean something about the particular voice quality that was in evidence, or the sat of a shoulder, or the obvious tension in certain muscles. A message may even be contradicted by the accompanying tone and gestures, so that each of “I´m ready,”“You´re beautiful,”and“I don´t know where he is”can mean the opposite of any literal interpretation. Often we experience difficulty in pinpointing exactly (B) in the communication causes the change of meaning, and any statement we make as to the sources of the discrepancy between the literal meaning of the words and the total message communicated is likely to be expressed in extremely impressionistic terms. It is likely to refer to something like a sparkle in a person´s eye, or a “threatening”gesture, or an “insulting”manner. We are likely to make similar impressionistic statements about communication between members of different cultures. Sometimes we remark that Frenchmen “talk with their hands,”Japanese “smile”on inappropriate occasions, and American Indians are “stone-faced.”As a result, (tend,people,we,stereotype,to,who) come from other linguistic and cultural backgrounds on the basis of impressions about their language, gestures, customary movements, and uses of space． 以上です。
- ベストアンサー
- 英語
