进化论与创世论

<圣经·创世记>中说:人和世界是上帝在七天之内创造出来的.上帝创造万物的原则是各从其类,即各物种自被创造出来后就是固定的,不会改变.人是上帝按照自己的形象和样式创造的,是整个创造的高峰,所以,人高于万物,是万物的管理者.这就是基督教关于世界和人类起源的创世论思想的主要内容,长期以来,人们视之为天经地义,对之坚信不疑.到18世纪,创世论还得到瑞典博物学家林奈(1707-1778)的植物分类学的有力支持.林奈对于物种作了详细的分类,这给人们一个印象:大自然从它开始的那一刻就固定了下来,每一个物种都是上帝单独、有区别地创造的,都具有自身的固定特征.     

The Genesis of Possible Worlds Semantics

This article traces the development of possible worlds semantics through the work of: Wittgenstein, 1913–1921; Feys, 1924; McKinsey, 1945; Carnap, 1945–1947; McKinsey, Tarski and Jónsson, 1947–1952; von Wright, 1951; Becker, 1952; Prior, 1953–1954; Montague, 1955; Meredith and Prior, 1956; Geach, 1960; Smiley, 1955–1957; Kanger, 1957; Hintikka, 1957; Guillaume, 1958; Binkley, 1958; Bayart, 1958–1959; Drake, 1959–1961; Kripke, 1958–1965.     

Genesis and modern theories of evolution

Summary We have seen that the theory of the evolution of the universe is very remote from being matter of absolute knowledge as its popular presentation today would have us believe. Moreover, it is based on a certain aspect of reality, namely, that of science, which cannot pretend to be the only one possible and thus to exclude the religious aspect of the world as a creation by God. The same is true regarding the evolutionary theories of life by Eigen or Vollmert, both being based on polymeric chemistry. If, therefore, Vollmert confesses, as already quoted, that he is not afraid to accept a creating God as an alternative to Darwinism, so in this respect he speaks despite everything as a believer and not as a scientist. By no means do I deny that the scientific results of Vollmert which seem to reveal the mystery of life to us can strengthen our faith — but never can faith be based on it. Faith springs from another source.Despite that, we can say today that the situation has changed principally, because both the philosophy of science and the discussions of the theories of evolution have shaken that kind of naive belief in science which in contrast to former times has turned theology into the ancilla, the maid of science.On the other hand, it would be a great misunderstanding to assume that now we can simply turn the tables. The criticism which I have partly put forward against the modern theories of evolution cannot obscure the numerous discoveries of the highest importance which are connected with them. These discoveries have provided us with an immensely deepened knowledge both of the physical conditions of the universe and of the chemical foundations of life. To conclude, I want to quote an American scientist who said: I am as confused as before — but on a much higher level. And this, I think, is the best summary of the present situation.     

The Genesis of Mind and Spirit

Spiritual life is made possible by the evolution of a human neuropsychology that requires social interdependence for its development. Extensive neuroplasticity requires experiential shaping throughout life. The evolution of frontal cortex hypertrophy suggests that much of this shaping is produced by a socially constructed virtual reality, extending beyond immediate experience. Prefrontal colonization makes possible the social scaffolding of neuroregulation, including the emotional attachments necessary for moral life. Cognitive independence from immediate environments enables symbioses with external memory systems, producing novel forms of socially constituted experience and making possible the transformative effect of religious systems upon individual biologies and psychologies.     

Aristotle on God as Principle of Genesis

Aristotle holds that there must be multiple forms of human being and those forms constitute a genos, this paper argues. Aristotle advances his claim by arguing that the strength of a polis rests on the existence of a spectrum of useful essential differences among its citizens. The paper rejects the notion that eîdos is a homonym, and argues that it signifies `form,' not `species.' Its theses are based on analysis of passages in the Ethics, Metaphysics, Politics and other works. The argument of the paper is compatible with `individual' or `particular' forms. The paper also proposes a solution to the issue of `natural slavery.'     

Johannes Oecolampadius. An Exposition of Genesis

Abstract

The frequency with which Old Testament figures use mendacious means to achieve good and even holy ends presents a challenge to John Calvin's exegesis of the Hebrew Scriptures. Following Augustine, Calvin takes a hard line against all forms of intentional deception. He rejects the solution offered by some in the Christian tradition that there are situations that call for a ‘dutiful lie’ (mendacium officiosum). This necessitates some exegetical acrobatics on Calvin's part when he interprets texts in which liars are blessed, rewarded, and praised for their actions. Calvin does not, however, reject all forms of dissimulation, which is all the more surprising given his opposition to the half-truths employed by the Nicodemites. While Calvin strives for a consistent ethic of veracity in his exegesis, however, there remains the question of how consistently truthful Calvin was in his own practices, particularly in his use of Renaissance flattery and pseudonyms.     

Neither Dichotomies Nor Dualisms; Simply Genesis

Our starting point is an article by Uchoa Angela Branco published in 2009 in Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Sciences (vol. 43, pp. 350–355) and titled “Why Dichotomies can be Misleading while Dualities Fit the Analysis of Complex Phenomena”. She criticizes the dualist uses of the distinction between subject and object, or between subjectivist and objectivist perspectives. However we subscribe to the criticism, we argue that some kind of distinction between objectual and subjectual realities is neccesary. Our argument is grounded on the classic constructivist Psychology, especially that of James Mark Baldwin’s genetic logic. We assess two theoretical perspectives -the systemic and the structuralist ones- that, in our view, are at risk of falling into objectivism because they tend to reduce subjectual activity to objectivistic or formalistic kinds of explanation. Based on a critical recovery of some ideas of the French philosopher Michel Serres, we propose that subjects and objects must be understood as interpenetrated realities in perpetual construction.     

Genesis and Intersubjectivity: Levels of Mediation

I will make a brief comment on the thesis of José C. Loredo-Narciandi and José C. Sánchez-González (2012) “Neither Dichotomies Nor Dualism; Simply Genesis”. Denying any reductionism and reification, they insists the importance of inseparable relation between subject and object, then discuss about genesis. I pointed out that their argument lacks an important element, i.e., mediator that differ from mere physical object. After discussing mediators nature, I discriminate the three level of interaction which mediated by mediator. The first is the pre-interaction level, the second is physical interaction level and the third is sign or language interaction level. The last argument of mine is about how we can solve the problem of reification and reductionism. In the argument it is pointed out that intersubjectivity is key concept for understanding and solving the problem appropriately.     

Origen's Version of Genesis 1:2

Chalcidius attributes to Origen an interpretation of the phrase in Genesis 1:2 which personifies the earth: terra autem stupidaquadam erat admiratione. This can be explained by noting thatGenesis Rabba on Genesis 1:2 supports a similar interpretationof , probably on the basis of the Aramaic roots and , bothof which denote amazement or perplexity.