It's wonderful to be back. I love this wonderful gathering. And you must be wondering, "What on earth? Have they put up the wrong slide?" No, no. Look at this magnificent beast, and ask the question: Who designed it?
Lijepo je opet biti tu. Volim ovakva divna okupljanja Mora da se pitate, "što je to dovraga? Jesu li stavili pogrešan slide?" Ne, ne Pogledajte ovu predivnu životinju i zapitajte se -- tko je dizajner? Ovo je TED.
This is TED; this is Technology, Entertainment, Design, and there's a dairy cow. It's a quite wonderfully designed animal. And I was thinking, how do I introduce this? And I thought, well, maybe that old doggerel by Joyce Kilmer, you know: "Poems are made by fools like me, but only God can make a tree." And you might say, "Well, God designed the cow."
Ovo je Tehnologija, Zabava, Dizajn... a tu je i krava muzara. Predivno dizajnirana životinja. Razmišljao sam, kako da ovo predstavim? Pa sam pomislio, pa možda putem grubih stihova Joyca Kilmera, znate ono: "stihovi stvaraju glupani poput mene, ali samo Bog može stvoriti drvo." A vi možete reći, "Pa, Bog je dizajnirao kravu."
But, of course, God got a lot of help. This is the ancestor of cattle. This is the aurochs. And it was designed by natural selection, the process of natural selection, over many millions of years. And then it became domesticated, thousands of years ago. And human beings became its stewards, and, without even knowing what they were doing, they gradually redesigned it and redesigned it and redesigned it. And then more recently, they really began to do reverse engineering on this beast and figure out just what the parts were, how they worked and how they might be optimized -- how they might be made better.
Ali, naravno, Bog je imao veliku pomoć.. Ovo je predak goveda. Ovo je Oriks. Dizajniran je prirodnom selekcijom, procesom prirodne selekcije tijekom mnoštva milijona godina. I onda je pripitomljen prije mnogo tisuća godina. Ljudi su postali njegovi skrbnici, i bez da su znali što rade uspješno su ga redizajnirali i redizajnirali i redizajnirali. I onda su, nedavno, ozbiljno započeli provoditi svojevrsni obratni inženjering na ovom biću da shvate koji su joj dijelovi, kako rade i kako se mogu optimizirati -- kako postići da bolje rade.
Now, why am I talking about cows? Because I want to say that much the same thing is true of religions. Religions are natural phenomena -- they're just as natural as cows. They have evolved over millennia. They have a biological base, just like the aurochs. They have become domesticated, and human beings have been redesigning their religions for thousands of years. This is TED, and I want to talk about design. Because what I've been doing for the last four years -- really since the first time you saw me -- some of you saw me at TED when I was talking about religion -- and in the last four years, I've been working just about non-stop on this topic. And you might say it's about the reverse engineering of religions. Now that very idea, I think, strikes terror in many people, or anger, or anxiety of one sort or another. And that is the spell that I want to break.
Zašto ja sada govorim o kravama? Zato što želim reći kako je isto i sa religijama. Religije su prirodni fenomen. Prirodne su poput krava. Evoluirale su kroz tisućljeća. Imaju biološku bazu poput Oriksa. Pripitomljene su, a ljudi su ih redizajnirali tisućama godina. Ovo je TED, i ja želim govoriti o dizajnu. Zbog toga jer to radim posljednje četiri godine, zapravo odkad ste me prvi put vidjeli -- neki od vas vidjeli su me na TED-u kada sam govorio o religiji, i u zadnje četiri godine radio sam neprestano na ovoj temi. I možete reći da je riječ o obratnom inženjeringu religije. Mislim da ta ideja užasava mnoge, ili ih ljuti ili im stvara tjeskobu. To je čarolija koju želim prekinuti.
I want to say, no, religions are an important natural phenomenon. We should study them with the same intensity that we study all the other important natural phenomena, like global warming, as we heard so eloquently last night from Al Gore. Today's religions are brilliantly designed -- brilliantly designed. They are immensely powerful social institutions and many of their features can be traced back to earlier features that we can really make sense of by reverse engineering. And, as with the cow, there's a mixture of evolutionary design -- designed by natural selection itself -- and intelligent design -- more or less intelligent design -- and redesigned by human beings who are trying to redesign their religions.
Želim reći: ne, religije su važan prirodni fenomen. Trebamo ih proučavati s istim intenzitetom kao što to radimo i sa ostalim prirodnim fenomenima, poput globalnog zatopljenje, što smo tako rječito čuli od Al Gorea. Današnje su religije savršeno dizajnirane, savršeno dizajnirane. One su silno moćne društvene institucije i mnoge njihove značajke možemo povezati s ranijim značajkama koje uistinu možemo shvatiti tek ako koristimo obratni inženjering. I, kao kod krava, tu je mješavina evolucijskog dizajna, dizajniranog prirodnom selekcijom, i inteligentnog dizajna -- više ili manje inteligentnog dizajna -- redizajniranog od strane ljudi koji su pokušavali redizajnirati svoje religije.
You don't do book talks at TED, but I'm going to have just one slide about my book, because there is one message in it which I think this group really needs to hear. And I would be very interested to get your responses to this. It's the one policy proposal that I make in the book, at this time, when I claim not to know enough about religion to know what other policy proposals to make. And it's one that echoes remarks that you've heard already today.
Na TED-u se ne održavaju govori iz knjiga, ali ja ću imati samo jedan slide o mojoj knjizi, jer je u njoj jedna poruka koju ova grupa stvarno mora čuti. Volio bi dobiti vaš odgovor na ovo. To je jedan politički prijedlog koji sam dao u knjizi, u vremenu kada tvrdim kako ne znam dovoljno o religiji da bi znao dovoljno da predložim drugačije. To je odjek ideja koje ste danas već čuli.
Here's my proposal, I'm going to just take a couple of minutes to explain it: Education on world religions for all of our children -- in primary school, in high school, in public schools, in private schools and in home schooling. So what I'm proposing is, just as we require reading, writing, arithmetic, American history, so we should have a curriculum on facts about all the religions of the world -- about their history, about their creeds, about their texts, their music, their symbolisms, their prohibitions, their requirements. And this should be presented factually, straightforwardly, with no particular spin, to all of the children in the country. And as long as you teach them that, you can teach them anything else you like. That, I think, is maximal tolerance for religious freedom. As long as you inform your children about other religions, then you may -- and as early as you like and whatever you like -- teach them whatever creed you want them to learn. But also let them know about other religions.
Evo mog prijedloga. Uzet ću si nekoliko minuta da ga objasnim -- obrazovanje naše djece o svjetskim religijama u osnovnim školama, srednjim školama, javnim školama, privatnim školama, i kućnom obrazovanju. Ono što predlažem je, da isto kao što zahtjevamo čitanje, pisanje, računanje, povijest, tako bi trebali imati i nastavni plan o svjetskim religijama -- o njihovoj povijesti, pravilima, tekstovima, glazbi, simbolima, zabranama, obavezama. To bi trebalo prezentirati preko činjenica, izravno bez posebnog "spina", svoj djeci u zemlji. Ukoliko ih time podučavate, možete ih podučavati i svemu ostalom. To je, mislim, maksimalna tolerancija spram religijske slobode. Ukoliko djecu podučavate ostalim religijama tada ih možete -- koliko to rano želite i što god želite, podučavati bilo kojim smjernicama koje želite da nauče. Ali ih i pustite da znaju o drugim religijama.
Now, why do I say that? Because democracy depends on an informed citizenship. Informed consent is the very bedrock of our understanding of democracy. Misinformed consent is not worth it. It's like a coin flip; it doesn't count, really. Democracy depends on informed consent. This is the way we treat people as responsible adults. Now, children below the age of consent are a special case. Parents -- I'm going to use a word that Pastor Rick just used -- parents are stewards of their children. They don't own them. You can't own your children. You have a responsibility to the world, to the state, to them, to take care of them right. You may teach them whatever creed you think is most important, but I say you have a responsibility to let them be informed about all the other creeds in the world, too.
Zašto to govorim? Jer demokracija ovisi o upućenosti građana. Upućeni pristanak je temelj našeg razumijevanja demokracije. Neupućeni pristanak nije vrijedan. To je poput bacanja novčića, jednostavno nije -- ne broji se. Demokracija ovisi o informiranosti. To je način da ljude tretiramo kao odgovorna bića. Malodobna djeca su poseban slučaj. Upotrijebiti ću riječ koju je upotrijebio pastor Rick -- roditelji su djetetovi skrbnici. Oni ih ne posjeduju. Ne možete posjedovati svoju djecu. Vi imate odgovornost prema svijetu, prema državi, prema njima, da se brinete za njih. Možete ih podučavati bilo kojim pravilima vi mislili da su najvažnija, ali ja kažem da imate odgovornost da im osigurate informiranost i o drugim idejama na svijetu.
The reason I've taken this time is I've been fascinated to hear some of the reactions to this. One reviewer for a Roman Catholic newspaper called it "totalitarian." It strikes me as practically libertarian. Is it totalitarian to require reading, writing and arithmetic? I don't think so. All I'm saying is -- and facts, facts only; no values, just facts -- about all the world's religions. Another reviewer called it "hilarious." Well, I'm really bothered by the fact that anybody would think that was hilarious. It seems to me to be such a plausible, natural extension of the democratic principles we already have that I'm shocked to think anybody would find that just ridiculous. I know many religions are so anxious about preserving the purity of their faith among their children that they are intent on keeping their children ignorant of other faiths. I don't think that's defensible. But I'd really be pleased to get your answers on that -- any reactions to that -- later.
Razlog što sam si uzeo ovo vrijeme je što sam fasciniran nekim reakcijama koje čujem na ovo. Jedan ocjenjivač za Rimokatoličke novine to je nazvao "totalitarno". To mi je gotovo libertarijanski. Je li totalitarno zahtjevati čitanje, pisanje i računanje? Mislim da nije. Sve što tražim su -- činjenice. Samo činjenice. Bez vrijednosti, samo činjenice o svjetskim religijama. Drugi je to nazvao "smiješnim". Pa, stvarno me smeta da bi bilo tko pomislio kako je to smiješno. Čini mi se da je to vjerojatan, prirodni produžetak demokratskih načela koje već imamo, da sam šokiran time da to netko smatra smiješnim. Znam da se mnoge religije trude očuvati čistoću vjere preko svoje djece da su naumili držati ih u neznanju o drugim vjerama. Ne mislim da je to dobar razlog, ali bi stvarno volio da dobijem o tome vaše odgovore -- bilo kakvu reakciju na to -- kasnije. Ali sad ću nastaviti.
But now I'm going to move on. Back to the cow. This picture, which I pulled off the web -- the fellow on the left is really an important part of this picture. That's the steward. Cows couldn't live without human stewards -- they're domesticated. They're a sort of ectosymbiont. They depend on us for their survival. And Pastor Rick was just talking about sheep. I'm going to talk about sheep, too. There's a lot of serendipitous convergence here. How clever it was of sheep to acquire shepherds!
Vratimo se kravi. Ovu sliku, koju sam uzeo s interneta -- dečko s lijeva je stvarno bitan dio ove slike. to je skrbnik. Krave ne bi trebale živjeti bez ljudske skrbi -- one su pripitomljene. To je svojevrsna moć simbioze. Njihovo preživljavanje ovisi o nama. I pastor Rick je govorio o ovcama. I ja ću govoriti o ovcama. Baš je to sretna slučajnosti. Kako je od ovaca bilo pametno što su si nabavile skrbnike!
(Laughter)
Zamislite što im je to donijelo.
Think of what this got them. They could outsource all their problems: protection from predators, food-finding ...
Riješili su sve svoje probleme: zaštićene su od grabežljivaca, daje im se hrana, brine se o njihovom zdravlju.
(Laughter)
... health maintenance.
(Laughter)
The only cost in most flocks -- not even this -- a loss of free mating. What a deal! "How clever of sheep!" you might say. Except, of course, it wasn't the sheep's cleverness. We all know sheep are not exactly rocket scientists -- they're not very smart. It wasn't the cleverness of the sheep at all. They were clueless. But it was a very clever move. Whose clever move was it? It was the clever move of natural selection itself.
Jedina cijena većine stada je gubitak slobode parenja. Dobra pogodba. "Kako su samo pametne te ovce!" mogli biste reći. Osim, naravno, ako to nije bila ovčja pamet. Svi znamo da one baš i nisu vrhunski znanstvenici -- nisu jako pametne. To uopće nije bila njihova pamet. Nisu imale pojma. Ali, bio je to vrlo pametan potez. Čiji pametan potez? Bio je to pametan potez same prirodne selekcije.
Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA with Jim Watson, once joked about what he called Orgel's Second Rule. Leslie Orgel is a molecular biologist, brilliant guy, and Orgel's Second Rule is: Evolution is cleverer than you are. Now, that is not Intelligent Design -- not from Francis Crick. Evolution is cleverer than you are. If you understand Orgel's Second Rule, then you understand why the Intelligent Design movement is basically a hoax.
Francis Crick, suotkrivač strukture DNK sa Jimom Watsonom, jednom se našalio s nečim što je nazvao Orgelovo drugo pravilo. Leslie Orgel je još uvijek molekularni biolog, predivna osoba, a njegovo je drugo pravilo: evolucija je pametnija od vas samih. I sada, to nije inteligentni dizajn -- ne od Francisa Cricka Evolucija je pametnija od vas samih. Ako razumijeta Orgelovo drugo pravilo, onda razumijete zašto je inteligentni dizajn obična prijevara.
The designs discovered by the process of natural selection are brilliant, unbelievably brilliant. Again and again biologists are fascinated with the brilliance of what's discovered. But the process itself is without purpose, without foresight, without design. When I was here four years ago, I told the story about an ant climbing a blade of grass. And why the ant was doing it was because its brain had been infected with a lancet fluke that was needed to get into the belly of a sheep or a cow in order to reproduce. So it was sort of a spooky story.
Dizajni koji su nastali kao posljedica prirodne selekcije su brilijantni, nevjerojatno brilijantni. Iznova i iznova biolozi su fascinirani brilijantnošću onog što otkrivaju. Ali sam proces je bez svrhe, bez planiranja, bez dizajna. Kada sam prije četiri godine bio ovdje, ispričao sam priču o mravu koji se penje uz vlat trave. Zašto je to mrav radio? Pa, zato jer je njegov um bio inficiran lancetnim iverkom koji je -- trebao dospjeti u želudac ovce ili krave u svrhu reprodukcije. Bila je to pomalo stravična priča.
And I think some people may have misunderstood. Lancet flukes aren't smart. I submit that the intelligence of a lancet fluke is down there, somewhere between petunia and carrot. They're not really bright. They don't have to be. The lesson we learn from this is: you don't have to have a mind to be a beneficiary. The design is there in nature, but it's not in anybody's head. It doesn't have to be. That's the way evolution works. Question: Was domestication good for sheep? It was great for their genetic fitness.
I mislim da su je neki ljudi krivo shvatili. Lancetni iverak nije pametan. Tvrdio sam da je njegova inteligencija ovdje dolje negdje između petunije i mrkve. Oni nisu stvarno pametni. Ni ne trebaju biti. Lekcija koju smo ovdje naučili je kako ne trebamo biti pametni da bi bili povlašteni. Dizajn se nalazi u prirodi, ali nije u ničijoj glavi. Ni ne treba biti. Tako radi evolucija. Pitanje -- da li je pripitomljavanje bilo dobro za ovce? Bilo je sjajno za njihov genetički rast.
And here I want to remind you of a wonderful point that Paul MacCready made at TED three years ago. Here's what he said: "Ten thousand years ago, at the dawn of agriculture, human population, plus livestock and pets, was approximately a tenth of one percent of the terrestrial vertebrate landmass." That was just 10,000 years ago. Yesterday, in biological terms. What is it today? Does anybody remember what he told us? 98 percent. That is what we have done on this planet.
Ovdje vas želim podsjetiti na jednu zanimljivu misao koju je stvorio Paul MacCready na TED-u prije tri godine. Rekao je sljedeće. Prije 10,000 godina u svitanju agrikulture, Ljudska populacija, sa stokom i kućnim ljubimcima, bila je približno 0,1 posto biomase zemaljskih kralježnjaka. To je bilo samo prije 10,000 godina U biološkim terminima, to je bilo jučer. Koliko je to danas? Sjeća li se itko što nam je rekao? 98 posto. To je što smo napravili na ovom planetu.
Now, I talked to Paul afterwards -- I wanted to check to find out how he'd calculated this, and get the sources and so forth -- and he also gave me a paper that he had written on this. And there was a passage in it which he did not present here and I think it is so good, I'm going to read it to you: "Over billions of years on a unique sphere, chance has painted a thin covering of life: complex, improbable, wonderful and fragile. Suddenly, we humans -- a recently arrived species no longer subject to the checks and balances inherent in nature -- have grown in population, technology and intelligence to a position of terrible power. We now wield the paintbrush." We heard about the atmosphere as a thin layer of varnish. Life itself is just a thin coat of paint on this planet. And we're the ones that hold the paintbrush. And how can we do that?
Razgovarao sam kasnija sa Paulom. Htio sam saznati kako je to on izračunao, dobiti izvore i tako dalje. Dao mi je papir na kojem je to zapisao. U njemu je bio odlomak koji ovdje nije iznosio i mislim da je toliko dabar da ću vam ga pročitati "Tijekom milijuna godina na jedinstvenoj kugli, prilike su nanjele tanak sloj života: složen, nevjerojatan, predivan i krhak. Iznenada, mi ljudi, novopridošla vrsta koja više ne podliježe prirodnim zakonitostima, izrasla je u brojnosti, tehnologiji i inteligenciji do strašne razine moći. Sada mi držimo kist." Čuli smo o atmosferi kao tankom prozirnom sloju. Sam život je tanak sloj boje na ovom planetu. A mi smo oni koji drže kist. Kako nam to uspjeva?
The key to our domination of the planet is culture. And the key to culture is religion. Suppose Martian scientists came to Earth. They would be puzzled by many things. Anybody know what this is? I'll tell you what it is. This is a million people gathering on the banks of the Ganges in 2001, perhaps the largest single gathering of human beings ever, as seen from satellite photograph. Here's a big crowd. Here's another crowd in Mecca. Martians would be amazed by this. They'd want to know how it originated, what it was for and how it perpetuates itself.
Ključ za svjetskom dominacijom leži u kulturi, a ključ kulture je religija. Pretpostavimo da Marsovski znanstvenici dođu na zemlju. Čudili bi se mnogim stvarima. Zna li netko što je ovo? Reći ću vam. To je milijun ljudi okupljenih na obalama Gangesa 2001, možda najveće okupljanje ljudi ikad, kao što vidimo na satelitskoj snimci. Velika je gužva. Evo još jedne gužve u Meki. Marsovci bi bili zapanjeni. Ne bi znali kako je to organizirano, što je svrha i kako se ponavlja. Zapravo ću ovo preskočiti.
Actually, I'm going to pass over this. The ant isn't alone. There's all sorts of wonderful cases of species which -- in that case -- A parasite gets into a mouse and needs to get into the belly of a cat. And it turns the mouse into Mighty Mouse, makes it fearless, so it runs out in the open, where it'll be eaten by a cat. True story. In other words, we have these hijackers -- you've seen this slide before, from four years ago -- a parasite that infects the brain and induces even suicidal behavior, on behalf of a cause other than one's own genetic fitness.
Mrav nije sam. Ima mnogo slučajeva među vrstama. U ovom slučaju parazit ulazi u miša i treba dospjeti u probavni sustav mačke. Pretvara miša u Super Miša -- stvara ga neustrašivim, pa tako trči na otvorenom, gdje će ga pojesti mačka. Istinita priča. Drugim riječima, mi imamo ove putnike -- vidjeli ste već ovu sliku prije četiri godine -- parazit koji inficira mozak i inducira samoubilačko ponašanje koje nije u interesu vaših gena.
Does that ever happen to us? Yes, it does -- quite wonderfully. The Arabic word "Islam" means "submission." It means "surrender of self-interest to the will of Allah." But I'm not just talking about Islam. I'm talking also about Christianity. This is a parchment music page that I found in a Paris bookstall 50 years ago. And on it, it says, in Latin: "Semen est verbum Dei. Sator autem Christus." The word of God is the seed and the sower of the seed is Christ. Same idea. Well, not quite. But in fact, Christians, too ... glory in the fact that they have surrendered to God. I'll give you a few quotes. "The heart of worship is surrender. Surrendered people obey God's words, even if it doesn't make sense." Those words are by Rick Warren. Those are from "The Purpose Driven Life."
Da li se to ikada događa nama? Da, događa se -- i to prilično fascinantno. Arapska riječ "islam" znači pokornost. Znači predaju vlastitog interesa volji Allaha. Međutim, ne govorim samo o islamu. Govorim i o kršćanstvu. Ovo je pergament koju sam pronašao u Parizu prije 50 godina. I na njoj piše, na latinskom: (Latinski) "Riječ Božja je sjeme, a žanje ga Krist." Ista ideja! Zapravo i ne baš. Ali u biti, to je Kršćanski hvalospjev činjenici da su se predali Bogu. Navesti ću nekoliko navoda. Srce bogoslužja je predaja. Predani ljudi slušaju Božje riječi i kada one nemaju smisla." To su riječi Ricka Warrena. One su iz knjige "Život vođen smislom".
And I want to turn now, briefly, to talk about that book, which I've read. You've all got a copy, and you've just heard the man. And what I want to do now is say a bit about this book from the design standpoint, because I think it's actually a brilliant book. First of all, the goal -- and you heard just now what the goal is -- it's to bring purpose to the lives of millions, and he has succeeded. Is it a good goal? In itself, I'm sure we all agree, it is a wonderful goal. He's absolutely right. There are lots of people out there who don't have purpose in their life, and bringing purpose to their life is a wonderful goal. I give him an A+ on this.
Sada bi rekao par riječi o toj knjizi, koju sam pročitao. Svi imate primjerak. Upravo ste čuli čovjeka. Želim vam reći ponešto o ovoj knjizi sa stajališta dizajna, jer mislim da je ovo stvarno dobra knjiga. Prije svega, cilj. A upravo ste čuli što je cilj. Cilj je bio naći svrhu života za milijune ljudi, i uspio je. Da li je to dobar cilj? Sam po sebi, siguran sam da se slažemo, to je dobar cilj. On je apsolutno u pravu. Ima mnogo ljudi koji nemaju cilj u životu, a donošenje cilja njihovim životima je odličan cilj. Dajem mu +5 za to.
(Laughter)
Je li cilj postignut?
Is the goal achieved? Yes. Thirty million copies of this book. Al Gore, eat your heart out.
Da. 30 milijuna prodanih primjeraka. Ale Gore, svisni od muke.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
Just exactly what Al is trying to do, Rick is doing. This is a fantastic achievement. And the means -- how does he do it?
Upravo ono što je htio Al, napravio je Rick. Do je zapanjujuće postignuće. A način -- kako je to postigao?
It's a brilliant redesign of traditional religious themes -- updating them, quietly dropping obsolete features, putting new interpretations on other features. This is the evolution of religion that's been going on for thousands of years, and he's just the latest brilliant practitioner of it. I don't have to tell you this; you just heard the man. Excellent insights into human psychology, wise advice on every page. Moreover, he invites us to look under the hood. I really appreciated that. For instance, he has an appendix where he explains his choice of translations of different Bible verses. The book is clear, vivid, accessible, beautifully formatted. Just enough repetition. That's really important. Every time you read it or say it, you make another copy in your brain. Every time you read it or say it, you make another copy in your brain.
To je predivni redizajn tradicionalne religije -- ažurirajući ih, potiho sklanjajući zastarjele načine, pronalazeći nove interpretacije njihovih potvrda. To je religijska revolucija na koju smo čekali tisućama godina, a on je zadnji praktičar toga. Nisam vam to trebao reći. Upravo ste čuli čovjeka. Izvrstan uvid u ljudsku psihologiju, mudar savjet na svakoj stranici. Štoviše, pozvao nas je da pogledamo ispod haube. To stvarno cijenim. Kao primjer, postoji dodatak u kojem objašnjava svoj izbor između različitih prijevoda Biblije. Knjiga je jasna, pristupačna, prelijepo dizajnirana. Sasvim dovoljno ponavljanja. To je vrlo važno. Svaki put kada je pročitate ili izgovorite, stvarate novu kopiju u mozgu. Svaki put kada je pročitate ili izgovorite, stvarate novu kopiju u mozgu.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
With me, everybody --
Ponovite sa mnom: Svaki put kada je pročitate ili izgovorite,
(Audience and Dan Dennett) Every time you read it or say it, you make another copy in your brain.
stvarate novu kopiju u mozgu. Hvala.
Thank you.
A sad dolazimo do mog problema
And now we come to my problem. Because I'm absolutely sincere in my appreciation of all that I said about this book. But I wish it were better. I have some problems with the book. And it would just be insincere of me not to address those problems. I wish he could do this with a revision, a Mark 2 version of his book. "The truth will set you free." That's what it says in the Bible, and it's something that I want to live by, too.
Jer sam potpuno iskren u svom poštivanju prema svemu što sam rekao o ovoj knjizi. Ali bih volio da je bilo bolje. Imam nekih problema s knjigom. I bilo bi neodgovorno od mene da to ne istaknem. Volio bih da je ovo napravio s revizijom, drugom izdanju knjige. "Istina će vas osloboditi." -- to je ono što kaže Biblija, i to je nešto u što želim vjerovati.
My problem is, some of the bits in it I don't think are true. Now some of this is a difference of opinion. And that's not my main complaint, that's worth mentioning. Here's a passage -- it's very much what he said, anyway: "If there was no God we would all be accidents, the result of astronomical random chance in the Universe. You could stop reading this book because life would have no purpose or meaning or significance. There would be no right or wrong and no hope beyond your brief years on Earth." Now, I just do not believe that. By the way, I find -- Homer Groening's film presented a beautiful alternative to that very claim. Yes, there is meaning and a reason for right or wrong. We don't need a belief in God to be good or to have meaning in us. But that, as I said, is just a difference of opinion. That's not what I'm really worried about.
Moj je problem za neke pojmove nisam siguran da su istiniti. Nešto od toga je razlika u mišljenju, i to nije moj glavni prigovor. To vrijedi spomenuti. Ovo je odlomak -- govori mnogo o tome što je htio reći. "Kada ne bi bilo Boga svi bismo bili slučajnost, rezultat astronomske slučajnosti u Svemiru. Trebali biste prestati čitati ovi knjigu jer život nebi imao svrhe, smisla niti značenja. Ne bi bilo pravilnog ili krivog i ne bi bilo nade u životu provedenom na Zemlji." Ja jednostavno u to ne vjerujem. Naime, film Homera Groeninga predstavlja bolju alternativu toj tvrdnji. Da, postoji razlog za pravo i krivo. Ne trebamo vjerovati u boga da bi bili bolji ili imali svrhu. Ali to je samo razlika u mišljenju. To nije ono o čemu trenutno brinem
How about this: "God designed this planet's environment just so we could live in it." I'm afraid that a lot of people take that sentiment to mean that we don't have to do the sorts of things that Al Gore is trying so hard to get us to do. I am not happy with that sentiment at all. And then I find this: "All the evidence available in the biological sciences supports the core proposition that the cosmos is a specially designed whole with life and mankind as its fundamental goal and purpose, a whole in which all facets of reality have their meaning and explanation in this central fact." Well, that's Michael Denton. He's a creationist. And here, I think, "Wait a minute." I read this again. I read it three or four times and I think, "Is he really endorsing Intelligent Design? Is he endorsing creationism here?" And you can't tell. So I'm sort of thinking, "Well, I don't know, I don't know if I want to get upset with this yet."
Što mislite o ovome: "Bog je stvorio ovaj planet samo kako bi mi živjeli na njemu." Bojim se da mnogi dobivaju taj osjećaj da ne trebamo raditi ono što nam Al Gore toliko uporno želi nametnuti. Uopće nisam sretan zbog tog osjećaja. A onda sam pronašao ovo: "Svi dokazi koji su dostupni biolozima podržavaju osnovnu tvrdnju da je svemir posebno dizajniran kao cjelina sa životom i ljudskom vrstom koja mu je krajnji cilj i svrha, cjelina u kojoj sva naličja stvarnosti imaju svoj smisao i objašnjenje u toj središnjoj činjenici." Pa, to je Michael Denton. On je kreacionist. I tu pomišljam, "Čekaj malo." Ponovno čitam. Pročitao sam to tri ili četiri puti i pomislio, "Da li on to stvarno promiče inteligentni dizajn? Je li ovdje podržao kreacionizam?" I ne možete biti sigurni. Pa pomislim nešto poput, "Pa, ne znam, nisam siguran da se ovime trenutno želim zamarati."
But then I read on, and I read this: "First, Noah had never seen rain, because prior to the Flood, God irrigated the earth from the ground up." I wish that sentence weren't in there, because I think it is false. And I think that thinking this way about the history of the planet, after we've just been hearing about the history of the planet over millions of years, discourages people from scientific understanding. Now, Rick Warren uses scientific terms and scientific factoids and information in a very interesting way.
Zatim sam čitao dalje i pročitao -- "Prvo, Noa nije nikad vidio kišu, jer je Bog prije potopa navodnjavao zemlju iz zemlje." Volio bi da te rečenice nema tamo jer mislim da je neistinita. I mislim kako je razmišljanje o povijesti na ovaj način, netom što smo čuli o prošlosti planeta tijekom milijuna godina, udaljuje ljude od znanstvenog razumijevanja. Rick Warren koristi znanstvene termine, činjenice i informacije na jedan vrlo zanimljiv način.
Here's one: "God deliberately shaped and formed you to serve him in a way that makes your ministry unique. He carefully mixed the DNA cocktail that created you." I think that's false. Now, maybe we want to treat it as metaphorical. Here's another one: "For instance, your brain can store 100 trillion facts. Your mind can handle 15,000 decisions a second." Well, it would be interesting to find the interpretation where I would accept that. There might be some way of treating that as true. "Anthropologists have noted that worship is a universal urge, hardwired by God into the very fiber of our being -- an inbuilt need to connect with God." Well, the sense of which I agree with him, except I think it has an evolutionary explanation.
Evo jednog -- "Bog te namjerno oblikuje da mu služiš, na način da to služenje bude jedinstveno. Pomno je zamiješao DNK koktel koji te stvorio." Mislim da je to neistina. Ali možda to želimo smatrati metaforom. Evo još jednog: "Na primjer, tvoj mozak može spremiti 100 bilijuna činjenica. Tvoj um može baratati sa 15 000 odluka u sekundi." Pa, bilo bi lijepo pronaći način na koji bi mogao prihvatiti tu tvrdnju. Možda postoji neki način da se to smatra istinom. "Antropolozi su primijetili da je obožavanje univerzalni nagon, ugrađen od strane Boga u samu srž našeg bića, urođena potreba za povezivanja s Bogom." Pa, tu je smisao oko kojeg se slažem s njim, osim što mislim da se objašnjenje nalazi u evoluciji.
And what I find deeply troubling in this book is that he seems to be arguing that if you want to be moral, if you want to have meaning in your life, you have to be an Intelligent Designer, you have to deny the theory of evolution by natural selection. And I think, on the contrary, that it is very important to solving the world's problems that we take evolutionary biology seriously. Whose truth are we going to listen to? Well, this is from "The Purpose Driven Life": "The Bible must become the authoritative standard for my life: the compass I rely on for direction, the counsel I listen to for making wise decisions, and the benchmark I use for evaluating everything." Well maybe, OK, but what's going to follow from this?
A ono što smatram jako problematičnim u ovoj knjizi je to što se u njoj raspravlja da ako želiš bit moralan, ako želiš imati smisao u životu, moraš biti pristaša Inteligentnog dizajna - moraš poricati teoriju evolucije prirodnim odabirom. Ja naprotiv mislim da je vrlo važno za rješavanje svjetskih problema da ozbiljno shvatimo evolucijsku biologiju. Čiju čemo istinu prihvatiti? Ovu iz "Života vođenog smislom": "Biblija treba postati najviši prioritet mog života, kompas od kojeg tražim smjer, savjetnika kojeg slušam kako bi donosio mudre odluke i s kojim bi sve drugo uspoređivao." Pa možda, u redu, ali što iz ovog slijedi? A ovdje je jedan koji me brine.
And here's one that does concern me. Remember I quoted him before with this line: "Surrendered people obey God's word, even if it doesn't make sense." And that's a problem.
Zapamtite da sam ovo već citirao -- "Predani ljudi štuju Božju riječ, iako ona nema smisla." U tome je problem.
(Sighs)
"Nemoj nikad raspravljati s vragom.
"Don't ever argue with the Devil. He's better at arguing than you are, having had thousands of years to practice." Now, Rick Warren didn't invent this clever move. It's an old move. It's a very clever adaptation of religions. It's a wild card for disarming any reasonable criticism. "You don't like my interpretation? You've got a reasonable objection to it? Don't listen, don't listen! That's the Devil speaking." This discourages the sort of reasoning citizenship it seems to me that we want to have.
Bolji je u tome od tebe, jer je imao tisuće godina vježbe." Ali Rick Warren nije izmislio taj mudri potez. To je stara stvar. To je vrlo pametna religijska adaptacija. To je džoker za razoružavanje svake realne kritike. "Ne sviđa vam se moja interpretacija? Imate razuman prigovor? Ne slušajte ga, ne slušajte. To govori Vrag." Takav stav nas udaljuje od razumnosti koju, čini mi se, želimo.
I've got one more problem, then I'm through. And I'd really like to get a response if Rick is able to do it. "In the Great Commission, Jesus said, 'Go to all people of all nations and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and teach them to do everything I've told you.'" The Bible says Jesus is the only one who can save the world. We've seen many wonderful maps of the world in the last day or so. Here's one, not as beautiful as the others; it simply shows the religions of the world. Here's one that shows the sort of current breakdown of the different religions.
Za kraj, imam još jedan problem. I stvarno bih želio odgovor ako je Rick to u stanju. "U velikoj poruci Isus je rekao, Odite svim ljudima svih nacija i učinite ih mojim učenicima, krstite ih u ime Oca, Sina i Duha Svetoga, podučite ih svemu što sam vam rekao." Biblija kaže kako je Isus jedini spasitelj svijeta. Ovdje smo vidjeli mnogo predivnih krajeva svijeta u posljednjih par dana. Ovdje je jedan, ne tako lijep kao drugi. Jednostavno prikazuje svjetske religije. A ovdje je jedan koji prikazuje trenutačnu razdiobu različitih religija.
Do we really want to commit ourselves to engulfing all the other religions, when their holy books are telling them, "Don't listen to the other side, that's just Satan talking!"? It seems to me that that's a very problematic ship to get on for the future. I found this sign as I was driving to Maine recently, in front of a church: "Good without God becomes zero." Sort of cute. A very clever little meme. I don't believe it and I think this idea, popular as it is -- not in this guise, but in general -- is itself one of the main problems that we face.
Želimo li stvarno učiniti ujediniti sve ostale religije kada im njihove svete knjige govore "Ne slušaj drugu stranu, to Vrag govori!" Čini mi se da je to veoma nepouzdan brod na putu za budućnost. Pronašao sam ovaj zapis nedavno, kada sam vozio u Maine, ispred crkve: "Dobrota bez Boga je ništa." Simpatična igra riječi [na engleskom]. Pametan mali "mem". Ne mislim da je to istina i mislim da je ta ideja, iako popularna glavni problem s kojim smo suočeni. Ako ste poput mene, poznajete mnogo divnih, predanih, angažiranih
If you are like me, you know many wonderful, committed, engaged atheists, agnostics, who are being very good without God. And you also know many religious people who hide behind their sanctity instead of doing good works. So, I wish we could drop this meme. I wish this meme would go extinct.
ateista i agnostika, koji su vrlo dobri i bez boga. I isto tako možda znate mnoge ljude koji se skrivaju iza svoje svetosti umjesto da rade dobra djela. Zato bih volio da odbacimo ovaj mem. Želim da taj mem izumre.
Thanks very much for your attention.
Puno vam hvala na pozornosti.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)