托?？谡Z中經(jīng)常會問到大家關(guān)于科技類的話題：

　　Some people believe that modern technology has made our lives simpler. Others believethat modern technology has made our lives more complicated. What is your opinion?

　　讓我們首先一起來閱讀羅素的這篇On science and good life.

　　既可以積累素材，也可以激發(fā)靈感：

　　There is probably no limit to what science can do in the way of increasing positive excellence. Health has already been greatly improved; in spite of the lamentations of those who idealize the past, we live longer and have fewer illnesses than any class or nation in the eighteenth century. With a little more application of the knowledge we already possess, we might be much healthier than we are. And future discoveries are likely to accelerate this process enormously.

　　科學在增加美好的積極因素方面所能做的事情，很可能是沒有止境的。衛(wèi)生條件已經(jīng)得到極大的改善;不管那些懷舊者如何哀嘆，與十八世紀任何階級和民族相比，我們畢竟延長了壽命并減少了疾病。只要把我們已有的知識稍加廣泛地應(yīng)用，我們就會比現(xiàn)在更加健康。未來的發(fā)現(xiàn)很可能會極大地加快這方面的進程。

　　So far, it has been physical science that has had most effect upon our lives, but in the future physiology and psychology are likely to be far more potent. When we have discovered how character depends upon physiological conditions, we shall be able, if we choose, to produce far more of the type of human beings that we admire. Intelligence, artistic capacity, benevolence—all these things no doubt could be increased by science. There seems scarcely any limit to what could be done in the way of producing a good world, if only men would use science wisely.

　　迄今為止，對我們生活影響最大的當數(shù)自然科學，但是在將來，生理學和心理學的影響很可能遠在它之上。當我們發(fā)現(xiàn)了性格如何依賴于生理條件時，只要我們愿意，我們就能產(chǎn)生出大量我們所稱羨的那種人。智力，藝術(shù)能力，仁慈---所有這些東西無疑可因科學而增加。只要人們明智地利用科學，在創(chuàng)造美好世界方面所能做的事情，幾乎是沒有止境的。

　　There is a certain attitude about the application of science to human life with which I have some sympathy, though I do not, in the last analysis, agree with it. It is the attitude of those who dread what is ‘unnatural.’ Rousseau is, of course, the great protagonist of the view in Europe. In Asia, Lao-Tze has set it forth even more persuasively, and 2400 years sooner. I think there is a mixture of truth and falsehood in the admiration of ‘nature, which it is important to disentangle. To begin with, what is ‘natural?’ Roughly speaking, anything to which the speaker was accustomed in childhood. Lao-Tze objects to roads and carriages and boats, all of which were probably unknown in the village where he was born

　　關(guān)于科學應(yīng)用到人生這個問題，存在著一種觀點，對這種觀點，我有些同感，但是最后分析起來，我是不能同意的。 它是那些害怕‘不自然的’東西的人所持有的觀點。當然，盧梭是歐洲這一觀點的偉大創(chuàng)始人。在亞洲，老子對這一觀點的闡述，更是動人心弦，而且要早兩千四百年。我認為，他們對于‘自然’的贊美，不過是真理與謬誤的混合物，而理清這一問題是很重要的。首先要問，什么東西是‘自然的?’泛泛說來，是說話者幼年時所習慣的東西。老子反對車道和舟車，這恐怕是他所出生的那個村子不知車道和舟車為何物的緣故。

　　Rousseau has got used to these things, and does not regard them as against nature. But he would no doubt have thundered against railways if he had lived to see them. Clothes and cooking are too ancient to be denounced by most of the apostles of nature, though they all object to new fashions in either. Birth control is thought wicked by people who tolerate celibacy, because the former is a new violation of nature and the latter an ancient one. In these ways those who preach ‘nature’ are inconsistent, and one is tempted to regard them as mere conservatives.