Section outline

  • General

    Collapse all Expand all

  • 经验和实用主义为上帝存在提出的论据

    lesson content

    Arguments for the Existence of God from Religious Experience
    ::宗教经验为上帝存在提出的论据

    lesson content

    EPISD Informed Problem Solvers Goal
    ::EPISD 信息化解决问题者目标

    Arguments or proofs based upon experience come in two basic forms
    ::基于经验的论据或证明有两种基本形式:

    1. Direct Experience
      1. Encounter with the supernatural
        ::与超自然相遇
      2. Mystical experience- union with the deity/supernatural
        ::与神/超自然的神/超自然的神秘经验结合

      ::直接经验 与超超自然超自然超自然超自然超自然超自然 超自然超自然超自然超自然
    2. Indirect Experience
      1. Miracles
        ::奇迹

      ::间接经验奇迹

    For many religious people there is in the center of their religious nature the feeling that there is something more than their individual consciousness could contact. There is a sense of something "more" or bigger than anything in the known universe. This issues into a hypothesis or idea of a supernatural reality or dimension of reality beyond that which normal sensation can encounter.
    ::对于许多宗教人士来说,宗教性质的核心是感觉有比他们个人意识所能接触的更多的东西。 在已知的宇宙中,有一种“更多”或更大的感觉。 这在超自然现实的假说或思想或现实的维度上引起了超出正常感觉所能够遇到的范畴的问题。

     A Religious experience is an encounter of a human being with a supernatural being, be it a deity or an emissary or intermediary for the deity, nevertheless a spiritual entity. It is a numinal experience. Religious experiences are for the most part, individual and esoteric.
    ::宗教经历是人类与超自然的相遇,无论是神还是神的使者或中间人,但还是精神实体,是一种纯净的经历,宗教经历大部分是个人和通俗的。

    The mystical experience is a particular variety of religious experience in which the subject is transformed and reports the loss of individuality, the oneness of all reality, union with the deity, the unity of the subject of the experience with the object of the experience. It is an experience which posits the oneness of all reality and the unity of all. In particular, the Mystical Experience involves the unity of the subject with its object (the deity, the totality).
    ::神秘经验是各种宗教经验,在这种经验中,人们改变了主题,并报告了丧失个性、所有现实的同一性、与神的结合、经验主体与经验对象的统一性、所有现实的同一性和所有人的一致性,特别是,神秘经验涉及主体与目标(神,全部)的统一性。

    •  The commonalities in such experience around the world is termed the consensus mysticum .
      ::世界各地这种经验的共同点被称为协商一致的神秘。
    • It has been described by Rudolph Otto as involving an experience characterized as being tremendum et fascinans
      ::鲁道夫·奥托说,它涉及一种被描述为tremendum et Fascinans的经验。

     William James has described such experiences as having the following characteristics:
    ::威廉·詹姆斯将这种经历描述为具有以下特点:

    • Ineffable noetic
      ::无效调温器
    • Anti-naturalistic transient
      ::反自然即时主义
    • Passive pantheistic
      ::被动的全神主义者
    • optimistic
      ::乐观乐观

    James held that such experiences are powerful and lead the subject of such an experience to a belief in a supernatural entity. James held:
    ::James认为,这种经历是强大的,使这种经历的主体相信一个超自然实体。

    • Mystical states are authoritative over the individual who has the experience
      ::神秘国家对有这种经验的个人具有权威
    • Mystical states have no authority over individuals who have not had such an experience
      ::神秘国家无权管辖没有这种经验的个人
    • Mystical states break down the authority of ordinary consciousness and sense knowledge. Such states offer hypotheses which others may ignore
      ::神秘的状态打破了普通意识和感知知识的权威。 这种状态提供了其他国家可能忽视的假设。
    • Such religious experiences have consequences for those who encounter them. They issue into feelings and actions.
      ::这种宗教经历对遇到这种经历的人有影响,使他们产生感情和行动。

    The questions are:
    ::这些问题是:

    1.  Is the subject of a religious experience justified inferring from the psychological experience to the existential or the ontological reality of the object of that experience: the supernatural being?
      ::宗教经历的主体是否有理由从心理经历推断为该经历对象的存在或本体现实:即超自然存在?
    2. Is anyone else justified in reaching the conclusion that a supernatural being exists based upon the report of the individual who has made the claim to have had the religious experience?
      ::任何其他人是否有理由根据声称具有宗教经验的个人的报告得出结论,认为存在超自然现象?
    3. Does the accumulation of reports from such witnesses to religious experiences justify the claim that a supernatural or spiritual being, a deity, a transcendent reality , exists?
      ::从这些证人到宗教经历的报告的积累是否证明存在超自然或精神、神灵、超常现实?

    Argument From Religious Experience
    ::宗教经验的论据

    Problems
    ::问题、问题、问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题、 问题

    Premises/Conclusion
    ::房地/结论

    1. People report encounters with a deity or being sent from the deity
      ::人们报告遇到神灵或被神派来
    2. There must exist a deity.
      ::一定有神灵存在

      Rebuttal or Counter Argument
    ::复辩或对辩

    The reports of such encounters are not verified as they have alternative naturalistic explanations that do not involve the existence of any supernatural agents.  So many do ask: Are the reports true?  Veridical ?
    ::此类遭遇的报告没有被核实,因为它们有其他的自然论解释,不涉及任何超自然物剂的存在。 这么多人问:这些报道是真实的吗? 真实的?

    Not all who learn of the reports of such religious experiences accept them as conclusive evidence for the existence of a supernatural reality or spiritual beings. Many have attempted to give alternative accounts of such experiences that do not involve acceptance of the existence of any supernatural entities or reality.
    ::并非所有了解这种宗教经历的报告的人都认为它们是超自然现实或精神生命存在的确凿证据,许多人试图以其他方式描述这种经历,而不涉及接受任何超自然实体或现实的存在。

    Naturalism is an approach to religious experiences which explains them as being the result of natural forces. It accounts for such phenomena in natural terms without recourse to anything that is beyond the physical realm. In general, all reality and all experiences can be accounted for (fully explained) in terms of physical processes.
    ::自然主义是一种对待宗教经历的方法,它把宗教经历解释为自然力量的结果,它用自然术语来描述此类现象,而没有诉诸任何超出自然领域的范围,一般来说,所有现实和所有经验都可以以物理过程来解释(充分解释)所有现实和所有经验。

    There are different explanations for the origin and nature of religious experiences. What they have in common is the rejection of a supernatural source or object and the attempt to offer a full explanation in empirically verifiable terms.
    ::对宗教经历的起源和性质有不同的解释,它们的共同点是拒绝某种超自然来源或物体,试图用经验可核实的术语提供充分解释。

    Psychological explanations have been offered by several theoreticians , including Sigmund Freud. Sociological explanations have also been developed by several other scientists, such as Emil Durkheim . What they have in common is the refusal to accept religious experiences as being truthful, accurate, or believable in so far as the existence of any supernatural reality. One of the principle reasons for withholding acceptance of the reports is that the experiences can not be verified and what they report encountering can not be verified empirically.
    ::包括西格蒙德·弗洛伊德在内的数位理论家提出了心理解释,其他几位科学家也提出了社会学解释,例如埃米尔·杜尔克海姆,他们的共同点是拒绝接受宗教经历是真实的、准确的或可以相信的,只要存在任何超自然现实。

     Alternative Explanations 
    ::备选解释

    When people hear of those who claim to have seen god or an angel or have heard a voice or were instructed by god to kill their child, most people are inclined to think that the claim is not an accurate and truthful report. Most tend not to believe the person making the claim.  Most people would be inclined to suspect one or more of the following factors are the more likely explanation of the claim other than that the claim is accurate and true. 
    ::当人们听到有人声称见过神或天使,或听到神的声音,或奉神指示要杀死自己的孩子时,大多数人倾向于认为这种主张不是准确和真实的报告,大多数人往往不相信提出主张的人,大多数人倾向于怀疑以下一种或多种因素:除了声称是准确和真实的以外,对主张的解释更可能是准确和真实的。

    • Persons are mistaken, e.g., optical illusion, misinterpretation, hallucination
      ::人是错误的,例如,光学幻觉、误解、幻觉
    • Persons are under the influence of mind altering substances
      ::人受到改变思维物质的影响
    • Persons are suffering from brain malfunctioning, e.g., chemical imbalance in brain
      ::患有脑机能失灵的人,例如脑中的化学不平衡
    • Persons are under the influence of group influence-social psychology
      ::受群体影响的人受到群体影响 -- -- 社会心理的影响
    • Persons are self deceiving
      ::个人是自我欺骗的
    • Persons operate with confirmation bias and belief perseverance.
      ::这些人的行动带有确认偏见和坚持信念。
    • Persons are preconditioned for Misinformation Effect but self deceived
      ::个人是产生错误信息效应的先决条件,但自我欺骗
    • Persons are manipulated by Compliance Techniques
      ::受合规技术操纵的人
    • Persons operating with Projection
      ::从事预测活动的人
    • Persons have a need for Closure
      ::需要关闭的人
    • Persons have a need for Agenticity : Anthropomorphism
      ::需要制剂的人:人类形态学

    Hallucinations
    ::幻觉

    Questions 
    ::问 问 问 问 问 问 问 问 问 问

    lesson content

    EPISD Critical Knowledge and Creative Thinkers Goal
    ::EPISD 关键知识和创意思想者目标

    1. Are the reports concerning these religious experiences veridical (truthful and accurate)
      ::有关这些宗教经历的报告是否真实(真实和准确)?
    2. What is the scientific analysis of the religious experiences?
      ::宗教经历的科学分析是什么?
    3. What are the genetic and causal conditions of religious experiences?
      1. in the human race ?
        ::在人类中?
      2. in the individual?
        ::个人?

      ::宗教经历的遗传和因果条件是什么? 在人类中? 在个人中?
    4. Is the religious experience veridical? Is it truthful? Is it a report which others can accept as being Correct? Truthful? Accurate?
      ::宗教经验是真实的吗?是真实的吗?是真实的吗?是真实的吗?是真实的吗?是真实的,是准确的。

    Humans should accept religious experiences as being veridical unless there exists positive grounds for thinking otherwise, for thinking that the reports are not truthful, accurate or correct.Some claim that there are positive grounds for rejecting the reports of such experiences, i.e., against their being veridical experiences
    ::人类应该接受宗教经历,认为宗教经历是荒诞的,除非有积极的理由持相反的思维,认为报告不真实、准确或正确。

    • mystics are abnormal: they tend to be sexually repressed
      ::神秘是不正常的:他们往往受到性压抑
    • mystical experience is always mixed with other elements such as sexual emotion or imagery
      ::神秘经历总是与性情感或图像等其他要素混杂在一起。

     In response to these observations some offer that perhaps the human being must be in an altered state of consciousness in order to have the experience of the greater (supernatural) reality which the ordinary consciousness can not contain or reach. Sexual abstinence may be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having such an encounter.
    ::针对这些意见,一些与会者提出,也许人必须改变意识状态,才能体验普通意识无法遏制或达到的大(超自然)现实,性禁欲可能是进行这种接触的必要条件,但不是充分的条件。

    Outcome Assessment
    ::成果评估

    This argument or proof does not establish the actual existence of a supernatural deity.  It attempts to argue for the existence of such a being by offering evidence that is highly questionable and for which there are alternative and often more plausible explanations.  While the argument can not be used to convert a non-believer to a believer, the faults in the argument do not prove that there is no god.  The Burden of Proof demands that the positive claim that there is a supernatural deity be established by reason and evidence and this argument does not meet that standard.  The believer in god can use this argument to establish the mere logical possibility that there is a supernatural deity or at least that it is not irrational to believe in the possibility that there is such a being but the argument does not establish any degree of probability at all when there are alternative explanations for the reports of experiences offered.  The veracity of the reports has not been established.
    ::这种论点或证据并不能证明超自然神的存在,它试图通过提供极有疑问的证据来论证这种存在的存在,而这种证据有其他的、而且往往更可信的解释。虽然这种论点不能用来将不信者转换为信仰者,但这种论点的错误并不能证明不存在神灵。证据的责任要求根据理由和证据来证实有超自然神灵的积极主张,而这种论点不符合这一标准。信仰上帝的人可以利用这一论点来证明存在超自然神灵的逻辑可能性,或者至少相信存在这种神灵的可能性并非不合理,但当对所提供经验的报告有其他解释时,这种论点并不能证明任何可能性。报告的真实性尚未确定。

    Premises/Conclusion
    ::房地/结论

    1. People report encounters with a deity or being sent from the deity
      ::人们报告遇到神灵或被神派来
    2. There must exist a deity.
      ::一定有神灵存在

      Problem with argument :
    ::有争论的问题 :

    1. _X_ Premises are false or questionable
      ::_X_房舍是虚假或可疑的
    2. ___ Premises are irrelevant
      ::房舍无关紧要
    3. ___ Premises Contain the Conclusion –Circular Reasoning
      ::含有结论的房舍 - 循环理由
    4. ___ Premises are inadequate to support the conclusion
      ::房舍不足以支持结论
    5. _X_ Alternative arguments exist with equal or greater support
      ::_X_在同等或更大的支持下存在替代论据

    This argument or proof has flaws in it and would not convince a rational person to accept its conclusion.  This is not because someone who does not believe in a deity will simply refuse to accept based on emotions or past history but because it is not rationally compelling of acceptance of its conclusion.   God made me do it…
    ::这种论点或证据有缺陷,不能说服理性的人接受其结论。 这并非因为不相信神的人会基于情感或过去的历史而拒绝接受它,而是因为它没有理性地说服人们接受它的结论。上帝让我这样做...

    Argument for Existence of God from Miracles
    ::从奇迹中为上帝的存在提出论据

    Many but not all of the religions of the world have as part of their traditions claims of miracles. Miracles have different forms and play different roles within each religion. The religions of the West have many things in common that have a bearing on the way in which they view miracles . They share in being religions of the holy book or sacred text. They place importance on events which have been reported to have occurred in history. They rely on the existence of miracles  The events which are reported to have taken place in the time of Moses are key to the acceptance of the idea of the One God for the peoples of Israel and all who follow after them. The events during the times of Jesus, the Christ, are also the basis for the acceptance of Jesus as being the Son of God by the followers of Jesus. The spread of Islam is also an event regarded as miraculous and a proof of the legitimacy of the claims of Mohammed. So, miracles are important for the Western religions.
    ::世界上许多宗教,但不是所有宗教,都把奇迹视为其传统的一部分。奇迹有不同的形式,在每个宗教中扮演不同的角色。西方的宗教有许多共同点,这些共同点影响着他们看待奇迹的方式。它们共同点是圣书或圣经的宗教。它们重视历史上报道的事件;它们依赖奇迹的存在;据报告在摩西时代发生的事件是以色列人民接受独一真主思想的关键,而后继者则都接受。耶稣基督时代的事件也是耶稣信徒接受耶稣为上帝之子的基础。伊斯兰教的传播也是被视为奇迹的事件,也是穆罕默德主张合法性的证明。因此,奇迹对于西方宗教来说是重要的。

    Miracles have served as the foundation for the historical proof of the existence of the God of the western religions. The leadership of the religions of the West do not want miracle taken lightly and do not want false claims of miracles. These religions will often be the first to investigate claims of miraculous events in order to disprove them! The concern is that if people come to accept the claim of a miracle and it later turns out to be disproved, then those who had come to believe in it might come not only to stop believing in that particular "miracle" that had been disproved but in all other such claims and thus might come to loose their faith altogether. The fear is that people would think something similar to this: "If I could be fooled into thinking this recent event was a miracle, then what about those people long ago who reported experiencing a miracle? Could it be possible that they too were deceived? Or mistaken?"
    ::奇迹已成为西方宗教的神存在的历史证据的基础。西方宗教的领导者们不希望奇迹被轻描淡写,也不希望虚妄地宣称奇迹。这些宗教往往首先调查奇迹事件的说法,以便反驳它们。人们担心的是,如果人们接受奇迹的主张,而后来发现它被证明是不容的,那么相信奇迹的人不仅会停止相信那些已经否认的“奇迹”,而且会停止相信所有其他的这种主张,从而可能完全解除他们的信仰。担心的是,人们会这样想 : “ 如果我被愚弄,以为最近的事件是奇迹,那么那些早已报告曾经历奇迹的人呢?他们会不会被欺骗呢?”

    Current cinema offers several movies that have miracles as their theme.  A few have a member of a church sent to investigate the legitimacy of a claim of a miracle.  The movies are for entertainment and most of these films result in some sort of confirmation for the audience.  In real life it does not work out that way.  Claims of apparitions and cures are usually quickly dispelled by investigators.
    ::当前电影院提供数部以奇迹为主题的电影。 少数电影院的一位教会成员被派去调查奇迹主张的合法性。 电影是娱乐性的, 这些电影大多对观众产生某种程度的肯定。 在现实生活中,电影院不会以这种方式运作。 调查人员通常会很快地消除关于神迹和治疗方法的声称。

    Argument
    ::参数参数

    Premises/Conclusion
    ::房地/结论

    1. There is an event that has taken place that violates the laws of nature.
      ::发生了一起违反自然法则的事件。
    2. If the laws of nature are violated it could only be by a power that could violate the laws of nature that could only be the power that would have created those laws-the law maker, the deity.
      ::如果违反自然法则,它只能是由可能违反自然法则的强权,而这种强权只能是建立那些法律的权力——法律的制定者、神。
    3. Thus, the power that would have created those laws-the law maker, the deity must exist .
      ::因此,建立这些法律的权力 -- -- 法律制定者、神灵 -- -- 必须存在。

    The criticisms of this argument or proof attack the first premise.  What evidence is there that there has ever been an event that has taken place that violates the laws of nature.  What would be required to establish that such an event has, in fact, taken place. The questions are:
    ::对这一论点或证据的批评是对第一个前提的攻击。有什么证据可以证明曾经发生过违反自然法则的事件。

    1. What exactly are Miracles ?
      ::什么是奇迹?
    2. Do they prove the existence of a supernatural realm ?
      1. A deity?
        ::仙女吗?
      2. God?
        ::上帝吗?
      3. The supreme Being?
        ::至高无上的人?

      ::难道他们能证明超自然国的存在吗?神吗?上帝?至尊的主吗?
    3. What does it take to prove that a miracle has taken place?
      ::需要用什么来证明奇迹已经发生?
    4. Could it ever be proven that a miracle had taken place?
      ::能否证明奇迹已经发生?

     Proving Some Event is a Miracle
    ::证明一件大事确是一件奇事,

    • So event X is reported to have occurred.
      ::因此,据报发生了X事件。
    • Event X has either a natural cause or supernatural cause.
      ::X事件不是自然原因就是超自然原因
    • If event X can have either a natural cause  or supernatural cause  it cannot be a miracle. Why not?
      ::如果事件X既可能有自然原因,也有超自然原因,那不可能是奇迹。为什么不呢?
    • Because a miracle is defined to be an event that can only have a supernatural cause. Why?
      ::因为奇迹被定义为 只能有超自然原因的事件 为什么?
    • Because then it can be used to prove that there is a supernatural being aka God.
      ::因为那样它就可以用来证明 存在超自然的神。
    • Anyone who wants to claim X is a miracle needs to satisfy the two conditions presented above for an event to be accepted as a miracle.
      ::任何想声称X是奇迹的人 需要满足上述两个条件 才能被接受为奇迹
    • The Burden of Proof is on defending that X is a miracle and not the other way around.
      ::证明的责任在于捍卫X是一个奇迹,而不是相反。

    Yes, people choose to believe that events are miracles even though they do not satisfy the conditions and even though there is evidence against the events being miracles and even though if the reports were true it would not necessarily mean that the event was the result of the Supreme Being bringing about the events.
    ::是的,人们选择相信,事件是奇迹,即使它们不符合条件,即使有证据表明事件是奇迹,即使报告属实,也不一定意味着事件是最高领袖促成事件的结果。

    In logic it is shown that you can never prove a general negative claim.  Those that assert the affirmative have the burden of proof within the community of reasoning beings.  This goes for claims that there are purple elephants with yellow stripes, that there are miracles and that there is a single Supreme Being.  Miracles are very, very difficult to prove.  So difficult that several philosophers have concluded that there have been none thus far.
    ::逻辑表明,你永远无法证明普遍否定的主张。 主张肯定的人在推理界中负有举证责任。 这是指声称有紫象和黄条纹,有奇迹,只有一个最高体。奇迹是非常非常非常难以证明的。 如此困难,一些哲学家得出结论说,到目前为止还没有。

    To be a miracle an event would need to violate the laws of nature.  For any report to be accepted the evidence would need to be pretty convincing and all alternative explanations would need to be ruled out (completely eliminated).  That is a very difficult thing to do.  The evidence would come from witnesses but the more unbelievable (violating the laws of nature) the event was the more we would doubt the witnesses.  Given the lack of reliable witnesses and the inability to completely eliminate all other possible explanations (fraud, delusions, greed, optical illusions, advanced technology, alien activities, etc...) miracles are not accepted by most rational people.
    ::要想成为奇迹,事件就必须违反自然法则。 如果要接受任何报告,证据必须十分令人信服,所有替代解释都必须被排除(完全消除 ) 。 这是一个非常困难的事情。 证据来自证人,但更令人难以置信(违反自然法则 ) , 事件越多,我们就越怀疑证人。 由于缺乏可靠的证人和无法完全消除所有其他可能的解释(欺诈、妄想、贪婪、光学幻觉、先进技术、外星人活动等等 ) , 最理性的人不会接受奇迹。

    Problems with Miracles - Definition
    ::奇迹问题 -- -- 定义

    Exactly what constitutes a miracle is a matter for careful consideration, given the importance of the reports of such events, should they be correct and truthful.
    ::鉴于有关此类事件的报道的重要性,如果这些报道正确和真实的话,究竟什么是奇迹就是一个需要认真考虑的问题。

    Unusual or Extraordinary Event
    ::不寻常或非常事件

    Some consider any unusual event as a miracle or at least an unusual event with a positive outcome, e.g. winning Lotto. Negative events with less probability (being hit by lightning, three separate times) are not considered as miracles. This is a very weak use of the term "miracle”.This cannot be the basis for a proof for the existence of God because unusual events occur all the time and have explanations using natural factors. Surviving an auto accident is not a miracle.  This event happens often and has an explanation using the laws of nature.  Such survivals do not violate the laws of nature.
    ::一些人认为任何异常事件都是奇迹,或至少是具有积极结果的不寻常事件,例如,赢得了Lotto;概率较低(被闪电击中,三次不同时间)的负面事件不被视为奇迹;这是对“奇迹”一词的非常微弱的用法。 这不能作为证明上帝存在的依据,因为不寻常事件经常发生,并且有自然因素的解释。 车祸幸存不是奇迹。 事故经常发生,并且用自然法则加以解释。 此类生存并不违反自然法则。

    If surviving an auto accident were to be considered a miracle because God brought it about then so would death be a miracle because if God determines who survives such an accident so too does God determine who dies.  However, we do not hear people say:  He died in the accident.  It was a miracle!
    ::万一在意外中幸存,因为真主使难死成为奇迹,那末,死亡就是一个奇迹。如果真主判定谁在此类意外中幸存,那末,真主判定谁在事故中死亡,那末,谁在事故中死亡,那末,我们没有听见人说:他是在事故中死亡的。那只是一种迹象。

    Not Just Happy Events
    ::不只是快乐活动

    There are many happy events.  Winning the lotto, surviving a crash, or surviving a disease.   They are not miracles in the sense that we need for an event in order to use it to prove that there is a supernatural being.There are particular problems with happy events being called a miracle.
    ::有许多快乐事件。 赢得乐透、 幸存于坠机或幸存于疾病。 它们不是奇迹,因为我们需要一个事件来证明有超自然存在。 快乐事件被称为奇迹, 尤其存在问题。

     Examples
    ::实例

    • A person survives cancer. The chances were 1 in 50.
      ::一个人在癌症中幸存下来 几率是50分之一
    • A person survives a car crash. 5 other people were killed in the crash.
      ::一人在车祸中幸存下来,另有5人在车祸中丧生。

    The survivals are happy events but if the survivals are miracles and indicate that a deity is behind them and caused them then the deity also caused the deaths of the 49 from disease and the 5 from the crash. Those deaths would be miracles as well. Most would not want to call them miracles.
    ::生存是快乐的事件,但如果生存是奇迹,并且表明神灵在它们后面并造成它们,那么神灵也造成49人死于疾病,5人死于坠机。这些死亡也是奇迹。 大多数人不想称之为奇迹。

    To accept some event as being a miracle in order to use it to prove the existence of a supernatural being we must satisfy two conditions:   1) the event must violate the laws of nature and 2) there must be clear and indisputable evidence which compels us to accept that the event took place just as reported
    ::将某些事件视为奇迹,以便利用它来证明存在超自然现象,我们必须满足两个条件:1)该事件必须违反自然法则;2)必须有明确和无可争议的证据,迫使我们承认事件发生如所报告的那样。

    Situation
    ::情况状况

    Falling Down: It is highly unusual for someone to die from a fall of less than 4 feet, say off of a chair or step stool.  It is highly unusual for someone not to die after falling over 10,00 feet.  Both events have happened.  People fall off of a chair and hit their heads and die and people fall out of planes and live.  We call those who live after an unusual fall a miracle but not those who die after an unusual fall.  If we call the event a miracle because it is so unusual and not at all what was expected why not call the event of someone's dying after falling off of a chair a miracle?
    ::跌倒:有人因跌落不到四英尺而死亡,说从椅子上或从凳子上摔下来,这是非常罕见的。一个人在跌落超过10,00英尺后不死,这是非常罕见的。两种情况都发生过。人们从椅子上摔下来,头部被撞死,飞机上的人倒下并活命。我们把那些在异常跌倒后生活的人称为奇迹,而不是那些在异常跌倒后死亡的人。如果我们把事件称为奇迹,因为它是如此不寻常,根本不是预期的,为什么不把有人在摔落椅子后死亡的事件称为奇迹呢?

      Examples  
    ::实例

    •  "Lieutenant I. M. Chisov of the former Soviet Union was flying his Ilyushin 4 on a bitter cold day in January 1942, when it was attacked by 12 German Messerschmitts. Convinced that he had no chance of surviving if he staged with his badly battered plane, Chisov bailed out at 21,980 feet. With the fighters still buzzing around, Chisov cleverly decided to fall freely out of the area.  It was his plan not to open his chute until he was down to only 1000 ft above the ground.  Unfortunately, he lost consciousness en route.  As luck would have it, he crashed at the edge of a steep ravine covered with 3 ft of snow.  Hitting at about 120 mi/h, he plowed along its slope until he came to rest at the bottom.  Chisov awoke 20 min later, bruised and sore, but miraculously he had suffered only a concussion of the spine and a fractured pelvis.  Three and one-half months later he was back at work as a flight instructor."  
      ::“1942年1月,前苏联的I. M. Chisov中校在寒冷的一天,在12个德国梅瑟斯密特人袭击时,正在驾驶他的Ilyushin 4号飞机。他确信,如果他的飞机被击得惨败,他没有机会存活下来,Chisov在21.980英尺的高度跳伞。随着战斗机继续摇晃,Chisov巧妙地决定自由坠落出该地区。他计划不打开他的降落伞,直到他坠落到地上仅1000英尺。不幸的是,他在路上失去了知觉。幸运的是,他坠落在一条被3英尺雪覆盖的陡峭壁的边缘。打中大约120米/小时,他沿着斜坡滑下,直到他睡在底部。Chisov 20分钟后,他浑身发青,但神奇的是,他只受到脊椎的抽搐和骨折断。3个半月后,他又回来担任飞行教练。
    • Flight Sergeant Nicholas Steven Alkemade was on a bombing mission over Germany on 23 March 1944 when his Lancaster bomber flying at 18,000 feet his was in flames when he was forced to jump, without a parachute or be burned to death. He dove out of his destroyed aircraft hoping on a quick death. His speed accelerated to over 120 miles per hour and he impacted on a snow covered sloping forest. He was completely uninjured and later captured by the Germans who refused to believe his story.
      ::1944年3月23日,Nicholas Steven Alkemadade中士在德国上空执行轰炸任务,当时他的兰开斯特轰炸机在18 000英尺高空飞行,当时他被迫跳下,没有降落伞,或被烧死,当时他身着火焰,当时他被迫跳下,没有降落伞,或被烧死,他从被摧毁的飞机上跳下,希望很快死亡,他的速度加快到每小时120英里以上,并受到雪覆盖的森林的冲击。他完全没有受伤,后来被那些不相信他的故事的德国人抓获。
    • The longest survivable fall, 26 January 1972, was Vesna Vulovic a stewardess in a DC-9 which blew up at 33,330 feet. She was in the tail section of the aircraft and though injured survived the fall.
      ::1972年1月26日是最长的可存活下来的坠落地点,是位于DC-9的乘务员Vesna Vulovic,爆炸时间为33 330英尺,当时她身在飞机尾部,虽然在坠落时受伤,但幸免于难。

    Situation
    ::情况状况

    No explanation: Some consider events for which there are no explanations as miracles. It isn’t clear whether this would mean no explanation at the present time or no explanation possible. This cannot be used as a proof for the existence of God because these events could receive a completely naturalistic explanation in the future after science has advanced.
    ::没有解释:有些人认为没有解释的事件是奇迹。 不清楚这是否意味着目前没有解释或者不可能解释。 这不能作为上帝存在的证据,因为这些事件在科学进步后将来可以得到完全自然的解释。

     It is possible that events could be explained by advanced science. It is even possible that events that appear "miraculous" because there is no explanation at present could be the result of aliens with advanced technology causing them to occur here on this planet.
    ::事件有可能可以用先进的科学来解释。 甚至有可能,因为目前没有解释而显得“令人难以置信”的事件可能是具有先进技术的外国人导致它们在这个星球上发生的结果。

    Medical cases are not good cases for miracles because there are too many alternative explanations and they are almost always not violations of the laws of nature.  Medical doctors and scientists do not know everything.  Common place events today would have been thought to be miracles in the past (over 100 years ago).  Therefore, simply because a medical diagnosis or prognosis proved to be inaccurate or incorrect, there is insufficient evidence from that to conclude that the event could only have been caused by the Single Supreme Being-God.  Take for example heart resuscitation.  Reviving a stopped heart is not a miracle.  Bringing a person to full life appearance from what was thought to be death is not a miracle.  Curing a person of influenza is not a miracle.  Restoring a person's sight through surgery is not a miracle. These would have been thought to be miracles over 100 years ago but no longer. So, if someone who is very sick or thought to be dead turns out not to be dead or becomes well, those are no longer miracles.
    ::医学案例不是奇迹,因为有太多的替代解释,而且它们几乎总是不违反自然法则。医生和科学家不知道一切。今天的常见事件被认为是过去(100多年前)的奇迹。因此,仅仅因为医学诊断或预测证明不准确或不正确,因此没有充分的证据来得出结论,该事件只能由单一的至高无上的上帝造成。举个例子:心脏复苏。恢复停止的心脏不是奇迹。让一个人从认为死亡的事物中完全露出生命外观不是奇迹。治愈流感不是奇迹。通过手术恢复一个人的视力不是奇迹。100多年前就被认为是奇迹,但不再是奇迹了。因此,如果病重或认为死亡的人没有死亡或身体好起来,这些都不是奇迹。

    A miracle cannot be simply an unexplained or rare event, those happen often and as time goes on we learn more and can explain more and come to know how often people are hit by lightning and win Lotto.  To be a miracle an event must violate the Laws of Nature.  People getting well do not violate the laws of nature.  The best medical knowledge can only give percentages, as in, a person with ovarian cancer has a 40% survival rate with surgery and radiation treatment.  Some survive and some do not.  If someone survives it is not thought to be a miracle but that they have had a reversal of the disease process due to surgery or medication or radiation or mental focusing of the bodies regenerative powers or a combination of those factors.  Why do some survive and others do not?  Well there are different body chemistries, different mental attitudes etc...  If you think the person who is cured is cured because it is a miracle brought about by God then why not consider those who die as dying as a result of a miracle as well.  God wanted them dead and so they are.  People who win Lotto may think it is a miracle or God's will.  People who lose Lotto do not think of it as a miracle or God's will.  The factors in play with Lotto are the same for winners as for losers.  Likewise with physical ailments.
    ::奇迹不可能仅仅是一个无法解释的或罕见的事件,那些经常发生的事情,随着时间的流逝,我们学到更多东西,可以解释更多东西,知道人们经常被闪电击中,赢得洛托。要成为奇迹,事件就必须违反自然法则。人们健康不会违反自然法则。最好的医学知识只能提供百分比,例如,卵巢癌患者通过手术和辐射治疗存活率达到40%。有些人生存下来,有些人则没有。如果有人幸存下来,这不被认为是一个奇迹,但是,他们已经因为手术、药物、辐射或身体的重心而扭转了疾病进程,或者由于身体的再生能力或辐射或精神集中,或者这些因素的结合而改变。为什么有人生存而不能成功,其他人却不能成功呢?有不同的身体化学,不同的精神态度等等。如果你认为治愈的人是治愈的,因为那是上帝带来的奇迹,那么为什么不认为那些死亡的人是奇迹的结果。上帝希望他们死,他们也是这样。谁赢得洛托的胜利者可能认为这是奇迹,或者是真主所赋予的。

    Some people think that a recovery from a physical ailment would not be evidence of a miracle because there is fate or destiny working. e.g.: "I would not think of that as a miracle because that person I guess that it was not the time for him to die and that's why he got saved, because if it is your time to die no one will be able to save you."
    ::有些人认为,从身体疾病中康复不会成为奇迹的证据,因为有命运或命运在起作用,例如:“我不认为这是一个奇迹,因为那个人我猜他不是死的时候,这就是他获救的原因,因为如果是你死的时候,没有人能救你。”

    To think this way requires that you believe in fate or destiny. If so, what determines your fate or destiny? If it is a deity or deities then you are already a believer. But, what evidence is there that there is fate or destiny? What evidence or proof is there that there is a deity?
    ::要想这样,就需要相信命运或命运。如果是的话,什么决定你的命运或命运?如果这是神灵或神灵,那你就是信徒了。但有什么证据能证明命运或命运存在呢?有神灵的证据或证据呢?

    Can you give an example of a miracle that would be an event for which there are no alternative explanations but that it is the work of the Single Supreme Being (God) and that is because it is clearly a violation of the laws of nature that no other power could bring about?
    ::你能举一个奇迹的例子吗? 对于这个奇迹,没有别的解释,但它是独一至尊主的功绩,而这是因为它明显违反自然法则,是没有任何其他权力可以促成的?

    The Requirements of a Definition of Miracles
    ::奇迹定义的要求

    • What is needed is a definition that is strong enough so that the events claimed to be Miracles would establish the existence of a supernatural and very powerful entity, i.e., God.
      ::所需要的是一个足够有力的定义,以便声称是奇迹的事件能够证明存在一个超自然和非常强大的实体,即上帝。
    • What is needed is an event that could only be caused by God. This event can have no other possible explanation! So, what results is the strong definition of Miracles .
      ::现在需要的是一个只能由真主造成的事件,这个事件是无法解释的。结果是怎样的呢?奇迹的严格定义是什么呢?

    Miracles are events which violate the laws of nature itself. This is an event that could only be caused by the author of those laws. It cannot be an event which has no present naturalistic explanation, for in the future there might be one. It could not be caused by advanced technology possessed by advanced alien societies.
    ::奇迹是违反自然法则本身的事件,这只能由那些法律的作者造成,不可能是没有自然主义解释的事件,因为将来可能会发生,不可能是先进的外国人社会拥有的先进技术造成的。

      Problems with Verification
    ::核查与核查有关的问题

    Not all who learn of the reports of such miracles accept them as conclusive evidence for the existence of a supernatural reality or spiritual beings. Many have attempted to give alternative accounts of such experiences that do not involve acceptance of the existence of any supernatural entities or reality.
    ::并非所有知道这些奇迹的报告的人都认为它们是超自然现实或精神生命存在的确凿证据。 许多人试图以其他方式描述这些经历,而不涉及接受任何超自然实体或现实的存在。

    Naturalism is an approach to religious experiences and miracles which explains them as being the result of natural forces. It accounts for such phenomena in natural terms without recourse to anything that is beyond the physical realm. In general, all reality and all experiences can be accounted for (fully explained) in terms of physical processes.
    ::自然主义是一种处理宗教经历和奇迹的方法,它把宗教经历和奇迹解释为自然力量的产物,它用自然术语来描述此类现象,而没有诉诸任何超出自然领域的范围,一般来说,所有现实和所有经历都可以以物理过程来说明(充分解释)所有现实和所有经历。

    There are different explanations for the origin and nature of religious experiences and miracles. What they have in common is the rejection of a supernatural source or object and the attempt to offer a full explanation in empirically verifiable terms.
    ::对宗教经历和奇迹的起源和性质有不同的解释,它们的共同点是拒绝超自然来源或物体,试图用经验可核实的术语提供充分解释。

    You cannot claim that "miracles exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."  The burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist. It is a fallacy to claim that X exists unless you prove that there is no X.  What is improper is for a person to claim that "X exists" and when asked to prove it, the person who made the claim uses a defense of "X exists" then claim next that no one has proven that X does not exist.
    ::你不能声称“奇迹存在,除非有人证明它们不存在。” 举证责任始终在于X的存在,而不是X不存在的说法。 声称X存在,除非你证明不存在X,这是谬误的。 最不恰当的是,一个人声称“X存在”,当被要求证明“X存在”时,提出索赔的人使用“X存在”的辩护,然后声称没有人证明X不存在。

    What is the best way to proceed when there is a report of some appearance of a religious figure on a wall or pancake, etc...  Should the process favor a more natural explanation until proven otherwise?
    ::如果有报道说在墙上或煎饼上出现宗教人物,那么最好的办法是什么? ......除非有其他证明,否则这一过程是否应该赞成更自然的解释?

    The best explanation would be the one that has the best fit with facts or the explanation that is best supported by claims that are themselves each well supported by other well supported claims. This is a process of explanation that rests heavily on the use of reason and the insistence on evidence to support claims about physical events or a physical state of affairs.  So any appearance of any phenomena that is detectable by the senses should have an explanation concerning how the physical state of affairs has come about to produce that appearance to human senses. The burden of proof concerning physical claims is with those making the positive assertion.
    ::最好的解释是,最符合事实或最有根据的解释,最符合事实或最有根据的解释,而索赔本身都得到其他有根据的索赔的有力支持。这是一个解释过程,主要依靠的是使用理性和坚持以证据支持关于物理事件或物理事态的主张。因此,任何从感知中可以察觉到的现象的任何出现都应该有解释,说明事态的物理状态如何产生这种人感的外观。关于物理索赔的举证责任在于作出肯定的主张的人。

    The explanation must also avoid the pattern of thinking that if one cannot prove that X is not the cause then X is the cause.  One can not appeal to the absence of evidence or proof as constituting the basis for any conclusions.  If one cannot prove what caused phenomenon P then one must withhold accepting the conclusion that any particular cause C is the cause of P.
    ::解释还必须避免一种思维模式,即如果无法证明X不是原因,那么X就是原因;不能将缺乏证据或证据作为任何结论的依据;如果无法证明P现象的原因,那么就必须拒绝接受任何特定原因C是P原因的结论。

    If there is a claim that phenomenon N (natural event-perceived by the senses) was caused by factor S (supernatural cause) then there needs to be evidence to support the claim.
    ::如果声称N现象(由感官察觉到的自然事件)是由因素S(超自然原因)引起的,则需要有证据佐证索赔。

    So the explanation of an event such as the appearance of a figure resembling what someone thinks of as a figure from religious history would need to have evidence to support it.  In the absence of physical evidence, then the preponderance of the evidence is support of explanations of phenomena of a similar type might be given "preferred" status until subsequent evidence supports another conclusion.
    ::因此,对类似事件的解释,比如出现类似宗教史上人们所认为的人物的人物,需要证据来证明这一点。 在缺乏物证的情况下,证据的主体是支持对类似现象的解释,除非随后的证据支持另一种结论,否则可以给予“优先”地位。

    Using the resort of a supernatural explanation has so many gaps that it is less preferred in the absence of strong evidence in support of a naturalistic explanation or the holding of the expectation of a naturalistic explanation to be forthcoming. The supernatural explanation has no physical evidence (natural) to support it and no explanation of how it is that non-physical entities cause physical events in the natural realm.
    ::使用超自然解释有许多缺陷,因此在缺乏有力的证据支持自然解释或坚持自然解释的预期的情况下,它就不太可取。 超自然解释没有物理证据(自然)支持它,也没有解释非物理实体如何在自然领域造成物理事件。

    There is also the very important question to be answered in this particular case of why it is that anyone alive thinks that they known just what Mary looked like.  Why assume that the image is the image of any particular historical or or mythical entity?  This is a case of a simulacrum.
    ::在这个特定案例中,还有一个非常重要的问题需要回答,这就是为什么活着的人认为他们知道玛丽的长相,为什么认为她的形象是任何特定历史或神话实体的形象?这是一个模拟现象。

    If you cannot explain the event or phenomena by use of a natural explanation then it is a supernaturally caused event involving the spiritual or supernatural beings A B, C, etc...is both illogical and generated by and rests upon faith that is held to sustain hope.  This is a habit of mind that is quite strong as it has consequences thought to be beneficial by the holder of the habit.
    ::如果你不能利用自然解释来解释事件或现象,那么这是一个由超自然引起的事件,涉及精神或超自然生物A、B、C等.都是不合逻辑的,并且是由信念产生并赖以维持希望的。 这是一个相当强烈的思想习惯,其后果被认为有益于习惯的持有者。

    Premises/Conclusion
    ::房地/结论

    1. There is an event that has taken place that violates the laws of nature. 
      ::发生了一起违反自然法则的事件。
    2. If the laws of nature are violated it could only be by a power that could violate the laws of nature that could only be the power that would have created those laws (the law maker/ the deity).
      ::如果违反自然法则,只能由可能违反自然法则的强权(法律制定者/神)才能构成产生这些法律的权力。
    3. Thus, the power that would have created those laws (the law maker, the deity) must exist.
      ::因此,建立这些法律的权力(法律制定者、神)必须存在。

    Criticisms/Rebuttals 
    ::批评/抗辩

    The criticisms of this argument or proof attack the first premise.  What evidence is there that there has ever been an event that has taken place that violates the laws of nature.  What would be required to establish that such an event has, in fact, taken place?
    ::对这一论点或证据的批评攻击了第一个前提。有什么证据可以证明曾经发生过违反自然法则的事件。 需要怎样才能确定这种事件实际上确已发生?

    Hume maintains that the preponderance of the evidence will always be that the laws of nature are being followed. Any claim that there has been a violation of those laws would need to be substantiated by clear and convincing evidence. Since there is so much evidence that the laws are not violated, any claim to the contrary would need to have a good deal of evidence to support it. Hume does not believe that such evidence exists, has ever existed, or could ever exist. Evidence in support of miracles would need to satisfy the following criteria:
    ::Hume认为,证据的优势始终是自然法则得到遵守,任何声称违反这些法律的主张都需要有明确和令人信服的证据加以证实;由于有大量证据证明法律没有被违反,任何相反的主张都需要大量证据来支持。

    1. sufficient number of witnesses
      ::足够人数的证人人数
    2. witnesses of good sense and education
      ::和良好教育的见证人
    3. witnesses of integrity and good reputation
      ::证人的廉正和良好声誉
    4. public performance of the miracle event
      ::公开表演奇迹事件
    5. These conditions have not been satisfied
      ::这些条件没有得到满足

    Hume argues that miracles do not occur and that there is a logical obstacle to humans ever proving that events are miracles.
    ::Hume认为,奇迹不会发生,人类有逻辑上的障碍来证明事件是奇迹。

    Hume on Miracles
    ::奇迹上的休姆

    Outcome Assessment
    ::成果评估

    This argument or proof does not establish the actual existence of a supernatural deity.  It attempts to argue for the existence of such a being by offering evidence that is highly questionable and for which there are alternative and often more plausible explanations.  While the argument can not be used to convert a non-believer to a believer, the faults in the argument do not prove that there is no god.  The Burden of Proof demands that the positive claim that there is a supernatural deity be established by reason and evidence and this argument does not meet that standard.  The believer in god can use this argument to establish the mere logical possibility that there is a supernatural deity or at least that it is not irrational to believe in the possibility that there is such a being, but the argument does not establish any degree of probability at all when there are alternative explanations for the reports of experiences offered. The veracity of the reports has not been established.
    ::这种论点或证据并不能证明超自然神的存在,它试图通过提供极有疑问的证据来为存在这种人辩护,而这种证据往往有其他更可信的解释。虽然这种论点不能用来将不信者转换为信仰者,但这种论点的错误并不能证明不存在神灵。证据的责任要求根据理由和证据来证实有超自然神灵的积极主张,而这种论点不符合这一标准。信仰上帝的人可以利用这一论点来证明存在超自然神灵的逻辑可能性,或者至少相信存在这种神灵的可能性并非不合理,但当对所提供的经验报告有其他解释时,这种论点并不能证明任何可能性。报告的真实性尚未确定。

    Premises/Conclusion 
    ::房地/结论

    1. There is an event that has taken place that violates the laws of nature.
      ::发生了一起违反自然法则的事件。
    2. If the laws of nature are violated it could only be by a power that could violate the laws of nature that could only be the power that would have created those laws-the law maker, the deity.
      ::如果违反自然法则,它只能是由可能违反自然法则的强权,而这种强权只能是建立那些法律的权力——法律的制定者、神。
    3. Thus, the power that would have created those laws-the law maker, the deity must exist.
      ::因此,建立这些法律的权力 -- -- 法律制定者、神灵 -- -- 必须存在。

    Problem with argument:
    ::有争论的问题 :

    1.  _ X _ Premises are false or questionable
      ::_X_房舍是虚假或可疑的
    2. ____ Premises are irrelevant
      ::房舍无关紧要
    3. ____ Premises Contain the Conclusion –Circular Reasoning
      ::含有结论的房舍 -- -- 环形理由
    4. ____ Premises are inadequate to support the conclusion
      ::房舍不足以支持结论
    5. ____ Alternative arguments exist with equal or greater support
      ::现有替代论点得到同等或更大程度的支持。

    This argument or proof has flaws in it and would not convince a rational person to accept its conclusion.  This is not because someone who does not believe in a deity will simply refuse to accept based on emotions or past history but because it is not rationally compelling of acceptance of its conclusion.
    ::这一论点或证据有缺陷,无法说服理性的人接受其结论。 这并不是因为不相信神的人会基于情感或过去的历史而拒绝接受其结论,而是因为它没有理性地说服理性的人接受其结论。

    Psychic Phenomena 
    ::精神病

    If reports of certain types of psychic phenomena were accurate and truthful and believable they would establish the existence of a spiritual realm that would support claims of another dimension and spiritual beings and powers.  God as a spirit would then be more believable.  Are the reports of such phenomena veridical?
    ::如果某些类型的灵媒现象的报告是准确、真实和可信的,它们将证实存在一个精神领域,支持对另一维维度以及精神生命和力量的主张,那么,上帝作为精神将更加可信。 此类现象的报告是否具有极端性?

    Psychic Phenomena-Death and Immortality  
    ::精神病-死亡和不朽

    • Support for the post-mortem survival hypothesis
      • apparitions-spirits/ ghosts/ poltergeists
        ::幽灵/幽灵/妖怪
      • reincarnation memories
        ::转回记忆
      • near death experiences -NDE's
        ::近乎死亡的经历 - NDE's
      • death bed observations
        ::死床观察
      • sacred scripture
        ::圣经

      ::支持死后生存的假设 幽灵/鬼魂 / 幽灵/

    Arguments against the postmortem survival hypothesis
    ::反对死后生存假设的论据

    • the irrational nature of the explanation of consciousness
      ::意识解释的非理性性质
    • lack of clear, unambiguous physical evidence
      ::缺乏明确无误的物证

    Existence of deities and spirits that enter into humans, possess them or channel through them
    ::存在进入人类、拥有或引导人类的神灵和灵灵

    Alternative Explanations
    ::备选解释

    • Persons think that they are telling the truth but they are mistaken, e.g., optical illusion, misinterpretation.
      ::人们认为他们说的是实话,但他们错了,例如视像错觉、误解。
    • Persons think that they are telling the truth but they are under the influence of mind altering substances
      ::人们认为他们说的是真话 但却受到改变思想物质的影响
    • Persons think that they are telling the truth but they are suffering from brain malfunctioning, e.g., chemical imbalance
      ::一些人认为他们说的是实话,但是他们患有脑机能失灵,例如化学不平衡。
    • Persons think that they are telling the truth but they are under the influence of group influence-social psychology
      ::人们认为他们说的是实话,但他们受到群体影响和社会心理的影响。
    • Persons are making a false report to get attention from believers
      ::某些人假报信信教,以引起信教者的注意。
    • Persons are making a false report to raise money from donations to their cause or movement.
      ::这些人正在假报,从对其事业或运动的捐款中筹集资金。
    • Persons are making a false report to please others and gain acceptance from believers.
      ::有人假报,以取悦他人,并获得信士们的接受。
    • Persons are making a false report to get power, perhaps as a leader of a religious cult or sect.
      ::一些人为了获得权力而发表虚假报告,也许作为宗教邪教或教派的领导人。

    The Questions Are:
    ::问题是:

    1. Is the subject of a religious experience justified inferring from the psychological experience to the existential or the ontological reality of the object of that experience: the supernatural being?
      ::宗教经历的主体是否有理由从心理经历推断为该经历对象的存在或本体现实:即超自然存在?
    2. Is anyone else justified in reaching the conclusion that a supernatural being exists based upon the report of the individual who has made the claim to have had the religious experience?
      ::任何其他人是否有理由根据声称具有宗教经验的个人的报告得出结论,认为存在超自然现象?
    3. Does the accumulation of reports from such witnesses to religious experiences justify the claim that a supernatural or spiritual being, a deity, a transcendent reality, exists?
      ::从这些证人到宗教经历的报告的积累是否证明存在超自然或精神、神灵、超自然、超常现实的说法是正当的?

    Problems with Religious Experiences
    ::宗教经验问题

    Not all who learn of the reports of such religious experiences accept them as conclusive evidence for the existence of a supernatural reality or spiritual beings. Many have attempted to give alternative accounts of such experiences that do not involve acceptance of the existence of any supernatural entities or reality.
    ::并非所有了解这种宗教经历的报告的人都认为它们是超自然现实或精神生命存在的确凿证据,许多人试图以其他方式描述这种经历,而不涉及接受任何超自然实体或现实的存在。

    Naturalism is an approach to religious experiences which explains them as being the result of natural forces. It accounts for such phenomena in natural terms without recourse to anything that is beyond the physical realm. In general, all reality and all experiences can be accounted for (fully explained) in terms of physical processes.
    ::自然主义是一种对待宗教经历的方法,它把宗教经历解释为自然力量的结果,它用自然术语来描述此类现象,而没有诉诸任何超出自然领域的范围,一般来说,所有现实和所有经验都可以以物理过程来解释(充分解释)所有现实和所有经验。

    There are different explanations for the origin and nature of religious experiences. What they have in common is the rejection of a supernatural source or object and the attempt to offer a full explanation in empirically verifiable terms.
    ::对宗教经历的起源和性质有不同的解释,它们的共同点是拒绝某种超自然来源或物体,试图用经验可核实的术语提供充分解释。

    Psychological explanations have been offered by several theoreticians, including Sigmund Freud. Sociological explanations have also been developed by several other scientists, such as Emil Durkheim. What they have in common is the refusal to accept religious experiences as being truthful, accurate, or believable in so far as the existence of any supernatural reality. One of the principle reasons for withholding acceptance of the reports is that the experiences cannot be verified and what they report encountering can not be verified empirically.
    ::包括西格蒙德·弗洛伊德在内的数位理论家提供了心理解释,其他几位科学家也提供了社会学解释,例如埃米尔·杜尔克海姆,他们的共同点是拒绝接受宗教经历是真实的、准确的或可以相信的,只要存在任何超自然现实。 拒绝接受报告的主要理由之一是这些经验无法核实,他们报告的经历也无法以经验方式核实。

    See Alternative Explanations above
    ::见上文备选解释

    Truthfulness
    ::真相

    1.  Are the religious experiences veridical?
      ::宗教经历是否具有宗教意义?
    2. What is the scientific analysis of the religious experiences?
      ::宗教经历的科学分析是什么?
    3. What are the genetic and causal conditions of religious experiences?
      1. in the human race?
        ::在人类中?
      2. in the individual?
        ::个人?

      ::宗教经历的遗传和因果条件是什么? 在人类中? 在个人中?
    4. Is the religious experience veridical?
      ::宗教经验是宗教经验吗?
    5. Is it truthful? Is it a report which others can accept as being Correct? Truthful? Accurate?
      ::难道这是真实的吗?是别人可以接受的、正经的报告呢?是真实的呢?还是准确的呢?

    Humans should accept religious experiences as being veridical unless there exists positive grounds for thinking otherwise, for thinking that the reports are not truthful, accurate or correct. Some claim that there are positive grounds for rejecting the reports of such experiences, i.e., against their being veridical experiences
    ::人类应该接受宗教经历,认为宗教经历不是真实的、准确的或正确的,除非有积极的理由进行相反的思考,否则就应该认为宗教经历是野蛮的。

    • mystics are abnormal: they tend to be sexually repressed
      ::神秘是不正常的:他们往往受到性压抑
    • mystical experience is always mixed with other elements such as sexual emotion or imagery
      ::神秘经历总是与性情感或图像等其他要素混杂在一起。

    In response to these observations some offer that perhaps the human being must be in an altered state of consciousness in order to have the experience of the greater (supernatural) reality which the ordinary consciousness can not contain or reach. Sexual abstinence may be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having such an encounter. There are reports or descriptions of these religious experiences involve concepts and beliefs that are:
    ::针对这些意见,一些与会者提出,也许人必须改变意识状态,才能体验普通意识无法遏制或达到的大(超自然)现实。性禁欲可能是进行这种接触的必要条件,但不是充分条件。

    • inadequate to the facts
      ::不够充分的事实
    • highly confused
      ::高度混乱
    • mixed with error and nonsense
      ::再加上迷误和妄言,
    • subject to change in time
      ::时间变化

    Perhaps  these features are also true of scientific concepts and beliefs and that they have and do change in time.  Perhaps religious experiences are not pure delusions or illusions. Perhaps religious experiences are only encountered by those who have an ability to experience them. Perhaps there are people, even many people, who are "deaf" to such experiences.
    ::也许这些特征对科学概念和信仰也是一样,而且它们已经和确实改变了时间。 也许宗教经历不是纯粹的幻觉或幻觉。 也许只有那些有能力体验这些特征的人才能体验到宗教经历。 也许有些人,甚至许多人,对于这些经历“懒惰 ” 。

    If the subject of a religious experience is to be believed there are certain requirements to be met. Any perception of an individual should be publicly confirmed. No private experience can establish the existence of God. You would first need to establish the existence of God by other means on order to confirm that what was experienced was both God and True.
    ::如果宗教经验的主体是确信的,那末,有一定的条件必须满足,对于一个人的任何感知,都应当公开证实。任何私欲都不能证实真主的存在,你首先需要以其他方法证实真主的存在,以便你证实,真主所经历的,确是真实的,确是真实的。

    • No indescribable experience can be publicly confirmed
      ::无法公开确认任何无法描述的经验
    • No mystical experience can be publicly confirmed.
      ::无法公开证实任何神秘经验。
    • Mystics appear similar to people who are deluded, or mentally ill, not adjusted to reality.
      ::神秘人似乎和被欺骗的人或精神病患者相似,他们没有适应现实。
    • Their claims can not be accepted without evidence.
      ::没有证据,就无法接受他们的申诉。
    • But you can not have evidence without a prior belief in God.
      ::你们对于真主,既未信道,又未信道的证据,确是无干的。
    • To confirm what any subject is experiencing there must be "checkable" statements.
      ::为了确认任何主体正在经历什么,必须“可核实”声明。
    • Similar to a blind person confirming what a sighted person sees.
      ::与盲人相似,盲人能证实视力人所见。

    With the religious experiences there are no such "checkable" statements, so there can be no confirmation. Hence, they cannot serve as a proof of the existence of supernatural entities because they are not veridical.
    ::在宗教经历中,没有这种“可核实”的言词,因此无法证实。 因此,这些言词不能作为超自然实体存在的证据,因为它们不是天真无邪的。

    Mediums
    ::中 中

    Many people want strongly to believe in a spirit world and deities.  They ask questions such as:  What about mediums?  Don't people like John Edward communicate with the dead?  If they do that is evidence of the spirit world and of souls and of a deity as well. So do they do this?
    ::许多人希望信仰一个精神世界和神灵,他们问许多问题,例如:媒介呢?像约翰·爱德华这样的人,难道他们不与死人交流吗?如果他们这样做,那便是精神世界、灵魂和神灵的证据。难道他们这样做吗?

    Long Island Medium on Ellen Degeneris
    ::Ellen Degeneris岛长中岛

    If one has no had a religious experience how can one reach a conclusion as to whether or not such an experience exists as reported? Is truthful? Is accurate? Is sufficient grounds to conclude that there is a supernatural realm? That there is a deity?  That there is a supreme being? How can non-believers accept the reports of people who claim to have had such experiences when there are so many alternative explanations for those reports which would provide strong reasons to reject the claim that the reports are truthful and accurate?
    ::如果一个人没有宗教经验,那么人们怎么能得出这样一个结论:这种经验是否如实存在?是真实的吗?准确的吗?是否有足够的理由认为存在超自然界?有神吗?有神吗?有至高无上的神吗?当那些报告有如此多的替代解释,为拒绝关于报告是真实和准确的说法提供有力的理由时,非信徒怎能接受自称有这种经验的人的报告?

    Outcome Assessment
    ::成果评估

    This argument or proof does not establish the actual existence of a supernatural deity.  It attempts to argue for the existence of such a being by offering evidence that is highly questionable and for which there are alternative and often more plausible explanations.  While the argument cannot be used to convert a non-believer to a believer, the faults in the argument do not prove that there is no god.  The Burden of Proof demands that the positive claim that there is a supernatural deity be established by reason and evidence and this argument does not meet that standard.  The believer in god can use this argument to establish the mere logical possibility that there is a supernatural deity or at least that it is not irrational to believe in the possibility that there is such a being but the argument does not establish any degree of probability at all when there are alternative explanations for the reports of experiences offered.  The veracity of the reports has not been established.
    ::这种论点或证据并不能证明超自然神的存在,它试图通过提供极有疑问的证据来为这种存在辩护,而这种证据往往有其他更可信的解释。虽然这种论点不能用来将不信者转换为信仰者,但这种论点的错误并不能证明不存在神灵。证据的责任要求根据理由和证据来确立关于超自然神灵的积极主张,而这种论点不符合这一标准。信仰上帝的人可以利用这一论点来证明存在超自然神灵的逻辑可能性,或者至少相信存在这种神灵的可能性并非不合理,但当对所提供的经验报告有其他解释时,这种论点并不能证明任何可能性。报告的真实性尚未确定。

      Premises/Conclusions
    ::房地/结论

    1. Persons claim to experience contact or communication with the dead.
      ::声称与死者接触或联系的人。
    2. There is a realm of the dead or spiritual realm in which there are souls, spirits, and the deity
      ::在一个死亡或精神王国的王国里 有灵魂,灵魂,神灵和神灵

      Problem with argument:
    ::有争论的问题 :

    1.  _ X _ Premises are false or questionable
      ::_X_房舍是虚假或可疑的
    2. ____Premises are irrelevant
      ::房舍无关紧要
    3. ____Premises Contain the Conclusion –Circular Reasoning
      ::载有结论的序言 - 环形理由
    4. ____Premises are inadequate to support the conclusion
      ::房舍不足以支持结论
    5. _ X _ Alternative arguments exist with equal or greater support
      ::_X_在同等或更大的支持下存在替代论据

    This argument or proof has flaws in it and would not convince a rational person to accept its conclusion. This is not because someone who does not believe in a deity will simply refuse to accept based on emotions or past history but because it is not rationally compelling of acceptance of its conclusion.
    ::这一论点或证据有缺陷,无法说服理性的人接受其结论。 这并不是因为不相信神的人会基于情感或过去的历史而拒绝接受其结论,而是因为它没有理性地说服理性的人接受其结论。

    The Pragmatic Argument for the Existence of God
    ::为上帝的存在而提出的实实在在的论据

    Blaise Pascal , 1623-1662, was both a mathematician and a philosopher. He had studied many of the traditional arguments for the existence of God but did not find the arguments persuasive. Living in a time when gambling was en vogue , Pascal attempted to formulate an argument, based on chance, that would impel the reader to believe in God. After reading Pascal's "Wager", Pascal wants you to believe that the "smart money" is on belief in God.
    ::Blaise Pascal,1623-1662年,既是数学家,也是哲学家。他研究了许多关于上帝存在的传统论点,但没有发现这些论点有说服力。 生活在赌博的时代,Pascal试图根据机会提出一种论点,促使读者相信上帝。读了Pascal的“Wager ” ( Wager)之后,Pascal希望你相信“聪明的钱”是建立在对上帝的信仰之上的。

    Pragmatic Argument for Existence of God
    ::为上帝的存在提出实实在在的论据

    What are the Odds? Pascal's "Wager"
    ::什么是奇数?

    lesson content

    EPISD Informed Problem Solvers Goal
    ::EPISD 信息化解决问题者目标

    According to Pascal, we can conceive or our choice whether or not to believe in the existence of God as a wager. As in all bets, if we wager properly, then we stand to gain. If we wager improperly (or lose the bet), then we stand to suffer a loss.
    ::帕斯卡说,我们可以想象或选择是否相信上帝作为赌注的存在。 和所有赌注一样,如果我们赌注得当,那么我们就能赢。 如果我们赌注不当(或输了赌注 ) , 那么我们就遭受损失。

    The bet at hand concerns the existence of God. We can either bet on the existence of God or we can bet on the non-existence of God. But what would a gambler want to know before placing their money on the table? A gambler would probably want to know how much is at stake. Most bets are monetary. In this case, the gambler can think of their investment in terms of lifestyle choices. That is, those who do believe in God will act accordingly, e.g. no more late night parties, no more seeking of the good life, etc. Belief requires certain practices and orthopraxy - like when you want to watch football on Sunday morning but you have to attend Church. The next thing a gambler would want to know is the payoff/penalty. That is, how much will the gambler win potentially and how much will the gambler lose potentially. The wager is often presented as follows: 
    ::手中的赌注是关乎真主的存在。我们可以赌真主的存在,也可以赌真主的不存在。赌徒在把钱放在桌子上之前想知道什么?赌徒可能想知道赌徒想要知道什么?赌徒可能想知道赌徒的赌注是多少。赌徒大多赌注是金钱的赌注。赌徒可以想到他们在生活方式选择方面的投资。就是说,相信上帝的人会照此行事,例如,不再有深夜聚会,不再寻求美好生活等等。信仰需要某些做法和奥霍普拉西(orhopraxy),就像你想在星期天早上看橄榄球,但你必须参加教堂。下一个赌徒想知道的是报酬/惩罚。这就是说,赌徒能赢多少,赌徒会损失多少。赌徒通常会赌注如下:

    1.  If you believe in God and God does exist then your payoff is immeasurable . You will enter heaven and know eternal happiness
      ::如果你们确信真主,而真主确已存在,那末,你们的报酬是不可估量的,你们将入天天,而得享永久的幸福。
    2. If you believe in God and God does not exist then you have lost some pleasure but you have led a decent life. You have forfeited a high amount of pleasure but your existence was not miserable.
      ::如果你们确信真主,而不信真主,那末,你们确已丧失了享受,但你们已过上体面的生活了。你们已丧失了相当的快乐,但你们没有忧愁。
    3. If you do not believe in God and God does exist then your penalty is immeasurable. You will suffer eternal displeasure.
      ::如果你们不信真主,而真主确已存在,那末,你们的刑罚是不可估量的,你们将受永久的怨恨。
    4. If you do not believe in God and God does not exist then you will have a high measurable amount of pleasure. Your pleasure will end once your life ends.
      ::如果你们不信真主,而真主不存在,那末,你们将享受重大的喜悦,你们的喜悦将在你们寿终之后结束。

    Although #4 does pay well, it does not have as high a potential return as #1. Considering the consequences of #3 and the potential return of #1 Pascal concludes that the most reasonable wager is to place your money on the existence of God. Even if you are wrong, the potential loss is minimal (see #2).
    ::虽然4票报酬不错,但回报的可能性不如1票那么大。 考虑到3票的后果和1票Pascal的回报的可能性,最合理的赌注是将你的钱寄托在上帝的存在上。即使你错了,潜在的损失也极小(见2票)。

     Sometimes the return or payoff is represented as follows:                        
    ::有时,回报或报酬代表如下:

     

    GOD EXISTS
    ::现有神的存在

    GOD DOES NOT EXIST
    ::神并不存在

    BELIEVE IN GOD
    ::相信上帝

    IMMEASURABLE PAYOFF
    ::保证的付款额

    INCONSEQUENTIAL LOSS
    ::不动产损失

    DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD              
    ::不相信上帝

    IMMEASURABLE LOSS
    ::长期损失

    MEASURABLE PAYOFF
    ::计量和可计量支付额

    Pascal's Wager
    ::帕斯卡尔的赌注

    Many arguments for the existence of God are deductive or inductive arguments. Some of these same arguments are based on valid laws of inference and specific claims of knowledge. While these arguments might try to infer God with very different arguments that are built upon very different assumptions and methodologies, these arguments do have one thing in common, i.e. they argue for the existence of God based on specific propositions or ideas.  This has been the case with the ontological, cosmological and teleological  arguments. Such arguments are known as epistemic arguments. Epistemic is from the Greek, episteme , or knowledge. Such arguments are well organized and appear to lead to their conclusions and so they are called valid indicating that if their premises were true their conclusions would be true as well.  However valid they may appear their soundness and cogency are not at all well established as their premises have been severely criticized over the centuries. It has fairly well been demonstrated or proven that their premises are not obviously true nor can they be verified as true through empirical methods.  So these arguments have been rejected by many as having unwarranted conclusions or as not being cogent or convincing.
    ::许多关于上帝存在的论据都是推论或推论性的论点。这些论据中有些是依据有效的推论法和具体的知识主张。这些论据可能试图用基于不同假设和方法的不同论点来推断上帝,但这些论点的确有共同之处,即它们根据具体主张或想法为上帝的存在辩护,这在本体、宇宙和神学论点中就是如此。这些论点被称为缩略论。信条来自希腊人、通识或知识。这些论点组织良好,似乎导致其结论,因此它们被称作有效,表明如果它们的前提属实,它们的结论也是真实的。尽管这些论点看起来可能并非完全正确,因为它们的前提在几个世纪里受到严厉批评。已经充分证明或证明它们的前提并不明显正确,也不能通过经验方法证实它们的真实性。因此,这些论点已被许多人拒绝,因为他们没有作出错误的结论,或者缺乏说服力或说服力。

    Non-Epistemic proofs are arguments for the existence of God that are not knowledge-based arguments. If understood properly, the non-epistemic proof should invoke a personal response. The power of Pascal's "Wager" is not found in valid rules of inference but in probability and possible outcomes. The "Wager" appeals to the feelings in us - to our emotions, our fear of loss or punishment and our hopes for rewards. Should human beings accept such arguments?  Should rational human beings act on less than rational arguments?  Some say it is immoral to so act.  Others disagree..
    ::非宗教证据是证明上帝存在的理由,不是基于知识的论据。如果正确理解,非普遍证据应当援引个人反应。帕斯卡尔的“怀孕”的力量并不见于有效的推论规则,而是在概率和可能的结果中。“怀孕”吸引了我们的感受——我们的情感、我们对损失或惩罚的恐惧和对报酬的希望。人类是否应该接受这种论点?理性的人应该根据比理性的论点行事吗?有些人说这样做是不道德的,另一些人则不同意。

    Problem with Pascal's "Wager"
    ::Pascal的“ Wager” 问题

    We may believe what goes beyond our experience, only when it is inferred from that experience by the assumption that what we do not know is like what we know.We may believe the statement of another person, when there is reasonable ground for supposing that he knows the matter of which he speaks, and that he is speaking the truth so far as he knows it. It is wrong in all cases to believe on insufficient evidence; and where it is presumption to doubt and to investigate, there it is worse than presumption to believe.
    ::我们也许相信超出我们经验的事物,但前提是从这种经验中推断出我们所不知道的东西与我们所知道的相似。 我们可能相信另一个人的说法,如果有合理的理由假设他知道自己所讲的事情,而且他所讲的就是他所知道的真相。 在所有案件中,相信证据不足是错误的;如果假定怀疑和调查,则比相信更糟糕。

    The Many Gods Problem
    ::千神万神的问题

    If a skeptic were to accept Pascal's invitation to believe in what deity would that person place their psychological commitment to believe?  There are different conception of the deity in different religions of the West and the East.  If the deity does exist and it is the one and only and it does pay attention to what humans do and it will reward and punish then the would-be believer needs more than Pascal's argument to arrive at  the proper conclusion as to exactly which conception of a deity to place trust and hope in in order to avoid the possibly vindictive deity who would punish both non-believers and those who believed in a "false" or inaccurate conception of the deity.
    ::如果怀疑论者接受帕斯卡尔的邀请,相信他的神性会让他们的心理承诺相信什么?西方和东方不同宗教的神灵有不同的概念。如果神灵确实存在,它是唯一的神灵,它确实关注人类的所作所为,它会奖赏和惩罚,那么,未来信仰者需要比帕斯卡尔的论据多一些,才能得出正确的结论,确定什么是神灵的观念来建立信任和希望,以避免可能存在的报复性神灵来惩罚非信仰者和那些相信神灵的“虚假”或错误概念的人。

    The assumption that believing in God has no different result than not believing in god , if there is no god. This is not always the case however.  If a person chooses to believe in a deity and that belief leads a person to certain actions such as using prayer in the place of medication for illnesses for which there are known cures then there is a decided difference.  A believer in the deity of the Christians or Islamic people might lead a person to a negative regard for others or even into physical acts of violence towards infidels.
    ::相信上帝与不相信上帝没有不同的结果,如果没有神的话,这种假设并不不同;但是,这种情况并不总是如此;如果一个人选择相信神,而这种信仰导致一个人采取某些行动,例如以祈祷代替治疗已知治疗的疾病,那么就存在着决定性的差别;信奉基督教徒或伊斯兰民族的神灵的人可能会使一个人对他人产生负面的考虑,甚至对异教徒采取肉体的暴力行为。

    It would appear that Pascal's approach would have appeal for those who do not want to use the intellect to its fullest extent and investigate all claims about what exists or does not exist.  It would appeal to those who want to have some being to appeal to for favor or exemption from harms and ills or favor for support against those they would oppose.
    ::看来帕斯卡尔的做法会对那些不想最充分地使用智力的人产生吸引力,并调查所有关于存在或不存在的主张。 它会对那些想让某些人呼吁帮助或免除伤害和弊病或支持他们反对的人的人的人产生吸引力。

    Outcome Assessment
    ::成果评估

    Premises/Conclusion
    ::房地/结论

    1. The possible reward for believing in a deity are greater than not believing in a deity
      ::信仰神与不信神之间的可能的报酬,是大于不信神的。
    2. The possible punishment or penalties for not believing in a deity is greater than the possible penalties for believing.
      ::不相信神的,可能受到的惩罚或处罚大于可能受到的惩罚。
    3. It is less risky to believe in a deity than not believe.
      ::相信神灵比不相信更危险。
    4. Believe in a deity existing or
      ::相信现有神灵或
    5. There is a deity
      ::有神灵存在

    Problem with argument:
    ::有争论的问题 :

    1. ____ Premises are false or questionable
      ::房舍是假的或有问题
    2. _ X __ Premises are irrelevant
      ::_X__房舍无关紧要
    3. ____ Premises Contain the Conclusion –Circular Reasoning
      ::含有结论的房舍 -- -- 环形理由
    4. _ X __ Premises are inadequate to support the conclusion
      ::_X__ 房舍不足以支持结论
    5. ____ Alternative arguments exist with equal or greater support
      ::现有替代论点得到同等或更大程度的支持。

    This argument or proof has flaws in it and would not convince a rational person to accept its conclusion.  This is not because someone who does not believe in a deity will simply refuse to accept based on emotions or past history but because it is not rationally compelling of acceptance of its conclusion.
    ::这一论点或证据有缺陷,无法说服理性的人接受其结论。 这并不是因为不相信神的人会基于情感或过去的历史而拒绝接受其结论,而是因为它没有理性地说服理性的人接受其结论。

       Philosophy Applications 
    ::哲学应用

    lesson content

    EPISD Critical Knowledge and Creative Thinking Goal
    ::EPISD 关键知识和创造性思维目标

    lesson content

     

    For the Jews belief in a Supreme Being was supported by the miracles associated with Moses.  For the Christians belief that Jesus is god is supported by the miracles associated with him.  For the Islamic peoples the miracles associated with the rise and spread of Islam are supportive of their faith as well. 
    ::犹太教徒信仰至高无上的神灵,与摩西有关联的神迹,支持摩西的神迹;基督教徒信仰耶稣是神灵,支持与他有关联的神迹;伊斯兰民族的神迹,与伊斯兰教的兴起和蔓延有关联的神迹,也支持他们的信仰。

    Think about it:
    ::考虑一下:

    Are these events really miracles?  Are there really miracles?  Are there really events that break the very laws of nature and for which there could be no other possible explanation other than the Supreme Being, the author of the laws of nature, being responsible for those events?
    ::这些事件真的有奇迹吗?真的有奇迹吗?真的有违反自然法则的事件吗?除了自然法则的作者“最高生物”之外,别无其他可能的解释。 自然法则的作者“最高生物”对这些事件负有责任吗?

    To accept some event as being a miracle we must satisfy two conditions:
    ::要接受某些事件为奇迹,我们必须满足两个条件:

    1. The event must violate the laws of nature
      ::事件必须违反自然法则
    2. There must be clear and indisputable evidence which compels us to accept that the event took place just as reported
      ::必须有明确和无可争议的证据,迫使我们承认事件发生如报告所述

    Why is it so difficult to satisfy both conditions at the same time? Use your answers from above to help you fully explore this issue. Make sure to support  your opinions with evidence.
    ::使用上面的答案来帮助您充分探讨这个问题。 一定要以证据支持您的意见。

    Vocabulary
    ::词汇表

    lesson content

    EPISD Effective Bilingual Education Goal
    ::EPISD 有效双语教育目标