2007,3,10
In some early states of society, these forces might be, and were, too much ahead of the power which society then possessed of disciplining and controlling them. There has been a time when the element of spontaneity and individuality was in excess, and the social principle had a hard struggle with it. The difficulty then was, to induce men of strong bodies or minds to pay obedience to any rules which required them to control their impulses. To overcome this difficulty, law and discipline, like the Popes struggling against the Emperors, asserted a power over the whole man, claiming to control all his life in order to control his character—which society had not found any other sufficient means of binding. But society has now fairly got the better of individuality; and the danger which threatens human nature is not the excess, but the deficiency, of personal impulses and preferences. Things are vastly changed, since the passions of those who were strong by station or by personal endowment were in a state of habitual rebellion against laws and ordinances, and required to be rigorously chained up to enable the persons within their reach to enjoy any particle of security. In our times, from the highest class of society down to the lowest, every one lives as under the eye of a hostile and dreaded censorship. Not only in what concerns others, but in what concerns only themselves, the individual or the family do not ask themselves—what do I prefer? or, what would suit my character and disposition? or, what would allow the best and highest in me to have fair play, and enable it to grow and thrive? They ask themselves, what is suitable to my position? what is usually done by persons of my station and pecuniary circumstances? or (worse still) what is usually done by persons of a station and circumstances superior to mine? I do not mean that they choose what is customary, in preference to what suits their own inclination. It does not occur to them to have any inclination, except for what is customary. Thus the mind itself is bowed to the yoke: even in what people do for pleasure, conformity is the first thing thought of; they like in crowds; they exercise choice only among things commonly done: peculiarity of taste, eccentricity of conduct, are shunned equally with crimes: until by dint of not following their own nature, they have no nature to follow: their human capacities are withered and starved: they become incapable of any strong wishes or native pleasures, and are generally without either opinions or feelings of home growth, or properly their own. Now is this, or is it not, the desirable condition of human nature?
In some early states of society, these forces might be, and were, too much ahead of the power which society then possessed of disciplining and controlling them. There has been a time when the element of spontaneity and individuality was in excess, and the social principle had a hard struggle with it. The difficulty then was, to induce men of strong bodies or minds to pay obedience to any rules which required them to control their impulses. To overcome this difficulty, law and discipline, like the Popes struggling against the Emperors, asserted a power over the whole man, claiming to control all his life in order to control his character—which society had not found any other sufficient means of binding. But society has now fairly got the better of individuality; and the danger which threatens human nature is not the excess, but the deficiency, of personal impulses and preferences. Things are vastly changed, since the passions of those who were strong by station or by personal endowment were in a state of habitual rebellion against laws and ordinances, and required to be rigorously chained up to enable the persons within their reach to enjoy any particle of security. In our times, from the highest class of society down to the lowest, every one lives as under the eye of a hostile and dreaded censorship. Not only in what concerns others, but in what concerns only themselves, the individual or the family do not ask themselves—what do I prefer? or, what would suit my character and disposition? or, what would allow the best and highest in me to have fair play, and enable it to grow and thrive? They ask themselves, what is suitable to my position? what is usually done by persons of my station and pecuniary circumstances? or (worse still) what is usually done by persons of a station and circumstances superior to mine? I do not mean that they choose what is customary, in preference to what suits their own inclination. It does not occur to them to have any inclination, except for what is customary. Thus the mind itself is bowed to the yoke: even in what people do for pleasure, conformity is the first thing thought of; they like in crowds; they exercise choice only among things commonly done: peculiarity of taste, eccentricity of conduct, are shunned equally with crimes: until by dint of not following their own nature, they have no nature to follow: their human capacities are withered and starved: they become incapable of any strong wishes or native pleasures, and are generally without either opinions or feelings of home growth, or properly their own. Now is this, or is it not, the desirable condition of human nature?
|
|
|
|
コメント(8)
Thus the mind itself is bowed to the yoke:
このようにして心それ自体がくびきにおじぎしてしまう。（拘束されているものに曲げられてしまう）
even in what people do for pleasure,
人が楽しみのためにするものにおいてさえ
conformity is the first thing thought of;
(周囲と）一致することをまず最初に考える
they like in crowds;
彼らは集団のなかにいることを好む
they exercise choice only among things commonly done:
通常なされる範囲内でのみ選択を行う。
peculiarity of taste, eccentricity of conduct,
好みの特異さ、行為の奇抜さは、
are shunned equally with crimes:
犯罪と同じように遠ざけられる
until by dint of not following their own nature,
彼ら自身の天性に従わないことによって
they have no nature to follow:
従うべき天性を持たなくなる。
their human capacities are withered and starved:
彼らの人間としての容量は収縮し、飢える。
they become incapable of any strong wishes or native pleasures,
彼らは強い望みや天性の歓喜を感じる能力がなくなり、
and are generally without either opinions or feelings of home growth, or properly their own.
内部から沸き起こる意見や感情、つまり、彼ら自身のものというべきもの、が一般的になくなる。
:::::：：：：：：：：：：：：：：：：
until by dint of not following their own nature,
彼ら自身の天性に不服従によるのだが、
they have no nature to follow:
従うべき天性を持たないほどまでに。
昨日の読書会では、このuntilの解釈が問題となった。
語源としては、untilは、un（まで）＋till（まで）である。だから、文の解釈としては、
従うべき天性を持たなくなる『まで』（ほどまで）
自分の天性に従わない、という状態であった
としてみてはどうだろうか。
このようにして心それ自体がくびきにおじぎしてしまう。（拘束されているものに曲げられてしまう）
even in what people do for pleasure,
人が楽しみのためにするものにおいてさえ
conformity is the first thing thought of;
(周囲と）一致することをまず最初に考える
they like in crowds;
彼らは集団のなかにいることを好む
they exercise choice only among things commonly done:
通常なされる範囲内でのみ選択を行う。
peculiarity of taste, eccentricity of conduct,
好みの特異さ、行為の奇抜さは、
are shunned equally with crimes:
犯罪と同じように遠ざけられる
until by dint of not following their own nature,
彼ら自身の天性に従わないことによって
they have no nature to follow:
従うべき天性を持たなくなる。
their human capacities are withered and starved:
彼らの人間としての容量は収縮し、飢える。
they become incapable of any strong wishes or native pleasures,
彼らは強い望みや天性の歓喜を感じる能力がなくなり、
and are generally without either opinions or feelings of home growth, or properly their own.
内部から沸き起こる意見や感情、つまり、彼ら自身のものというべきもの、が一般的になくなる。
:::::：：：：：：：：：：：：：：：：
until by dint of not following their own nature,
彼ら自身の天性に不服従によるのだが、
they have no nature to follow:
従うべき天性を持たないほどまでに。
昨日の読書会では、このuntilの解釈が問題となった。
語源としては、untilは、un（まで）＋till（まで）である。だから、文の解釈としては、
従うべき天性を持たなくなる『まで』（ほどまで）
自分の天性に従わない、という状態であった
としてみてはどうだろうか。
最初からいきます。
In some early states of society,
初期の社会状態においては
these forces might be, and were, too much ahead of the power which society then possessed of disciplining and controlling them.
これらの勢力は、彼らを押さえつけ、制御するために社会がそのとき保有していた力よりもかなり前を行くものであったかも知れないし、事実、あった（ものもある）のである。
There has been a time when the element of spontaneity and individuality was in excess,
自発性と個性の要素が過剰であり、
and the social principle had a hard struggle with it.
そして、社会の原則は、それとの闘争で苦労していた時代があったのである。
The difficulty then was,
困難なことは、
to induce men of strong bodies or minds to pay obedience to any rules which required them to control their impulses.
強力な肉体と精神の人間をして、彼らの衝動を制御することを彼らに要求する如何なるルールに対しても従順にさせしめることである。
To overcome this difficulty,
この困難さに打ち克つために、
law and discipline, like the Popes struggling against the Emperors,
教皇が皇帝相手に苦労したように、法や統制が
asserted a power over the whole man,
人の全体に対して権力を主張し、
claiming to control all his life in order to control his character
彼の人格を制御するために、彼の人生のすべてを制御することを要求し、
—which society had not found any other sufficient means of binding.
社会は他に十分な拘束の手段を発見していないのである。
But society has now fairly got the better of individuality;
しかしながら、社会はいまや個人に打ち勝っているのである。
and the danger which threatens human nature is
人間の性格を脅かす危険があるのは、
not the excess, but the deficiency, of personal impulses and preferences.
個人の衝動や好みの過剰ではないのであり、欠如なのである。
In some early states of society,
初期の社会状態においては
these forces might be, and were, too much ahead of the power which society then possessed of disciplining and controlling them.
これらの勢力は、彼らを押さえつけ、制御するために社会がそのとき保有していた力よりもかなり前を行くものであったかも知れないし、事実、あった（ものもある）のである。
There has been a time when the element of spontaneity and individuality was in excess,
自発性と個性の要素が過剰であり、
and the social principle had a hard struggle with it.
そして、社会の原則は、それとの闘争で苦労していた時代があったのである。
The difficulty then was,
困難なことは、
to induce men of strong bodies or minds to pay obedience to any rules which required them to control their impulses.
強力な肉体と精神の人間をして、彼らの衝動を制御することを彼らに要求する如何なるルールに対しても従順にさせしめることである。
To overcome this difficulty,
この困難さに打ち克つために、
law and discipline, like the Popes struggling against the Emperors,
教皇が皇帝相手に苦労したように、法や統制が
asserted a power over the whole man,
人の全体に対して権力を主張し、
claiming to control all his life in order to control his character
彼の人格を制御するために、彼の人生のすべてを制御することを要求し、
—which society had not found any other sufficient means of binding.
社会は他に十分な拘束の手段を発見していないのである。
But society has now fairly got the better of individuality;
しかしながら、社会はいまや個人に打ち勝っているのである。
and the danger which threatens human nature is
人間の性格を脅かす危険があるのは、
not the excess, but the deficiency, of personal impulses and preferences.
個人の衝動や好みの過剰ではないのであり、欠如なのである。
Things are vastly changed, since the passions of those who were strong by station or by personal endowment were in a state of habitual rebellion against laws and ordinances, and required to be rigorously chained up to enable the persons within their reach to enjoy any particle of security.
立場や個人の才能のより強い人の情熱は法律や慣行に対しての習慣的な反乱状態の中にあって、情熱が近くにいる人たちが少しの安全を楽しむのを可能にするために厳格に取り締まる事を必要とされて以来物事は大いに変わった。
In our times, from the highest class of society down to the lowest, every one lives as under the eye of a hostile and dreaded censorship.
我々の時代においては地位の高い人から低い人まで、全ての人が冷淡で恐ろしい検閲の元でのように暮らしています。
Not only in what concerns others, but in what concerns only themselves, the individual or the family do not ask themselves;what do I prefer? or, what would suit my character and disposition? or, what would allow the best and highest in me to have fair play, and enable it to grow and thrive?
何が他の人と関わっているのかだけでなく、何が彼ら自身に関わってるかと言うことすら個人も家族も自らに尋ねはしない。つまり私は何が好きなのか？あるいは何が私の性格や気質に合っているのか？あるいは何が私の中の一番良く、高尚な物がただしく作用し、それを育て成長させるのであろうか？などとは尋ねはしない。
They ask themselves, what is suitable to my position? what is usually done by persons of my station and pecuniary circumstances? or (worse still) what is usually done by persons of a station and circumstances superior to mine?
彼らは自分自身に尋ねる。何が私の地位にふさわしいか？私と同じ立場や金銭的な状況の人によって普通は何がなされるのか？あるいは（良くない事ではあるが）私より優れた立場や状況の人たちによって普通は何がなされるのであろうか？などと尋ねるのです。
立場や個人の才能のより強い人の情熱は法律や慣行に対しての習慣的な反乱状態の中にあって、情熱が近くにいる人たちが少しの安全を楽しむのを可能にするために厳格に取り締まる事を必要とされて以来物事は大いに変わった。
In our times, from the highest class of society down to the lowest, every one lives as under the eye of a hostile and dreaded censorship.
我々の時代においては地位の高い人から低い人まで、全ての人が冷淡で恐ろしい検閲の元でのように暮らしています。
Not only in what concerns others, but in what concerns only themselves, the individual or the family do not ask themselves;what do I prefer? or, what would suit my character and disposition? or, what would allow the best and highest in me to have fair play, and enable it to grow and thrive?
何が他の人と関わっているのかだけでなく、何が彼ら自身に関わってるかと言うことすら個人も家族も自らに尋ねはしない。つまり私は何が好きなのか？あるいは何が私の性格や気質に合っているのか？あるいは何が私の中の一番良く、高尚な物がただしく作用し、それを育て成長させるのであろうか？などとは尋ねはしない。
They ask themselves, what is suitable to my position? what is usually done by persons of my station and pecuniary circumstances? or (worse still) what is usually done by persons of a station and circumstances superior to mine?
彼らは自分自身に尋ねる。何が私の地位にふさわしいか？私と同じ立場や金銭的な状況の人によって普通は何がなされるのか？あるいは（良くない事ではあるが）私より優れた立場や状況の人たちによって普通は何がなされるのであろうか？などと尋ねるのです。
Things are vastly changed, since the passions of those who were strong by station or by personal endowment were in a state of habitual rebellion against laws and ordinances, and required to be rigorously chained up to enable the persons within their reach to enjoy any particle of security.
物事は大いに変わってしまいました。立場や個人的な才能によって強められた人々の情熱が法律や慣習に対して常に反発する状態であり、彼らの近くに居る人たちがいささかの安全を楽しむことが出来るようにその情熱は厳重に取り締まれなければならなかったのであったけれども、そのように変わってしまったのです。
物事は大いに変わってしまいました。立場や個人的な才能によって強められた人々の情熱が法律や慣習に対して常に反発する状態であり、彼らの近くに居る人たちがいささかの安全を楽しむことが出来るようにその情熱は厳重に取り締まれなければならなかったのであったけれども、そのように変わってしまったのです。
- mixiユーザー
- ログインしてコメントしよう！
|
|
|
|
ミル自由論 更新情報
-
最新のイベント
-
まだ何もありません
-
-
最新のアンケート
-
まだ何もありません
-
