Twenty years ago in A Dynamic Faith, after reviewing the new questions which the great sciences had raised for religion, I said: “There are still harder problems than any of these. Psychology1 has opened a series of questions which make the boldest tremble for his faith in an endless life or in any spiritual reality.” The twenty years that have intervened have made my point much more clear. It is now pretty generally recognized that the deepest issues of the faith are to be settled in this field. The problem of the real nature of the human soul is at the present moment probably the most important religious question before us, for upon the answer to it all our vital spiritual interests depend. If man has no unique interior domain2, if he is only a tiny bit of that vast system of naturalism in which every curve of process and development is rigidly3 determined4 by antecedent causes, then “spiritual”[161] is only a high-sounding word with a metaphorical5 significance, but with no basis of reality in the nature of things. There is certainly no “place” in the external world of space where we can expect to find spiritual realities. They are not to be found by going “somewhere.” Olympus has been climbed, and it was as naturalistic as any other mountain peak. Eden is only a defined area of Mesopotamia, and that blessed word can work no miracles for us now. The dome6 of the sky is only an optical illusion. It is no supersensuous realm on which we can build our hopes. The beyond as a spiritual reality is within, or it is nowhere. Psychology, however, has not been very encouraging in promises of hope. It has gone the way of the other sciences and has taken an ever increasing slant7 toward naturalism. The result is that most so-called “psychologies of religion” reduce religion either to a naturalistic or to a subjective8 basis, which means in either case that religion as a way to some objective spiritual reality has eluded9 us and has disappeared as a constructive10 power. Many a modern psychologist can say with Browning’s Cleon:
“And I have written three books on the soul,
Proving absurd all written hitherto,
And putting us to ignorance again.”
[162]
Two of the main tendencies in what is usually called scientific psychology are (1) the “behaviorist” tendency and (2) the tendency to reduce the inner life to a series of “mind states.” Let us consider behaviorism first. This turns psychology into “a purely11 objective experimental branch of natural science.”[9] It aims at “the prediction and control of behavior.” “Introspection forms no essential part of its method.” One is not concerned with “interpretation in terms of consciousness,” one is interested only in reactions, responses—in short, in behavior in the presence of stimuli12 which produce movements. The body is a complicated organ and “mind” is merely a convenient term to express its “activities.”[10] The behaviorist “recognizes no dividing line between man and brute14.” Psychology becomes “the science of behavior,”[11] the study of “the activity of man or animal as it can be observed from the outside, either with or without attempting to determine the mental states by inference from these acts.” Emotions become reduced forthwith to “the bodily resonance” set up in the muscular and visceral systems by instinctive15 movements in[163] the presence of objects, these curious movements being due entirely16 to the inheritance of physiological17 structure adapted at least in the early stages to aid survival. There is no way by which behaviorist psychology can give any standing18 to religion or to any type of spiritual values. “?sthetics is the study of the useless,” as William James baldly states the case. Conscience disappears or becomes another name for the inheritance or acquisition of certain types of social behavior. Everything which we call ethics19 or morality changes into well-defined and rigidly determined behavior. There is nothing more “spiritual” about it than there is in the fall of a raindrop or in the luminous20 trail of a meteor, or in any form of what has happily been called “cosmic weather.”
This reduction of personality to a center of activity is a reaction from the dualistic sundering22 of mind and body inherited from Descartes. The theory of psycho-physical parallelism is utterly23 bankrupt. Idealism, which is an attempt to get round the impasse24 of dualism by treating mind as the only reality, is abhorrent25 to scientists and unpopular with young philosophers, especially in America. Some other solution is therefore urgent. The easiest one at hand, though it is obviously temporary and superficial, is to cut across[164] the mind loop, ignore its unique, originative, creative capacity and its interior depth, to deal only with body plus body’s activities, and to call that “psychology.”
The “mind-state” psychology takes us little farther on. It also is a form of naturalism. “Mind-state” psychology makes more of introspection than behaviorist psychology does, and it works more than the latter does in terms of consciousness, which for the behaviorist can be almost ignored or questioned as an existing reality. According to this view, mind or consciousness is composed of a vast number of “elemental units,” and the business of psychology is to analyze26 and describe these units or states and to discover the laws of their arrangement or succession. Mind, on this theory, is an aggregate27 or sum total of “states.” Professor James, who gives great place to “mind states,” will, however, not admit that they are permanent and repeatable “units,” passing and returning unaltered. In his usual vivid way he says that “a permanently28 existing ‘idea’ [i.e., mental unit] which makes its appearance before the footlights of consciousness at periodical intervals29 is as mythological30 an entity31 as the Jack32 of Spades.”[12] And yet he continues[165] to deal with mind as a vast series of more or less describable states. Some states are “substantive33,” such as our “perceptions,” our “memories,” or our definite “images,” when the mind perches34 and rests upon some clear and describable thought, and on the other hand there are “transitive states” which are vague, hard to catch or hold or express, and which reveal the mind in flight, in passage, on the way from one substantive state to another.
When we ask the “mind-state” psychologist to tell us about the soul or to supply us with a working substitute for it, he relegates35 it to the scrap36 heap where lie the collected rubbish and the antiquated37 mental furniture of the medieval centuries. We have no need of it. It is only a word anyhow. It has always been an expensive luxury and a continual bother. We are better off with it gone. When we look about for a “self as knower,” or for a guardian38 of our identity, we find all that we need in these same “passing states of consciousness.” They not only know things and facts, but they also know themselves, and successively inherit and adapt all the preceding “states” have gained and acquired. The state of the present moment owns the thoughts and experiences which preceded it, for “what possesses[166] the possessor possesses the possessed39.” “In our waking hours,” Professor James says, “though each pulse of consciousness dies away and is replaced by another, yet that other, among the things it knows, knows its own predecessor40 and finding it ‘warm,’ greets it saying, ‘Thou art mine and part of the same self with me.’” It seems, then, this famous writer concludes, that “states of consciousness are all that psychology needs to do her work with. Metaphysics or theology may prove the soul to exist; but for psychology the hypothesis of such a substantial principle of unity41 is superfluous42.”[13] We are certainly hard up if we must depend on proofs which theology can give us!
We are thus once more reduced to a condition of sheer naturalism. Our stream of consciousness is only a rapid succession of passing states, each “state” causally attached to a molecular43 process in the brain. “Every psychosis is the result of a neurosis.” There is no soul, there is no creative spiritual pilot of the stream, there is no freedom, there are no moral values, there is nothing but passing “cosmic weather,” sometimes peeps of sunshine, sometimes moonshine, sometimes drizzle44 or blizzard45, and sometimes cyclone[167] or waterspout! To meet the appalling46 thinness of this “cinema” of mind states, we are given the comfort of believing that there is an under-threshold world within, possibly more real and surely more important than this little rivulet47 of states which make up our conscious life. There is a “fringe” to consciousness more wonderful than that which adorned48 the robe of the high priest. This “fringe” defies description and baffles all analysis. It is a halo or penumbra49 which surrounds every “state” and holds all the states vitally together, so that “states” turn out to be unsundered in some deeper mysterious currents of being. Others would call this same underlying50, mysterious part of us the subliminal51 “self,” i.e., under-threshold “self.” It is a kind of semi-spiritual matrix where the states of consciousness are formed and gestated. It is the source to which we may trace everything that can not be explained by the avenues of the senses. Demons52 and divinities knock at its doors and visitants from superterrestrial shores peep in at its windows. It is often treated, especially of course by Frederic Myers, as a deeper “self,” more or less discontinuous with our conscious upper self, the self of mind states. All work of genius is due to “subliminal uprushes,” “an emergence[168] into the current of ideas which the man is consciously manipulating of other ideas which he has not consciously originated, but which have shaped themselves beyond his will in profounder regions of his being.” As is well known, Professor James resorts to these “subliminal uprushes” for his explanation of all the deeper religious experiences and he has done much to give credit to these “profounder regions of our being” and to make the subliminal theory popular. He does not, however, as Myers does, treat it as another “self,” an intermediary between earth and heaven, a messenger and a mediator53 of all those higher and diviner aspects of life which transcend54 the sphere of sense and of the empirical world.
II
No theory certainly is sound which begins by cutting the subconscious55 and the conscious life apart into two more or less dissociated selves. There is every indication and evidence of continuity and correlation56 between what is above and what is below the threshold which in any case is as relative and artificial a line as is the horizon. The so-called “uprushes” of the genius are finely correlated with his normal experience into which[169] they “uprush.” The “uprushes” which convey truth to Socrates beautifully fit, first, the character of the man and, secondly57, the demands of the temporal environment. Dante’s “uprushes” correspond to the psychological climate of the medieval world, and Shakespeare’s “uprushes” are well suited to the later period of the Renaissance58. All subliminal communications are congruent and consonant59 with the experience of the person who receives them. The visions of apocalyptic60 seers are all couched in the imagery of the apocalyptic schools, and so, too, the reports of mediums are all in terms of spiritualistic beliefs. We shall never find the solution of our religious problems by dividing the inner life of man into two unrelated selves, by whatever name we call them, for any religion that is to be real must go all the way through us, must unify61 all our powers, and must furnish a spring and power by which we live here and now in the sphere of our consciousness, our character, and our will.
It proves to be just as impossible to cut consciousness up into the fragmentary bits or units called mind states, or to sunder21 it into a so-called “self as knower” and “self as known.” Consciousness is never a shower of shot—a series of discontinuous units. It is the most completely[170] integral unity known to us anywhere in the universe. There are no “parts” to it; it is without breaks or gaps. It is one undivided whole. The only unit we can properly talk about is our unique persisting personal self in conscious relation to an environment. We can, of course, treat consciousness in the abstract as an aggregate of states and we can formulate62 a scientific account of this constructed entity as we can of any other abstracted section of reality. But this abstracted entity is forever totally different from the warm and intimate inner life within us, as we actually live it and feel its flow. Any state or process which we may talk about is only an artificial fragment of a larger, deeper reality which gives the “fragment” its peculiar63 being and makes it what it is. Underneath64 all that appears and happens in the conscious flow is the personal self for whom the appearances occur. Any psychologist who explicitly65 leaves this out of his account always implicitly66 smuggles67 it in again.
The most striking fact of experience is knowing that we know. The same consciousness which knows any given object in the same pulse of consciousness knows itself as knowing it. Self-consciousness is present in all consciousness of objects. The thinker that thinks is involved in and[171] is bound up with all knowledge, even of the simplest sort. Every idea, every feeling, and every act of will is what it is because it is in living unity with our entire personal self. If any such “state” got dissociated, slipped away and undertook to do business on its own hook, it would be as unknown to us as our guardian angel is. The mind that knows can never be separated from the world that is known. One can think in abstraction of a mind apart by itself and of a world equally isolated—but no such mind and no such world actually exist. To be a real mind, a real self, is to be in active commerce with a real world given in experience. One thinks his object in the same unified68 pulse of consciousness in which he thinks himself and vice69 versa. There is no self-consciousness without object-consciousness, and there is no object-consciousness without self-consciousness. Outer and inner, knower and known, are not two but forever one. The “soul,” therefore, is not something hidden away in behind or above and beyond our ideas and feelings and will activities. It is the active living unity of personal consciousness—the one psychic70 integer and unit for a true psychology. It binds71 all the items of experience into one indivisible unity, one organic whole through which our personal type[172] of life is made possible. At every moment of waking, intelligent life we look out upon each fact, each event, each experience from a wider self which organizes the new fact in with its former experiences, weaves it into the web of its memories and emotions and purposes, makes the new fact a part of itself, and yet at the same time knows itself as transcending72 and outliving the momentary73 fact.
When we study the personal self deeply enough, not as cut up into artificial units, but as the living, undivided whole, which is implied in all coherent experience, we find at once a basis for those ideal values that are rightly called spiritual and for “those mighty74 hopes that make us men.” The first step toward a genuine basis of spiritual life is to be found in the restoration of the personal self to its true place as the ultimate fact, or datum75, of self-conscious experience. As soon as we come back to this central reality, our unified, unique, self-active personality, we find ourselves in possession of material enough; as Browning would say,
“For fifty hopes and fears
As old and new at once as nature’s self,
To rap and knock and enter in our soul,
[173]
Take hands and dance there, a fantastic ring,
The grand Perhaps!”
What we find at once, even without a resort to a subliminal self, or to “uprushes,” is that our normal, personal self-consciousness is a unique, living, self-active, creative center of energies, dealing77 not only with space and time and tangible78 things, but dealing as well with realities which are space- and time-transcending. “The things that are not” prove to be immense factors in our lives and constantly “bring to naught79 the things that are.” The greatest events of history have not been due to physical forces; they have been due to plans and ideals which were real only in the viewless minds of men. What was not yet brought about what was to be. Alexander the Great with his physical forces, sweeping80 across the ancient world like a cataclysm81 of nature, was certainly no more truly a world-builder than was Jesus, who had no armies, who used no tangible forces, but merely put into operation those “things that were not,” i.e., his ideas of what ought to be and his conviction that love is stronger than Roman legions. The simplest and humblest of us, like the Psalmist, find the[174] Meshech where we sojourn82 too straitened and narrow for us. We have all cried, “Woe is me that I sojourn in Meshech!” The reason that we discover the limits and bounds of our poor Meshech is that we are all the time going beyond the hampering83 Meshech that tries to contain and imprison84 us.
The thing which spoils all our finite camping places is our unstilled consciousness that we are made for something more than we have yet realized or attained85. Our ideals are an unmistakable intimation of our time-transcending nature. We can no more stop with that which is than Niagara can stop at the fringe of the fall. All consciousness of the higher rational type is continually carried forward toward the larger whole that would complete and fulfill86 its present experience. We are aware of the limit only because we are already beyond it. The present is a pledge of more; the little arc which we have gives us a ground of faith in the full circle which we seek. A study of man’s life which does not deal with this inherent idealizing tendency is like Hamlet with Hamlet left out. Martineau declared:
“Amid all the sickly talk about ‘ideals’ which has become the commonplace of our age, it is well to remember[175] that so long as they are dreams of future possibility and not faiths in present realities, so long as they are a mere13 self-painting of the yearning87 spirit and not its personal surrender to immediate88 communion with an infinite Perfection, they have no more solidity or steadiness than floating air-bubbles, gay in the sunshine and broken by the passing wind.... The very gate of entrance to religion, the moment of its new birth, is the discovery that your ideal is the everlasting89 Real, no transient brush of a fancied angel wing, but the abiding90 presence and persuasion91 of the Soul of souls.”[14]
“Consciousness of imperfection, the capacity for progress, and the pursuit of perfection, are alike possible to man only through the universal life of thought and goodness in which he shares and which, at once an indwelling presence and an unattainable ideal, draws him ‘on and always on.’”[15]
It is here in these experiences of ours which spring out of our real nature, but which always carry us beyond what is and which make it impossible for us to live in a world composed of “things,” no matter how golden they are, that[176] we have the source of our spiritual values. When we talk about values we may use the word in two senses. In the ordinary sense we mean something extrinsic93, utilitarian94. We mean that we possess something which can be exchanged for something else. It is precious because we can sell it or swap95 it or use it to keep life going. In the other sense we see value in reference to something which ought to be, whether it now is or not. It is fit to be, it would justify96 its being in relation to the whole reality. When we speak of ethical97 or spiritual values we are thinking of something that will minister to the highest good of persons or of a society of persons. Value in this loftier meaning always has to do with ideals. A being without any conscious end or goal, i.e., without an ideal, would have no sense of worth, no spiritual values. It does not appear on the level of instinct. It arises as an appreciation98 of what ought to be realized in order to complete and fulfill any life which is to be called good. Obviously a person with rich and complex interests will have many scales of value, but lower and lesser99 ones will fall into place under wider and higher ones, so that one forms a kind of hierarchical system of values with some overtopping end of supreme100 worth dominating the will.
[177]
It becomes one of the deepest questions in the world what connection there is between man’s spiritual values or ideals and the eternal nature of things in the universe. Are these ideals of ours, these values which seem to raise us from the naturalistic to the spiritual level, just our subjective creations, or are they expressions of a co?perating and rational power beyond us and yet in us, giving us intimations of what is true and best in a world more real than that of matter and motion? These ideal values, such as our appreciation of beauty, our confidence in truth, our dedication101 to moral causes, our love for worthy102 persons, our loyalty103 to the Kingdom of God, are not born of selfish preference or individual desire. They are not capricious like dreams and visions. They attach to something deeper than our personal wishes, in fact our faith in them and our devotion to them often cause us to take lines of action straight against our personal wishes and our individual desires. They stand the test of stress and strain, they weather the storms of time which submerge most things, they survive all shock and mutations and only increase in worth with the wastage of secondary goods. They rest on no mere temporary impulse or sporadic104 whim105. They have their roots deep in the life of the race.[178] They have lasted better than Andes or Ararat, and they are based upon common, universal aspects of rational life. They are at least as sure and prophetic as are laws of triangles and relations of space. If we can count on the permanence of the multiplication106 table and on the continuity of nature, no less can we count on the conservation of values and the continued significance of life.
They seem thus to belong to the system of the universe and to have the guardianship107 of some invisible Pilot of the cosmic ship. The streams of moral power and the spiritual energies that have their rise in good persons are as much to be respected facts of the universe as are the rivers that carry ships of commerce. Moral goodness is a factor in the constitution of the world, and the eternal nature of the universe backs it as surely as it backs the laws of hydrogen. It does not back every ideal, for some ideals are unfit and do not minister to a coherent and rationally ordered scheme of life. Those ideals only have the august sanction and right of way which are born out of the age-long spiritual travail108 of the race and which tend to organize men for better team efforts, i.e., which promote the social community life, the organism of the Spirit. Through these spiritual[179] forces, revealed in normal ethical persons, we are, I believe, nearer to the life of God and closer to the revealing centers of the universe than we are when we turn to the subliminal selves of hysterics. The normal interior life of man is boundless109 and bottomless. It is not a physical reality, to be measured by foot rules or yardsticks110. It is a reality of a wholly different order. It is essentially111 spiritual, i.e., of spirit. In its organized and differentiated112 life this personal self of ours is often weak and erratic113. We feel the urge which belongs to the very nature of spirit, but we blunder in our direction, we bungle114 our aims and purposes, we fail to discover what it is that we really want. But we are never insulated from the wider spiritual environment which constitutes the true inner world from which we have come and to which we belong. There are many ways of correspondence with this environment. No way, however, is more vital, more life-giving than this way of dedication to the advancement115 of the moral ideals of the world.
The End
The End
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
psychology
|
|
| n.心理，心理学，心理状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
domain
|
|
| n.(活动等)领域，范围；领地，势力范围 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
rigidly
|
|
| adv.刻板地，僵化地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
metaphorical
|
|
| a.隐喻的，比喻的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
dome
|
|
| n.圆屋顶，拱顶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
slant
|
|
| v.倾斜，倾向性地编写或报道；n.斜面，倾向 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
subjective
|
|
| a.主观(上)的，个人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
eluded
|
|
| v.（尤指机敏地）避开( elude的过去式和过去分词 )；逃避；躲避；使达不到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
constructive
|
|
| adj.建设的，建设性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
stimuli
|
|
| n.刺激（物） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
brute
|
|
| n.野兽，兽性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
instinctive
|
|
| adj.(出于)本能的；直觉的；(出于)天性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
physiological
|
|
| adj.生理学的，生理学上的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
ethics
|
|
| n.伦理学；伦理观，道德标准 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
luminous
|
|
| adj.发光的，发亮的；光明的；明白易懂的；有启发的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
sunder
|
|
| v.分开；隔离；n.分离，分开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
sundering
|
|
| v.隔开，分开( sunder的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
impasse
|
|
| n.僵局；死路 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
abhorrent
|
|
| adj.可恶的，可恨的，讨厌的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
analyze
|
|
| vt.分析，解析 (=analyse) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
aggregate
|
|
| adj.总计的，集合的；n.总数；v.合计；集合 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
permanently
|
|
| adv.永恒地，永久地，固定不变地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
intervals
|
|
| n.[军事]间隔( interval的名词复数 )；间隔时间；[数学]区间；（戏剧、电影或音乐会的）幕间休息 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
mythological
|
|
| adj.神话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
entity
|
|
| n.实体，独立存在体，实际存在物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
jack
|
|
| n.插座，千斤顶，男人；v.抬起，提醒，扛举；n.（Jake）杰克 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
substantive
|
|
| adj.表示实在的；本质的、实质性的；独立的；n.实词，实名词；独立存在的实体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
perches
|
|
| 栖息处( perch的名词复数 )； 栖枝； 高处； 鲈鱼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
relegates
|
|
| v.使降级( relegate的第三人称单数 )；使降职；转移；把…归类 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
scrap
|
|
| n.碎片；废料；v.废弃，报废 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
antiquated
|
|
| adj.陈旧的，过时的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
guardian
|
|
| n.监护人；守卫者，保护者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
predecessor
|
|
| n.前辈，前任 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
superfluous
|
|
| adj.过多的，过剩的，多余的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
molecular
|
|
| adj.分子的；克分子的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
drizzle
|
|
| v.下毛毛雨；n.毛毛雨，蒙蒙细雨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
blizzard
|
|
| n.暴风雪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
appalling
|
|
| adj.骇人听闻的，令人震惊的，可怕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
rivulet
|
|
| n.小溪，小河 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
adorned
|
|
| [计]被修饰的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
penumbra
|
|
| n.（日蚀）半影部 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
underlying
|
|
| adj.在下面的，含蓄的，潜在的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
subliminal
|
|
| adj.下意识的，潜意识的；太弱或太快以至于难以觉察的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
demons
|
|
| n.恶人( demon的名词复数 )；恶魔；精力过人的人；邪念 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
mediator
|
|
| n.调解人，中介人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
transcend
|
|
| vt.超出，超越(理性等)的范围 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
subconscious
|
|
| n./adj.潜意识(的)，下意识(的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
correlation
|
|
| n.相互关系，相关，关连 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
secondly
|
|
| adv.第二，其次 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
renaissance
|
|
| n.复活，复兴，文艺复兴 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
consonant
|
|
| n.辅音；adj.[音]符合的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
apocalyptic
|
|
| adj.预示灾祸的，启示的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
unify
|
|
| vt.使联合，统一；使相同，使一致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
formulate
|
|
| v.用公式表示；规划；设计；系统地阐述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
underneath
|
|
| adj.在...下面，在...底下；adv.在下面 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
explicitly
|
|
| ad.明确地，显然地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
implicitly
|
|
| adv. 含蓄地, 暗中地, 毫不保留地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
smuggles
|
|
| v.偷运( smuggle的第三人称单数 )；私运；走私；不按规章地偷带（人或物） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
68
unified
|
|
| (unify 的过去式和过去分词)； 统一的； 统一标准的； 一元化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
vice
|
|
| n.坏事；恶习；[pl.]台钳，老虎钳；adj.副的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
psychic
|
|
| n.对超自然力敏感的人；adj.有超自然力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
binds
|
|
| v.约束( bind的第三人称单数 )；装订；捆绑；（用长布条）缠绕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
transcending
|
|
| 超出或超越（经验、信念、描写能力等）的范围( transcend的现在分词 )； 优于或胜过… | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
momentary
|
|
| adj.片刻的，瞬息的；短暂的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
datum
|
|
| n.资料；数据；已知数 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
idol
|
|
| n.偶像，红人，宠儿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
tangible
|
|
| adj.有形的，可触摸的，确凿的，实际的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
naught
|
|
| n.无，零 [=nought] | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
sweeping
|
|
| adj.范围广大的，一扫无遗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
cataclysm
|
|
| n.洪水，剧变，大灾难 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
sojourn
|
|
| v./n.旅居，寄居；逗留 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
hampering
|
|
| 妨碍，束缚，限制( hamper的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
imprison
|
|
| vt.监禁，关押，限制，束缚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
fulfill
|
|
| vt.履行，实现，完成；满足，使满意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
yearning
|
|
| a.渴望的；向往的；怀念的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
everlasting
|
|
| adj.永恒的，持久的，无止境的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
abiding
|
|
| adj.永久的，持久的，不变的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
persuasion
|
|
| n.劝说；说服；持有某种信仰的宗派 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
vein
|
|
| n.血管，静脉；叶脉，纹理；情绪；vt.使成脉络 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
extrinsic
|
|
| adj.外部的；不紧要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
utilitarian
|
|
| adj.实用的，功利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
swap
|
|
| n.交换；vt.交换，用...作交易 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
justify
|
|
| vt.证明…正当(或有理)，为…辩护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
ethical
|
|
| adj.伦理的，道德的，合乎道德的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
appreciation
|
|
| n.评价；欣赏；感谢；领会，理解；价格上涨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
lesser
|
|
| adj.次要的，较小的；adv.较小地，较少地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
dedication
|
|
| n.奉献，献身，致力，题献，献辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
loyalty
|
|
| n.忠诚，忠心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
sporadic
|
|
| adj.偶尔发生的 [反]regular；分散的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
whim
|
|
| n.一时的兴致，突然的念头；奇想，幻想 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
multiplication
|
|
| n.增加，增多，倍增；增殖，繁殖；乘法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
guardianship
|
|
| n. 监护, 保护, 守护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
travail
|
|
| n.阵痛；努力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
boundless
|
|
| adj.无限的；无边无际的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
yardsticks
|
|
| 比较或衡量的标准，尺度( yardstick的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
differentiated
|
|
| 区分，区别，辨别( differentiate的过去式和过去分词 )； 区别对待； 表明…间的差别，构成…间差别的特征 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
erratic
|
|
| adj.古怪的，反复无常的，不稳定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
bungle
|
|
| v.搞糟；n.拙劣的工作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
advancement
|
|
| n.前进，促进，提升 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |