忘却からの帰還〜Intelligent Design

「2 + 2 =5」といえば、最も有名なのは、ジョージ・オーウェルの"1984年"である：

'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'
'Four.'
'And if the party says that it is not four but five--then how many?'
'Four.'
...
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four.'
The needle went up to sixty.
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four! Four! What else can I say? Four!'
...
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four! Stop it, stop it! How can you go on? Four! Four!'
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Five! Five! Five!'
'No, Winston, that is no use. You are lying. You still think there are four. How many fingers, please?'
'Four! five! Four! Anything you like. Only stop it, stop the pain!'
...
'How many fingers, Winston?'
'Four. I suppose there are four. I would see five if I could. I am trying to see five.'
'Which do you wish: to persuade me that you see five, or really to see them?'
'Really to see them.'
'Again,' said O'Brien.
...
'How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?'
'I don't know. I don't know. You will kill me if you do that again. Four, five, six--in all honesty I don't know.'
'Better,' said O'Brien.

[ George Orwell: "Nineteen Eighty Four" ]

しかし、「2+2=5」はGeorge Orwellが初出ではない。、

19世紀初頭、英国の詩人バイロンが「though I must say if by any sort of process I could convert 2 & 2 into five it would give me much greater pleasure」と書いたのが、初出のようである。

Your opinion of my "reasoning powers" is so exactly my own — that you will not wonder if I avoid a controversy with so skilful a casuist — particularly on a subject where I am certain to get the worst of it in this world — and perhaps incur a warmer confutation in the next. But I shall be most happy to hear your observations on the subject — or on any subject — if anybody could do me much good — probably you might — as by all accounts you are a mistress of the practice as well as theory of that benevolent science (which I take to be even better than your Mathematics) at all events it is my fault if I derive no benefit from your remarks. I agree with you quite upon mathematics too, and must be content to admire them at an incomprehensible distance - always adding them to the catalogue of my regrets. I know that two and two make four — & should be glad to prove it too if I could — though I must say if by any sort of process I could convert 2 & 2 into five it would give me much greater pleasure, — The only part I remember which gave me delight were those theorems ( is that the word? ) in which after ringing the changes upon — A — B — & C — D &c. I at last came to "which is absurd - which is impossible" and at this point I have always arrived & I fear always shall through life — very fortunate if I can continue to stop there.

[ George Gordon Byron Baron Byron, Leslie Alexis Marchand: "Alas! the Love of Women": 1813-1814 ]

そして、19世紀から20世紀初頭にかけて、ドストエフスキーやユーゴーやツルゲーネフやトルストイが不条理の象徴として使った

In Fyodor Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, the protagonist implicitly supports the idea of two plus two making five, spending several paragraphs considering the implications of rejecting the statement "two times two makes four."

His purpose is not ideological, however. Instead, he proposes that it is the free will to choose or reject the logical as well as the illogical that makes mankind human. He adds: "I admit that two times two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, two times two makes five is sometimes a very charming thing too."

フョードル・ドストエフスキー[1821-1881]は、"地下室の手記"の中で、数パラグラフを費やして「2x2=4」を否定することの意味を考え、主人公が「2+2=5」という考えを暗黙のうちに支持している。

ドストエフスキーがそう書いた目的はイデオロギーではない。そうではなくて、非論理と同様に論理を選択あるいは否定する自由意志はが人間を人間たらしめると言うのが目的である。ドストエフスキーはさらにこう言う「私は2x2=4が素晴らしいと認めるが、我々に与えられるべきものが与えられるなら、2x2=5は非常に魅力的である」

Victor Hugo said "Now, get seven million five hundred thousand votes to declare that two and two make five, that the straight line is the longest road, that the whole is less than its part; get it declared by eight millions, by ten millions, by a hundred millions of votes, you will not have advanced a step."

ヴィクトル・ユーゴー[1802-1885]は言った。「すぐに、750万票が2+2=5に投票する。一直線が最も長い道のりであり、部分よりも全体の方が小さい。800万票になり、1000万票になり、1億票になれば、一歩も前へ進めなくなる。」[ Victor Hugo: "Napoleon the Little" ]

The idea seems to have been significant to Russian literature and culture. Ivan Turgenev wrote in prayer, one of his Poems in Prose "Whatever a man prays for, he prays for a miracle. Every prayer reduces itself to this: Great God, grant that twice two be not four."

この考えは、ロシア文学とロシア文化では重要だったようである。イワン・ツルゲーネフ[1818-1883]は散文詩のひとつである"祈り"で次のように書いている。「人が神が何を祈ったとしても、人は奇跡を祈る。すべての祈りは次で尽きている。偉大なる神よ、2x2≠4にしてください。」

Also similar sentiments are said to be among Leo Tolstoy's last words when urged to convert back to the Russian Orthodox Church: "Even in the valley of the shadow of death, two and two do not make six." Even turn-of-the-century Russian newspaper columnists used the phrase to suggest the moral confusion of the age (e.g. Novoe vremia (New Times), 31 October 1900.

ロシア正教会へと立ち返るように主張されたときの、レフ・トルストイ[1828-1910]の最後の言葉のひとつが同様な気分を示していると言われている：「死の闇の谷においても2＋2=6にはならない。」　世紀の変わり目に、ロシアの新聞コラムニストはこのフレーズを、時代のモラルの混乱を示唆するのに使った[Novoe vremia 1900/10/31]。

[ wikipedia: 2 + 2 = 5 ]

まさしく、非論理的・誤り・実現不可能などのネガティブな意味で使われている。「自由意志は誤りを選択し、民衆は誤った投票をし、人々はありえざることを祈る」と。

しかし、この「2+2=5」は旧ソビエト連邦の5カ年計画のスローガンとなった。ジャーナリストEugene Lyons:の1937年の「Assignment in Utopia」によれば...

Optimism ran amuck. Every new statistical success gave another justification for the coercive policies by which it was achieved. Every setback was another stimulus to the same policies. The slogan "The Five Year Plan in Four Years" was advanced, and the magic symbols "5-in-4" and "2 + 2 = 5" were posted and shouted throughout the land.

The formula 2 + 2 = 5 instantly riveted my attention. It seemed to me at once bold and preposterous − the daring and the paradox and the tragic absurdity of the Soviet scene, its mystical simplicity, its defiance of logic, all reduced to nose-thumbing arithmetic. . . . 2 + 2 = 5 : in electric lights on Moscow housefronts, in foot-high letters on billboards, spelled planned error, hyperbole, perverse optimism; something childishly headstrong and stirringly imaginative. . . . 2 + 2 = 5: a slogan born in premature success, tobogganing toward horror and destined to end up, lamely, as 2 + 2 1⁄4. = 5. . . .

楽観主義が荒れ狂っていた。あらゆる新たな統計数値の成功は、それが達成されることで、別に強圧的政策を正当化した。あらゆる挫折は、同じ政策の別な刺激となった。「5カ年計画を4年で」というスローガンは、さらに進んで、国家全土に魔法のシンボル「5-in-4」や「2+2=5」が貼り出され、喚き散らされた。

私の眼は公式 2+2=5 に釘付けになった。私には傲慢かつ不合理に思えた。ソビエトの大胆と逆説と悲劇的不条理、その魔術的純真、その論理軽視、嘲るべき算数... 2 + 2 = 5 モスクワの建物の電飾、大きな文字の看板、記された計画的誤り、誇張、頑迷な楽観主義、何か子供じみた強情と膨れ上がった空想.... 2 + 2 = 5 時期尚早な成功の中で生まれ、恐怖に向かって急降下し、結末へと至りつく。フラフラとした足取りで、2 + 2 1⁄4. = 5として。

[ Eugene Lyons: "Assignment in Utopia", p.240, 1937 ]]

もちろん、この結末は破滅的なものだった。計画目標は常に不条理に引き上げられるが、実績は当初目標をも下回り、そして次期計画で再び不条理に誇大な計画目標が定められる。

Nigel Linsan Colleyによれば、この本がジョージ・オーウェルに強い印象を残した。

Indeed Lyons’ book[Eugene Lyons:"ASSIGMENT IN UTOPIA"] must have a made a lasting impression on Orwell. Lyons writes about a soviet slogan “2+2=5” used to describe that the 5-year plan could be achieved in four years. Orwell was to take this equation and incorporate it into his later novel 1984, where the main Character Winston Smith uses it to consider the possibility that the State might declare "two plus two makes five" as a fact; Winston ponders that if everybody believes in it, does that make it true?

Eugene Lyonsの本[Assignment in Utopia]はジョージ・オーウェルに強い印象を残したはずだ。Eugene Lyonsは、5か年計画を4年で達成できるというソ連のスローガン「2+2=5」について書いている。ジョージ・オーウェルはこの数式を取り入れ、後の小説「1984年」で、「主人公ウィンストン・スミスが、国家が2+2=5を事実として主張する可能性を考える」ところで使った。ウィンストン・スミスは、もし誰もがこれを信じたら、2+2=5が真理になるのだろうかと、考えた。

[ Nigel Linsan Colley: "James Mace Memorial Panel" (2005/06/19) ]

かくして、旧ソビエト連邦で実績ある「不条理の象徴 2+2=5」は、文学として未来へと語られることとなった。

しかし、「不条理の象徴 2+2=5」を知らぬ者たちは言う。「1+1は3にも4にもなる」と。

そして、STS学者たちも...

---

---