TED演讲：为什么科技越发达我们却越孤独

第一篇：TED演讲：为什么科技越发达我们却越孤独

几分钟之前，我的女儿Rebecca给我发了一条短信。她说：妈妈，你会震惊全场的。我太喜欢这个了。接到这条短信，就像得到了她的拥抱一样。所以大家看到了，我自己，就处在这样一个核心矛盾里。我自己，非常喜欢收短信，但却要告诉大家，大多的短信会成为一个大的问题。

事实上，我的女儿，让我想起了这个故事的开端。1996年我第一次在TED演讲的时候，Rebecca只有5岁，她就坐在那里。最前排，那时我刚写了一本书，庆祝我们的网络新生活，而且将要成为《连线》杂志（wired）的封面人物。在那些令人陶醉的日子里，我们体验着网络聊天室和在线虚拟社区。我们正从不同的角度探索自己。然后我们回到现实中来，我对此感到非常兴奋。作为一个心理学家，最令我兴奋的就是这样的理念：我们会运用我们在虚拟世界中，最自己，对自身的认同改善我们的现实生活。现在让我们快进到2012年，我们重新回到了TED的讲台，我的女儿已经是一名20岁的大学生了。她睡觉都抱着她的手机，其实我也是。我刚刚完成一本新书，但是这一本确不会让我登上《连线》杂志的封面。那这十几年间发生了什么？我仍然为科技而兴奋，但是我相信，并且想向大家说明：我们正在放任科技，它将带我们走向歧途。在过去的15年间，我一直在研究通信技术的影响，并且访问了成百上千的人，年轻的或者年长的，了解他们的“移动生活”。我发现，我们的口袋中那些轻巧的电子设备，在心理上有如此强大的力量。它不仅改变了我们的生活方式，而且改变了我们本身。我们现在在用电子设备做的一些事情，在几年前还被认为是稀奇或让人讨厌，但是很快大家就习以为常。只是我们的行为方式而已。让我们来举几个简单的例子：人们在公司的董事会议上，打短信或者写邮件。人们发短信，网购，浏览facebook；上课时，听报告时，实际上在几乎所有的会议时。甚至有人告诉我一项重要的新技能，发短信时如何与别人进行眼神交流！他们所虽然这很难，但还是可以做得到的。父母在早餐和晚餐是发短信发邮件，孩子们因此而抱怨父母对他们不够关注。但是同时这些孩子，也很少专心地与彼此相处。这是一张我女儿和她的朋友们最近的照片，他们虽然处在同样的空间，却没有真正的在一起相处。人们甚至在葬礼上发短信，我研究这一现象：我们需要别的东西来分散我们的悲伤或者胡思乱想，所以们要玩手机。这样有什么问题吗？我认为这的确是个问题：我们正在为自己挖陷阱，这个陷阱无形中会影响人与人之间的联系。同时也会影响我们和自己的联系。降低我们认识和反省自己的能力。我们越来越习惯这种新的“一起独处”（alone together）的相处方式。人们希望呆在一起，但同时也“在别处”——连线到他们想去的不同的地方。人们想定制他们的生活，想要在不同的场合和地点之间切换。因为对他们来说非常重要的是控制和分配他们的精力。例如你想去参加董事会会议，但只是想关注你感兴趣的一小部分内容。有人认为这是好事，单长此以往人们就会对比人隐藏自己（hiding form each other）,即便我们一直保持这彼此的联系。一位50岁的商人，曾悲哀地告诉我他觉得工作时不再有同事了。他工作时不会停下来和别人说话，他不打电话，他说他不想打断他的同事。因为他说：“他们都在忙着发邮件”。但是然后他停下来，他说：“其实我没有说实话，我也不想让别人来打扰我。我觉得我应该是想（被打扰）的，但是实际上我们更愿意用黑莓手机联系别人”不管哪一代人，我发现他们没法彼此那里得到足够的关注，如果他们仅仅将彼此保持在一种可以控制的距离范围里。我们把这种现象称作Goldilocks适应效应：不太近也不太远 刚刚好。但是对于刚刚那位中年商人来说，刚刚好的距离对需要学会与人面对面交流的青少年来说却可能过于疏远。有一个18岁的孩子，他几乎任何事情都用发短信来解决。他惆怅地干我说，总有一天，当然不是现在我会学习一下如何与人交谈。我问人们，为什么不面对面交谈？他们回答说：因为面对面交流时实时发生的，你没法控制你要说什么。所以这才是最重要的：发短信、写邮件、贴照片、发状态，所有这些都能让我们向别人呈现出我们想变成的样子。我们可以编辑，也就是说我们可以删除，可以修改和润色。我们的声音、容颜甚至我们的整个形象。让它不多不少，刚刚好。人类的关系非常丰富也非常复杂，而且需要技巧和和精力来处理。我们现在可以用技术使它变得简便。在我们做这种建华石，一个很可能的问题就是：我们为了简便的联系，放弃了面对面的交流，我们这是自欺欺人。长此以往，我们似乎忘记了这一点，或者没有人在乎这一点了。Stephen Colbert问过这样一个让我猝不及防深刻的问题，非常深刻。他说：“难道那些微小的简短的在线交流的片段加在一起不能等同于真正的交谈吗？我的回答是：不能！那些片段不能整合在一起！以这种小片段的方式交流，可能可以收集到那些精心修饰过的信息，可能表达“我在想你”，甚至表达“我爱你”。的确，想象一下，接到女儿的那条短信是我有多么高兴。但是那些小片段很难让我们互相了解，真正地了解和理解对方。我们在与彼此交谈的同时，也同时学习着同自己交流。所以放弃面对面交谈确实有很大的影响，因为这会损害我们自我反省的能力。对于孩子们来说，这项能力是成长的一个重要的基石。我一次又一次听到，比起说话我更喜欢发短信。我所看到的也是，人们如此习惯于自欺欺人，逃离真实的交谈，如此习惯于逃向更少更浅的交流。以至于他们越来越希望多开别人。比如说：很多人跟我讲过，有一天更高版本的Siri会更像一个好朋友。一个当别人都无暇顾及你时，还耐心聆听你的挚友。我相信这样的愿望，反映了过去15年间我了解到的一个痛苦的事实：那种“没有人愿意听我倾诉”的感觉，在我们与科技的关系间起了重要的作用。这就解释了我们为什么这么喜欢facebook页面，或者推特页面。上面有那么多自动生成的听众呀！而那种没人倾听的感觉，使我们更愿意和看似关心我们的机器呆在一起。我们在开发一种被称作“社会性机器人”的产品，它们专门设计用来陪伴老人、孩子甚至我们每个人。我们已经给予彼此关怀毫无信心了吗？（转而要依赖机器人？）我有一项在疗养院进行到研究，我们把“社会性机器人”带到疗养院里，希望它们给予老人被理解的温暖感。一天，我走进疗养院看到一位失去孩子的妇女正在对着一个小海豹形状的机器人说话，这个机器人看上去好像在看着她，好像听得懂她说的话——它可以给她安慰。很多人都觉得这种技术很棒。但是那位妇女居然在试图让一个对人类生活轨迹毫无感受的机器理解她！那个机器人只是完成了一项好棒的表演。我们是如此的脆弱，会把伪装的同情和共鸣当作是真的。在那位妇女沉溺于机器人带给她的伪装的同情的时候，我在想：“那个机器人不可能真正地同情，它不用面对死亡，它也根本不懂人生”从那位从机器人的陪伴中得到同情的妇女，我一点都不觉得这种技术先进。我发现那是我这15年的工作里，最复杂、最纠结、最不是滋味的时刻。但是当我退一步来看，我感觉到自己在这场完美风暴冰冷无情地中心。我们对技术期望的越多，对彼此的期望却越来越少。我问自己：为什么会这样呢？我相信是科技最吸引我们的地方，正是我们最脆弱的一方面。我们都很脆弱，我们都很孤独，却又害怕“亲密关系”。所以我们研发社交网站和“社会性机器人”这样的技术，是我们可以在不需要真正友谊的情况下体验被关心和陪伴的感觉。我们借助技术后找到了和别人保持联系的感觉，并且可以舒服的控制这种联系。但是我们其实没有那么舒服，也没能很好地控制。如今，我们口袋中的手机正在改变我们的想法和我们的心灵，源于它给我们带来了三种让人兴奋的错觉：

一、我们可以把精力分配到任何我们想关注的地方；

二、总有人会倾听我们；

三、我们永远都不用独自一人。这第三种“我们永远不要独处”的错觉对于改变我们的心灵状态是最关键的。因为当人们独处的时候，及时只有几秒钟，他们也会变得焦虑、恐慌、坐立不安因而转向那些电子设备。想想人们在排队的时候，在等红灯的时候独处像是一个亟待解决的问题（Being alone feels like a problem that needs to be solved），所以人们试着用联系别人的方法解决它。但这种联系更像是一种症状而不是真正的治疗。它表达着我们的焦虑，却没有解决根本的问题。但是它不仅仅是一种症状，频繁的联系人们对自己的理解。它催生了一种新的生活方式，对此最好的描述是：“我分享 故我在”。我们用技术来定义自己，分享我们的想法和感觉，甚至我们刚刚产生这些想法的时候。所以以前情况是，我有了一个新想法我想打电话告诉别人。现在，事情变成了我想要有个想法，所以我需要发短信告诉别人。这种“我分享 故我在”的问题在于，如果我们断了和别人的联系，我们就感觉不再是自己了，我们几乎感觉不到自己的存在了。所以我们该怎么办了？我们的联系越来越多。但是与此同时，我们也把自己隔绝起来。为什么联系会导致隔绝呢？原因是没有培养独处的能力，一种可以与外界分离，集中自己思想的能力。独处中你可以找到自己，这样你才能很好地转向别人，与他形成真正的联系。当我们缺乏独处的能力的时候，我们联系别人仅仅是为了减少焦虑感或者为了感觉到自己还活着。这时候，我们并不真正地欣赏别人，而这好像是把他们当做吃撑我们脆弱的自我感觉备用零件。我们简单地认为总和别人保持联系，就能让我们不再那么孤单，但这是有风险的。因为事实恰好相反，如果我们不能够独处，我们会更加孤单。而如果我们不能教会我们的孩子独处，他们只能学会如何体验独处。1996年我在TED演讲，报告我关于早期虚拟社区的研究时曾说：那些对于网络世界最为投入的人，是带着一种自我反省的精神上网的，这也是我现在想要呼吁的。我们需要一些反思，更甚至是展开对话讨论我们目前对技术的应用会将我们带向何方，会让我们失去什么。我们被技术（带来的错觉）迷住了，而且我们就像年轻恋人一样害怕说太多话会毁掉浪漫的气氛，但是时候该交谈了。数字技术伴随着我们长大，所以我们也认为技术已经很成熟。实则不然，它还在起步阶段，我们还有很多时间来反思我们应当如何应用它，如何发展它。我并不是说我们应该抛弃我们的电子设备，我只是建议我们应当与电子设备，与别人也与自己建立更加有自我意识的关系。我们可以从这些方面开始改变，把孤独当做一件好事，为它留出空间，向你们的孩子说明独处的价值。在家里开辟专门的空间，例如厨房或者客厅用于和家人交谈。在工作中也可以这样，我们工作室总是忙于浅层的关系，以至于没时间思考，也没有时间讨论那些真正重要的事情。是时候该改变了，最重要的是我们真的需要聆听彼此，包括说的那些无聊的细节。因为正是我们在结巴，迟疑找不到合适的词的时候我们才向对方展现出真实的自我。技术正在试图重新定义人们的联系，例如我们怎样关心比人和关系自己。但是它给我们机会，确认我们的价值观和发展方向，对此我很乐观。我们拥有做这种改变所需要的一切，我们身边有彼此，而且我们有很大的几率成功，只要我们意识到自己的脆弱性。我们会相信，技术能“将复杂的事情变简单”的这种脆弱性。在我的工作中我常常听到：生活很艰难，人际关系充满风险等等。然后技术出现了，更简单，充满希望，乐观而充满朝气。就像天降一位专家，解决所有烦恼。一个系列广告说过，在线使用虚拟形象系统你“最终就可以爱你的朋友，爱你自己，爱你的生活如此简单”我们被虚拟的爱情吸引，被电脑游戏塑造的奇幻世界吸引，也被”机器人将会变成我们最好的伴侣“的想法所吸引。我们晚上泡在社交网络上而不是和现实中的朋友去酒吧玩。但是我们对于这些网路替代品的幻想已经使我们失去了很多。如今，我们要专注于找到可以让科技将我们带回现实生活的方法，带回到我们的身体，我们的圈子，我们的社会，我们的政治，我们自己的星球。它需要我们。让我们来关注和讨论如何运用数字技术，那些我们梦想的神奇技术，来帮助我们回归这样的生活，充满爱的生活。谢谢大家！

第二篇：TED演讲：越有钱越无情(中英对照版)解析

越有钱越无情

It's amazing what a rigged game of Monopoly can reveal.In this entertaining but sobering talk, social psychologist Paul Piff shares his research into how people behave when they feel wealthy.(Hint: badly.)But while the problem of inequality is a complex and daunting challenge, there's good news too.(Filmed at TEDx Marin.)

一个被操纵的大富翁游戏能告诉我们的东西竟然有那么多！在这个有趣且发人深省的演讲中，社会心理学家保罗-皮夫分享了他对于“人感到富有时如何表现”的研究结果（暗示：很坏）。在面对异常复杂、异常严峻的不平等问题的同时，我们也听到了好的消息。（摄于TEDx加州马林县）

Paul Piff studies how social hierarchy, inequality and emotion shape relations between individuals and groups.Why you should listen: Paul Piff is an Assistant Professor of Psychology and Social Behavior at the University of California, Irvine.In particular, he studies how wealth(having it or not having it)can affect interpersonal relationships.His surprising studies include running rigged games of Monopoly, tracking how those who drive expensive cars behave versus those driving less expensive vehicles and even determining that rich people are literally more likely to take candy from children than the less well-off.The results often don't paint a pretty picture about the motivating forces of wealth.He writes, “specifically, I have been finding that increased wealth and status in society lead to increased self-focus and, in turn, decreased compassion, altruism, and ethical behavior.” What others say: “When was the last time, as Piff puts it, that you prioritized your own interests above the interests of other people? Was it yesterday, when you barked at the waitress for not delivering your cappuccino with sufficient promptness? Perhaps it was last week, when, late to work, you zoomed past a mom struggling with a stroller on the subway stairs and justified your heedlessness with a ruthless but inarguable arithmetic: Today, the 9 a.m.meeting has got to come first;that lady’s stroller can’t be my problem.Piff is one of a new generation of scientists—psychologists, economists, marketing professors, and neurobiologists—who are exploiting this moment of unprecedented income inequality to explore behaviors like those.” — Lisa Miller, New York Magazine

演讲稿正文

I want you to, for a moment, think about playing a game of Monopoly, except in this game, that combination of skill, talent and luck that help earn you success in games, as in life, has been rendered irrelevant, because this game's been rigged, and you've got the upper hand.You've got more money, more opportunities to move around the board, and more access to resources.And as you think about that experience, I want you to ask yourself, how might that experience of being a privileged player in a rigged game change the way that you think about yourself and regard that other player? 我想让大家花一点时间，想想一下自己正在玩大富翁游戏。只不过在这个游戏里面，那些帮助你赢的游戏的因素，比如技巧、才能和运气在此无关紧要，就像对于人生一样，因为这个游戏被操纵了，而你已经占了上风，你有更多的钱，有更多在棋盘上移动的机会以及更对获得资源的机会。在你想象这一经历的过程中，我想让大家问一下自己，一个被操纵的游戏里面作为优势玩家的经历会如何改变你思考自己和对待对手的方式？

So we ran a study on the U.C.Berkeley campus to look at exactly that question.We brought in more than 100 pairs of strangers into the lab, and with the flip of a coin randomly assigned one of the two to be a rich player in a rigged game.They got two times as much money.When they passed Go, they collected twice the salary, and they got to roll both dice instead of one, so they got to move around the board a lot more.(Laughter)And over the course of 15 minutes, we watched through hidden cameras what happened.And what I want to do today, for the first time, is show you a little bit of what we saw.You're going to have to pardon the sound quality, in some cases, because again, these were hidden cameras.So we've provided subtitles.在加州大学伯克利分校，我们做了一个试验来研究这个问题。我们招募了100多对陌生人到实验室，通过投掷硬币的方式随机选中一对中的一个作为这个游戏中占上风的玩家。他们拿到了两倍的钱。当他们途径起点的时候，他们拿到两倍的工资，而且他们可以同时掷两个骰子而不是一个，所以他们可以在棋盘上移动更多。在接下来的15分钟内，我们通过隐藏的摄像头观察了现场情况。今天是第一次我想和大家分享一下我们观察到的，有的时候音质可能不太好，还请大家原谅，因为毕竟是用隐藏的摄像头，所以我们加上了字幕。

Rich Player: How many 500s did you have? 富玩家：你有多少张500块？ Poor Player: Just one.穷玩家：就一张。

Rich Player: Are you serious.富玩家：真的吗？ Poor Player: Yeah.穷玩家：是的。

Rich Player: I have three.(Laughs)I don't know why they gave me so much.富玩家：我有三张。（笑声）不知道为什么他们给了我这么多。Paul Piff: Okay, so it was quickly apparent to players that something was up.One person clearly has a lot more money than the other person, and yet, as the game unfolded, we saw very notable differences and dramatic differences begin to emerge between the two players.The rich player started to move around the board louder, literally smacking the board with their piece as he went around.We were more likely to see signs of dominance and nonverbal signs, displays of power and celebration among the rich players.保罗.皮夫：所以，玩家们很快就意识到这个游戏明显有点奇怪。一个玩家比另一个玩家明显有更多的钱。随着游戏慢慢展开，我们观察到两个玩家开始有一些明显不同的表现。富的玩家明显在棋盘上移动的声音更大，移动的时候几乎是在狠狠砸棋盘。我们看到富玩家们“霸主”信号、肢体动作，权力的显示以及相互庆祝。

We had a bowl of pretzels positioned off to the side.It's on the bottom right corner there.That allowed us to watch participants' consummatory behavior.So we're just tracking how many pretzels participants eat.我们在旁边放了一碗椒盐卷饼，就在右下角，这使得我们可以观察玩家吃椒盐卷饼的行为。我们就是看看玩家吃了多少椒盐卷饼。

Rich Player: Are those pretzels a trick? 富玩家：这些椒盐卷饼有什么猫腻吗？ Poor Player: I don't know.穷玩家：不知道啊。

Okay, so no surprises, people are onto us.They wonder what that bowl of pretzels is doing there in the first place.One even asks, like you just saw, is that bowl of pretzels there as a trick? And yet, despite that, the power of the situation seems to inevitably dominate, and those rich players start to eat more pretzels.保罗·皮夫：好吧，不出所料，大家觉得有问题。起先他们好奇那一碗椒盐卷饼为什么会在那里。就像你刚才看到的，其中有一个甚至问：这碗椒盐卷饼与什么猫腻吗？但尽管如此，整个现场的主导形势还是不可避免的。那些富的玩家开始吃更多的椒盐卷饼。Rich Player: I love pretzels.富玩家：我爱椒盐卷饼。

(Laughter)（笑声）

And as the game went on, one of the really interesting and dramatic patterns that we observed begin to emerge was that the rich players actually started to become ruder toward the other person, less and less sensitive to the plight of those poor, poor players, and more and more demonstrative of their material success, more likely to showcase how well they're doing.保罗·皮夫：游戏继续进行，我们发现了一个很明显的有趣现象，就是富玩家开始对另一个玩家表现得不友好，对那些可怜玩家的贫穷困境越来越不敏感，开始越来越频繁的炫富，更喜欢展示他们正在做的一切。

Rich Player: I have money for everything.富玩家：我什么都买得起。

Poor Player: How much is that? 穷玩家：你有多少钱？

Rich Player: You owe me 24 dollars.You're going to lose all your money soon.I'll buy it.I have so much money.I have so much money, it takes me forever.富玩家：你还欠我24块。你很快就要输光了。我要买它，我太多钱了那么多花都花不完的钱。

Rich Player 2: I'm going to buy out this whole board.富玩家2：我要把整个棋盘都买下来。Rich Player 3：You're going to run out of money soon.I'm pretty much untouchable at this point.富玩家3：你很快就要没钱了。我已经差不多不可战胜了。Okay, and here's what I think was really, really interesting, is that at the end of the 15 minutes, we asked the players to talk about their experience during the game.And when the rich players talked about why they had inevitably won in this rigged game of Monopoly--(Laughter)— they talked about what they'd done to buy those different properties and earn their success in the game, and they became far less attuned to all those different features of the situation, including that flip of a coin that had randomly gotten them into that privileged position in the first place.And that's a really, really incredible insight into how the mind makes sense of advantage.保罗·皮夫：下面是我觉得一个非常非常有有意思的现象。在15分钟要结束的时候，我们请玩家谈论他们在游戏中的经历。当玩家谈论他们在这个被操纵的游戏里面为什么必胜的时候（笑声）他们提到了自己为了买到不同地产和赢得游戏所作的努力而他们忽略了这个游戏一开始的不同形势也就是投掷硬币随即决定了他们哪一个获得优势，而这对我们理解大脑如何看待优势提供了非常好的启发。Now this game of Monopoly can be used as a metaphor for understanding society and its hierarchical structure, wherein some people have a lot of wealth and a lot of status, and a lot of people don't.They have a lot less wealth and a lot less status and a lot less access to valued resources.And what my colleagues and I for the last seven years have been doing is studying the effects of these kinds of hierarchies.What we've been finding across dozens of studies and thousands of participants across this country is that as a person's levels of wealth increase, their feelings of compassion and empathy go down, and their feelings of entitlement, of deservingness, and their ideology of self-interest increases.In surveys, we found that it's actually wealthier individuals who are more likely to moralize greed being good, and that the pursuit of self-interest is favorable and moral.Now what I want to do today is talk about some of the implications of this ideology self-interest, talk about why we should care about those implications, and end with what might be done.我们可以用这个大富翁的游戏作比喻来理解我们的社会以及社会分层，也就是有的人有大量的社会财富和地位而很多人没有，他们仅有很少的财富和地位以及很少获得宝贵资源的机会。我和我的同事在过去的7年里一直在做的就是研究这些不同层次的影响。全国范围内的大量研究都表明，当一个人的财富增加时，他们的同情心和同理心下降，而他们的优越感增加，也更注重个人利益。在调查中，我们发现，富有的人更可能把贪婪定义为好的，把对个人利益的追求定义为有利的，道德的。今天我想谈的就是这种个人利益思维的影响，谈谈为什么我们应该关注这些影响以及我们能做些什么。

Some of the first studies that we ran in this area looked at helping behavior, something social psychologists call pro-social behavior.And we were really interested in who's more likely to offer help to another person, someone who's rich or someone who's poor.In one of the studies, we bring in rich and poor members of the community into the lab and give each of them the equivalent of 10 dollars.We told the participants that they could keep these 10 dollars for themselves, or they could share a portion of it, if they wanted to, with a stranger who is totally anonymous.They'll never meet that stranger and the stranger will never meet them.And we just monitor how much people give.Individuals who made 25,000 sometimes under 15,000 dollars a year, gave 44 percent more of their money to the stranger than did individuals making 150,000 or 200,000 dollars a year.我们在这一领域最初做的一些研究，观察了助人行为，社会心理学家称之为亲社会行为。我们很想知道什么人更倾向于给其他人提供帮助，富人还是穷人。其中一个研究，我们把一个社区的富人和穷人都带到了实验室，给了每个人十美元。我们告诉他们，他们可以把这十块钱给自己用，也可以把其中一部分拿出来分享。如果他们愿意的话，跟一个陌生人分享，一个永远不会再相见的陌生人。我们观察人们给了多少。那下年收入为25000甚至低于15000美元的人，而那些收入为15万甚至20万的人比起来多给了44%。We've had people play games to see who's more or less likely to cheat to increase their chances of winning a prize.In one of the games, we actually rigged a computer so that die rolls over a certain score were impossible.You couldn't get above 12 in this game, and yet, the richer you were, the more likely you were to cheat in this game to earn credits toward a $50 cash prize, sometimes by three to four times as much.我们还让人们玩游戏，看看什么人更可能为了赢得一个奖品而作弊。其中一个游戏，我们其实操纵了电脑使得某些数字不可能出现。这个游戏里面你不可能超过12。然而，越富有的人，越有可能在这个游戏中作弊去争取那个最终能够赢取50美元现金的分数，可能性甚至高达3到4倍。

We ran another study where we looked at whether people would be inclined to take candy from a jar of candy that we explicitly identified as being reserved for children--(Laughter)— participating--I'm not kidding.I know it sounds like I'm making a joke.We explicitly told participants this jar of candy's for children participating in a developmental lab nearby.They're in studies.This is for them.And we just monitored how much candy participants took.Participants who felt rich took two times as much candy as participants who felt poor.我们还做了另一个实验，观察人们是否会从糖罐里面拿糖。糖罐上清楚地写着：给小朋友预留......（笑声）我是认真的，我知道这听上去像我在讲笑话，我们明确的告诉了参与者，这一罐糖是给隔壁发展中心的小朋友准备的，他们在实验中，这是给他们的。然后我们观察这些参与者拿了多少糖果，那些感觉富有的参与者多拿了两倍的糖果。

We've even studied cars, not just any cars, but whether drivers of different kinds of cars are more or less inclined to break the law.In one of these studies, we looked at whether drivers would stop for a pedestrian that we had posed waiting to cross at a crosswalk.Now in California, as you all know, because I'm sure we all do this, it's the law to stop for a pedestrian who's waiting to cross.So here's an example of how we did it.That's our confederate off to the left posing as a pedestrian.He approaches as the red truck successfully stops.In typical California fashion, it's overtaken by the bus who almost runs our pedestrian over.(Laughter)Now here's an example of a more expensive car, a Prius, driving through, and a BMW doing the same.So we did this for hundreds of vehicles on several days, just tracking who stops and who doesn't.What we found was that as the expensiveness of a car increased, the driver's tendencies to break the law increased as well.None of the cars, none of the cars in our least expensive car category broke the law.Close to 50 percent of the cars in our most expensive vehicle category broke the law.We've run other studies finding that wealthier individuals are more likely to lie in negotiations, to endorse unethical behavior at work like stealing cash from the cash register, taking bribes, lying to customers.我们还研究了汽车，不只是汽车，而是不同类型汽车的司机谁更倾向于做一些违法的事情。其中一个实验，我们观察了，司机在碰到行人（我们安排的）过马路时的停车行为。在加州，大家都知道，因为我相信我们都有这样做，法律规定碰到行人要过马路，我们必须停车。下面我告诉大家我们是怎样做的，左侧是我们的研究人员装作一个行人，她正要过马路，这时候红色的卡车停了下来，当然这是在加州。很快一辆巴士呼啸而过，差点要撞到我们的行人——（笑声）——这是一辆比较贵的车，一辆普锐斯开过来，一辆宝马车也一样。几天内，我们测试了几百辆车记录谁停了谁没有停。我们发现，随着车价的增加司机违法的倾向也增加了。而在我们的廉价车系里，没有一辆车作出违法行为。而在我们的昂贵车系里，有接近50%的车都违法了。我们还做了其他研究并发现，越有钱的人越有可能在谈判中说谎，赞同工作中的不道德行为。比如从收银台偷现金，受贿，忽悠顾客等。Now I don't mean to suggest that it's only wealthy people who show these patterns of behavior.Not at all.In fact, I think that we all, in our day-to-day, minute-by-minute lives, struggle with these competing motivations of when, or if, to put our own interests above the interests of other people.And that's understandable because the American dream is an idea in which we all have an equal opportunity to succeed and prosper, as long as we apply ourselves and work hard, and a piece of that means that sometimes, you need to put your own interests above the interests and well-being of other people around you.But what we're finding is that, the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to pursue a vision of personal success, of achievement and accomplishment, to the detriment of others around you.Here I've plotted for you the mean household income received by each fifth and top five percent of the population over the last 20 years.In 1993, the differences between the different quintiles of the population, in terms of income, are fairly egregious.It's not difficult to discern that there are differences.But over the last 20 years, that significant difference has become a grand canyon of sorts between those at the top and everyone else.我并不是说只是有钱人会表现出类似的行为，完全不是。事实上，我觉得我们每个人在我们日常的分分秒秒中都要跟这些动机作斗争。什么时候以及是否把我们的利益置于他人的利益之上。这很容易理解，因为美国梦告诉我们每个人都有同等的机会可以成功，发达，只要我们足够努力。而这也意味着有的时候字需要把自己的利益置于你周边人的利益和幸福之上。但我们发现的是，你越有钱，则越有可能一种个人的成功。个人的成果和成就，这可能是建立在对旁人的损害之上。这里我为大家画出了在过去20年里，每个15和最高5%人口的平均家庭收入。1993年，每个15之间的收入差距还是相当大的，我们不难看出其中的差别。但是在过去的20年里面，这种巨大差距最终成为了顶层人群与其他所有人之间的鸿沟。

In fact, the top 20 percent of our population own close to 90 percent of the total wealth in this country.We're at unprecedented levels of economic inequality.What that means is that wealth is not only becoming increasingly concentrated in the hands of a select group of individuals, but the American dream is becoming increasingly unattainable for an increasing majority of us.And if it's the case, as we've been finding, that the wealthier you are, the more entitled you feel to that wealth, and the more likely you are to prioritize your own interests above the interests of other people, and be willing to do things to serve that self-interest, well then there's no reason to think that those patterns will change.In fact, there's every reason to think that they'll only get worse, and that's what it would look like if things just stayed the same, at the same linear rate, over the next 20 years.事实是，顶层20%的人口拥有整个国家接近90%的财富。我们正在经历史无前例的经济上的不平等，而这不仅意味着财富更多的聚集在为数很少的一群人手里，还意味着美国梦对越来越多的人来说都变得越来越遥远。如果事实果真如我们发现的那样，你越有钱就越发觉得这些财富是你应得的，越会把自己的利益置于他人的利益之上，越会做那些利己的事情。那里没有理由可以相信这个现状会有所改变。事实上，我们有更多的理由认为情况会变得更糟糕。这时在接下来的20年内保持和原来一样、相同现行速率的情况。

Now, inequality, economic inequality, is something we should all be concerned about, and not just because of those at the bottom of the social hierarchy, but because individuals and groups with lots of economic inequality do worse, not just the people at the bottom, everyone.There's a lot of really compelling research coming out from top labs all over the world showcasing the range of things that are undermined as economic inequality gets worse.Social mobility, things we really care about, physical health, social trust, all go down as inequality goes up.Similarly, negative things in social collectives and societies, things like obesity, and violence, imprisonment, and punishment, are exacerbated as economic inequality increases.Again, these are outcomes not just experienced by a few, but that resound across all strata of society.Even people at the top experience these outcomes.不平等，经济上的不平等，是我们每个人都要关心的问题，不仅是因为社会底层的人，而是因为经济不平等会让个人和集体都变得糟糕。不仅仅是底层的人，是每一个人。有很多来自世界各地的顶级实验室的非常有说服力的研究，展示了日益增加的经济不平等造成的影响范围。社会流动性，那些我们非常关心的东西，如身体健康、社会信任，都会随着不平等的增加而削弱。同样的，社会中消极的东西，比如肥胖、暴力、徒刑和惩罚都会随着经济不平等的增加而加剧。而这些后果，不是少数人所经历的而是会影响社会的各个阶层。即使是在顶层的人也要遭受这些后果。So what do we do? This cascade of self-perpetuating, pernicious, negative effects could seem like something that's spun out of control, and there's nothing we can do about it, certainly nothing we as individuals could do.But in fact, we've been finding in our own laboratory research that small psychological interventions, small changes to people's values, small nudges in certain directions, can restore levels of egalitarianism and empathy.For instance, reminding people of the benefits of cooperation, or the advantages of community, cause wealthier individuals to be just as egalitarian as poor people.In one study, we had people watch a brief video, just 46 seconds long, about childhood poverty that served as a reminder of the needs of others in the world around them, and after watching that, we looked at how willing people were to offer up their own time to a stranger presented to them in the lab who was in distress.After watching this video, an hour later, rich people became just as generous of their own time to help out this other person, a stranger, as someone who's poor, suggesting that these differences are not innate or categorical, but are so malleable to slight changes in people's values, and little nudges of compassion and bumps of empathy.那我们该怎么办呢？这些带有延续性的，有害的消极影响看上去是什么东西失控了，而我们无能为力特别是作为个人更是无能为力。但是事实上，我们发现在我们自己的实验室研究中，小小的心理干预，价值观的小小改变，某些特定的微小暗示就可以将平等和同理心恢复。比如，提醒人们合作的好处或者社区的优点，就能够让富人和穷人一样关注平等。其中一个实验中，我们让参与者看一短片，46秒，关于儿童贫困，以此提醒大家周围人的需要。看过这个视频后，我们观察了他们为实验中一个压抑的陌生人提供帮助的积极性。看完这个视频一个小时后，富人变得和穷人一样大方，他们愿意花时间帮助别人，帮助那些陌生人。这意味着这些差别不是与生俱来或者一成不变的。它们很容易改变，只是需要价值观的微小变化。同情心的一点点推动，和同理心的轻微触碰。

And beyond the walls of our lab, we're even beginning to see signs of change in society.Bill Gates, one of our nation's wealthiest individuals, in his Harvard commencement speech, talked about the problem facing society of inequality as being the most daunting challenge, and talked about what must be done to combat it, saying, “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.” And there's the Giving Pledge, in which more than 100 of our nation's wealthiest individuals are pledging half of their fortunes to charity.And there's the emergence of dozens of grassroots movements, like We are the One Percent, the Resource Generation, or Wealth for Common Good, in which the most privileged members of the population, members of the one percent and elsewhere, people who are wealthy, are using their own economic resources, adults and youth alike, that's what's most striking to me, leveraging their own privilege, their own economic resources, to combat inequality by advocating for social policies, changes in social values, and changes in people's behavior, that work against their own economic interests but that may ultimately restore the American dream.在实验室之外，我们也开始看到社会上的改变。比尔-盖茨，我们国家的富豪之一，在哈佛的开学典礼演讲中说到这个社会所面临的问题，他说不平等是我们目前面临的严峻挑战，他谈论了我们应该如何战胜它。他说：“人类最伟大的进步不在于它的各种发现，而在于如何将这些发现用于削弱不平等。“还有捐赠承诺，我们国家100多个最富有的人正在承诺将他们一半的财产捐赠给慈善事业，还有许多草根运动的出现。比如”我们是那百分之一“、”资源一代“、”共同的财富“等。在这些组织中，那些最有优势的成员，那些1%的人和其他有钱的人，其中有成人有青少年，这是最让我震惊的。他们正在利用自己的优势，利用自己的经济资源与不平等抗争，通过倡导社会政策、社会价值的改变、人类行为的改变，这有悖于他们自身的经济利益，但却会最终重建美国梦！

Thank you.谢谢！

第三篇：TED演讲(中英双语) 我们都是赛博人(关键词：科技与社会)

安博∙凯斯：我们都是赛博人

Amber Case:We are all cyborgs now 0:11我想告诉你们大家 你们其实都是半机器人，不是你们想象的那种半机器人。你们不是机器战警，也不是魔鬼终结者，但是你每次看着电脑屏幕 或者使用手机时你就是个半机器人。所以什么是半机器人的定义呢？传统的定义是一个生物体 “为了适应环境而被 加入外源成分。” 这是从1960年一篇太空旅行的文章中摘录的。因为你想，空间是很可怕的； 人类本不会去那里。但是人类很好奇，他们很可能会给他们身体里加东西 所以他们有一天可以去阿尔卑斯山 然后另一天又变成海里的一条鱼。

0:49所以让我们看看传统的人类学观点。有人到另一个国家 说：“这些人多么神奇啊，他们的工具是多么有趣他们的文化是多么奇特啊！” 然后他们写文章，也许有少数几个其他人类学家读了，我们觉得它特别有异国情调。而正在发生的是 我们突然发现了一个新的物种。我作为一个半机器人的人类学家，突然说：“噢，我们突然就成了一种新新人类。过来看看这些魅力十足的文化。过来看看这令人好奇的仪式 每个人都环绕着技术行事。他们点击着东西，关注着荧屏。”

1:24我之所以研究这个 而不是传统的人类学是有原因的。因为工具的使用 从一开始，经历了成千上万年，一切都是对人类的一种自身改造。它帮助我们超越我们自身的体能，让我们走得更远，敲打起来更有力，而这些方面也是有限的。但是现在我们看到的不是人类自身体能的延伸，而是心智的延伸。因此，我们可以更快地旅行 用不同的方式交流。另一件正在发生的事情是 我们都挟带着小Mary Poppins的魔法技术。我们可以把任何东西都装进去，而它却不会变重，然后我们又可以把任何东西都从里面取出来。你计算机里面到底有什么？ 如果你把所有信息印出来，这就好比 你会不断地接受上千磅重的信息材料。而如果你真失去了这些信息，这意味着你心里感觉失去了它，你会突然感到少了什么，只是你看不见，你有一种非常奇怪的感觉。

2:20另一件发生的事情是你拥有了第二个自我。无论你是否喜欢，你开始在网上出现，当你不在那里的时候，人们跟你网上的 第二自我交流。所以你得小心 别把朋友圈的第一道防线都开放，也就是你脸书的墙头，别让人家半夜里随便在上面涂写 因为它的效果跟现实生活是几乎等同的。所以突然我们要维护我们的第二自我。你要在电子生活里展示自己 跟你在现实生活中要做的差不多。跟你醒来，冲淋浴，穿衣服一样，你要学习怎样在你的电子生活中做这些事。问题是现在很多人 特别是青少年 要经历两个青春期。他们要经历他们主要的那个，那已经是很不容易了，他们还要经历他们的第二自我的青春期。那更难 因为在这个实实在在的网络历史中 他们的网络经历都被记录。现在每个新接触技术的人 在网上都算是网络青少年。所以这是很尴尬的 让他们做这些事情很难。

3:19所以当我还小的时候，晚上我爸爸会让我坐下对我说，“我来教你未来的时间和空间问题。” 我说：“好。”有一天他说：“两点间的最短的距离是什么？” 我说：“是直线，这个你昨天已经告诉我了。我觉得自己很聪明。” 他说：“不是，不是，这儿有一个更好的办法。” 他拿了一张纸，在一面画了A在另一面画了B 然后把纸头折叠起来，让A和B碰在一起。然后他说：“这是两点间最短的距离。” 我说：“爸爸，爸爸，你怎么做到的？” 他说：“你就这样把时间和空间弯曲了，这需要花很大的能量，这就是你要做的。” 我说：“我想要这样做。” 他说：“好啊。” 于是，之后的10，20年，我晚上去睡觉 总是想，“我要成为创造虫洞-时光隧道的人 让事物加速。我想做一个时间机器。” 我总是用录音带给未来的我 传递信息。

4:15但是当我进了大学后发现 技术不是因为它有用，所以人们 才接纳它； 技术是在人们的应用过程中被接纳的它是为人类的应用需求而产生的。所以我开始学习人类学。而当我在写关于手机的论文时，我认识到每个人的口袋里都装着虫洞-时光隧道。这虫洞-时光隧道不是通过身体接触来传递信息，它们其实是在心智上传递信息。人们按一下按钮，人们就把A和B立刻联系起来了。我想：“噢，哇，我找到了，这太棒了。”

4:43所以随着时间的推移，时间和空间 都因此被压缩联系在一起。你可以站在世界的这一头低语，而世界的另一端就能听到了。而我另外想到的是 你用的每个设备都给你一个不同类型的时间。每个网页都给你一个不同的时间轴。你因此而到处挖掘 你延伸的记忆，你把它们存在哪里了呢？ 所以现在我们都成了古生物学家挖掘我们遗失了的东西 我们将我们延伸的外部大脑揣在口袋里。这会促发某种恐慌。不行，这东西到底存在哪里？ 在信息爆炸前，我们都跟我爱露西电视里演的那样措手不及，我们跟不上信息的脚步。5:20因此 我们把这些都带到社交空间，结果我们每时每刻都在查看电话。所以我们把这个东西称为亲密环境。我们不是跟每个人时刻都联系着，但是我们在任何时候可以和任何人交流。如果你可以把你手机上的人都打印出来，那个屋子一定十分拥挤。一般而言，这些就是你能联系到的人 和你有联系的所有朋友，家人

5:43这也会随之带来一些心理影响。其实我担心的一个是 人们不再花时间停下来内心反省，人们不再放慢速度和停下来，人们时刻和屋里的所有的人在一起 在同一时间界面 要争取所有人的注意力 仿佛我们生活在研究古生物学和面对恐慌的构架中。他们并不只是坐在那里。真的，当你没有外来影响时 就保留了一段创造自我的时间 你可以用来制定长远的计划 来试着发现你自己到底是什么样一个人。而一旦你这么做了，你就能弄清楚 怎样合理地展示你的第二自我 而不是等着每件事发生，然后临阵应付 噢，我得做这个，做这个，做这个 所以这是很重要的。我很担心，特别是今天的孩子，他们没有这种停机休息时间，他们生活在不断点击的文化中，什么东西都向他们扑面而来，他们对此非常兴奋，也非常容易上瘾。

6:36你想么，世界也不会停下来。它自己也有自己外部修复设备，这些设备都在帮助我们 互相沟通和互动交流。如果你现在能看见这些 将我们联系在一起的链接，你看见的是一副英特网的地图。它上去并不是技术化的； 它其实看上去是有机化的。这是人类有史以来，我们第一次这样 链接在一起。这并不是指机器主宰了我们； 它们只是帮助我们更加人性化，帮助我们互相联系。

7:09最成功的技术帮我们扫清障碍 帮我们生活得更好。真的，最终机器使我们人类比起技术化来说，变得更人性化，因为我们一直互相合作共同创造。所以这是我想研究的一个要点： 事物是美好的，这还是要归于人类之间的联系； 只是用了不同的方法。我们只是增强了我们人类的特性 以及我们不管地理位置的约束互相联系在一起的能力。这就是我研究半机器人类学的原因。7:36谢谢。7:38(掌声)0:11 I would like to tell you all that you are all actually cyborgs, but not the cyborgs that you think.You're not RoboCop, and you're not Terminator, but you're cyborgs every time you look at a computer screen or use one of your cell phone devices.So what's a good definition for cyborg? Well, traditional definition is “an organism to which exogenous components have been added for the purpose of adapting to new environments.” That came from a 1960 paper on space travel, because, if you think about it, space is pretty awkward.People aren't supposed to be there.But humans are curious, and they like to add things to their bodies so they can go to the Alps one day and then become a fish in the sea the next.0:49So let's look at the concept of traditional anthropology.Somebody goes to another country, says, “How fascinating these people are, how interesting their tools are, how curious their culture is.” And then they write a paper, and maybe a few other anthropologists read it, and we think it's very exotic.Well, what's happening is that we've suddenly found a new species.I, as a cyborg anthropologist, have suddenly said, “Oh, wow.Now suddenly we're a new form of Homo sapiens, and look at these fascinating cultures, and look at these curious rituals that everybody's doing around this technology.They're clicking on things and staring at screens.” 1:24Now there's a reason why I study this, versus traditional anthropology.And the reason is that tool use,in the beginning--for thousands and thousands of years, everything has been a physical modification of self.It has helped us to extend our physical selves, go faster, hit things harder, and there's been a limit on that.But now what we're looking at is not an extension of the physical self, but an extension of the mental self, and because of that, we're able to travel faster, communicate differently.And the other thing that happens is that we're all carrying around little Mary Poppins technology.We can put anything we want into it, and it doesn't get heavier, and then we can take anything out.What does the inside of your computer actually look like? Well, if you print it out, it looks like a thousand pounds of material that you're carrying around all the time.And if you actually lose that information, it means that you suddenly have this loss in your mind, that you suddenly feel like something's missing, except you aren't able to see it, so it feels like a very strange emotion.2:20The other thing that happens is that you have a second self.Whether you like it or not, you're starting to show up online, and people are interacting with your second self when you're not there.And so you have to be careful about leaving your front lawn open, which is basically your Facebook wall, so that people don't write on it in the middle of the night--because it's very much the equivalent.And suddenly we have to start to maintain our second self.You have to present yourself in digital life in a similar way that you would in your analog life.So, in the same way that you wake up, take a shower and get dressed, you have to learn to do that for your digital self.And the problem is that a lot of people now,especially adolescents, have to go through two adolescences.They have to go through their primary one, that's already awkward, and then they go through their second self's adolescence, and that's even more awkward because there's an actual history of what they've gone through online.And anybody coming in new to technology is an adolescent online right now, and so it's very awkward, and it's very difficult for them to do those things.3:19So when I was little, my dad would sit me down at night and he would say, “I'm going to teach you about time and space in the future.” And I said, “Great.” And he said one day, “What's the shortest distance between two points?” And I said, “Well, that's a straight line.You told me that yesterday.” I thought I was very clever.He said, “No, no, no.Here's a better way.” He took a piece of paper, drew A and B on one side and the other and folded them together so where A and B touched.And he said, “That is the shortest distance between two points.” And I said, “Dad, dad, dad, how do you do that?” He said, “Well, you just bend time and space, it takes an awful lot of energy, and that's just how you do it.”And I said, “I want to do that.” And he said, “Well, okay.” And so, when I went to sleep for the next 10 or 20 years, I was thinking at night, “I want to be the first person to create a wormhole, to make things accelerate faster.And I want to make a time machine.” I was always sending messages to my future self using tape recorders.4:15But then what I realized when I went to college is that technology doesn't just get adopted because it works.It gets adopted because people use it and it's made for humans.So I started studying anthropology.And when I was writing my thesis on cell phones, I realized that everyone was carrying around wormholes in their pockets.They weren't physically transporting themselves;they were mentally transporting themselves.They would click on a button, and they would be connected as A to B immediately.And I thought, “Oh, wow.I found it.This is great.” 4:43So over time, time and space have compressed because of this.You can stand on one side of the world, whisper something and be heard on the other.One of the other ideas that comes around is that you have a different type of time on every single device that you use.Every single browser tab gives you a different type of time.And because of that, you start to dig around for your external memories--where did you leave them? So now we're all these paleontologists that are digging for things that we've lost on our external brains that we're carrying around in our pockets.And that incites a sort of panic architecture--“Oh no, where's this thing?” We're all “I Love Lucy” on a great assembly line of information, and we can't keep up.5:20And so what happens is, when we bring all that into the social space, we end up checking our phones all the time.So we have this thing called ambient intimacy.It's not that we're always connected to everybody, but at anytime we can connect to anyone we want.And if you were able to print out everybody in your cell phone, the room would be very crowded.These are the people that you have access to right now, in general--all of these people, all of your friends and family that you can connect to.5:43And so there are some psychological effects that happen with this.One I'm really worried about is that people aren't taking time for mental reflection anymore, and that they aren't slowing down and stopping, being around all those people in the room all the time that are trying to compete for their attention on the simultaneous time interfaces, paleontology and panic architecture.They're not just sitting there.And really, when you have no external input, that is a time when there is a creation of self,when you can do long-term planning, when you can try and figure out who you really are.And then, once you do that, you can figure out how to present your second self in a legitimate way, instead of just dealing with everything as it comes in--and oh, I have to do this, and I have to do this, and I have to do this.And so this is very important.I'm really worried that, especially kids today, they're not going to be dealing with this down-time, that they have an instantaneous button-clicking culture, and that everything comes to them, and that they become very excited about it and very addicted to it.6:36So if you think about it, the world hasn't stopped either.It has its own external prosthetic devices, and these devices are helping us all to communicate and interact with each other.But when you actually visualize it, all the connections that we're doing right now--this is an image of the mapping of the Internet--it doesn't look technological.It actually looks very organic.This is the first time in the entire history of humanity that we've connected in this way.And it's not that machines are taking over.It's that they're helping us to be more human, helping us to connect with each other.7:09The most successful technology gets out of the way and helps us live our lives.And really, it ends up being more human than technology, because we're co-creating each other all the time.And so this is the important point that I like to study: that things are beautiful, that it's still a human connection--it's just done in a different way.We're just increasing our humanness and our ability to connect with each other, regardless of geography.So that's why I study cyborg anthropology.7:36Thank you.7:38(Applause)