Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

已審核 字幕已審核
  • We have historical records that allow us to know how the ancient Greeks dressed,

    我們有歷史紀錄可循,可以讓我們知道 古希臘人如何穿著、

  • how they lived,

    如何生活、

  • how they fought ...

    如何打仗...

  • but how did they think?

    但他們如何思考呢?

  • One natural idea is that the deepest aspects of human thought --

    有一個很自然的方法就是, 去探索人類最深層的想法——

  • our ability to imagine,

    我們的想像力、

  • to be conscious,

    自覺力、

  • to dream --

    夢想力、

  • have always been the same.

    是否是一樣的。

  • Another possibility

    另一種可能是,

  • is that the social transformations that have shaped our culture

    去探索造就我們文化的社會變革,

  • may have also changed the structural columns of human thought.

    這些變革也許就是 改變人類想法的主要因素。

  • We may all have different opinions about this.

    對這一點,大家或許有不同的看法。

  • Actually, it's a long-standing philosophical debate.

    實際上,這是一個存在已久的哲學辯論。

  • But is this question even amenable to science?

    究竟這個問題是否可以 經由科學來處理?

  • Here I'd like to propose

    我的建議是

  • that in the same way we can reconstruct how the ancient Greek cities looked

    如同僅藉由一些磚頭, 我們得以重建希臘古都的外貌,

  • just based on a few bricks,

    也可用同樣的方式,

  • that the writings of a culture are the archaeological records,

    藉由一些文化作品、建築歷史、

  • the fossils, of human thought.

    化石,來了解人類的想法。

  • And in fact,

    而實際上,

  • doing some form of psychological analysis

    因為做了一些

  • of some of the most ancient books of human culture,

    人類古老文化書籍的心理分析,

  • Julian Jaynes came up in the '70s with a very wild and radical hypothesis:

    裘利安.傑尼斯在70年代, 發表了一個相當大膽激進的假說:

  • that only 3,000 years ago,

    他說,3000年前的人類,

  • humans were what today we would call schizophrenics.

    是我們現在俗稱的 「精神分裂症患者」。

  • And he made this claim

    他會如此主張的原因是,

  • based on the fact that the first humans described in these books

    在世界各地不同的傳統及地方,

  • behaved consistently,

    這些書籍裡面所描述的人類行為

  • in different traditions and in different places of the world,

    似乎不約而同地都會服從

  • as if they were hearing and obeying voices

    他們認為是從神祗那邊傳來的聲音。

  • that they perceived as coming from the Gods,

    而如今,我們會稱之為 「幻聽」或「幻覺」。

  • or from the muses ...

    隨著時間的洗禮,

  • what today we would call hallucinations.

    他們開始認知到 那些聲音是他們自己創造的,

  • And only then, as time went on,

    他們就是那些內在聲音的主人。

  • they began to recognize that they were the creators,

    有了這樣的認知,他們學會了自省:

  • the owners of these inner voices.

    一種反思自己想法的能力。

  • And with this, they gained introspection:

    所以傑尼斯對「意識」的理論就是,

  • the ability to think about their own thoughts.

    至少現今我們覺察到「意識」、

  • So Jaynes's theory is that consciousness,

    感受到我們自己就是 人生導師的體悟

  • at least in the way we perceive it today,

    是相當近代的文化發展。

  • where we feel that we are the pilots of our own existence --

    這理論相當特別,

  • is a quite recent cultural development.

    但它有一個很明顯的問題就是,

  • And this theory is quite spectacular,

    它是建立在極少又特定的案例上。

  • but it has an obvious problem

    所以問題是,

  • which is that it's built on just a few and very specific examples.

    3000年來人類才建立起 自省能力的這個理論,

  • So the question is whether the theory

    是否可以經得起「量化」 且「客觀」的考驗。

  • that introspection built up in human history only about 3,000 years ago

    至於要如何做的問題, 也是相當簡單明瞭。

  • can be examined in a quantitative and objective manner.

    但我的意思並非,比如, 柏拉圖有一天突然醒來說,

  • And the problem of how to go about this is quite obvious.

    「哈囉!我是柏拉圖,

  • It's not like Plato woke up one day and then he wrote,

    我今天,擁有完整的自省意識了」 那樣的簡單而已。

  • "Hello, I'm Plato,

    (笑聲)

  • and as of today, I have a fully introspective consciousness."

    而這告訴我們,我們要找出 問題的本質為何。

  • (Laughter)

    我們必須找到從來沒有被 談論過的概念。

  • And this tells us actually what is the essence of the problem.

    「自省」這個字,

  • We need to find the emergence of a concept that's never said.

    在這些書本中從未出現過一次。

  • The word introspection does not appear a single time

    所以為了解決這個問題, 我們要建立一個文字的空間。

  • in the books we want to analyze.

    在這個大空間裡, 包含了相當多的字,

  • So our way to solve this is to build the space of words.

    用這種方式,可以量測出

  • This is a huge space that contains all words

    兩個字彼此之間的 關聯性程度。

  • in such a way that the distance between any two of them

    舉個例子,

  • is indicative of how closely related they are.

    你會想,「狗」、「貓」 應該是比較有關聯性的,

  • So for instance,

    但「葡萄柚」和「對數」 就沒甚麼關聯了。

  • you want the words "dog" and "cat" to be very close together,

    而在這個空間裡的任何兩個字, 都必須是可以被量測出來的。

  • but the words "grapefruit" and "logarithm" to be very far away.

    而我們有很多方式 可以建立起這些字的空間架構,

  • And this has to be true for any two words within the space.

    方法一,是只要請教專家就行了,

  • And there are different ways that we can construct the space of words.

    有點類似查字典。

  • One is just asking the experts,

    另一個可行的方法是,

  • a bit like we do with dictionaries.

    當兩個字出現關聯性時, 去追蹤它們的預設狀況,

  • Another possibility

    它們可能會出現在同一句、

  • is following the simple assumption that when two words are related,

    同一段落、

  • they tend to appear in the same sentences,

    或同一文件中,

  • in the same paragraphs,

    多於「偶然」地出現。

  • in the same documents,

    在這個簡單的前提下,

  • more often than would be expected just by pure chance.

    這個單純且帶有運算技巧 的方法必須好用,

  • And this simple hypothesis,

    而這個複雜且高維度的空間,

  • this simple method,

    事後證明,相當有效。

  • with some computational tricks

    向各位介紹一下,它多有效,

  • that have to do with the fact

    我們分析了一些經常用到的字,

  • that this is a very complex and high-dimensional space,

    首先你可以看到,

  • turns out to be quite effective.

    這些詞彙會自動地歸納成 語義相近的相鄰群組,

  • And just to give you a flavor of how well this works,

    所以你可看到,水果跟身體部位,

  • this is the result we get when we analyze this for some familiar words.

    電腦與科學字彙等等。

  • And you can see first

    演算法也可以把我們要 整理的概念分門別類出來。

  • that words automatically organize into semantic neighborhoods.

    舉個例子,

  • So you get the fruits, the body parts,

    你可以看到,科學的字彙 被拆解成兩個子類,

  • the computer parts, the scientific terms and so on.

    分別是太空與物理的詞彙。

  • The algorithm also identifies that we organize concepts in a hierarchy.

    然後你會發現一件好玩的事,

  • So for instance,

    舉個例子,「天文學」這個詞彙,

  • you can see that the scientific terms break down into two subcategories

    它應該擺的位置

  • of the astronomic and the physics terms.

    與它現在的位置

  • And then there are very fine things.

    好像不太搭嘎,

  • For instance, the word astronomy,

    它現在介於真實科學與

  • which seems a bit bizarre where it is,

    天文學之間,偏向科學的位置,

  • is actually exactly where it should be,

    而它自己卻是一個天文學的字彙。

  • between what it is,

    我們可以持續尋找 其它類似的情況。

  • an actual science,

    實際上,如果你盯著這些字一陣子,

  • and between what it describes,

    然後隨機搭配連結一下這些字,

  • the astronomical terms.

    你會覺得好像自己在吟詩。

  • And we could go on and on with this.

    那是因為,在某種程度上,

  • Actually, if you stare at this for a while,

    在這些空間字彙裡漫遊, 就像是在腦海中吟詩一樣。

  • and you just build random trajectories,

    最後,

  • you will see that it actually feels a bit like doing poetry.

    演算法也能辨識出人類的直覺字彙,

  • And this is because, in a way,

    並歸納到內省的相鄰字彙中。

  • walking in this space is like walking in the mind.

    舉個例子,

  • And the last thing

    像是自我、內疚、理由、情緒

  • is that this algorithm also identifies what are our intuitions,

    與內省相關的字彙非常接近,

  • of which words should lead in the neighborhood of introspection.

    但其它的字,

  • So for instance,

    像是,紅色、足球、蠟燭、香蕉

  • words such as "self," "guilt," "reason," "emotion,"

    就差很遠了。

  • are very close to "introspection,"

    所以一旦我們建立起 這樣的詞彙空間,

  • but other words,

    有關於內省的歷史,

  • such as "red," "football," "candle," "banana,"

    有關與任何概念的歷史,

  • are just very far away.

    以前被認為是抽象或是有點模糊的字彙,

  • And so once we've built the space,

    都可以變成紮紮實實

  • the question of the history of introspection,

    可以被量化的科學。

  • or of the history of any concept

    而我們要做的就是, 拿起這些書,

  • which before could seem abstract and somehow vague,

    把它們數位化,

  • becomes concrete --

    然後把這些字,像子彈一樣

  • becomes amenable to quantitative science.

    射到這些字彙空間裡面,

  • All that we have to do is take the books,

    然後我們問電腦, 這些字彙所行經的軌跡

  • we digitize them,

    花了多少的時間 才達到內省概念的字彙中。

  • and we take this stream of words as a trajectory

    有了這些數據,

  • and project them into the space,

    我們就可以分析古希臘傳統中,

  • and then we ask whether this trajectory spends significant time

    有關於內省的歷史,

  • circling closely to the concept of introspection.

    因為有著最完整的文字記錄。

  • And with this,

    所以,我們先把這些書,

  • we could analyze the history of introspection

    按照時間排列,

  • in the ancient Greek tradition,

    然後把這些字

  • for which we have the best available written record.

    投射到字彙空間裡面,

  • So what we did is we took all the books --

    然後我們問電腦,這些字 與內省有多少的相關性,

  • we just ordered them by time --

    再把它們平均起來。

  • for each book we take the words

    然後,我們不斷地問電腦問題,

  • and we project them to the space,

    這些書就會

  • and then we ask for each word how close it is to introspection,

    越來越接近內省的概念。

  • and we just average that.

    而這正是古希臘所發生的事。

  • And then we ask whether, as time goes on and on,

    各位可以看到在 荷馬時代最古老的書籍,

  • these books get closer, and closer and closer

    與內省的相關性只有一點點。

  • to the concept of introspection.

    但約在西元前400年左右,

  • And this is exactly what happens in the ancient Greek tradition.

    快速成長了五倍,

  • So you can see that for the oldest books in the Homeric tradition,

    這些書與內省的概念

  • there is a small increase with books getting closer to introspection.

    越來越接近。

  • But about four centuries before Christ,

    最棒的是,

  • this starts ramping up very rapidly to an almost five-fold increase

    我們可以問電腦,

  • of books getting closer, and closer and closer

    在不同的、獨立的傳統文化中, 是否也有一樣的現象。

  • to the concept of introspection.

    所以,我們用同樣的方法, 分析了傳統猶太基督教的書籍,

  • And one of the nice things about this

    也得到了類似的趨勢。

  • is that now we can ask

    在最古老的舊約聖經中, 你可以看到它緩慢地增加,

  • whether this is also true in a different, independent tradition.

    之後在新約聖經中, 它快速地增長,

  • So we just ran this same analysis on the Judeo-Christian tradition,

    大約西元400年,聖奧古斯丁的《懺悔錄》 內省達到了最高峰。

  • and we got virtually the same pattern.

    這個方法相當重要,

  • Again, you see a small increase for the oldest books in the Old Testament,

    因為聖奧古斯丁已經被多位學者、

  • and then it increases much more rapidly

    心理學家、歷史學家公認為

  • in the new books of the New Testament.

    是內省的創始人之一。

  • And then we get the peak of introspection

    有些人認為他是現代心理學之父。

  • in "The Confessions of Saint Augustine,"

    所以,我們演算法的優點

  • about four centuries after Christ.

    不僅可以量化、

  • And this was very important,

    而且客觀、

  • because Saint Augustine had been recognized by scholars,

    當然速度也相當快——

  • philologists, historians,

    幾秒就可以跑完——

  • as one of the founders of introspection.

    並捕捉到若使用傳統方法 必須費長時間調查

  • Actually, some believe him to be the father of modern psychology.

    才能抓到的一些重點。

  • So our algorithm,

    這也是科學美好的地方,

  • which has the virtue of being quantitative,

    它可以可以解讀、歸納這想法,

  • of being objective,

    然後廣泛應用在許多不同的領域上。

  • and of course of being extremely fast --

    或許,最具挑戰性的問題是,

  • it just runs in a fraction of a second --

    我們用電腦來分析過去的 自我意識發展的方法,

  • can capture some of the most important conclusions

    是不是亦可以告訴我們 自我意識的未來趨向呢?

  • of this long tradition of investigation.

    更精確地說,

  • And this is in a way one of the beauties of science,

    我們現在說的話,

  • which is that now this idea can be translated

    是否可以告訴我們

  • and generalized to a whole lot of different domains.

    接下來的幾天、幾個月或幾年後, 我們的心智會達到什樣的情況。

  • So in the same way that we asked about the past of human consciousness,

    同樣的方式,我們現在很多人 都使用穿戴式偵測器,

  • maybe the most challenging question we can pose to ourselves

    可以偵測我們的心跳、

  • is whether this can tell us something about the future of our own consciousness.

    呼吸、

  • To put it more precisely,

    基因,

  • whether the words we say today

    讓我們可以預防疾病的發生,

  • can tell us something of where our minds will be in a few days,

    我們是否已可以藉由 偵測分析我們所說的話、

  • in a few months

    推的文、郵寄的信、寫的文字,

  • or a few years from now.

    來提前告訴我們,我們的心智 可能要發生問題了?

  • And in the same way many of us are now wearing sensors

    我跟我的兄弟,吉列爾莫.切基,

  • that detect our heart rate,

    扛起了這項任務。

  • our respiration,

    我們紀錄分析了 34 位年輕人的談話。

  • our genes,

    他們過去曾經是罹患 精神分裂症的高風險族群。

  • on the hopes that this may help us prevent diseases,

    我們測量了他們第一天的談話,

  • we can ask whether monitoring and analyzing the words we speak,

    然後問電腦,從他們的話中, 是否可以預測出,

  • we tweet, we email, we write,

    未來三年內,

  • can tell us ahead of time whether something may go wrong with our minds.

    他們會不會精神錯亂。

  • And with Guillermo Cecchi,

    但我們大失所望,

  • who has been my brother in this adventure,

    一次又一次的失敗。

  • we took on this task.

    因為沒有足夠的語義資訊

  • And we did so by analyzing the recorded speech of 34 young people

    來預測未來的心智發展。

  • who were at a high risk of developing schizophrenia.

    它在分辨精神病患及控制組上

  • And so what we did is, we measured speech at day one,

    已經有足夠的能力,

  • and then we asked whether the properties of the speech could predict,

    因為這有點像我們之前 做古文字的分析,

  • within a window of almost three years,

    但沒辦法預測未來 精神錯亂的發病。

  • the future development of psychosis.

    後來我們了解到,

  • But despite our hopes,

    也許最重要的關鍵 不是他們說了甚麼,

  • we got failure after failure.

    而是他們怎麼說。

  • There was just not enough information in semantics

    更精確地說,

  • to predict the future organization of the mind.

    不是他們說的「話」落在哪個 語義相近的群組裡,

  • It was good enough

    而是他們說話的「方式」 是否會在這幾個語義相近的群組裡

  • to distinguish between a group of schizophrenics and a control group,

    快速地跳來跳去。

  • a bit like we had done for the ancient texts,

    所以我們想出了一個

  • but not to predict the future onset of psychosis.

    叫做「語義連貫性」的量測方法,

  • But then we realized

    本質上就是測量談話的持續性

  • that maybe the most important thing was not so much what they were saying,

    是否會落在同一個 語義主題或類別上。

  • but how they were saying it.

    結果顯示,剛剛的 34 位年輕人,

  • More specifically,

    透過這個語義連貫性演算法,

  • it was not in which semantic neighborhoods the words were,

    預測誰會精神錯亂的正確率 達到百分之百。

  • but how far and fast they jumped

    目前臨床上所有測量方式 都無法達到、或接近這個數字。

  • from one semantic neighborhood to the other one.

    在我做這項研究的時候, 清楚地記得一件事,

  • And so we came up with this measure,

    當時我坐在電腦前面,

  • which we termed semantic coherence,

    看到之前我回到布宜諾斯艾利斯的第一個學生 ——保羅,傳了一堆信息給我,

  • which essentially measures the persistence of speech within one semantic topic,

    當時他住在紐約。

  • within one semantic category.

    我發現訊息不太對勁——

  • And it turned out to be that for this group of 34 people,

    雖然我講不出個所以然來, 因為他寫得不清不楚——

  • the algorithm based on semantic coherence could predict,

    但我有一個強烈的直覺, 一定是出事了。

  • with 100 percent accuracy,

    所以,我打電話給保羅,

  • who developed psychosis and who will not.

    沒錯,他當時感覺不太舒服。

  • And this was something that could not be achieved --

    用這樣一個單純的辨認方式,

  • not even close --

    從他的字裡行間,

  • with all the other existing clinical measures.

    我可以隱約感受到他的感覺,

  • And I remember vividly, while I was working on this,

    並在第一時間有效地幫助他。

  • I was sitting at my computer

    今天我要告訴各位的是,

  • and I saw a bunch of tweets by Polo --

    我們已經越來越能理解

  • Polo had been my first student back in Buenos Aires,

    如何把我們共有的直覺, 轉換成演算法。

  • and at the time he was living in New York.

    經由這樣做,

  • And there was something in this tweets --

    未來我們也許可以看到一種 全然不同的心理健康模式,

  • I could not tell exactly what because nothing was said explicitly --

    而且是基於一種客觀、量化的方式

  • but I got this strong hunch,

    來自動分析出我們所寫的字、

  • this strong intuition, that something was going wrong.

    我們所說的話。

  • So I picked up the phone, and I called Polo,

    謝謝。

  • and in fact he was not feeling well.

    (掌聲)

  • And this simple fact,

  • that reading in between the lines,

  • I could sense, through words, his feelings,

  • was a simple, but very effective way to help.

  • What I tell you today