Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

已審核 字幕已審核
  • Philosophers, dramatists, theologians

    許多世紀以來,哲學家,劇作家,神學家

  • have grappled with this question for centuries:

    都在著力解決這個問題:

  • what makes people go wrong?

    什麼使人們變壞?

  • Interestingly, I asked this question when I was a little kid.

    有趣的是,當我還是小孩時,我問過同樣的問題。

  • When I was a kid growing up in the South Bronx, inner-city ghetto

    我成長於紐約南布朗克斯市中的貧民窟,

  • in New York, I was surrounded by evil,

    周圍充滿了罪惡,

  • as all kids are who grew up in an inner city.

    如同所有在貧民窟長大的孩子一樣。

  • And I had friends who were really good kids,

    我有一些朋友,他們曾是好孩子,

  • who lived out the Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde scenario -- Robert Louis Stevenson.

    但他們的人生卻如同羅伯特·路易斯·斯蒂文森筆下的變身怪醫,由善轉惡。

  • That is, they took drugs, got in trouble, went to jail.

    他們染毒,惹了麻煩,然後進了監獄。

  • Some got killed, and some did it without drug assistance.

    有些喪了命,即使並沒有沾染毒品。

  • So when I read Robert Louis Stevenson, that wasn't fiction.

    所以當我讀羅伯特·路易斯·斯蒂文森的作品時,我覺得那不是小說。

  • The only question is, what was in the juice?

    唯一的問題是:釀成由善轉惡的毒藥是什麼?

  • And more importantly, that line between good and evil --

    更重要的是,善惡之間的界限——

  • which privileged people like to think is fixed and impermeable,

    特權階層喜歡認定這個界限是固定且不可逾越的,

  • with them on the good side, and the others on the bad side --

    認為他們是在善的一邊,其他人在惡的一邊——

  • I knew that line was movable, and it was permeable.

    而我以前就知道這個界限是可以移動的,而且是可逾越的。

  • Good people could be seduced across that line,

    好人可以受誘惑而越界,

  • and under good and some rare circumstances, bad kids could recover

    偶爾在某些比較好的情況下,壞孩子也可能

  • with help, with reform, with rehabilitation.

    依靠外界的幫助、改造、治療,以重塑人生。

  • So I want to begin with this this wonderful illusion

    所以,我想以荷蘭藝術家M. C. Escher

  • by [Dutch] artist M.C. Escher.

    這幅奇妙的作品開始說起。

  • If you look at it and focus on the white,

    如果你把視線集中在白色區域,

  • what you see is a world full of angels.

    你會看到一個充滿了天使的世界。

  • But let's look more deeply, and as we do,

    但是當我們再靠近一點看,

  • what appears is the demons, the devils in the world.

    魔鬼就出現了,世間的魔鬼。

  • And that tells us several things.

    這告訴我們幾點。

  • One, the world is, was, will always be filled with good and evil,

    一:這個世界,無論過去,現在,還是將來,都總是由善和惡組成,

  • because good and evil is the yin and yang of the human condition.

    因為善惡就如人類的陰陽。

  • It tells me something else. If you remember,

    它也告訴我另外一件事。如果你還記得,

  • God's favorite angel was Lucifer.

    上帝最喜歡的天使是路西法。

  • Apparently, Lucifer means "the light."

    顯然,路西法的意思是“光明”。

  • It also means "the morning star," in some scripture.

    在某些經文裡,它也有“黎明之星”的意思。

  • And apparently, he disobeyed God,

    顯然他後來背叛了上帝,

  • and that's the ultimate disobedience to authority.

    這是對權威的終極背叛。

  • And when he did, Michael, the archangel, was sent

    當他率眾背叛後,上帝派邁克天使長

  • to kick him out of heaven along with the other fallen angels.

    將他和其他墮落的天使一起趕出天堂。

  • And so Lucifer descends into hell, becomes Satan,

    於是路西法降入地獄,成為撒旦,

  • becomes the devil, and the force of evil in the universe begins.

    成為惡魔,宇宙中的惡之能量誕生了。

  • Paradoxically, it was God who created hell as a place to store evil.

    矛盾的是,是上帝造出了惡的容身之處---地獄。

  • He didn't do a good job of keeping it there though.

    他卻沒能使惡一直呆在那裡。

  • So, this arc of the cosmic transformation

    所以,從上帝最受寵的天使變為惡魔,

  • of God's favorite angel into the Devil,

    這個巨大的轉變,

  • for me, sets the context for understanding human beings

    為我設立了一個大背景,

  • who are transformed from good, ordinary people

    去理解那些從好人或者普通人

  • into perpetrators of evil.

    轉變成壞人的人。

  • So the Lucifer effect, although it focuses on the negatives --

    所以,路西法效應,儘管它集中在陰暗的方面——

  • the negatives that people can become,

    人們可能投向陰暗,

  • not the negatives that people are --

    但他們本身並非陰暗——

  • leads me to a psychological definition. Evil is the exercise of power.

    引導我作出一個心理學定義:惡是行使權力

  • And that's the key: it's about power.

    這才是關鍵:權力。

  • To intentionally harm people psychologically,

    來故意對他人進行心理傷害,

  • to hurt people physically, to destroy people mortally, or ideas,

    對他人進行身體傷害,殘害他人生命或思想,

  • and to commit crimes against humanity.

    犯下反人道的罪行。

  • If you Google "evil," a word that should surely have withered by now,

    如果你用谷歌搜索evil (惡) 這個詞——時至今日,這本是個早應消亡的詞,

  • you come up with 136 million hits in a third of a second.

    你會在1/3秒內得到1.36億個搜索結果。

  • A few years ago -- I am sure all of you were shocked, as I was,

    幾年前發生的一件事——我知道你們當時一定和我一樣震驚,

  • with the revelation of American soldiers

    就是揭露美軍士兵

  • abusing prisoners in a strange place

    在那場爭議性的對伊戰爭中

  • in a controversial war, Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

    中的虐囚行為:阿布葛拉伊布虐囚事件。

  • And these were men and women

    這些士兵,有男性也有女性,

  • who were putting prisoners through unbelievable humiliation.

    對囚犯們實施了讓人難以置信的羞辱。

  • I was shocked, but I wasn't surprised,

    我很震驚,但是並不感到意外,

  • because I had seen those same visual parallels

    因為我以前看過類似的情況,

  • when I was the prison superintendent of the Stanford Prison Study.

    當時我是史丹佛監獄實驗的負責人。

  • Immediately the Bush administration military said ... what?

    布希政府軍方對此事的第一反應是什麼?

  • What all administrations say when there's a scandal.

    是醜聞發生後任何官方都會說的套詞,

  • "Don't blame us. It's not the system. It's the few bad apples,

    "不要怪我們。這與整個系統無關。只是幾個壞蘋果而已,

  • the few rogue soldiers."

    只是一小撮惡劣的士兵而已。 "

  • My hypothesis is, American soldiers are good, usually.

    而我的假設是,美國士兵通常情況下是好的。

  • Maybe it was the barrel that was bad.

    也許是裝蘋果的桶壞了。

  • But how am I going to -- how am I going to deal with that hypothesis?

    但我如何證明這個假設呢?

  • I became an expert witness

    我成為了其中一個名叫

  • for one of the guards, Sergeant Chip Frederick,

    奇普·弗萊德里克中士的專家證人,

  • and in that position, I had access to the dozen investigative reports.

    在這個位置上,我可以接觸到關於此事的十幾份調查報告。

  • I had access to him. I could study him,

    我同他接觸,我可以研究他,

  • have him come to my home, get to know him,

    讓他來我家,了解他,

  • do psychological analysis to see, was he a good apple or bad apple.

    作些心理上的分析來判斷他是個好蘋果還是壞蘋果。

  • And thirdly, I had access to all of the 1,000 pictures

    第三點,我可以查看所有的

  • that these soldiers took.

    1000多張士兵拍攝的照片。

  • These pictures are of a violent or sexual nature.

    這些照片都是暴力或色情的。

  • All of them come from the cameras of American soldiers.

    所有這些都是美軍士兵用相機拍攝的。

  • Because everybody has a digital camera or cell phone camera,

    因為每個人都有數位相機或手機相機,

  • they took pictures of everything. More than 1,000.

    他們什麼都拍。拍了超過1000張照片。

  • And what I've done is I organized them into various categories.

    我所做的是把它們分類。

  • But these are by United States military police, army reservists.

    但這些由陸軍預備役的美軍憲兵所拍攝的。

  • They are not soldiers prepared for this mission at all.

    他們完全不是為執行此項任務而設立的部隊。

  • And it all happened in a single place, Tier 1-A, on the night shift.

    而此事僅發生在一個地點,1A層,在夜間值班時間。

  • Why? Tier 1-A was the center for military intelligence.

    為什麼? 1A層是軍方情報中心。

  • It was the interrogation hold. The CIA was there.

    是審訊關押處。中央情報局在那裡。

  • Interrogators from Titan Corporation, all there,

    巨人公司(美軍外包公司)的審訊人員,全部都在那裡,

  • and they're getting no information about the insurgency.

    而他們得不到任何關於暴動的信息。

  • So they're going to put pressure on these soldiers,

    於是他們向這些憲兵隊士兵施加壓力,

  • military police, to cross the line,

    迫使他們越線,

  • give them permission to break the will of the enemy,

    允許他們採取措施來擊潰敵人的意志,

  • to prepare them for interrogation, to soften them up,

    挽起袖子,為審訊做準備,

  • to take the gloves off. Those are the euphemisms,

    使他們屈服。這些都是婉辭,

  • and this is how it was interpreted.

    而這就是他們如何闡釋的。

  • Let's go down to that dungeon.

    讓我們進入地牢吧。

  • (Camera shutter)

    (相機快門聲)(以下圖片含有裸露及暴力展示)

  • (Thuds)

    (重擊聲)

  • (Camera shutter)

    (相機快門聲)

  • (Thuds)

    (重擊聲)

  • (Breathing)

    (喘息聲)

  • (Bells)

    (鐘聲)

  • So, pretty horrific.

    很恐怖。

  • That's one of the visual illustrations of evil.

    這是惡的一種視覺展示。

  • And it should not have escaped you that

    你應該不會沒有注意到,

  • the reason I paired the prisoner with his arms out

    我把那個伸開雙臂的囚犯

  • with Leonardo da Vinci's ode to humanity

    和達文西頌揚人類的作品放在一起的原因,

  • is that that prisoner was mentally ill.

    是那個犯人得了精神疾病。

  • That prisoner covered himself with shit every day,

    那個犯人每天用大便塗抹在身上,

  • and they used to have to roll him in dirt so he wouldn't stink.

    士兵們不得不使他在泥土裡打滾,以消除臭味。

  • But the guards ended up calling him "Shit Boy."

    但士兵們最終還是叫他屎男。

  • What was he doing in that prison

    他在監獄裡做什麼!?

  • rather than in some mental institution?

    他本應在精神病院。

  • In any event, here's former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.

    不管怎樣,前國防部長拉姆斯菲爾德

  • He comes down and says, "I want to know, who is responsible?

    下來問,"我想知道誰該為此負責?

  • Who are the bad apples?" Well, that's a bad question.

    到底誰才是那幾個壞蘋果? "嗯,這是個差勁的問題。

  • You have to reframe it and ask, "What is responsible?"

    你應該重新組織一下這個句子,"是什麼為此負責?"

  • Because "what" could be the who of people,

    因為"什麼"既可以是指人,

  • but it could also be the what of the situation,

    也可以是指情境,

  • and obviously that's wrongheaded.

    而顯然那樣問是堅持錯誤。

  • So how do psychologists go about understanding

    那麼心理學家是如何理解

  • such transformations of human character,

    這種人性的轉變呢?

  • if you believe that they were good soldiers

    如果你相信他們在進入地牢之前

  • before they went down to that dungeon?

    是好士兵的話。

  • There are three ways. The main way is -- it's called dispositional.

    有三種方式。最主要的方式是所謂的特質論。

  • We look at what's inside of the person, the bad apples.

    我們查看那些壞蘋果的內在特徵。

  • This is the foundation of all of social science,

    這是所有社會科學的基礎,

  • the foundation of religion, the foundation of war.

    宗教的基礎,戰爭的基礎。

  • Social psychologists like me come along and say, "Yeah,

    像我這樣的社會心理學家會出來說,"是啊,

  • people are the actors on the stage,

    人們是舞台上的演員,

  • but you'll have to be aware of what that situation is.

    但你得清楚其所處的情境。

  • Who are the cast of characters? What's the costume?

    扮演角色的演員是哪些人?戲服什麼樣?

  • Is there a stage director?"

    有舞台導演嗎?

  • And so we're interested in, what are the external factors

    所以我們感興趣的是,個體周圍的外界因素

  • around the individual -- the bad barrel?

    是什麼,壞的蘋果桶?

  • And social scientists stop there, and they miss the big point

    社會學家研究的僅限於此,卻遺漏了這個很重要的問題,

  • that I discovered when I became an expert witness for Abu Ghraib.

    即我在成為阿布葛拉伊布虐囚事件的專家證人後所發現的:

  • The power is in the system.

    權力存在於系統中。

  • The system creates the situation that corrupts the individuals,

    系統製造出腐化個體的情境,

  • and the system is the legal, political, economic, cultural background.

    這個系統,是指法制、政治、經濟和文化背景。

  • And this is where the power is of the bad-barrel makers.

    該系統即蘋果桶製造者權力之所在。

  • So if you want to change a person, you've got to change the situation.

    如果你想改變一個人,你就得改變其所處的情境。

  • If you want to change the situation,

    如果你要改變情境,

  • you've got to know where the power is, in the system.

    你得知道其權力存在於系統的何處。

  • So the Lucifer effect involves understanding

    所以路西法效應牽涉到理解

  • human character transformations with these three factors.

    人性轉變是如何受這三項因素影響的。

  • And it's a dynamic interplay.

    它是一個相互作用的過程。

  • What do the people bring into the situation?

    人們會怎樣影響情境?

  • What does the situation bring out of them?

    情境如何影響人們?

  • And what is the system that creates and maintains that situation?

    製造並維持該情境的系統是什麼?

  • So my book, "The Lucifer Effect," recently published, is about,

    我最近出版的書《路西法效應》,

  • how do you understand how good people turn evil?

    就是關於我們如何理解好人是怎樣變成惡人的。

  • And it has a lot of detail

    書中有關於我今天演講內容

  • about what I'm going to talk about today.

    的大量細節。

  • So Dr. Z's "Lucifer Effect," although it focuses on evil,

    所以,津博士的《路西法效應》,儘管著重於惡,

  • really is a celebration of the human mind's

    但其實是頌揚人類有無限的潛力,

  • infinite capacity to make any of us kind or cruel,

    使我們任何人向善或作惡,

  • caring or indifferent, creative or destructive,

    關懷或冷漠,創造或毀滅,

  • and it makes some of us villains.

    甚至可以使得我們其中一些人成為惡棍。

  • And the good news story that I'm going to hopefully come to

    而我在最後將滿懷希望地給大家講一個好消息的故事,

  • at the end is that it makes some of us heroes.

    即這潛力也可以使我們其中一些人成為英雄。

  • This is a wonderful cartoon in the New Yorker,

    這是登在《紐約客》上非常棒的一個漫畫,

  • which really summarizes my whole talk:

    它其實總結了我的全部演講:

  • "I'm neither a good cop nor a bad cop, Jerome.

    "傑若米,我既不是好警察也不是壞警察,

  • Like yourself, I'm a complex amalgam

    跟你一樣,我是一個正面和負面 人格特質

  • of positive and negative personality traits

    的複雜混合體,

  • that emerge or not, depending on the circumstances."

    至於體現哪一面,要靠具體情況而言。 "

  • (Laughter)

    (笑聲)

  • There's a study some of you think you know about,

    有一項研究,你們其中一些人可能以為自己知道,

  • but very few people have ever read the story. You watched the movie.

    但極少數人讀過這個故事。你看過電影。

  • This is Stanley Milgram, little Jewish kid from the Bronx,

    這是斯坦利·米爾格拉姆,自小在布朗克斯長大的一個猶太人,

  • and he asked the question, "Could the Holocaust happen here, now?"

    他問,"大屠殺在此時此地發生嗎?"

  • People say, "No, that's Nazi Germany,

    人們回答,"不,那是納粹德國,

  • that's Hitler, you know, that's 1939."

    那是希特勒,你知道,那是1939年。 "

  • He said, "Yeah, but suppose Hitler asked you,

    他說,"是啊,但如果希特勒問你,

  • 'Would you electrocute a stranger?' 'No way, not me, I'm a good person.' "

    '你會用電刑處死一個陌生人嗎? ' ' 不可能,我肯定不會,我是個好人。 "

  • He said, "Why don't we put you in a situation

    他說,"那麼我們不如把你放在一個情境裡,

  • and give you a chance to see what you would do?"

    給你一個機會,看看你會怎麼做? "

  • And so what he did was he tested 1,000 ordinary people.

    於是,他找了1000個普通人來做測試。

  • 500 New Haven, Connecticut, 500 Bridgeport.

    500人來自康州紐黑文,500人來自布里奇波特。

  • And the ad said, "Psychologists want to understand memory.

    廣告是這樣說的,"心理學家想要研究人的記憶,

  • We want to improve people's memory,

    我們想改善人的記憶,

  • because memory is the key to success." OK?

    因為記憶是成功的關鍵。 "

  • "We're going to give you five bucks -- four dollars for your time."

    "我們會給你5美元——4元用來支付時間。"

  • And it said, "We don't want college students.

    上面寫著,"我們不要大學生,

  • We want men between 20 and 50."

    我們需要20到50歲之間的男性。 "

  • In the later studies, they ran women.

    ——他們在後來的實驗中也研究了女性——

  • Ordinary people: barbers, clerks, white-collar people.

    他們都是普通人:理髮師,收銀員,白領等等。

  • So, you go down, and one of you is going to be a learner,

    於是你們下去,其中一個扮演學生,

  • and one of you is going to be a teacher.

    另一個扮演教師。

  • The learner's a genial, middle-aged guy.

    學生是一個和藹的中年男子。

  • He gets tied up to the shock apparatus in another room.

    在另外一間屋子裡,他被綁在一個電擊儀器上。

  • The learner could be middle-aged, could be as young as 20.

    學生可能是中年人,也可能是二十多歲。

  • And one of you is told by the authority, the guy in the lab coat,

    穿實驗室工作服的負責人,即權威角色,會告訴你們其中一個人說,

  • "Your job as teacher is to give this guy material to learn.

    "你作為教師的工作就是讓這個人學習材料。

  • Gets it right, reward him.

    記對了,就獎勵他。

  • Gets it wrong, you press a button on the shock box.

    記錯了,你就按這個電擊盒上的按鈕。

  • The first button is 15 volts. He doesn't even feel it."

    第一個按鈕是15伏特。他基本感覺不到。 "

  • That's the key. All evil starts with 15 volts.

    這就是關鍵。所有的惡都是從15伏特開始的。

  • And then the next step is another 15 volts.

    下一個再加15伏特。

  • The problem is, at the end of the line, it's 450 volts.

    問題是,最後一個按鈕,是450伏特。

  • And as you go along, the guy is screaming,

    隨著你不斷加電壓,那個人就會慘叫,

  • "I've got a heart condition! I'm out of here!"

    "我有心臟問題!我要出去!"

  • You're a good person. You complain.

    你是一個好人。你去投訴。

  • "Sir, who's going to be responsible if something happens to him?"

    "先生,如果他出事了,誰來負責?"

  • The experimenter says, "Don't worry, I will be responsible.

    實驗人員說,"不要緊,我來負責。

  • Continue, teacher."

    請繼續,教師。 "

  • And the question is, who would go all the way to 450 volts?

    問題是,誰會一直按到450伏特?

  • You should notice here, when it gets up to 375,

    你們會注意到,到375伏特時,

  • it says, "Danger. Severe Shock."

    上面寫著,"危險:強烈電擊"

  • When it gets up to here, there's "XXX" -- the pornography of power.

    到這兒的時候,那兒標著"XXX"﹕限制級的權力。

  • (Laughter)

    (笑聲)

  • So Milgram asks 40 psychiatrists,

    於是米爾格拉姆問了40個精神病醫生,

  • "What percent of American citizens would go to the end?"

    "百分之多少的美國人會按到最高電壓?"

  • They said only one percent. Because that's sadistic behavior,

    他們回答只有百分之1。因為那屬於虐待狂行為,

  • and we know, psychiatry knows, only one percent of Americans are sadistic.

    而且我們知道,精神病學顯示,只有百分之1的美國人是虐待狂。

  • OK. Here's the data. They could not be more wrong.

    好。這裡是研究資料。他們大錯特錯。

  • Two thirds go all the way to 450 volts. This was just one study.

    三分之二的人會一直按到450伏特。這只是一個研究而已。

  • Milgram did more than 16 studies. And look at this.

    米爾格拉姆做了超過16項研究。我們看一下這個。

  • In study 16, where you see somebody like you go all the way,

    在第16個研究中,你可以看到跟你們一樣的人們有百分之90

  • 90 percent go all the way. In study five, if you see people rebel, 90 percent rebel.

    會一直按到450伏特。在第5個研究中,如果有人反抗,百分之90的人反抗。

  • What about women? Study 13 -- no different than men.

    女性呢?第13個研究:與男性無差別。

  • So Milgram is quantifying evil as the willingness of people

    米爾格拉姆在以人們盲目服從權威,

  • to blindly obey authority, to go all the way to 450 volts.

    一直按到450伏特的意願,來數量化惡。

  • And it's like a dial on human nature.

    這就好像是在調節人性。

  • A dial in a sense that you can make almost everybody totally obedient,

    調節的意思是,你幾乎可以從使絕大多數人完全服從,

  • down to the majority, down to none.

    到使沒有人服從。

  • So what are the external parallels? For all research is artificial.

    那麼,外界世界有什麼類似情況嗎?畢竟所有的實驗都是人為的。

  • What's the validity in the real world?

    它在真實世界中的有效性如何?

  • 912 American citizens committed suicide or were murdered

    1978年,在圭亞那叢林裡,有912名美國人

  • by family and friends in Guyana jungle in 1978,

    自殺或遭其家人朋友殺害,

  • because they were blindly obedient to this guy, their pastor --

    因為他們盲目地服從這個傢伙,他們的傳道者。

  • not their priest -- their pastor, Reverend Jim Jones.

    不是他們的神父。他們的傳道者,吉姆·瓊斯主教。

  • He persuaded them to commit mass suicide.

    他說服他們進行集體自殺。

  • And so, he's the modern Lucifer effect,

    所以他是一個當代的路西法效應。

  • a man of God who becomes the Angel of Death.

    從上帝使者變成死亡天使。

  • Milgram's study is all about individual authority to control people.

    米爾格拉姆的研究完全是關於控制大眾的個人權力。

  • Most of the time, we are in institutions,

    大多數時間我們在機構裡,

  • so the Stanford Prison Study is a study of the power of institutions

    所以史丹佛監獄實驗,研究的是機構權力

  • to influence individual behavior.

    如何影響個人行為。

  • Interestingly, Stanley Milgram and I were in the same high school class

    有趣的是,斯坦利·米爾格拉姆和我上高中的時候在同一個班級,

  • in James Monroe in the Bronx, 1954.

    那是1954年,在布朗克斯的詹姆斯·門羅高中。