that economic inequality is historically high,

或許你已經聽說，

that the wealthiest one-tenth of one percent in the United States

經濟不平等到達了歷史上的新高，

have as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent combined,

美國財富排名在前千分之一的有錢人

or that the wealthiest eight individuals in the world

擁有的財富相當於 底層百分之九十的人的總財富。

have as much wealth

或者，世界上財富排名前八名的有錢人

as the poorest 3.5 billion inhabitants of the planet.

擁有的財富

But did you know that economic inequality is associated with shorter lifespans,

等同於地球上最貧窮的 三十五億居民的總財富。

less happiness,

但你知道經濟不平等

more crime

與壽命縮短、快樂減少、

and more drug abuse?

犯罪增加、

Those sound like problems of poverty,

及更多藥物濫用都相關嗎？

but among wealthy, developed nations

這些聽起來是貧窮的問題。

those health and social problems

但在富有、已開發的國家中，

are actually more tightly linked to inequality between incomes

那些健康和社會問題

than to absolute incomes.

其實是和收入不平等有更密切的關係，

And because of that,

而不是絕對收入。

the United States,

正因如此，

the wealthiest and the most unequal of nations,

美國這個最富有 且最不平等的國家中的人民

actually fares worse than all other developed countries.

其實過得比所有其他 已開發國家都還要糟。

Surveys show that large majorities of Americans,

調查顯示，大部分美國人，

both Democrats and Republicans,

無論是民主黨或共和黨，

believe inequality is too high and want more equal pay.

都相信不平等狀況太嚴重， 且希望能有更平等的薪水。

And yet as a society, we don't seem to be able to find the common ground,

然而，整個社會似乎還未能找到共同點、

the consensus, the political will to do anything about it.

共識、和政治意願去處理這個問題。

Because, as inequality has risen in recent decades,

因為，這幾十年來， 隨著不平等的狀況越發嚴重，

political polarization has risen along with it.

政治兩極化也隨之而起。

We see those who disagree with us as idiots or as immoral.

我們把意見和我們不同的人 視為白痴或惡人。

Nearly half of Democrats and Republicans

近一半的民主黨和共和黨

now think that the other side is not just mistaken

現在都認為對方不僅是錯的，

but a threat to the nation.

還是對國家的威脅。

And that animosity prevents us from finding the common ground

那種憎惡讓我們無法找到交集

to change things.

來改變現狀。

I'm a social psychology professor at the University of North Carolina,

我是北卡羅萊納大學的 社會心理學教授，

and I study the effects of inequality on people's thinking and behavior.

我研究不平等對於人的思想 與行為會有什麼影響。

I'm going to argue that it's not just an unfortunate coincidence

我主張，不平等 與政治分裂會一起出現，

that inequality and political division have risen together.

並非只是不幸的巧合。

There are good psychological reasons

不平等會導致政治上的不和，

that inequality drives wedges in our politics.

背後有充分的心理因素，

That means there are good psychological paths

那這也意味著 ，

to improve both at once.

可能有心理途徑能夠同時改善兩者。

To understand why inequality is so powerful,

若要了解為什麼 不平等的力量如此強大，

you have to first understand that we are constantly comparing ourselves

你首先得要了解，

to other people,

我們經常會一直 把我們自己和他人做比較，

and when we do that,

當我們這麼做時，

we really like to come out on top,

我們會很希望在比較之下高人一等。

and we find it painful to be on the bottom.

矮人一截，讓我們會感到很痛苦。

Psychologists call it the "better-than-average effect."

心理學家稱之為「優於常人效應」。

Most people believe they're better than average

大部分的人認為， 在他們在乎的事物上，

at just about anything they care about,

他們都比平均值更優秀，

which isn't strictly possible, because that's just what average means.

那是不可能的事， 因為平均值就是這樣。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But that's the way people feel.

但人們總是會有這種感覺。

Most people think they're smarter than average,

多數人認為自己的聰明、

harder working than average

自己的努力、

and more socially skilled.

社交技能都在平均之上。

Most people think they're better drivers than average.

多數人也認為自己 開車技術優於常人。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

That's true even if you do the study with a sample of people

針對目前因為自己肇事 釀成車禍而躺在醫院的人所做的研究，

currently hospitalized for a car accident that they caused.

還是會發現同樣的結果。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

So we really want to see ourselves as better than average,

所以我們真的很想看見自己優於平均，

and if we find out otherwise,

若發現實情並非如此，

it's a painful experience that we have to cope with.

我們就得處理這種痛苦的感受。

And we cope with it by shifting how we see the world.

而我們處理的方式就是 轉換我們看世界的角度。

To understand how this works,

為了了解這背後的機制， 我和同事做了一項實驗。

my collaborators and I ran an experiment.

我們請受試者做決策性的工作來賺錢，

We asked participants to complete a decision-making task to earn some money,

事實上，每個人賺到的錢都一樣多。

and in reality, everyone earned the same amount of money.

但我們將他們隨機分為兩組，

But we randomly divided them into two groups,

我們告訴一組，他們做得比平均好，

and we told one group that they had done better than average,

告訴另一組，他們做得比平均差，

and we told the other group they had done worse than average.

現在，有一組覺得自己比較有錢，

So now we have one group that feels richer and one group that feels poorer,

另一組覺得自己比較窮，

but for no objective reason.

但都是主觀認定，無客觀理由。

And then we asked them some questions.

接著我們問他們一些問題。

When we asked them, "How good are you at making decisions?"

當我們問他們： 「你有多擅長做決策？」

the better-than-average group said that they were more competent

相對於比自覺貧窮的那組，

than the below-average group.

自覺有錢的那組 更會認為自己有能力。

The better-than-average group said that their success

自覺有錢的那組說他們的成功

was a fair outcome of a meritocracy.

是英才制度的公平結果。

The below-average group thought the system was rigged,

自覺貧窮的那組認為 體制遭到不正當操縱，

and in this case, of course, they were right.

在這個實驗裡的確是有操縱。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Even though the two groups had the same amount of money,

即使這兩組人擁有的錢一樣多，

the group that felt richer said we should cut taxes on the wealthy,

覺得自己有錢的那組認為 我們應該對有錢人減少收稅，

cut benefits to the poor.

減少給窮人的福利。

Let them work hard and be responsible for themselves, they said.

他們的說法是讓窮人自己 去努力，為自己負責。

These are attitudes that we normally assume are rooted in deeply held values

我們通常會假設這些態度

and a lifetime of experience,

根源於穩固的價值觀及畢生的經歷中，

but a 10-minute exercise

但僅僅十分鐘的操作，

that made people feel richer or poorer

只是讓受試者感覺比較富裕或貧窮，

was enough to change those views.

就足以改變這些觀點。

This difference between being rich or poor and feeling rich or poor is important,

「真正」富裕或貧窮 與「覺得自己」富裕或貧窮

because the two don't always line up very well.

之間的差異很重要，

You often hear people say with nostalgia,

因為這兩者不見得一定一致。

"We were poor, but we didn't know it."

你常會聽到有人懷舊地說：

That was the case for me growing up,

「我們很貧窮，但我們當時不知道。」

until one day,

我成長過程就是這種狀況，

in the fourth-grade lunch line,

直到有一天，四年級午餐排隊時，

we had a new cashier who didn't know the ropes,

有一名狀況外的新出納員，

and she asked me for 1.25 dollars.

她跟我要 1.25 美金。

I was taken aback, because I had never been asked to pay for my lunch before.

我吃了一驚，因為以前 從來沒有人跟我要午餐錢。

I didn't know what to say, because I didn't have any money.

我不知道該說什麼， 因為我身上沒有錢。

And suddenly, I realized for the first time

突然間，我第一次了解到，

that we free lunch kids were the poor ones.

我們這種吃免費午餐的孩子是窮孩子。

That awkward moment in the school lunch line

在學校排隊領午餐的尷尬時刻

changed so much for me,

為我帶來了很大的改變，

because for the first time, I felt poor.

因為那是我第一次感到貧窮。

We didn't have any less money than the day before,

我們那天的錢並沒有比前一天少，

but for the first time,

但我人生中第一次

I started noticing things differently.

我注意事情的方式開始改變了。

It changed the way I saw the world.

我看世界的角度改變了。

I started noticing how the kids who paid for their lunch

我開始注意到那些付錢吃午餐的孩子

seemed to dress better than the free lunch kids.

穿的衣服似乎比 免費午餐的孩子更好。

I started noticing the big yellow blocks of government cheese

我開始注意到我們家門口 總會出現政府配給的大塊黃色起士，

that showed up at our door

也注意到我母親在雜貨店 會拿出政府發的食物券。

and the food stamps my mother would pull out at the grocery store.

我向來是害羞的孩子，

I was always a shy kid,

但在那件事之後， 我在學校幾乎不說話了。

but I hardly talked at all after that at school.

我算什麼？哪能大聲發言？

Who was I to speak up?

數十年來，社會科學家 都在尋找證據證明

For decades, social scientists looked for evidence

自覺和其他人相比之下比較貧困的人

that feeling deprived compared to other people

會有動機採取政治行動。

would motivate political action.

他們認為這種感受會驅動抗爭、

They thought it would mobilize protests, strikes,

罷工，甚至連革命都有可能。

maybe even revolutions.

但他們的發現卻總是： 這種感受會讓人氣餒，

But again and again what they found was that it paralyzed people,

因為，事實是，

because the truth is,

自覺劣於他人，會帶來羞恥感。

feeling less than other people

這種感覺會讓人轉身不去面對問題，

brings shame.

對體制感到作噁。

It makes people turn away,

但自覺優於他人…… 那才會變成動力。

disgusted with the system.

這種感受會驅使我們 去守護優越的地位，

Feeling better than other people, though --

對我們的政治會造成影響。

now that is motivating.

若要了解為什麼， 讓我們思考一下另一個實驗。

It motivates us to protect that position,

同樣的，我們也請受試者 做決策來賺取金錢，

and it has important consequences for our politics.

我們告訴一組， 他們做得比平均更好，

To see why, consider another experiment.

告訴另一組，他們做得比平均更差。

Again, we asked participants to make decisions to earn some money,

同樣的，比平均更好的那一組 說這是公平的英才制度，

and we told one group that they had done better than average

減少對有錢人收稅，

and the other group that they had done worse than average.

減少給窮人的福利。

And again, the better-than-average group said it's a fair meritocracy,

但這次，我們也問他們，

cut taxes on the wealthy,

對於在這些議題上 和他們意見相左的受試者

cut benefits on the poor.

有什麼看法。

But this time, we also asked them what did they think

這些人是聰明，還是無能？

about other participants who disagree with them

他們是理性的，還是有偏見？

on those issues.

比平均好的那一組說， 和他們意見相左的人

Are they smart or incompetent?

都一定很無能、有偏見、

Are they reasonable or are they biased?

被自我利益所蒙蔽。

The better-than-average group said anybody who disagrees with them

比平均差的那一組 對於對手不會抱持這種假設。

must be incompetent, biased,

有許多心理學研究

blinded by self-interest.

證明當別人認同我們時， 我們會覺得他們很出色，

The below-average group

當別人和我們意見相左， 我們可能會認為他們是白痴。

didn't assume that about their opponents.

（笑聲）

Now, there are lots of psychology studies

但我們的新發現是， 這種現象完全只會發生在

showing that when people agree with us,

自覺比平均好的那一組身上，

we think they're brilliant,

他們自覺有資格可以屏棄 和他們不同的意見。

and when people disagree with us,

想想看，隨著富人 和窮人的差距越來越大，

we tend to think they're idiots.

這種現象對我們的政治會有什麼影響。

(Laughter)

是的，很多人都認為 另一邊的人是白痴，

But this is new because we found it was driven entirely by the group

但對政治有足夠的關注，

that felt better than average,

而會為了政治彼此爭吵的人

who felt entitled to dismiss those people who disagree with them.

多半是富人。

So think about what this is doing to our politics,

事實上，

as the haves and have-nots spread further and further apart.

隨著這數十年來不平等越來越明顯，

Yes, a lot of us think that people on the other side are idiots,

窮人對政治的興趣及參與度都大減。

but the people politically engaged enough to be yelling at each other about politics

同樣的，我們發現， 覺得自己被遺棄的人

are actually mostly the well-off.

並不會走上街頭抗議 或者發動投票登記活動。

In fact, as inequality has grown in recent decades,

通常，他們甚至不會去投票。

political interest and participation among the poor has plummeted.

反之，他們轉過身，選擇退出。

Again, we see that people who feel left behind

對於極端不平等， 如果我們想要做點什麼，

aren't taking to the streets to protest or organize voter registration drives.

我們就得整頓我們的政治。

Often, they aren't even voting.

如果我們想要整頓政治，

Instead, they're turning away and dropping out.

我們就得處理不平等的問題。

So if we want to do something about extreme inequality,

我們要怎麼做？

we have to fix our politics.

螺旋式的每況愈下有個好處，

And if we want to fix our politics,

就是你可以在螺旋上的任何一點 切斷這個循環。

we have to do something about inequality.

我想，希望會寄託在

So what do we do?

我們當中因為不平等加劇 而受益最多的人，

The wonderful thing about spirals

我們當中表現比平均更好的人。

is that you can interrupt at any point in the cycle.

如果你很成功，

I think our best bet starts with those of us

很自然會把你的成功 歸功於你自己的努力。

who have benefited the most from inequality's rise,

但就像我剛才提到的研究，

those of us who have done better than average.

每個人都會做同樣的努力，

If you've been successful,

不論努力是不是成功的最大因素。

it's natural to chalk up your success to your own hard work.

我認識的所有成功人士

But, like the studies I showed you,

都能想出他們在何時 很努力掙扎邁向成功。

everybody does that,

他們也都能想出

whether or not it really was the hard work that mattered most.

何時他們因為好運 或因他人相助而獲益，

Every successful person I know

但這部分比較難想到。

can think of times when they worked hard and struggled to succeed.

心理學家夏大衛戴 和湯姆吉洛維奇稱之為

They can also think of times

「逆風—順風的不對稱性」。

when they benefited from good luck or a helping hand

當你逆風掙扎時，

but that part is harder.

你眼中只有那些障礙。

Psychologists Shai Davidai and Tom Gilovich

你只會注意到、記住那些障礙。

call it the "headwind-tailwind asymmetry."

但當風從你背後吹來， 一切都順著你時，

When you're struggling against headwinds,

你所注意到的就只有你自己，

those obstacles are all you can see.

和你自己的驚世才華。

It's what you notice and remember.

我們得要停下來好好想想，

But when the wind's at your back and everything's going your way,

才能意識到一路上有順風的協助。

all you notice is yourself

注意到和你意見相左的人 有什麼缺點很容易。

and our own amazing talents.

開始的兩分鐘內， 在座就有人認定我是白痴，

So we have to stop and think for a minute

只因為我說不平等是有害的。

to recognize those tailwinds helping us along.

（笑聲）

It's so easy to see what's wrong with people

困難的部分在於要承認

who disagree with you.

如果你的立場不同， 你的看法可能也會不同，

Some of you decided that I was an idiot in the first two minutes,

就像我們實驗中的受試者一樣。

because I said inequality was harmful.

所以，若你在人生中 是屬於優於平均的那組，

(Laughter)

若你會看 TED 演說， 基本上你就是那組。

The hard part is to recognize

（笑聲）

that if you were in a different position,

那麼我想給你個挑戰：

you might see things differently,

下次當你很想將某個 和你意見相左的人

just like the subjects in our experiments.

貶為白痴時，

So if you're in the above-average group in life --

想想協助你走到今天這一步的順風。

and if you're watching a TED talk, you most likely are --

你得到過什麼好運？

(Laughter)

若沒有那好運，一切可能會不同。

then I leave you with this challenge:

你感激哪些援手？

the next time you're tempted to dismiss someone who disagrees with you

意識到這些順風，會讓我們謙卑，

as an idiot,

讓我們了解到和我們意見不同 並不等同於白痴。

think about the tailwinds that helped you get where you are.

真正困難之處在於找到交集，

What lucky breaks did you get

因為富人有權力

that might have turned out differently?

和責任來做出改變。

What helping hands are you grateful for?

謝謝。

Recognizing those tailwinds gives us the humility we need

（掌聲）

to see that disagreeing with us doesn't make people idiots.

The real hard work is in finding common ground,

because it's the well-off who have the power

and the responsibility to change things.

Thank you.

(Applause)