reality headset.

現實中的耳機。

You can slip it on and experience anything that you want.

你可以穿上它，體驗任何你想要的東西。

Everything that you experience would feel 100% life-like and, in fact, you wouldn't

你所經歷的一切都會感覺到100%的生活化，事實上，你也不會

be able to tell your experiences apart from real life.

能把自己的經歷和現實生活區分開來。

This machine could maximize the total amount of pleasure you would experience in life.

這臺機器可以最大限度地提高你在生活中體驗到的快樂總量。

If you think you need a little pain to have more pleasure, it can produce that for you.

如果你認為你需要一點痛苦來獲得更多的快樂，它可以為你產生這種快樂。

No matter what, this machine can maximize pleasure over your lifetime.

無論怎樣，這臺機器都能讓你一生的快樂最大化。

There's also no reason to worry about anyone outside of the machine because they can plug

也不用擔心機器外的人，因為他們可以插上電源。

in too or you can assume that they are being taken care of by someone else (the government

或者你可以認為他們是被別人（政府）照顧的。

for example).

例如）。)

So, don't let your worries about serving others prevent you from plugging in.

所以，不要因為服務他人的顧慮而不敢插手。

Once you plug in, you won't even know that you're plugged in.

一旦你插上電源，你甚至不會知道你已經插上了電源。

You could do anything you want in that world but the only catch is that once you plug in,

你可以在那個世界裡做任何你想做的事，但唯一的問題是，一旦你插入。

you can't come out.

你不能出來。

Knowing this, would you plug into this world?

知道了這些，你會不會插入這個世界？

When I asked this question on Twitter 45% of you said yes, you would plug in, and 55%

當我在微博上問這個問題時，45%的人說是，你會插隊，55%的人說是

said no, you would not.

說不，你不會。

This question is actually a twist on an infamous thought experiment - posed by the philosopher

這個問題實際上是一個臭名昭著的思想實驗的轉折--由哲學家提出。

Robert Nozick in his book Anarchy, State, and Utopia - titled “The Experience Machine”.

羅伯特-諾齊克在他的《無政府、國家和烏托邦》一書中--名為《經驗機器》。

The situation stays the exact same except instead of plugging into virtual reality,

情況保持完全一樣，只是沒有插入虛擬現實。

Robert refers to it as an experience machine.

羅伯特將其稱為體驗機。

Robert assumed that most people would choose not to enter this machine.

羅伯特以為，大多數人都會選擇不進入這個機器。

I wanted to revisit this thought experiment because I feel as if the question it asks

我想重新審視這個思想實驗，因為我覺得它所提出的問題好像是

is actually becoming more and more relevant in modern society.

其實在現代社會中越來越有意義。

We are seeing great advances in virtual reality and it doesn't seem impossible that we could

我們看到了虛擬現實領域的巨大進步，而且我們似乎也不是不可能

one day create something similar to an experience machine

總有一天會創造出類似於體驗機的東西

I believe that one of the initial responses that someone might have to this modified thought

我相信，有人可能會對這種修改後的思想有一個初步的反應，那就是

experiment is that they can control their usage.

實驗是，他們可以控制自己的使用。

“I would only play for a bit and plug out whenever I want - sort of like a video game”

"我只會玩一會，想什麼時候插隊就什麼時候插隊，有點像電子遊戲"

they might say.

他們可能會說。

I'd argue that it's actually not so simple for two reasons.

我想說，其實並不那麼簡單，原因有二。

Video games are designed to be addictive in the same way fast food, and social media are.

電子遊戲的設計是為了讓人上癮，就像快餐和社交媒體一樣。

It's a form of supernormal stimuli.

這是一種超常刺激的形式。

I mentioned this in one of my videos on self-discipline in the past and some viewers took it as a

過去我在一個關於自律的視頻中提到過這個問題，有的觀眾把它當成了一個

knock against gaming.

對博弈的敲打。

I have nothing against gaming, I've been a gamer myself for most of my life.

我並不反對遊戲，我自己大半輩子都是個遊戲玩家。

I DO think it's delusional to deny that developers don't try to make their games

我認為否認開發者不努力製作遊戲是妄想。

as addictive as possible similar to how fast food companies try to make their food as addictive

儘可能地讓人上癮，就像快餐公司試圖讓他們的食物儘可能地讓人上癮一樣。

as possible, and social media sites try to make their feeds as addictive as possible.

儘可能的，而社交媒體網站也試圖讓他們的feeds儘可能的讓人上癮。

It's in the creators best interest, financially at least, to make their creations as addictive

至少在經濟上，讓他們的作品讓人上癮是創作者的最大利益。

as possible.

儘可能的。

In a lot of cases, their livelihood depends on it.

在很多情況下，他們的生計都依賴於此。

It might even be impossible to remove what makes a good product from being addictive.

甚至可能無法去掉一個好產品讓人上癮的原因。

If you accept this premise, that people, more often than not, try to make their products

如果你接受這個前提，人們，往往會試圖讓自己的產品。

or creations as addictive as possible, then we can move on to my next premise.

或創作儘可能的讓人上癮，那麼我們就可以繼續我的下一個前提。

For better or worse, there are ways to take advantage of human biology.

無論好壞，都有辦法利用人類的生物學優勢。

Easy example: it can be hard to quit smoking cigarettes even when you really want to.

簡單的例子：即使你真的想戒菸，也很難戒掉。

If you accept both of these premises, that people make their things as addictive as possible

如果你接受這兩個前提，那就是人們儘可能地讓自己的東西上癮

and that it's possible to take advantage of human biology, then you would likely accept

並且有可能利用人類的生物學優勢，那麼你很可能會接受。

my conclusion that VR will be a highly addictive experience.

我的結論是，VR將是一種高度上癮的體驗。

If you can enter a world that feels real and can provide you with maximum pleasure, why

如果你能進入一個感覺真實的世界，並能為你提供最大的快樂，為什麼？

would you ever want to leave?

你會不會想離開？

Coming out of that experience would make reality seem dull and drab by comparison.

從這種經歷中走出來，相比之下，現實會顯得枯燥無味。

The likelihood of you wanting to remain plugged in as much possible would be very high.

你想盡可能的保持插電狀態的可能性會非常大。

Now you see why I think this is a good thought experiment to discuss.

現在你明白為什麼我認為這是一個很好的思想實驗，可以討論。

I don't think it seems as unlikely of a scenario as when Nozick first proposed it.

我覺得這種情況似乎不像諾齊克第一次提出來的時候那麼不可能。

Keeping in line with the original thought experiment, we should also assume that technology

與最初的思想實驗保持一致，我們還應該假設技術

is at a point where they can connect us to this ultra-real VR experience and also keep

是在一個點上，他們可以將我們與這種超真實的VR體驗聯繫起來，同時也可以保持

our bodies functioning and alive while we are in it.

我們的身體在裡面的時候，我們的身體在運作和活著。

Knowing this, would you plug in?

知道了這些，你會插手嗎？

There are good reasons to plug in.

有很好的理由去插手。

The primary one is a philosophy called hedonism.

最主要的是一種叫做享樂主義的哲學。

Hedonists believe that everything in life boils down to two things: pain and pleasure.

享樂主義者認為，生活中的一切都歸結為兩件事：痛苦和快樂。

Pleasure is what is intrinsically good and maximizing net pleasure over a life time is

快樂才是本質上的好，一生中淨快樂的最大化就是

the most important goal for a person.

一個人最重要的目標。

Everything else is only good as long as it leads to the production of more pleasure or

只要能讓人產生更多的快感，或者說，其他的一切都只是好的

avoids pain.

避免了痛苦。

Another thing we hear people say often is, “just do what makes you happy.”

另外我們經常聽到人們說的一句話是："做讓自己開心的事就好"。

If doing what makes you happy is the most important thing - and this machine is designed

如果做讓你快樂的事是最重要的事--而這臺機器就是為你設計的。

to maximize pleasure and therefore happiness - there would be no reason not to plug in,

以使快樂最大化，從而使幸福最大化--就沒有理由不插手。

right?

對不對

However, Nozick initially proposed this thought experiment to refute hedonism.

然而，諾齊克最初提出這個思想實驗是為了駁斥享樂主義。

He said that if you don't plug into the machine, which he suspected most people wouldn't,

他說，如果你不插入機器，他懷疑大多數人不會。

then there are things you value more than pleasure.

那麼有些東西你比快樂更重視。

It means there are things you think are more important than just our inner feelings about

這意味著有一些你認為更重要的東西，而不僅僅是我們內心的感受。

the world.

世界上。

Judging by the poll I ran on Twitter, the majority of people, intuitively, do not want

從我在微博上進行的調查來看，大多數人，直覺上是不希望有

to plug in.

以插。

Nozick actually laid out three arguments as to why he believed someone wouldn't want

諾齊克實際上提出了三個論點來解釋為什麼他認為有人不願意。

to plug in:

以插。

We actually want to do things and not just experience them.

其實我們想做的事情，不僅僅是體驗。

There is something intrinsically valuable about actually doing an activity as opposed

有一些內在價值的東西，是關於實際做一個活動，而非

to merely experiencing it.

到僅僅是經歷。

We want to become certain kinds of people.

我們要成為某種類型的人。

Nozick said that entering the machine is a form of suicide because the person who enters

諾齊克說，進入機器是一種自殺的形式，因為進入機器的人

the machine has no character.

機器沒有特色。

We don't know if they are kind, brave, loyal, or anything.

我們不知道他們是否善良，勇敢，忠誠，還是什麼。

Consider this: do you want to win an olympic gold medal to have the experience of having

考慮一下：你想獲得一枚奧運金牌，是否要有這樣的經歷？

a medal and to feel the pleasure of winning that medal, or do you want to win it because

獎牌，並感受到贏得獎牌的樂趣，或者你想贏得它，因為

it means that you are a strong, hard-working, and brave person.

說明你是一個堅強、勤勞、勇敢的人。

Something to think about.

一些值得思考的問題。

Lastly, Nozick said that people would not want to enter because the machine would prevent

最後，Nozick說，人們不願意進入，因為機器會阻止。

us from experiencing a deeper reality.

我們無法體驗到更深的現實。

Everything that we experience in the machine would be man-made.

我們在機器中經歷的一切都將是人為的。

I believe here Nozick is saying that many of us would rather live in a world that is

我相信諾齊克在這裡說的是，我們很多人寧願生活在這樣一個世界裡。

true, rather than artificial, even if an artificial world produces more net pleasure.

真實的，而不是人為的，即使人為的世界產生更多的淨快樂。

When I first heard this argument, I totally agreed with it.

當我第一次聽到這個說法時，我完全贊同。

Everything Nozick said made sense.

諾齊克說的一切都很有道理。

Of course, I would want to live in a world that is real but less pleasurable than one

當然，我也希望生活在一個真實的世界裡，但比起這個世界，我更希望生活在一個不那麼快樂的世界裡。

that is fake but more pleasurable.

那是假的，但更有樂趣。

That was, until I heard about The Reverse Experience Machine.

那是，直到我聽說了逆向體驗機。

Now, I want you to imagine a different scenario.

現在，我要你想象一個不同的場景。

Imagine that you suddenly wake up in a white room.

想象一下，你突然在一個白色的房間裡醒來。

A scientist approaches you and says: “hey, you've been connected to this experience

一個科學家走近你，說："嘿，你已經和這個經歷聯繫在一起了。

machine for a decade.

機十年了。

Everybody you thought you knew, and all the experiences you had were manufactured by this

你以為你認識的每個人 和你所有的經歷都是這個人制造的

machine.

機。

We're supposed to ask every decade whether you would like to plug back in.

我們應該每十年問一次你是否願意插回去。

Would you?”

你會嗎？"

This scenario was initially posed by Joshua Greene although I modified it a bit.

這個方案最初是由Joshua Greene提出的，不過我修改了一下。

Knowing that everything you had just experienced was fake, would you want to return to it or

知道自己剛才經歷的一切都是假的，你是想回去還是

would you want to return to reality.

你想回到現實中去嗎？

What if in this new reality you're actually living in poverty, would you want to go back?

如果在這個新的現實中，你真的生活在貧困中，你還想回去嗎？

What if in this new reality you're actually a billionaire, would you want to go back then?

如果在這個新的現實中，你真的成了億萬富翁，那你還想回去嗎？

Felipe De Brigard actually posed the idea that our reluctance to enter the machine in

費利佩-德-布里加德實際上提出了這樣一個觀點，即我們不願意進入機器中。

the original experiment may be due to status quo bias.

原實驗可能是由於現狀偏差。

We don't like change.

我們不喜歡改變。

The reason we might be hesitant to enter the machine might be status quo bias and not the

我們之所以會猶豫不決，可能是現狀的偏見，而不是入機的原因。

reasons Nozick outlined.

諾齊克概述的原因。

If you find yourself hesitating to enter the machine in the first scenario but wanting

如果你發現自己在第一種情況下對進入機器猶豫不決，但又想。

to connect back in the second scenario then you might have been a victim of the status

在第二種情況下連接回來，那麼你可能是一個受害者的狀態。

quo bias.

quo偏。

I'm not sure if I would want to enter reality, if it turns out that I'm actually living

我不知道自己會不會想進入現實，如果發現自己真的生活在

in poverty.

在貧困中，

This virtual life is pretty great.

這種虛擬的生活是相當不錯的。

So, maybe I don't value truth over pleasure?

所以，也許我不重視真理而不重視快樂？

But, let me hit you with another scenario.

不過，我再給你打一個方案。

You're in a relationship with a lovely spouse.

你和一個可愛的配偶在談戀愛。

You work a great job with a wonderful boss and co-workers, and you have beautiful, amazing

你的工作很出色，有一個很棒的老闆和同事，你有美麗的，令人驚奇的。

kids.

孩子們。

Everyone loves you, except for that they don't.

每個人都愛你，除了他們不愛你。

You just think that everyone loves you but really they hate you.

你只是認為每個人都愛你，但其實他們恨你。

Your spouse is constantly cheating on you, your kids laughing at and despising you, your

你的配偶經常出軌，你的孩子嘲笑和鄙視你，你的。

coworkers doing the same, and your boss thinks your the worst employee.

同事也這樣做，而你的老闆認為你是最差的員工。

But, you have no idea.

但是，你不知道。

Assume that finding out about this truth would reduce your net pleasure over a life time.

假設發現這個真相，會減少你一生的淨歡喜。

Would you want to know the truth and reduce your pleasure or live a delusional life and

你是想知道真相，減少自己的快樂，還是想過著妄想的生活，並。

have more pleasure?

有更多的樂趣？

What would you want for someone else whose not you but that you care about?

你想要一個不是你但你關心的人的什麼？

For the hedonist, someone who thinks that net pleasure over a life time is the most

對於享樂主義者來說，有人認為一生的淨享樂是最。

important goal, living in delusion is the obvious answer.

重要的目標，活在妄想中是顯而易見的答案。

This again brings up the question: what's more important, pleasure or truth?

這又引出了一個問題：快樂和真相哪個更重要？

If you picked truth, then you might agree with Nozick that there are things more important

如果你選擇了真相，那麼你可能會同意諾齊克的觀點，認為還有更重要的事情。

than pleasure, happiness, and our inner feelings.

比快樂、幸福和我們內心的感受。

This is by no means an easy thought experiment to answer, and there are several complex answers

這絕不是一個簡單的思想實驗，有幾種複雜的答案

to it.

到它。

With VR technology improving, I think it's something important and interesting to think

隨著VR技術的進步，我覺得這是一件很重要也很有意思的事情，可以思考一下

about so I'd love to see what you guys think in the comments: would you plug in?

關於，所以我很想在評論中看看你們的想法：你會插手嗎？