you find people who believe in free will

你會發現那些相信自由意志的人

contrasted with determinists,

與決定論者對比。

who just think the laws of physics are gonna tell us

誰只是認為物理學定律會告訴我們

what happens in the world.

世界上發生了什麼。

'Determinism' is a statement

'決定論'是一種說法

about how the laws of physics work.

關於物理學定律如何工作。

It goes back to Pierre-Simon Laplace

這可以追溯到皮埃爾-西蒙-拉普拉斯

explicating the implications of classical mechanics,

闡釋經典力學的含義。

a la Isaac Newton.

a la Isaac Newton.

He says, "If you knew the position

他說："如果你知道了這個位置

and velocity of everything in the world,

和世界上一切事物的速度。

the equations of classical physics

經典物理學的方程

deterministically predict what will happen next."

確定性地預測接下來會發生什麼"。

There's no randomness:

沒有隨機性。

you know exactly what's gonna happen in the future.

你完全知道未來會發生什麼。

To me, this is one of the biggest mistakes we could make.

對我來說，這是我們可能犯的最大錯誤之一。

Not that you should be determinist or not,

不是說你該不該做決定論者。

but that there is some relationship

但有一些關係

between determinism versus non-determinism,

決定論與非決定論之間。

and free will versus non-free will.

以及自由意志與非自由意志。

Those are two separate questions.

這是兩個不同的問題。

'Libertarian free will' is truly an ability to make choices

自由主義的自由意志 "確實是一種做出選擇的能力

and do things in the world that cannot even, in principle,

並在世界範圍內做一些原則上都不能做的事情。

in any way, be explained

以任何方式解釋

by stuff obeying the laws of physics.

由遵守物理學定律的東西來完成。

Immanuel Kant and other people put it in these terms:

伊曼紐爾-康德和其他一些人用這樣的方式說。

They said, "There's no way of thinking of a human being

他們說："人是沒有辦法思考的

as somehow a collection of physical things

某種程度上說是實物的集合

obeying the laws of physics."

遵守物理學定律。"

There is something that is inescapably human

有一些東西是人類不可避免的

that cannot be reduced to an understanding

不能歸結為一種理解

of ourselves as just mindless pieces

我們自己只是無意識的碎片

conglomerated together to make something with a mind.

凝結在一起，形成有思想的東西。

Now I would say, no modern scientist believes in that-

現在我要說的是，沒有一個現代科學家相信--

to say no is an exaggeration.

說 "不 "是一種誇張。

There's probably some who do,

可能有一些人這樣做。

but the overwhelming majority of scientists

但絕大部分的科學家

take seriously the idea that we know what we are physically.

認真對待 "我們知道自己的身體是什麼 "的想法。

We are collections of atoms, molecules, etc.-

我們是原子、分子等的集合。

that, in principle, obey the laws of physics.

原則上遵守物理學定律。

And where you get into a little bit of tension

而在這裡，你進入了一個有點緊張的狀態

with the underlying laws of physics is you say,

與物理學的基本規律是你說的。

"Okay, I'm describing myself.

"好吧，我在描述我自己。

You know, I have some knowledge,

你知道，我有一些知識。

but I also have some preferences.

但我也有一些偏好。

I have some desires, I have some values.

我有一些慾望，我有一些價值觀。

I have some feelings, I have some emotions.

我有一些感覺，我有一些情緒。

And you're telling me that I'm also a collection of neurons.

而你卻告訴我，我也是一個神經元的集合。

And then you're telling me that those neurons

然後你告訴我，這些神經元

are made of atoms and particles

是由原子和粒子組成的

and they obey the laws of physics.

而且他們遵守物理學規律。

And once I get to the level of neurons,

而一旦我達到了神經元的水準。

much less the level of atoms and molecules,

更不用說原子和分子的水準了。

there's no feelings there."

那裡沒有感情。"

And so this is where we enter

是以，這就是我們進入的地方

into the idea of 'compatibilist free will.'

到'兼容的自由意志'的想法。

Compatibilism says that we can still talk about human beings

Compatibilism說，我們仍然可以談論人的問題

as agents making choices, while also agreeing

作為代理人做出選擇，同時也同意

that we don't violate the laws of physics.

即我們不違反物理定律。

And to say, "Well, how are those two things compatible?"

並說："那麼，這兩件事如何兼容？"

That's a perfectly fair question,

這是個非常公平的問題。

and the answer is 'emergence.'

而答案是'出現'。

The answer is layers of reality.

答案是現實的層次。

The answer is there are different ways

答案是有不同的方法

of talking about the world

談論世界的人

that are compatible with each other,

互相兼容的。

but very, very different.

但非常、非常不同。

When I open the closet door in the morning

當我在早晨打開衣櫃的門時

and say, "Should I wear the blue shirt or the red shirt?"

並說："我應該穿藍襯衫還是紅襯衫？"

It doesn't help me to say,

說這些對我沒有幫助。

"Well, I'm gonna do whatever my atoms want me to do."

"好吧，我要做我的原子要我做的任何事情。"

My atoms have no wants.

我的原子沒有需求。

There is something that I have that is a want,

有一些東西是我所擁有的，是我想要的。

and the fact that I'm made of atoms

以及我是由原子組成的事實

doesn't make that go away.

並不能使之消失。

The compatibilist position is not

兼容論者的立場不是

one that denies determinism

否認決定論的人

or indeterminism-it doesn't care.

或不確定主義--它並不關心。

What it's saying is

它說的是

that you can both be a law-abiding thing in the Universe,

你們都可以在宇宙中成為一個守法的東西。

a physical system subject to the laws of nature,

一個受自然法則制約的物理系統。

and it makes sense to talk about you

談論你是有意義的

as an agent making choices because you're talking

作為一個代理人做出選擇，因為你正在談論

about a different level of description-

關於不同層次的描述--

a higher-level, emerging kind of phenomenon.

一種更高層次的、新興的現象。

I think that the best objection

我認為，最好的反對意見是

to my own view about free will, the compatibilist view,

我自己對自由意志的看法，即兼容主義的看法。

the emergent view, is that it's a little loosey-goosey

新出現的觀點是，它有點鬆散的感覺。

in some sense, right?

在某種意義上，對嗎？

I'm saying I can talk about human beings,

我是說我可以談論人類。

a level of human beings,

一個人的水準。

or I could talk about atoms and so forth.

或者我可以談論原子等等。

Well, where do I draw the line?

那麼，我應該在哪裡劃清界限呢？

The non-compatibilist could say,

非兼容論者可以說。

"Well, what if someday I'm able

"那麼，如果有一天我能夠

to read your microexpressions on your face

在你的臉上讀出你的微表情

and exactly and reliably predict what you will do next?

並準確可靠地預測你接下來會做什麼？

Would you still have free will?"

你還會有自由意志嗎？"

And my answer is: "Maybe not."

而我的答案是："也許不是"。

My answer is: "I can imagine in principle, getting so good

我的回答是："我可以想象，在原則上，得到這麼好的

at predicting how human beings actually behave

在預測人類的實際行為方面。

on the basis of truly accessible information,

在真正可獲得的資訊的基礎上。

that the concept of free will

自由意志的概念

no longer becomes helpful or necessary."

不再變得有幫助或有必要"。

That's just an improvement in our scientific understanding.

這只是我們在科學認識上的一個進步。

Do I think that actually will ever happen?

我認為這真的會發生嗎？

No, for lots of good reasons.

不，有很多很好的理由。

Human beings are incredibly complex.

人類是令人難以置信的複雜。

There's chaotic dynamics, there's quantum fluctuations.

有混亂的動力學，有量子的波動。

There's a whole bunch of reasons why we should expect

有一大堆的原因，我們應該期望

to never give up on the picture of human beings

永不放棄對人類的描繪

as agents making decisions.

作為做決定的代理人。

A lot of people who are anti-free will

很多反對自由意志的人

the way they phrase it is:

他們的表述方式是。

"I will believe that there's free will

"我將相信有自由意志

if there's a way that I could have acted differently."

如果有一種方式，我可以採取不同的行動。"

And what they have in mind

而他們的想法是

is they are collections of particles

是它們是粒子的集合

or, you know, whatever physical system,

或者，你知道，任何物理系統。

that is obeying the laws of physics-

那就是遵守物理學規律--

and, in fact, they could not have acted differently

而且，事實上，他們不可能採取不同的行動

'cause the laws of physics are the laws of physics.

因為物理學規律就是物理學規律。

But the reality is,

但現實是。

given the actual information you know about yourself,

鑑於你所知道的關於你自己的實際資訊。

you could have acted differently

你可以採取不同的行動

because the information you have about yourself

因為你擁有的關於你自己的資訊

is wildly incomplete.

是非常不完整的。

It's compatible with all sorts

它與各種類型的產品兼容

of different microscopic arrangements

的不同微觀安排

of what's going on in your brain and your body.

你的大腦和你的身體正在發生什麼。

That incomplete information

這種不完整的資訊

is why we're not perfect reasoners about the future.

是為什麼我們不是關於未來的完美推理者。

We have an ability to reason counterfactually:

我們有能力進行反事實的推理。

to think not about just what will happen,

不要只考慮會發生什麼。

but of various things that could happen,

但有可能發生的各種事情。

and then pick the one that we think is a good one.

然後挑選出我們認為是好的那一個。

And since we don't know the positions and velocities

而且由於我們不知道位置和速度

of every molecule in the Universe,

宇宙中每一個分子的。

we can't say what would happen

我們不能說會發生什麼

just given the laws of physics.

只是鑑於物理學規律。

What we have to say is,

我們要說的是。

"Given the choices I make,

"鑑於我所做的選擇。

what is the future that I'm going to help bring about?"

我所要幫助實現的未來是什麼？"

So like it or not, the world that we really know and live in

所以不管你喜不喜歡，我們真正瞭解並生活在其中的世界

is one where our choices matter.

是一個我們的選擇很重要的地方。

That's where meaning comes from,

這就是意義的來源。

from recognizing that in the real world

從認識到在現實世界中

of the knowledge that we have

的知識，我們有

and our computational boundedness,

和我們的計算約束性。

we have some responsibility

我們有一定的責任

for bringing about what is going to happen next.

因為帶來了接下來要發生的事情。

- To learn even more

- 要了解更多

from the world's biggest thinkers, get Big Think+

從世界上最大的思想家那裡得到的資訊，得到大思考+。

for your business.

為您的企業服務。