It was pioneered by this ad executive named Alex Osborn.

首創人為廣告大師 Alex Osborn。

In a series of best-selling business books in late 1940s and early '50s, he outlined the technique called brainstorming.

1940 晚期到 1950 早期，他在一系列的暢銷商用書中提出「腦力激盪」的觀點。

Which basically, there's just one rule to brainstorming, which is "don't criticize".

基本上，腦力激盪的原則是「絕不批判」。

Whatever you do in a brainstorming meeting, you cannot criticize the ideas of other people. That all ideas are good ideas.

在腦力激盪的會議中，不論你做任何事，絕不可以批評他人的想法。所有的想法，都是好想法。

And the assumption behind this is that imagination is very meek and shy and fragile.

而會有這樣的假設，是因為想像力非常敏感脆弱。

And if we're worried about being criticized, it'll just clam up and it won't be able to free associate at all.

一旦遭人批評，想像力先生便閉口不言，以致於無法自由揮灑創意。

But the only problem with brainstorming is that it just doesn't work.

然而，腦力激盪的問題在於它毫無作用。

Psychologists have known this for 60-plus years.

心理學家在六十多年前已得知這個事實。

Study after study has shown that if you put people in a room, tell them to brainstorm, they gonna come up with fewer ideas and less original ideas than those same people who might work by themselves.

研究一再指出，當你要求一群人腦力激盪，相較於獨立作業，你會得到比較枯楬乏味的點子。

So brainstorming would become less than the sum of our parts.

個人努力的總和，反而大過於腦力激盪的成果。

Now, the reason brainstorming doesn't work returns us to the very first rule of brainstorming which is "thou shalt not criticise".

腦力激盪沒有作用讓我們反思當初「絕不批判」的原則是否正確。

Because as studies by Charlan Nemeth have shown, groups that engage in what she called "debate and dissent", where they're encouraged to engage in constructive criticism, they come up with anywhere between 25% to 40% more ideas, and those ideas are rated as much more original.

因為心理學家查蘭奈米斯的研究指出，在討論中進行「爭辯與議論」並鼓勵建設性批評的小組，相形之下多提出 25% 至 40% 的想法，而這些想法被評斷為更加有創意的。

That's because when we don't criticize each other, when we all just pretend that every idea is a good idea, we tend to float on the superficial surface of the imagination.

因為當我們不進行批判，預設所有想法都是好想法時，我們只在想像力的膚淺表面載浮載沉。

And our free associations, left to their own devices, are not of interest.

而想像力孤軍奮戰的結果，其實乏善無味。

So if I ask you to free associate on "blue", I can predict, with a high degree of accuracy, that your first answer will be "green", followed by "ocean", "sky".

如果以「藍色」為主題，讓你自由發揮，我猜十之八九，你第一個會想到「綠色」，再來是「海洋」、「天空」。

Then things get a little more complicated.

接下來的答案只會有一點點創意。

You may say, you know, "Joni Mitchell" or "Miles Davis" or "jeans" or "Smurfs", but nothing too profound or surprising.

也許你會說「瓊尼·米歇爾」、「邁爾士·戴維斯」 (爵士音樂家)，或「牛仔褲」、「藍色小精靈」，但不會出現更有深度或出乎意料的答案。

And that's because our free associations are bound by language, and language is full of cliches.

這是因為我們的聯想力受限於語言，而語言中充斥著陳腔濫調。

Now, the way we get past those cliches is to engage in criticism.

所以想擺脫老掉牙的意見，就從批判開始。

You know, that's what surprises us, that's what invigorates us, that's what wakes us up.

這樣才能得到驚奇、振奮、發人省思的答案。

It means really paying attention to get the ideas of other people.

批判意味著你必須專注思考他人的意見。

It forces us to dig a little bit deeper and that's when things get interesting.

強迫自己往更深的層面探究，如此一來，得到的答案就有趣的多了！