Name: 極端的神經科學從無情的心理變態到非凡的慷慨 | 阿比蓋爾-馬什 (The neuroscience of extremes: Ruthless psychopathy to extraordinary generosity | Abigail Marsh)
Uploaded: 2025-08-15T18:44:01.000Z
Duration: 1 h 24 min 20 s

I'm a professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Georgetown University, and I study the neural and cognitive basis of empathy, altruism, and aggression.

我是喬治城大學心理學和神經科學教授，研究移情、利他主義和攻擊行為的神經和認知基礎。

I'm the author of the book, The Fear Factor, and the co-founder of the non-profit organization, Psychopathy Is.

我是《恐懼因素》一書的作者，也是非營利組織 "精神變態就是 "的共同創始人。

For the last 20 years or so, I've been trying to understand what makes people care about other people.

在過去的 20 多年裡，我一直試圖瞭解是什麼讓人們關心他人。

There's a very pervasive belief that human nature is fundamentally selfish, but I know for a fact that that can't be true, in part because my life was saved by a stranger a long time ago when I was 19.

人們普遍認為人性從根本上是自私的，但我知道事實並非如此，部分原因是很久以前我 19 歲時被一個陌生人救了一命。

And assuming that it's possible for people to care about one another, that process somehow gets instantiated, gets created by the brain.

假設人們有可能互相關心，那麼這個過程就會以某種方式被實例化，被大腦創造出來。

There must be some neural process that allows us to genuinely value other people's welfare.

一定有某種神經過程能讓我們真正重視他人的福祉。

And so, to try to understand that better, I have been studying extreme populations of people who care a lot more about others than the average person.

是以，為了更好地理解這一點，我一直在研究一些極端人群，他們比普通人更關心他人。

So, for example, people who give their kidneys to strangers.

例如，有人會把自己的腎臟捐給陌生人。

And I've also studied people who care a lot less about most people than the average person, so people who are psychopathic.

我還研究過那些比普通人更不關心大多數人的人，也就是心理變態的人。

The problem is that kind of question is really hard to answer in the confines of a laboratory, right?

問題是，這種問題很難在實驗室裡回答，不是嗎？

Because if you're trying to understand when do people help others at some real risk or cost to themselves, it's really hard to create a situation in the laboratory that is ethical and that could actually result in people facing serious risks or costs.

因為如果你想了解人們在幫助他人時是否會給自己帶來真正的風險或代價，那麼就很難在實驗室中創造出一種符合道德規範的情況，而這種情況實際上會導致人們面臨嚴重的風險或代價。

And so, you know, the alternatives are basically to set up very tiny examples of altruism in the lab where people are making relatively small-scale decisions to help other people that might be a little risky or a little costly, but not much.

是以，你知道，替代方案基本上就是在實驗室裡建立起非常微小的利他主義範例，讓人們做出相對小規模的幫助他人的決定，這些決定可能會有點風險或有點代價，但不會太大。

Or you could take another approach, which is the approach I take, which is sort of like a clinical approach to studying altruism.

或者你也可以採取另一種方法，也就是我所採取的方法，這有點像研究利他主義的臨床方法。

So, for example, people who are interested in understanding memory will often find populations of people in the real world who have unusual memories, either who have amnesia, lack of memory, or who have unusually good memories, and try to understand what makes them different.

是以，舉例來說，對理解記憶感興趣的人通常會在現實世界中找到記憶異常的人群，這些人要麼失憶、缺乏記憶，要麼記憶異常好，並試圖理解是什麼讓他們與眾不同。

So, the approach that we take is finding people who have done things in the real world that suggest they're unusually caring or unusually uncaring.

是以，我們採取的方法是找到那些在現實世界中做過一些事情的人，這些事情表明他們異常關心他人或異常不關心他人。

So, they've given a kidney to a stranger, for example, or they've hurt other people to benefit themselves.

例如，他們把腎臟給了陌生人，或者為了自己的利益而傷害他人。

And then we bring them into the lab and we run cognitive tests and brain scans with them to try to understand what's different about their brains, what's different about the way they think and make decisions, and what's different about their emotions.

然後，我們把他們帶到實驗室，對他們進行認知測試和腦部掃描，試圖瞭解他們的大腦有什麼不同，他們思考和做決定的方式有什麼不同，他們的情緒有什麼不同。

It's a very common perception, I'd say misperception, that humans are fundamentally selfish, meaning everything that we do, every motivation that drives us is based in a desire for what will benefit us, that we don't have any capacity for truly caring about other people.

人類從根本上說是自私的，也就是說，我們所做的每一件事，推動我們前進的每一個動機，都是基於對自己有利的願望，我們沒有能力真正關心他人，這是一種非常普遍的看法，我認為是一種誤解。

I think there are a couple reasons to be confident that can't be true.

我認為有幾個理由可以讓我們確信這不可能是真的。

And I think one of the most compelling is the existence of the disorder called psychopathy.

我認為其中最有說服力的一點是存在一種叫做 "心理變態 "的疾病。

And psychopathy is a disorder I study that, just in brief, is sort of a constellation of personality traits that include, at heart, being truly callous, really not caring about other people's welfare, having sort of no capacity for compassion or remorse, as well as being socially dominant and bold and what's called disinhibited, so not restraining your impulses.

心理變態是我研究的一種疾病，簡單地說，它是一種人格特徵的組合，從根本上說，它包括真正的冷酷無情，真正不關心他人的福祉，沒有同情心或悔恨之心，以及在社會上占主導地位、大膽、所謂的不受約束，是以無法剋制自己的衝動。

And we know that people who are psychopathic often genuinely don't care about other people at all.

我們知道，心理變態的人往往是真的完全不在乎別人。

And so it defies logic for there to be such a thing as psychopathy and for humans as a whole to be fundamentally selfish, because we know what truly fundamentally selfish people look like.

是以，心理變態這種東西的存在，以及人類作為一個整體從根本上是自私的，都是違背邏輯的，因為我們知道真正從根本上自私的人是什麼樣的。

And if all people were fundamentally selfish, there would be no such thing as psychopathy.

如果所有人從根本上都是自私的，那就不會有心理變態這種東西了。

And so I think the fact that psychopathy exists is pretty clear evidence that people are not fundamentally selfish.

是以，我認為心理變態存在的事實很清楚地證明，人從根本上來說並不自私。

And the fact that we now know that psychopathy exists on a spectrum.

而事實上，我們現在已經知道，心理變態是有譜系的。

So it used to be thought that there were, you know, people who were psychopaths over here and then everybody else.

是以，人們曾經認為，你知道，這裡的人是精神病患者，而其他人都是。

It turns out that's not true for almost any psychological phenomenon.

事實證明，幾乎所有的心理現象都不是這樣。

They're almost all distributed continuously.

So there's very psychopathic people, some are psychopathic people, people in the middle.

是以，有的人很變態，有的人很變態，有的人則處於中間狀態。

But then what's interesting is it suggests there are also people who are sort of anti-psychopathic.

但有趣的是，這也表明有些人是反精神病患者。

In any case, most of that distribution of people definitely have the capacity to care for other people.

無論如何，這些人中的大多數肯定有能力照顧其他人。

And we've now seen really good evidence that this is true in neuroscience literature.

現在，我們已經在神經科學文獻中看到了證明這一點的確鑿證據。

We've identified cells in the brain that specifically seem to encode the value of other people's welfare.

我們已經在大腦中發現了一些細胞，它們似乎專門編碼他人福利的價值。

We have lots and lots of psychological studies that show that people will frequently volunteer to help other people even at a cost to themselves when there's no other obvious benefit present.

我們有很多很多的心理學研究表明，在沒有其他明顯好處的情況下，人們會經常自願幫助他人，即使自己要付出代價。

And I think it's really important to understand the answers to these questions because one thing that's become increasingly clear, especially in recent years, is that when people believe that human nature is fundamentally selfish, one, it makes them cynical.

我認為了解這些問題的答案非常重要，因為有一點已經變得越來越清楚，尤其是近年來，那就是當人們相信人性從根本上是自私的時候，第一，這會讓他們變得憤世嫉俗。

So you feel justified in trusting other people and just assuming everybody's out for themselves.

所以你覺得有理由相信別人，認為每個人都是為了自己。

是以，你也可以而且應該這樣做。

That's sort of the logical conclusion of that belief.

And it really erodes trust, which is the foundation of any healthy society.

信任是任何健康社會的基礎，而這種信任確實會削弱信任。

So I think it's really important for the reality of human nature based on the scientific literature to be better understood because trusting one another is a lot more enjoyable way to be and it's more accurate, frankly, than being cynical.

是以，我認為根據科學文獻來更好地理解人性的現實是非常重要的，因為相互信任比憤世嫉俗更令人愉快，而且坦率地說，相互信任比憤世嫉俗更準確。

I don't think it's any accident that a lot of people think humans are very selfish because we are sort of suffused with a lot of pop culture that reinforces that idea.

我不認為很多人認為人類非常自私是偶然的，因為我們的生活中充斥著很多強化這種想法的流行文化。

And a lot of the pop culture characters that tend to be very popular have a very sort of selfish, charismatic way of being that I think people are sometimes attracted to because it's a little bit vicariously thrilling.

很多流行文化人物都有一種非常自私、充滿魅力的存在方式，我認為人們有時會被這種方式所吸引，因為它有點代入式的刺激。

And so you can think about characters like financial scions from The Wolf of Wall Street as a recent example of that.

你可以把《華爾街之狼》中的金融世家等角色作為最近的一個例子。

克里斯蒂安-貝爾主演的《美國精神病人》。

And I think people get a little bit of a vicarious thrill out of these characters, right?

我覺得人們會從這些角色中獲得一些代入感，對嗎？

And most people could never imagine acting the way that they do.

大多數人都無法想象他們的行為方式。

And, you know, in popular culture they're supposed to be escapists, right?

你知道，在大眾文化中，他們應該是逃避現實的人，對嗎？

Give us a chance to see what life would be like as somebody else and that's fine.

給我們一個機會，讓我們看看作為別人的生活會是什麼樣子，這很好。

However, I think the popularity of these characters is really doing a number on the statistical calculator in our brain that tells us what the world is really like.

不過，我認為這些角色的流行確實對我們大腦中的統計計算器造成了影響，而這個計算器會告訴我們這個世界到底是什麼樣的。

And that's really what your brain is doing all the time.

這就是你的大腦一直在做的事情。

It's running the numbers on the kinds of things that you're encountering in the world to try to create sort of a portrait of what the world is like, what people are like on average based on all the people you encounter.

它對你在世界上遇到的各種事情進行統計，試圖根據你遇到的所有人，描繪出世界是什麼樣的，人們平均是什麼樣的。

If that statistical calculator was just using evidence from the real interactions you have with other people day to day, it would come up with a really sunny portrait of other people.

如果這個統計計算器只是使用你每天與他人真實互動的證據，它就會得出一個非常陽光的他人畫像。

I bet if the average person were to think about the last hundred encounters they had with a real person in the world, they would be overwhelmingly positive.

我敢打賭，如果讓普通人回想一下他們在這個世界上與真人的最近一百次接觸，絕大多數都會是正面的。

They were being pretty polite and respectful.

But unfortunately so much of the information that we get now about what people are like is not coming from our actual in-person interactions, which again are so overwhelmingly good.

但遺憾的是，我們現在獲得的關於人們是什麼樣的人的資訊，有很多並不是來自於我們實際的人際交往，而這種交往又是非常好的。

They're coming from the people that we thrill ourselves by watching in the media.

他們來自我們在媒體上看到的那些讓自己興奮不已的人。

They're coming from social media, which we know is really not an average accurate representation of what real people are like.

他們來自社交媒體，而我們知道，社交媒體並不能平均準確地代表真實的人。

And it's really throwing off our statistical estimate of what real people are like, unfortunately.

不幸的是，這確實讓我們對現實生活中的人的統計估計出現了偏差。

So, psychopathy is best thought of as a constellation of personality traits.

是以，心理變態最好被視為一種人格特質的組合。

And the three key traits that compose psychopathy include, most importantly, a mean callous dominant personality, and third is being disinhibited or impulsive.

而構成心理變態的三個關鍵特徵包括，最重要的是刻薄冷酷的支配性人格，第三是不受約束或衝動。

Once upon a time, people thought that there were these people we could call psychopaths who were over here, and then everybody else was just normal.

曾幾何時，人們認為這裡有一些我們可以稱之為精神病患者的人，而其他人都很正常。

And now I think we understand that that's not true.

現在我想我們明白了，事實並非如此。

And that psychopathy, like most psychological phenomena, doesn't really operate in groups.

而且，心理變態和大多數心理現象一樣，並不真正在群體中發生作用。

It is a variable that ranges continuously throughout the population.

這是一個在整個人口中不斷變化的變量。

So, you have some people who are extremely psychopathic, truly heartless, don't care about other people at all.

是以，有些人心理極度變態，真正冷酷無情，根本不關心他人。

And then you have people who have milder versions of those traits.

還有一些人的這些特徵比較輕微。

And then you have sort of most of us here in the middle.

And then you probably have another end of the continuum as well, people who are anti-psychopathic, who care even more than usual about the average person, although research on that type of person is much more new.

此外，可能還有另一種類型的人，即反精神病患者，他們比平常人更關心普通人，儘管對這類人的研究還很新。

But we do have a lot of information now about what it is that's different about people who are on the very low end of what I call the caring continuum, because care about other people's welfare is really the variable that is what differs across people at either end.

但是，我們現在確實掌握了很多關於處於我所說的 "關懷連續體 "低端的人的不同之處的資訊，因為對他人福利的關懷才是真正的變量，而這正是處於兩端的人的不同之處。

So, people who are highly psychopathic genuinely don't care about other people's welfare.

所以，高度精神變態的人是真的不關心別人的福利。

That doesn't mean they can't be nice sometimes.

但這並不意味著他們有時就不能友善。

And this is one of the most tricky things about psychopathy.

而這正是心理變態最棘手的地方之一。

People have a stereotype that people who are psychopathic are going to look obviously deranged, obviously malign.

人們有一種刻板印象，認為心理變態的人看起來明顯精神錯亂，明顯惡毒。

And you think about characters like Hannibal Lecter, you think about the Joker, or you think about Voldemort, all of whom have excellently depicted and portrayed psychopathic personalities, clearly.

你會想到漢尼拔-萊克特（Hannibal Lecter）、小丑（Joker）或伏地魔（Voldemort）等角色，顯然，他們都出色地描繪和刻畫了精神病患者的性格。

In fact, in some ways, I think Voldemort is maybe the most sort of perfectly psychopathic character in recent pop media.

事實上，在某些方面，我認為伏地魔也許是近期流行媒體中最完美的變態角色。

But you'd see any of them coming a mile away.

但你在一英里外就能看到他們中的任何一個。

None of them seem like they might actually be a nice person, and you can't really tell either way.

他們看起來都不像是真正的好人，而且你也無法判斷。

People who are psychopathic actually have a very narrow set of differences compared to other people.

與其他人相比，心理變態者的差異其實非常小。

They can often appear to be sort of even supernormal, very charming, very kind even.

他們往往看起來甚至有點特異功能，非常迷人，甚至非常善良。

Because if you want to get things out of other people, if you want to manipulate them, if you want them to do what you want them to do, one of the best ways to do that is to be really nice.

因為如果你想從別人那裡得到東西，如果你想操縱他們，如果你想讓他們做你想讓他們做的事，最好的方法之一就是非常友善。

And I think this could contribute to the false perception many people have that people are fundamentally selfish.

我認為，這可能導致許多人錯誤地認為，人從根本上說是自私的。

And even when they do things that seem nice, it's just driven by selfishness underneath.

即使他們做了看起來很好的事情，也只是出於內心的自私。

There are people who are that way, who are only ever nice in an effort to get things out of other people.

有些人就是這樣，為了從別人那裡得到東西而對別人好。

And because they're not that rare, so psychopathy in its extreme form affects probably 1% of people, maybe 2%.

因為他們並不罕見，所以精神變態的極端形式可能會影響 1%的人，也可能是 2%。

So we all have met somebody who's psychopathic, right?

我們都見過心理變態的人，對嗎？

字幕列表影片播放

極端的神經科學從無情的心理變態到非凡的慷慨 | 阿比蓋爾-馬什 (The neuroscience of extremes: Ruthless psychopathy to extraordinary generosity | Abigail Marsh)

sort

extraordinary

meditation

recognize