the most powerful, dangerous and subversive trait

一項物競天擇過程所衍生出的產物中，

that natural selection has ever devised.

最強力，危險，且具有顛覆性的特徵。

It's a piece of neural audio technology

這是一項用來跟他人進行心意溝通

for rewiring other people's minds.

的神經性音頻技術。

I'm talking about your language, of course,

我所說的正是語言，

because it allows you to implant a thought from your mind

透過語言你可以將自己的想法

directly into someone else's mind,

直接灌輸進他人的腦袋裡，

and they can attempt to do the same to you,

而別人也能夠反過來這樣做，

without either of you having to perform surgery.

這個過程並不需要透過手術才能達成。

Instead, when you speak,

換個角度，當你開口說話時，

you're actually using a form of telemetry

你其實是在使用一種

not so different

跟電視遙控器幾乎沒什麼兩樣的

from the remote control device for your television.

遙測技術。

It's just that, whereas that device

差別只在於遙控器

relies on pulses of infrared light,

是透過紅外線脈衝，

your language relies on pulses,

而語言則是透過

discrete pulses, of sound.

聲音的離散脈衝進行傳導。

And just as you use the remote control device

就像你使用遙控器

to alter the internal settings of your television

去改變電視機的內部設定

to suit your mood,

以迎合自己當下的心情一樣，

you use your language

你也透過語言

to alter the settings inside someone else's brain

去改變別人腦袋裡的設定

to suit your interests.

來配合自己的喜好。

Languages are genes talking,

語言其實是基因開口

getting things that they want.

獲得他們所需事物的表現。

And just imagine the sense of wonder in a baby

讓我們設想一下發生在小嬰兒身上的神奇場面，

when it first discovers that, merely by uttering a sound,

當小嬰兒首次發現僅僅是發出聲音

it can get objects to move across a room

就能使物體橫越房間朝他而來，

as if by magic,

甚至餵飽他的肚子，

and maybe even into its mouth.

簡直就像變魔術一樣。

Now language's subversive power

語言的顛覆性力量

has been recognized throughout the ages

也已經在實施言論審查的年代，

in censorship, in books you can't read,

透過不得閱讀的禁書、

phrases you can't use

禁止使用的辭彙

and words you can't say.

和文字而得到印證。

In fact, the Tower of Babel story in the Bible

事實上，聖經中的巴別塔故事

is a fable and warning

正是一則有關語言的力量

about the power of language.

的預言和告誡。

According to that story, early humans developed the conceit

根據故事的描述，遠古的人類藉由使用語言

that, by using their language to work together,

得以彼此溝通，進而起了驕慢之心，

they could build a tower

認為他們能夠共同合作建造一座

that would take them all the way to heaven.

直上天庭的高塔。

Now God, angered at this attempt to usurp his power,

上帝對人類這個形同篡權奪位的行為怒不可遏，

destroyed the tower,

於是摧毀了高塔，

and then to ensure

並且為了確保

that it would never be rebuilt,

人類不再重建通天塔，

he scattered the people by giving them different languages --

上帝透過變亂語言來混淆人類 --

confused them by giving them different languages.

從而使他們分散各地。

And this leads to the wonderful irony

而這也導致了一個奇妙且諷刺的狀況，

that our languages exist to prevent us from communicating.

正是我們的語言阻礙了彼此之間的溝通。

Even today,

即使在今天，

we know that there are words we cannot use,

仍然有我們不得使用的字眼，

phrases we cannot say,

不能使用的辭彙，

because if we do so,

因為一旦這樣做，

we might be accosted, jailed,

我們就可能面臨牢獄之災，

or even killed.

甚至是殺身之禍。

And all of this from a puff of air

而這一切不過都是

emanating from our mouths.

起於口舌吞吐之間的一口氣罷了。

Now all this fuss about a single one of our traits

剛剛這一長串針對語言能力的長篇大論

tells us there's something worth explaining.

正說明了有些值得闡釋的事情。

And that is how and why

也就是語言這個不尋常的特徵

did this remarkable trait evolve,

是基於什麼成因，又是以什麼方式發展的？

and why did it evolve

並且，為何

only in our species?

只在人類的世界衍繹？

Now it's a little bit of a surprise

比較出人意表的是，

that to get an answer to that question,

為了解答這個問題，

we have to go to tool use

我們得先研究一下

in the chimpanzees.

黑猩猩使用工具的情形。

Now these chimpanzees are using tools,

這些黑猩猩正在使用工具，

and we take that as a sign of their intelligence.

這被認為是牠們智力的一種表現。

But if they really were intelligent,

但如果黑猩猩真的很聰明的話，

why would they use a stick to extract termites from the ground

為什麼牠們會用棍子去挖土裡的白蟻，

rather than a shovel?

卻不用鏟子呢？

And if they really were intelligent,

如果牠們真的那麼聰明，

why would they crack open nuts with a rock?

又為什麼要費事自己拿石頭砸開堅果？

Why wouldn't they just go to a shop and buy a bag of nuts

為什麼不直接到商店裡

that somebody else had already cracked open for them?

去買一袋別人已經開好的堅果呢？

Why not? I mean, that's what we do.

為什麼不？我的意思是，我們不就是這樣做的嗎？

Now the reason the chimpanzees don't do that

黑猩猩不會這樣做的理由

is that they lack what psychologists and anthropologists call

是因為牠們缺乏心理學家和人類學家稱之為

social learning.

社會學習的能力。

They seem to lack the ability

牠們似乎缺乏

to learn from others

透過複製或摹仿，

by copying or imitating

甚至於單純觀察他人

or simply watching.

而從中學習的能力。

As a result,

於是乎，

they can't improve on others' ideas

牠們也就無法透過改良他人的創意，

or learn from others' mistakes --

或以他人的錯誤爲借鏡 --

benefit from others' wisdom.

從而汲取他人的智慧。

And so they just do the same thing

因此牠們只能一再而再的

over and over and over again.

重複做相同的事情。

In fact, we could go away for a million years and come back

事實上，如果我們前進到一百萬年後，再倒溯回來，

and these chimpanzees would be doing the same thing

那些黑猩猩肯定還在做著相同的事情，

with the same sticks for the termites

用同樣的棍子挖白蟻，

and the same rocks to crack open the nuts.

用同樣的石塊砸開堅果。

Now this may sound arrogant, or even full of hubris.

這樣說聽起來或者很傲慢，甚至於很狂妄。

How do we know this?

我們怎麼會知道這些呢？

Because this is exactly what our ancestors, the Homo erectus, did.

因為我們的老祖宗，直立人，就是這樣做的。

These upright apes

距今約兩百萬年前，

evolved on the African savanna

這些直立猿人

about two million years ago,

在非洲的熱帶草原上演化，

and they made these splendid hand axes

他們製作了這些能夠完美符合掌型

that fit wonderfully into your hands.

的精巧手斧。

But if we look at the fossil record,

但假使我們查看化石紀錄的話，

we see that they made the same hand axe

就會發現他們是一再而再

over and over and over again

不斷重複的製作同樣的手斧

for one million years.

時間長達一百萬年。

You can follow it through the fossil record.

你可以從追溯化石紀錄發現這一點。

Now if we make some guesses about how long Homo erectus lived,

如果我們對於直立人存在的時間，

what their generation time was,

和他們的世代做一些假設的話，

that's about 40,000 generations

從對經過約莫40,000代的

of parents to offspring, and other individuals watching,

父子傳承，和其他個體的觀察來看，

in which that hand axe didn't change.

手斧的製作全然未有改變。

It's not even clear

我們甚至不太清楚，

that our very close genetic relatives, the Neanderthals,

我們的近親，尼安德塔人，

had social learning.

是否具備了社會學習的能力。

Sure enough, their tools were more complicated

當然，他們的工具和直立人所使用的相較之下

than those of Homo erectus,

是複雜得多了，

but they too showed very little change

只不過，這些住在歐亞大陸的人類，

over the 300,000 years or so

尼安德塔人，

that those species, the Neanderthals,

在超過300,000年的時間裡，

lived in Eurasia.

也只呈現了極少的變化。

Okay, so what this tells us

這跟諺語

is that, contrary to the old adage,

“有樣學樣“告訴我們的道理

"monkey see, monkey do,"

正好完全相反。

the surprise really is

令人驚訝的是

that all of the other animals

其它所有動物

really cannot do that -- at least not very much.

都無法做到有樣學樣 -- 至少程度上極為有限。

And even this picture

即使這張照片

has the suspicious taint of being rigged about it --

都不免有人為操控之嫌 --

something from a Barnum & Bailey circus.

像是出自巴納姆貝利馬戲團之手似的。

But by comparison,

但在相較之下，

we can learn.

人類具備了學習能力。

We can learn by watching other people

我們能透過觀察他人，

and copying or imitating

複製或摹仿他人的行為

what they can do.

而從中學習。

We can then choose, from among a range of options,

然後我們就能在許多不同選項裡

the best one.

挑選出最好的一個。

We can benefit from others' ideas.

我們能夠從別人的想法中受益。

We can build on their wisdom.

以別人的智慧爲基礎加以發展。

And as a result, our ideas do accumulate,

而最終，我們的創意得以累積，

and our technology progresses.

科技也因而進步。

And this cumulative cultural adaptation,

這種人類學家稱之爲

as anthropologists call

累積文化適性的

this accumulation of ideas,

想法累積，

is responsible for everything around you

是與你繁忙的群體日常生活裡

in your bustling and teeming everyday lives.

各種事物都習習相關的。

I mean the world has changed out of all proportion

跟1,000或2,000年前相比

to what we would recognize

這個世界

even 1,000 or 2,000 years ago.

已經發生徹頭徹尾的改變。

And all of this because of cumulative cultural adaptation.

這一切都是拜累積文化適性所賜。

The chairs you're sitting in, the lights in this auditorium,

各位所坐的椅子，會場裡的燈光，

my microphone, the iPads and iPods that you carry around with you --

我手上的麥克風，各位隨身攜帶的 iPad 和 iPod

all are a result

全都是

of cumulative cultural adaptation.

累積文化適性的產物。

Now to many commentators,

對許多評論家而言，

cumulative cultural adaptation, or social learning,

累積文化適性，或者社會學習能力，

is job done, end of story.

都已經算發展完成，劃上句點。

Our species can make stuff,

人類有生產製造的能力，

therefore we prospered in a way that no other species has.

因此我們比其它物種發展得更加繁榮昌盛。

In fact, we can even make the "stuff of life" --

事實上，我們甚至能製造“生活用品“ --

as I just said, all the stuff around us.

也就是我方才所說的，所有我們周遭的事物。

But in fact, it turns out

然而實際上，

that some time around 200,000 years ago,

在距今約莫200,000萬年前，

when our species first arose

當現代人類出現

and acquired social learning,

並取得社會學習能力時，

that this was really the beginning of our story,

那才是人類故事的開端，

not the end of our story.

而非故事的終結。

Because our acquisition of social learning

由於社會學習能力的獲得

would create a social and evolutionary dilemma,

讓社會與進化陷入了進退維谷的兩難，

the resolution of which, it's fair to say,

解決之道，持平而言，

would determine not only the future course of our psychology,

不僅勢將決定人類未來心理層面的課題，

but the future course of the entire world.

更會左右整個世界未來的走向。

And most importantly for this,

最重要的是，

it'll tell us why we have language.

它將會揭示：為什麼人類會有語言。

And the reason that dilemma arose

兩難局面產生的理由

is, it turns out, that social learning is visual theft.

是因為社會學習實際上是一種視覺竊取。

If I can learn by watching you,

如果我可以藉著觀察你來學習，

I can steal your best ideas,

我就能偷取你的創意，

and I can benefit from your efforts,

而且無須像你一樣付出時間和精力

without having to put in the time and energy that you did

投注在改善創意之上，

into developing them.

就能輕易坐享其成。

If I can watch which lure you use to catch a fish,

如果我可以觀察你使用什麼魚餌釣魚，

or I can watch how you flake your hand axe

或如何削薄手斧

to make it better,

讓它更加順手，

or if I follow you secretly to your mushroom patch,

或者，偷偷跟蹤你到你的蘑菇採集點，

I can benefit from your knowledge and wisdom and skills,

我就能夠從你的知識、智慧和技巧受惠，

and maybe even catch that fish

甚至可能比你更早一步

before you do.

抓到魚。

Social learning really is visual theft.

社會學習實際上就是一種視覺竊取。

And in any species that acquired it,

任何具備這種能力的物種，

it would behoove you

最終都會

to hide your best ideas,

隱藏起自己最好的創意，

lest somebody steal them from you.

免得被別人給偷走了。

And so some time around 200,000 years ago,

就在大約200,000年前，

our species confronted this crisis.

人類面臨了這個危機。

And we really had only two options

對於視覺竊取

for dealing with the conflicts

所帶來的衝突狀況

that visual theft would bring.

我們僅有兩個選擇。

One of those options

一個是

was that we could have retreated

將自己退回

into small family groups.

小家庭單位的族群。

Because then the benefits of our ideas and knowledge

如此一來，因為我們的創意和知識所生的利益

would flow just to our relatives.

就可以留在自己的親族之間。

Had we chosen this option,

如果在大約200,000年前

sometime around 200,000 years ago,

我們選擇的是這個做法，

we would probably still be living like the Neanderthals were

很可能在40,000年前人類首度進入歐洲的時候

when we first entered Europe 40,000 years ago.

我們都還維持著跟尼安德塔人一樣的生活方式。

And this is because in small groups

因為在小團體裡

there are fewer ideas, there are fewer innovations.

能產生的發想有限，創新也有限。

And small groups are more prone to accidents and bad luck.

但卻更易於遭遇事故和厄運。

So if we'd chosen that path,

因此如果我們當初選擇的是這條路，

our evolutionary path would have led into the forest --

我們的進化之道就會通向密林 --

and been a short one indeed.

並且十分短命。

The other option we could choose

另一個選擇則是

was to develop the systems of communication

發展出得以相互交流創意

that would allow us to share ideas

和彼此相互合作的

and to cooperate amongst others.

溝通系統。

Choosing this option would mean

選擇這個方式意味著

that a vastly greater fund of accumulated knowledge and wisdom

豐厚的累積知識和智慧資產

would become available to any one individual

將對所有人開放。

than would ever arise from within an individual family

而不僅是拘限於個別家族之間的流傳，

or an individual person on their own.

或一己的私藏。

Well, we chose the second option,

我們當初選擇了第二個方法，

and language is the result.

語言即是此一抉擇下的產物。

Language evolved to solve the crisis

語言的進化解決了

of visual theft.

視覺竊取所產生的危機。

Language is a piece of social technology

語言是一種用來

for enhancing the benefits of cooperation --

加強合作的利益的社會科技 --

for reaching agreements, for striking deals

用來達成協議，完成交易，

and for coordinating our activities.

和協調各種活動的進行。

And you can see that, in a developing society

各位可以想見，對一個尚位於發展階段，

that was beginning to acquire language,

剛開始學習語言的國家而言，

not having language

缺乏對於語言的掌握

would be a like a bird without wings.

處境就如同沒有翅膀的鳥一樣。

Just as wings open up this sphere of air

就像鳥類，

for birds to exploit,

展開翅膀劃破空氣翱翔一般。

language opened up the sphere of cooperation

人類也藉由語言

for humans to exploit.

開啟彼此合作之門。

And we take this utterly for granted,

而我們將此視為理所當然，

because we're a species that is so at home with language,

因為我們對於語言的掌握已臻嫻熟。

but you have to realize

但我們應當理解到

that even the simplest acts of exchange that we engage in

即使是我們最簡單的交換行為

are utterly dependent upon language.

也完全是倚靠語言來完成的。

And to see why, consider two scenarios

請想像兩個

from early in our evolution.

進化早期的場景。

Let's imagine that you are really good

想像你非常

at making arrowheads,

擅於製作箭頭，

but you're hopeless at making the wooden shafts

但卻對於製作帶著羽毛的箭柄

with the flight feathers attached.

完全無計可施。

Two other people you know are very good at making the wooden shafts,

另外兩個你認識的人則是非常擅於製作箭柄，

but they're hopeless at making the arrowheads.

卻完全不會製作箭頭。

So what you do is --