Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

已審核 字幕已審核
  • We are going to take a quick voyage

    讓我們迅速審視對

  • over the cognitive history of the 20th century,

    20世紀的認知發展歷史

  • because during that century,

    這是因為在20世紀裡

  • our minds have altered dramatically.

    我們的心智發展發生了顯著的改變

  • As you all know, the cars that people drove in 1900

    大家都知道,人們駕駛的車子

  • have altered because the roads are better

    到了20世紀有了改變,因為道路變得更好開了

  • and because of technology.

    這也是科技進步的關係

  • And our minds have altered, too.

    而我們的心智也變得跟以往不同

  • We've gone from people who confronted a concrete world

    我們從一群面對具體世界,

  • and analyzed that world primarily in terms

    藉由分析現況

  • of how much it would benefit them

    來算計出還能從中獲取多少利益的人

  • to people who confront a very complex world,

    到一群面對十分複雜世界的人

  • and it's a world where we've had to develop

    而這是個我們得演化適應

  • new mental habits, new habits of mind.

    發展出新的心靈模式、思考習慣的新世界

  • And these include things like

    這些包括

  • clothing that concrete world with classification,

    讓世界確立階級分明的服裝穿著

  • introducing abstractions that we try to make

    引進種種我們試著讓抽象

  • logically consistent,

    變得前後邏輯一致

  • and also taking the hypothetical seriously,

    以及嚴肅看待各種假設

  • that is, wondering about what might have been

    換句話說,以思考「可能是什麼」

  • rather than what is.

    取代「是什麼」

  • Now, this dramatic change was drawn to my attention

    而這個顯著的變化引起我注意的是

  • through massive I.Q. gains over time,

    經歷時間,我們的智商高度進化

  • and these have been truly massive.

    是真的非常高度的進化

  • That is, we don't just get a few more questions right

    我指的是,這不只是在智商測驗裡

  • on I.Q. tests.

    多答對幾個問題的那種程度

  • We get far more questions right on I.Q. tests

    我們在智商測驗上

  • than each succeeding generation

    比上好幾代答對了更多題

  • back to the time that they were invented.

    自智商測驗出世以來,新一代就更勝上一代

  • Indeed, if you score the people a century ago

    事實上,若你給一世紀前的人們做測驗

  • against modern norms,

    以現在的標準來評定

  • they would have an average I.Q. of 70.

    他們的平均智商大約只有70

  • If you score us against their norms,

    若你以他們的標準來評定我們現代人

  • we would have an average I.Q. of 130.

    我們的平均智商為130

  • Now this has raised all sorts of questions.

    這個結果引起各種疑問

  • Were our immediate ancestors

    這代表我們的直系祖先

  • on the verge of mental retardation?

    接近智力發展遲緩的邊緣嗎?

  • Because 70 is normally the score for mental retardation.

    因為在一般的標準來看,智商70代表智力發展遲緩

  • Or are we on the verge of all being gifted?

    或代表我們的智力接近天才?

  • Because 130 is the cutting line for giftedness.

    因為智商130差不多是天才的程度了

  • Now I'm going to try and argue for a third alternative

    這裡我想以第三種角度來做解釋

  • that's much more illuminating than either of those,

    相信能比前兩種說法解釋得更清楚合理

  • and to put this into perspective,

    為了讓大家了解這個視角

  • let's imagine that a Martian came down to Earth

    讓我們現在想像火星人來到了地球

  • and found a ruined civilization.

    發現了古老的文明遺跡

  • And this Martian was an archaeologist,

    而這些火星人是群考古學家

  • and they found scores, target scores,

    他們考察到了射重標靶的分數記錄

  • that people had used for shooting.

    也就是之前人類用來記錄射擊的次數

  • And first they looked at 1865,

    首先他們看到1865年的標靶

  • and they found that in a minute,

    發現在一分鐘內

  • people had only put one bullet in the bullseye.

    人們只有一顆子彈射中靶心

  • And then they found, in 1898,

    接下來他們發現1898年的標靶射擊記錄

  • that they'd put about five bullets in the bullseye in a minute.

    一分鐘就約為五顆子彈射中靶的中心

  • And then about 1918 they put a hundred bullets in the bullseye.

    接下來在1918年的標靶上人們射中靶心的子彈就有一百顆

  • And initially, that archaeologist would be baffled.

    一開始,火星考古學家們頗困惑

  • They would say, look, these tests were designed

    他們說,看,這個測試本來是為了

  • to find out how much people were steady of hand,

    找出人們持槍的穩定度

  • how keen their eyesight was,

    以及人們視覺的敏銳度

  • whether they had control of their weapon.

    看他們能否控制好他們的武器

  • How could these performances have escalated

    為什麼不同年代的測試結果

  • to this enormous degree?

    會拉出這麼大的差距呢?

  • Well we now know, of course, the answer.

    當然,我們現在都知道,答案是

  • If that Martian looked at battlefields,

    如果火星考古學家們同時考察戰場狀況

  • they would find that people had only muskets

    他們會發現在南北戰爭中

  • at the time of the Civil War

    人們只有基本款的火槍配做武器

  • and that they had repeating rifles

    而到了美國和西班牙的對戰時

  • at the time of the Spanish-American War,

    人們有了自動來福槍

  • and then they had machine guns

    然後到了第一次世界大戰時

  • by the time of World War I.

    人們有了機關槍

  • And, in other words, it was the equipment

    換句話說,改變的是武器

  • that was in the hands of the average soldier

    操作武器的士兵依舊是普通人

  • that was responsible, not greater keenness of eye

    武器才是關鍵,而不是士兵的視力變得更敏銳了

  • or steadiness of hand.

    或持槍穩定度變得更好了

  • Now what we have to imagine is the mental artillery

    將這個情況換到心靈上來說,心靈上的武裝

  • that we have picked up over those hundred years,

    在過去百年來發生的演進

  • and I think again that another thinker will help us here,

    我想在這裡另一名思想家的理論能幫助我們

  • and that's Luria.

    思想家盧里亞

  • Luria looked at people

    盧里亞在人類進入科學時代之前

  • just before they entered the scientific age,

    觀察人們

  • and he found that these people

    他發現這時代的人們

  • were resistant to classifying the concrete world.

    並不願意將現實世界做分類

  • They wanted to break it up

    他們希望將世界分割成

  • into little bits that they could use.

    一小塊一小塊他們能各自利用的部份

  • He found that they were resistant

    盧里亞發現他們也不願意

  • to deducing the hypothetical,

    對假設做進一步的推測

  • to speculating about what might be,

    拒絕推想事情可能會變成什麼樣

  • and he found finally that they didn't deal well

    最後他也發現人們不大應付得來

  • with abstractions or using logic on those abstractions.

    抽象概念或用邏輯思考理解抽象概念

  • Now let me give you a sample of some of his interviews.

    現在我對大家介紹盧里亞的訪問案例

  • He talked to the head man of a person

    他訪問了俄國鄉村的

  • in rural Russia.

    村長

  • They'd only had, as people had in 1900,

    他們當時僅有20 世紀的人們所享有的

  • about four years of schooling.

    四年學校教育

  • And he asked that particular person,

    盧里亞問村長

  • what do crows and fish have in common?

    烏鴉和魚有什麼共通點?

  • And the fellow said, "Absolutely nothing."

    這老兄回答:「完全沒有。」

  • You know, I can eat a fish. I can't eat a crow.

    就魚是可吃的,烏鴉我卻就沒法吃了。

  • A crow can peck at a fish.

    烏鴉能攻擊魚

  • A fish can't do anything to a crow."

    而魚卻不能對烏鴉做任何反擊。」

  • And Luria said, "But aren't they both animals?"

    盧里亞問:「但牠們不都是動物嗎?」

  • And he said, "Of course not.

    村長答道:「當然不是。

  • One's a fish.

    一個是魚類,

  • The other is a bird."

    另一個是烏類啊!」

  • And he was interested, effectively,

    這個回答顯然的引起盧里亞的興趣

  • in what he could do with those concrete objects.

    他思考著,還能在這些具體的事物上,發現人們什麼樣的看法呢?

  • And then Luria went to another person,

    然後盧里亞對另一個人做訪問

  • and he said to them,

    他告訴那人:

  • "There are no camels in Germany.

    「德國沒有駱駝。

  • Hamburg is a city in Germany.

    漢堡是個位於德國的城市。

  • Are there camels in Hamburg?"

    那麼漢堡會有駱駝嗎?」

  • And the fellow said,

    這人回答:

  • "Well, if it's large enough, there ought to be camels there."

    「嗯,如果漢堡是個夠大的城市的話,應該會有駱駝吧。」

  • And Luria said, "But what do my words imply?"

    盧里亞問:「但根據我話中的邏輯思考呢?」

  • And he said, "Well, maybe it's a small village,

    對方回答:「呃,或許它是個小村莊,

  • and there's no room for camels."

    塞不下駱駝。」

  • In other words, he was unwilling to treat this

    換句話說,這個人不願意將這個問題

  • as anything but a concrete problem,

    當做一個實際的問題來思考

  • and he was used to camels being in villages,

    而且他認為駱駝就應該出現在村莊裡

  • and he was quite unable to use the hypothetical,

    他沒辦法依照盧里卡給出的假設

  • to ask himself what if there were no camels in Germany.

    去思考德國有沒有駱駝這個問題

  • A third interview was conducted

    盧里卡的第三個訪問

  • with someone about the North Pole.

    是訪問某人對於北極的概念

  • And Luria said, "At the North Pole, there is always snow.

    盧里亞說:「北極總是在下雪。

  • Wherever there is always snow, the bears are white.

    而在總是下雪的地方,熊都會是白色的。

  • What color are the bears at the North Pole?"

    那麼北極的熊是什麼顏色?」

  • And the response was, "Such a thing

    對方回答:「這樣的問題

  • is to be settled by testimony.

    得親眼見到才能知道啊。

  • If a wise person came from the North Pole

    如果現在有位來自北極的智者

  • and told me the bears were white,

    告訴我北極的熊是白色的,

  • I might believe him,

    我可能會相信他,

  • but every bear that I have seen is a brown bear."

    但目前為止我看過的熊都是棕色的啊。」

  • Now you see again, this person has rejected

    大家可以再一次看到,這名受訪者拒絕

  • going beyond the concrete world

    脫離現實世界做思考

  • and analyzing it through everyday experience,

    並且用他的日常生活經驗去分析問題

  • and it was important to that person

    對這名受訪者而言

  • what color bears were --

    熊是什麼顏色很重要

  • that is, they had to hunt bears.

    因為他得狩獵熊

  • They weren't willing to engage in this.

    他們不願意順著假設思考

  • One of them said to Luria,

    其中一名受訪者對盧里亞說

  • "How can we solve things that aren't real problems?

    「如果不是實際存在的問題,我們要怎麼解決?

  • None of these problems are real.

    你提的這些問題都不是實際存在的。

  • How can we address them?"

    我們要怎麼做思考?」

  • Now, these three categories --

    這三個層面包括

  • classification,

    區分種類,

  • using logic on abstractions,

    對抽象概念做出邏輯思考,

  • taking the hypothetical seriously --

    和認真看待假設--

  • how much difference do they make in the real world

    這三個思考層面的改變,為實際世界帶來多少影響

  • beyond the testing room?

    除了智力測驗分數以外?

  • And let me give you a few illustrations.

    這裡我想提出幾點

  • First, almost all of us today get a high school diploma.

    首先,今天我們幾乎所有人都擁有高中學歷

  • That is, we've gone from four to eight years of education

    我們從四年義務教育發展到八年義務教育

  • to 12 years of formal education,

    現在發展到十二年義務教育

  • and 52 percent of Americans

    52%的美國人

  • have actually experienced some type of tertiary education.

    都受過大專或大學教育

  • Now, not only do we have much more education,

    我們不只受教程度提高了

  • and much of that education is scientific,

    教導的科學知識也變多了

  • and you can't do science without classifying the world.

    而在沒有分類概念的前提下,是沒辦法進行科學思考的

  • You can't do science without proposing hypotheses.

    你也沒辦法在不提出假設的前提下做科學思考

  • You can't do science without making it logically consistent.

    缺少邏輯一致性,也無法做科學思考

  • And even down in grade school, things have changed.

    就算在小學基礎教育的階段,教學情況也改變了

  • In 1910, they looked at the examinations

    看看1910年時,俄亥俄州

  • that the state of Ohio gave to 14-year-olds,

    給14歲小孩的測驗

  • and they found that they were all

    會發現這些測驗全是關於

  • for socially valued concrete information.

    社會價值、社會認知的實際資訊

  • They were things like,

    比如像是

  • what are the capitals of the 44 or 45 states

    那個時候

  • that existed at that time?

    全美44或45州的首都名稱是什麼?

  • When they looked at the exams

    再看看1990年俄亥俄州

  • that the state of