Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

已審核 字幕已審核
  • It would be nice to be objective in life,

    如果我們能客觀面對生活和各方面

  • in many ways.

    就太好了。

  • The problem is that we have these color-tinted glasses

    問題是我們戴著這些有色鏡片

  • as we look at all kinds of situations.

    去看待各種情境。

  • For example, think about something as simple as beer.

    拿啤酒這種簡單的例子來說吧。

  • If I gave you a few beers to taste

    如果我讓你嚐幾款啤酒,

  • and I asked you to rate them on intensity and bitterness,

    請你評比每一種酒的烈度和苦味,

  • different beers would occupy different space.

    不同的啤酒會落在不同的位置。

  • But what if we tried to be objective about it?

    但如果我們試著客觀面對會怎麼樣?

  • In the case of beer, it would be very simple.

    以啤酒來說很簡單。

  • What if we did a blind taste?

    如果我們不看啤酒廠牌會怎麼樣?

  • Well, if we did the same thing, you tasted the same beer,

    如果我們做同樣的事,你嚐同樣的啤酒,

  • now in the blind taste, things would look slightly different.

    但現在你不知道是哪種啤酒,結果就會不太一樣。

  • Most of the beers will go into one place.

    大部分的啤酒會落在同一個位置,

  • You will basically not be able to distinguish them,

    基本上你無法分辨,

  • and the exception, of course, will be Guinness.

    當然,健力士例外。

  • (Laughter)

    (笑聲)

  • Similarly, we can think about physiology.

    同樣我們也能來看看生理機能。

  • What happens when people expect something from their physiology?

    大家在預期自己的生理機能時會出現什麼情況?

  • For example, we sold people pain medications.

    例如,我們賣止痛藥給大家。

  • Some people, we told them the medications were expensive.

    我們跟某些人說的價格比較昂貴,

  • Some people, we told them it was cheap.

    跟其他人說的價格較低。

  • And the expensive pain medication worked better.

    結果昂貴止痛藥的效果比較好,

  • It relieved more pain from people,

    更能有效舒緩這些人的疼痛,

  • because expectations do change our physiology.

    因為預期會改變我們的身體機能。

  • And of course, we all know that in sports,

    當然,我們都知道看運動賽的時候,

  • if you are a fan of a particular team,

    如果你是某隊的粉絲,

  • you can't help but see the game

    你就會無法克制

  • develop from the perspective of your team.

    從你支持隊伍的觀點去看比賽。

  • So all of those are cases in which our preconceived notions

    因此這些案例都顯示了我們先入為主的念頭和期待

  • and our expectations color our world.

    影響了我們的世界。

  • But what happened in more important questions?

    但是在更重要的問題上出現什麼情況?

  • What happened with questions that had to do with social justice?

    在和社會正義有關的問題上出現什麼情況?

  • So we wanted to think about what is the blind tasting version

    所以我們想

  • for thinking about inequality?

    思考不平等的盲測試版本是什麼?

  • So we started looking at inequality,

    因此我們開始檢視不平等,

  • and we did some large-scale surveys

    我們做了大規模的調查,

  • around the U.S. and other countries.

    遍及美國和其它國家。

  • So we asked two questions:

    我們問了兩個問題:

  • Do people know what kind of level of inequality we have?

    大家「知道」我們現今社會不平等的程度如何嗎?

  • And then, what level of inequality do we want to have?

    第二,我們「希望」的不平等程度又是如何?

  • So let's think about the first question.

    我們來看看第一個問題。

  • Imagine I took all the people in the U.S.

    想像我將所有美國人分類,

  • and I sorted them from the poorest on the right

    最貧窮的在右邊,

  • to the richest on the left,

    最富有的在左邊,

  • and then I divided them into five buckets:

    然後我將所有人分成五群:

  • the poorest 20 percent, the next 20 percent,

    最窮的佔 20%,接著 20%,

  • the next, the next, and the richest 20 percent.

    接著 20%、20%,以及最富有的 20%。

  • And then I asked you to tell me how much wealth do you think

    然後請你告訴我,

  • is concentrated in each of those buckets.

    你認為每一群人擁有的財富比例是多少。

  • So to make it simpler, imagine I ask you to tell me,

    簡單來說,請想像我問的是

  • how much wealth do you think is concentrated

    你認為有多少財富集中在

  • in the bottom two buckets,

    最底層的這兩群人身上?

  • the bottom 40 percent?

    就是底層 40% 的人?

  • Take a second. Think about it and have a number.

    花點時間,想出一個數字。

  • Usually we don't think.

    通常我們都不會多想。

  • Think for a second, have a real number in your mind.

    只要花點時間,心裡得出一個數字。

  • You have it?

    有答案了嗎?

  • Okay, here's what lots of Americans tell us.

    好,這是大多數美國人給我們的答案。

  • They think that the bottom 20 percent

    他們認為最底層 20% 的人

  • has about 2.9 percent of the wealth,

    大概擁有 2.9% 的財富;

  • the next group has 6.4,

    下一群人有 6.4% 的財富,

  • so together it's slightly more than nine.

    總計比 9% 多一點。

  • The next group, they say, has 12 percent,

    他們說下一群人有 12% 的財富,

  • 20 percent,

    20%,

  • and the richest 20 percent, people think has 58 percent of the wealth.

    大家認為最富有的 20% 人口擁有 58% 的財富。

  • You can see how this relates to what you thought.

    你可以看到這和你想像中數字的差異。

  • Now, what's reality?

    事實呢?

  • Reality is slightly different.

    事實有點不同。

  • The bottom 20 percent has 0.1 percent of the wealth.

    底層 20% 的人擁有 0.1% 的財富。

  • The next 20 percent has 0.2 percent of the wealth.

    接下來 20% 的人有 0.2% 的財富。

  • Together, it's 0.3.

    加起來是 0.3%。

  • The next group has 3.9,

    下一組是 3.9%、

  • 11.3,

    11.3%,

  • and the richest group has 84-85 percent of the wealth.

    最富有的這群人有 84% 到 85% 的財富。

  • So what we actually have and what we think we have

    因此事實和我們的想像

  • are very different.

    大不相同。

  • What about what we want?

    那麼我們的期待呢?

  • How do we even figure this out?

    我們怎麼找出答案?

  • So to look at this,

    為了找出答案,

  • to look at what we really want,

    了解我們真正的期待,

  • we thought about the philosopher John Rawls.

    我們想到哲學家約翰.羅爾斯。

  • If you remember John Rawls,

    如果你記得約翰.羅爾斯的話,

  • he had this notion of what's a just society.

    你會知道他說「什麼是正義的社會」這個概念。

  • He said a just society

    他說正義的社會

  • is a society that if you knew everything about it,

    是一個如果你知道其中的一切,

  • you would be willing to enter it in a random place.

    你會願意在這個社會的任何一個位置。

  • And it's a beautiful definition,

    這是很美好的定義,

  • because if you're wealthy, you might want the wealthy

    因為如果你很富有,你也許會希望

  • to have more money, the poor to have less.

    富者更富,窮者更窮。

  • If you're poor, you might want more equality.

    如果你是窮人,你應該會希望更平等。

  • But if you're going to go into that society

    但如果你要進入那個社會,

  • in every possible situation, and you don't know,

    可能待在任何的位置上,你不知道是哪一個,

  • you have to consider all the aspects.

    你就得考慮周詳。

  • It's a little bit like blind tasting in which you don't know

    這有點像盲測試,

  • what the outcome will be when you make a decision,

    你不知道自己做的決定會有什麼結果,

  • and Rawls called this the "veil of ignorance."

    約翰.羅爾斯稱此為「無知之幕」。

  • So, we took another group, a large group of Americans,

    我們拿另一組人,一大群美國人,

  • and we asked them the question in the veil of ignorance.

    套用「無知之幕」的情況問他們這個問題。

  • What are the characteristics of a country that would make you want to join it,

    一個有什麼特質的國家會讓你想成為國民?

  • knowing that you could end randomly at any place?

    前提是你會隨機被放在任何一個位置上。

  • And here is what we got.

    我們得到的結果如下:

  • What did people want to give to the first group,

    大家想給第一組人,

  • the bottom 20 percent?

    也就是底層 20% 的人多少?

  • They wanted to give them about 10 percent of the wealth.

    他們想要給這些人 10% 的財富,

  • The next group, 14 percent of the wealth,

    接下來這組是 14% 的財富、

  • 21, 22 and 32.

    21%、22%、32% 的財富。

  • Now, nobody in our sample wanted full equality.

    現在,樣本裡沒人想要完全平等。

  • Nobody thought that socialism is a fantastic idea in our sample.

    樣本裡沒人認為社會主義是最好的。

  • But what does it mean?

    但這意謂著什麼?

  • It means that we have this knowledge gap

    這意謂了我們有知識落差,

  • between what we have and what we think we have,

    存在於真實情況和我們的想像之間,

  • but we have at least as big a gap between what we think is right

    但是我們認為正確和我們想像中的現況,

  • to what we think we have.

    這兩者間的知識落差更大。

  • Now, we can ask these questions, by the way, not just about wealth.

    順帶一提,我們不只能在財富上問這個問題,

  • We can ask it about other things as well.

    每件事都能是這些問題的主題。

  • So for example, we asked people from different parts of the world

    例如,我們問世界各地的人

  • about this question,

    這個問題,

  • people who are liberals and conservatives,

    不論是自由黨還是保守黨,

  • and they gave us basically the same answer.

    基本上他們給的答案都一樣。

  • We asked rich and poor, they gave us the same answer,

    不論貧富都給了相同答案,

  • men and women,

    不論男女,

  • NPR listeners and Forbes readers.

    不論是全國公共廣播電台聽眾,或《富比士》讀者。

  • We asked people in England, Australia, the U.S. --

    我們問了英國、澳洲、美國…等國國民,

  • very similar answers.

    答案都大同小異。

  • We even asked different departments of a university.

    我們還問了大學不同系所的人,

  • We went to Harvard and we checked almost every department,

    我們幾乎去了哈佛的每個系所,

  • and in fact, from Harvard Business School,

    事實上哈佛商學院裡,

  • where a few people wanted the wealthy to have more and the rich to have less,

    有些人希望富者越富、有些人希望有錢人有的少一點,

  • the similarity was astonishing.

    答案如此雷同,非常驚人。

  • I know some of you went to Harvard Business School.

    我知道在座有些人念過哈佛商學院。

  • We also asked this question about something else.

    我們也會拿其它主題來問這些問題。

  • We asked, what about the ratio of CEO pay to unskilled workers?

    我們問,總裁和非技術性員工的薪資比是多少?

  • So you can see what people think is the ratio,

    你可以看到大家想像中的比例,

  • and then we can ask the question, what do they think should be the ratio?

    接著我們可以再問這個問題,你認為比例應該是多少?

  • And then we can ask, what is reality?

    然後我們就可以問事實是多少?

  • What is reality? And you could say, well, it's not that bad, right?

    事實是多少?你可能會說,噢,其實沒那麼差嘛?

  • The red and the yellow are not that different.

    紅色和黃色差不多。

  • But the fact is, it's because I didn't draw them on the same scale.

    但事實是因為我沒有使用相同的比例尺。

  • It's hard to see, there's yellow and blue in there.

    你幾乎看不到裡面還有黃色和藍色。

  • So what about other outcomes of wealth?

    那其它財富的結果呢?

  • Wealth is not just about wealth.

    財富不只事關財富。

  • We asked, what about things like health?

    我們還問,健康方面又如何呢?

  • What about availability of prescription medication?

    像是取得處方箋的難易度呢?

  • What about life expectancy?

    平均壽命呢?

  • What about life expectancy of infants?

    嬰兒的平均壽命呢?

  • How do we want this to be distributed?

    我們希望怎麼分配這些項目?

  • What about education for young people?

    年輕人的教育呢?

  • And for older people?

    年長者的教育呢?

  • And across all of those things, what we learned was that people

    透過那些事情,我們發現

  • don't like inequality of wealth,

    大家不是很喜歡貧富不均,

  • but there's other things where inequality, which is an outcome of wealth,

    但是還有很多來自於貧富不均的情況

  • is even more aversive to them:

    更讓人反感:

  • for example, inequality in health or education.

    例如,健康或教育的不平等。

  • We also learned that people are particularly open

    我們也發現大家特別願意

  • to changes in equality when it comes to people

    改變不平等的情況,

  • who have less agency --

    特別是碰到那些比較沒有行為能力的對象,

  • basically, young kids and babies,

    基本上就是小孩和嬰兒,

  • because we don't think of them as responsible for their situation.

    因為我們認為他們不需為自己的現況負責。

  • So what are some lessons from this?

    那我們從中學到什麼?

  • We have two gaps:

    我們有兩種落差:

  • We have a knowledge gap and we have a desirability gap

    我們有知識落差和期望落差。

  • And the knowledge gap is something that we think about,

    知識落差是指我們認為

  • how do we educate people?

    我們怎麼教育大眾?

  • How do we get people to think differently about inequality

    我們怎麼讓大家用不同的方式想像不平等、

  • and the consequences of inequality in terms of health, education,

    以及隨之而來,像是健康、教育、

  • jealousy, crime rate, and so on?

    妒忌、犯罪率…等等的不平等後果?

  • Then we have the desirability gap.

    另外我們也有期望落差。

  • How do we get people to think differently about what we really want?

    我們怎麼讓大家用不同的方式思考我們真正想要的是什麼?

  • You see, the Rawls definition, the Rawls way of looking at the world,

    你看羅爾斯定義,羅爾斯看世界的方式,

  • the blind tasting approach,

    盲測試法,

  • takes our selfish motivation out of the picture.

    將我們自私的動機移到畫面之外。

  • How do we implement that to a higher degree

    我們如何將之運用在程度更高、

  • on a more extensive scale?

    範圍更廣的事物上?

  • And finally, we also have an action gap.

    最後,我們還有行為落差。

  • How do we take these things and actually do something about it?

    我們要如何依據這些東西並確實做出改變?

  • I think part of the answer is to think about people

    我認為可能的答案是

  • like young kids and babies that don't have much agency,

    想想孩子、嬰兒,他們沒什麼行為能力,

  • because people seem to be more willing to do this.

    因為大家似乎更願意為了他們而改變。

  • To summarize, I would say, next time you go to buy, to drink beer or wine,

    總而言之,下次你去購物、去喝啤酒或紅酒,

  • first of all, think about, what is it in your experience that is real,

    先思考在你的經驗裡,有什麼是真的,

  • and what is it in your experience that is a placebo effect

    在你的經驗裡,有什麼只是安慰劑效應,

  • coming from expectations?

    你被期待影響了?

  • And then think about what it also means for other decisions in your life,

    接著再思考,這對你生命中其它決定有何意義?

  • and hopefully also for policy questions

    以及對影響我們大家的政策問題

  • that affect all of us.

    會有什麼意義?

  • Thanks a lot.

    非常感謝。

  • (Applause)

    (掌聲)

It would be nice to be objective in life,

如果我們能客觀面對生活和各方面

字幕與單字
已審核 字幕已審核

影片操作 你可以在這邊進行「影片」的調整,以及「字幕」的顯示

A2 初級 中文 美國腔 TED 財富 平等 啤酒 底層 富有

【TED】丹.艾瑞利: 我們期待世界有多平等?答案讓人大吃一驚 (How equal do we want the world to be? You'd be surprised | Dan Ariely)

  • 10171 906
    CUChou 發佈於 2015 年 04 月 18 日
影片單字