Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • So since I was here last in '06,

    自從上一次,06年來這裡之後,

  • we discovered that global climate change

    我們發現全球暖化

  • is turning out to be a pretty serious issue,

    變成一個相當嚴肅的議題。

  • so we covered that fairly extensively

    所以我們在"懷疑論者"雜誌裡,

  • in Skeptic magazine.

    對暖化議題有相當深入的報導。

  • We investigate all kinds

    我們調查了各式各樣

  • of scientific and quasi-scientific controversies,

    科學以及偽科學的爭論。

  • but it turns out we don't have to worry about any of this

    不過看來我們不用這麼擔心,

  • because the world's going to end in 2012.

    反正2012年就是世界末日了。

  • Another update:

    另外一個新聞則是,

  • You will recall I introduced you guys

    你們可能記得我曾介紹過的

  • to the Quadro Tracker.

    Quadro探測器。

  • It's like a water dowsing device.

    有點像探測水源的裝置,

  • It's just a hollow piece of plastic with an antenna that swivels around.

    在中空的塑膠上面接著一根會轉動的天線。

  • And you walk around, and it points to things.

    當你移動的時候,它會指向某些東西,

  • Like if you're looking for marijuana in students' lockers,

    比方說當你想在學生置物櫃裡找大麻時,

  • it'll point right to somebody.

    它就會指著某個人...

  • Oh, sorry. (Laughter)

    喔,抱歉。 (笑聲)

  • This particular one that was given to me

    而我拿到的這隻

  • finds golf balls,

    則是專門用來找高爾夫球的。

  • especially if you're at a golf course

    特別是當你在高爾夫球場上,

  • and you check under enough bushes.

    為了找球翻遍樹叢之後。

  • Well, under the category of "What's the harm of silly stuff like this?"

    在那些你覺得無傷大雅的玩意兒之中,

  • this device, the ADE 651,

    這個裝置,ADE651

  • was sold to the Iraqi government

    被伊拉克政府

  • for 40,000 dollars apiece.

    用四萬美金一組的價錢給買下。

  • It's just like this one, completely worthless,

    就跟我手上的一樣,完全不值一文,

  • in which it allegedly worked by "electrostatic

    並且被說成是利用"靜電-

  • magnetic ion attraction,"

    磁離子引力"來操作。

  • which translates to

    或許翻成

  • "pseudoscientific baloney" -- would be the nice word --

    "偽科學的胡扯"可能比較好,

  • in which you string together a bunch of words that sound good,

    把一堆華麗的名詞串在一起,

  • but it does absolutely nothing.

    但是沒有任何意義。

  • In this case, at trespass points,

    在這個例子裡,

  • allowing people to go through

    若是要讓人們通過地雷區,

  • because your little tracker device said they were okay,

    只靠這種"探測器"的判斷,

  • actually cost lives.

    是會賠上性命的。

  • So there is a danger to pseudoscience,

    因此相信這類偽科學,

  • in believing in this sort of thing.

    是有潛在危險的。

  • So what I want to talk about today is belief.

    所以今天我想談談信念。

  • I want to believe,

    我想要相信,

  • and you do too.

    而你們也是。

  • And in fact, I think my thesis here is that

    而事實上,我想我今天的論點是,

  • belief is the natural state of things.

    信念是自然而然形成的,

  • It is the default option. We just believe.

    是預設的選項。盡管信就是了。

  • We believe all sorts of things.

    我們相信形形色色的事物。

  • Belief is natural;

    信念是天生的,

  • disbelief, skepticism, science, is not natural.

    疑問、懷疑論、科學則否。

  • It's more difficult.

    它們難以接受,

  • It's uncomfortable to not believe things.

    因為抱持疑問會讓人不快。

  • So like Fox Mulder on "X-Files,"

    像"X檔案"裡的福克斯穆德,

  • who wants to believe in UFOs? Well, we all do,

    誰想要相信UFO? 我們都想。

  • and the reason for that is because

    這是因為

  • we have a belief engine in our brains.

    我們的大腦裡有處理信念的機制

  • Essentially, we are pattern-seeking primates.

    事實上,我們這種靈長類喜歡尋找模式(pattern-seeking)。

  • We connect the dots: A is connected to B; B is connected to C.

    我們找尋事物的關聯:由A到B,由B到C,

  • And sometimes A really is connected to B,

    有時候A和B的確互為因果,

  • and that's called association learning.

    即所謂的關聯式學習。

  • We find patterns, we make those connections,

    我們尋找模式,發現事物的脈絡。

  • whether it's Pavlov's dog here

    不管是巴甫洛夫的狗,

  • associating the sound of the bell with the food,

    把鈴聲與餵食兩件事連結起來,

  • and then he salivates to the sound of the bell,

    於是一聽到鈴聲就流口水。

  • or whether it's a Skinnerian rat,

    或是斯金納的老鼠,

  • in which he's having an association

    把自身的行為,

  • between his behavior and a reward for it,

    與得到的獎賞之間聯繫起來,

  • and therefore he repeats the behavior.

    因而重複同樣的行為。

  • In fact, what Skinner discovered

    斯金納發現,

  • is that, if you put a pigeon in a box like this,

    如果把鴿子放進這樣的一個箱子裡,

  • and he has to press one of these two keys,

    讓它按下兩個按鍵中的其中一個。

  • and he tries to figure out what the pattern is,

    它會試著猜測其中的模式,

  • and you give him a little reward in the hopper box there --

    然後透過箱子拿到一點小小的獎賞。

  • if you just randomly assign rewards

    若是你隨機給予獎勵,

  • such that there is no pattern,

    即使沒有任何的規則可尋,

  • they will figure out any kind of pattern.

    它們也會想出五花八門的方式。

  • And whatever they were doing just before they got the reward,

    它們會記得嘗到甜頭之前所做的動作,

  • they repeat that particular pattern.

    並且一再重複同樣動作。

  • Sometimes it was even spinning around twice counterclockwise,

    有時候甚至會是逆時針轉兩圈、

  • once clockwise and peck the key twice.

    順時針轉一圈然後啄兩下按鍵。

  • And that's called superstition,

    然後迷信就產生了。

  • and that, I'm afraid,

    而不幸的是,

  • we will always have with us.

    我們也是如此。

  • I call this process "patternicity" --

    我將這個過程稱作"模式化"。

  • that is, the tendency to find meaningful patterns

    意思是從毫無意義的雜訊中,

  • in both meaningful and meaningless noise.

    尋找有意義模式的傾向。

  • When we do this process, we make two types of errors.

    當這樣做的時候,我們可能會犯兩種類型的錯誤:

  • A Type I error, or false positive,

    類型一,也稱作『錯誤接受』,

  • is believing a pattern is real

    是當相信某種模式是正確的,

  • when it's not.

    而實際上不是。(誤認不存在的模式)

  • Our second type of error is a false negative.

    第二種類型則是『錯誤拒絕』,

  • A Type II error is not believing

    是當某種模式實際上是正確的,

  • a pattern is real when it is.

    卻拒絕相信。(忽略模式的存在)

  • So let's do a thought experiment.

    讓我們來點思想實驗:

  • You are a hominid three million years ago

    你是生活在三百萬年前的原始人,

  • walking on the plains of Africa.

    在非洲大草原上走著,

  • Your name is Lucy, okay?

    你的名字是...露西。

  • And you hear a rustle in the grass.

    你聽到草叢中一陣響動,

  • Is it a dangerous predator,

    這會是危險的掠食者,

  • or is it just the wind?

    或者只是一陣風?

  • Your next decision could be the most important one of your life.

    你接下來的判斷可能就是這一生中最重要的決定。

  • Well, if you think that the rustle in the grass is a dangerous predator

    如果你誤把草叢中的聲響當做危險的掠食者,

  • and it turns out it's just the wind,

    結果只是一陣風。

  • you've made an error in cognition,

    你犯下錯誤認知,

  • made a Type I error, false positive.

    類型一的誤判。

  • But no harm. You just move away.

    但是沒差,你只是閃邊。

  • You're more cautious. You're more vigilant.

    變得更加小心謹慎。

  • On the other hand, if you believe that the rustle in the grass is just the wind,

    另一方面,如果你把草叢中的聲響當做風聲,

  • and it turns out it's a dangerous predator,

    結果是危險的掠食者--

  • you're lunch.

    你就成了午餐。

  • You've just won a Darwin award.

    你拿到所謂"達爾文的獎賞",

  • You've been taken out of the gene pool.

    從基因庫中被抹去。

  • Now the problem here is that

    問題來了,

  • patternicities will occur whenever the cost

    模式化會發生在

  • of making a Type I error

    當類型一錯誤的代價,

  • is less than the cost of making a Type II error.

    低於類型二錯誤時。

  • This is the only equation in the talk by the way.

    這是這個演講裡唯一的一條公式。

  • We have a pattern detection problem

    我們有辨識模式的困難,

  • that is assessing the difference between a Type I and a Type II error

    在於評估類型一和類型二錯誤的時候,

  • is highly problematic,

    沒有辦法準確的區別,

  • especially in split-second, life-and-death situations.

    尤其是當生死關頭的那一瞬間。

  • So the default position

    所以我們的預設反應

  • is just: Believe all patterns are real --

    被設定成"相信所有的模式都是真的"。

  • All rustles in the grass are dangerous predators

    "草叢中的響動都是危險的掠食者"

  • and not just the wind.

    "不會只是風聲而已"。

  • And so I think that we evolved ...

    我想經過演化的歷程,

  • there was a natural selection for the propensity for our belief engines,

    信任機制的傾向經過自然的挑選。

  • our pattern-seeking brain processes,

    我們尋求模式的大腦進化成,

  • to always find meaningful patterns

    總是去找尋有意義的模式。

  • and infuse them with these sort of

    並且將之連結到對掠食者的恐懼,

  • predatory or intentional agencies that I'll come back to.

    或是等下會提到的 意圖化的形象。

  • So for example, what do you see here?

    舉例來說,你們看到什麼?

  • It's a horse head, that's right.

    馬的頭部,沒錯。

  • It looks like a horse. It must be a horse.

    看起來像匹馬,這個肯定是馬。

  • That's a pattern.

    那就是模式。

  • And is it really a horse?

    不過真的是匹馬嗎?

  • Or is it more like a frog?

    還是更像隻青蛙?

  • See, our pattern detection device,

    我們偵測模式的機制,

  • which appears to be located in the anterior cingulate cortex --

    位於大腦的前扣帶皮層,

  • it's our little detection device there --

    我們小小的偵測裝置,

  • can be easily fooled, and this is the problem.

    很容易就會被誤導,問題就出在這兒。

  • For example, what do you see here?

    比方說,這是什麼?

  • Yes, of course, it's a cow.

    當然了,是一隻牛。

  • Once I prime the brain -- it's called cognitive priming --

    一旦我給了大腦提示 --稱作認知啟動--

  • once I prime the brain to see it,

    當我讓大腦開始辨識它,

  • it pops back out again even without the pattern that I've imposed on it.

    即使不用提示,大腦也會一再的嘗試辨認。

  • And what do you see here?

    這次你看到了什麼?

  • Some people see a Dalmatian dog.

    有些人看到一隻大麥町狗。

  • Yes, there it is. And there's the prime.

    沒有錯,這就是提示。

  • So when I go back without the prime,

    即使把提示拿掉,

  • your brain already has the model

    腦中的樣板還是在,

  • so you can see it again.

    所以你仍然看的到。

  • What do you see here?

    這是什麼?

  • Planet Saturn. Yes, that's good.

    土星,很好。

  • How about here?

    這個呢?

  • Just shout out anything you see.

    看到什麼就出個聲。

  • That's a good audience, Chris.

    很棒的觀眾,克里斯。

  • Because there's nothing in this. Well, allegedly there's nothing.

    因為裡面什麼都沒有,據說是沒有。

  • This is an experiment done by Jennifer Whitson

    這是珍妮佛惠特森在德州大學奧斯汀分校,

  • at U.T. Austin

    所做的實驗。

  • on corporate environments

    探討在企業環境下,

  • and whether feelings of uncertainty and out of control

    那些無法確定或是不受控制的感覺,

  • makes people see illusory patterns.

    是否會使人看到虛幻的模式。

  • That is, almost everybody sees the planet Saturn.

    也就是說,幾乎所有人都看的到土星的圖樣。

  • People that are put in a condition of feeling out of control

    但一旦人們處於自覺失控的狀況下,

  • are more likely to see something in this,

    他們就越有可能從圖中看出什麼,

  • which is allegedly patternless.

    即使這裡沒有任何模式可尋。

  • In other words, the propensity to find these patterns

    換句話說,當狀況失去控制的時候,

  • goes up when there's a lack of control.

    嘗試尋找模式的傾向就越強。

  • For example, baseball players are notoriously superstitious

    例如,棒球選手是出了名的迷信

  • when they're batting,

    不過只在打擊的時候。

  • but not so much when they're fielding.

    守備的時候就不是這麼一回事。

  • Because fielders are successful

    因為守備成功率,

  • 90 to 95 percent of the time.

    通常有九成到九成五左右。

  • The best batters fail seven out of 10 times.

    即使最好的打者,十次裡也會有七次失誤。

  • So their superstitions, their patternicities,

    所以他們的迷信,模式化的程度,

  • are all associated with feelings of lack of control

    跟這種無法掌控的感覺

  • and so forth.

    有很大的關聯。

  • What do you see in this particular one here, in this field?

    這次你們看到了什麼?在這個區域裡。

  • Anybody see an object there?

    有人看到什麼嗎?

  • There actually is something here,

    其實有些東西,

  • but it's degraded.

    只是被模糊處理過了。

  • While you're thinking about that,

    當你們在嘗試的時候,

  • this was an experiment done by Susan Blackmore,

    這是蘇珊布萊克摩爾,一位心理學家

  • a psychologist in England,

    在英國所做的實驗。

  • who showed subjects this degraded image

    他們讓受試者觀看模糊處理過的圖片,

  • and then ran a correlation between

    接著分析兩者間的關聯性:

  • their scores on an ESP test:

    他們的ESP(第六感)測驗分數--

  • How much did they believe in the paranormal,

    對科學無法解釋的事件、

  • supernatural, angels and so forth.

    超自然、天使等等,相信程度的多寡--

  • And those who scored high on the ESP scale,

    在ESP量表上得分越高的人,

  • tended to not only see

    就越容易,

  • more patterns in the degraded images

    不僅看到更多的樣式,

  • but incorrect patterns.

    也辨識出不正確的樣式。

  • Here is what you show subjects.

    這是你讓受試者看到的,

  • The fish is degraded 20 percent, 50 percent

    魚的圖片經過百分之二十,和五十的模糊化處理。

  • and then the one I showed you,

    以及我放的這張,

  • 70 percent.

    百分之七十。

  • A similar experiment was done by another [Swiss] psychologist

    另一位英國(應為瑞士籍)心理學家,

  • named Peter Brugger,

    彼得布魯格也做過類似的實驗。

  • who found significantly more meaningful patterns

    他發現連接左邊視覺區的右腦半球,

  • were perceived on the right hemisphere,

    比起左腦,

  • via the left visual field, than the left hemisphere.

    更容易察覺有意義的圖樣。

  • So if you present subjects the images such

    因此如果你給受測者看的圖片,

  • that it's going to end up on the right hemisphere instead of the left,

    偏重於用右腦來處理,

  • then they're more likely to see patterns

    那麼比起需要用左腦處理的圖片,

  • than if you put it on the left hemisphere.

    他們會更容易發現其中的模式。

  • Our right hemisphere appears to be

    看來我們的右腦

  • where a lot of this patternicity occurs.

    負責了大多數的模式化行為。

  • So what we're trying to do is bore into the brain

    所以我們試著觀察大腦內部,

  • to see where all this happens.

    找出相關的區域。

  • Brugger and his colleague, Christine Mohr,

    布魯格和他的同事,克莉絲汀莫爾

  • gave subjects L-DOPA.

    提供受測者左旋多巴胺(L-DOPA)。

  • L-DOPA's a drug, as you know, given for treating Parkinson's disease,

    你們或許聽過左旋多巴胺是用來治療帕金森氏症,

  • which is related to a decrease in dopamine.

    與患者的多巴胺含量降低有關,

  • L-DOPA increases dopamine.

    而這種藥能夠提升多巴胺的含量。

  • An increase of dopamine caused

    多巴胺含量的提升

  • subjects to see more patterns

    則使得受測者看到更多圖樣,

  • than those that did not receive the dopamine.

    比未使用的受測者還多。

  • So dopamine appears to be the drug

    也就是說多巴胺應該和模式化認知

  • associated with patternicity.

    有相當程度的關聯。

  • In fact, neuroleptic drugs

    事實上,一些鎮靜劑

  • that are used to eliminate psychotic behavior,

    被用來抑制精神病相關症狀,如

  • things like paranoia, delusions

    妄想症、錯覺,

  • and hallucinations,

    以及幻覺,

  • these are patternicities.

    這些都是模式化行為。

  • They're incorrect patterns. They're false positives. They're Type I errors.

    只是那些是不正確的模式。類型一的誤判。

  • And if you give them drugs

    當患者使用

  • that are dopamine antagonists,

    抑制多巴胺的藥劑,

  • they go away.

    這些症狀就會消失。

  • That is, you decrease the amount of dopamine,

    多巴胺的含量一降低,

  • and their tendency to see

    患者原本容易看到不存在的模式,

  • patterns like that decreases.

    這樣的傾向也隨著降低。

  • On the other hand, amphetamines like cocaine

    另一種情況,安非他命類藥劑如可卡因,

  • are dopamine agonists.

    是多巴胺的促進劑。

  • They increase the amount of dopamine.

    這類藥劑會提升體內的多巴胺分泌量,

  • So you're more likely to feel in a euphoric state,

    讓你容易覺得飄飄欲仙,

  • creativity, find more patterns.

    文思泉湧,看到更多東西。

  • In fact, I saw Robin Williams recently

    我最近就和羅賓威廉斯討論到

  • talk about how he thought he was much funnier

    他嗑藥的時候--過去他有這方面的問題--

  • when he was doing cocaine, when he had that issue, than now.

    覺得那時可卡因讓他比現在更加風趣。

  • So perhaps more dopamine

    或許多巴胺的量越多,

  • is related to more creativity.

    能夠讓你更有創造力。

  • Dopamine, I think, changes

    我認為多巴胺會改變

  • our signal-to-noise ratio.

    我們對信號/雜訊的認知。

  • That is, how accurate we are

    也就是讓我們找出模式

  • in finding patterns.

    的準確程度。

  • If it's too low, you're more likely to make too many Type II errors.

    如果準確度太低,你會傾向於犯下更多類型二的錯誤。

  • You miss the real patterns. You don't want to be too skeptical.

    你會忽略實際存在的模式,你不想變得太疑神疑鬼,

  • If you're too skeptical, you'll miss the really interesting good ideas.

    果真如此,你可能會錯過那些真正有趣的想法。

  • Just right, you're creative, and yet you don't fall for too much baloney.

    恰到好處的話,你會很有創意。也不會被人耍著玩。

  • Too high and maybe you see patterns everywhere.

    太過度的話,你會發現到處都是模式。

  • Every time somebody looks at you, you think people are staring at you.

    別人只是看你一眼,你卻覺得對方在瞪你。