Squarespace: share your passion with the world.

Squarespace: 和世界分享你的熱情

Imagine being alive when Albert Einstein was developing his theories of relativity.

想像一下如果你生在愛因斯坦發現相對論的時代

Or witnessing the birth of psychology, as Sigmund Freud and psychoanalysis took over the scientific mainstream.

或親眼見證心理學科剛出現時，西格蒙德·佛洛伊德和精神分析學派被視為主流科學的年代

The early 1900s was an amazing time for Western science.

1990年代前期是西方科學發展的重要年代

There was another figure on the intellectual scene when these great minds were at work.

在這些偉大思想家們大行其道時，學術界出現了另一個人物

Young philosopher Karl Popper was born in Austria -- Freud’s home turf -- but built

年輕的哲學家卡爾·波普爾誕生於佛洛伊德主場地--澳洲，但在英國發展他的哲學

his career in Britain, giving serious consideration to the new ways that these and other scientists

嚴謹地審視了這些科學家和當代其他科學家們

of the time were thinking about the world.

看待這個世界的新方法

And after looking at different methods that people like Einstein and Freud were using,

而當他探究各種不同研究者例如愛因斯坦和佛洛伊德的研究方式後

Popper came to understand that not all scientific achievement was created equal.

波普爾終於了解並不是所有的科學成果都是有同等價值的

He ended up making an important distinction, between science … and what he called pseudo-science.

他最後提出了所謂科學，與我們稱之為「偽科學」這兩者之間的區別

And in the process of doing this, he taught us volumes about the nature of knowledge itself,

而在找出這兩者差別的過程中，他告訴我們許多有關於知識的本質

and how we can best test it, and challenge it, to bring us closer to the truth.

我們該如何測試它、挑戰他，藉此更加接近真理

[Theme Music]

Emerging at roughly the same point in history, Freud and Einstein both made predictions that

差不多在同時期崛起的愛因斯坦和佛洛伊德雙雙表示

they hoped would help us better understand our world.

他們希望能幫助我們更加了解這個世界

Freud, concerned with the individual psyche, predicted that our childhood experiences would

佛洛伊德關注個體心理的研究，預測童年經驗

have a heavy bearing on who we grew up to be.

對我們長大後成為怎樣的人有很大的影響

Meanwhile, Einstein waited patiently for a solar eclipse that could disprove his entire

同時，愛因斯坦耐心地等待著一次

general theory of relativity, depending on what it would reveal about how light travels through space.

「根據它揭示光線如何穿梭太空，有可能完全反證自己的廣義相對論的日蝕」到的來

And then there was Karl Popper, born in 1902, who grew up to observe these predictions with

接著卡爾·波普爾在1902年誕生了，他長大後興致勃勃地觀察這兩種預測

keen interest. As a young scholar, he learned about the psychoanalytic theories of Freud,

身為一個年輕學者，他學到了佛洛伊德的精神分析理論

and attended lectures given by Einstein himself about the rules of the universe.

也出席了愛因斯坦關於宇宙定則的講座

And he noticed that these great thinkers used different methods.

他發現這些偉大思想家使用不同的研究方法

For example, Popper observed that Freud was able to make just about any data point work

例如，波普爾察覺佛洛伊德可以利用任何數據點（data point ）

in service of his theory. Freud could explain a person’s intimacy issues both in terms

來支持自己的理論，佛洛伊德可以從小時候被擁抱得不夠，或太多

of not being hugged enough as a child, or in terms of having been hugged too much. Meanwhile,

解釋一個人親密關係上的問題，同時

almost any behavior on the part of a female could be explained in terms of penis envy.

幾乎任何女性的行為問題都能用陰莖羨妒（penis envy）來解釋

Evidence to support Freud’s theories seemed to be everywhere!

能支持佛洛伊德理論的「證據」似乎無所不在！

But Popper saw that Einstein was making a different type of prediction.

但波普爾發現愛因斯坦做出的預測並不相同

Instead of looking backward, and using past data to “predict” the present, he was

他並沒有從過往找尋過去的資料來「預測」現在的狀況

looking ahead, and predicting future states of affairs. Einstein’s theory was truly

他把目光放在未來，並預測未來的事件。波普爾發現愛因斯坦的理論相當危險

risky, Popper realized. Because, if the future didn’t match his predictions, then his theory

因為如果未來的狀況與他的預測不相符，那他的理論就完全被反證了

would be conclusively disproven. If the results of the solar eclipse in 1919 had been different,

如果1919年的日食時觀察的狀況不如預期

general relativity would have been finished.

那麼廣義相對論就在那天起沒戲唱了

Freud, on the other hand, could always just read the past differently, so as to maintain

另一方面，佛洛伊德總是能以不同的方式解讀過去，用其

some kind of confirmation of his theory.

作為對自己理論的「證據」

Suddenly, Popper understood the difference between the science that Einstein was doing,

突然間，波普爾了解了愛因斯坦所研究的「科學」

and what Freud was doing, which Popper rather snootily referred to as pseudo-science.

以及佛洛伊德所研究的...他略帶不屑地稱之為「偽科學」的差別

Now, whether psychology today is considered a hard science or a social science or some

今天心理學該被視為硬科學、社會科學或其他類型的學科或許是爭議的

other kind might be debatable. But you won’t find many mainstream thinkers who consider

但你很少會看到主流思想家視其為偽科學

it pseudoscience. But still, nearly a hundred years ago, when Popper was reaching these

但即使如此，當波普爾約一百年以前得到這個結論時

conclusions, no modern philosopher had really characterized what “science” truly meant

還沒有任何近代哲學家實際去定義「科學」的真實意義

-- and what the implications were for the pursuit of knowledge.

而科學意味著對知識的追求

The traditional understanding of the scientific method, going all the way back to the ancient

傳統上對科學的了解可以追溯到古希臘時代

Greeks, relied on the belief that, to look at the world with a scientific eye is to observe

基於一個信條：以科學之眼觀看這個世界就是

with no preconceived notions.

不帶任何先入為主的概念觀察它

You simply look, see what you see, and then develop hypotheses based on those observations.

你很單純的打開眼睛、看看你看到了什麼，然後基於你的觀察發展出假說

So, you look at a swan, and you notice it’s white. You look at another swan; it’s white too.

所以你看到一隻天鵝，發現牠是白色的，你又看向另一隻，牠也是白色的

You look at enough white swans, and eventually you form the hypothesis that all swans are white.

你看了足夠多的白天鵝，最後你產生了一個假設：所有天鵝都是白的

This is what Freud said he was doing: Observing relationships -- but instead of it being between

這就是佛洛伊德描述自己做的事情：觀察相關性--但並非觀察天鵝之於色彩

the relationship swans and colors, it was between particular human phenomena and human behavior.

而是觀察特定人類現象之於人類行為

But Popper argued that everyone has preconceived notions of some kind. We all start out with

但波普爾認為人類都有某種先入為主的觀念

a hunch, whether we admit it or not.

無論我們承不承認，我們一開始都會有一種直覺

After all, what you decide to observe is determined by what you already care about enough to observe

畢竟，「你決定觀察何物」取決於你在「一開始已經對何物感到在乎而想要去觀察它」

in the first place and the fact that you care about it so much also means that you already

而你極度在乎某物的事實意味著你已經

have some beliefs about it.

對它有一些固有的信念

So, what does that tell us about Freud?

所以這告訴了我們什麼有關佛洛伊德的事呢？

Popper became convinced that methods like his that only served to confirm beliefs were pseudo-science.

波普爾相信如弗洛伊德的研究方法一般，為既有信念服務的研究方法就是「偽科學」

And they could be used to prove anything.

這種研究方法可以用來證明「任何事」

Consider the existence of Santa Claus. If I try to find evidence of Santa’s existence,

想想聖誕老人，如果我要尋找聖誕老人存在的證據

I’m going to find it, easily. The world is filled with evidence of Santa Claus! There

我可以很容易地找到它，這世界充滿了聖誕老人存在的證據

are presents under the tree on Christmas morning. There’s the guy at the mall. And then there

聖誕節的早上聖誕樹下出現了禮物、購物中心也有他的蹤影，還有

are all those songs, and stories, and tv shows, and movies – they combine to confirm your belief in Santa.

各種關於聖誕老人的歌曲、故事、電視劇和電影...這些都能用來證實你對於聖誕老人存在的信念

But Popper would argue that it’s only by seeking to disprove Santa’s existence that you can demonstrate his unreality.

但波普爾會說只有尋找反證聖誕老人存在的證據你才能證實他是不真實的

So the question is, when we begin to test a theory, are we looking to confirm it, or disconfirm it?

問題是：我們何時才算開始檢測一項理論？我們應該證實它？還是證偽它？

This is the key point, for Popper – science disconfirms, while pseudoscience confirms.

這就是關鍵，對波普爾來說，科學「證偽」理論，而偽科學「證實」理論

He elaborated on this insight by establishing a series of distinct conclusions about science and knowledge.

他藉由一連串清楚的結論詳述了何謂科學和知識

First, he said, it’s easy to find confirmation of a theory if you’re looking for it.

第一、只要你想，找到證據支持你的理論是容易的

Remember the presents under the tree? If you’re looking for proof that Santa exists, you’re not

記得那個聖誕樹下的禮物嗎？如果你正在找聖誕老人存在的證據

likely to keep searching for contradictory evidence after that.

你很可能不會再發現了禮物之後繼續尋找與其矛盾的證據

Second, confirmation should only count if it comes from risky predictions – ones that

第二、證據如果不是從冒險的預測（risky predictions）而來，也就是如果預測失敗很可能摧毀你的理論的預測

could actually destroy your theory. Because, Popper observed that every good scientific

那它便不能算是證據。因為波普爾發限

theory is prohibitive – it rules things out.

任何好的科學理論是有禁律性（prohibitive）的--它會排除其他的可能性

This might sound strange, because no one wants to be wrong, but Popper says that every false

這聽起來或許有點奇怪，因為沒有人希望自己是錯的，但波普爾說：任何被發現是錯誤的信念都是好的

belief we discover is actually good, because that gets us that much closer to believing only true things.

因為它讓我們更加接近只相信真實事物的狀態

Next, Popper argued that the only genuine test of a theory is one that’s attempting to falsify it.

接者波普爾認為唯一真確的理論檢測就是試圖證明它是錯的

So, if you were to test for Santa’s reality, your method would require you to try to prove that he doesn’t exist,

所以如果你要證明聖誕老人的真實性，你證明方法就是試圖證明他並不存在，而非他存在

rather than proving that he does. So, you stay up all night, waiting to catch him delivering his presents.

所以你整晚不睡，看著他有沒有來送禮物

This is risky, because if the person who actually shows up to put presents under the tree is your Dad,

這是很冒險的，因為如果放禮物在聖誕樹底下的人是你爸

then you’ve destroyed the Santa hypothesis.

那你就摧毀了自己的「聖誕老人存在假說」了

On a very similar note, Popper also pointed out that irrefutable theories are not scientific.

本著相同的精神，波普爾更指出無法被證明為假的理論就不是科學的理論

If it can’t be tested, then your theory doesn’t have much value.

如果它不能被驗證，那你的理論就沒有多大的價值

Like, you can only confirm that Santa is real by doing everything in your power to prove

就像你只能盡你所能藉由「證明聖誕老人只是幻想的」證明「聖誕老人是真的」然後失敗

that he’s imaginary, and then failing to do so. So you need to be tugging on Santa

所以你必須在購物中心拉扯聖誕老人的鬍子

beards at the mall. You need to investigate reports of Santa sightings, and other weirdoes

調查聖誕老人以及其他神奇生物被目擊者看到從煙囪闖入他人民宅的說詞

caught breaking into peoples’ houses through their chimneys. If you want to be able to

如果你希望你能放心相信你對聖誕老人的信仰

really trust in your belief in Santa, in a genuinely scientific way, you need to put

以科學的方法，你必須檢視你的信仰以任何你想得到的方式

your belief to the test, in every way you can imagine.

檢視你的信仰

This is where Popper says that you have earned the right to call a theory scientific.

這就是波普爾說的，你必須努力才能爭取將你的理論冠上科學之名的權利

And finally, once you’ve disproven your theory, Popper said, you need to be willing to give it up.

最後，如果你反證了你的理論，波普爾說：你必須含淚放棄它

I mean, you can still cling to the Santa myth, even after catching your Dad putting gifts under the tree,

我的意思是說，就算你發現放禮物在聖誕樹下的人是你爸，你還是可以依舊相信聖誕老人的迷思

by accepting his lie that Santa had dropped the gifts off earlier, and that he was just “helping.”

只要你接受你爸「聖誕老人剛剛來過了，他只是幫忙」的謊話

But, if you’re a scientist, you’re gonna have to be willing to let your beliefs go.

但如果你是個科學家，你必須心甘情願地放棄你的信仰

Accept the evidence. Move on.

接受證據，然後繼續探究下去

And this is the modern scientific thinking that we accept today: Testable, refutable, falsifiable.

這就是我們現今廣為接受的科學精神：可測試、可駁斥、可證偽

You don’t seek to prove scientific hypotheses right, you only prove them wrong.

你不是去證明一個理論正確，而是去證明他錯！

A lot of this might seem so obvious that maybe you’re wonder why we’re talking about it.

今天講的很多東西似乎非常理所當然，你甚至會覺得「講這些有什麼必要？」

But that’s how right Popper was – he was one of those rare philosophers who actually

但這就是波普爾的貢獻，他是極少數成功提出一個思想

managed to hit on an idea so right that we don’t even really argue about it anymore.

而這個思想在後世我們幾乎不再爭論它的哲學家

So, it sounds like I’ve been talking mainly about science all this time. But Popper and

所以雖然我們目前為止聽起來主要都在討論科學，但波普爾

his insights actually tell us a lot about knowledge, in the philosophical sense.

和他的見解告訴我們許多知識在哲學層面的意義

For Popper, knowledge was about probability and contingency. We are justified in believing

對波普爾來說，知識是一種概率與可能性

whatever seems most probable given our current data. And we should always be willing to revise

我們理所應當的根據我們現有的數據相信最有可能的答案，而我們應樂於再出現新證據時

our beliefs in the light of new evidence. In other words, our belief should be contingent on the data themselves.

修改我們既有的信念。換句話說，我們的信念應與數據本身一致

This wouldn’t have satisfied Descartes, who was always concerned about certainty.

笛卡兒或許不會滿意這種看法，因為他非常在意所謂的「確定性」

But Popper never thought that certainty was possible in the first place. If anything,

但波普爾從一開始就不相信確定任何事物是有可能的

he thought being certain of something causes you to close your mind, and that’s

他認為當你對任何事物持完全確信的態度時，你就會封閉你的思想，而這不是我們樂見的

not what we want. Always remaining open to the idea that your current beliefs might be

接近真理最好的方法，就是對於「你現存的信念很有可能是錯誤的」的想法

wrong is the best way to get ever closer to truth.

抱持著開放的態度

So where does this leave us?

所以這告訴了我們什麼？

Remember, we started out trying to prove that we know the things we thought we knew. But

記住，我們試圖證明我們知道那些我們覺得我們知道的事情

you have to be open to the idea that your beliefs might be false -- because that’s

但你必須接受你的信念可能是錯誤的

the only way that holding onto them can really mean anything. Otherwise, we’re all just

因為這是唯一使你堅信的事物存有價值的方法，否則

believing whatever we want, with no grounds for adjudicating between beliefs.

我們就只是毫無根據，無判斷標準地相信著我們想相信的事物

You should keep that in mind, because that’s the name of the game for the rest of this course.

你要記清楚今天的內容，因為它將成為往後系列課程的關鍵

You only get to believe the things you have reasons for, and we’re going to

你只能相信你有理由相信的事物，而我們即將從這個領域最困難的部分：神

start with the area that is hardest for most people – God. Hope to see you there.

說起。期待到時再見！

Today you learned about Karl Popper, and his insights into science, pseudoscience, and

今天你學到了卡爾波普爾和他關於科學、偽科學以及知識的見解

knowledge -- which might best be summarized as science disconfirms, while pseudoscience confirms.

簡而言之就是：科學證偽理論，偽科學證實理論

This episode of Crash Course Philosophy is made possible by Squarespace. Squarespace

本集哲學速成班由Squarespace贊助撥出

is a way to create a website, blog or online store for you and your ideas. Squarespace

Squarespace是一個能為你和你的點子創造出網站、部落格和網路商店的好途徑

features a user-friendly interface, custom templates and 24/7 customer support. Try Squarespace

有使用者友善介面、自訂樣板和全天候的客戶支持，請在

at squarespace.com/crashcourse for a special offer.

squarespace.com/crashcourse試用Squarespace獲取而外好康

Crash Course Philosophy is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios. You can head over

哲學速成班與公共電視網數位工作室合作撥出，你可以去他們的頻道

to their channel to check out amazing shows like Artrageous, The Good Stuff, and Blank on Blank.

看看超棒的節目例如Artrageous, The Good Stuff和Blank on Blank

This episode of Crash Course was filmed in the Doctor Cheryl C. Kinney Crash Course Studio

這集速成班由 Doctor Cheryl C. Kinney在 Doctor Cheryl C. Kinney Crash Course Studio攝製

with the help of these awesome people and our equally fantastic graphics team is Thought Cafe.

並獲得這些好人的幫忙，我們的繪圖團隊是Thought Cafe