have grappled with this question for centuries:

都在著力解決這個問題：

what makes people go wrong?

什麼使人們變壞？

Interestingly, I asked this question when I was a little kid.

有趣的是，當我還是小孩時，我問過同樣的問題。

When I was a kid growing up in the South Bronx, inner-city ghetto

我成長於紐約南布朗克斯市中的貧民窟，

in New York, I was surrounded by evil,

周圍充滿了罪惡，

as all kids are who grew up in an inner city.

如同所有在貧民窟長大的孩子一樣。

And I had friends who were really good kids,

我有一些朋友，他們曾是好孩子，

who lived out the Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde scenario -- Robert Louis Stevenson.

但他們的人生卻如同羅伯特·路易斯·斯蒂文森筆下的變身怪醫，由善轉惡。

That is, they took drugs, got in trouble, went to jail.

他們染毒，惹了麻煩，然後進了監獄。

Some got killed, and some did it without drug assistance.

有些喪了命，即使並沒有沾染毒品。

So when I read Robert Louis Stevenson, that wasn't fiction.

所以當我讀羅伯特·路易斯·斯蒂文森的作品時，我覺得那不是小說。

The only question is, what was in the juice?

唯一的問題是：釀成由善轉惡的毒藥是什麼？

And more importantly, that line between good and evil --

更重要的是，善惡之間的界限——

which privileged people like to think is fixed and impermeable,

特權階層喜歡認定這個界限是固定且不可逾越的，

with them on the good side, and the others on the bad side --

認為他們是在善的一邊，其他人在惡的一邊——

I knew that line was movable, and it was permeable.

而我以前就知道這個界限是可以移動的，而且是可逾越的。

Good people could be seduced across that line,

好人可以受誘惑而越界，

and under good and some rare circumstances, bad kids could recover

偶爾在某些比較好的情況下，壞孩子也可能

with help, with reform, with rehabilitation.

依靠外界的幫助、改造、治療，以重塑人生。

So I want to begin with this this wonderful illusion

所以，我想以荷蘭藝術家M. C. Escher

by [Dutch] artist M.C. Escher.

這幅奇妙的作品開始說起。

If you look at it and focus on the white,

如果你把視線集中在白色區域，

what you see is a world full of angels.

你會看到一個充滿了天使的世界。

But let's look more deeply, and as we do,

但是當我們再靠近一點看，

what appears is the demons, the devils in the world.

魔鬼就出現了，世間的魔鬼。

And that tells us several things.

這告訴我們幾點。

One, the world is, was, will always be filled with good and evil,

一：這個世界，無論過去，現在，還是將來，都總是由善和惡組成，

because good and evil is the yin and yang of the human condition.

因為善惡就如人類的陰陽。

It tells me something else. If you remember,

它也告訴我另外一件事。如果你還記得，

God's favorite angel was Lucifer.

上帝最喜歡的天使是路西法。

Apparently, Lucifer means "the light."

顯然，路西法的意思是“光明”。

It also means "the morning star," in some scripture.

在某些經文裡，它也有“黎明之星”的意思。

And apparently, he disobeyed God,

顯然他後來背叛了上帝，

and that's the ultimate disobedience to authority.

這是對權威的終極背叛。

And when he did, Michael, the archangel, was sent

當他率眾背叛後，上帝派邁克天使長

to kick him out of heaven along with the other fallen angels.

將他和其他墮落的天使一起趕出天堂。

And so Lucifer descends into hell, becomes Satan,

於是路西法降入地獄，成為撒旦，

becomes the devil, and the force of evil in the universe begins.

成為惡魔，宇宙中的惡之能量誕生了。

Paradoxically, it was God who created hell as a place to store evil.

矛盾的是，是上帝造出了惡的容身之處---地獄。

He didn't do a good job of keeping it there though.

他卻沒能使惡一直呆在那裡。

So, this arc of the cosmic transformation

所以，從上帝最受寵的天使變為惡魔，

of God's favorite angel into the Devil,

這個巨大的轉變，

for me, sets the context for understanding human beings

為我設立了一個大背景，

who are transformed from good, ordinary people

去理解那些從好人或者普通人

into perpetrators of evil.

轉變成壞人的人。

So the Lucifer effect, although it focuses on the negatives --

所以，路西法效應，儘管它集中在陰暗的方面——

the negatives that people can become,

人們可能投向陰暗，

not the negatives that people are --

但他們本身並非陰暗——

leads me to a psychological definition. Evil is the exercise of power.

引導我作出一個心理學定義：惡是行使權力

And that's the key: it's about power.

這才是關鍵：權力。

To intentionally harm people psychologically,

來故意對他人進行心理傷害，

to hurt people physically, to destroy people mortally, or ideas,

對他人進行身體傷害，殘害他人生命或思想，

and to commit crimes against humanity.

犯下反人道的罪行。

If you Google "evil," a word that should surely have withered by now,

如果你用谷歌搜索evil (惡) 這個詞——時至今日，這本是個早應消亡的詞，

you come up with 136 million hits in a third of a second.

你會在1/3秒內得到1.36億個搜索結果。

A few years ago -- I am sure all of you were shocked, as I was,

幾年前發生的一件事——我知道你們當時一定和我一樣震驚，

with the revelation of American soldiers

就是揭露美軍士兵

abusing prisoners in a strange place

在那場爭議性的對伊戰爭中

in a controversial war, Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

中的虐囚行為：阿布葛拉伊布虐囚事件。

And these were men and women

這些士兵，有男性也有女性，

who were putting prisoners through unbelievable humiliation.

對囚犯們實施了讓人難以置信的羞辱。

I was shocked, but I wasn't surprised,

我很震驚，但是並不感到意外，

because I had seen those same visual parallels

因為我以前看過類似的情況，

when I was the prison superintendent of the Stanford Prison Study.

當時我是史丹佛監獄實驗的負責人。

Immediately the Bush administration military said ... what?

布希政府軍方對此事的第一反應是什麼？

What all administrations say when there's a scandal.

是醜聞發生後任何官方都會說的套詞，

"Don't blame us. It's not the system. It's the few bad apples,

"不要怪我們。這與整個系統無關。只是幾個壞蘋果而已，

the few rogue soldiers."

只是一小撮惡劣的士兵而已。 "

My hypothesis is, American soldiers are good, usually.

而我的假設是，美國士兵通常情況下是好的。

Maybe it was the barrel that was bad.

也許是裝蘋果的桶壞了。

But how am I going to -- how am I going to deal with that hypothesis?

但我如何證明這個假設呢？

I became an expert witness

我成為了其中一個名叫

for one of the guards, Sergeant Chip Frederick,

奇普·弗萊德里克中士的專家證人，

and in that position, I had access to the dozen investigative reports.

在這個位置上，我可以接觸到關於此事的十幾份調查報告。

I had access to him. I could study him,

我同他接觸，我可以研究他，

have him come to my home, get to know him,

讓他來我家，了解他，

do psychological analysis to see, was he a good apple or bad apple.

作些心理上的分析來判斷他是個好蘋果還是壞蘋果。

And thirdly, I had access to all of the 1,000 pictures

第三點，我可以查看所有的

that these soldiers took.

1000多張士兵拍攝的照片。

These pictures are of a violent or sexual nature.

這些照片都是暴力或色情的。

All of them come from the cameras of American soldiers.

所有這些都是美軍士兵用相機拍攝的。

Because everybody has a digital camera or cell phone camera,

因為每個人都有數位相機或手機相機，

they took pictures of everything. More than 1,000.

他們什麼都拍。拍了超過1000張照片。

And what I've done is I organized them into various categories.

我所做的是把它們分類。

But these are by United States military police, army reservists.

但這些由陸軍預備役的美軍憲兵所拍攝的。

They are not soldiers prepared for this mission at all.

他們完全不是為執行此項任務而設立的部隊。

And it all happened in a single place, Tier 1-A, on the night shift.

而此事僅發生在一個地點，1A層，在夜間值班時間。

Why? Tier 1-A was the center for military intelligence.

為什麼？ 1A層是軍方情報中心。

It was the interrogation hold. The CIA was there.

是審訊關押處。中央情報局在那裡。

Interrogators from Titan Corporation, all there,

巨人公司（美軍外包公司）的審訊人員，全部都在那裡，

and they're getting no information about the insurgency.

而他們得不到任何關於暴動的信息。

So they're going to put pressure on these soldiers,

於是他們向這些憲兵隊士兵施加壓力，

military police, to cross the line,

迫使他們越線，

give them permission to break the will of the enemy,

允許他們採取措施來擊潰敵人的意志，

to prepare them for interrogation, to soften them up,

挽起袖子，為審訊做準備，

to take the gloves off. Those are the euphemisms,

使他們屈服。這些都是婉辭，

and this is how it was interpreted.

而這就是他們如何闡釋的。

Let's go down to that dungeon.

讓我們進入地牢吧。

(Camera shutter)

（相機快門聲）（以下圖片含有裸露及暴力展示）

(Thuds)

（重擊聲）

(Camera shutter)

（相機快門聲）

(Thuds)

（重擊聲）

(Breathing)

（喘息聲）

(Bells)

（鐘聲）

So, pretty horrific.

很恐怖。

That's one of the visual illustrations of evil.

這是惡的一種視覺展示。

And it should not have escaped you that

你應該不會沒有注意到，

the reason I paired the prisoner with his arms out

我把那個伸開雙臂的囚犯

with Leonardo da Vinci's ode to humanity

和達文西頌揚人類的作品放在一起的原因，

is that that prisoner was mentally ill.

是那個犯人得了精神疾病。

That prisoner covered himself with shit every day,

那個犯人每天用大便塗抹在身上，

and they used to have to roll him in dirt so he wouldn't stink.

士兵們不得不使他在泥土裡打滾，以消除臭味。

But the guards ended up calling him "Shit Boy."

但士兵們最終還是叫他屎男。

What was he doing in that prison

他在監獄裡做什麼!?

rather than in some mental institution?

他本應在精神病院。

In any event, here's former Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld.

不管怎樣，前國防部長拉姆斯菲爾德

He comes down and says, "I want to know, who is responsible?

下來問，"我想知道誰該為此負責？

Who are the bad apples?" Well, that's a bad question.

到底誰才是那幾個壞蘋果？ "嗯，這是個差勁的問題。

You have to reframe it and ask, "What is responsible?"

你應該重新組織一下這個句子，"是什麼為此負責？"

Because "what" could be the who of people,

因為"什麼"既可以是指人，

but it could also be the what of the situation,

也可以是指情境，

and obviously that's wrongheaded.

而顯然那樣問是堅持錯誤。

So how do psychologists go about understanding

那麼心理學家是如何理解

such transformations of human character,

這種人性的轉變呢？

if you believe that they were good soldiers

如果你相信他們在進入地牢之前

before they went down to that dungeon?

是好士兵的話。

There are three ways. The main way is -- it's called dispositional.

有三種方式。最主要的方式是所謂的特質論。

We look at what's inside of the person, the bad apples.

我們查看那些壞蘋果的內在特徵。

This is the foundation of all of social science,

這是所有社會科學的基礎，

the foundation of religion, the foundation of war.

宗教的基礎，戰爭的基礎。

Social psychologists like me come along and say, "Yeah,

像我這樣的社會心理學家會出來說，"是啊，

people are the actors on the stage,

人們是舞台上的演員，

but you'll have to be aware of what that situation is.

但你得清楚其所處的情境。

Who are the cast of characters? What's the costume?

扮演角色的演員是哪些人？戲服什麼樣？

Is there a stage director?"

有舞台導演嗎？

And so we're interested in, what are the external factors

所以我們感興趣的是，個體周圍的外界因素

around the individual -- the bad barrel?

是什麼，壞的蘋果桶？

And social scientists stop there, and they miss the big point

社會學家研究的僅限於此，卻遺漏了這個很重要的問題，

that I discovered when I became an expert witness for Abu Ghraib.

即我在成為阿布葛拉伊布虐囚事件的專家證人後所發現的：

The power is in the system.

權力存在於系統中。

The system creates the situation that corrupts the individuals,

系統製造出腐化個體的情境，

and the system is the legal, political, economic, cultural background.

這個系統，是指法制、政治、經濟和文化背景。

And this is where the power is of the bad-barrel makers.

該系統即蘋果桶製造者權力之所在。

So if you want to change a person, you've got to change the situation.

如果你想改變一個人，你就得改變其所處的情境。

If you want to change the situation,

如果你要改變情境，

you've got to know where the power is, in the system.

你得知道其權力存在於系統的何處。

So the Lucifer effect involves understanding

所以路西法效應牽涉到理解

human character transformations with these three factors.

人性轉變是如何受這三項因素影響的。

And it's a dynamic interplay.

它是一個相互作用的過程。

What do the people bring into the situation?

人們會怎樣影響情境？

What does the situation bring out of them?

情境如何影響人們？

And what is the system that creates and maintains that situation?

製造並維持該情境的系統是什麼？

So my book, "The Lucifer Effect," recently published, is about,

我最近出版的書《路西法效應》，

how do you understand how good people turn evil?

就是關於我們如何理解好人是怎樣變成惡人的。

And it has a lot of detail

書中有關於我今天演講內容

about what I'm going to talk about today.

的大量細節。

So Dr. Z's "Lucifer Effect," although it focuses on evil,

所以，津博士的《路西法效應》，儘管著重於惡，

really is a celebration of the human mind's

但其實是頌揚人類有無限的潛力，

infinite capacity to make any of us kind or cruel,

使我們任何人向善或作惡，

caring or indifferent, creative or destructive,

關懷或冷漠，創造或毀滅，

and it makes some of us villains.

甚至可以使得我們其中一些人成為惡棍。

And the good news story that I'm going to hopefully come to

而我在最後將滿懷希望地給大家講一個好消息的故事，

at the end is that it makes some of us heroes.

即這潛力也可以使我們其中一些人成為英雄。

This is a wonderful cartoon in the New Yorker,

這是登在《紐約客》上非常棒的一個漫畫，

which really summarizes my whole talk:

它其實總結了我的全部演講：

"I'm neither a good cop nor a bad cop, Jerome.

"傑若米，我既不是好警察也不是壞警察，

Like yourself, I'm a complex amalgam

跟你一樣，我是一個正面和負面 人格特質

of positive and negative personality traits

的複雜混合體，

that emerge or not, depending on the circumstances."

至於體現哪一面，要靠具體情況而言。 "

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

There's a study some of you think you know about,

有一項研究，你們其中一些人可能以為自己知道，

but very few people have ever read the story. You watched the movie.

但極少數人讀過這個故事。你看過電影。

This is Stanley Milgram, little Jewish kid from the Bronx,

這是斯坦利·米爾格拉姆，自小在布朗克斯長大的一個猶太人，

and he asked the question, "Could the Holocaust happen here, now?"

他問，"大屠殺在此時此地發生嗎？"

People say, "No, that's Nazi Germany,

人們回答，"不，那是納粹德國，

that's Hitler, you know, that's 1939."

那是希特勒，你知道，那是1939年。 "

He said, "Yeah, but suppose Hitler asked you,

他說，"是啊，但如果希特勒問你，

'Would you electrocute a stranger?' 'No way, not me, I'm a good person.' "

'你會用電刑處死一個陌生人嗎？ ' ' 不可能，我肯定不會，我是個好人。 "

He said, "Why don't we put you in a situation

他說，"那麼我們不如把你放在一個情境裡，

and give you a chance to see what you would do?"

給你一個機會，看看你會怎麼做？ "

And so what he did was he tested 1,000 ordinary people.

於是，他找了1000個普通人來做測試。

500 New Haven, Connecticut, 500 Bridgeport.

500人來自康州紐黑文，500人來自布里奇波特。

And the ad said, "Psychologists want to understand memory.

廣告是這樣說的，"心理學家想要研究人的記憶，

We want to improve people's memory,

我們想改善人的記憶，

because memory is the key to success." OK?

因為記憶是成功的關鍵。 "

"We're going to give you five bucks -- four dollars for your time."

"我們會給你5美元——4元用來支付時間。"

And it said, "We don't want college students.

上面寫著，"我們不要大學生，

We want men between 20 and 50."

我們需要20到50歲之間的男性。 "

In the later studies, they ran women.

——他們在後來的實驗中也研究了女性——

Ordinary people: barbers, clerks, white-collar people.

他們都是普通人：理髮師，收銀員，白領等等。

So, you go down, and one of you is going to be a learner,

於是你們下去，其中一個扮演學生，

and one of you is going to be a teacher.

另一個扮演教師。

The learner's a genial, middle-aged guy.

學生是一個和藹的中年男子。

He gets tied up to the shock apparatus in another room.

在另外一間屋子裡，他被綁在一個電擊儀器上。

The learner could be middle-aged, could be as young as 20.

學生可能是中年人，也可能是二十多歲。

And one of you is told by the authority, the guy in the lab coat,

穿實驗室工作服的負責人，即權威角色，會告訴你們其中一個人說，

"Your job as teacher is to give this guy material to learn.

"你作為教師的工作就是讓這個人學習材料。

Gets it right, reward him.

記對了，就獎勵他。

Gets it wrong, you press a button on the shock box.

記錯了，你就按這個電擊盒上的按鈕。

The first button is 15 volts. He doesn't even feel it."

第一個按鈕是15伏特。他基本感覺不到。 "

That's the key. All evil starts with 15 volts.

這就是關鍵。所有的惡都是從15伏特開始的。

And then the next step is another 15 volts.

下一個再加15伏特。

The problem is, at the end of the line, it's 450 volts.

問題是，最後一個按鈕，是450伏特。

And as you go along, the guy is screaming,

隨著你不斷加電壓，那個人就會慘叫，

"I've got a heart condition! I'm out of here!"

"我有心臟問題！我要出去！"

You're a good person. You complain.

你是一個好人。你去投訴。

"Sir, who's going to be responsible if something happens to him?"

"先生，如果他出事了，誰來負責？"

The experimenter says, "Don't worry, I will be responsible.

實驗人員說，"不要緊，我來負責。

Continue, teacher."

請繼續，教師。 "

And the question is, who would go all the way to 450 volts?

問題是，誰會一直按到450伏特？

You should notice here, when it gets up to 375,

你們會注意到，到375伏特時，

it says, "Danger. Severe Shock."

上面寫著，"危險：強烈電擊"

When it gets up to here, there's "XXX" -- the pornography of power.

到這兒的時候，那兒標著"XXX"﹕限制級的權力。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

So Milgram asks 40 psychiatrists,

於是米爾格拉姆問了40個精神病醫生，

"What percent of American citizens would go to the end?"

"百分之多少的美國人會按到最高電壓？"

They said only one percent. Because that's sadistic behavior,

他們回答只有百分之1。因為那屬於虐待狂行為，

and we know, psychiatry knows, only one percent of Americans are sadistic.

而且我們知道，精神病學顯示，只有百分之1的美國人是虐待狂。

OK. Here's the data. They could not be more wrong.

好。這裡是研究資料。他們大錯特錯。

Two thirds go all the way to 450 volts. This was just one study.

三分之二的人會一直按到450伏特。這只是一個研究而已。

Milgram did more than 16 studies. And look at this.

米爾格拉姆做了超過16項研究。我們看一下這個。

In study 16, where you see somebody like you go all the way,

在第16個研究中，你可以看到跟你們一樣的人們有百分之90

90 percent go all the way. In study five, if you see people rebel, 90 percent rebel.