I think for people like me in the world of the making of things,

1962 年，根據瑞秋•卡森寫的書「寂靜的春天」，

the canary in the mine wasn't singing.

對像我這樣創作物件領域的人而言，

And so the question that we might not have birds

礦坑中的黃絲雀不唱歌了。

became kind of fundamental to those of us wandering around

因此，「可能沒有鳥」這個問題，

looking for the meadowlarks that seemed to have all disappeared.

對四處找尋似已消失的北美野雲雀的我們

And the question was, were the birds singing?

變得至為根本。

Now, I'm not a scientist, that'll be really clear.

問題本來應該是：鳥在唱歌嗎？

But, you know, we've just come from this discussion of what a bird might be.

我不是科學家，這一點是很明白的。

What is a bird?

但是，我們剛剛才討論過「鳥」可能是什麼。

Well, in my world, this is a rubber duck.

什麼是「鳥」？

It comes in California with a warning --

在我的世界，這是個塑膠鴨。

"This product contains chemicals known by the State of California

它來自加州，附有警告：

to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm."

「此產品含有加州政府認定會

This is a bird.

造成癌症、畸胎、或其他生育傷害的化學物質。」

What kind of culture would produce a product of this kind

這是一隻鳥。

and then label it and sell it to children?

怎樣的文化會製造這種產品，

I think we have a design problem.

標示後，又賣給兒童？

Someone heard the six hours of talk that I gave

我想我們有設計的問題。

called "The Monticello Dialogues" on NPR, and sent me this as a thank you note --

有人聽了我在全國公共電台講六小時的

"We realize that design is a signal of intention,

「蒙提切羅對話」後，寄給我這個感謝詞：

but it also has to occur within a world,

「我們體認到設計是意圖的信號，

and we have to understand that world in order to

而它也必須發生在世界裡，

imbue our designs with inherent intelligence,

我們必須明白那個世界，

and so as we look back at the basic state of affairs

以便使固有的智慧注入我們的設計，

in which we design, we, in a way, need to go to the primordial condition

因此當我們回顧我們所設計

to understand the operating system and the frame conditions of a planet,

事物的基本狀態，我們有必要回到原始條件

and I think the exciting part of that is the good news that's there,

去了解星球的運行系統及架構條件，

because the news is the news of abundance,

我認為有個令人振奮的部分，即那裡存有好的消息，

and not the news of limits,

因為該消息是充裕的消息，

and I think as our culture tortures itself now

而不是稀少的消息，

with tyrannies and concerns over limits and fear,

而我認為既然我們的文化現在如此殘暴自虐，

we can add this other dimension of abundance that is coherent,

並對稀少及恐懼如此關切，

driven by the sun, and start to imagine

我們可加上這充裕的另一面向，它是穩固的、

what that would be like to share."

由太陽驅動的，然後開始想像

That was a nice thing to get.

分享會是什麼樣子。」

That was one sentence.

收到這個感覺不錯。

Henry James would be proud.

它只是一句話。

This is -- I put it down at the bottom,

亨利•詹姆斯將會感到驕傲。

but that was extemporaneous, obviously.

我把它放在投影片底下，

The fundamental issue is that, for me,

但顯然，這是一時興起的。

design is the first signal of human intentions.

在我看來，根本的議題是，

So what are our intentions, and what would our intentions be --

設計是人類意圖的第一個信號。

if we wake up in the morning, we have designs on the world --

那麼，我們的意圖是什麼，我們的意圖會怎樣 —

well, what would our intention be as a species

如果我們早上醒來，我們設計著這個世界 —

now that we're the dominant species?

身為一個物種，我們的意圖是什麼？

And it's not just stewardship and dominion debate,

既然我們是優勢物種。

because really, dominion is implicit in stewardship --

而那不只是掌理和統領的辯論，

because how could you dominate something you had killed?

因為說真的，統領意味著掌理 —

And stewardship's implicit in dominion,

因為你如何統領你殺死的東西？

because you can't be steward of something if you can't dominate it.

而掌理也意味著統領，

So the question is, what is the first question for designers?

因為你無法掌理事情，如果你無法統領它。

Now, as guardians -- let's say the state, for example,

因此，問題是：設計師的第一道問題是什麼？

which reserves the right to kill, the right to be duplicitous and so on --

現在身為守護者 — 例如國家，

the question we're asking the guardian at this point is

它擁有殺人、欺矇等權利 —

are we meant, how are we meant,

現在我們問守護者的問題是：

to secure local societies, create world peace

我們是否有意、或我們打算如何

and save the environment?

去保障地區社會、締造世界和平

But I don't know that that's the common debate.

及拯救環境？

Commerce, on the other hand, is relatively quick,

但是我不知道這是個常見的爭論。

essentially creative, highly effective and efficient,

另一方面，商業相對而言是快速的、

and fundamentally honest, because we can't exchange

本質上有創意、效率高、

value for very long if we don't trust each other.

且基本上是誠實的，因為如果沒有互信

So we use the tools of commerce primarily for our work,

我們很難保持企業的永續經營。

but the question we bring to it is,

因此，我們基本上使用商業工具來工作，

how do we love all the children of all species for all time?

但我們問它的問題是：

And so we start our designs with that question.

我們要如何珍愛所有物種及其後代直到永遠？

Because what we realize today is that modern culture

因此我們以這個問題開始設計。

appears to have adopted a strategy of tragedy.

因為今天我們了解的是現代文化

If we come here and say, "Well, I didn't intend

採用的策略會導致悲劇。

to cause global warming on the way here,"

如果我們到現在還說：「嗯，我没料到

and we say, "That's not part of my plan,"

會造成這樣的全球暖化」，

then we realize it's part of our de facto plan.

並且說：「那不是我原本的計畫」，

Because it's the thing that's happening because we have no other plan.

則我們知道，事實上這是我們所導致的後果。

And I was at the White House for President Bush,

因為我們缺乏其他配套措施，才導致這些事的發生。

meeting with every federal department and agency,

布希總統請我到白宮

and I pointed out that they appear to have no plan.

與聯邦各部門開會，

If the end game is global warming, they're doing great.

我指出他們好像沒有計畫。

If the end game is mercury toxification of our children

如果結局是要全球暖化，他們幹得很好。

downwind of coal fire plants as they scuttled the Clean Air Act,

如果結局是火力發電廠下風處兒童的汞中毒，

then I see that our education programs should be explicitly defined as,

因為他們扼殺了清淨空氣法案，

"Brain death for all children. No child left behind."

因而我認為我們的教育方案應該重新訂定為：

(Applause)

「全部兒童腦死，一個不留」。

So, the question is, how many federal officials

（掌聲）

are ready to move to Ohio and Pennsylvania with their families?

所以，問題是：有幾個聯邦官員

So if you don't have an endgame of something delightful,

準備好帶著家人移居到俄亥俄州和賓州？

then you're just moving chess pieces around,

因此如果你沒有能讓人愉悅的目的，

if you don't know you're taking the king.

那麼你就如無頭蒼蠅四處亂竄，

So perhaps we could develop a strategy of change,

因為你看不到目標。

which requires humility. And in my business as an architect,

因此也許我們可以想出一個策略來改變，

it's unfortunate the word "humility" and the word "architect"

那需要謙虛。在我從事的建築師行業中，

have not appeared in the same paragraph since "The Fountainhead."

佷不幸地，「謙虛」和「建築師」這兩個詞，

So if anybody here has trouble with the concept of design humility,

從 "The Fountainhead" 一書後，就不曾在同段文字出現過。

reflect on this -- it took us 5,000 years

在場如果有人對這個「設計師的謙虛」概念有疑問，

to put wheels on our luggage.

聽聽這句話：我們花了 5000 年

So, as Kevin Kelly pointed out, there is no endgame.

才為行李箱裝上輪子。

There is an infinite game, and we're playing in that infinite game.

因此，誠如 Kevin Kelly 所說，沒有結局。

And so we call it "cradle to cradle,"

是個無止境的賽局，我們身處在這個無止境的賽局中。

and our goal is very simple.

因此稱它為「從搖籃到搖籃」，

This is what I presented to the White House.

我們的目標非常單純。

Our goal is a delightfully diverse, safe, healthy and just world,

這是我對白宮的簡報。

with clean air, clean water, soil and power --

我們的目標是一個快樂而多元的、安全的、健康的及正義的世界，

economically, equitably, ecologically and elegantly enjoyed, period.

有著清淨的空氣、清淨的水、土壤和電力 —

(Applause)

經濟地、均衡地、環保地及優雅地享用。

What don't you like about this?

（掌聲）

Which part of this don't you like?

這句話中你有不喜歡的地方嗎？

So we realized we want full diversity,

哪一部分你不喜歡？

even though it can be difficult to remember what De Gaulle said

所以我們要充分多元，

when asked what it was like to be President of France.

即使記不住戴高樂被問及

He said, "What do you think it's like trying to run a country with 400 kinds of cheese?"

「當法國總統的感覺如何」時說了什麼。

But at the same time, we realize that our products are not safe and healthy.

他說：「你認為經營有 400 種乳酪的國家感覺如何？」

So we've designed products

但同時，我們知道我們的產品並不安全及健康。

and we analyzed chemicals down to the parts per million.

因此當我們設計出了產品，

This is a baby blanket by Pendleton that will give your child nutrition

我們分析其化學成份到 ppm 層次。

instead of Alzheimer's later in life.

這是 Pendleton 公司的嬰兒毯，它給你的小孩養分

We can ask ourselves, what is justice,

而不是老年痴呆症。

and is justice blind, or is justice blindness?

我們可以自問，何謂正義、

And at what point did that uniform turn from white to black?

正義是否盲了、或正義就是盲目？

Water has been declared a human right by the United Nations.

在哪一點她的制服由白變黑？

Air quality is an obvious thing to anyone who breathes.

聯合國已經宣布了水資源同樣具有人權。

Is there anybody here who doesn't breathe?

需要呼吸的人都能很明顯的察覺空氣品質狀況。

Clean soil is a critical problem -- the nitrification, the dead zones

這裡有人不需要呼吸嗎？

in the Gulf of Mexico.

乾淨的土壤是個關鍵問題 — 土壤硝化、

A fundamental issue that's not being addressed.

墨西哥灣的死亡區。

We've seen the first form of solar energy

全是未處理的基本議題。

that's beat the hegemony of fossil fuels in the form of wind

我們已看到太陽能首先以風的形式

here in the Great Plains, and so that hegemony is leaving.

在在北美大平原區打敗了石化燃料的統治，

And if we remember Sheikh Yamani when he formed OPEC,

因此石化業者逐漸退出市場。

they asked him, "When will we see the end of the age of oil?"

如果我們記得當亞瑪尼親王在成立石油輸出國組織時，

I don't know if you remember his answer, but it was,

有人問他：｢石油時代何時會結束？｣

"The Stone Age didn't end because we ran out of stones."

不知你是否記得他的回答，他說：

We see that companies acting ethically in this world

｢石器時代不是因為我們用完石頭才結束的。｣

are outperforming those that don't.

我們看到世界上行為合於倫理的公司

We see the flows of materials in a rather terrifying prospect.

表現勝過那些不合倫理的。

This is a hospital monitor from Los Angeles, sent to China.

我們看到材料流的前景可慮。

This woman will expose herself to toxic phosphorous,

這是醫院的顯示器，從洛杉磯運到中國去。

release four pounds of toxic lead into her childrens' environment,

這個婦人將接觸有毒的磷，

which is from copper.

放出四磅有毒的鉛到她子孫的環境中，

On the other hand, we see great signs of hope.

那是從銅來的。

Here's Dr. Venkataswamy in India, who's figured out

另方面，我們看到希望的大好跡象。

how to do mass-produced health.

這是印度的 Venkataswamy 醫師，

He has given eyesight to two million people for free.

他想出了大量保健的方法。

We see in our material flows that car steels don't become car steel again

他免費替 200 萬人矯正視力。

because of the contaminants of the coatings --

從材料流我們發現，汽車鋼材不能再當汽車鋼材用，

bismuth, antimony, copper and so on.

因為它的塗裝含有：

They become building steel.

鉍、銻、銅、等等污染物。

On the other hand, we're working with Berkshire Hathaway,

所以它們變成了建材。

Warren Buffett and Shaw Carpet,

另一方面，我們和 Berkshire Hathaway,

the largest carpet company in the world.

Warren Buffett and Shaw Carpet 公司合作，

We've developed a carpet that is continuously recyclable,

它是世界最大的地毯公司。

down to the parts per million.

我們已開發了一種可持續循環利用的地毯，

The upper is Nylon 6 that can go back to caprolactam,

達到 ppm 的層次。

the bottom, a polyolephine -- infinitely recyclable thermoplastic.

上層是尼龍6，那可回收為己內醯胺，

Now if I was a bird, the building on my left is a liability.

底層是聚烯烴 — 一種可無限次回收的熱塑性塑料。

The building on my right, which is our corporate campus for The Gap

如果我是鳥，左邊的建築對我是危險的。

with an ancient meadow, is an asset -- its nesting grounds.

右邊的建築是我們為 The Gap 公司建的企業園區，

Here's where I come from. I grew up in Hong Kong,

屋頂上有原始的草原，是一項資產 — 築巢的好地方。

with six million people in 40 square miles.

這是我的故鄉。我在香港長大：

During the dry season, we had four hours of water every fourth day.

600 萬人住在 40 平方英哩土地上。

And the relationship to landscape was that of farmers who have been

旱季裡，每四天只供水四小時。

farming the same piece of ground for 40 centuries.

與土地的關係是這樣的：

You can't farm the same piece of ground for 40 centuries

農民在同一塊地耕種了 4000 年。

without understanding nutrient flow.

你不可能耕種同一塊土地 4000 年

My childhood summers were in the Puget Sound of Washington,

而不知它的養分流向。

among the first growth and big growth.

我的童年夏日在華盛頓普捷灣度過，

My grandfather had been a lumberjack in the Olympics,

徜徉在初生及茁壯的樹林裡。

so I have a lot of tree karma I am working off.

我祖父曾是奧林匹克伐木工，

I went to Yale for graduate school,

因此我背負許多樹木業障，正在設法消除。

studied in a building of this style by Le Corbusier,

我在耶魯大學讀研究所，

affectionately known in our business as Brutalism.

在這一棟柯比意風格的大樓裡讀書，

If we look at the world of architecture,

我們這行在情意上稱之為「粗野主義」。

we see with Mies' 1928 tower for Berlin,

如果我們看看建築的世界，

the question might be, "Well, where's the sun?"

我們看到密斯 1928 年的柏林高塔，

And this might have worked in Berlin, but we built it in Houston,

問題可能是：｢太陽在哪裡？｣

and the windows are all closed. And with most products

這也許對柏林可行，但我們把它蓋在休士頓，

appearing not to have been designed for indoor use,

窗子全關著。並由於大部分產品

this is actually a vertical gas chamber.

顯然不是設計供室內使用，

When I went to Yale, we had the first energy crisis,

這實質上是一個垂直的毒氣室。

and I was designing the first solar-heated house in Ireland

我在耶魯時，正逢第一次能源危機，

as a student, which I then built --

我設計了愛爾蘭的第一個太陽能暖氣房子，

which would give you a sense of my ambition.

當時我是學生，建了那房子 —

And Richard Meier, who was one of my teachers,

這讓你感受到我的雄心。

kept coming over to my desk to give me criticism,

Richard Meiers 是我的老師之一 ，

and he would say, "Bill, you've got to understand- --

常來我桌前批評我，

solar energy has nothing to do with architecture."

他會說：｢比爾，你要明白 —

I guess he didn't read Vitruvius.

太陽能和建築沒什麼關係。｣

In 1984, we did the first so-called "green office" in America

我猜他沒有讀過維特魯威。

for Environmental Defense.

1984 年，我們設計了美國第一棟所謂的「綠色辦公室」，

We started asking manufacturers what were in their materials.

為環保局設計的。

They said, "They're proprietary, they're legal, go away."

我們開始問生產商他們材料的成分。

The only indoor quality work done in this country at that time

他們說：「它們都是適宜的，它們都合法，滾開吧。」

was sponsored by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company,

當時全國唯一的室內品質研究

and it was to prove there was no danger

是由 R.J. Reynolds 菸草公司所贊助，

from secondhand smoke in the workplace.

研究目的是要證明

So, all of a sudden, here I am, graduating from high school in 1969,

工作區的二手菸是無害的。

and this happens, and we realize that "away" went away.

因此，突然間，1969 年我從高中畢業，

Remember we used to throw things away, and we'd point to away?

事情發生了，我們知道「丟棄」離我們而去了。

And yet, NOAA has now shown us, for example --

記得我們習慣拋棄物品、我們有理由抛棄？

you see that little blue thing above Hawaii?

而美國海洋及大氣管理局的資料顯示，像這個 —

That's the Pacific Gyre.

看到夏威夷上方的那塊藍色嗎？

It was recently dragged for plankton by scientists,

那是太平洋環流。

and they found six times as much plastic as plankton.

科學家近來抽取那邊的浮游生物，

When asked, they said, "It's kind of like a giant toilet that doesn't flush."

他們發現六倍於浮游生物的塑膠。

Perhaps that's away.

當被問到此事，他們說：「就像個阻塞的巨型馬桶。」

So we're looking for the design rules of this --

也許這就是抛棄。

this is the highest biodiversity of trees in the world, Irian Jaya,

因此我們在找尋設計規則 —

259 species of tree, and we described this

這是世界上最具多樣性的樹林，伊利安查亞，

in the book, "Cradle to Cradle."

259 個樹種，在「從搖籃到搖籃」

The book itself is a polymer. It is not a tree.

書中有提到。

That's the name of the first chapter -- "This Book is Not a Tree."

那本書用的紙是聚合物。它不使用樹木。

Because in poetics, as Margaret Atwood pointed out,

書的第一章就叫做「這本書不是一棵樹」。

"we write our history on the skin of fish

在詩裡，瑪格麗特•愛特伍德寫著：

with the blood of bears."

「我們把歷史寫在魚皮上

And with so much polymer, what we really need

用熊的血寫。」

is technical nutrition, and to use something

用了那麼多聚合物，我們真正需要的是技術養分，

as elegant as a tree -- imagine this design assignment:

並使用像樹一樣優雅的東西 —

Design something that makes oxygen, sequesters carbon,

想想這樣的一個設計習題：

fixes nitrogen, distills water, accrues solar energy as fuel,

設計一樣東西會造氧、固碳、

makes complex sugars and food, creates microclimates,

固氮、濾水、儲存太陽能為燃料、