the future of the world was bleak.

1970年，當我還是個牛津大學的學生時，

The population explosion was unstoppable.

全世界的未來是暗淡無光的。

Global famine was inevitable.

人口爆炸的情形我們擋不住，

A cancer epidemic caused by chemicals in the environment

全球性的饑荒似乎無法避免。

was going to shorten our lives.

環境中的化學殘留物造成癌症的蔓延，

The acid rain was falling on the forests.

使我們的壽命減短。

The desert was advancing by a mile or two a year.

酸雨落在森林裡。

The oil was running out,

沙漠的範圍每年都擴張1到2英里。

and a nuclear winter would finish us off.

石油就快被我們用完。

None of those things happened,

核子冬天會把我們殺死。（註：全球發動核戰後的情景）

(Laughter)

不過剛說的其實都沒有發生。

and astonishingly, if you look at what actually happened in my lifetime,

（笑）

the average per-capita income

令人驚訝的是，若你好好觀察我有生之年發生了什麼事情，

of the average person on the planet,

目前地球上，

in real terms, adjusted for inflation,

平均一個人的收入，

has tripled.

經過通膨的調整，實際上

Lifespan is up by 30 percent in my lifetime.

比以前成長了3倍。

Child mortality is down by two-thirds.

我的壽命比以前提升了30%。

Per-capita food production

兒童死亡率下降了三分之二 。

is up by a third.

平均一個人的食品生產量

And all this at a time when the population has doubled.

上升了三分之一。

How did we achieve that, whether you think it's a good thing or not?

我們在人口暴增2倍的情況下發生這些事情。

How did we achieve that?

怎麼做到的?不論你覺得這樣是好是壞，

How did we become

我們到底怎麼做到的?

the only species

我們是如何變成

that becomes more prosperous

生活密度越高

as it becomes more populous?

就越興旺的

The size of the blob in this graph represents the size of the population,

物種。

and the level of the graph

圖中的顏色班點代表人口，

represents GDP per capita.

圖中的縱座標

I think to answer that question

表示人均國民生產毛額。

you need to understand

我想去回答

how human beings bring together their brains

各位必須了解的疑問，

and enable their ideas to combine and recombine,

人類是如何匯集他們的大腦，

to meet and, indeed, to mate.

並讓腦中的概念結合再結合，

In other words, you need to understand

使其互相連結，進一步來說，是繁衍。

how ideas have sex.

換句話說，各位必須要了解的是

I want you to imagine

這些概念是如何交配的?

how we got from making objects like this

希望各位可以想像一下，

to making objects like this.

我們是如何將畫面上的這個東西

These are both real objects.

變成像右邊這個東西。

One is an Acheulean hand axe from half a million years ago

這二個都是真實存在的東西。

of the kind made by Homo erectus.

一個是50萬年前阿舍利手斧，

The other is obviously a computer mouse.

由直立式猿人所製作；

They're both exactly the same size and shape to an uncanny degree.

另一個很明顯是電腦滑鼠。

I've tried to work out which is bigger,

這二個東西的大小跟形狀，相似到不可思議的境界。

and it's almost impossible.

我試著計算出這二者哪個較大，

And that's because they're both designed to fit the human hand.

但幾乎是不可能的。

They're both technologies. In the end, their similarity is not that interesting.

那是因為，它們都是根據我們的手去設計的。

It just tells you they were both designed to fit the human hand.

它們都用了同樣的技術。最後，這二者的相似性就不是這麼令人感興趣了。

The differences are what interest me,

相似性只不過是告訴各位，它們都是根據人手去設計的。

because the one on the left was made to a pretty unvarying design

這二者差異性才是吸引我的地方。

for about a million years --

左邊的這個石器的設計樣貌維持了很長一段時間，

from one-and-a-half million years ago to half a million years ago.

大概用了一百萬年---

Homo erectus made the same tool

約150萬年前到50萬年前這段時間在使用。

for 30,000 generations.

直立人猿製作這個器具

Of course there were a few changes,

至少3萬個世代。

but tools changed slower than skeletons in those days.

當然中間可能會有一點點改變，

There was no progress, no innovation.

但在這段時間裡，這個工具改變的速度比猿人的骨骼還要慢。

It's an extraordinary phenomenon, but it's true.

沒有進步，沒有創新。

Whereas the object on the right is obsolete after five years.

這是一個多驚人的現象，不過這是真的。

And there's another difference too,

但右邊的這個東西，再過5年它就過時了。

which is the object on the left is made from one substance.

另一個不同點是，

The object on the right is made from

左邊的石器只用一種原料製成，

a confection of different substances,

右邊的滑鼠是

from silicon and metal and plastic and so on.

用很多原料製作成的複雜產品，

And more than that, it's a confection of different ideas,

像是矽、金屬、塑膠等等。

the idea of plastic, the idea of a laser,

滑鼠最不一樣的地方是，它是一個不同概念的的混合體，

the idea of transistors.

塑膠的概念，雷射光學的概念，

They've all been combined together in this technology.

電晶體的概念。

And it's this combination,

這些概念被組合在一起成為這項科技。

this cumulative technology, that intrigues me,

這是一個結合體，

because I think it's the secret to understanding

這累積的科技引起我的好奇心。

what's happening in the world.

因為我認為這其中的奧妙，

My body's an accumulation of ideas too:

可以用來解釋當今世界的發展。

the idea of skin cells, the idea of brain cells, the idea of liver cells.

我的身體也是一種概念的累積，

They've come together.

皮膚細胞的概念，大腦細胞的概念，肝臟細胞的概念。

How does evolution do cumulative, combinatorial things?

這些概念聚集在一起。

Well, it uses sexual reproduction.

人類的進化如何累積、組合?

In an asexual species, if you get two different mutations in different creatures,

答案是利用了有性生殖。

a green one and a red one,

一個無性生殖的物種，產生2個不同個體，且各為2種基因變異的結果，

then one has to be better than the other.

變異結果一種是綠色的，一種是紅色的，

One goes extinct for the other to survive.

若其中一種的較能適應環境，

But if you have a sexual species,

則另一種會滅絕，一種會繼續生存。

then it's possible for an individual

但，若是個有性生殖的物種，

to inherit both mutations

那一個個體是有可能

from different lineages.

從二個不同的血統中

So what sex does is it enables the individual

同時繼承到二邊的基因。

to draw upon

因此'有性'，能使個體

the genetic innovations of the whole species.

吸收

It's not confined to its own lineage.

整個物種的遺傳基因。

What's the process that's having the same effect

這樣就不會只侷限於單一的血統。

in cultural evolution

既然'性'能讓生物特性進化，

as sex is having in biological evolution?

那要經過怎樣的流程，

And I think the answer is exchange,

才能讓文化的演進中有相同效果？

the habit of exchanging one thing for another.

我想答案就是透過'交易'，

It's a unique human feature.

透過將物品交易到另一個地方的手法。

No other animal does it.

這是人類特性獨特的地方。

You can teach them in the laboratory to do a little bit of exchange --

沒有其他動物會這樣做。

and indeed there's reciprocity in other animals --

是可以在實驗室裡教動物一點簡單的交易手法。

But the exchange of one object for another never happens.

其他動物的確都會做出互惠的行為。

As Adam Smith said, "No man ever saw a dog

但是將一個物品跟其他個體交換是從未發生的。

make a fair exchange of a bone with another dog."

亞當斯密曾說：

(Laughter)

''沒人看過狗與狗公平交換骨頭。''

You can have culture without exchange.

（笑）

You can have, as it were, asexual culture.

沒有交易也會產生文化。

Chimpanzees, killer whales, these kinds of creatures, they have culture.

像是所謂的無性文化（asexual culture）。

They teach each other traditions

黑猩猩、殺人鯨等等，像這些哺乳類都有自己的文化。

which are handed down from parent to offspring.

牠們會互相教導傳統慣例，

In this case, chimpanzees teaching each other

像是透過父母傳承給子女的這種方式。

how to crack nuts with rocks.

舉個例，黑猩猩會互相教導

But the difference is

如何用石頭敲碎核桃殼。

that these cultures never expand, never grow,

但不一樣的點在於，

never accumulate, never become combinatorial,

這些文化從未擴大，從未成長，

and the reason is because

從未累積，也從來沒有組合過。

there is no sex, as it were,

其中的原因就是因為

there is no exchange of ideas.

這些文化沒有'性'，

Chimpanzee troops have different cultures in different troops.

這些文化裡沒有交易的概念在。

There's no exchange of ideas between them.

一群黑猩猩跟另一群黑猩猩的文化會略有不同。

And why does exchange raise living standards?

牠們之間沒有交易的概念在。

Well, the answer came from David Ricardo in 1817.

那，為什麼交易能夠提昇生活水準？

And here is a Stone Age version of his story,

這個問題的答案，大衛-李嘉圖在1817年時就說明了。

although he told it in terms of trade between countries.

他當時是用二個國家之間的交易情形來說明，

Adam takes four hours to make a spear and three hours to make an axe.

現在我用石器時代版本的案例。

Oz takes one hour to make a spear and two hours to make an axe.

亞當做一支矛要4小時，一支斧要3小時。

So Oz is better at both spears and axes than Adam.

奧茲做一支矛要1小時，一支斧要2小時。

He doesn't need Adam.

奧茲在矛與斧的製作速度上都優於亞當。

He can make his own spears and axes.

他根本不需要亞當。

Well no, because if you think about it,

他大可自己製作矛跟斧。

if Oz makes two spears and Adam make two axes,

但事情不是這樣的，想想看，

and then they trade,

如果奧茲做2支矛，亞當做2支斧，

then they will each have saved an hour of work.

他們就可以交易了，

And the more they do this, the more true it's going to be,

而且交易能使他們都少工作1個小時。

because the more they do this, the better Adam is going to get at making axes

他們做越多次，工作時數就少越多。

and the better Oz is going to get at making spears.

因為若他們做越多次，對亞當最有利的就是只做斧頭，

So the gains from trade are only going to grow.

而對奧茲最有利的就是只做矛。

And this is one of the beauties of exchange,

這樣一來透過交易的好處就變多了。

is it actually creates the momentum

這就是交易美妙的地方，

for more specialization,

交易居然成了

which creates the momentum for more exchange and so on.

專業化的原動力，

Adam and Oz both saved an hour of time.

而專業化又再驅使人做更多的交易。

That is prosperity, the saving of time

亞當跟奧茲都省下一個小時。

in satisfying your needs.

用更少的時間去滿足需求，

Ask yourself how long you would have to work

這就是繁榮的象徵。

to provide for yourself

各位可捫心自問，

an hour of reading light this evening to read a book by.

你需要工作多久

If you had to start from scratch, let's say you go out into the countryside.

才能換得在晚上點亮1小時的閱讀燈來看書？。

You find a sheep. You kill it. You get the fat out of it.

假設你一無所有要從頭打拼，回到了鄉下。

You render it down. You make a candle, etc. etc.

你找到了一支羊，宰了牠，然後得到牠身上的脂肪。

How long is it going to take you? Quite a long time.

然後你把脂肪萃取成油，做成蠟燭之類的東西。

How long do you actually have to work

這件事情你要花多久時間完成？要超級久。

to earn an hour of reading light

以當今在英國工作一天所得的薪水，

if you're on the average wage in Britain today?

要工作多久

And the answer is about half a second.

才能賺到點亮閱讀燈1小時的錢？

Back in 1950,

答案是0.5秒。

you would have had to work for eight seconds on the average wage

退到1950年，

to acquire that much light.

在那時候的薪資水準下，你必須工作8秒

And that's seven and a half seconds of prosperity that you've gained

才能點亮1小時的燈。

since 1950, as it were,

所以現在你比以前多賺了7.5秒。

because that's seven and a half seconds in which you can do something else,

從1950年來算的確是如此。

or you can acquire another good or service.

因為多出來的這7.5秒，你可以做其他的事情。

And back in 1880,

或者你可以去換取別的商品或服務。

it would have been 15 minutes

退到1880年，

to earn that amount of light on the average wage.

當時的薪資水準下

Back in 1800,

想賺到一樣的光量就得工作15秒。

you'd have had to work six hours

退到1800年，

to earn a candle that could burn for an hour.

你必須去工作6個小時

In other words, the average person on the average wage

才能賺到一支能點1小時的蠟燭。

could not afford a candle in 1800.

換句話說，1800年時平均一個人的薪水

Go back to this image of the axe and the mouse,

根本就買不起一根蠟燭。

and ask yourself: "Who made them and for who?"

回到剛剛的斧頭和滑鼠，

The stone axe was made by someone for himself.

你會問自己：是誰做出這些東西？又是為了誰而作？

It was self-sufficiency.

這石斧是某人為了自己而自製。

We call that poverty these days.

這叫自給自足。

But the object on the right

對這樣的生活我們稱為貧窮。

was made for me by other people.

但右邊這個滑鼠

How many other people?

是其他人為了我而作的。

Tens? Hundreds? Thousands?

這些人的數量有多少？

You know, I think it's probably millions.

10位？上百？上千？

Because you've got to include the man who grew the coffee,

我想人數大約是數百萬。

which was brewed for the man who was on the oil rig,

因為你必須把很多人算進去--

who was drilling for oil, which was going to be made into the plastic, etc.

像是所種的咖啡會被鑽油平台上的工人拿去泡的咖啡農；

They were all working for me,

還有那利用工人鑽出來的油去做出塑膠的人，諸如此類。

to make a mouse for me.

這些人都為我工作，

And that's the way society works.

為了我做出一個滑鼠。

That's what we've achieved as a species.

這是人類社會工作的方式。

In the old days, if you were rich,

身為人類這個物種，這是我們已經做到的。

you literally had people working for you.

在很久以前的年代，如果你很有錢，

That's how you got to be rich; you employed them.

會有人幫你工作。

Louis XIV had a lot of people working for him.

這就是你如何變有錢的；你僱用這些人。

They made his silly outfits, like this,

路易十六有一堆人幫他工作。

(Laughter)

這些人為他做了這件超蠢的外套。

and they did his silly hairstyles, or whatever.

（笑）

He had 498 people

這些人也幫他做了這超蠢的髮型，還有很多東西等等

to prepare his dinner every night.

當時有498個人

But a modern tourist going around the palace of Versailles

負責幫他做晚餐。

and looking at Louis XIV's pictures,

但一位現代觀光客到凡爾賽遊覽，

he has 498 people doing his dinner tonight too.

觀賞路易十六的這幅畫，

They're in bistros and cafes and restaurants

這觀光客同樣也有498個人幫他準備晚餐。

and shops all over Paris,

這些人是在全巴黎的

and they're all ready to serve you at an hour's notice with an excellent meal

小酒吧、咖啡店、餐廳、商店工作。

that's probably got higher quality

這些人隨時都能在一個小時內

than Louis XIV even had.

提供出非常精緻的餐點，

And that's what we've done, because we're all working for each other.

這些餐點可能還比路易十六吃的還棒。

We're able to draw upon specialization and exchange

我們能做到這件事，就是因為我們互相工作。

to raise each other's living standards.

我們能夠利用專業化與交易，

Now, you do get other animals working for each other too.

來互相提昇生活水準。

Ants are a classic example; workers work for queens and queens work for workers.

你會發覺，有其他生物也會互相工作。

But there's a big difference,

螞蟻就是典型的例子。工蟻為蟻后工作，蟻后為工蟻工作。

which is that it only happens within the colony.

但是這跟人類的差太多了，

There's no working for each other across the colonies.

因為螞蟻的互相工作只限於同一個聚落裡。

And the reason for that is because there's a reproductive division of labor.

牠們不會跨聚落的互相工作。

That is to say, they specialize with respect to reproduction.

另一個理由，因為螞蟻是「生殖性的分工體系」。

The queen does it all.

意思是說，牠們的分工是取決於生殖能力。

In our species, we don't like doing that.

繁殖就由蟻后完全負責。

It's the one thing we insist on doing for ourselves, is reproduction.

我們人類這個物種不會這樣做。

(Laughter)

因為我們最想要讓自己來的事情，就是繁殖。

Even in England, we don't leave reproduction to the Queen.

（笑）

(Applause)

即使在英國，我們也不會把繁殖的工作交給女王。

So when did this habit start?

（掌聲）

And how long has it been going on? And what does it mean?

所以這個行為是什麼時候開始的？（指互相工作）

Well, I think, probably, the oldest version of this

這行為持續多久了？這有什麼含意？

is probably the sexual division of labor.

嗯，我認為人類最古老的互相工作版本，

But I've got no evidence for that.

應該是從性別分工開始。

It just looks like the first thing we did

但我沒有證據可以證實。

was work male for female and female for male.

只是看起來，我們剛開始，

In all hunter-gatherer societies today,

就是男性為女性工作，女性也為男性工作。

there's a foraging division of labor

今日，在採獵者的聚落裡（以打獵和採集為生），

between, on the whole, hunting males and gathering females.

那是一種以覓食來分工的體系，

It isn't always quite that simple,

大致上分為男性狩獵者和女性採集者。

but there's a distinction between

當然不是都能這麼簡單地區分。

specialized roles for males and females.

不過這是男女之間分工的

And the beauty of this system

主要區分方式。

is that it benefits both sides.

而這種系統的美妙之處，

The woman knows

就是男女兩邊都有受益。

that, in the Hadzas' case here --