Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • I just did something I've never done before.

    我剛完成一件從未做過的事

  • I spent a week at sea on a research vessel.

    我乘上一艄調查船,在海上待了一個星期

  • Now I'm not a scientist,

    我並非科學家

  • but I was accompanying a remarkable scientific team

    但有一個優秀的科學家團隊與我同行

  • from the University of South Florida

    團隊成員來自南弗羅里達大學

  • who have been tracking the travels of BP's oil

    他們正在追踪BP原油

  • in the Gulf of Mexico.

    在墨西哥灣的流向

  • This is the boat we were on, by the way.

    這就是我們所乘坐的那艘船

  • The scientists I was with

    與我同行的科學團隊

  • were not studying the effect of the oil and dispersants on the big stuff --

    並非研究原油及散油劑對大型生物的影響

  • the birds, the turtles,

    像是對鳥類、烏龜、

  • the dolphins, the glamorous stuff.

    海豚、其它美麗生物的影響

  • They're looking at the really little stuff

    而是研究原油對微生物的影響

  • that gets eaten by the slightly less little stuff

    較小的生物會吃掉微型生物

  • that eventually gets eaten by the big stuff.

    小型生物最終會被大型生物吃掉

  • And what they're finding

    他們的研究顯示

  • is that even trace amounts of oil and dispersants

    極微量的原油或散油劑

  • can be highly toxic to phytoplankton,

    對浮游植物來說都是劇毒

  • which is very bad news,

    這是個很糟的消息

  • because so much life depends on it.

    因為很多生物都以浮游植物為生

  • So contrary to what we heard a few months back

    所以不同於我們數月前聽到的-

  • about how 75 percent of that oil

    也就是75%的原油

  • sort of magically disappeared

    神奇似的消失了

  • and we didn't have to worry about it,

    我們用不著再擔心-

  • this disaster is still unfolding.

    事實上,災難還在持續擴散

  • It's still working its way up the food chain.

    災難正沿著食物鏈向上延伸

  • Now this shouldn't come as a surprise to us.

    我們不該以此感到訝異

  • Rachel Carson --

    瑞秋.卡森

  • the godmother of modern environmentalism --

    現代環保之母

  • warned us about this very thing

    很早就警告過我們

  • back in 1962.

    早在1962年之時

  • She pointed out that the "control men" --

    卡森指出她稱為

  • as she called them --

    環境控制者的人

  • who carpet-bombed towns and fields

    污染了城鎮及田野的各個角落

  • with toxic insecticides like DDT,

    他們噴灑DDT之類的毒性殺蟲劑

  • were only trying to kill the little stuff, the insects,

    是為了除掉昆蟲之類的小型生物

  • not the birds.

    本非為了除掉鳥類

  • But they forgot this:

    但他們忘了:

  • the fact that birds dine on grubs,

    鳥類以幼蟲為食

  • that robins eat lots of worms

    知更鳥所吃下的蚯蚓

  • now saturated with DDT.

    體內都累積了大量DDT

  • And so, robin eggs failed to hatch,

    結果導致知更鳥的蛋無法孵化

  • songbirds died en masse,

    歌聲悠揚的鳥兒大量死亡

  • towns fell silent.

    城鎮因而變得安靜

  • Thus the title "Silent Spring."

    因此卡森寫書名為《寂靜的春天》

  • I've been trying to pinpoint

    我一直試圖解釋

  • what keeps drawing me back to the Gulf of Mexico,

    是什麼不斷吸引我回到墨西哥灣

  • because I'm Canadian,

    我是加拿大人

  • and I can draw no ancestral ties.

    祖先並非來自墨西哥灣

  • And I think what it is

    我想自己不斷回來

  • is I don't think we have fully come to terms

    是因為我認為大家尚未真正理解

  • with the meaning of this disaster,

    這場災難的影響

  • with what it meant to witness a hole

    親見大地被撕裂

  • ripped in our world,

    究竟代表什麼

  • with what it meant to watch the contents of the Earth

    看見原油從地底衝出

  • gush forth on live TV,

    在電視上被實況轉播

  • 24 hours a day,

    每天24小時

  • for months.

    數月如此,究竟代表什麼

  • After telling ourselves for so long

    長久以來,我們告訴自己

  • that our tools and technology can control nature,

    工具及科技可以控制大自然

  • suddenly we were face-to-face

    突然之間,我們必須面對

  • with our weakness,

    自己的軟弱

  • with our lack of control,

    我們束手無策

  • as the oil burst out

    看著原油由地底衝出

  • of every attempt to contain it --

    就算用盡方法也無法阻止油漏-

  • "top hats," "top kills"

    試圖「蓋頂」、「封頂」

  • and, most memorably, the "junk shot" --

    以及最讓人難忘的,投擲「垃圾彈」--

  • the bright idea

    這個天才法子

  • of firing old tires and golf balls

    要發射廢棄輪胎及高爾夫球

  • down that hole in the world.

    堵住地底的漏洞

  • But even more striking

    但比起那股由地底上衝的力量

  • than the ferocious power emanating from that well

    更加駭人的是

  • was the recklessness

    人們的魯莽、輕率

  • with which that power was unleashed --

    輕率所帶來的

  • the carelessness, the lack of planning

    是粗心大意、缺乏計劃

  • that characterized the operation

    計劃整個草率進行

  • from drilling to clean-up.

    從鑽油到清理油污都是如此

  • If there is one thing

    如果我們從 BP

  • BP's watery improv act made clear,

    缺乏實質的改進計劃學到些什麼

  • it is that, as a culture,

    那就是,在現今的文化下

  • we have become far too willing to gamble

    我們總是肆無忌憚地下注

  • with things that are precious

    賭的是我們最寶貴的資產

  • and irreplaceable,

    無法替代的資產

  • and to do so without a back-up plan,

    但我們並沒有後備計劃

  • without an exit strategy.

    也沒有退出策略

  • And BP was hardly

    此外,BP事件

  • our first experience of this in recent years.

    也並非近年來的首見

  • Our leaders barrel into wars,

    我們的領袖一頭鑽進戰爭

  • telling themselves happy stories

    卻用美好的故事自我催眠

  • about cakewalks and welcome parades.

    想像著閱兵儀式及迎軍遊行

  • Then, it is years of deadly damage control,

    但接下來卻是數年的災害控制

  • Frankensteins of sieges and surges

    無數城鎮被封鎖,各地興起反叛勢力

  • and counter-insurgencies,

    只得再次鎮壓反叛勢力

  • and once again, no exit strategy.

    同樣,我們沒有退出的策略

  • Our financial wizards routinely fall victim

    而聰明的金融界人士,一再地

  • to similar overconfidence,

    因過度自信而失腳

  • convincing themselves that the latest bubble

    他們一再說服自己,這次的泡沫

  • is a new kind of market --

    代表一種新型市場

  • the kind that never goes down.

    而這新的市場絕不會垮

  • And when it inevitably does,

    直到泡沫化真的發生

  • the best and the brightest

    那些最優秀、最聰明的人

  • reach for the financial equivalent of the junk shot --

    求助於金融界的「垃圾彈」--

  • in this case, throwing massive amounts

    意即,要將大眾急需的公款

  • of much-needed public money

    大量投擲到

  • down a very different kind of hole.

    一個很不一樣的漏洞

  • As with BP, the hole does get plugged,

    與 BP 一樣,洞是被封住了

  • at least temporarily,

    至少暫時封住了

  • but not before

    但至此

  • exacting a tremendous price.

    已付出巨額代價

  • We have to figure out

    我們必須想想清楚

  • why we keep letting this happen,

    為何讓同樣的事一再發生

  • because we are in the midst

    因為現今所處的時期

  • of what may be our highest-stakes gamble of all --

    要求我們拿出或許是最高額的賭注:

  • deciding what to do, or not to do,

    決定要對氣候變遷

  • about climate change.

    做什麼,或不做什麼

  • Now as you know,

    如你所知

  • a great deal of time is spent,

    美國以及世界各國

  • in this country and around the world,

    已花了許多時間

  • inside the climate debate,

    討論氣候議題

  • on the question of, "What if the IPC scientists

    也不斷在問,如果政府間氣候變遷小組的科學家

  • are all wrong?"

    都錯了呢?

  • Now a far more relevant question --

    再說一個更為要緊的問題--

  • as MIT physicist Evelyn Fox Keller puts it --

    就是 MIT 物理學家 Evelyn Fox Keller 所問的 --

  • is, "What if those scientists are right?"

    若是氣候變遷科學家都說對了呢?

  • Given the stakes, the climate crisis

    由於影響深遠,針對氣候問題

  • clearly calls for us to act

    我們必須立即採取行動

  • based on the precautionary principle --

    行動應本於預防為主的原則上

  • the theory that holds

    預防原則說

  • that when human health and the environment

    當人類健康及環境

  • are significantly at risk

    受到極大威脅

  • and when the potential damage is irreversible,

    且潛在的傷害將無法逆轉時

  • we cannot afford to wait

    我們就不能等待--

  • for perfect scientific certainty.

    期待見到科學確據才行動

  • Better to err on the side of caution.

    寧可謹慎也不要後悔

  • More overt, the burden of proving

    再來,談到舉證責任

  • that a practice is safe

    一項行動是否安全

  • should not be placed on the public that would be harmed,

    不該由可能受行動傷害的公眾來證明

  • but rather on the industry that stands to profit.

    而應該由可能從中獲利的產業來證明

  • But climate policy in the wealthy world --

    但富裕世界的氣候政策 --

  • to the extent that such a thing exists --

    如果這政策真的存在的話 --

  • is not based on precaution,

    並不是基於預防原則

  • but rather on cost-benefit analysis --

    而是基於成本效益分析 --

  • finding the course of action that economists believe

    所尋找的行動方案,是經濟學家認為

  • will have the least impact

    對國家生產總額

  • on our GDP.

    影響最小的方案

  • So rather than asking, as precaution would demand,

    因此不像預防原則所問的

  • what can we do as quickly as possible

    我們可以儘快採取那些行動

  • to avoid potential catastrophe,

    以預防可能的災難

  • we ask bizarre questions like this:

    我們反而問奇怪的問題,像是:

  • "What is the latest possible moment we can wait

    現狀最久可以維持到什麼時候

  • before we begin seriously lowering emissions?

    然後才需要認真的降低排放量?

  • Can we put this off till 2020,

    可以維持到2020

  • 2030, 2050?"

    2030, 2050?

  • Or we ask,

    或著我們會問:

  • "How much hotter can we let the planet get

    地球溫度還可上升幾度

  • and still survive?

    而人類可同時存活?

  • Can we go with two degrees, three degrees, or --

    可再加上2度、3度,或是--

  • where we're currently going --

    現在是說--

  • four degrees Celsius?"

    可再上升4度?

  • And by the way,

    順便一提

  • the assumption that we can safely control

    我們假設自己可以安全地控制

  • the Earth's awesomely complex climate system

    地球絕妙複雜的氣候系統

  • as if it had a thermostat,

    好似地球有個恆溫器

  • making the planet not too hot, not too cold,

    可將它調整到不太熱、不太冷

  • but just right -- sort of Goldilocks style --

    剛剛好的溫度、恰好適合居住的溫度

  • this is pure fantasy,

    這純粹是幻想

  • and it's not coming from the climate scientists.

    這種想法並非出自氣候科學家

  • It's coming from the economists

    而是來自於經濟學家

  • imposing their mechanistic thinking

    經濟學家將機械性的思考

  • on the science.

    運用於科學上

  • The fact is that we simply don't know

    事實是我們根本不知道

  • when the warming that we create

    我們所造成的暖化

  • will be utterly overwhelmed

    何時會因為循環作用

  • by feedback loops.

    使得地球無法負荷

  • So once again,

    所以我再問

  • why do we take these crazy risks

    為何我們拿最寶貴的東西

  • with the precious?

    下這場賭注呢?

  • A range of explanations

    一連串的解釋

  • may be popping into your mind by now,

    可能正從你腦海中冒出

  • like "greed."

    像是貪婪

  • This is a popular explanation, and there's lots of truth to it,

    許多人都如此解釋,而當中也不乏道理

  • because taking big risks, as we all know,

    因為我們都知道,承擔極大風險

  • pays a lot of money.

    會帶來極大的利益

  • Another explanation that you often hear for recklessness

    大家常為輕率所做的另一個解釋

  • is hubris.

    是傲慢

  • And greed and hubris

    貪婪以及傲慢

  • are intimately intertwined

    兩者時常如影隨形

  • when it comes to recklessness.

    特別是在談到輕率之時

  • For instance, if you happen to be a 35-year-old banker

    例如,如果你恰巧是一位35歲的銀行家

  • taking home 100 times more

    所賺取的收入

  • than a brain surgeon,

    是腦外科醫師的100倍之多

  • then you need a narrative,

    那你就需要使用敘事技巧

  • you need a story

    並需要一個故事

  • that makes that disparity okay.

    讓收入差距合理化

  • And you actually don't have a lot of options.

    而事實上,你沒有太多選擇

  • You're either an incredibly good scammer,

    你要不是技術高超的騙子

  • and you're getting away with it -- you gamed the system --

    厲害到可以瞞天過海、掌握全局

  • or you're some kind of boy genius,

    要不就最好是個天才小子

  • the likes of which the world has never seen.

    且是全世界都沒見過的那種

  • Now both of these options -- the boy genius and the scammer --

    而這兩種呢--天才或騙子--

  • are going to make you vastly overconfident

    都會讓你變得過分自信

  • and therefore more prone

    也因此更有可能

  • to taking even bigger risks in the future.

    在未來冒更大的風險

  • By the way, Tony Hayward, the former CEO of BP,

    順帶一提,BP 的前總裁東尼.海沃德

  • had a plaque on his desk

    在他桌上有一銘牌

  • inscribed with this inspirational slogan:

    上面刻了這段引人發省的標語:

  • "What would you attempt to do

    「如果你知道自己不會失敗,

  • if you knew you could not fail?"

    那你會嘗試做什麼事?」

  • Now this is actually a popular plaque,

    這銘牌倒是挺流行的

  • and this is a crowd of overachievers,

    喜歡的人各個野心勃勃

  • so I'm betting that some of you have this plaque.

    我猜你們當中也有人有這銘牌

  • Don't feel ashamed.

    別感到羞愧

  • Putting fear of failure out of your mind

    將害怕失敗的心情拋諸腦後

  • can be a very good thing

    可以是一件好事

  • if you're training for a triathlon

    像是當你在接受鐵人三項之時

  • or preparing to give a TEDTalk,

    或當你在準備 TEDTalk 之時

  • but personally, I think people with the power

    但我個人認為,這些人擁有強大權利

  • to detonate our economy and ravage our ecology

    可以對經濟及生態造成破壞

  • would do better having

    他們的牆上若有伊卡魯斯的畫像

  • a picture of Icarus hanging from the wall,

    或許會成就更好的事

  • because -- maybe not that one in particular --

    因為--未必一定要掛伊卡魯斯的畫像--

  • but I want them thinking about the possibility of failure

    但我要他們想想失敗的可能性

  • all of the time.

    無論何時都想到那可能性

  • So we have greed,

    所以我們都同意

  • we've got overconfidence/hubris,

    我們都變得過分自信/傲慢

  • but since we're here at TEDWomen,

    但既然我們來參與 TEDWomen

  • let's consider one other factor

    可以一同想想有什麼做法

  • that could be contributing in some small way

    或許可以貢獻一點微小力量

  • to societal recklessness.

    來抗衡社會的輕率魯莽

  • Now I'm not going to belabor this point,

    接下來這點,我不會說明過多

  • but studies do show that, as investors,

    不過據研究顯示,同為投資人

  • women are much less prone

    女性比起男性

  • to taking reckless risks than men,

    較少輕率地冒風險

  • precisely because, as we've already heard,

    這是因為,就如我們所知的

  • women tend not to suffer from overconfidence

    女性不會像男性那樣

  • in the same way that men do.

    過度地自我膨脹

  • So it turns out

    所以我們發現

  • that being paid less and praised less

    獲得較少的薪資及讚美

  • has its upsides --

    其實是有好處的--

  • for society at least.

    至少對社會而言是如此

  • The flipside of this

    反之

  • is that constantly being told

    不斷聽到他人對你說

  • that you are gifted, chosen

    你有天賦,是萬中選一的人才

  • and born to rule

    生來就要統御他人

  • has distinct societal downsides.

    這種說法對社會有害

  • And this problem -- call it the "perils of privilege" --

    且會產生問題--稱其為特權的危害--

  • brings us closer, I think,

    但我認為,也會讓我們了解

  • to the root of our collective recklessness.

    眾人行為輕率的根本原因

  • Because none of us -- at least in the global North --

    因為我們當中所有人--至少在北半球--

  • neither men nor women,

    不管男女

  • are fully exempt from this message.

    多少都受自我吹捧的言辭影響

  • Here's what I'm talking about.

    我所要談的就是這個

  • Whether we actively believe them

    不管我們是相信自我吹捧的言辭

  • or consciously reject them,

    或有意識的拒絕

  • our culture remains in the grips

    我們的文化依舊相信

  • of certain archetypal stories

    一些典型的故事

  • about our supremacy

    當中講述我們如何優秀