Name: TED】拉比大人喬納森-薩克斯。我們如何能夠無懼地共同面對未來（我們如何能夠無懼地共同面對未來｜拉比大人喬納森-薩克斯）。 (【TED】Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks: How we can face the future without fear, together (How we can face the future without fear, together | Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks))
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T07:31:02.000Z
Duration: 12 min 37 s

"These are the times," said Thomas Paine, "that try men's souls."

湯瑪斯·潘恩曾說：「眼下是考驗人們靈魂的時刻。」

而現在正是考驗我們靈魂的時刻。

This is a fateful moment in the history of the West.

這是西方史上決定命運的時刻。

We've seen divisive elections and divided societies.

我們見到了造成分裂的選舉 以及分化的社會。

We've seen a growth of extremism in politics and religion.

我們目睹極端主義在政治及宗教中壯大。

All of it fueled by anxiety, uncertainty and fear, of a world that's changing almost faster than we can bear.

這背後的刺激動因是焦慮、不確定性、及恐懼。因為世界改變太快， 快到讓我們幾乎無法承受。

And the sure knowledge that it's going to change faster still.

也因為我們很肯定地知道， 世界仍然會繼續快速改變下去。

I asked him, what was it like being in America during the recent presidential election?

我問他，在最近一次總統大選期間，身在美國是什麼感覺？

He said to me, "Well, it was like the man sitting on the deck of the Titanic with a glass of whiskey in his hand.

他對我說：「感覺就像一個人，坐在鐵達尼號的甲板上，手上拿著一杯威士忌。」

And he's saying, 'I know I asked for ice...but this is ridiculous.'"

他說：『我知道我要求要加冰……但這樣真的太誇張了！』」 （註：鐵達尼後來撞上冰山）

So is there something we can do, each of us, to be able to face the future without fear?

所以，是不是有什麼是我們能做的，我們每個人都能做的，能讓我們無懼地面對未來？

And one way into it is to see that perhaps the most simple way into a culture and into an age is to ask: What do people worship?

其中一種方法是要了解到，也許進入一種文化和一個時代最簡單的方式，就是問：人們崇拜什麼？

People have worshipped so many different things: the sun, the stars, the storm.

人們曾經崇拜、敬畏過許多不同的東西：如太陽、星星、暴風雨。

Some people worship many gods, some one, some none.

有些人崇拜多神， 有些人獨尊一神，有些人不信神。

In the 19th and 20th centuries, people worshipped the nation.

在十九和二十世紀，人們崇拜的是民族。

I think future anthropologists will take a look at the books we read on self-help, self-realization, self-esteem.

我認為未來的人類學家，會看看我們在閱讀的那些關於自我協助、自我實現、自我尊嚴的書。

They'll look at the way we talk about morality as being true to oneself.

他們會看看我們如何談論道德，說它就是忠於自我。

The way we talk about politics as a matter of individual rights.

看看我們如何談論政治，說它就是個人的權利。

And they'll look at this wonderful new religious ritual we have created.

他們也會看看我們所創造的，這個美好的新宗教儀式，

And I think they'll conclude that what we worship in our time is the self, the me, the I.

我想他們得到的結論會是：那個時代裡，人們所崇拜的就是自己。

It's liberating. It's empowering. It's wonderful.

這樣是自由而解放的， 這樣很有自主權，這樣很美好。

But don't forget that biologically, we're social animals.

但別忘了，在生物學上我們是社會動物。

We've spent most of our evolutionary history in small groups.

我們進化史的絕大部份都是以小團體的形式發生。

We need those face-to-face interactions where we learn the choreography of altruism.

我們需要面對面的互動，在這種互動中才能學到利他主義的運作道理。

And where we create those spiritual goods like friendship and trust and loyalty and love that redeem our solitude.

在這種互動中才能創造出靈性的善良，像是友誼和信賴、忠誠和愛，而這些才能夠解救我們的孤獨。

When we have too much of the "I" and too little of the "we," we can find ourselves vulnerable, fearful and alone.

當我們有太多的「我」、 太少的「我們」，就會發現自己很脆弱、很恐懼、很孤單。

It was no accident that Sherry Turkle of MIT called the book she wrote on the impact of social media "Alone Together."

並不意外，麻省理工的雪莉‧特克寫了一本關於社交媒體衝擊的書，書名為：「在一起孤獨」。

So I think the simplest way of safeguarding the future "you" is to strengthen the future "us".

我認為要保護未來的「你」，最簡單的方法是強化未來的「我們」。

the us of relationship, the us of identity, and the us of responsibility.

關係的我們、身份的我們、以及責任的我們。

So let me first take the us of relationship.

我可能會講些比較私人的事，請見諒。

Once upon a time, a very long time ago, I was a 20-year-old undergraduate studying philosophy.

很久、很久以前，我是個二十歲的大學生，主修哲學。

I was into Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and Sartre and Camus.

我對尼采、叔本華、 沙特、卡繆很感興趣。

I was full of ontological uncertainty and existential angst.

我充滿本體論的不確定性，以及存在主義的不安。

I was self-obsessed and thoroughly unpleasant to know.

我陷入自我著迷， 認識我這個人是很不愉快的事。

Until one day I saw across the courtyard, a girl who was everything that I wasn't.

直到有一天，我看見在庭院的另一頭有個女孩，她和我截然不同。

And 47 years, three children and eight grandchildren later, I can safely say it was the best decision I ever took in my life.

過了 47 年，有了三個孩子和八個孫子、孫女之後，我可以很有把握的說，這是我人生中做過最好的決定。

Because it's the people not like us that make us grow.

因為正是那些和我們不相像的人，讓我們成長。

And that is why I think we have to do just that.

那正是為什麼我們需要那樣做。

The trouble with Google filters, Facebook friends, and reading the news by "narrowcasting" rather than broadcasting means that we're surrounded almost entirely by people like us whose views, whose opinions, whose prejudices, even, are just like ours.

問題是 Google 濾過的搜尋、臉書挑過的朋友，以及「狹播」而非「廣播」的新聞，會讓我們處在跟自己很像的人當中，他們的觀點、意見、甚至偏見，都和我們很像。

And Cass Sunstein of Harvard has shown that if we surround ourselves with people with the same views as us, we get more extreme.

哈佛的凱斯·桑斯坦指出，如果我們都處在和我們有相同觀點的人群當中，我們會變得更極端。

I think we need to renew those face-to-face encounters with the people not like us.

我認為我們得要去重建面對面的接觸，和與我們不相像的人接觸。

I think we need to do that in order to realize that we can disagree strongly and yet still stay friends.

我認為我們需要那樣做，才能了解儘管我們的意見大不相同，但仍然能維持友誼。

It's in those face-to-face encounters that we discover that the people not like us are just people, like us.

在那些面對面的接觸中，我們才能發現那些不像我們的人，其實也只是人，就像我們一樣。

And actually, every time we hold out the hand of friendship to somebody not like us, whose class or creed or color are different from ours, we heal one of the fractures of our wounded world.

其實，每當我們對不像我們的人—階級、信條或膚色與我們不同的人，伸出友誼之手時，我們能治癒受創世界的一條裂痕。

Have you been to Washington? Have you seen the memorials?

你們曾去過華盛頓嗎？ 你們曾看過紀念碑嗎？

There's the Lincoln Memorial: Gettysburg Address on one side, Second Inaugural on the other.

那兒有林肯紀念碑，一面是蓋茲堡演講詞， 一面是連任演講詞。

You go to the Jefferson Memorial, screeds of text.

如果你去看傑佛遜的紀念碑，是冗長的文字。

Martin Luther King Memorial, more than a dozen quotes from his speeches.

馬丁路德金恩的紀念碑有超過十段截自他演說的語錄。

I didn't realize, in America you read memorials.

我之前不知道，原來在美國，紀念碑是要閱讀的。

Now go to the equivalent in London in Parliament Square and you will see that the monument to David Lloyd George contains three words:

若去倫敦的國會廣場看類似的東西，會看到大衛·勞合·喬治的紀念碑，上面只有三個字：

大衛·勞合·喬治。 （註：英文原文是三個字）

納爾遜·曼德拉則有兩個字， （註：他的英文名字是兩個字）

邱吉爾只有一個字： （註：只用英文的姓）就是邱吉爾。

Why the difference? I'll tell you why the difference.

為什麼會有這種差別？ 我來告訴你們為什麼：

Because America was from the outset a nation of wave after wave of immigrants.

因為美國一開始是個一波又一波移民形成的國家。

So it had to create an identity which it did by telling a story which you learned at school, you read on memorials.

它需要創造自己的身份，而它創造身份的方式就是說故事，你會在學校學到這故事， 你會在紀念碑上讀到這故事。

And you heard repeated in presidential inaugural addresses.

你會在總統就職演說重覆聽到這故事。

Britain until recently wasn't a nation of immigrants, so it could take identity for granted.

近代之前，英國並不是個移民國家，它可以把身份視為理所當然。

The trouble is now that two things have happened which shouldn't have happened together.

問題是現在發生了兩件原本不該一起發生的事。

The first thing is in the West we've stopped telling this story of who we are and why, even in America.

第一件事是西方不再說關於我們是誰以及為什麼的故事，甚至在美國本土都不說了。

And at the same time, immigration is higher than it's ever been before.

同時，移民的數量卻是史上最高。

So when you tell a story and your identity is strong, you can welcome the stranger.

當你會說故事， 且你的身份很強而有力時，你可以歡迎陌生人。

But when you stop telling the story, your identity gets weak.

但當你不再說故事，你的身份變弱了。

就會感覺到來自陌生人的威脅。

I tell you, Jews have been scattered and dispersed and exiled for 2,000 years.

我告訴各位，猶太人分散於各地且被放逐了兩千年。

我們從來沒有失去我們的身份。

Why? Because at least once a year, on the festival of Passover, we told our story and we taught it to our children.

為什麼？因為每年至少一次，在踰越節時，我們會說我們的故事， 將這個故事教給我們的孩子。

And we ate the unleavened bread of affliction and tasted the bitter herbs of slavery.

我們會吃未發酵的苦餅，品嚐當年奴隸的苦難。

所以我們從來沒有失去我們的身份。

I think collectively we've got to get back to telling our story, who we are, where we came from, what ideals by which we live.

我想我們得要一起回去說我們的故事，關於我們是誰、我們來自何方、我們生活的理想是什麼的故事。

And if that happens, we will become strong enough to welcome the stranger and say,

如果這能夠實現，我們就會夠堅強，就能歡迎陌生人，並說：

"Come and share our lives, share our stories, share our aspirations and dreams."

「來，分享我們的生命，分享我們的故事，分享我們的熱望和夢想。」

最後，來談談「責任的我們」。

My favorite phrase in all of politics, very American phrase, "We the people".

在所有政治範疇中，我最喜歡的片語是句非常美國式的片語：「我們人民」。

Because it says that we all share collective responsibility for our collective future.

因為它意味著對於我們集體的未來，我們有著集體的責任。

And that's how things really are and should be.

事實就是這樣，也應該是這樣。

Have you noticed how magical thinking has taken over our politics?

你們是否留意到，我們的政治已經被奇幻思維給主導了？

專題演講

托福雅思

多益考試

TED】拉比大人喬納森-薩克斯。我們如何能夠無懼地共同面對未來（我們如何能夠無懼地共同面對未來｜拉比大人喬納森-薩克斯）。 (【TED】Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks: How we can face the future without fear, together (How we can face the future without fear, together | Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks))