Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Krystian Aparta

    譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Marssi Draw

  • So a friend of mine was riding in a taxi to the airport the other day,

    有一天,我朋友搭計程車去機場,

  • and on the way, she was chatting with the taxi driver,

    在路上,她和計程車司機聊天,

  • and he said to her, with total sincerity,

    司機很誠懇地對她說:

  • "I can tell you are a really good person."

    「我看得出來,你真的是個好人。」

  • And when she told me this story later,

    後來,當她告訴我這個故事時,

  • she said she couldn't believe how good it made her feel,

    她說她無法相信, 那句話讓她感覺這麼好,

  • that it meant a lot to her.

    那對她而言意義重大。

  • Now that may seem like a strong reaction from my friend

    那只是個完全陌生的人所說的話,

  • to the words of a total stranger,

    我朋友的反應似乎很強烈,

  • but she's not alone.

    但她並不孤單。

  • I'm a social scientist.

    我是社會科學家。 我研究的是好人的心理。

  • I study the psychology of good people,

    我的領域中的研究指出, 我們很多人會非常在乎

  • and research in my field says many of us care deeply

    「感覺自己是個好人」 和「被視為是個好人」。

  • about feeling like a good person and being seen as a good person.

    你對於「好人」的定義、 你對於「好人」的定義,

  • Now, your definition of "good person" and your definition of "good person"

    還有也許那位計程車司機 對於「好人」的定義——

  • and maybe the taxi driver's definition of "good person" --

    我們可能都有不同的定義,

  • we may not all have the same definition,

    但不論我們的定義是什麼,

  • but within whatever our definition is,

    在那定義中的道德身分 對許多人而言是很重要的。

  • that moral identity is important to many of us.

    如果有人挑戰它,

  • Now, if somebody challenges it, like they question us for a joke we tell,

    比如他們質疑我們所說的笑話,

  • or maybe we say our workforce is homogenous,

    或是也許我們說 大家的勞動力是同樣的,

  • or a slippery business expense,

    或是棘手的營業支出,

  • we go into red-zone defensiveness a lot of the time.

    大多時候,我們會進入 防禦的紅色警戒區。

  • I mean, sometimes we call out

    我的意思是,有時我們會大聲說出

  • all the ways in which we help people from marginalized groups,

    我們用了哪些方式 去幫助被邊緣化的族群,

  • or we donate to charity,

    或是我們捐錢給慈善機構,

  • or the hours we volunteer to nonprofits.

    或是我們在非營利機構 當了幾小時的志工。

  • We work to protect that good person identity.

    我們會努力保護那個好人的身分。

  • It's important to many of us.

    那對許多人而言是很重要的。

  • But what if I told you this?

    但如果我告訴你這件事呢?

  • What if I told you that our attachment to being good people

    如果我告訴你,我們 對於「當好人」的依附感

  • is getting in the way of us being better people?

    其實會阻礙我們 成為「更好的人」呢?

  • What if I told you that our definition of "good person" is so narrow,

    如果我告訴你,

  • it's scientifically impossible to meet?

    我們對於「好人」的 定義非常狹隘,

  • And what if I told you the path to being better people

    在科學上來看,要成為 這種人是不可能的呢?

  • just begins with letting go of being a good person?

    如果我告訴你,邁向 成為「更好的人」之路

  • Now, let me tell you a little bit about the research

    開始於放下想要當好人的執念呢?

  • about how the human mind works

    讓我跟各位稍微 說明一下這個研究,

  • to explain.

    人腦如何運作的研究, 來解釋這個現象。

  • The brain relies on shortcuts to do a lot of its work.

    大腦在做許多工作時,要仰賴捷徑。

  • That means a lot of the time,

    那就表示,大多時候

  • your mental processes are taking place outside of your awareness,

    你不會意識到你的 心理過程正在發生,

  • like in low-battery, low-power mode in the back of your mind.

    就像是在你的大腦背景 以省電模式在運作。

  • That's, in fact, the premise of bounded rationality.

    事實上,那就是 「有限理性」的前提。

  • Bounded rationality is the Nobel Prize-winning idea

    有限理性這個概念贏得了諾貝爾獎,

  • that the human mind has limited storage resources,

    指出人腦中用來儲存的資源有限,

  • limited processing power,

    處理的能力也有限,

  • and as a result, it relies on shortcuts to do a lot of its work.

    因此,它在做許多工作的時候 會需要仰賴捷徑。

  • So for example,

    比如,

  • some scientists estimate that in any given moment ...

    有些科學家估計,在任何時刻……

  • Better, better click, right? There we go.

    (彈指)彈好一點,有了。

  • (Laughter)

    (笑聲)

  • At any given moment,

    在任何時刻,

  • 11 million pieces of information are coming into your mind.

    都會有一千一百萬則資訊 進入你的大腦。

  • Eleven million.

    一千一百萬。

  • And only 40 of them are being processed consciously.

    當中只有四十則會被有意識地處理。

  • So 11 million, 40.

    所以,一千一百萬,四十。

  • I mean, has this ever happened to you?

    你有沒有遇過這種狀況?

  • Have you ever had a really busy day at work,

    你是否曾經忙了一天的工作,

  • and you drive home,

    開車回家,

  • and when you get in the door,

    進了家門,

  • you realize you don't even remember the drive home,

    你才發現你都不記得 你是怎麼開車回來的,

  • like whether you had green lights or red lights.

    經過的是紅燈或綠燈都不記得?

  • You don't even remember. You were on autopilot.

    你都不會記得。你是在自動駕駛。

  • Or have you ever opened the fridge,

    或者,你是否曾經打開冰箱,

  • looked for the butter,

    想要找奶油,

  • swore there is no butter,

    發誓沒有看到裡面有任何奶油,

  • and then realized the butter was right in front of you the whole time?

    接著才發現奶油 其實一直都在你面前?

  • These are the kinds of "whoops" moments that make us giggle,

    這些是讓我們發笑的 「哎喲」時刻,

  • and this is what happens in a brain

    會發生這種狀況,就是因為大腦

  • that can handle 11 million pieces of information coming in

    能夠處理一千一百萬則 輸入的資訊,

  • with only 40 being processed consciously.

    但當中卻只有四十則 是有意識地在處理。

  • That's the bounded part of bounded rationality.

    那就是有限理性的有限部分。

  • This work on bounded rationality

    關於有限理性的這項研究,

  • is what's inspired work I've done with my collaborators

    成為我的靈感,

  • Max Bazerman and Mahzarin Banaji,

    讓我和麥斯.貝澤曼 及瑪札琳.貝納基合作研究

  • on what we call bounded ethicality.

    我們所謂的「有限倫理」。

  • So it's the same premise as bounded rationality,

    它的前提和有限理性是一樣的,

  • that we have a human mind that is bounded in some sort of way

    也就是,我們的大腦

  • and relying on shortcuts,

    有某種限制且要仰賴捷徑,

  • and that those shortcuts can sometimes lead us astray.

    而那些捷徑有時可能會 讓我們偏離正道。

  • With bounded rationality,

    就有限理性來說,

  • perhaps it affects the cereal we buy in the grocery store,

    也許它會影響我們 到雜貨店買的麥片,

  • or the product we launch in the boardroom.

    或是我們在董事會上發表的產品。

  • With bounded ethicality, the human mind,

    就有限倫理來說,人腦,

  • the same human mind,

    同樣的人腦,

  • is making decisions,

    會做決策,

  • and here, it's about who to hire next,

    在這裡,決定的是接下來要僱用誰,

  • or what joke to tell

    或是要說什麼笑話,

  • or that slippery business decision.

    或是棘手的營業支出。

  • So let me give you an example of bounded ethicality at work.

    所以,讓我舉個例子 說明有限倫理怎麼運作。

  • Unconscious bias is one place

    其中一個能看見有限倫理 有什麼效應的地方,

  • where we see the effects of bounded ethicality.

    就是無意識偏見。

  • So unconscious bias refers to associations we have in our mind,

    無意識偏見指的是, 我們的腦中都有一些關聯性,

  • the shortcuts your brain is using to organize information,

    我們的大腦會用 這些捷徑來組織資訊,

  • very likely outside of your awareness,

    很可能是你沒有意識到的,

  • not necessarily lining up with your conscious beliefs.

    不一定會和你的意識信念有一致性。

  • Researchers Nosek, Banaji and Greenwald

    諾賽克、貝納基, 和格林華德這些研究者

  • have looked at data from millions of people,

    研究了數百萬人的資料,

  • and what they've found is, for example,

    他們的發現是,比如,

  • most white Americans can more quickly and easily

    大部分白種美國人 會比較快也比較容易

  • associate white people and good things

    將白人與好事連結起來,

  • than black people and good things,

    勝過將黑人與好事連結起來,

  • and most men and women can more quickly and easily associate

    而大部分的男性和女性 都會比較快也比較容易

  • men and science than women and science.

    將男性和科學連結起來, 勝過將女性和科學連結起來。

  • And these associations don't necessarily line up

    這些關聯性不見得

  • with what people consciously think.

    會和人們有意識時的想法一致。

  • They may have very egalitarian views, in fact.

    事實上,這些人可能 有非常平等的觀點。

  • So sometimes, that 11 million and that 40 just don't line up.

    所以,有時,那一千一百萬則資訊 和那四十則資訊並沒有一致性。

  • And here's another example:

    還有一個例子。

  • conflicts of interest.

    利益衝突。

  • So we tend to underestimate how much a small gift --

    我們傾向會低估一個小禮物——

  • imagine a ballpoint pen or dinner --

    想像那是一枝原子筆或一頓晚餐——

  • how much that small gift can affect our decision making.

    一個小禮物對我們的決策 有多大的影響。

  • We don't realize that our mind is unconsciously lining up evidence

    我們並不知道,我們的大腦 會無意識地整理出證據

  • to support the point of view of the gift-giver,

    來支持送禮者的觀點,

  • no matter how hard we're consciously trying to be objective and professional.

    不論我們的意識多麼努力去反對, 去保持專業,都沒有用。

  • We also see bounded ethicality --

    我們也會看到有限倫理——

  • despite our attachment to being good people,

    儘管我們很喜愛「當好人」,

  • we still make mistakes,

    我們仍然會犯錯,

  • and we make mistakes that sometimes hurt other people,

    我們犯的錯有時會傷害別人,

  • that sometimes promote injustice,

    有時會造成不公正,

  • despite our best attempts,

    儘管我們盡力嘗試了,

  • and we explain away our mistakes rather than learning from them.

    而我們會從我們的錯誤中辯解, 而不是從我們的錯誤中學習。

  • Like, for example,

    比如,

  • when I got an email from a female student in my class

    我收到一封我班上的 一名女學生寄來的電子郵件,

  • saying that a reading I had assigned,

    信上提到我分派的一項閱讀作業,

  • a reading I had been assigning for years,

    我多年來都會分派 學生做的閱讀作業,

  • was sexist.

    是有性別主義的。

  • Or when I confused two students in my class

    或是,我分不清我班上

  • of the same race --

    兩個同種族的學生——

  • look nothing alike --

    他們長得一點也不像——

  • when I confused them for each other

    我會把他們兩個搞混,

  • more than once, in front of everybody.

    不只一次,且是在大家面前。

  • These kinds of mistakes send us, send me,

    這些錯誤會讓我們,會讓我,

  • into red-zone defensiveness.

    進入防禦的紅色警戒區。

  • They leave us fighting for that good person identity.

    它們會讓我們努力爭取好人身分。

  • But the latest work that I've been doing on bounded ethicality with Mary Kern

    但我和瑪麗.肯恩最新合作的 有限倫理研究指出,

  • says that we're not only prone to mistakes --

    我們不只經常會犯錯——

  • that tendency towards mistakes depends on how close we are to that red zone.

    犯錯的傾向是依據我們 有多靠近那紅色警戒區。

  • So most of the time, nobody's challenging our good person identity,

    所以,大部分的時候, 沒有人會挑戰我們的好人身分,

  • and so we're not thinking too much

    我們就不會針對

  • about the ethical implications of our decisions,

    我們決策的倫理意涵想太多,

  • and our model shows that we're then spiraling

    而我們的模型顯示, 接著,大部分的時候,

  • towards less and less ethical behavior most of the time.

    我們就會越來越少 做出符合倫理的行為。

  • On the other hand, somebody might challenge our identity,

    另一方面,有人可能 會挑戰我們的身分,

  • or, upon reflection, we may be challenging it ourselves.

    或是,我們在反思的時候, 會自己挑戰自己的身分。

  • So the ethical implications of our decisions become really salient,

    所以,我們決策的倫理意涵 就變得非常突顯,

  • and in those cases, we spiral towards more and more good person behavior,

    在那些案例中,我們會 越做越多好人的行為,

  • or, to be more precise,

    或是,更精確地說,

  • towards more and more behavior that makes us feel like a good person,

    做更多讓我們感覺 自己是個好人的行為,

  • which isn't always the same, of course.

    當然,這兩者不見得是一樣的。

  • The idea with bounded ethicality

    有限倫理的概念是

  • is that we are perhaps overestimating

    我們可能高估了

  • the importance our inner compass is playing in our ethical decisions.

    我們的內在羅盤在我們 做倫理決策時的重要性。

  • We perhaps are overestimating how much our self-interest

    我們可能高估了我們的決策

  • is driving our decisions,

    被自利所驅使的程度,

  • and perhaps we don't realize how much our self-view as a good person

    也許我們不知道,

  • is affecting our behavior,

    我們把自己視為好人的自我觀點

  • that in fact, we're working so hard to protect that good person identity,

    對我們的行為有多大的影響,

  • to keep out of that red zone,

    事實上,我們太努力

  • that we're not actually giving ourselves space to learn from our mistakes

    去保護好人身分,

  • and actually be better people.

    保持不要踏入紅色警戒區,

  • It's perhaps because we expect it to be easy.

    以致於我們沒有真正 給予我們自己空間

  • We have this definition of good person that's either-or.

    來從錯誤中學習並成為更好的人。

  • Either you are a good person or you're not.

    可能是因為我們預期這會很容易。

  • Either you have integrity or you don't.

    我們對於好人的定義是 「是這樣,不然就是那樣」。

  • Either you are a racist or a sexist or a homophobe or you're not.

    你要嘛是好人,不然就不是。

  • And in this either-or definition, there's no room to grow.

    你要嘛很正直,不然就是不正直。

  • And by the way,

    你是種族主義者、性別主義者, 或恐同性戀者,不然你就不是。

  • this is not what we do in most parts of our lives.

    在「是這樣,不然就是那樣」的 這種定義中,沒有成長的空間。

  • Life, if you needed to learn accounting,

    順便一提,我們在生活中 大部分的時候,都不會這麼做。

  • you would take an accounting class,

    在人生中,如果你需要學習會計,

  • or if you become a parent,

    你會去修會計的課程,

  • we pick up a book and we read about it.

    或者,如果你初為人父母,

  • We talk to experts,

    我們就會去找本相關書籍來閱讀。

  • we learn from our mistakes,

    我們會和專家談,

  • we update our knowledge,

    我們會從錯誤中學習, 我們會把我們的知識更新,

  • we just keep getting better.

    我們會持續變更好。

  • But when it comes to being a good person,

    但談到「做好人」時, 我們認為它是

  • we think it's something we're just supposed to know,

    我們應該知道、我們應該去做的事,

  • we're just supposed to do,

    沒有努力帶來的益處或成長。

  • without the benefit of effort or growth.

    所以,我一直在想,

  • So what I've been thinking about

    如果我們能不要再想著要當好人,

  • is what if we were to just forget about being good people,

    放下這個執念,

  • just let it go,

    取而代之,設定更高的標準,

  • and instead, set a higher standard,

    成為「有好人特徵的人」的 更高標準,如何?

  • a higher standard of being a good-ish person?

    有好人特徵的人絕對還是會犯錯。

  • A good-ish person absolutely still makes mistakes.

    身為有好人特徵的人, 我總是在犯錯。

  • As a good-ish person, I'm making them all the time.

    但,身為有好人特徵的人, 我試圖從錯誤中學習,承認錯誤。

  • But as a good-ish person, I'm trying to learn from them, own them.

    我預期會犯錯,然後就去犯錯。

  • I expect them and I go after them.

    我知道錯誤會造成成本。

  • I understand there are costs to these mistakes.

    如果是像倫理、偏見、 多樣性,及包容這類議題,

  • When it comes to issues like ethics and bias and diversity and inclusion,

    會有真正的人需要付出真正的成本,

  • there are real costs to real people,

    我接受這一點。

  • and I accept that.

    事實上,身為有好人特徵的人,

  • As a good-ish person, in fact,

    我變得更會注意到我自己的錯誤。

  • I become better at noticing my own mistakes.

    我不用等其他人點出來。

  • I don't wait for people to point them out.

    我練習自己找出自己的錯誤,

  • I practice finding them,

    結果……

  • and as a result ...

    當然,有時是很丟臉的,

  • Sure, sometimes it can be embarrassing,

    有時會很不舒服。

  • it can be uncomfortable.

    有時,我們讓自己 處於一個脆弱的位置。

  • We put ourselves in a vulnerable place, sometimes.

    但透過那些脆弱,

  • But through all that vulnerability,

    就像我們在試著 學得更好的其他事情一樣,

  • just like in everything else we've tried to ever get better at,

    我們會看到進步。 我們會看到成長。

  • we see progress.

    我們允許自己變得更好。

  • We see growth.

    為什麼我們不給自己這樣的東西?

  • We allow ourselves to get better.

    在我們人生中的所有其他部分, 我們都會給自己成長的空間——

  • Why wouldn't we give ourselves that?

    除了這個部分,但在這個部分, 成長空間卻是最重要的。

  • In every other part of our lives, we give ourselves room to grow --

    謝謝。

  • except in this one, where it matters most.

    (掌聲)

  • Thank you.

  • (Applause)

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Krystian Aparta

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Marssi Draw

字幕與單字

影片操作 你可以在這邊進行「影片」的調整,以及「字幕」的顯示

B1 中級 中文 美國腔 TED 好人 倫理 定義 身分 理性

如何变成一个好人 (How to let go of being a "good" person and become a better person | Dolly Chugh)

  • 704 32
    NaiBoLiao 發佈於 2019 年 01 月 16 日
影片單字