07:46
TED2009

Dan Dennett: Cute, sexy, sweet, funny

ダニエル・デネット:かわいさ、セクシーさ、甘さ、おかしさ

Filmed:

なぜ赤ちゃんはかわいいのか?なぜケーキは甘いのか?かわいさ、甘さ、セクシーさ(とおかしさのマシュー・ハーレーによる新理論)について、哲学者ダニエル・デネットは予想もできない進化の推論を紹介します。

- Philosopher, cognitive scientist
Dan Dennett argues that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes. His latest book is "Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking," Full bio

I’m going around the world giving talks about Darwin,
世界中でダーウィンに関する講演をしていて
00:12
and usually what I’m talking about
彼の推論の奇妙な逆転について
00:15
is Darwin’s strange inversion of reasoning.
よく話しています
00:17
Now that title, that phrase, comes from a critic, an early critic,
このフレーズは初期の批評家によるものです
00:20
and this is a passage that I just love, and would like to read for you.
私はこの一節が好きです ご紹介しましょう
00:25
"In the theory with which we have to deal, Absolute Ignorance is the artificer;
「いま問題としている理論においては 絶対的な無知が考案者である
00:29
so that we may enunciate as the fundamental principle of the whole system,
それゆえ 全システムの基本原理はこう明言できる
00:34
that, in order to make a perfect and beautiful machine,
"完璧で美しい機械を作るために
00:39
it is not requisite to know how to make it.
それを作る方法を知る必要はない"
00:42
This proposition will be found on careful examination to express,
注意深く検討すれば この提案は
00:45
in condensed form, the essential purport of the Theory,
ダーウィン氏の理論の要点を凝縮して表現し
00:49
and to express in a few words all Mr. Darwin’s meaning;
彼の意味することを簡潔に表現している
00:53
who, by a strange inversion of reasoning,
奇妙な推論の逆転によって 彼は
00:57
seems to think Absolute Ignorance fully qualified
完全なる無知が 完全なる知恵に代わって
01:01
to take the place of Absolute Wisdom in the achievements of creative skill."
創造たる技をすべて達成できると考えているようだ」
01:04
Exactly. Exactly. And it is a strange inversion.
まさにこれです 推論の奇妙な逆転ですね
01:10
A creationist pamphlet has this wonderful page in it:
創造論者のパンフレットに面白いページがあります
01:17
"Test Two:
「質問2:
01:21
Do you know of any building that didn’t have a builder? Yes/No.
建築者のいない建物を知っていますか? はい、いいえ
01:23
Do you know of any painting that didn’t have a painter? Yes/No.
画家のいない絵画を知っていますか? はい、いいえ
01:27
Do you know of any car that didn’t have a maker? Yes/No.
製造者のいない車を知っていますか? はい、いいえ
01:30
If you answered 'Yes' for any of the above, give details."
どれかに"はい"と答えた人は、詳細を書いてください」
01:34
A-ha! I mean, it really is a strange inversion of reasoning.
なるほど!これによると ダーウィンの推論は全く奇妙に逆転していますね
01:39
You would have thought it stands to reason
設計には優れた設計者が必要なのは
01:45
that design requires an intelligent designer.
もっともだと思うでしょう
01:49
But Darwin shows that it’s just false.
しかし ダーウィンは違うと言います
01:53
Today, though, I’m going to talk about Darwin’s other strange inversion,
さて 今日はダーウィンの逆転した奇妙な推論の他の例を話します
01:55
which is equally puzzling at first, but in some ways just as important.
始めは混乱しますがこちらも同じように重要なことです
02:00
It stands to reason that we love chocolate cake because it is sweet.
チョコレートケーキは甘いから好きというのはもっともです
02:06
Guys go for girls like this because they are sexy.
男性がこういう女性を好むのはセクシーだから
02:13
We adore babies because they’re so cute.
赤ちゃんを溺愛するのはかわいいから
02:19
And, of course, we are amused by jokes because they are funny.
そして ジョークが楽しいのはおかしいから
02:23
This is all backwards. It is. And Darwin shows us why.
これらは全て反対です なぜなのかダーウィンが示してくれます
02:32
Let’s start with sweet. Our sweet tooth is basically an evolved sugar detector,
まずは甘さですが 私達が甘味が好きなのは糖分探知機として進化したからです
02:39
because sugar is high energy, and it’s just been wired up to the preferer,
大雑把に言えば 糖分は高エネルギーなので
02:47
to put it very crudely, and that’s why we like sugar.
それを好む様に 脳の配線が組まれたのです
02:51
Honey is sweet because we like it, not "we like it because honey is sweet."
私達が好きだからハチミツは甘いのです 「甘いから 私達はハチミツを好む」ではないです
02:56
There’s nothing intrinsically sweet about honey.
本質的にハチミツに甘さがあるわけではありません
03:03
If you looked at glucose molecules till you were blind,
ブドウ糖分子を凝視しても
03:08
you wouldn’t see why they tasted sweet.
それがなぜ甘いのかはわからないでしょう
03:12
You have to look in our brains to understand why they’re sweet.
なぜ甘いのかを知るには脳の中を見なければいけません
03:15
So if you think first there was sweetness,
ですから始めに甘さがあり
03:21
and then we evolved to like sweetness,
私達が甘さを好むように進化したと考えるのは
03:23
you’ve got it backwards; that’s just wrong. It’s the other way round.
順番が違っています 本当はその反対です
03:25
Sweetness was born with the wiring which evolved.
甘さは進化上の関係付けの中で生まれました
03:29
And there’s nothing intrinsically sexy about these young ladies.
同じように この女性たちが本質的にセクシーなのではありません
03:33
And it’s a good thing that there isn’t, because if there were,
これはいいことです さもなければ
03:37
then Mother Nature would have a problem:
自然の摂理に問題が起こります
03:42
How on earth do you get chimps to mate?
チンパンジーはどうやって相手を見つければいいのでしょう?
03:46
Now you might think, ah, there’s a solution: hallucinations.
妄想を頼りにするやり方もあるかもしれないですが
03:53
That would be one way of doing it, but there’s a quicker way.
もっと手っ取り早い方法があります
04:01
Just wire the chimps up to love that look,
こういう外見を好む様に脳を配線すればいいのです
04:05
and apparently they do.
実際 そうなっているようです
04:08
That’s all there is to it.
たったそれだけのことです
04:11
Over six million years, we and the chimps evolved our different ways.
600万年以上にわたりヒトとチンパンジーは別々の進化を経ました
04:16
We became bald-bodied, oddly enough;
おかしなことに
04:20
for one reason or another, they didn’t.
私達の体毛は退化しました
04:23
If we hadn’t, then probably this would be the height of sexiness.
そうでなければこれが最高のセクシーさだったでしょう
04:27
Our sweet tooth is an evolved and instinctual preference for high-energy food.
私達の甘味嗜好も高エネルギーの食物を本能的に好むように進化した結果です
04:39
It wasn’t designed for chocolate cake.
チョコレートケーキのためにデザインされたわけではありません
04:44
Chocolate cake is a supernormal stimulus.
チョコレートケーキは超正常刺激です
04:47
The term is owed to Niko Tinbergen,
この用語はカモメの有名な実験をした
04:50
who did his famous experiments with gulls,
ニコラース・ティンバーゲンによるものです
04:52
where he found that that orange spot on the gull’s beak --
彼はカモメのクチバシに着目し
04:54
if he made a bigger, oranger spot
オレンジの斑点を大きくすると
04:58
the gull chicks would peck at it even harder.
ヒナはより強くその部分をつつくようになることを発見しました
05:00
It was a hyperstimulus for them, and they loved it.
それは過剰な刺激ですが ヒナはそれを好みます
05:02
What we see with, say, chocolate cake
このことから言えるのは チョコレートケーキは
05:05
is it’s a supernormal stimulus to tweak our design wiring.
私達の脳の配線を圧迫する超正常刺激ということです
05:09
And there are lots of supernormal stimuli; chocolate cake is one.
超正常刺激はたくさんあります まずチョコレートケーキ
05:14
There's lots of supernormal stimuli for sexiness.
セクシーさにも超正常刺激はたくさんあります
05:17
And there's even supernormal stimuli for cuteness. Here’s a pretty good example.
かわいさにも超正常刺激があります これが良い例です
05:20
It’s important that we love babies, and that we not be put off by, say, messy diapers.
私達は赤ちゃんが好きで 汚れたおむつにも嫌気がさしません
05:26
So babies have to attract our affection and our nurturing, and they do.
赤ちゃんは私達の注意を引いて愛され育てられることに成功しています
05:31
And, by the way, a recent study shows that mothers
ところで最近の研究によると
05:37
prefer the smell of the dirty diapers of their own baby.
母親は自分の赤ちゃんの汚れたおむつのにおいの方を好むようです
05:41
So nature works on many levels here.
自然の仕組みは上手くはたらいています
05:44
But now, if babies didn’t look the way they do -- if babies looked like this,
もし赤ちゃんの外見が違っていて こんなふうだったら
05:47
that’s what we would find adorable, that’s what we would find --
もしこんな赤ちゃんをかわいがらなければいけないとしても
05:52
we would think, oh my goodness, do I ever want to hug that.
抱きしめたいとはなかなか思わないでしょう
05:56
This is the strange inversion.
これが 奇妙な逆転です
06:02
Well now, finally what about funny. My answer is, it’s the same story, the same story.
最後におかしさについてです 私の答えはここまでと全く同じです
06:04
This is the hard one, the one that isn’t obvious. That’s why I leave it to the end.
しかし難しくてよくわかっていません だからおかしさを最後にしました
06:11
And I won’t be able to say too much about it.
あまり多くのことは語れません
06:15
But you have to think evolutionarily, you have to think, what hard job that has to be done --
非常に難しい問題ですが
06:17
it’s dirty work, somebody’s got to do it --
誰かがやれなければなりません
06:23
is so important to give us such a powerful, inbuilt reward for it when we succeed.
そして 成し遂げられたとき 努力に値する報酬を受けとることは大切です
06:26
Now, I think we've found the answer -- I and a few of my colleagues.
私と同僚がついに答えを見つけました
06:34
It’s a neural system that’s wired up to reward the brain
それは 忌まわしい事務作業をこなす脳への報酬として
06:38
for doing a grubby clerical job.
配線された神経システムです
06:42
Our bumper sticker for this view is
この考察のキャッチフレーズは
06:48
that this is the joy of debugging.
デバッグする楽しさです
06:52
Now I’m not going to have time to spell it all out,
全てを詳しく説明する時間はありませんが
06:55
but I’ll just say that only some kinds of debugging get the reward.
一部のデバッグだけが報酬の対象になると言えます
06:57
And what we’re doing is we’re using humor as a sort of neuroscientific probe
ジョークのスイッチを操作してユーモアのオンとオフを切り替えることで
07:02
by switching humor on and off, by turning the knob on a joke --
ユーモアを神経科学の道具として活用しています
07:10
now it’s not funny ... oh, now it’s funnier ...
今はおかしくない…今はおかしくなった
07:14
now we’ll turn a little bit more ... now it’s not funny --
もう少しおかしくなった…今はおかしくない…
07:16
in this way, we can actually learn something
このようにして脳の構造について
07:18
about the architecture of the brain,
脳の機能的構造について
07:21
the functional architecture of the brain.
実際に分かってくることがあるのです
07:23
Matthew Hurley is the first author of this. We call it the Hurley Model.
マシュー・ハーレーがこの理論の考案者です これをハーレーモデルと呼んでいます
07:25
He’s a computer scientist, Reginald Adams a psychologist, and there I am,
彼はコンピュータ科学者です レジナルド・アダムズは心理学者です そこに私が加わって
07:30
and we’re putting this together into a book.
3人で研究成果をまとめています
07:34
Thank you very much.
どうもありがとうございます
07:36
Translated by Keisuke Kusunoki
Reviewed by Kayo Mizutani

▲Back to top

About the Speaker:

Dan Dennett - Philosopher, cognitive scientist
Dan Dennett argues that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes. His latest book is "Intuition Pumps and Other Tools for Thinking,"

Why you should listen

One of our most important living philosophers, Dan Dennett is best known for his provocative and controversial arguments that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes in the brain. He argues that the brain's computational circuitry fools us into thinking we know more than we do, and that what we call consciousness — isn't. His 2003 book "Freedom Evolves" explores how our brains evolved to give us -- and only us -- the kind of freedom that matters, while 2006's "Breaking the Spell" examines belief through the lens of biology.

This mind-shifting perspective on the mind itself has distinguished Dennett's career as a philosopher and cognitive scientist. And while the philosophy community has never quite known what to make of Dennett (he defies easy categorization, and refuses to affiliate himself with accepted schools of thought), his computational approach to understanding the brain has made him, as Edge's John Brockman writes, “the philosopher of choice of the AI community.”

“It's tempting to say that Dennett has never met a robot he didn't like, and that what he likes most about them is that they are philosophical experiments,” Harry Blume wrote in the Atlantic Monthly in 1998. “To the question of whether machines can attain high-order intelligence, Dennett makes this provocative answer: ‘The best reason for believing that robots might some day become conscious is that we human beings are conscious, and we are a sort of robot ourselves.'"

In recent years, Dennett has become outspoken in his atheism, and his 2006 book Breaking the Spell calls for religion to be studied through the scientific lens of evolutionary biology. Dennett regards religion as a natural -- rather than supernatural -- phenomenon, and urges schools to break the taboo against empirical examination of religion. He argues that religion's influence over human behavior is precisely what makes gaining a rational understanding of it so necessary: “If we don't understand religion, we're going to miss our chance to improve the world in the 21st century.”

Dennett's landmark books include The Mind's I, co-edited with Douglas Hofstaedter, Consciousness Explained, and Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Read an excerpt from his 2013 book, Intuition Pumps, in the Guardian >>

More profile about the speaker
Dan Dennett | Speaker | TED.com