TED2010
Sam Harris: Science can answer moral questions
Sam Harris：科學可以回答道德問題
Filmed:
Readability: 4.3
6,257,604 views
幾個世紀以來，科學被排拒於善惡對錯的問題以外。 Sam Harris 提出科學不但可以，更應當成為道德問題的準則，為人類設立新人道價值，帶領我們走向真正的幸福生活。
Sam Harris - Neuroscientist, philosopher
Sam Harris's work focuses on how our growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live. Full bio
Sam Harris's work focuses on how our growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:15
I'm going to speak today about the relationship
0
0
3000
今日我要討論科學和價值觀
00:18
between science and human values.
1
3000
4000
之間的關係
00:22
Now, it's generally understood that
2
7000
2000
我們一般認為
00:24
questions of morality --
3
9000
2000
有關道德問題
00:26
questions of good and evil and right and wrong --
4
11000
2000
善惡對錯的概念
00:28
are questions about which science officially has no opinion.
5
13000
3000
是科學所不能解決和參與討論的
00:31
It's thought that science can help us
6
16000
3000
人們認為科學可以幫助我們
00:34
get what we value,
7
19000
2000
得到我們所想要的
00:36
but it can never tell us what we ought to value.
8
21000
3000
卻永遠無法告訴我們什麼是重要的
00:39
And, consequently, most people -- I think most people
9
24000
2000
於是大部分的人，甚至今日坐在這裏的各位
00:41
probably here -- think that science will never answer
10
26000
3000
認為科學永遠無法回答
00:44
the most important questions in human life:
11
29000
3000
人類生命中的重要問題
00:47
questions like, "What is worth living for?"
12
32000
2000
像是“我們為了什麼活著？”
00:49
"What is worth dying for?"
13
34000
2000
“我們應該為什麼犧牲？”
00:51
"What constitutes a good life?"
14
36000
2000
“什麼樣的生活，是一個幸福的生活？”
00:53
So, I'm going to argue
15
38000
2000
我想告訴大家
00:55
that this is an illusion -- that the separation between
16
40000
2000
把科學和人類價值觀做分隔
00:57
science and human values is an illusion --
17
42000
2000
是一種人為假像
00:59
and actually quite a dangerous one
18
44000
3000
是一個非常危險的假像
01:02
at this point in human history.
19
47000
2000
尤其是在我們的今日社會
01:04
Now, it's often said that science
20
49000
2000
人們常說科學
01:06
cannot give us a foundation for morality and human values,
21
51000
3000
不能作為道德和價值觀的基礎
01:09
because science deals with facts,
22
54000
3000
因為科學講求實證
01:12
and facts and values seem to belong to different spheres.
23
57000
4000
而事實和價值似乎是兩種不同層次的事
01:16
It's often thought that there's no description
24
61000
3000
人們認為，就算把世界的模樣
01:19
of the way the world is
25
64000
2000
描繪出來
01:21
that can tell us how the world ought to be.
26
66000
4000
也不能帶我們走到烏托邦
01:25
But I think this is quite clearly untrue.
27
70000
2000
但我認為這很明顯是錯誤的
01:27
Values are a certain kind of fact.
28
72000
4000
價值自然是一種實證
01:31
They are facts about the well-being of conscious creatures.
29
76000
4000
是人類如何可以獲得幸福生活的實證
01:35
Why is it that we don't have ethical obligations toward rocks?
30
80000
4000
為什麼我們對石頭沒有任何道德要求？
01:39
Why don't we feel compassion for rocks?
31
84000
3000
為什麼我們對石頭沒有仁愛之情？
01:42
It's because we don't think rocks can suffer. And if we're more
32
87000
2000
因為我們不認為石頭會受折磨
01:44
concerned about our fellow primates
33
89000
2000
如果和昆蟲做比較
01:46
than we are about insects, as indeed we are,
34
91000
3000
我們比較關心我們自己的物種
01:49
it's because we think they're exposed to a greater range
35
94000
2000
那是因為我們認為我們比昆蟲
01:51
of potential happiness and suffering.
36
96000
3000
能感受到更大程度的快樂或痛苦
01:54
Now, the crucial thing to notice here
37
99000
3000
其中的意義是
01:57
is that this is a factual claim:
38
102000
2000
這個說法是有實證的
01:59
This is something that we could be right or wrong about. And if we
39
104000
2000
這中間是有對錯的
02:01
have misconstrued the relationship between biological complexity
40
106000
3000
如果我們在生物複雜性和知覺體驗的關係上
02:04
and the possibilities of experience
41
109000
3000
做出了錯誤的推估
02:07
well then we could be wrong about the inner lives of insects.
42
112000
3000
那代表我們有可能錯估了昆蟲的內心生活
02:10
And there's no notion,
43
115000
4000
但是我發覺
02:14
no version of human morality
44
119000
2000
從沒有一種道德
02:16
and human values that I've ever come across
45
121000
3000
和價值觀
02:19
that is not at some point reducible
46
124000
2000
是和人類的感知體驗
02:21
to a concern about conscious experience
47
126000
3000
和嘗試改變這感知體驗的可能性
02:24
and its possible changes.
48
129000
2000
無關的
02:26
Even if you get your values from religion,
49
131000
3000
就算你的價值觀來自宗教
02:29
even if you think that good and evil ultimately
50
134000
2000
就算你認為善惡
02:31
relate to conditions after death --
51
136000
2000
和死後的結果有關聯
02:33
either to an eternity of happiness with God
52
138000
3000
永遠和神在快樂的國度裏逍遙
02:36
or an eternity of suffering in hell --
53
141000
2000
或是永遠在地獄之火中燃燒
02:38
you are still concerned about consciousness and its changes.
54
143000
4000
這仍然兩種不同的感知體驗有關
02:42
And to say that such changes can persist after death
55
147000
3000
認為這些體驗會一直持續到死後的世界
02:45
is itself a factual claim,
56
150000
2000
也是在追求一種實證
02:47
which, of course, may or may not be true.
57
152000
3000
雖然誰也不知道死後的世界會如何
02:50
Now, to speak about the conditions of well-being
58
155000
3000
談到幸福生活的基礎
02:53
in this life, for human beings,
59
158000
2000
身為人類，在此生
02:55
we know that there is a continuum of such facts.
60
160000
3000
我們知道有些事實一直存在
02:58
We know that it's possible to live in a failed state,
61
163000
3000
我們知道你有可能會住在一個失序的國家
03:01
where everything that can go wrong does go wrong --
62
166000
2000
所有東西都有可能出錯
03:03
where mothers cannot feed their children,
63
168000
3000
母親無法餵養她們的孩子
03:06
where strangers cannot find the basis for peaceful collaboration,
64
171000
4000
人們找不到一個能保障和平的共識
03:10
where people are murdered indiscriminately.
65
175000
3000
人們被不分青紅地謀殺
03:13
And we know that it's possible to move along this continuum
66
178000
3000
我們知道我們可以解決這些持續已久的問題
03:16
towards something quite a bit more idyllic,
67
181000
2000
走向一個較為理想的狀況
03:18
to a place where a conference like this is even conceivable.
68
183000
5000
像我們現在這樣，齊聚一堂，和平討論
03:23
And we know -- we know --
69
188000
3000
我們知道，清楚知道
03:26
that there are right and wrong answers
70
191000
2000
想要達到這樣的境界
03:28
to how to move in this space.
71
193000
2000
有對的，也有錯誤的方法
03:30
Would adding cholera to the water be a good idea?
72
195000
6000
在水中加入霍亂病毒是對的嗎？
03:36
Probably not.
73
201000
2000
大概不是
03:38
Would it be a good idea for everyone to believe in the evil eye,
74
203000
3000
每個人都相信邪惡之眼的魔力
03:41
so that when bad things happened to them
75
206000
2000
於是，當某些不幸事件發生
03:43
they immediately blame their neighbors? Probably not.
76
208000
4000
他們馬上就開始怪罪他們的鄰舍？大概也不是
03:47
There are truths to be known
77
212000
2000
我們應該去理解
03:49
about how human communities flourish,
78
214000
3000
人類社群邁向繁榮的方法
03:52
whether or not we understand these truths.
79
217000
2000
無論我們現在能不能理解
03:54
And morality relates to these truths.
80
219000
3000
或把這些事實和道德做連結
03:57
So, in talking about values we are talking about facts.
81
222000
4000
當我們討論價值，我們就是在討論事實
04:01
Now, of course our situation in the world can be understood at many levels --
82
226000
3000
世界的現況可以用很多不同層次來看
04:04
from the level of the genome
83
229000
2000
從染色體的層次
04:06
on up to the level of economic systems
84
231000
2000
一直到經濟體系
04:08
and political arrangements.
85
233000
2000
和政治協定的層次
04:10
But if we're going to talk about human well-being
86
235000
2000
但如果我們回去思考人類幸福的議題
04:12
we are, of necessity, talking about the human brain.
87
237000
3000
我們必須談到人類的大腦
04:15
Because we know that our experience of the world and of ourselves within it
88
240000
3000
因為我們知道我們對世界的看法、我們的體驗和感知
04:18
is realized in the brain --
89
243000
3000
都是由大腦建構的
04:21
whatever happens after death.
90
246000
2000
無論死後會怎樣
04:23
Even if the suicide bomber does get 72 virgins in the afterlife,
91
248000
5000
就算背著炸彈自殺死後能得到72個處女
04:28
in this life, his personality --
92
253000
3000
在此生，他的人格
04:31
his rather unfortunate personality --
93
256000
2000
這令人遺憾的人格
04:33
is the product of his brain.
94
258000
3000
也是由他的大腦所產出
04:36
So the contributions of culture --
95
261000
3000
於是，文化的貢獻是 －
04:39
if culture changes us, as indeed it does,
96
264000
2000
是因為文化會改變我們的想法
04:41
it changes us by changing our brains.
97
266000
2000
也就是改變我們大腦的思考模式
04:43
And so therefore whatever cultural variation there is
98
268000
3000
於是不管有多少不同文化
04:46
in how human beings flourish
99
271000
2000
對人類的幸福有多少不同想法
04:48
can, at least in principle, be understood
100
273000
2000
都可以原則性地
04:50
in the context of a maturing science of the mind --
101
275000
3000
以成熟的腦內科學作為理解的辦法
04:53
neuroscience, psychology, etc.
102
278000
3000
神經科學、心理學等等
04:56
So, what I'm arguing is that
103
281000
2000
我想說的是
04:58
value's reduced to facts --
104
283000
2000
價值觀可以以事實
05:00
to facts about the conscious experience
105
285000
2000
有關人類感知體驗的事實
05:02
of conscious beings.
106
287000
3000
作為準則
05:05
And we can therefore visualize a space
107
290000
3000
我們才有可能想像在某個情況下
05:08
of possible changes in the experience of these beings.
108
293000
3000
來改變這些人的體驗
05:11
And I think of this as kind of a moral landscape,
109
296000
2000
這就像一片道德風景
05:13
with peaks and valleys that correspond
110
298000
2000
有不同的山巔和峽谷
05:15
to differences in the well-being of conscious creatures,
111
300000
3000
像是人類對於幸福生活的不同感知
05:18
both personal and collective.
112
303000
2000
無論是個人或群體的
05:20
And one thing to notice is that perhaps
113
305000
2000
我們該注意的是
05:22
there are states of human well-being
114
307000
2000
或許有個人類幸福的所在
05:24
that we rarely access, that few people access.
115
309000
3000
是我們從來沒有去過的，很少人能達到的體驗
05:27
And these await our discovery.
116
312000
2000
正在等待我們去發掘
05:29
Perhaps some of these states can be appropriately called
117
314000
2000
或許這些體驗就是我們所說的
05:31
mystical or spiritual.
118
316000
2000
神秘或靈性的體驗
05:33
Perhaps there are other states that we can't access
119
318000
2000
或許有些是我們根本無法體驗的
05:35
because of how our minds are structured
120
320000
3000
因為我們的大腦有自己的迴路
05:38
but other minds possibly could access them.
121
323000
4000
但其他人卻可能可以到達
05:42
Now, let me be clear about what I'm not saying. I'm not saying
122
327000
2000
我必須澄清，我並不是說
05:44
that science is guaranteed to map this space,
123
329000
5000
科學可以完全為我們畫出這份幸福地圖
05:49
or that we will have scientific answers to every
124
334000
2000
或是科學可以回答
05:51
conceivable moral question.
125
336000
2000
所有道德爭議
05:53
I don't think, for instance, that you will one day consult
126
338000
2000
舉例來說，我並不認為
05:55
a supercomputer to learn whether you should have a second child,
127
340000
4000
某天我們會和電腦商量我們是不是該生第二胎
05:59
or whether we should bomb Iran's nuclear facilities,
128
344000
4000
或是我們是不是應該轟炸伊朗的核子設備
06:03
or whether you can deduct the full cost of TED as a business expense.
129
348000
4000
或是參加TED演講的經費是不是可以向公司報賬
06:07
(Laughter)
130
352000
2000
（大笑）
06:09
But if questions affect human well-being
131
354000
2000
但如果這個問題是影響到人身幸福的
06:11
then they do have answers, whether or not we can find them.
132
356000
3000
他們是有答案的，無論我們找不著得到
06:14
And just admitting this --
133
359000
2000
承認吧
06:16
just admitting that there are right and wrong answers
134
361000
2000
當我們嘗試解決人類幸福的問題
06:18
to the question of how humans flourish --
135
363000
2000
是可能會有錯誤答案的
06:20
will change the way we talk about morality,
136
365000
2000
承認這個事實能改變我們討論道德的方法
06:22
and will change our expectations
137
367000
2000
也會改變我們在合作共創未來時
06:24
of human cooperation in the future.
138
369000
4000
所期待的結果
06:28
For instance, there are 21 states in our country
139
373000
4000
舉例來說，在美國還有21省
06:32
where corporal punishment in the classroom is legal,
140
377000
3000
課堂上的體罰是合法的
06:35
where it is legal for a teacher to beat a child with a wooden board, hard,
141
380000
6000
這個老師可以合法使用木板
06:41
and raising large bruises and blisters and even breaking the skin.
142
386000
4000
把孩子打得瘀傷、起水泡、甚至破皮
06:45
And hundreds of thousands of children, incidentally,
143
390000
2000
每年有千百個孩子
06:47
are subjected to this every year.
144
392000
2000
都在遭受這樣的待遇
06:49
The locations of these enlightened districts, I think, will fail to surprise you.
145
394000
5000
而且我認為，你會很吃驚，這都是些什麼省份
06:54
We're not talking about Connecticut.
146
399000
3000
不是康乃迪克州
06:57
And the rationale for this behavior is explicitly religious.
147
402000
4000
宗教往往是這些做法背後的理由
07:01
The creator of the universe himself
148
406000
2000
創造宇宙的造物主說
07:03
has told us not to spare the rod,
149
408000
2000
告訴我們不要“不忍用仗”
07:05
lest we spoil the child --
150
410000
2000
不然會寵壞孩子
07:07
this is in Proverbs 13 and 20, and I believe, 23.
151
412000
5000
這是《舊約箴言》第13章20、和23節
07:12
But we can ask the obvious question:
152
417000
2000
我們可以問一個簡單的問題
07:14
Is it a good idea, generally speaking,
153
419000
4000
以常理判斷
07:18
to subject children to pain
154
423000
3000
讓孩子經歷這樣的痛苦
07:21
and violence and public humiliation
155
426000
3000
暴力和在眾人面前被羞辱
07:24
as a way of encouraging healthy emotional development
156
429000
2000
會帶來健康的情緒發展
07:26
and good behavior?
157
431000
2000
和良好行為模式嗎？
07:28
(Laughter)
158
433000
1000
（笑聲）
07:29
Is there any doubt
159
434000
4000
我們之中有人懷疑
07:33
that this question has an answer,
160
438000
2000
這個問題不但有解答
07:35
and that it matters?
161
440000
3000
而且對我們來說很重要？
07:38
Now, many of you might worry
162
443000
2000
或許在你們之中，有許多人會擔心
07:40
that the notion of well-being is truly undefined,
163
445000
3000
這所謂的幸福該如何界定
07:43
and seemingly perpetually open to be re-construed.
164
448000
3000
這似乎沒有一定的標準
07:46
And so, how therefore can there be an
165
451000
2000
而且，怎麼可能有一種完全客觀的
07:48
objective notion of well-being?
166
453000
3000
“人身幸福”的標準存在呢？
07:51
Well, consider by analogy, the concept of physical health.
167
456000
3000
如果是這樣，難道因為對身體健康的概念
07:54
The concept of physical health is undefined.
168
459000
3000
沒有一個真正的定論
07:57
As we just heard from Michael Specter, it has changed over the years.
169
462000
3000
如同 Michael Specter 适才說道，這些概念也會改變
08:00
When this statue was carved
170
465000
2000
在這個雕像產生的年代
08:02
the average life expectancy was probably 30.
171
467000
3000
人類的平均壽命是30
08:05
It's now around 80 in the developed world.
172
470000
3000
現在已發展國家的平均壽命是80
08:08
There may come a time when we meddle with our genomes
173
473000
3000
也許有一天，因為我們對基因的研究
08:11
in such a way that not being able to run a marathon
174
476000
3000
200歲不能跑馬拉松
08:14
at age 200 will be considered a profound disability.
175
479000
4000
是一種殘疾
08:18
People will send you donations when you're in that condition.
176
483000
3000
如果你有這種狀況，人們會捐錢給你
08:21
(Laughter)
177
486000
2000
（笑聲）
08:23
Notice that the fact that the concept of health
178
488000
4000
我們知道健康的觀念會改變
08:27
is open, genuinely open for revision,
179
492000
3000
隨時都可以重新思考
08:30
does not make it vacuous.
180
495000
2000
這不代表這些討論是毫無意義的
08:32
The distinction between a healthy person
181
497000
3000
一個健康的人和一個死人
08:35
and a dead one
182
500000
2000
之間的差別
08:37
is about as clear and consequential as any we make in science.
183
502000
3000
在科學或理論裏是一樣的
08:43
Another thing to notice is there may be many peaks on the moral landscape:
184
508000
3000
另外一個該注意的事情是道德地圖上雖然有很多山巔
08:46
There may be equivalent ways to thrive;
185
511000
3000
是有可能可以一起努力
08:49
there may be equivalent ways to organize a human society
186
514000
2000
一起找出一個管理人類社會的方法
08:51
so as to maximize human flourishing.
187
516000
2000
一起找出最大的幸福
08:53
Now, why wouldn't this
188
518000
2000
為什麼我們不能將這個
08:55
undermine an objective morality?
189
520000
4000
當作客觀道德的基礎？
08:59
Well think of how we talk about food:
190
524000
3000
想像我們討論食物的方式
09:02
I would never be tempted to argue to you
191
527000
3000
我永遠不會和你爭辯
09:05
that there must be one right food to eat.
192
530000
2000
人類應該有吃的自由
09:07
There is clearly a range of materials
193
532000
2000
一個健康的飲食方式中
09:09
that constitute healthy food.
194
534000
2000
有許多不同食物
09:11
But there's nevertheless a clear distinction
195
536000
2000
但從沒有人會把食物和毒物
09:13
between food and poison.
196
538000
2000
搞錯
09:15
The fact that there are many right answers
197
540000
3000
當我們問“什麼是食物？”的時候
09:18
to the question, "What is food?"
198
543000
2000
有許多正確答案
09:20
does not tempt us
199
545000
3000
並不會阻止我們
09:23
to say that there are no truths to be known about human nutrition.
200
548000
5000
去研究營養學，找出更多事實
09:28
Many people worry
201
553000
2000
許多人擔心
09:30
that a universal morality would require
202
555000
3000
普世道德必須有一種
09:33
moral precepts that admit of no exceptions.
203
558000
3000
嚴厲的基本教義，不允許例外
09:36
So, for instance, if it's really wrong to lie,
204
561000
2000
比如說，說謊是錯誤的
09:38
it must always be wrong to lie,
205
563000
2000
說謊永遠是錯誤的
09:40
and if you can find an exception,
206
565000
2000
如果你能找到例外的話
09:42
well then there's no such thing as moral truth.
207
567000
3000
這就不是真正的道德
09:45
Why would we think this?
208
570000
2000
為什麼我們會這樣想？
09:47
Consider, by analogy, the game of chess.
209
572000
3000
讓我們以西洋棋為例
09:50
Now, if you're going to play good chess,
210
575000
2000
如果你想打一盤漂亮的西洋棋
09:52
a principle like, "Don't lose your Queen,"
211
577000
2000
“別失去你的皇后”
09:54
is very good to follow.
212
579000
2000
是一個很好的原則
09:56
But it clearly admits some exceptions.
213
581000
2000
但它也有例外
09:58
There are moments when losing your Queen is a brilliant thing to do.
214
583000
3000
在某些時候犧牲皇后是一種很漂亮的打法
10:01
There are moments when it is the only good thing you can do.
215
586000
4000
在某些必要時刻，那是你唯一能做的
10:05
And yet, chess is a domain of perfect objectivity.
216
590000
4000
但西洋棋是一個絕對客觀的遊戲
10:09
The fact that there are exceptions here does not
217
594000
2000
就算在棋局中允許例外
10:11
change that at all.
218
596000
3000
也不會改變這個事實
10:14
Now, this brings us to the sorts of moves
219
599000
3000
在這個道德的場域裏
10:17
that people are apt to make in the moral sphere.
220
602000
3000
有些事是我們應該做的
10:20
Consider the great problem of women's bodies:
221
605000
5000
想想女性身體政治
10:25
What to do about them?
222
610000
2000
我們該怎麼做？
10:27
Well this is one thing you can do about them:
223
612000
2000
有個方法是
10:29
You can cover them up.
224
614000
2000
你可以把它們蓋起來
10:31
Now, it is the position, generally speaking, of our intellectual community
225
616000
2000
普遍來說，我們的學術界是這樣想的
10:33
that while we may not like this,
226
618000
4000
雖然我們不喜歡這樣
10:37
we might think of this as "wrong"
227
622000
2000
我們覺得這樣是錯誤的
10:39
in Boston or Palo Alto,
228
624000
2000
在波士頓或帕羅奧多
10:41
who are we to say
229
626000
2000
但我們怎麼能說
10:43
that the proud denizens of an ancient culture
230
628000
3000
這些古老文化的驕傲後裔
10:46
are wrong to force their wives and daughters
231
631000
3000
不應該強迫它們的妻子和女兒
10:49
to live in cloth bags?
232
634000
2000
住在衣袋裏？
10:51
And who are we to say, even, that they're wrong
233
636000
2000
我們怎麼能說，他們是錯誤的
10:53
to beat them with lengths of steel cable,
234
638000
2000
當他們用鋼索痛打她們
10:55
or throw battery acid in their faces
235
640000
2000
或是把強酸潑到她們臉上
10:57
if they decline the privilege of being smothered in this way?
236
642000
4000
如果她們拒絕被這樣對待？
11:01
Well, who are we not to say this?
237
646000
3000
我們憑什麼可以這樣說呢？
11:04
Who are we to pretend
238
649000
2000
我們怎麼可以裝作
11:06
that we know so little about human well-being
239
651000
4000
我們完全不瞭解人類的幸福
11:10
that we have to be non-judgmental about a practice like this?
240
655000
4000
或是我們應該對此類行為保持中立？
11:14
I'm not talking about voluntary wearing of a veil --
241
659000
4000
我不是在說那些自發性的蒙頭
11:18
women should be able to wear whatever they want, as far as I'm concerned.
242
663000
2000
我認為女人應該想穿什麼就穿什麼
11:20
But what does voluntary mean
243
665000
3000
但自發性是什麼意思？
11:23
in a community where,
244
668000
2000
在一個女孩被強暴
11:25
when a girl gets raped,
245
670000
3000
他的父親的第一個反應
11:28
her father's first impulse,
246
673000
2000
往往是謀殺她以免羞愧
11:30
rather often, is to murder her out of shame?
247
675000
5000
的這種社會？自發性是什麼意思？
11:35
Just let that fact detonate in your brain for a minute:
248
680000
7000
讓這些事實在你腦中轉一轉：
11:42
Your daughter gets raped,
249
687000
2000
你的女兒被強暴了
11:44
and what you want to do is kill her.
250
689000
3000
你的反應竟然是殺掉她
11:52
What are the chances that represents
251
697000
2000
請問你真的覺得這應該是
11:54
a peak of human flourishing?
252
699000
5000
人類幸福的一個可能嗎？
12:02
Now, to say this is not to say that we have got the
253
707000
2000
我這麼說，並不是說我們的社會
12:04
perfect solution in our own society.
254
709000
4000
有最完美的解答
12:08
For instance,
255
713000
2000
舉例來說
12:10
this is what it's like to go to a newsstand almost anywhere
256
715000
2000
現在你到任何文明國家的報攤
12:12
in the civilized world.
257
717000
2000
都可以看到這樣的景象
12:14
Now, granted, for many men
258
719000
2000
我必須承認，對大部分的男人來說
12:16
it may require a degree in philosophy to see something wrong with these images.
259
721000
3000
可能需要有某種程度的哲學修為，才會覺得這有什麼不對
12:19
(Laughter)
260
724000
3000
（笑聲）
12:22
But if we are in a reflective mood,
261
727000
3000
但當我們自省的時候
12:25
we can ask,
262
730000
2000
我們也可以想
12:27
"Is this the perfect expression
263
732000
2000
“這樣的東西會讓我們
12:29
of psychological balance
264
734000
2000
完美學習尊重不同女性的
12:31
with respect to variables like youth and beauty and women's bodies?"
265
736000
3000
年齡和肉體嗎？”
12:34
I mean, is this the optimal environment
266
739000
2000
難道我們會希望我們的孩子
12:36
in which to raise our children?
267
741000
4000
生在在這種視覺環境裏嗎？
12:40
Probably not. OK, so perhaps there's some place
268
745000
2000
大概不會。於是在這兩個極端中
12:42
on the spectrum
269
747000
2000
.
12:44
between these two extremes
270
749000
2000
應該有一個中間點
12:46
that represents a place of better balance.
271
751000
3000
能帶來一種比較健康的平衡
12:49
(Applause)
272
754000
8000
（掌聲）
12:57
Perhaps there are many such places --
273
762000
2000
或許這個平衡點不止一個
12:59
again, given other changes in human culture
274
764000
3000
在這個多元的世界裏
13:02
there may be many peaks on the moral landscape.
275
767000
2000
我們的道德地圖應該有許多不同的山峰
13:04
But the thing to notice is that there will be
276
769000
2000
但重點是
13:06
many more ways not to be on a peak.
277
771000
5000
這世界上還有許多不是這些山峰的地方
13:11
Now the irony, from my perspective,
278
776000
2000
在我看來，諷刺的事情是
13:13
is that the only people who seem to generally agree with me
279
778000
3000
一般會認同我說法的
13:16
and who think that there are right and wrong answers to moral questions
280
781000
3000
那些覺得道德爭議是有正確和錯誤答案的
13:19
are religious demagogues of one form or another.
281
784000
3000
大都是一些宗教家
13:22
And of course they think they have right answers to moral questions
282
787000
3000
他們當然會覺得道德爭議有正確答案
13:25
because they got these answers from a voice in a whirlwind,
283
790000
4000
因為他們已經在神秘之聲中聽到這些答案了
13:29
not because they made an intelligent analysis of the causes
284
794000
2000
而不是因為他們理智思考和分析過這些議題
13:31
and condition of human and animal well-being.
285
796000
4000
人類和動物的幸福快樂
13:35
In fact, the endurance of religion
286
800000
2000
事實上，在許久以來
13:37
as a lens through which most people view moral questions
287
802000
4000
宗教成為人們關注道德的角度
13:41
has separated most moral talk
288
806000
3000
讓所有的道德議題
13:44
from real questions of human and animal suffering.
289
809000
4000
都和人類和動物的痛苦脫鉤
13:48
This is why we spend our time
290
813000
2000
這就是為什麼我們花費精神
13:50
talking about things like gay marriage
291
815000
2000
討論同性戀是不是應該結婚
13:52
and not about genocide or nuclear proliferation
292
817000
4000
而不是種族屠殺或是核子武器激增
13:56
or poverty or any other hugely consequential issue.
293
821000
5000
或是貧窮和其他一樣嚴重的議題
14:01
But the demagogues are right about one thing: We need
294
826000
2000
但這些宗教煽動者說對了一件事
14:03
a universal conception of human values.
295
828000
4000
我們需要一個普世價值
14:07
Now, what stands in the way of this?
296
832000
2000
為什麼這會這麼困難？
14:09
Well, one thing to notice is that we
297
834000
2000
其中一件是就是當我們討論道德
14:11
do something different when talking about morality --
298
836000
2000
我們這些沒有特殊宗教的、學術的、科學家型的人
14:13
especially secular, academic, scientist types.
299
838000
4000
就會產生差別待遇
14:17
When talking about morality we value differences of opinion
300
842000
3000
當我們討論道德，我們就開始尊重不同意見
14:20
in a way that we don't in any other area of our lives.
301
845000
3000
但我們在其他方面不會這樣做
14:23
So, for instance the Dalai Lama gets up every morning
302
848000
2000
舉例來說，達賴喇嘛每天早上起來
14:25
meditating on compassion,
303
850000
2000
思考仁愛精神
14:27
and he thinks that helping other human beings is an integral component
304
852000
2000
他認為幫助其他人類是帶來人類快樂的一部分
14:29
of human happiness.
305
854000
3000
.
14:32
On the other hand, we have someone like Ted Bundy;
306
857000
2000
另外一邊我們有 Ted Bundy
14:34
Ted Bundy was very fond of abducting and raping
307
859000
2000
他的興趣是綁架和強暴
14:36
and torturing and killing young women.
308
861000
2000
虐待和殺害這些年輕女孩
14:38
So, we appear to have a genuine difference of opinion
309
863000
2000
很明顯的，這裏我們看到每個人對打發時間
14:40
about how to profitably use one's time.
310
865000
3000
都有不同的看法
14:43
(Laughter)
311
868000
2000
（笑聲）
14:45
Most Western intellectuals
312
870000
2000
大部分的西方學者
14:47
look at this situation
313
872000
2000
看到這個狀況
14:49
and say, "Well, there's nothing for the Dalai Lama
314
874000
2000
會說，“嗯事實上達賴喇嘛也不是
14:51
to be really right about -- really right about --
315
876000
3000
完全正確，絕對正確
14:54
or for Ted Bundy to be really wrong about
316
879000
3000
Ted Bundy 也不是絕對錯誤
14:57
that admits of a real argument
317
882000
4000
這其中沒有真正的討論價值
15:01
that potentially falls within the purview of science.
318
886000
3000
這是科學範疇的事
15:04
He likes chocolate, he likes vanilla.
319
889000
3000
他喜歡巧克力，他喜歡香草
15:07
There's nothing that one should be able to say to the other
320
892000
3000
無論跟他們說什麼
15:10
that should persuade the other."
321
895000
3000
都不能改變他們。”
15:13
Notice that we don't do this in science.
322
898000
3000
但我們不會這樣討論科學
15:16
On the left you have Edward Witten.
323
901000
2000
左邊這位是愛德華·威滕
15:18
He's a string theorist.
324
903000
3000
他是弦理論的專家
15:21
If you ask the smartest physicists around
325
906000
2000
如果你問你旁邊最聰明的物理學家
15:23
who is the smartest physicist around,
326
908000
2000
誰是世界上最聰明的物理學家
15:25
in my experience half of them will say Ed Witten.
327
910000
3000
我的經驗是一半都會說是愛德華·威滕
15:28
The other half will tell you they don't like the question.
328
913000
3000
另外一半會告訴你“這個問題很不正確”
15:31
(Laughter)
329
916000
3000
（笑聲）
15:34
So, what would happen if I showed up at a physics conference
330
919000
4000
那麼，如果我出現在一個物理研討會
15:38
and said,"String theory is bogus.
331
923000
2000
然後說“弦理論是個假貨
15:40
It doesn't resonate with me. It's not how I chose to
332
925000
2000
我對它沒有感覺，這不是我選擇
15:42
view the universe at a small scale.
333
927000
3000
的宇宙觀
15:45
I'm not a fan."
334
930000
2000
我不是那派的。”
15:47
(Laughter)
335
932000
3000
（笑聲）
15:50
Well, nothing would happen because I'm not a physicist;
336
935000
2000
什麼都不會發生，因為我不是物理學家
15:52
I don't understand string theory.
337
937000
2000
我不懂弦理論
15:54
I'm the Ted Bundy of string theory.
338
939000
2000
我是弦理論的 Ted Bundy
15:56
(Laughter)
339
941000
3000
（笑聲）
15:59
I wouldn't want to belong to any string theory club that would have me as a member.
340
944000
3000
我不想加入任何願意接受我的弦理論社團
16:02
But this is just the point.
341
947000
2000
這就是重點
16:04
Whenever we are talking about facts
342
949000
3000
當我們談論事實
16:07
certain opinions must be excluded.
343
952000
2000
我們必須排除某些意見
16:09
That is what it is to have a domain of expertise.
344
954000
3000
那就是為什麼我們有專業
16:12
That is what it is for knowledge to count.
345
957000
3000
那就是為什麼我們應該依靠知識
16:15
How have we convinced ourselves
346
960000
3000
無論我們怎麼和自己說
16:18
that in the moral sphere there is no such thing as moral expertise,
347
963000
4000
在道德裏沒有所謂的道德專家
16:22
or moral talent, or moral genius even?
348
967000
3000
道德人才，或甚至道德天才
16:25
How have we convinced ourselves
349
970000
2000
為什麼我們要說服自己
16:27
that every opinion has to count?
350
972000
2000
所有的意見都應該納入考慮？
16:29
How have we convinced ourselves
351
974000
2000
我們是怎麼說服自己
16:31
that every culture has a point of view
352
976000
2000
所有的文化對這些事情都有自己的觀點
16:33
on these subjects worth considering?
353
978000
3000
而我們都應該把他們納入考量？
16:36
Does the Taliban
354
981000
2000
難道塔利班
16:38
have a point of view on physics
355
983000
2000
對物理學的意見
16:40
that is worth considering? No.
356
985000
3000
也值得我們考慮嗎？不。
16:43
(Laughter)
357
988000
5000
（笑聲）
16:48
How is their ignorance any less obvious
358
993000
3000
但他們對幸福的無知
16:51
on the subject of human well-being?
359
996000
2000
和他們對物理的無知有什麼不同？
16:53
(Applause)
360
998000
6000
（掌聲）
16:59
So, this, I think, is what the world needs now.
361
1004000
4000
現在世界所需要的是
17:03
It needs people like ourselves to admit
362
1008000
3000
像我們這樣的人們承認
17:06
that there are right and wrong answers
363
1011000
3000
在人類的幸福問題中
17:09
to questions of human flourishing,
364
1014000
2000
是有正確和錯誤答案的
17:11
and morality relates
365
1016000
2000
以及道德
17:13
to that domain of facts.
366
1018000
2000
是和事實有直接關聯的
17:15
It is possible
367
1020000
2000
個人
17:17
for individuals, and even for whole cultures,
368
1022000
4000
或整個文化
17:21
to care about the wrong things,
369
1026000
2000
過分關心某些錯誤議題是絕對可能的
17:23
which is to say that it's possible for them
370
1028000
3000
他們的信仰和想法也絕對有可能
17:26
to have beliefs and desires that reliably lead
371
1031000
2000
為人類帶來無益的痛苦
17:28
to needless human suffering.
372
1033000
2000
.
17:30
Just admitting this will transform our discourse about morality.
373
1035000
5000
承認這些事實會改變我們討論道德的方式
17:35
We live in a world in which
374
1040000
3000
在今日世界中
17:38
the boundaries between nations mean less and less,
375
1043000
3000
國界的意義不斷減弱
17:41
and they will one day mean nothing.
376
1046000
3000
有一天國界將沒有任何意義
17:44
We live in a world filled with destructive technology,
377
1049000
2000
我們生活在一個充滿毀滅性科技的世界
17:46
and this technology cannot be uninvented;
378
1051000
2000
這些技術可以不被發明
17:48
it will always be easier
379
1053000
2000
搗毀一樣事情
17:50
to break things than to fix them.
380
1055000
4000
永遠比重建來的容易
17:54
It seems to me, therefore, patently obvious
381
1059000
2000
我認為，很明顯地
17:56
that we can no more
382
1061000
4000
我們不能再
18:00
respect and tolerate
383
1065000
2000
尊重和容忍這些
18:02
vast differences in notions of human well-being
384
1067000
4000
對人類幸福的不同觀點
18:06
than we can respect or tolerate vast differences
385
1071000
3000
就像我們不會尊重和容忍
18:09
in the notions about how disease spreads,
386
1074000
3000
傳染病的散播
18:12
or in the safety standards of buildings and airplanes.
387
1077000
3000
或是建築和飛機的安全標準
18:15
We simply must converge
388
1080000
3000
我們必須承認，這些問題
18:18
on the answers we give to the most important questions in human life.
389
1083000
4000
能找到解答，才有可能
18:22
And to do that, we have to admit that these questions have answers.
390
1087000
5000
回答人類生命中最重要的這些問題。
18:27
Thank you very much.
391
1092000
2000
謝謝大家。
18:29
(Applause)
392
1094000
23000
（掌聲）
18:52
Chris Anderson: So, some combustible material there.
393
1117000
4000
Chris Anderson：讓我提出一些爭議性的問題
18:56
Whether in this audience or people elsewhere in the world,
394
1121000
3000
這裏有某些人，或現在在世界上別的角落
18:59
hearing some of this, may well be doing the
395
1124000
2000
可能有人聽見這個
19:01
screaming-with-rage thing, after as well, some of them.
396
1126000
5000
然後憤怒或尖叫。某些人。
19:06
Language seems to be really important here.
397
1131000
2000
語言似乎是個很重要的元素
19:08
When you're talking about the veil,
398
1133000
2000
但你提到面罩的時候
19:10
you're talking about women dressed in cloth bags.
399
1135000
3000
你是說那些把全身蒙住的女人嗎
19:13
I've lived in the Muslim world, spoken with a lot of Muslim women.
400
1138000
4000
我曾在回教國家居住，和許多回教婦女談話
19:17
And some of them would say something else. They would say,
401
1142000
2000
她們可能會有別種想法。她們會說
19:19
"No, you know, this is a celebration
402
1144000
3000
“不，這是對女性的一種禮贊
19:22
of female specialness,
403
1147000
3000
凸顯我們是特別的，
19:25
it helps build that and it's a result of the fact that" --
404
1150000
2000
這幫助我們這個，而且是因為那個……“
19:27
and this is arguably a sophisticated psychological view --
405
1152000
4000
當然這不是一種非常可靠的心理學論點
19:31
"that male lust is not to be trusted."
406
1156000
3000
“你不能信任男人的情欲”
19:34
I mean, can you engage in a conversation
407
1159000
3000
我們是否可以用一種
19:37
with that kind of woman without seeming kind of cultural imperialist?
408
1162000
5000
不帶著文化帝國主義的角度和這些女人討論這些問題
19:42
Sam Harris: Yeah, well I think I tried to broach this in a sentence,
409
1167000
3000
Sam Harris：讓我一邊看著秒針
19:45
watching the clock ticking,
410
1170000
2000
一邊嘗試簡短回答這個問題
19:47
but the question is:
411
1172000
2000
真正的問題是
19:49
What is voluntary in a context
412
1174000
3000
這真的是她們的個人意願嗎
19:52
where men have certain expectations,
413
1177000
2000
在男人期待你戴上面罩
19:54
and you're guaranteed to be treated in a certain way
414
1179000
4000
如果不戴就必須承受某種後果
19:58
if you don't veil yourself?
415
1183000
2000
的狀況下？
20:00
And so, if anyone in this room
416
1185000
2000
如果在這個房間裏
20:02
wanted to wear a veil,
417
1187000
2000
有任何人想要戴面罩
20:04
or a very funny hat, or tattoo their face --
418
1189000
3000
一個非常可笑的帽子，或是在臉上刺青
20:07
I think we should be free to voluntarily do whatever we want,
419
1192000
3000
我想每個人應該做我們想做的，在自願的情況下
20:10
but we have to be honest about
420
1195000
3000
但我們必須誠實面對
20:13
the constraints that these women are placed under.
421
1198000
2000
這些女人的處境
20:15
And so I think we shouldn't be so eager
422
1200000
3000
我認為我們不應該太快地
20:18
to always take their word for it,
423
1203000
2000
接受她們的說法
20:20
especially when it's 120 degrees out
424
1205000
2000
尤其在120度高溫
20:22
and you're wearing a full burqa.
425
1207000
3000
而你竟然必須蒙住全身的狀況下
20:25
CA: A lot of people want to believe in this
426
1210000
2000
C.A.：許多人想要相信
20:27
concept of moral progress.
427
1212000
2000
道德進步的這個概念
20:29
But can you reconcile that?
428
1214000
2000
但是這有可能達到和諧嗎？
20:31
I think I understood you to say that you could
429
1216000
2000
我想我瞭解你所說的
20:33
reconcile that with a world that doesn't become
430
1218000
2000
不要讓世界變得只有一種道德
20:35
one dimensional, where we all have to think the same.
431
1220000
3000
也不需要大家都只有一種想法
20:38
Paint your picture of what
432
1223000
2000
你可以告訴我們
20:40
rolling the clock 50 years forward,
433
1225000
3000
如果我們快轉到50年後
20:43
100 years forward, how you would like to think of
434
1228000
2000
100年後，你希望我們的世界
20:45
the world, balancing moral progress
435
1230000
3000
能如何在道德進步和多元文化中
20:48
with richness.
436
1233000
3000
找到平衡
20:51
SH: Well, I think once you admit
437
1236000
2000
S.H.：一旦我們承認
20:53
that we are on the path toward understanding our minds
438
1238000
3000
我們正走在了解我們理智的路上
20:56
at the level of the brain in some important detail,
439
1241000
3000
透過理解大腦運作的方法，
20:59
then you have to admit
440
1244000
2000
那麼你也必須承認
21:01
that we are going to understand all of the positive
441
1246000
4000
我們將會更明白我們身上的這些
21:05
and negative qualities
442
1250000
2000
正面和負面的特質
21:07
of ourselves in much greater detail.
443
1252000
2000
.
21:09
So, we're going to understand positive social emotion
444
1254000
2000
我們會理解正面的社群特質
21:11
like empathy and compassion,
445
1256000
2000
像是同情心、仁愛心
21:13
and we're going to understand the factors
446
1258000
2000
我們將會瞭解是怎樣的元素
21:15
that encourage it -- whether they're genetic,
447
1260000
2000
幫助我們有這些特質 － 無論是基因
21:17
whether they're how people talk to one another,
448
1262000
2000
是人們對話的方式
21:19
whether they're economic systems,
449
1264000
2000
是經濟體系
21:21
and insofar as we begin to shine light on that
450
1266000
3000
我們正要開始發現
21:24
we are inevitably going to converge
451
1269000
2000
並無可避免的步向
21:26
on that fact space.
452
1271000
2000
這些事實
21:28
So, everything is not going to be up for grabs.
453
1273000
2000
我們不能再自由心證
21:30
It's not going to be like
454
1275000
3000
為了得到男人的青睞
21:33
veiling my daughter from birth
455
1278000
2000
就讓我剛出生的女兒蒙頭
21:35
is just as good as teaching her
456
1280000
3000
或是教導她成為一個
21:38
to be confident and well-educated
457
1283000
4000
自信而有教養的女性
21:42
in the context of men who do desire women.
458
1287000
3000
是完全不同的兩件事
21:45
I mean I don't think we need an NSF grant to know
459
1290000
4000
我想我們不需要國家科學基金會特別撥款
21:49
that compulsory veiling is a bad idea --
460
1294000
3000
才能發現強制女人蒙頭很不好
21:52
but at a certain point
461
1297000
2000
到了某種程度
21:54
we're going to be able to scan the brains of everyone involved
462
1299000
3000
我們可以掃描每個人的頭腦
21:57
and actually interrogate them.
463
1302000
3000
並研究它們
22:00
Do people love their daughters
464
1305000
3000
人們真的愛它們的女兒嗎
22:03
just as much in these systems?
465
1308000
3000
就算在那樣的文化下？
22:06
And I think there are clearly right answers to that.
466
1311000
2000
我想這些問題是有正確答案的。
22:08
CA: And if the results come out that actually they do,
467
1313000
3000
C.A.：如果結論是她們真的快樂
22:11
are you prepared to shift your instinctive current judgment
468
1316000
3000
你準備好改變你現在的直觀判斷了嗎
22:14
on some of these issues?
469
1319000
2000
在這些議題上
22:16
SH: Well yeah, modulo one obvious fact,
470
1321000
3000
S.H.：舉個真實案例
22:19
that you can love someone
471
1324000
2000
就算在一個虛假的道德體系裏
22:21
in the context of a truly delusional belief system.
472
1326000
3000
你還是可以愛人
22:24
So, you can say like, "Because I knew my gay son
473
1329000
2000
你會說，“因為我愛我的兒子，
22:26
was going to go to hell if he found a boyfriend,
474
1331000
3000
我不想他因為他的男朋友下地獄
22:29
I chopped his head off. And that was the most compassionate thing I could do."
475
1334000
3000
於是我把他的頭砍下來，這就是我對他的愛
22:32
If you get all those parts aligned,
476
1337000
2000
如果你能找到一個均衡
22:34
yes I think you could probably be feeling the emotion of love.
477
1339000
3000
是的你仍然可以感覺到一種愛
22:37
But again, then we have to talk about
478
1342000
2000
但是我們也必須把幸福
22:39
well-being in a larger context.
479
1344000
2000
放到更大的背景下來談
22:41
It's all of us in this together,
480
1346000
2000
這是我們共同的功課
22:43
not one man feeling ecstasy
481
1348000
4000
不是一個男人進入一種狂喜狀態
22:47
and then blowing himself up on a bus.
482
1352000
2000
就可以在巴士上把自己炸掉
22:49
CA: Sam, this is a conversation I would actually love to
483
1354000
2000
C.A.：我很希望這個對話可以繼續
22:51
continue for hours.
484
1356000
2000
幾個小時
22:53
We don't have that, but maybe another time. Thank you for coming to TED.
485
1358000
2000
雖然現在不行，或許在不遠的將來。謝謝你來 TED 演講
22:55
SH: Really an honor. Thank you.
486
1360000
2000
S.H.：是我的榮幸，謝謝你。
22:57
(Applause)
487
1362000
3000
（掌聲）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Sam Harris - Neuroscientist, philosopherSam Harris's work focuses on how our growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live.
Why you should listen
Sam Harris is the author of five New York Times bestsellers. His books include The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation, The Moral Landscape, Free Will, Lying, Waking Up and Islam and the Future of Tolerance (with Maajid Nawaz). The End of Faith won the 2005 PEN Award for Nonfiction. Harris's writing and public lectures cover a wide range of topics -- neuroscience, moral philosophy, religion, spirituality, violence, human reasoning -- but generally focus on how a growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live.
Harris's work has been published in more than 20 languages and has been discussed in the New York Times, Time, Scientific American, Nature, Newsweek, Rolling Stone and many other journals. He has written for the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Economist, The Times (London), the Boston Globe, The Atlantic, The Annals of Neurology and elsewhere. Harris also regularly hosts a popular podcast.
Harris received a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from UCLA.
Sam Harris | Speaker | TED.com