TED2015
Dan Ariely: How equal do we want the world to be? You'd be surprised
丹．艾瑞利: 我們期待世界有多平等？答案讓人大吃一驚
Filmed:
Readability: 3.3
1,928,125 views
社會上不平等的情況日益嚴重，這消息讓每個人都不好受。但為什麼呢？丹．艾瑞利揭露針對大家認為的平等，以及財富如何在社會上分配的新奇、驚人調查結果，並計算出加總起來的真實數字是多少。
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
如果我們能客觀面對生活和各方面
00:12
It would be nice to be
objective in life,
objective in life,
0
926
2645
00:15
in many ways.
1
3571
2022
就太好了。
00:17
The problem is that we have
these color-tinted glasses
these color-tinted glasses
2
5593
3378
問題是我們戴著這些有色鏡片
00:20
as we look at all kinds of situations.
3
8971
4679
去看待各種情境。
拿啤酒這種簡單的例子來說吧。
00:25
For example, think about
something as simple as beer.
something as simple as beer.
4
13650
3716
00:29
If I gave you a few beers to taste
5
17366
2182
如果我讓你嚐幾款啤酒，
00:31
and I asked you to rate them
on intensity and bitterness,
on intensity and bitterness,
6
19548
3808
請你評比每一種酒的烈度和苦味，
00:35
different beers would occupy
different space.
different space.
7
23356
3697
不同的啤酒會落在不同的位置。
00:39
But what if we tried
to be objective about it?
to be objective about it?
8
27053
2757
但如果我們試著客觀面對
會怎麼樣？
會怎麼樣？
00:41
In the case of beer,
it would be very simple.
it would be very simple.
9
29810
2160
以啤酒來說很簡單。
00:43
What if we did a blind taste?
10
31970
2152
如果我們不看啤酒廠牌
會怎麼樣？
會怎麼樣？
00:46
Well, if we did the same thing,
you tasted the same beer,
you tasted the same beer,
11
34122
2724
如果我們做同樣的事，
你嚐同樣的啤酒，
你嚐同樣的啤酒，
00:48
now in the blind taste,
things would look slightly different.
things would look slightly different.
12
36846
3971
但現在你不知道是哪種啤酒，
結果就會不太一樣。
結果就會不太一樣。
00:52
Most of the beers will go into one place.
13
40817
2222
大部分的啤酒會落在同一個位置，
00:55
You will basically not
be able to distinguish them,
be able to distinguish them,
14
43039
2445
基本上你無法分辨，
00:57
and the exception, of course,
will be Guinness.
will be Guinness.
15
45484
3089
當然，健力士例外。
01:00
(Laughter)
16
48573
2228
（笑聲）
01:02
Similarly, we can think about physiology.
17
50801
2786
同樣我們也能來看看生理機能。
01:05
What happens when people expect
something from their physiology?
something from their physiology?
18
53587
3042
大家在預期自己的生理機能時
會出現什麼情況？
會出現什麼情況？
01:08
For example, we sold people
pain medications.
pain medications.
19
56629
2508
例如，我們賣止痛藥給大家。
01:11
Some people, we told them
the medications were expensive.
the medications were expensive.
20
59137
2739
我們跟某些人說的價格比較昂貴，
01:13
Some people, we told them it was cheap.
21
61876
1881
跟其他人說的價格較低。
01:15
And the expensive
pain medication worked better.
pain medication worked better.
22
63757
2972
結果昂貴止痛藥的效果比較好，
01:18
It relieved more pain from people,
23
66729
2554
更能有效舒緩這些人的疼痛，
01:21
because expectations
do change our physiology.
do change our physiology.
24
69283
3504
因為預期會改變我們的身體機能。
01:24
And of course, we all know that in sports,
25
72787
2062
當然，我們都知道看運動賽的時候，
01:26
if you are a fan of a particular team,
26
74849
1818
如果你是某隊的粉絲，
你就會無法克制
01:28
you can't help but see the game
27
76667
2369
從你支持隊伍的觀點去看比賽。
01:31
develop from the perspective of your team.
28
79036
3505
01:34
So all of those are cases in which
our preconceived notions
our preconceived notions
29
82541
4176
因此這些案例都顯示了
我們先入為主的念頭和期待
我們先入為主的念頭和期待
01:38
and our expectations color our world.
30
86717
3440
影響了我們的世界。
01:42
But what happened
in more important questions?
in more important questions?
31
90157
3402
但是在更重要的問題上
出現什麼情況？
出現什麼情況？
01:45
What happened with questions
that had to do with social justice?
that had to do with social justice?
32
93559
3552
在和社會正義有關的問題上
出現什麼情況？
出現什麼情況？
01:49
So we wanted to think about
what is the blind tasting version
what is the blind tasting version
33
97111
3405
所以我們想
思考不平等的盲測試版本是什麼？
01:52
for thinking about inequality?
34
100516
3065
01:55
So we started looking at inequality,
35
103581
2299
因此我們開始檢視不平等，
01:57
and we did some large-scale surveys
36
105880
1950
我們做了大規模的調查，
遍及美國和其它國家。
01:59
around the U.S. and other countries.
37
107830
2554
我們問了兩個問題：
02:02
So we asked two questions:
38
110384
1951
02:04
Do people know what kind of
level of inequality we have?
level of inequality we have?
39
112335
3366
大家「知道」
我們現今社會不平等的程度如何嗎？
我們現今社會不平等的程度如何嗎？
02:07
And then, what level of inequality
do we want to have?
do we want to have?
40
115701
4111
第二，我們「希望」
的不平等程度又是如何？
的不平等程度又是如何？
02:11
So let's think about the first question.
41
119812
2414
我們來看看第一個問題。
想像我將所有美國人分類，
02:14
Imagine I took all the people in the U.S.
42
122226
2113
02:16
and I sorted them from
the poorest on the right
the poorest on the right
43
124339
2925
最貧窮的在右邊，
02:19
to the richest on the left,
44
127264
2392
最富有的在左邊，
02:21
and then I divided them into five buckets:
45
129656
2662
然後我將所有人分成五群：
02:24
the poorest 20 percent,
the next 20 percent,
the next 20 percent,
46
132318
2298
最窮的佔 20%，接著 20%，
02:26
the next, the next,
and the richest 20 percent.
and the richest 20 percent.
47
134616
2856
接著 20%、20%，
以及最富有的 20%。
以及最富有的 20%。
02:29
And then I asked you to tell me
how much wealth do you think
how much wealth do you think
48
137472
2996
然後請你告訴我，
你認為每一群人
擁有的財富比例是多少。
擁有的財富比例是多少。
02:32
is concentrated in each of those buckets.
49
140468
2949
簡單來說，請想像我問的是
02:35
So to make it simpler,
imagine I ask you to tell me,
imagine I ask you to tell me,
50
143417
2461
02:37
how much wealth do you think
is concentrated
is concentrated
51
145878
2260
你認為有多少財富集中在
02:40
in the bottom two buckets,
52
148138
2260
最底層的這兩群人身上？
02:42
the bottom 40 percent?
53
150398
2261
就是底層 40% 的人？
02:44
Take a second. Think about it
and have a number.
and have a number.
54
152659
2692
花點時間，想出一個數字。
02:47
Usually we don't think.
55
155351
1904
通常我們都不會多想。
02:49
Think for a second,
have a real number in your mind.
have a real number in your mind.
56
157255
2485
只要花點時間，心裡得出一個數字。
02:51
You have it?
57
159740
1625
有答案了嗎？
02:53
Okay, here's what lots
of Americans tell us.
of Americans tell us.
58
161365
3065
好，這是大多數美國人給我們的答案。
02:56
They think that the bottom 20 percent
59
164430
1927
他們認為最底層 20% 的人
02:58
has about 2.9 percent of the wealth,
60
166357
2322
大概擁有 2.9% 的財富；
03:00
the next group has 6.4,
61
168679
2183
下一群人有 6.4% 的財富，
03:02
so together it's slightly more than nine.
62
170862
2507
總計比 9% 多一點。
03:05
The next group, they say, has 12 percent,
63
173369
3413
他們說下一群人有 12% 的財富，
03:08
20 percent,
64
176782
1649
20%，
03:10
and the richest 20 percent, people think
has 58 percent of the wealth.
has 58 percent of the wealth.
65
178431
4644
大家認為最富有的 20% 人口
擁有 58% 的財富。
擁有 58% 的財富。
03:15
You can see how this relates
to what you thought.
to what you thought.
66
183075
3135
你可以看到這和你想像中數字的差異。
03:18
Now, what's reality?
67
186210
1741
事實呢？
03:19
Reality is slightly different.
68
187951
1811
事實有點不同。
03:21
The bottom 20 percent
has 0.1 percent of the wealth.
has 0.1 percent of the wealth.
69
189762
3813
底層 20% 的人擁有 0.1% 的財富。
03:25
The next 20 percent
has 0.2 percent of the wealth.
has 0.2 percent of the wealth.
70
193575
3251
接下來 20% 的人有 0.2% 的財富。
03:28
Together, it's 0.3.
71
196826
2113
加起來是 0.3%。
03:30
The next group has 3.9,
72
198939
3529
下一組是 3.9%、
03:34
11.3,
73
202468
2183
11.3%，
03:36
and the richest group
has 84-85 percent of the wealth.
has 84-85 percent of the wealth.
74
204651
5741
最富有的這群人
有 84% 到 85% 的財富。
有 84% 到 85% 的財富。
03:42
So what we actually have
and what we think we have
and what we think we have
75
210392
2966
因此事實和我們的想像
03:45
are very different.
76
213358
1973
大不相同。
03:47
What about what we want?
77
215331
2090
那麼我們的期待呢？
03:49
How do we even figure this out?
78
217421
1997
我們怎麼找出答案？
03:51
So to look at this,
79
219418
1411
為了找出答案，
03:52
to look at what we really want,
80
220829
1578
了解我們真正的期待，
03:54
we thought about
the philosopher John Rawls.
the philosopher John Rawls.
81
222407
3065
我們想到哲學家約翰．羅爾斯。
03:57
If you remember John Rawls,
82
225472
1835
如果你記得約翰．羅爾斯的話，
03:59
he had this notion
of what's a just society.
of what's a just society.
83
227307
3250
你會知道他說
「什麼是正義的社會」這個概念。
「什麼是正義的社會」這個概念。
04:02
He said a just society
84
230557
1482
他說正義的社會
04:04
is a society that if
you knew everything about it,
you knew everything about it,
85
232039
2715
是一個如果你知道其中的一切，
04:06
you would be willing
to enter it in a random place.
to enter it in a random place.
86
234754
2433
你會願意在這個社會的任何一個位置。
04:09
And it's a beautiful definition,
87
237187
1524
這是很美好的定義，
04:10
because if you're wealthy,
you might want the wealthy
you might want the wealthy
88
238711
2478
因為如果你很富有，你也許會希望
富者更富，窮者更窮。
04:13
to have more money, the poor to have less.
89
241189
2037
04:15
If you're poor, you might
want more equality.
want more equality.
90
243226
2109
如果你是窮人，你應該會希望更平等。
04:17
But if you're going
to go into that society
to go into that society
91
245335
2004
但如果你要進入那個社會，
04:19
in every possible situation,
and you don't know,
and you don't know,
92
247339
3320
可能待在任何的位置上，
你不知道是哪一個，
你不知道是哪一個，
04:22
you have to consider all the aspects.
93
250659
2206
你就得考慮周詳。
04:24
It's a little bit like blind tasting
in which you don't know
in which you don't know
94
252865
2926
這有點像盲測試，
你不知道自己做的決定會有什麼結果，
04:27
what the outcome will be
when you make a decision,
when you make a decision,
95
255791
2670
04:30
and Rawls called this
the "veil of ignorance."
the "veil of ignorance."
96
258461
3715
約翰．羅爾斯稱此為「無知之幕」。
04:34
So, we took another group,
a large group of Americans,
a large group of Americans,
97
262176
3607
我們拿另一組人，一大群美國人，
04:37
and we asked them the question
in the veil of ignorance.
in the veil of ignorance.
98
265783
2755
套用「無知之幕」的情況
問他們這個問題。
問他們這個問題。
04:40
What are the characteristics of a country
that would make you want to join it,
that would make you want to join it,
99
268538
4110
一個有什麼特質的國家
會讓你想成為國民？
會讓你想成為國民？
04:44
knowing that you could end
randomly at any place?
randomly at any place?
100
272648
3158
前提是你會隨機
被放在任何一個位置上。
被放在任何一個位置上。
04:47
And here is what we got.
101
275806
1479
我們得到的結果如下：
04:49
What did people want to give
to the first group,
to the first group,
102
277285
2259
大家想給第一組人，
04:51
the bottom 20 percent?
103
279544
2183
也就是底層 20% 的人多少？
04:53
They wanted to give them
about 10 percent of the wealth.
about 10 percent of the wealth.
104
281727
2694
他們想要給這些人 10% 的財富，
04:56
The next group, 14 percent of the wealth,
105
284421
2600
接下來這組是 14% 的財富、
04:59
21, 22 and 32.
106
287021
5363
21%、22%、32% 的財富。
05:04
Now, nobody in our sample
wanted full equality.
wanted full equality.
107
292384
3506
現在，樣本裡沒人想要完全平等。
05:07
Nobody thought that socialism
is a fantastic idea in our sample.
is a fantastic idea in our sample.
108
295890
4433
樣本裡沒人認為社會主義是最好的。
05:12
But what does it mean?
109
300323
1288
但這意謂著什麼？
05:13
It means that we have this knowledge gap
110
301611
2038
這意謂了我們有知識落差，
05:15
between what we have
and what we think we have,
and what we think we have,
111
303649
2658
存在於真實情況
和我們的想像之間，
和我們的想像之間，
05:18
but we have at least as big a gap
between what we think is right
between what we think is right
112
306307
3715
但是我們認為正確
和我們想像中的現況，
和我們想像中的現況，
05:22
to what we think we have.
113
310022
2798
這兩者間的知識落差更大。
05:24
Now, we can ask these questions,
by the way, not just about wealth.
by the way, not just about wealth.
114
312820
3192
順帶一提，我們不只能
在財富上問這個問題，
在財富上問這個問題，
05:28
We can ask it about other things as well.
115
316012
2415
每件事都能是這些問題的主題。
05:30
So for example, we asked people
from different parts of the world
from different parts of the world
116
318427
4203
例如，我們問世界各地的人
05:34
about this question,
117
322630
1718
這個問題，
05:36
people who are liberals and conservatives,
118
324348
2343
不論是自由黨還是保守黨，
05:38
and they gave us basically
the same answer.
the same answer.
119
326691
2044
基本上他們給的答案都一樣。
05:40
We asked rich and poor,
they gave us the same answer,
they gave us the same answer,
120
328735
2482
不論貧富都給了相同答案，
05:43
men and women,
121
331217
1301
不論男女，
05:44
NPR listeners and Forbes readers.
122
332518
2693
不論是全國公共廣播電台聽眾，
或《富比士》讀者。
或《富比士》讀者。
05:47
We asked people in England,
Australia, the U.S. --
Australia, the U.S. --
123
335211
3229
我們問了英國、澳洲、美國…等國國民，
05:50
very similar answers.
124
338440
1717
答案都大同小異。
05:52
We even asked different
departments of a university.
departments of a university.
125
340157
2771
我們還問了大學不同系所的人，
05:54
We went to Harvard and we checked
almost every department,
almost every department,
126
342928
2758
我們幾乎去了哈佛的每個系所，
05:57
and in fact, from Harvard Business School,
127
345686
2012
事實上哈佛商學院裡，
05:59
where a few people wanted the wealthy
to have more and the [poor] to have less,
to have more and the [poor] to have less,
128
347698
3712
很少人希望富人更富，
而希望他們擁有的少一點。
而希望他們擁有的少一點。
答案如此雷同，非常驚人。
06:03
the similarity was astonishing.
129
351410
2540
06:05
I know some of you went
to Harvard Business School.
to Harvard Business School.
130
353950
2824
我知道在座有些人念過哈佛商學院。
06:08
We also asked this question
about something else.
about something else.
131
356774
3346
我們也會拿其它主題來問這些問題。
06:12
We asked, what about the ratio
of CEO pay to unskilled workers?
of CEO pay to unskilled workers?
132
360120
4969
我們問，總裁和非技術性員工的薪資比是多少？
06:17
So you can see what
people think is the ratio,
people think is the ratio,
133
365089
3157
你可以看到大家想像中的比例，
06:20
and then we can ask the question,
what do they think should be the ratio?
what do they think should be the ratio?
134
368246
3901
接著我們可以再問這個問題，
你認為比例應該是多少？
你認為比例應該是多少？
06:24
And then we can ask, what is reality?
135
372147
2627
然後我們就可以問事實是多少？
06:26
What is reality? And you could say,
well, it's not that bad, right?
well, it's not that bad, right?
136
374774
3278
事實是多少？你可能會說，
噢，其實沒那麼差嘛？
噢，其實沒那麼差嘛？
06:30
The red and the yellow
are not that different.
are not that different.
137
378052
2153
紅色和黃色差不多。
06:32
But the fact is, it's because
I didn't draw them on the same scale.
I didn't draw them on the same scale.
138
380205
3920
但事實是因為我沒有
使用相同的比例尺。
使用相同的比例尺。
06:38
It's hard to see, there's yellow
and blue in there.
and blue in there.
139
386105
3910
你幾乎看不到裡面還有黃色和藍色。
06:42
So what about other outcomes of wealth?
140
390015
2345
那其它財富的結果呢？
06:44
Wealth is not just about wealth.
141
392360
1695
財富不只事關財富。
06:46
We asked, what about things like health?
142
394055
2624
我們還問，健康方面又如何呢？
06:48
What about availability
of prescription medication?
of prescription medication?
143
396679
4133
像是取得處方箋的難易度呢？
06:52
What about life expectancy?
144
400812
2020
平均壽命呢？
06:54
What about life expectancy of infants?
145
402832
2415
嬰兒的平均壽命呢？
06:57
How do we want this to be distributed?
146
405247
2345
我們希望怎麼分配這些項目？
06:59
What about education for young people?
147
407592
2809
年輕人的教育呢？
07:02
And for older people?
148
410401
1870
年長者的教育呢？
07:04
And across all of those things,
what we learned was that people
what we learned was that people
149
412271
2983
透過那些事情，我們發現
大家不是很喜歡貧富不均，
07:07
don't like inequality of wealth,
150
415254
3158
07:10
but there's other things where inequality,
which is an outcome of wealth,
which is an outcome of wealth,
151
418412
3506
但是還有很多來自於貧富不均的情況
07:13
is even more aversive to them:
152
421918
2043
更讓人反感：
07:15
for example, inequality
in health or education.
in health or education.
153
423961
3971
例如，健康或教育的不平等。
07:19
We also learned that people
are particularly open
are particularly open
154
427932
2461
我們也發現大家特別願意
改變不平等的情況，
07:22
to changes in equality
when it comes to people
when it comes to people
155
430393
2554
特別是碰到那些
比較沒有行為能力的對象，
比較沒有行為能力的對象，
07:24
who have less agency --
156
432947
2044
基本上就是小孩和嬰兒，
07:26
basically, young kids and babies,
157
434991
2345
07:29
because we don't think of them
as responsible for their situation.
as responsible for their situation.
158
437336
4667
因為我們認為
他們不需為自己的現況負責。
他們不需為自己的現況負責。
07:34
So what are some lessons from this?
159
442003
2345
那我們從中學到什麼？
07:36
We have two gaps:
160
444348
1160
我們有兩種落差：
07:37
We have a knowledge gap
and we have a desirability gap
and we have a desirability gap
161
445508
2580
我們有知識落差和期望落差。
07:40
And the knowledge gap
is something that we think about,
is something that we think about,
162
448088
2622
知識落差是指我們認為
07:42
how do we educate people?
163
450710
1370
我們怎麼教育大眾？
07:44
How do we get people to think
differently about inequality
differently about inequality
164
452080
2716
我們怎麼讓大家
用不同的方式想像不平等、
用不同的方式想像不平等、
07:46
and the consequences of inequality
in terms of health, education,
in terms of health, education,
165
454796
3762
以及隨之而來，像是健康、教育、
07:50
jealousy, crime rate, and so on?
166
458558
2391
妒忌、犯罪率…等等的不平等後果？
07:52
Then we have the desirability gap.
167
460949
1881
另外我們也有期望落差。
07:54
How do we get people to think differently
about what we really want?
about what we really want?
168
462830
3823
我們怎麼讓大家用不同的方式
思考我們真正想要的是什麼？
思考我們真正想要的是什麼？
07:58
You see, the Rawls definition,
the Rawls way of looking at the world,
the Rawls way of looking at the world,
169
466653
3375
你看羅爾斯定義，
羅爾斯看世界的方式，
羅爾斯看世界的方式，
08:02
the blind tasting approach,
170
470028
1742
盲測試法，
08:03
takes our selfish motivation
out of the picture.
out of the picture.
171
471770
2925
將我們自私的動機移到畫面之外。
08:06
How do we implement that
to a higher degree
to a higher degree
172
474695
2577
我們如何將之運用在程度更高、
08:09
on a more extensive scale?
173
477272
2624
範圍更廣的事物上？
08:11
And finally, we also have an action gap.
174
479896
2856
最後，我們還有行為落差。
08:14
How do we take these things
and actually do something about it?
and actually do something about it?
175
482752
2949
我們要如何依據這些東西
並確實做出改變？
並確實做出改變？
08:17
I think part of the answer
is to think about people
is to think about people
176
485701
2902
我認為可能的答案是
08:20
like young kids and babies
that don't have much agency,
that don't have much agency,
177
488603
3112
想想孩子、嬰兒，
他們沒什麼行為能力，
他們沒什麼行為能力，
08:23
because people seem to be
more willing to do this.
more willing to do this.
178
491715
3808
因為大家似乎更願意為了他們而改變。
08:27
To summarize, I would say,
next time you go to drink beer or wine,
next time you go to drink beer or wine,
179
495523
5270
總而言之，下次你去喝啤酒或紅酒，
08:32
first of all, think about, what is it
in your experience that is real,
in your experience that is real,
180
500793
4087
先思考在你的經驗裡，有什麼是真的，
08:36
and what is it in your experience
that is a placebo effect
that is a placebo effect
181
504880
3274
在你的經驗裡，
有什麼只是安慰劑效應，
有什麼只是安慰劑效應，
08:40
coming from expectations?
182
508154
1604
你被期待影響了？
08:41
And then think about what it also means
for other decisions in your life,
for other decisions in your life,
183
509758
3529
接著再思考，這對你生命中
其它決定有何意義？
其它決定有何意義？
08:45
and hopefully also for policy questions
184
513287
2075
以及對影響我們大家的政策問題
會有什麼意義？
08:47
that affect all of us.
185
515362
1305
08:48
Thanks a lot.
186
516667
1727
非常感謝。
08:50
(Applause)
187
518394
2337
（掌聲）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economistThe dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why.
Why you should listen
Dan Ariely is a professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University and a founding member of the Center for Advanced Hindsight. He is the author of the bestsellers Predictably Irrational, The Upside of Irrationality, and The Honest Truth About Dishonesty -- as well as the TED Book Payoff: The Hidden Logic that Shapes Our Motivations.
Through his research and his (often amusing and unorthodox) experiments, he questions the forces that influence human behavior and the irrational ways in which we often all behave.
Dan Ariely | Speaker | TED.com