ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Jonathan Haidt - Social psychologist
Jonathan Haidt studies how -- and why -- we evolved to be moral and political creatures.

Why you should listen

By understanding more about our moral psychology and its biases, Jonathan Haidt says we can design better institutions (including companies, universities and democracy itself), and we can learn to be more civil and open-minded toward those who are not on our team.

Haidt is a social psychologist whose research on morality across cultures led to his 2008 TED Talk on the psychological roots of the American culture war, and his 2013 TED Talk on how "common threats can make common ground." In both of those talks he asks, "Can't we all disagree more constructively?" Haidt's 2012 TED Talk explored the intersection of his work on morality with his work on happiness to talk about "hive psychology" -- the ability that humans have to lose themselves in groups pursuing larger projects, almost like bees in a hive. This hivish ability is crucial, he argues, for understanding the origins of morality, politics, and religion. These are ideas that Haidt develops at greater length in his book, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion.

Haidt joined New York University Stern School of Business in July 2011. He is the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership, based in the Business and Society Program. Before coming to Stern, Professor Haidt taught for 16 years at the University of Virginia in the department of psychology.

Haidt's writings appear frequently in the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. He was named one of the top global thinkers by Foreign Policy magazine and by Prospect magazine. Haidt received a B.A. in Philosophy from Yale University, and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Pennsylvania.

More profile about the speaker
Jonathan Haidt | Speaker | TED.com
TED2008

Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives

Jonathan Haidt 讨论自由和保守主义的道德本质

Filmed:
3,635,704 views

心理学家 Jonathan Haidt 研究构成我们政治选择的五种道德基础。无论我们是左派、右派还是持平。在令人大开眼界的谈话中,告诉我们自由主义和保守主义在道德上的偏好。
- Social psychologist
Jonathan Haidt studies how -- and why -- we evolved to be moral and political creatures. Full bio

Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.

00:19
Suppose假设 that two American美国 friends朋友 are traveling旅行 together一起 in Italy意大利.
0
1000
3000
想象两个美国人到意大利旅游
00:22
They go to see Michelangelo's米开朗基罗 "David大卫,"
1
4000
2000
一起去看米开朗基罗的名作“大卫”
00:24
and when they finally最后 come face面对 to face面对 with the statue雕像,
2
6000
2000
当他们和巨大石雕面对面时
00:26
they both freeze冻结 dead in their tracks轨道.
3
8000
2000
两个人都望着出神
00:28
The first guy -- we'll call him Adam亚当 --
4
10000
2000
第一个人﹐我们就叫他亚当吧
00:30
is transfixed呆若木鸡 by the beauty美女 of the perfect完善 human人的 form形成.
5
12000
3000
被完美的人体肌理震慑住了
00:33
The second第二 guy -- we'll call him Bill法案 --
6
15000
2000
第二个人 我们就叫他比尔吧
00:35
is transfixed呆若木鸡 by embarrassment困窘, at staring凝视 at the thing there in the center中央.
7
17000
4000
也吓傻了 - 被那两腿间的玩意儿
00:40
So here's这里的 my question for you:
8
22000
2000
让我试问
00:42
which哪一个 one of these two guys was more likely容易 to have voted for George乔治 Bush衬套,
9
24000
4000
这两个男人谁比较有可能把票投给小布什
00:46
which哪一个 for Al Gore血块?
10
28000
2000
谁投给了高尔﹖
00:48
I don't need a show显示 of hands
11
30000
1000
大家不用举手
00:49
because we all have the same相同 political政治 stereotypes定型.
12
31000
3000
因为我们都有一样的刻板印象
00:52
We all know that it's Bill法案.
13
34000
2000
我们都知道是比尔
00:54
And in this case案件, the stereotype铅板 corresponds对应 to reality现实.
14
36000
4000
在这个例子里﹐刻板印象反映了事实
00:58
It really is a fact事实 that liberals自由主义者 are much higher更高 than conservatives保守派
15
40000
3000
事实上﹐自由党员的确比保守党员
01:01
on a major重大的 personality个性 trait特征 called openness透明度 to experience经验.
16
43000
3000
更容易接受新体验
01:04
People who are high in openness透明度 to experience经验
17
46000
2000
那些喜欢接受新体验的人
01:06
just crave渴望 novelty新奇, variety品种, diversity多样, new ideas思路, travel旅行.
18
48000
4000
渴望新鲜 多样性 新想法 旅行
01:10
People low on it like things that are familiar, that are safe安全 and dependable可信.
19
52000
5000
较难接受新体验的人喜欢熟悉 安全 可靠的事物
01:15
If you know about this trait特征,
20
57000
2000
如果你知道这些特性
01:17
you can understand理解 a lot of puzzles谜题 about human人的 behavior行为.
21
59000
2000
你便能了解人类许多难解的行为
01:19
You can understand理解 why artists艺术家 are so different不同 from accountants会计师.
22
61000
3000
了解为什么艺术家和会计师如此不同
01:22
You can actually其实 predict预测 what kinds of books图书 they like to read,
23
64000
2000
你可以预测他们喜欢看的书
01:24
what kinds of places地方 they like to travel旅行 to,
24
66000
2000
他们喜欢去的旅游点
01:26
and what kinds of food餐饮 they like to eat.
25
68000
2000
甚至他们的饮食偏好
01:28
Once一旦 you understand理解 this trait特征, you can understand理解
26
70000
3000
只要你了解这个特性﹐你便能理解
01:31
why anybody任何人 would eat at Applebee's阿普尔比的, but not anybody任何人 that you know.
27
73000
4000
为什么这么多人喜欢去连锁餐厅吃饭 但你却一个都不认识
01:35
(Laughter笑声)
28
77000
6000
(笑声)
01:41
This trait特征 also tells告诉 us a lot about politics政治.
29
83000
2000
这个特性也让我们理解政治
01:43
The main主要 researcher研究员 of this trait特征, Robert罗伯特 McCrae麦克雷 says that,
30
85000
3000
研究这个性格特质的研究者 Robert McCrae 说
01:46
"Open打开 individuals个人 have an affinity亲和力 for liberal自由主义的, progressive进步, left-wing左翼 political政治 views意见" --
31
88000
4000
“开放的人偏向自由 进步 左翼政治思想”
01:50
they like a society社会 which哪一个 is open打开 and changing改变 --
32
92000
2000
他们喜欢一个开放 持续改变的社会
01:52
"whereas closed关闭 individuals个人 prefer比较喜欢 conservative保守, traditional传统, right-wing右翼 views意见."
33
94000
5000
“封闭的人偏好保守 传统 右翼的观点。”
01:57
This trait特征 also tells告诉 us a lot about the kinds of groups people join加入.
34
99000
4000
这个特质也让我们了解人们所参与的社团组织
02:01
So here's这里的 the description描述 of a group I found发现 on the Web卷筒纸.
35
103000
2000
这是我在网络上找到的一个组织简介
02:03
What kinds of people would join加入 a global全球 community社区
36
105000
2000
怎样的人会参加一个全球性的社群
02:05
welcoming欢迎 people from every一切 discipline学科 and culture文化,
37
107000
2000
欢迎来自各种文化和学科的人
02:07
who seek寻求 a deeper更深 understanding理解 of the world世界,
38
109000
2000
那些想更深刻理解世界的人
02:09
and who hope希望 to turn that understanding理解 into a better future未来 for us all?
39
111000
3000
同时也是那些想以这些理解让世界变得更好的人
02:12
This is from some guy named命名 Ted摊晒.
40
114000
2000
这是一个叫 TED 的男人写的
02:14
(Laughter笑声)
41
116000
2000
(笑声)
02:16
Well, let's see now, if openness透明度 predicts预测 who becomes liberal自由主义的,
42
118000
4000
那么﹐如果开放性格偏向自由派
02:20
and openness透明度 predicts预测 who becomes a TEDsterTEDster,
43
122000
2000
同时也预知了你会成为 TED 一员
02:22
then might威力 we predict预测 that most TEDstersTEDsters are liberal自由主义的?
44
124000
3000
是否大部份的 TED 成员都是自由党呢﹖
02:25
Let's find out.
45
127000
1000
让我们试试
02:26
I'm going to ask you to raise提高 your hand, whether是否 you are liberal自由主义的, left of center中央 --
46
128000
4000
请你举起手﹐不管你是自由党﹐中间偏左
02:30
on social社会 issues问题, we're talking about, primarily主要 --
47
132000
2000
在我们所讨论的议题上
02:32
or conservative保守, and I'll give a third第三 option选项,
48
134000
2000
或是保守党﹐还有一个第三选项
02:34
because I know there are a number of libertarians自由主义者 in the audience听众.
49
136000
2000
因为我知道观众中还有一些相信自由至上的放任自由主义者
02:36
So, right now, please raise提高 your hand --
50
138000
2000
现在﹐举起你的手来
02:38
down in the simulcast同播 rooms客房, too,
51
140000
1000
在联播台里的人也是
02:39
let's let everybody每个人 see who's谁是 here --
52
141000
2000
让每个人看看都是谁
02:41
please raise提高 your hand if you would say that you are liberal自由主义的 or left of center中央.
53
143000
3000
如果你是自由党或中间偏左﹐请举起手来
02:44
Please raise提高 your hand high right now. OK.
54
146000
3000
请把你的手举高﹐好
02:48
Please raise提高 your hand if you'd say you're libertarian自由主义者.
55
150000
2000
请举手如果你是放任自由主义者
02:51
OK, about a -- two dozen.
56
153000
2000
好 差不多有二十多人
02:53
And please raise提高 your hand if you'd say you are right of center中央 or conservative保守.
57
155000
3000
如果你觉得你是中间偏右或保守党﹐请举手
02:56
One, two, three, four, five -- about eight or 10.
58
158000
5000
1 2 3 4 5 - 大概8 到10人
03:02
OK. This is a bit of a problem问题.
59
164000
3000
好。这就是问题。
03:05
Because if our goal目标 is to understand理解 the world世界,
60
167000
3000
如果我们的目标是了解世界
03:08
to seek寻求 a deeper更深 understanding理解 of the world世界,
61
170000
2000
深刻的进一步了解世界
03:10
our general一般 lack缺乏 of moral道德 diversity多样 here is going to make it harder更难.
62
172000
3000
但缺乏道德多样性让了解世界变得更难
03:13
Because when people all share分享 values, when people all share分享 morals,
63
175000
4000
因为当每个人都分享一样的价值观和道德观
03:17
they become成为 a team球队, and once一旦 you engage从事 the psychology心理学 of teams球队,
64
179000
3000
便成为一个团队﹐一旦进入团队心理
03:20
it shuts启闭 down open-minded思想开明的 thinking思维.
65
182000
2000
原本开放的思想就会闭塞
03:25
When the liberal自由主义的 team球队 loses失去, as it did in 2004,
66
187000
4000
当自由队在2004年败选
03:29
and as it almost几乎 did in 2000, we comfort安慰 ourselves我们自己.
67
191000
4000
就像在2000年一样﹐我们自我安慰
03:33
(Laughter笑声)
68
195000
2000
(笑声)
03:35
We try to explain说明 why half of America美国 voted for the other team球队.
69
197000
4000
我们尝试自我解释为什么有一半美国人投给另外一队
03:39
We think they must必须 be blinded失明 by religion宗教, or by simple简单 stupidity糊涂事.
70
201000
5000
我们想 他们一定是被宗教蒙蔽 或是纯粹愚蠢
03:44
(Laughter笑声)
71
206000
3000
(笑声)
03:47
(Applause掌声)
72
209000
8000
(掌声)
03:55
So, if you think that half of America美国 votes Republican共和党人
73
217000
6000
如果你认为投给共和党的另一半美国人
04:01
because they are blinded失明 in this way,
74
223000
3000
是因为他们被蒙蔽了
04:04
then my message信息 to you is that you're trapped被困 in a moral道德 matrix矩阵,
75
226000
3000
我想告诉你的是你被道德母体限制住了
04:07
in a particular特定 moral道德 matrix矩阵.
76
229000
1000
某一种特别的道德母体
04:08
And by the matrix矩阵, I mean literally按照字面 the matrix矩阵, like the movie电影 "The Matrix矩阵."
77
230000
4000
所谓的道德母体﹐就像“黑客任务”里面的大计算机一样
04:12
But I'm here today今天 to give you a choice选择.
78
234000
2000
但今日我让你有个选择
04:14
You can either take the blue蓝色 pill and stick to your comforting欣慰的 delusions妄想,
79
236000
4000
你可以选择蓝色药丸然后保持在舒适的幻觉中
04:18
or you can take the red pill,
80
240000
2000
或是选择红色药丸﹐
04:20
learn学习 some moral道德 psychology心理学 and step outside the moral道德 matrix矩阵.
81
242000
3000
了解道德心理学﹐跨越你的道德母体
04:23
Now, because I know --
82
245000
2000
因为我知道 --
04:25
(Applause掌声) --
83
247000
3000
(掌声)
04:28
OK, I assume承担 that answers答案 my question.
84
250000
2000
我想这已经回答了我的问题
04:30
I was going to ask you which哪一个 one you picked采摘的, but no need.
85
252000
2000
我本来想问你们要选哪一个﹐我想不需要了
04:32
You're all high in openness透明度 to experience经验, and besides除了,
86
254000
2000
你们都很爱接受新体验﹐更何况
04:34
it looks容貌 like it might威力 even taste味道 good, and you're all epicures美食家.
87
256000
3000
这看起来很可能很可口 能满足你们的美食主义
04:37
So anyway无论如何, let's go with the red pill.
88
259000
2000
总而言之﹐让我们选择红色药丸
04:39
Let's study研究 some moral道德 psychology心理学 and see where it takes us.
89
261000
2000
让我们学习一些道德心理学﹐看看我们能了解什么
04:41
Let's start开始 at the beginning开始.
90
263000
2000
让我们从头开始
04:43
What is morality道德 and where does it come from?
91
265000
2000
道德是什么﹖它从哪里来﹖
04:45
The worst最差 idea理念 in all of psychology心理学
92
267000
2000
心理学中最糟的想法
04:47
is the idea理念 that the mind心神 is a blank空白 slate石板 at birth分娩.
93
269000
3000
便是我们像一张白纸一样出生
04:50
Developmental发展的 psychology心理学 has shown显示
94
272000
2000
发展心理学告诉我们
04:52
that kids孩子 come into the world世界 already已经 knowing会心 so much
95
274000
2000
婴儿来到世界上时已经知道许多
04:54
about the physical物理 and social社会 worlds世界,
96
276000
2000
有关世界和社会
04:56
and programmed程序 to make it really easy简单 for them to learn学习 certain某些 things
97
278000
4000
让他们变得更易学习
05:00
and hard to learn学习 others其他.
98
282000
1000
却很难向他人学习
05:01
The best最好 definition定义 of innateness天赋 I've ever seen看到 --
99
283000
2000
有关这些与生俱来的天赋
05:03
this just clarifies澄清 so many许多 things for me --
100
285000
2000
有个人说的很好
05:05
is from the brain scientist科学家 Gary加里 Marcus马库斯.
101
287000
2000
脑科学家 Gary Marcus
05:07
He says, "The initial初始 organization组织 of the brain does not depend依靠 that much on experience经验.
102
289000
5000
他说“脑的初始组织不是来自经验
05:12
Nature性质 provides提供 a first draft草案, which哪一个 experience经验 then revises修改.
103
294000
3000
自然提供了第一个版本﹐经验只能修改
05:15
Built-in内建的 doesn't mean unmalleableunmalleable;
104
297000
2000
先建不代表不可塑﹔
05:17
it means手段 organized有组织的 in advance提前 of experience经验."
105
299000
3000
而是组织先于经验。”
05:20
OK, so what's on the first draft草案 of the moral道德 mind心神?
106
302000
2000
那么道德的第一个版本是什么﹖
05:22
To find out, my colleague同事, Craig克雷格 Joseph约瑟夫, and I
107
304000
3000
我和同事 Craig Joseph
05:25
read through通过 the literature文学 on anthropology人类学,
108
307000
2000
阅读了许多人类学的文献
05:27
on culture文化 variation变异 in morality道德
109
309000
2000
有关不同文化的道德
05:29
and also on evolutionary发展的 psychology心理学, looking for matches火柴.
110
311000
2000
同时也在进化心理学里找相同处
05:31
What are the sorts排序 of things that people talk about across横过 disciplines学科?
111
313000
3000
跨领域的人谈论的时候他们都谈论什么
05:34
That you find across横过 cultures文化 and even across横过 species种类?
112
316000
2000
跨文化和跨物种的人又谈论什么﹖
05:36
We found发现 five -- five best最好 matches火柴,
113
318000
2000
我们总共找到五种
05:38
which哪一个 we call the five foundations基金会 of morality道德.
114
320000
2000
我们称它们为五种道德基础
05:40
The first one is harm危害/care关心.
115
322000
2000
第一种是伤害-照护
05:42
We're all mammals哺乳动物 here, we all have a lot of neural神经 and hormonal激素 programming程序设计
116
324000
4000
我们都是哺乳类﹐我们都有许多神经和荷尔蒙程序
05:46
that makes品牌 us really bond with others其他, care关心 for others其他,
117
328000
2000
让我们与他人联结﹐关怀他人
05:48
feel compassion同情 for others其他, especially特别 the weak and vulnerable弱势.
118
330000
3000
同情他人﹐尤其那些脆弱容易受伤的人
05:51
It gives us very strong强大 feelings情怀 about those who cause原因 harm危害.
119
333000
3000
让我们对那些造成伤害的人有强烈感觉
05:54
This moral道德 foundation基础 underliesunderlies about 70 percent百分
120
336000
3000
这个道德基础含括了我在TED所听到的
05:57
of the moral道德 statements声明 I've heard听说 here at TEDTED.
121
339000
2000
七成的道德陈述
05:59
The second第二 foundation基础 is fairness公平/reciprocity互惠.
122
341000
3000
第二个道德基础是公平-相等
06:02
There's actually其实 ambiguous暧昧 evidence证据
123
344000
2000
有一些模糊的证据
06:04
as to whether是否 you find reciprocity互惠 in other animals动物,
124
346000
2000
证明你是否能在其它动物身上找到相互性
06:06
but the evidence证据 for people could not be clearer更清晰.
125
348000
2000
但在人类身上的例子却再清楚不过了
06:08
This Norman诺曼 Rockwell罗克韦尔 painting绘画 is called "The Golden金色 Rule规则,"
126
350000
2000
这幅 Norman Rockwell 的画叫做“金科玉律”
06:10
and we heard听说 about this from Karen卡伦 Armstrong阿姆斯特朗, of course课程,
127
352000
2000
Karen Armstrong 也告诉我们
06:12
as the foundation基础 of so many许多 religions宗教.
128
354000
3000
这是很多宗教的基础
06:15
That second第二 foundation基础 underliesunderlies the other 30 percent百分
129
357000
2000
第二哥道德基础含括了我在TED所听到的
06:17
of the moral道德 statements声明 I've heard听说 here at TEDTED.
130
359000
2000
另外三成的道德陈诉
06:19
The third第三 foundation基础 is in-group在组/loyalty忠诚.
131
361000
2000
第三个基础是团队忠诚
06:21
You do find groups in the animal动物 kingdom王国 --
132
363000
2000
你可以在动物里面找到群体
06:23
you do find cooperative合作社 groups --
133
365000
2000
你可以找到合作团队
06:25
but these groups are always either very small or they're all siblings兄弟姐妹.
134
367000
3000
但这些组织通常不是很小或是牠们都是兄弟姐妹
06:28
It's only among其中 humans人类 that you find very large groups of people
135
370000
3000
只有在人类的世界里你看到一大群人
06:31
who are able能够 to cooperate合作, join加入 together一起 into groups,
136
373000
3000
彼此相处﹐一起合作
06:34
but in this case案件, groups that are united联合的 to fight斗争 other groups.
137
376000
4000
但在这例子里﹐团队合作是为了和其它团队斗争
06:38
This probably大概 comes from our long history历史 of tribal部落的 living活的, of tribal部落的 psychology心理学.
138
380000
4000
这大概是来自我们长时间的部落生态﹐部落心理
06:42
And this tribal部落的 psychology心理学 is so deeply pleasurable愉快的
139
384000
2000
这种部落心态实在太愉快了
06:44
that even when we don't have tribes部落,
140
386000
2000
就算我们已经不在部落里了
06:46
we go ahead and make them, because it's fun开玩笑.
141
388000
3000
我们还是照样因为好玩
06:49
(Laughter笑声)
142
391000
3000
(笑声)
06:52
Sports体育 is to war战争 as pornography色情 is to sex性别.
143
394000
3000
运动和战争就像A片和性的关系
06:55
We get to exercise行使 some ancient, ancient drives驱动器.
144
397000
3000
我们借此发泄那些古老的欲望
06:58
The fourth第四 foundation基础 is authority权威/respect尊重.
145
400000
3000
第四种道德基础是权威-尊敬
07:01
Here you see submissive服从的 gestures手势 from two members会员 of very closely密切 related有关 species种类.
146
403000
3000
从这里你可以看到两种非常接近的物种的服从姿态
07:04
But authority权威 in humans人类 is not so closely密切 based基于 on power功率 and brutality残酷,
147
406000
4000
但人类的权威不是以权力和暴力为基础
07:08
as it is in other primates灵长类动物.
148
410000
2000
像其它动物
07:10
It's based基于 on more voluntary自主性 deference尊重,
149
412000
2000
而是以自愿的服从﹐
07:12
and even elements分子 of love, at times.
150
414000
2000
有时候甚至是爱的元素
07:14
The fifth第五 foundation基础 is purity纯度/sanctity尊严.
151
416000
2000
第五种基础是纯洁- 神圣
07:16
This painting绘画 is called "The Allegory寓言 Of Chastity贞洁,"
152
418000
3000
这幅画是“贞节的寓意”
07:19
but purity's纯度的 not just about suppressing抑制 female sexuality性欲.
153
421000
3000
但纯洁不只是压抑女性性欲
07:22
It's about any kind of ideology思想, any kind of idea理念
154
424000
3000
而是任何理想﹐任何想法
07:25
that tells告诉 you that you can attain达到 virtue美德
155
427000
2000
告诉你只要控制你的身体
07:27
by controlling控制 what you do with your body身体,
156
429000
1000
你便可以成善
07:28
by controlling控制 what you put into your body身体.
157
430000
2000
只要控制进入你身体的东西
07:30
And while the political政治 right may可能 moralize说教 sex性别 much more,
158
432000
4000
右翼喜欢谈论性方面的道德
07:34
the political政治 left is really doing a lot of it with food餐饮.
159
436000
2000
左翼喜欢用食物
07:36
Food餐饮 is becoming变得 extremely非常 moralized道德化 nowadays如今,
160
438000
2000
今日食物变成一种道德指标
07:38
and a lot of it is ideas思路 about purity纯度,
161
440000
2000
这些观点也来自纯洁
07:40
about what you're willing愿意 to touch触摸, or put into your body身体.
162
442000
3000
有关你愿意触摸和放进身体的东西
07:43
I believe these are the five best最好 candidates候选人
163
445000
3000
我相信这是五个最好的候选人
07:46
for what's written书面 on the first draft草案 of the moral道德 mind心神.
164
448000
2000
在我们道德思想的初稿上
07:48
I think this is what we come with, at least最小
165
450000
1000
我相信这是我们与生俱来的
07:49
a preparedness准备 to learn学习 all of these things.
166
451000
3000
做好准备要来学习这些东西
07:52
But as my son儿子, Max马克斯, grows成长 up in a liberal自由主义的 college学院 town,
167
454000
3000
但我的儿子 Max 在一个自由派的大学城里长大
07:56
how is this first draft草案 going to get revised修订?
168
458000
2000
这个初稿将如何被改写﹖
07:58
And how will it end结束 up being存在 different不同
169
460000
2000
和在我们南部六十里的乡下
08:00
from a kid孩子 born天生 60 miles英里 south of us in Lynchburg林奇堡, Virginia弗吉尼亚州?
170
462000
3000
生下来的孩子 又会有什么不同﹖
08:03
To think about culture文化 variation变异, let's try a different不同 metaphor隐喻.
171
465000
2000
当我们想到这些多样文化的时候﹐让我们试试其它隐喻
08:05
If there really are five systems系统 at work in the mind心神 --
172
467000
3000
如果真的有着五种系统在我们想法里
08:08
five sources来源 of intuitions直觉 and emotions情绪 --
173
470000
2000
五种情绪和直觉的来源
08:10
then we can think of the moral道德 mind心神
174
472000
2000
我们可以把道德感
08:12
as being存在 like one of those audio音频 equalizers均衡器 that has five channels渠道,
175
474000
2000
当做音响有五种频道的均衡器
08:14
where you can set it to a different不同 setting设置 on every一切 channel渠道.
176
476000
2000
你可以在不同频道选择不同的程度
08:16
And my colleagues同事, Brian布赖恩 Nosek诺塞克 and Jesse杰西 Graham格雷厄姆, and I,
177
478000
3000
我的同事 Brian Nosek, Jesse Graham 和我
08:19
made制作 a questionnaire调查问卷, which哪一个 we put up on the Web卷筒纸 at www万维网.YourMoralsYourMorals.org组织.
178
481000
5000
做了一个问卷﹐放在www.YourMorals.org网站上
08:24
And so far, 30,000 people have taken采取 this questionnaire调查问卷, and you can too.
179
486000
5000
目前为止已经有三万人填写了这个问卷﹐你也可以
08:29
Here are the results结果.
180
491000
1000
结果在这里
08:30
Here are the results结果 from about 23,000 American美国 citizens公民.
181
492000
3000
这里是两万三千个美国公民的结果
08:33
On the left, I've plotted绘制 the scores分数 for liberals自由主义者;
182
495000
2000
左边是自由派的分数
08:35
on the right, those for conservatives保守派; in the middle中间, the moderates温和派.
183
497000
2000
右边是保守派的﹐中间是中立
08:37
The blue蓝色 line线 shows节目 you people's人们 responses回复
184
499000
2000
蓝线是你们的回应
08:39
on the average平均 of all the harm危害 questions问题.
185
501000
2000
在所有有关伤害的问题上
08:41
So, as you see, people care关心 about harm危害 and care关心 issues问题.
186
503000
3000
你可以看到﹐人们真的很关心伤害和照护的问题
08:44
They give high endorsement背书 of these sorts排序 of statements声明
187
506000
2000
他们很支持这方面的陈述
08:46
all across横过 the board, but as you also see,
188
508000
2000
在整个表上﹐但你也可以看到
08:48
liberals自由主义者 care关心 about it a little more than conservatives保守派 -- the line线 slopes连续下坡 down.
189
510000
3000
自由派比保守派更在乎一些﹐线慢慢降了下来
08:51
Same相同 story故事 for fairness公平.
190
513000
2000
公平也是一样
08:53
But look at the other three lines线.
191
515000
2000
但看看其它三条线
08:55
For liberals自由主义者, the scores分数 are very low.
192
517000
2000
自由派的分数非常低
08:57
Liberals自由主义者 are basically基本上 saying, "No, this is not morality道德.
193
519000
2000
基本上自由派是说“这根本不是道德。
08:59
In-group在组, authority权威, purity纯度 -- this stuff东东 has nothing to do with morality道德. I reject拒绝 it."
194
521000
3000
团体 权威 纯洁 - 这些东西和道德一点关系也没有。我拒绝。”
09:02
But as people get more conservative保守, the values rise上升.
195
524000
2000
但当人越保守﹐这些价值便提升
09:04
We can say that liberals自由主义者 have a kind of a two-channel双通道,
196
526000
3000
我们可以说自由派有一种 - 双频
09:07
or two-foundation两基金 morality道德.
197
529000
1000
或是双基础的道德
09:08
Conservatives保守党 have more of a five-foundation五基础,
198
530000
2000
保守派则是有五基础
09:10
or five-channel五通道 morality道德.
199
532000
2000
或是五频的道德
09:12
We find this in every一切 country国家 we look at.
200
534000
1000
我们在每个国家都看到一样的情形
09:13
Here's这里的 the data数据 for 1,100 Canadians加拿大人.
201
535000
2000
这是一千多个加拿大人的数据
09:15
I'll just flip翻动 through通过 a few少数 other slides幻灯片.
202
537000
2000
我会翻过一些其它的国家
09:17
The U.K., Australia澳大利亚, New Zealand新西兰, Western西 Europe欧洲, Eastern Europe欧洲,
203
539000
3000
英国﹐澳洲 纽西兰 西欧 东欧
09:20
Latin拉丁 America美国, the Middle中间 East, East Asia亚洲 and South Asia亚洲.
204
542000
4000
拉丁美洲 中东 中亚 和南亚
09:24
Notice注意 also that on all of these graphs,
205
546000
2000
你可以看到在这些图表上
09:26
the slope is steeper陡峭的 on in-group在组, authority权威, purity纯度.
206
548000
3000
在团体 权威 纯洁的差异更大
09:29
Which哪一个 shows节目 that within any country国家,
207
551000
2000
这告诉我们在任何国家
09:31
the disagreement异议 isn't over harm危害 and fairness公平.
208
553000
3000
歧见并不是来自伤害和公平
09:34
Everybody每个人 -- I mean, we debate辩论 over what's fair公平 --
209
556000
2000
我们讨论什么是公平
09:36
but everybody每个人 agrees同意 that harm危害 and fairness公平 matter.
210
558000
3000
但每个人都认同伤害和公平是要紧的
09:39
Moral道德 arguments参数 within cultures文化
211
561000
2000
在文化中的道德讨论
09:41
are especially特别 about issues问题 of in-group在组, authority权威, purity纯度.
212
563000
3000
通常都与团队 权威 纯洁有关
09:44
This effect影响 is so robust强大的 that we find it no matter how we ask the question.
213
566000
3000
无论我们怎么提出问题﹐效果还是很明显。
09:47
In one recent最近 study研究,
214
569000
2000
在最近的一项研究中
09:49
we asked people to suppose假设 you're about to get a dog.
215
571000
2000
我们问人们﹕如果你们要买狗
09:51
You picked采摘的 a particular特定 breed品种,
216
573000
1000
你选择了一种特别的品种
09:52
you learned学到了 some new information信息 about the breed品种.
217
574000
2000
后来你知道有关这些品种的一些事
09:54
Suppose假设 you learn学习 that this particular特定 breed品种 is independent-minded独立思想,
218
576000
3000
或许你学到这个特别的品种会独立思考
09:57
and relates涉及 to its owner所有者 as a friend朋友 and an equal等于?
219
579000
2000
并且把主人当做平等的朋友
09:59
Well, if you are a liberal自由主义的, you say, "Hey, that's great!"
220
581000
2000
如果你是自由派你会说“哇!那太好了!”
10:01
Because liberals自由主义者 like to say, "Fetch, please."
221
583000
2000
因为自由派喜欢说“去接!”
10:03
(Laughter笑声)
222
585000
4000
(笑声)
10:08
But if you're conservative保守, that's not so attractive有吸引力.
223
590000
3000
但如果你是保守派﹐这就不是太好
10:11
If you're conservative保守, and you learn学习 that a dog's小狗 extremely非常 loyal忠诚
224
593000
3000
如果你是保守派﹐你知道这只狗对牠的家庭非常忠诚
10:14
to its home and family家庭, and doesn't warm up quickly很快 to strangers陌生人,
225
596000
2000
不会很快地和陌生人混熟
10:16
for conservatives保守派, well, loyalty忠诚 is good -- dogs小狗 ought应该 to be loyal忠诚.
226
598000
3000
对保守派来说 忠诚很好 狗就是要忠诚
10:19
But to a liberal自由主义的, it sounds声音 like this dog
227
601000
2000
但对自由派来说﹐这听起来
10:21
is running赛跑 for the Republican共和党人 nomination提名.
228
603000
2000
像是这只狗要参加共和党初选了
10:23
(Laughter笑声)
229
605000
1000
(笑声)
10:24
So, you might威力 say, OK,
230
606000
2000
所以你可能说 好
10:26
there are these differences分歧 between之间 liberals自由主义者 and conservatives保守派,
231
608000
2000
这就是保守派和自由派的差异
10:28
but what makes品牌 those three other foundations基金会 moral道德?
232
610000
2000
但什么让其它三种基础也成为道德呢﹖
10:30
Aren't是不是 those just the foundations基金会 of xenophobia排外主义
233
612000
2000
难道它们不是只是极权主义
10:32
and authoritarianism独裁主义 and Puritanism清教?
234
614000
2000
排他主义和清教主义的基础吗﹖
10:34
What makes品牌 them moral道德?
235
616000
1000
什么让它们变成道德﹖
10:35
The answer回答, I think, is contained in this incredible难以置信 triptych三联 from Hieronymus海欧纳莫斯 Bosch博世,
236
617000
3000
答案﹐我想﹐就存在布殊这个三联图中
10:38
"The Garden花园 of Earthly俗世的 Delights美食."
237
620000
2000
“世俗欲望的乐园。”
10:40
In the first panel面板, we see the moment时刻 of creation创建.
238
622000
3000
在第一幅图里﹐我们看到创造世界时
10:43
All is ordered有序, all is beautiful美丽, all the people and animals动物
239
625000
4000
一切都有秩序﹐一些都很美丽﹐所有的人和动物
10:47
are doing what they're supposed应该 to be doing, where they're supposed应该 to be.
240
629000
3000
都在它们应该在的地方做他们应该做的事情
10:50
But then, given特定 the way of the world世界, things change更改.
241
632000
3000
但因为世俗的一切 事情开始改变
10:53
We get every一切 person doing whatever随你 he wants,
242
635000
2000
人们开始任意而为
10:55
with every一切 aperture光圈 of every一切 other person and every一切 other animal动物.
243
637000
3000
和任何人和任何动物
10:58
Some of you might威力 recognize认识 this as the '60s.
244
640000
2000
在座的某些人可能会发现这是60年代
11:00
(Laughter笑声)
245
642000
1000
(笑声)
11:01
But the '60s inevitably必将 gives way to the '70s,
246
643000
4000
但60年代终究被70年代取代
11:05
where the cuttings插条 of the apertures hurt伤害 a little bit more.
247
647000
4000
这些裂缝开始令人痛苦
11:09
Of course课程, Bosch博世 called this hell地狱.
248
651000
2000
当然 布殊称这为地狱
11:11
So this triptych三联, these three panels面板
249
653000
3000
在这个三联画中﹐三片图
11:14
portray写真 the timeless永恒 truth真相 that order订购 tends趋向 to decay衰变.
250
656000
5000
描绘了秩序逐渐腐败的真实
11:19
The truth真相 of social社会 entropy.
251
661000
2000
社会消减的事实
11:21
But lest免得 you think this is just some part部分 of the Christian基督教 imagination想像力
252
663000
3000
你们可能只会想这只是基督徒的想象
11:24
where Christians基督徒 have this weird奇怪的 problem问题 with pleasure乐趣,
253
666000
2000
因为基督徒老是要跟欢愉过不去
11:26
here's这里的 the same相同 story故事, the same相同 progression级数,
254
668000
3000
这里有一个一样的故事 一样的演进
11:29
told in a paper that was published发表 in Nature性质 a few少数 years年份 ago,
255
671000
3000
在自然杂志中刊登的一篇文章里
11:32
in which哪一个 Ernst恩斯特 Fehr费尔 and Simon西蒙 GachterGachter had people play a commons公地 dilemma困境.
256
674000
4000
Ernst Fehr 和 Simon Gachter 要人们思考一个常见的难题
11:36
A game游戏 in which哪一个 you give people money,
257
678000
2000
你给人们钱
11:38
and then, on each round回合 of the game游戏,
258
680000
2000
然后在每一轮游戏结束前
11:40
they can put money into a common共同 pot,
259
682000
2000
他们可以把钱放进一个共享壶里
11:42
and then the experimenter实验者 doubles双打 what's in there,
260
684000
2000
实验者把里面的钱变双份
11:44
and then it's all divided分为 among其中 the players玩家.
261
686000
2000
然后再分给所有玩家
11:46
So it's a really nice不错 analog类似物 for all sorts排序 of environmental环境的 issues问题,
262
688000
3000
这就像许多环境议题
11:49
where we're asking people to make a sacrifice牺牲
263
691000
2000
我们要求人们做出牺牲
11:51
and they themselves他们自己 don't really benefit效益 from their own拥有 sacrifice牺牲.
264
693000
2000
他们自己不会从牺牲中得到什么
11:53
But you really want everybody每个人 else其他 to sacrifice牺牲,
265
695000
2000
但你总是要其它人牺牲
11:55
but everybody每个人 has a temptation诱惑 to a free自由 ride.
266
697000
2000
但人总有搭便车的想法
11:57
And what happens发生 is that, at first, people start开始 off reasonably合理 cooperative合作社 --
267
699000
4000
刚开始﹐人们较为合作
12:01
and this is all played发挥 anonymously匿名.
268
703000
2000
这是无名制的 --
12:03
On the first round回合, people give about half of the money that they can.
269
705000
3000
第一轮﹐人们给出一半的钱
12:06
But they quickly很快 see, "You know what, other people aren't doing so much though虽然.
270
708000
3000
但他们很快知道”说真的﹐其它人没有做这么多。
12:09
I don't want to be a sucker吸盘. I'm not going to cooperate合作."
271
711000
2000
我才不是笨蛋。我不要合作。“
12:11
And so cooperation合作 quickly很快 decays衰变 from reasonably合理 good, down to close to zero.
272
713000
4000
于是合作关系很快的从还不错﹐落到几乎没有
12:15
But then -- and here's这里的 the trick --
273
717000
2000
但是 - 诀窍在这
12:17
Fehr费尔 and GachterGachter said, on the seventh第七 round回合, they told people,
274
719000
2000
Fehr 和 Gachter 在第七轮的时候和每个人说
12:19
"You know what? New rule规则.
275
721000
2000
”好的﹐新规则
12:21
If you want to give some of your own拥有 money
276
723000
2000
如果你要给一些钱
12:23
to punish惩治 people who aren't contributing贡献, you can do that."
277
725000
4000
来惩罚那些没有贡献的人﹐你可以这样做。“
12:27
And as soon不久 as people heard听说 about the punishment惩罚 issue问题 going on,
278
729000
3000
当人们听到惩罚的时候
12:30
cooperation合作 shoots up.
279
732000
2000
马上变得合作
12:32
It shoots up and it keeps保持 going up.
280
734000
2000
不但合作 而且继续加强
12:34
There's a lot of research研究 showing展示 that to solve解决 cooperative合作社 problems问题, it really helps帮助.
281
736000
3000
有许多研究表示在解决合作问题上 这有明显的帮助
12:37
It's not enough足够 to just appeal上诉 to people's人们 good motives动机.
282
739000
2000
只靠人们的好心并不够
12:39
It really helps帮助 to have some sort分类 of punishment惩罚.
283
741000
2000
有些惩罚会更好
12:41
Even if it's just shame耻辱 or embarrassment困窘 or gossip八卦,
284
743000
2000
就算只是羞辱或是被谈论
12:43
you need some sort分类 of punishment惩罚 to bring带来 people,
285
745000
3000
你需要惩罚
12:46
when they're in large groups, to cooperate合作.
286
748000
2000
让人们在大的群体里合作
12:48
There's even some recent最近 research研究 suggesting提示 that religion宗教 --
287
750000
3000
甚至有些最近的研究谈到宗教
12:51
priming God, making制造 people think about God --
288
753000
2000
让人们想到神
12:53
often经常, in some situations情况, leads引线 to more cooperative合作社, more pro-social亲社会 behavior行为.
289
755000
5000
往往让人们懂得合作 更符合社会期待
12:59
Some people think that religion宗教 is an adaptation适应
290
761000
2000
某些人认为宗教是一种适应作用
13:01
evolved进化 both by cultural文化 and biological生物 evolution演化
291
763000
2000
来自文化和生理进化
13:03
to make groups to cohere粘着,
292
765000
2000
让群体可以合作
13:05
in part部分 for the purpose目的 of trusting信任的 each other,
293
767000
2000
让人们何以互信
13:07
and then being存在 more effective有效 at competing竞争 with other groups.
294
769000
2000
在与他人竞争时能够更有效
13:09
I think that's probably大概 right,
295
771000
1000
我想这大概是真的
13:10
although虽然 this is a controversial争论的 issue问题.
296
772000
2000
虽然这是个争议性很大的话题
13:12
But I'm particularly尤其 interested有兴趣 in religion宗教,
297
774000
2000
但我对宗教特别有兴趣
13:14
and the origin起源 of religion宗教, and in what it does to us and for us.
298
776000
3000
宗教的来源﹐他为我们和对我们做了什么
13:17
Because I think that the greatest最大 wonder奇迹 in the world世界 is not the Grand盛大 Canyon峡谷.
299
779000
4000
因为我认为最大的奇景不是大峡谷
13:21
The Grand盛大 Canyon峡谷 is really simple简单.
300
783000
2000
大峡谷很简单
13:23
It's just a lot of rock, and then a lot of water and wind, and a lot of time,
301
785000
3000
很多石头 很多水和风 很多时间
13:26
and you get the Grand盛大 Canyon峡谷.
302
788000
2000
你就能得到大峡谷
13:28
It's not that complicated复杂.
303
790000
1000
一点也不复杂
13:29
This is what's really complicated复杂,
304
791000
2000
复杂的是
13:31
that there were people living活的 in places地方 like the Grand盛大 Canyon峡谷,
305
793000
2000
那些住在大峡谷这样的地方的人
13:33
cooperating合作 with each other, or on the savannahs大草原 of Africa非洲,
306
795000
2000
彼此合作﹐或在非洲的撒哈拉沙漠
13:35
or on the frozen冻结的 shores海岸 of Alaska阿拉斯加州, and then some of these villages村庄
307
797000
3000
或在阿拉斯加的冰岸﹐和那些村庄
13:38
grew成长 into the mighty威武 cities城市 of Babylon巴比伦, and Rome罗马, and Tenochtitlan特诺奇蒂特兰城.
308
800000
4000
逐渐变成伟大城市像巴比伦﹐罗马 湖中之城提诺契特兰
13:42
How did this happen发生?
309
804000
1000
这是怎么发生的﹖
13:43
This is an absolute绝对 miracle奇迹, much harder更难 to explain说明 than the Grand盛大 Canyon峡谷.
310
805000
3000
这完全是奇迹﹐比大峡谷更难解释
13:46
The answer回答, I think, is that they used every一切 tool工具 in the toolbox工具箱.
311
808000
3000
答案﹐我想﹐是他们用了所有工具盒里面的工具
13:49
It took all of our moral道德 psychology心理学
312
811000
2000
用了所有道德心理学
13:51
to create创建 these cooperative合作社 groups.
313
813000
2000
创造了这些合作团队
13:53
Yes, you do need to be concerned关心 about harm危害,
314
815000
2000
是﹐你需要想到伤害
13:55
you do need a psychology心理学 of justice正义.
315
817000
1000
你需要想到正义
13:56
But it really helps帮助 to organize组织 a group if you can have sub-groups子组,
316
818000
3000
但如果你有一些小团队﹐便很容易组织大团队
13:59
and if those sub-groups子组 have some internal内部 structure结构体,
317
821000
3000
这些小团队中有一些内部组织
14:02
and if you have some ideology思想 that tells告诉 people
318
824000
2000
如果你有一些理想可以告诉人
14:04
to suppress压制 their carnality肉欲, to pursue追求 higher更高, nobler高贵 ends结束.
319
826000
4000
压制他们的欲望 去追求更高的 更荣耀的理想
14:08
And now we get to the crux症结 of the disagreement异议
320
830000
2000
现在我们来到自由派和保守派
14:10
between之间 liberals自由主义者 and conservatives保守派.
321
832000
2000
歧义的交会处
14:12
Because liberals自由主义者 reject拒绝 three of these foundations基金会.
322
834000
2000
因为自由派拒绝其中三个基础
14:14
They say "No, let's celebrate庆祝 diversity多样, not common共同 in-group在组 membership."
323
836000
3000
他们说”不﹐我们应该要支持多样性 不要搞一些小圈圈。“
14:17
They say, "Let's question authority权威."
324
839000
2000
他们说”让我们质疑权威。“
14:19
And they say, "Keep your laws法律 off my body身体."
325
841000
2000
他们说”不要给我这些法律。“
14:21
Liberals自由主义者 have very noble高贵 motives动机 for doing this.
326
843000
3000
自由派这样做有着崇高的动机
14:24
Traditional传统 authority权威, traditional传统 morality道德 can be quite相当 repressive压制性,
327
846000
3000
传统的权威﹐传统的道德 时常压制那些
14:27
and restrictive限制 to those at the bottom底部, to women妇女, to people that don't fit适合 in.
328
849000
3000
在底层的人 女人 那些不符合社会标准的人
14:30
So liberals自由主义者 speak说话 for the weak and oppressed压迫.
329
852000
2000
所以自由派为了那些受压迫的弱者说话
14:32
They want change更改 and justice正义, even at the risk风险 of chaos混沌.
330
854000
2000
他们要改变 要正义 就算可能造成混乱
14:34
This guy's家伙 shirt衬衫 says, "Stop bitching婊子, start开始 a revolution革命."
331
856000
3000
这个人的衣服上说”少放屁﹐去革命“
14:37
If you're high in openness透明度 to experience经验, revolution革命 is good,
332
859000
2000
如果你很喜欢经历新事 革命是好的
14:39
it's change更改, it's fun开玩笑.
333
861000
2000
它是改变 它很有趣
14:41
Conservatives保守党, on the other hand, speak说话 for institutions机构 and traditions传统.
334
863000
3000
保守派﹐在另一边 为传统和制度发声
14:44
They want order订购, even at some cost成本 to those at the bottom底部.
335
866000
4000
他们要秩序﹐就算有可能要牺牲底层的人
14:48
The great conservative保守 insight眼光 is that order订购 is really hard to achieve实现.
336
870000
2000
保守派的心理是 秩序是非常难达成的
14:50
It's really precious珍贵, and it's really easy简单 to lose失去.
337
872000
3000
很珍贵 很容易就失去了
14:53
So as Edmund埃德蒙 Burke伯克 said, "The restraints限制 on men男人,
338
875000
2000
所以 Edmund Burke 说”人们的束缚
14:55
as well as their liberties自由, are to be reckoned估摸 among其中 their rights权利."
339
877000
3000
和他们的自由﹐是在他们的权利上。“
14:58
This was after the chaos混沌 of the French法国 Revolution革命.
340
880000
2000
这是在法国大革命的混乱后
15:00
So once一旦 you see this -- once一旦 you see
341
882000
2000
只要你看清这一点
15:02
that liberals自由主义者 and conservatives保守派 both have something to contribute有助于,
342
884000
3000
自由派和保守派都能有一些贡献
15:05
that they form形成 a balance平衡 on change更改 versus stability稳定性 --
343
887000
3000
他们能在改变和稳定中找到平衡 --
15:08
then I think the way is open打开 to step outside the moral道德 matrix矩阵.
344
890000
3000
我想重点是试着踏出我们的道德框架
15:11
This is the great insight眼光 that all the Asian亚洲 religions宗教 have attained实现.
345
893000
5000
这是所有亚洲宗教都有的特性
15:16
Think about yin and yang.
346
898000
2000
想想阴阳
15:18
Yin and yang aren't enemies敌人. Yin and yang don't hate讨厌 each other.
347
900000
2000
阴阳不是敌人﹐阴阳不互相仇恨
15:20
Yin and yang are both necessary必要, like night and day,
348
902000
2000
阴阳都是必须的﹐像日夜
15:22
for the functioning功能 of the world世界.
349
904000
2000
让世界继续转动
15:24
You find the same相同 thing in Hinduism印度教.
350
906000
2000
你在印度教中也能看到
15:26
There are many许多 high gods in Hinduism印度教.
351
908000
2000
印度教有很多大神
15:28
Two of them are Vishnu毗湿奴, the preserver保护者, and Shiva湿婆, the destroyer驱逐舰.
352
910000
3000
其中两位是守护神毗瑟挐﹐和破坏神湿婆
15:31
This image图片 actually其实 is both of those gods sharing分享 the same相同 body身体.
353
913000
3000
这个图片是两个神使用同一个身体
15:34
You have the markings标记 of Vishnu毗湿奴 on the left,
354
916000
2000
左边有毗瑟挐的特质
15:36
so we could think of Vishnu毗湿奴 as the conservative保守 god.
355
918000
3000
你可以想他是保护神
15:39
You have the markings标记 of Shiva湿婆 on the right,
356
921000
2000
右边有湿婆的特质
15:41
Shiva's湿婆的 the liberal自由主义的 god. And they work together一起.
357
923000
2000
湿婆是个自由派 - 祂们一起合作
15:43
You find the same相同 thing in Buddhism佛教.
358
925000
2000
你在佛教里也可以找到一样的例子
15:45
These two stanzas contain包含, I think, the deepest最深 insights见解
359
927000
2000
这两个小句有深深的寓意
15:47
that have ever been attained实现 into moral道德 psychology心理学.
360
929000
3000
或许是道德心理学从来没达到的境界
15:50
From the Zen master Seng-ts'an僧ts'an:
361
932000
2000
来自禅宗的僧璨
15:52
"If you want the truth真相 to stand clear明确 before you, never be for or against反对.
362
934000
4000
至道无难,唯嫌拣择。
15:56
The struggle斗争 between之间 for and against反对 is the mind's心灵的 worst最差 disease疾病."
363
938000
4000
违顺相争,是为心病。“
16:00
Now unfortunately不幸, it's a disease疾病
364
942000
2000
很不幸的﹐这种心病
16:02
that has been caught抓住 by many许多 of the world's世界 leaders领导者.
365
944000
2000
许多世界的伟大领袖都有
16:04
But before you feel superior优越 to George乔治 Bush衬套,
366
946000
3000
但在你感觉自己比小布什好很多前
16:07
before you throw a stone, ask yourself你自己, do you accept接受 this?
367
949000
4000
在你对他扔石头前﹐先自问﹕我接受吗﹖
16:11
Do you accept接受 stepping步进 out of the battle战斗 of good and evil邪恶?
368
953000
3000
我能跨出善恶论吗﹖
16:14
Can you be not for or against反对 anything?
369
956000
3000
我能不支持和反对任何事情吗
16:18
So, what's the point? What should you do?
370
960000
3000
重点是什么 我该怎么做
16:21
Well, if you take the greatest最大 insights见解
371
963000
2000
你可以在伟大的古代亚洲宗教和哲学里
16:23
from ancient Asian亚洲 philosophies哲学 and religions宗教,
372
965000
2000
找到答案
16:25
and you combine结合 them with the latest最新 research研究 on moral道德 psychology心理学,
373
967000
2000
将这些答案加上最新的道德心理学研究
16:27
I think you come to these conclusions结论:
374
969000
2000
你会有这三个结论﹕
16:29
that our righteous正义 minds头脑 were designed设计 by evolution演化
375
971000
4000
我们的脑子被进化所设计
16:33
to unite团结 us into teams球队, to divide划分 us against反对 other teams球队
376
975000
3000
要我们成为一个团队 让我们和其它团队分开
16:36
and then to blind us to the truth真相.
377
978000
2000
让我们无视真理
16:39
So what should you do? Am I telling告诉 you to not strive努力?
378
981000
4000
你该怎么做﹖难道我要你放弃努力
16:43
Am I telling告诉 you to embrace拥抱 Seng-ts'an僧ts'an and stop,
379
985000
3000
我是要你拥抱僧璨
16:46
stop with this struggle斗争 of for and against反对?
380
988000
3000
然后停止这些支持和反对的想法吗﹖
16:49
No, absolutely绝对 not. I'm not saying that.
381
991000
2000
绝对不是。这不是我要说的
16:51
This is an amazing惊人 group of people who are doing so much,
382
993000
3000
有许多了不起的人做了许多事
16:54
using运用 so much of their talent天赋, their brilliance, their energy能源, their money,
383
996000
4000
用他们的才能﹐他们的技能 他们的精力和金钱
16:58
to make the world世界 a better place地点, to fight斗争 --
384
1000000
2000
让世界变得更好﹐去争取
17:00
to fight斗争 wrongs冤屈, to solve解决 problems问题.
385
1002000
3000
打击错误﹐解决问题
17:04
But as we learned学到了 from Samantha萨曼莎 Power功率, in her story故事
386
1006000
4000
但就像我们在 Samantha Power 的故事里学到的
17:08
about Sergio塞尔吉奥 Vieira维埃拉 de Mello梅洛, you can't just go charging充电 in,
387
1010000
5000
像 Sergio Vieira de Mello﹐你不能直接杀进去
17:13
saying, "You're wrong错误, and I'm right."
388
1015000
2000
然后说”你错了 我对了“
17:15
Because, as we just heard听说, everybody每个人 thinks they are right.
389
1017000
4000
因为﹐就像我们刚刚听到的 每个人都以为自己是对的
17:19
A lot of the problems问题 we have to solve解决
390
1021000
2000
有太多我们需要解决的问题
17:21
are problems问题 that require要求 us to change更改 other people.
391
1023000
3000
是那些需要我们去改变他人的问题
17:24
And if you want to change更改 other people, a much better way to do it
392
1026000
3000
如果你想要改变他人﹐一个比较好的方法是
17:27
is to first understand理解 who we are -- understand理解 our moral道德 psychology心理学,
393
1029000
4000
先了解我们是谁 -- 了解我们自己的道德心理
17:31
understand理解 that we all think we're right -- and then step out,
394
1033000
3000
了解我们都认为自己是对的﹐然后跨出去
17:34
even if it's just for a moment时刻, step out -- check in with Seng-ts'an僧ts'an.
395
1036000
4000
就算只是一下子﹐跨出去 想想僧璨
17:38
Step out of the moral道德 matrix矩阵,
396
1040000
2000
跨出你的道德框架
17:40
just try to see it as a struggle斗争 playing播放 out,
397
1042000
2000
尝试当做这只是每个人认为自己是对的人
17:42
in which哪一个 everybody每个人 does think they're right,
398
1044000
2000
的一种拔河
17:44
and everybody每个人, at least最小, has some reasons原因 -- even if you disagree不同意 with them --
399
1046000
2000
每个人﹐就算你不认同他们 都有自己的理由
17:46
everybody每个人 has some reasons原因 for what they're doing.
400
1048000
2000
每个人做事都有自己的理由
17:48
Step out.
401
1050000
1000
跨出去
17:49
And if you do that, that's the essential必要 move移动 to cultivate培育 moral道德 humility谦逊,
402
1051000
4000
如果你这样做﹐你便可以培养道德谦逊
17:53
to get yourself你自己 out of this self-righteousness自以为是,
403
1055000
1000
让你自己离开这个自以为义
17:54
which哪一个 is the normal正常 human人的 condition条件.
404
1056000
2000
一种正常人类的心理
17:56
Think about the Dalai达赖 Lama喇嘛.
405
1058000
2000
想想达赖喇嘛
17:58
Think about the enormous巨大 moral道德 authority权威 of the Dalai达赖 Lama喇嘛 --
406
1060000
3000
想想达赖喇嘛巨大的道德权威
18:01
and it comes from his moral道德 humility谦逊.
407
1063000
2000
这是来自他的道德谦逊
18:05
So I think the point -- the point of my talk,
408
1067000
2000
我想我谈话的重点是
18:07
and I think the point of TEDTED --
409
1069000
3000
TED的重点是
18:10
is that this is a group that is passionately热情 engaged订婚
410
1072000
3000
这是一个热情的想要
18:13
in the pursuit追求 of changing改变 the world世界 for the better.
411
1075000
2000
让世界变得更好的团体
18:15
People here are passionately热情 engaged订婚
412
1077000
3000
人们热情的希望
18:18
in trying to make the world世界 a better place地点.
413
1080000
2000
让世界变得更好
18:20
But there is also a passionate多情 commitment承诺 to the truth真相.
414
1082000
3000
同时也有一种接近真理的希望
18:23
And so I think that the answer回答 is to use that passionate多情 commitment承诺
415
1085000
4000
我想答案是保持你的热情﹐寻找真理
18:27
to the truth真相 to try to turn it into a better future未来 for us all.
416
1089000
4000
然后把它变成更好的未来
18:31
Thank you.
417
1093000
1000
谢谢你。
18:32
(Applause掌声)
418
1094000
3000
(掌声)
Translated by Coco Shen
Reviewed by Zachary Lin Zhao

▲Back to top

ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Jonathan Haidt - Social psychologist
Jonathan Haidt studies how -- and why -- we evolved to be moral and political creatures.

Why you should listen

By understanding more about our moral psychology and its biases, Jonathan Haidt says we can design better institutions (including companies, universities and democracy itself), and we can learn to be more civil and open-minded toward those who are not on our team.

Haidt is a social psychologist whose research on morality across cultures led to his 2008 TED Talk on the psychological roots of the American culture war, and his 2013 TED Talk on how "common threats can make common ground." In both of those talks he asks, "Can't we all disagree more constructively?" Haidt's 2012 TED Talk explored the intersection of his work on morality with his work on happiness to talk about "hive psychology" -- the ability that humans have to lose themselves in groups pursuing larger projects, almost like bees in a hive. This hivish ability is crucial, he argues, for understanding the origins of morality, politics, and religion. These are ideas that Haidt develops at greater length in his book, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion.

Haidt joined New York University Stern School of Business in July 2011. He is the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership, based in the Business and Society Program. Before coming to Stern, Professor Haidt taught for 16 years at the University of Virginia in the department of psychology.

Haidt's writings appear frequently in the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. He was named one of the top global thinkers by Foreign Policy magazine and by Prospect magazine. Haidt received a B.A. in Philosophy from Yale University, and an M.A. and Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Pennsylvania.

More profile about the speaker
Jonathan Haidt | Speaker | TED.com

Data provided by TED.

This site was created in May 2015 and the last update was on January 12, 2020. It will no longer be updated.

We are currently creating a new site called "eng.lish.video" and would be grateful if you could access it.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please feel free to write comments in your language on the contact form.

Privacy Policy

Developer's Blog

Buy Me A Coffee