ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Dan Gilbert - Psychologist; happiness expert
Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert says our beliefs about what will make us happy are often wrong -- a premise he supports with intriguing research, and explains in his accessible and unexpectedly funny book, Stumbling on Happiness.

Why you should listen

Dan Gilbert believes that, in our ardent, lifelong pursuit of happiness, most of us have the wrong map. In the same way that optical illusions fool our eyes -- and fool everyone's eyes in the same way -- Gilbert argues that our brains systematically misjudge what will make us happy. And these quirks in our cognition make humans very poor predictors of our own bliss.

The premise of his current research -- that our assumptions about what will make us happy are often wrong -- is supported with clinical research drawn from psychology and neuroscience. But his delivery is what sets him apart. His engaging -- and often hilarious -- style pokes fun at typical human behavior and invokes pop-culture references everyone can relate to. This winning style translates also to Gilbert's writing, which is lucid, approachable and laugh-out-loud funny. The immensely readable Stumbling on Happiness, published in 2006, became a New York Times bestseller and has been translated into 20 languages.

In fact, the title of his book could be drawn from his own life. At 19, he was a high school dropout with dreams of writing science fiction. When a creative writing class at his community college was full, he enrolled in the only available course: psychology. He found his passion there, earned a doctorate in social psychology in 1985 at Princeton, and has since won a Guggenheim Fellowship and the Phi Beta Kappa teaching prize for his work at Harvard. He has written essays and articles for The New York Times, Time and even Starbucks, while continuing his research into happiness at his Hedonic Psychology Laboratory.

More profile about the speaker
Dan Gilbert | Speaker | TED.com
TEDGlobal 2005

Dan Gilbert: Why we make bad decisions

Dan Gilbert: 关于我们错误的期望值

Filmed:
5,287,085 views

Dan Gilbert 向我们展示他探索快乐过程中的研究成果,分享了很多引人入胜的小实验(你也可以自己试一下)。他的演讲最后有问答环节,我们可以看到TED里面许多熟悉的面孔
- Psychologist; happiness expert
Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert says our beliefs about what will make us happy are often wrong -- a premise he supports with intriguing research, and explains in his accessible and unexpectedly funny book, Stumbling on Happiness. Full bio

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

00:18
We all make decisions决定 every一切 day; we want to know
0
0
2000
大家每天都在做决定;谁都想知道
00:20
what the right thing is to do -- in domains from the financial金融
1
2000
3000
如何做正确的事情--无论是金融、
00:23
to the gastronomic美食 to the professional专业的 to the romantic浪漫.
2
5000
4000
烹饪,还是职业、爱情方面
00:27
And surely一定, if somebody could really tell us how to do
3
9000
3000
那么,如果有人能指导我们
00:30
exactly究竟 the right thing at all possible可能 times,
4
12000
3000
每次都做对
00:33
that would be a tremendous巨大 gift礼品.
5
15000
3000
那将是一个非常了不起的才能
00:36
It turns out that, in fact事实, the world世界 was given特定 this gift礼品 in 1738
6
18000
5000
其实,早在1738年世人就见识过了拥有这项才能的人
00:41
by a Dutch荷兰人 polymath博学 named命名 Daniel丹尼尔 Bernoulli伯努利.
7
23000
3000
他是荷兰学者Daniel Bernoulli
00:44
And what I want to talk to you about today今天 is what that gift礼品 is,
8
26000
3000
今天我们就来讲这是怎样一种才能
00:47
and I also want to explain说明 to you why it is
9
29000
3000
我还会告诉你为什么即使知道其中的道理
00:50
that it hasn't有没有 made制作 a damn该死的 bit of difference区别.
10
32000
3000
也不会事事顺利
00:53
Now, this is Bernoulli's伯努利 gift礼品. This is a direct直接 quote引用.
11
35000
5000
这就是Bernoulli的思路,原始的表述
00:58
And if it looks容貌 like Greek希腊语 to you, it's because, well, it's Greek希腊语.
12
40000
3000
如果这看起来像希腊字母一样,是因为,嗯,这确实是希腊字母。
01:02
But the simple简单 English英语 translation翻译 -- much less precise精确,
13
44000
4000
翻译成英语--没有原文那样的精确
01:06
but it captures捕获 the gist要旨 of what Bernoulli伯努利 had to say -- was this:
14
48000
4000
但基本上诠释了Bernoulli的主要思想,那就是
01:10
The expected预期 value of any of our actions行动 --
15
52000
2000
我们任何行为的预估价值
01:12
that is, the goodness善良 that we can count计数 on getting得到 --
16
54000
4000
或者说能得到的好处
01:16
is the product产品 of two simple简单 things:
17
58000
2000
是两样东西的乘积
01:18
the odds可能性 that this action行动 will allow允许 us to gain获得 something,
18
60000
4000
一个是成功的概率
01:22
and the value of that gain获得 to us.
19
64000
3000
另一个是成功所带来的价值
01:25
In a sense, what Bernoulli伯努利 was saying is,
20
67000
2000
从某种程度上说,Bernoulli想表达的是
01:27
if we can estimate估计 and multiply these two things,
21
69000
3000
如果我们能预估这两个因素并将其相乘
01:30
we will always know precisely恰恰 how we should behave表现.
22
72000
3000
我们总能知道怎样去做
01:33
Now, this simple简单 equation方程, even for those of you
23
75000
3000
而这个简单的等式,即使对于你们中间
01:36
who don't like equations方程, is something that you're quite相当 used to.
24
78000
3000
不喜欢等式的人来说,也是非常容易理解的
01:39
Here's这里的 an example: if I were to tell you, let's play
25
81000
3000
举个例子:假如我告诉你
01:42
a little coin硬币 toss折腾 game游戏, and I'm going to flip翻动 a coin硬币,
26
84000
3000
我们来猜硬币,我扔一枚硬币
01:45
and if it comes up heads, I'm going to pay工资 you 10 dollars美元,
27
87000
3000
人头朝上,我输你10美元
01:48
but you have to pay工资 four dollars美元 for the privilege特权 of playing播放 with me,
28
90000
4000
但你必须先付给我4美元来玩儿
01:52
most of you would say, sure, I'll take that bet赌注. Because you know
29
94000
3000
很多人会说,好啊,我跟你玩。因为你知道
01:55
that the odds可能性 of you winning胜利 are one half, the gain获得 if you do is 10 dollars美元,
30
97000
5000
你有50%的赢面,而赢了能得到10美元
02:00
that multiplies to five, and that's more
31
102000
2000
两者相乘得5,要比你付的4美元多
02:02
than I'm charging充电 you to play. So, the answer回答 is, yes.
32
104000
4000
所以当然要玩儿
02:06
This is what statisticians统计学家 technically技术上 call a damn该死的 fine bet赌注.
33
108000
4000
统计学家们称之为“完美赌局”
02:10
Now, the idea理念 is simple简单 when we're applying应用 it to coin硬币 tosses,
34
112000
3000
在丢硬币的游戏中道理是很简单的
02:13
but in fact事实, it's not very simple简单 in everyday每天 life.
35
115000
4000
然而在日常生活中就没那么简单了
02:17
People are horrible可怕 at estimating估计 both of these things,
36
119000
4000
人们估计这两件事情的水平都很差
02:21
and that's what I want to talk to you about today今天.
37
123000
2000
这正是我今天要讲的
02:23
There are two kinds of errors错误 people make when trying to decide决定
38
125000
3000
人们做决策时
02:26
what the right thing is to do, and those are
39
128000
2000
会犯两种错误
02:28
errors错误 in estimating估计 the odds可能性 that they're going to succeed成功,
40
130000
3000
即错误地估算成功的概率
02:31
and errors错误 in estimating估计 the value of their own拥有 success成功.
41
133000
4000
和错误地估算成功的价值
02:35
Now, let me talk about the first one first.
42
137000
4000
我们先说第一种错误
02:39
Calculating计算 odds可能性 would seem似乎 to be something rather easy简单:
43
141000
2000
计算成功的概率貌似比较容易
02:41
there are six sides双方 to a die, two sides双方 to a coin硬币, 52 cards in a deck甲板.
44
143000
4000
1个骰子6个面、一个硬币2个面,一叠扑克52张
02:45
You all know what the likelihood可能性 is of pulling the ace高手 of spades黑桃
45
147000
4000
谁都知道抽到黑桃A的概率
02:49
or of flipping翻转 a heads.
46
151000
1000
或者丢硬币人头朝上的概率
02:50
But as it turns out, this is not a very easy简单 idea理念 to apply应用
47
152000
5000
然而事实证明,具体情况下似乎没有那么简单
02:55
in everyday每天 life. That's why Americans美国人 spend more --
48
157000
3000
这也就是为什么美国人在赌博上的花费
02:58
I should say, lose失去 more -- gambling赌博
49
160000
3000
更确切地说是赌博输掉的钱
03:01
than on all other forms形式 of entertainment娱乐 combined结合.
50
163000
5000
比其它所有娱乐活动花费总和还多
03:06
The reason原因 is, this isn't how people do odds可能性.
51
168000
3000
其原因就是,概率并不是人们计算的那样
03:09
The way people figure数字 odds可能性
52
171000
1000
人们如何计算概率呢?
03:10
requires要求 that we first talk a bit about pigs.
53
172000
3000
说到这里我们先要讨论一个关于猪的问题
03:13
Now, the question I'm going to put to you is whether是否 you think
54
175000
2000
这个问题就是,你们觉得
03:15
there are more dogs小狗 or pigs on leashes牵引绳
55
177000
3000
任意一天,在牛津镇上被链子拴着的狗更多
03:18
observed观察到的 in any particular特定 day in Oxford牛津.
56
180000
3000
还是猪更多?
03:21
And of course课程, you all know that the answer回答 is dogs小狗.
57
183000
2000
你们都会说:当然狗更多
03:23
And the way that you know that the answer回答 is dogs小狗 is
58
185000
3000
大家得出这个狗比猪多的结论是因为
03:26
you quickly很快 reviewed回顾 in memory记忆 the times
59
188000
2000
你们迅速回忆以前
03:28
you've seen看到 dogs小狗 and pigs on leashes牵引绳.
60
190000
2000
曾经见过的被拴着的狗和猪
03:30
It was very easy简单 to remember记得 seeing眼看 dogs小狗,
61
192000
3000
很容易就想起见过狗
03:33
not so easy简单 to remember记得 pigs. And each one of you assumed假定
62
195000
3000
好像没怎么见过猪。所以便假设
03:36
that if dogs小狗 on leashes牵引绳 came来了 more quickly很快 to your mind心神,
63
198000
4000
既然能快速地想起见过狗
03:40
then dogs小狗 on leashes牵引绳 are more probable可能.
64
202000
2000
应该是被拴着的狗更多些
03:42
That's not a bad rule规则 of thumb拇指, except when it is.
65
204000
5000
凭经验判断通常是对的,但这次你错了
03:47
So, for example, here's这里的 a word puzzle难题.
66
209000
2000
再拿猜字游戏举个例子
03:49
Are there more four-letter四个字母 English英语 words
67
211000
2000
哪种4个字母的单词更多?
03:51
with R in the third第三 place地点 or R in the first place地点?
68
213000
4000
R在第三个还是R在第一个
03:55
Well, you check memory记忆 very briefly简要地, make a quick scan扫描,
69
217000
3000
你又迅速回忆
03:58
and it's awfully非常 easy简单 to say to yourself你自己, Ring, Rang, Rung梯级,
70
220000
3000
很容易想到 Ring,Rang,Rung
04:01
and very hard to say to yourself你自己, Pare削减, Park公园: they come more slowly慢慢地.
71
223000
7000
很难回忆出,Pare, Park,至少要慢很多
04:08
But in fact事实, there are many许多 more words in the English英语 language语言
72
230000
2000
但实际上,在英文中更多的是
04:10
with R in the third第三 than the first place地点.
73
232000
3000
第三个字母是R的单词
04:13
The reason原因 words with R in the third第三 place地点 come slowly慢慢地 to your mind心神
74
235000
4000
想到这些单词要慢一些
04:17
isn't because they're improbable难以置信, unlikely不会 or infrequent罕见的.
75
239000
3000
并不是因为它们不重要、不常见
04:20
It's because the mind心神 recalls召回 words by their first letter.
76
242000
4000
而是因为我们的大脑是根据首字母忆单词的
04:24
You kind of shout out the sound声音, S -- and the word comes.
77
246000
3000
你发出一个S音,就能想起一大串单词来
04:27
It's like the dictionary字典;
78
249000
1000
就像字典一样
04:28
it's hard to look things up by the third第三 letter.
79
250000
3000
而根据第3个字母去查单词往往很难
04:31
So, this is an example of how this idea理念 that
80
253000
2000
所以这是一个例子
04:33
the quickness速度 with which哪一个 things come to mind心神
81
255000
2000
大脑的反应速度
04:35
can give you a sense of their probability可能性 --
82
257000
2000
能暗示你概率的大小
04:37
how this idea理念 could lead you astray走错. It's not just puzzles谜题, though虽然.
83
259000
4000
这个结果将把你引向错误的道路。不仅仅是填字游戏
04:41
For example, when Americans美国人 are asked to estimate估计 the odds可能性
84
263000
3000
例如,曾在美国人中做过调查,要求他们预测
04:44
that they will die in a variety品种 of interesting有趣 ways方法 --
85
266000
3000
各种各样匪夷所思死法发生的几率
04:47
these are estimates估计 of number of deaths死亡 per year
86
269000
3000
估计每年
04:50
per 200 million百万 U.S. citizens公民.
87
272000
2000
每2亿美国人当中的死亡人数
04:52
And these are just ordinary普通 people like yourselves你自己 who are asked
88
274000
2000
这些被调查者都是跟你我一样的普通人
04:54
to guess猜测 how many许多 people die from tornado龙卷风, fireworks烟花, asthma哮喘, drowning溺死, etc等等.
89
276000
4000
猜测因为以下原因死亡:飓风、烟火、哮喘、溺水的人数
04:58
Compare比较 these to the actual实际 numbers数字.
90
280000
3000
然后和真实发生的数据对比
05:01
Now, you see a very interesting有趣 pattern模式 here, which哪一个 is first of all,
91
283000
3000
一个非常有意思的现象出现了,首先
05:04
two things are vastly大大 over-estimated高估, namely亦即 tornadoes龙卷风 and fireworks烟花.
92
286000
5000
两项数据大大超过实际值:飓风和烟火
05:09
Two things are vastly大大 underestimated低估:
93
291000
2000
两项数据又被大大地低估了
05:11
dying垂死 by drowning溺死 and dying垂死 by asthma哮喘. Why?
94
293000
3000
即死于溺水和哮喘病,为什么呢?
05:14
When was the last time that you picked采摘的 up a newspaper报纸
95
296000
3000
你什么时候在报纸的头版上读到过
05:17
and the headline标题 was, "Boy男孩 dies of Asthma哮喘?"
96
299000
3000
“男童死于哮喘”?
05:20
It's not interesting有趣 because it's so common共同.
97
302000
3000
这条新闻非常无趣因为它太常见了
05:23
It's very easy简单 for all of us to bring带来 to mind心神 instances实例
98
305000
4000
而大家却很容易想起来
05:27
of news新闻 stories故事 or newsreels新闻影片 where we've我们已经 seen看到
99
309000
3000
曾经看过的电视或者新闻中报道
05:30
tornadoes龙卷风 devastating破坏性的 cities城市, or some poor较差的 schmuck笨蛋
100
312000
2000
飓风摧毁城市,或者某个倒霉鬼
05:32
who's谁是 blown his hands off with a firework焰火 on the Fourth第四 of July七月.
101
314000
4000
在国庆日被烟火蹦掉了脑袋
05:36
Drownings溺水 and asthma哮喘 deaths死亡 don't get much coverage覆盖.
102
318000
3000
因为对溺水、哮喘报道的不多
05:39
They don't come quickly很快 to mind心神, and as a result结果,
103
321000
2000
在头脑中印象不深,所以
05:41
we vastly大大 underestimate低估 them.
104
323000
2000
我们大大低估了这些东西
05:43
Indeed确实, this is kind of like the Sesame芝麻 Street game游戏
105
325000
2000
实际上,这就好像“芝麻街”游戏中
05:45
of "Which哪一个 thing doesn't belong属于?" And you're right to say
106
327000
4000
“以下哪个选项与其他不同?”的问题,你觉得
05:49
it's the swimming游泳的 pool that doesn't belong属于, because the swimming游泳的 pool
107
331000
3000
游泳池跟其它的都不一样,因为游泳池
05:52
is the only thing on this slide滑动 that's actually其实 very dangerous危险.
108
334000
4000
其实是最最危险的东西!
05:56
The way that more of you are likely容易 to die than the combination组合
109
338000
2000
你们在游泳池中死亡的概率
05:58
of all three of the others其他 that you see on the slide滑动.
110
340000
4000
比其它三个的总和还多
06:02
The lottery抽奖 is an excellent优秀 example, of course课程 -- an excellent优秀 test-case测试用例
111
344000
4000
买彩票是一个绝佳案例—这是测试人们计算概率能力的
06:06
of people's人们 ability能力 to compute计算 probabilities概率.
112
348000
3000
一个极好的例子
06:09
And economists经济学家 -- forgive原谅 me, for those of you who play the lottery抽奖 --
113
351000
3000
经济学家--你们中间买彩票的人请原谅我这么说--
06:12
but economists经济学家, at least最小 among其中 themselves他们自己, refer参考 to the lottery抽奖
114
354000
3000
至少经济学家们,认为买彩票是一种
06:15
as a stupidity糊涂事 tax, because the odds可能性 of getting得到 any payoff付清
115
357000
5000
为愚蠢交的税,因为买彩票
06:20
by investing投资 your money in a lottery抽奖 ticket
116
362000
2000
中大奖的几率
06:22
are approximately equivalent当量 to flushing冲洗 the money
117
364000
2000
几乎和你直接用马桶
06:24
directly down the toilet厕所 -- which哪一个, by the way,
118
366000
2000
把钱冲掉是一样的
06:26
doesn't require要求 that you actually其实 go to the store商店 and buy购买 anything.
119
368000
4000
起码这样还不用你费力跑到商店去买一下
06:30
Why in the world世界 would anybody任何人 ever play the lottery抽奖?
120
372000
3000
究竟为什么还有人买彩票呢?
06:33
Well, there are many许多 answers答案, but one answer回答 surely一定 is,
121
375000
3000
有很多种解释,很显然,但其中有一个一定是
06:36
we see a lot of winners获奖者. Right? When this couple一对 wins the lottery抽奖,
122
378000
4000
我们看到了很多赢家,对吗?有一对夫妇中了头彩
06:40
or Ed埃德 McMahon麦克马洪 shows节目 up at your door with this giant巨人 check --
123
382000
3000
或者Ed McMahon在你家门口,拿着巨大的一张支票
06:43
how the hell地狱 do you cash现金 things that size尺寸, I don't know.
124
385000
3000
你想怎么花这一大笔钱呢?
06:46
We see this on TV电视; we read about it in the paper.
125
388000
3000
我们在电视里面看到过;在报纸上也看到过
06:49
When was the last time that you saw extensive广泛 interviews面试
126
391000
3000
但你什么时候看到大规模采访
06:52
with everybody每个人 who lost丢失?
127
394000
2000
买彩票输了的人?
06:54
Indeed确实, if we required需要 that television电视 stations run
128
396000
3000
实际上,如果我们要求电视台
06:57
a 30-second interview访问 with each loser失败者
129
399000
2000
在采访每个赢家的同时,对每位没有中彩的人来一个30秒的采访
06:59
every一切 time they interview访问 a winner优胜者, the 100 million百万 losers失败者
130
401000
4000
那么这1亿位
07:03
in the last lottery抽奖 would require要求 nine-and-a-half九和半 years年份
131
405000
3000
上一个彩票开奖后的输家将要花9.5年的时间
07:06
of your undivided一心一意 attention注意 just to watch them say,
132
408000
3000
不间断地告诉你说:
07:09
"Me? I lost丢失." "Me? I lost丢失."
133
411000
3000
“我,输了”,“我,输了”……
07:12
Now, if you watch nine-and-a-half九和半 years年份 of television电视 --
134
414000
2000
如果你看了九年半的电视
07:14
no sleep睡觉, no potty便壶 breaks休息 -- and you saw loss失利 after loss失利 after loss失利,
135
416000
5000
不休不眠--看到一个接一个的输家
07:19
and then at the end结束 there's 30 seconds of, "and I won韩元,"
136
421000
2000
然后最后的30秒钟有一个“我,赢了!”
07:21
the likelihood可能性 that you would play the lottery抽奖 is very small.
137
423000
3000
你买彩票的可能性就会小很多
07:24
Look, I can prove证明 this to you: here's这里的 a little lottery抽奖.
138
426000
3000
现在我证明给你看:这里有一个彩票
07:27
There's 10 tickets门票 in this lottery抽奖.
139
429000
2000
一共10张
07:29
Nine of them have been sold出售 to these individuals个人.
140
431000
3000
其中的9张已经卖给了不同的人
07:32
It costs成本 you a dollar美元 to buy购买 the ticket and, if you win赢得,
141
434000
3000
1张彩票1美元,如果你赢了
07:35
you get 20 bucks雄鹿. Is this a good bet赌注?
142
437000
2000
你将得到20美元,这个赌局怎么样?
07:37
Well, Bernoulli伯努利 tells告诉 us it is.
143
439000
1000
那么按照Bernoulli的逻辑
07:38
The expected预期 value of this lottery抽奖 is two dollars美元;
144
440000
3000
这个彩票的期望回报是2美元
07:41
this is a lottery抽奖 in which哪一个 you should invest投资 your money.
145
443000
3000
应该去买
07:44
And most people say, "OK, I'll play."
146
446000
2000
而且大多数人都会说“嗯,我要买”
07:46
Now, a slightly different不同 version of this lottery抽奖:
147
448000
3000
现在我稍稍改变一下条件
07:49
imagine想像 that the nine tickets门票 are all owned拥有的
148
451000
2000
设想其它9张彩票都卖给了
07:51
by one fat脂肪 guy named命名 Leroy乐华.
149
453000
2000
一个叫Leroy的胖子
07:53
Leroy乐华 has nine tickets门票; there's one left.
150
455000
2000
Leroy有9张,还剩下1张
07:55
Do you want it? Most people won't惯于 play this lottery抽奖.
151
457000
3000
你买不买?大多数人不会买
07:58
Now, you can see the odds可能性 of winning胜利 haven't没有 changed,
152
460000
2000
其实赢的几率并没有变
08:00
but it's now fantastically飞驰 easy简单 to imagine想像 who's谁是 going to win赢得.
153
462000
5000
但很更容易看出谁会赢
08:05
It's easy简单 to see Leroy乐华 getting得到 the check, right?
154
467000
3000
显然Leroy会赢,对吗?
08:08
You can't say to yourself你自己, "I'm as likely容易 to win赢得 as anybody任何人,"
155
470000
2000
你现在不敢说“我和其它人一样有机会赢”
08:10
because you're not as likely容易 to win赢得 as Leroy乐华.
156
472000
3000
显然你的赢面不可能和Leroy一样
08:13
The fact事实 that all those tickets门票 are owned拥有的 by one guy
157
475000
2000
所有彩票都被一个人买走的事实
08:15
changes变化 your decision决定 to play,
158
477000
2000
改变了你的决定
08:17
even though虽然 it does nothing whatsoever任何 to the odds可能性.
159
479000
3000
即使这对概率丝毫没有影响
08:20
Now, estimating估计 odds可能性, as difficult as it may可能 seem似乎, is a piece of cake蛋糕
160
482000
5000
估算概率也许看起来比较复杂,但是相对于
08:25
compared相比 to trying to estimate估计 value:
161
487000
2000
估算价值来说却是小巫见大巫了
08:27
trying to say what something is worth价值, how much we'll enjoy请享用 it,
162
489000
3000
估算价值即试图说出某样东西的价值,我们有多喜欢它
08:30
how much pleasure乐趣 it will give us.
163
492000
3000
它给我带来多少快乐
08:33
I want to talk now about errors错误 in value.
164
495000
2000
我想多谈谈估值的误差
08:35
How much is this Big Mac苹果电脑 worth价值? Is it worth价值 25 dollars美元?
165
497000
4000
麦当劳的一个“巨无霸”值多少钱?值25美元吗?
08:39
Most of you have the intuition直觉 that it's not --
166
501000
3000
大家的直觉都是“不值”
08:42
you wouldn't不会 pay工资 that for it.
167
504000
2000
你不会花那么多钱去买它
08:44
But in fact事实, to decide决定 whether是否 a Big Mac苹果电脑 is worth价值 25 dollars美元 requires要求
168
506000
4000
然而,决定一个“巨无霸”是否值25美元的前提
08:48
that you ask one, and only one question, which哪一个 is:
169
510000
3000
是你要问一个,只问一个问题:
08:51
What else其他 can I do with 25 dollars美元?
170
513000
2000
我还能用这25美元做什么?
08:53
If you've ever gotten得到 on one of those long-haul长途 flights航班 to Australia澳大利亚
171
515000
4000
如果你曾经坐过长时间飞机去澳大利亚
08:57
and realized实现 that they're not going to serve服务 you any food餐饮,
172
519000
3000
而且你知道飞机上不提供食物
09:00
but somebody in the row in front面前 of you has just opened打开
173
522000
2000
当坐在你前排的人打开了一个
09:02
the McDonald's麦当劳 bag, and the smell of golden金色 arches拱门
174
524000
3000
麦当劳的盒子,那诱人的香味
09:05
is wafting飘出 over the seat座位, you think,
175
527000
3000
飘过椅背传到你鼻子里,你会觉得
09:08
I can't do anything else其他 with this 25 dollars美元 for 16 hours小时.
176
530000
3000
这16小时里25美元做不了其它事情
09:11
I can't even set it on fire -- they took my cigarette香烟 lighter打火机!
177
533000
3000
我甚至不能把它烧掉——过安检的时候打火机被没收了:(
09:14
Suddenly突然, 25 dollars美元 for a Big Mac苹果电脑 might威力 be a good deal合同.
178
536000
3000
突然间,花25美元买一个“巨无霸”汉堡是一笔划算的买卖
09:17
On the other hand, if you're visiting访问 an underdeveloped发育不全的 country国家,
179
539000
2000
反过来,如果你去一个贫穷国家
09:19
and 25 dollars美元 buys购买 you a gourmet美食 meal膳食, it's exorbitant高昂 for a Big Mac苹果电脑.
180
541000
4000
在那里25美元可以买一顿丰盛的晚餐,那么“巨无霸”汉堡就显得贵得离谱了
09:23
Why were you all sure that the answer回答 to the question was no,
181
545000
3000
为什么大家在我说出特定条件之间
09:26
before I'd even told you anything about the context上下文?
182
548000
3000
都认为答案应该是“不”呢?
09:29
Because most of you compared相比 the price价钱 of this Big Mac苹果电脑
183
551000
4000
因为大家在比较
09:33
to the price价钱 you're used to paying付款. Rather than asking,
184
555000
3000
从前买的“巨无霸”的价格,而不是问自己一个问题
09:36
"What else其他 can I do with my money," comparing比较 this investment投资
185
558000
3000
“我还能用这些钱做什么”
09:39
to other possible可能 investments投资, you compared相比 to the past过去.
186
561000
4000
与其它可能的消费比较,你比较的是“过去”
09:43
And this is a systematic系统的 error错误 people make.
187
565000
2000
这是人们很容易犯的常规性错误
09:45
What you knew知道 is, you paid支付 three dollars美元 in the past过去; 25 is outrageous蛮横的.
188
567000
5000
你心里想的是,你曾经花3美元买巨无霸,现在25美元简直是岂有此理
09:50
This is an error错误, and I can prove证明 it to you by showing展示
189
572000
2000
这是错误的,我可以证明给大家
09:52
the kinds of irrationalities不合理 to which哪一个 it leads引线.
190
574000
2000
这个错误所引致的非理性行为
09:54
For example, this is, of course课程,
191
576000
3000
例如,当然了
09:57
one of the most delicious美味的 tricks技巧 in marketing营销,
192
579000
2000
这是一个在市场营销中非常常见的把戏
09:59
is to say something used to be higher更高,
193
581000
2000
告诉你一样东西曾经非常贵
10:01
and suddenly突然 it seems似乎 like a very good deal合同.
194
583000
3000
然后马上这个东西就显得很值
10:04
When people are asked about these two different不同 jobs工作:
195
586000
3000
我们做过一个试验,考察人们对两个工作的看法
10:07
a job工作 where you make 60K, then 50K, then 40K,
196
589000
3000
一个工作承诺你第一年6万,然后5万,然后4万
10:10
a job工作 where you're getting得到 a salary薪水 cut each year,
197
592000
2000
这个工作每年都会减薪
10:12
and one in which哪一个 you're getting得到 a salary薪水 increase增加,
198
594000
2000
而另一个工作则承诺你加薪
10:14
people like the second第二 job工作 better than the first, despite尽管 the fact事实
199
596000
4000
人们会更希望得到第二个工作,即使
10:18
they're all told they make much less money. Why?
200
600000
3000
知道这个工作挣得少一些,为什呢?
10:21
Because they had the sense that declining下降 wages工资 are worse更差
201
603000
4000
因为他们觉得减薪比加薪糟糕
10:25
than rising升起 wages工资, even when the total amount of wages工资 is higher更高
202
607000
4000
即使减薪期间的总收入更高。
10:29
in the declining下降 period. Here's这里的 another另一个 nice不错 example.
203
611000
4000
另外一个例子
10:33
Here's这里的 a $2,000 Hawaiian夏威夷 vacation假期 package; it's now on sale拍卖 for 1,600.
204
615000
5000
有一个2000美元的夏威夷度假产品,现在只卖1600美元
10:38
Assuming假设 you wanted to go to Hawaii夏威夷, would you buy购买 this package?
205
620000
3000
假设你想去夏威夷,你会不会买这个产品?
10:41
Most people say they would. Here's这里的 a slightly different不同 story故事:
206
623000
4000
大多数人是会的。现在稍稍改变一下
10:45
$2,000 Hawaiian夏威夷 vacation假期 package is now on sale拍卖 for 700 dollars美元,
207
627000
4000
2000美元的夏威夷度假产品现在只卖700美元
10:49
so you decide决定 to mull仔细考虑 it over for a week.
208
631000
2000
你决定再考虑一个礼拜
10:51
By the time you get to the ticket agency机构, the best最好 fares票价 are gone走了 --
209
633000
2000
后来你去旅行社的时候,最好的价格已经没有了
10:53
the package now costs成本 1,500. Would you buy购买 it? Most people say, no.
210
635000
5000
现在需要1500美元。你会买么?很多人都会说:不会!
10:58
Why? Because it used to cost成本 700, and there's no way I'm paying付款 1,500
211
640000
4000
为什么?因为曾经只卖700,而我绝不会花1500
11:02
for something that was 700 last week.
212
644000
3000
买上周还是700的旅游产品
11:05
This tendency趋势 to compare比较 to the past过去
213
647000
2000
这种”比较过去“的倾向
11:07
is causing造成 people to pass通过 up the better deal合同. In other words,
214
649000
4000
使人们放弃了很多好交易,换句话说
11:11
a good deal合同 that used to be a great deal合同 is not nearly几乎 as good
215
653000
3000
一个从前有更好价格的交易即使现在仍然是一个好交易,也不如
11:14
as an awful可怕 deal合同 that was once一旦 a horrible可怕 deal合同.
216
656000
4000
一个从前有更差价格的差交易能打动人。
11:18
Here's这里的 another另一个 example of how comparing比较 to the past过去
217
660000
2000
还有一个例子,说明“比较过去”如何
11:20
can befuddle醉人 our decisions决定.
218
662000
4000
迷惑我们的眼睛
11:24
Imagine想像 that you're going to the theater剧院.
219
666000
2000
假设你要去剧场看节目
11:26
You're on your way to the theater剧院.
220
668000
1000
去剧场的路上
11:27
In your wallet钱包 you have a ticket, for which哪一个 you paid支付 20 dollars美元.
221
669000
2000
你钱包里有一张票,是花20美元买的
11:29
You also have a 20-dollar-美元 bill法案.
222
671000
2000
你还有一张20美金的纸币
11:31
When you arrive到达 at the theater剧院,
223
673000
2000
当你到达剧场的时候
11:33
you discover发现 that somewhere某处 along沿 the way you've lost丢失 the ticket.
224
675000
3000
发现票丢了
11:36
Would you spend your remaining其余 money on replacing更换 it?
225
678000
3000
你会花剩下的钱再去买一张么?
11:39
Most people answer回答, no.
226
681000
3000
很多人会说,不会!
11:42
Now, let's just change更改 one thing in this scenario脚本.
227
684000
3000
现在,我只改变一个条件
11:45
You're on your way to the theater剧院,
228
687000
1000
你在去剧场的路上
11:46
and in your wallet钱包 you have two 20-dollar-美元 bills票据.
229
688000
2000
你钱包里有两张20美元
11:48
When you arrive到达 you discover发现 you've lost丢失 one of them.
230
690000
2000
到达剧场的时候发现丢了一张
11:50
Would you spend your remaining其余 20 dollars美元 on a ticket?
231
692000
2000
你会不会拿剩下的20美元去买票?
11:52
Well, of course课程, I went to the theater剧院 to see the play.
232
694000
3000
当然会!我去剧院就是要看戏的。
11:55
What does the loss失利 of 20 dollars美元 along沿 the way have to do?
233
697000
3000
跟我在路上丢没丢20美元没关系
11:58
Now, just in case案件 you're not getting得到 it,
234
700000
3000
如果你还没明白我的意思
12:01
here's这里的 a schematic概要 of what happened发生, OK?
235
703000
2000
还有另一种简单的解释
12:03
(Laughter笑声)
236
705000
1000
(笑声)
12:04
Along沿 the way, you lost丢失 something.
237
706000
2000
在路上,你丢了一样东西
12:06
In both cases, it was a piece of paper.
238
708000
2000
在两种情况下,这个东西都是一张纸
12:08
In one case案件, it had a U.S. president主席 on it; in the other case案件 it didn't.
239
710000
4000
一种情况下,这张纸上有美国总统头像,另一张纸没有。
12:12
What the hell地狱 difference区别 should it make?
240
714000
2000
这到底有什么区别?
12:14
The difference区别 is that when you lost丢失 the ticket you say to yourself你自己,
241
716000
3000
区别就是,当你丢了票的时候,你会这样对自己说
12:17
I'm not paying付款 twice两次 for the same相同 thing.
242
719000
2000
我不会为买样东西花双份的钱
12:19
You compare比较 the cost成本 of the play now -- 40 dollars美元 --
243
721000
3000
你将现在的花费--40美元
12:22
to the cost成本 that it used to have -- 20 dollars美元 -- and you say it's a bad deal合同.
244
724000
5000
和原来20美元相比,会觉得不值
12:27
Comparing对比 with the past过去 causes原因 many许多 of the problems问题
245
729000
4000
比较过去会导致很多问题
12:31
that behavioral行为的 economists经济学家 and psychologists心理学家 identify鉴定
246
733000
3000
行为经济学家和心理学家认为这些问题
12:34
in people's人们 attempts尝试 to assign分配 value.
247
736000
2000
会影响人们对价值的估算。
12:36
But even when we compare比较 with the possible可能, instead代替 of the past过去,
248
738000
5000
但即使不”比较过去“,而去比较其它的可能
12:41
we still make certain某些 kinds of mistakes错误.
249
743000
2000
我们还是会犯类似的错误
12:43
And I'm going to show显示 you one or two of them.
250
745000
2000
举几个例子
12:45
One of the things we know about comparison对照:
251
747000
3000
“比较”有一个特点
12:48
that when we compare比较 one thing to the other, it changes变化 its value.
252
750000
3000
当一样东西和另一样东西比较时,它的价值会改变
12:51
So in 1992, this fellow同伴, George乔治 Bush衬套, for those of us who were
253
753000
4000
所以在1992年的时候,乔治布什,对于我们这些
12:55
kind of on the liberal自由主义的 side of the political政治 spectrum光谱,
254
757000
3000
政治上站在自由主义一边的人来说
12:58
didn't seem似乎 like such这样 a great guy.
255
760000
2000
他好像不是一个理想的人物
13:00
Suddenly突然, we're almost几乎 longing渴望 for him to return返回.
256
762000
4000
突然间,我们又非常盼着他复出
13:04
(Laughter笑声)
257
766000
3000
笑声
13:07
The comparison对照 changes变化 how we evaluate评估 him.
258
769000
3000
比较改变了我们对他的看法
13:10
Now, retailers零售商 knew知道 this long before anybody任何人 else其他 did, of course课程,
259
772000
4000
当然,零售商人们早就懂得这个道理
13:14
and they use this wisdom智慧 to help you --
260
776000
2000
他们利用这一点使你
13:16
spare备用 you the undue过度的 burden负担 of money.
261
778000
2000
花更多的钱
13:18
And so a retailer零售商, if you were to go into a wine红酒 shop
262
780000
3000
当你走进一家红酒商店
13:21
and you had to buy购买 a bottle瓶子 of wine红酒,
263
783000
1000
要买一瓶红酒
13:22
and you see them here for eight, 27 and 33 dollars美元, what would you do?
264
784000
4000
你看到了红酒的价钱:8、27、33美元,你会怎样做?
13:26
Most people don't want the most expensive昂贵,
265
788000
2000
大多数人不会买最贵的
13:28
they don't want the least最小 expensive昂贵.
266
790000
2000
也不会买最便宜的
13:30
So, they will opt选择 for the item项目 in the middle中间.
267
792000
2000
所以他们选择价格适中的
13:32
If you're a smart聪明 retailer零售商, then, you will put a very expensive昂贵 item项目
268
794000
3000
如果你是一个聪明的零售商,你会放一个最贵的商品在架上
13:35
that nobody没有人 will ever buy购买 on the shelf,
269
797000
2000
即使根本没人买
13:37
because suddenly突然 the $33 wine红酒 doesn't look as expensive昂贵 in comparison对照.
270
799000
6000
因为相比之下33美元的红酒显得没那么贵了
13:43
So I'm telling告诉 you something you already已经 knew知道:
271
805000
1000
其实这些你们早就知道了
13:44
namely亦即, that comparison对照 changes变化 the value of things.
272
806000
4000
“比较”可以改变价值
13:48
Here's这里的 why that's a problem问题:
273
810000
1000
但问题在哪里呢?
13:49
the problem问题 is that when you get that $33 bottle瓶子 of wine红酒 home,
274
811000
6000
问题就出在:这瓶33美元的红酒带回家后
13:55
it won't惯于 matter what it used to be sitting坐在 on the shelf next下一个 to.
275
817000
4000
他的价值跟原来放在旁边的酒没有关系
13:59
The comparisons对比 we make when we are appraising评价 value,
276
821000
5000
当初为估量价值而做的比较
14:04
where we're trying to estimate估计 how much we'll like things,
277
826000
4000
即我们试图决定我们有多喜欢一样东西
14:08
are not the same相同 comparisons对比 we'll be making制造 when we consume消耗 them.
278
830000
3000
当我们消费或者使用这样东西的时候,当初的比较早已不复存在了
14:11
This problem问题 of shifting comparisons对比 can bedevil困扰
279
833000
4000
这个“比较转移”的问题
14:15
our attempts尝试 to make rational合理的 decisions决定.
280
837000
3000
影响了我们的理性决策
14:18
Let me just give you an example.
281
840000
1000
再举一个例子
14:19
I have to show显示 you something from my own拥有 lab实验室, so let me sneak潜行 this in.
282
841000
4000
我要给大家看一个实验
14:23
These are subjects主题 coming未来 to an experiment实验 to be asked
283
845000
2000
这些实验对象们
14:25
the simplest简单 of all questions问题:
284
847000
2000
问一个最简单的问题
14:27
How much will you enjoy请享用 eating potato土豆 chips芯片 one minute分钟 from now?
285
849000
4000
一分钟之后你会多享受这包薯条?
14:31
They're sitting坐在 in a room房间 with potato土豆 chips芯片 in front面前 of them.
286
853000
3000
实验对象坐在房间里,前面放着一些薯条
14:34
For some of the subjects主题, sitting坐在 in the far corner of a room房间
287
856000
3000
对于一些实验对象,他们所在房间的另一个角落,有其它东西
14:37
is a box of GodivaGODIVA chocolates巧克力, and for others其他 is a can of Spam垃圾邮件.
288
859000
5000
有的是一盒Godiva巧克力,有的是一罐Spam午餐肉
14:42
In fact事实, these items项目 that are sitting坐在 in the room房间 change更改
289
864000
4000
事实上,这些角落里的东西改变了
14:46
how much the subjects主题 think they're going to enjoy请享用 the potato土豆 chips芯片.
290
868000
3000
试验者对薯条的预期享受程度
14:49
Namely亦即, those who are looking at Spam垃圾邮件
291
871000
2000
也就是说,这些看到午餐肉的人
14:51
think potato土豆 chips芯片 are going to be quite相当 tasty可口;
292
873000
2000
会觉得薯条非常美味
14:53
those who are looking at GodivaGODIVA chocolate巧克力
293
875000
2000
而看到巧克力的人
14:55
think they won't惯于 be nearly几乎 so tasty可口.
294
877000
2000
觉得薯条不会很美味
14:57
Of course课程, what happens发生 when they eat the potato土豆 chips芯片?
295
879000
2000
然而,他们吃薯条的时候会怎样呢?
14:59
Well, look, you didn't need a psychologist心理学家 to tell you that
296
881000
3000
不需要心理学家告诉你
15:02
when you have a mouthful一口 of greasy, salty, crispy香脆, delicious美味的 snacks小吃,
297
884000
4000
当你嘴里都是油炸的,脆脆的美味薯条的时候
15:06
what's sitting坐在 in the corner of the room房间
298
888000
1000
在屋子的角落放着什么
15:07
makes品牌 not a damn该死的 bit of difference区别 to your gustatory味觉 experience经验.
299
889000
5000
根本不会影响你的味觉
15:12
Nonetheless尽管如此, their predictions预测 are perverted变态 by a comparison对照
300
894000
4000
然而在吃之前,人们对食物的预期被“比较”迷惑了
15:16
that then does not carry携带 through通过 and change更改 their experience经验.
301
898000
4000
这种“比较”在我们吃的过程中,是完全不存在的
15:20
You've all experienced有经验的 this yourself你自己, even if you've never come
302
902000
2000
大家都亲身经历过类似的事情,即使你以前没有
15:22
into our lab实验室 to eat potato土豆 chips芯片. So here's这里的 a question:
303
904000
3000
来过我的实验室吃薯条。那我现在有一个问题:
15:25
You want to buy购买 a car汽车 stereo立体声.
304
907000
2000
你想买一个汽车音响
15:27
The dealer零售商 near your house sells塞尔斯 this particular特定 stereo立体声 for 200 dollars美元,
305
909000
5000
你家附近的经销商卖200美元
15:32
but if you drive驾驶 across横过 town, you can get it for 100 bucks雄鹿.
306
914000
3000
如果你开车穿过市区,只要100美元买一个一样的
15:35
So would you drive驾驶 to get 50 percent百分 off, saving保存 100 dollars美元?
307
917000
3000
你会开车去买这个五折的音响,从而节省100美元吗?
15:38
Most people say they would.
308
920000
2000
多数人都会
15:40
They can't imagine想像 buying购买 it for twice两次 the price价钱
309
922000
2000
他们不能想象多花一倍的钱
15:42
when, with one trip across横过 town, they can get it for half off.
310
924000
4000
去买一个在城市的另一端只要半价的东西
15:46
Now, let's imagine想像 instead代替 you wanted to buy购买 a car汽车 that had a stereo立体声,
311
928000
4000
现在我再假设你想买一辆有音响的车
15:50
and the dealer零售商 near your house had it for 31,000.
312
932000
2000
你家旁边的经销商卖31000美元
15:52
But if you drove开车 across横过 town, you could get it for 30,900.
313
934000
5000
同样开车穿过市区,只要30900
15:57
Would you drive驾驶 to get it? At this point, 0.003 savings -- the 100 dollars美元.
314
939000
4000
你会去么?这次你节省了0.3%,也是100美元
16:01
Most people say, no, I'm going to schlep拖带 across横过 town
315
943000
2000
很多人会说,不,我才不会开车穿过拥堵的市区
16:03
to save保存 100 bucks雄鹿 on the purchase采购 of a car汽车?
316
945000
3000
就为了节省100美元去买一辆车
16:06
This kind of thinking思维 drives驱动器 economists经济学家 crazy, and it should.
317
948000
4000
这种想法令经济学家们抓狂,而也确实应该这样
16:10
Because this 100 dollars美元 that you save保存 -- hello你好! --
318
952000
4000
因为你节省下来的这100美元:拜托!
16:14
doesn't know where it came来了 from.
319
956000
2000
根本不在乎从哪儿来的
16:16
It doesn't know what you saved保存 it on.
320
958000
2000
它也不知道是买什么东西节省下来的
16:18
When you go to buy购买 groceries杂货 with it, it doesn't go,
321
960000
2000
你去超市买东西的时候,它不会说
16:20
I'm the money saved保存 on the car汽车 stereo立体声, or,
322
962000
3000
我是从汽车音响节省下来的,或者
16:23
I'm the dumb money saved保存 on the car汽车. It's money.
323
965000
4000
我是一个笨蛋从买汽车里节省下来的。钱就是钱!
16:27
And if a drive驾驶 across横过 town is worth价值 100 bucks雄鹿, it's worth价值 100 bucks雄鹿
324
969000
3000
如果开车穿过市区值100美元,就是值100美元
16:30
no matter what you're saving保存 it on. People don't think that way.
325
972000
3000
不管你是通过什么方式节省下来的。可是人们并不这么认为。
16:33
That's why they don't know whether是否 their mutual相互 fund基金 manager经理
326
975000
2000
这就是为什么人们不关心基金经理
16:35
is taking服用 0.1 percent百分 or 0.15 percent百分 of their investment投资,
327
977000
5000
从他们的投资中拿0.1%还是0.15%佣金
16:40
but they clip coupons优惠券 to save保存 one dollar美元 off of toothpaste牙膏.
328
982000
3000
但是他们会收集折扣券去少花1美元买牙膏
16:43
Now, you can see, this is the problem问题 of shifting comparisons对比,
329
985000
3000
现在你看到了,也是“转移比较”的问题
16:46
because what you're doing is, you're comparing比较 the 100 bucks雄鹿
330
988000
3000
因为你在比较100美元
16:49
to the purchase采购 that you're making制造,
331
991000
2000
和你要买的东西之间的关系
16:51
but when you go to spend that money you won't惯于 be making制造 that comparison对照.
332
993000
4000
而当你去花这笔钱的时候,你不会再做那样的比较
16:55
You've all had this experience经验.
333
997000
2000
你们都有过这样的经历
16:57
If you're an American美国, for example, you've probably大概 traveled旅行 in France法国.
334
999000
4000
举个例子,如果你是一个美国人,去法国旅游
17:01
And at some point you may可能 have met会见 a couple一对
335
1003000
2000
在法国的时候有可能会遇到一对夫妇
17:03
from your own拥有 hometown家乡, and you thought,
336
1005000
1000
他们也是从你的家乡过来旅游的,你会想
17:04
"Oh, my God, these people are so warm. They're so nice不错 to me.
337
1006000
5000
天哪!这些人真热情,对我太好了。
17:09
I mean, compared相比 to all these people who hate讨厌 me
338
1011000
2000
比起那些讨厌我试着说法语
17:11
when I try to speak说话 their language语言 and hate讨厌 me more when I don't,
339
1013000
3000
更讨厌我不说法语的当地人
17:14
these people are just wonderful精彩." And so you tour游览 France法国 with them,
340
1016000
3000
这对夫妇简直太好了,所以你和他们一起游历法国
17:17
and then you get home and you invite邀请 them over for dinner晚餐,
341
1019000
2000
之后你回到家,邀请这对夫妇来家里吃饭
17:19
and what do you find?
342
1021000
1000
现在的感觉呢?
17:20
Compared相比 to your regular定期 friends朋友,
343
1022000
2000
和你的其它朋友相比,
17:22
they are boring无聊 and dull平淡, right? Because in this new context上下文,
344
1024000
4000
他们又无聊又闷,对吗?处在新的环境里
17:26
the comparison对照 is very, very different不同. In fact事实, you find yourself你自己
345
1028000
4000
这种比较太不一样了。实际上你发现
17:30
disliking不喜欢 them enough足够 almost几乎 to qualify修饰 for French法国 citizenship国籍.
346
1032000
3000
他们的讨厌程度简直都够资格申请法国国籍了
17:34
Now, you have exactly究竟 the same相同 problem问题 when you shop for a stereo立体声.
347
1036000
3000
其实如果你去买音响也会遇上同样的问题
17:37
You go to the stereo立体声 store商店, you see two sets of speakers音箱 --
348
1039000
3000
你去到一个音响商店,你看到了两款扬声器
17:40
these big, boxy四四方方, monoliths巨石, and these little, sleek光滑 speakers音箱,
349
1042000
4000
一款是又大又方像石头的,一款是小巧玲珑的外表光滑的
17:44
and you play them, and you go, you know, I do hear a difference区别:
350
1046000
2000
然后你都试了一下,觉得确实听到了他们的区别
17:46
the big ones那些 sound声音 a little better.
351
1048000
2000
大的那个感觉好一些
17:48
And so you buy购买 them, and you bring带来 them home,
352
1050000
2000
于是你付了钱,把音响带回家
17:50
and you entirely完全 violate违反 the décorCOR of your house.
353
1052000
3000
根本不在乎彻底破坏了家里的装饰风格
17:53
And the problem问题, of course课程, is that this comparison对照 you made制作 in the store商店
354
1055000
4000
问题在于,你在音响商店做的“比较”
17:57
is a comparison对照 you'll你会 never make again.
355
1059000
2000
回家之后永远不可能再发生
17:59
What are the odds可能性 that years年份 later后来 you'll你会 turn on the stereo立体声 and go,
356
1061000
2000
你不会再回到那个音响商店说:
18:01
"Sounds声音 so much better than those little ones那些,"
357
1063000
3000
“大的听起来就是比那些小的好”
18:04
which哪一个 you can't even remember记得 hearing听力.
358
1066000
2000
具体是哪个“小的”你自己可能都不记得了
18:06
The problem问题 of shifting comparisons对比 is even more difficult
359
1068000
3000
“比较转移”的问题在跨越时间的
18:09
when these choices选择 are arrayed摆着 over time.
360
1071000
3000
某些情况下显得更复杂
18:12
People have a lot of trouble麻烦 making制造 decisions决定
361
1074000
3000
关于不同时间点发生的几件事
18:15
about things that will happen发生 at different不同 points in time.
362
1077000
3000
人们在做决策时往往显得尤其困难
18:18
And what psychologists心理学家 and behavioral行为的 economists经济学家 have discovered发现
363
1080000
2000
心理学家和行为经济学家发现
18:20
is that by and large people use two simple简单 rules规则.
364
1082000
3000
大体上来讲有两个简单的原则
18:23
So let me give you one very easy简单 problem问题, a second第二 very easy简单 problem问题
365
1085000
4000
现在我先给你一个非常简单的问题,然后是一个同样简单的问题
18:27
and then a third第三, hard, problem问题.
366
1089000
1000
最后是一个困难的问题
18:28
Here's这里的 the first easy简单 problem问题:
367
1090000
3000
第一个简单问题是:
18:31
You can have 60 dollars美元 now or 50 dollars美元 now. Which哪一个 would you prefer比较喜欢?
368
1093000
3000
现在得到$60或者$50,你要哪个?
18:34
This is what we call a one-item一个项目 IQ智商 test测试, OK?
369
1096000
3000
这个叫做单项智商测验
18:37
All of us, I hope希望, prefer比较喜欢 more money, and the reason原因 is,
370
1099000
3000
大家都想要更多的钱
18:40
we believe more is better than less.
371
1102000
3000
因为我们认为多比少好
18:43
Here's这里的 the second第二 problem问题:
372
1105000
1000
第二个问题来了
18:44
You can have 60 dollars美元 today今天 or 60 dollars美元 in a month. Which哪一个 would you prefer比较喜欢?
373
1106000
4000
你可以今天得到$60或者一个月之后得到$60,你选哪个?
18:48
Again, an easy简单 decision决定,
374
1110000
2000
同样的,非常简单的决策
18:50
because we all know that now is better than later后来.
375
1112000
4000
因为我们知道"现在"比"以后"好
18:54
What's hard in our decision-making做决定 is when these two rules规则 conflict冲突.
376
1116000
3000
当这两条规则相互冲突时,困难来了
18:57
For example, when you're offered提供 50 dollars美元 now or 60 dollars美元 in a month.
377
1119000
4000
例如,现在得到$50或者一个月后得到$60,你选哪个
19:01
This typifies典型代表 a lot of situations情况 in life in which哪一个 you will gain获得
378
1123000
3000
生活中有很多类似情况
19:04
by waiting等候, but you have to be patient患者.
379
1126000
3000
想得到就必须等待,还要有耐心
19:07
What do we know? What do people do in these kinds of situations情况?
380
1129000
3000
那么人们在这样的情形下会怎么做呢?
19:10
Well, by and large people are enormously巨大 impatient不耐烦.
381
1132000
4000
多数情况下,人们很缺乏耐心
19:14
That is, they require要求 interest利益 rates利率 in the hundred
382
1136000
3000
也就是说他们会要求很高的利息
19:17
or thousands数千 of percents百分比 in order订购 to delay延迟 gratification享乐
383
1139000
4000
才能推迟他们的满足感
19:21
and wait until直到 next下一个 month for the extra额外 10 dollars美元.
384
1143000
4000
而等到下个月去获得额外的10美元
19:25
Maybe that isn't so remarkable卓越, but what is remarkable卓越 is
385
1147000
3000
也许这个还不足为奇,但是奇怪的是
19:28
how easy简单 it is to make this impatience不耐烦 go away by simply只是 changing改变
386
1150000
4000
让人们有耐心是如此容易,只要改变一下
19:32
when the delivery交货 of these monetary货币 units单位 will happen发生.
387
1154000
4000
给钱的时间
19:36
Imagine想像 that you can have 50 dollars美元 in a year -- that's 12 months个月 --
388
1158000
3000
假设你可以一年之后获得50美元--那是12个月
19:39
or 60 dollars美元 in 13 months个月.
389
1161000
3000
或者13个月之后获得60美元
19:42
What do we find now?
390
1164000
1000
我们得到了什么结果?
19:43
People are gladly乐意 willing愿意 to wait: as long as they're waiting等候 12,
391
1165000
3000
人们开始愿意等待了,既然他们已经等了12个月
19:46
they might威力 as well wait 13.
392
1168000
2000
等13个月也无妨
19:48
What makes品牌 this dynamic动态 inconsistency前后矛盾 happen发生?
393
1170000
3000
是什么让决策不一致了呢?
19:51
Comparison对照. Troubling令人不安 comparison对照. Let me show显示 you.
394
1173000
4000
比较!麻烦的比较。我来给大家解释
19:55
This is just a graph图形 showing展示 the results结果 that I just suggested建议
395
1177000
3000
这是一个我刚刚提到的结果的演示图
19:58
you would show显示 if I gave you time to respond响应, which哪一个 is,
396
1180000
2000
如果我给大家足够时间去反应,你们会发现
20:00
people find that the subjective主观 value of 50 is higher更高
397
1182000
3000
人们发现主观上现在的50美元要比
20:03
than the subjective主观 value of 60 when they'll他们会 be delivered交付 in now
398
1185000
4000
未来的60美元更有价值
20:07
or one month, respectively分别 -- a 30-day-天 delay延迟 --
399
1189000
2000
虽然仅仅是30天的差别
20:09
but they show显示 the reverse相反 pattern模式 when you push the entire整个 decision决定
400
1191000
4000
然而当我们把决策时间推迟1年
20:13
off into the future未来 a year.
401
1195000
3000
他们表现出了完全相反的行为模式
20:16
Now, why in the world世界 do you get this pattern模式 of results结果?
402
1198000
4000
那么,为什么你会看到这样的结果呢?
20:20
These guys can tell us.
403
1202000
1000
这两个人可以给我们解释
20:21
What you see here are two lads小伙子,
404
1203000
3000
大家看到的是两个小伙子
20:24
one of them larger than the other: the fireman消防队员 and the fiddler小提琴手.
405
1206000
3000
其中一个比另外一个块头大些:救火队员和小提琴家
20:27
They are going to recede退 towards the vanishing消失 point in the horizon地平线,
406
1209000
3000
他们要往后退直到消失
20:30
and I want you to notice注意 two things.
407
1212000
2000
我希望大家注意两样东西
20:32
At no point will the fireman消防队员 look taller than the fiddler小提琴手. No point.
408
1214000
6000
这个救火队员是永远不可能比小提琴家小的,绝对不会
20:38
However然而, the difference区别 between之间 them seems似乎 to be getting得到 smaller.
409
1220000
3000
然而,他们之间的差距却是越来越小的
20:41
First it's an inch英寸 in your view视图, then it's a quarter-inch四分之一英寸,
410
1223000
3000
刚开始你看到一英寸的差距,然后是四分之三英寸
20:44
then a half-inch半英寸, and then finally最后 they go off the edge边缘 of the earth地球.
411
1226000
4000
然后是半英寸,最终他们从地平线上消失了
20:48
Here are the results结果 of what I just showed显示 you.
412
1230000
3000
这就是我刚刚给大家看的结果
20:51
This is the subjective主观 height高度 --
413
1233000
2000
这是主观高度
20:53
the height高度 you saw of these guys at various各个 points.
414
1235000
3000
即你在不同阶段看到的高度
20:56
And I want you to see that two things are true真正.
415
1238000
2000
现在我想让你看到,两样东西是真的
20:58
One, the farther更远 away they are, the smaller they look;
416
1240000
3000
第一,他们离我们越远,看起来越小
21:01
and two, the fireman消防队员 is always bigger than the fiddler小提琴手.
417
1243000
2000
第二,消防队员总是比小提琴师高。
21:03
But watch what happens发生 when we make some of them disappear消失. Right.
418
1245000
6000
但是当我们让一些东西消失之后发生了什么?
21:09
At a very close distance距离, the fiddler小提琴手 looks容貌 taller than the fireman消防队员,
419
1251000
3000
如果我们非常近距离观察,小提琴师要比消防队员更高大
21:12
but at a far distance距离
420
1254000
2000
但是如果离远了
21:14
their normal正常, their true真正, relations关系 are preserved罐头.
421
1256000
3000
他们正常的,真实的关系就出来了
21:17
As Plato柏拉图 said, what space空间 is to size尺寸, time is to value.
422
1259000
5000
就像柏拉图说的,时间对于价值的影响正如空间对于大小的影响一样
21:22
These are the results结果 of the hard problem问题 I gave you:
423
1264000
5000
这是刚才那道难题的答案
21:27
60 now or 50 in a month?
424
1269000
2000
现在拿50美元还是一个月后拿60?
21:29
And these are subjective主观 values,
425
1271000
1000
这些是主观的判断
21:30
and what you can see is, our two rules规则 are preserved罐头.
426
1272000
2000
大家可以看到的是,我们的两条定理都是成立的
21:32
People always think more is better than less:
427
1274000
2000
人们通常会觉得多比少好
21:34
60 is always better than 50,
428
1276000
2000
60美元永远比50美元好
21:36
and they always think now is better than later后来:
429
1278000
2000
人们还会觉得现在永远比将来好
21:38
the bars酒吧 on this side are higher更高 than the bars酒吧 on this side.
430
1280000
3000
这边的柱形图比那边的要高
21:41
Watch what happens发生 when we drop下降 some out.
431
1283000
3000
看看去掉几个图形时发生了什么
21:44
Suddenly突然 we have the dynamic动态 inconsistency前后矛盾 that puzzled困惑 us.
432
1286000
3000
现在突然有些困惑了,刚才比较的结果一下子反了过来
21:47
We have the tendency趋势 for people to go for 50 dollars美元 now
433
1289000
4000
我们看到人们更希望现在获得50元
21:51
over waiting等候 a month, but not if that decision决定 is far in the future未来.
434
1293000
3000
而不是去等一个月拿60,但是在更长的时间里,又会反过来决定
21:54
Notice注意 something interesting有趣 that this implies暗示 -- namely亦即, that
435
1296000
4000
我们看到了一个有趣的现象--那就是
21:58
when people get to the future未来, they will change更改 their minds头脑.
436
1300000
4000
人们会在未来改变主意
22:02
That is, as that month 12 approaches方法, you will say,
437
1304000
3000
当第12个月马上到了的时候,你会说
22:05
what was I thinking思维, waiting等候 an extra额外 month for 60 dollars美元?
438
1307000
3000
为什么还要为了那60块钱再等一个月呢?
22:08
I'll take the 50 dollars美元 now.
439
1310000
3000
我现在就想要这50块钱
22:11
Well, the question with which哪一个 I'd like to end结束 is this:
440
1313000
3000
那么,在结束的时候想问大家一个问题
22:14
If we're so damn该死的 stupid, how did we get to the moon月亮?
441
1316000
3000
如果我们都这么笨,人类是怎么登上月球的?
22:17
Because I could go on for about two hours小时 with evidence证据
442
1319000
3000
因为我可以在这里讲两个小时,举例子
22:20
of people's人们 inability无力 to estimate估计 odds可能性 and inability无力 to estimate估计 value.
443
1322000
6000
证明人类在估计概率和价值方面的无能表现
22:26
The answer回答 to this question, I think, is an answer回答 you've already已经 heard听说
444
1328000
2000
这个问题的答案,我想大家都已经知道了
22:28
in some of the talks会谈, and I dare say you will hear again:
445
1330000
2000
以前听过相关的演讲,我敢保证大家还会听到
22:30
namely亦即, that our brains大脑 were evolved进化 for a very different不同 world世界
446
1332000
4000
即是:我们的大脑是朝着一个完全不同的世界进化的
22:34
than the one in which哪一个 we are living活的.
447
1336000
2000
即是:我们的大脑是朝着一个完全不同的世界进化的
22:36
They were evolved进化 for a world世界
448
1338000
2000
在大脑为之进化的世界里
22:38
in which哪一个 people lived生活 in very small groups,
449
1340000
2000
人类生活在很小的群体当中
22:40
rarely很少 met会见 anybody任何人 who was terribly可怕 different不同 from themselves他们自己,
450
1342000
3000
周围都是和自己一样的人
22:43
had rather short lives生活 in which哪一个 there were few少数 choices选择
451
1345000
3000
人们的寿命非常短,选择也非常少
22:46
and the highest最高 priority优先 was to eat and mate伴侣 today今天.
452
1348000
5000
人们决定最重要的事情就是“今朝有酒今朝醉”
22:51
Bernoulli's伯努利 gift礼品, Bernoulli's伯努利 little formula, allows允许 us, it tells告诉 us
453
1353000
5000
Bernoulli的天赋,Bernoulli的小等式,告诉我们
22:56
how we should think in a world世界 for which哪一个 nature性质 never designed设计 us.
454
1358000
5000
在这个不符合自然规律的世界我们应该如何思考问题,
23:01
That explains说明 why we are so bad at using运用 it, but it also explains说明
455
1363000
4000
揭示了为什么我们思考问题这么差,也告诉我们
23:05
why it is so terribly可怕 important重要 that we become成为 good, fast快速.
456
1367000
5000
勤奋高效是如此重要
23:10
We are the only species种类 on this planet行星
457
1372000
2000
人类是这个星球上唯一的
23:12
that has ever held保持 its own拥有 fate命运 in its hands.
458
1374000
4000
将命运掌握在自己手中的物种
23:16
We have no significant重大 predators大鳄,
459
1378000
2000
我们没有主要的天敌
23:18
we're the masters主人 of our physical物理 environment环境;
460
1380000
2000
我们征服了大自然
23:20
the things that normally一般 cause原因 species种类 to become成为 extinct绝种
461
1382000
3000
通常导致物种灭绝的东西
23:23
are no longer any threat威胁 to us.
462
1385000
3000
已经不能对人类够成威胁
23:26
The only thing -- the only thing -- that can destroy破坏 us and doom厄运 us
463
1388000
5000
只有一样东西,唯一的东西可以毁灭我们
23:31
are our own拥有 decisions决定.
464
1393000
2000
那就是我们自己的决定
23:33
If we're not here in 10,000 years年份, it's going to be because
465
1395000
4000
如果在10000年之后人类灭亡了,原因就是
23:37
we could not take advantage优点 of the gift礼品 given特定 to us
466
1399000
4000
我们没能用好这个天赋
23:41
by a young年轻 Dutch荷兰人 fellow同伴 in 1738,
467
1403000
3000
那个荷兰人在1738年献给世界的礼物
23:44
because we underestimated低估 the odds可能性 of our future未来 pains辛劳
468
1406000
4000
因为我们低估了未来痛苦
23:48
and overestimated高估 the value of our present当下 pleasures乐趣.
469
1410000
4000
高估了眼前快乐的价值
23:52
Thank you.
470
1414000
1000
谢谢。
23:53
(Applause掌声)
471
1415000
10000
(掌声)
24:03
Chris克里斯 Anderson安德森: That was remarkable卓越.
472
1425000
3000
讲得太精彩了
24:06
We have time for some questions问题 for Dan Gilbert吉尔伯特. One and two.
473
1428000
5000
我们还有些时间向Dan Gilbert提问。这里第一个问题,这里第二个
24:11
Bill法案 Lyell莱尔: Would you say that this mechanism机制
474
1433000
3000
你是不是说这种思考模式
24:14
is in part部分 how terrorism恐怖主义 actually其实 works作品 to frighten吓唬 us,
475
1436000
4000
也是恐怖分子用来恐吓我们的一种手段
24:18
and is there some way that we could counteract抵消 that?
476
1440000
4000
有没有方法可以克服它呢?
24:22
Dan Gilbert吉尔伯特: I actually其实 was consulting咨询 recently最近
477
1444000
1000
实际上最近我正在做一个咨询项目
24:23
with the Department of Homeland家园 Security安全, which哪一个 generally通常 believes相信
478
1445000
3000
和国土安全部合作,大概的内容就是
24:26
that American美国 security安全 dollars美元 should go to making制造 borders国界 safer更安全.
479
1448000
4000
美国的国防经费应该用在可以让边境更加安全的项目上
24:30
I tried试着 to point out to them that terrorism恐怖主义 was a name名称
480
1452000
3000
我试图告诉他们恐怖主义只是一个词
24:33
based基于 on people's人们 psychological心理 reaction反应 to a set of events事件,
481
1455000
4000
是人们对一系列的事件产生的心理反应
24:37
and that if they were concerned关心 about terrorism恐怖主义 they might威力 ask
482
1459000
2000
如果他们真的担心恐怖主义,他们应该问一个问题
24:39
what causes原因 terror恐怖 and how can we stop people from being存在 terrified,
483
1461000
3000
什么导致恐怖活动以及如何让人们不再恐惧
24:42
rather than -- not rather than, but in addition加成 to
484
1464000
3000
在此基础上
24:45
stopping停止 the atrocities暴行 that we're all concerned关心 about.
485
1467000
3000
再去制止我们所担心的暴行
24:48
Surely一定 the kinds of play that at least最小 American美国 media媒体 give to --
486
1470000
6000
事实上,美国媒体在这类事件上的报道
24:54
and forgive原谅 me, but in raw生的 numbers数字 these are very tiny accidents事故.
487
1476000
5000
请原谅我的直接,这些恐怖袭击的数量是非常小的
24:59
We already已经 know, for example, in the United联合的 States状态,
488
1481000
2000
我们已经知道,例如,在美国
25:01
more people have died死亡 as a result结果 of not taking服用 airplanes飞机 --
489
1483000
4000
更多的人因为没有坐飞机而死亡
25:05
because they were scared害怕 -- and driving主动 on highways公路,
490
1487000
2000
因为他们害怕坐飞机
25:07
than were killed杀害 in 9/11. OK?
491
1489000
2000
其实在高速公路上开车死的人比911要多
25:09
If I told you that there was a plague鼠疫
492
1491000
2000
如果我告诉你有一个瘟疫
25:11
that was going to kill 15,000 Americans美国人 next下一个 year,
493
1493000
3000
致使明年美国要死亡15000人
25:14
you might威力 be alarmed惊慌 if you didn't find out it was the flu流感.
494
1496000
3000
如果你不知道这是“感冒",你可能会非常惶恐
25:17
These are small-scale小型 accidents事故, and we should be wondering想知道
495
1499000
3000
这些小规模事件,我们应该反思
25:20
whether是否 they should get the kind of play,
496
1502000
2000
这些东西是否应该得到
25:22
the kind of coverage覆盖, that they do.
497
1504000
2000
这样多的报道
25:24
Surely一定 that causes原因 people to overestimate估计过高 the likelihood可能性
498
1506000
3000
显然导致人们过高地估计了
25:27
that they'll他们会 be hurt伤害 in these various各个 ways方法,
499
1509000
2000
这些事件的伤害程度
25:29
and gives power功率 to the very people who want to frighten吓唬 us.
500
1511000
2000
恰恰让那些企图恐吓我们的人达到目的
25:31
CACA: Dan, I'd like to hear more on this. So, you're saying
501
1513000
2000
Dan,我想再问几句。你的意思是说
25:33
that our response响应 to terror恐怖 is, I mean, it's a form形成 of mental心理 bug窃听器?
502
1515000
4000
我们对恐怖事件的反应,是一种精神上的缺陷吗?
25:37
Talk more about it.
503
1519000
1000
给我们讲讲好吗
25:38
DGDG: It's out-sized出大小. I mean, look.
504
1520000
3000
这个是被夸大了的。你看
25:41
If Australia澳大利亚 disappears消失 tomorrow明天,
505
1523000
2000
如果明天澳大利亚消失了
25:43
terror恐怖 is probably大概 the right response响应.
506
1525000
2000
大家的第一感觉可能就是恐怖袭击
25:45
That's an awful可怕 large lot of very nice不错 people. On the other hand,
507
1527000
5000
那么大的国家,那么善良的人民。但是另一方面
25:50
when a bus总线 blows打击 up and 30 people are killed杀害,
508
1532000
3000
当一辆公共汽车爆炸了,30个人遇难
25:53
more people than that were killed杀害
509
1535000
2000
而在同一个国家更多人
25:55
by not using运用 their seatbelts安全带 in the same相同 country国家.
510
1537000
3000
因为不系安全带死亡
25:58
Is terror恐怖 the right response响应?
511
1540000
1000
你觉得恐惧应该是正常的反应吗?
25:59
CACA: What causes原因 the bug窃听器? Is it the drama戏剧 of the event事件 --
512
1541000
4000
是什么导致这样的精神缺陷呢?是事件的震撼效果
26:03
that it's so spectacular壮观?
513
1545000
1000
对人们的触动太大了吗?
26:04
Is it the fact事实 that it's an intentional故意的 attack攻击 by, quote引用, outsiders外人?
514
1546000
3000
是因为那是一个由“外国人”发动的国际袭击吗?
26:07
What is it?
515
1549000
1000
或者是别的什么?
26:08
DGDG: Yes. It's a number of things, and you hit击中 on several一些 of them.
516
1550000
3000
是的,很多的因素,你说出了其中的一些
26:11
First, it's a human人的 agent代理人 trying to kill us --
517
1553000
2000
首先,是一个人类的组织试图杀死我们
26:13
it's not a tree falling落下 on us by accident事故.
518
1555000
3000
而不是一棵树倒下来意外地砸到我们
26:16
Second第二, these are enemies敌人 who may可能 want to strike罢工 and hurt伤害 us again.
519
1558000
3000
其次,我们的敌人也许会再次发动袭击伤害我们
26:19
People are being存在 killed杀害 for no reason原因 instead代替 of good reason原因 --
520
1561000
3000
人们是无缘无故地被杀害,而不是死于正常的原因
26:22
as if there's good reason原因, but sometimes有时 people think there are.
521
1564000
3000
就像真的有正常原因似的,但是有时候人们就是这样想的
26:25
So there are a number of things that together一起
522
1567000
2000
所以这是很多的因素集合在一起
26:27
make this seem似乎 like a fantastic奇妙 event事件, but let's not play down
523
1569000
3000
把这件事变成一个显著事件,但是我们不要忘了
26:30
the fact事实 that newspapers报纸 sell when people see something in it
524
1572000
4000
当人们读到想看的内容时,报纸的销售会比较好
26:34
they want to read. So there's a large role角色 here played发挥 by the media媒体,
525
1576000
3000
所以媒体在其中起了很大作用
26:37
who want these things to be
526
1579000
2000
他们希望这些事情
26:39
as spectacular壮观 as they possibly或者 can.
527
1581000
4000
越引人入胜越好
26:43
CACA: I mean, what would it take to persuade说服 our culture文化 to downplay淡化 it?
528
1585000
6000
我的意思是,怎样去降低这种情绪呢?
26:49
DGDG: Well, go to Israel以色列. You know,
529
1591000
1000
去以色列吧
26:50
go to Israel以色列. And a mall购物中心 blows打击 up,
530
1592000
2000
去以色列。发生了一起商场爆炸事件
26:52
and then everybody's每个人的 unhappy不快乐 about it, and an hour-and-a-half一个半小时 later后来 --
531
1594000
3000
所有人都非常气愤,一个半小时后
26:55
at least最小 when I was there, and I was 150 feet from the mall购物中心
532
1597000
3000
至少当我在场的时候,一个离我们150码的商场
26:58
when it blew自爆 up -- I went back to my hotel旅馆
533
1600000
2000
爆炸了--我回到了酒店
27:00
and the wedding婚礼 that was planned计划 was still going on.
534
1602000
3000
一个计划好的婚礼在照常进行
27:03
And as the Israeli以色列 mother母亲 said,
535
1605000
1000
就像一个以色列母亲所说的
27:04
she said, "We never let them win赢得 by stopping停止 weddings婚礼."
536
1606000
4000
她说,我们永远不会让他们得逞影响我们的婚礼
27:08
I mean, this is a society社会 that has learned学到了 --
537
1610000
1000
我的意思是,这是一个已经习惯了的社会
27:09
and there are others其他 too -- that has learned学到了 to live生活
538
1611000
2000
当然也有其它的社会--学会了如何在
27:11
with a certain某些 amount of terrorism恐怖主义 and not be quite相当 as upset烦乱 by it,
539
1613000
5000
有限的的恐怖主义威胁中生存,而且不会过分担心,被打扰
27:16
shall I say, as those of us who have not had many许多 terror恐怖 attacks攻击.
540
1618000
3000
就像我们中间那些没怎么经历过恐怖袭击的人一样
27:19
CACA: But is there a rational合理的 fear恐惧 that actually其实,
541
1621000
3000
但是这样的恐惧是不是理性的呢
27:22
the reason原因 we're frightened受惊 about this is because we think that
542
1624000
3000
我们我们之所以恐惧是因为
27:25
the Big One is to come?
543
1627000
1000
下一轮袭击可能更严重
27:26
DGDG: Yes, of course课程. So, if we knew知道 that this was the worst最差 attack攻击
544
1628000
4000
当然,如果我们知道这次袭击已经是最严重的了
27:30
there would ever be, there might威力 be more and more buses公共汽车 of 30 people --
545
1632000
4000
--当然,也许还会有更多的30人大巴爆炸--
27:34
we would probably大概 not be nearly几乎 so frightened受惊.
546
1636000
2000
我们很可能就没那么害怕了
27:36
I don't want to say -- please, I'm going to get quoted somewhere某处
547
1638000
2000
我并不是说-我要引用一句别人的话
27:38
as saying, "Terrorism恐怖主义 is fine and we shouldn't不能 be so distressed苦恼."
548
1640000
4000
“恐怖主义不可怕我们不应该那么紧张”
27:42
That's not my point at all.
549
1644000
2000
这决不是我的意思
27:44
What I'm saying is that, surely一定, rationally合理,
550
1646000
2000
我要说的是,理性地讲
27:46
our distress苦难 about things that happen发生, about threats威胁,
551
1648000
4000
我们对这些事实和威胁产生的恐惧心理
27:50
should be roughly大致 proportional成比例的 to the size尺寸 of those threats威胁
552
1652000
3000
应该和所面对的威胁
27:53
and threats威胁 to come.
553
1655000
2000
及将要到来的威胁的规模成比例
27:55
I think in the case案件 of terrorism恐怖主义, it isn't.
554
1657000
3000
我认为在对待恐怖主义这件事上,人们不是这样的
27:58
And many许多 of the things we've我们已经 heard听说 about from our speakers音箱 today今天 --
555
1660000
2000
今天我们听到那么多的演讲
28:00
how many许多 people do you know got up and said,
556
1662000
2000
有多少人站起来说
28:02
Poverty贫穷! I can't believe what poverty贫穷 is doing to us.
557
1664000
4000
贫穷!贫穷都给我们带来了什么!!!
28:06
People get up in the morning早上; they don't care关心 about poverty贫穷.
558
1668000
2000
人们早上起来;他们不关心贫穷
28:08
It's not making制造 headlines新闻头条, it's not making制造 news新闻, it's not flashy华而不实.
559
1670000
2000
贫穷不会被做成头条报道;因为它一点都不吸引人
28:10
There are no guns枪炮 going off.
560
1672000
2000
这里没有枪声
28:12
I mean, if you had to solve解决 one of these problems问题, Chris克里斯,
561
1674000
2000
我的意思是,如果你必须去解决其中的一个问题,
28:14
which哪一个 would you solve解决? Terrorism恐怖主义 or poverty贫穷?
562
1676000
2000
你会选哪个?恐怖主义还是贫穷?
28:16
(Laughter笑声)
563
1678000
4000
笑声
28:20
(Applause掌声)
564
1682000
2000
掌声
28:22
That's a tough强硬 one.
565
1684000
2000
这个问题很难
28:24
CACA: There's no question.
566
1686000
1000
毫无疑问
28:25
Poverty贫穷, by an order订购 of magnitude大小, a huge巨大 order订购 of magnitude大小,
567
1687000
4000
贫穷,从重要性上来讲无疑是优先的
28:29
unless除非 someone有人 can show显示 that there's, you know,
568
1691000
3000
除非什么人在这里可以证明
28:32
terrorists恐怖分子 with a nuke核弹 are really likely容易 to come.
569
1694000
4000
恐怖主义已经拥有了核武器
28:36
The latest最新 I've read, seen看到, thought
570
1698000
2000
我最近读到、看到、想到的
28:38
is that it's incredibly令人难以置信 hard for them to do that.
571
1700000
4000
核武器对于恐怖主义来说还是比较难获得的
28:42
If that turns out to be wrong错误, we all look silly愚蠢,
572
1704000
2000
如果那个判断是错误的,我们都很愚蠢
28:44
but with poverty贫穷 it's a bit --
573
1706000
2000
但是相对于贫穷,有那么一点儿……
28:46
DGDG: Even if that were true真正, still more people die from poverty贫穷.
574
1708000
3000
即使那是真的,还是有更多的人死于贫困
28:53
CACA: We've我们已经 evolved进化 to get all excited兴奋
575
1715000
1000
我们变得对恐怖袭击很兴奋
28:54
about these dramatic戏剧性 attacks攻击. Is that because in the past过去,
576
1716000
3000
那是因为
28:57
in the ancient past过去, we just didn't understand理解 things like disease疾病
577
1719000
3000
在古时候,我们不知道疾病
29:00
and systems系统 that cause原因 poverty贫穷 and so forth向前,
578
1722000
2000
和其他导致贫穷的原因
29:02
and so it made制作 no sense for us as a species种类 to put any energy能源
579
1724000
4000
所以不用投入太多精力
29:06
into worrying令人担忧 about those things?
580
1728000
2000
去担心这些事情
29:08
People died死亡; so be it.
581
1730000
2000
人们死去了,正常的
29:10
But if you got attacked袭击, that was something you could do something about.
582
1732000
2000
如果你被袭击了,是可以做些什么去应对的
29:12
And so we evolved进化 these responses回复.
583
1734000
2000
所以我们会有这样的反应
29:14
Is that what happened发生?
584
1736000
1000
是这个原因吗?
29:15
DGDG: Well, you know, the people who are most skeptical怀疑的
585
1737000
3000
你知道吗,那些对用进化论解释所有问题
29:18
about leaping跳跃 to evolutionary发展的 explanations说明 for everything
586
1740000
2000
持最大怀疑态度的人
29:20
are the evolutionary发展的 psychologists心理学家 themselves他们自己.
587
1742000
2000
恰恰是进化心理学者们自己
29:22
My guess猜测 is that there's nothing quite相当 that specific具体
588
1744000
3000
我的猜测是,从人类的进化史上看
29:25
in our evolutionary发展的 past过去. But rather, if you're looking for
589
1747000
2000
从来没有任何东西是特定的。然而,如果你去寻找
29:27
an evolutionary发展的 explanation说明, you might威力 say
590
1749000
2000
一个进化论的解释,你也许会说
29:29
that most organisms生物 are neo-phobic新恐惧 -- that is, they're a little scared害怕
591
1751000
4000
绝大多数的都有一种“恐新症”--他们害怕
29:33
of stuff东东 that's new and different不同.
592
1755000
1000
新的、不一样的东西
29:34
And there's a good reason原因 to be,
593
1756000
2000
一个充分的理由是
29:36
because old stuff东东 didn't eat you. Right?
594
1758000
1000
见过的东西不会吃你,对吗?
29:37
Any animal动物 you see that you've seen看到 before is less likely容易
595
1759000
3000
见过的动物都不可能
29:40
to be a predator捕食者 than one that you've never seen看到 before.
596
1762000
3000
比那些没见过的动物更可怕
29:43
So, you know, when a school学校 bus总线 is blown up and we've我们已经 never seen看到 this before,
597
1765000
3000
所以,当一个学校的校车爆炸,我们以前从来没有见过这样的事情
29:46
our general一般 tendency趋势 is to orient东方 towards
598
1768000
2000
这种恐惧新生事物的倾向
29:48
that which哪一个 is new and novel小说 is activated活性.
599
1770000
5000
就被激活了
29:53
I don't think it's quite相当 as specific具体 a mechanism机制
600
1775000
2000
我并不认为这是一种特别的机制在里面起作用
29:55
as the one you alluded暗示 to, but maybe a more fundamental基本的 one underlying底层 it.
601
1777000
2000
就像你刚才暗指的那样,但背后也许是更基础的原因
30:01
Jay松鸦 Walker助步车: You know, economists经济学家 love to talk about
602
1783000
5000
你知道,经济学家喜欢谈论
30:06
the stupidity糊涂事 of people who buy购买 lottery抽奖 tickets门票. But I suspect疑似
603
1788000
4000
那些买彩票的人的愚蠢程度。但是我怀疑
30:10
you're making制造 the exact精确 same相同 error错误 you're accusing指责 those people of,
604
1792000
3000
就在你指责这些人的时候,自己也犯了同样的错误
30:13
which哪一个 is the error错误 of value.
605
1795000
1000
也就是在估值上的错误
30:14
I know, because I've interviewed采访
606
1796000
1000
我这么说是因为在近几年中我曾经访谈过
30:15
about 1,000 lottery抽奖 buyers买家 over the years年份.
607
1797000
2000
大约1000个买彩票的人
30:17
It turns out that the value of buying购买 a lottery抽奖 ticket is not winning胜利.
608
1799000
4000
结果显示,购买彩票的价值并不是去中奖
30:21
That's what you think it is. All right?
609
1803000
2000
但这是你认为的价值,对吗?
30:23
The average平均 lottery抽奖 buyer买方 buys购买 about 150 tickets门票 a year,
610
1805000
3000
一个普通的彩民一年要买大约150张彩票
30:26
so the buyer买方 knows知道 full充分 well that he or she is going to lose失去,
611
1808000
4000
这个彩民其实完全知道他是会输掉的
30:30
and yet然而 she buys购买 150 tickets门票 a year. Why is that?
612
1812000
3000
可还是会每年买150张,为什么?
30:33
It's not because she is stupid or he is stupid.
613
1815000
4000
这并不是因为他(她)的脑子有问题
30:37
It's because the anticipation预期 of possibly或者 winning胜利
614
1819000
3000
而是因为中奖的预期
30:40
releases发布 serotonin血清素 in the brain, and actually其实 provides提供 a good feeling感觉
615
1822000
4000
在大脑中释放出一种胺,让人们产生快感
30:44
until直到 the drawing画画 indicates指示 you've lost丢失.
616
1826000
2000
一直持续到开奖的时候
30:46
Or, to put it another另一个 way, for the dollar美元 investment投资,
617
1828000
3000
换一种说法,投资1美元
30:49
you can have a much better feeling感觉 than flushing冲洗 the money
618
1831000
3000
可以获得比马桶冲钱好很多的快感
30:52
down the toilet厕所, which哪一个 you cannot不能 have a good feeling感觉 from.
619
1834000
3000
如果你真用马桶冲钱的话,你是不会有好的感觉的
30:55
Now, economists经济学家 tend趋向 to --
620
1837000
2000
现在,经济学家们都倾向于
30:57
(Applause掌声)
621
1839000
3000
掌声
31:00
-- economists经济学家 tend趋向 to view视图 the world世界
622
1842000
1000
经济学家们都试图用他们的有色眼镜
31:01
through通过 their own拥有 lenses镜头, which哪一个 is:
623
1843000
2000
看这个世界,结果是:
31:03
this is just a bunch of stupid people.
624
1845000
2000
看到一群愚蠢的人
31:05
And as a result结果, many许多 people look at economists经济学家 as stupid people.
625
1847000
4000
结果很多人觉得经济学家更愚蠢
31:09
And so fundamentally从根本上, the reason原因 we got to the moon月亮 is,
626
1851000
3000
总之,人类能登上月球
31:12
we didn't listen to the economists经济学家. Thank you very much.
627
1854000
3000
就是因为当初没有听经济学家的意见,谢谢。
31:15
(Applause掌声)
628
1857000
5000
掌声
31:20
DGDG: Well, no, it's a great point. It remains遗迹 to be seen看到
629
1862000
3000
好,你的观点很好。但是有件事还有待考察:
31:23
whether是否 the joy喜悦 of anticipation预期 is exactly究竟 equaled追平
630
1865000
4000
预期中奖的快乐是不是和
31:27
by the amount of disappointment失望 after the lottery抽奖. Because remember记得,
631
1869000
3000
开奖之后的“沮丧”的程度相等。请记住:
31:30
people who didn't buy购买 tickets门票 don't feel awful可怕 the next下一个 day either,
632
1872000
3000
不买彩票的人开奖后第二天不会觉得那么“沮丧”
31:33
even though虽然 they don't feel great during the drawing画画.
633
1875000
2000
即使在开奖的瞬间也不会感觉那么好
31:35
I would disagree不同意 that people know they're not going to win赢得.
634
1877000
2000
我不同意那些人知道自己肯定会输
31:37
I think they think it's unlikely不会, but it could happen发生,
635
1879000
3000
也许他们觉得可能性不大,但还是可能发生的
31:40
which哪一个 is why they prefer比较喜欢 that to the flushing冲洗.
636
1882000
3000
所以他们更愿意去买彩票而不是冲厕所
31:43
But certainly当然 I see your point: that there can be
637
1885000
3000
但是我也看到了你的观点:确实,
31:46
some utility效用 to buying购买 a lottery抽奖 ticket other than winning胜利.
638
1888000
4000
除了中奖之外买彩票是会给人们带来一定的效用的
31:50
Now, I think there's many许多 good reasons原因 not to listen to economists经济学家.
639
1892000
3000
其实还有很多很好的理由不听经济学家的
31:53
That isn't one of them, for me, but there's many许多 others其他.
640
1895000
3000
对我来说这不是其中一个,但确实还有很多别的理由
31:56
CACA: Last question.
641
1898000
2000
最后一个问题
31:58
Aubrey奥布里 de Grey灰色: My name's名字的 Aubrey奥布里 de Grey灰色, from Cambridge剑桥.
642
1900000
3000
我叫Aubrey de Grey,剑桥的
32:01
I work on the thing that kills杀死 more people than anything else其他 kills杀死 --
643
1903000
4000
我所研究的东西比其他所有东西都更能致人死亡
32:05
I work on aging老化 -- and I'm interested有兴趣 in doing something about it,
644
1907000
2000
我研究衰老--非常希望能在这个领域做些什么
32:07
as we'll all hear tomorrow明天.
645
1909000
1000
就像明天大家会听到的
32:08
I very much resonate谐振 with what you're saying,
646
1910000
3000
我很认同你的观点
32:11
because it seems似乎 to me that the problem问题
647
1913000
2000
因为在我看来
32:13
with getting得到 people interested有兴趣 in doing anything about aging老化
648
1915000
3000
人们之所以不太关心衰老的问题
32:16
is that by the time aging老化 is about to kill you it looks容貌 like cancer癌症
649
1918000
3000
是因为衰老在即将夺去生命的时候,它看起来像癌症
32:19
or heart disease疾病 or whatever随你. Do you have any advice忠告?
650
1921000
3000
或者心脏病什么的。你有什么建议吗?
32:22
(Laughter笑声)
651
1924000
3000
笑声
32:25
DGDG: For you or for them?
652
1927000
1000
建议是给你还是给他们?
32:26
AdGADG: In persuading说服 them.
653
1928000
1000
说服他们
32:27
DGDG: Ah, for you in persuading说服 them.
654
1929000
2000
如果让你说服他们
32:29
Well, it's notoriously臭名昭著 difficult to get people to be farsighted.
655
1931000
3000
让人们有远见是一件非常困难的事情
32:32
But one thing that psychologists心理学家 have tried试着 that seems似乎 to work
656
1934000
4000
但是,有一件事情心理学家试过,效果还不错
32:36
is to get people to imagine想像 the future未来 more vividly生动地.
657
1938000
3000
那就是让人们更生动、更真实地设想未来
32:39
One of the problems问题 with making制造 decisions决定 about the far future未来
658
1941000
3000
做未来的决策和当前决策的问题
32:42
and the near future未来 is that we imagine想像 the near future未来
659
1944000
3000
在于人们对当前的预期
32:45
much more vividly生动地 than the far future未来.
660
1947000
2000
要比未来生动、真实的多
32:47
To the extent程度 that you can equalize均衡 the amount of detail详情
661
1949000
4000
真实你可以找到很多细节
32:51
that people put into the mental心理 representations交涉
662
1953000
2000
帮助人们想象
32:53
of near and far future未来, people begin开始 to make decisions决定
663
1955000
2000
短期和长期的环境,人们开始用同样
32:55
about the two in the same相同 way.
664
1957000
2000
的方式对现在和未来做决定
32:57
So, would you like to have an extra额外 100,000 dollars美元 when you're 65
665
1959000
5000
你愿意在65随地时候得到额外的100000美元吗?
33:02
is a question that's very different不同 than,
666
1964000
1000
这个问题很复杂,当你设想
33:03
imagine想像 who you'll你会 be when you're 65: will you be living活的,
667
1965000
4000
你65岁的时候是什么人,是否还活着
33:07
what will you look like, how much hair头发 will you have,
668
1969000
2000
会喜欢什么东西,会留多少头发
33:09
who will you be living活的 with.
669
1971000
1000
和什么人生活在一起
33:10
Once一旦 we have all the details细节 of that imaginary假想 scenario脚本,
670
1972000
3000
一旦我们想清楚了所有未来情景下的细节
33:13
suddenly突然 we feel like it might威力 be important重要 to save保存
671
1975000
2000
我们会忽然感觉,攒钱是很重要的
33:15
so that that guy has a little retirement退休 money.
672
1977000
3000
所以退休的时候会有钱
33:18
But these are tricks技巧 around the margins利润率.
673
1980000
2000
但这也不能一概而论
33:20
I think in general一般 you're battling作战 a very fundamental基本的 human人的 tendency趋势,
674
1982000
3000
我感觉总的来说你在和最基本的人性做斗争
33:23
which哪一个 is to say, "I'm here today今天,
675
1985000
2000
那就是:我今天在这里
33:25
and so now is more important重要 than later后来."
676
1987000
3000
所以现在比未来更重要
33:28
CACA: Dan, thank you. Members会员 of the audience听众,
677
1990000
2000
谢谢你 Dan,谢谢大家
33:30
that was a fantastic奇妙 session会议. Thank you.
678
1992000
1000
这段演讲真是很精彩,谢谢大家。
33:31
(Applause掌声)
679
1993000
2000
掌声
Translated by tian zeng
Reviewed by Vivian Lee

▲Back to top

ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Dan Gilbert - Psychologist; happiness expert
Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert says our beliefs about what will make us happy are often wrong -- a premise he supports with intriguing research, and explains in his accessible and unexpectedly funny book, Stumbling on Happiness.

Why you should listen

Dan Gilbert believes that, in our ardent, lifelong pursuit of happiness, most of us have the wrong map. In the same way that optical illusions fool our eyes -- and fool everyone's eyes in the same way -- Gilbert argues that our brains systematically misjudge what will make us happy. And these quirks in our cognition make humans very poor predictors of our own bliss.

The premise of his current research -- that our assumptions about what will make us happy are often wrong -- is supported with clinical research drawn from psychology and neuroscience. But his delivery is what sets him apart. His engaging -- and often hilarious -- style pokes fun at typical human behavior and invokes pop-culture references everyone can relate to. This winning style translates also to Gilbert's writing, which is lucid, approachable and laugh-out-loud funny. The immensely readable Stumbling on Happiness, published in 2006, became a New York Times bestseller and has been translated into 20 languages.

In fact, the title of his book could be drawn from his own life. At 19, he was a high school dropout with dreams of writing science fiction. When a creative writing class at his community college was full, he enrolled in the only available course: psychology. He found his passion there, earned a doctorate in social psychology in 1985 at Princeton, and has since won a Guggenheim Fellowship and the Phi Beta Kappa teaching prize for his work at Harvard. He has written essays and articles for The New York Times, Time and even Starbucks, while continuing his research into happiness at his Hedonic Psychology Laboratory.

More profile about the speaker
Dan Gilbert | 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