TED2003
Dan Dennett: The illusion of consciousness
丹•丹尼特 <意識>
Filmed:
Readability: 3.2
3,868,782 views
哲學家丹•丹尼特不但有力地指出我們並不了解自己的意識，還告訴我們大腦多半在愚弄我們。
Dan Dennett - Philosopher, cognitive scientist
Dan Dennett thinks that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes. Full bio
Dan Dennett thinks that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:26
So I'm going to speak about a problem that I have
0
1000
3000
我想談談我的一個問題
00:29
and that's that I'm a philosopher.
1
4000
3000
那就是：我是個哲學家
00:32
(Laughter)
2
7000
2000
（眾笑）
00:34
When I go to a party and people ask me what do I do
3
9000
3000
派對上人家問我做什麼的
00:37
and I say, "I'm a professor," their eyes glaze over.
4
12000
5000
我答我是教授，他們的眼睛立刻失神
00:42
When I go to an academic cocktail party
5
17000
2000
我去參加學術酒會
00:44
and there are all the professors around, they ask me what field I'm in
6
19000
4000
周圍都是教授，他們問我的專業
00:48
and I say, "philosophy" -- their eyes glaze over.
7
23000
3000
我答哲學，他們的眼睛立刻失神
00:51
(Laughter)
8
26000
2000
（眾笑）
00:53
When I go to a philosopher's party
9
28000
3000
我去哲學家的派對
00:56
(Laughter)
10
31000
3000
（眾笑）
00:59
and they ask me what I work on and I say, "consciousness,"
11
34000
4000
他們問我研究什麼，我答意識
01:03
their eyes don't glaze over -- their lips curl into a snarl.
12
38000
5000
他們的眼睛沒有失神，而是唇帶鄙夷
01:08
(Laughter)
13
43000
1000
（眾笑）
01:09
And I get hoots of derision and cackles and growls
14
44000
6000
我得到的是訕笑和怪叫
01:15
because they think, "That's impossible! You can't explain consciousness."
15
50000
5000
因為他們認為「這怎麼可能！意識是無法解釋的。」
01:20
The very chutzpah of somebody thinking
16
55000
2000
那些人傲慢地認為
01:22
that you could explain consciousness is just out of the question.
17
57000
4000
你根本不可能解釋意識
01:26
My late, lamented friend Bob Nozick, a fine philosopher,
18
61000
4000
我不久前過世的朋友羅伯特·諾齊克是一位優秀的哲學家
01:30
in one of his books, "Philosophical Explanations,"
19
65000
4000
在他的《哲學性的解釋》一書中
01:34
is commenting on the ethos of philosophy --
20
69000
5000
評論了哲學的特質
01:39
the way philosophers go about their business.
21
74000
2000
即哲學家對待其專業的態度
01:41
And he says, you know, "Philosophers love rational argument."
22
76000
4000
他說「哲學家喜歡理性的論述」
01:45
And he says, "It seems as if the ideal argument
23
80000
2000
他又說「對多數的哲學家而言
01:47
for most philosophers is you give your audience the premises
24
82000
6000
最佳的論述似乎是先為聽眾設定前提
01:53
and then you give them the inferences and the conclusion,
25
88000
5000
接下來是邏輯推演，然後得到結論
01:58
and if they don't accept the conclusion, they die.
26
93000
4000
他們不接受結論的話，他們就死定了
02:02
Their heads explode." The idea is to have an argument
27
97000
3000
腦袋開花了。」重點是
02:05
that is so powerful that it knocks out your opponents.
28
100000
4000
論述要強得能把對手完全擊倒
02:09
But in fact that doesn't change people's minds at all.
29
104000
3000
但其實這根本改變不了別人的想法
02:12
It's very hard to change people's minds
30
107000
1000
要改變別人對意識的想法
02:13
about something like consciousness,
31
108000
2000
確實很難
02:15
and I finally figured out the reason for that.
32
110000
5000
我終於找到為何如此的原因
02:20
The reason for that is that everybody's an expert on consciousness.
33
115000
4000
原因就是人人都是意識的專家
02:24
We heard the other day that everybody's got a strong opinion about video games.
34
119000
4000
我們前些時候聽說人人對電玩都很有看法
02:28
They all have an idea for a video game, even if they're not experts.
35
123000
3000
儘管不是專家，大家都對電玩有點認識
02:31
But they don't consider themselves experts on video games;
36
126000
3000
也不認為自己是電玩專家
02:34
they've just got strong opinions.
37
129000
1000
卻都很有自己的看法
02:35
I'm sure that people here who work on, say, climate change
38
130000
5000
我敢說這裡研究氣候變遷、全球暖化
02:40
and global warming, or on the future of the Internet,
39
135000
5000
或網際網路之未來的人都會遇到
02:45
encounter people who have very strong opinions
40
140000
2000
對將會發生的事
02:47
about what's going to happen next.
41
142000
3000
都很有看法的人
02:50
But they probably don't think of these opinions as expertise.
42
145000
4000
但多半不會把那些當成專業意見
02:54
They're just strongly held opinions.
43
149000
2000
那些只算是強烈的看法
02:56
But with regard to consciousness, people seem to think,
44
151000
4000
但說到意識，大家都覺得
03:00
each of us seems to think, "I am an expert.
45
155000
3000
我們每個人都似乎認為「我就是專家
03:03
Simply by being conscious, I know all about this."
46
158000
3000
因為我有意識，所以我清楚這個。」
03:06
And so, you tell them your theory and they say,
47
161000
2000
因此，你告訴他們你的理論
03:08
"No, no, that's not the way consciousness is!
48
163000
1000
他們說：「不對
03:09
No, you've got it all wrong."
49
164000
2000
意識不是這樣，你全搞錯了。」
03:11
And they say this with an amazing confidence.
50
166000
4000
他們還說得自信滿滿的
03:15
And so what I'm going to try to do today
51
170000
2000
那麼，我今天要來
03:17
is to shake your confidence. Because I know the feeling --
52
172000
3000
動搖你的信心－因為我知道那種感覺
03:20
I can feel it myself.
53
175000
2000
我自己也有那種感覺
03:22
I want to shake your confidence that you know your own innermost minds --
54
177000
6000
我要動搖你自以為了解自己靈魂深處的信心
03:28
that you are, yourselves, authoritative about your own consciousness.
55
183000
5000
我要動搖你自以為能控制你自己的意識的信心
03:33
That's the order of the day here.
56
188000
3000
這就是今天的主題
03:36
Now, this nice picture shows a thought-balloon, a thought-bubble.
57
191000
3000
看，這圖片有個思想框
03:39
I think everybody understands what that means.
58
194000
2000
我想大家都知道這是什麼
03:41
That's supposed to exhibit the stream of consciousness.
59
196000
3000
這是用來表示意識流
03:44
This is my favorite picture of consciousness that's ever been done.
60
199000
2000
這是我最喜歡的一張圖片
03:46
It's a Saul Steinberg of course -- it was a New Yorker cover.
61
201000
3000
這是索爾•斯坦伯格的作品－紐約客的封面
03:49
And this fellow here is looking at the painting by Braque.
62
204000
5000
這位朋友看著布拉克的畫作
03:54
That reminds him of the word baroque, barrack, bark, poodle,
63
209000
4000
讓他想起巴洛克，再想到軍營、狗吠、貴婦犬、
03:58
Suzanne R. -- he's off to the races.
64
213000
2000
蘇珊娜－就這樣一直想下去
04:00
There's a wonderful stream of consciousness here
65
215000
4000
這是一串精彩的意識流
04:04
and if you follow it along, you learn a lot about this man.
66
219000
4000
你一直看下去就會知道這個人的許多事
04:08
What I particularly like about this picture, too,
67
223000
2000
這張圖還讓我特別喜歡的是
04:10
is that Steinberg has rendered the guy
68
225000
2000
斯坦伯格描繪這個人時
04:12
in this sort of pointillist style.
69
227000
3000
用了點彩的畫法
04:15
Which reminds us, as Rod Brooks was saying yesterday:
70
230000
3000
讓人想到如同羅德•布洛斯昨天所說的：
04:18
what we are, what each of us is -- what you are, what I am --
71
233000
4000
我們每個人，無論你我都是
04:22
is approximately 100 trillion little cellular robots.
72
237000
6000
大約100萬億個細胞所組成的
04:28
That's what we're made of.
73
243000
2000
組成我們的就是細胞
04:30
No other ingredients at all. We're just made of cells, about 100 trillion of them.
74
245000
4000
再沒有其他的材料，不過是細胞，大約100萬億個
04:34
Not a single one of those cells is conscious;
75
249000
2000
裡頭沒有一個有意識
04:36
not a single one of those cells knows who you are, or cares.
76
251000
5000
沒有任何一個細胞會知道或在乎你是誰
04:41
Somehow, we have to explain
77
256000
2000
我們似乎必須解釋
04:43
how when you put together teams, armies, battalions
78
258000
4000
這成億上兆自動機式無意識的細胞
04:47
of hundreds of millions of little robotic unconscious cells --
79
262000
4000
各個都跟細菌沒有什麼區別
04:51
not so different really from a bacterium, each one of them --
80
266000
4000
放在一起卻變成這樣
04:55
the result is this. I mean, just look at it.
81
270000
4000
我是說，你看看這個
04:59
The content -- there's color, there's ideas, there's memories,
82
274000
4000
看這些內容－有顏色、有想法、有回憶
05:03
there's history. And somehow all that content of consciousness
83
278000
4000
也有歷史。這些意識的內容
05:07
is accomplished by the busy activity of those hoards of neurons.
84
282000
5000
似乎都來自忙碌活動中的神經元－怎會如此？
05:12
How is that possible? Many people just think it isn't possible at all.
85
287000
4000
許多人認為根本不可能
05:16
They think, "No, there can't be any
86
291000
2000
他們認為根本不會有
05:18
sort of naturalistic explanation of consciousness."
87
293000
4000
自然主義的方法可以解釋意識
05:22
This is a lovely book by a friend of mine named Lee Siegel,
88
297000
3000
我的朋友里•希格爾寫了一本好書
05:25
who's a professor of religion, actually, at the University of Hawaii,
89
300000
3000
他是夏威夷大學的宗教學教授
05:28
and he's an expert magician, and an expert
90
303000
2000
他是魔術專家
05:30
on the street magic of India, which is what this book is about,
91
305000
4000
精通印度的街頭魔術，他的書就是寫這個
05:34
"Net of Magic."
92
309000
2000
「魔術網」
05:36
And there's a passage in it which I would love to share with you.
93
311000
3000
我想跟大家分享這一段話
05:39
It speaks so eloquently to the problem.
94
314000
6000
他寫這個問題寫得太好了
05:45
"'I'm writing a book on magic,' I explain, and I'm asked, 'Real magic?'
95
320000
5000
他說：這是關於魔術的書，人家問我「真的魔術嗎？」
05:50
By 'real magic,' people mean miracles,
96
325000
2000
所謂真的魔術，意思是奇蹟
05:52
thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers.
97
327000
2000
幻術、超自然力量
05:54
'No,' I answer. 'Conjuring tricks, not real magic.'
98
329000
4000
我說「不是，是障眼法，不是真的魔術」
05:58
'Real magic,' in other words, refers to the magic that is not real;
99
333000
4000
這麼說，真的魔術指的並不是真的魔術
06:02
while the magic that is real, that can actually be done, is not real magic."
100
337000
5000
做得出的真魔術，其實並非真的魔術
06:07
(Laughter)
101
342000
4000
（眾笑）
06:11
Now, that's the way a lot of people feel about consciousness.
102
346000
4000
這就是許多人對意識的感覺
06:15
(Laughter)
103
350000
1000
（眾笑）
06:16
Real consciousness is not a bag of tricks.
104
351000
2000
真的意識不是一堆把戲
06:18
If you're going to explain this as a bag of tricks,
105
353000
2000
若把它解釋成一堆把戲
06:20
then it's not real consciousness, whatever it is.
106
355000
3000
那它是什麼都好，但不是真正的意識
06:23
And, as Marvin said, and as other people have said,
107
358000
6000
像馬文還有其他人說
06:29
"Consciousness is a bag of tricks."
108
364000
3000
「意識是一堆把戲」
06:32
This means that a lot of people are just left completely dissatisfied
109
367000
5000
這也就是說，當我嘗試解說意識時
06:37
and incredulous when I attempt to explain consciousness.
110
372000
3000
很多人完全不能滿意也不能相信
06:40
So this is the problem. So I have to
111
375000
3000
這就是我說的問題了。因此我嘗試
06:43
do a little bit of the sort of work
112
378000
3000
做一點會讓很多人不高興的事
06:46
that a lot of you won't like,
113
381000
4000
就像大家不喜歡看到
06:50
for the same reason that you don't like to see
114
385000
2000
某個魔術把戲
06:52
a magic trick explained to you.
115
387000
2000
被揭穿一樣
06:54
How many of you here, if somebody -- some smart aleck --
116
389000
4000
你們這裡－如果有人自作聰明要解釋
06:58
starts telling you how a particular magic trick is done,
117
393000
3000
某個魔術背後是怎樣弄的－
07:01
you sort of want to block your ears and say, "No, no, I don't want to know!
118
396000
3000
有多少人會想按住耳朵說「我不想知道!
07:04
Don't take the thrill of it away. I'd rather be mystified.
119
399000
3000
別掃興，我寧可不知道
07:07
Don't tell me the answer."
120
402000
3000
不要告訴我」
07:10
A lot of people feel that way about consciousness, I've discovered.
121
405000
3000
我發現很多人對「意識」就是這樣
07:13
And I'm sorry if I impose some clarity, some understanding on you.
122
408000
6000
抱歉，如果我說得太清楚、太明白
07:19
You'd better leave now if you don't want to know some of these tricks.
123
414000
5000
而你不想知道這些把戲，最好現在就走
07:24
But I'm not going to explain it all to you.
124
419000
4000
但我也不會全都解釋給你們聽
07:28
I'm going to do what philosophers do.
125
423000
3000
我會像哲學家那樣做
07:31
Here's how a philosopher explains the sawing-the-lady-in-half trick.
126
426000
6000
哲學家會這樣解釋刀鋸美人的魔術
07:37
You know the sawing-the-lady-in-half trick?
127
432000
2000
大家都知道「刀鋸美人」吧？
07:39
The philosopher says, "I'm going to explain to you how that's done.
128
434000
4000
哲學家會說「我來給你解釋這是怎麼做的
07:43
You see, the magician doesn't really saw the lady in half."
129
438000
5000
其實魔術師並沒有真的把美人鋸成兩半
07:48
(Laughter)
130
443000
2000
（眾笑）
07:50
"He merely makes you think that he does."
131
445000
4000
他只是讓你以為他真的做了
07:54
And you say, "Yes, and how does he do that?"
132
449000
1000
那你說「對，那他是怎麼做到的？」
07:55
He says, "Oh, that's not my department, I'm sorry."
133
450000
2000
哲學家說「喔，對不起，這不干我們學系的事」
07:57
(Laughter)
134
452000
5000
（眾笑）
08:02
So now I'm going to illustrate how philosophers explain consciousness.
135
457000
3000
我現在告訴各位哲學家怎麼解釋意識
08:05
But I'm going to try to also show you
136
460000
3000
但我也會嘗試讓大家明白
08:08
that consciousness isn't quite as marvelous --
137
463000
3000
意識並不那麼令人驚訝
08:11
your own consciousness isn't quite as wonderful --
138
466000
2000
你擁有的意識也不那麼奇妙
08:13
as you may have thought it is.
139
468000
2000
不像你原本可能以為的那樣
08:15
This is something, by the way, that Lee Siegel talks about in his book.
140
470000
4000
順道說，里•席格爾在他的書裡也提到這點
08:19
He marvels at how he'll do a magic show, and afterwards
141
474000
4000
他的魔術令人驚嘆，後來觀眾也以為
08:23
people will swear they saw him do X, Y, and Z. He never did those things.
142
478000
4000
他做了這個那個的，但其實他什麼都沒有做
08:27
He didn't even try to do those things.
143
482000
2000
他甚至試都沒試過做那些事
08:29
People's memories inflate what they think they saw.
144
484000
4000
人的記憶會把自以為看見的東西誇大
08:33
And the same is true of consciousness.
145
488000
3000
意識的情況也是如此
08:36
Now, let's see if this will work. All right. Let's just watch this.
146
491000
7000
我們來看這個行不行。好，我們看看這個
08:43
Watch it carefully.
147
498000
1000
仔細看
08:56
I'm working with a young computer-animator documentarian
148
511000
3000
我跟一位年青的電腦動畫製作人一起工作
08:59
named Nick Deamer, and this is a little demo that he's done for me,
149
514000
5000
他叫尼克•甸馬，這是他替我做的短片
09:04
part of a larger project some of you may be interested in.
150
519000
3000
這是個大計畫的一部分，你們有些人也許會有興趣
09:07
We're looking for a backer.
151
522000
3000
我們在找贊助人
09:10
It's a feature-length documentary on consciousness.
152
525000
4000
這是一部關於意識的紀錄長片
09:14
OK, now, you all saw what changed, right?
153
529000
2000
好，大家都看到是什麼變了，是吧?
09:20
How many of you noticed that every one of those squares changed color?
154
535000
5000
你們有幾位發現每個方形都變了顏色的？
09:25
Every one. I'll just show you by running it again.
155
540000
4000
大家都發現了。那我再播放一次
09:34
Even when you know that they're all going to change color,
156
549000
5000
儘管你知道方塊會變色
09:39
it's very hard to notice. You have to really concentrate
157
554000
4000
還是很難注意到，確實要很專注
09:43
to pick up any of the changes at all.
158
558000
3000
才能看到任何變化
09:46
Now, this is an example -- one of many --
159
561000
5000
這是目前相當熱門研究這種現象的
09:51
of a phenomenon that's now being studied quite a bit.
160
566000
2000
許多例子中的一個
09:53
It's one that I predicted in the last page or two of my
161
568000
4000
這是我1991年出版的書「意識全解」
09:57
1991 book, "Consciousness Explained,"
162
572000
2000
最後一兩頁所預測的
09:59
where I said if you did experiments of this sort,
163
574000
3000
我說，如果你做這樣的實驗
10:02
you'd find that people were unable to pick up really large changes.
164
577000
3000
你會發現人們無法察覺真正的大變化
10:05
If there's time at the end,
165
580000
2000
如果最後還有時間
10:07
I'll show you the much more dramatic case.
166
582000
3000
我讓大家看一個更極端的情況
10:10
Now, how can it be that there are all those changes going on,
167
585000
5000
那麼，為什麼有那麼多變化
10:15
and that we're not aware of them?
168
590000
3000
我們卻注意不到？
10:18
Well, earlier today, Jeff Hawkins mentioned the way your eye saccades,
169
593000
5000
哲夫•霍金斯今天稍早談過眼球的掃視
10:23
the way your eye moves around three or four times a second.
170
598000
3000
他說我們的眼球一秒鐘移動三四次
10:26
He didn't mention the speed. Your eye is constantly in motion,
171
601000
3000
但他沒提速度，眼睛不斷移動就是
10:29
moving around, looking at eyes, noses, elbows,
172
604000
3000
看著其他的眼睛、鼻子、手肘
10:32
looking at interesting things in the world.
173
607000
2000
看著世上有趣的事情
10:34
And where your eye isn't looking,
174
609000
2000
你的眼沒有看著的地方
10:36
you're remarkably impoverished in your vision.
175
611000
3000
你看得見的其實很少
10:39
That's because the foveal part of your eye,
176
614000
3000
因為眼睛的視網膜中央窩
10:42
which is the high-resolution part,
177
617000
2000
負責高解析影像的部位
10:44
is only about the size of your thumbnail held at arms length.
178
619000
3000
就像你伸直手範圍內的拇指那樣大小
10:47
That's the detail part.
179
622000
2000
那就是解析細微的部位
10:49
It doesn't seem that way, does it?
180
624000
3000
想不到是這樣吧?
10:52
It doesn't seem that way, but that's the way it is.
181
627000
2000
想不到，但事實就是如此
10:54
You're getting in a lot less information than you think.
182
629000
4000
你得到的資訊比你所以為的少
10:58
Here's a completely different effect. This is a painting by Bellotto.
183
633000
6000
以下是另一種效應，請看這幅貝洛托的畫作
11:04
It's in the museum in North Carolina.
184
639000
2000
在北卡羅萊納州美術館展出
11:06
Bellotto was a student of Canaletto's.
185
641000
3000
貝洛托是加納萊托的學生
11:09
And I love paintings like that --
186
644000
1000
我很喜歡這類作品
11:10
the painting is actually about as big as it is right here.
187
645000
4000
它的大小就像你們看見那樣
11:14
And I love Canalettos, because Canaletto has this fantastic detail,
188
649000
3000
我也很喜歡加納萊托，他的畫著重細節
11:17
and you can get right up
189
652000
3000
你可以靠近
11:20
and see all the details on the painting.
190
655000
3000
看到畫裡的細節
11:23
And I started across the hall in North Carolina,
191
658000
5000
我先是從畫廊的另一邊看到它
11:28
because I thought it was probably a Canaletto,
192
663000
2000
我以為它是加納萊托的畫作
11:30
and would have all that in detail.
193
665000
2000
會有許多細節
11:32
And I noticed that on the bridge there, there's a lot of people --
194
667000
3000
我發現橋上有很多人
11:35
you can just barely see them walking across the bridge.
195
670000
3000
你可以看見他們過橋
11:38
And I thought as I got closer
196
673000
1000
我以為我走近
11:39
I would be able to see all the detail of most people,
197
674000
3000
可以看到那些人的細節
11:42
see their clothes, and so forth.
198
677000
2000
他們的衣服和其他的東西
11:44
And as I got closer and closer, I actually screamed.
199
679000
4000
我走近這幅畫，卻叫出來了
11:48
I yelled out because when I got closer,
200
683000
2000
我叫了，因為我走近時
11:50
I found the detail wasn't there at all.
201
685000
4000
發現那裡沒有什麼細節
11:54
There were just little artfully placed blobs of paint.
202
689000
4000
只是一片片鋪陳亮麗的顏料
11:58
And as I walked towards the picture,
203
693000
3000
我慢慢走上前
12:01
I was expecting detail that wasn't there.
204
696000
3000
預期找到那些不存在的細節
12:04
The artist had very cleverly suggested people and clothes
205
699000
5000
畫家巧妙地暗示那裡有人、衣服
12:09
and wagons and all sorts of things,
206
704000
3000
還有車和其他的東西
12:12
and my brain had taken the suggestion.
207
707000
3000
而我的腦袋接受了這樣的暗示
12:15
You're familiar with a more recent technology, which is -- There,
208
710000
6000
這裡有個新的技術，大家可能比較熟悉
12:21
you can get a better view of the blobs.
209
716000
2000
這樣色塊會比較容易看到
12:23
See, when you get close
210
718000
2000
看到嗎？你走近了
12:25
they're really just blobs of paint.
211
720000
5000
看到的就只是一些色塊
12:30
You will have seen something like this -- this is the reverse effect.
212
725000
6000
大家可能看過這個－恰恰相反的效應
12:44
I'll just give that to you one more time.
213
739000
3000
我們再看一次
12:47
Now, what does your brain do when it takes the suggestion?
214
742000
7000
那麼，你的腦袋做了什麼來接受暗示呢？
12:54
When an artful blob of paint or two, by an artist,
215
749000
5000
當畫家添上一兩片的色塊
12:59
suggests a person -- say, one of
216
754000
6000
暗示出有一個人－比方像馬文·閔斯基
13:05
Marvin Minsky's little society of mind --
217
760000
2000
說的那個意識群體－
13:07
do they send little painters out to fill in all the details in your brain somewhere?
218
762000
5000
畫裡是不是有小小的畫家跑到我們腦袋、填上細節呢?
13:12
I don't think so. Not a chance. But then, how on Earth is it done?
219
767000
5000
我不認為如此，不可能。可是這怎發生的呢？
13:17
Well, remember the philosopher's explanation of the lady?
220
772000
5000
好，還記得哲學家如何解釋刀鋸美人嗎？
13:22
It's the same thing.
221
777000
3000
道理一樣
13:25
The brain just makes you think that it's got the detail there.
222
780000
3000
大腦只是讓你以為有細節
13:28
You think the detail's there, but it isn't there.
223
783000
3000
你以為有，不是真的有
13:31
The brain isn't actually putting the detail in your head at all.
224
786000
3000
大腦並沒有真的把細節填上去
13:34
It's just making you expect the detail.
225
789000
3000
它只是讓你預期那裡會有細節
13:37
Let's just do this experiment very quickly.
226
792000
3000
我們很快做個實驗
13:40
Is the shape on the left the same as the shape on the right, rotated?
227
795000
5000
右邊的圖案是不是跟左邊一樣，只是轉了向？
13:45
Yes.
228
800000
2000
是
13:47
How many of you did it by rotating the one on the left
229
802000
2000
在座有幾位想像
13:49
in your mind's eye, to see if it matched up with the one on the right?
230
804000
3000
把左邊的轉過來看跟右邊的是否一樣？
13:52
How many of you rotated the one on the right? OK.
231
807000
4000
有幾位是把右邊的轉過來的？好
13:56
How do you know that's what you did?
232
811000
2000
你怎麼知道你這麼做了？
13:58
(Laughter)
233
813000
3000
（眾笑）
14:01
There's in fact been a very interesting debate
234
816000
2000
有一場論戰非常有趣
14:03
raging for over 20 years in cognitive science --
235
818000
3000
在認知科學界激辯了20多年
14:06
various experiments started by Roger Shepherd,
236
821000
2000
羅傑‧舍帕德發明了一些實驗
14:08
who measured the angular velocity of rotation of mental images.
237
823000
5000
他要量度思維圖像的角度轉向速度
14:13
Yes, it's possible to do that.
238
828000
2000
這確實可以量度
14:15
But the details of the process are still in significant controversy.
239
830000
7000
但實驗過程的細節還是很有爭議
14:22
And if you read that literature, one of the things
240
837000
3000
如果你閱讀該文獻，你必須接受的
14:25
that you really have to come to terms with is
241
840000
3000
事實之一是：即使你是受試者
14:28
even when you're the subject in the experiment, you don't know.
242
843000
2000
你不會知道
14:30
You don't know how you do it.
243
845000
2000
你不會知道你怎麼做的
14:32
You just know that you have certain beliefs.
244
847000
3000
你只知道你有一些想法
14:35
And they come in a certain order, at a certain time.
245
850000
3000
在特定的時間按照一定的順序出現
14:38
And what explains the fact that that's what you think?
246
853000
2000
是什麼讓你認為
14:40
Well, that's where you have to go backstage and ask the magician.
247
855000
4000
那些是你所想的？這你得問問後台的魔術師
14:44
This is a figure that I love: Bradley, Petrie, and Dumais.
248
859000
4000
我很喜歡這個圖形：伯里、皮特和杜邁作的
14:48
You may think that I've cheated,
249
863000
2000
你可能以為我作弊
14:50
that I've put a little whiter-than-white boundary there.
250
865000
5000
故意把邊線畫得要白一點
14:55
How many of you see that sort of boundary,
251
870000
2000
有幾位看得到那種邊界？
14:57
with the Necker cube floating in front of the circles?
252
872000
3000
黑色圓形前面漂浮著奈克方塊的那種？
15:00
Can you see it?
253
875000
2000
各位看得到嗎?
15:02
Well, you know, in effect, the boundary's really there, in a certain sense.
254
877000
5000
這種邊界在某種意義下確實存在
15:07
Your brain is actually computing that boundary,
255
882000
3000
大腦確實計算著這種邊界
15:10
the boundary that goes right there.
256
885000
5000
這個邊界就在這裡
15:15
But now, notice there are two ways of seeing the cube, right?
257
890000
2000
不過，其實有兩種方法觀看方塊，是吧？
15:17
It's a Necker cube.
258
892000
2000
這就是奈克方塊
15:19
Everybody can see the two ways of seeing the cube? OK.
259
894000
4000
大家都看出方塊的兩種方法了吧？
15:23
Can you see the four ways of seeing the cube?
260
898000
4000
那看得出四種方法嗎?
15:27
Because there's another way of seeing it.
261
902000
2000
因為還有另一種方法
15:29
If you're seeing it as a cube floating in front of some circles,
262
904000
3000
如果你看它是圓形前面的方塊－黑色圓形
15:32
some black circles, there's another way of seeing it.
263
907000
3000
那麼就還有另一種觀看的方法
15:35
As a cube, on a black background,
264
910000
2000
那是在黑色背景上的方塊
15:37
as seen through a piece of Swiss cheese.
265
912000
2000
通過瑞士乾酪看到的方塊
15:39
(Laughter)
266
914000
3000
（眾笑）
15:42
Can you get it? How many of you can't get it? That'll help.
267
917000
6000
看到了嗎？有幾位看不到？這樣也許就看到了
15:48
(Laughter)
268
923000
2000
（眾笑）
15:50
Now you can get it. These are two very different phenomena.
269
925000
5000
現在大家都看到了。這是兩種非常不同的現象
15:55
When you see the cube one way, behind the screen,
270
930000
6000
當你把方塊看成是在白幕後
16:01
those boundaries go away.
271
936000
2000
那些邊界就消失了
16:03
But there's still a sort of filling in, as we can tell if we look at this.
272
938000
5000
但腦袋還是填上了些什麼，看看這個就知道
16:08
We don't have any trouble seeing the cube, but where does the color change?
273
943000
4000
毫無問題看得見方塊，但顏色在哪裡改變的呢？
16:12
Does your brain have to send little painters in there?
274
947000
3000
大腦必須派出小畫家在那裡填色的嗎？
16:15
The purple-painters and the green-painters
275
950000
2000
填紫色的要跟填綠色的
16:17
fight over who's going to paint that bit behind the curtain? No.
276
952000
3000
在幕後打架決定誰填色的嗎？不會的
16:20
Your brain just lets it go. The brain doesn't need to fill that in.
277
955000
4000
腦袋不管這些，腦袋不需要填色
16:29
When I first started talking about
278
964000
3000
我先前提到一張圖片
16:32
the Bradley, Petrie, Dumais example that you just saw --
279
967000
4000
剛才看到的伯里、皮特和杜邁那個例子
16:36
I'll go back to it, this one --
280
971000
4000
我們再來看一下這一張
16:40
I said that there was no filling-in behind there.
281
975000
7000
我先前說了這後面沒有填色
16:47
And I supposed that that was just a flat truth, always true.
282
982000
3000
我也假定這就是真的
16:50
But Rob Van Lier has recently shown that it isn't.
283
985000
5000
但羅勃‧范里爾最近卻證明這不是真的
16:55
Now, if you think you see some pale yellow --
284
990000
5000
如果你覺得你看見的是淡黃色
17:00
I'll run this a few more times.
285
995000
2000
－我來多播放幾次－
17:02
Look in the gray areas,
286
997000
4000
看著灰色的地方
17:06
and see if you seem to see something sort of shadowy moving in there --
287
1001000
5000
看看你是否好像看到那裡有些陰影在動？
17:11
yeah, it's amazing. There's nothing there. It's no trick.
288
1006000
7000
沒錯！在動! 很神奇－但那裡什麼都沒有，沒有作弊
17:18
["Failure to Detect Changes in Scenes" slide]
289
1013000
6000
[「景象變化的失察」]
17:24
This is Ron Rensink's work, which was in some degree
290
1019000
2000
這是朗‧樂森的研究
17:26
inspired by that suggestion right at the end of the book.
291
1021000
4000
多少受到這書最後的暗示啟發而做的研究
17:30
Let me just pause this for a second if I can.
292
1025000
2000
讓我在這兒停下
17:32
This is change-blindness.
293
1027000
2000
這就是轉變盲
17:34
What you're going to see is two pictures,
294
1029000
2000
各位接著會看到兩張圖片
17:36
one of which is slightly different from the other.
295
1031000
2000
兩張稍有不同
17:38
You see here the red roof and the gray roof,
296
1033000
3000
大家看見有個紅屋頂、有個灰屋頂
17:41
and in between them there will be a mask,
297
1036000
2000
中間遮住了
17:43
which is just a blank screen, for about a quarter of a second.
298
1038000
4000
那只是個空畫面，出現四分一秒
17:47
So you'll see the first picture, then a mask,
299
1042000
2000
你會看到第一張圖、然後空白
17:49
then the second picture, then a mask.
300
1044000
2000
然後是第二張圖、然後是遮罩
17:51
And this will just continue, and your job as the subject
301
1046000
4000
就這樣繼續下去，你是受試者
17:55
is to press the button when you see the change.
302
1050000
3000
你看到變化就按鈕
17:58
So, show the original picture for 240 milliseconds. Blank.
303
1053000
8000
好，圖片出現240毫秒、然後空白
18:06
Show the next picture for 240 milliseconds. Blank.
304
1061000
6000
下一張圖出現240毫秒、空白
18:12
And keep going, until the subject presses the button, saying,
305
1067000
4000
一直這樣，直到受試者按鈕
18:16
"I see the change."
306
1071000
2000
表示看到轉變了
18:18
So now we're going to be subjects in the experiment.
307
1073000
3000
我們現在來當受試者吧
18:21
We're going to start easy. Some examples.
308
1076000
9000
我們從容易的開始，看這些例子
18:30
No trouble there.
309
1085000
2000
沒問題吧
18:32
Can everybody see? All right.
310
1087000
3000
大家都看見了嗎？好
18:35
Indeed, Rensink's subjects took only a little bit more
311
1090000
4000
其實，樂森的受試者過一秒多的時間
18:39
than a second to press the button.
312
1094000
2000
就按鈕了
18:46
Can you see that one?
313
1101000
1000
這個看見了嗎？
18:55
2.9 seconds.
314
1110000
2000
2.9 秒
19:04
How many don't see it still?
315
1119000
3000
有幾位還是看不見？
19:07
What's on the roof of that barn?
316
1122000
2000
糧倉頂上的是什麼？
19:09
(Laughter)
317
1124000
3000
（眾笑）
19:20
It's easy.
318
1135000
2000
很簡單吧
19:46
Is it a bridge or a dock?
319
1161000
2000
這是橋還是船塢？
19:52
There are a few more really dramatic ones, and then I'll close.
320
1167000
4000
我多放幾張對比大些的、然後就會結束
19:56
I want you to see a few that are particularly striking.
321
1171000
4000
我希望大家看幾張對比更大的
20:00
This one because it's so large and yet it's pretty hard to see.
322
1175000
7000
這張圖片挺大的，但還是不容易看見
20:07
Can you see it?
323
1182000
3000
看得見嗎?
20:10
Audience: Yes.
324
1185000
2000
(觀眾：看得見)
20:12
Dan Dennett: See the shadows going back and forth? Pretty big.
325
1187000
3000
看到陰影前後移動嗎? 相當大
20:23
So 15.5 seconds is the median time
326
1198000
4000
受試者所用的時間
20:27
for subjects in his experiment there.
327
1202000
2000
中位數是15秒半
20:29
I love this one. I'll end with this one,
328
1204000
3000
我喜歡這張，最後一張了
20:32
just because it's such an obvious and important thing.
329
1207000
3000
就因為這個很明顯、很重要
20:37
How many still don't see it? How many still don't see it?
330
1212000
6000
有幾位看不見？有幾位看不見呢？
20:43
How many engines on the wing of that Boeing?
331
1218000
3000
這架波音機翼上有幾台引擎呢？
20:46
(Laughter)
332
1221000
1000
（眾笑）
20:47
Right in the middle of the picture!
333
1222000
6000
就在圖片的中央!
20:53
Thanks very much for your attention.
334
1228000
1000
謝謝大家用心
20:54
What I wanted to show you is that scientists,
335
1229000
5000
我想讓大家看到
20:59
using their from-the-outside, third-person methods,
336
1234000
4000
科學家利用外在、第三者的方法
21:03
can tell you things about your own consciousness
337
1238000
2000
能讓你了解你自己的意識
21:05
that you would never dream of,
338
1240000
2000
連你自己也沒有想過
21:07
and that, in fact, you're not the authority
339
1242000
2000
你以為你可以控制自己的意識
21:09
on your own consciousness that you think you are.
340
1244000
2000
其實你是控制不了的
21:11
And we're really making a lot of progress
341
1246000
2000
在發展心智的理論方面
21:13
on coming up with a theory of mind.
342
1248000
3000
我們確實進步了許多
21:16
Jeff Hawkins, this morning, was describing his attempt
343
1251000
6000
傑夫‧霍金斯今天早上講述他嘗試為神經科學
21:22
to get theory, and a good, big theory, into the neuroscience.
344
1257000
4000
建構一個整體的大理論
21:26
And he's right. This is a problem.
345
1261000
5000
他說得對。這就是問題了。
21:31
Harvard Medical School once -- I was at a talk --
346
1266000
2000
有一回我去哈佛醫學院的講座
21:33
director of the lab said, "In our lab, we have a saying.
347
1268000
4000
實驗室總監說「我們實驗室有個說法：
21:37
If you work on one neuron, that's neuroscience.
348
1272000
3000
研究的若是一個神經元，那是神經科學
21:40
If you work on two neurons, that's psychology."
349
1275000
3000
研究的若兩個神經元，那是心理學」
21:43
(Laughter)
350
1278000
4000
（眾笑）
21:47
We have to have more theory, and it can come as much from the top down.
351
1282000
3000
我們需要更多理論，很可能是由上而下的
21:50
Thank you very much.
352
1285000
2000
謝謝大家
21:52
(Applause)
353
1287000
4000
（觀眾鼓掌）
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Dan Dennett - Philosopher, cognitive scientistDan Dennett thinks that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes.
Why you should listen
One of our most important living philosophers, Dan Dennett is best known for his provocative and controversial arguments that human consciousness and free will are the result of physical processes in the brain. He argues that the brain's computational circuitry fools us into thinking we know more than we do, and that what we call consciousness — isn't. His 2003 book "Freedom Evolves" explores how our brains evolved to give us -- and only us -- the kind of freedom that matters, while 2006's "Breaking the Spell" examines belief through the lens of biology.
This mind-shifting perspective on the mind itself has distinguished Dennett's career as a philosopher and cognitive scientist. And while the philosophy community has never quite known what to make of Dennett (he defies easy categorization, and refuses to affiliate himself with accepted schools of thought), his computational approach to understanding the brain has made him, as Edge's John Brockman writes, “the philosopher of choice of the AI community.”
“It's tempting to say that Dennett has never met a robot he didn't like, and that what he likes most about them is that they are philosophical experiments,” Harry Blume wrote in the Atlantic Monthly in 1998. “To the question of whether machines can attain high-order intelligence, Dennett makes this provocative answer: ‘The best reason for believing that robots might some day become conscious is that we human beings are conscious, and we are a sort of robot ourselves.'"
In recent years, Dennett has become outspoken in his atheism, and his 2006 book Breaking the Spell calls for religion to be studied through the scientific lens of evolutionary biology. Dennett regards religion as a natural -- rather than supernatural -- phenomenon, and urges schools to break the taboo against empirical examination of religion. He argues that religion's influence over human behavior is precisely what makes gaining a rational understanding of it so necessary: “If we don't understand religion, we're going to miss our chance to improve the world in the 21st century.”
Dennett's landmark books include The Mind's I, co-edited with Douglas Hofstaedter, Consciousness Explained, and Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Read an excerpt from his 2013 book, Intuition Pumps, in the Guardian >>
Dan Dennett | Speaker | TED.com