TED学院 | 真实的自己存在吗？

提示：点击↑上方"小芳老师"免费关注，点击“阅读原文”加入打卡

TED简介：2011 | Is there a real you ?是什么让你成为了你自己？是你如何看待自己，其他人如何看待你，还是别的什么因素？在这个演讲中，朱立安·巴吉尼以哲学和神经科学为依据给出了一个惊人的答案。

演讲者：Julian Baggini 朱立安·巴吉尼

片长：11:55

https://v.qq.com/txp/iframe/player.html?width=500&height=375&auto=0&vid=m0302b0o4yd

中英对照演讲稿

Is there a real you? This might seem to youlike a very odd question. Because, you might ask, how do we find the real you,how do you know what the real you is? And so forth.

是否存在一个真实的你？ 你也许觉得这个问题很怪， 因为你可能会问， 我们怎么找到真实的自己， 又要怎么知道真实的你是怎样的？如此等等。

But the idea that there must be a real you,surely that's obvious. If there's anything real in the world, it's you. Well,I'm not quite sure. At least we have to understand a bit better what thatmeans. Now certainly, I think there are lots of things in our culture around uswhich sort of reinforce the idea that for each one of us, we have a kind of acore, an essence. 

真实的你应该存在， 这个命题很明显。 如果世界上只存在一样 真实的事物，那就是你。 我对此并不太确定。 至少我们要深入地理解这个命题的意思。 当然，我认为我们的文化中 存在很多我们周围的东西 或多或少地强化了这样一种信念。 那就是我们每个人 都有一个核心，一种实质。

There is something about what it means to be you which defines you, and it's kind of permanent and unchanging. The most kind of crudeway in which we have it, are things like horoscopes. You know, people are verywedded to these, actually. People put them on their Facebook profile as thoughthey are meaningul, you even know your Chinese horoscope as well. 

有一些东西能够定义你，而这种东西是永恒不变的。 我们有一些很不精确的方法， 比如星座。 事实上，有很多人执着与此。 人们在脸书的个人资料上 写着自己的星座， 好像它有多重要似的， 还有生肖也是。

There are also more scientific versions of this, all sorts of ways of profilingpersonality type, such as the Myers-Briggs tests, for example. I don't know ifyou've done those. A lot of companies use these for recruitment. You answer alot of questions, and this is supposed to reveal something about your corepersonality. 

有一些所谓更科学的办法来定义你， 有许许多多定义性格类型的方法， 比如麦氏测试 (MBTI)。 不知道你们有没有做过这项测试。 许多公司将这个测试用于招聘。 你要回答一大堆问题， 这照理来说能揭示 你的核心人格特质。

And of course, the popular fascination with this is enormous. Inmagazines like this, you'll see, in the bottom left corner, they'll advertisein virtually every issue some kind of personality thing. And if you pick up oneof those magazines, it's hard to resist, isn't it? Doing the test to find whatis your learning style, what is your loving style, or what is your workingstyle? Are you this kind of person or that?

当然这些测试的影响很普遍。 你会在这样的杂志上， 左下角这种杂志的几乎每一期，都有各种性格测试的广告。 你随便拿起一本这样的杂志， 都很难拒绝，是吧？ 做这些测试可以找到你 自己的学习方式是什么、恋爱方式如何、工作方式又怎样、 你是什么样的人？

So I think that we have a common-sense ideathat there is a kind of core or essence of ourselves to be discovered. And thatthis is kind of a permanent truth about ourselves, something that's the samethroughout life. Well, that's the idea I want to challenge. And I have to saynow, I'll say it a bit later, but I'm not challenging this just because I'mweird, the challenge actually has a very, very long and distinguished history.Here's the common-sense idea. 

我们有这样一种共识， 认为自己有一些核心特质 需要被发现。 有一些关于自己的永恒真相， 存在于我们的一生。 那么，我就来挑战一下这种认知。我现在要讲的， 待会儿也会讲， 我挑战这个认知不是因为我很怪， 而是这种挑战实际上有 很长的一段特殊的历史。 这是常识性的认识： 这是你。 

There is you. You are the individuals you are,and you have this kind of core. Now in your life, what happens is that you, ofcourse, accumulate different experiences and so forth. So you have memories,and these memories help to create what you are. You have desires, maybe for acookie, maybe for something that we don't want to talk about at 11 o'clock inthe morning in a school. You will have beliefs. This is a number plate fromsomeone in America. 

你作为一个个人， 拥有一些核心特质。在你的人生中， 你会积累各种不同的经验。 你因此有记忆， 这些记忆帮助塑造了你自己。 你有渴望，也许是渴望一块饼干， 也许是渴望一些不可告人的东西， 起码在上午11点的学校 讲堂里我不方便说。 你会有信仰。 这是一个美国人的车牌。

I don't know whether this number plate, which says"messiah 1," indicates that the driver believes in the messiah, orthat they are the messiah. Either way, they have beliefs about messiahs. Wehave knowledge. We have sensations and experiences as well. It's not justintellectual things. So this is kind of the common-sense model, I think, ofwhat a person is. There is a person who has all the things that make up ourlife experiences.

我不知道这个写着“弥赛亚1”的车牌 是不是代表这个司机相信弥赛亚， 还是代表车主自己 就是弥赛亚（即救世主）。 不管怎么说，他们都信弥赛亚。 我们拥有知识，包括直觉和经验， 而不仅仅是智力上的东西。 我认为这就是 关于「人是什么」的常识模型。 所有这些东西组成一个人的人生经验。

But the suggestion I want to put to youtoday is that there's something fundamentally wrong with this model. And I canshow you what's wrong with one click. Which is there isn't actually a"you" at the heart of all these experiences. Strange thought? Well,maybe not. What is there, then? Well, clearly there are memories, desires,intentions, sensations, and so forth. But what happens is these things exist,and they're kind of all integrated, they're over lapped, they're connected invarious different ways. 

但我今天想给大家的建议是 这种模型存在一个基本性的错误。 我一下就能告诉你什么错了。 这就是：在这些经验中间 并不存在所谓的「你」。这个想法奇怪吗？ 也许并不奇怪。 那么到底有什么？ 显然有记忆、渴望、意图、知觉， 等等， 但这些东西存在， 而且是完整一体的， 它们在许多方面 互相重迭、互相联结。

They're connecting partly, and perhaps even mainly,because they all belong to one body and one brain. But there's also anarrative, a story we tell about ourselves, the experiences we have when weremember past things. We do things because of other things. So what we desireis partly a result of what we believe, and what we remember is also informingus what we know. And so really, there are all these things, like beliefs,desires, sensations, experiences, they're all related to each other, and thatjust is you. In some ways, it's a small difference from the common-senseunderstanding. In some ways, it's a massive one.

它们部分相连， 也可能是绝大部分相连， 因为它们都属于同一个身体、 同一个大脑。 但我们自己存在一种叙事， 可以讲出我们自己的故事， 这就是我们忆起过去 而产生的体验。我们因为其他事情而做某些事情。 渴望的一部分原因在于我们的信念， 记住的东西告诉我们知道什么。 确实，这些全部， 包括信仰、渴望、直觉、经验， 都是互相关联的，而这些就是你。 从某种角度讲，这个想法 跟常识没太大不同； 但从某种角度讲， 却有非常大的不同。

It's the shift between thinking of yourselfas a thing which has all the experiences of life, and thinking of yourself assimply that collection of all experiences in life. You are the sum of yourparts. Now those parts are also physical parts, of course, brains, bodies andlegs and things, but they aren't so important, actually. If you have a heart transplant,you're still the same person. If you have a memory transplant, are you the sameperson? If you have a belief transplant, would you be the same person? Now thisidea, that what we are, the way to understand ourselves, is as not of somepermanent being, which has experiences, but is kind of a collection ofexperiences, might strike you as kind of weird.

你要从把自己认为是拥有全部这些 人生经验的某种存在， 转变为把自己认为 是这些人生经验的 某种简单集合体。 你就是你各个部分的总和。当然各个部分是身体上的， 大脑、肢体之类； 但这其实并不那么重要。如果你接受了心脏移植，你还是你； 如果你接受了记忆移植，那你还是你吗？ 如果你被移植了信仰，你还是不是你？ 这种理解自身存在的想法， 认为自己不是某种 拥有经验的永恒存在， 而是这些经验的集合， 可能让你觉得有些古怪。

But actually, I don't think it should beweird. In a way, it's common sense. Because I just invite you to think about,by comparison, think about pretty much anything else in the universe, maybeapart from the very most fundamental forces or powers. Let's take somethinglike water. Now my science isn't very good. We might say something like waterhas two parts hydrogen and one parts oxygen, right? We all know that. I hope noone in this room thinks that what that means is there is a thing called water,and attached to it are hydrogen and oxygen atoms, and that's what water is.

但事实上，我并不认为 这种想法古怪。 从某种意义上说，这是常识。 我请大家藉由比较， 想想宇宙中任何一个事物， 除去最基本的动力。让我们以水为例。 我的科学素养很一般。 我们可以说水含有两份氢、 一份氧，对吗？ 这我们都懂。 我希望这屋里不会有人认为 水是一种 外挂氢气和氧气原子的东西。

Of course we don't. We understand, very easily, very straightforwardly, that wateris nothing more than the hydrogen and oxygen molecules suitably arranged.Everything else in the universe is the same. There's no mystery about my watch,for example. We say the watch has a face, and hands, and a mechanism and abattery, But what we really mean is, we don't think there is a thing called thewatch to which we then attach all these bits. We understand very clearly thatyou get the parts of the watch, you put them together, and you create a watch.Now if everything else in the universe is like this, why are we different?

我们当然不会这么想。 我们都能轻易又直观的理解， 水不外乎是 氢分子和氧分子组合的产物。 宇宙中的其他物质也是如此。 譬如说，我的手表就没什么神秘的。 这只手表有表面、指针、一套机械系统、还有一块电池。 但我真正要说的， 是我们不会认为这些东西 是附加在手表上面的。 我们清楚地知道， 把手表的各个部件 组合在一起， 你就能得到一只手表。如果宇宙中的一切事物都是如此， 我们又为什么会有不同？

Why think of ourselves as somehow not justbeing a collection of all our parts, but somehow being a separate, permanententity which has those parts? Now this view is not particularly new, actually.It has quite a long lineage. You find it in Buddhism, you find it in 17th,18th-century philosophy going through to the current day, people like Locke andHume. But interestingly, it's also a view increasingly being heard reinforcedby neuroscience. 

为什么我们不能把自己想成 所有部分的集合体， 而要把自己想成拥有这些组成部分的 某种分离、永恒的存在？ 这种观念并不新。它有着自己漫长的传承。 在佛教中有， 在十七、十八世纪的哲学中有， 当代的洛克、休谟这些人的著述中也有。 但有趣的是，这种观点 不断地被神经科学所支持。

This is Paul Broks, he's a clinical neuropsychologist, and hesays this: "We have a deep intuition that there is a core, an essencethere, and it's hard to shake off, probably impossible to shake off, I suspect.But it's true that neuroscience shows that there is no centre in the brainwhere things do all come together." So when you look at the brain, and youlook at how the brain makes possible a sense of self, you find that there isn'ta central control spot in the brain. There is no kind of center where everything happens. There are lots of different processes in the brain, all of whichoperate, in a way, quite independently. 

这是保罗‧布洛克斯，他是一位临床神经科学家， 他说过： 「我们有一种根深蒂固的直觉， 认为人有一种核心特质， 这种核心特质轻易不会改变， 我甚至怀疑是绝对不可能改变。 但神经科学显示人的大脑中不存在一个中心， 让所有的东西集合在一起。」 当你观察大脑， 探求大脑如何理解自我， 你会发现大脑不存在中心控制点。 没有中控区域。 大脑存在非常多的流程， 基本上都是独立运作的。

But it's because of the way that they relate that we get this sense of self. The term I use in the book, I call itthe ego trick. It's like a mechanical trick. It's not that we don't exist, it'sjust that the trick is to make us feel that inside of us is something moreunified than is really there.

不过，由于它们是互相联系的， 我们才有了自我的感觉。 我在书里用的术语 叫做自我戏法。 这有点像机械戏法。 这不是说我们不存在， 这种「戏法」能让我们的内心 感觉更为统一。

Now you might think this is a worryingidea. You might think that if it's true, that for each one of us there is noabiding core of self, no permanent essence, does that mean that really, theself is an illusion? Does it mean that we really don't exist? There is no realyou. Well, a lot of people actually do use this talk of illusion and so forth.These are three psychologists, Thomas Metzinger, Bruce Hood, Susan Blackmore, alot of these people do talk the language of illusion, the self is an illusion,it's a fiction. 

你也许觉得这种想法让人担忧。 也许觉得，如果这是真的， 我们每个人都没有 永固的核心自我， 没有什么核心特质， 这是否意味着自我只是一种假象？ 这是否意味着我们其实不存在？ 没有什么真正的你。 确实有许多人采取这种假象说。 有三位心理学家： 托马斯·梅辛革、布鲁斯·胡德、 苏珊‧布莱克摩尔， 这些人皆持假象说， 认为自我是一种假象，是虚构的。

But I don't think this is a very helpful way of looking at it.Go back to the watch. The watch isn't an illusion, because there is nothing tothe watch other than a collection of its parts. In the same way, we're notillusions either. The fact that we are, in some ways, just this very, verycomplex collection, ordered collection of things, does not mean we're not real.I can give you a very sort of rough metaphor for this. 

但我不认为这种想法有多少建设性。让我们再来看看这只手表， 这只手表并不是假象， 因为它在各部件组合之外 不存在其他东西。 同理，我们也不是假象。 事实是，从某种角度说， 我们只不过是一种复杂的集合体，包含有序排列的各种事物， 这不是说我们就不是真实的。 我想提出一个粗劣的隐喻。

Let's take something like a waterfall. These are the Iguazu Falls, in Argentina. Now if you takesomething like this, you can appreciate the fact that in lots of ways, there'snothing permanent about this. For one thing, it's always changing. The watersare always carving new channels. with changes and tides and the weather, somethings dry up, new things are created. Of course the water that flows throughthe waterfall is different every single instance. 

让我们谈谈瀑布。 这是阿根廷的伊瓜苏瀑布。 如果你仔细想想， 就能意识到， 从很多角度来看，都没有永恒这回事。 一样事物永远在变化。 水永远在制造新的水路， 通过潮水和天气的变化， 一些地方干涸了，新事物出现， 当然瀑布流过的水， 每一刻都是不同的。

But it doesn't mean that theIguazu Falls are an illusion. It doesn't mean it's not real. What it means iswe have to understand what it is as something which has a history, has certainthings that keep it together, but it's a process, it's fluid, it's foreverchanging.

但这并不表示伊瓜苏瀑布是个假象， 并不代表它不是真实的。 这意味着，我们要去理解 这种事物拥有历史， 是一些特定事物的集合， 但它是一个过程， 是流动的，永远在变化。

Now that, I think, is a model forunderstanding ourselves, and I think it's a liberating model. Because if youthink that you have this fixed, permanent essence, which is always the same,throughout your life, no matter what, in a sense you're kind of trapped. You'reborn with an essence, that's what you are until you die, if you believe in anafterlife, maybe you continue. 

我认为这个模型 可以用来理解我们自身， 这是一个自由的模型。 因为，如果你认为自己有什么 固定的永恒特质， 终其一生、无论如何都不会改变，那你可以说是进入了死胡同。 你出生即带有某种特质， 这种特质定义你的一生， 如果你相信有死后的世界， 这种特质甚至能在死后继续。 

But if you think of yourself as being, in a way,not a thing as such, but a kind of a process, something that is changing, thenI think that's quite liberating. Because unlike the the waterfalls, we actuallyhave the capacity to channel the direction of our development for ourselves toa certain degree. Now we've got to be careful here, right? 

但如果你换种方式理解自己， 不是一样「事物」，而是一种过程， 处在不断变化之中， 我认为这是一种解放。 因为与瀑布不同的是， 我们其实拥有一种能力， 某种程度上可以规划自己发展的方向。 现在我们要小心了，对吗？

If you watch theX-Factor too much, you might buy into this idea that we can all be whatever wewant to be. That's not true. I've heard some fantastic musicians this morning,and I am very confident that I could in no way be as good as them. I couldpractice hard and maybe be good, but I don't have that really natural ability.There are limits to what we can achieve. There are limits to what we can makeof ourselves. But nevertheless, we do have this capacity to, in a sense, shape our selves. 

如果你看太多《X音素》节目， 你可能会深信， 我们能成为任何想成为的人。 但这不对。 我今天早上听了几位 超棒音乐家的表演，我坚信自己绝不可能 演奏得像他们一样出色。 如果勤学苦练， 我也许能有不错的水平， 但我真的不具备 那种与生俱来的天赋。 我们能达到的成就是有限的。 我们自我实现的程度是有限的。但不管怎样，我们确实有一种能力， 在一定程度上塑造自己。

The true self, as it were then, is not something that is just therefor you to discover, you don't sort of look into your soul and find your trueself, What you are partly doing, at least, is actually creating your true self.And this, I think, is very, very significant, particularly at this stage oflife you're at. You'll be aware of the fact how much of you changed over recentyears. If you have any videos of yourself, three or four years ago, youprobably feel embarrassed because you don't recognize yourself.

 「真我」这种东西， 并不是隐藏着需要你去发现的， 你无需内视自己的灵魂来找寻真我， 你至少可以部份地创造真我。 我认为这很重要， 特别是在你们现今的人生阶段。 你会认识到 自己在过去几年改变了多少。 如果你有自己三、四年前的影片， 看着就会觉得不好意思， 你都快不认识自己了。

So I want to get that message over, thatwhat we need to do is think about ourselves as things that we can shape, andchannel and change. This is the Buddha, again: "Well-makers lead thewater, fletchers bend the arrow, carpenters bend a log of wood, wise peoplefashion themselves." And that's the idea I want to leave you with, thatyour true self is not something that you will have to go searching for, as amystery, and maybe never ever find. To the extent you have a true self, it'ssomething that you in part discover, but in part create. and that, I think, isa liberating and exciting prospect. Thank you very much.

我希望能传递这个讯息， 我们需要做的就是相信我们能够 塑造自己，决定人生轨迹，并做出改变。 佛祖曰： 「水人调船， 弓工调角，材匠调木， 智者调身。」（摘自《法句经》） 我希望大家记住这点， 你无须去寻找自我， 那这是个谜，也许你永远无法找到。 如果你有真我， 那也是一种你一半能发现，而另一半能去创造的东西。 我认为这观点是一种解放， 着实令人兴奋。 谢谢大家。

学习型公众号：值得你关注

点击关键词获取福利

关注小芳老师 

听哈利波特，看TED视频

转发和点赞是我持续更新的动力

---

资源来自网络，如果有侵权，即刻删除！