【双语】TED演讲：人最大的教养，是不知全貌，不予置评
来源：TED
How do you know what's true?
Sheila Marie Orfano
>>上下滑动可查看中英全文<<
A samurai is found dead in a quiet bamboo grove.One by one,the crime’s only known witnesses recount their version of the events that transpired.But as they each tell their tale,it becomes clear that every testimony is plausible,yet different.And each witness implicates themselves.
一个武士被发现死在一个安静的竹林里。犯罪的唯一目击者一个接一个地讲述了他们对所发生事件的看法。但当他们各自讲述自己的故事时，很明显每个证词都是可信的，但又各不相同。每个证人都有牵连。
This is the premise of“In a Grove,”a short story published in the early 1920s by Japanese author Ryūnosuke Akutagawa.Though many know this tale of warring perspectives by a different name:“Rashomon.”In 1950,Japanese filmmaker Akira Kurosawa adapted two of Akutagawa’s stories into one film.This movie introduced the world to an enduring cultural metaphor that has transformed our understanding of truth,justice and human memory.
这就是20世纪20年代初日本作家李小冉发表的短篇小说《在树林里》的前提ū芥川野介。虽然很多人都知道这个关于战争视角的故事，但名字不同：“罗生门”。1950年，日本电影制片人黑泽明（Akira Kurosawa）将芥川的两个故事改编成了一部电影。这部电影向世界介绍了一种持久的文化隐喻，它改变了我们对真理、正义和人类记忆的理解。
The Rashomon effect describes a situation in which individuals give significantly different but equally conceivable accounts of the same event.Often used to highlight the unreliability of eyewitnesses,the Rashomon effect usually occurs under two specific conditions.The first:there’s no evidence to verify what really happened.And the second:there’s pressure to achieve closure,often provided by an authority figure trying to identify the definitive truth.
罗生门效应描述了一种情况，在这种情况下，个体对同一事件给出了显著不同但同样可以想象的解释。罗生门效应经常被用来强调目击者的不可靠性，它通常发生在两种特定情况下。第一：没有证据证明到底发生了什么。第二个问题是：有压力要结束调查，通常是由一位权威人士提供的，他试图找出确切的真相。
But the Rashomon effect undermines the very idea of a singular,objective truth.In the source material,Akutagawa and Kurosawa use the tools of their media to give each character’s testimony equal weight,transforming each witness into an unreliable narrator.Without any hints on who’s sharing the most accurate account,the audience can’t tell which character to trust.Instead,each testimony takes on a truthful quality,and the audience is left doubting their convictions as they guess who ended the samurai’s life.
但是罗生门效应破坏了一个单一的、客观的真理。在原始材料中，芥川和黑泽明利用媒体的工具给每个角色的证词赋予同等的权重，将每个证人转变成一个不可靠的叙述者。如果没有任何关于谁分享了最准确的描述的提示，观众就无法判断该信任哪个角色。相反，每一个证词都具有真实性，观众在猜测是谁结束了武士的生命时都会怀疑自己的信念。
Some might find this frustrating because the plot subverts expectations of how mysteries usually end.But by refusing to provide a clear answer,these two artists capture the messiness and complexity of truth and human memory.
有些人可能会觉得这令人沮丧，因为情节颠覆了人们对神秘结局的预期。但由于拒绝提供一个明确的答案，这两位艺术家捕捉到了真相和人类记忆的混乱和复杂。
Neuroscientists have found that when we form a memory,our interpretation of visual information is influenced by our previous experiences and internal biases.Some of these biases are unique to individuals,but others are more universal.For example,egocentric bias can influence people to subconsciously reshape their memories in ways that cast a positive light on their actions.
神经科学家发现，当我们形成记忆时，我们对视觉信息的解释会受到我们以往经验和内在偏见的影响。其中有些偏见是个人独有的，但另一些则更具普遍性。例如，以自我为中心的偏见会影响人们下意识地重塑他们的记忆，从而对他们的行为产生积极的影响。
Even if we were able to encode a memory accurately,recalling it incorporates new information that changes the memory.And when we later recall that event,we typically remember the embellished memory instead of the original experience.
即使我们能够准确地编码一个记忆，回忆它也包含了改变记忆的新信息。当我们后来回忆起那个事件时，我们通常会记住修饰过的记忆，而不是最初的经历。
These underlying psychological phenomena mean that the Rashomon effect can pop up anywhere.In biology,scientists starting from the same dataset and applying the same analytical methods,frequently publish different results.Anthropologists regularly grapple with the impact personal backgrounds can have on an expert's perception.In one famous case,two anthropologists visited the Mexican village of Tepoztlan.The first researcher described life in the town as happy and contented,while the second recorded residents as paranoid and disgruntled.
这些潜在的心理现象意味着拉什隆效应可以在任何地方出现。在生物学中，科学家从同一数据集开始，应用相同的分析方法，经常发表不同的结果。人类学家经常努力应对个人背景对专家感知的影响。在一个著名的例子中，两位人类学家参观了墨西哥的特波特兰村。第一位研究者描述了这个城市的生活是快乐和满足的，而第二个研究者则记录了居民的偏执和不满。
Experts aside,the Rashomon effect can also impact the general public,particularly when it comes to the perception of complicated world events.For example,following a 2015 security summit between the United States and leaders from the Arab States,media reports about the summit varied enormously.Some stated that it had gone smoothly,while others called it a complete failure.
专家们不说，拉斯曼效应也会影响到公众，特别是在对复杂世界事件的感知方面。例如，在2015年美国与阿拉伯国家领导人举行安全峰会之后，媒体对首脑会议的报道差别很大。有些人说，它进展顺利，而另一些人则称之为完全失败。
It's tempting to fixate on why we have competing perceptions,but perhaps the more important question the Rashomon effect raises is,what is truth anyway?Are there situations when an“objective truth”doesn’t exist?What can different versions of the same event tell us about the time,place and people involved?
我们很容易就这样想，为什么我们有竞争的观念，但是拉斯曼效应提出的更重要的问题是，究竟真相是什么？是否存在“客观真理”不存在的情况？同一事件的不同版本能告诉我们有关时间、地点和参与人员的情况？
And how can we make group decisions if we’re all working with different information,backgrounds,and biases?Like most questions,these don’t have a definitive answer.But the enduring importance of Akutagawa’s story suggests there may be value in embracing the ambiguity.
如果我们都在处理不同的信息、背景和偏见，我们如何做出小组决策？和大多数问题一样，这些问题没有明确的答案。但川川和郎故事的持久重要性表明，接受这种模糊性可能有价值。
-END-
最姐推荐 | 持续输入 悦听英语