Do you remember the story of Odysseus and the Sirens from high school or junior high school? There was this hero, Odysseus, who's heading back home after the Trojan War. And he's standing on the deck of his ship, he's talking to his first mate, and he's saying, "Tomorrow, we will sail past those rocks, and on those rocks sit some beautiful women called Sirens. And these women sing an enchanting song, a song so alluring that all sailors who hear it crash into the rocks and die." Now you would expect, given that, that they would choose an alternate route around the Sirens, but instead Odysseus says, "I want to hear that song. And so what I'm going to do is I'm going to pour wax in the ears of you and all the men -- stay with me -- so that you can't hear the song, and then I'm going to have you tie me to the mast so that I can listen and we can all sail by unaffected." So this is a captain putting the life of every single person on the ship at risk so that he can hear a song.
你記不記得 從高中或初中 奧德修斯和塞壬的故事嗎? 有這一個英雄, 奧德修斯,剛從 特洛伊戰爭戰後回家。 他站立在他的的船的甲板上, 他和他的第一副手, 談着說: 「明天,我們將駛過那些岩石去, 在這些岩石上會坐着一群美麗的女子, 她們稱為塞壬。 而這群女子會唱着一首迷人的歌曲, 那首如此誘人的歌曲, 令到所有水手聽到都着迷, 撞到岩石而死亡。」 現在你當然以為鑑於這個原因, 他們會選擇另一條迴避塞壬們的路徑, 但奧德修斯竟然說: 「我想聽到這首歌。 而我要做的是要 在你和所有人的耳朵中 倒進蠟-- 等着-- 你們便聽不到這首歌, 然後你們要把我綁在桅杆上, 那我便可以聽到這首歌, 而我們都可以不受影響順利渡過。」 這是一個 只為了聽到一首歌曲, 而願意妄顧船上 每一個人安危的隊長。
And I'd like to think if this was the case, they probably would have rehearsed it a few times. Odysseus would have said, "Okay, let's do a dry run. You tie me to the mast, and I'm going to beg and plead. And no matter what I say, you cannot untie me from the mast. All right, so tie me to the mast." And the first mate takes a rope and ties Odysseus to the mast in a nice knot. And Odysseus does his best job playacting and says, "Untie me. Untie me. I want to hear that song. Untie me." And the first mate wisely resists and doesn't untie Odysseus. And then Odysseus says, "I see that you can get it. All right, untie me now and we'll get some dinner." And the first mate hesitates. He's like, "Is this still the rehearsal, or should I untie him?" And the first mate thinks, "Well, I guess at some point the rehearsal has to end." So he unties Odysseus, and Odysseus flips out. He's like, "You idiot. You moron. If you do that tomorrow, I'll be dead, you'll be dead, every single one of the men will be dead. Now just don't untie me no matter what." He throws the first mate to the ground. This repeats itself through the night -- rehearsal, tying to the mast, conning his way out of it, beating the poor first mate up mercilessly. Hilarity ensues.
而且我覺得如果是這種情況, 他們理應先會排練幾次。 奧德修斯會說: 「好吧,讓我們試試做。 當你把我綁在桅杆上,我會央求你把我釋放。 無論我說什麼,你不可以都解開我。 好, 現在把我綁在桅杆上吧。」 大副便拿着繩子 把奧德修斯綁在桅杆上,結了一個漂亮的結。 然後奧德修斯假裝演着說, 「解開我, 解開我。 我想聽聽這首歌。解開我。」 大副明智地抗拒 和不解開奧德修斯。 然後奧德修斯說,「好, 我看到你是行的。 好, 把我解開, 然後我們去吃晚餐。」 大副遲疑。 他在想: 「這是否仍是排練? 或是我應該解開他呢?」 大副在想: 「好吧,排練都應該有結束的時候。」 於是,他解開了奧德修斯,而奧德修斯卻大發雷霆, 罵着: 「你這個白痴。你這個蠢材。 如果明天你這樣做,我會死,你會死的, 每一個人都會死亡。 只要無論如何都不要解開我。」 他把大副推到地上。 整夜這個過程一再重複-- 排練,綁在桅杆上, 奧德修斯哄騙着要解開他, 毫不留情地毆打那個可憐的大副。 鬧劇隨之而來。
Tying yourself to a mast is perhaps the oldest written example of what psychologists call a commitment device. A commitment device is a decision that you make with a cool head to bind yourself so that you don't do something regrettable when you have a hot head. Because there's two heads inside one person when you think about it. Scholars have long invoked this metaphor of two selves when it comes to questions of temptation. There is first, the present self. This is like Odysseus when he's hearing the song. He just wants to get to the front row. He just thinks about the here and now and the immediate gratification. But then there's this other self, the future self. This is Odysseus as an old man who wants nothing more than to retire in a sunny villa with his wife Penelope outside of Ithaca -- the other one.
把自己綁在桅杆 也許是心理學家最長久有書寫記錄 所說的稱為承諾設備的例子。 承諾設備是一個你以冷靜頭腦 作出的決定來約束自己, 是以讓你不要當你脾气急躁時 做一些遺憾的事情。 因為當你想想看, 人內其實 有兩個頭腦。 當涉及到的誘惑力的問題, 學者早就調用到這兩個自我的比喻。 首先是, 目前的自我。 這是像奧德修斯聽到這首歌的時候。 他只想去坐前排。 他只是想到此時此地和當下的滿足。 但另一個自我, 是未來的自我。 這是奧德修斯作為一個老人, 一個想要在陽光明媚伊薩卡外的別墅, 和他的妻子佩內洛普退休 的奧德修斯,另一個自我。
So why do we need commitment devices? Well resisting temptation is hard, as the 19th century English economist Nassau William Senior said, "To abstain from the enjoyment which is in our power, or to seek distant rather than immediate results, are among the most painful exertions of the human will." If you set goals for yourself and you're like a lot of other people, you probably realize it's not that your goals are physically impossible that's keeping you from achieving them, it's that you lack the self-discipline to stick to them. It's physically possible to lose weight. It's physically possible to exercise more. But resisting temptation is hard.
那麼,為什麼我們需要承諾的設備? 因為抗拒誘惑是很困難的, 如19世紀英國經濟學家 老拿騷威廉說: 「要放棄我們有權力掌管的享受, 或是要企圖遙遠規避而不享有即時的效果, 是對人類意志最痛苦 費力的事。」 像其他很多人一樣, 如果你為自己設定目標, 你可能會意識到 不是你的目標過於高不可攀 令你不可能實現, 而是你缺乏自律去堅持。 減肥是物理上有可能實現的。 要多點運動物理上是有可能的。 但抵制誘惑 是很難。
The other reason that it's difficult to resist temptation is because it's an unequal battle between the present self and the future self. I mean, let's face it, the present self is present. It's in control. It's in power right now. It has these strong, heroic arms that can lift doughnuts into your mouth. And the future self is not even around. It's off in the future. It's weak. It doesn't even have a lawyer present. There's nobody to stick up for the future self. And so the present self can trounce all over its dreams. So there's this battle between the two selves that's being fought, and we need commitment devices to level the playing field between the two.
另外一個原因 令誘惑難以抗拒, 是因為在目前的自我 和未來的自我之間有著不平等的戰鬥。 我的意思是,面對現實吧,現在的自我是現在。 它在控制。它現在在控制權力。 它有著這些強大的,英勇的胳膊, 可以把甜圈放在你的口中。 而未來的自我根甚本不存。 它在未來。它薄弱。 它甚至沒有律師在場。 沒有人堅持為未來的自我爭辯。 所以現在的自我可以打垮 所有未來的夢想。 這自我兩者之間的鬥爭在戰鬥中, 我們需要的承諾設備 來公平平整兩者之間的競爭環境。
Now I'm a big fan of commitment devices actually. Tying yourself to the mast is the oldest one, but there are other ones such as locking a credit card away with a key or not bringing junk food into the house so you won't eat it or unplugging your Internet connection so you can use your computer. I was creating commitment devices of my own long before I knew what they were. So when I was a starving post-doc at Columbia University, I was deep in a publish-or-perish phase of my career. I had to write five pages a day towards papers or I would have to give up five dollars.
事實上我是承諾設備的擁躉。 把自己綁在桅杆上是最古老的一例,但也有其他的, 例如把信用卡用鑰匙鎖着 或不把垃圾食品帶回家,這樣你便不會吃它, 或拔走互聯網連接, 因此你可以實在使用你的電腦。 我早在未認識承諾設備之前 已經創造我自己的承諾設。 當我還是一個身無長物的哥倫比亞大學 博士畢業生, 當時我的職業生涯是在於發布或滅亡的階段。 我要為文章 每一天寫五頁, 否則我便要放棄五塊錢。
And when you try to execute these commitment devices, you realize the devil is really in the details. Because it's not that easy to get rid of five dollars. I mean, you can't burn it; that's illegal. And I thought, well I could give it to a charity or give it to my wife or something like that. But then I thought, oh, I'm sending myself mixed messages. Because not writing is bad, but giving to charity is good. So then I would kind of justify not writing by giving a gift. And then I kind of flipped that around and thought, well I could give it to the neo-Nazis. But then I was like, that's more bad than writing is good, and so that wouldn't work. So ultimately, I just decided I would leave it in an envelope on the subway. Sometimes a good person would find it, sometimes a bad person would find it. On average, it was just a completely pointless exchange of money that I would regret. (Laughter) Such it is with commitment devices.
且當你嘗試執行這些承諾設備的時候, 你會意識到真正的苦處在於細節。 因為要擺脫五塊錢不是那麼容易。 我的意思是,你可以不燒它,這是非法的。 我想,我可以把它捐贈給一個慈善機構, 或把它給我的妻子, 等等。 但轉念一想,哦,我是在給予自己混淆的訊息。 因為不寫作是不好,但給慈善機構是好的。 以給他人一種賜予, 那麼想 我便有理由不寫作。 然後,我會這樣的翻轉左右思想, 我可以把它給予新納粹分子。 但我便會想,這其實比寫作更壞, 這樣想行不通。 所以,最後我決定 我會把它放入一個信封內並留在地鐵上。 有時一個好人會找到它, 有時一個壞人會找到它。 平均而言,它只是一個完全沒有意義掉錢的方法, 以我至會後悔。 (笑聲) 它便是承諾的設備。
But despite my like for them, there's two nagging concerns that I've always had about commitment devices, and you might feel this if you use them yourself. So the first is, when you've got one of these devices going, such as this contract to write everyday or pay, it's just a constant reminder that you have no self-control. You're just telling yourself, "Without you, commitment device, I am nothing, I have no self-discipline." And then when you're ever in a situation where you don't have a commitment device in place -- like, "Oh my God, that person's offering me a doughnut, and I have no defense mechanism," -- you just eat it. So I don't like the way that they take the power away from you. I think self-discipline is something, it's like a muscle. The more you exercise it, the stronger it gets.
但儘管我喜歡它們, 我一直有兩個 關於承諾設備的顧慮, 如果你使用它們自己, 你都可能會發覺到。 第一個是, 當你已經有了這些設備, 例如要經常寫作否則要付帳, 它只是不斷地提醒 你有沒有自我控制的能力。 你只是在告訴自己:「如果沒有你,承諾設備, 我什麼也不是,我不能自律。」 然後當你在一個沒有 承諾設備安設的情況-- 「噢我的天,那個人要給我一個甜圈, 而我沒有任何的防禦機制,」-- 你便把它吃掉了。 因此,我並不喜歡它們能夠有遠離你的權力。 我認為自律是一種東西,它像一塊肌肉。 你鍛煉它,它便更強壯。
The other problem with commitment devices is that you can always weasel your way out of them. You say, "Well, of course I can't write today, because I'm giving a TEDTalk and I have five media interviews, and then I'm going to a cocktail party and then I'll be drunk after that. And so there's no way that this is going to work." So in effect, you are like Odysseus and the first mate in one person. You're putting yourself, you're binding yourself, and you're weaseling your way out of it, and then you're beating yourself up afterwards.
承諾設備的另一個問題是, 你可以耍滑头逃脱它們。 你會說:「好了,今天我當然不能寫作, 因為我要給TEDTalk演說, 以及5家媒體採訪, 然後我要去一個雞尾酒會,然後我便會喝醉。 所以根本沒有辦法執筆。」 這樣實際上,你像是奧德修斯和大副 混合為一人。 你把你自己,你綁定你自己, 和你正在滑头地逃脱, 然而之後你便會責備自己。」
So I've been working for about a decade now on finding other ways to change people's relationship to the future self without using commitment devices. In particular, I'm interested in the relationship to the future financial self. And this is a timely issue. I'm talking about the topic of saving. Now saving is a classic two selves problem. The present self does not want to save at all. It wants to consume. Whereas the future self wants the present self to save. So this is a timely problem. We look at the savings rate and it has been declining since the 1950s. At the same time, the Retirement Risk Index, the chance of not being able to meet your needs in retirement, has been increasing. And we're at a situation now where for every three baby boomers, the McKinsey Global Institute predicts that two will not be able to meet their pre-retirement needs while they're in retirement.
因此我一直在工作了 近十年, 在尋找其他的方法 不使用承諾設備來改變 人與未來自的我的關係。 我的興趣特別是在於與 未來自我財政的關係。 這是一個涉及時間的問題。 我說的是節儉積蓄的話題。 節能是一個典型的兩個自我的問題。 如今的自我完全不希望儲蓄。 它想花費。 而未來的自我卻希望目前的自我儲蓄。 這是一個涉及時間的問題。 看看我們的儲蓄率, 它自50年代以來一直下降。 與此同時,退休風險指數, 未能在退休後滿足你需求的機會, 一直在上升。 而現在我們的情況是, 每三個嬰兒潮一代的人, 麥肯錫全球研究所預計, 在他們退休的時候。有兩個將無法 滿足其退休前的需要。
So what can we do about this? There's a philosopher, Derek Parfit, who said some words that were inspiring to my coauthors and I. He said that, "We might neglect our future selves because of some failure of belief or imagination." That is to say, we somehow might not believe that we're going to get old, or we might not be able to imagine that we're going to get old some day. On the one hand, it sounds ridiculous. Of course, we know that we're going to get old. But aren't there things that we believe and don't believe at the same time?
那我們可以做些什麼呢? 有一個哲學家,德瑞克•帕菲特, 他說了一些對我和我的合著者甚有發啟性話的, 他說: 「我們可能會忽視我們未來的自我, 皆因一些失敗的信念或想像力。」 這就是說, 我們不知何故可能不相信我們會變老, 或我們可能無法想像 一天會變老。 一方面,這聽上去有些可笑。 當然,我們知道,我們無疑會變老。 我們是不是有一些我們在同一時間相信和不相信的東西呢?
So my coauthors and I have used computers, the greatest tool of our time, to assist people's imagination and help them imagine what it might be like to go into the future. And I'll show you some of these tools right here. The first is called the distribution builder. It shows people what the future might be like by showing them a hundred equally probable outcomes that might be obtained in the future. Each outcome is shown by one of these markers, and each sits on a row that represents a level of wealth and retirement. Being up at the top means that you're enjoying a high income in retirement. Being down at the bottom means that you're struggling to make ends meet. When you make an investment, what you're really saying is, "I accept that any one of these 100 things could happen to me and determine my wealth."
所以我和我的合著者使用電腦, 我們這個時代最偉大的工具, 以協助人們的想像力, 並幫助他們想像進入未來 可能會是怎麼樣。 而我會在這裡告訴你其中一些工具。 首先的是所謂分佈的建設。 由一百個在未來同樣可能 獲得的結果, 它顯示了 人在未來的可能。 每一個結果由這些標誌物顯示, 每個坐在一排, 代表了財富和退休的水平。 在頂部的 意味著你退休後享受高的收入。 在底部的 便意味著你掙扎地入不敷出。 當你作出投資時, 你真的是在說:「我接受 這100件事情中任何的一件 都可能會發生在我身上,並會決定我的財富。」
Now you can try to move your outcomes around. You can try to manipulate your fate, like this person is doing, but it costs you something to do it. It means that you have to save more today. Once you find an investment that you're happy with, what people do is they click "done" and the markers begin to disappear, slowly, one by one. It simulates what it is like to invest in something and to watch that investment pan out. At the end, there will only be one marker left standing and it will determine our wealth in retirement.
刻下你可以嘗試將你的成果推動攪拌。 你可以嘗試操縱自己的命運,這個人便正是這樣做, 但你這樣做要有代價。 這意味著你有今天要節省更多。 一旦你找到你合意的投資, 只要點擊「完成」, 標記會開始消失, 慢慢地,一個跟一個。 它模擬投資的東西, 和顯示投資的成績。 最後,只會剩下一個標記, 它將決定我們在退休的財富。
Yes, this person retired at 150 percent of their working income in retirement. They're making more money while retired than they were making while they were working. If you're like most people, just seeing that gave you a small sense of elation and joy -- just to think about making 50 percent more money in retirement than before. However, had you ended up on the very bottom, it might have given you a slight sense of dread and/or nausea thinking about struggling to get by in retirement. By using this tool over and over and simulating outcome after outcome, people can understand that the investments and savings that they undertake today determine their well-being in the future.
不錯,這個人 在他在退休後的收入是工作時收入的150%。 他們退休時比工作時 賺得更多。 如果你像大多數人一樣, 只是看到了這個你便會感到小小得意和喜悅-- 只是要想想 退休時有比以前約50%更多的錢。 然而,倘若你在最底層, 它可能會給你一個輕微的 恐懼和/或噁心的感覺, 想到退休後在掙扎生活。 通過使用這個工具一遍又一遍 和模擬大量結果後, 人們可以理解, 今天他們所承擔的儲蓄和投資 決定他們在未來的福祉。
Now people are motivated through emotions, but different people find different things motivating. This is a simulation that uses graphics, but other people find motivating what money can buy, not just numbers. So here I made a distribution builder where instead of showing numerical outcomes, I show people what those outcomes will get you, in particular apartments that you can afford if you're retiring on 3,000, 2,500, 2,000 dollars per month and so on. As you move down the ladder of apartments, you see that they get worse and worse. Some of them look like places I lived in as a graduate student. And as you get to the very bottom, you're faced with the unfortunate reality that if you don't save anything for retirement, you won't be able to afford any housing at all. Those are actual pictures of actual apartments renting for that amount as advertised on the Internet.
人是通過情緒的刺激動機, 但不同的人是會以不同的東西感到激勵。 這是一個使用 圖形的模擬, 但其他人會看到錢可以買什麼而激勵感到, 不只是數字。 所以我製造一個生產分佈的建設器, 不是顯示數值結果, 而是我告訴人們這些成果將會買得什麼, 例如你退休每月有3000元, 2500元,或2000元 便會買得起的公寓等等。 當你移動公寓的層次向下, 你可以看到它們越來越差。 其中一些看起來像我作為一個研究生起居的地方。 到最底層, 你會面對不幸的現實, 如果你不為退休儲蓄什麼, 你根本不會能夠負擔得起任何房屋。 這些實實在在都是在互聯網上 刊登廣告的圖片, 顯示租用公寓的數額。
The last thing I'll show you, the last behavioral time machine, is something that I created with Hal Hershfield, who was introduced to me by my coauthor on a previous project, Bill Sharpe. And what it is is an exploration into virtual reality. So what we do is we take pictures of people -- in this case, college-age people -- and we use software to age them and show these people what they'll look like when they're 60, 70, 80 years old. And we try to test whether actually assisting your imagination by looking at the face of your future self can change you investment behavior.
最後我告訴你的一件事, 是一個行為時間機器, 是我和Hal Hershfield合作創建的東西, 他便是給我介紹之前提及的項目合著者的人, Bill Sharpe。 它是是一個 進入虛擬現實的探索。 我們要做的是攝取人們的照片 -- 在這個例子,大學年齡的人-- 然後我們使用軟件變老他們的面容, 並顯示給他們看,他們在 60, 70, 80歲時將會是什麼樣子。 我們試圖測試 實際協助你的想像力 來面對你未來的自我, 是否可以改變你投資的作風。
So this is one of our experiments. Here we see the face of the young subject on the left. He's given a control that allows him to adjust his savings rate. As he moves his savings rate down, it means that he's saving zero when it's all the way here at the left. You can see his current annual income -- this is the percentage of his paycheck that he can take home today -- is quite high, 91 percent, but his retirement income is quite low. He's going to retire on 44 percent of what he earned while he was working. If he saves the maximum legal amount, his retirement income goes up, but he's unhappy because now he has less money on the left-hand side to spend today. Other conditions show people the future self. And from the future self's point of view, everything is in reverse. If you save very little, the future self is unhappy living on 44 percent of the income. Whereas if the present self saves a lot, the future self is delighted, where the income is close up near 100 percent.
這是我們的實驗之一。 在這裡,我們看到在左邊的年輕人的面孔。 他被給予一個控制, 讓他能夠調整自己的儲蓄率。 當他將他的儲蓄率下降, 意味著他的儲蓄為零時, 直到最左邊。 你可以看到他目前的年收入 -- 這是他今天可以帶回家的薪水百分比-- 是相當高,91%, 但他退休後的收入是相當低。 他在退休時將會得到 他工作時44%的收入。 如果他儲蓄法律上允許的最大金額, 他退休後的收入便上升, 但他不快樂, 因為現在他會有較少的錢在今天花。 其他狀況展示人們未來的自我。 從未來自我的角度來看,一切都反向。 如果儲蓄得很少, 未來的自我以44%的收入, 生活是不愉快的。 而如果目前的自我儲蓄了很多, 收入接近100%附近左右, 未來的自我會很高興。
To bring this to a wider audience, I've been working with Hal and Allianz to create something we call the behavioral time machine, in which you not only get to see yourself in the future, but you get to see anticipated emotional reactions to different levels of retirement wealth. So for instance, here is somebody using the tool. And just watch the facial expressions as they move the slider. The younger face gets happier and happier, saving nothing. The older face is miserable. And slowly, slowly we're bringing it up to a moderate savings rate. And then it's a high savings rate. The younger face is getting unhappy. The older face is quite pleased with the decision. We're going to see if this has an effect on what people do. And what's nice about it is it's not something that biasing people actually, because as one face smiles, the other face frowns. It's not telling you which way to put the slider, it's just reminding you that you are connected to and legally tied to this future self.
要把這個更廣泛的受眾, 我一直在與Hal和Allianz 創造一個我們稱之為行為時間機器的東西, 你不僅能看到自己的未來, 你還能看到預期不同退休財富水平 的情緒反應。 例如, 這裡是有人在使用這工具。 只看看當他 移動滑塊的面部表情。 當儲蓄越少, 年輕的臉變得更快樂。 老的臉是苦不堪言。 慢慢地,我們將它移動到中等的儲蓄率。 然後,一個高儲蓄率。 年輕的臉是越來越不滿。 年長的臉對決定是 相當滿意。 我們要看看這會否有影響人的效果。 它的好處是, 因為實際上不是偏置人, 以當一面在笑, 另一面便皺眉。 它不會告訴你應該如何移動滑塊, 它只是提醒你, 你是跟未來的自我 息息相關。
Your decisions today are going to determine its well-being. And that's something that's easy to forget. This use of virtual reality is not just good for making people look older. There are programs you can get to see how people might look if they smoke, if they get too much exposure to the sun, if they gain weight and so on. And what's good is, unlike in the experiments that Hal and myself ran with Russ Smith, you don't have to program these by yourself in order to see the virtual reality. There are applications you can get on smartphones for just a few dollars that do the same thing. This is actually a picture of Hal, my coauthor. You might recognize him from the previous demos. And just for kicks we ran his picture through the balding, aging and weight gain software to see how he would look. Hal is here, so I think we owe it to him as well as yourself to disabuse you of that last image. And I'll close it there.
你今天的決定是以確定其福祉。 而這是很容易忘記的東西。 使用這種虛擬現實, 不僅僅是讓人們看看年邁的面貌。 還有其他程式讓你可以 看到人們如果吸煙, 如果他們過多地暴露在陽光下的結果, 或如果他們體重增加,等等。 好處是, 和我,Hal, 和Russ Smith在實驗不同的是, 你不用自己手動編這些程式 才能看到虛擬的現實。 只是幾元錢一個,你便可以在智能手機上 做到同樣的事情。 這圖片實際上是Hal,我的合著者。 你可能從以前的演示中認出他。 我們只是玩玩着, 把他的照片 輸入禿頂,衰老和體重增加的軟件, 看看他會變成怎樣。 Hal是在這裡,所以我覺得我們應該為尊重他 而毀滅最後的圖片。 而我以此終結。
On behalf of Hal and myself, I wish all the best to your present and future selves. Thank you.
代表Hal和我本人, 我祝愿你現在和未來的自我都美好。 謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)