In an era of extreme polarization, it's really dangerous to talk about right and wrong. You can be targeted, judged for something you said 10 years ago, 10 months ago, 10 hours ago, 10 seconds ago. And that means that those who think you're wrong may burn you at the stake or those who are on your side that think you're not sufficiently orthodox may try and cancel you. As you're thinking about right and wrong, I want you to consider three ideas. What if right and wrong is something that changes over time. What if right and wrong is something that can change because of technology. What if technology is moving exponentially?
在嚴重兩級化的時代, 談「對錯」是很危險的事。 你可能會成為目標,被評斷, 只因為你在十年前、十個月前、 十小時前、十秒鐘前說了某些話。 那就表示,認為你錯了的人, 會嚴厲懲罰你, 或者站在你這一邊的人 若認為你不夠正統, 可能會試圖排擠你。 當你在想著對錯時, 我希望你能考量三個想法。 如果對錯會隨著時間改變呢? 如果對錯會隨著科技改變呢? 如果科技是以指數的速度在發展呢?
So as you're thinking about this concept, remember human sacrifice used to be normal and natural. It was a way of appeasing the gods. Otherwise the rain wouldn't come, the sun wouldn't shine. Public executions. They were common, normal, legal. You used to take your kids to watch beheadings in the streets of Paris. One of the greatest wrongs, slavery, indentured servitude, that was something that was practiced for millennia. It was practiced across the Incas, the Mayas, the Chinese, the Indians in North and South America. And as you're thinking about this, one question is why did something so wrong last for so long? And a second question is: why did it go away? And why did it go away in a few short decades in legal terms?
所以,當你正在思考這個概念時, 別忘了,活人獻祭也曾 被視為是合乎常情的事。 那是一種讓神息怒的方式。 要不然,雨就不會降下來, 太陽就不會照耀。 公開行刑。 也曾是常見、正常、合法的。 以前人會帶孩子 到巴黎街上去看斬首。 最大的錯誤之一,奴隸制度, 用契約約束的奴役, 卻行之有數千年。 包括印加人、馬雅人、中國人、 北美洲和南美洲的 印地安人都有這麼做。 當你在思考這些時, 想想一個問題,為什麼 錯得這麼離譜的事 會持續這麼久? 還有一個問題:它為什麼會消失? 為什麼在短短幾十年間, 它就不再合法了?
Certainly there was a work by extraordinary abolitionists who risked their lives, but there may be something else happening alongside these brave abolitionists. Consider energy and the industrial revolution. A single barrel of oil contains the energy equivalent of the work of five to 10 people. Add that to machines, and suddenly you've got millions of people's equivalent labor at your disposal. You can quit oppressing people and have a doubling in lifespan after a flattened lifespan for millennia. The world economy, which had been flat for millennia, all of a sudden explodes. And you get enormous amounts of wealth and food and other things produced by far fewer hands.
這背後一定有一些 了不起的廢奴主義者做出貢獻, 但除了這些勇敢的廢奴主義者 之外,可能還有其他因素。 想想看能源及工業革命。 單一桶石油所含的能源就等同於 5~10 個人的工作力。 再加上機器, 突然間,你就可以自行支配 等同於數百萬人的勞動力。 可以不用再壓迫人, 且在壽命持續數千年都沒有之後, 可以延長為兩倍了。 世界經濟也持平了數千年, 突然間就爆衝起來。 你還能得到大量的財富、 食物,及其他東西, 而且是用更少的人力所生產。
Technology changes the way we interact with each other in fundamental ways. New technologies like the machine gun completely changed the nature of warfare in World War I. It drove people into trenches. You were in the British trench, or you were in the German trench. Anything in between was no man's land. You entered no man's land. You were shot. You were killed. You tried to leave the trench in the other direction. Then your own side would shoot you because you were a deserter.
科技從根本上改變了 我們與彼此互動的方式。 像機關槍這類新科技 在第一次世界大戰中 完全改變了戰爭的本質。 讓人必須要躲到戰壕裡。 你若不是在英國的戰壕裡, 就是在德國的戰壕裡。 兩者之間只有無人地帶。 你若是進入無人地帶, 就會中槍,就會被殺。 你若是嘗試朝另一個方向離開戰壕, 你自己這一邊的人會射殺你, 因為你是逃兵。
In a weird way, today's machine guns are narrowcast social media. We're shooting at each other. We're shooting at those we think are wrong with posts, with tweets, with photographs, with accusations, with comments. And what it's done is it's created these two trenches where you have to be either in this trench or that trench. And there's almost no middle ground to meet each other, to try and find some sort of a discussion between right and wrong.
就一種很奇怪的意義來說, 現今的機關槍就是窄播社群媒體。 我們在朝彼此開槍。 認為誰錯了,就朝誰開槍, 我們的子彈包括貼文、 推文、照片、指控、評論。 造成的結果就是產生了兩條戰壕, 你若不是在這條戰壕內, 就是在那條戰壕內。 兩者之間幾乎沒有 妥協區域可以讓大家相會 並試圖找到對錯之間的討論。
As you drive around the United States, you see signs on lawns.
當你在美國開車時,
Some say, "Black Lives Matter." Others say, "We support the police." You very rarely see both signs on the same lawn. And yet if you ask people, most people would probably support Black Lives Matter and they would also support their police. So as you think of these polarized times, as you think of right and wrong, you have to understand that right and wrong changes and is now changing in exponential ways.
會看到草皮上立著標語。 有些寫著「黑命貴」。 也有些寫著「我們支持警察」。 很難看到一片草皮上 同時有這兩種標語。 但,如果你去問別人, 大部分人可能會支持黑命貴, 且他們同時也支持他們的警察。 當你在思考這些兩極化的時期, 當你在思考對錯, 你必須要了解,對錯會改變, 且現在是以指數的速度在改變。
Take the issue of gay marriage. In 1996, two-thirds of the US population was against gay marriage. Today two-thirds is for. It's almost 180-degree shift in the opinion. In part, this is because of protests, because people came out of the closet, because of AIDS, but a great deal of it has to do with social media. A great deal of it has to do with people out in our homes, in our living rooms, through television, through film, through posts, through people being comfortable enough, our friends, our neighbors, our family, to say, "I'm gay." And this has shifted opinion even in some of the most conservative of places. Take the Pope. As Cardinal in 2010, he was completely against gay marriage. He becomes Pope. And three years after the last sentence he comes out with "Who am I to judge?" And then today, he's in favor of civil unions.
以同性婚姻為例。 1996 年,所有美國人中 有 3 分之 2 反對同性婚姻。 現今,有 3 分之 2 支持。 這幾乎可說是看法 180 度大轉變。 有部分的原因是抗議, 因為同志出櫃, 因為愛滋病, 但有很大一部分是因為社群媒體。 有很大一部分是因為我們家裡的人, 我們客廳裡的人,透過電視, 透過電影,透過貼文, 透過相處夠自在的人, 我們的朋友,我們的鄰居, 我們的家人,說出「我是同志」。 這造成了看法的轉變, 就連一些最保守的地方也是如此。 以教宗為例。 2010 年,身為樞機主教, 他完全反對同性婚姻。 他成了教宗。 上次發表意見之後 3 年, 他說出「我有什麼資格評斷?」 現今,他則是支持民事結合。
As you're thinking about technology changing ethics, you also have to consider that technology is now moving exponentially. As right and wrong changes, if you take the position, "I know right. And if you completely disagree with me, if you partially disagree with me, if you even quibble with me, then you're wrong," then there's no discussion, no tolerance, no evolution, and certainly no learning.
當你在思考科技改變倫理的議題時, 你也得考量現今科技 是以指數的速度在發展。 隨著對錯不斷改變, 如果你選擇的立場是 「我知道什麼是對的。 如果你完全不認同我, 如果你部分不認同我, 如果你跟我爭論,那你就是錯的。」 那麼,就不會有討論, 不會有包容,不會有進展, 肯定也不會有學習。
Most of us are not vegetarians yet. Then again, we haven't had a whole lot of faster, better, cheaper alternatives to meat. But now that we're getting synthetic meats, as the price drops from 380,000 dollars in 2013 to 9 dollars today, a great big chunk of people are going to start becoming vegetarian or quasi-vegetarian. And then in retrospect, these pictures of walking into the fanciest, most expensive restaurants in town and walking past racks of bloody steaks is going to look very different in 10 years, in 20 years and 30 years.
我們大部分人還不是素食者。 然而,我們還沒有其他更快速、 更佳、更便宜的選擇可以代替肉類。 但現在我們可以取得人造合成肉, 其價格從 2013 年的 38 萬美金 掉到現在的 9 塊美金, 許多人將會開始變成 素食者或半素食者。 將來回頭看,這樣的畫面, 走進鎮上最炫最貴的餐廳, 經過的架子上放著血淋淋的牛排, 10 年、20 年、30 年後 這樣的畫面看起來會大不同。
In these polarized times, I'd like to revive two words you rarely hear today: humility and forgiveness. When you judge the past, your ancestors, your forefathers, do so with a little bit more humility, because perhaps if you'd been educated in that time, if you'd lived in that time, you would've done a lot of things wrong. Not because they're right. Not because we don't see they're wrong today, but simply because our notions, our understanding of right and wrong change across time.
在這些兩極化的時期, 我想要重提兩個現今很難聽到的詞: 謙卑和寬恕。 當你評斷過去、 你的祖先、你的先人時, 別忘了帶著一點謙卑, 因為,如果你是在 那個時期接受教育, 如果你生活在那個時期, 你可能會做錯許多事。 並非因為它們是對的。 並非因為現今我們 不把它們視為錯的, 只單純是因為我們的見解, 我們對於對錯的了解, 會隨時間而改變。
The second word, forgiveness. Forgiveness is incredibly important these days. You cannot cancel somebody for saying the wrong word, for having done something 10 years ago, for having triggered you and not being a hundred percent right. To build a community, you have to build it and talk to people and learn from people who may have very different points of view from yours. You have to allow them a space instead of creating a no man's land. A middle ground, a creation and a space of empathy. This is a time to build community. This is not a time to continue ripping nations apart.
第二個詞,寬恕。 現今,寬恕極度重要。 你不能因為某人說錯話就排擠他, 因為他 10 年前做的事就排擠他, 因為他觸怒你 或沒有 100% 正確就排擠他。 要建立起共同體,你必須 與別人談,向別人學習, 即便是觀點與你大大相逕庭的人。 你必須為他們留有空間, 而不是弄個無人地帶; 留個中間地帶,創建同理的空間。 現在是該建立共同體的時候。 現在不是該持續撕裂國家的時候。
Thank you very much.
非常謝謝。