Do you ever wonder why we're surrounded with things that help us do everything faster and faster and faster? Communicate faster, but also work faster, bank faster, travel faster, find a date faster, cook faster, clean faster and do all of it all at the same time? How do you feel about cramming even more into every waking hour?
你納悶過嗎?為什麼生活中好多東西 幫助我們更快完成所有事情 溝通得更快 工作得更快、領錢存錢更快 更快的旅行、更快的遇見心儀對象 花更少時間烹飪和清理 還要一心多用 一睡醒,事情一塞再塞,大家作何感想?
Well, to my generation of Americans, speed feels like a birthright. Sometimes I think our minimum speed is Mach 3. Anything less, and we fear losing our competitive edge. But even my generation is starting to question whether we're the masters of speed or if speed is mastering us.
我這一代美國人 覺得一生下來,便要追求速度 有時我覺得,3 馬赫是基本要求 再慢,與別人競爭的優勢就沒了 但連我這代都開始質疑 究竟是我們主宰速度 還是速度掌控了我們
I'm an anthropologist at the Rand Corporation, and while many anthropologists study ancient cultures, I focus on modern day cultures and how we're adapting to all of this change happening in the world. Recently, I teamed up with an engineer, Seifu Chonde, to study speed. We were interested both in how people are adapting to this age of acceleration and its security and policy implications. What could our world look like in 25 years if the current pace of change keeps accelerating? What would it mean for transportation, or learning, communication, manufacturing, weaponry or even natural selection? Will a faster future make us more secure and productive? Or will it make us more vulnerable?
我在蘭德公司研究人類學 雖然很多人類學家研究古文化 但我致力於研究現代文化 還有我們如何適應一切變動 最近我與 Seifu Chonde 合作 他是一位工程師,我們研究速度 我們對於人們如何適應不斷加速的時代 還有加速造成的安全和政策隱憂,特別有興趣 如果變化來得越來越快 我們的世界 25 年後會是什麼樣子? 交通 學習、溝通 加工業、軍備 甚至是天擇又會是什麼樣子? 更快速的未來裡 會更安全、更有生產力嗎? 或我們只會更脆弱?
In our research, people accepted acceleration as inevitable, both the thrills and the lack of control. They fear that if they were to slow down, they might run the risk of becoming obsolete. They say they'd rather burn out than rust out. Yet at the same time, they worry that speed could erode their cultural traditions and their sense of home. But even people who are winning at the speed game admit to feeling a little uneasy. They see acceleration as widening the gap between the haves, the jet-setters who are buzzing around, and the have-nots, who are left in the digital dust.
我們的研究結果指出 人們無可避免步調變快 也會感到緊張、沒法控制 他們害怕如果放慢腳步 便會面臨風險,遭到淘汰 他們寧願筋疲力盡也不要趕不上時代 但同時 人們也擔心速度會讓傳統文化 和家的感覺流逝 即使贏了這個速度競爭 人們也不免感到憂慮 他們認為加快步調會擴大貧富差距 富人搭著噴射客機四處移動 但窮人 卻迷失在數位沙漠之中
Yes, we have good reason to forecast that the future will be faster, but what I've come to realize is that speed is paradoxical, and like all good paradoxes, it teaches us about the human experience, as absurd and complex as it is.
我們預計未來步調會更加快速 這個推測很合理 但我卻漸漸瞭解到 追求速度是個自相矛盾的行為 就像其他矛盾的事一樣 讓我們學到人類的經驗 本就建立在唐突和複雜之上
The first paradox is that we love speed, and we're thrilled by its intensity. But our prehistoric brains aren't really built for it, so we invent roller coasters and race cars and supersonic planes, but we get whiplash, carsick, jet-lagged. We didn't evolve to multitask. Rather, we evolved to do one thing with incredible focus, like hunt -- not necessarily with great speed but with endurance for great distance. But now there's a widening gap between our biology and our lifestyles, a mismatch between what our bodies are built for and what we're making them do. It's a phenomenon my mentors have called "Stone Agers in the fast lane."
第一個矛盾處:我們追求速度 也因此緊張兮兮 但我們這史前時期 就成形的大腦卻沒作好準備 所以人類發明了雲霄飛車 賽車和超音速飛機 自己卻常拉傷頸部、暈車 為時差所苦 我們一心多用的能力並沒進步 反而愈加擅長極力專注完成一件事 例如打獵,不太用追求速度 但要能跑好一段距離 現今,生理構造和生活方式 有了很大的差距 我們要自己的身體做不適合的事 我的導師比擬這現象為 「叫史前人類開車上快車道」
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
A second paradox of speed is that it can be measured objectively. Right? Miles per hour, gigabytes per second. But how speed feels, and whether we like it, is highly subjective. So we can document that the pace at which we are adopting new technologies is increasing. For example, it took 85 years from the introduction of the telephone to when the majority of Americans had phones at home. In contrast, it only took 13 years for most of us to have smartphones. And how people act and react to speed varies by culture and among different people within the same culture. Interactions that could be seen as pleasantly brisk and convenient in some cultures could be seen as horribly rude in others. I mean, you wouldn't go asking for a to-go cup at a Japanese tea ceremony so you could jet off to your next tourist stop. Would you?
第二個矛盾處: 我們能客觀量測速度,對吧? 時速、秒速 但不同速度帶來的感覺 還有我們對速度的偏好 都非常主觀 很多資料告訴我們 人類要適應新科技越來越快 舉例來說,電話出現 85 年後 大部分美國人家裡才都有電話 但智慧型手機只花了 13 年 大家便人手一機 人們對速度有不同反應 因文化而異也因人而不盡相同 有時,有些行為稀鬆平常又方便 但在其他文化 一樣的事情卻很沒禮貌 就像是,參加日本茶道宴會時 大家不會還要求外帶 才能快點到下個景點 你不會這樣做吧?
A third paradox is that speed begets speed. The faster I respond, the more responses I get, the faster I have to respond again. Having more communication and information at our fingertips at any given moment was supposed to make decision-making easier and more rational. But that doesn't really seem to be happening.
第三個矛盾處:速度是連鎖反應 我越是快點回應,就越多人回應我 這樣我又得更快回應 動動指尖就能溝通 或是查詢資料 不論什麼時候 應該要讓我們更容易、更理性做決定 但似乎事與願違
Here's just one more paradox: If all of these faster technologies were supposed to free us from drudgery, why do we all feel so pressed for time? Why are we crashing our cars in record numbers, because we think we have to answer that text right away? Shouldn't life in the fast lane feel a little more fun and a little less anxious? German speakers even have a word for this: "Eilkrankheit." In English, that's "hurry sickness." When we have to make fast decisions, autopilot brain kicks in, and we rely on our learned behaviors, our reflexes, our cognitive biases, to help us perceive and respond quickly. Sometimes that saves our lives, right? Fight or flight. But sometimes, it leads us astray in the long run.
另外還有一個矛盾處 如果更快速的科技應當免去苦差事 為什麼我們感到時間不足 為什麼我們因為要即時回覆訊息 讓車禍此起彼落發生 生活在迅速如快車道的環境中 不是應該充滿樂趣 而非焦慮嗎? 德語甚至為此造一字 「Eilkrankheit」 這個字的意思是「倉促不適感」 當我們很快得做出決定 自控式的大腦開始運轉 我們憑著學來的行為 反應、認知偏誤 更快察覺事物、做出回應 我們有時因此撿回小命,對吧? 正面迎擊或逃之夭夭 但這樣的機制長時間下來 我們有時無所適從
Oftentimes, when our society has major failures, they're not technological failures. They're failures that happen when we made decisions too quickly on autopilot. We didn't do the creative or critical thinking required to connect the dots or weed out false information or make sense of complexity. That kind of thinking can't be done fast. That's slow thinking. Two psychologists, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, started pointing this out back in 1974, and we're still struggling to do something with their insights.
很多時候,我們的社會出現嚴重紕漏 問題並非出自於科技 當大腦自控時,我們太快下決定 才出這些差錯 我們面臨危急時,無法激盪出辦法 把線索連起來 或是剔除錯誤訊息 或是意識到事情很複雜 這種決策急不來 而是需要慢慢完成 Daniel Kahneman 和 Amos Tversky 這兩位心理學家 1974 年就提出這樣的想法 但我們仍無法達到他們所言
All of modern history can be thought of as one spurt of acceleration after another. It's as if we think if we just speed up enough, we can outrun our problems. But we never do. We know this in our own lives, and policymakers know it, too. So now we're turning to artificial intelligence to help us make faster and smarter decisions to process this ever-expanding universe of data. But machines crunching data are no substitute for critical and sustained thinking by humans, whose Stone Age brains need a little time to let their impulses subside, to slow the mind and let the thoughts flow.
整段現代歷史都可以視為一次次的加速 好像只要我們思考得快一些 所有的事都能迎刃而解 但我們力有未逮 我們從生活中領悟到這樣的事實 政府決策者也知道這樣的事情 因此我們轉而追求人工智慧 幫助我們做出更快、更完善的決定 處理不停擴張的巨量資訊 但機器再怎麼分析數據 也無法取代人類 應付緊急狀況或是長遠思考 我們這石器時代成形的大腦 需要一些時間平靜下來 放慢思考 讓想法自由發展
If you're starting to think that we should just hit the brakes, that won't always be the right solution. We all know that a train that's going too fast around a bend can derail, but Seifu, the engineer, taught me that a train that's going too slowly around a bend can also derail.
如果你覺得我們該緊急煞車 這樣做並非總是妥當 我們都知道火車跑得太快 轉彎的時候會脫軌 但 Seifu,那位工程師 告訴我火車轉彎太慢,也會脫軌
So managing this spurt of acceleration starts with the understanding that we have more control over speed than we think we do, individually and as a society. Sometimes, we'll need to engineer ourselves to go faster. We'll want to solve gridlock, speed up disaster relief for hurricane victims or use 3-D printing to produce what we need on the spot, just when we need it. Sometimes, though, we'll want to make our surroundings feel slower to engineer the crash out of the speedy experience. And it's OK not to be stimulated all the time. It's good for adults and for kids. Maybe it's boring, but it gives us time to reflect. Slow time is not wasted time.
因此,要主宰速度,我們要先知道 我們其實比想像中更能掌控速度 不管是個人或是整個社會 有時候,我們得想得更快、做得更急 我們想要排解塞車車陣 或是加快救援風災的腳步 或是用 3D 列印技術當場製作所需 只要我們需要,就可以做得到 我們有時候卻想要讓一切慢下來 處理急忙後的雜亂無章 偶爾逃離時間壓力是不錯的 對成人有益 對小孩也是 這樣可能很無聊 但我們卻有了時間深思 放慢腳步並非浪費時間
And we need to reconsider what it means to save time. Culture and rituals around the world build in slowness, because slowness helps us reinforce our shared values and connect. And connection is a critical part of being human. We need to master speed, and that means thinking carefully about the trade-offs of any given technology. Will it help you reclaim time that you can use to express your humanity? Will it give you hurry sickness? Will it give other people hurry sickness? If you're lucky enough to decide the pace that you want to travel through life, it's a privilege. Use it. You might decide that you need both to speed up and to create slow time: time to reflect, to percolate at your own pace; time to listen, to empathize, to rest your mind, to linger at the dinner table.
我們必須重新想想節省時間這個概念 全世界的文化和習慣都經過長時間淬鍊 如此的平緩讓我們 強化共同的理念和連結 這種連接是人性重要的一部分 我們必須主宰速度 在使用任何科技的同時 必須仔細端詳我們犧牲了什麼 某項科技是否真的能節省時間 讓你更有人性? 還是你會感到「倉促不適感」? 或是讓周遭的人也為之所苦? 如果你有幸能決定自己人生的步調 這是種特權 請善加利用 你可能決定有時加快腳步 有時放慢步調 用自己感到舒適的步調 來檢討 沉澱 聆聽 替別人著想 讓心神歇息 在餐桌旁逗留
So as we zoom into the future, let's consider setting the technologies of speed, the purpose of speed and our expectations of speed to a more human pace.
因此當我們投身未來 讓我們決定科技的速度 決定加速的目的 還有建立對速度的實際期待 讓我們活得更有人性
Thank you.
謝謝
(Applause)
(掌聲)