I want to talk today about -- I've been asked to take the long view, and I'm going to tell you what I think are the three biggest problems for humanity from this long point of view. Some of these have already been touched upon by other speakers, which is encouraging. It seems that there's not just one person who thinks that these problems are important.
今天我所要讲的是- 他们让我谈谈长远的观点-我要告诉你们 我认为,从长远来看, 人类面临着三大问题。 其中有些问题已经被其他讲演者提到了, 这是很鼓舞人心的。 看起来远不止一个人 认为这些问题意义重大。
The first is -- death is a big problem. If you look at the statistics, the odds are not very favorable to us. So far, most people who have lived have also died. Roughly 90 percent of everybody who has been alive has died by now. So the annual death rate adds up to 150,000 -- sorry, the daily death rate -- 150,000 people per day, which is a huge number by any standard. The annual death rate, then, becomes 56 million. If we just look at the single, biggest cause of death -- aging -- it accounts for roughly two-thirds of all human people who die. That adds up to an annual death toll of greater than the population of Canada. Sometimes, we don't see a problem because either it's too familiar or it's too big. Can't see it because it's too big. I think death might be both too familiar and too big for most people to see it as a problem.
第一——死亡是一个重大的问题。 如果你看看统计数据, 形式对我们来说并不乐观。 到目前为止,大部分曾经活过的人,都已经死了。 大致来说,所有人类中百分之九十的人目前已经死亡了. 因此,年死亡率总计就是15万—— 对不起,日死亡率——每天15万人, 以任何标准看,这个数字都是巨大的。 那么,年死亡率就变成了5千6百万人。 如果我们只着眼于死亡的最大的单一因素——衰老—— 大约有三分之二的人因此而死。 这些每年因衰老而死亡的人数 比加拿大的人口还要多。 有时,我们无视于问题之存在, 因为要么这个问题太熟悉,要么这个问题太大了。 因为问题太大了,所以我们看不见。 我认为,死亡对我们来说,既过于熟悉也过于巨大 因此大多数人都不会把它当做一个问题来看待。
Once you think about it, you see this is not statistical points; these are -- let's see, how far have I talked? I've talked for three minutes. So that would be, roughly, 324 people have died since I've begun speaking. People like -- it's roughly the population in this room has just died. Now, the human cost of that is obvious, once you start to think about it -- the suffering, the loss -- it's also, economically, enormously wasteful. I just look at the information, and knowledge, and experience that is lost due to natural causes of death in general, and aging, in particular.
一旦你想一下,你就会发现这并不是统计数字而已。 这些是——让我看看,我讲了有多久了? 我已经讲了三分钟。 那么,从我开始讲话到现在,有大概324个人已经去世了。 这个人数就像——大概有这个房间里的那么多人刚才去世了。 死亡给人类带来的损失是很明显的。 如果你开始细想——死亡带来的痛苦、损失 从经济上来说,这也是一种巨大的浪费。 光从信息、知识和经验来看, 一般而言,它们都因人的自然死亡而消失了, 尤其是因衰老而造成的死亡。
Suppose we approximated one person with one book? Now, of course, this is an underestimation. A person's lifetime of learning and experience is a lot more than you could put into a single book. But let's suppose we did this. 52 million people die of natural causes each year corresponds, then, to 52 million volumes destroyed. Library of Congress holds 18 million volumes. We are upset about the burning of the Library of Alexandria. It's one of the great cultural tragedies that we remember, even today. But this is the equivalent of three Libraries of Congress -- burnt down, forever lost -- each year.
假设我们把一个人比作一本书, 当然,这对人来说是低估的。 一个人一生的学识和经验 远不能为一本书所容纳。 但让我们这么假设吧。 每年有五千两百万人因自然原因而死亡 那么,相应的,五千两百万册书也毁灭了。 国会图书馆有一千八百万册藏书。 亚历山大图书馆被烧毁让我们深感惋惜。 这是一大文化悲剧 我们直到今天还记忆犹新。 但死亡造成的损失,相当于每年有三座国会图书馆的藏书 灰飞烟灭,永远消亡。
So that's the first big problem. And I wish Godspeed to Aubrey de Grey, and other people like him, to try to do something about this as soon as possible. Existential risk -- the second big problem. Existential risk is a threat to human survival, or to the long-term potential of our species. Now, why do I say that this is a big problem? Well, let's first look at the probability -- and this is very, very difficult to estimate -- but there have been only four studies on this in recent years, which is surprising. You would think that it would be of some interest to try to find out more about this given that the stakes are so big, but it's a very neglected area.
因此,这是第一个重大问题。 我要祝奥布里·德·格雷(译者:研究永生的学者) 和他的同行们成功, 祝他们在这个问题上尽早有所进展。 存在风险——第二个重大问题。 存在风险是对人类生存,或对整个人类种群的长远潜能的一种威胁。 为什么我会认为这是一个重大问题? 让我们来看看可能性—— 这非常难估量—— 但近年来,这个领域只出现了四篇研究文章。 这很让人吃惊。 你可能会认为,既然厉害关系如此巨大, 那么在这个领域做研究一定是有意义的。 然而,这是一个被人们忽视的领域。
But there have been four studies -- one by John Lesley, wrote a book on this. He estimated a probability that we will fail to survive the current century: 50 percent. Similarly, the Astronomer Royal, whom we heard speak yesterday, also has a 50 percent probability estimate. Another author doesn't give any numerical estimate, but says the probability is significant that it will fail. I wrote a long paper on this. I said assigning a less than 20 percent probability would be a mistake in light of the current evidence we have. Now, the exact figures here, we should take with a big grain of salt, but there seems to be a consensus that the risk is substantial. Everybody who has looked at this and studied it agrees.
但是,已经有了四篇研究—— 其中一篇由约翰·雷斯利所著,为这个问题写了一本书。 据他估计,有50%的可能性 我们会在这个世纪灭亡。 类似的,皇家天文学家(名号)——我们昨天听过他的演讲—— 的估算结果也是50%。 另外一个作者并没有给出任何数据估算, 但他指出,人类灭亡的可能性非常高。 我就这个问题写了一篇长篇论文 我在文章里指出,根据现有的证据, 任何低于20%的可能性估算都应该是错误的。 对于这里的具体数字, 我们不应该全盘相信, 但人们似乎对此达成共识,风险的确不小。 每个看过并研究过这方面的人,都会同意。
Now, if we think about what just reducing the probability of human extinction by just one percentage point -- not very much -- so that's equivalent to 60 million lives saved, if we just count the currently living people, the current generation. Now one percent of six billion people is equivalent to 60 million. So that's a large number. If we were to take into account future generations that will never come into existence if we blow ourselves up, then the figure becomes astronomical. If we could eventually colonize a chunk of the universe -- the Virgo supercluster -- maybe it will take us 100 million years to get there, but if we go extinct we never will. Then, even a one percentage point reduction in the extinction risk could be equivalent to this astronomical number -- 10 to the power of 32.
那么,如果我们考虑 将人类灭绝的可能性几率只减少一个百分点—— 并不是很多——那就相当于拯救了六千万的生命, 而这只是计算现存的人类,当代人口。 那么六十亿人的百分之一相当于六千万。 这是一个很大的数字。 如果我们把未来的人口也算进来 如果我们把自己毁灭了,未来人口也永不会存在, 那么这数字就变成天文数字了。 如果我们最终可以开拓宇宙的一角为生存地—— 比如室女座超星系团—— 可能我们需要一亿年才能到达那儿, 但如果我们灭亡了,我们永远也到不了 那么,即使是减少百分之一 的灭绝风险,那将等同于 这个极为庞大的数字——10的32次方。
So if you take into account future generations as much as our own, every other moral imperative of philanthropic cost just becomes irrelevant. The only thing you should focus on would be to reduce existential risk because even the tiniest decrease in existential risk would just overwhelm any other benefit you could hope to achieve. And even if you just look at the current people, and ignore the potential that would be lost if we went extinct, it should still have a high priority. Now, let me spend the rest of my time on the third big problem, because it's more subtle and perhaps difficult to grasp. Think about some time in your life -- some people might never have experienced it -- but some people, there are just those moments that you have experienced where life was fantastic.
那么,如果你像关心我们自己一样关心我们的后代, 所有其他基于道义责任的慈善都变得无关紧要。 你所应该关注的唯一事情 就是减少生存风险 因为即使只减少极少的一点生存风险, 其带来的好处也可以覆盖其它任何你希望获得的利益。 另外,如果你仅仅关注现在的人类, 而忽略那些一旦我们灭绝后可能失去的潜能, 减少存在风险也仍旧值得优先考虑。 现在,让我把余下的时间花在对第三个重大问题的探讨上。 因为这个问题更加微妙,也可能难以把握。 试着回忆一下你生命中的某些时刻—— 有些人可能从未体会过——但有些人 在他们生命的某些时刻 体会到生命的美妙。
It might have been at the moment of some great, creative inspiration you might have had when you just entered this flow stage. Or when you understood something you had never done before. Or perhaps in the ecstasy of romantic love. Or an aesthetic experience -- a sunset or a great piece of art. Every once in a while we have these moments, and we realize just how good life can be when it's at its best. And you wonder, why can't it be like that all the time? You just want to cling onto this. And then, of course, it drifts back into ordinary life and the memory fades. And it's really difficult to recall, in a normal frame of mind, just how good life can be at its best. Or how bad it can be at its worst.
它可能是当你进入心流体验时 所经历的很棒的,产生创造性灵感的时候。 或者是当你弄懂了某件以往从未涉足的事情的时刻。 或者是浪漫爱情中那销魂迷醉的时刻。 或者是一种对美感的欣赏——如一次落日,或一幅名画。 时不时的,我们便会经历这样的时刻, 我们意识到,生命最美好的时刻是多么令人陶醉。 然后你就想,为什么生活不能总是那么美好呢? 你就是想抓住此刻不放。 然后呢,当然,生活又回到了常态,美好记忆悄然消退。 对我们来说,以一颗平常之心是非常难以回想 生活在最精彩的时候是多么的美好, 或在最差劲的时候是多么的糟糕。
The third big problem is that life isn't usually as wonderful as it could be. I think that's a big, big problem. It's easy to say what we don't want. Here are a number of things that we don't want -- illness, involuntary death, unnecessary suffering, cruelty, stunted growth, memory loss, ignorance, absence of creativity. Suppose we fixed these things -- we did something about all of these. We were very successful. We got rid of all of these things. We might end up with something like this, which is -- I mean, it's a heck of a lot better than that. But is this really the best we can dream of? Is this the best we can do?
第三个重大问题是,生命通常达不到 它可能达到的美妙状态。 我想这是一个非常,非常大的问题。 我们很容易指出出我们不喜欢的东西。 以下都是我们避之而不及的东西—— 疾病、非自愿死亡、不必要的痛苦、残酷、 发育停滞、健忘症、无知,以及缺乏创造力。 假设我们解决了这些问题——我们对所有这些都采取些措施。 我们对此非常成功。 我们摆脱了所有这些难题。 我们可能会变成这样。 我的意思是,这将比原来的境况要好一百倍, 但是,这真的是我们能想到的最好结果吗? 这真的是我们所能做的最好程度吗?
Or is it possible to find something a little bit more inspiring to work towards? And if we think about this, I think it's very clear that there are ways in which we could change things, not just by eliminating negatives, but adding positives. On my wish list, at least, would be: much longer, healthier lives, greater subjective well-being, enhanced cognitive capacities, more knowledge and understanding, unlimited opportunity for personal growth beyond our current biological limits, better relationships, an unbounded potential for spiritual, moral and intellectual development.
还是有可能找到一些更加鼓舞人心的目标来为之奋斗? 如果我们这样想, 我认为,有一点非常明确,那就是 如果想改变现状,除了消除负面因素, 还可以增加积极因素。 至少在我的愿望清单上会有—— 更长久、更健康的幸福,更美满的康乐安宁, 更强的认知能力,更多的知识和领悟力, 超越目前人类生物极限的无限的个人成长机会, 更好的人际关系, 更宽广的精神,道德 以及才智方面的发展空间。
If we want to achieve this, what, in the world, would have to change? And this is the answer -- we would have to change. Not just the world around us, but we, ourselves. Not just the way we think about the world, but the way we are -- our very biology. Human nature would have to change. Now, when we think about changing human nature, the first thing that comes to mind are these human modification technologies -- growth hormone therapy, cosmetic surgery, stimulants like Ritalin, Adderall, anti-depressants, anabolic steroids, artificial hearts. It's a pretty pathetic list. They do great things for a few people who suffer from some specific condition, but for most people, they don't really transform what it is to be human. And they also all seem a little bit -- most people have this instinct that, well, sure, there needs to be anti-depressants for the really depressed people. But there's a kind of queasiness that these are unnatural in some way.
如果我们想达到这些目标,世界应如何改变? 答案是——该改变的是我们。 不仅仅改变我们周围的世界,更应该改变我们自己。 不仅仅改变我们看待世界的方式,还有我们自身存在的方式——我们自身的生物特性。 人类本质必须要改变。 那么,当我们考虑改变人类本质时, 首先想到的 便是那些人类改造技术—— 荷尔蒙生长疗法,整容手术, 如利他林,安非他命缓释剂之类的兴奋剂,抗抑郁剂, 合成代谢类固醇,人造心脏。 这是一张可悲的清单。 这些技术极大地帮助了一部分人, 这些人患有某些特定的病症。 但对与大多数人来说,它们并不能真正改变 人的本质。 并且,它们看起来也有点—— 大多数人都会本能地认为, 虽然抗抑郁剂对严重抑郁的人来说确实是必须的, 但这里面总有一点让人不舒服的成分, 因为在某种程度上说,这毕竟是很不自然的。
It's worth recalling that there are a lot of other modification technologies and enhancement technologies that we use. We have skin enhancements, clothing. As far as I can see, all of you are users of this enhancement technology in this room, so that's a great thing. Mood modifiers have been used from time immemorial -- caffeine, alcohol, nicotine, immune system enhancement, vision enhancement, anesthetics -- we take that very much for granted, but just think about how great progress that is -- like, having an operation before anesthetics was not fun. Contraceptives, cosmetics and brain reprogramming techniques -- that sounds ominous,
值得一提的是,有许多其他的 改造技术和改善技术供我们使用。 我们有改善皮肤的产品,服装。 据我的观察,你们所有人都是 这改善技术的使用者,所以这是个好东西。 自古以来,情绪改善剂就一直为人们所使用—— 咖啡因、酒精、尼古丁、免疫系统增强剂、 视力增强品、麻醉剂。 我们通常认为这些是理所当然的,没什么稀奇, 但想想看这是多么伟大的进步—— 比如,不实施麻醉而进行手术可不是好玩的。 避孕药、美容用品和大脑重新编程技术—— 听起来并不像什么好事。
but the distinction between what is a technology -- a gadget would be the archetype -- and other ways of changing and rewriting human nature is quite subtle. So if you think about what it means to learn arithmetic or to learn to read, you're actually, literally rewriting your own brain. You're changing the microstructure of your brain as you go along. So in a broad sense, we don't need to think about technology as only little gadgets, like these things here, but even institutions and techniques, psychological methods and so forth. Forms of organization can have a profound impact on human nature.
但技术——典型的例子就是小装置, 以及其他改变和重塑人类本质的方法, 这两者的差别很微妙。 因此,如果你思考学习算术和阅读意义何在, 那实际上你就是在重写你自己的大脑。 你在学习的过程中,也正在改变大脑的微型结构。 所以,广义而言,我们不必认为技术 只是一些小装置,如上面列举的那些。 还应包括甚至像制度,技能, 心理学方法等等。 组织机构的不同形式可对人类本质产生深远影响。
Looking ahead, there is a range of technologies that are almost certain to be developed sooner or later. We are very ignorant about what the time scale for these things are, but they all are consistent with everything we know about physical laws, laws of chemistry, etc. It's possible to assume, setting aside a possibility of catastrophe, that sooner or later we will develop all of these. And even just a couple of these would be enough to transform the human condition.
遥望未来,一系列技术 迟早会被研发出来。 虽然我们对这些技术何时面世一无所知, 但它们必然与我们所知的一切知识相一致, 包括物理定律、化学定律等等。 我们可以假定, 排除人类遭受大灾难的可能性, 迟早我们都会发展出所有这些技术。 而且,仅仅这其中的几项就足够 改变人类的处境。
So let's look at some of the dimensions of human nature that seem to leave room for improvement. Health span is a big and urgent thing, because if you're not alive, then all the other things will be to little avail. Intellectual capacity -- let's take that box, which falls into a lot of different sub-categories: memory, concentration, mental energy, intelligence, empathy. These are really great things. Part of the reason why we value these traits is that they make us better at competing with other people -- they're positional goods. But part of the reason -- and that's the reason why we have ethical ground for pursuing these -- is that they're also intrinsically valuable. It's just better to be able to understand more of the world around you and the people that you are communicating with, and to remember what you have learned. Modalities and special faculties. Now, the human mind is not a single unitary information processor, but it has a lot of different, special, evolved modules that do specific things for us. If you think about what we normally take as giving life a lot of its meaning -- music, humor, eroticism, spirituality, aesthetics, nurturing and caring, gossip, chatting with people --
那么,让我们看看人类本质中哪些部分 是有进步空间的。 寿命长短是一个巨大而紧迫的问题, 因为如果你死了, 那么所有其他事情都一无所用了。 智力——看那个方框, 它可以分为许多不同的子目录—— 记忆力,注意力,精神能量,理解力,情感共鸣。 这些都是非常美妙的东西。 我们之所以重视这些特质,一方面是因为 它们能令我们在与他人的竞争中处于更有利的位置, 所以它们是地位商品。 但另一方面的原因—— 即从人类的本质上看,它们也是很有价值的, 这也是为什么我们拥有追求这些特质的道德基础。 去理解你周围的世界和人 以及记住所学的知识, 能让你变得更好。 不同的模式和特殊能力. 人类的思维并不是一个单一的信息处理器, 相反,它拥有许多不同的、特殊的、已进化的模块, 这些模块各司其职,为我们服务。 想一下那些通常我们认为赋予生活许多意义的事物—— 音乐、幽默、性爱、灵性、美学 养育和关心、八卦、与他人聊天。
all of these, very likely, are enabled by a special circuitry that we humans have, but that you could have another intelligent life form that lacks these. We're just lucky that we have the requisite neural machinery to process music and to appreciate it and enjoy it. All of these would enable, in principle -- be amenable to enhancement. Some people have a better musical ability and ability to appreciate music than others have. It's also interesting to think about what other things are -- so if these all enabled great values, why should we think that evolution has happened to provide us with all the modalities we would need to engage with other values that there might be?
所有的这些,都类似的由一个特殊的 每个人都具备的电路所启动, 但很可能,另外一种智慧生命形态却没有这些装置。 我们只是幸运地拥有了这种必备的神经装置 来处理音乐,欣赏它,并从中得到乐趣。 所有的这些,从原则上说,都可以以某些方式改进。 有些人拥有比他人优秀的音乐能力 及更好的音乐欣赏能力。 如果想想其它事物的情况,那会很有意思 那么,如果这些事物都能带来宝贵的价值, 为什么我们要认为,这些模式, 这些我们要用来与其他可能存在的价值体系来沟通的模式, 是由进化凑巧提供的呢?
Imagine a species that just didn't have this neural machinery for processing music. And they would just stare at us with bafflement when we spend time listening to a beautiful performance, like the one we just heard -- because of people making stupid movements, and they would be really irritated and wouldn't see what we were up to. But maybe they have another faculty, something else that would seem equally irrational to us, but they actually tap into some great possible value there. But we are just literally deaf to that kind of value. So we could think of adding on different, new sensory capacities and mental faculties. Bodily functionality and morphology and affective self-control. Greater subjective well-being. Be able to switch between relaxation and activity -- being able to go slow when you need to do that, and to speed up. Able to switch back and forth more easily would be a neat thing to be able to do -- easier to achieve the flow state, when you're totally immersed in something you are doing. Conscientiousness and sympathy. The ability to -- it's another interesting application that would have large social ramification, perhaps. If you could actually choose to preserve your romantic attachments to one person, undiminished through time, so that wouldn't have to -- love would never have to fade if you didn't want it to. That's probably not all that difficult. It might just be a simple hormone or something that could do this.
假设有这样一个物种 它们刚好没有能够处理音乐的神经装置。 当我们花时间聆听一曲美妙的演奏时, 就像我们刚听到的那支, 它们只能迷惑的盯着我们,因为觉得人们在做愚蠢的举动。 并且它们会变得很烦躁,不知道我们到底在干什么。 但是,它们可能具有另外一种能力, 一种同样对我们来说毫无意义的东西, 但它们的确会在这方面开发出一些美好的可能的价值。 但我们对那种价值就是充耳不闻。 因此,我们可以考虑增加不同的 新式的感官机能和精神能力。 身体功能、形态以及情感自我控制。 更高层次的主观幸福。 能够在放松和活动之间转换 能够根据需要,或放慢速度或加快步伐。 能够进退更加自如 是件很棒的事, 它可以让我们更加容易进入心流状态, 即一种完全沉浸于所做之事时的状态。 责任心和同情心。 这另一种有趣的能力 会带来巨大的社会分歧问题。 如果你真的能够保存你对另一个人的浪漫爱恋, 不受时光侵蚀, 那么,爱情就会随你心意,永葆灿烂。 这也许并不是太难做到的事情。 可能只需要一种普通激素或其它什么材料。
It's been done in voles. You can engineer a prairie vole to become monogamous when it's naturally polygamous. It's just a single gene. Might be more complicated in humans, but perhaps not that much. This is the last picture that I want to -- now we've got to use the laser pointer. A possible mode of being here would be a way of life -- a way of being, experiencing, thinking, seeing, interacting with the world. Down here in this little corner, here, we have the little sub-space of this larger space that is accessible to human beings -- beings with our biological capacities. It's a part of the space that's accessible to animals; since we are animals, we are a subset of that.
人们在田鼠身上做过这种实验。 本性上是一雄多雌制的草原田鼠,经过改造后, 可变为一雄一雌制。 只是单一基因的转变 对于人类这可能更加复杂,但也许并不那么麻烦。 这是我想讨论的最后一张图片 现在我们要用镭射指针了。 一种可能存在的模式,是一种生活的方式 一种存在、经历、思考、观察、 及与世界互动的方式。 在下面这里的小角落里,我们可以看到这个子空间 存在于这片较大的、属于我们 这种具有人类能力的生物可及的空间。 这空间属于更大的动物可及空间的一部分—— 因为我们也是动物,所以我们属于动物的分支。
And then you can imagine some enhancements of human capacities. There would be different modes of being you could experience if you were able to stay alive for, say, 200 years. Then you could live sorts of lives and accumulate wisdoms that are just not possible for humans as we currently are. So then, you move off to this larger sphere of "human +," and you could continue that process and eventually explore a lot of this larger space of possible modes of being.
那么我们可以想象对人类的能力进行一些改善。 你可能可以体验不同的存在模式, 假设你能活到200岁吧。 那么你就可以体验不同的生活并积累智慧, 而以我们现阶段的人类形态,我们是无法做到的。 那么,然后我们迈步来到这片更大的人类空间, 我们不断地前进, 最终,在这片更大的空间,我们可以探索许多可能的生存方式。
Now, why is that a good thing to do? Well, we know already that in this little human circle there, there are these enormously wonderful and worthwhile modes of being -- human life at its best is wonderful. We have no reason to believe that within this much, much larger space there would not also be extremely worthwhile modes of being, perhaps ones that would be way beyond our wildest ability even to imagine or dream about. And so, to fix this third problem, I think we need -- slowly, carefully, with ethical wisdom and constraint -- develop the means that enable us to go out in this larger space and explore it and find the great values that might hide there. Thanks.
那么,为什么这么做有益呢? 我们已经知道,在这片小小的人类空间中, 有极多美妙和宝贵的生存模式 人类生活的最高境界是美好的。 我们没有理由不相信,在这片更大的空间中 会存在更多极其宝贵的生存方式。 它们可能大大超越我们智慧的极限, 我们甚至做梦也无法想象得到。 因此,要解决这第三个问题 我认为我们需要缓慢地,仔细地,带着道德智慧和自制力 来发展一些方式让我们能够走进并探索这片更宽广的空间。 并且找到那里可能隐藏着的巨大价值。 谢谢。