"These are the times," said Thomas Paine, "that try men's souls." And they're trying ours now.
湯瑪斯·潘恩曾說: 「眼下是考驗人們靈魂的時刻。」 而現在正是考驗我們靈魂的時刻。
This is a fateful moment in the history of the West. We've seen divisive elections and divided societies. We've seen a growth of extremism in politics and religion, all of it fueled by anxiety, uncertainty and fear, of a world that's changing almost faster than we can bear, and the sure knowledge that it's going to change faster still. I have a friend in Washington. I asked him, what was it like being in America during the recent presidential election? He said to me, "Well, it was like the man sitting on the deck of the Titanic with a glass of whiskey in his hand and he's saying, 'I know I asked for ice --
這是西方史上決定命運的時刻, 我們見到了造成分裂的選舉 以及分化的社會。 我們目睹極端主義 在政治及宗教中壯大, 這背後的刺激動因是 焦慮、不確定性、及恐懼。 因為世界的改變太快, 快到讓我們幾乎無法承受。 也因為我們很肯定地知道, 世界仍然會繼續快速改變下去。 我有一個在華盛頓的朋友, 我問他,在最近一次的 總統大選期間, 身在美國是什麼感覺? 他對我說:「嗯, 感覺就像一個人, 坐在鐵達尼號的甲板上, 手上拿著一杯威士忌, 說:『我知道我要求要加冰……
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
but this is ridiculous.'"
但這樣真的太誇張了!』」 (註:鐵達尼後來撞上冰山)
So is there something we can do, each of us, to be able to face the future without fear? I think there is. And one way into it is to see that perhaps the most simple way into a culture and into an age is to ask: What do people worship? People have worshipped so many different things -- the sun, the stars, the storm. Some people worship many gods, some one, some none. In the 19th and 20th centuries, people worshipped the nation, the Aryan race, the communist state. What do we worship? I think future anthropologists will take a look at the books we read on self-help, self-realization, self-esteem. They'll look at the way we talk about morality as being true to oneself, the way we talk about politics as a matter of individual rights, and they'll look at this wonderful new religious ritual we have created. You know the one? Called the "selfie." And I think they'll conclude that what we worship in our time is the self, the me, the I.
所以,是不是有什麼是我們能做的, 我們每個人都能做的, 能讓我們無懼地面對未來? 我認為有。 其中一種方法是要了解到, 也許進入一種文化和一個時代 最簡單的方式, 就是問:人們崇拜什麼? 人們曾經崇拜過許多不同的東西: 如太陽、星星、暴風雨。 有些人崇拜多神, 有些人獨尊一神,有些人不信神。 在十九和二十世紀, 人們崇拜民族、 亞利安種、共產國家。 我們崇拜什麼? 我認為未來的人類學家, 會看看我們在閱讀的那些 關於自我協助、自我實現、 自我尊嚴的書; 他們會看看我們如何談論道德, 說它就是忠於自我; 看看我們如何談論政治, 說它就是個人的權利; 他們也會看看我們所創造的 這個美好的新宗教儀式, 你們知道這個嗎? 它叫做「自拍」。 我想他們得到的結論會是: 在我們的這個時代,我們崇拜的 是自我、是我。
And this is great. It's liberating. It's empowering. It's wonderful. But don't forget that biologically, we're social animals. We've spent most of our evolutionary history in small groups. We need those face-to-face interactions where we learn the choreography of altruism and where we create those spiritual goods like friendship and trust and loyalty and love that redeem our solitude. When we have too much of the "I" and too little of the "we," we can find ourselves vulnerable, fearful and alone. It was no accident that Sherry Turkle of MIT called the book she wrote on the impact of social media "Alone Together."
這樣很棒, 這樣很解放, 這樣很有自主權,這樣很美好。 但,別忘了,在生物學上, 我們是社會動物, 我們進化史的絕大部份 都是以小團體的形式發生。 我們需要面對面的互動, 在這種互動中才能學到 利他主義的舞藝, 在這種互動中 才能創造出靈性的善良, 像是友誼和信賴、忠誠和愛, 而這些才能夠解救我們的孤獨。 當我們有太多的「我」, 太少的「我們」, 我們就會發現自己很脆弱、 很恐懼、很孤單。 並不意外,麻省理工的雪莉‧特克 寫了一本關於社交媒體衝擊的書, 書名為:「在一起孤獨」。
So I think the simplest way of safeguarding the future "you" is to strengthen the future "us" in three dimensions: the us of relationship, the us of identity and the us of responsibility.
我認為要保護未來的「你」, 最簡單的方法 是強化未來的「我們」。 這涉及了三個維度: 關係的我們、 身份的我們、 以及責任的我們。
So let me first take the us of relationship. And here, forgive me if I get personal. Once upon a time, a very long time ago, I was a 20-year-old undergraduate studying philosophy. I was into Nietzsche and Schopenhauer and Sartre and Camus. I was full of ontological uncertainty and existential angst. It was terrific.
讓我先來談「關係的我們」。 我可能會講些 比較私人的事,請見諒。 很久 很久以前, 我是個二十歲的大學生, 主修哲學, 我對尼采、叔本華、 沙特、卡繆很感興趣, 我充滿本體論的不確定性、 以及存在主義的不安。 這感覺棒極了。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
I was self-obsessed and thoroughly unpleasant to know, until one day I saw across the courtyard a girl who was everything that I wasn't. She radiated sunshine. She emanated joy. I found out her name was Elaine. We met. We talked. We married. And 47 years, three children and eight grandchildren later, I can safely say it was the best decision I ever took in my life, because it's the people not like us that make us grow. And that is why I think we have to do just that.
我陷入自我著迷, 認識我這個人是很不愉快的事。 直到有一天, 我看見在庭院的另一頭 有個女孩, 她和我截然不同, 她散發出陽光, 她發散出喜悅。 我得知她的名字叫伊蓮, 我們見面、談天, 我們結了婚。 過了 47 年,有了三個孩子 和八個孫子孫女之後, 我可以很有把握的說, 這是我人生中做過最好的決定, 因為正是那些和我們不相像的人, 讓我們成長。 那就是為什麼我認為 我們需要那樣做。
The trouble with Google filters, Facebook friends and reading the news by narrowcasting rather than broadcasting means that we're surrounded almost entirely by people like us whose views, whose opinions, whose prejudices, even, are just like ours. And Cass Sunstein of Harvard has shown that if we surround ourselves with people with the same views as us, we get more extreme. I think we need to renew those face-to-face encounters with the people not like us. I think we need to do that in order to realize that we can disagree strongly and yet still stay friends. It's in those face-to-face encounters that we discover that the people not like us are just people, like us. And actually, every time we hold out the hand of friendship to somebody not like us, whose class or creed or color are different from ours, we heal one of the fractures of our wounded world. That is the us of relationship.
問題是 Google 濾過的搜尋、 臉書挑過的朋友, 以及「狹播」而非「廣播」的新聞, 會讓我們處在跟自己很像的人當中, 他們的觀點、意見、甚至偏見 都和我們很像。 哈佛的凱斯·桑斯坦指出, 如果我們都處在 和我們有相同觀點的人群當中, 我們會變得更極端。 我認為我們得要去重建 面對面的接觸, 和與我們不相像的人接觸。 我認為我們需要那樣做, 才能了解儘管我們的意見大不相同, 但仍然能維持友誼。 在那些面對面的接觸中, 我們才能發現那些不像我們的人 其實也只是人,就像我們一樣。 其實, 每當我們對不像我們的人, 階級、信條或膚色與我們不同的人, 伸出友誼之手時, 我們能治癒 受創世界的 一條裂痕。 那就是「關係的我們」。
Second is the us of identity. Let me give you a thought experiment. Have you been to Washington? Have you seen the memorials? Absolutely fascinating. There's the Lincoln Memorial: Gettysburg Address on one side, Second Inaugural on the other. You go to the Jefferson Memorial, screeds of text. Martin Luther King Memorial, more than a dozen quotes from his speeches. I didn't realize, in America you read memorials. Now go to the equivalent in London in Parliament Square and you will see that the monument to David Lloyd George contains three words: David Lloyd George.
接著來談談「身份的我們」。 我們先來做個思想實驗, 你們曾去過華盛頓嗎? 你們曾看過紀念碑嗎? 實在是棒透了。 那兒有林肯紀念碑, 一面是蓋茲堡演講詞, 一面是連任演講詞。 如果你去看傑佛遜的紀念碑, 是冗長的文字。 馬丁路德金恩的紀念碑 有超過十段截自他演說的語錄。 我之前不知道,原來在美國 紀念碑是要閱讀的。 若去倫敦的國會廣場看類似的東西, 會看到大衛·勞合·喬治的紀念碑, 上面只有三個字: 大衛·勞合·喬治。 (註:英文原文是三個字)
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Nelson Mandela gets two. Churchill gets just one: Churchill.
納爾遜·曼德拉則有兩個字, (註:他的英文名字是兩個字) 邱吉爾只有一個字: (註:只用英文的姓) 就是邱吉爾。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Why the difference? I'll tell you why the difference. Because America was from the outset a nation of wave after wave of immigrants, so it had to create an identity which it did by telling a story which you learned at school, you read on memorials and you heard repeated in presidential inaugural addresses. Britain until recently wasn't a nation of immigrants, so it could take identity for granted. The trouble is now that two things have happened which shouldn't have happened together. The first thing is in the West we've stopped telling this story of who we are and why, even in America. And at the same time, immigration is higher than it's ever been before. So when you tell a story and your identity is strong, you can welcome the stranger, but when you stop telling the story, your identity gets weak and you feel threatened by the stranger. And that's bad.
為什麼會有這種差別? 我來告訴你們為什麼: 因為美國一開始是個 一波又一波移民形成的國家, 它需要創造自己的身份, 而它創造身份的方式就是說故事。 你會在學校學到這故事, 你會在紀念碑上讀到這故事, 你會在總統就職演說 重覆聽到這故事。 近代之前,英國並不是個移民國家, 它可以把身份視為理所當然。 問題是現在發生了 兩件原本不該一起發生的事。 第一件事是西方不再說 關於我們是誰以及為什麼的故事, 甚至在美國本土都不說了。 同時, 移民的數量卻是史上最高。 當你會說故事, 且你的身份很強而有力時, 你可以歡迎陌生人; 但當你不再說故事, 你的身份變弱了, 就會感覺到來自陌生人的威脅。 那很糟。
I tell you, Jews have been scattered and dispersed and exiled for 2,000 years. We never lost our identity. Why? Because at least once a year, on the festival of Passover, we told our story and we taught it to our children and we ate the unleavened bread of affliction and tasted the bitter herbs of slavery. So we never lost our identity. I think collectively we've got to get back to telling our story, who we are, where we came from, what ideals by which we live. And if that happens, we will become strong enough to welcome the stranger and say, "Come and share our lives, share our stories, share our aspirations and dreams." That is the us of identity.
我告訴各位,猶太人 分散於各地且被放逐了兩千年, 我們從來沒有失去我們的身份。 為什麼?因為每年至少一次, 在踰越節時, 我們會說我們的故事, 將這個故事教給我們的孩子, 我們會吃未發酵的苦餅, 品嚐當年奴隸的苦難, 所以我們從來沒有失去我們的身份。 我想我們 得要一起回去說我們的故事, 關於我們是誰、我們來自何方、 我們生活的理想是什麼的故事。 如果這能夠實現, 我們就會夠堅強, 就能歡迎陌生人,並說: 「來,分享我們的生命, 分享我們的故事, 分享我們的熱望和夢想。」 那就是「身份的我們」。
And finally, the us of responsibility. Do you know something? My favorite phrase in all of politics, very American phrase, is: "We the people." Why "we the people?" Because it says that we all share collective responsibility for our collective future. And that's how things really are and should be.
最後,來談談「責任的我們」。 你們知道嗎? 在所有政治範疇中,我最喜歡的片語 是句非常美國式的片語: 「我們人民」。 為什麼是「我們人民」? 因為它意味著對於我們集體的未來, 我們有著集體的責任。 事實就是這樣的,也應該是這樣的。
Have you noticed how magical thinking has taken over our politics? So we say, all you've got to do is elect this strong leader and he or she will solve all our problems for us. Believe me, that is magical thinking. And then we get the extremes: the far right, the far left, the extreme religious and the extreme anti-religious, the far right dreaming of a golden age that never was, the far left dreaming of a utopia that never will be and the religious and anti-religious equally convinced that all it takes is God or the absence of God to save us from ourselves. That, too, is magical thinking, because the only people who will save us from ourselves is we the people, all of us together. And when we do that, and when we move from the politics of me to the politics of all of us together, we rediscover those beautiful, counterintuitive truths: that a nation is strong when it cares for the weak, that it becomes rich when it cares for the poor, it becomes invulnerable when it cares about the vulnerable. That is what makes great nations.
你們是否留意到,我們的政治 已經被奇幻思維給主導了? 以致我們說,必須要選出 這位強而有力的領導者, 他或她就會為我們解決所有問題。 相信我,那就是奇幻思維。 接下來,我們就走向極端: 極左、極右、 極度虔誠,以及極端反對宗教。 極右派夢想著 不曾擁有過的黃金年代; 極左派夢想著 根本不可能會發生的烏托邦。 教徒和反宗教者都相信, 要將我們從自己手中解救出來, 需要的就是神或是無神。 那也是奇幻思維。 因為能將我們 從自己手中解救出來的, 只有「我們人民」, 所有人一起。 若我們能這麼做, 若能從「我」的政治 轉向「我們一起」的政治, 我們就能重新發現 那些美好而反直覺的真相: 當一個國家能關懷弱者, 它就會很強大; 當一個國家能關懷貧者, 它就會變富有; 當它能關懷脆弱的人, 它就會變得無堅不摧。 偉大的國家是這麼形成的。
(Applause)
(鼓掌)
So here is my simple suggestion. It might just change your life, and it might just help to begin to change the world. Do a search and replace operation on the text of your mind, and wherever you encounter the word "self," substitute the word "other." So instead of self-help, other-help; instead of self-esteem, other-esteem. And if you do that, you will begin to feel the power of what for me is one of the most moving sentences in all of religious literature. "Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me." We can face any future without fear so long as we know we will not face it alone.
所以我的建議很簡單, 它可能會改變你的生命, 或許有助於讓世界開始改變: 針對你腦海中的文字, 執行「搜尋及取代」功能, 每當你遇到「自己」這個詞時, 把它取代成「他人」。 所以自我協助就變成他人協助, 自我尊嚴就變成他人尊嚴。 如果你這麼做, 你就會開始感受到, 對我而言是在所有宗教文獻中 最動人的句子之一的力量: 「我雖然走過死蔭的幽谷, 也不怕遭害, 因為你與我同在。」 我們能無懼地面對任何未來, 只要我們知道, 我們不用獨自去面對它。
So for the sake of the future "you," together let us strengthen the future "us."
所以為了未來的「你」, 讓我們一起強化 未來的「我們」。
Thank you.
謝謝大家。
(Applause)
(鼓掌)