Today I'm going to talk to you about the problem of other minds. And the problem I'm going to talk about is not the familiar one from philosophy, which is, "How can we know whether other people have minds?" That is, maybe you have a mind, and everyone else is just a really convincing robot. So that's a problem in philosophy, but for today's purposes I'm going to assume that many people in this audience have a mind, and that I don't have to worry about this.
Sot, une do t'ju flas per problemet e mendjes. Dhe problemi per te cilin do te flas nuk eshte nga pikpamja filozofike, "Si mund ta dijme nese njerezit e tjere kane mendje?" Kjo eshte, ndoshta ju keni mendje, por te gjithe te tjeret s'jane vetcse robote shume te bindur. Pra ky eshte problemi filozofik. Por per qellimet e sotme une po pretendoj se shume njerez ne kete audience kane zgjuaresi, dhe nuk behem merak per kete.
There is a second problem that is maybe even more familiar to us as parents and teachers and spouses and novelists, which is, "Why is it so hard to know what somebody else wants or believes?" Or perhaps, more relevantly, "Why is it so hard to change what somebody else wants or believes?"
Eshte problemi i dyte qe ndoshta eshte me i njohur per ne sikurse prinderit dhe mesuesit dhe ciftet bashkeshortore, dhe novelistet, qe eshte, " Pse eshte kaq e veshtire te dime cka do dhe cka beson dikush tjeter?" Ose ndoshta, me perkatsisht, " Pse eshte aq e veshtire te ndryshojme dicka qe dikush pelqen ose beson?
I think novelists put this best. Like Philip Roth, who said, "And yet, what are we to do about this terribly significant business of other people? So ill equipped are we all, to envision one another's interior workings and invisible aims." So as a teacher and as a spouse, this is, of course, a problem I confront every day. But as a scientist, I'm interested in a different problem of other minds, and that is the one I'm going to introduce to you today. And that problem is, "How is it so easy to know other minds?"
Une mendoj qe novelistet e vene kete me se miri. Sic tha Philip Roth, Dhe tash, cka do te bejme ne lidhje me kete biznes tmeresisht te rendesishem te njerezve tjere? Pra te gjithe ne jemi te keq pajisur, per te parashikuar punen e brendshme te dikujt tjeter dhe qellimet e padukshme Si nje mesuese, dhe si nje bashkeshorte, ky eshte, padyshim problemi qe une perballem cdo dite. Por si nje shkenctare, une jam e interesuar ne probleme te ndryshme te mendjeve tjera, dhe kjo eshte ajo qe une do t'ua prezantoj sot. Dhe ky problem eshte, " Sa e lehte eshte te njohim mendjet e tjera?"
So to start with an illustration, you need almost no information, one snapshot of a stranger, to guess what this woman is thinking, or what this man is. And put another way, the crux of the problem is the machine that we use for thinking about other minds, our brain, is made up of pieces, brain cells, that we share with all other animals, with monkeys and mice and even sea slugs. And yet, you put them together in a particular network, and what you get is the capacity to write Romeo and Juliet. Or to say, as Alan Greenspan did, "I know you think you understand what you thought I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant." (Laughter)
Pra te fillojme me nje ilustrim, ju gati s'ju duhet asnje informacion, nje foto e nje te huaji, per te gjetur se cka eshte duke menduar kjo grua, apo ky burre. Po ta themi ne nje menyre tjeter, thelbi i problemit eshte makina qe ne perdorim per te menduar per mendjet tjera, truri yne, eshte i perbere nga pjese, qeliza te trurit, qe i ndajme me te gjitha kafshet tjera, majmunet dhe minjte e madje me kermijte e detit. Dhe prape, ju i vendosoni te gjithe ata ne nje rrjet te vecante, dhe ajo cka perfitoni eshte kapaciteti te shkruani Romeo dhe Xhulieta. Ose te themi, sic beri Alan Greenspan, " Une e di qe ju mendoni se e kuptoni ate qe menduat se une thashe, por nuk jam e sigurt nese ju kuptuat se cka ju degjuat nuk eshte ajo cka doja te thoja." ( Te qeshura)
So, the job of my field of cognitive neuroscience is to stand with these ideas, one in each hand. And to try to understand how you can put together simple units, simple messages over space and time, in a network, and get this amazing human capacity to think about minds. So I'm going to tell you three things about this today. Obviously the whole project here is huge. And I'm going to tell you just our first few steps about the discovery of a special brain region for thinking about other people's thoughts. Some observations on the slow development of this system as we learn how to do this difficult job. And then finally, to show that some of the differences between people, in how we judge others, can be explained by differences in this brain system.
Pra, puna ime ne fushen e neuroshkences njohese eshte te qendroj me keto ide, nga nje ne secilen dore. Dhe te mundohem te kuptoj si mund ti vendos se bashku unite te thjeshta, mesazhe te thjeshte mbi hapesiren dhe kohen, ne nje lidhje, dhe te fitoj kete kapacitet te mrekullushem njerezor per te menduar rreth mendjes. Pra une do t'ju tregoj tri gjera per kete sot. Sic duket projekti ketu eshte i madh. Dhe une do t'ju tregoj vetem disa hapa te pare rreth zbulimit te nje regjioni te vecante te trurit per te menduarit rreth mendimeve te njerezve tjere. Disa hulumtime ne zhvillimin e ngadalshem te ketij sistemi pasi ne mesojme si te bejme kete pune te veshtire. Dhe se fundi, te tregojme se disa nga dallimet ne mes njerezve, se si ne i gjykojme te tjeret, mund te sqarohen nga dallimet ne kete sistem te trurit.
So first, the first thing I want to tell you is that there is a brain region in the human brain, in your brains, whose job it is to think about other people's thoughts. This is a picture of it. It's called the Right Temporo-Parietal Junction. It's above and behind your right ear. And this is the brain region you used when you saw the pictures I showed you, or when you read Romeo and Juliet or when you tried to understand Alan Greenspan. And you don't use it for solving any other kinds of logical problems. So this brain region is called the Right TPJ. And this picture shows the average activation in a group of what we call typical human adults. They're MIT undergraduates. (Laughter)
Pra fillimisht, gjeja e pare qe dua t'ju tregoj eshte nje zone e trurit ne trurin njerezor, ne trurin tuaj, puna e se cilit eshte te mendoje per mendimet e njerezve tjere. Kjo eshte nje foto e tij. Quhet Nyja e djathte Temporo-Parietal. Eshte siper dhe mbrapa veshit tuaj te djathte. Kjo eshte zona e trurit qe ju perdoret kur pate fotografine qe u tregova, ose kur keni lexuar Romeo dhe Xhulieta ose kur keni tentuar te kuptoni Alan Greenspan. Dhe nuk e perdorni ate per te zgjidhur asnje problem logjik. Pra kjo zone e trurit quhet TPJ e djathte. Dhe kjo fotografi tregon aktivizimin mesatar ne grupin qe ne i qujame te njeriu i rritur tipik. Ata jane student te MIT. (te qeshura)
The second thing I want to say about this brain system is that although we human adults are really good at understanding other minds, we weren't always that way. It takes children a long time to break into the system. I'm going to show you a little bit of that long, extended process. The first thing I'm going to show you is a change between age three and five, as kids learn to understand that somebody else can have beliefs that are different from their own. So I'm going to show you a five-year-old who is getting a standard kind of puzzle that we call the false belief task.
Gjeja e dyte qe dua te them per kete sistem te trurit eshte se edhe pse ne njerezit e rritur jemi shume te zote ne kuptimin e mendjeve tjera, nuk kemi qene gjithmone ashtu. Femijeve ju merr kohe te gjate te hyjne ne sistem. Do t'ju tregoj pak a shume per ate proces te gjere e te gjate. Gjeja e pare qe do t'ju tregoj eshte ndryshimi midis moshes tre dhe pese, pasi femijet mesojne te kuptojne se dikush tjeter mund te kete besime qe jane ndryshe nga vetja e tyre. Pra une do t'ju tregoj nje pese vjecar qe kupton nje lloj standard te enigmes qe ne e quajme pune e besimit te rreme .
Rebecca Saxe (Video): This is the first pirate. His name is Ivan. And you know what pirates really like?
Rebecca Saxe ( Video): Ky eshte pirati i pare. Emri i tij eshte Ivan. Dhe a e din se cka ne te vertete piratet pelqejne?
Child: What? RS: Pirates really like cheese sandwiches.
Femiju: Cka? RS: Piratet me te vertete pelqejne sanduice me djathe.
Child: Cheese? I love cheese!
Femiju: Djathe? Me pelqen djathi!
RS: Yeah. So Ivan has this cheese sandwich, and he says, "Yum yum yum yum yum! I really love cheese sandwiches." And Ivan puts his sandwich over here, on top of the pirate chest. And Ivan says, "You know what? I need a drink with my lunch." And so Ivan goes to get a drink. And while Ivan is away the wind comes, and it blows the sandwich down onto the grass. And now, here comes the other pirate. This pirate is called Joshua. And Joshua also really loves cheese sandwiches. So Joshua has a cheese sandwich and he says, "Yum yum yum yum yum! I love cheese sandwiches." And he puts his cheese sandwich over here on top of the pirate chest.
RS: Po. Pra Ivan merr kete sanduic me djathe, dhe thote, " Yum yum yum yum! Une me te vertete pelqej sanduicin me djathe." Dhe Ivan e vendos sanduicin e tij ketu, mbi sendukun e piratit Dhe Ivan thote, " E dini cka? Dua nje pije me dreken time." Keshtu Ivan shkon te marre nje pije. Dhe ndersa Ivan nuk eshte aty fryn ere, dhe e hedh sanduicin poshte ne bar. Dhe tani, ja ku vjen pirati tjeter. Pirati quhet Joshua. Dhe Joshua gjithashtu pelqen sanduicet me djathe. Pra, Joashua merr nje sanduic me djathe dhe thote, " Yum yum yum yum! Me pelqen sanduici me djathe." Dhe ai e vendos sanduicin e tij ketu, mbi sendukun e piratit.
Child: So, that one is his.
Femiju: Pra, ky ketu eshte i tij.
RS: That one is Joshua's. That's right.
RS: Ai atje eshte i Joshua. Ne rregull.
Child: And then his went on the ground.
Femiju: Dhe pastaj sanduici i tij ra ne toke.
RS: That's exactly right.
RS: Kjo eshte saktsisht e vertete.
Child: So he won't know which one is his.
Femiju: Pra ai nuk do ta dije cili eshte i tij.
RS: Oh. So now Joshua goes off to get a drink. Ivan comes back and he says, "I want my cheese sandwich." So which one do you think Ivan is going to take?
RS:Oh. Tani Joshua shkon per te marre nje pije. Ivan kthehet dhe thote, " Une dua sanduicin tim." Pra cilen mendon se do ta marr Ivani ?
Child: I think he is going to take that one.
Femiju: Une mendoj qe ai do ta marr ate.
RS: Yeah, you think he's going to take that one? All right. Let's see. Oh yeah, you were right. He took that one.
RS: Po, ti mendon qe ai do ta marre ate? Ne rregull. Te shohim. Oh po, ju kishit te drejte. Ai mori ate.
So that's a five-year-old who clearly understands that other people can have false beliefs and what the consequences are for their actions. Now I'm going to show you a three-year-old who got the same puzzle.
Pra ky eshte nje pese vjecar i cili kupton qarte se njerezit e tjere mund te kene besime te rreme dhe cilat jane pasojat per veprimet e tyre. Tani do t'u tregoj nje tre vjecar qe ka te njejten enigme.
RS: And Ivan says, "I want my cheese sandwich." Which sandwich is he going to take? Do you think he's going to take that one? Let's see what happens. Let's see what he does. Here comes Ivan. And he says, "I want my cheese sandwich." And he takes this one. Uh-oh. Why did he take that one?
RS: Kur Ivani thote, "Une dua sanduicin tim." Cilin sanduic do te marre ai? A mendon se ai do te marre ate atje? Te shohim cka do ndodhi. Te shohim c'do te beje ai. Ja ku po vjen Ivan. Dhe ai thote, " Une dua sanducin tim." Dhe ai merr kete ketu. Uh-oh. Pse ai mori ate?
Child: His was on the grass.
Femiju: I atij ishte te bari.
So the three-year-old does two things differently. First, he predicts Ivan will take the sandwich that's really his. And second, when he sees Ivan taking the sandwich where he left his, where we would say he's taking that one because he thinks it's his, the three-year-old comes up with another explanation: He's not taking his own sandwich because he doesn't want it, because now it's dirty, on the ground. So that's why he's taking the other sandwich. Now of course, development doesn't end at five. And we can see the continuation of this process of learning to think about other people's thoughts by upping the ante and asking children now, not for an action prediction, but for a moral judgment. So first I'm going to show you the three-year-old again.
Pra tre vejcari ben dy gjera ne menyre te ndryshme. Fillimisht, ai parashikon qe Ivan do te marre sanduicin qe ne te vertete eshte i tij. Dhe e dyta, kur sheh Ivanin duke e marre sanduicin atje ku ai e pati lene, kur ne do te themi ai po merr ate sepse ai mendon se eshte i tij, tre vjecari vjen me nje sqarim tjeter: Ai nuk po merr sanduicin e vet sepse ai nuk e do me ate, sepse tani eshte i piste, ra ne toke. Pra per kete arsye ai eshte duke e marre sanduicin tjeter. Tani natyrisht, zhvillimi nuk ndalet ne moshen pese vjec. Dhe ne mund ta shohim vazhdimesine e ketij procesi te mesuarit si te mendojme rreth mendimeve te njerezve te tjere duke e rritur lojen dhe duke i pyetur nxenesit, jo per parashikim te veprimit, por per nje gjykim moral. Pra, se pari do te ju tregoj tre vjecarin perseri.
RS.: So is Ivan being mean and naughty for taking Joshua's sandwich?
RS: Mos eshte i keq Ivan qe po merr sanduicin e Joshua?
Child: Yeah.
Femiju: Po.
RS: Should Ivan get in trouble for taking Joshua's sandwich?
RS: A duhet t'i heqim veshin Ivanit qe i mori sanduicin Joshua-s?
Child: Yeah.
Femiju: Po.
So it's maybe not surprising he thinks it was mean of Ivan to take Joshua's sandwich, since he thinks Ivan only took Joshua's sandwich to avoid having to eat his own dirty sandwich. But now I'm going to show you the five-year-old. Remember the five-year-old completely understood why Ivan took Joshua's sandwich.
R.S.: Pra ndoshta nuk eshte surprize qe ai mendon se Ivani ishte i lig qe mori sanduicin e Joshua-s, ai, bile mendon se Ivani mori sanduicin e Joshua-s per te shmangur ngrenjen e sanduicit te piset. Tani do t'ju tregoj pese vjecarin. Mbani mend pese vjecari kuptoi teresisht pse Ivan mori sanduicin e Joshua-s.
RS: Was Ivan being mean and naughty for taking Joshua's sandwich?
Video RS: A ishte Ivani i keq qe mori sanduicin e Joshua-s?
Child: Um, yeah.
Femiju: Um, po.
And so, it is not until age seven that we get what looks more like an adult response.
R.S. Dhe keshtu, vetem ne moshen shtate vjecare ne marrim cka duket me shume si pergjigje e rritur.
RS: Should Ivan get in trouble for taking Joshua's sandwich?
RS: A duhet te ndeshkohet Ivani qe ka marr sanduicin e Joshua-s?
Child: No, because the wind should get in trouble.
Femiju: Jo, era duhet te ndeshkohet.
He says the wind should get in trouble for switching the sandwiches. (Laughter)
R.S. Ai thote era duhet te ndeshkohet per nderrimin e sanduiceve. (Qeshje)
And now what we've started to do in my lab is to put children into the brain scanner and ask what's going on in their brain as they develop this ability to think about other people's thoughts. So the first thing is that in children we see this same brain region, the Right TPJ, being used while children are thinking about other people. But it's not quite like the adult brain.
Dhe tani ajo qe kemi filluar te bejme ne laboratorin tim eshte te vendosim femijet ne skanerin e trurit dhe te shohim ata qe po ndodh ne trurin e tyre pasi e zhvillojne kete aftesi per te menduar per mendimet e njerezve tjere. Pra gjeja e pare eshte se te femija shohim te aktivizohet e njejta zone e trurit, TPJ e djathte, ndersa fermijet jane duke menduar per njerezit e tjere. Por nuk eshte njesoj si te truri i nje te rrituri.
So whereas in the adults, as I told you, this brain region is almost completely specialized -- it does almost nothing else except for thinking about other people's thoughts -- in children it's much less so, when they are age five to eight, the age range of the children I just showed you. And actually if we even look at eight to 11-year-olds, getting into early adolescence, they still don't have quite an adult-like brain region. And so, what we can see is that over the course of childhood and even into adolescence, both the cognitive system, our mind's ability to think about other minds, and the brain system that supports it are continuing, slowly, to develop.
Ndersa në te rriturit, sikuse edhe ju thashe, kjo zone e trurit eshte pothuajse teresisht e specializuar-- ajo pothujase s'ben asgje tjeter vec te menduarit rreth mendimeve te njerezve te tjere-- tek femijet eshte pak me pak, kur ata jane ne moshe pese deri tete, renditja e moshes se femijeve qe posa jua tregova. Dhe faktikisht nese ne shikojme tek mosha tete deri njembedhjete, duke arritur ne adoleshencen e hershme, ata akoma nuk kane zonen adulte te trurit. Dhe keshtu, ajo cfare ne mund te shohim eshte se gjate femijrise dhe madje ne adoloshence, te dyja, edhe sistemi kognitiv, aftesia e mendjes tone per te menduar per mendje tjera, edhe sistemi i trurit qe e mbeshtet ate jane duke vazhduar, ngadalshem, te zhvillohen.
But of course, as you're probably aware, even in adulthood, people differ from one another in how good they are at thinking of other minds, how often they do it and how accurately. And so what we wanted to know was, could differences among adults in how they think about other people's thoughts be explained in terms of differences in this brain region? So, the first thing that we did is we gave adults a version of the pirate problem that we gave to the kids. And I'm going to give that to you now.
Por sigurisht, pasiqe ju jeni te vetdijshem, madje edhe ne moshen e madhore njerezit dallojne njeri me tjetrin se sa te mire jane ata per mendimin e mendjeve te tjera, sa shpesh e bejne ata kete dhe sa saktesisht. Ne deshem te dime, nese diferenca ne mes te rritureve ne menyre se si ata mendojne per mendimet e te tjereve mund te shpjegohet ne terma te diferences ne kete zone te trurit? Pra, gjeja e pare qe beme eshte qe u dhame te rritureve nje version te problemit te pirateve te cilin ua dhame femijeve. Dhe une do t'ua tregoj tani.
So Grace and her friend are on a tour of a chemical factory, and they take a break for coffee. And Grace's friend asks for some sugar in her coffee. Grace goes to make the coffee and finds by the coffee a pot containing a white powder, which is sugar. But the powder is labeled "Deadly Poison," so Grace thinks that the powder is a deadly poison. And she puts it in her friend's coffee. And her friend drinks the coffee, and is fine.
Grace dhe shoqja e saj po vizitojne nje fabrike te produkteve kimike, dhe po bejne pushim per kafe. Shoqja e Grace kerkon ca sheqer ne kafen e saj. Grace shkon ta beje kafen dhe afer kafes gjen nje kuti qe permban pluhur te bardhe, i cili eshte sheqer. Por etiketa thote " Helm Vdekjeprures". Pra Grace mendon se pluhuri eshte helm vdekjeprures. Dhe e hedh ate ne kafen e shoqes se saj. Dhe shoqja e saj e pi kafen, dhe nuk ndodh asgje.
How many people think it was morally permissible for Grace to put the powder in the coffee? Okay. Good. (Laughter) So we ask people, how much should Grace be blamed in this case, which we call a failed attempt to harm?
Sa njerez mendojne qe moralisht ishte e lejushme per Grace te hedhe pluhurin ne kafe? Ne rregull. Mire. ( qeshje) Pra ne pyetem njerez, nese duhet te fajesohet Grace ne kete rast, te cilin e quajme nje tentim i deshtuar per te bere dem?
And we can compare that to another case, where everything in the real world is the same. The powder is still sugar, but what's different is what Grace thinks. Now she thinks the powder is sugar. And perhaps unsurprisingly, if Grace thinks the powder is sugar and puts it in her friend's coffee, people say she deserves no blame at all. Whereas if she thinks the powder was poison, even though it's really sugar, now people say she deserves a lot of blame, even though what happened in the real world was exactly the same.
Dhe mund ta krahasojme ate me rastin tjeter, ku cdo gje ne boten reale eshte e njejte. Pluhuri ende eshte sheqer, ndryshon vetem ajo qe mendon Grace. Tani ajo mendon qe pluhuri eshte sheqer. Dhe ndoshta befasisht, nese Grace mendon se pluhuri eshte sheqer dhe e vendos ate ne kafen e shoqes, njerezit thone ajo nuk meriton te fajesohet fare. Ndersa, kur ajo mendon se pluhuri ishte helm, edhe pse ne te vertete eshte sheqer, njerezit thone qe ajo meriton te fajesohet. Edhe pse cka ndodhi ne boten reale ishte pikerisht e njejte.
And in fact, they say she deserves more blame in this case, the failed attempt to harm, than in another case, which we call an accident. Where Grace thought the powder was sugar, because it was labeled "sugar" and by the coffee machine, but actually the powder was poison. So even though when the powder was poison, the friend drank the coffee and died, people say Grace deserves less blame in that case, when she innocently thought it was sugar, than in the other case, where she thought it was poison and no harm occurred.
Dhe ne fakt, ata thone ajo ka me shume faj ne kete rast, tentimi i deshtuar per te bere dem, sesa ne nje rast tjeter, te cilin ne e quajme aksident. Ku Grace mendoi qe pluhuri ishte sheqer, sepse keshtu thoshte etiketa prane makines se kafes, por faktikisht pluhuri ishte helm. Keshtu edhe pse kur pluhuri ishte helm, dhe shoqja qe piu kafen, vdiq, njerezit mendojne qe Grace meriton me pak faj kur ajo pafajesisht mendoi qe ishte sheqer, sesa ne rastin tjeter, ku ajo mendoi qe ishte helm dhe nuk u be asnje dem.
People, though, disagree a little bit about exactly how much blame Grace should get in the accident case. Some people think she should deserve more blame, and other people less. And what I'm going to show you is what happened when we look inside the brains of people while they're making that judgment. So what I'm showing you, from left to right, is how much activity there was in this brain region, and from top to bottom, how much blame people said that Grace deserved.
Njerezit ketu, duket sikur nuk bien dakort me graden e fajit qe duhet te bjere mbi Grace ne rastin e aksidentit. Disa njerez mendojne ajo duhet te meritoje me shume faj, disa te tjere me pak. Do t'u tregoj tani se cka ndodhi kur ne shikuam brenda trurit te njerezve ndersa ata jane duke e bere ate gjykim. Pra cka jam duke ju treguar, nga e majta ne te djathte, eshte se sa shume aktivitet kishte ne kete zone te trurit, dhe nga lart poshte, shkalla e fajit qe meriton Grace sipas ketyre njerezve.
And what you can see is, on the left when there was very little activity in this brain region, people paid little attention to her innocent belief and said she deserved a lot of blame for the accident. Whereas on the right, where there was a lot of activity, people paid a lot more attention to her innocent belief, and said she deserved a lot less blame for causing the accident.
Dhe ajo qe sheh eshte, ne te majte ku kishte pak aktivitet ne kete zone te trurit, njerezit i kushtuan pak vemendje besimit ne pafajsine e saj dhe thane ajo meriton shume faj per aksidentin. Ndersa ne te djathtin, ku kishte shume aktivitet, njerezit i kushtuan me shume vemendje besimit ne pafajsine e saj, dhe thane qe ajo meritonte shume me pak faj per shkaktimin e aksidentit.
So that's good, but of course what we'd rather is have a way to interfere with function in this brain region, and see if we could change people's moral judgment. And we do have such a tool. It's called Trans-Cranial Magnetic Stimulation, or TMS. This is a tool that lets us pass a magnetic pulse through somebody's skull, into a small region of their brain, and temporarily disorganize the function of the neurons in that region.
Kjo eshte mire, por sigurisht do te donim te kishim nje menyre per te nderhyre ne funksioninim e kesaj zone te trurit, dhe te shihnim nese mund te nderrojme gjykimin moral te njerezve. Dhe ne kemi nje mjet te tille. Quhet Trans-Cranial Magnetic Stimulation, ose TMS. Ky eshte nje mjet qe na lejon te kalojme nje impuls magnetik nepermjet kafkes, ne nje zone te vogel te trurit, dhe ç'organizon perkohesisht funksionin e neuroneve ne ate zone.
So I'm going to show you a demo of this. First, I'm going to show you that this is a magnetic pulse. I'm going to show you what happens when you put a quarter on the machine. When you hear clicks, we're turning the machine on. So now I'm going to apply that same pulse to my brain, to the part of my brain that controls my hand. So there is no physical force, just a magnetic pulse.
Do t'ju tregoj nje demo te kesaj. Per t'ju treguar se kjo eshte nje impuls magnetik, do t'ju tregoj cfare ndodh kur vendosni nje monedhe ne makine. Kur degjoni kercitje, makina eshte e ndezur. Tani do te aplikoj te njejtin impuls ne trurin tim, ne pjesen e trurit qe kontrollon doren. Pra nuk ka force fizike, vetem nje impuls magnetik.
Woman (Video): Ready, Rebecca? RS: Yes.
Gruaja( Video): Gati, Rebecca? RS: Po.
Okay, so it causes a small involuntary contraction in my hand by putting a magnetic pulse in my brain. And we can use that same pulse, now applied to the RTPJ, to ask if we can change people's moral judgments. So these are the judgments I showed you before, people's normal moral judgments. And then we can apply TMS to the RTPJ and ask how people's judgments change. And the first thing is, people can still do this task overall.
Ne rregull, shkakton nje shtrengim te vogel te pavullnetshem te dores me nje impuls magnetik ne trurin tim. Dhe ne mund ta perdorim te njejtin impuls, tani e aplikova ne RTPJ, per te pare nese mund te ndryshojme gjykimin moral te njerezve. Pra keto jane gjykimet qe u'a tregova me parë, gjykimet morale normale te njerezve. Tani te aplikojme TMS ne RTPJ dhe te shohim si mund te ndryshojne gjykimet e njerezve. Dhe gjeja e pare eshte se njerezit akoma mund te bejne kete detyre ne pergjithesi.
So their judgments of the case when everything was fine remain the same. They say she deserves no blame. But in the case of a failed attempt to harm, where Grace thought that it was poison, although it was really sugar, people now say it was more okay, she deserves less blame for putting the powder in the coffee.
Pra gjykimet e tyre per rastin kur cdo gje ishte ne rregull mbeten te njejta. Ata thone ajo nuk meriton faj. Por ne rastin e tentimit te deshtuar te demit, ku Grace mendoi qe ishte helm, megjithese ishte me te vertete sheqer, njerezit thone qe ajo meriton me pak faj per vendosjen e pluhurit ne kafe.
And in the case of the accident, where she thought that it was sugar, but it was really poison and so she caused a death, people say that it was less okay, she deserves more blame. So what I've told you today is that people come, actually, especially well equipped to think about other people's thoughts.
Dhe ne rastin e aksidentit, ku ajo mendoi qe ishte sheqer, por ne te vertete ishte helm dhe ajo shkatoi vdekje, njerezit thone se s'eshte ne rregull, ajo meriton me shume faj. Pra cka ju kam treguar sot eshte se njerezit jane, vecanerisht te pajisur mire per te menduar rreth mendimeve te njerezve tjere.
We have a special brain system that lets us think about what other people are thinking. This system takes a long time to develop, slowly throughout the course of childhood and into early adolescence. And even in adulthood, differences in this brain region can explain differences among adults in how we think about and judge other people.
Ne kemi nje sistem te vecante te trurit qe na lejon te mendojme cka mendojne njerezit e tjere. Ky sistem merr kohe te gjate te zhvillohet ngadale pergjate femijerise dhe deri ne adoleshence te hershme. Dhe madje ne moshen madhore, ndryshime ne kete pjese te trurit mund te shpjegojne ndryshimet ne menyren qe te rriturit mendojne dhe gjykojne njerezit e tjere.
But I want to give the last word back to the novelists, and to Philip Roth, who ended by saying, "The fact remains that getting people right is not what living is all about anyway. It's getting them wrong that is living. Getting them wrong and wrong and wrong, and then on careful reconsideration, getting them wrong again." Thank you. (Applause)
Por une dua t'jap fjalen e fundit novelisteve, dhe Philip Roth, i cili perfundoi duke thene, " Fakti mbetet se te kuptosh drejt njerezit nuk eshte kusht i domosdoshem ne jete". T'i kuptosh duke bere gabim eshte jetesa. Duke i kuptuar ata gabim dhe gabim dhe gabim, dhe pastaj nje rishkim i kujdesshem, duke i kuptuar gabim ata perseri." Faleminderit, (Duartroktije)
Chris Anderson: So, I have a question. When you start talking about using magnetic pulses to change people's moral judgments, that sounds alarming. (Laughter) Please tell me that you're not taking phone calls from the Pentagon, say.
Chris Anderson : Kam nje pyetje. Kur ju filloni te flisni per perdorimin e impulsit magnetik per te ndryshuar gjykimin moral te njerezve, kjo duket alarmante. (qeshje) Ju lutem tregoni qe nuk po ju telefonojne, le te themi, nga Pentagoni.
RS: I'm not. I mean, they're calling, but I'm not taking the call. (Laughter)
RS: Jo. E kam fjalen, ata po telefonojne, por une nuk po pergjigjem. (qeshje)
CA: They really are calling? So then seriously, you must lie awake at night sometimes wondering where this work leads. I mean, you're clearly an incredible human being, but someone could take this knowledge and in some future not-torture chamber, do acts that people here might be worried about.
CA: Me te vertete po telefonojne? Pra seriozisht, ju duhet te qendroni zgjuar naten ndonjehere duke menduar ku na con kjo pune. Mendoj, ju ne menyre te qarte jeni e jashtezakonshme, por dikush mund ta marre kete njohuri dhe ne te ardhmen jo ne dhomen e tortures, por te beje veprime ne menyra qe njerezit ketu mund te shqetsoheshin.
RS: Yeah, we worry about this. So, there's a couple of things to say about TMS. One is that you can't be TMSed without knowing it. So it's not a surreptitious technology. It's quite hard, actually, to get those very small changes. The changes I showed you are impressive to me because of what they tell us about the function of the brain, but they're small on the scale of the moral judgments that we actually make.
RS: Po, ne shqetsohemi per kete. Pra, jane disa gjera qe duhen te dime per TMS. Nje eshte qe ju nuk mund tju aplikojne TMS pa e kuptuar ate. Pra nuk behet fjale per nje teknologji sekrete. Eshte krejtsisht e veshtire, faktisht, te behen keto ndryshime te vogla. Ndryshimet qe u'a tregova jane mbreselense per mua per ate qe na tregojne per funksionin e trurit. Por ato jane te vogla ne shkallen e gjykimeve morale qe ne faktikisht kemi bere.
And what we changed was not people's moral judgments when they're deciding what to do, when they're making action choices. We changed their ability to judge other people's actions. And so, I think of what I'm doing not so much as studying the defendant in a criminal trial, but studying the jury.
Dhe cka ndryshuam nuk ishte gjykimi moral i njerzeve kur ata jane te vendosur cfare te bejne, kur ata marrin zgjedhje te veprimeve. Ne ndryshuam aftesine e tyre per te gjykuar veprimet e njerzve te tjere. Dhe keshtu, mendoj se per ate cka po bej jo edhe aq shume sa te studjoj te pandehurit ne nje gjyq penal, por duke studjuar jurine.
CA: Is your work going to lead to any recommendations in education, to perhaps bring up a generation of kids able to make fairer moral judgments?
CA: A do te ju drejtoje puna juaj ne ndonje rekomandim ne edukim, qe ndoshta te sjellim nje gjenerate te femijeve qe jane ne gjendje te bejne gjykime morale me te drejta?
RS: That's one of the idealistic hopes. The whole research program here of studying the distinctive parts of the human brain is brand new. Until recently, what we knew about the brain were the things that any other animal's brain could do too, so we could study it in animal models. We knew how brains see, and how they control the body and how they hear and sense. And the whole project of understanding how brains do the uniquely human things -- learn language and abstract concepts, and thinking about other people's thoughts -- that's brand new. And we don't know yet what the implications will be of understanding it.
RS: Kjo eshte njera nder shpresat idealistike. I tere programi hulutues i studimiit te pjeseve te vecanta te trurit njerezor eshte i ri. Deri ne kohet e fundit, ajo qe dinim per trurin ishin gjera qe secili tru i kafshes mund te beje gjithashtu, E mund ta studionim ne modelet e kafsheve. Kemi kuptuar se si truri arrin te shohe, per te kontrolluar trupin, dhe si degjon e ndjen. Dhe i tere projekti i te kuptuarit si truri ben gjera unike meson gjuhe dhe koncepte abstrakte, dhe mendon per mendimet e njerezve te tjere -- kjo eshte e re. Dhe akoma nuk e dime cfare implikime do te kete per t'a kuptuar ate.
CA: So I've got one last question. There is this thing called the hard problem of consciousness, that puzzles a lot of people. The notion that you can understand why a brain works, perhaps. But why does anyone have to feel anything? Why does it seem to require these beings who sense things for us to operate? You're a brilliant young neuroscientist. I mean, what chances do you think there are that at some time in your career, someone, you or someone else, is going to come up with some paradigm shift in understanding what seems an impossible problem?
C.A.: Nje pyetje e fundit. Eshte nje gje e quajtur problemi i veshtire i ndergjegjes, qe le ne medyshje shume njerez. Nocionin qe ju mund ta kuptoni pse truri funksion, ndoshta, Por pse duhet te kuptoje dicka? Pse per te funksionuar kemi nevoje te kuptojme gjerat qe na rrethojne? Ju jeni nje neuroscientist i ri e briliant, sipas jush, cfare shance ka qe heret a vone ne karieren tuaj, dikush, ju ose dikush tjter do te vije me disa zhvendosje paradigme ne kuptushmerine cka duket nje problem i pa mundshem?
RS: I hope they do. And I think they probably won't.
RS: Shpresoj qe ata do t'a bejne. Por mendoj qe nuk do ta bejne.
CA: Why?
CA: Pse?
RS: It's not called the hard problem of consciousness for nothing. (Laughter)
RS: Nuk eshte quajtur kot problemi i veshtire i ndergjegjes. (Qeshje)
CA: That's a great answer. Rebecca Saxe, thank you very much. That was fantastic. (Applause)
CA: Kjo eshte nje pergjigje e shkelqyer. Rebecca Saxe, faleminderit shume. Kjo ishte fantastike. (Duartrokitje)