Today, I'm going to take you around the world in 18 minutes. My base of operations is in the U.S., but let's start at the other end of the map, in Kyoto, Japan, where I was living with a Japanese family while I was doing part of my dissertational research 15 years ago. I knew even then that I would encounter cultural differences and misunderstandings, but they popped up when I least expected it.
今天, 我要带大家 在十八分钟的时间里环游世界。 美国是这次旅程的起点。 但让我们从地图的另一端出发 - 日本京都 在那儿我和一个日本当地家庭生活在一起 当时我正在做博士毕业论文的相关研究 这是十五年前的事了。 那时候我就知道我肯定会遭遇 文化差异和误解, 但它们却是在我毫无准备的情形下发生了。
On my first day, I went to a restaurant, and I ordered a cup of green tea with sugar. After a pause, the waiter said, "One does not put sugar in green tea." "I know," I said. "I'm aware of this custom. But I really like my tea sweet." In response, he gave me an even more courteous version of the same explanation. "One does not put sugar in green tea." "I understand," I said, "that the Japanese do not put sugar in their green tea, but I'd like to put some sugar in my green tea." (Laughter) Surprised by my insistence, the waiter took up the issue with the manager. Pretty soon, a lengthy discussion ensued, and finally the manager came over to me and said, "I am very sorry. We do not have sugar." (Laughter) Well, since I couldn't have my tea the way I wanted it, I ordered a cup of coffee, which the waiter brought over promptly. Resting on the saucer were two packets of sugar.
我到那儿的第一天, 去了一家餐厅, 点了一杯加糖的绿茶。 那个服务生顿了一下说, “我们这里喝绿茶都不加糖。” “我知道。”我说,“我知道这个习俗。 但是我想要喝甜的绿茶。” 听到我的回答,他用更礼貌的语气对我 又解释了一遍同样的意思。 我们从来不在绿茶里 加糖。 “我明白,”我说, “我明白日本人从来不在绿茶里加糖。 但是我就想放点糖 在我的绿茶里。” (笑声) 服务生被我的执着震住了, 他把此事告诉了店经理 不一会儿, 开始了一个很长的讨论 最后店经理走过来对我说, ”非常抱歉。我们店里没有糖。“ (笑声) 好吧,既然喝不到想喝的加糖绿茶, 我只好另点了一杯咖啡, 这次服务生很快就端过来了。 只见茶托上赫然躺着 两小包糖。
My failure to procure myself a cup of sweet, green tea was not due to a simple misunderstanding. This was due to a fundamental difference in our ideas about choice. From my American perspective, when a paying customer makes a reasonable request based on her preferences, she has every right to have that request met. The American way, to quote Burger King, is to "have it your way," because, as Starbucks says, "happiness is in your choices." (Laughter) But from the Japanese perspective, it's their duty to protect those who don't know any better -- (Laughter) in this case, the ignorant gaijin -- from making the wrong choice. Let's face it: the way I wanted my tea was inappropriate according to cultural standards, and they were doing their best to help me save face.
我没能给自己点到 一杯加糖绿茶 并不是因为简单的误解。 而是因为对于选择这个概念 我们存在根本的认识差异。 从我作为一个美国人的视角, 当顾客提出合理要求 出于个人喜好, 她就有权利让自己的要求得到满足。 这种美式作风,用汉堡王的话来说, 就是“吃出你的自己的方式” 因为,正如星巴克所说, “快乐尽在你的选择中。" (笑声) 但在日本人眼里, 他们有责任保护不知好歹的人 (笑声) 也就是我这个无知的外国人(注:日语外人)-- 做出错误的选择。 这么说吧,我要在绿茶里放糖这种方式 在日本的文化标准中是不恰当的, 他们只是尽最大努力帮我保住面子。
Americans tend to believe that they've reached some sort of pinnacle in the way they practice choice. They think that choice, as seen through the American lens best fulfills an innate and universal desire for choice in all humans. Unfortunately, these beliefs are based on assumptions that don't always hold true in many countries, in many cultures. At times they don't even hold true at America's own borders. I'd like to discuss some of these assumptions and the problems associated with them. As I do so, I hope you'll start thinking about some of your own assumptions and how they were shaped by your backgrounds.
而美国人则认为 在实行选择这件事上, 他们已经做到最巅峰了。 他们认为以美国人的视角做出的选择 最能满足人类对选择的 本性和普遍性的欲望。 不幸的是, 这种观点是建立在一种假设上的 而这些假设在不同文化不同国家里 并不总是成立的。 甚至有时候在美国本土 都不一定成立。 我想探讨其中一些假设 以及引申而来的一些问题。 我希望在我进行的同时,大家也能开始想想 你们自己的一些假设 以及它们在你个人背景影响下是如何形成的
First assumption: if a choice affects you, then you should be the one to make it. This is the only way to ensure that your preferences and interests will be most fully accounted for. It is essential for success. In America, the primary locus of choice is the individual. People must choose for themselves, sometimes sticking to their guns, regardless of what other people want or recommend. It's called "being true to yourself." But do all individuals benefit from taking such an approach to choice? Mark Lepper and I did a series of studies in which we sought the answer to this very question. In one study, which we ran in Japantown, San Francisco, we brought seven- to nine-year-old Anglo- and Asian-American children into the laboratory, and we divided them up into three groups.
第一个假设: 如果一个选择影响你, 那么该选择应当由你本人做出。 这是唯一的办法来保证 你自己的偏好和兴趣 被最大限度的纳入考虑。 这是成功的基本。 在美国,选择的主要焦点 在于个人。 人们必须为自己选择,有时甚至于固执己见地 不管其他人想要什么或推荐什么。 这叫“对自己真实。” 但是不是所有人都从 这种选择的方式中获益呢? 马克 莱珀和我进行了一系列研究 来寻求这个问题的答案。 在其中的一项研究中, 在旧金山的日本城展开 我们把7至9岁的英裔美国籍和亚裔美国籍儿童 带进了实验室 并将其分成三组。
The first group came in, and they were greeted by Miss Smith, who showed them six big piles of anagram puzzles. The kids got to choose which pile of anagrams they would like to do, and they even got to choose which marker they would write their answers with. When the second group of children came in, they were brought to the same room, shown the same anagrams, but this time Miss Smith told them which anagrams to do and which markers to write their answers with. Now when the third group came in, they were told that their anagrams and their markers had been chosen by their mothers. (Laughter) In reality, the kids who were told what to do, whether by Miss Smith or their mothers, were actually given the very same activity, which their counterparts in the first group had freely chosen.
第一组进来, 由史密斯小姐迎接他们, 并给他们看了六张字谜。 孩子们可以选择自己喜欢的拼字图来完成。 他们还可以选择用哪只水笔 把答案写下来。 当第二组孩子进来时, 他们被带到同一个房间,展示同样的字谜游戏。 不过这次史密斯小姐告诉他们 该做哪个拼字图 该用哪只水笔写答案。 第三个小组进来, 他们被告知做哪个拼字图得用哪只水笔 已经由他们的妈妈决定好了。 (笑声) 现实中, 那些被告知该做什么的孩子, 不管是史密斯小姐还是他们的妈妈做的选择, 实际上做出了和 第一组自由选择的孩子们 做出了完全一致的行为。
With this procedure, we were able to ensure that the kids across the three groups all did the same activity, making it easier for us to compare performance. Such small differences in the way we administered the activity yielded striking differences in how well they performed. Anglo-Americans, they did two and a half times more anagrams when they got to choose them, as compared to when it was chosen for them by Miss Smith or their mothers. It didn't matter who did the choosing, if the task was dictated by another, their performance suffered. In fact, some of the kids were visibly embarrassed when they were told that their mothers had been consulted. (Laughter) One girl named Mary said, "You asked my mother?"
在这个过程中,我们可以保证 三组的孩子 都进行相同的活动, 使我们更容易比较他们的行为 我们管理时的细微差异 在他们实际行为中 引起了显著的不同。 英裔美国籍的孩子们, 做了两点五倍更多的拼图 当他们可以(自己)进行选择时, 相对于 史密斯小姐或妈妈们为他们作出选择时。 不论是谁作出的选择 如果这任务已经被他人所强制, 他们的表现就会受损。 事实上,一些孩子面露尴尬 当他们得知已经同他们的妈妈商讨过了。 (笑声) 一个叫玛丽的孩子说 “你真的问了我妈妈?”
(Laughter)
(笑声)
In contrast, Asian-American children performed best when they believed their mothers had made the choice, second best when they chose for themselves, and least well when it had been chosen by Miss Smith. A girl named Natsumi even approached Miss Smith as she was leaving the room and tugged on her skirt and asked, "Could you please tell my mommy I did it just like she said?" The first-generation children were strongly influenced by their immigrant parents' approach to choice. For them, choice was not just a way of defining and asserting their individuality, but a way to create community and harmony by deferring to the choices of people whom they trusted and respected. If they had a concept of being true to one's self, then that self, most likely, [was] composed, not of an individual, but of a collective. Success was just as much about pleasing key figures as it was about satisfying one's own preferences. Or, you could say that the individual's preferences were shaped by the preferences of specific others.
相比之下, 亚裔的孩子们 当他们相信他们妈妈作了选择时 表现得最好, 第二好的是当他们自己作选择时 最差的则是当史密斯小姐告诉他们时 一个叫夏实的女孩 甚至在史密斯小姐要离开房间时 拉住她的裙角问, ”你可以告诉我妈妈 我照她的话乖乖做了吗?“ 这些“第一代”(父母都为移民)的孩子 受到了他们父母选择 的强烈影响 对他们来说,选择不仅是一种 展现自我的 途径 更是一种建立社群使人相处融洽的过程 通过服从他们 所信任和尊敬的人作出的选择。 如果他们有一种对自我真实的观点 那么这个自我,在很多情况下 不是以个人为出发点 而是以集体作为出发点 成功意味着满足一些重要人物 和满足 自己的偏爱。 或者你可以这样认为, 个人偏好的形成是根据 其他人偏好的影响。
The assumption then that we do best when the individual self chooses only holds when that self is clearly divided from others. When, in contrast, two or more individuals see their choices and their outcomes as intimately connected, then they may amplify one another's success by turning choosing into a collective act. To insist that they choose independently might actually compromise both their performance and their relationships. Yet that is exactly what the American paradigm demands. It leaves little room for interdependence or an acknowledgment of individual fallibility. It requires that everyone treat choice as a private and self-defining act. People that have grown up in such a paradigm might find it motivating, but it is a mistake to assume that everyone thrives under the pressure of choosing alone.
有这样一个假设,我们将做到最好 当个人为自己做选择时 只维持在 当自我同他人 明显区分开的情况下。 相对的, 当两个或两人以上的个人 发现他们的选择和结果 非常的相近时 他们则有可能放大自己的成就 通过把选择 转变成一种集团行为。 要保持他们做出独立的选择, 事实上需要 他们的表现 和他们的关系相互妥协。 这恰恰就是 美国最需要的典范行为。 这种典范忽略了相互独立 以及对个人过失的承认。 它让每个人把选择 当成一种私人的和自我界定的行为。 一直依据这样的典范成长的人们 可能会认为这就是动机. 但这是错误的 去假设每个人都能够在独自选择的压力下 茁壮成长。
The second assumption which informs the American view of choice goes something like this. The more choices you have, the more likely you are to make the best choice. So bring it on, Walmart, with 100,000 different products, and Amazon, with 27 million books and Match.com with -- what is it? -- 15 million date possibilities now. You will surely find the perfect match. Let's test this assumption by heading over to Eastern Europe. Here, I interviewed people who were residents of formerly communist countries, who had all faced the challenge of transitioning to a more democratic and capitalistic society. One of the most interesting revelations came not from an answer to a question, but from a simple gesture of hospitality. When the participants arrived for their interview, I offered them a set of drinks: Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite -- seven, to be exact.
第二个对美国选择观的假设 则是这样的。 你拥有的选择越多, 你就越有可能 做出最好的选择。 所以呢,沃尔玛超市里就会有十万种不同的商品, 亚马逊网站有两千七百万册的书 交友网站有--什么来着-- 目前可能有一千五百万的约会机会。 你一定可以在上面找到真爱。 让我们在东欧 验证一下这个假设。 在那儿,我采访了一些人 他们都曾是共产主义国家的居民, 都曾经历过 向民主和资本主义社会的过渡 所带来的挑战。 其中最有意思的启示 并不是来自访谈过程, 而是来自一个款待客人的简单行为。 当访谈对象到了之后, 我给他们提供了一些饮料, 可乐、无糖可乐、雪碧等-- 准确地来讲有七种。
During the very first session, which was run in Russia, one of the participants made a comment that really caught me off guard. "Oh, but it doesn't matter. It's all just soda. That's just one choice." (Murmuring) I was so struck by this comment that from then on, I started to offer all the participants those seven sodas, and I asked them, "How many choices are these?" Again and again, they perceived these seven different sodas, not as seven choices, but as one choice: soda or no soda. When I put out juice and water in addition to these seven sodas, now they perceived it as only three choices -- juice, water and soda. Compare this to the die-hard devotion of many Americans, not just to a particular flavor of soda, but to a particular brand. You know, research shows repeatedly that we can't actually tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi. Of course, you and I know that Coke is the better choice.
在第一部分 在对俄罗斯进行访谈时, 其中一个参与者的一个意见 让我大吃一惊。 “哦,没关系的, 反正都是汽水,都是一种选择啦。” (议论声) 对这句话我真感到惊讶,于是在接下来对象中, 我开始为访谈者提供 这七种汽水。 然后我问他们:“这里有多少种选择呢?” 一次又一次的, 他们认为这七种汽水, 不是七种选择,而是一种选择: 汽水或非汽水饮料。 我又另外加了果汁和水 除这七种汽水之外, 这会儿他们认为有三种选择 果汁、水和汽水。 这让许多顽固死硬的美国人来辨别, 依据的就不仅仅是口味不同的汽水了, 还有不同的牌子。 调查反复证明 我们其实并不能真正辨别出 可口可乐和百事可乐有什么区别。 当然,大家都明白, 可口可乐是更好的选择。
(Laughter)
(笑声)
For modern Americans who are exposed to more options and more ads associated with options than anyone else in the world, choice is just as much about who they are as it is about what the product is. Combine this with the assumption that more choices are always better, and you have a group of people for whom every little difference matters and so every choice matters. But for Eastern Europeans, the sudden availability of all these consumer products on the marketplace was a deluge. They were flooded with choice before they could protest that they didn't know how to swim. When asked, "What words and images do you associate with choice?" Grzegorz from Warsaw said, "Ah, for me it is fear. There are some dilemmas you see. I am used to no choice." Bohdan from Kiev said, in response to how he felt about the new consumer marketplace, "It is too much. We do not need everything that is there." A sociologist from the Warsaw Survey Agency explained, "The older generation jumped from nothing to choice all around them. They were never given a chance to learn how to react." And Tomasz, a young Polish man said, "I don't need twenty kinds of chewing gum. I don't mean to say that I want no choice, but many of these choices are quite artificial."
对现代的美国人来说, 他们面对的选项最多, 面对的广告带来的选择也最多, 选择表现了他们是谁 正如不同的产品一样。 与第二个假设结合起来看,越多选择总是越好的, 于是你能找到一群人,对他们来说,每一个小小的区别都很重要, 也因此每一个选择都很重要。 但对东欧人而言, 突然那么多的产品 如洪水般充斥着消费市场。 在他们抗议自己还没学会游泳之前, 就已经被大量的选择淹没了。 当被问及“选择会令你联想到什么 词语和印象时?“ 来自华沙的格雷戈尔说: “啊,对我来说是害怕。 有很多进退两难的问题。 我习惯没有选择。” 来自基辅的布丹, 他针对新的消费市场, 做出的回应则是: "太多了。 我们不需要那么多东西。" 一个来自华沙研究机构 的社会学家解释到: ”这里上一代的人是从“ 没有选择的时代过来的。 他们从来没有机会学习 如何对外界的选择做出反应。” 来自波兰的年轻人汤马士说, 我不需要二十种口香糖。“ 我并不是说我不需要选择。 但这些选择中,有很多是刻意制造的。”
In reality, many choices are between things that are not that much different. The value of choice depends on our ability to perceive differences between the options. Americans train their whole lives to play "spot the difference." They practice this from such an early age that they've come to believe that everyone must be born with this ability. In fact, though all humans share a basic need and desire for choice, we don't all see choice in the same places or to the same extent. When someone can't see how one choice is unlike another, or when there are too many choices to compare and contrast, the process of choosing can be confusing and frustrating. Instead of making better choices, we become overwhelmed by choice, sometimes even afraid of it. Choice no longer offers opportunities, but imposes constraints. It's not a marker of liberation, but of suffocation by meaningless minutiae. In other words, choice can develop into the very opposite of everything it represents in America when it is thrust upon those who are insufficiently prepared for it. But it is not only other people in other places that are feeling the pressure of ever-increasing choice. Americans themselves are discovering that unlimited choice seems more attractive in theory than in practice.
现实中,很多的选择, 存在于并无明显差异的东西之间。 选择的价值 基于我们识别 各种选择之不同的 能力。 美国人的一生都在接受 ”识别差异“的训练。 他们从小就开始练习做选择, 便不由得相信这种能力 是与生俱来的。 事实上,尽管所有人 在“选择”上都有基本的需要和欲望, 但是我们认识选择时的角度 和程度都是不同的。 当有些人无法识辨一个选择 和另一个选择有什么区别时, 或者得在许多的选择间做出类比, 这种选择的过程可能是 令人困惑的甚至感到沮丧的。 这时,我们非但不能做出最佳选择, 反倒被选择给打垮了, 有时甚至会害怕做出选择。 选择不再是提供机遇, 反而是来增加限制。 (选择)不再是一支书写自由的笔, 反而被一些毫无意义的琐碎小事 给扼制了。 换句话说, 选择可以向它所代表的反面 发展 在美国 当选择突然扔到 那些没有准备好的人面前时是这样。 但是不仅仅是其他地方 的人们会感到 纷纷而至的选择 所带来的压抑。 美国人自己也发现 无限的选择 似乎在理论上要比在实际中 更具有吸引力
We all have physical, mental and emotional (Laughter) limitations that make it impossible for us to process every single choice we encounter, even in the grocery store, let alone over the course of our entire lives. A number of my studies have shown that when you give people 10 or more options when they're making a choice, they make poorer decisions, whether it be health care, investment, other critical areas. Yet still, many of us believe that we should make all our own choices and seek out even more of them.
我们都有肉体上、精神上 和情感上的局限 这使得我们不可能处理 接触到的每一个微小的选择。 即使是在杂货店里也难做到, 更不用说是在我们整个生活中了。 我的一些研究表明, 当你给人们十个以上的选项时 他们在选择时,会做出糟糕的决定, 不论是医疗,投资 还是其他重要的方面。 尽管如此,我们很多人还是相信 我们应该完全做出自己的选择, 甚至寻找更多的选择。
This brings me to the third, and perhaps most problematic, assumption: "You must never say no to choice." To examine this, let's go back to the U.S. and then hop across the pond to France. Right outside Chicago, a young couple, Susan and Daniel Mitchell, were about to have their first baby. They'd already picked out a name for her, Barbara, after her grandmother. One night, when Susan was seven months pregnant, she started to experience contractions and was rushed to the emergency room. The baby was delivered through a C-section, but Barbara suffered cerebral anoxia, a loss of oxygen to the brain. Unable to breathe on her own, she was put on a ventilator. Two days later, the doctors gave the Mitchells a choice: They could either remove Barbara off the life support, in which case she would die within a matter of hours, or they could keep her on life support, in which case she might still die within a matter of days. If she survived, she would remain in a permanent vegetative state, never able to walk, talk or interact with others. What do they do? What do any parent do?
这令我做出了第三个, 也或许是最具争议的一个假设: “你必须绝不能对 选择说不。” 为了验证,我们把视线放回美国, 然后跳到法国 就在芝加哥郊外, 一对年轻的夫妇,苏珊和丹尼尔 米切尔, 即将要有他们第一个孩子。 他们已经为她娶好了名字, 以她祖母的名字命名,芭芭拉。 苏珊怀孕七个月的一个晚上, 她开始感觉到子宫收缩, 赶紧送到了急救室里。 宝宝生了下来, 不料芭芭拉患有 脑缺氧, 无法自己呼吸。 她靠呼吸机供氧。 两天后, 医生给了米切尔 一个选择。 他们或者移除芭芭拉 的生命支持装置, 这样她会在几小时后死去, 或者保留她的生命装置, 在这种情况下,她还是可能会在 几天内死去, 即便保住了生命, 她也会是永久性植物人, 无法走路、说话 交流。 他们怎么做呢? 身为父母的人会怎么做呢?
In a study I conducted with Simona Botti and Kristina Orfali, American and French parents were interviewed. They had all suffered the same tragedy. In all cases, the life support was removed, and the infants had died. But there was a big difference. In France, the doctors decided whether and when the life support would be removed, while in the United States, the final decision rested with the parents. We wondered: does this have an effect on how the parents cope with the loss of their loved one? We found that it did. Even up to a year later, American parents were more likely to express negative emotions, as compared to their French counterparts. French parents were more likely to say things like, "Noah was here for so little time, but he taught us so much. He gave us a new perspective on life."
在我与西蒙娜 博蒂和克里斯蒂娜 奥法里一起 进行的研究里, 几对美国夫妇和法国夫妇 接受了访谈。 他们都经历了 同样的悲剧。 这几对夫妇都决定不再使用生命支持仪, 于是婴儿死了。 但这其中却有很大的差别。 在法国,是由医生来决定生命装置是否需要移除 以及什么时候移除, 而在美国, 最后的决定则还是交给了父母。 我们想: 这是否会影响到并且如何影响 父母对待失去挚爱的这件事呢? 我们发现答案是肯定的。 甚至到了一年以后, 美国夫妇 更容易流出负面的情绪, 相较于法国夫妇。 法国夫妇则会说些:“ 诺娃活得很短暂, 却教会了我们很多。 他让我们看到了生活的另一页”之类的话
American parents were more likely to say things like, "What if? What if?" Another parent complained, "I feel as if they purposefully tortured me. How did they get me to do that?" And another parent said, "I feel as if I've played a role in an execution." But when the American parents were asked if they would rather have had the doctors make the decision, they all said, "No." They could not imagine turning that choice over to another, even though having made that choice made them feel trapped, guilty, angry. In a number of cases they were even clinically depressed. These parents could not contemplate giving up the choice, because to do so would have gone contrary to everything they had been taught and everything they had come to believe about the power and purpose of choice.
美国夫妇则常常会说, “如果怎样?如果怎样?”之类的话 另一对父母则抱怨, “我觉得他们似乎在故意折磨我。 他们怎么可以让我做这个?” 还有一个父母则说, “我觉得我好像扮演了 侩子手的角色。" 但是当问这些美国父母们 愿不愿意让医生 来做这个决定时, 他们都回答说,“不” 他们无法想象 把选择交给另外一方, 尽管自己做决定 令他们感到困扰 负罪、愤怒。 在一些案例中, 有些人甚至得了焦虑症。 这些父母无法想象 放弃这个选择, 因为这样做将违背 他们一直来所被教导的 和所相信的 关于权力 和选择的目的。
In her essay, "The White Album," Joan Didion writes, "We tell ourselves stories in order to live. We interpret what we see, select the most workable of the multiple choices. We live entirely by the imposition of a narrative line upon disparate images, by the idea with which we have learned to freeze the shifting phantasmagoria, which is our actual experience." The story Americans tell, the story upon which the American dream depends, is the story of limitless choice. This narrative promises so much: freedom, happiness, success. It lays the world at your feet and says, "You can have anything, everything." It's a great story, and it's understandable why they would be reluctant to revise it. But when you take a close look, you start to see the holes, and you start to see that the story can be told in many other ways.
在琼 迪迪恩的文章, 《白色相册》中,她写道, “我们给自己讲故事 促使自己生活下去。 我们体会着自己所见, 在多种选择中, 寻找可行的选择。 我们完全是被强迫地生活在 一个叙述性的 基于一些零碎图片上的线条上, 我们已学会去冻结 千变万化的幻觉中 的真实经历。” 那些美国人所讲述的故事, 那些铸造着 美国梦的故事 是人拥有无限选择的故事 这个故事 许诺了太多: 自由、幸福 成功。 它令人身置云端,说道, “你可以拥有一切的一切。” 这是一个传奇, 并且可以理解为何他们不愿意 去改写它。 但是当你细细地看时, 你便会发现漏洞, 然后你发现这个故事 也可以这样讲,那样讲。
Americans have so often tried to disseminate their ideas of choice, believing that they will be, or ought to be, welcomed with open hearts and minds. But the history books and the daily news tell us it doesn't always work out that way. The phantasmagoria, the actual experience that we try to understand and organize through narrative, varies from place to place. No single narrative serves the needs of everyone everywhere. Moreover, Americans themselves could benefit from incorporating new perspectives into their own narrative, which has been driving their choices for so long.
美国人尝试着 去传播他们关于选择的观念 相信他人将会,或者必然会, 用开放的心胸去接受这种观念。 但是历史书和每天的新闻告诉我们, 这套理论并不总是这样顺利运作的。 说故事的手法 各地不同,千变万化 我们都试图用说故事的方法 去了解组织阐释自己的真实经验。 任何地区的任何人 都不会只满足于一种叙事的手法 况且,美国人自己 也能收益于吸收他人 的叙事技巧, 这一套叙事技巧已经左右他们的选择 很久了。
Robert Frost once said that, "It is poetry that is lost in translation." This suggests that whatever is beautiful and moving, whatever gives us a new way to see, cannot be communicated to those who speak a different language. But Joseph Brodsky said that, "It is poetry that is gained in translation," suggesting that translation can be a creative, transformative act. When it comes to choice, we have far more to gain than to lose by engaging in the many translations of the narratives. Instead of replacing one story with another, we can learn from and revel in the many versions that exist and the many that have yet to be written. No matter where we're from and what your narrative is, we all have a responsibility to open ourselves up to a wider array of what choice can do, and what it can represent. And this does not lead to a paralyzing moral relativism. Rather, it teaches us when and how to act. It brings us that much closer to realizing the full potential of choice, to inspiring the hope and achieving the freedom that choice promises but doesn't always deliver. If we learn to speak to one another, albeit through translation, then we can begin to see choice in all its strangeness, complexity and compelling beauty.
罗伯特 福斯特(注:美国诗人)曾说, “诗就是翻译过程中所失去的东西。” 这句话是说 不管多么美丽多么动人, 多么让我们有了新的感悟的东西 人们都没有办法将它 用另一种语言表述出来。 可约瑟夫布 罗司机(注:苏联诗人)也曾说过, “诗, 是从翻译过程中得到的" 这意味着翻译可以是 一项富有创造力的 和改变力的艺术。 在翻译过程中要面临选择 透过许多不同的翻译叙事手法 我们从中得到的感触 会比失去的还要多。 这并不是要 用另一个故事来取代, 我们可以在翻译过程中学习到新事物 并陶醉于不同的版本里, 甚至陶醉在非原版的意境里 不论我们来自哪里, 叙述的手段如何, 我们都有一个共同的责任, 打开心房去接受 更广泛的选择 以及这些选择所代表的意义 这样才不会让 ”道德相对主义“滋生, 相反它可以教导我们 何时行动,如何行动。 让我们了解 各种选择的蕴涵, 更接近能鼓舞人心的希望 获得选择所拥有的 却有时不能传递的 的自由 如果我们学会与人交谈, 即使是通过翻译, 我们就可以发现 选择的不可思议之处, 复杂之处, 和它的迷人之处。
Thank you.
谢谢大家。
(Applause)
(掌声)
Bruno Giussani: Thank you. Sheena, there is a detail about your biography that we have not written in the program book. But by now it's evident to everyone in this room. You're blind. And I guess one of the questions on everybody's mind is: How does that influence your study of choosing because that's an activity that for most people is associated with visual inputs like aesthetics and color and so on?
布鲁诺 吉桑尼:谢谢您。 希娜,目前有没有你自传的消息 但是我们已经听过你的许多事迹 在座的各位都知道你的眼睛看不见。 我想,大家都有一个问题: 这一点如何影响你关于选择的研究。 因为这项活动 很大程度上需要视觉获得信息, 比如美学啊,色彩啊等等
Sheena Iyengar: Well, it's funny that you should ask that because one of the things that's interesting about being blind is you actually get a different vantage point when you observe the way sighted people make choices. And as you just mentioned, there's lots of choices out there that are very visual these days. Yeah, I -- as you would expect -- get pretty frustrated by choices like what nail polish to put on because I have to rely on what other people suggest. And I can't decide. And so one time I was in a beauty salon, and I was trying to decide between two very light shades of pink. And one was called "Ballet Slippers." And the other one was called "Adorable." (Laughter) And so I asked these two ladies, and the one lady told me, "Well, you should definitely wear 'Ballet Slippers.'" "Well, what does it look like?" "Well, it's a very elegant shade of pink." "Okay, great." The other lady tells me to wear "Adorable." "What does it look like?" "It's a glamorous shade of pink." And so I asked them, "Well, how do I tell them apart? What's different about them?" And they said, "Well, one is elegant, the other one's glamorous." Okay, we got that. And the only thing they had consensus on: well, if I could see them, I would clearly be able to tell them apart.
希娜 亚格尔:恩,你问得问题很有趣, 因为关于失明,有一个有趣的地方是 你事实上有一个非常不同的 视角 去观察人们的选择。 正如你刚刚提到的,日常生活中 我们常常依赖视觉做出选择, 是的,就如你想得那样, 我有时候会感到沮丧受挫,在面临 该涂什么指甲油的选择时 我不得不依赖他人的意见 我无法自己做出选择, 有一次我在美容院, 我试图在两种淡粉色之间做出选择, 一个叫”粉色芭蕾“, 另一个”粉可爱“ (笑声) 于是我就问了两位女士, 其中一个说”啊,你一定得涂个粉色芭蕾“ ”嗯,那它是什么样的呢“ ”它是一种非常优雅的粉色“ ”哦,不错“ 另一个则告诉我涂”粉可爱“ ”它是什么样的呢“ ”它是一种华丽的粉色“ 于是我就问他们”那我该怎么区别呢“ ”它们之前有什么不同“ 她们说”一款是优雅的,另一款华丽“ 好吧,我们知道了。 她们唯一达成共识的, 是,如果我能看见, 我就能够很清晰地辨别了。
(Laughter)
(笑声)
And what I wondered was whether they were being affected by the name or the content of the color, so I decided to do a little experiment. So I brought these two bottles of nail polish into the laboratory, and I stripped the labels off. And I brought women into the laboratory, and I asked them, "Which one would you pick?" 50 percent of the women accused me of playing a trick, of putting the same color nail polish in both those bottles. (Laughter) (Applause) At which point you start to wonder who the trick's really played on. Now, of the women that could tell them apart, when the labels were off, they picked "Adorable," and when the labels were on, they picked "Ballet Slippers." So as far as I can tell, a rose by any other name probably does look different and maybe even smells different.
所以我想她们是不是 被这两种颜色的名字所影响了呢。 于是我就做了个小实验, 我把这两瓶指甲油带回了实验室, 撕掉了标签, 然后我让几个女士进了实验室, 问她们:”你会选择哪一种呢“ 一半的人都说我在跟她们开玩笑, 她们觉得 这两罐指甲油是一模一样的 (笑声) (掌声) 这时候你就会猜想究竟是谁在耍把戏了 而在撕掉标签的情况下, 那些能分辨的女性会选择“粉可爱” 若贴上了标签, 她们又选择了”粉色芭蕾“ 所以就我所理解的 一款玫瑰只要有不同名字, 就能让它的外观看起来与其他款不同 可能闻起来也有不同。
BG: Thank you. Sheena Iyengar. Thank you Sheena.
布鲁诺 吉桑尼: 谢谢。希娜•亚格尔教授 。. 谢谢你Sheena.
(Applause)
(掌声)