Seventy-thousand years ago, our ancestors were insignificant animals. The most important thing to know about prehistoric humans is that they were unimportant. Their impact on the world was not much greater than that of jellyfish or fireflies or woodpeckers. Today, in contrast, we control this planet. And the question is: How did we come from there to here? How did we turn ourselves from insignificant apes, minding their own business in a corner of Africa, into the rulers of planet Earth?
七萬年前,我們的先祖 不過是各種動物中的一種。 當你想到原人時,最重要的是 他們一點也不重要。 他們對世界的影響力 和水母、螢火蟲、啄木鳥差別不大。 今天,我們卻變成地球的霸主。 所以問題是: 我們是怎麼走到這一步的? 我們是如何從毫不起眼的人猿, 在非洲的角落自生自滅, 搖身一變成為地球霸主的?
Usually, we look for the difference between us and all the other animals on the individual level. We want to believe -- I want to believe -- that there is something special about me, about my body, about my brain, that makes me so superior to a dog or a pig, or a chimpanzee. But the truth is that, on the individual level, I'm embarrassingly similar to a chimpanzee. And if you take me and a chimpanzee and put us together on some lonely island, and we had to struggle for survival to see who survives better, I would definitely place my bet on the chimpanzee, not on myself. And this is not something wrong with me personally. I guess if they took almost any one of you, and placed you alone with a chimpanzee on some island, the chimpanzee would do much better.
通常我們會在個體差異上 檢視我們與其它動物的分別, 我們想信 - 我想要相信 我們與眾不同, 我的身體,我的大腦, 讓我遠比狗、豬,或是黒猩猩優越。 但事實是,就個體差異來說 我和黑猩猩驚人的相似。 如果你把我和一頭黒猩猩置於同一孤島 看我們之中誰能存活的更好, 我會把籌碼放在黒猩猩身上, 而不是我自己。 這不是因為我個人的缺陷, 我想如果有人把你們其中任何人 與一頭黒猩猩一起放在孤島上, 黑猩猩絕對會生存的更好。
The real difference between humans and all other animals is not on the individual level; it's on the collective level. Humans control the planet because they are the only animals that can cooperate both flexibly and in very large numbers. Now, there are other animals -- like the social insects, the bees, the ants -- that can cooperate in large numbers, but they don't do so flexibly. Their cooperation is very rigid. There is basically just one way in which a beehive can function. And if there's a new opportunity or a new danger, the bees cannot reinvent the social system overnight. They cannot, for example, execute the queen and establish a republic of bees, or a communist dictatorship of worker bees.
真正讓人類與其它動物分別開來的特質 不是個體的, 而是群體的。 人類控制地球, 是因為我們是唯一 可以大規模靈活合作的動物。 其它動物, 那些昆蟲,蜜蜂、螞蟻, 牠們也可以大規模地合作, 但沒有像我們這樣靈活。 牠們的合作方式是固定的。 蜂窩總是用同一種方式運作。 就算遇上新的機會、新的威脅, 蜜蜂無法在一夜之間改變分工方式 譬如說,牠們無法處死蜂后, 建立蜜蜂共和國, 工蜂也不能組成共產獨裁政權。
Other animals, like the social mammals -- the wolves, the elephants, the dolphins, the chimpanzees -- they can cooperate much more flexibly, but they do so only in small numbers, because cooperation among chimpanzees is based on intimate knowledge, one of the other. I'm a chimpanzee and you're a chimpanzee, and I want to cooperate with you. I need to know you personally. What kind of chimpanzee are you? Are you a nice chimpanzee? Are you an evil chimpanzee? Are you trustworthy? If I don't know you, how can I cooperate with you?
其它動物,那些群居的哺乳類動物 狼、大象、海豚、黒猩猩 - 牠們的合作性更靈活, 但規模有限, 因為黑猩猩合作的基礎是 對於彼此的瞭解與認知。 假設你我都是黒猩猩, 我想和你合作, 我需要先認識你。 你是哪種黒猩猩? 你是頭善良的黒猩猩? 還是邪惡的黒猩猩? 你可靠嗎? 如果我不認識你, 我怎麼和你合作呢?
The only animal that can combine the two abilities together and cooperate both flexibly and still do so in very large numbers is us, Homo sapiens. One versus one, or even 10 versus 10, chimpanzees might be better than us. But, if you pit 1,000 humans against 1,000 chimpanzees, the humans will win easily, for the simple reason that a thousand chimpanzees cannot cooperate at all. And if you now try to cram 100,000 chimpanzees into Oxford Street, or into Wembley Stadium, or Tienanmen Square or the Vatican, you will get chaos, complete chaos. Just imagine Wembley Stadium with 100,000 chimpanzees. Complete madness.
唯一擁有這兩種特質 既能大規模合作,又能保持靈活的, 只有我們,智人。 一比一,甚至十比十, 黒猩猩可能都比我們優秀。 但,如果數目提高到 一千個人和一千頭黒猩猩 人類就能輕易獲勝, 因為上千頭黒猩猩無法共同合作。 如果你嘗試把十萬頭黒猩猩, 塞進牛津街、溫布萊體育館 天安門廣場或梵諦岡, 絕對會陷入一片混亂。 想像塞滿十萬頭黒猩猩的溫布萊體育館, 那個景象將有多瘋狂。
In contrast, humans normally gather there in tens of thousands, and what we get is not chaos, usually. What we get is extremely sophisticated and effective networks of cooperation. All the huge achievements of humankind throughout history, whether it's building the pyramids or flying to the moon, have been based not on individual abilities, but on this ability to cooperate flexibly in large numbers.
相對的,成千上萬的人時常一同在那, 也通常不會陷入混亂。 我們有效率、有制度地合作。 人類在歷史上達成的巨大成就, 無論是金字塔還是上月球, 都不是建立在個體的能力, 而是群體的靈活合作。
Think even about this very talk that I'm giving now: I'm standing here in front of an audience of about 300 or 400 people, most of you are complete strangers to me. Similarly, I don't really know all the people who have organized and worked on this event. I don't know the pilot and the crew members of the plane that brought me over here, yesterday, to London. I don't know the people who invented and manufactured this microphone and these cameras, which are recording what I'm saying. I don't know the people who wrote all the books and articles that I read in preparation for this talk. And I certainly don't know all the people who might be watching this talk over the Internet, somewhere in Buenos Aires or in New Delhi.
就像現在,我在這裡演講, 面對三、四百個觀眾, 絕大多數我都不認識。 同樣的,我不認識所有策劃 或參與這個活動的人員。 我不認識昨日帶我飛抵倫敦的 駕駛員和機組人員。 我不認識這些設備的發明和製造者, 但錄影機和麥克風正在拍攝這段演講。 為了準備這段演講, 我讀了不少書和文章, 卻不認識這些作者。 我當然更不認識這場演講的 網路觀眾, 此刻可能正在布宜諾斯艾利斯、 或新德里。
Nevertheless, even though we don't know each other, we can work together to create this global exchange of ideas. This is something chimpanzees cannot do. They communicate, of course, but you will never catch a chimpanzee traveling to some distant chimpanzee band to give them a talk about bananas or about elephants, or anything else that might interest chimpanzees. Now cooperation is, of course, not always nice; all the horrible things humans have been doing throughout history -- and we have been doing some very horrible things -- all those things are also based on large-scale cooperation. Prisons are a system of cooperation; slaughterhouses are a system of cooperation; concentration camps are a system of cooperation. Chimpanzees don't have slaughterhouses and prisons and concentration camps.
然而,我們雖不認識彼此, 卻能合作創造這個世界平台, 互相交流。 這是黑猩猩所做不到的。 當然,牠們也能溝通, 但你絕不會看到一隻黑猩猩 遠渡重洋 對另一群黑猩猩講解香蕉或大象, 或任何黑猩猩有興趣的事。 合作自然不是只有好事, 人類歷史上所有恐怖的事件 - 我們的確做過一些非常恐怖的事 - 同樣也是用大規模合作達成的。 監獄是一種合作系統, 屠宰場是一種合作系統, 集中營是一種合作系統, 黒猩猩沒有屠宰場、監獄、或集中營。
Now suppose I've managed to convince you perhaps that yes, we control the world because we can cooperate flexibly in large numbers. The next question that immediately arises in the mind of an inquisitive listener is: How, exactly, do we do it? What enables us alone, of all the animals, to cooperate in such a way? The answer is our imagination. We can cooperate flexibly with countless numbers of strangers, because we alone, of all the animals on the planet, can create and believe fictions, fictional stories. And as long as everybody believes in the same fiction, everybody obeys and follows the same rules, the same norms, the same values.
現在或許我已經說服你 我們的確掌控了世界, 因為我們能大規模靈活合作。 下一個問題隨之而來, 好奇的聽眾心裡想: 我們是怎麼做到的? 在所有動物中, 為什麼只有我們這樣合作? 答案是我們的想像力。 我們之所以能和無數陌生人 靈活的合作, 因為在這星球上的所有動物中, 只有我們能創造和相信虛構的故事。 只要大家相信同一個故事, 每個人服從並執行一樣的規則, 一樣的基準,一樣的價值觀。
All other animals use their communication system only to describe reality. A chimpanzee may say, "Look! There's a lion, let's run away!" Or, "Look! There's a banana tree over there! Let's go and get bananas!" Humans, in contrast, use their language not merely to describe reality, but also to create new realities, fictional realities. A human can say, "Look, there is a god above the clouds! And if you don't do what I tell you to do, when you die, God will punish you and send you to hell." And if you all believe this story that I've invented, then you will follow the same norms and laws and values, and you can cooperate. This is something only humans can do. You can never convince a chimpanzee to give you a banana by promising him, "... after you die, you'll go to chimpanzee heaven ..." (Laughter) "... and you'll receive lots and lots of bananas for your good deeds. So now give me this banana." No chimpanzee will ever believe such a story. Only humans believe such stories, which is why we control the world, whereas the chimpanzees are locked up in zoos and research laboratories.
其它動物的溝通, 只限於描述真實的物事。 黒猩猩說:「看啊!有獅子!快跑!」 或是:「看啊!有棵香蕉樹! 去摘香蕉吧!」 而人類呢,我們的語言 不只是用來描述現實, 更能用來創造新的現實, 想像的現實。 人可以說:「看啊!雲上有神! 如果你不聽從命令, 你死後,神會懲罰你下地獄。」 如果你們都相信我發明的故事, 就會依循一樣的基準、法則、價值觀, 你們就會合作。 這件事只有人類做得到。 你永遠無法說服一隻黑猩猩交出香蕉, 就算你承諾牠:「死後, 你會上黑猩猩天堂..... 」 (笑聲) 「... 到時候你的善行 會為你贏得無數的香蕉。 現在,快把香蕉給我。」 沒有任何黑猩猩會相信這種故事, 只有人類會相信這種故事。 這就是我們稱霸世界, 而黑猩猩卻淪落到 動物園和實驗室的原因。
Now you may find it acceptable that yes, in the religious field, humans cooperate by believing in the same fictions. Millions of people come together to build a cathedral or a mosque or fight in a crusade or a jihad, because they all believe in the same stories about God and heaven and hell. But what I want to emphasize is that exactly the same mechanism underlies all other forms of mass-scale human cooperation, not only in the religious field.
或許你同意, 的確,在宗教領域, 人們因為信仰相同而彼此合作, 百萬人同心合力建造教堂、清真寺, 奮身投入各種聖戰, 全都是因為對於 神、天堂與地獄有著相同的信仰。 但我想說的是同樣的運作機制, 存在於所有人類的大規模合作, 不限於宗教領域。
Take, for example, the legal field. Most legal systems today in the world are based on a belief in human rights. But what are human rights? Human rights, just like God and heaven, are just a story that we've invented. They are not an objective reality; they are not some biological effect about homo sapiens. Take a human being, cut him open, look inside, you will find the heart, the kidneys, neurons, hormones, DNA, but you won't find any rights. The only place you find rights are in the stories that we have invented and spread around over the last few centuries. They may be very positive stories, very good stories, but they're still just fictional stories that we've invented.
譬如,法治概念。 現在世界上大部分的法律, 都以人權為基礎。 但人權是什麼? 人權,就像神和天堂, 都是我們發明的故事。 不是客觀的事實; 也不是智人的某種生理反應。 解剖人體,往裡探看, 裡面有心臟、腎臟、神經元、 荷爾蒙、基因, 但找不到什麼權利。 權利只存在於故事裡, 我們在近代世紀裡創造、散播的故事。 這些故事可能很正面、很好, 但仍然是我們虛構的。
The same is true of the political field. The most important factors in modern politics are states and nations. But what are states and nations? They are not an objective reality. A mountain is an objective reality. You can see it, you can touch it, you can even smell it. But a nation or a state, like Israel or Iran or France or Germany, this is just a story that we've invented and became extremely attached to.
政治領域也一樣。 國族是今日政治裡最重要的元素。 但國族是什麼? 它並不是客觀事實。 山嶽才是客觀事實。 你看得到,摸得到,甚至聞得到。 但國族, 像以色列、伊朗、法國或德國, 只是我們創造的故事, 並且變得深信不疑。
The same is true of the economic field. The most important actors today in the global economy are companies and corporations. Many of you today, perhaps, work for a corporation, like Google or Toyota or McDonald's. What exactly are these things? They are what lawyers call legal fictions. They are stories invented and maintained by the powerful wizards we call lawyers. (Laughter) And what do corporations do all day? Mostly, they try to make money. Yet, what is money? Again, money is not an objective reality; it has no objective value. Take this green piece of paper, the dollar bill. Look at it -- it has no value. You cannot eat it, you cannot drink it, you cannot wear it. But then came along these master storytellers -- the big bankers, the finance ministers, the prime ministers -- and they tell us a very convincing story: "Look, you see this green piece of paper? It is actually worth 10 bananas." And if I believe it, and you believe it, and everybody believes it, it actually works. I can take this worthless piece of paper, go to the supermarket, give it to a complete stranger whom I've never met before, and get, in exchange, real bananas which I can actually eat. This is something amazing. You could never do it with chimpanzees. Chimpanzees trade, of course: "Yes, you give me a coconut, I'll give you a banana." That can work. But, you give me a worthless piece of paper and you except me to give you a banana? No way! What do you think I am, a human? (Laughter)
經濟領域也一樣。 今日全球經濟的主角 是公司和企業。 你們當中可能有許多人為企業工作, 像谷歌或豐田汽車或麥當勞。 這些到底是什麼? 律師叫它們法人。 是虛構並且需要維持的故事, 由厲害的巫師負責- 不過我們叫他們律師。 (笑聲) 企業都在做些什麼? 他們最大的目的是賺錢圖利。 但錢是什麼? 錢也不是客觀事實; 沒有任何客觀價值。 這張綠色的紙,一元鈔票, 根本一文不值。 不能拿來吃,不能拿來喝, 也不能穿在身上。 但這些故事高手出現了 - 大銀行家、 各國的財政部長、 總理、首相 - 他們說著同一個動人的故事: 「你們看到這張綠色的紙嗎? 它可以換十根香蕉。」 如果我信了,你也信了, 大家都信了, 手段就成功了。 我可以拿著這張一文不值的紙, 到任何超市, 把它交給一位素昧平生的陌生人, 換到真的香蕉,可以給我吃。 這未免太神奇了! 黑猩猩可辦不到。 當然,黑猩猩也懂得交換: 「你給我一顆椰子,我給你一根香蕉」 也行。 但如果你給我一張廢紙, 然後要我給你一根香蕉? 做夢吧你! 你把我當什麼了,人類嗎? (笑聲)
Money, in fact, is the most successful story ever invented and told by humans, because it is the only story everybody believes. Not everybody believes in God, not everybody believes in human rights, not everybody believes in nationalism, but everybody believes in money, and in the dollar bill. Take, even, Osama Bin Laden. He hated American politics and American religion and American culture, but he had no objection to American dollars. He was quite fond of them, actually. (Laughter)
錢,其實是人類史上, 最成功的故事。 因為它是唯一一個所有人都相信的故事。 不是每個人都相信神, 不是每個人都追求人權, 不是每個人都愛國, 但每個人都相信錢,相信現金。 就像賓拉登。 他憎恨美國的政策和信仰, 美國文化, 但他完全不排斥美金, 其實挺愛的。 (笑聲)
To conclude, then: We humans control the world because we live in a dual reality. All other animals live in an objective reality. Their reality consists of objective entities, like rivers and trees and lions and elephants. We humans, we also live in an objective reality. In our world, too, there are rivers and trees and lions and elephants. But over the centuries, we have constructed on top of this objective reality a second layer of fictional reality, a reality made of fictional entities, like nations, like gods, like money, like corporations. And what is amazing is that as history unfolded, this fictional reality became more and more powerful so that today, the most powerful forces in the world are these fictional entities. Today, the very survival of rivers and trees and lions and elephants depends on the decisions and wishes of fictional entities, like the United States, like Google, like the World Bank -- entities that exist only in our own imagination.
結論是: 人類稱霸世界, 因為我們活在雙重現實裡。 其它動物活在客觀事實裡。 牠們的真實世界存在於客觀現實, 像河流、樹木、獅子和大象。 我們人類也活在客觀現實裡。 我們也有河流、樹木、獅子和大象。 但幾個世紀來, 我們在客觀現實上, 建構了另一個層次的虛構現實, 一個由虛構元素組成的現實: 國族、神、錢、企業。 厲害的是在歷史進程裡, 這一層虛構的現實日漸強大, 直到今日,世界上最強大的力量, 已經被這些虛構的主體把持。 今天,河流、樹、獅子和大象的存亡, 端賴於這些虛構主體的決策和慾望, 像美國、谷歌、世界銀行 - 這些只存在於我們想像中的主體。
Thank you. (Applause)
謝謝各位。 (掌聲)
Bruno Giussani: Yuval, you have a new book out. After Sapiens, you wrote another one, and it's out in Hebrew, but not yet translated into ...
Bruno Guissani:烏瓦爾, 你剛出版一本新書 《人類大歷史》 之後,你又寫了一本, 希伯來文的版本已經出版了, 但還沒翻譯成...
Yuval Noah Harari: I'm working on the translation as we speak.
烏瓦爾:我現在正在翻譯。
BG: In the book, if I understand it correctly, you argue that the amazing breakthroughs that we are experiencing right now not only will potentially make our lives better, but they will create -- and I quote you -- "... new classes and new class struggles, just as the industrial revolution did." Can you elaborate for us?
BG:在這本書裡, 如果我想得沒錯的話, 你認為,當今奇妙的科技突破, 不只會讓我們的生活更好, 更有可能創造 - 你這麼說 - 「...新的階級和新的階級鬥爭, 就像工業革命時期一樣。」 你可以多說一點嗎?
YNH: Yes. In the industrial revolution, we saw the creation of a new class of the urban proletariat. And much of the political and social history of the last 200 years involved what to do with this class, and the new problems and opportunities. Now, we see the creation of a new massive class of useless people. (Laughter) As computers become better and better in more and more fields, there is a distinct possibility that computers will out-perform us in most tasks and will make humans redundant. And then the big political and economic question of the 21st century will be, "What do we need humans for?", or at least, "What do we need so many humans for?"
烏瓦爾:好的。 工業革命時期, 創造了城市中的無產階級, 過去兩百年的政治社會史 都在處理由此而生的新問題和機會。 現在,沒有用處的人 又形成了一個龐大的新階級。 (笑聲) 隨著電腦在越來越多的領域壯大, 電腦處理許多事務的能力 極可能勝過人類, 進而取代人類。 這個世紀 最大的政治和經濟問題是, 「我們需要人類做什麼?」 至少是 「我們需要這麼多人做什麼?」
BG: Do you have an answer in the book?
BG:書裡會找到答案嗎?
YNH: At present, the best guess we have is to keep them happy with drugs and computer games ... (Laughter) but this doesn't sound like a very appealing future.
烏瓦爾:目前別無他法, 要安頓這些人, 只能暫時用藥物和電腦遊戲吧。 (笑聲) 雖然這前景堪憂。
BG: Ok, so you're basically saying in the book and now, that for all the discussion about the growing evidence of significant economic inequality, we are just kind of at the beginning of the process?
BG:所以你在書裡和在此演講的看法是, 這麼多攀升證據所顯示的 貧富懸殊、經濟極端不平等, 都只是一個新巨變的開端而已?
YNH: Again, it's not a prophecy; it's seeing all kinds of possibilities before us. One possibility is this creation of a new massive class of useless people. Another possibility is the division of humankind into different biological castes, with the rich being upgraded into virtual gods, and the poor being degraded to this level of useless people.
烏瓦爾:我還是要說,這不是預言; 只是評估眼前的所有可能性。 其中一種可能是 龐大廢人階級的誕生。 另一種可能是把人類分工, 分成不同的生物階級。 富人升級成神, 窮人則貶到無用之人的階級。
BG: I feel there is another TED talk coming up in a year or two. Thank you, Yuval, for making the trip.
BG:我想一兩年內會有這個 TED 演說。 謝謝你遠道而來。
YNH: Thanks! (Applause)
烏瓦爾:謝謝! (掌聲)