第一篇：TED演講—Joseph Nye《21世紀權力的變遷》(中英對照)

I'm going to talk to you about power in this 21st century.And basically, what I'd like to tell you is that power is changing, and there are two types of changes I want to discuss.One is power transition, which is change of power amongst states.And they are the simple version of the message, is it's moving from West to East.The other is power diffusion, the way power is moving from all states, West or East, to non-state actors.Those two things are the huge shifts of power in our century.And I want to tell you about them each separately and then how they interact and why, in the end, there may be some good news.我想討論的是21世紀的權利?；旧衔蚁敫嬖V大家的是權利的變化，有兩種變化是我想探討的。一種是權利的轉移，國家和國家之間的權利變化。這是對權利轉移的簡單解讀，即權利正從西方轉移到東方。另一種是權利的分散，即權利的轉移是從西方和東方的各個國家 到非國家的范圍。以上兩種情況是本世紀權利的重要轉移。我想分別說說這兩種情況 和它們之間的相互影響 以及為什么說最終可能是個好消息。

When we talk about power transition, we often talk about the rise of Asia.It really should be called the recovery, or return, of Asia.If we looked at the world in 1800, you'd find that more than half of the world's people lived in Asia and they made more than half the world's product.Now fast forward to 1900: half the world's people--more than half--still live in Asia, but they're making only a fifth of the world's product.What happened? The Industrial Revolution, which meant that all of a sudden, Europe and America became the dominant center of the world.What we're going to see in the 21st century is Asia gradually returning to being more than half of the world's population and more than half of the world's product.That's important, and it's an important shift.But let me tell you a little bit about the other shift that I'm talking about, which is power diffusion.說到權利的轉移，我們經常會提起亞洲的崛起。確切地說應該稱作亞洲的復興或者亞洲的回歸。回顧19世紀的世界，你會發現世界上一半以上的人口都居住在亞洲 而且他們生產的產品占了世界總量的一半以上?，F在我們來看20世紀，世界上一般的人口——超過一半——仍然在亞洲居住，但是他們的生產總值進占全球的五分之一。這是為什么呢？工業革命，也就是說突然之間，歐洲和美國成為主導世界的中心。而到了21世紀，我們看到的是亞洲將重新回到占世界一半以上人口和生產總值的位置。這很重要，而且是一次重大的權利轉移。但是接下來我要和你們探討一下剛才提到的另外一種轉移，那就是權利分散。

To understand power diffusion put this in your mind: computing and communications costs have fallen a thousandfold between 1970 and the beginning of this century.Now that's a big, abstract number, but to make it more real, if the price of an automobile had fallen as rapidly as the price of computing power, you could buy a car today for five dollars.Now when the price of any technology declines that dramatically, the barriers to entry go down;anybody can play in the game.So in 1970, if you wanted to communicate from Oxford to Johannesburg to New Delhi to Brasilia and anywhere simultaneously, you could do it, the technology was there.But to be able to do it, you had to be very rich--a government, a multinational corporation, maybe the Catholic Church--but you had to be pretty wealthy.Now, anybody has that capacity, which previously was restricted by price just to a few actors, if they have the price of entry into an internet cafe--the last time I looked, it was something like a pound an hour--and if you have Skype, it's free.So capabilities that were once restricted are now available to everyone.要理解權利分散 就要明白一點：計算和交流的成本已經降到原來的千分之幾 從1970年到本世紀初。這個數字很大，很抽象，但是具體來說，如果汽車價格的降幅和計算機的降幅一樣，那么今天你只花五美元，就可以買輛車。那么如果所有的技術價格 都以這個

幅度下跌，獲得這一技術的門檻就會降低；人人都可以享有。從20世紀70年代開始，如果你想 從牛津到約翰內斯堡 或到新德里 或到巴西利亞 或是其他任何地方獲得即時通訊，是可行的，因為技術已經發展到了這個階段。但是要真正做到這一點，你需要很有錢才行—— 你要么是政府，要么是跨國公司，也可能是基督教堂 不過你得及其有錢才行。但是幾天人人都能享有這些技術，以前人們受到價格的制約 只有少數人才能享有，如果人們有足夠的錢去網吧—— 我上次查到的價格大概是每小時一磅左右—— 但是如果你用Skype，是免費的。所以曾經被限制的能力現在人人都可以享有。

And what that means is not that the age of the State is over.The State still matters.But the stage is crowded.The State's not alone.There are many, many actors.Some of that's good.Oxfam, a great non-governmental actor.Some of it's bad.Al Qaeda, another non-governmental actor.But think of what it does to how we think in traditional terms and concepts.We think in terms of war and interstate war.And you can think back to 1941, when the government of Japan attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor.It's worth noticing that a non-state actor attacking the United States in 2001 killed more Americans than the government of Japan did in 1941.You might think of that as the privatization of war.So we're seeing a great change in terms of diffusion of power.這并不意味著國家的時代結束了。國家依然很重要。但是舞臺是很擁擠的。國家不可能單獨存在。還有很多很多的角色。其中有一些是好的角色。比如牛津饑荒救濟委員會（樂施會）就是一個很重要的非政府角色。其中也有一些是不好的。基地組織，是另一個非政府角色。但是試想這些對我們 傳統的思維方式和觀念有哪些改變。我們過去考慮的是戰爭 和內戰。大家可以想一想1941年，日本政府日本政府襲擊美國珍珠港。只得注意的是 在2001年，一個非政府的角色 襲擊了美國 在這次襲擊中喪生的美國人超過了 1941年日本政府的行為。你可能會想戰爭已經不再是國家行為。因此我們看到的是權力分散的一個重大變化。

Now the problem is that we're not thinking about it in very innovative ways.So let me step back and ask: what's power? Power is simple the ability to affect others to get the outcomes you want, and you can do it in three ways.You can do it with threats, of coercion--sticks, you can do it with payments--carrots, or you can do it by getting others to want what you want.And that ability to get others to want what you want, to get the outcomes you want, without coercion or payment, is what I call soft power.And that soft power has been much neglected and much misunderstood.And yet it's tremendously important.Indeed, if you can learn to use more soft power, you can save a lot on carrots and sticks.Traditionally, the way people thought about power was primarily in terms of military power.For example, the great Oxford historian who taught here at this university, A.J.P.Taylor, defined a great power as a country able to prevail in war.But we need a new narrative if we're to understand power in the 21st century.It's not just prevailing at war, though war still persists.It's not whose army wins;it's also whose story wins.And we have to think much more in terms of narratives and whose narrative is going to be effective.可問題是我們對此的看法不夠新。所以讓我們再退一步重新審視并且想一想：什么是權利？ 權利其實就是一種能力 能夠影響他人 以達到你的目的，實現權利的方式有三種。可以威脅他人，通過強迫——棍棒，可以買通他人 胡蘿卜，或者通過讓別人心甘情愿地做你想要達成的結果。而讓別人心甘情愿地做逆向要做的，來達到你的目的，而不是通過強迫或買通，就是我所說的軟實力。而這種軟實力很大程度上被人們所忽視所誤解了。然而軟實力是極其重要地。事實上，如果你知道如何運用軟實力，你會節省很多地胡蘿卜和棍棒。按照慣例，人們認為權利基本就是軍事力量。例如來自牛津的偉大的歷史學家 A.J.P.泰勒 對大國的定義是 能夠打贏戰爭的國家。但是我們需要一個新的闡述來真正懂得21世紀地

權利。權利不僅僅是贏得戰爭盡管戰爭依舊存在。哪一個國家的軍隊贏了并不重要； 重要的是誰講的故事能夠贏得人心。而且我們需要進一步考慮這個闡釋以及誰的闡釋更加有效。

Now let me go back to the question of power transition between states and what's happening there.the narratives that we use now tend to be the rise and fall of the great powers.And the current narrative is all about the rise of China and the decline of the United States.Indeed, with the 2008 financial crisis, many people said this was the beginning of the end of American power.The tectonic【筑造的;構造的】plates of world politics were shifting.And president Medvedev of Russia, for example, pronounced in 2008 this was the beginning of the end of United States power.But in fact, this metaphor【暗喻】of decline is often very misleading.If you look at history, in recent history, you'll see the cycles of belief in American decline come and go every 10 or 15 years or so.In 1958, after the Soviets put up Sputnik【俄人造衛星】, it was “That's the end of America.” In 1973, with the oil embargo【禁運】 and the closing of the gold window, that was the end of America.In the 1980s, as America went through a transition in the Reagan period, between the rust belt【鐵銹地帶(指從前工業繁盛今已衰落的發達國家一些地區】economy of the midwest to the Silicon Valley economy of California, that was the end of America.But in fact, what we've seen is none of those were true.Indeed, people were over-enthusiastic in the early 2000s, thinking America could do anything, which led us into some disastrous foreign policy adventures, and now we're back to decline again.現在我要回到國家之間權利轉移的問題講講最新的動態。我們現在用的闡釋大多是大國的 崛起和沒落。而近來這種闡述全都是中國的崛起和美國的沒落。確實，2008年發生的經濟危機 會讓很多人說這是美國領導力終結的開始。全球政治格局的板塊正在發生轉變。例如俄羅斯的總統梅德韋杰夫，在2008年曾說過經濟危機是美國領導力結束的開端。然而事實上，這種衰落的比喻非常誤導人。如果回顧歷史，近代歷史你會發現這種認為美國衰落的說法 每隔10年到20年左右就會出現。1958年，蘇聯發射人造衛星以后 人們就說“美國要衰落了?！?1973年的石油禁運和黃金窗口的關閉，又有人說美國要衰落了。20世紀80年代，在里根就職期間，美國經歷了一次 從美國中西部老工業基地到加州的硅谷經濟的轉變，又有人在說美國要衰落了。但事實上，我們發現 所有這些謠言都不是真的。事實上，正是人們在21世紀初過分樂觀，認為美國無所不能，導致了我們作出了一些災難性的外交政策，現在又出現了美國衰落的聲音。

The moral of this story is all these narratives about rise and fall and decline tell us a lot more about psychology than they do about reality.If we try to focus on the reality, then what we need to focus on is what's really happening in terms of China and the United States.Goldman Sachs has projected that China, the Chinese economy, will surpass that of the U.S.by 2027.So we've got, what, 17 more years to go or so before China's bigger.Now someday, with a billion point three people getting richer, they are going to be bigger than the United States.But be very careful of these projections such as the Goldman Sachs projection as though that gives you an accurate picture of power transition in this century.Let me mention three reasons why it's too simple.First of all, it's a linear projection.You know, everything says, here's the growth rate of China, here's the growth rate of the U.S., here it goes--straight line.History is not linear.There are often bumps along the road, accidents along the way.The second thing is that the Chinese economy passes the U.S.economy in, let's say, 2030, which it may it【就算事實真的如此】, that will be a measure of

total economic size, but not of per capita income--won't tell you about the composition of the economy.China still has large areas of underdevelopment.And per capita income is a better measure of the sophistication of the economy.And that the Chinese won't catch up or pass the Americans until somewhere in the latter part, after 2050, of this century.總之 所有這些關于崛起，倒退和衰落的闡述 講的更多的是一種心理 而不是事實。現在讓我們只關注事實，那么我們就需要關注 當下在中國和美國 正在發生的事情。高盛預言 中國，中國經濟 將會在2027年 超過美國。所以我們只剩下在中國超過美國之前 我們只剩下17年左右。也許未來等到這1.3億人口富起來的時候，他們將超過美國。但是不要輕易接受 高盛這些公司做出的預測。盡管這些預測能給你本世紀潛力轉移的精確畫面。讓我來給出為什么這些預測過于簡單的原因。第一，它是線性的預測。種種跡象 這是中國的增長率，這是美國的增長率，請看——直線 然而歷史不是一條直線。歷史進程經常出現曲折和突發事件。第二 中國經濟 如果說在2030年超過了美國經濟，就算事實真的如此，也是按經濟總量來衡量的，并非人均收入—— 并不能說明經濟的組成。中國的廣大地區 還很落后。人均收入能夠更好的衡量 經濟的復雜性。在這之后，中國才有可能在人均收入超過美國，那會是在本世紀，2050年以后。

The other point that's worth noticing is how one-dimensional this projection is.You know, it looks at economic power measured by GDP.Doesn't tell you much about military power, doesn't tell you very much about soft power.It's all one-dimensional.And also, when we think about the rise of Asia, or return of Asia, as I called it a little bit earlier, it's worth remembering Asia's not one thing.If you're sitting in Japan, or in New Delhi, or in Hanoi, your view of the rise of China is a little different than if you're sitting in Beijing.Indeed, one of the advantages that the Americans will have in terms of power in Asia is all those countries want an American insurance policy against the rise of China.It's as though Mexico and Canada were hostile neighbors to the United States, which they're not.So these simple projections of the Goldman Sachs type are not telling us what we need to know about power transition.另外值得一提的是這個預測的衡量標準 是多么的單一。它看到是通過GDP，衡量的經濟實力。并不說明軍事實力，也不能說明軟實力。它的衡量標準是單一的。而且說到亞洲的崛起，或者是亞洲的回歸，就像我之前提到的，需要注意的是亞洲不是一個整體。對于日本，新德里，或者河內來說，對與中國的崛起和中國自己的看法是不同的。事實上，關于亞洲的勢力 美國擁有的一個優勢就是所有這些國家都希望得到美國政策的保護來制衡中國。就像墨西哥和加拿大歷史上是美國不很友好的鄰邦，現在也是這樣的。所以高盛作出的這些簡單的預測并不能說明我們應該知道的全力轉移。

But you might ask, well so what, in any case? Why does it matter? Who cares? Is this just a game that diplomats and academics play? The answer is it matters quite a lot.Because, if you believe in decline and you get the answers wrong on this, the facts, not the myths, you may have policies which are very dangerous.Let me give you an example from history.The Peloponnesian War【伯羅奔尼薩戰爭】was the great conflict in which the Greek city state system tore itself apart two and a half millennia ago.What caused it? Thucydides【修西得底斯】, the great historian of the the Peloponnesian War, said it was the rise in the power of Athens and the fear it created in Sparta.Notice both halves【對半分】of that explanation.然而，你可能會說，無論如何，那又怎么樣呢？ 為什么這一點很重要？誰會在乎？ 這只是一場 外交家們和學術界的一場游戲嗎？答案是這一點很重要。因為，如果相信衰落關于這個問題得到的答案是錯誤的，事實上，不是謠傳，這樣錯誤的答案是很危險的。以下是歷史上的例子。伯羅奔尼薩戰爭是希臘城邦體制的很大的沖突導致了兩千伍佰年前希臘的分崩離析。根源是什么？ 修西得底斯，伯羅奔尼薩戰爭時期的偉大歷史學家，說是因為希臘人的崛起 和斯巴達克人對希臘人崛起的恐懼。注意這前后這兩部分的原因。

Many people argue that the 21st century is going to repeat the 20th century, in which World War One, the great conflagration【大火】in which the European state system tore itself apart and destroyed its centrality in the world, that that was caused by the rise in the power of Germany and the fear that it created in Britain.So there are people who are telling us this is going to be reproduced today, that what we're going to see is the same thing now in this century.No.I think that's wrong.It's bad history.For one thing, Germany had surpassed Britain in Industrial strength by 1900.And as I said earlier, China has not passed the United States.But also, if you have this belief and it creates a sense of fear, it leads to overreaction.And the greatest danger we have of managing this power transition of the shift toward the East is fear.To paraphrase【釋義，解釋】 Franklin Roosevelt from a different context, the greatest thing we have to fear is fear itself.We don't have to fear the rise of China or the return of Asia.And if we have policies in which we take it in that larger historical perspective, we're going to be able to manage this process.很多人認為 21世紀將會重蹈20世紀的覆轍，第一次世界大戰的戰火 使得整個歐洲的體制 分崩離析 破壞了它在世界的中心地位，原因就是德國的崛起和英國的恐慌。所以今天有些人告訴我們 今天這樣得歷史將會重演，為我們將會看到的是本世紀歷史得重演。不，我認為這不會發生。那段歷史不會重蹈。一方面，在1900年德國得工業實力已經超過了英國。就像我之前說過的，中國還沒有超過美國。但同時如果相信衰落就會產生恐懼，導致過度反映。我們在處理權利向東方轉移時面臨的最大的危險就是恐懼。用羅斯福的話來說就是我們最需要害怕的是害怕本身。我們不需要害怕中國的崛起或者亞洲的回歸。如果我們采取的政策能夠從歷史的大局出發，我們就可以處理好這個過程。

Let me say a word now about the distribution of power and how it relates to power diffusion and then pull these two types together.If you ask how is power distributed in the world today, it's distributed much like a three-dimensional chess game.Top board: military power among states.The United States is the only superpower, and it's likely to remain that way for two or three decades.China's not going to replace the U.S.on this military board.Middle board of this three-dimensional chess game: economic power among states.Power is multi-polar.There are balancers.The U.S., Europe, China, Japan can balance each other.The bottom board of this three-dimensional, the board of transnational relations, things that cross borders outside the control of governments, things like climate change, drug trade, financial flows, pandemics,【傳染病】all these things that cross borders outside the control of governments, there nobody's in charge.It makes no sense to call this unipolar or multi-polar.Power is chaotically distributed.And the only way you can solve these problems--and this is where many greatest challenges are coming in this century--is through cooperation, through working together, which means that soft power becomes more important, that ability to organize networks to deal with these kinds of problems and to be able to get cooperation.現在我想說的一個詞就是權利的分配以及它是如何和權利的分散相聯系的 然后我會把二者撮合到一起。如果你們想知道今天世界的是如何分配的，權利的分配很像是 三維的象棋。最高層： 各國的軍事力量。美國是唯一的超級大國，而且未來20到30年 依然如此。中國在軍事這盤棋還不能取代美國。這盤三維象棋的中間是：各國經濟實力的較量。經濟實力是多極的。各級之間相互平衡。美國，歐洲，中國，日本 能夠相互制衡。三維象棋的最下層，是各國之間的關系，是各國政府所不能夠控制的因素，例如氣候變暖，毒品走私，貨幣流入和流出，傳染病，所有這些跨國因素 都不是政府所能掌控的，而且也沒有人負責。把這些叫做單極或者多極是沒有 任何意義的。權利的分配是很混亂的。而且唯一能解決這些跨國問題的—— 這也正是本世紀出現的很多大的挑戰的唯一出路—— 那就是合作，通過互相合作，也就是說軟實力越來越重要了，協調各國的關系來解決這些問題 并達成一致日益重要。

Another way of putting it is that as we think of power in the 21st century, we want to get away from the idea that power's always zero sum--my gain is your loss and vice versa.Power can also be positive sum, where your gain can be my gain.If China develops greater energy security and greater capacity to deal with its problems of carbon emissions, that's good for us as well as good for China as well as good for everybody else.So empowering China to deal with its own problems of carbon is good for everybody, and it's not a zero sum, I win, you lose.It's one in which we can all gain.So as we think about power in this century, we want to get away from this view that it's all I win, you lose.Now I don't mean to be Pollyannaish【盲目樂觀】about this.Wars persist.Power persists.Military power is important.Keeping balances is important.All this is still persists.Hard power is there, and it will remain.But unless you learn how to mix hard power with soft power into strategies that I call smart power, you're not going to deal with the new kinds of problems that we're facing.另外一種闡釋就是 說到21世紀的權利，我們想要擺脫 權利總是走向零和—— 不是你死就是我活 權利也可以是正和，你獲得的同時我也可以獲得。如果中國能的能源安全發展的更好，處理 碳排放的能力越強 對我們來說有好處，同時對中國有好處 而且對每個國家都有好處。因此賦予中國 應對溫室效應的能力 對誰都有好處，而且這不是一個零和游戲，我贏你就輸了。這是一場雙贏的游戲。所以想到本世紀的 權利，我們要擺脫這種 你死我活的觀念。我并不是過分樂觀。戰爭已就存在，權利依舊存在。軍事力量依舊很重要。保持平衡很重要。所有這些仍然繼續。硬實力很重要，而且依然很重要。但是除非學會如何將 硬實力和軟實力相結合 到我所說的巧實力的戰略中，就不用再處理我們所面對的類似的 新問題了。

So the key question that we need to think about as we look at this is how do we work together to produce global public goods, things from which all of us can benefit? How do we define our national interests so that it's not just zero sum, but positive sum.In that sense, if we define our interests, for example, for the United States the way Britain defined its interests in the 19th century, keeping an open trading system, keeping a monetary stability, keeping freedom of the seas--those were good for Britain, they were good for others as well.And in the 21st century, you have to do an analog to that.How do we produce global public goods, which are good for us, but good for everyone at the same time? And that's going to be the good news dimension of what we need to think about as we think of power in the 21st century.因此關鍵問題是關于這個問題時我們需要思考如何合作來創造有益于全世界有益于每個國家的東西。思考如何定義國家利益 這樣它就不再是零和，而是正和。那樣的話，如果我們能夠定義我們的利益，例如，在19世紀英國認為美國可以使其保持開放的貿易體系，穩定的貨幣，和海上自由——這些對英國都是有利的，對其他國家也是有利的。在21世界，我們應該以史為鑒，如何創造有利于全世界，有利于我們自己，但同時又有利于每個人的事情，這就是我們在思考 21世紀的權利時 想到的一些好的結果。

There are ways to define our interests in which, while protecting ourselves with hard power, we can organize with others in networks to produce, not only public goods, but ways that will enhance our soft power.So if one looks at the statements that have been made about this, I am impressed that when Hillary Clinton described the foreign policy of the Obama administration, she said that the foreign policy of the Obama administration was going to be smart power, as she put it, “using all the tools in our foreign policy tool box.” And if we're going to deal with these two great power shifts that I've described, the power shift represented by transition among states, the power shift represented by diffusion of power away from all states, we're going to have to develop a new narrative of power in which we combine hard and soft power into strategies of smart power.And that's the good news I have.We can do that.對于國家利益的理解，在用硬實力保護自我的同時 我們還可以協調和其他國家的關系 來創造不僅是有利于全世界 同時也有利于增強我們的軟實力的理解。因此得到這一結論的 說法，希拉里克林頓關于奧巴馬政府外交政策的闡述讓我印象頗深，她說奧巴馬政府的外交政策 應該立足于巧實力，就向她說得那樣“利用 外交政策的各種策略?！?要處理好 我提到的這兩種全力轉移，一種是國家之間權利的轉移，一種是 從國家分散出來的權利，我們就需要形成關于權利的新的闡釋 將軟硬實力結合 到巧實力中。這就是我說的好消息。我們能夠做到。

Thank you very much.

第二篇：TED演講中英對照3

My job is to design, build and study robots that communicate with people.But this story doesn't start with robotics at all, it starts with animation.When I first saw Pixar's “Luxo Jr.,” I was amazed by how much emotion they could put into something as trivial as a desk lamp.I mean, look at them--at the end of this movie, you actually feel something for two pieces of furniture.(Laughter)And I said, I have to learn how to do this.So I made a really bad career decision.And that's what my mom was like when I did it.(Laughter)I left a very cozy tech job in Israel at a nice software company and I moved to New York to study animation.And there I lived in a collapsing apartment building in Harlem with roommates.I'm not using this phrase metaphorically, the ceiling actually collapsed one day in our living room.Whenever they did those news stories about building violations in New York, they would put the report in front of our building.As kind of like a backdrop to show how bad things are.我的工作是設計、構造和研究 那些能夠與人交流的機器人。不過這個故事不是從機器人說起，而是要從動畫說起。當我第一次看到皮克斯的《頑皮跳跳燈》電影時，我驚呆了，一個如此微不足道的臺燈 竟能表現如此多的感情。你看他們??！電影結尾的時候，你真的開始喜歡上這兩件小小的家具了。（笑聲）我對自己說，我要學會做這樣的東西。所以我做了一個很壞的職業決策，我做出這個決定的時候，我媽媽就是這樣的。（笑聲）我辭去了在以色列一個軟件公司的 一份非常舒服的技術工作，我搬到了紐約 去學習動畫。在那，我和我的室友住在 哈萊姆一棟即將坍塌的公寓樓里。我沒有夸張，有一天天花板真的塌下來了 就塌在了我們的客廳里。每次報到紐約的違章建筑時，他們都會跑到們的大樓下進行采訪。就好像讓你看看現場有多糟糕一樣。

Anyway, during the day I went to school and at night I would sit and draw frame by frame of pencil animation.And I learned two surprising lessons--one of them was that when you want to arouse emotions, it doesn't matter so much how something looks, it's all in the motion--it's in the timing of how the thing moves.And the second, was something one of our teachers told us.He actually did the weasel in Ice Age.And he said: “As an animator you are not a director, you're an actor.” So, if you want to find the right motion for a character, don't think about it, go use your body to find it--stand in front of a mirror, act it out in front of a camera--whatever you need.And then put it back in your character.言歸正傳，我上學的日日夜夜，我不停地一幅又一幅地用鉛筆畫著畫。我學到了兩個讓我驚訝的東西—— 其中一個是： 當你想要喚起某些情感時，外觀并不算太重要，關鍵是動作——物體運動時，對時間的把握。關鍵是動作——物體運動時，對時間的把握。第二個是我們的一個老師告訴我們的。他正是電影《冰河世紀》的黃鼠狼。他說： ”作為一個動畫制作者，你不是一個導演，而是一個演員。“ 所以如果你要為一個角色找到正確的肢體語言，不要想，用你的身體找到它，站在鏡子面前，攝像機前，演出來，無論你需要做什么。然后再把這個動作放在你的角色上。

A year later I found myself at MIT in the robotic life group, it was one of the first groups researching the relationships between humans and robots.And I still had this dream to make an actual, physical Luxo Jr.lamp.But I found that robots didn't move at all in this engaging way that I was used to for my animation studies.Instead, they were all--how should I put it, they were all kind of robotic.(Laughter)And I thought, what if I took whatever I learned in animation school, and used that to design my robotic desk lamp.So I went and designed frame by frame to try to make this robot as graceful and engaging as possible.And here when you see the robot interacting with me on a desktop.And I'm actually redesigning the robot so, unbeknownst to itself, it's kind of digging its own grave by helping me.(Laughter)I wanted it to be less of a mechanical structure giving me light, and more of a helpful, kind of quiet apprentice that's always there when you need it and doesn't really interfere.And when, for example, I'm looking for a battery that I can't find, in a subtle way, it will show me where the battery is.So you can see my confusion here.I'm not an actor.And I want you to notice how the same mechanical structure can at one point, just by the way it moves seem gentle and caring--and in the other case, seem violent and confrontational.And it's the same structure, just the motion is different.Actor: “You want to know something? Well, you want to know something? He was already dead!Just laying there, eyes glazed over!”(Laughter)But, moving in graceful ways is just one building block of this whole structure called human-robot interaction.I was at the time doing my Ph.D., I was working on human robot teamwork;teams of humans and robots working together.I was studying the engineering, the psychology, the philosophy of teamwork.And at the same time I found myself in my own kind of teamwork situation with a good friend of mine who is actually here.And in that situation we can easily imagine robots in the near future being there with us.It was after a Passover seder.We were folding up a lot of folding chairs, and I was amazed at how quickly we found our own rhythm.Everybody did their own part.We didn't have to divide our tasks.We didn't have to communicate verbally about this.It all just happened.And I thought, humans and robots don't look at all like this.When humans and robots interact, it's much more like a chess game.The human does a thing, the robot analyzes whatever the human did, then the robot decides what to do next, plans it and does it.And then the human waits, until it's their turn again.So, it's much more like a chess game and that makes sense because chess is great for mathematicians and computer scientists.It's all about information analysis, decision making and planning.一年以后，我去了麻省理工大學（MIT）的 機器人生命小組，這是最早 開始研究人類和機器人關系的小組之一。我依然懷揣著要造一個 真正的、可觸碰的頑皮跳跳燈的夢想。但是我發現機器人完全不是 按照我的動畫課程中的那種 引人入勝的方式移動。相反的，他們都—— 該怎么說呢？他們都有點兒機械化。（笑聲）我就想，如果我可以把我在動畫學校學到的東西 應用于設計我的機器人臺燈會怎樣？ 因此我設計了一幅又一幅，試圖讓這個機器人 盡量優雅、有吸引力。這里你可以看到這個桌子上的機器人 在跟我互動，我其實是在重新設計這個機器人，而這個機器人完全不知道，它幫我，其實是在自掘墳墓呢。（笑聲）比起把他它做成一個照明的機械，比起把他它做成一個照明的機械，我更想要一個能幫忙的、安靜的學徒，隨時滿足你的需求卻不打擾你。比如，當我要找一個我怎么也 找不到的電池時，它可以巧妙地提醒我電池在哪里。你看到我的困惑了嗎？ 我不是一個演員。我希望你們注意到，同一個機械如何 在前一刻非常溫柔、充滿關懷，在前一刻非常溫柔、充滿關懷，下一刻又顯得非常暴力，有進攻性。一模一樣的結構，改變的僅僅是動作。演員：”你想知道嗎？你真的想知道嗎？ 他已經死了！他就躺在那里，目光呆滯！“（笑聲）但是，以一種優雅的方式移動只是這整個 人類機器人互動結構的一塊基石。那時候我正在攻讀我的博士學位，我正在研究人類與機器人的團隊合作，也就是人類和機器人一起合作。我在學習團隊合作的工程學，心理學和哲學。同時，我意識到自己 和我的一個好朋友（他今天也在這里），也碰到了一個團隊合作的情境。在那個情境中，我們很容易想象 不久的將來機器人會和我們在一起。那是在一個逾越節家宴結束后，我們要收起大量的折疊椅，我驚訝于我們迅速找到了各自的節奏。每個人都做了自己的那部分，無需分工，無需特意口頭溝通。就這樣發生了。于是我想，人類和機器人的互動卻完全不是這樣。當人類和機器人互動的時候，就好像他們在下象棋。人類走一步，機器人對此分析一下，然后機器人決定接下來怎么做，計劃好，走下一步。這時候人類就等著，直到輪到他們玩為止。所以，人類和機器人的互動更像下象棋，這很好理解，因為 對數學家和計算機科學家來說，象棋很好，它們都是關于信息分析、決策制定和計劃。

But I wanted my robot to be less of a chess player, and more like a doer that just clicks and works together.So I made my second horrible career choice: I decided to study acting for a semester.I took off from a Ph.D.I went to acting classes.I actually participated in a play, I hope theres no video of that around still.And I got every book I could find about acting, including one from the 19th century that I got from the library.And I was really amazed because my name was the second name on the list--the previous name was in 1889.(Laughter)And this book was kind of waiting for 100 years to be rediscovered for robotics.And this book shows actors how to move every muscle in the body to match every kind of emotion that they want to express.但比起象棋玩家，我更希望我的機器人是一個行動者，但比起象棋玩家，我更希望我的機器人是一個行動者，可以和人類有默契地一起工作。于是我做了我人生中的第二個糟糕的職業決策： 我決定學習一學期的表演課程。我放下了我的博士課程，去上了表演課。我還參與了一個戲劇，希望現在已經找不到那個視頻了。我找到了每一本關于表演的書，其中包括一本從圖書館里借來的 19世紀的書。我震驚地發現我的名字是借閱者名單上的第二個，之前的一個名字是1889年。（笑聲）這本書已經躺了100年了，只為了借機器人之名被重新發現。這本書教演員 如何調動他們身體上的每塊肌肉 來表達他們想要表達的情感。

But the real revelation was when I learned about method acting.It became very popular in the 20th century.And method acting said, you don't have to plan every muscle in your body.Instead you have to use your body to find the right movement.You have to use your sense memory to reconstruct the emotions and kind of think with your body to find the right expression.Improvise, play off yor scene partner.And this came at the same time as I was reading about this trend in cognitive psychology called embodied cognition.Which also talks about the same ideas--We use our bodies to think, we don't just think with our brains and use our bodies to move.but our bodies feed back into our brain to generate the way that we behave.And it was like a lightning bolt.I went back to my office.I wrote this paper--which I never really published called “Acting Lessons for Artificial Intelligence.” And I even took another month to do what was then the first theater play with a human and a robot acting together.That's what you saw before with the actors.And I thought: How can we make an artificial intelligence model--computer, computational model--that will model some of these ideas of improvisation, of taking risks, of taking chances, even of making mistakes.Maybe it can make for better robotic teammates.So I worked for quite a long time on these models and I implemented them on a number of robots.Here you can see a very early example with the robots trying to use this embodied artificial intelligence, to try to match my movements as closely as possible, sort of like a game.Let's look at it.You can see when I psych it out, it gets fooled.And it's a little bit like what you might see actors do when they try to mirror each other to find the right synchrony between them.And then, I did another experiment, and I got people off the street to use the robotic desk lamp, and try out this idea of embodied artificial intelligence.So, I actually used two kinds of brains for the same robot.The robot is the same lamp that you saw, and I put in it two brains.For one half of the people, I put in a brain that's kind of the traditional, calculated robotic brain.It waits for its turn, it analyzes everything, it plans.Let's call it the calculated brain.The other got more the stage actor, risk taker brain.Let's call it the adventurous brain.It sometimes acts without knowing everything it has to know.It sometimes makes mistakes and corrects them.And I had them do this very tedious task that took almost 20 minutes and they had to work together.Somehow simulating like a factory job of repetitively doing the same thing.And what I found was that people actually loved the adventurous robot.And they thought it was more intelligent, more committed, a better member of the team, contributed to the success of the team more.They even called it 'he' and 'she,' whereas people with the calculated brain called it 'it.' And nobody ever called it 'he' or 'she'.When they talked about it after the task with the adventurous brain, they said, “By the end, we were good friends and high-fived mentally.” Whatever that means.(Laughter)Sounds painful.Whereas the people with the calculated brain said it was just like a lazy apprentice.It only did what it was supposed to do and nothing more.Which is almost what people expect robots to do, so I was surprised that people had higher expectations of robots, than what anybody in robotics thought robots should be doing.And in a way, I thought, maybe it's time--just like method acting changed the way people thought about acting in the 19th century, from going from the very calculated, planned way of behaving, to a more intuitive, risk-taking, embodied way of behaving.Maybe it's time for robots to have the same kind of revolution.真正讓我受到啟示的是 方法演技。它在20世紀的時候非常流行。方法演技指出，你不需要安排你的每一塊肌肉，相反，你可以用你的身體找到對的動作。你應該運用你的感覺記憶，去重新建構情感，用你的身體找到對的表情。即興發揮，根據你的場景搭檔即興表演。這個時候我也正讀到 認知心理學關于具身認知的東西，這也談到同樣的觀點—— 即我們用我們的身體思考，我們并不是用大腦思考用身體表現，而是我們的身體反饋給大腦 并做出相應的動作，這對我好像一道閃電。我馬上回了我的辦公室。我寫了這篇論文，從來也沒發表過，叫做《人工智能的表演課》。我甚至花了一個月的時間 去做當時第一部由人類和機器人 一起主演的戲劇。你之前看到的演員和機器人的表演就是這部戲劇。當時我就想： 我們怎樣可以做出這樣的人工智能模型—— 計算機、計算機模型等等，它們會即興發揮、會冒險、甚至會犯錯。它可能會是更好的機器人隊友。因此我花了很多時間去研究這些模型，我還在幾個機器人身上做了試驗。這里你可以看到一個早期的例子，這個機器人試圖運用具身人工智能 來盡量模仿我的動作，就好像一個游戲。我們來看一下。你可以看到我可以糊弄它。有點像你可能看到的演員們 互相模仿對方 只為了找到他們之間的默契。然后，我又做了另外一個實驗，我從大街上拉人來使用這個機器人臺燈，試驗具身人工智能。其實，同樣的機器人我用了兩個大腦，機器人就是你看到的這個臺燈，我給了它兩個大腦。對一半的人，我放入了一個傳統的、機械計算的大腦。它會等，會分析，會計劃，我們暫且稱它為“會計算的大腦”。給另一半人則是那個舞臺演員、愛冒險的大腦，我們暫且稱它為“愛冒險的大腦”，有的時候它在并不知道所有事情的時候行動，有的時候它會犯錯然后去糾正。我讓他們完成一項無比乏味的任務，這個任務要花近20分鐘，他們必須一起合作完成，有點類似在工廠工作，機械地重復一件事情。我發現人們非常喜歡 那個“愛冒險的機器人”。他們覺得它非常聰明，非常忠心，是一個很好的團隊成員，一起幫助團隊成功。他們甚至稱它為“他”和“她”，而另外那些人稱那個“會計算的機器人”為“它”，沒有人稱它為“他”或“她”。任務完成后，那些與“會冒險的大腦”互動的人說： “最后，我們成了好朋友，還在腦內舉手擊掌了。” 不管那是啥意思……（笑聲）聽上去很…（口齒不清）然而，那些與“會計算的大腦”互動的人 則說“它就像一個懶徒弟，只做最基本的。“ 這基本上和同人對機器人期待一樣，所以我有些驚訝，比起那些機器人研究專家，人們居然對機器人有更高的期望。但從另一個角度，我又想，也許就像方法演技改變了 19世紀人們思考表演的方式一樣，是時間改變這種通過精確計算的 行為方式，而轉向一種更直覺的、冒險的、用身體表現的行為方式。也許類似的 機器人革命時間到了。A few years later, I was at my next research job at Georgia Tech in Atlanta, and I was working in a group dealing with robotic musicians.And I thought, music, that's the perfect place to look at teamwork, coordination, timing, improvisation--and we just got this robot playing marimba.Marimba, for everybody who was like me, it was this huge, wooden xylophone.And, when I was looking at this, I looked at other works in human-robot improvisation--yes, there are other works in human-robot improvisation--and they were also a little bit like a chess game.The human would play, the robot would analyze what was played, would improvise their own part.So, this is what musicians called a call and response interaction, and it also fits very well, robots and artificial intelligence.But I thought, if I use the same ideas I used in the theater play and in the teamwork studies, maybe I can make the robots jam together like a band.Everybody's riffing off each other, nobody is stopping it for a moment.And so, I tried to do the same things, this time with music, where the robot doesn't really know what it's about to play.It just sort of moves its body and uses opportunities to play, And does what my jazz teacher when I was 17 taught me.She said, when you improvise, sometimes you don't know what you're doing and you're still doing it.And so I tried to make a robot that doesn't actually know what it's doing, but it's still doing it.So let's look at a few seconds from this performance.Where the robot listens to the human musician and improvises.And then, look at how the human musician also responds to what the robot is doing, and picking up from its behavior.And at some point can even be surprised by what the robot came up with.(Music)(Applause)幾年后，我在亞特蘭大的喬治理工大學做研究，我在一個研究機器人音樂家的 小組工作。我想，音樂是可以很好的 研究團隊合作、配合、時間分配和即興表演的領域，我們有這個玩馬林巴的機器人。和我一樣對樂器不在行的朋友，馬林巴是 一個巨大的木琴。我看著這個，又看了那些其它的人類和機器人的即興互動，——沒錯，還有其它人和機器人即興互動的項目—— 都差不多也是一個個象棋游戲式的互動。人類走一步，機器人對此分析，然后決定下一步。音樂家們稱其為 呼叫和應答互動，作為機器人和人工智能，這很合適。但是我想，如果我可以運用 戲劇表演和團隊合作中的研究發現，也許我可以讓這些機器人 組成一個樂隊，每個人都在即興發揮，沒有人需要停下來。于是這次我嘗試用音樂做試驗，機器人并不知道 它會演奏什么，它就這樣移動它的身體，找機會演奏，做著我17歲時候的爵士老師教我的事情。她說，當你即興表演的時候，有的時候，你并不知道你在做什么，但是你還是繼續做。于是我嘗試做一個不知道自己在做什么 卻仍然繼續做的機器人。讓我們來看一下這個表演的一個小片段。機器人聽人類音樂家演奏 然后即興發揮。接著，看人類音樂家如何 回應機器人的行為，回應機器人的行為，有時甚至被機器人的表現驚訝。（音樂）（掌聲）

Being a musician is not just about making notes, otherwise nobody would ever go see a live show.Musicians also communicate with their bodies, with other band members, with the audience, they use their bodies to express the music.And I thought, we already have a robot musician on stage, why not make it be a full-fledged musician.And I started designing a socially expressive head for the robot.The head does't actually touch the marimba, it just expresses what the music is like.These are some napkin sketches from a bar in Atlanta, that was dangerously located exactly halfway between my lab and my home.(Laughter)So I spent, I would say on average, three to four hours a day there.I think.(Laughter)And I went back to my animation tools and tried to figure out not just what a robotic musician would look like, but especially what a robotic musician would move like.To sort of show that it doesn't like what the other person is playing--and maybe show whatever beat it's feeling at the moment.作為一個音樂家不僅僅是編寫音符，否則沒有人會去看現場表演了。音樂家也用他們的身體交流，和他們的樂隊成員，和觀眾，他們用他們的身體來表現音樂。于是我想，我們已經有一個在舞臺上的機器人音樂家，為什么不把它打造成一個真正的音樂家呢？ 于是我開始為機器人設計一個 可以表現情感的頭部。頭部并不會碰到馬林巴，它只是用來表現音樂是什么樣的。這草圖的紙巾來自亞特蘭大某處一個酒吧，而且酒吧就正好在實驗室和我家的正中間。（笑聲）而且酒吧就正好在實驗室和我家的正中間。（笑聲）我大概平均 每天有3到4個小時的時間在那里，“大概”…（笑聲）我重新拾起了我的動畫工具，試圖想象 不僅僅一個機器人音樂家的樣子，特別是一個機器人音樂家會如何移動它的身體，來告訴人們它不喜歡其他人的演奏，還有它自己當下感覺到的節奏。還有它自己當下感覺到的節奏。

So we ended up actually getting the money to build this robot, which was nice.I'm going to show you now the same kind of performance, this time with a socially expressive head.And notice one thing--how the robot is really showing us the beat it's picking up from the human.We're also giving the human a sense that the robot knows what it's doing.And also how it changes the way it moves as soon as it starts its own solo.(Music)Now it's looking at me to make sure I'm listening.(Music)And now look at the final chord of the piece again, and this time the robot communicates with its body when it's busy doing its own thing.And when it's ready to coordinate the final chord with me.(Music)(Applause)幸運的是，我們最終還獲得了一筆 造這樣一個機器人的資金。接下來我給大家看一下同樣的表演 換成一個情感表現頭的效果。注意一點： 請觀察這個機器人如何 根據人類的演奏即興發揮，也讓人類知道，這個機器人知道它在做什么。還有獨奏開始時，它是如何做出回應的。還有獨奏開始時，它是如何做出回應的。（音樂）這會兒它正看著我確保我在聽。（音樂）我們再看一下這段的最后一部分，現在機器人正在用它的身體進行溝通，當它正忙于做它自己的事情時，忙于準備 跟我一起演奏最后的旋律。（音樂）（掌聲）

Thanks.I hope you see how much this totally not--how much this part of the body that doesn't touch the instrument actually helps with the musical performance.And at some point, we are in Atlanta, so obviously some rapper will come into our lab at some point.And we had this rapper come in and do a little jam with the robot.And here you can see the robot basically responding to the beat and--notice two things.One, how irresistible it is to join the robot while it's moving its head.and you kind of want to move your own head when it does it.And second, even though the rapper is really focused on his iPhone, as soon as the robot turns to him, he turns back.So even though it's just in the periphery of his vision--it's just in the corner of his eye--it's very powerful.And the reason is that we can't ignore physical things moving in our environment.We are wired for that.So, if you have a problem with maybe your partners looking at the iPhone too much or their smartphone too much, you might want to have a robot there to get their attention.(Laughter)(Music)(Applause)謝謝。我希望你能看到 它的頭部不碰到樂器 其實有助于音樂表演！既然我們在亞特蘭大，就不會沒有說唱歌手參與到我們的試驗中來。既然我們在亞特蘭大，就不會沒有說唱歌手參與到我們的試驗中來。這個說唱歌手來了之后，我們讓他和這個機器人一起表演。這里你可以看到這個機器人 對節奏的回應，請注意兩點。第一，當這個機器人在搖頭晃腦的時候，你是不是也很想加入其中，和它一起晃動你的頭部？ 第二，雖然這個說唱歌手非常專注于它的蘋果手機，當機器人轉向它的時候，他也馬上轉回來。雖然僅僅是在他的視線邊緣—— 他的眼角的余光里，它仍然非常強大。這就是為什么我們不能忽視 我們周邊物體的移動。我們天生會這樣做。所以，如果你的搭檔 很喜歡看它的蘋果手機或智能手機，也許你需要一個機器人 來獲得他們的注意力。（笑聲）（音樂）（掌聲）

Just to introduce the last robot that we've worked on, that came out of something kind of surprising that we found: At some point people didn't care anymore about the robot being so intelligent, and can improvise and listen, and do all these embodied intelligence things that I spent years on developing.They really liked that the robot was enjoying the music.(Laughter)And they didn't say that the robot was moving to the music, they said that the robot was enjoying the music.And we thought, why don't we take this idea, and I designed a new piece of furniture.This time it wasn't a desk lamp;it was a speaker dock.It was one of those things you plug your smartphone in.And I thought, what would happen if your speaker dock didn't just play the music for you, but it would actually enjoy it too.(Laughter)And so again, here are some animation tests from an early stage.(Laughter)And this is what the final product looked like.(“Drop It Like It's Hot”)So, a lot of bobbing head.(Applause)A lot of bobbing heads in the audience, so we can still see robots influence people.And it's not just fun and games.最后再為大家介紹一下 我們最近在打造的一個機器人。說來也奇怪，我們發現 到了某個階段，人們不再對那些聰明的、會即興表演、會聆聽、會做那些我花了多年研究的身體智能表演的 機器人感興趣了。他們真的很喜歡那個會享受音樂的機器人。（笑聲）他們沒有說這個機器人是隨著音樂扭動身體，而是說這個機器人在享受音樂。于是我們想，為什么不借用這個想法呢，因此我設計了一件新的小家具。這次不是一個臺燈，而是一個揚聲器底座，就是你可以把你的智能手機放上去的那種。于是我想，如果這個揚聲器底座 不僅可以為你放音樂，還可以享受音樂，會怎樣？（笑聲）這是早期的一些動畫嘗試。這是早期的一些動畫嘗試。這是最終的成品的樣子。饒舌音樂 不停的點頭……（掌聲）觀眾那里也有很多人在不停點頭，因此我們可以看到機器人可以影響人。當然這一切不僅僅只是娛樂和游戲。

I think one of the reasons I care so much about robots that use their body to communicate and use their body to move--and I'm going to let you in on a little secret we roboticists are hiding--is that every one of you is going to be living with a robot at some point in their life.Somewhere in your future there's going to be a robot in your life.And if not in yours, then in your children's lives.And I want these robots to be--to be more fluent, more engaging, more graceful than currently they seem to be.And for that I think that maybe robots need to be less like chess players and more like stage actors and more like musicians.Maybe they should be able to take chances and improvise.And maybe they should be able to anticipate what you're about to do.And maybe they need to be able to make mistakes and correct them, because in the end we are human.And maybe as humans, robots that are a little less than perfect are just perfect for us.Thank you.(Applause)我覺得自己非常熱衷研究 那些可以用身體溝通、用身體移動的機器人的一個原因是—— 我告訴你一個只有我們機器人專家知道的秘密—— 我們每一個人在生命的某個階段 都會需要機器人，你未來的某個階段會有個機器人。如果不是你的未來，那么你的孩子的未來。我希望這些機器人 比現在 可以更流暢、更吸引人、更優雅。比現在 可以更流暢、更吸引人、更優雅。因此，我覺得機器人 不應該是像一個象棋玩家，而應該更像一個舞臺演員或者音樂家。它們應該可以冒險，會即興表演，甚至會預料到你接下來會做什么。它們也應該可以犯錯 并且改正，因為到頭來，我們只是人類。也許對人類而言，不完美的機器人 才是完美的。謝謝！

第三篇：萊溫斯基TED演講 中英對照

The price of shame

主講人：莫妮卡 萊溫斯基

主題：恥辱的代價

You're looking at a woman who was publicly silent for a decade.Obviously, that's changed, but only recently.站在你們面前的是一個在大眾面前沉默了十年之久的女人。當然，現在情況不一樣了，不過這只是最近發生的事。

It was several months ago that I gave my very first major public talk at the Forbes 30 Under 30 summit:1,500 brilliant people, all under the age of 30.That meant that in 1998, the oldest among the group were only 14, and the youngest, just four.I joked with them that some might only have heard of me from rap songs.Yes, I'm in rap songs.Almost 40 rap songs.幾個月前，我在《福布斯》雜志舉辦的“30歲以下”峰會（Under 30 Summit）上發表了首次公開演講。現場1500位才華橫溢的與會者都不到30歲。這意味著1998年，他們中最年長的是14歲，而最年輕的只有4歲。我跟他們開玩笑道，他們中有些人可能只在說唱歌曲里聽到過我的名字。是的，大約有40首說唱歌曲唱過我。

But the night of my speech, a surprising thing happened.At the age of 41, I was hit on by a 27-year-old guy.I know, right? He was charming and I was flattered, and I declined.You know what his unsuccessful pickup line was? He could make me feel 22 again.I realized later that night, I'm probably the only person over 40 who does not want to be 22 again.但是，在我演講當晚，發生了一件令人吃驚的事——我作為一個41歲的女人，被一個27歲的男孩示愛。我知道，這聽上去不太可能對吧？他很迷人，說了很多恭維我的話，然后我拒絕了他。你知道他為何搭訕失敗嗎？他說，他可以讓我感到又回到了22歲。后來，那晚我意識到，也許我是年過40歲的女人中唯一一個不想重返22歲的人。

At the age of 22, I fell in love with my boss, and at the age of 24, I learned the devastating consequences.Can I see a show of hands of anyone here who didn't make a mistake or do something they regretted at 22? Yep.That's what I thought.So like me, at 22, a few of you may have also taken wrong turns and fallen in love with the wrong person, maybe even your boss.Unlike me, though, your boss probably wasn't the president of the United States of America.Of course, life is full of surprises.Not a day goes by that I'm not reminded of my mistake, and I regret that mistake deeply.22歲時，我愛上了我的老板；24歲的時，我飽受了這場戀愛帶來的災難性的后果?，F場的觀眾們，如果你們在22歲的時候沒有犯過錯，或者沒有做過讓自己后悔的事，請舉起手好嗎？是的，和我想的一樣。與我一樣，22歲時，你們中有一些人也曾走過彎路，愛上了不該愛的人，也許是你們的老板。但與我不同的是，你們的老板可能不會是美國總統。當然，人生充滿驚奇。之后的每一天，我都會想起自己所犯的錯誤，并為之深深感到后悔。

In 1998, after having been swept up into an improbable romance, I was then swept up into the eye of a political, legal and media maelstrom like we had never seen before.Remember, just a few years earlier,news was consumed from just three places: reading a newspaper or magazine, listening to the radio, or watching television.That was it.But that wasn't my fate.Instead, this scandal was brought to you by the digital revolution.That meant we could access all the information we wanted, when we wanted it, anytime, anywhere, and when the story broke in January 1998, it broke online.It was the first time the traditional news was usurped by the Internet for a major news story, a click that reverberated around the world.飽受網絡欺凌之苦 1998年，在卷入一場不可思議的戀情后，我又被卷入了一場前所未有的政治、法律和輿論漩渦的中心。記得嗎？幾年前，新聞一般通過三個途徑傳播：讀報紙雜志、聽廣播、和看電視，僅此而已。但我的命運并不是僅此而已。這樁丑聞是通過數字革命傳播的。這意味著我們可以獲取任何我們需要的信息，不論何時何地。這則新聞在1998年1月爆發時，它也在互聯網上火了。這是互聯網第一次在重大新聞事件報道中超越了傳統媒體。只要輕點一下鼠標，就會在全世界引起反響。

What that meant for me personally was that overnight I went from being a completely private figure to a publicly humiliated one worldwide.I was patient zero of losing a personal reputation on a global scale almost instantaneously.This rush to judgment, enabled by technology, led to mobs of virtual stone-throwers.Granted, it was before social media, but people could still comment online, email stories, and, of course, email cruel jokes.News sources plastered photos of me all over to sell newspapers, banner ads online, and to keep people tuned to the TV.Do you recall a particular image of me, say, wearing a beret? 對我個人而言，這則新聞讓我一夜之間從一個無名小卒變成了全世界人民公開羞辱的對象。我成了第一個經歷在全世界范圍內名譽掃地的“零號病人”?？萍际沁@場草率審判的始作俑者，無數暴民向我投擲石塊。當然，那時還沒有社交媒體，但人們依然可以在網上發表評論，通過電子郵件傳播新聞和殘酷的玩笑。新聞媒體貼滿了我的照片，借此來兜售報紙，為網頁吸引廣告商，提高電視收視率。記得當時的那張照片嗎？我戴著貝雷帽的照片。

Now, I admit I made mistakes, especially wearing that beret.But the attention and judgment that I received, not the story, but that I personally received, was unprecedented.I was branded as a tramp, tart, slut, whore, bimbo, and, of course, that woman.I was seen by many but actually known by few.And I get it: it was easy to forget that that woman was dimensional, had a soul, and was once unbroken.現在，我承認我犯了錯，特別是不該戴那頂貝雷帽。但是，除了事件本身，我因此受到的關注和審判是前所未有的。我被貼上“淫婦”、“妓女”，“蕩婦”，“婊子”，“蠢女人”的標簽，當然，還有“那個女人”。許多人看到了我，但很少有人真正了解我。對此我表示理解，因為人們很容易忘記“那個女人”也是一個活生生的人，她也有靈魂，她也曾過著平靜的生活。

When this happened to me 17 years ago, there was no name for it.Now we call it cyberbullying and online harassment.Today, I want to share some of my experience with you, talk about how that experience has helped shape my cultural observations, and how I hope my past experience can lead to a change that results in less suffering for others.17年前，對于我經歷的這些遭遇還沒有一個專有名詞?，F在，我們稱之為“網絡欺凌”和“網上騷擾”。今天我要與你們分享一些我的經歷，我想談談那次經歷是如何形成了我的文化觀察，我希望我過去的經歷能夠產生一些改變，減少他人的痛苦。

In 1998, I lost my reputation and my dignity.I lost almost everything, and I almost lost my life.1998年，我失去了名譽和尊嚴。我幾乎失去了所有，我幾乎失去了我的人生。丑聞爆發之后，鋪天蓋地都是對此事件的報道。Let me paint a picture for you.It is September of 1998.I'm sitting in a windowless office room inside the Office of the Independent Counsel underneath humming fluorescent lights.I'm listening to the sound of my voice, my voice on surreptitiously taped phone calls that a supposed friend had made the year before.I’m here because I've been legally required to personally authenticate all 20 hours of taped conversation.For the past eight months, the mysterious content of these tapes has hung like the Sword of Damocles over my head.I mean, who can remember what they said a year ago?

讓我來描繪這樣一幅場景：1998年9月的一天，我坐在美國獨立檢察官辦公室一間沒有窗的屋子里，頭頂上的日光燈嗡嗡作響。我正在聽我的錄音，那是一位所謂的朋友偷偷錄下的電話談話。我被依法要求鑒定那20個小時的電話錄音是真實的。在過去的八個月里，這些錄音帶中神秘的內容就像一把懸在我頭頂的達摩克利斯之劍。我的意思是，有誰會記得自己一年前說過的話？ Scared and mortified, I listen, listen as I prattle on about the flotsam and jetsam of the day;listen as I confess my love for the president, and, of course, my heartbreak;listen to my sometimes catty, sometimes churlish, sometimes silly self being cruel, unforgiving, uncouth;listen, deeply, deeply ashamed, to the worst version of myself,a self I don't even recognize.在恐懼和羞愧中，我聽著錄音，聽我閑扯每天發生的瑣碎之事；聽我坦白對總統的愛慕，當然，還有我的心碎；聽有時尖酸，有時粗魯，有時愚蠢的我是如何冷酷，無情，無理取鬧。我帶著深深的羞愧聽著那個最糟糕的我的聲音，糟糕到我自己都不認識了。A few days later, the Starr Report is released to Congress, and all of those tapes and trans, those stolen words, form a part of it.That people can read the trans is horrific enough, but a few weeks later, the audio tapes are aired on TV, and significant portions made available online.The public humiliation was excruciating.Life was almost unbearable.幾天后，斯塔爾報告提交至國會，那些錄音帶和文字記錄，那些被竊取的言語，都是這份報告的一部分。人們能夠讀到這些文字對我來說已經夠恐怖了，但是幾個星期后，那些錄音又在電視上播放，有一些重要的內容還被發布在網絡上。公開的羞辱讓我飽受折磨。這樣的生活讓我幾乎無法忍受。

This was not something that happened with regularity back then in 1998, and by this, I mean the stealing of people's private words, actions，conversations or photos, and then making them public--public without consent, public without context, and public without compassion.在1998年，我所說的這些還并不常見。我指的是竊取他人私下的言語、行動、談話內容和照片，并公之于眾——在未經本人同意，未交待背景的情況下，毫無惻隱之心地將這些內容公之于眾。

Fast forward 12 years to 2010, and now social media has been born.The landscape has sadly become much more populated with instances like mine, whether or not someone actually make a mistake, and now it's for both public and private people.The consequences for some have become dire, very dire.快進到12年后的2010年，社交媒體誕生了?？杀氖?，社交媒體上充斥著更多像我這樣的例子，不管這個當事人是不是真的犯了錯，而且，公眾人物和普羅大眾都深受其害。對于有些人來說，后果是嚴重的，非常嚴重。

I was on the phone with my mom in September of 2010, and we were talking about the news of a young college freshman from Rutgers University named Tyler Clementi.Sweet, sensitive, creative Tyler was secretly webcammed by his roommate while being intimate with another man.When the online world learned of this incident, the ridicule and cyberbullying ignited.A few days later, Tyler jumped from the George Washington Bridge to his death.He was 18.2010年9月的一天，我正在和我的母親通電話，我們在討論一則新聞，關于羅格斯大學的一個名叫泰勒 克萊門蒂的大一新生。可愛、敏感、富有創意的克萊門蒂被室友偷拍到和另一個男人有親密關系。當這個視頻在網絡世界曝光后，嘲笑和網絡欺凌的火種被點燃。幾天后，泰勒從喬治華盛頓大橋上縱身跳下。一個年僅18歲的生命就這樣逝去。

My mom was beside herself about what happened to Tyler and his family, and she was gutted with painin a way that I just couldn't quite understand, and then eventually I realized she was reliving 1998, reliving a time when she sat by my bed every night, reliving a time when she made me shower with the bathroom door open, and reliving a time when both of my parents feared that I would be humiliated to death,literally.我母親在講到泰勒和他的家人時情緒有些失控，她所表現出的痛苦讓我并不十分理解。后來，我才終于意識到，她正在重新經歷1998年發生的一切。重新經歷她每晚坐在我的床頭的時候；重新經歷她要我開著浴室門洗澡的時候，重新經歷她和父親擔心我會因為受到羞辱而自尋短見的時候。真的是這樣。

Today, too many parents haven't had the chance to step in and rescue their loved ones.Too many have learned of their child's suffering and

humiliation after it was too late.今天，太多父母沒有機會及時介入來拯救他們摯愛的孩子。太多的人，當他們獲悉自己的孩子的痛苦和受到的羞辱時，已為時已晚。

Tyler's tragic, senseless death was a turning point for me.It served to recontextualize my experiences, and I then began to look at the world of humiliation and bullying around me and see something different.泰勒悲慘而毫無意義的死亡對我來說是一個轉折點。他讓我開始重新審視我的親身經歷，他讓我開始觀察身邊這個充滿羞辱和欺凌的世界，讓我看到了不同的東西。In 1998, we had no way of knowing where this brave new technology called the Internet would take us.Since then, it has connected people in unimaginable ways, joining lost siblings, saving lives, launching revolutions, but the darkness, cyberbullying, and slut-shaming that I experienced had mushroomed.1998年，沒有人知道這種名叫“因特網”的新技術會把人類帶向何方。自誕生以來，因特網用難以想象的方式將人類聯系起來。它讓人們找到失散的兄弟姐妹、拯救生命、發起革命，但是我所遭受的黑暗、網絡欺凌和被稱為“蕩婦”的羞辱也如雨后春筍般瘋長。Every day online, people, especially young people who are not developmentally equipped to handle this, are so abused and humiliated that they can't imagine living to the next day, and some, tragically, don't, and

there's nothing virtual about that.ChildLine, a U.K.nonprofit that's focused on helping young people on various issues,released a staggering statistic late last year: From 2012 to 2013, there was an 87 percent increase in calls and emails related to cyberbullying.A meta-analysis done out of the Netherlands showed that for the first time, cyberbullying was leading to suicidal ideations more significantly than offline bullying.And you know what shocked me, although it shouldn't have, was other research last year that determined humiliation was a more intensely felt emotion than either happiness or even anger.每天，在網絡上都會有人，特別是年輕人被辱罵和羞辱，而他們對此束手無策。這些辱罵和羞辱讓他們想立刻死去。悲劇的是，有些人，真的因此死去。這一點兒也不虛擬。

ChildLine是英國一個致力于幫助年輕人解決各種問題的公益組織。去年年底，該組織公布了一組令人震驚的數據：從2012年到2013年，與網絡欺凌有關的電話和郵件數量增加了87%。一份來自荷蘭的綜合分析首次披露，網絡欺凌比線下欺凌更容易讓人產生自殺的念頭。去年，還有一項研究讓我震驚，盡管我并不該感到震驚。研究顯示，羞辱是比快樂或者生氣更為強烈的情緒。Cruelty to others is nothing new, but online, technologically enhanced shaming is amplified, uncontained, and permanently accessible.殘忍對待他人不是什么新鮮事，但是，在互聯網上，技術讓羞辱放大，一發而不可收，并且永遠可以被看到。

The echo of embarrassment used to extend only as far as your family, village, school or community, but now it's the online community too.Millions of people, often anonymously, can stab you with their words, and that's a lot of pain, and there are no perimeters around how many people can publicly observe you and put you in a public stockade.There is a very personal price to public humiliation, and the growth of the Internet has jacked up that price.過去，丑聞最多在你的家庭、村莊、學?；蛘呱鐓^傳播。但是現在也在網絡社區流傳。數百萬的網民，經常匿名地惡語相向，這帶來很多痛苦。而且，到底有多少人可以公開地關注你，讓你成為眾矢之的？這是無法計算的。被公開羞辱對個人而言代價很大，而互聯網的發展加劇了這種代價。

For nearly two decades now, we have slowly been sowing the seeds of shame and public humiliation in our cultural soil, both on-and offline.Gossip websites, paparazzi, reality programming, politics, news outlets and

sometimes hackers all traffic in shame.It's led to desensitization and a

permissive environment online which lends itself to trolling, invasion of privacy, and cyberbullying.This shift has created what Professor Nicolaus Mills calls a culture of humiliation.近20年來，我們慢慢地在文化的土壤中播下恥辱和公開羞辱的種子，無論是線上還是線下。八卦網站、狗仔隊、真人秀節目、政治、新聞媒體，有時甚至是黑客都是羞辱的通道。冷酷、放縱的網絡環境助長了網絡煽動、侵犯個人隱私、和網絡欺凌。這種轉變形成了一種尼古拉斯

米爾斯教授所說的羞辱文化。Consider a few prominent examples just from the past six months alone.Snapchat, the service which is used mainly by younger generationsand claims that its messages only have the lifespan of a few

seconds.You can imagine the range of content that that gets.A third-party app which Snapchatters use to preserve the lifespan of the messages was hacked, and 100,000 personal conversations, photos, and videos were leaked online to now have a lifespan of forever.想想最近六個月發生的事情。Snapchat是一項主要是年輕人使用的服務，它號稱所有的信息只有幾秒鐘的壽命。你可以想象這些信息會包含哪些內容。Snapchat用戶使用的保存信息的第三方應用被黑客攻擊，近10萬名用戶的私人談話、照片、視頻被泄露到網上。現在，它們可以永久保留了。Jennifer Lawrence and several other actors had their iCloud accounts hacked, and private, intimate, nude photos were plastered across the Internet without their permission.One gossip website had over five million hits for this one story.And what about the Sony Pictures

cyberhacking? The documents which received the most attention were private emails that had maximum public embarrassment value.詹妮弗 勞倫斯和其他幾位演員的iCloud賬戶被攻擊，他們所有私人的、親密的、裸體的照片在未經允許的情況下在互聯網上鋪天蓋地地傳播。一個八卦網站僅僅因為這一則新聞就獲得了超過500萬的點擊量。索尼影視被黑客攻擊的情況又如何呢？最受關注的文件是那些公開羞辱價值最大的私人電子郵件。

But in this culture of humiliation, there is another kind of price tag attached to public shaming.The price does not measure the cost to the victim, which Tyler and too many others, notably women, minorities,and members of the LGBTQ community have paid, but the price measures the profit of those who prey on them.This invasion of others is a raw material, efficiently and ruthlessly mined, packaged and sold at a profit.但是在這種羞辱文化中，公開羞辱還被貼上了另一種價格標簽。這個價格標簽衡量的并不是受害者付出的代價，比如泰勒、還有其他很多人，特別是婦女，少數群體和同性戀、雙性戀、變性群體(LGBTQ)成員所付出的代價，而是衡量損害他們利益的牟利者的收益。侵入他人領域成了一種原材料，被人以最快的速度無情地挖掘，打包并出售。

A marketplace has emerged where public humiliation is a commodity and shame is an industry.How is the money made? Clicks.The more shame, the more clicks.The more clicks, the more advertising dollars.We're in a dangerous cycle.The more we click on this kind of gossip, the more numb we get to the human lives behind it, and the more numb we get, the more we click.一個市場橫空出世，公開羞辱是商品，恥辱變成了一種產業。靠什么賺錢呢？點擊。恥辱越多，點擊越多。點擊越多，廣告收入就越多。我們身處一個惡性循環。我們對這類八卦點擊得越多，我們就會對故事背后的當事人越麻木。我們越麻木，就越會去點擊。

All the while, someone is making money off of the back of someone else's suffering.With every click, we make a choice.The more we saturate our culture with public shaming, the more accepted it is, the more we will see behavior like cyberbullying, trolling, some forms of hacking, and online harassment.Why? Because they all have humiliation at their cores.This behavior is a symptom of the culture we've created.Just think about it.與此同時，有些人把自己的利益建立在他人的痛苦之上，每一次點擊，我們都是在做出選擇。我們文化中充斥的公開恥辱越多，它就越容易被接受，我們就會看到越多的網絡欺凌、網絡煽動、某些形式的黑客入侵，和線上騷擾。為什么呢？因為它們的核心都是羞辱。這種行為成為了我們所創造的一種文化病癥。想想吧。

Changing behavior begins with evolving beliefs.We've seen that to be true with racism, homophobia, and plenty of other biases, today and in the past.As we've changed beliefs about same-sex marriage, more people have been offered equal freedoms.When we began valuing sustainability, more people began to recycle.向網絡欺凌說不。改變行為從改變信念開始。不管是現在還是過去，無論是種族歧視、同性戀歧視和其它很多的歧視，都是這樣來消除的。隨著對同性戀結婚觀念的改變，更多人被賦予了平等的自由。隨著對可持續性的提倡，越來越多的人開始循環利用。

So as far as our culture of humiliation goes, what we need is a cultural revolution.Public shaming as a blood sport has to stop, and it's time for an intervention on the Internet and in our culture.對于羞辱的文化也應該如此。我們需要文化革命。公開羞辱這種血腥的運動應該終止，是時候對英特網和我們的文化采取干預行動了。

The shift begins with something simple, but it's not easy.We need to return to a long-held value of compassion--compassion and empathy.Online, we've got a compassion deficit, an empathy crisis.Researcher Brené Brown said, and I quote, “Shame can't survive empathy.” Shame cannot survive empathy.I've seen some very dark days in my life, and it was the compassion and empathy from my family, friends, professionals, and sometimes even strangers that saved me.轉變可以從簡單的事開始，不過這也不容易。我們需要回歸人類固有的一種價值，也就是同情心和同理心。互聯網正經歷著同情心匱乏和同理心危機。引用研究者布林 布朗的話來說就是，“羞辱在同理心之下無法存活”。羞辱在同理心之下無法存活。我的人生中有過一些非常黑暗的日子，是來自家人、朋友、專業人士、甚至是一些陌生人的同情心和同理心拯救了我。

Even empathy from one person can make a difference.The theory of minority influence, proposed by social psychologist Serge Moscovici, says that even in small numbers, when there's consistency over time, change can happen.In the online world, we can foster minority influence by becoming upstanders.To become an upstander means instead of bystander apathy, we can post a positive comment for someone or report a bullying situation.哪怕只有一個人的同情也會產生改變。社會心理學家謝爾蓋 莫斯科維奇提出了小眾影響理論。他說，哪怕是小眾人群，只要能堅持下去，也能做出改變。在網絡世界中，我們可以成為行動派，培養小眾影響力。成為行動派意味著不再袖手旁觀，而是發表積極評論或是舉報欺凌現象。

Trust me, compassionate comments help abate the negativity.We can also counteract the culture by supporting organizations that deal with these kinds of issues, like the Tyler Clementi Foundation in the U.S., In the U.K., there's Anti-Bullying Pro, and in Australia, there's Project Rockit.相信我，表達同情的評論能夠削弱負面影響。我們還可以通過支持處理這類問題的組織機構來對抗這種羞辱文化。例如，美國有泰勒 克萊門蒂基金，英國有反欺凌項目，澳大利亞有Rockit項目。

We talk a lot about our right to freedom of expression, but we need to talk more about our responsibility to freedom of expression.We all want to be heard, but let's acknowledge the difference between speaking up with intention and speaking up for attention.The Internet is the superhighway for the id, but online, showing empathy to others benefits us all and helps create a safer and better world.We need to communicate online with compassion, consume news with compassion, and click with compassion.Just imagine walking a mile in someone else's headline.I'd like to end on a personal note.關于言論自由的權力我們討論了很多，但我們還應該更多地談談享受言論自由時所承擔的責任。我們都希望自己的聲音被聽到，但是我們要區分有意圖的發聲和尋求關注的發聲。因特網是表達自我的超級高速公路，但是，站在他人角度考慮問題對我們都是有利的，而且能夠幫助創建更安全，更美好的世界。

我們需要懷著同情心在網絡上交流，懷著同情心閱讀新聞，懷著同情心點擊鼠標。試著想象活在別人的新聞頭條里。

In the past nine months, the question I've been asked the most is why.Why now? Why was I sticking my head above the parapet? You can read between the lines in those questions, and the answer has nothing to do with politics.最后我想以個人說明做總結。過去九個月里，我被人問得最多的問題是“為什么”。為什么是現在？為什么要逆流而上？你們應該可以聽出這些問題的言外之意。答案與政治無關。

The top note answer was and is because it's time: time to stop tip-toeing around my past;time to stop living a life of opprobrium;and time to take back my narrative.It's also not just about saving myself.Anyone who is suffering from shame and public humiliation needs to know one thing: You can survive it.I know it's hard.It may not be painless, quick or easy, but you can insist on a different ending to your story.我的答案是，因為是時候了，是時候不再為過去而過得如履薄冰，是時候結束背負罵名的生活，是時候奪回我的話語權了。這不僅僅是為了拯救我自己。任何遭受恥辱和公開羞辱的人，都需要明白一點：你能挺過來。我知道這很難，肯定會伴隨痛苦，肯定不會又快又輕松，但你可以通過你的堅持，書寫一個不同的故事結局。

Have compassion for yourself.We all deserve compassion, and to live both online and off in a more compassionate world.同情自己。我們都值得同情，無論線上還是線下，我們都應該生活在一個更富有同情心的世界。Thank you for listening.謝謝聆聽！

第四篇：ted演講中英對照 拖延癥

TED演講——拖延癥

拖延癥者的思維方式到底是什么樣的？為什么有些人非要到deadline來的時候才知道打起精神做事情？是否存在執行力強的人或是說人人都有一定程度的拖延癥？Tim Urban從一個被deadline趕著走的拖延癥者的角度帶你走進拖延癥的神奇思維世界。

中英對照翻譯

So in college, I was a government major, which means I had to write a lot of papers.Now, when a normal student writes a paper, they might spread the work out a little like this.So, you know--you get started maybe a little slowly, but you get enough done in the first week that, with some heavier days later on, everything gets done, things stay civil.And I would want to do that like that.That would be the plan.I would have it all ready to go, but then, actually, the paper would come along, and then I would kind of do this.在大學，我讀的是政府專業。也就是說，我需要寫很多的論文。一般的學生寫論文時，他們可能會這樣安排：(看圖)你可能開頭會慢一點，但第一周有這些已經足夠。后期再一點點的增加，最后任務完成，非常的有條理。我也想這么做，所以一開始也是這么計劃的。我做了完美的安排(看圖)，但后來，實際上論文任務一直出現，我就只能這樣了(看圖)。

And that would happen every single paper.But then came my 90-page senior thesis, a paper you're supposed to spend a year on.And I knew for a paper like that, my normal work flow was not an option.It was way too big a project.So I planned things out, and I decided I kind of had to go something like this.This is how the year would go.So I'd start off light, and I'd bump it up in the middle months, and then at the end, I would kick it up into high gear just like a little staircase.How hard could it be to walk up the stairs? No big deal, right?

我的每一篇論文都是這種情況，直到我長達90頁的畢業論文任務，這篇論文理應花一年的時間來做，我也知道這樣的工作，我先前的工作方式是行不通的，這個項目太大，所以我制定了計劃。決定按照這樣的方式工作，這樣來安排我這一年。(看圖)開頭我會輕松一點，中期任務逐漸增加，到最后，我再全力沖刺一下。整體是這種階梯式安排，一層一層走樓梯有多難?所以沒什么大不了的，是吧?

But then, the funniest thing happened.Those first few months? They came and went, and I couldn't quite do stuff.So we had an awesome new revised plan.And then--But then those middle months actually went by, and I didn't really write words, and so we were here.And then two months turned into one month, which turned into two weeks.但后來，好笑的事情出現了，頭幾個月時光匆匆而逝，我還沒有來得及動工，所以我們明智的調整了計劃。然后，中間的幾個月也過去了，我還是一個字也沒有動，眨眼就到了這里，然后兩個月變成了一個月，再變成了2周。

And one day I woke up with three days until the deadline, still not having written a word, and so I did the only thing I could: I wrote 90 pages over 72 hours, pulling not one but two all-nighters--humans are not supposed to pull two all-nighters--sprinted across campus, dove in slow motion, and got it in just at the deadline.一天我醒來，發現離交稿日期只剩3天了，但我還一個字都沒寫。我別無選擇，只能在接下來的72小時里，連續通宵兩個晚上趕論文——一般人不應連續通宵兩個晚上。90頁趕出來后，我飛速沖過校園，像電影中的特寫慢鏡頭一樣，恰好在截止日期前的最后一刻交上。

I thought that was the end of everything.But a week later I get a call, and it's the school.And they say, “Is this Tim Urban?” And I say, “Yeah.” And they say, “We need to talk about your thesis.” And I say, “OK.” And they say, “It's the best one we've ever seen.” That did not happen.It was a very, very bad thesis.I just wanted to enjoy that one moment when all of you thought, “This guy is amazing!” No, no, it was very, very bad.我以為事情就這么完了，但一周后，我接到一個電話，是學校打來的。他們說：“你是Tim Urban嗎?”我說：“是。”他們說：“我們要說一說你的畢業論文?！蔽艺f：“好啊。”他們說：“這是我見過最棒的論文。”……當然不可能。論文非常非常的差勁。我只想享受下你們對我的崇拜，想聽你們說：“這老兄太厲害了。”沒有，其實寫的非常差勁。

Anyway, today I'm a writer-blogger guy.I write the blog Wait But Why.And a couple of years ago, I decided to write about procrastination.My behavior has always perplexed the non-procrastinators around me, and I wanted to explain to the non-procrastinators of the worldwhat goes on in the heads of procrastinators, and why we are the way we are.不管怎樣，我現在成為了一個博客寫手，經營著“wait but why”這個博客。幾年前，我決定寫寫拖延這件事。我的行為方式總讓身邊非拖延者感到不能理解。我很想對世界上非拖延者的人解釋一下，我們拖延癥患者的腦子是什么樣的，為什么我們會拖延。

Now, I had a hypothesisthat the brains of procrastinators were actually different than the brains of other people.And to test this, I found an MRI lab that actually let me scan both my brain and the brain of a proven non-procrastinator,so I could compare them.I actually brought them here to show you today.I want you to take a look carefully to see if you can notice a difference.I know that if you're not a trained brain expert, it's not that obvious, but just take a look, OK? So here's the brain of a non-procrastinator.Now...here's my brain.首先我假設，拖延癥患者的大腦實際上和其他人的大腦不一樣。為了驗證這一點，我找了家核磁共振實驗室，給我和另一個確定是非拖延癥的人，進行了腦部掃描，我好將二者進行對比，今天我帶到現場，給大家展示一下。我希望大家仔細觀察，看能不能注意到差異。我知道大家并非專業的大腦專家，較難看出他們的差異，但大家不妨先看一眼，如何?這張是非拖延者的大腦，這張是我的大腦。

There is a difference.Both brains have a Rational Decision-Maker in them, but the procrastinator's brain also has an Instant Gratification Monkey.Now, what does this mean for the procrastinator? Well, it means everything's fine until this happens.[This is a perfect time to get some work done.] [Nope!] So the Rational Decision-Maker will make the rational decision to do something productive, but the Monkey doesn't like that plan, so he actually takes the wheel, and he says, “Actually, let's read the entire Wikipedia page of the Nancy Kerrigan/ Tonya Harding scandal, because I just remembered that that happened.兩張是有一點不同，兩個大腦都有一個理性決策人，但在拖延癥患者的大腦里，還有一個及時行樂的猴子。那這對拖延癥患者來說意味著什么呢? 這意味著平時沒什么異樣，但一旦發生了以下的情況，理性的決策人做出理性的決策，要去做一些實際的工作，但猴子不喜歡這個計劃，所以他搶過方向盤，說道：“說實話，我們還是去維基百科上查一查NKTH的丑聞吧?！币驗槲覄傁肫饋磉€發生過這件事。

Then--Then we're going to go over to the fridge, to see if there's anything new in there since 10 minutes ago.After that, we're going to go on a YouTube spiral that starts with videos of Richard Feynman talking about magnets and ends much, much later with us watching interviews with Justin Bieber's mom.然后我們會去翻冰箱，看看和十分鐘前相比有沒有什么新的東西。然后我們去youtobe看一連串的視頻，從Richard Feynman談論磁鐵開始，一直到很久很久之后看到一個Justin Bieber媽媽的訪談才結束。以上這些事情都得花時間，所以我們今天沒有時間再來工作了。

”All of that's going to take a while, so we're not going to really have room on the schedule for any work today.Sorry!“ Now, what is going on here? The Instant Gratification Monkey does not seem like a guy you want behind the wheel.He lives entirely in the present moment.He has no memory of the past, no knowledge of the future, and he only cares about two things: easy and fun.5:15Now, in the animal world, that works fine.If you're a dog and you spend your whole life doing nothing other than easy and fun things, you're a huge success!

所以，到底發生了什么?這個及時行樂的猴子并非你，希望是控制方向的人，他完全生活在當下，沒有過去的記憶，也沒有未來的概念。他只關注兩件事情：簡單和開心。在動物界，這兩點完全沒有問題。如果你是一條狗，一輩子只追求一些簡單和快樂的事，那就是巨大的成功了。

And to the Monkey, humans are just another animal species.You have to keep well-slept, well-fed and propagating into the next generation, which in tribal times might have worked OK.But, if you haven't noticed, now we're not in tribal times.We're in an advanced civilization, and the Monkey does not know what that is.Which is why we have another guy in our brain, the Rational Decision-Maker, who gives us the ability to do things no other animal can do.We can visualize the future.We can see the big picture.We can make long-term plans.And he wants to take all of that into account.And he wants to just have us do whatever makes sense to be doing right now.但對猴子來說，人類是另外一個物種，你得正常睡眠、規律飲食、繁衍后代。在原始部落時代，這也沒太大問題。但你注意到沒有，現在并非原始部落時代，我們生活在一個現代文明社會中，而猴子完全不能理解這是什么意思，這也是為什么我們大腦中會有另外一個，理性的決策者，他使人類有能力做到其他動物無法做到的事情。我們能設想未來，可以從大局出發，制定長期計劃，他可以把所有這些事考慮在內。希望讓我們做出最合理的事情.Now, sometimes it makes sense to be doing things that are easy and fun, like when you're having dinner or going to bed or enjoying well-earned leisure time.That's why there's an overlap.Sometimes they agree.But other times, it makes much more senseto be doing things that are harder and less pleasant, for the sake of the big picture.And that's when we have a conflict.And for the procrastinator, that conflict tends to end a certain way every time, leaving him spending a lot of time in this orange zone, an easy and fun place that's entirely out of the Makes Sense circle.I call it the Dark Playground.有時，做一些簡單開心的事情是很合理的，比如吃飯睡覺、享受贏得的休閑時光，所以二者也有重疊的部分。有時二者是一致的，但有些時候，從長遠的角度來看，一些更困難不開心的事情，才是合理的事情，所以就出現了沖突。對拖延癥患者來說，每次這種沖突到最后的結果都一樣，都讓他在這片橙色區域里耗費大量時間，這里很簡單很開心，但完全不在合理圈的范圍內，我將這個區域稱為黑暗操場。

Now, the Dark Playground is a place that all of you procrastinators out there know very well.It's where leisure activities happen at times when leisure activities are not supposed to be happening.The fun you have in the Dark Playground isn't actually fun, because it's completely unearned, and the air is filled with guilt, dread, anxiety, self-hatred--all of those good procrastinator feelings.And the question is, in this situation, with the Monkey behind the wheel, how does the procrastinator ever get himself over here to this blue zone, a less pleasant place, but where really important things happen?

這個黑暗操場，所有的拖延者患者都應該很熟悉，在這里發生了許多，本不應該在此時進行的休閑活動。你在黑暗操場獲得的樂趣，實際并不有趣，因為這并非你應得的。這里的空氣充滿了內疚、恐懼、焦慮和自我憎恨——這些都是拖延癥患者常有的情緒。所以問題是，在猴子掌握方向盤的情況下，拖延癥患者如何進入這邊的藍色區域呢?這里雖然沒有這么舒適，但進行的事情都非常重要。

And they were all writing, saying the same thing: ”I have this problem too." But what struck me was the contrast between the light tone of the post and the heaviness of these emails.These people were writing with intense frustration about what procrastination had done to their lives, about what this Monkey had done to them.And I thought about this, and I said, well, if the procrastinator's system works, then what's going on? Why are all of these people in such a dark place?

他們都在寫同一句話：“我也有這個問題?！钡嬲屛腋械接|動的，是我博客的輕描淡寫，和郵件的沉重文風之間的強烈對比。這些讀者以非常沮喪的語言，告訴我拖延對他們的生活造成了哪些影響，告訴我猴子對他們都做了些什么。我思考了一下，問道，既然拖延癥患者的系統是有效果的，那到底哪不對呢?為什么這些人都置身黑暗之中呢?

Well, it turns out that there's two kinds of procrastination.Everything I've talked about today, the examples I've given, they all have deadlines.And when there's deadlines, the effects of procrastination are contained to the short term because the Panic Monster gets involved.But there's a second kind of procrastination that happens in situations when there is no deadline.So if you wanted a career where you're a self-starter--something in the arts, something entrepreneurial--there's no deadlines on those things at first, because nothing's happening, not until you've gone out and done the hard work to get momentum, get things going.原來，拖延分為兩種，我今天所說的拖延和所舉的例子，都是有截止日期的。一旦有了截止日期，拖延的影響會被限制在一定時期內，因為后期驚慌怪獸會出現，但還有第二種拖延，這種拖延是沒有截止日期的，所以如果你想在一些領域內自學成才——比如學個藝術或者創個業——這些事情開始都是沒有截止日期的，因為開始不會有什么變化，直到你拼盡全力，辛勤投入，才會有一點起色，你才能看到進展。

There's also all kinds of important things outside of your career that don't involve any deadlines, like seeing your family or exercising and taking care of your health, working on your relationship or getting out of a relationship that isn't working.Now if the procrastinator's only mechanism of doing these hard things is the Panic Monster, that's a problem, because in all of these non-deadline situations, the Panic Monster doesn't show up.He has nothing to wake up for, so the effects of procrastination, they're not contained;they just extend outward forever.除了工作之外，還有很多其他重要的事情，也是沒有截止日期的，比如看望家人、鍛煉身體、保持健康、維系感情，或者從一段不合適的感情中抽身。如果說拖延癥患者處理這些困難的唯一機制，是驚慌怪獸的話，那就有問題了，因為在這些沒有截止日期的情況下，驚慌怪獸是不會現身的，沒有喚醒他的條件，所以這一類拖延的后果是沒有限制的，他們會不斷地肆意延伸。

And it's this long-term kind of procrastination that's much less visible and much less talked about than the funnier, short-term deadline-based kind.It's usually suffered quietly and privately.And it can be the source of a huge amount of long-term unhappiness, and regrets.和有截止日期的好笑的短期拖延相比，這種長時期的拖延，更不易被人察覺，也更少被談論到，他常常在無聲無息中折磨著人們，可以說是大部分長期抑郁和悔恨的根源。

And I thought, that's why those people are emailing, and that's why they're in such a bad place.It's not that they're cramming for some project.It's that long-term procrastination has made them feel like a spectator, at times, in their own lives.The frustration is not that they couldn't achieve their dreams;it's that they weren't even able to start chasing them.我想，這也是為什么這些人會寫信，為什么狀態這么差的原因吧。他們并非在為某個項目臨時抱佛腳，這種長期拖延使他們有時感覺，自己只是生活的旁觀者，讓他們沮喪的不是他們沒有實現夢想，而是他們甚至還沒有開始追尋夢想。

So I read these emails and I had a little bit of an epiphany--that I don't think non-procrastinators exist.That's right--I think all of you are procrastinators.Now, you might not all be a mess, like some of us, and some of you may have a healthy relationship with deadlines, but remember: the Monkey's sneakiest trick is when the deadlines aren't there.我讀著這些來信，忽然有一種頓悟——我覺得非拖延者是不存在的，沒錯，我認為你們所有人都是拖延者，當然你們可能不像，我們有些人這么混亂。你們有些人可能與截止日期保持著良性的關系。但記?。汉镒幼罱苹募總z，發生在沒有截止日期的時候。

Now, I want to show you one last thing.I call this a Life Calendar.That's one box for every week of a 90-year life.That's not that many boxes, especially since we've already used a bunch of those.So I think we need to all take a long, hard look at that calendar.We need to think about what we're really procrastinating on, because everyone is procrastinating on something in life.We need to stay aware of the Instant Gratification Monkey.That's a job for all of us.And because there's not that many boxes on there, it's a job that should probably start today.Well, maybe not today, but...You know.Sometime soon.最后我想給大家看一個東西，我稱之為“生命日歷”。這里的每一個格子都代表90年生命中的一周，格子數并不是很多，尤其我們已經用掉了許多。我想我們需要好好花時間，認真看看這個日歷。我們需要想一下，我們真正在拖延的是什么，因為每個人在生命中都有拖延一些東西，我們需要警惕及時行樂的猴子，這是我們所有人的任務。因為這里的格子數并不多，所以或許我們今天就應該行動起來，或許不一定是今天，而是盡快。Thank you.

第五篇：TED演講中英對照1

At every stage of our lives we make decisions that will profoundly influence the lives of the people we're going to become, and then when we become those people, we're not always thrilled with the decisions we made.So young people pay good money to get tattoos removed that teenagers paid good money to get.Middle-aged people rushed to divorce people who young adults rushed to marry.Older adults work hard to lose what middle-aged adults worked hard to gain.On and on and on.The question is, as a psychologist, that fascinates me is, why do we make decisions that our future selves so often regret? 在我們生命的每個階段，我們都會做出一些決定，這些決定會深刻影響未來我們自己的生活，當我們成為未來的自己時，我們并不總是對過去做過的決定感到高興。所以年輕人花很多錢洗去當還是青少年時花了很多錢做上的紋身。中年人急著跟年輕時迫不及待想結婚的人離婚。老年人很努力的揮霍著作為中年人時不停工作所賺的錢。如此沒完沒了。作為一個心理學家，讓我感興趣的問題是，為什么我們會做出讓自己將來常常后悔的決定？

Now, I think one of the reasons--I'll try to convince you today — is that we have a fundamental misconception about the power of time.Every one of you knows that the rate of change slows over the human lifespan, that your children seem to change by the minute but your parents seem to change by the year.But what is the name of this magical point in life where change suddenly goes from a gallop to a crawl? Is it teenage years? Is it middle age? Is it old age? The answer, it turns out, for most people, is now, wherever now happens to be.What I want to convince you today is that all of us are walking around with an illusion, an illusion that history, our personal history, has just come to an end, that we have just recently become the people that we were always meant to be and will be for the rest of our lives.我認為其中一個原因——而我今天想說服你們的——就是我們對時間的力量有個基本的錯誤概念。你們每個人都知道變化的速度隨著人的年齡增長不斷放慢，孩子們好像每分鐘都有變化，而父母們的變化則要慢得多。那么生命中這個讓變化突然間從飛速變得緩慢的神奇轉折點應該叫什么呢？是青少年時期嗎？是中年時期嗎？是老年階段嗎？其實對大多數人來說，答案是，現在，無論現在發生在什么。今天我想讓大家明白的是，我們所有人都在圍繞著一種錯覺生活，這種錯覺就是，我們每個人的過去，都已經結束了，我們已經成為了我們應該成為的那種人，在余下的生命中也都會如此。

Let me give you some data to back up that claim.So here's a study of change in people's personal values over time.Here's three values.Everybody here holds all of them, but you probably know that as you grow, as you age, the balance of these values shifts.So how does it do so? Well, we asked thousands of people.We asked half of them to predict for us how much their values would change in the next 10 years, and the others to tell us how much their values had changed in the last 10 years.And this enabled us to do a really interesting kind of analysis, because it allowed us to compare the predictions of people, say, 18 years old, to the reports of people who were 28, and to do that kind of analysis throughout the lifespan.我想給你們展示一些數據來支持這個觀點。這是一項關于人們的個人價值觀隨時間變化的研究。這里有3種價值觀。每個人的生活都與這三個價值觀相關，但是你們可能知道，隨著你們慢慢長大，變老，這三個價值觀的平衡點會不斷變化。到底是怎么回事呢？我們詢問了數千人。我們讓他們當中一半的人預測了一下在未來10年中，他們的價值觀會發生多大的改變，讓另一半人告訴我們在過去的10年中，他們的價值觀發生了多大的變化。這項調查可以讓我們做一個很有趣的分析，因為它可以讓我們將大約18歲左右的人的預測同大約28歲左右的人的答案相比較，這項分析可以貫穿人的一生。

Here's what we found.First of all, you are right, change does slow down as we age, but second, you're wrong, because it doesn't slow nearly as much as we think.At every age, from 18 to 68 in our data set, people vastly underestimated how much change they would experience over the next 10 years.We call this the “end of history” illusion.To give you an idea of the magnitude of this effect, you can connect these two lines, and what you see here is that 18-year-olds anticipate changing only as much as 50-year-olds actually do.這是我們的發現。首先，你們是對的，隨著我們年齡的增長，變化會減緩。第二，你們錯了，因為這種變化并不像我們想象的那么慢。在我們的數據庫從18歲到68歲的每一個年齡段中，人們大大的低估了在未來的10年他們會經歷多少變化。我們把這叫做“歷史終止”錯覺。為了讓你們了解這種影響有多大，你們可以把這兩條線連接起來，你們現在看到的是18歲的人群預期的改變僅僅和50歲的人群實際經歷的一樣。

Now it's not just values.It's all sorts of other things.For example, personality.Many of you know that psychologists now claim that there are five fundamental dimensions of personality: neuroticism, openness to experience, agreeableness, extraversion, and conscientiousness.Again, we asked people how much they expected to change over the next 10 years, and also how much they had changed over the last 10 years, and what we found, well, you're going to get used to seeing this diagram over and over, because once again the rate of change does slow as we age, but at every age, people underestimate how much their personalities will change in the next decade.現在不僅僅是價值觀了。其他的方面都也有變化。比如說，人格。你們當中的很多人知道現在心理學家們認為人格可以分為五個基本維度：神經質性，經驗汲取度，協調性，外向性和道德感。回到原來的話題，我們問人們他們期待未來的10年中自己會有多大的變化，以及他們在過去的10年中發生了多少變化，我們發現了，你們會習慣不斷地看到這個圖表，因為又一次，變化速率隨著我們的年齡增長減慢了。但是在每一個年齡階段，人們都低估了在未來的十年中他們的人格會發生多大的改變。

And it isn't just ephemeral things like values and personality.You can ask people about their likes and dislikes, their basic preferences.For example, name your best friend, your favorite kind of vacation, what's your favorite hobby, what's your favorite kind of music.People can name these things.We ask half of them to tell us, “Do you think that that will change over the next 10 years?” and half of them to tell us, “Did that change over the last 10 years?” And what we find, well, you've seen it twice now, and here it is again: people predict that the friend they have now is the friend they'll have in 10 years, the vacation they most enjoy now is the one they'll enjoy in 10 years, and yet, people who are 10 years older all say, “Eh, you know, that's really changed.” 而且不光是像價值觀和人格這樣的臨時性的特質。你們可以問問人們關于他們喜好和厭惡的事，他們基本的偏好。比如說，說出你最好朋友的名字，你最喜歡什么樣的假期，你最大的愛好是什么，你最喜歡什么樣的音樂。人們可以說出這些事情。我們讓他們當中的一半人告訴我們，“你認為這在未來10年內會改變嗎？”讓另一半告訴我們，“這個在過去十年內變化了嗎？”我們的發現是，嗯，這個圖你們已經看過2次了，再展示一次：人們推測他們現在的朋友在未來10年中還會是他們的朋友，他們喜歡的度假之地在未來10年內還會是他們喜歡的地方，然而，年長10歲的人都會說：“嗯，你知道，這確實不一樣了?！?/p>

Does any of this matter? Is this just a form of mis-prediction that doesn't have consequences? No, it matters quite a bit, and I'll give you an example of why.It bedevils our decision-making in important ways.Bring to mind right now for yourself your favorite musician today and your favorite musician 10 years ago.I put mine up on the screen to help you along.Now we asked people to predict for us, to tell us how much money they would pay right now to see their current favorite musician perform in concert 10 years from now, and on average, people said they would pay 129 dollars for that ticket.And yet, when we asked them how much they would pay to see the person who was their favorite 10 years ago perform today, they say only 80 dollars.Now, in a perfectly rational world, these should be the same number, but we overpay for the opportunity to indulge our current preferences because we overestimate their stability.這有什么關系嗎？這只是一種并不會有什么后果的錯誤的預測嗎？不，這有很大的關系，我會舉例告訴你們為什么。它在很多重要的方面困擾著我們做決定?，F在想想你們此時此刻最喜歡的音樂人，還有10年前你們最喜歡的音樂人。我把我的答案放在大屏幕上作為提示?，F在我們讓人們預測一下，告訴我們他們現在愿意付多少錢來參加他們現在最喜歡的音樂人從現在起10年后的音樂會，平均來講，人們會說他們會付129美元買票。然而，當我們問他們愿意付多少錢去看他們10年前喜歡的人現在的演出，他們說只有80塊。那么，在一個完全理性的世界里，這兩個數字應該是相同的，但是我們為沉浸于當前喜好中的機會付了更多的錢，因為我們高估了它們的持久性。

Why does this happen? We're not entirely sure, but it probably has to do with the ease of remembering versus the difficulty of imagining.Most of us can remember who we were 10 years ago, but we find it hard to imagine who we're going to be, and then we mistakenly think that because it's hard to imagine, it's not likely to happen.Sorry, when people say “I can't imagine that,” they're usually talking about their own lack of imagination, and not about the unlikelihood of the event that they're describing.為什么會發生這樣的變化呢？我們也不是很確定，不過這可能與記憶的消逝和想象的難度相關。我們中的大多數人都能記得10年前的我們是什么樣子，但是要想像我們會成為什么樣的人就困難了，然后我們會錯誤地認為因為很難想象，就不太可能會發生。很遺憾，當人們說“我可想象不出來”，他們通常是在表達他們缺乏想象力，而不是他們所描述的不可能發生的事情。

The bottom line is, time is a powerful force.It transforms our preferences.It reshapes our values.It alters our personalities.We seem to appreciate this fact, but only in retrospect.Only when we look backwards do we realize how much change happens in a decade.It's as if, for most of us, the present is a magic time.It's a watershed on the timeline.It's the moment at which we finally become ourselves.Human beings are works in progress that mistakenly think they're finished.The person you are right now is as transient, as fleeting and as temporary as all the people you've ever been.The one constant in our life is change.總而言之，時間是一種強大的力量。它改變了我們的喜好。它重塑了我們的價值觀。它改變了我們的人格。我們似乎會感激這個事實，但是只在回想過去的時候。只有在我們回首過去的時候我們才會認識到在過去的十年里發生了多么大的變化。好像，對我們大多數人來說，當前是個有魔力的時刻。它是時間軸上的分水嶺。它是一個使我們最終成為我們自己的時刻。人類還處在發展變化的過程中，卻錯誤地以為他們不會發生任何改變了?，F在的你只是處于過渡中，轉瞬即逝，暫時的的狀態而已，就像所有那些過去的你。在我們的生命中唯一不變的就是，變化。

Thank you.