第一篇：TED演講：為什么科技越發(fā)達(dá)我們卻越孤獨

幾分鐘之前，我的女兒Rebecca給我發(fā)了一條短信。她說：媽媽，你會震驚全場的。我太喜歡這個了。接到這條短信，就像得到了她的擁抱一樣。所以大家看到了，我自己，就處在這樣一個核心矛盾里。我自己，非常喜歡收短信，但卻要告訴大家，大多的短信會成為一個大的問題。

事實上，我的女兒，讓我想起了這個故事的開端。1996年我第一次在TED演講的時候，Rebecca只有5歲，她就坐在那里。最前排，那時我剛寫了一本書，慶祝我們的網(wǎng)絡(luò)新生活，而且將要成為《連線》雜志（wired）的封面人物。在那些令人陶醉的日子里，我們體驗著網(wǎng)絡(luò)聊天室和在線虛擬社區(qū)。我們正從不同的角度探索自己。然后我們回到現(xiàn)實中來，我對此感到非常興奮。作為一個心理學(xué)家，最令我興奮的就是這樣的理念：我們會運用我們在虛擬世界中，最自己，對自身的認(rèn)同改善我們的現(xiàn)實生活。現(xiàn)在讓我們快進(jìn)到2012年，我們重新回到了TED的講臺，我的女兒已經(jīng)是一名20歲的大學(xué)生了。她睡覺都抱著她的手機，其實我也是。我剛剛完成一本新書，但是這一本確不會讓我登上《連線》雜志的封面。那這十幾年間發(fā)生了什么？我仍然為科技而興奮，但是我相信，并且想向大家說明：我們正在放任科技，它將帶我們走向歧途。在過去的15年間，我一直在研究通信技術(shù)的影響，并且訪問了成百上千的人，年輕的或者年長的，了解他們的“移動生活”。我發(fā)現(xiàn)，我們的口袋中那些輕巧的電子設(shè)備，在心理上有如此強大的力量。它不僅改變了我們的生活方式，而且改變了我們本身。我們現(xiàn)在在用電子設(shè)備做的一些事情，在幾年前還被認(rèn)為是稀奇或讓人討厭，但是很快大家就習(xí)以為常。只是我們的行為方式而已。讓我們來舉幾個簡單的例子：人們在公司的董事會議上，打短信或者寫郵件。人們發(fā)短信，網(wǎng)購，瀏覽facebook；上課時，聽報告時，實際上在幾乎所有的會議時。甚至有人告訴我一項重要的新技能，發(fā)短信時如何與別人進(jìn)行眼神交流！他們所雖然這很難，但還是可以做得到的。父母在早餐和晚餐是發(fā)短信發(fā)郵件，孩子們因此而抱怨父母對他們不夠關(guān)注。但是同時這些孩子，也很少專心地與彼此相處。這是一張我女兒和她的朋友們最近的照片，他們雖然處在同樣的空間，卻沒有真正的在一起相處。人們甚至在葬禮上發(fā)短信，我研究這一現(xiàn)象：我們需要別的東西來分散我們的悲傷或者胡思亂想，所以們要玩手機。這樣有什么問題嗎？我認(rèn)為這的確是個問題：我們正在為自己挖陷阱，這個陷阱無形中會影響人與人之間的聯(lián)系。同時也會影響我們和自己的聯(lián)系。降低我們認(rèn)識和反省自己的能力。我們越來越習(xí)慣這種新的“一起獨處”（alone together）的相處方式。人們希望呆在一起，但同時也“在別處”——連線到他們想去的不同的地方。人們想定制他們的生活，想要在不同的場合和地點之間切換。因為對他們來說非常重要的是控制和分配他們的精力。例如你想去參加董事會會議，但只是想關(guān)注你感興趣的一小部分內(nèi)容。有人認(rèn)為這是好事，單長此以往人們就會對比人隱藏自己（hiding form each other）,即便我們一直保持這彼此的聯(lián)系。一位50歲的商人，曾悲哀地告訴我他覺得工作時不再有同事了。他工作時不會停下來和別人說話，他不打電話，他說他不想打斷他的同事。因為他說：“他們都在忙著發(fā)郵件”。但是然后他停下來，他說：“其實我沒有說實話，我也不想讓別人來打擾我。我覺得我應(yīng)該是想（被打擾）的，但是實際上我們更愿意用黑莓手機聯(lián)系別人”不管哪一代人，我發(fā)現(xiàn)他們沒法彼此那里得到足夠的關(guān)注，如果他們僅僅將彼此保持在一種可以控制的距離范圍里。我們把這種現(xiàn)象稱作Goldilocks適應(yīng)效應(yīng)：不太近也不太遠(yuǎn) 剛剛好。但是對于剛剛那位中年商人來說，剛剛好的距離對需要學(xué)會與人面對面交流的青少年來說卻可能過于疏遠(yuǎn)。有一個18歲的孩子，他幾乎任何事情都用發(fā)短信來解決。他惆悵地干我說，總有一天，當(dāng)然不是現(xiàn)在我會學(xué)習(xí)一下如何與人交談。我問人們，為什么不面對面交談？他們回答說：因為面對面交流時實時發(fā)生的，你沒法控制你要說什么。所以這才是最重要的：發(fā)短信、寫郵件、貼照片、發(fā)狀態(tài)，所有這些都能讓我們向別人呈現(xiàn)出我們想變成的樣子。我們可以編輯，也就是說我們可以刪除，可以修改和潤色。我們的聲音、容顏甚至我們的整個形象。讓它不多不少，剛剛好。人類的關(guān)系非常豐富也非常復(fù)雜，而且需要技巧和和精力來處理。我們現(xiàn)在可以用技術(shù)使它變得簡便。在我們做這種建華石，一個很可能的問題就是：我們?yōu)榱撕啽愕穆?lián)系，放棄了面對面的交流，我們這是自欺欺人。長此以往，我們似乎忘記了這一點，或者沒有人在乎這一點了。Stephen Colbert問過這樣一個讓我猝不及防深刻的問題，非常深刻。他說：“難道那些微小的簡短的在線交流的片段加在一起不能等同于真正的交談嗎？我的回答是：不能！那些片段不能整合在一起！以這種小片段的方式交流，可能可以收集到那些精心修飾過的信息，可能表達(dá)“我在想你”，甚至表達(dá)“我愛你”。的確，想象一下，接到女兒的那條短信是我有多么高興。但是那些小片段很難讓我們互相了解，真正地了解和理解對方。我們在與彼此交談的同時，也同時學(xué)習(xí)著同自己交流。所以放棄面對面交談確實有很大的影響，因為這會損害我們自我反省的能力。對于孩子們來說，這項能力是成長的一個重要的基石。我一次又一次聽到，比起說話我更喜歡發(fā)短信。我所看到的也是，人們?nèi)绱肆?xí)慣于自欺欺人，逃離真實的交談，如此習(xí)慣于逃向更少更淺的交流。以至于他們越來越希望多開別人。比如說：很多人跟我講過，有一天更高版本的Siri會更像一個好朋友。一個當(dāng)別人都無暇顧及你時，還耐心聆聽你的摯友。我相信這樣的愿望，反映了過去15年間我了解到的一個痛苦的事實：那種“沒有人愿意聽我傾訴”的感覺，在我們與科技的關(guān)系間起了重要的作用。這就解釋了我們?yōu)槭裁催@么喜歡facebook頁面，或者推特頁面。上面有那么多自動生成的聽眾呀！而那種沒人傾聽的感覺，使我們更愿意和看似關(guān)心我們的機器呆在一起。我們在開發(fā)一種被稱作“社會性機器人”的產(chǎn)品，它們專門設(shè)計用來陪伴老人、孩子甚至我們每個人。我們已經(jīng)給予彼此關(guān)懷毫無信心了嗎？（轉(zhuǎn)而要依賴機器人？）我有一項在療養(yǎng)院進(jìn)行到研究，我們把“社會性機器人”帶到療養(yǎng)院里，希望它們給予老人被理解的溫暖感。一天，我走進(jìn)療養(yǎng)院看到一位失去孩子的婦女正在對著一個小海豹形狀的機器人說話，這個機器人看上去好像在看著她，好像聽得懂她說的話——它可以給她安慰。很多人都覺得這種技術(shù)很棒。但是那位婦女居然在試圖讓一個對人類生活軌跡毫無感受的機器理解她！那個機器人只是完成了一項好棒的表演。我們是如此的脆弱，會把偽裝的同情和共鳴當(dāng)作是真的。在那位婦女沉溺于機器人帶給她的偽裝的同情的時候，我在想：“那個機器人不可能真正地同情，它不用面對死亡，它也根本不懂人生”從那位從機器人的陪伴中得到同情的婦女，我一點都不覺得這種技術(shù)先進(jìn)。我發(fā)現(xiàn)那是我這15年的工作里，最復(fù)雜、最糾結(jié)、最不是滋味的時刻。但是當(dāng)我退一步來看，我感覺到自己在這場完美風(fēng)暴冰冷無情地中心。我們對技術(shù)期望的越多，對彼此的期望卻越來越少。我問自己：為什么會這樣呢？我相信是科技最吸引我們的地方，正是我們最脆弱的一方面。我們都很脆弱，我們都很孤獨，卻又害怕“親密關(guān)系”。所以我們研發(fā)社交網(wǎng)站和“社會性機器人”這樣的技術(shù)，是我們可以在不需要真正友誼的情況下體驗被關(guān)心和陪伴的感覺。我們借助技術(shù)后找到了和別人保持聯(lián)系的感覺，并且可以舒服的控制這種聯(lián)系。但是我們其實沒有那么舒服，也沒能很好地控制。如今，我們口袋中的手機正在改變我們的想法和我們的心靈，源于它給我們帶來了三種讓人興奮的錯覺：

一、我們可以把精力分配到任何我們想關(guān)注的地方；

二、總有人會傾聽我們；

三、我們永遠(yuǎn)都不用獨自一人。這第三種“我們永遠(yuǎn)不要獨處”的錯覺對于改變我們的心靈狀態(tài)是最關(guān)鍵的。因為當(dāng)人們獨處的時候，及時只有幾秒鐘，他們也會變得焦慮、恐慌、坐立不安因而轉(zhuǎn)向那些電子設(shè)備。想想人們在排隊的時候，在等紅燈的時候獨處像是一個亟待解決的問題（Being alone feels like a problem that needs to be solved），所以人們試著用聯(lián)系別人的方法解決它。但這種聯(lián)系更像是一種癥狀而不是真正的治療。它表達(dá)著我們的焦慮，卻沒有解決根本的問題。但是它不僅僅是一種癥狀，頻繁的聯(lián)系人們對自己的理解。它催生了一種新的生活方式，對此最好的描述是：“我分享 故我在”。我們用技術(shù)來定義自己，分享我們的想法和感覺，甚至我們剛剛產(chǎn)生這些想法的時候。所以以前情況是，我有了一個新想法我想打電話告訴別人。現(xiàn)在，事情變成了我想要有個想法，所以我需要發(fā)短信告訴別人。這種“我分享 故我在”的問題在于，如果我們斷了和別人的聯(lián)系，我們就感覺不再是自己了，我們幾乎感覺不到自己的存在了。所以我們該怎么辦了？我們的聯(lián)系越來越多。但是與此同時，我們也把自己隔絕起來。為什么聯(lián)系會導(dǎo)致隔絕呢？原因是沒有培養(yǎng)獨處的能力，一種可以與外界分離，集中自己思想的能力。獨處中你可以找到自己，這樣你才能很好地轉(zhuǎn)向別人，與他形成真正的聯(lián)系。當(dāng)我們?nèi)狈Κ毺幍哪芰Φ臅r候，我們聯(lián)系別人僅僅是為了減少焦慮感或者為了感覺到自己還活著。這時候，我們并不真正地欣賞別人，而這好像是把他們當(dāng)做吃撐我們脆弱的自我感覺備用零件。我們簡單地認(rèn)為總和別人保持聯(lián)系，就能讓我們不再那么孤單，但這是有風(fēng)險的。因為事實恰好相反，如果我們不能夠獨處，我們會更加孤單。而如果我們不能教會我們的孩子獨處，他們只能學(xué)會如何體驗獨處。1996年我在TED演講，報告我關(guān)于早期虛擬社區(qū)的研究時曾說：那些對于網(wǎng)絡(luò)世界最為投入的人，是帶著一種自我反省的精神上網(wǎng)的，這也是我現(xiàn)在想要呼吁的。我們需要一些反思，更甚至是展開對話討論我們目前對技術(shù)的應(yīng)用會將我們帶向何方，會讓我們失去什么。我們被技術(shù)（帶來的錯覺）迷住了，而且我們就像年輕戀人一樣害怕說太多話會毀掉浪漫的氣氛，但是時候該交談了。數(shù)字技術(shù)伴隨著我們長大，所以我們也認(rèn)為技術(shù)已經(jīng)很成熟。實則不然，它還在起步階段，我們還有很多時間來反思我們應(yīng)當(dāng)如何應(yīng)用它，如何發(fā)展它。我并不是說我們應(yīng)該拋棄我們的電子設(shè)備，我只是建議我們應(yīng)當(dāng)與電子設(shè)備，與別人也與自己建立更加有自我意識的關(guān)系。我們可以從這些方面開始改變，把孤獨當(dāng)做一件好事，為它留出空間，向你們的孩子說明獨處的價值。在家里開辟專門的空間，例如廚房或者客廳用于和家人交談。在工作中也可以這樣，我們工作室總是忙于淺層的關(guān)系，以至于沒時間思考，也沒有時間討論那些真正重要的事情。是時候該改變了，最重要的是我們真的需要聆聽彼此，包括說的那些無聊的細(xì)節(jié)。因為正是我們在結(jié)巴，遲疑找不到合適的詞的時候我們才向?qū)Ψ秸宫F(xiàn)出真實的自我。技術(shù)正在試圖重新定義人們的聯(lián)系，例如我們怎樣關(guān)心比人和關(guān)系自己。但是它給我們機會，確認(rèn)我們的價值觀和發(fā)展方向，對此我很樂觀。我們擁有做這種改變所需要的一切，我們身邊有彼此，而且我們有很大的幾率成功，只要我們意識到自己的脆弱性。我們會相信，技術(shù)能“將復(fù)雜的事情變簡單”的這種脆弱性。在我的工作中我常常聽到：生活很艱難，人際關(guān)系充滿風(fēng)險等等。然后技術(shù)出現(xiàn)了，更簡單，充滿希望，樂觀而充滿朝氣。就像天降一位專家，解決所有煩惱。一個系列廣告說過，在線使用虛擬形象系統(tǒng)你“最終就可以愛你的朋友，愛你自己，愛你的生活如此簡單”我們被虛擬的愛情吸引，被電腦游戲塑造的奇幻世界吸引，也被”機器人將會變成我們最好的伴侶“的想法所吸引。我們晚上泡在社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)上而不是和現(xiàn)實中的朋友去酒吧玩。但是我們對于這些網(wǎng)路替代品的幻想已經(jīng)使我們失去了很多。如今，我們要專注于找到可以讓科技將我們帶回現(xiàn)實生活的方法，帶回到我們的身體，我們的圈子，我們的社會，我們的政治，我們自己的星球。它需要我們。讓我們來關(guān)注和討論如何運用數(shù)字技術(shù)，那些我們夢想的神奇技術(shù)，來幫助我們回歸這樣的生活，充滿愛的生活。謝謝大家！

第二篇：TED演講：越有錢越無情(中英對照版)解析

越有錢越無情

It's amazing what a rigged game of Monopoly can reveal.In this entertaining but sobering talk, social psychologist Paul Piff shares his research into how people behave when they feel wealthy.(Hint: badly.)But while the problem of inequality is a complex and daunting challenge, there's good news too.(Filmed at TEDx Marin.)

一個被操縱的大富翁游戲能告訴我們的東西竟然有那么多！在這個有趣且發(fā)人深省的演講中，社會心理學(xué)家保羅-皮夫分享了他對于“人感到富有時如何表現(xiàn)”的研究結(jié)果（暗示：很壞）。在面對異常復(fù)雜、異常嚴(yán)峻的不平等問題的同時，我們也聽到了好的消息。（攝于TEDx加州馬林縣）

Paul Piff studies how social hierarchy, inequality and emotion shape relations between individuals and groups.Why you should listen: Paul Piff is an Assistant Professor of Psychology and Social Behavior at the University of California, Irvine.In particular, he studies how wealth(having it or not having it)can affect interpersonal relationships.His surprising studies include running rigged games of Monopoly, tracking how those who drive expensive cars behave versus those driving less expensive vehicles and even determining that rich people are literally more likely to take candy from children than the less well-off.The results often don't paint a pretty picture about the motivating forces of wealth.He writes, “specifically, I have been finding that increased wealth and status in society lead to increased self-focus and, in turn, decreased compassion, altruism, and ethical behavior.” What others say: “When was the last time, as Piff puts it, that you prioritized your own interests above the interests of other people? Was it yesterday, when you barked at the waitress for not delivering your cappuccino with sufficient promptness? Perhaps it was last week, when, late to work, you zoomed past a mom struggling with a stroller on the subway stairs and justified your heedlessness with a ruthless but inarguable arithmetic: Today, the 9 a.m.meeting has got to come first;that lady’s stroller can’t be my problem.Piff is one of a new generation of scientists—psychologists, economists, marketing professors, and neurobiologists—who are exploiting this moment of unprecedented income inequality to explore behaviors like those.” — Lisa Miller, New York Magazine

演講稿正文

I want you to, for a moment, think about playing a game of Monopoly, except in this game, that combination of skill, talent and luck that help earn you success in games, as in life, has been rendered irrelevant, because this game's been rigged, and you've got the upper hand.You've got more money, more opportunities to move around the board, and more access to resources.And as you think about that experience, I want you to ask yourself, how might that experience of being a privileged player in a rigged game change the way that you think about yourself and regard that other player? 我想讓大家花一點時間，想想一下自己正在玩大富翁游戲。只不過在這個游戲里面，那些幫助你贏的游戲的因素，比如技巧、才能和運氣在此無關(guān)緊要，就像對于人生一樣，因為這個游戲被操縱了，而你已經(jīng)占了上風(fēng)，你有更多的錢，有更多在棋盤上移動的機會以及更對獲得資源的機會。在你想象這一經(jīng)歷的過程中，我想讓大家問一下自己，一個被操縱的游戲里面作為優(yōu)勢玩家的經(jīng)歷會如何改變你思考自己和對待對手的方式？

So we ran a study on the U.C.Berkeley campus to look at exactly that question.We brought in more than 100 pairs of strangers into the lab, and with the flip of a coin randomly assigned one of the two to be a rich player in a rigged game.They got two times as much money.When they passed Go, they collected twice the salary, and they got to roll both dice instead of one, so they got to move around the board a lot more.(Laughter)And over the course of 15 minutes, we watched through hidden cameras what happened.And what I want to do today, for the first time, is show you a little bit of what we saw.You're going to have to pardon the sound quality, in some cases, because again, these were hidden cameras.So we've provided subtitles.在加州大學(xué)伯克利分校，我們做了一個試驗來研究這個問題。我們招募了100多對陌生人到實驗室，通過投擲硬幣的方式隨機選中一對中的一個作為這個游戲中占上風(fēng)的玩家。他們拿到了兩倍的錢。當(dāng)他們途徑起點的時候，他們拿到兩倍的工資，而且他們可以同時擲兩個骰子而不是一個，所以他們可以在棋盤上移動更多。在接下來的15分鐘內(nèi)，我們通過隱藏的攝像頭觀察了現(xiàn)場情況。今天是第一次我想和大家分享一下我們觀察到的，有的時候音質(zhì)可能不太好，還請大家原諒，因為畢竟是用隱藏的攝像頭，所以我們加上了字幕。

Rich Player: How many 500s did you have? 富玩家：你有多少張500塊？ Poor Player: Just one.窮玩家：就一張。

Rich Player: Are you serious.富玩家：真的嗎？ Poor Player: Yeah.窮玩家：是的。

Rich Player: I have three.(Laughs)I don't know why they gave me so much.富玩家：我有三張。（笑聲）不知道為什么他們給了我這么多。Paul Piff: Okay, so it was quickly apparent to players that something was up.One person clearly has a lot more money than the other person, and yet, as the game unfolded, we saw very notable differences and dramatic differences begin to emerge between the two players.The rich player started to move around the board louder, literally smacking the board with their piece as he went around.We were more likely to see signs of dominance and nonverbal signs, displays of power and celebration among the rich players.保羅.皮夫：所以，玩家們很快就意識到這個游戲明顯有點奇怪。一個玩家比另一個玩家明顯有更多的錢。隨著游戲慢慢展開，我們觀察到兩個玩家開始有一些明顯不同的表現(xiàn)。富的玩家明顯在棋盤上移動的聲音更大，移動的時候幾乎是在狠狠砸棋盤。我們看到富玩家們“霸主”信號、肢體動作，權(quán)力的顯示以及相互慶祝。

We had a bowl of pretzels positioned off to the side.It's on the bottom right corner there.That allowed us to watch participants' consummatory behavior.So we're just tracking how many pretzels participants eat.我們在旁邊放了一碗椒鹽卷餅，就在右下角，這使得我們可以觀察玩家吃椒鹽卷餅的行為。我們就是看看玩家吃了多少椒鹽卷餅。

Rich Player: Are those pretzels a trick? 富玩家：這些椒鹽卷餅有什么貓膩嗎？ Poor Player: I don't know.窮玩家：不知道啊。

Okay, so no surprises, people are onto us.They wonder what that bowl of pretzels is doing there in the first place.One even asks, like you just saw, is that bowl of pretzels there as a trick? And yet, despite that, the power of the situation seems to inevitably dominate, and those rich players start to eat more pretzels.保羅·皮夫：好吧，不出所料，大家覺得有問題。起先他們好奇那一碗椒鹽卷餅為什么會在那里。就像你剛才看到的，其中有一個甚至問：這碗椒鹽卷餅與什么貓膩嗎？但盡管如此，整個現(xiàn)場的主導(dǎo)形勢還是不可避免的。那些富的玩家開始吃更多的椒鹽卷餅。Rich Player: I love pretzels.富玩家：我愛椒鹽卷餅。

(Laughter)（笑聲）

And as the game went on, one of the really interesting and dramatic patterns that we observed begin to emerge was that the rich players actually started to become ruder toward the other person, less and less sensitive to the plight of those poor, poor players, and more and more demonstrative of their material success, more likely to showcase how well they're doing.保羅·皮夫：游戲繼續(xù)進(jìn)行，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個很明顯的有趣現(xiàn)象，就是富玩家開始對另一個玩家表現(xiàn)得不友好，對那些可憐玩家的貧窮困境越來越不敏感，開始越來越頻繁的炫富，更喜歡展示他們正在做的一切。

Rich Player: I have money for everything.富玩家：我什么都買得起。

Poor Player: How much is that? 窮玩家：你有多少錢？

Rich Player: You owe me 24 dollars.You're going to lose all your money soon.I'll buy it.I have so much money.I have so much money, it takes me forever.富玩家：你還欠我24塊。你很快就要輸光了。我要買它，我太多錢了那么多花都花不完的錢。

Rich Player 2: I'm going to buy out this whole board.富玩家2：我要把整個棋盤都買下來。Rich Player 3：You're going to run out of money soon.I'm pretty much untouchable at this point.富玩家3：你很快就要沒錢了。我已經(jīng)差不多不可戰(zhàn)勝了。Okay, and here's what I think was really, really interesting, is that at the end of the 15 minutes, we asked the players to talk about their experience during the game.And when the rich players talked about why they had inevitably won in this rigged game of Monopoly--(Laughter)— they talked about what they'd done to buy those different properties and earn their success in the game, and they became far less attuned to all those different features of the situation, including that flip of a coin that had randomly gotten them into that privileged position in the first place.And that's a really, really incredible insight into how the mind makes sense of advantage.保羅·皮夫：下面是我覺得一個非常非常有有意思的現(xiàn)象。在15分鐘要結(jié)束的時候，我們請玩家談?wù)撍麄冊谟螒蛑械慕?jīng)歷。當(dāng)玩家談?wù)撍麄冊谶@個被操縱的游戲里面為什么必勝的時候（笑聲）他們提到了自己為了買到不同地產(chǎn)和贏得游戲所作的努力而他們忽略了這個游戲一開始的不同形勢也就是投擲硬幣隨即決定了他們哪一個獲得優(yōu)勢，而這對我們理解大腦如何看待優(yōu)勢提供了非常好的啟發(fā)。Now this game of Monopoly can be used as a metaphor for understanding society and its hierarchical structure, wherein some people have a lot of wealth and a lot of status, and a lot of people don't.They have a lot less wealth and a lot less status and a lot less access to valued resources.And what my colleagues and I for the last seven years have been doing is studying the effects of these kinds of hierarchies.What we've been finding across dozens of studies and thousands of participants across this country is that as a person's levels of wealth increase, their feelings of compassion and empathy go down, and their feelings of entitlement, of deservingness, and their ideology of self-interest increases.In surveys, we found that it's actually wealthier individuals who are more likely to moralize greed being good, and that the pursuit of self-interest is favorable and moral.Now what I want to do today is talk about some of the implications of this ideology self-interest, talk about why we should care about those implications, and end with what might be done.我們可以用這個大富翁的游戲作比喻來理解我們的社會以及社會分層，也就是有的人有大量的社會財富和地位而很多人沒有，他們僅有很少的財富和地位以及很少獲得寶貴資源的機會。我和我的同事在過去的7年里一直在做的就是研究這些不同層次的影響。全國范圍內(nèi)的大量研究都表明，當(dāng)一個人的財富增加時，他們的同情心和同理心下降，而他們的優(yōu)越感增加，也更注重個人利益。在調(diào)查中，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，富有的人更可能把貪婪定義為好的，把對個人利益的追求定義為有利的，道德的。今天我想談的就是這種個人利益思維的影響，談?wù)劄槭裁次覀儜?yīng)該關(guān)注這些影響以及我們能做些什么。

Some of the first studies that we ran in this area looked at helping behavior, something social psychologists call pro-social behavior.And we were really interested in who's more likely to offer help to another person, someone who's rich or someone who's poor.In one of the studies, we bring in rich and poor members of the community into the lab and give each of them the equivalent of 10 dollars.We told the participants that they could keep these 10 dollars for themselves, or they could share a portion of it, if they wanted to, with a stranger who is totally anonymous.They'll never meet that stranger and the stranger will never meet them.And we just monitor how much people give.Individuals who made 25,000 sometimes under 15,000 dollars a year, gave 44 percent more of their money to the stranger than did individuals making 150,000 or 200,000 dollars a year.我們在這一領(lǐng)域最初做的一些研究，觀察了助人行為，社會心理學(xué)家稱之為親社會行為。我們很想知道什么人更傾向于給其他人提供幫助，富人還是窮人。其中一個研究，我們把一個社區(qū)的富人和窮人都帶到了實驗室，給了每個人十美元。我們告訴他們，他們可以把這十塊錢給自己用，也可以把其中一部分拿出來分享。如果他們愿意的話，跟一個陌生人分享，一個永遠(yuǎn)不會再相見的陌生人。我們觀察人們給了多少。那下年收入為25000甚至低于15000美元的人，而那些收入為15萬甚至20萬的人比起來多給了44%。We've had people play games to see who's more or less likely to cheat to increase their chances of winning a prize.In one of the games, we actually rigged a computer so that die rolls over a certain score were impossible.You couldn't get above 12 in this game, and yet, the richer you were, the more likely you were to cheat in this game to earn credits toward a $50 cash prize, sometimes by three to four times as much.我們還讓人們玩游戲，看看什么人更可能為了贏得一個獎品而作弊。其中一個游戲，我們其實操縱了電腦使得某些數(shù)字不可能出現(xiàn)。這個游戲里面你不可能超過12。然而，越富有的人，越有可能在這個游戲中作弊去爭取那個最終能夠贏取50美元現(xiàn)金的分?jǐn)?shù)，可能性甚至高達(dá)3到4倍。

We ran another study where we looked at whether people would be inclined to take candy from a jar of candy that we explicitly identified as being reserved for children--(Laughter)— participating--I'm not kidding.I know it sounds like I'm making a joke.We explicitly told participants this jar of candy's for children participating in a developmental lab nearby.They're in studies.This is for them.And we just monitored how much candy participants took.Participants who felt rich took two times as much candy as participants who felt poor.我們還做了另一個實驗，觀察人們是否會從糖罐里面拿糖。糖罐上清楚地寫著：給小朋友預(yù)留......（笑聲）我是認(rèn)真的，我知道這聽上去像我在講笑話，我們明確的告訴了參與者，這一罐糖是給隔壁發(fā)展中心的小朋友準(zhǔn)備的，他們在實驗中，這是給他們的。然后我們觀察這些參與者拿了多少糖果，那些感覺富有的參與者多拿了兩倍的糖果。

We've even studied cars, not just any cars, but whether drivers of different kinds of cars are more or less inclined to break the law.In one of these studies, we looked at whether drivers would stop for a pedestrian that we had posed waiting to cross at a crosswalk.Now in California, as you all know, because I'm sure we all do this, it's the law to stop for a pedestrian who's waiting to cross.So here's an example of how we did it.That's our confederate off to the left posing as a pedestrian.He approaches as the red truck successfully stops.In typical California fashion, it's overtaken by the bus who almost runs our pedestrian over.(Laughter)Now here's an example of a more expensive car, a Prius, driving through, and a BMW doing the same.So we did this for hundreds of vehicles on several days, just tracking who stops and who doesn't.What we found was that as the expensiveness of a car increased, the driver's tendencies to break the law increased as well.None of the cars, none of the cars in our least expensive car category broke the law.Close to 50 percent of the cars in our most expensive vehicle category broke the law.We've run other studies finding that wealthier individuals are more likely to lie in negotiations, to endorse unethical behavior at work like stealing cash from the cash register, taking bribes, lying to customers.我們還研究了汽車，不只是汽車，而是不同類型汽車的司機誰更傾向于做一些違法的事情。其中一個實驗，我們觀察了，司機在碰到行人（我們安排的）過馬路時的停車行為。在加州，大家都知道，因為我相信我們都有這樣做，法律規(guī)定碰到行人要過馬路，我們必須停車。下面我告訴大家我們是怎樣做的，左側(cè)是我們的研究人員裝作一個行人，她正要過馬路，這時候紅色的卡車停了下來，當(dāng)然這是在加州。很快一輛巴士呼嘯而過，差點要撞到我們的行人——（笑聲）——這是一輛比較貴的車，一輛普銳斯開過來，一輛寶馬車也一樣。幾天內(nèi)，我們測試了幾百輛車記錄誰停了誰沒有停。我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，隨著車價的增加司機違法的傾向也增加了。而在我們的廉價車系里，沒有一輛車作出違法行為。而在我們的昂貴車系里，有接近50%的車都違法了。我們還做了其他研究并發(fā)現(xiàn)，越有錢的人越有可能在談判中說謊，贊同工作中的不道德行為。比如從收銀臺偷現(xiàn)金，受賄，忽悠顧客等。Now I don't mean to suggest that it's only wealthy people who show these patterns of behavior.Not at all.In fact, I think that we all, in our day-to-day, minute-by-minute lives, struggle with these competing motivations of when, or if, to put our own interests above the interests of other people.And that's understandable because the American dream is an idea in which we all have an equal opportunity to succeed and prosper, as long as we apply ourselves and work hard, and a piece of that means that sometimes, you need to put your own interests above the interests and well-being of other people around you.But what we're finding is that, the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to pursue a vision of personal success, of achievement and accomplishment, to the detriment of others around you.Here I've plotted for you the mean household income received by each fifth and top five percent of the population over the last 20 years.In 1993, the differences between the different quintiles of the population, in terms of income, are fairly egregious.It's not difficult to discern that there are differences.But over the last 20 years, that significant difference has become a grand canyon of sorts between those at the top and everyone else.我并不是說只是有錢人會表現(xiàn)出類似的行為，完全不是。事實上，我覺得我們每個人在我們?nèi)粘５姆址置朊胫卸家@些動機作斗爭。什么時候以及是否把我們的利益置于他人的利益之上。這很容易理解，因為美國夢告訴我們每個人都有同等的機會可以成功，發(fā)達(dá)，只要我們足夠努力。而這也意味著有的時候字需要把自己的利益置于你周邊人的利益和幸福之上。但我們發(fā)現(xiàn)的是，你越有錢，則越有可能一種個人的成功。個人的成果和成就，這可能是建立在對旁人的損害之上。這里我為大家畫出了在過去20年里，每個15和最高5%人口的平均家庭收入。1993年，每個15之間的收入差距還是相當(dāng)大的，我們不難看出其中的差別。但是在過去的20年里面，這種巨大差距最終成為了頂層人群與其他所有人之間的鴻溝。

In fact, the top 20 percent of our population own close to 90 percent of the total wealth in this country.We're at unprecedented levels of economic inequality.What that means is that wealth is not only becoming increasingly concentrated in the hands of a select group of individuals, but the American dream is becoming increasingly unattainable for an increasing majority of us.And if it's the case, as we've been finding, that the wealthier you are, the more entitled you feel to that wealth, and the more likely you are to prioritize your own interests above the interests of other people, and be willing to do things to serve that self-interest, well then there's no reason to think that those patterns will change.In fact, there's every reason to think that they'll only get worse, and that's what it would look like if things just stayed the same, at the same linear rate, over the next 20 years.事實是，頂層20%的人口擁有整個國家接近90%的財富。我們正在經(jīng)歷史無前例的經(jīng)濟上的不平等，而這不僅意味著財富更多的聚集在為數(shù)很少的一群人手里，還意味著美國夢對越來越多的人來說都變得越來越遙遠(yuǎn)。如果事實果真如我們發(fā)現(xiàn)的那樣，你越有錢就越發(fā)覺得這些財富是你應(yīng)得的，越會把自己的利益置于他人的利益之上，越會做那些利己的事情。那里沒有理由可以相信這個現(xiàn)狀會有所改變。事實上，我們有更多的理由認(rèn)為情況會變得更糟糕。這時在接下來的20年內(nèi)保持和原來一樣、相同現(xiàn)行速率的情況。

Now, inequality, economic inequality, is something we should all be concerned about, and not just because of those at the bottom of the social hierarchy, but because individuals and groups with lots of economic inequality do worse, not just the people at the bottom, everyone.There's a lot of really compelling research coming out from top labs all over the world showcasing the range of things that are undermined as economic inequality gets worse.Social mobility, things we really care about, physical health, social trust, all go down as inequality goes up.Similarly, negative things in social collectives and societies, things like obesity, and violence, imprisonment, and punishment, are exacerbated as economic inequality increases.Again, these are outcomes not just experienced by a few, but that resound across all strata of society.Even people at the top experience these outcomes.不平等，經(jīng)濟上的不平等，是我們每個人都要關(guān)心的問題，不僅是因為社會底層的人，而是因為經(jīng)濟不平等會讓個人和集體都變得糟糕。不僅僅是底層的人，是每一個人。有很多來自世界各地的頂級實驗室的非常有說服力的研究，展示了日益增加的經(jīng)濟不平等造成的影響范圍。社會流動性，那些我們非常關(guān)心的東西，如身體健康、社會信任，都會隨著不平等的增加而削弱。同樣的，社會中消極的東西，比如肥胖、暴力、徒刑和懲罰都會隨著經(jīng)濟不平等的增加而加劇。而這些后果，不是少數(shù)人所經(jīng)歷的而是會影響社會的各個階層。即使是在頂層的人也要遭受這些后果。So what do we do? This cascade of self-perpetuating, pernicious, negative effects could seem like something that's spun out of control, and there's nothing we can do about it, certainly nothing we as individuals could do.But in fact, we've been finding in our own laboratory research that small psychological interventions, small changes to people's values, small nudges in certain directions, can restore levels of egalitarianism and empathy.For instance, reminding people of the benefits of cooperation, or the advantages of community, cause wealthier individuals to be just as egalitarian as poor people.In one study, we had people watch a brief video, just 46 seconds long, about childhood poverty that served as a reminder of the needs of others in the world around them, and after watching that, we looked at how willing people were to offer up their own time to a stranger presented to them in the lab who was in distress.After watching this video, an hour later, rich people became just as generous of their own time to help out this other person, a stranger, as someone who's poor, suggesting that these differences are not innate or categorical, but are so malleable to slight changes in people's values, and little nudges of compassion and bumps of empathy.那我們該怎么辦呢？這些帶有延續(xù)性的，有害的消極影響看上去是什么東西失控了，而我們無能為力特別是作為個人更是無能為力。但是事實上，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)在我們自己的實驗室研究中，小小的心理干預(yù)，價值觀的小小改變，某些特定的微小暗示就可以將平等和同理心恢復(fù)。比如，提醒人們合作的好處或者社區(qū)的優(yōu)點，就能夠讓富人和窮人一樣關(guān)注平等。其中一個實驗中，我們讓參與者看一短片，46秒，關(guān)于兒童貧困，以此提醒大家周圍人的需要。看過這個視頻后，我們觀察了他們?yōu)閷嶒炛幸粋€壓抑的陌生人提供幫助的積極性。看完這個視頻一個小時后，富人變得和窮人一樣大方，他們愿意花時間幫助別人，幫助那些陌生人。這意味著這些差別不是與生俱來或者一成不變的。它們很容易改變，只是需要價值觀的微小變化。同情心的一點點推動，和同理心的輕微觸碰。

And beyond the walls of our lab, we're even beginning to see signs of change in society.Bill Gates, one of our nation's wealthiest individuals, in his Harvard commencement speech, talked about the problem facing society of inequality as being the most daunting challenge, and talked about what must be done to combat it, saying, “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.” And there's the Giving Pledge, in which more than 100 of our nation's wealthiest individuals are pledging half of their fortunes to charity.And there's the emergence of dozens of grassroots movements, like We are the One Percent, the Resource Generation, or Wealth for Common Good, in which the most privileged members of the population, members of the one percent and elsewhere, people who are wealthy, are using their own economic resources, adults and youth alike, that's what's most striking to me, leveraging their own privilege, their own economic resources, to combat inequality by advocating for social policies, changes in social values, and changes in people's behavior, that work against their own economic interests but that may ultimately restore the American dream.在實驗室之外，我們也開始看到社會上的改變。比爾-蓋茨，我們國家的富豪之一，在哈佛的開學(xué)典禮演講中說到這個社會所面臨的問題，他說不平等是我們目前面臨的嚴(yán)峻挑戰(zhàn)，他談?wù)摿宋覀儜?yīng)該如何戰(zhàn)勝它。他說：“人類最偉大的進(jìn)步不在于它的各種發(fā)現(xiàn)，而在于如何將這些發(fā)現(xiàn)用于削弱不平等。“還有捐贈承諾，我們國家100多個最富有的人正在承諾將他們一半的財產(chǎn)捐贈給慈善事業(yè)，還有許多草根運動的出現(xiàn)。比如”我們是那百分之一“、”資源一代“、”共同的財富“等。在這些組織中，那些最有優(yōu)勢的成員，那些1%的人和其他有錢的人，其中有成人有青少年，這是最讓我震驚的。他們正在利用自己的優(yōu)勢，利用自己的經(jīng)濟資源與不平等抗?fàn)帲ㄟ^倡導(dǎo)社會政策、社會價值的改變、人類行為的改變，這有悖于他們自身的經(jīng)濟利益，但卻會最終重建美國夢！

Thank you.謝謝！

第三篇：TED演講(中英雙語) 我們都是賽博人(關(guān)鍵詞：科技與社會)

安博?凱斯：我們都是賽博人

Amber Case:We are all cyborgs now 0:11我想告訴你們大家 你們其實都是半機器人，不是你們想象的那種半機器人。你們不是機器戰(zhàn)警，也不是魔鬼終結(jié)者，但是你每次看著電腦屏幕 或者使用手機時你就是個半機器人。所以什么是半機器人的定義呢？傳統(tǒng)的定義是一個生物體 “為了適應(yīng)環(huán)境而被 加入外源成分。” 這是從1960年一篇太空旅行的文章中摘錄的。因為你想，空間是很可怕的； 人類本不會去那里。但是人類很好奇，他們很可能會給他們身體里加?xùn)|西 所以他們有一天可以去阿爾卑斯山 然后另一天又變成海里的一條魚。

0:49所以讓我們看看傳統(tǒng)的人類學(xué)觀點。有人到另一個國家 說：“這些人多么神奇啊，他們的工具是多么有趣他們的文化是多么奇特啊！” 然后他們寫文章，也許有少數(shù)幾個其他人類學(xué)家讀了，我們覺得它特別有異國情調(diào)。而正在發(fā)生的是 我們突然發(fā)現(xiàn)了一個新的物種。我作為一個半機器人的人類學(xué)家，突然說：“噢，我們突然就成了一種新新人類。過來看看這些魅力十足的文化。過來看看這令人好奇的儀式 每個人都環(huán)繞著技術(shù)行事。他們點擊著東西，關(guān)注著熒屏。”

1:24我之所以研究這個 而不是傳統(tǒng)的人類學(xué)是有原因的。因為工具的使用 從一開始，經(jīng)歷了成千上萬年，一切都是對人類的一種自身改造。它幫助我們超越我們自身的體能，讓我們走得更遠(yuǎn)，敲打起來更有力，而這些方面也是有限的。但是現(xiàn)在我們看到的不是人類自身體能的延伸，而是心智的延伸。因此，我們可以更快地旅行 用不同的方式交流。另一件正在發(fā)生的事情是 我們都挾帶著小Mary Poppins的魔法技術(shù)。我們可以把任何東西都裝進(jìn)去，而它卻不會變重，然后我們又可以把任何東西都從里面取出來。你計算機里面到底有什么？ 如果你把所有信息印出來，這就好比 你會不斷地接受上千磅重的信息材料。而如果你真失去了這些信息，這意味著你心里感覺失去了它，你會突然感到少了什么，只是你看不見，你有一種非常奇怪的感覺。

2:20另一件發(fā)生的事情是你擁有了第二個自我。無論你是否喜歡，你開始在網(wǎng)上出現(xiàn)，當(dāng)你不在那里的時候，人們跟你網(wǎng)上的 第二自我交流。所以你得小心 別把朋友圈的第一道防線都開放，也就是你臉書的墻頭，別讓人家半夜里隨便在上面涂寫 因為它的效果跟現(xiàn)實生活是幾乎等同的。所以突然我們要維護(hù)我們的第二自我。你要在電子生活里展示自己 跟你在現(xiàn)實生活中要做的差不多。跟你醒來，沖淋浴，穿衣服一樣，你要學(xué)習(xí)怎樣在你的電子生活中做這些事。問題是現(xiàn)在很多人 特別是青少年 要經(jīng)歷兩個青春期。他們要經(jīng)歷他們主要的那個，那已經(jīng)是很不容易了，他們還要經(jīng)歷他們的第二自我的青春期。那更難 因為在這個實實在在的網(wǎng)絡(luò)歷史中 他們的網(wǎng)絡(luò)經(jīng)歷都被記錄。現(xiàn)在每個新接觸技術(shù)的人 在網(wǎng)上都算是網(wǎng)絡(luò)青少年。所以這是很尷尬的 讓他們做這些事情很難。

3:19所以當(dāng)我還小的時候，晚上我爸爸會讓我坐下對我說，“我來教你未來的時間和空間問題。” 我說：“好。”有一天他說：“兩點間的最短的距離是什么？” 我說：“是直線，這個你昨天已經(jīng)告訴我了。我覺得自己很聰明。” 他說：“不是，不是，這兒有一個更好的辦法。” 他拿了一張紙，在一面畫了A在另一面畫了B 然后把紙頭折疊起來，讓A和B碰在一起。然后他說：“這是兩點間最短的距離。” 我說：“爸爸，爸爸，你怎么做到的？” 他說：“你就這樣把時間和空間彎曲了，這需要花很大的能量，這就是你要做的。” 我說：“我想要這樣做。” 他說：“好啊。” 于是，之后的10，20年，我晚上去睡覺 總是想，“我要成為創(chuàng)造蟲洞-時光隧道的人 讓事物加速。我想做一個時間機器。” 我總是用錄音帶給未來的我 傳遞信息。

4:15但是當(dāng)我進(jìn)了大學(xué)后發(fā)現(xiàn) 技術(shù)不是因為它有用，所以人們 才接納它； 技術(shù)是在人們的應(yīng)用過程中被接納的它是為人類的應(yīng)用需求而產(chǎn)生的。所以我開始學(xué)習(xí)人類學(xué)。而當(dāng)我在寫關(guān)于手機的論文時，我認(rèn)識到每個人的口袋里都裝著蟲洞-時光隧道。這蟲洞-時光隧道不是通過身體接觸來傳遞信息，它們其實是在心智上傳遞信息。人們按一下按鈕，人們就把A和B立刻聯(lián)系起來了。我想：“噢，哇，我找到了，這太棒了。”

4:43所以隨著時間的推移，時間和空間 都因此被壓縮聯(lián)系在一起。你可以站在世界的這一頭低語，而世界的另一端就能聽到了。而我另外想到的是 你用的每個設(shè)備都給你一個不同類型的時間。每個網(wǎng)頁都給你一個不同的時間軸。你因此而到處挖掘 你延伸的記憶，你把它們存在哪里了呢？ 所以現(xiàn)在我們都成了古生物學(xué)家挖掘我們遺失了的東西 我們將我們延伸的外部大腦揣在口袋里。這會促發(fā)某種恐慌。不行，這東西到底存在哪里？ 在信息爆炸前，我們都跟我愛露西電視里演的那樣措手不及，我們跟不上信息的腳步。5:20因此 我們把這些都帶到社交空間，結(jié)果我們每時每刻都在查看電話。所以我們把這個東西稱為親密環(huán)境。我們不是跟每個人時刻都聯(lián)系著，但是我們在任何時候可以和任何人交流。如果你可以把你手機上的人都打印出來，那個屋子一定十分擁擠。一般而言，這些就是你能聯(lián)系到的人 和你有聯(lián)系的所有朋友，家人

5:43這也會隨之帶來一些心理影響。其實我擔(dān)心的一個是 人們不再花時間停下來內(nèi)心反省，人們不再放慢速度和停下來，人們時刻和屋里的所有的人在一起 在同一時間界面 要爭取所有人的注意力 仿佛我們生活在研究古生物學(xué)和面對恐慌的構(gòu)架中。他們并不只是坐在那里。真的，當(dāng)你沒有外來影響時 就保留了一段創(chuàng)造自我的時間 你可以用來制定長遠(yuǎn)的計劃 來試著發(fā)現(xiàn)你自己到底是什么樣一個人。而一旦你這么做了，你就能弄清楚 怎樣合理地展示你的第二自我 而不是等著每件事發(fā)生，然后臨陣應(yīng)付 噢，我得做這個，做這個，做這個 所以這是很重要的。我很擔(dān)心，特別是今天的孩子，他們沒有這種停機休息時間，他們生活在不斷點擊的文化中，什么東西都向他們撲面而來，他們對此非常興奮，也非常容易上癮。

6:36你想么，世界也不會停下來。它自己也有自己外部修復(fù)設(shè)備，這些設(shè)備都在幫助我們 互相溝通和互動交流。如果你現(xiàn)在能看見這些 將我們聯(lián)系在一起的鏈接，你看見的是一副英特網(wǎng)的地圖。它上去并不是技術(shù)化的； 它其實看上去是有機化的。這是人類有史以來，我們第一次這樣 鏈接在一起。這并不是指機器主宰了我們； 它們只是幫助我們更加人性化，幫助我們互相聯(lián)系。

7:09最成功的技術(shù)幫我們掃清障礙 幫我們生活得更好。真的，最終機器使我們?nèi)祟惐绕鸺夹g(shù)化來說，變得更人性化，因為我們一直互相合作共同創(chuàng)造。所以這是我想研究的一個要點： 事物是美好的，這還是要歸于人類之間的聯(lián)系； 只是用了不同的方法。我們只是增強了我們?nèi)祟惖奶匦?以及我們不管地理位置的約束互相聯(lián)系在一起的能力。這就是我研究半機器人類學(xué)的原因。7:36謝謝。7:38(掌聲)0:11 I would like to tell you all that you are all actually cyborgs, but not the cyborgs that you think.You're not RoboCop, and you're not Terminator, but you're cyborgs every time you look at a computer screen or use one of your cell phone devices.So what's a good definition for cyborg? Well, traditional definition is “an organism to which exogenous components have been added for the purpose of adapting to new environments.” That came from a 1960 paper on space travel, because, if you think about it, space is pretty awkward.People aren't supposed to be there.But humans are curious, and they like to add things to their bodies so they can go to the Alps one day and then become a fish in the sea the next.0:49So let's look at the concept of traditional anthropology.Somebody goes to another country, says, “How fascinating these people are, how interesting their tools are, how curious their culture is.” And then they write a paper, and maybe a few other anthropologists read it, and we think it's very exotic.Well, what's happening is that we've suddenly found a new species.I, as a cyborg anthropologist, have suddenly said, “Oh, wow.Now suddenly we're a new form of Homo sapiens, and look at these fascinating cultures, and look at these curious rituals that everybody's doing around this technology.They're clicking on things and staring at screens.” 1:24Now there's a reason why I study this, versus traditional anthropology.And the reason is that tool use,in the beginning--for thousands and thousands of years, everything has been a physical modification of self.It has helped us to extend our physical selves, go faster, hit things harder, and there's been a limit on that.But now what we're looking at is not an extension of the physical self, but an extension of the mental self, and because of that, we're able to travel faster, communicate differently.And the other thing that happens is that we're all carrying around little Mary Poppins technology.We can put anything we want into it, and it doesn't get heavier, and then we can take anything out.What does the inside of your computer actually look like? Well, if you print it out, it looks like a thousand pounds of material that you're carrying around all the time.And if you actually lose that information, it means that you suddenly have this loss in your mind, that you suddenly feel like something's missing, except you aren't able to see it, so it feels like a very strange emotion.2:20The other thing that happens is that you have a second self.Whether you like it or not, you're starting to show up online, and people are interacting with your second self when you're not there.And so you have to be careful about leaving your front lawn open, which is basically your Facebook wall, so that people don't write on it in the middle of the night--because it's very much the equivalent.And suddenly we have to start to maintain our second self.You have to present yourself in digital life in a similar way that you would in your analog life.So, in the same way that you wake up, take a shower and get dressed, you have to learn to do that for your digital self.And the problem is that a lot of people now,especially adolescents, have to go through two adolescences.They have to go through their primary one, that's already awkward, and then they go through their second self's adolescence, and that's even more awkward because there's an actual history of what they've gone through online.And anybody coming in new to technology is an adolescent online right now, and so it's very awkward, and it's very difficult for them to do those things.3:19So when I was little, my dad would sit me down at night and he would say, “I'm going to teach you about time and space in the future.” And I said, “Great.” And he said one day, “What's the shortest distance between two points?” And I said, “Well, that's a straight line.You told me that yesterday.” I thought I was very clever.He said, “No, no, no.Here's a better way.” He took a piece of paper, drew A and B on one side and the other and folded them together so where A and B touched.And he said, “That is the shortest distance between two points.” And I said, “Dad, dad, dad, how do you do that?” He said, “Well, you just bend time and space, it takes an awful lot of energy, and that's just how you do it.”And I said, “I want to do that.” And he said, “Well, okay.” And so, when I went to sleep for the next 10 or 20 years, I was thinking at night, “I want to be the first person to create a wormhole, to make things accelerate faster.And I want to make a time machine.” I was always sending messages to my future self using tape recorders.4:15But then what I realized when I went to college is that technology doesn't just get adopted because it works.It gets adopted because people use it and it's made for humans.So I started studying anthropology.And when I was writing my thesis on cell phones, I realized that everyone was carrying around wormholes in their pockets.They weren't physically transporting themselves;they were mentally transporting themselves.They would click on a button, and they would be connected as A to B immediately.And I thought, “Oh, wow.I found it.This is great.” 4:43So over time, time and space have compressed because of this.You can stand on one side of the world, whisper something and be heard on the other.One of the other ideas that comes around is that you have a different type of time on every single device that you use.Every single browser tab gives you a different type of time.And because of that, you start to dig around for your external memories--where did you leave them? So now we're all these paleontologists that are digging for things that we've lost on our external brains that we're carrying around in our pockets.And that incites a sort of panic architecture--“Oh no, where's this thing?” We're all “I Love Lucy” on a great assembly line of information, and we can't keep up.5:20And so what happens is, when we bring all that into the social space, we end up checking our phones all the time.So we have this thing called ambient intimacy.It's not that we're always connected to everybody, but at anytime we can connect to anyone we want.And if you were able to print out everybody in your cell phone, the room would be very crowded.These are the people that you have access to right now, in general--all of these people, all of your friends and family that you can connect to.5:43And so there are some psychological effects that happen with this.One I'm really worried about is that people aren't taking time for mental reflection anymore, and that they aren't slowing down and stopping, being around all those people in the room all the time that are trying to compete for their attention on the simultaneous time interfaces, paleontology and panic architecture.They're not just sitting there.And really, when you have no external input, that is a time when there is a creation of self,when you can do long-term planning, when you can try and figure out who you really are.And then, once you do that, you can figure out how to present your second self in a legitimate way, instead of just dealing with everything as it comes in--and oh, I have to do this, and I have to do this, and I have to do this.And so this is very important.I'm really worried that, especially kids today, they're not going to be dealing with this down-time, that they have an instantaneous button-clicking culture, and that everything comes to them, and that they become very excited about it and very addicted to it.6:36So if you think about it, the world hasn't stopped either.It has its own external prosthetic devices, and these devices are helping us all to communicate and interact with each other.But when you actually visualize it, all the connections that we're doing right now--this is an image of the mapping of the Internet--it doesn't look technological.It actually looks very organic.This is the first time in the entire history of humanity that we've connected in this way.And it's not that machines are taking over.It's that they're helping us to be more human, helping us to connect with each other.7:09The most successful technology gets out of the way and helps us live our lives.And really, it ends up being more human than technology, because we're co-creating each other all the time.And so this is the important point that I like to study: that things are beautiful, that it's still a human connection--it's just done in a different way.We're just increasing our humanness and our ability to connect with each other, regardless of geography.So that's why I study cyborg anthropology.7:36Thank you.7:38(Applause)