评论
打印
You've probably heard by now that economic inequality is historically high,
各位或许听说过，贫富差距已经达到了历史最高点，
that the wealthiest one-tenth of one percent in the United States have as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent combined,
在美国最富有的1%人口中，10%的人财富总量相当于最底层90%人群的财富总和；
or that the wealthiest eight individuals in the world have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion inhabitants of the planet.
换言之，全球最富有的8个人的财富总量相当于世界上最贫穷的35亿人的财富总和。
But did you know that economic inequality is associated with shorter lifespans, less happiness, more crime and more drug abuse?
但各位知道吗，经济不平等与寿命缩短、幸福感降低、犯罪数量上升，以及毒品滥用加剧都有着密切的联系。
Those sound like problems of poverty, but among wealthy, developed nations
这些听起来似乎是贫困所带来的问题，但在富裕的发达国家中，
those health and social problems are actually more tightly linked to inequality between incomes than to absolute incomes.
和绝对收入的差异相比，这些健康和社会问题实际上与收入不平等的联系更密切。
And because of that, the United States, the wealthiest and the most unequal of nations, actually fares worse than all other developed countries.
正因如此，与其他发达国家相比，美国，这个最富裕但也最不平等的国家，实际上情况更加糟糕。
Surveys show that large majorities of Americans, both Democrats and Republicans, believe inequality is too high and want more equal pay.
研究表明，大量的美国民众，民主党也好，共和党也罢，都认为贫富差距的问题非常严重，希望实现更公平的薪资待遇。
And yet as a society, we don't seem to be able to find the common ground, the consensus, the political will to do anything about it.
而从社会层面出发，针对这个问题，我们似乎始终无法找到共同点，也无法达成共识或共同的政治意愿，从而也就无法采取一致的行动。
Because, as inequality has risen in recent decades, political polarization has risen along with it.
因为，随着贫富差距在最近几十年不断加剧，政治两极化也愈演愈烈。
We see those who disagree with us as idiots or as immoral.
我们把与我们意见相左的人称作“白痴”或“缺德的人”。
Nearly half of Democrats and Republicans now think that the other side is not just mistaken but a threat to the nation.
将近半数的民主党人和共和党人，认为对方不只是犯错而已，而是国家的祸患。
And that animosity prevents us from finding the common ground to change things.
而那种敌意阻碍了人们寻求共同利益，进而也阻碍了变革。
I'm a social psychology professor at the University of North Carolina,
我是北卡罗莱纳大学的一名社会心理学教授，
and I study the effects of inequality on people's thinking and behavior.
主要研究贫富差距对人的思想和行为的影响。
I'm going to argue that it's not just an unfortunate coincidence that inequality and political division have risen together.
我想说的是，贫富差距和政治分歧的同时出现不仅仅是一个不幸的巧合。
There are good psychological reasons that inequality drives wedges in our politics.
有充分的心理原因表明，是贫富差距造成了我们政治中的裂痕。
That means there are good psychological paths to improve both at once.
这同时也意味着，良好的心理学方法可以实现二者的同步改善。
To understand why inequality is so powerful, you have to first understand that we are constantly comparing ourselves to other people,
为了理解贫富差距影响巨大的原因，必须首先理解，我们会不断拿自己和他人进行比较，
and when we do that, we really like to come out on top, and we find it painful to be on the bottom.
一旦这样做了，我们就会非常希望自己处于优势，如果处于劣势，就会感觉非常挫败。
Psychologists call it the "better-than-average effect."
心理学将这种现象称为“中上等效应”。
Most people believe they're better than average at just about anything they care about,
大多数人认为他们在任何他们关心的事情上都比一般人做得好，
which isn't strictly possible, because that's just what average means.
这是不可能的，因为这就是“一般”的意思。
But that's the way people feel. Most people think they're smarter than average, harder working than average and more socially skilled.
但这却恰恰就是人们的感觉。大多数人觉得他们比一般人聪明、工作比普通人更加卖力，而且更加擅长社交。
Most people think they're better drivers than average.
大多数人还觉得他们的驾驶技术高于平均水平。
That's true even if you do the study with a sample of people currently hospitalized for a car accident that they caused.
即使针对正在住院治疗的交通事故肇事者抽样进行研究，结论依然如此。
So we really want to see ourselves as better than average, and if we find out otherwise, it's a painful experience that we have to cope with.
所以我们由衷的希望看到自己比一般人好，而且如果我们发现事与愿违，就必须痛苦的面对这一事实。
And we cope with it by shifting how we see the world.
而我们的应对方法，就是换一套方式去看待这个世界。
To understand how this works, my collaborators and I ran an experiment.
为了搞明白这背后的机制，我和合作者进行了一项试验。
We asked participants to complete a decision-making task to earn some money, and in reality, everyone earned the same amount of money.
我们要求参与者做一个决定，从而获取一定数目的报酬，实际上，每人所获金额是相同的。
But we randomly divided them into two groups,
但我们随机将他们分成两组，
and we told one group that they had done better than average, and we told the other group they had done worse than average.
告诉其中一组参与者，他们的表现好于平均水平，而告诉另一组，他们的表现低于平均水平。
So now we have one group that feels richer and one group that feels poorer, but for no objective reason.
因此一组人觉得他们更富有，而另一组人觉得他们更贫穷，只是没有客观原因。
And then we asked them some questions. When we asked them, "How good are you at making decisions?"
接下来我们询问了他们一些问题。当我们询问他们：“你们的决策水平如何？”
the better-than-average group said that they were more competent than the below-average group.
优于平均水平的组说，相比低于平均水平的组，他们在这方面的能力更强。
The better-than-average group said that their success was a fair outcome of a meritocracy.
优于平均水平的组说，他们的成就是优胜劣汰的自然结果。
The below-average group thought the system was rigged, and in this case, of course, they were right.
低于平均水平的组则觉得体制存在漏洞和弊病，当然，在这个实验中，他们说的倒是没错。
Even though the two groups had the same amount of money,
尽管两组的报酬相同，
the group that felt richer said we should cut taxes on the wealthy, cut benefits to the poor.
感觉更富有的测试组说，我们应该对富人减税，削减穷人福利。
Let them work hard and be responsible for themselves, they said.
并且表示，应该让穷人努力工作，对自己负责。
These are attitudes that we normally assume are rooted in deeply held values and a lifetime of experience,
我们通常认为这些态度是根植于根深蒂固的价值观和人生的经历，
but a 10-minute exercise that made people feel richer or poorer was enough to change those views.
但一个让人们感受到贫富差距的10分钟测试，就足以改变这些看法。
This difference between being rich or poor and feeling rich or poor is important, because the two don't always line up very well.
实际富有或贫穷与感觉富有或贫穷之间的区别很重要，因为这两种情况不能简单的混为一谈。
You often hear people say with nostalgia, "We were poor, but we didn't know it."
我们经常听到人们带着怀旧之情说，“我们很穷，但我们并没有感觉到。”
That was the case for me growing up, until one day, in the fourth-grade lunch line,
我就是在这种环境中长大的，直到有一天，在四年级的午餐领取窗口，
we had a new cashier who didn't know the ropes, and she asked me for 1.25 dollars.
新来了一位收银员，不了解情况，她向我收取了1.25美金。
I was taken aback, because I had never been asked to pay for my lunch before.
我深感震惊，因为我之前从没被要求支付午餐费用。
I didn't know what to say, because I didn't have any money.
我一时语塞，因为我身无分文。
And suddenly, I realized for the first time that we free lunch kids were the poor ones.
突然间，我生平第一次意识到我们这些享受免费午餐的孩子其实都是穷人家的孩子。
That awkward moment in the school lunch line changed so much for me, because for the first time, I felt poor.
而在学校餐厅窗口的那一狼狈时刻彻底改变了我，因为这是我第一次感受到贫穷。
We didn't have any less money than the day before, but for the first time, I started noticing things differently.
那天之前，我们家的钱丝毫没有减少，但生平第一次，我开始以不同的视角看待周遭的一切。
It changed the way I saw the world. I started noticing how the kids who paid for their lunch seemed to dress better than the free lunch kids.
它改变了我看世界的方式。我开始留意那些支付午餐费用的孩子，他们似乎比吃免费午餐孩子的穿着更好。
I started noticing the big yellow blocks of government cheese that showed up at our door
我开始留意家门口出现的那些政府提供的黄色奶酪块，
and the food stamps my mother would pull out at the grocery store.
以及在副食店妈妈拿出的食品券。
I was always a shy kid, but I hardly talked at all after that at school. Who was I to speak up?
我一直是个腼腆的孩子，但从那以后，我在学校更少言寡语了。我能和谁讲话呢？
For decades, social scientists looked for evidence that feeling deprived compared to other people would motivate political action.
几十年来，社会学家一直在寻找证据证明，感觉到自己比其他人更贫穷能够激励政治行动。
They thought it would mobilize protests, strikes, maybe even revolutions.
他们认为这样的做法会引发抗议、罢工，甚至可能是变革运动。
But again and again what they found was that it paralyzed people, because the truth is, feeling less than other people brings shame.
但他们接二连三发现的结论是，这种状态反而会麻痹民众，因为真相是，感觉不如别人会带来羞耻感。
It makes people turn away, disgusted with the system. Feeling better than other people, though -- now that is motivating.
它让人们有意回避这令人不满的现有体系。然而感觉比他人优秀则会激励人心。
It motivates us to protect that position, and it has important consequences for our politics.
这种感觉会激励我们捍卫现有地位，同时也会对我们的政治环境带来重要影响。
To see why, consider another experiment. Again, we asked participants to make decisions to earn some money,
究其原因，用另外一个实验可以说明。同样的，我们要求参与者通过做出相关决定以换取报酬，
and we told one group that they had done better than average and the other group that they had done worse than average.
同时告诉一组人员，他们的收入高于均值，而告诉另一组，他们的收入低于均值。
And again, the better-than-average group said it's a fair meritocracy, cut taxes on the wealthy, cut benefits on the poor.
同样的，高于均值的组说，适者生存是公平的，要对富人减税，削减穷人的福利。
But this time, we also asked them what did they think about other participants who disagree with them on those issues.
与此同时，就那些问题，我们也同样询问了他们对与他们意见相左的其他参与者有何看法。
Are they smart or incompetent? Are they reasonable or are they biased?
他们是聪明，还是能力不足？他们富于理性，还是持有偏见？
The better-than-average group said anybody who disagrees with them must be incompetent, biased, blinded by self-interest.
优于均值水平的组反馈说，那些和他们意见相左的人，一定是能力不足，同时存在偏见，被个人利益蒙蔽了双眼。
The below-average group didn't assume that about their opponents.
而低于均值水平的组则并没有对他们的对照组持有同样的看法。
Now, there are lots of psychology studies showing that when people agree with us,
目前，有大量的心理学研究表明，在人们和我们持相同意见时，
we think they're brilliant, and when people disagree with us, we tend to think they're idiots.
我们会认为他们聪明智慧，而当意见不同时，则更倾向于认为对方是白痴。
But this is new because we found it was driven entirely by the group that felt better than average,
但这是一个新现象，因为我们发现它完全是由那些感觉自己比一般人更好的群体驱动的，
who felt entitled to dismiss those people who disagree with them.
他们觉得有权忽视那些与他们意见相左的人。
So think about what this is doing to our politics, as the haves and have-nots spread further and further apart.
那么思考一下，这种举动会给我们的政治带来什么，那些利益既得者和丧失利益者，他们之间只会更加分裂。
Yes, a lot of us think that people on the other side are idiots,
是的，很多人会想，站在对立面的人是“白痴”，
but the people politically engaged enough to be yelling at each other about politics are actually mostly the well-off.
而那些向彼此吼叫着政治口号的政治参与者，实际上绝大多数都是既得利益者。
In fact, as inequality has grown in recent decades, political interest and participation among the poor has plummeted.
事实上，在最近几十年中，随着贫富差距的不断加剧，穷人的政治兴趣和参与度急剧下降。
Again, we see that people who feel left behind aren't taking to the streets to protest or organize voter registration drives.
我们也再一次看到，那些感到被遗忘的人，并未走上街头参与抗议，或组织投票登记运动。
Often, they aren't even voting. Instead, they're turning away and dropping out.
通常，他们甚至都不参与投票。相反，他们选择了回避和放弃。
So if we want to do something about extreme inequality, we have to fix our politics.
所以，如果我们想对极端的贫富差距有所行动，就必须消除这些政治弊病。
And if we want to fix our politics, we have to do something about inequality. So what do we do?
而要达到这一目的，我们就必须在贫富差距上下功夫。那我们要做些什么呢？
The wonderful thing about spirals is that you can interrupt at any point in the cycle.
螺旋的奇妙之处在于，你可以在周期的任何一点中断它。
I think our best bet starts with those of us who have benefited the most from inequality's rise,
我认为，我们最好从那些从贫富差距加剧中受益最多的这些人开始，
those of us who have done better than average.
从那些比一般人表现更好的人开始。
If you've been successful, it's natural to chalk up your success to your own hard work.
如果你事业有成，将个人成就归功于努力勤奋再自然不过。
But, like the studies I showed you, everybody does that, whether or not it really was the hard work that mattered most.
但是，就像我刚才提到的研究那样，每个人都会这样做，不管勤奋工作是不是关键所在。
Every successful person I know can think of times when they worked hard and struggled to succeed.
每个我认识的成功人士都能回忆起他们卖力工作，奋力获取成功的日子。
They can also think of times when they benefited from good luck or a helping hand but that part is harder.
他们也会想起那些他们受益于好运气或者他人帮助的时光，只是那部分更容易被遗忘。
Psychologists Shai Davidai and Tom Gilovich call it the "headwind-tailwind asymmetry."
心理学家赛·戴维戴和汤姆·吉洛维奇，称其为“逆风-顺风不对称原理”。
When you're struggling against headwinds, those obstacles are all you can see. It's what you notice and remember.
当你在对抗逆风时，你能看到的只有困难和障碍，它们令你印象深刻。
But when the wind's at your back and everything's going your way, all you notice is yourself and our own amazing talents.
而当一切都顺风顺水，你的所有关注点都是自己和我们自己的过人天赋。
So we have to stop and think for a minute to recognize those tailwinds helping us along.
因此我们需要停下来，思考一下，清楚的认识到那些顺境为我们一路提供的便利。
It's so easy to see what's wrong with people who disagree with you.
我们轻而易举就能看到和我们意见不同的人身上的问题。
Some of you decided that I was an idiot in the first two minutes, because I said inequality was harmful.
在演讲开始的前两分钟，有人就已经认定我是一个“白痴”，就因为我说，贫富差距是有害的。
The hard part is to recognize that if you were in a different position,
难点在于，要认识到，当你体会到了他人的处境，
you might see things differently, just like the subjects in our experiments.
或许就会从不同的角度看待事物，就像那些实验参与者。
So if you're in the above-average group in life -- and if you're watching a TED talk, you most likely are...
如果生活中你属于优于均值水平的组--如果你正在看TED演讲，你很可能就属于这一组，
then I leave you with this challenge: the next time you're tempted to dismiss someone who disagrees with you as an idiot,
我想留给你们一个挑战：下次你忍不住要忽略那个与你意见相左的人，认为对方是白痴，
think about the tailwinds that helped you get where you are.
想一想那个帮助你实现个人理想的顺境。
What lucky breaks did you get that might have turned out differently? What helping hands are you grateful for?
是否是幸运之神的垂青让事情有了转机？你最感恩的帮助是什么？
Recognizing those tailwinds gives us the humility we need to see that disagreeing with us doesn't make people idiots.
认识到这些顺境会让我们变得谦卑，并且能够看到，和自己意见不同并不会让他人成为白痴。
The real hard work is in finding common ground,
真正的困难在于找到共同立场，
because it's the well-off who have the power and the responsibility to change things. Thank you.
因为正是那些有权有势的人才有能力和责任去改变现状。谢谢。
