Why we make bad decisions | Dan Gilbert

Prevoditelj: Mirko Čojanović Recezent: Hrvoje Simic

We all make decisions every day; we want to know

Svi mi svakodevno donosimo odluke; želimo znati

what the right thing is to do -- in domains from the financial

kako učiniti pravu stvar - u područjima financija,

to the gastronomic to the professional to the romantic.

preko gastronomije i struke, do ljubavi.

And surely, if somebody could really tell us how to do

I sigurno, kada bi nam netko stvarno mogao reći kako učiniti

exactly the right thing at all possible times,

baš pravu stvar u bilo koje vrijeme,

that would be a tremendous gift.

to bi bio ogroman dar.

It turns out that, in fact, the world was given this gift in 1738

Pa, u stvari, svijet je dobio taj dar 1738.,

by a Dutch polymath named Daniel Bernoulli.

od svestranog Nizozemca, Daniela Bernoullia.

And what I want to talk to you about today is what that gift is,

Danas vam želim govoriti o tome što je taj dar,

and I also want to explain to you why it is

i također vam želim objasniti zašto nije

that it hasn't made a damn bit of difference.

doprinjeo apsolutno ničemu.

Now, this is Bernoulli's gift. This is a direct quote.

Sad, ovo je Bernoullijev dar. Direktno citiran.

And if it looks like Greek to you, it's because, well, it's Greek.

I ako izgleda nerazumljivo - pa, pisan je na grčkom.

But the simple English translation -- much less precise,

Ali jednostavan hrvatski prijevod - puno manje precizan,

but it captures the gist of what Bernoulli had to say -- was this:

ali vjeran srži onoga što je Bernoulli želio reći - je ovaj:

The expected value of any of our actions --

Očekivana korisnost bilo koje naše radnje

that is, the goodness that we can count on getting --

- dobit koju možemo očekivati -

is the product of two simple things:

je umnožak dvije jednostavne stvari:

the odds that this action will allow us to gain something,

vjerojatnosti da će nam neka radnja omogućiti dobit,

and the value of that gain to us.

i vrijednosti koju nam predstavlja ta dobit.

In a sense, what Bernoulli was saying is,

U nekom smislu, što je Bernoulli govorio je da,

if we can estimate and multiply these two things,

ako možemo procijeniti i pomnožiti ove dvije stvari,

we will always know precisely how we should behave.

uvijek ćemo znati točno kako se ponašati.

Now, this simple equation, even for those of you

Ova jednostavna jednadžba je, čak i za one

who don't like equations, is something that you're quite used to.

koji ne vole jednadžbe, nešto na što ste prilično navikli.

Here's an example: if I were to tell you, let's play

Evo primjera: Kada bih vam rekao, 'ajmo igrati

a little coin toss game, and I'm going to flip a coin,

jednu igru s novčićima. Ja ću baciti novčić,

and if it comes up heads, I'm going to pay you 10 dollars,

ako padne glava dat ću vam 10 dolara,

but you have to pay four dollars for the privilege of playing with me,

ali mi morate platiti četiri dolara da bi ste igrali sa mnom.

most of you would say, sure, I'll take that bet. Because you know

Većina vas bi rekla: može, prihvaćam okladu. Zato što znate

that the odds of you winning are one half, the gain if you do is 10 dollars,

da su izgledi za pobjedu jedna polovina, dobit u tom slučaju je 10 dolara,

that multiplies to five, and that's more

što ispadne pet, što je više

than I'm charging you to play. So, the answer is, yes.

nego što vam naplaćujem za igru. Dakle, odgovor je: da.

This is what statisticians technically call a damn fine bet.

Ovo statističari stručno nazivaju vraški dobrom okladom.

Now, the idea is simple when we're applying it to coin tosses,

Sad, ideja je jednostavna kad ju se primjenjuje na bacanje novčića,

but in fact, it's not very simple in everyday life.

ali zapravo, nije tako jednostavna u svakodnevnom životu.

People are horrible at estimating both of these things,

Ljudi užasno procjenjuju obje ove stvari,

and that's what I want to talk to you about today.

i to je ono o čemu želim razgovarati danas s vama.

There are two kinds of errors people make when trying to decide

Postoje dvije greške koje ljudi čine kada pokušavaju odlučiti

what the right thing is to do, and those are

kako napraviti pravu stvar:

errors in estimating the odds that they're going to succeed,

greške u procjeni izgleda za uspjeh

and errors in estimating the value of their own success.

i greške u procjeni vrijednosti vlastitog uspjeha.

Now, let me talk about the first one first.

Govoriti ću prvo o prvoj.

Calculating odds would seem to be something rather easy:

Računati vjerojatnost se čini prilično lakim:

there are six sides to a die, two sides to a coin, 52 cards in a deck.

postoji 6 strana na kocki, dve strane na novčiću, 52 karte u špilu.

You all know what the likelihood is of pulling the ace of spades

Svi znate koliko je vjerovatno da ćete izvući asa pika

or of flipping a heads.

ili da će "pasti glava".

But as it turns out, this is not a very easy idea to apply

Ali kako ispada, ova ideja nije lako primjenjiva

in everyday life. That's why Americans spend more --

na svakodnevni život. Zato Amerikanci potroše više

I should say, lose more -- gambling

- trebao bih reći, izgube više - kockajući,

than on all other forms of entertainment combined.

nego na sve druge oblike zabave zajedno.

The reason is, this isn't how people do odds.

To je zato što ljudi ne računaju vjerojatnosti tako.

The way people figure odds

Način na koji ljudi računaju vjerojatnost

requires that we first talk a bit about pigs.

traži da prvo razgovaramo o svinjama.

Now, the question I'm going to put to you is whether you think

Što mislite, da li

there are more dogs or pigs on leashes

ima više pasa ili svinja na uzicama

observed in any particular day in Oxford.

viđenih nekoga dana u Oxfordu.

And of course, you all know that the answer is dogs.

I naravno, svi znate da je odgovor: pasa.

And the way that you know that the answer is dogs is

A znate da je odgovor "pasa" zato što

you quickly reviewed in memory the times

ste se na brzinu prisjetili slučajeva

you've seen dogs and pigs on leashes.

u kojima ste vidjeli pse i svinje na uzicama.

It was very easy to remember seeing dogs,

Bilo je vrlo lako prisjetiti se da ste vidjeli pse;

not so easy to remember pigs. And each one of you assumed

ne tako lako sjetiti se svinja. I svatko je od vas pretpostavio

that if dogs on leashes came more quickly to your mind,

da ako je lakše prisjetiti se pasa na uzicama,

then dogs on leashes are more probable.

onda su psi na uzicama vjerojatniji.

That's not a bad rule of thumb, except when it is.

To nije loše opće pravilo, osim kada jest.

So, for example, here's a word puzzle.

Evo, na primjer, zadatka sa riječima.

Are there more four-letter English words

Ima li u engleskom jeziku više riječi od četiri slova

with R in the third place or R in the first place?

sa "R" na trećem mjestu ili sa "R" na prvom mjestu?

Well, you check memory very briefly, make a quick scan,

Pa, provjeriti ćete nakratko u sjećanju, brzo pregledati,

and it's awfully easy to say to yourself, Ring, Rang, Rung,

i strašno je lako reći sebi, Ring, Rang, Rung,

and very hard to say to yourself, Pare, Park: they come more slowly.

a jako je teško reći si Pare, Park: ove riječi dolaze sporije.

But in fact, there are many more words in the English language

Ali zapravo, postoji puno više riječi u engleskom jeziku

with R in the third than the first place.

sa "R" na trećem mjestu, nego na prvom.

The reason words with R in the third place come slowly to your mind

Riječi kod kojih je "R" na trećem mjestu dolaze sporije do svijesti

isn't because they're improbable, unlikely or infrequent.

ne zato što su manje vjerojatne, neobične ili rijetke.

It's because the mind recalls words by their first letter.

To je zato što se um prisjeća riječi po prvom slovu.

You kind of shout out the sound, S -- and the word comes.

Izviknete glas "S" i riječ sama dođe.

It's like the dictionary;

To je kao i u rječniku -

it's hard to look things up by the third letter.

teško je tražiti stvari po trećem slovu.

So, this is an example of how this idea that

Dakle, ovo je primjer kako ideja da vam

the quickness with which things come to mind

brzina kojom se um prisjeća stvari

can give you a sense of their probability --

može dati osjećaj o njenoj vjerojatnosti -

how this idea could lead you astray. It's not just puzzles, though.

ta ideja može zavarati. I to ne samo u zagonetkama.

For example, when Americans are asked to estimate the odds

Na primjer, kada Amerikance pitate da procjene vjerojatnost

that they will die in a variety of interesting ways --

da će umrijeti na neki zanimljiv način -

these are estimates of number of deaths per year

to su procjene broja godišnjih smrtnih slučajeva

per 200 million U.S. citizens.

na 200 milijuna amerikanaca.

And these are just ordinary people like yourselves who are asked

Pitaju obične ljude, kao što ste vi,

to guess how many people die from tornado, fireworks, asthma, drowning, etc.

da procijene koliko ljudi umre u tornadima, od vatrometa, astme, utapanjem, itd.

Compare these to the actual numbers.

Usporedite te brojeve sa stvarnima.

Now, you see a very interesting pattern here, which is first of all,

Vidi se vrlo zanimljiv trend.

two things are vastly over-estimated, namely tornadoes and fireworks.

Prvo, dvije stvari su jako precjenjene: tornada i vatrometi;

Two things are vastly underestimated:

a dvije su jako podcjenjene:

dying by drowning and dying by asthma. Why?

smrt utapanjem i smrt od astme. Zašto?

When was the last time that you picked up a newspaper

Kada ste zadnji put uzeli novine

and the headline was, "Boy dies of Asthma?"

u kojima je naslov bio "Dječak umro od astme?"

It's not interesting because it's so common.

To nije zanimljivo jer je tako uobičajeno.

It's very easy for all of us to bring to mind instances

Svima nam je lako prisjetiti se slučajeva

of news stories or newsreels where we've seen

iz vijesti ili novina kada smo vidjeli

tornadoes devastating cities, or some poor schmuck

kako tornada ruše gradove, ili nekog jadnika

who's blown his hands off with a firework on the Fourth of July.

koji si je raznio ruke vatrometom za Novu godinu.

Drownings and asthma deaths don't get much coverage.

Utapanja i astma nisu pretjerano medijski pokriveni.

They don't come quickly to mind, and as a result,

Njih se ne prisjećamo lako i zato

we vastly underestimate them.

ih znatno potcjenjujemo.

Indeed, this is kind of like the Sesame Street game

Stvarno, ovo je kao igra iz Ulice Sezam,

of "Which thing doesn't belong?" And you're right to say

"Koja stvar ne pripada?" I u pravu ste kada kažete

it's the swimming pool that doesn't belong, because the swimming pool

da je bazen taj koji ne pripada, zato što je bazen

is the only thing on this slide that's actually very dangerous.

jedina stvar na ovoj slici koja je zapravo vrlo opasna.

The way that more of you are likely to die than the combination

Vjerojatnije je da ćete umrijeti taj način nego od

of all three of the others that you see on the slide.

tri preostala načina skupa.

The lottery is an excellent example, of course -- an excellent test-case

Loto je odličan primjer, naravno - odličan slučaj za testiranje

of people's ability to compute probabilities.

ljudske sposobnosti računanja vjerojatnosti.

And economists -- forgive me, for those of you who play the lottery --

I ekonomisti - oprostite, vi koji igrate loto -

but economists, at least among themselves, refer to the lottery

ali ekonomisti, bar između sebe, nazivaju loto

as a stupidity tax, because the odds of getting any payoff

porezom na glupost, jer su izgledi da vam se isplati

by investing your money in a lottery ticket

ulaganje novca u kupnju listića

are approximately equivalent to flushing the money

približno jednaki bacanju novca

directly down the toilet -- which, by the way,

direktno u WC školjku - što, usput,

doesn't require that you actually go to the store and buy anything.

ne traži da stvarno odete u trgovinu i kupite nešto.

Why in the world would anybody ever play the lottery?

Zašto bi itko ikad igrao loto?

Well, there are many answers, but one answer surely is,

Pa, postoje mnogi odgovori, ali je jedan zasigurno,

we see a lot of winners. Right? When this couple wins the lottery,

taj da vidimo dosta pobjednika. Zar ne? Kada ovaj par dobije na lotu,

or Ed McMahon shows up at your door with this giant check --

ili kada se poznati voditelj pojavi na vašem pragu sa ogromnim čekom -

how the hell do you cash things that size, I don't know.

kako se kvragu unovčuje stvar te veličine, ne znam.

We see this on TV; we read about it in the paper.

Vidimo ovo na televiziji; čitamo o tome u novinama.

When was the last time that you saw extensive interviews

Kada ste zadnji put vidjeli iscrpne intervjue

with everybody who lost?

sa svima koji su izgubili?

Indeed, if we required that television stations run

Uistinu, kada bi tražili da televizijske kuće prikažu

a 30-second interview with each loser

intervju od 30 sekundi sa svima koji su izgubili

every time they interview a winner, the 100 million losers

svaki put kada intervjuiraju pobjednika, 100 miliona gubitnika

in the last lottery would require nine-and-a-half years

u zadnjem krugu lota bi uzeli devet i po godina

of your undivided attention just to watch them say,

vaše nepodjeljene pažnje samo da bi ih odgledali kako kažu

"Me? I lost." "Me? I lost."

"Ja? Izgubio." "Ja? Izgubio."

Now, if you watch nine-and-a-half years of television --

Sad, ako bi ste gledali devet i pol' godina televizije --

no sleep, no potty breaks -- and you saw loss after loss after loss,

bez sna, bez piš-pauze - gledanja samo u gubitnike, gubitnike, gubitnike

and then at the end there's 30 seconds of, "and I won,"

i onda na kraju bude 30 sekundi gdje netko kaže "Ja sam pobijedio!",

the likelihood that you would play the lottery is very small.

vjerojatnost da bi ste igrali loto bila bi vrlo mala.

Look, I can prove this to you: here's a little lottery.

Gledajte, mogu vam to dokazati: evo malog lota.

There's 10 tickets in this lottery.

Postoji 10 listića u ovom lotu.

Nine of them have been sold to these individuals.

Devet ih je prodano ovim osobama.

It costs you a dollar to buy the ticket and, if you win,

Kupnja listića košta vas jedan dolar, a ako pobjedite,

you get 20 bucks. Is this a good bet?

dobijate 20 zelembaća. Je li ovo dobra oklada?

Well, Bernoulli tells us it is.

Pa, Bernoulli nam kaže da je:

The expected value of this lottery is two dollars;

očekivana vrijednost od ove igre je dva dolara;

this is a lottery in which you should invest your money.

ovo je loto u koji bi ste trebali uložiti vaš novac.

And most people say, "OK, I'll play."

I većina ljudi kaže, "OK, igrati ću."

Now, a slightly different version of this lottery:

Sad, malo drugačija verzija ovog lota:

imagine that the nine tickets are all owned

zamislite preostalih devet listića ima

by one fat guy named Leroy.

jedan debeli tip, koji se zove Leroy.

Leroy has nine tickets; there's one left.

Leroy ima devet listića; ostao je jedan.

Do you want it? Most people won't play this lottery.

Da li ga želite? Većina ljudi neće igrati ovaj loto.

Now, you can see the odds of winning haven't changed,

Sad, možete vidjeti da se izgledi za pobjedu nisu promijenili,

but it's now fantastically easy to imagine who's going to win.

ali je sada fantastično jednostavno zamisliti ko će pobijediti.

It's easy to see Leroy getting the check, right?

Lako je vidjeti Leroya sa čekom, zar ne?

You can't say to yourself, "I'm as likely to win as anybody,"

Ne možete reći: "Imam jednake šanse kao i drugi",

because you're not as likely to win as Leroy.

zato što nemate jednake šanse kao Leroy.

The fact that all those tickets are owned by one guy

Činjenica da su svi ostali listići u vlasništvu jednog tipa

changes your decision to play,

mijenja vašu odluku o igranju,

even though it does nothing whatsoever to the odds.

iako ni na koji način ne mijenja vjerojatnost pobjede.

Now, estimating odds, as difficult as it may seem, is a piece of cake

Sad, procjena izglednosti, koliko god se činila teškom, je laka

compared to trying to estimate value:

kad se usporedi sa pokušajima procjene vrijednosti:

trying to say what something is worth, how much we'll enjoy it,

pokušavanje određenja vrijednosti nečega, koliko ćemo uživati u tome,

how much pleasure it will give us.

koliko će nam zadovoljstva donijeti.

I want to talk now about errors in value.

Sada želim pričati o pogreškama u vrijednosti.

How much is this Big Mac worth? Is it worth 25 dollars?

Koliko je vrijedan ovaj hamburger? Da li je vrijedan 25 dolara?

Most of you have the intuition that it's not --

Većina bi intuitivno rekla da nije -

you wouldn't pay that for it.

ne bi ste toliko platili za njega.

But in fact, to decide whether a Big Mac is worth 25 dollars requires

Ali zapravo, da bi ste odlučili je li Big Mac vrijedan 25 dolara potrebno je

that you ask one, and only one question, which is:

zapitati se jedno, i samo jedno pitanje, koje je:

What else can I do with 25 dollars?

Šta još mogu sa 25 dolara?

If you've ever gotten on one of those long-haul flights to Australia

Ako ste ikada bili na jednom od onih dugotrajnih putovanja do Australije

and realized that they're not going to serve you any food,

i shvatili ste da vam neće posluživati nikakvu hranu,

but somebody in the row in front of you has just opened

a netko iz reda ispred vas otvara

the McDonald's bag, and the smell of golden arches

vrećicu iz McDonaldsa, i taj miris

is wafting over the seat, you think,

prelazi preko vašeg sjedala, pomislite,

I can't do anything else with this 25 dollars for 16 hours.

ne mogu ništa učiniti sa ovih 25 dolara u narednih 16 sati.

I can't even set it on fire -- they took my cigarette lighter!

Ne mogu ih čak ni zapaliti - uzeli su mi upaljač!

Suddenly, 25 dollars for a Big Mac might be a good deal.

Odjednom, 25 dolara za Big Mac se čini dobrom pogodbom.

On the other hand, if you're visiting an underdeveloped country,

S druge strane, ako posjećujete nerazvijenu zemlju,

and 25 dollars buys you a gourmet meal, it's exorbitant for a Big Mac.

i za 25 dolara možete dobiti gurmansko jelo, to je daleko previše za Big Mac.

Why were you all sure that the answer to the question was no,

Zašto ste svi bili sigurni da je odgovor na pitanje "Ne",

before I'd even told you anything about the context?

čak i prije nego što sam vam rekao bilo što o kontekstu?

Because most of you compared the price of this Big Mac

Zato što je većina vas usporedila cijenu ovog Big Maca

to the price you're used to paying. Rather than asking,

sa cijenom na koju ste navikli. Rađe nego da pitate,

"What else can I do with my money," comparing this investment

"Što još mogu učiniti sa mojim novcem", uspoređujući ovo ulaganje

to other possible investments, you compared to the past.

sa drugim mogućim, vi ste usporedili sa prošlošću.

And this is a systematic error people make.

I ovo je sistematska pogreška koju ljudi čine.

What you knew is, you paid three dollars in the past; 25 is outrageous.

Znali ste da ste ranije plaćali 3 dolara; 25 je nečuveno skupo.

This is an error, and I can prove it to you by showing

Ovo je greška, i to vam mogu dokazati pokažem li vam

the kinds of irrationalities to which it leads.

razne iracionalnosti kojima ona vodi.

For example, this is, of course,

Na primjer, ovo je, naravno,

one of the most delicious tricks in marketing,

jedan od najslađih trikova u marketingu;

is to say something used to be higher,

reći da je nešto nekad bilo skuplje,

and suddenly it seems like a very good deal.

i odjednom izgleda kao vrlo dobra pogodba.

When people are asked about these two different jobs:

Kad se ljude pita za dva različita posla:

a job where you make 60K, then 50K, then 40K,

posao na kojem zarađujete 60 tisuća, pa 50, pa 40,

a job where you're getting a salary cut each year,

posao na kojem vam svake godine smanjuju plaću,

and one in which you're getting a salary increase,

i jedan na kojem dobijate povišicu,

people like the second job better than the first, despite the fact

ljudi više vole drugi posao od prvog, usprkos činjenici

they're all told they make much less money. Why?

da je svima rečeno da će zaraditi puno manje. Zašto?

Because they had the sense that declining wages are worse

Zato što smatraju da su smanjenja plaće lošija

than rising wages, even when the total amount of wages is higher

od povišica, iako je ukupna zarađena svota veća

in the declining period. Here's another nice example.

kod smanjujućih. Evo još jednog lijepog primjera.

Here's a $2,000 Hawaiian vacation package; it's now on sale for 1,600.

Aranžman za odmor na Havajima za 2000 dolara sad se prodaje za 1600.

Assuming you wanted to go to Hawaii, would you buy this package?

Pretpostavimo da ste htjeli ići na Havaje, biste li kupili ovaj aranžman?

Most people say they would. Here's a slightly different story:

Većina ljudi kaže da bi. Evo malo drugačije priče:

$2,000 Hawaiian vacation package is now on sale for 700 dollars,

Aranžman za odmor na Havajima, koji je koštao 2000 dolara sad se prodaje za 700,

so you decide to mull it over for a week.

pa odlučite razmisliti o tome kroz tjedan.

By the time you get to the ticket agency, the best fares are gone --

Kad svratite do agencije, akcija je završila

the package now costs 1,500. Would you buy it? Most people say, no.

aranžman sad stoji 1500. Bi ste li ga kupili? Većina ljudi bi rekla, ne.

Why? Because it used to cost 700, and there's no way I'm paying 1,500

Zašto? Zato što je koštao 700 i nema šanse da sad platim 1500

for something that was 700 last week.

za nešto što je prošlog tjedna bilo 700.

This tendency to compare to the past

Ova tendencija uspoređivanja sa prošlošću

is causing people to pass up the better deal. In other words,

čini da ljudi propuste bolju priliku. Drugim riječima,

a good deal that used to be a great deal is not nearly as good

dobra prilika koja je nekad bila odlična nije ni približno dobra

as an awful deal that was once a horrible deal.

kao loša prilika koja je nekad bila užasna.

Here's another example of how comparing to the past

Evo još jednog primjera kako nas uspoređivanje s prošlošću

can befuddle our decisions.

može zbuniti pri donošenju odluka.

Imagine that you're going to the theater.

Zamislite da idete u kazalište.

You're on your way to the theater.

Na putu ste do kazališta.

In your wallet you have a ticket, for which you paid 20 dollars.

U novčaniku imate ulaznicu koju ste platili 20 dolara.

You also have a 20-dollar bill.

Također imate i novčanicu od 20 dolara.

When you arrive at the theater,

Kada stignete do kazališta,

you discover that somewhere along the way you've lost the ticket.

otkrivate da ste putem izgubili ulaznicu.

Would you spend your remaining money on replacing it?

Bi ste li potrošili ostatak vašeg novca na novu ulaznicu?

Most people answer, no.

Većina ljudi odgovara da ne bi.

Now, let's just change one thing in this scenario.

Sad, promjenimo samo jednu stvar u scenariju.

You're on your way to the theater,

Na putu ste do kazališta,

and in your wallet you have two 20-dollar bills.

a u novčaniku imate dvije novčanice od 20 dolara.

When you arrive you discover you've lost one of them.

Kad ste stigli otkrivate da ste izgubili jednu od njih.

Would you spend your remaining 20 dollars on a ticket?

Bi ste li potrošili preostalih 20 dolara na ulaznicu?

Well, of course, I went to the theater to see the play.

Pa, naravno: Došao sam u kazalište da pogledam predstavu.

What does the loss of 20 dollars along the way have to do?

Kakve veze ima to što sam izgubio 20 dolara putem?

Now, just in case you're not getting it,

Sad, za slučaj da niste shvatili,

here's a schematic of what happened, OK?

evo shematskog prikaza događaja, OK?

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Along the way, you lost something.

Putem, nešto ste izgubili.

In both cases, it was a piece of paper.

U oba slučaja to je bio komadić papira.

In one case, it had a U.S. president on it; in the other case it didn't.

U jednom slučaju bio je sa slikom američkog predsjednika, a u drugom nije.

What the hell difference should it make?

Koja bi, kvragu, trebala biti razlika?

The difference is that when you lost the ticket you say to yourself,

Razlika je, kada ste izgubili kartu pomislili ste,

I'm not paying twice for the same thing.

neću platiti dva puta istu stvar.

You compare the cost of the play now -- 40 dollars --

Usporedili ste sadašnju cijenu predstave: 40 dolara

to the cost that it used to have -- 20 dollars -- and you say it's a bad deal.

s prijašnjom od 20 dolara i pomislili ste kako je to loša pogodba.

Comparing with the past causes many of the problems

Uspoređivanje sa prošlošću uzrokuje puno problema

that behavioral economists and psychologists identify

koje bihevioralni ekonomisti i psiholozi nalaze

in people's attempts to assign value.

u ljudskim pokušajima određenja vrijednosti.

But even when we compare with the possible, instead of the past,

Ali čak i kada uspoređujemo sa mogućim, umjesto sa prošlošću,

we still make certain kinds of mistakes.

i dalje činimo razne greške.

And I'm going to show you one or two of them.

Pokazati ću vam jednu ili dve.

One of the things we know about comparison:

Jedna od stvari koju znamo o uspoređivanju je;

that when we compare one thing to the other, it changes its value.

prilikom uspoređivanja dve stvari dolazi do promjene njihovih vrijednosti.

So in 1992, this fellow, George Bush, for those of us who were

Tako se u 1992. ovaj momak, George Bush, za nas koji smo bili,

kind of on the liberal side of the political spectrum,

tako reći na liberalnoj strani političkog spektra,

didn't seem like such a great guy.

nije činio pretjerano dobrim tipom.

Suddenly, we're almost longing for him to return.

Odjednom, gotovo da čeznemo za njegovim povratkom.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

The comparison changes how we evaluate him.

Usporedba mijenja način na koji ga vrednujemo.

Now, retailers knew this long before anybody else did, of course,

Sad, prodavači su ovo znali davno prije drugih, naravno,

and they use this wisdom to help you --

i oni koriste ovu mudrost kako bi vam pomogli --

spare you the undue burden of money.

da vas poštede nepravednog tereta novca.

And so a retailer, if you were to go into a wine shop

Na mjestu prodavača; ako bi ste ušli u vinariju

and you had to buy a bottle of wine,

i morali bi ste kupiti bocu vina,

and you see them here for eight, 27 and 33 dollars, what would you do?

a vidite ih ovdje za 8, 27 i 33 dolara, što bi ste učinili?

Most people don't want the most expensive,

Većina ljudi ne želi najskuplje,

they don't want the least expensive.

a ne želi ni najjeftinije.

So, they will opt for the item in the middle.

Pa će se odlučiti za stvar u sredini.

If you're a smart retailer, then, you will put a very expensive item

Ako ste pametan prodavač, onda ćete staviti jako skup artikal

that nobody will ever buy on the shelf,

na policu, koji nitko nikada neće kupiti,

because suddenly the $33 wine doesn't look as expensive in comparison.

jer odjednom se vino od 33 dolara ne čini tako skupim u usporedbi.

So I'm telling you something you already knew:

Dakle, govorim vam nešto što ste već znali:

namely, that comparison changes the value of things.

naime, da usporedba mijenja vrijednost stvari.

Here's why that's a problem:

Evo zašto je to problem:

the problem is that when you get that $33 bottle of wine home,

problem je što, kad donesete kući to vino od 33 dolara

it won't matter what it used to be sitting on the shelf next to.

neće biti važno pored čega se ono nalazilo na polici.

The comparisons we make when we are appraising value,

Uspoređivanja koja vršimo dok procjenjujemo vrijednost,

where we're trying to estimate how much we'll like things,

kada pokušavamo ocjeniti koliko će nam se stvari sviđati,

are not the same comparisons we'll be making when we consume them.

nisu ista uspoređivanja koja ćemo vršiti prilikom konzumacije istih.

This problem of shifting comparisons can bedevil

Ovaj problem promjenjivih usporedbi može osujetiti

our attempts to make rational decisions.

pokušaje donošenja racionalnih odluka.

Let me just give you an example.

Dati ću vam primjer.

I have to show you something from my own lab, so let me sneak this in.

Moram vam pokazati nešto iz vlastitog laboratorija; samo da provučem ovo.

These are subjects coming to an experiment to be asked

Ovo su ispitanici koji će u ogledu biti pitani

the simplest of all questions:

najjednostavnije pitanje:

How much will you enjoy eating potato chips one minute from now?

Koliko ćete uživati jedući čips, za jednu minutu od sada?

They're sitting in a room with potato chips in front of them.

Oni sjede u sobi a čips je ispred njih.

For some of the subjects, sitting in the far corner of a room

Kod nekih ispitanika, u udaljenom kutu sobe nalazi se

is a box of Godiva chocolates, and for others is a can of Spam.

kutija Godiva čokolada, a kod drugih konzerva mesnog doručka.

In fact, these items that are sitting in the room change

Zapravo, ove stvari koje se nalaze u sobi mijenjaju

how much the subjects think they're going to enjoy the potato chips.

koliko ispitanici misle da će uživati u čipsu.

Namely, those who are looking at Spam

Naime, oni koji gledaju u mesni doručak

think potato chips are going to be quite tasty;

misle da će čips biti baš ukusan;

those who are looking at Godiva chocolate

a oni koji gledaju Godiva čokolade

think they won't be nearly so tasty.

misle da neće biti ni približno ukusan.

Of course, what happens when they eat the potato chips?

Naravno, šta se desi kada pojedu čips?

Well, look, you didn't need a psychologist to tell you that

Pa, gledajte, ne treba vam psiholog da vam kaže da

when you have a mouthful of greasy, salty, crispy, delicious snacks,

kad su vam usta puna masne, slane, hrskave, ukusne zakuske,

what's sitting in the corner of the room

ono što se nalazi u kutu sobe

makes not a damn bit of difference to your gustatory experience.

baš nikako ne utječe na vaše gustatorno iskustvo.

Nonetheless, their predictions are perverted by a comparison

Svejedno, njihova predviđanja su iskrivljena usporedbom

that then does not carry through and change their experience.

koja ipak ne mijenja njihovo iskustvo.

You've all experienced this yourself, even if you've never come

Svi ste ovo i sami iskusili, čak i ako nikad niste došli

into our lab to eat potato chips. So here's a question:

pojesti čips u naš laboratorij, pa evo pitanja:

You want to buy a car stereo.

Želite kupiti auto-radio.

The dealer near your house sells this particular stereo for 200 dollars,

Trgovina pored vaše kuće prodaje radio koji želite za 200 dolara,

but if you drive across town, you can get it for 100 bucks.

ali ako bi ste se odvezli na drugu stranu grada, mogli bi ste ga kupiti za 100.

So would you drive to get 50 percent off, saving 100 dollars?

Dakle, bi ste li vozili za popust od 50% i uštedjeli 100 dolara?

Most people say they would.

Većina ljudi kaže da bi.

They can't imagine buying it for twice the price

Ne mogu zamisliti da ga kupe po duploj cijeni

when, with one trip across town, they can get it for half off.

kada ga, samo da se odvezu preko grada, mogu kupiti za duplo manje.

Now, let's imagine instead you wanted to buy a car that had a stereo,

Sad, zamislimo umjeto ovoga da želite kupiti auto koji ima radio,

and the dealer near your house had it for 31,000.

a trgovina pored vaše kuće ga prodaje za 31.000.

But if you drove across town, you could get it for 30,900.

Ali ako bi ste se odvezli preko grada, mogli bi ste ga kupiti za 30.900.

Would you drive to get it? At this point, 0.003 savings -- the 100 dollars.

Bi ste li vozili da ga kupite? Ovog puta, ušteda je 0.003 posto - 100 dolara.

Most people say, no, I'm going to schlep across town

Većina kaže da se ne bi vukla na drugu stranu grada

to save 100 bucks on the purchase of a car?

kako bi uštedila 100 dolara na kupnji automobila.

This kind of thinking drives economists crazy, and it should.

Ovakav način razmišljanja izluđuje ekonomiste, a i trebao bi.

Because this 100 dollars that you save -- hello! --

Ovih 100 dolara koje ste uštedjeli - haloo! -

doesn't know where it came from.

ne znaju odakle su došli.

It doesn't know what you saved it on.

Ne znaju na čemu ste ih uštedjeli.

When you go to buy groceries with it, it doesn't go,

Kad odete u dućan s njima ne kažu:

I'm the money saved on the car stereo, or,

ja sam novac ušteđen na auto-radiju, ili

I'm the dumb money saved on the car. It's money.

ja sam glupi novac ušteđen na autu. To je samo novac.

And if a drive across town is worth 100 bucks, it's worth 100 bucks

Ako je vožnja preko grada vrijedna 100 dolara, onda vrijedi 100 dolara

no matter what you're saving it on. People don't think that way.

bez obzira na čemu ste ih uštedjeli. Ali ljudi ne razmišljaju tako.

That's why they don't know whether their mutual fund manager

Zato ne znaju uzima li upravitelj njihovog fonda

is taking 0.1 percent or 0.15 percent of their investment,

0,1 posto, ili 0,15 posto od njihovih ulaganja,

but they clip coupons to save one dollar off of toothpaste.

ali zato skupljaju kupone kako bi uštedjeli par kuna na pasti za zube.

Now, you can see, this is the problem of shifting comparisons,

Sad, kako možete vidjeti, ovo je problem kod promjenjivih usporedbi,

because what you're doing is, you're comparing the 100 bucks

jer vi zapravo uspoređujete tih 100 dolara

to the purchase that you're making,

sa kupovinom koju obavljate,

but when you go to spend that money you won't be making that comparison.

ali kad budete trošili taj novac, nećete činiti tu usporedbu.

You've all had this experience.

Svi ste imali ovakvo iskustvo.

If you're an American, for example, you've probably traveled in France.

Ako ste Amerikanac, na primjer, vjerojatno ste putovali u Francusku.

And at some point you may have met a couple

Na putovanju ste možda upoznali par

from your own hometown, and you thought,

iz vašeg rodnog grada, i pomislili ste,

"Oh, my God, these people are so warm. They're so nice to me.

"Moj Bože, ovi ljudi su tako topli. Tako su dobri prema meni.

I mean, compared to all these people who hate me

Mislim, u usporedbi sa svim ovim ljudima koji me mrze

when I try to speak their language and hate me more when I don't,

kad pokušavam govoriti njihovim jezikom, a još i više kad ne pokušavam,

these people are just wonderful." And so you tour France with them,

ovi ljudi su stvarno divni." I tako proputujete Francuskom sa njima,

and then you get home and you invite them over for dinner,

a kad se vratite kući, pozovete ih na večeru,

and what do you find?

i šta otkrijete?

Compared to your regular friends,

U usporedbi sa vašim stalnim prijateljima,

they are boring and dull, right? Because in this new context,

ovi su dosadni i glupi! Zato što u ovom novom kontekstu,

the comparison is very, very different. In fact, you find yourself

usporedba je vrlo, vrlo drugačija. Zapravo, shvaćate da su

disliking them enough almost to qualify for French citizenship.

vam toliko mrski da bi ste se prijavili za francusko državljanstvo.

Now, you have exactly the same problem when you shop for a stereo.

Sad, isti problem postoji i kad kupujete muzički uređaj.

You go to the stereo store, you see two sets of speakers --

Odete u trgovinu i tamo vidite 2 para zvučnika -

these big, boxy, monoliths, and these little, sleek speakers,

ovi veliki, kutijasti monoliti i ovi mali, elegantni zvučnici.

and you play them, and you go, you know, I do hear a difference:

Slušate ih, i pomislite, znaš, stvarno se čuje razlika:

the big ones sound a little better.

Ovi veliki se čuju malo bolje.

And so you buy them, and you bring them home,

Pa ih i kupite, donesete kući i,

and you entirely violate the décor of your house.

potpuno poremetite unutrašnje uređenje.

And the problem, of course, is that this comparison you made in the store

A problem je, naravno, što je ta usporedba koju ste učinili u trgovini

is a comparison you'll never make again.

usporedba koju više nikada nećete učiniti.

What are the odds that years later you'll turn on the stereo and go,

Koji su izgledi da ćete godinama kasnije pustiti muziku i reći,

"Sounds so much better than those little ones,"

"Zvuče puno bolje od onih malih",

which you can't even remember hearing.

kojih se ni ne sjećate da ste čuli.

The problem of shifting comparisons is even more difficult

Problem promjenjivih usporedbi je još teži

when these choices are arrayed over time.

kada su odluke raspoređene kroz vrijeme.

People have a lot of trouble making decisions

Ljudi imaju puno problema donoseći odluke

about things that will happen at different points in time.

o stvarima koje će se dogoditi u različitim vremenima.

And what psychologists and behavioral economists have discovered

A psiholozi i bihevioralni ekonomisti su otkrili

is that by and large people use two simple rules.

da ljudi uvelike koriste dva jednostavna pravila.

So let me give you one very easy problem, a second very easy problem

Postaviti ću vam jedan vrlo lak problem, drugi vrlo lak problem

and then a third, hard, problem.

i treći, težak problem.

Here's the first easy problem:

Evo prvog lakog problema:

You can have 60 dollars now or 50 dollars now. Which would you prefer?

Možete sada dobiti 60 dolara ili 50 dolara, isto sada. Što bi ste izabrali?

This is what we call a one-item IQ test, OK?

Ovo nazivamo IQ testom s jednim pitanjem, OK?

All of us, I hope, prefer more money, and the reason is,

I svi smo, nadam se, odabrali više novca; iz razloga što

we believe more is better than less.

vjerujemo da je više bolje nego manje.

Here's the second problem:

Evo drugog problema:

You can have 60 dollars today or 60 dollars in a month. Which would you prefer?

Možete dobiti 60 dolara sada, ili 60 dolara za mjesec dana. Što bi ste izabrali?

Again, an easy decision,

Opet lagana odluka,

because we all know that now is better than later.

jer svi znamo da je prije bolje nego kasnije.

What's hard in our decision-making is when these two rules conflict.

Teško je donositi odluke kada su ova dva pravila u sukobu.

For example, when you're offered 50 dollars now or 60 dollars in a month.

Na primjer, kada vam se ponudi 50 dolara sada, ili 60 za jedan mjesec.

This typifies a lot of situations in life in which you will gain

Ovo je tipični primjer mnogih situacija u životu u kojima bi ste zaradili

by waiting, but you have to be patient.

čekanjem, ali bi ste morali biti strpljivi.

What do we know? What do people do in these kinds of situations?

Što mi znamo? Što ljudi čine u ovakvim situacijama?

Well, by and large people are enormously impatient.

Pa, ljudi su najčešće vrlo nestrpljivi.

That is, they require interest rates in the hundred

To jest, traže da kamatna stopa bude stotine

or thousands of percents in order to delay gratification

ili čak tisuće posto da odgode zadovoljenje

and wait until next month for the extra 10 dollars.

i pričekaju do sljedećeg mjeseca za tih dodatnih 10 dolara.

Maybe that isn't so remarkable, but what is remarkable is

Možda to i nije neka naročita stvar, ali je značajno

how easy it is to make this impatience go away by simply changing

kako ovo nestrpljenje brzo nestaje ako jednostavno promjenimo

when the delivery of these monetary units will happen.

vrijeme isporuke ovih monetarnih jedinica.

Imagine that you can have 50 dollars in a year -- that's 12 months --

Zamislite da možete dobiti 50 dolara za godinu dana - 12 mjeseci -

or 60 dollars in 13 months.

ili 60 dolara za 13 mjeseci.

What do we find now?

Što sada nalazimo?

People are gladly willing to wait: as long as they're waiting 12,

Ljudi će rado čekati: kada već čekaju 12 mjeseci,

they might as well wait 13.

mogli bi čekati i 13.

What makes this dynamic inconsistency happen?

Što je uzrok ovoj dinamičnoj nedosljednosti?

Comparison. Troubling comparison. Let me show you.

Usporedbe. Problematične usporedbe. Pokazati ću vam.

This is just a graph showing the results that I just suggested

Ovaj graf pokazuje rezultate koje vjerujem da bi smo dobili

you would show if I gave you time to respond, which is,

da sam vam ostavio dovoljno vremena za odgovaranje, to jest,

people find that the subjective value of 50 is higher

da ljudi smatraju da je subjektivna vrijednost od 50 veća

than the subjective value of 60 when they'll be delivered in now

od subjektivne vrijednosti 60, kada bi ih dobili sada,

or one month, respectively -- a 30-day delay --

odnosno za jedan mjesec -- sa odgodom od 30 dana.

but they show the reverse pattern when you push the entire decision

Ali pokazuje se obrnut obrazac kada se cijela odluka pomjeri

off into the future a year.

za godinu dana u budućnost.

Now, why in the world do you get this pattern of results?

Sad, zašto uopće dobijamo ovakav uzorak rezultata?

These guys can tell us.

Ovi dečki nam mogu reći.

What you see here are two lads,

Ovdje vidite dva dečka,

one of them larger than the other: the fireman and the fiddler.

jedan je veći od drugoga: vatrogasac i violinist.

They are going to recede towards the vanishing point in the horizon,

Oni će se postepeno primicati horizontu, sve dok ne nestanu,

and I want you to notice two things.

a ja želim da primjetite dvije stvari.

At no point will the fireman look taller than the fiddler. No point.

U nijednom trenutku vatrogasac se neće činiti nižim od violinista.

However, the difference between them seems to be getting smaller.

Ipak, čini se da se razlika među njima smanjuje.

First it's an inch in your view, then it's a quarter-inch,

Prvo vam se čini kao tri centimetra; zatim dva centimetra,

then a half-inch, and then finally they go off the edge of the earth.

i tako dok napokon ne padnu sa ruba Zemlje.

Here are the results of what I just showed you.

Evo rezultata ovoga što sam vam upravo pokazao.

This is the subjective height --

Ovo je subjektivna visina -

the height you saw of these guys at various points.

visina ove dvojice u raznim točkama.

And I want you to see that two things are true.

Želim da vidite kako su dvije stvari istinite.

One, the farther away they are, the smaller they look;

Prva, što su udaljeniji, to se čine manjima;

and two, the fireman is always bigger than the fiddler.

i druga, vatrogasac je uvijek veći od violinista.

But watch what happens when we make some of them disappear. Right.

Ali pogledajte što se događa kada maknemo neke od njih. Tako je.

At a very close distance, the fiddler looks taller than the fireman,

Sa male udaljenosti, violinist izgleda viši od vatrogasca,

but at a far distance

ali na većoj udaljenosti,

their normal, their true, relations are preserved.

njihov normalan, istinit odnos je očuvan.

As Plato said, what space is to size, time is to value.

Kako je rekao Platon, prostor je veličini isto što i vrijeme vrijednosti.

These are the results of the hard problem I gave you:

Ovo su rezultati teškog problema kojeg sam vam zadao:

60 now or 50 in a month?

60 sada ili 50 za jedan mjesec?

And these are subjective values,

A ovo su subjektivne vrijednosti,

and what you can see is, our two rules are preserved.

i možete vidjeti da su naša dva pravila očuvana.

People always think more is better than less:

Ljudi uvijek misle da je više bolje nego manje:

60 is always better than 50,

60 je uvijek bolje nego 50;

and they always think now is better than later:

i uvijek misle da je prije bolje nego kasnije:

the bars on this side are higher than the bars on this side.

stupci s ove strane su viši nego stupci s ove strane.

Watch what happens when we drop some out.

Gledajte što se događa kada izbacimo neke od njih.

Suddenly we have the dynamic inconsistency that puzzled us.

Odjednom imamo onu dinamičnu nedosljednost koja nas je bunila.

We have the tendency for people to go for 50 dollars now

Imamo trend u kojem ljudi uzimaju 50 dolara sada

over waiting a month, but not if that decision is far in the future.

rađe nego da čekaju mjesec dana, ali ne ako je odluka pomjerena u budućnost.

Notice something interesting that this implies -- namely, that

Primjetite zanimljivost na koju ovo ukazuje -- naime, kad

when people get to the future, they will change their minds.

se nađu u budućnosti, ljudi će se predomisliti.

That is, as that month 12 approaches, you will say,

To jest, kako se bude približavao 12. mjesec, reći ćete:

what was I thinking, waiting an extra month for 60 dollars?

o čemu sam razmišljao, da čekam još jedan mjesec za 60 dolara?

I'll take the 50 dollars now.

Uzeti ću ja tih 50 dolara sada.

Well, the question with which I'd like to end is this:

Dobro, pitanje s kojim bih želio završiti je slijedeće:

If we're so damn stupid, how did we get to the moon?

Ako smo tako prokleto glupi, kako smo došli do Mjeseca?

Because I could go on for about two hours with evidence

Jer, mogao bih nastaviti još dva sata izlažući dokaze

of people's inability to estimate odds and inability to estimate value.

o ljuskoj nesposobnosti procjene vjerojatnosti i nesposobnosti procjene vrijednosti.

The answer to this question, I think, is an answer you've already heard

Odgovor na ovo pitanje je, mislim, odgovor koji ste već čuli

in some of the talks, and I dare say you will hear again:

u nekim od razgovora, i usudim li se reći, kojeg ćete čuti ponovo:

namely, that our brains were evolved for a very different world

naime, naši mozgovi su evoluirani za vrlo različit svijet

than the one in which we are living.

od ovog u kojem živimo.

They were evolved for a world

Oni su razvijeni za svijet

in which people lived in very small groups,

u kojem ljudi žive u vrlo malim grupama,

rarely met anybody who was terribly different from themselves,

rijetko sreću nekoga tko se jako razlikuje od njih samih,

had rather short lives in which there were few choices

žive relativno kratke živote sa malo izbora

and the highest priority was to eat and mate today.

i, najveći problem je bio kako jesti i pariti se danas.

Bernoulli's gift, Bernoulli's little formula, allows us, it tells us

Bernoullijev dar, Bernoullijeva mala formula nam omogućuje, govori nam

how we should think in a world for which nature never designed us.

kako bi trebali razmišljati u svijetu za kojeg nas priroda nije dizajnirala.

That explains why we are so bad at using it, but it also explains

To objašnjava zašto je tako loše koristimo, ali također objašnjava

why it is so terribly important that we become good, fast.

zašto je strašno važno da postanemo dobri u tome, brzo.

We are the only species on this planet

Mi smo jedina vrsta na ovoj planeti

that has ever held its own fate in its hands.

koja je ikad držala svoju sudbinu u svojim rukama.

We have no significant predators,

Nemamo značajnih grabežljivaca,

we're the masters of our physical environment;

gospodari smo naše fizičke okoline;

the things that normally cause species to become extinct

stvari zbog kojih vrste ineča izumiru

are no longer any threat to us.

nama više nisu nikakva prijetnja.

The only thing -- the only thing -- that can destroy us and doom us

Jedina stvar - jedina stvar - koja nas može uništiti, doći glave

are our own decisions.

su naše vlastite odluke.

If we're not here in 10,000 years, it's going to be because

Ako za 10 000 godina više ne budemo ovdje, to će biti zato što

we could not take advantage of the gift given to us

nismo mogli iskoristiti dar koji nam je dao

by a young Dutch fellow in 1738,

mladi Nizozemski momak, 1738.;

because we underestimated the odds of our future pains

zato što smo potcjenili vjerojatnost budućih boli

and overestimated the value of our present pleasures.

i precjenili vrijednost trenutnih užitaka.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

Chris Anderson: That was remarkable.

Chris Anderson: To je bilo izvanredno.

We have time for some questions for Dan Gilbert. One and two.

Imamo vremena za nekoliko pitanja za Dana Gilberta. Jedan i dva.

Bill Lyell: Would you say that this mechanism

Bill Lyell: Bi ste li rekli da ovaj mehanizam

is in part how terrorism actually works to frighten us,

djelimično objašnjava kako nas terorizam zastrašuje,

and is there some way that we could counteract that?

i postoji li način da to suzbijemo?

Dan Gilbert: I actually was consulting recently

Dan Gilbert: Zapravo sam nedavno savjetovao

with the Department of Homeland Security, which generally believes

Službu za nacionalnu sigurnost, koja inače vjeruje

that American security dollars should go to making borders safer.

da bi novac koji Amerikanci daju za sigurnost trebao ići na osiguravanje granica.

I tried to point out to them that terrorism was a name

Pokušao sam im istaknuti da je terorizam naziv

based on people's psychological reaction to a set of events,

utemeljen na ljudskoj psihološkoj reakciji na niz događaja,

and that if they were concerned about terrorism they might ask

i da, ako bi bili zabrinuti o terorizmu mogli bi se zapitati

what causes terror and how can we stop people from being terrified,

što uzrokuje strahovanje i kako možemo učiniti da ljudi ne budu užasnuti,

rather than -- not rather than, but in addition to

rađe nego - ne rađe, nego i uz

stopping the atrocities that we're all concerned about.

zaustavljanje strahota o kojima svi brinemo.

Surely the kinds of play that at least American media give to --

Sigurno je način na koji, bar Američki mediji obrađuju -

and forgive me, but in raw numbers these are very tiny accidents.

i oprostite, ali u sirovim brojkama ovo su vrlo male nesreće.

We already know, for example, in the United States,

Već znamo, na primjer, da je u Sjedinjenim Državama

more people have died as a result of not taking airplanes --

više ljudi poginulo zbog nekorištenja aviona

because they were scared -- and driving on highways,

- jer su bili uplašeni - i vožnje po autocestama,

than were killed in 9/11. OK?

nego što ih je poginulo u 9/11. OK?

If I told you that there was a plague

Ako bih vam rekao da postoji kuga

that was going to kill 15,000 Americans next year,

koja će ubiti 15 000 Amerikanaca sljedeće godine,

you might be alarmed if you didn't find out it was the flu.

mogli bi ste se zabrinuti, ako ne bi ste znali da se radi o gripi.

These are small-scale accidents, and we should be wondering

Ovo su nesreće malog kalibra, i trebali bi smo se zapitati

whether they should get the kind of play,

trebaju li one dobijati ovakvu sliku,

the kind of coverage, that they do.

pokriće u medijima, kakvu inače dobijaju.

Surely that causes people to overestimate the likelihood

To je zasigurno uzrok ljudskom precjenjivanju vjerojatnoće

that they'll be hurt in these various ways,

da će biti povrijeđeni na ove razne načine,

and gives power to the very people who want to frighten us.

i daje moć baš onim ljudima koji nas žele zastrašiti.

CA: Dan, I'd like to hear more on this. So, you're saying

CA: Dan, htio bih čuti više o ovome. Dakle, vi kažete

that our response to terror is, I mean, it's a form of mental bug?

da je naša reakcija na užas, mislim, oblik mentalnog "buga"?

Talk more about it.

Pričajte više o tome.

DG: It's out-sized. I mean, look.

Pretjerano je. Mislim, gledajte.

If Australia disappears tomorrow,

Ako Australija sutra nestane,

terror is probably the right response.

užas je vjerovatno prava reakcija.

That's an awful large lot of very nice people. On the other hand,

To je jako velika hrpa jako dobrih ljudi. S druge strane,

when a bus blows up and 30 people are killed,

kad eksplodira autobus i 30 ljudi bude ubijeno,

more people than that were killed

više ljudi od toga je ubijeno

by not using their seatbelts in the same country.

zbog nekorištenja pojaseva za vezanje u istoj državi.

Is terror the right response?

Je li užasnutost prava reakcija?

CA: What causes the bug? Is it the drama of the event --

CA: Što uzrokuje "bug"? Je li drama povezana s događajem -

that it's so spectacular?

što ga čini tako spektakularnim?

Is it the fact that it's an intentional attack by, quote, outsiders?

Ili je do činjenice da se radi o namjernom napadu od strane, citiram, stranaca?

What is it?

Koje je?

DG: Yes. It's a number of things, and you hit on several of them.

DG: Da. Radi se o više stvari, i pogodili ste ih nekoliko.

First, it's a human agent trying to kill us --

Prvo, ljudi djeluju na način da nas žele ubiti -

it's not a tree falling on us by accident.

to nije drvo koje bi slučajno palo na nas.

Second, these are enemies who may want to strike and hurt us again.

Drugo, ovo su neprijatelji koji bi nas možda ponovo željeli napasti i povrijediti.

People are being killed for no reason instead of good reason --

Ljudi ubijaju bez razloga, umjesto s dobrim razlogom -

as if there's good reason, but sometimes people think there are.

kao da uopće postoje dobri razlozi, ali ljudi ponekad misle da postoje.

So there are a number of things that together

Dakle, postoji nekoliko stvari koje zajedno

make this seem like a fantastic event, but let's not play down

čine ovo čudnim događajem, ali nemojmo umanjivati

the fact that newspapers sell when people see something in it

činjenicu da se novine prodaju kada ljudi vide u njima nešto

they want to read. So there's a large role here played by the media,

što žele pročitati. Ovdje postoji velika uloga koju igraju mediji,

who want these things to be

koji žele da stvari budu

as spectacular as they possibly can.

što je spektakularnije moguće.

CA: I mean, what would it take to persuade our culture to downplay it?

CA: Mislim, što bi moglo uvjeriti našu kulturu da daje manje značaja tome?

DG: Well, go to Israel. You know,

DG: Pa, odite u Izrael. Znate,

go to Israel. And a mall blows up,

odite u Izrael. Tamo raznesu trgovački centar,

and then everybody's unhappy about it, and an hour-and-a-half later --

i svi su nezadovoljni zbog toga, a sat i po kasnije -

at least when I was there, and I was 150 feet from the mall

bar kada sam ja bio tamo, i bio sam 50 metara od tog centra

when it blew up -- I went back to my hotel

kada je eksplodirao - vratio sam se u hotel

and the wedding that was planned was still going on.

a vjenčanje koje je bilo zakazano je i dalje trajalo.

And as the Israeli mother said,

A kako je rekla Izraelska majka,

she said, "We never let them win by stopping weddings."

rekla je, "Nikad im ne damo da pobjede zaustavljanjem vjenčanja."

I mean, this is a society that has learned --

Mislim, to je društvo koje je naučilo -

and there are others too -- that has learned to live

a postoje i druga - naučilo živjeti

with a certain amount of terrorism and not be quite as upset by it,

sa određenom količinom terorizma, i koji nisu toliko uznemireni time kao,

shall I say, as those of us who have not had many terror attacks.

rekao bih, kao oni od nas koji nisu doživjeli puno terorističkih napada.

CA: But is there a rational fear that actually,

CA: Ali postoji li racionalni strah da je zapravo,

the reason we're frightened about this is because we think that

razlog što smo toliko preplašeni ovime, to što mislimo da

the Big One is to come?

će se tek dogoditi Veliki Napad?

DG: Yes, of course. So, if we knew that this was the worst attack

DG: Da, naravno. Pa, ako bi znali da je neki napad bio najgori koji

there would ever be, there might be more and more buses of 30 people --

će ikada biti, moglo bi biti sve više autobusa sa 30 ljudi --

we would probably not be nearly so frightened.

vjerojatno se ne bi ni približno bojali.

I don't want to say -- please, I'm going to get quoted somewhere

Ne želim reći - molim vas, negdje će me citirati

as saying, "Terrorism is fine and we shouldn't be so distressed."

kako govorim, "Terorizam je u redu, i ne bi se trebali toliko uznemiravati."

That's not my point at all.

To uopće nije što želim reći.

What I'm saying is that, surely, rationally,

Što želim reći je da bi, sigurno i racionalno,

our distress about things that happen, about threats,

naša uznemirenost stvarima koje se događaju, zbog prijetnji,

should be roughly proportional to the size of those threats

trebala biti grubo proporcionalna veličini tih prijetnji

and threats to come.

i budućih prijetnji.

I think in the case of terrorism, it isn't.

Mislim da u slučaju terorizma, ona nije.

And many of the things we've heard about from our speakers today --

Od puno stvari o kojima smo slušali kod naših govornika danas -

how many people do you know got up and said,

koliko ljudi znate da su ustali i rekli,

Poverty! I can't believe what poverty is doing to us.

Siromaštvo! Ne mogu vjerovati što nam siromaštvo radi.

People get up in the morning; they don't care about poverty.

Ljudi se ustaju ujutro; ne zanima ih siromaštvo.

It's not making headlines, it's not making news, it's not flashy.

Ono ne dolazi na naslovnice; nema ga u vijestima, ne privlači pažnju.

There are no guns going off.

Ne puca se puškama.

I mean, if you had to solve one of these problems, Chris,

Mislim, kada bi ste morali riješiti jedan od ovih problema, Chris,

which would you solve? Terrorism or poverty?

koji bi ste riješili? Terorizam ili siromaštvo?

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

That's a tough one.

Teško pitanje.

CA: There's no question.

CA: Odgovor je jasan.

Poverty, by an order of magnitude, a huge order of magnitude,

Siromaštvo je važnije, za veliki red veličine,

unless someone can show that there's, you know,

osim ako nam netko ne pokaže

terrorists with a nuke are really likely to come.

da su teroristi sa nuklearnom bombom vrlo blizu.

The latest I've read, seen, thought

U zadnjemu što sam pročitao, vidio, misli

is that it's incredibly hard for them to do that.

se da je nevjerojatno teško za njih uraditi tako nešto.

If that turns out to be wrong, we all look silly,

Ako to ispadne pogrešno, svi ćemo izgledati smiješno,

but with poverty it's a bit --

ali sa siromaštvom je malo -

DG: Even if that were true, still more people die from poverty.

DG: Čak i ako je to istina, svejedno više ljudi umire od siromaštva.

CA: We've evolved to get all excited

CA: Evoluirali smo tako da se uzbuđujemo

about these dramatic attacks. Is that because in the past,

oko tih dramatičnih napada. Je li to zato što u prošlosti,

in the ancient past, we just didn't understand things like disease

u davnoj prošlosti, jednostavno nismo razumijeli stvari poput bolesti

and systems that cause poverty and so forth,

i sistema koji uzrokuju siromaštvo i tako dalje,

and so it made no sense for us as a species to put any energy

pa nije imalo smisla za nas kao vrstu, da ulažemo bilo kakvu energiju

into worrying about those things?

u brigu oko takvih stvari?

People died; so be it.

Ljudi su umirali; pa neka.

But if you got attacked, that was something you could do something about.

Ali ako vas napadnu, to je nešto oko čega bi ste mogli učiniti nešto,

And so we evolved these responses.

pa smo tako razvili ovakve reakcije.

Is that what happened?

Je li se to dogodilo?

DG: Well, you know, the people who are most skeptical

DG: Pa, znate, ljudi koji su najskeptičniji

about leaping to evolutionary explanations for everything

oko olakog objašnjavanja svega evolucijom

are the evolutionary psychologists themselves.

su sami evolucionarni psiholozi.

My guess is that there's nothing quite that specific

Rekao bih da ne postoji nešto baš toliko specifično

in our evolutionary past. But rather, if you're looking for

u našoj evolutivnoj prošlosti. Nego rađe, ako tražite

an evolutionary explanation, you might say

evolucionističko objašnjenje, mogli bi ste reći

that most organisms are neo-phobic -- that is, they're a little scared

da je većina organizama novo-fobična - tj. da se pomalo boje

of stuff that's new and different.

stvari koje su nove i različite.

And there's a good reason to be,

I postoji dobar razlog da se boje

because old stuff didn't eat you. Right?

jer, stare stvari vas nisu pojele. Šta ne?

Any animal you see that you've seen before is less likely

Svaka životinja koju vidite a već ste ju prije vidjeli je manje vjerojatno

to be a predator than one that you've never seen before.

grabežljivac od neke koju nikad prije niste vidjeli.

So, you know, when a school bus is blown up and we've never seen this before,

Tako, znate, kada školski autobus bude raznesen, i to nikada ranije nismo vidjeli,

our general tendency is to orient towards

naša je generalna tendencija orijentirati se prema

that which is new and novel is activated.

onome što je novo i novina je aktivirana.

I don't think it's quite as specific a mechanism

Ne mislim da je to baš tako specifičan mehanizam

as the one you alluded to, but maybe a more fundamental one underlying it.

kao onaj na koji ste aludirali, nego možda jedan osnovniji koji leži iza toga.

Jay Walker: You know, economists love to talk about

Jay Walker: Znate, ekonomisti vole govoriti o¼

the stupidity of people who buy lottery tickets. But I suspect

gluposti ljudi koji kupuju listiće za loto. Ali čini mi se da

you're making the exact same error you're accusing those people of,

činite točno istu grešku za koju optužujete ljude,

which is the error of value.

a to je greška vrijednosti.

I know, because I've interviewed

Ja znam, jer sam intervjuirao

about 1,000 lottery buyers over the years.

oko 1000 kupaca listoća za loto kroz godine.

It turns out that the value of buying a lottery ticket is not winning.

Ispada da vrijednost kupovine listića nije u pobijedi.

That's what you think it is. All right?

Vi mislite da je. Dobro?

The average lottery buyer buys about 150 tickets a year,

Prosječan igrač lota kupi oko 150 listića godišnje,

so the buyer knows full well that he or she is going to lose,

i kupac jako dobro zna da će, on ili ona, izgubiti,

and yet she buys 150 tickets a year. Why is that?

a svejedno kupi 150 listića godišnje. Zašto?

It's not because she is stupid or he is stupid.

To nije zato što je on ili ona glup ili glupa.

It's because the anticipation of possibly winning

To je zato jer iščekivanje moguće pobjede

releases serotonin in the brain, and actually provides a good feeling

oslobađa serotonin u mozgu, i zapravo ostvaruje dobar osjećaj

until the drawing indicates you've lost.

sve dok izvlačenje ne pokaže da ste izgubili.

Or, to put it another way, for the dollar investment,

Ili, drugim riječima, za ulog od jednog dolara,

you can have a much better feeling than flushing the money

možete imati puno bolji osjećaj, od bacanja novca

down the toilet, which you cannot have a good feeling from.

u WC, što vam ne može dati dobar osjećaj.

Now, economists tend to --

Sad, ekonomisti inače -

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

-- economists tend to view the world

ekonomisti inače gledaju svijet

through their own lenses, which is:

kroz vlastite leće, koje kažu:

this is just a bunch of stupid people.

ovo je samo hrpa glupih ljudi.

And as a result, many people look at economists as stupid people.

Zbog toga puno ljudi gleda na ekonomiste kao glupe ljude.

And so fundamentally, the reason we got to the moon is,

Pa u stvari, razlog zbog kojeg smo došli do mjeseca je

we didn't listen to the economists. Thank you very much.

što nismo slušali ekonomiste. Hvala vam puno.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

DG: Well, no, it's a great point. It remains to be seen

DG: Pa, ne, odlična poanta. Ostaje da se vidi

whether the joy of anticipation is exactly equaled

je li radost očekivanja točno jednaka

by the amount of disappointment after the lottery. Because remember,

količini razočaranja nakon završenog kruga lota. Jer, sjetite se,

people who didn't buy tickets don't feel awful the next day either,

ljudi koji nisu kupili listić se drugoga dana ne osjećaju užasno,

even though they don't feel great during the drawing.

ali se ni ne osjećaju dobro tokom izvlačenja.

I would disagree that people know they're not going to win.

Ne bih se složio s tim da ljudi znaju da neće pobijediti.

I think they think it's unlikely, but it could happen,

Mislim da misle da nije vjerojatno, ali da se može desiti,

which is why they prefer that to the flushing.

i zato im je to draže od bacanja novca u WC.

But certainly I see your point: that there can be

Ali svakako shvaćam vašu poantu: da može postojati

some utility to buying a lottery ticket other than winning.

drugi razlog kupovine listića, od pobjede.

Now, I think there's many good reasons not to listen to economists.

Sad, mislim da postoji puno dobrih razloga za neslušanje ekonomista.

That isn't one of them, for me, but there's many others.

To za mene nije jedan od njih, ali postoje mnogi drugi.

CA: Last question.

CA: Zadnje pitanje.

Aubrey de Grey: My name's Aubrey de Grey, from Cambridge.

Aubrey de Grey: Moje ime je Aubrey de Grey, iz Cambridgea.

I work on the thing that kills more people than anything else kills --

Ja radim na stvari koja ubije više ljudi od bilo čega drugog --

I work on aging -- and I'm interested in doing something about it,

radim na starenju - i zanima me učiniti nešto oko toga,

as we'll all hear tomorrow.

kako ćemo svi sutra čuti.

I very much resonate with what you're saying,

Vrlo dobro shvaćam to što govorite,

because it seems to me that the problem

jer, meni se čini da je problem

with getting people interested in doing anything about aging

kod poticanja interesa kod ljudi da učine nešto oko starenja,

is that by the time aging is about to kill you it looks like cancer

jer kad se čini da će nas starenje ubiti, ono izgleda kao rak

or heart disease or whatever. Do you have any advice?

ili srčana bolest, ili šta god. Imate li kakav savjet?

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

DG: For you or for them?

DG: Za Vas ili za njih?

AdG: In persuading them.

AdG: U uvjeravanju njih.

DG: Ah, for you in persuading them.

DG: A, za Vas da uvjerite njih.

Well, it's notoriously difficult to get people to be farsighted.

Pa, posebno je teško natjerati ljude da gledaju unaprijed.

But one thing that psychologists have tried that seems to work

Ali jedna stvar koju su psiholozi probali i koja, čini se, radi

is to get people to imagine the future more vividly.

je da natjeraju ljude da zamisle budućnost življe.

One of the problems with making decisions about the far future

Jedan od problema pri donošenju odluka o dalekoj budućnosti

and the near future is that we imagine the near future

i bližoj budućnosti je taj da bližu budućnost zamišljamo

much more vividly than the far future.

puno življe nego daleku budućnost.

To the extent that you can equalize the amount of detail

Toliko da ako možete izjednačiti količinu detalja

that people put into the mental representations

koju ljudi stavljaju u mentalne predstave

of near and far future, people begin to make decisions

bliže i dalje budućnosti, ljudi počnu donositi odluke

about the two in the same way.

o dvama, na jednak način.

So, would you like to have an extra 100,000 dollars when you're 65

Pa, bi ste li voljeli dobiti 100 000 dolara kad napunite 65

is a question that's very different than,

je pitanje vrlo različito od,

imagine who you'll be when you're 65: will you be living,

zamislite kakvi ćete biti sa 65; hoćete li biti živi,

what will you look like, how much hair will you have,

kako ćete izgledati, koliko kose ćete imati,

who will you be living with.

s kim ćete živjeti.

Once we have all the details of that imaginary scenario,

Jednom kad posjedujemo sve detalje zamišljenog scenarija,

suddenly we feel like it might be important to save

učini nam se da bi moglo biti važno štedjeti,

so that that guy has a little retirement money.

pa da taj u budućnosti ima malo novca za mirovinu.

But these are tricks around the margins.

Ali ovo su pomalo varajući trikovi.

I think in general you're battling a very fundamental human tendency,

Mislim da se, generalno, borimo sa vrlo općeljudskom tendencijom,

which is to say, "I'm here today,

koja je; reći: "Danas sam ovdje,

and so now is more important than later."

pa je 'sada' važnije od 'kasnijeg'."

CA: Dan, thank you. Members of the audience,

CA: Dan, hvala vam. Članovi publike,

that was a fantastic session. Thank you.

ovo je bila fantastična sesija. Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)