Why our IQ levels are higher than our grandparents' | James Flynn

Prevodilac: Anca Dimovska Lektor: Ivana Korom

We are going to take a quick voyage

Poći ćemo na kratko putovanje

over the cognitive history of the 20th century,

kroz kognitivnu istoriju 20. veka,

because during that century,

jer tokom tog veka,

our minds have altered dramatically.

naši umovi su se zapanjujuće menjali.

As you all know, the cars that people drove in 1900

Kao što znate, kola koja su ljudi vozili 1900.

have altered because the roads are better

su se menjala jer su putevi bolji,

and because of technology.

a i zbog tehnologije.

And our minds have altered, too.

I naš um se takođe menjao.

We've gone from people who confronted a concrete world

Od ljudi koji su se suočavali sa opipljivim svetom

and analyzed that world primarily in terms

i analizirali taj svet u smislu

of how much it would benefit them

koliko od njega imaju koristi

to people who confront a very complex world,

do ljudi koji se suočavaju sa veoma kompleksnim svetom,

and it's a world where we've had to develop

a to je svet u kome smo morali da razvijemo

new mental habits, new habits of mind.

nove mentalne navike, nove navike uma.

And these include things like

A to uključuje stvari poput

clothing that concrete world with classification,

oblačenja tog sveta u klasifikaciju,

introducing abstractions that we try to make

uvođenja apstrakcije koje pokušavamo da učinimo

logically consistent,

logičnim,

and also taking the hypothetical seriously,

i toga da hipotetično shvatamo ozbiljno,

that is, wondering about what might have been

to jest, razmišljamo o onome što je moglo da bude,

rather than what is.

pre nego o onome što jeste.

Now, this dramatic change was drawn to my attention

Ova dramatična promena je privukla moju pažnju

through massive I.Q. gains over time,

kroz masivan porast kvocijenta inteligencije tokom vremena,

and these have been truly massive.

koji je zaista masivan porast.

That is, we don't just get a few more questions right

To jest, ne rešavamo tačno samo nekoliko dodatnih pitanja

on I.Q. tests.

na testu inteligencije.

We get far more questions right on I.Q. tests

Odgovorimo tačno na mnogo više pitanja

than each succeeding generation

od svake sledeće generacije,

back to the time that they were invented.

sve do vremena kad su testovi izmišljeni.

Indeed, if you score the people a century ago

Ako merite KI ljudi od pre jednog veka

against modern norms,

po savremenim normama

they would have an average I.Q. of 70.

oni bi imali prosečan KI 70.

If you score us against their norms,

Ako nas merimo po njihovim normama,

we would have an average I.Q. of 130.

mi bismo imali 130.

Now this has raised all sorts of questions.

Ovo donosi mnoga pitanja.

Were our immediate ancestors

Da li su naši bliski preci bili

on the verge of mental retardation?

na ivici mentalne retardiranosti?

Because 70 is normally the score for mental retardation.

Jer je 70 obično rezultat za mentalnu retardaciju.

Or are we on the verge of all being gifted?

Ili smo svi mi maltene nadareni?

Because 130 is the cutting line for giftedness.

Jer je 130 granica za nadarenost.

Now I'm going to try and argue for a third alternative

Ja ću sad probati da obrazložim i treći izbor

that's much more illuminating than either of those,

koji više rasvetljava od druga dva,

and to put this into perspective,

i da bismo ovo shvatili,

let's imagine that a Martian came down to Earth

hajde da zamislimo da je Marsovac došao na Zemlju

and found a ruined civilization.

i našao uništenu civilizaciju.

And this Martian was an archaeologist,

A ovaj Marsovac je bio arheolog,

and they found scores, target scores,

i našao je bodove sa meta,

that people had used for shooting.

koje su ljudi koristili za gađanje.

And first they looked at 1865,

Prvo su pogledali 1865. god.

and they found that in a minute,

i videli da je u minuti,

people had only put one bullet in the bullseye.

ispaljivan jedan metak u centar.

And then they found, in 1898,

Onda su našli da je u 1898.

that they'd put about five bullets in the bullseye in a minute.

bilo 5 metaka u centru u minutu.

And then about 1918 they put a hundred bullets in the bullseye.

A u 1918. su gađali sto metaka u centar.

And initially, that archaeologist would be baffled.

Najpre bi taj arheolog bio zbunjen.

They would say, look, these tests were designed

Rekao bi, vidite, ovi testovi su napravljeni tako

to find out how much people were steady of hand,

da se sazna koliko je ljudima bila mirna ruka,

how keen their eyesight was,

koliko im je bio oštar vid,

whether they had control of their weapon.

da li su imali kontrolu nad svojim oružjem.

How could these performances have escalated

Kako su ove osobine mogle da se poboljšaju

to this enormous degree?

u tolikoj meri?

Well we now know, of course, the answer.

Mi sada, naravno, znamo odgovor.

If that Martian looked at battlefields,

Da je taj Marsovac pogledao na bojna polja,

they would find that people had only muskets

saznao bi da su ljudi imali samo muskete

at the time of the Civil War

u doba građanskog rata,

and that they had repeating rifles

a da su imali repetirke

at the time of the Spanish-American War,

u doba Špansko-američkog rata,

and then they had machine guns

a da su imali mašinke

by the time of World War I.

u doba Prvog svetskog rata.

And, in other words, it was the equipment

I drugim rečima,

that was in the hands of the average soldier

oprema u rukama prosečnog vojnika

that was responsible, not greater keenness of eye

je bila odgovorna za rezultat, ne bolja oštrina oka

or steadiness of hand.

ili mirnoća ruke.

Now what we have to imagine is the mental artillery

Ono što sada treba da zamislimo je mentalna artiljerija

that we have picked up over those hundred years,

koju smo pokupili tokom tih sto godina,

and I think again that another thinker will help us here,

i mislim da će nam jedan mislilac u tome pomoći,

and that's Luria.

a to je Lurija.

Luria looked at people

Lurija je posmatrao ljude

just before they entered the scientific age,

neposredno pre Savremenog doba,

and he found that these people

i našao je da su ovi ljudi

were resistant to classifying the concrete world.

odbijali da klasifikuju opipljiv svet.

They wanted to break it up

Hteli su da ga raščlane

into little bits that they could use.

na sitne komade koje su mogli da koriste.

He found that they were resistant

Našao je da su odbijali

to deducing the hypothetical,

da zaključuju šta je hipotetično,

to speculating about what might be,

da razmišljaju o onome što bi moglo da bude

and he found finally that they didn't deal well

i na kraju je uvideo da se nisu dobro nosili

with abstractions or using logic on those abstractions.

sa apstraktnim pojmovima ili koristili logiku za rešavanje apstrakcija.

Now let me give you a sample of some of his interviews.

Sad ću vam dati neke primere njegovih razgovora.

He talked to the head man of a person

On je pričao sa vođom osoblja

in rural Russia.

u ruralnoj Rusiji.

They'd only had, as people had in 1900,

Oni su imali, kao što je to bilo normalno 1900.

about four years of schooling.

oko 4 godine škole.

And he asked that particular person,

Pitao bi tu osobu,

what do crows and fish have in common?

šta zajedničko imaju vrane i ribe?

And the fellow said, "Absolutely nothing.

I čovek bi odgovorio: "Nemaju ništa zajedničko.

You know, I can eat a fish. I can't eat a crow.

Znate, ja mogu da jedem ribu, vranu ne mogu da jedem.

A crow can peck at a fish.

Vrana može da kljuca ribu.

A fish can't do anything to a crow."

Riba ne može ništa vrani."

And Luria said, "But aren't they both animals?"

A Lurija bi upitao: "Zar nisu i jedno i drugo životinje"?

And he said, "Of course not.

"Naravno da nisu", čovek bi odgovorio.

One's a fish.

"Jedna je riba.

The other is a bird."

Druga je ptica."

And he was interested, effectively,

I zanimalo ga je

in what he could do with those concrete objects.

šta se može učiniti sa tim opipljivm stvarima.

And then Luria went to another person,

Onda je Lurija našao drugog čoveka,

and he said to them,

i rekao mu:

"There are no camels in Germany.

"U Nemačkoj nema kamila,

Hamburg is a city in Germany.

Hamburg je grad u Nemačkoj.

Are there camels in Hamburg?"

Ima li kamila u Hamburgu"?

And the fellow said,

I čovek bi odgovorio,

"Well, if it's large enough, there ought to be camels there."

"Pa, ako je dovoljno veliki, trebalo bi da tamo ima kamila".

And Luria said, "But what do my words imply?"

Lurija bi ga upitao: "A šta ti moje reči nagoveštavaju"?

And he said, "Well, maybe it's a small village,

On bi odgovorio: "Pa, možda je to malo selo,

and there's no room for camels."

i nema mesta za kamile."

In other words, he was unwilling to treat this

Drugim rečima, nije želeo da na ovo gleda

as anything but a concrete problem,

kao ni na šta drugo do opipljiv problem

and he was used to camels being in villages,

i navikao je da su kamile u selima

and he was quite unable to use the hypothetical,

i nije bio sposoban da upotrebi nešto hipotetično,

to ask himself what if there were no camels in Germany.

da se zapita šta ako nema kamila u Nemačkoj.

A third interview was conducted

Treći intervju je bio

with someone about the North Pole.

sa osobom o Severnom polu.

And Luria said, "At the North Pole, there is always snow.

I Lurija je rekao: "Na Severnom polu je uvek sneg.

Wherever there is always snow, the bears are white.

Gde god uvek ima snega, medvedi su beli.

What color are the bears at the North Pole?"

Koje boje su medvedi na Severnom polu"?

And the response was, "Such a thing

A odgovor je bio: "Takva stvar

is to be settled by testimony.

treba da se reši uz dokaz.

If a wise person came from the North Pole

Ako bi mudrac došao sa Severnog pola

and told me the bears were white,

i rekao mi da su medvedi beli,

I might believe him,

možda bih mu poverovao,

but every bear that I have seen is a brown bear."

ali svaki medved kog sam ja video je smeđe boje (mrki medved)".

Now you see again, this person has rejected

Tako da vidite, i ova osoba je takođe odbila

going beyond the concrete world

da razmišlja ispod opipljivog sveta

and analyzing it through everyday experience,

i da nešto analizira kroz svakodnevno iskustvo,

and it was important to that person

a toj osobi je bilo važno

what color bears were --

koje su boje medvedi -

that is, they had to hunt bears.

to jest, morala je da lovi medvede.

They weren't willing to engage in this.

Nisu bili voljni da se unesu u to razmišljanje.

One of them said to Luria,

Jedan od njih je rekao Luriji

"How can we solve things that aren't real problems?

"Kako možemo da rešimo stvari koje nisu pravi problemi?

None of these problems are real.

Nijedan od ovih problema nije pravi.

How can we address them?"

Kako da se odnosimo prema njima?"

Now, these three categories --

Sada, ove tri kategorije -

classification,

klasifikacija,

using logic on abstractions,

korišćenje logike u apstraktnim pojmovima,

taking the hypothetical seriously --

shvatati hipotetično ozbiljno -

how much difference do they make in the real world

kakvu razliku one prave u stvarnom svetu,

beyond the testing room?

izvan sobe za testiranje?

And let me give you a few illustrations.

I daću vam još nekoliko ilustracija.

First, almost all of us today get a high school diploma.

Prvo, skoro svi danas dobiju diplomu srednje škole.

That is, we've gone from four to eight years of education

To jest, sa 4 smo prešli na 8 godina školovanja,

to 12 years of formal education,

na 12 godina formalnog obrazovanja,

and 52 percent of Americans

i 52% Amerikanaca

have actually experienced some type of tertiary education.

je imalo neku vrstu tercijarnog obrazovanja.

Now, not only do we have much more education,

Ne samo da danas imamo više obrazovanja,

and much of that education is scientific,

čiji je veliki deo naučni,

and you can't do science without classifying the world.

a naukom ne možete da se bavite a da ne klasifikujete svet.

You can't do science without proposing hypotheses.

Ne možete da se bavite naukom a da ne ponudite hipotezu.

You can't do science without making it logically consistent.

Ne možete da se bavite naukom a da je ne učinite logičnom.

And even down in grade school, things have changed.

A stvari su se promenile, čak i u osnovnoj školi.

In 1910, they looked at the examinations

Kad se gledaju ispiti iz 1910. godine

that the state of Ohio gave to 14-year-olds,

koje je država Ohajo davala četrnaestogodišnjacima,

and they found that they were all

nađeno je da su to ispiti

for socially valued concrete information.

za opipljive podatke koji su važni u društvu.

They were things like,

Bilo je pitanja kao što su:

what are the capitals of the 44 or 45 states

koji su glavni gradovi 44 ili 45 država

that existed at that time?

koje su postojale u to vreme?

When they looked at the exams

Kad se gledaju ispiti

that the state of Ohio gave in 1990,

u državi Ohajo iz 1990.

they were all about abstractions.

svi su o apstraktnim pojmovima.

They were things like,

Bilo je pitanja kao što je:

why is the largest city of a state rarely the capital?

zašto je najveći grad u državi retko i glavni grad?

And you were supposed to think, well,

I trebalo je da razmišljaš

the state legislature was rural-controlled,

da je državno zakonodavstvo kontrolisano ruralnom sredinom

and they hated the big city,

i da su mrzeli velike gradove,

so rather than putting the capital in a big city,

pa umesto da stave da je glavni grad u velikom gradu,

they put it in a county seat.

on je u sedištu okruga.

They put it in Albany rather than New York.

Glavni grad je postavljen u Olbani, a ne Njujork.

They put it in Harrisburg rather than Philadelphia.

U Harisburg, a ne u Filadelfiju.

And so forth.

I tako dalje.

So the tenor of education has changed.

Tako da se pravac obrazovanja promenio.

We are educating people to take the hypothetical seriously,

Učimo ljude da hipotetično shvataju ozbiljno,

to use abstractions, and to link them logically.

da koriste apstraktno i da ih logično povezuju.

What about employment?

Šta je sa zapošljavanjem?

Well, in 1900, three percent of Americans

Pa, 1900. 3% Amerikanaca

practiced professions that were cognitively demanding.

imalo je profesije koje su bile kognitivno zahtevne.

Only three percent were lawyers or doctors or teachers.

Samo 3% su bili advokati ili doktori ili predavači.

Today, 35 percent of Americans

Danas se 35% Amerikanaca

practice cognitively demanding professions,

bavi kognitivno zahtevnim profesijama,

not only to the professions proper like lawyer

ne samo profesijama kao što je advokat,

or doctor or scientist or lecturer,

doktor, naučnik ili predavač,

but many, many sub-professions

već mnogim, mnogim podprofesijama

having to do with being a technician,

koje imaju veze sa tim da li si tehničar,

a computer programmer.

kompjuterski programer.

A whole range of professions now make cognitive demands.

Čitav niz profesija sada ima kognitivnu potrebu.

And we can only meet the terms of employment

I možemo da ispunimo očekivanja zaposlenja

in the modern world by being cognitively

u modernom svetu tako što smo kognitivno

far more flexible.

mnogo fleksibilniji.

And it's not just that we have many more people

I ne samo da ima mnogo više ljudi

in cognitively demanding professions.

u kognitivno zahtevnim profesijama.

The professions have been upgraded.

Same profesije su unapređene.

Compare the doctor in 1900,

Uporedite lekara iz 1900.

who really had only a few tricks up his sleeve,

koji je stvarno imao samo nekoliko kečeva u rukavu,

with the modern general practitioner or specialist,

sa savremenim lekarom opšte prakse ili specijalistom

with years of scientific training.

koji imaju godine naučnog obučavanja.

Compare the banker in 1900,

Uporedite bankara iz 1900,

who really just needed a good accountant

kome je trebao samo dobar računovođa

and to know who was trustworthy in the local community

i da zna ko je pouzdan u lokalnoj zajednici

for paying back their mortgage.

za otplaćivanje hipoteke.

Well, the merchant bankers who brought the world to their knees

Bankari trgovci, koji su porazili svet

may have been morally remiss,

su možda bili moralno nemarni,

but they were cognitively very agile.

ali su kognitivno bili vrlo sposobni.

They went far beyond that 1900 banker.

Otišli su mnogo ispred bankara iz 1900.

They had to look at computer projections

trebalo je da gledaju kompjuterske projekcije

for the housing market.

za tržište stambene izgradnje.

They had to get complicated CDO-squared

Trebalo je da dobiju komplikovan kvadrat kolateralne obaveze duga

in order to bundle debt together

da bi spojili dug

and make debt look as if it were actually a profitable asset.

i da bi napravili da dug izgleda kao profitabilan objekat.

They had to prepare a case to get rating agencies

Morali su da pripreme slučaj da bi pridobili agencije za rejting

to give it a AAA,

da im ovo odobre,

though in many cases, they had virtually bribed the rating agencies.

iako su u mnogo slučajeva, u stvari podmitili rejting agencije.

And they also, of course, had to get people

I takođe su morali da nateraju ljude

to accept these so-called assets

da prihvate ovu takozvanu dobit

and pay money for them

i da za nju daju pare

even though they were highly vulnerable.

iako su bile visoko osetljive.

Or take a farmer today.

Ili pogledajte današnjeg poljoprivrednika.

I take the farm manager of today as very different

Mislim da je današnji menadžer na imanju mnogo drugačiji

from the farmer of 1900.

od onog iz 1900.

So it hasn't just been the spread

Tako da nije samo bilo širenja

of cognitively demanding professions.

u kognitivno zahtevnim profesijama.

It's also been the upgrading of tasks

Takođe je došlo do unapređenja zadataka

like lawyer and doctor and what have you

advokata, doktora i kojih još,

that have made demands on our cognitive faculties.

koji su povećali zahteve naših kognitivnih mogućnosti.

But I've talked about education and employment.

Ali pričao sam o obrazovanju i zaposlenju.

Some of the habits of mind that we have developed

Neke navike uma koje su se razvile

over the 20th century

tokom 20. veka

have paid off in unexpected areas.

su se isplatile u neočekivanim oblastima.

I'm primarily a moral philosopher.

Ja sam prvobitno moralni filozof.

I merely have a holiday in psychology,

Jedva da imam godišnji iz psihologije,

and what interests me in general is moral debate.

i ono što me zanima uopšte uzev je moralna rasprava.

Now over the last century,

Sada, tokom prošlog veka,

in developed nations like America,

u razvijenim nacijama kao što je Amerika,

moral debate has escalated

moralna debata je napredovala

because we take the hypothetical seriously,

jer mi ono što je hipotetično shvatamo ozbiljno,

and we also take universals seriously

i mi takođe univerzalije shvatamo ozbiljno

and look for logical connections.

i tražimo logičke veze.

When I came home in 1955 from university

Kad sam se vratio kući sa fakulteta 1955.

at the time of Martin Luther King,

u vreme Martina Lutera Kinga,

a lot of people came home at that time

mnogo ljudi se vratilo kući u to vreme

and started having arguments with their parents and grandparents.

i počelo sa raspravama sa svojim roditeljima i babama i dedama.

My father was born in 1885,

Moj otac je rođen 1885,

and he was mildly racially biased.

i bio je blago rasno pristrasan.

As an Irishman, he hated the English so much

Pošto je bio Irac, mnogo je mrzeo Engleze,

he didn't have much emotion for anyone else.

a ni za druge nije imao mnogo emocija.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

But he did have a sense that black people were inferior.

Ali je mislio da su crnci niža rasa

And when we said to our parents and grandparents,

I kad smo pitali naše roditelje, babe i dede,

"How would you feel if tomorrow morning you woke up black?"

"Kako biste se vi osećali da se sutra ujutru probudite kao crnci?"

they said that is the dumbest thing you've ever said.

oni su rekli da je to najgluplja stvar koju si ikada rekao.

Who have you ever known who woke up in the morning --

Da li ste ikad znali nekoga ko se probudio ujutru...

(Laughter) --

(Smeh)

that turned black?

kao crnac?

In other words, they were fixed in the concrete

Drugim rečima, bili su fiksirani u konkretnim

mores and attitudes they had inherited.

normama i ponašanjima koje su nasledili.

They would not take the hypothetical seriously,

Nisu hteli da uzimaju u obzir nešto hipotetično,

and without the hypothetical,

a bez toga,

it's very difficult to get moral argument off the ground.

vrlo je teško da se pokrenu moralni argumenti.

You have to say, imagine you were

Morate da kažete, zamislite da ste

in Iran, and imagine that your relatives

u Iranu, i zamislite da su vaši rođaci

all suffered from collateral damage

svi doživeli kolateralnu štetu

even though they had done no wrong.

iako ništa loše nisu učinili.

How would you feel about that?

Kako biste se osećali povodom toga?

And if someone of the older generation says,

I ako neko iz starijih generacija kaže,

well, our government takes care of us,

pa, naša vlada se brine o nama,

and it's up to their government to take care of them,

i na njihovoj je vladi da se brine o njima,

they're just not willing to take the hypothetical seriously.

oni ne žele da nešto hipotetično ozbiljno shvate.

Or take an Islamic father whose daughter has been raped,

Ili uzmite oca Muslimana čija ćerka je silovana,

and he feels he's honor-bound to kill her.

i on oseća da je vezan čašću da je ubije.

Well, he's treating his mores

Dakle, on se odnosi prema svojim normama

as if they were sticks and stones and rocks that he had inherited,

kako da su drvlje, kamenje i stenje koje je on nasledio,

and they're unmovable in any way by logic.

i da nikakvom logikom ne mogu da se pomere.

They're just inherited mores.

To su samo nasleđene norme.

Today we would say something like,

Danas mi kažemo nešto kao

well, imagine you were knocked unconscious and sodomized.

dakle, zamisli da te neko onesvesti i siluje?

Would you deserve to be killed?

Da li zaslužuješ da budeš ubijen?

And he would say, well that's not in the Koran.

On bi odgovorio, pa to nije po Kuranu.

That's not one of the principles I've got.

To nije jedan od mojih principa.

Well you, today, universalize your principles.

Dobro, danas principi postaju univerzalni.

You state them as abstractions and you use logic on them.

Utvrdite da su apstrakcije i koristite logiku na njima.

If you have a principle such as,

Ako imate princip kao što je,

people shouldn't suffer unless they're guilty of something,

ljudi ne treba da pate ako nisu krivi za nešto,

then to exclude black people

a onda da isključite crnce

you've got to make exceptions, don't you?

morate da napravite izuzetke, zar ne?

You have to say, well, blackness of skin,

Morate da kažete, dobro, to što je koža crna,

you couldn't suffer just for that.

ne može da se pati samo zbog toga.

It must be that blacks are somehow tainted.

Mora da su crnci nekako uprljani.

And then we can bring empirical evidence to bear, can't we,

I onda treba da donesemo empirijski dokaz, zar ne,

and say, well how can you consider all blacks tainted

i da kažemo, kako možete da smatrate da su svi crnci uprljani

when St. Augustine was black and Thomas Sowell is black.

kad je Sveti Avgustin bio crnac i Tomas Soul je crnac.

And you can get moral argument off the ground, then,

I onda možete da pokrenete moralni argument

because you're not treating moral principles as concrete entities.

jer se ne odnosite prema moralnim pricipima kao opipljivim entitetima.

You're treating them as universals,

Odnosite se prema njima kao prema univerzalijama

to be rendered consistent by logic.

da bi bile logične.

Now how did all of this arise out of I.Q. tests?

A sada, kako se sve ovo razvilo iz testova inteligencije?

That's what initially got me going on cognitive history.

To je ono što me je prvo i pokrenulo na kognitivnu istoriju.

If you look at the I.Q. test,

Ako pogledate testove inteligencije,

you find the gains have been greatest in certain areas.

vidite da su rezultati bili najviši u određenim oblastima.

The similarities subtest of the Wechsler

Podtest sličnosti Vekslerovog testa

is about classification,

je o klasifikaciji,

and we have made enormous gains

i postignuti su ogromni rezultati

on that classification subtest.

na tom podtestu klasifikacije.

There are other parts of the I.Q. test battery

Ima drugih delova skupa testa inteligencije

that are about using logic on abstractions.

koji su o logici apstraktnog.

Some of you may have taken Raven's Progressive Matrices,

Neki od vas su možda radili Ravenove progresivne matrice,

and it's all about analogies.

koje se sastoje od analogija.

And in 1900, people could do simple analogies.

A 1900, ljudi su mogli da rešavaju proste analogije.

That is, if you said to them, cats are like wildcats.

To jest, ako biste im rekli: mačke liče na divlje mačke.

What are dogs like?

Na koga liče psi?

They would say wolves.

Oni bi rekli: na vukove.

But by 1960, people could attack Raven's

Ali do 1960. ljudi su mogli da reše Ravenove testove

on a much more sophisticated level.

na složenijem nivou.

If you said, we've got two squares followed by a triangle,

Ako biste pitali: ako imamo dva kvadrata koje prati trougao,

what follows two circles?

šta prati dva kruga?

They could say a semicircle.

Odgovorili bi polukrug.

Just as a triangle is half of a square,

Kao što je trougao polovina kvadrata,

a semicircle is half of a circle.

polukrug je polovina kruga.

By 2010, college graduates, if you said

Do 2010, diplomci sa koledža bi, ako biste im rekli

two circles followed by a semicircle,

dva kruga prati polukrug,

two sixteens followed by what,

a šta prati dve šesnaestice?

they would say eight, because eight is half of 16.

Oni bi rekli osmica, jer je to polovina od 16.

That is, they had moved so far from the concrete world

Što će reći, daleko su odmakli od opipljivog sveta u razmišljanju

that they could even ignore

da su čak mogli da ignorišu

the appearance of the symbols that were involved in the question.

postojanje simbola koji su u pitanju.

Now, I should say one thing that's very disheartening.

A sada ću reći nešto vrlo rastužujuće.

We haven't made progress on all fronts.

Nismo napredovali u svim poljima.

One of the ways in which we would like to deal

Jedan od načina na koji bismo hteli da se nosimo

with the sophistication of the modern world

sa napretkom savremenog sveta

is through politics,

je kroz politiku,

and sadly you can have humane moral principles,

i nažalost, možete da imate humane moralne principe,

you can classify, you can use logic on abstractions,

možete da klasifikujete, da koristite logiku kod apstraktnih pojmova,

and if you're ignorant of history and of other countries,

i ako se ne osvrćete na istoriju i na druge zemlje,

you can't do politics.

ne možete da se bavite politikom.

We've noticed, in a trend among young Americans,

Primećeno je, da je glavni pravac među mladim Amerikancima,

that they read less history and less literature

da čitaju sve manje istorije i književnosti

and less material about foreign lands,

i literature o stranim zemljama,

and they're essentially ahistorical.

i da su u suštini bez istorije.

They live in the bubble of the present.

Žive pod staklenim zvonom sadašnjice.

They don't know the Korean War from the war in Vietnam.

Ne razlikuju Korejski rat od Vijetnamskog.

They don't know who was an ally of America in World War II.

ne znaju ko je bio saveznik Amerike u Drugom svetskom ratu.

Think how different America would be

Razmislite koliko bi drugačija bila Amerika

if every American knew that this is the fifth time

da svaki Amerikanac zna da je ovo peti put

Western armies have gone to Afghanistan to put its house in order,

da Zapadne vojske idu u Avganistan da naprave red

and if they had some idea of exactly what had happened

i ako bi imali neku ideju šta se tačno desilo

on those four previous occasions.

u ta prethodna 4 puta u Avganistanu.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

And that is, they had barely left,

A desilo se, da nisu ni odlazili,

and there wasn't a trace in the sand.

a od njih ni traga u pesku.

Or imagine how different things would be

Ili zamislite koliko bi stvari bile drugačije

if most Americans knew that we had been lied

da većina Amerikanaca zna da su nas lagali

into four of our last six wars.

o 4 od naših 6 poslednjih ratova.

You know, the Spanish didn't sink the battleship Maine,

Jer znate, nisu Španci potopili ratni brod Mejn,

the Lusitania was not an innocent vessel

Luzitanija nije bila samo obično plovilo

but was loaded with munitions,

već je bila napunjena municijom,

the North Vietnamese did not attack the Seventh Fleet,

Severni Vijetnam nije napao Sedmu flotu,

and, of course, Saddam Hussein hated al Qaeda

i Sadam Husein naravno nije voleo Al Kaidu

and had nothing to do with it,

i nije imao nikakve veze sa njima,

and yet the administration convinced 45 percent of the people

a administracija je ubedila 45% ljudi

that they were brothers in arms,

da su oni braća po oružju,

when he would hang one from the nearest lamppost.

kad bi on obesio nekog na najbližu banderu.

But I don't want to end on a pessimistic note.

Ali neću da završim ovaj govor u pesimističnom tonu.

The 20th century has shown enormous cognitive reserves

Dvadeseti vek je pokazao ogromne kognitivne rezerve

in ordinary people that we have now realized,

u običnim ljudima koje smo sad uvideli,

and the aristocracy was convinced

a aristokratija je ubeđena

that the average person couldn't make it,

da prosečna osoba ne može da uspe,

that they could never share their mindset

da nisu sposobni da podele svoja razmišljanja

or their cognitive abilities.

ili svoje kognitivne mogućnosti.

Lord Curzon once said

Lord Kurzon je jednom rekao

he saw people bathing in the North Sea,

da je video ljude da se kupaju u Severnom moru,

and he said, "Why did no one tell me

i da je pitao: "Zašto mi niko nije rekao

what white bodies the lower orders have?"

kako ovi iz nižeg reda imaju beo ten".

As if they were a reptile.

Kao da su gmizavci.

Well, Dickens was right and he was wrong. [Correction: Rudyard Kipling]

Dikens je bio u pravu, a ovaj ne. [ispravka: citat Radjarda Kiplinga].

[Kipling] said, "The colonel's lady and Judy O'Grady

Kipling je rekao: "Pukovnikova žena i Džudi O'Grejdi

are sisters underneath the skin."

su jednake bez obzira na boju kože".

(Applause)

(Aplauz)