Why you think you're right -- even if you're wrong | Julia Galef

Prevodilac: Ivana Krivokuća Lektor: Tijana Mihajlović

So I'd like you to imagine for a moment

Htela bih da zamislite na trenutak

that you're a soldier in the heat of battle.

da ste vojnik u žaru borbe.

Maybe you're a Roman foot soldier or a medieval archer

Možda ste rimski pešak, srednjovekovni strelac

or maybe you're a Zulu warrior.

ili ste možda ratnik plemena Zulu.

Regardless of your time and place, there are some things that are constant.

Bez obzira na vreme i mesto u kome ste, neke stvari su nepromenljive.

Your adrenaline is elevated,

Nivo adrenalina vam je povišen

and your actions are stemming from these deeply ingrained reflexes,

i vaši postupci proističu iz tih duboko ukorenjenih refleksa,

reflexes rooted in a need to protect yourself and your side

refleksa koji imaju osnovu u potrebi da se vi i vaša strana zaštitite

and to defeat the enemy.

i da se porazi neprijatelj.

So now, I'd like you to imagine playing a very different role,

Želim da sada zamislite da igrate vrlo različitu ulogu,

that of the scout.

ulogu izviđača.

The scout's job is not to attack or defend.

Posao izviđača nije da napada ili brani.

The scout's job is to understand.

Posao izviđača je da razume.

The scout is the one going out,

Izviđač izlazi,

mapping the terrain, identifying potential obstacles.

mapira teren, identifikuje potencijalne smetnje.

And the scout may hope to learn that, say, there's a bridge

Izviđač se može nadati saznanju da, recimo, postoji most

in a convenient location across a river.

na pogodnoj lokaciji preko reke.

But above all, the scout wants to know what's really there,

No, pre svega, izviđač hoće da zna šta se zaista tamo nalazi,

as accurately as possible.

što je tačnije moguće.

And in a real, actual army, both the soldier and the scout are essential.

U pravoj, stvarnoj vojsci, vojnik i izviđač su suštinski značajni.

But you can also think of each of these roles as a mindset --

Takođe možete zamisliti obe ove uloge kao mentalni sklop -

a metaphor for how all of us process information and ideas

kao metaforu za način na koji svi obrađujemo informacije i ideje

in our daily lives.

u našem svakodnevnom životu.

What I'm going to argue today is that having good judgment,

Ono što ću obrazložiti danas je da se posedovanje dobrog rasuđivanja,

making accurate predictions, making good decisions,

pravljenje tačnih prognoza, donošenje dobrih odluka,

is mostly about which mindset you're in.

većim delom ima veze sa mentalnim sklopom u kome ste.

To illustrate these mindsets in action,

Da bih ilustrovala te mentalne sklopove u akciji,

I'm going to take you back to 19th-century France,

odvešću vas u Francusku 19. veka,

where this innocuous-looking piece of paper

gde je ovaj naizgled bezazleni papir

launched one of the biggest political scandals in history.

pokrenuo jedan od najvećih političkih skandala u istoriji.

It was discovered in 1894 by officers in the French general staff.

Otkrili su ga 1894. godine oficiri francuskog generalštaba.

It was torn up in a wastepaper basket,

Bio je pocepan u kanti za otpatke,

but when they pieced it back together,

ali kada su ponovo sastavili delove,

they discovered that someone in their ranks

otkrili su da je neko u njihovom rangu

had been selling military secrets to Germany.

prodavao vojne tajne Nemačkoj.

So they launched a big investigation,

Stoga su pokrenuli veliku istragu

and their suspicions quickly converged on this man,

i njihova sumnja ubrzo je usmerena na ovog čoveka,

Alfred Dreyfus.

Alfreda Drajfusa.

He had a sterling record,

Imao je čist dosije,

no past history of wrongdoing, no motive as far as they could tell.

nije imao istoriju prestupa, nikakav motiv, koliko se moglo primetiti.

But Dreyfus was the only Jewish officer at that rank in the army,

Međutim, Drajfus je bio jedini jevrejski oficir tog ranga u vojsci

and unfortunately at this time, the French Army was highly anti-Semitic.

i nažalost, u to vreme, francuska vojska je bila veoma antisemitski nastrojena.

They compared Dreyfus's handwriting to that on the memo

Uporedili su Drajfusov rukopis sa onim na belešci

and concluded that it was a match,

i zaključili da se podudaraju,

even though outside professional handwriting experts

iako su izvan vojske profesionalni eksperti za rukopis

were much less confident in the similarity,

bili mnogo manje uvereni u sličnost,

but never mind that.

ali nema veze.

They went and searched Dreyfus's apartment,

Krenuli su da pretražuju Drajfusov stan,

looking for any signs of espionage.

tražeći bilo kakav znak špijunaže.

They went through his files, and they didn't find anything.

Prošli su kroz njegova dokumenta i ništa nisu pronašli.

This just convinced them more that Dreyfus was not only guilty,

To ih je samo još više ubedilo da ne samo da je Drajfus kriv,

but sneaky as well, because clearly he had hidden all of the evidence

već je i podmukao, jer je očigledno sakrio sve dokaze

before they had managed to get to it.

pre nego što su uspeli da dođu do njih.

Next, they went and looked through his personal history

Zatim su razmotrili njegovu ličnu istoriju

for any incriminating details.

radi bilo kakvih detalja koji bi ga okrivili.

They talked to his teachers,

Razgovarali su sa njegovim nastavnicima, otkrili da je u školi učio strane jezike,

they found that he had studied foreign languages in school,

which clearly showed a desire to conspire with foreign governments

što je jasno ukazalo na želju da kuje zaveru sa stranim vladama

later in life.

kasnije u životu.

His teachers also said that Dreyfus was known for having a good memory,

Njegovi nastavnici su takođe rekli

da je Drajfus bio poznat po dobrom pamćenju,

which was highly suspicious, right?

što je veoma sumnjivo, zar ne?

You know, because a spy has to remember a lot of things.

Znate, jer špijun mora da pamti mnogo stvari.

So the case went to trial, and Dreyfus was found guilty.

Tako je slučaj dospeo na sud i Drajfus je proglašen krivim.

Afterwards, they took him out into this public square

Potom su ga odveli na javni trg

and ritualistically tore his insignia from his uniform

i ritualno pokidali oznake sa njegove uniforme

and broke his sword in two.

i polomili njegov mač na dva dela.

This was called the Degradation of Dreyfus.

To je nazvano degradacija Drajfusa.

And they sentenced him to life imprisonment

Osudili su ga na doživotnu kaznu zatvora

on the aptly named Devil's Island,

na prikladno nazvanom Đavoljem ostrvu,

which is this barren rock off the coast of South America.

koje je pusta stena pri obali Južne Amerike.

So there he went, and there he spent his days alone,

Otišao je tamo i provodio dane sam,

writing letters and letters to the French government

pišući pisma i pisma francuskoj vladi,

begging them to reopen his case so they could discover his innocence.

moleći ih da ponovo otvore njegov sličaj da bi mogli da otkriju da je nevin.

But for the most part, France considered the matter closed.

No, u većoj meri, Francuska je smatrala njegovo pitanje završenim.

One thing that's really interesting to me about the Dreyfus Affair

Ono što je meni zaista zanimljivo u vezi sa „Aferom Drajfus“

is this question of why the officers were so convinced

je pitanje zašto su oficiri bili tako ubeđeni

that Dreyfus was guilty.

da je Drajfus kriv.

I mean, you might even assume that they were setting him up,

Mislim, možete čak i pretpostaviti da su mu podmetnuli,

that they were intentionally framing him.

da su ga namerno optužili.

But historians don't think that's what happened.

Međutim, istoričari ne misle da se to dogodilo.

As far as we can tell,

Koliko možemo zaključiti,

the officers genuinely believed that the case against Dreyfus was strong.

oficiri su istinski verovali da je slučaj protiv Drajfusa ubedljiv.

Which makes you wonder:

To navodi da se zapitate

What does it say about the human mind

šta govori o ljudskom umu

that we can find such paltry evidence

to da takav tričav dokaz možemo smatrati

to be compelling enough to convict a man?

dovoljno uverljivim da osudimo čoveka.

Well, this is a case of what scientists call "motivated reasoning."

Pa, ovo je slučaj onoga što naučnici zovu „motivisano rezonovanje“.

It's this phenomenon in which our unconscious motivations,

To je pojava pri kojoj naša nesvesna motivacija,

our desires and fears,

naše želje i strahovi

shape the way we interpret information.

oblikuju način na koji tumačimo informacije.

Some information, some ideas, feel like our allies.

Neke informacije, neke ideje se doživljavaju kao naši saveznici.

We want them to win. We want to defend them.

Želimo da pobede. Želimo da ih branimo.

And other information or ideas are the enemy,

Druge informacije ili ideje su neprijatelji

and we want to shoot them down.

i želimo da ih oborimo.

So this is why I call motivated reasoning, "soldier mindset."

Zato motivisano rezonovanje nazivam „vojničkim mentalnim sklopom“.

Probably most of you have never persecuted

Verovatno da većina vas nikada nije progonila

francusko-jevrejskog oficira zbog veleizdaje,

a French-Jewish officer for high treason,

I assume,

pretpostavljam,

but maybe you've followed sports or politics, so you might have noticed

ali možda ste pratili sport ili politiku, tako da ste možda primetili da,

that when the referee judges that your team committed a foul,

kada sudija presudi da je vaš tim počinio faul,

for example,

na primer,

you're highly motivated to find reasons why he's wrong.

visoko ste motivisani da nađete razloge zbog kojih nije u pravu.

But if he judges that the other team committed a foul -- awesome!

Međutim, ako presudi da je drugi tim počinio faul - sjajno!

That's a good call, let's not examine it too closely.

To je dobra odluka, hajde da je ne preispitujemo previše.

Or, maybe you've read an article or a study

Ili, možda ste čitali članak ili istraživanje

that examined some controversial policy,

koje ispituje neko kontroverzno pravilo,

like capital punishment.

kao što je smrtna kazna.

And, as researchers have demonstrated,

Kao što su istraživači pokazali,

if you support capital punishment

ako podržavate smrtnu kaznu

and the study shows that it's not effective,

a istraživanja pokazuje da nije delotvorna,

then you're highly motivated to find all the reasons

onda ste visoko motivisani da pronađete sve razloge

why the study was poorly designed.

zbog kojih je istraživanje loše osmišljeno.

But if it shows that capital punishment works,

Međutim, ako pokazuje da smrtna kazna deluje,

it's a good study.

to je dobro istraživanje,

i obrnuto, ako ne podržavate smrtu kaznu, ista stvar.

And vice versa: if you don't support capital punishment, same thing.

Na naše rasuđivanje snažno utiče, nesvesno,

Our judgment is strongly influenced, unconsciously,

by which side we want to win.

to koja strana želimo da pobedi.

And this is ubiquitous.

To je prisutno svuda.

This shapes how we think about our health, our relationships,

Oblikuje način na koji razmišljamo o našem zdravlju, našim vezama,

how we decide how to vote,

kako odlučujemo kako ćemo glasati,

what we consider fair or ethical.

šta smatramo pravednim ili etičkim.

Ono što je za mene najstrašnije u vezi sa motivisanim rezonovanjem

What's most scary to me about motivated reasoning

or soldier mindset,

ili vojničkim mentalnim sklopom je to koliko je nesvesno.

is how unconscious it is.

We can think we're being objective and fair-minded

Možemo misliti da smo objektivni i pravični,

and still wind up ruining the life of an innocent man.

a ipak na kraju uništimo život nevinog čoveka.

Ipak, srećom po Drajfusa, njegovoj priči nije kraj.

However, fortunately for Dreyfus, his story is not over.

This is Colonel Picquart.

Ovo je pukovnik Pikar.

He's another high-ranking officer in the French Army,

On je drugi oficir visokog čina u francuskoj vojsci

and like most people, he assumed Dreyfus was guilty.

i, kao većina ljudi, pretpostavljao je da je Drajfus kriv.

Also like most people in the army, he was at least casually anti-Semitic.

Takođe, kao većina ljudi u vojsci, bio je makar nezvanično antisemit.

But at a certain point, Picquart began to suspect:

Ipak, u nekom trenutku, Pikar je počeo da sumnja:

"What if we're all wrong about Dreyfus?"

„Šta ako grešimo u vezi sa Drajfusom?“

What happened was, he had discovered evidence

Desilo se da je on pronašao dokaz

that the spying for Germany had continued,

da se špijuniranje za Nemačku nastavilo

čak i nakon što je Drajfus bio u zatvoru.

even after Dreyfus was in prison.

And he had also discovered that another officer in the army

Takođe je otkrio da drugi oficir u vojsci ima rukopis

had handwriting that perfectly matched the memo,

koji se savršeno slagao sa beleškom,

much closer than Dreyfus's handwriting.

mnogo bolje nego Drajfusov rukopis.

So he brought these discoveries to his superiors,

Stoga je izneo ta otkrića pred svoje nadređene,

but to his dismay, they either didn't care

ali, na njegovo zaprepašćenje, njih ili nije bilo briga

or came up with elaborate rationalizations to explain his findings,

ili su pronašli podrobne racionalizacije da bi objasnili njegove nalaze,

like, "Well, all you've really shown, Picquart, is that there's another spy

poput: „Pa, sve što si zapravo pokazao, Pikarte, jeste da postoji drugi špijun

who learned how to mimic Dreyfus's handwriting,

koji je naučio kako da podražava Drajfusov rukopis

and he picked up the torch of spying after Dreyfus left.

i preuzeo je štafetu špijuniranja nakon što je Drajfus otišao,

But Dreyfus is still guilty."

ali Drajfus je i dalje kriv.“

Eventually, Picquart managed to get Dreyfus exonerated.

Na kraju je Pikar uspeo da oslobodi Drajfusa,

But it took him 10 years,

ali mu je trebalo 10 godina,

and for part of that time, he himself was in prison

a delom tog vremena je i on sam bio u zatvoru

for the crime of disloyalty to the army.

zbog zločina nelojalnosti vojsci.

A lot of people feel like Picquart can't really be the hero of this story

Mnogo ljudi smatra da Pikar ne može stvarno biti heroj ove priče

because he was an anti-Semite and that's bad, which I agree with.

jer je bio antisemit i to je loše, sa čime se slažem.

But personally, for me, the fact that Picquart was anti-Semitic

Ipak, za mene lično, činjenica da je Pikar bio antisemit

actually makes his actions more admirable,

zapravo čini njegov postupak više vrednim divljenja,

because he had the same prejudices, the same reasons to be biased

jer je imao iste predrasude, iste razloge da bude pristrasan

as his fellow officers,

kao i njegove kolege oficiri,

but his motivation to find the truth and uphold it trumped all of that.

ali je sve to nadjačala njegova motivacija da nađe istinu i podrži je.

So to me,

Zato je, za mene,

Picquart is a poster child for what I call "scout mindset."

Pikar je ilustracija onoga što nazivam „izviđački mentalni sklop“.

It's the drive not to make one idea win or another lose,

To je poriv ne da se postigne da jedna ideja pobedi ili druga izgubi,

but just to see what's really there

već samo da vidi šta se zapravo tamo nalazi,

as honestly and accurately as you can,

što je ispravnije i tačnije moguće,

even if it's not pretty or convenient or pleasant.

čak i ako nije lepo, povoljno ili prijatno.

This mindset is what I'm personally passionate about.

Prema tom mentalnom sklopu lično osećam strast.

And I've spent the last few years examining and trying to figure out

Provela sam poslednjih nekoliko godina proučavajući i pokušavajući da otkrijem

what causes scout mindset.

šta prouzrokuje izviđački mentalni sklop.

Why are some people, sometimes at least,

Zašto su neki ljudi, bar ponekad,

able to cut through their own prejudices and biases and motivations

u stanju da prelome preko svojih predrasuda,

naklonosti i motivacija

and just try to see the facts and the evidence

i samo pokušavaju da vide činjenice i dokaze

što objektivnije mogu?

as objectively as they can?

And the answer is emotional.

Odgovor je emocionalan.

So, just as soldier mindset is rooted in emotions

Dakle, baš kao što vojnički mentalni sklop

ima korene u emocijama kao što su defanzivnost ili tribalizam,

like defensiveness or tribalism,

scout mindset is, too.

isto tako je i izviđački.

Samo je ukorenjen u drugačijim emocijama.

It's just rooted in different emotions.

For example, scouts are curious.

Na primer, izviđači su radoznali.

They're more likely to say they feel pleasure

Više su skloni da kažu da osećaju zadovoljstvo

when they learn new information

kada nauče novu informaciju

or an itch to solve a puzzle.

ili osete želju da reše zagonetku.

They're more likely to feel intrigued when they encounter something

Imaju više sklonosti da ih zaintrigira kada naiđu na nešto

that contradicts their expectations.

što se suprotstavlja njihovim očekivanjima.

Scouts also have different values.

Izviđači takođe imaju drugačije vrednosti.

They're more likely to say they think it's virtuous

Veća je šansa da će reći da smatraju za vrlinu

to test your own beliefs,

ispitivanje svojih uverenja,

and they're less likely to say that someone who changes his mind

i manja je šansa da će reći da neko ko se predomisli deluje slabo.

seems weak.

And above all, scouts are grounded,

Pre svega, izviđači su prizemni,

which means their self-worth as a person

što znači da njihovo samovrednovanje kao osobe nije vezano

isn't tied to how right or wrong they are about any particular topic.

za to koliko su u pravu ili greše u pogledu neke određene teme.

So they can believe that capital punishment works.

Tako mogu da veruju da smrtna kazna deluje.

If studies come out showing that it doesn't, they can say,

Ako se pojave istraživanja koja pokazuju da ne deluje, mogu da kažu:

"Huh. Looks like I might be wrong. Doesn't mean I'm bad or stupid."

„Izgleda da možda nisam u pravu. To ne znači da sam loš ili glup.“

This cluster of traits is what researchers have found --

Za ovu grupu osobina su istraživači pronašli -

and I've also found anecdotally --

a i ja sam pronašla kroz anegdote -

predicts good judgment.

da predviđaju dobro prosuđivanje.

And the key takeaway I want to leave you with about those traits

Glavna stvar u vezi sa tim osobinama, sa kojom bih da vas napustim,

is that they're primarily not about how smart you are

jeste da se prvenstveno ne odnose na to koliko ste pametni

or about how much you know.

ili koliko toga znate.

In fact, they don't correlate very much with IQ at all.

Zapravo, uopšte ne koreliraju naročito sa IQ-om.

They're about how you feel.

Odnose se na to kako osećate.

There's a quote that I keep coming back to, by Saint-Exupéry.

Postoji citat na koji se uvek vraćam, koji je napisao Sent Egziperi.

He's the author of "The Little Prince."

On je autor „Malog princa“.

He said, "If you want to build a ship,

Rekao je: „Ako hoćete da izgradite brod,

don't drum up your men to collect wood and give orders

ne terajte svoje ljude da skupljaju drva, da naređuju

and distribute the work.

i raspodeljuju posao.

Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea."

Umesto toga ih naučite da žude za velikim i beskrajnim morem.“

In other words, I claim,

Drugim rečima, tvrdim,

if we really want to improve our judgment as individuals

ako zaista želimo da poboljšamo naše rasuđivanje kao pojedinci

i kao društva,

and as societies,

what we need most is not more instruction in logic

ono što nam je najviše potrebno nisu dodatna uputstva iz oblasti logike,

or rhetoric or probability or economics,

retorike, verovatnoće ili ekonomije,

even though those things are quite valuable.

mada su te stvari prilično korisne.

But what we most need to use those principles well

Ono što nam je najviše potrebno da bismo dobro koristili te principe

is scout mindset.

je izviđački mentalni sklop.

We need to change the way we feel.

Treba da promenimo način na koji se osećamo.

We need to learn how to feel proud instead of ashamed

Potrebno je da naučimo kako da se osećamo ponosno

umesto posramljeno kada primetimo da smo možda pogrešili u vezi sa nečim.

when we notice we might have been wrong about something.

We need to learn how to feel intrigued instead of defensive

Treba da naučimo kako da se osećamo zaintrigirano umesto defanzivno

when we encounter some information that contradicts our beliefs.

kada naiđemo na neku informaciju koja protivreči našim uverenjima.

So the question I want to leave you with is:

Dakle, pitanje sa kojim želim da vas napustim je:

What do you most yearn for?

za čim najviše žudite?

Do you yearn to defend your own beliefs?

Da li žudite da odbranite svoja uverenja?

Or do you yearn to see the world as clearly as you possibly can?

Ili žudite da vidite svet što je jasnije moguće?

Thank you.

Hvala.

(Applause)

(Aplauz)