The illusion of consciousness | Dan Dennett

翻译人员: Chengyin Liu 校对人员: Bojian Sun

So I'm going to speak about a problem that I have

让我从我的一个问题开始，

and that's that I'm a philosopher.

那就是，我是一个哲学家。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

When I go to a party and people ask me what do I do

当我参加派对时，人们问我，我是干什么的。

and I say, "I'm a professor," their eyes glaze over.

我说，“我是个教授”，他们一下就失去了兴趣。

When I go to an academic cocktail party

当我参加学术酒会时，

and there are all the professors around, they ask me what field I'm in

在场的都是教授，他们问我是做什么领域的。

and I say, "philosophy" -- their eyes glaze over.

我说，哲学——他们没了兴趣。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

When I go to a philosopher's party

当我参加哲学派对时

(Laughter)

（笑声）

and they ask me what I work on and I say, "consciousness,"

他们问我在研究什么，我说，意识，

their eyes don't glaze over -- their lips curl into a snarl.

他们就不仅仅是失去兴趣了——他们的嘴巴都拧成一团了。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

And I get hoots of derision and cackles and growls

我还引来了阵阵嘲笑以及嘀咕，

because they think, "That's impossible! You can't explain consciousness."

因为他们觉得，“那是不可能的！你没法解释意识。”

The very chutzpah of somebody thinking

这是太放肆大胆的想法

that you could explain consciousness is just out of the question.

意识是不可能被解释的

My late, lamented friend Bob Nozick, a fine philosopher,

我已故的，令人惋惜的朋友 Bob Nozick，一位极好的哲学家

in one of his books, "Philosophical Explanations,"

在他的著作 “哲学解释 (Philosophical Explanations)”中

is commenting on the ethos of philosophy --

评论了哲学的精神——

the way philosophers go about their business.

也就是哲学家行事的方法。

And he says, you know, "Philosophers love rational argument."

他说，你知道，“哲学家热爱合理的论点。”

And he says, "It seems as if the ideal argument

他还说，“看起来好像对于多数哲学家，理想的论证

for most philosophers is you give your audience the premises

是向观众提出前提，

and then you give them the inferences and the conclusion,

然后给出推理和结论，

and if they don't accept the conclusion, they die.

如果听众不接受那个结论，他们就死了。

Their heads explode." The idea is to have an argument

他们脑子坏了。” 这种想法是要有一个论点

that is so powerful that it knocks out your opponents.

强到可以直接压倒对方。

But in fact that doesn't change people's minds at all.

但事实上这丝毫没有改变人们的想法。

It's very hard to change people's minds

人们的想法是非常难以改变的

about something like consciousness,

特别是在类似意识这样的事情上，

and I finally figured out the reason for that.

后来我终于发现了原因所在。

The reason for that is that everybody's an expert on consciousness.

原因就是，每个人都是意识的专家。

We heard the other day that everybody's got a strong opinion about video games.

我们经常能听到人们对于电子游戏都有鲜明的个人观点

They all have an idea for a video game, even if they're not experts.

每个人都有自己对电子游戏的看法，尽管他们不是专家。

But they don't consider themselves experts on video games;

他们也没有把自己看做电子游戏专家，

they've just got strong opinions.

他们只是有着强烈的看法。

I'm sure that people here who work on, say, climate change

我非常确定在座的各位中，从事，比如气候变化

and global warming, or on the future of the Internet,

和全球变暖的，或者因特网的前景的，

encounter people who have very strong opinions

就各自领域未来这一问题

about what's going to happen next.

会遇到很多有鲜明观点的人。

But they probably don't think of these opinions as expertise.

但是或许他们并没有把这些想法当作专业知识

They're just strongly held opinions.

他们仅仅是有着鲜明的观点。

But with regard to consciousness, people seem to think,

但是说到意识，人们似乎觉得

each of us seems to think, "I am an expert.

我们每个人好像都觉得，“我是个专家。

Simply by being conscious, I know all about this."

就因为我是有意识的，所以我对意识全知全解。”

And so, you tell them your theory and they say,

所以，当你告诉他们你的理论时，他们会说，

"No, no, that's not the way consciousness is!

“不对，不对，意识不是那样的！

No, you've got it all wrong."

不对，你全搞错了。”

And they say this with an amazing confidence.

而且他们说的时候，还带着一种令人惊讶的自信。

And so what I'm going to try to do today

而我今天想要做的

is to shake your confidence. Because I know the feeling --

就是要动摇你们的信心。因为我很清楚这种感觉——

I can feel it myself.

我自己就能感觉到。

I want to shake your confidence that you know your own innermost minds --

我想要动摇你们对了解自身最深处想法的信心——

that you are, yourselves, authoritative about your own consciousness.

那种你主宰了自己意识的信心。

That's the order of the day here.

这就是今天的议程。

Now, this nice picture shows a thought-balloon, a thought-bubble.

好了，这张图展示的是一个“思维泡泡”。

I think everybody understands what that means.

我想大家都知道这是什么意思。

That's supposed to exhibit the stream of consciousness.

它展示了意识流。

This is my favorite picture of consciousness that's ever been done.

这是到目前，我最喜欢的展示意识的图片。

It's a Saul Steinberg of course -- it was a New Yorker cover.

它是 Saul Steinberg 的作品——是《纽约客》的一幅封面图片。

And this fellow here is looking at the painting by Braque.

这个人是在看 Braque 的画。

That reminds him of the word baroque, barrack, bark, poodle,

让他想起了巴洛克 (baroque)、兵营(barrack)、树皮 (bark)、狮毛狗(poodle)

Suzanne R. -- he's off to the races.

Suzanne R. ——精彩正要开始。

There's a wonderful stream of consciousness here

这是个极好的意识流

and if you follow it along, you learn a lot about this man.

如果你一直跟下去，你可以了解这个男人很多事情

What I particularly like about this picture, too,

我还特别喜欢这个图片里边

is that Steinberg has rendered the guy

Steinberg 把整个人渲染成

in this sort of pointillist style.

一种点彩画风格

Which reminds us, as Rod Brooks was saying yesterday:

这让我们想起，Rod Brooks 昨天所说的：

what we are, what each of us is -- what you are, what I am --

我们是什么，我们每个人是什么——你是什么，我是什么——

is approximately 100 trillion little cellular robots.

是将近一万亿亿的小细胞机器人。

That's what we're made of.

那就是我们的组成成分。

No other ingredients at all. We're just made of cells, about 100 trillion of them.

没有任何其他成分。我们就是细胞组成的，约一万亿亿个。

Not a single one of those cells is conscious;

这些细胞中没有任何一个有意识，

not a single one of those cells knows who you are, or cares.

没有一个知道你是谁，或者在乎这个。

Somehow, we have to explain

从某种意义上，我们需要解释

how when you put together teams, armies, battalions

我们如何把数队，数军，数营的

of hundreds of millions of little robotic unconscious cells --

成百百亿的无意识细胞机器——

not so different really from a bacterium, each one of them --

他们每个都与细菌没有多大区别——

the result is this. I mean, just look at it.

组合成了这个。我的意思是，就看一下。

The content -- there's color, there's ideas, there's memories,

这些内容——有颜色、有想法、有回忆，

there's history. And somehow all that content of consciousness

有历史。从某种意义上，这些意识的内容

is accomplished by the busy activity of those hoards of neurons.

是由那些聚集的神经元的繁忙活动完成的。

How is that possible? Many people just think it isn't possible at all.

这怎么可能呢？很多人认为这一点可能性都没有。

They think, "No, there can't be any

他们觉得，“不，不可能有

sort of naturalistic explanation of consciousness."

任何对意识的科学的解释。”

This is a lovely book by a friend of mine named Lee Siegel,

这是一本由我朋友 Lee Siegel 写的可爱的书，

who's a professor of religion, actually, at the University of Hawaii,

他是夏威夷大学的宗教方向教授，

and he's an expert magician, and an expert

而且还是个魔术专家，是

on the street magic of India, which is what this book is about,

印度街头魔术的专家，也就是这本书的内容，

"Net of Magic."

“魔术的网。”

And there's a passage in it which I would love to share with you.

我要与你们分享里面的一篇文章。

It speaks so eloquently to the problem.

这些话在这个问题上说的真是太好了。

"'I'm writing a book on magic,' I explain, and I'm asked, 'Real magic?'

“ ‘我在写一本关于魔术的书，’ 我解释道，然后我又被问道，‘真正的魔术？’

By 'real magic,' people mean miracles,

真正的魔术，人们指的是奇迹、

thaumaturgical acts, and supernatural powers.

魔法，以及超自然力量。

'No,' I answer. 'Conjuring tricks, not real magic.'

‘不’，我回应道。‘变戏法而已，不是真正的魔术。’

'Real magic,' in other words, refers to the magic that is not real;

真正的魔术，换句话来说，指的是那些并不真实可行的魔法，

while the magic that is real, that can actually be done, is not real magic."

而那些真实可行的魔术，又不是真正的魔法。”

(Laughter)

（笑声）

Now, that's the way a lot of people feel about consciousness.

好了，那就是很多人对意识的感觉。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

Real consciousness is not a bag of tricks.

真正的意识不是魔术师的口袋

If you're going to explain this as a bag of tricks,

如果你把它解释为魔术师的口袋，

then it's not real consciousness, whatever it is.

那它就不是真正的意识，不管它是什么。

And, as Marvin said, and as other people have said,

可是，Marvin 和其他的人说，

"Consciousness is a bag of tricks."

“意识是魔术师的口袋。”

This means that a lot of people are just left completely dissatisfied

这意味着很多人会感到不满

and incredulous when I attempt to explain consciousness.

和怀疑，在我尝试解释意识的时候。

So this is the problem. So I have to

所以，这就是个问题。我需要做

do a little bit of the sort of work

一点点尝试

that a lot of you won't like,

你们很多人不会喜欢它，

for the same reason that you don't like to see

因为你们不愿意看到

a magic trick explained to you.

魔术被揭秘。

How many of you here, if somebody -- some smart aleck --

在座有多少人，在别人——一些自作聪明的人——

starts telling you how a particular magic trick is done,

开始揭露魔术的秘密时，

you sort of want to block your ears and say, "No, no, I don't want to know!

你们想要塞上耳朵然后说，“不，不，我不想知道！

Don't take the thrill of it away. I'd rather be mystified.

不要破坏它的刺激。我宁愿被蒙在鼓里。

Don't tell me the answer."

不要告诉我答案。”

A lot of people feel that way about consciousness, I've discovered.

我发现，很多人对待意识是这样的态度。

And I'm sorry if I impose some clarity, some understanding on you.

所以我对给你们做的分析和解释感到抱歉。

You'd better leave now if you don't want to know some of these tricks.

如果你不想了解这些思维的秘密，最好现在就离开。

But I'm not going to explain it all to you.

不过我也不会向你们解释所有。

I'm going to do what philosophers do.

我会做哲学家所做的。

Here's how a philosopher explains the sawing-the-lady-in-half trick.

哲学家如何解释将女士锯成两半的魔术呢。

You know the sawing-the-lady-in-half trick?

你们知道将人锯成两半的魔术吧？

The philosopher says, "I'm going to explain to you how that's done.

哲学家说，“我来解释那是怎么做到的。

You see, the magician doesn't really saw the lady in half."

你看，魔术师并没有真正把那位女士锯成两半。”

(Laughter)

（笑声）

"He merely makes you think that he does."

“他仅仅是让你们以为他这样做了。”

And you say, "Yes, and how does he do that?"

然后他说 “是啊，他怎么做到呢？”

He says, "Oh, that's not my department, I'm sorry."

他说，“喔，那不是我的研究范围，不好意思。”

(Laughter)

（笑声）

So now I'm going to illustrate how philosophers explain consciousness.

现在我将描述哲学家是如何解释意识的。

But I'm going to try to also show you

我也将向你们展示

that consciousness isn't quite as marvelous --

意识并不是那么神奇——

your own consciousness isn't quite as wonderful --

你的意识并不像——

as you may have thought it is.

你所设想的那么神奇。

This is something, by the way, that Lee Siegel talks about in his book.

顺便说，这就是 Lee Siegal 在他的书中所谈到的事情。

He marvels at how he'll do a magic show, and afterwards

他的魔术表演非常神奇，所以

people will swear they saw him do X, Y, and Z. He never did those things.

有些人发誓目睹他曾做过甲事、乙事还有丙事。但其实他从来没做过。

He didn't even try to do those things.

他甚至都没有尝试过。

People's memories inflate what they think they saw.

当人们认为看到了的时候，他们的记忆就会自以为是。

And the same is true of consciousness.

意识也是这样。

Now, let's see if this will work. All right. Let's just watch this.

现在，让我们看看这个。

Watch it carefully.

仔细看。

I'm working with a young computer-animator documentarian

我在和一个年轻的计算机动画纪录片专家合作

named Nick Deamer, and this is a little demo that he's done for me,

他的名字叫 Nick Deamer。这是他帮我做的一个小演示，

part of a larger project some of you may be interested in.

是你们或许会感兴趣的大项目中的一小部分。

We're looking for a backer.

我们在寻求赞助。

It's a feature-length documentary on consciousness.

是一部关于意识的正片长度纪录片

OK, now, you all saw what changed, right?

好，你们都看到了什么东西改变了，对吧？

How many of you noticed that every one of those squares changed color?

有多少人注意到每一个方块都变了颜色？

Every one. I'll just show you by running it again.

每个都变了。我来重放一下。

Even when you know that they're all going to change color,

即使你们都知道他们要变颜色了，

it's very hard to notice. You have to really concentrate

那也很难被注意到。你需要完全地集中注意力

to pick up any of the changes at all.

以发现任何变化。

Now, this is an example -- one of many --

这是许多例子中的一个，

of a phenomenon that's now being studied quite a bit.

关于我们已经有很多研究的一个现象。

It's one that I predicted in the last page or two of my

它是我在我书的最后几页预言过的

1991 book, "Consciousness Explained,"

我在1991年的书，“意识的解释，”

where I said if you did experiments of this sort,

我说如果你有过这种经历，

you'd find that people were unable to pick up really large changes.

你会发现人们不能发现真正的大改变。

If there's time at the end,

如果最后还剩时间

I'll show you the much more dramatic case.

我会展示更多富有戏剧性的例子。

Now, how can it be that there are all those changes going on,

为什么到处都在发生这样的改变，

and that we're not aware of them?

而我们却意识不到？

Well, earlier today, Jeff Hawkins mentioned the way your eye saccades,

今天早些时候，Jeff Hawkins 提到了眼睛是如何扫视的，

the way your eye moves around three or four times a second.

也就是眼睛一秒钟移动三到四次。

He didn't mention the speed. Your eye is constantly in motion,

他没有提到速度。你的眼睛一直在运动，

moving around, looking at eyes, noses, elbows,

四处运动，看着眼睛、鼻子、手肘，

looking at interesting things in the world.

看着这世上有趣的东西。

And where your eye isn't looking,

在你眼睛没有看到的地方，

you're remarkably impoverished in your vision.

你的视野特别贫乏。

That's because the foveal part of your eye,

这是因为你眼睛的中央凹部分，

which is the high-resolution part,

也就是高分辨率的部分，

is only about the size of your thumbnail held at arms length.

只有大拇指甲在一臂长处看起来那么大。

That's the detail part.

那就是有细节的部分。

It doesn't seem that way, does it?

看起来好像不是这样对吧？

It doesn't seem that way, but that's the way it is.

看起来不是这么回事，但它就是。

You're getting in a lot less information than you think.

你接收到的信息远比你想象的少。

Here's a completely different effect. This is a painting by Bellotto.

这里有一个截然不同的效果。这是 Bellotto 的一幅油画。

It's in the museum in North Carolina.

它被藏于北卡罗来纳州博物馆。

Bellotto was a student of Canaletto's.

Bellotto 是 Canaletto 的学生。

And I love paintings like that --

我喜欢那样的油画——

the painting is actually about as big as it is right here.

像这样大的油画。

And I love Canalettos, because Canaletto has this fantastic detail,

我也喜欢 Canalettos，因为 Canaletto的作品对细节处理巧妙，

and you can get right up

我们可以细细地观察

and see all the details on the painting.

油画的细节。

And I started across the hall in North Carolina,

我穿过北卡博物馆的那个大厅，

because I thought it was probably a Canaletto,

因为我想可能是 Canaletto 的作品，

and would have all that in detail.

所以会有那些细节。

And I noticed that on the bridge there, there's a lot of people --

然后我注意到那边的桥，有非常多的人——

you can just barely see them walking across the bridge.

你似乎可以看到他们从桥上走过。

And I thought as I got closer

我想着如果我走近一点

I would be able to see all the detail of most people,

我就可以看到更多人物细节，

see their clothes, and so forth.

看到他们的衣服等等。

And as I got closer and closer, I actually screamed.

实际上，当我越来越近的时候，我叫了出来。

I yelled out because when I got closer,

我叫是因为当我靠近时，

I found the detail wasn't there at all.

我发现那里其实没有细节。

There were just little artfully placed blobs of paint.

那里只有巧妙放置的颜料粒。

And as I walked towards the picture,

而当我走近那幅画时，

I was expecting detail that wasn't there.

我在期待不存在的细节。

The artist had very cleverly suggested people and clothes

艺术家很聪明地暗示了人物和服装

and wagons and all sorts of things,

以及车马还有其他事物，

and my brain had taken the suggestion.

而我的大脑接受了这样的暗示。

You're familiar with a more recent technology, which is -- There,

你们很熟悉一个更新的技术，就在——这个。

you can get a better view of the blobs.

你们可以更好地看到颗粒。

See, when you get close

看，当你移近时

they're really just blobs of paint.

他们就真的只是颜料粒。

You will have seen something like this -- this is the reverse effect.

你应该看过像这样的东西——相反的效果。

I'll just give that to you one more time.

我再来演示一次。

Now, what does your brain do when it takes the suggestion?

好，那么当你的大脑接受暗示时他做了什么呢？

When an artful blob of paint or two, by an artist,

当艺术家的一两滴颜料粒

suggests a person -- say, one of

暗示了一个人——比如，一个

Marvin Minsky's little society of mind --

Marvin Minsky 的小社会心态——

do they send little painters out to fill in all the details in your brain somewhere?

难道他们把小画家送到你的脑子里来填充所有细节？

I don't think so. Not a chance. But then, how on Earth is it done?

我觉得不是。没有任何可能，不过那样的话，那这些又到底是怎么回事？

Well, remember the philosopher's explanation of the lady?

还记得哲学家怎么解释那个被锯成两半的女士吗？

It's the same thing.

这是同一件事情。

The brain just makes you think that it's got the detail there.

大脑只是让你确信它得到了那处细节。

You think the detail's there, but it isn't there.

你想着细节在那里，但是他不在。

The brain isn't actually putting the detail in your head at all.

大脑并没有把细节放入脑海中。

It's just making you expect the detail.

它只是让你期待细节。

Let's just do this experiment very quickly.

让我们快速地过下这个试验。

Is the shape on the left the same as the shape on the right, rotated?

左边的形状旋转后是不是与右边的完全相同？

Yes.

是的。

How many of you did it by rotating the one on the left

多少人把左边的形状旋转了

in your mind's eye, to see if it matched up with the one on the right?

在想象中，来看它是否与右边那个一致？

How many of you rotated the one on the right? OK.

有多少人旋转的是右边那个？好的。

How do you know that's what you did?

你怎么知道那就是你所作的？

(Laughter)

（笑声）

There's in fact been a very interesting debate

实际上这有个非常有趣的争论

raging for over 20 years in cognitive science --

在认知科学领域持续了20年——

various experiments started by Roger Shepherd,

由 Roger Shepherd 开始的各种试验，

who measured the angular velocity of rotation of mental images.

他测量了人的意识中图像的旋转角速度。

Yes, it's possible to do that.

是的，这是做得到的。

But the details of the process are still in significant controversy.

但是过程的细节还有着明显的争议。

And if you read that literature, one of the things

如果你阅读相关的文献，有件事情

that you really have to come to terms with is

你一定要妥协的是

even when you're the subject in the experiment, you don't know.

即使你是实验对象，你也无从知道。

You don't know how you do it.

你不知道你是怎么做到的。

You just know that you have certain beliefs.

你只是知道你有特定的信念

And they come in a certain order, at a certain time.

他们在特定的时间以特定的顺序出现。

And what explains the fact that that's what you think?

那么，如何解释“那就是你所想的”这个事实呢？

Well, that's where you have to go backstage and ask the magician.

那，你就要到后台去问魔术师了。

This is a figure that I love: Bradley, Petrie, and Dumais.

这是我喜欢的图示：Bradley, Petrie, 以及 Dumais。

You may think that I've cheated,

你可能觉得我在骗你，

that I've put a little whiter-than-white boundary there.

通过放置一些不显眼的边界。

How many of you see that sort of boundary,

多少人看到了那种边界，

with the Necker cube floating in front of the circles?

通过把内克尔方块放在圆圈的前面？

Can you see it?

你可以看到吗？

Well, you know, in effect, the boundary's really there, in a certain sense.

看起来，在特定情境下，是有边界的。

Your brain is actually computing that boundary,

你的大脑计算出了那种边界，

the boundary that goes right there.

让边界出现在那里。

But now, notice there are two ways of seeing the cube, right?

现在，你注意到了有两种方法来看那个立方体，对吧？

It's a Necker cube.

这是一个内科尔方块。

Everybody can see the two ways of seeing the cube? OK.

大家都可以看出两种看方块的方法吧？好的

Can you see the four ways of seeing the cube?

那你们能看出四种方法来吗？

Because there's another way of seeing it.

由于有不同的方法来看它。

If you're seeing it as a cube floating in front of some circles,

如果你让方块浮在圆圈之上，

some black circles, there's another way of seeing it.

那些黑色的圆圈，就有另一种看的方法。

As a cube, on a black background,

如果把方块当作放在黑色背景之上，

as seen through a piece of Swiss cheese.

就像是从一块瑞士奶酪的洞里看过去。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

Can you get it? How many of you can't get it? That'll help.

你们能理解吗？多少人不能理解？这样应该有所帮助。

(Laughter)

（笑声）

Now you can get it. These are two very different phenomena.

现在你们明白了。这里有两个很不一样的现象。

When you see the cube one way, behind the screen,

如果你把方块当作是放在屏幕之后的，

those boundaries go away.

边界就没了。

But there's still a sort of filling in, as we can tell if we look at this.

不过仍然可以把它填充出来，如果你用这种方法去看。

We don't have any trouble seeing the cube, but where does the color change?

我们可以毫无障碍的看到方块，但是颜色是在哪里改变的呢？

Does your brain have to send little painters in there?

你的大脑在那儿放了小画家？

The purple-painters and the green-painters

画紫色的画家和画绿色的画家

fight over who's going to paint that bit behind the curtain? No.

两者争着要在遮挡物之后涂色吗？不是。

Your brain just lets it go. The brain doesn't need to fill that in.

你的大脑就由它去了。大脑不需要填充它。

When I first started talking about

当我第一次谈论到

the Bradley, Petrie, Dumais example that you just saw --

你刚刚看到的 Bradley, Petrie, Dumais 的例子 ——

I'll go back to it, this one --

让我退回到它，这个——

I said that there was no filling-in behind there.

我说过在被挡住的地方是没有填充颜色的。

And I supposed that that was just a flat truth, always true.

我以为这是一个公理，总是对的。

But Rob Van Lier has recently shown that it isn't.

不过 Rob Van Lier 最近证明了它不是。

Now, if you think you see some pale yellow --

现在，如果你觉得你看到了一些黄色——

I'll run this a few more times.

让我再做几次。

Look in the gray areas,

看这些灰色区域，

and see if you seem to see something sort of shadowy moving in there --

你是不是好像看到有些阴影在移动——

yeah, it's amazing. There's nothing there. It's no trick.

是的！那很神奇。那里没有东西。没耍花招。

["Failure to Detect Changes in Scenes" slide]

这是 Ron Rensink 的作品，在一定程度上

This is Ron Rensink's work, which was in some degree

被书最后的暗示所激发。

inspired by that suggestion right at the end of the book.

让我暂停几秒。

Let me just pause this for a second if I can.

这是盲变化。

This is change-blindness.

你会看到两幅图片，

What you're going to see is two pictures,

一幅与另一幅有些许区别。

one of which is slightly different from the other.

你看这里是红色屋顶而那里是灰色，

You see here the red roof and the gray roof,

他们之间有个遮罩，

and in between them there will be a mask,

这里只是一个空白屏幕，在大概¼秒。

which is just a blank screen, for about a quarter of a second.

所以你将看到第一幅图，然后是遮罩。

So you'll see the first picture, then a mask,

再然后是第二幅图，然后是遮罩。

then the second picture, then a mask.

然后这会重复，你作为实验对象的工作

And this will just continue, and your job as the subject

就是当你看到变化的时候按下按钮。

is to press the button when you see the change.

所以是，原始图片出现240毫秒。空白。

So, show the original picture for 240 milliseconds. Blank.

下一幅图片出现240毫秒。空白。

Show the next picture for 240 milliseconds. Blank.

这会一直持续，直到实验对象按下按钮，表示

And keep going, until the subject presses the button, saying,

“我看到变化了。”

"I see the change."

好，现在我们就是实验对象。

So now we're going to be subjects in the experiment.

我们从简单的开始。一个例子。

We're going to start easy. Some examples.

没有问题。

No trouble there.

大家都可以看到吧？好的。

Can everybody see? All right.

是的，Rensink 的实验对象仅仅花了

Indeed, Rensink's subjects took only a little bit more

一秒多一点点的时间来按下按钮。

than a second to press the button.

这个能看到吗？

Can you see that one?

2.9 秒。

2.9 seconds.

多少人仍然没有看到？

How many don't see it still?

那个谷仓的屋顶上有什么？

What's on the roof of that barn?

（笑声）

(Laughter)

简单吧。

It's easy.

是桥还是船坞？

Is it a bridge or a dock?

还有更多富有戏剧性的，然后我的演讲将结束。

There are a few more really dramatic ones, and then I'll close.

我想让你们看看几个很让人惊讶的。

I want you to see a few that are particularly striking.

这个很难看到因为它很大。

This one because it's so large and yet it's pretty hard to see.

看到了吗？

Can you see it?

听众：看到了。

Audience: Yes.

看到那个朝前朝后的影子了吗？很大。

Dan Dennett: See the shadows going back and forth? Pretty big.

平均时间是15秒半

So 15.5 seconds is the median time

对于这个试验的对象。

for subjects in his experiment there.

我爱这个。我将以这个结束，

I love this one. I'll end with this one,

就因为它是一件很明显很重要的东西。

just because it's such an obvious and important thing.

多少人还没看到？多少人还没看到？

How many still don't see it? How many still don't see it?

那架波音的机翼上有几架引擎？

How many engines on the wing of that Boeing?

（笑声）

(Laughter)

就在图片中间！

Right in the middle of the picture!

感谢你们的聆听。

Thanks very much for your attention.

我想告诉你们的是科学家，

What I wanted to show you is that scientists,

通过利用外部的、第三人称的方法，

using their from-the-outside, third-person methods,

可以告诉你关于内在意识的事情

can tell you things about your own consciousness

那是你从未梦想的。

that you would never dream of,

而且，实际上，你并没有主宰

and that, in fact, you're not the authority

你自己的意识。

on your own consciousness that you think you are.

我们正取得很多进步

And we're really making a lot of progress

在研究思想的理论上。

on coming up with a theory of mind.

Jeff Hawkins 在今早描述了他的尝试

Jeff Hawkins, this morning, was describing his attempt

使一个优秀的、大的理论，进入神经科学。

to get theory, and a good, big theory, into the neuroscience.

他是对的。这是个问题。

And he's right. This is a problem.

哈佛医学院曾经——在一次谈话中——

Harvard Medical School once -- I was at a talk --

实验室主导说，“在我们实验室，有一种说法。

director of the lab said, "In our lab, we have a saying.

如果你研究一个神经元，那就是神经科学。

If you work on one neuron, that's neuroscience.

如果研究两个神经元，那就是心理学。”

If you work on two neurons, that's psychology."

（笑声）

(Laughter)

我们需要更多的理论，而且他们能够自上而下而来。

We have to have more theory, and it can come as much from the top down.

非常感谢。

Thank you very much.

（掌声）

(Applause)