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

譯者: Peggy Tsai 審譯者: Jen-Huei Wu

We are going to take a quick voyage

讓我們迅速審視對

over the cognitive history of the 20th century,

20世紀的認知發展歷史

because during that century,

這是因為在20世紀裡

our minds have altered dramatically.

我們的心智發展發生了顯著的改變

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

大家都知道，人們駕駛的車子

have altered because the roads are better

到了20世紀有了改變，因為道路變得更好開了

and because of technology.

這也是科技進步的關係

And our minds have altered, too.

而我們的心智也變得跟以往不同

We've gone from people who confronted a concrete world

我們從一群面對具體世界，

and analyzed that world primarily in terms

藉由分析現況

of how much it would benefit them

來算計出還能從中獲取多少利益的人

to people who confront a very complex world,

到一群面對十分複雜世界的人

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

而這是個我們得演化適應

new mental habits, new habits of mind.

發展出新的心靈模式、思考習慣的新世界

And these include things like

這些包括

clothing that concrete world with classification,

讓世界確立階級分明的服裝穿著

introducing abstractions that we try to make

引進種種我們試著讓抽象

logically consistent,

變得前後邏輯一致

and also taking the hypothetical seriously,

以及嚴肅看待各種假設

that is, wondering about what might have been

換句話說，以思考「可能是什麼」

rather than what is.

取代「是什麼」

Now, this dramatic change was drawn to my attention

而這個顯著的變化引起我注意的是

through massive I.Q. gains over time,

經歷時間，我們的智商高度進化

and these have been truly massive.

是真的非常高度的進化

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

我指的是，這不只是在智商測驗裡

on I.Q. tests.

多答對幾個問題的那種程度

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

我們在智商測驗上

than each succeeding generation

比上好幾代答對了更多題

back to the time that they were invented.

自智商測驗出世以來，新一代就更勝上一代

Indeed, if you score the people a century ago

事實上，若你給一世紀前的人們做測驗

against modern norms,

以現在的標準來評定

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

他們的平均智商大約只有70

If you score us against their norms,

若你以他們的標準來評定我們現代人

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

我們的平均智商為130

Now this has raised all sorts of questions.

這個結果引起各種疑問

Were our immediate ancestors

這代表我們的直系祖先

on the verge of mental retardation?

接近智力發展遲緩的邊緣嗎？

Because 70 is normally the score for mental retardation.

因為在一般的標準來看，智商70代表智力發展遲緩

Or are we on the verge of all being gifted?

或代表我們的智力接近天才？

Because 130 is the cutting line for giftedness.

因為智商130差不多是天才的程度了

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

這裡我想以第三種角度來做解釋

that's much more illuminating than either of those,

相信能比前兩種說法解釋得更清楚合理

and to put this into perspective,

為了讓大家了解這個視角

let's imagine that a Martian came down to Earth

讓我們現在想像火星人來到了地球

and found a ruined civilization.

發現了古老的文明遺跡

And this Martian was an archaeologist,

而這些火星人是群考古學家

and they found scores, target scores,

他們考察到了射重標靶的分數記錄

that people had used for shooting.

也就是之前人類用來記錄射擊的次數

And first they looked at 1865,

首先他們看到1865年的標靶

and they found that in a minute,

發現在一分鐘內

people had only put one bullet in the bullseye.

人們只有一顆子彈射中靶心

And then they found, in 1898,

接下來他們發現1898年的標靶射擊記錄

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

一分鐘就約為五顆子彈射中靶的中心

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

接下來在1918年的標靶上 人們射中靶心的子彈就有一百顆

And initially, that archaeologist would be baffled.

一開始，火星考古學家們頗困惑

They would say, look, these tests were designed

他們說，看，這個測試本來是為了

to find out how much people were steady of hand,

找出人們持槍的穩定度

how keen their eyesight was,

以及人們視覺的敏銳度

whether they had control of their weapon.

看他們能否控制好他們的武器

How could these performances have escalated

為什麼不同年代的測試結果

to this enormous degree?

會拉出這麼大的差距呢？

Well we now know, of course, the answer.

當然，我們現在都知道，答案是

If that Martian looked at battlefields,

如果火星考古學家們同時考察戰場狀況

they would find that people had only muskets

他們會發現在南北戰爭中

at the time of the Civil War

人們只有基本款的火槍配做武器

and that they had repeating rifles

而到了美國和西班牙的對戰時

at the time of the Spanish-American War,

人們有了自動來福槍

and then they had machine guns

然後到了第一次世界大戰時

by the time of World War I.

人們有了機關槍

And, in other words, it was the equipment

換句話說，改變的是武器

that was in the hands of the average soldier

操作武器的士兵依舊是普通人

that was responsible, not greater keenness of eye

武器才是關鍵，而不是士兵的視力變得更敏銳了

or steadiness of hand.

或持槍穩定度變得更好了

Now what we have to imagine is the mental artillery

將這個情況換到心靈上來說，心靈上的武裝

that we have picked up over those hundred years,

在過去百年來發生的演進

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

我想在這裡另一名 思想家的理論能幫助我們

and that's Luria.

思想家盧里亞

Luria looked at people

盧里亞在人類進入科學時代之前

just before they entered the scientific age,

觀察人們

and he found that these people

他發現這時代的人們

were resistant to classifying the concrete world.

並不願意將現實世界做分類

They wanted to break it up

他們希望將世界分割成

into little bits that they could use.

一小塊一小塊他們能各自利用的部份

He found that they were resistant

盧里亞發現他們也不願意

to deducing the hypothetical,

對假設做進一步的推測

to speculating about what might be,

拒絕推想事情可能會變成什麼樣

and he found finally that they didn't deal well

最後他也發現人們不大應付得來

with abstractions or using logic on those abstractions.

抽象概念或用邏輯思考理解抽象概念

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

現在我對大家介紹盧里亞的訪問案例

He talked to the head man of a person

他訪問了俄國鄉村的

in rural Russia.

村長

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

他們當時僅有 20 世紀的人們所享有的

about four years of schooling.

四年學校教育

And he asked that particular person,

盧里亞問村長

what do crows and fish have in common?

烏鴉和魚有什麼共通點？

And the fellow said, "Absolutely nothing.

這老兄回答：「完全沒有。

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

就魚是可吃的，烏鴉我卻就沒法子了。

A crow can peck at a fish.

烏鴉能攻擊魚

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

而魚卻不能對烏鴉做任何反擊。」

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

盧里亞問：「但牠們不都是動物嗎？」

And he said, "Of course not.

村長答道：「當然不是。

One's a fish.

一個是魚類，

The other is a bird."

另一個是烏類啊！」

And he was interested, effectively,

這個回答顯然的引起盧里亞的興趣

in what he could do with those concrete objects.

他思考著，還能在這些具體的事物上， 發現人們什麼樣的看法呢?

And then Luria went to another person,

然後盧里亞對另一個人做訪問

and he said to them,

他告訴那人：

"There are no camels in Germany.

「德國沒有駱駝。

Hamburg is a city in Germany.

漢堡是個位於德國的城市。

Are there camels in Hamburg?"

那麼漢堡會有駱駝嗎？」

And the fellow said,

這人回答:

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

「嗯，如果漢堡是個夠大的城市的話， 應該會有駱駝吧。」

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

盧里亞問：「但根據我話中的邏輯思考呢？」

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

對方回答：「呃，或許它是個小村莊，

and there's no room for camels."

塞不下駱駝。」

In other words, he was unwilling to treat this

換句話說，這個人不願意將這個問題

as anything but a concrete problem,

當做一個實際的問題來思考

and he was used to camels being in villages,

而且他認為駱駝就應該出現在村莊裡

and he was quite unable to use the hypothetical,

他沒辦法依照盧里卡給出的假設

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

去思考德國有沒有駱駝這個問題

A third interview was conducted

盧里卡的第三個訪問

with someone about the North Pole.

是訪問某人對於北極的概念

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

盧里亞說：「北極總是在下雪。

Wherever there is always snow, the bears are white.

而在總是下雪的地方，熊都會是白色的。

What color are the bears at the North Pole?"

那麼北極的熊是什麼顏色？」

And the response was, "Such a thing

對方回答：「這樣的問題

is to be settled by testimony.

得親眼見到才能知道啊。

If a wise person came from the North Pole

如果現在有位來自北極的智者

and told me the bears were white,

告訴我北極的熊是白色的，

I might believe him,

我可能會相信他，

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

但目前為止我看過的熊都是棕色的啊。」

Now you see again, this person has rejected

大家可以再一次看到，這名受訪者拒絕

going beyond the concrete world

脫離現實世界做思考

and analyzing it through everyday experience,

並且用他的日常生活經驗去分析問題

and it was important to that person

對這名受訪者而言

what color bears were --

熊是什麼顏色很重要

that is, they had to hunt bears.

因為他得狩獵熊

They weren't willing to engage in this.

他們不願意順著假設思考

One of them said to Luria,

其中一名受訪者對盧里亞說

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

「如果不是實際存在的問題，我們要怎麼解決？

None of these problems are real.

你提的這些問題都不是實際存在的。

How can we address them?"

我們要怎麼做思考？」

Now, these three categories --

這三個層面包括

classification,

區分種類，

using logic on abstractions,

對抽象概念做出邏輯思考，

taking the hypothetical seriously --

和認真看待假設--

how much difference do they make in the real world

這三個思考層面的改變， 為實際世界帶來多少影響

beyond the testing room?

除了智力測驗分數以外？

And let me give you a few illustrations.

這裡我想提出幾點

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

首先，今天我們幾乎所有人都擁有高學歷

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

我們從四年義務教育發展到八年義務教育

to 12 years of formal education,

現在發展到十二年義務教育

and 52 percent of Americans

52%的美國人

have actually experienced some type of tertiary education.

都受過大專或大學教育

Now, not only do we have much more education,

我們不只受教程度提高了

and much of that education is scientific,

教導的科學知識也變多了

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

而在沒有分類概念的前提下， 是沒辦法進行科學思考的

You can't do science without proposing hypotheses.

你也沒辦法在 不提出假設的前提下做科學思考

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

缺少邏輯一致性，也無法做科學思考

And even down in grade school, things have changed.

就算在小學基礎教育的階段，教學情況也改變了

In 1910, they looked at the examinations

看看1910年時，俄亥俄州

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

給14歲小孩的測驗

and they found that they were all

會發現這些測驗全是關於

for socially valued concrete information.

社會價值、社會認知的實際資訊

They were things like,

比如像是

what are the capitals of the 44 or 45 states

那個時候

that existed at that time?

全美44或45州的首都名稱是什麼？

When they looked at the exams

再看看1990年俄亥俄州

that the state of Ohio gave in 1990,

同樣給14歲小孩的測驗

they were all about abstractions.

它們則全是關於抽象概念的題目

They were things like,

像是

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

為什麼佔地面積最大的城市 很少成為一州的首都？

And you were supposed to think, well,

而你得去思考，嗯，大概因為

the state legislature was rural-controlled,

州立法機關聽命於當地農村

and they hated the big city,

而當地農村討厭大城市

so rather than putting the capital in a big city,

所以他們不把首都放在大城市

they put it in a county seat.

而放在鄉村

They put it in Albany rather than New York.

他們選奧爾巴尼為首都，而不是紐約

They put it in Harrisburg rather than Philadelphia.

他們選哈里斯堡為首都，而不是費城

And so forth.

如此推論下去

So the tenor of education has changed.

所以教育的基本內容改變了

We are educating people to take the hypothetical seriously,

我們教導人們認真看待假設問題

to use abstractions, and to link them logically.

教人們運用抽象概念， 用邏輯將它們連結起來

What about employment?

那麼從就業狀況來看呢？

Well, in 1900, three percent of Americans

1900年代，3%的美國人

practiced professions that were cognitively demanding.

從事需要高度認知能力的專門職業

Only three percent were lawyers or doctors or teachers.

只有3%的美國人是律師、醫生或老師

Today, 35 percent of Americans

今天，35%的美國人

practice cognitively demanding professions,

從事需要高度認知能力的職業

not only to the professions proper like lawyer

而不只這些以高度認知能力為主的專門行業

or doctor or scientist or lecturer,

如律師、醫生、科學家或講師

but many, many sub-professions

還有很多、很多需要認知能力的次專門行業

having to do with being a technician,

比如一名技術員

a computer programmer.

比如一名程式設計師

A whole range of professions now make cognitive demands.

所有的專業範圍都需要高度認知能力

And we can only meet the terms of employment

而這樣的就業情況

in the modern world by being cognitively

是現今世界中才演變出來的

far more flexible.

變成更廣泛的應用到認知能力

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

現今社會中，不只有更多人

in cognitively demanding professions.

從事需要高度認知的行業

The professions have been upgraded.

職業本身也升級了

Compare the doctor in 1900,

和1900年代的醫生做比較

who really had only a few tricks up his sleeve,

當時的醫生只有幾把花招

with the modern general practitioner or specialist,

現在的醫生有各科專業和各科的專家

with years of scientific training.

都是經過數年的科學訓練

Compare the banker in 1900,

和1900年代的銀行家做比較

who really just needed a good accountant

當時的銀行家只要計算能力好

and to know who was trustworthy in the local community

以及知道在地方社區裡，誰是可靠的

for paying back their mortgage.

會還清他們的貸款就可以了

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

現在的商業化銀行家將整個世界踩在腳下

may have been morally remiss,

或許不再那麼注重道德觀

but they were cognitively very agile.

但他們有非常敏銳的思考應變能力

They went far beyond that 1900 banker.

他們遠遠超越1900年代的銀行家

They had to look at computer projections

他們得看電腦分析

for the housing market.

對房地產市場做出預測報告

They had to get complicated CDO-squared

他們得拿到複雜的 新式 CDO (債務抵押債券)證券

in order to bundle debt together

做出負債整合

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

讓負債資產在帳面上看起來像是盈利的資產

They had to prepare a case to get rating agencies

他們必需準備完美的案件，讓評鑑單位

to give it a AAA,

給他們打上最好看的分數

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

而大致上的情況都是 用賄賂換取最佳的分數

And they also, of course, had to get people

理所當然的，他們還得必需說服人們

to accept these so-called assets

說服人們接受他們所謂的盈利資產

and pay money for them

然後付錢給他們

even though they were highly vulnerable.

即便這些資產有很大的風險

Or take a farmer today.

或看看今日的農夫們

I take the farm manager of today as very different

我認為今天的農場管理者和1900年代的農夫

from the farmer of 1900.

是非常不一樣的

So it hasn't just been the spread

所以這並不只是各行各業

of cognitively demanding professions.

都廣泛需要高度認知能力的情況

It's also been the upgrading of tasks

他們要完成的任務也跟著升級

like lawyer and doctor and what have you

像律師、醫生，和你面臨的情況

that have made demands on our cognitive faculties.

在我們的認知教育體系裡升級的課程

But I've talked about education and employment.

現在我們討論過了教育和就業上的情況

Some of the habits of mind that we have developed

從二十世紀以來

over the 20th century

我們某部分的心智狀況發展

have paid off in unexpected areas.

出乎意料的，反而停滯不前

I'm primarily a moral philosopher.

我主要是個道德哲學家

I merely have a holiday in psychology,

我幾乎離不開心理學研究

and what interests me in general is moral debate.

在大眾心理學中 引起我興趣的是道德辯證思考

Now over the last century,

過去一世紀以來

in developed nations like America,

像美國這樣個已開發國家

moral debate has escalated

道德辯證層面也升級了

because we take the hypothetical seriously,

因為我們認真看待種種假設

and we also take universals seriously

我們也認真看待全球事務

and look for logical connections.

並且試圖找出邏輯性的關聯

When I came home in 1955 from university

1955年我從大學畢業回到家鄉

at the time of Martin Luther King,

當時是馬丁‧路德‧金的時代

a lot of people came home at that time

很多在那時回到家鄉的人

and started having arguments with their parents and grandparents.

開始和他們的父母、祖父母起爭執

My father was born in 1885,

我父親在1885年出生

and he was mildly racially biased.

他的觀念裡帶有一點種族偏見

As an Irishman, he hated the English so much

他是名愛爾蘭人，因為他幾乎 把所有的激情都拿去恨英格蘭了

he didn't have much emotion for anyone else.

於是他沒剩下什麼激動的情緒給其他人

(Laughter)

(笑聲)

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

但他的確認為黑人是次等的

And when we said to our parents and grandparents,

而我們問父母和祖父母

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

「如果明天早上醒來， 你變成了黑人，你有什麼感覺？」

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

他們回答：這是你說過最蠢的話

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

你認識任何一個睡一覺醒來…

(Laughter) --

(笑聲)

that turned black?

…就發現自己變成黑人的人嗎？

In other words, they were fixed in the concrete

換句話說，他們用之前傳承下來的

mores and attitudes they had inherited.

離不開現實狀況的思考習慣 和態度來解決這個問題

They would not take the hypothetical seriously,

他們不會認真看待這個假設

and without the hypothetical,

而去除假設

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

就很難進行道德辯證

You have to say, imagine you were

你得說，想像你人在

in Iran, and imagine that your relatives

伊朗，想像你的親人

all suffered from collateral damage

都因戰火波及所苦

even though they had done no wrong.

他們沒做錯任何事，但依舊受苦

How would you feel about that?

你對此情況該做何感想？

And if someone of the older generation says,

而長一輩的人會回答

well, our government takes care of us,

喔，我們的政府照顧我們

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

而他們的生活是他們政府的事

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

他們不願意去認真思考這個假設

Or take an Islamic father whose daughter has been raped,

或舉信奉伊斯蘭教的父親 面對被強暴的女兒為例

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

父親認為，為了名節榮譽，他必需殺了她

Well, he's treating his mores

這個情況下，他是以他的思考模式在判定

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

而如果他們對這些 傳承下來的概念深信不疑

and they're unmovable in any way by logic.

任何邏輯都無法說服他們改變

They're just inherited mores.

他們只是跟著傳承下來的習俗走

Today we would say something like,

今天我們會這樣對父親說

well, imagine you were knocked unconscious and sodomized.

喔，想想如果是你被打昏了再被強姦

Would you deserve to be killed?

你覺得你應該為此被殺嗎？

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

父親會回答，這情況可蘭經裡沒寫

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

我奉行的經典裡沒有這一條

Well you, today, universalize your principles.

今天，讓我們，統一我們的思考原則

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

將這些原則視為抽象概念 而用你的邏輯去理解它們

If you have a principle such as,

如果你抱持這樣的思考原則：

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

有罪的人才應受苦

then to exclude black people

但又把黑人排除在外

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

那這個原則就得有例外了，不是嗎？

You have to say, well, blackness of skin,

你得說，嗯，只是因為黑皮膚

you couldn't suffer just for that.

不能成為受苦的理由

It must be that blacks are somehow tainted.

一定是因為這些黑人做錯了什麼

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

於是它才會符合我們熟悉的認知，對吧？

and say, well how can you consider all blacks tainted

那麼再問，你怎麼能判定所有的黑人都做錯了事？

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

聖奧古斯丁是個黑人， 湯瑪士‧索維爾(美國著名經濟學家)也是黑人

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

這時你就能進行道德辯證了

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

因為你不再將道德原則看做具體經驗

You're treating them as universals,

你將它們看做統一的標準

to be rendered consistent by logic.

而這標準必需前後邏輯一致

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

從智商測驗中，怎麼延伸出這些討論？

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

這是我一開始研究認知歷史的起點

If you look at the I.Q. test,

如果你檢視智商測驗結果

you find the gains have been greatest in certain areas.

你會看到在某些領域中的進步特別顯著

The similarities subtest of the Wechsler

韋氏測驗中最相近的部分

is about classification,

是關於分類的部分

and we have made enormous gains

而在分類這部分的測試上

on that classification subtest.

我們有非常大的進步

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

在智商測驗中還有其他部份

that are about using logic on abstractions.

即為將邏輯運用在抽象概念上

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

在座可能有些人做過雷文圖形認知測驗

and it's all about analogies.

這測驗的核心是類比概念

And in 1900, people could do simple analogies.

在1900年代，人們可以做出簡單的類比

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

比如，如果你告訴他們，貓和野貓是同類

What are dogs like?

那麼狗和什麼是同類？

They would say wolves.

他們會回答狼

But by 1960, people could attack Raven's

而到了1960年代，人們可以在雷文的測驗裡

on a much more sophisticated level.

做出較成熟的類比

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

如果你問，這裡有兩個正方形，後頭是個三角形

what follows two circles?

那麼兩個圓形後頭是什麼？

They could say a semicircle.

他們會回答半圓

Just as a triangle is half of a square,

因為三角形是正方形的一半

a semicircle is half of a circle.

類比過來，半圓是圓的一半

By 2010, college graduates, if you said

2010年，如果問大學畢業生

two circles followed by a semicircle,

兩個圓形後是個半圓

two sixteens followed by what,

兩個「16」後頭會是什麼？

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

他們會回答「8」，因為是「16」的一半

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

這證明了他們能高度脫離實際世界做出思考

that they could even ignore

他們甚至能忽略

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

題目中的比較的符號表象是不同的

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

現在我得告訴大家一件相當令人沮喪的事

We haven't made progress on all fronts.

我們其實並沒有比之前進步

One of the ways in which we would like to deal

我們選擇應付

with the sophistication of the modern world

現代世界複雜矛盾的情況的方法之一

is through politics,

是透過政治

and sadly you can have humane moral principles,

悲哀的是你還是擁有人類道德原則

you can classify, you can use logic on abstractions,

你還是有能力做分類，能以邏輯思考抽象概念

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

但如果你忽視歷史、忽視其他國家

you can't do politics.

你沒辦法做好政治

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

我們意識到，年輕一代的美國人越來越少人

that they read less history and less literature

讀歷史和文學

and less material about foreign lands,

和了解國外風俗民情

and they're essentially ahistorical.

他們基本上對歷史一無所知

They live in the bubble of the present.

而活在現今的泡沫化社會裡

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

他們不知道韓戰是因為越戰引起的

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

他們也不知道在第二次世界大戰時，美國的同盟國是誰

Think how different America would be

想想如果這樣會產生多大的改變

if every American knew that this is the fifth time

如果每個美國人都知道這是第五次

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

西方進軍阿富汗以處理好它的家務事

and if they had some idea of exactly what had happened

如果有人能記取前四次的教訓

on those four previous occasions.

正確認清到底當時發生了什麼事…

(Laughter)

(笑聲)

And that is, they had barely left,

教訓是，他們艱難的退兵

and there wasn't a trace in the sand.

沒有做出任何建樹

Or imagine how different things would be

或想想事情能有多大的改變

if most Americans knew that we had been lied

如果大多數的美國人知道我們又被騙入

into four of our last six wars.

四次或最近的六次戰爭裡

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

知道嗎，西班牙人並沒有擊沉緬因州的戰艦

the Lusitania was not an innocent vessel

盧西塔尼亞號並不是無辜的受害者

but was loaded with munitions,

相反的，它是全副武裝的

the North Vietnamese did not attack the Seventh Fleet,

北越南並沒有攻擊第七艦隊

and, of course, Saddam Hussein hated al Qaeda

而，當然的，蕯達姆‧侯賽因的仇恨基地組織

and had nothing to do with it,

跟這一點關係都沒有

and yet the administration convinced 45 percent of the people

但我們的管理者說服45%的人民

that they were brothers in arms,

他們是我們的戰友

when he would hang one from the nearest lamppost.

其實隨時準備將他們吊在最近的燈柱上示眾

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

我不想以這個悲觀的論點做結尾

The 20th century has shown enormous cognitive reserves

20世紀展現了巨大的認知發展潛力

in ordinary people that we have now realized,

在一般大眾身上，我們現在了解到這一點

and the aristocracy was convinced

特權階級認為

that the average person couldn't make it,

一般大眾做不到

that they could never share their mindset

他們沒辦法分享心智狀態

or their cognitive abilities.

或認知能力

Lord Curzon once said

柯爵士曾說

he saw people bathing in the North Sea,

他看到人們在北海裡洗澡

and he said, "Why did no one tell me

他問：「為什麼沒人告訴我

what white bodies the lower orders have?"

下層階級有那麼白的身體？」

As if they were a reptile.

將他們當做爬蟲生物看待

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

狄更斯說對了，但也說錯了 (*此處引用應為吉卜林的言論)

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

他(吉卜林)說：「上校的夫人和朱迪·奧格雷迪，

are sisters underneath the skin."

外表的差距之下，是真心相待的好姊妹。」

(Applause)

(掌聲)