The psychological traits that shape your political beliefs | Dannagal G. Young

譯者: Helen Chang 審譯者: Amanda Zhu

I'm a political and social psychologist.

我是個政治學和社會心理學家。

I study how people understand the world

我研究人們如何理解世界

and what this means for society and for democracy ...

以及這對社會和民主意味著什麼......

which, as it turns out, is quite a lot.

事實上非常多。

Some people see the world as safe and good,

有些人認為世界安全和美好，

and this allows them to be OK with uncertainty

這使他們可以接受不確定性，

and to take time to explore and play.

並花時間去探索、嬉戲。

Others are acutely aware of threats in their environment,

其他人則敏銳意識到身處環境的威脅，

so they prioritize order and predictability

因此他們將秩序和可預測性的重要性

over openness and experimentation.

置於放開的心胸和嘗試新事物之前。

In my academic research,

我在學術研究中

I study how these two approaches shape how we think and feel

探討這兩種方法 如何塑造我們的思維方式，

about everything from art to politics.

包括從藝術到政治的一切。

I also explore how political elites

我還探討政治精英和黨派媒體

and partisan media use these very differences

如何利用這些人性的差異

to engender hatred and fear

引起仇恨和恐懼，

and how the economics of our media system exploit these same divides.

以及我們的媒體系統經濟 如何利用這些相同的鴻溝。

But after studying this,

但在研究之後，

I have come away not with a sense that we are doomed to be divided

我得知我們未必註定要分裂，

but that it's up to us to see both sets of traits

而在於我們要不要將這兩種特徵

as necessary and even valuable.

視為必要、有價值。

Take for example two men who have been so influential in my own life.

以兩個在我人生中 具有重要影響力的男人為例。

First, my late husband, Mike.

先是我已故的丈夫邁克。

He was an artist who saw the world as safe and good.

他是視世界為安全美好之地的藝術家。

He welcomed ambiguity and play in his life.

他歡迎模棱兩可，一生樂在其中。

In fact, we met through improv comedy

實際上，我們通過即興喜劇相遇，

where he taught improvisers to listen and be open

他在那裡教即興表演者 聆聽、放開心胸，

and to be comfortable not knowing what was going to happen next.

就算不知道接下來會如何也無所謂。

After we got married and had our baby boy,

我們結婚生子之後，

Mike was diagnosed with a brain tumor.

邁克被診斷出罹患腦瘤。

And through months of hospitalizations and surgeries,

經過數月的住院和手術，

I followed Mike's lead,

我在邁克的引導之下，

trying to practice being open,

試圖練習放開心胸，

trying to be OK not knowing what was going to happen next.

試圖接納不知道接下來會怎樣。

It was Mike's tolerance for ambiguity

正是邁克對模棱兩可的寬容

that allowed me to survive those months of uncertainty,

讓我度過了那幾個月的不確定狀況，

and that helped me explore new ways to rebuild my life after he died.

幫助我在他去世後 探索重建人生的新方法。

About a year and a half after Mike passed away,

邁克去世大約一年半後，

I met my current husband, PJ.

我認識了我的現任丈夫 PJ。

PJ is a criminal prosecutor

PJ 是刑事檢察官，

who sees the world as potentially good

認為世界有美好的潛力，

provided that threats are properly managed.

只要威脅被妥善管理好即可。

He also is someone who embraces order and predictability

他也是擁護秩序和可預測性的人，

in his daily routine,

不論是他的日常工作、

in the foods that he eats,

他選的食物，

in his selection of wardrobe.

或是他的衣著。

And PJ has a vicious wit,

而且 PJ 有種惡毒的機智，

but he's also morally very serious

在道德上也很認真，

with a strong sense of duty and purpose.

具有強烈的責任心和目的感。

And he values tradition, loyalty and family,

他重視傳統、忠誠和家庭，

which is why at the age of 28

這就是為什麼 28 歲的他

he did not hesitate to marry a widow,

毫不猶豫地娶了寡婦，

adopt her baby boy

領養她的男嬰，

and raise him as his son.

視他為親生兒子般撫養。

It was PJ's need for certainty and closure

PJ 需要確定性，需要事情都有了結。

that brought stability to our lives.

這為我們的生活帶來了穩定。

I share these two stories of Mike and PJ

我分享邁克和 PJ 兩人的故事，

not just because they're personal,

不僅因為這關乎我個人，

but because they illustrate two things that I have found in my own research.

還因為它們展示 我在研究中發現的兩件事。

First, that our psychological traits shape how we engage with the world,

首先是我們的心理特徵 決定我們與世界互動的方式。

and second,

其次，

that both of these approaches make all of our lives possible.

這兩種方法造就我們的人生。

Tragically though, political and economic incentives of our media environment

可悲的是，我們媒體環境的 政治和經濟誘因，

seek to exploit these differences

都在設法利用這些差異，

to get us angry,

讓我們生氣，

to get our attention,

引我們的注意，

to get clicks

以獲得關注，

and to turn us against one another.

並使我們彼此對立。

And it works.

那還起了作用。

It works in part because these same sets of traits

之所以起作用，部分原因

are related to core political and cultural beliefs.

正是這些人性的特徵 與核心的政治和文化信仰有關。

For years, political psychologists have studied

多年來，政治心理學家一直在研究

how our psychological traits shape our political beliefs.

我們的心理特徵 如何塑造我們的政治信仰。

We've conducted experiments to understand

我們做實驗來了解

how our psychology and our politics shape how we respond to apolitical stimuli.

我們的心理和政治塑造了 我們對非政治性刺激的因應。

And this research has shown

這項研究表明

that those people who are less concerned with threats,

那些不太擔心威脅、

who are tolerant of ambiguity,

容忍歧義的人，

these people tend to be more culturally and socially liberal

在文化和社會上更傾向自由派，

on matters like immigration or crime or sexuality.

在關於移民、犯罪 或性別等問題上更傾向自由陣營。

And because they're tolerant of ambiguity,

而且由於他們容忍歧異，

they also tend to be OK with nuance

他們也傾向於容忍細微的差別。

and they enjoy thinking for the sake of thinking,

他們就是喜歡思考，

which helps explain why it is

因為思考有助於解釋為什麼

that there are distinct aesthetic preferences on the left and the right,

左右兩邊的審美偏好具有明顯的差異。

with liberals more likely than conservatives

自由派比保守派更有可能

to appreciate things like abstract art

欣賞抽象藝術之類的東西，

or even stories that lack a clear ending.

甚至欣賞沒有明確結局的故事。

In my experimental work,

在我的實驗工作中

I've also found that these differences help explain

我還發現這些差異有助於解釋

why ironic, political satire is more likely to be appreciated

為什麼自由主義者比保守主義者 更了解和更容易欣賞政治的諷刺。

and understood by liberals than conservatives.

On the other hand,

另一方面，

those people who are monitoring for threats,

那些密切監看威脅的人，

who prefer certainty and closure,

比較喜歡確定性和凡事有所了結，

those tend to be our political, cultural, social conservatives.

那些往往是我們的政治、 文化、社會的保守派。

Because they're on alert,

因為他們處於戒備的狀態，

they also make decisions quickly and efficiently,

他們可以由直覺和情感引導

guided by intuition and emotion.

快速有效地制定決策。

And we've found that these traits help explain

我們發現這些特徵有助於解釋

why conservatives enjoy political opinion talk programming

為什麼保守派喜歡 政治觀點類的談話節目，

that clearly and efficiently identifies threats and enemies.

清楚有效地識別威脅和敵人。

What is essential though

然而主要的是

is that these propensities are not absolute --

這些傾向不是絕對的、

they're not fixed.

不是固定不變的。

There are liberals who are monitoring for threats

有些自由主義者也監看威脅，

just as there are conservatives who are tolerant of ambiguity.

正如同有些保守主義者容忍歧異。

In fact, PJ's political beliefs

實際上，PJ 的政治信仰

are not that radically different from those that Mike held.

與 Mike 所持的觀點 並無巨大差異。

The link between psychology and politics is contingent on context:

心理學與政治之間的聯繫取決於環境：

who we're with and what's going on around us.

我們與誰在一起 以及我們周遭發生了什麼。

The problem is that right now,

問題是現在

our dominant context,

我們的主導情境，

our political and media context,

我們的政治和媒體背景，

actually needs these differences to be absolute,

實際上需要這些差異有絕對性、

to be reinforced

被強化、

and even to be weaponized.

甚至被武器化。

For reasons related to power and profit,

出於與權力和利潤有關的原因，

some in politics and media want us to believe

一些政治和媒體人士要我們相信

that those people who approach the world differently from us --

那些面對世界的態度 與我們截然不同的人

the Mikes or the PJs --

——如邁克或 PJ——

themselves are dangerous.

本身很危險。

And social media platforms use algorithms and microtargeting

社交媒體平台使用演算法和微觀定位

to deliver divisive messages

來傳遞符合我們喜愛的分歧訊息，

in our preferred messaging aesthetic.

Messages that relate to politics, culture and race.

那些與政治、文化和種族有關的消息。

And we see the devastating effects of these messages every single day.

我們每天目睹這些消息 所造成的毀滅性影響：

Americans who are angry and fearful of the other side.

憤怒和懼怕對方的美國人，

Charges of the other side destroying America.

互相指控對方摧毀了美國。

But stop and think for a moment.

但是請停下來想一想。

What would happen if those differences had never been weaponized?

如果這些差異未曾 被當作武器來用，會是什麼情況？

It is liberal inclinations towards openness and flexibility

正是對開放性和靈活性的自由主義傾向

that allow us to cope with uncertainty

讓我們得以應對不確定性，

and that allow us to explore new paths towards innovation, creativity --

會讓我們能夠探索 創新、創造力的新途徑

scientific discovery.

——科學的發現。

Think of things like space travel or cures for diseases

試想太空旅行、治療疾病，

or art that imagines and reimagines a better world.

和重構美好世界的藝術。

And those conservative inclinations towards vigilance and security

也試想那些保守的傾向，

警惕、安全和傳統的保守傾向。

and tradition.

These are the things that motivate us

正是這些激勵我們

to do what must be done

去做必須做的事，

for our own protection and stability.

為了保護我們自己和維持穩定。

Think of the safety that's offered by our armed forces

試想我們國軍的保家衛國、

or the security of our banking system.

銀行系統提供的安全、

Or think about the stability

陪審制度之類的民主機制、

that's offered by such democratic institutions as jury duty,

or cultural traditions like fireworks on the Fourth of July.

或七月四日放煙火等文化傳統。

What if the real threat posed to society and democracy

倘若對社會和民主構成的真正威脅

is not actually posed by the other side?

實際上不是另一方造成的呢？

What if the real danger is posed by political and media elites

倘若真正的危險

是由政治和媒體精英造成的，該如何？

who try to get us to think

他們試圖讓我們認為 沒有另一方會更好，

that we'd be better off without the other side

and who use these divisions for their own personal,

他們劃分彼此

來增進個人財務和政治利益。

financial, political benefit?

Mike and PJ engaged with the world very differently,

邁克和 PJ 看待世界的方式大不相同，

but these distinct approaches continue to enrich my life every day.

但是這些獨特的方法 每天都持續豐富我的人生。

Instead of our political and media context

別讓我們自身的政治和媒體背景

determining that the other side is the enemy

判定對方是敵人，

and lulling us into believing that that's true,

引誘我們信以為真。

what if we choose to create the context?

讓我們自己創建背景，好嗎？

Real people connecting with other real people,

真實的人與其他真實的人聯繫在一起，

appreciating these two approaches for what they are:

讚賞這兩種看待方式的本質：

necessary gifts that can help us all survive and thrive together.

乃是能夠幫助我們所有人 生存和共同成長的必要禮物。

Thank you.

謝謝。