John Searle: Our shared condition -- consciousness

譯者: Marssi Draw 審譯者: William Choi

I'm going to talk about consciousness.

我要和各位談談意識，

Why consciousness?

為什麼是意識呢？

Well, it's a curiously neglected subject,

嗯，說也奇怪，這是一個被忽略的學科，

both in our scientific and our philosophical culture.

不管是在科學還是在哲學領域中，

Now why is that curious?

為什麼這麼奇怪？

Well, it is the most important aspect of our lives

嗯，意識對生命有重要的意義，

for a very simple, logical reason,

原因簡單又合理，

namely, it's a necessary condition on anything

也就是說，在生命中的所有重要事情上，

being important in our lives that we're conscious.

擁有意識是必要的狀態。

You care about science, philosophy, music, art, whatever --

你關心科學、哲學、音樂、美術等，

it's no good if you're a zombie or in a coma, right?

但是如果你是殭屍或植物人， 就不太好了吧？

So consciousness is number one.

因此意識是最重要的。

The second reason is that when people do

第二個原因是，

get interested in it, as I think they should,

當人們對它感興趣時， 如同我說的，他們應該要有興趣，

they tend to say the most appalling things.

他們傾向說最可怕的事。

And then, even when they're not saying appalling things

然後，即使他們不說可怕的事，

and they're really trying to do serious research,

他們還真的會試著認真做研究，

嗯，有點慢，進展得有點慢。

well, it's been slow. Progress has been slow.

When I first got interested in this, I thought, well,

我剛開始對這個議題感興趣時，

it's a straightforward problem in biology.

我想，嗯，這是一條關於生物學的簡單問題。

Let's get these brain stabbers to get busy and figure out

我們可以拿些開腦的椎子，來看看

how it works in the brain.

意識怎麼在腦袋裡運作。

So I went over to UCSF and I talked to all

因此，我去了加州大學舊金山分校 (UCSF)，

和那裡所有重量級的神經生物學家討論，

the heavy-duty neurobiologists there,

and they showed some impatience,

他們顯得有點不耐煩，

as scientists often do when you ask them embarrassing questions.

就像當你問科學家 讓他難堪的問題時的模樣。

But the thing that struck me is, one guy said in exasperation,

但是讓我驚訝的是， 有一位老兄腦羞成怒地說，

a very famous neurobiologist, he said, "Look,

他是很有名的神經生物學家，他說：

in my discipline it's okay to be interested in consciousness,

「你聽好，在我這一行你可以對意識有興趣，

but get tenure first. Get tenure first."

但你要先取得終身教授職位才行。 先取得終身教授職！」

Now I've been working on this for a long time.

我做這個研究很久了，

I think now you might actually get tenure

我想藉由做點意識研究，

by working on consciousness.

也許你也可以成為終身教授了，

If so, that's a real step forward.

如果這樣的話，那還真是前進了一大步。

Okay, now why then is this curious reluctance

好吧，那為什麼意識總會奇怪地

and curious hostility to consciousness?

不被重視或反對？

Well, I think it's a combination of two features

嗯，我認為這是

of our intellectual culture

人類智力文化的兩大特點，

that like to think they're opposing each other

那就是愛說自己和對方持相反看法，

but in fact they share a common set of assumptions.

但是事實上，他們有同樣的假設。

One feature is the tradition of religious dualism:

第一個特點是宗教二元論的傳統思維：

Consciousness is not a part of the physical world.

意識不屬於物質世界，

It's a part of the spiritual world.

意識是精神世界的一部分。

It belongs to the soul,

它屬於靈魂，

and the soul is not a part of the physical world.

而靈魂不是物質世界的一部分。

That's the tradition of God, the soul and immortality.

這是上帝、靈魂和不滅的傳統思維。

There's another tradition that thinks it's opposed to this

另外有一項傳統思維和這個觀點完全相反，

but accepts the worst assumption.

而且選擇了最差的假設。

That tradition thinks that we are heavy-duty scientific materialists:

那個傳統思維認為我們都是 背負著重大責任的科學唯物主義者：

Consciousness is not a part of the physical world.

意識並不是物質世界的一部分。

Either it doesn't exist at all, or it's something else,

它要嘛根本就不存在， 不然就是別種東西，

a computer program or some damn fool thing,

一個電腦程式或是某種該死的蠢東西，

but in any case it's not part of science.

但絕不會是科學的一部分。

And I used to get in an argument that really gave me a stomachache.

我常會爭論到胃很痛。

Here's how it went.

結果是這樣。

Science is objective, consciousness is subjective,

科學是客觀的，而意識是主觀的。

therefore there cannot be a science of consciousness.

因此不可能有一種叫意識的科學。

Okay, so these twin traditions are paralyzing us.

好吧，這兩個雙胞傳統思維讓我們動彈不得。

It's very hard to get out of these twin traditions.

很難跳脫這兩個傳統雙胞胎。

And I have only one real message in this lecture,

這堂課我只有一句真正的訊息要傳達，

and that is, consciousness is a biological phenomenon

那就是，意識是一種生命現象，

like photosynthesis, digestion, mitosis --

就像光合作用、消化作用、細胞有絲分裂，

you know all the biological phenomena -- and once you accept that,

你知道所有的生命現象，一旦你接受了，

most, though not all, of the hard problems

大部分，雖然不是全部，

about consciousness simply evaporate.

關於意識的難題就會消失無蹤了。

And I'm going to go through some of them.

接下來我會再多做解釋。

Okay, now I promised you to tell you some

我之前承諾要告訴你一些

of the outrageous things said about consciousness.

跟意識有關的荒謬論點。

One: Consciousness does not exist.

第一：意識是不存在的。

It's an illusion, like sunsets.

那是錯覺，就像夕陽，

Science has shown sunsets and rainbows are illusions.

科學證明夕陽和彩虹都是錯覺，

So consciousness is an illusion.

如此看來意識也是一種錯覺。

Two: Well, maybe it exists, but it's really something else.

第二：好吧，也許它存在， 但那真的是別的東西，

It's a computer program running in the brain.

那是在腦袋裡運轉的電腦程式。

Three: No, the only thing that exists is really behavior.

第三：不對，行為動作才是真正唯一存在的東西。

It's embarrassing how influential behaviorism was,

行為主義的影響力如此深遠，真讓人尷尬，

but I'll get back to that.

我們稍後再討論。

And four: Maybe consciousness exists,

第四：也許意識存在，

but it can't make any difference to the world.

但是它不能為世界帶來任何改變。

精神怎麼可能移動得了東西？

How could spirituality move anything?

Now, whenever somebody tells me that, I think,

現在只要有人這樣問我，我會想，

you want to see spirituality move something?

你想看我用精神移動東西嗎？

你看好。我決定有意識地要舉起我的手臂，

Watch. I decide consciously to raise my arm,

and the damn thing goes up. (Laughter)

然後這該死的東西就舉起來了。 (笑聲）

Furthermore, notice this:

還有，給我仔細聽好，

We do not say, "Well, it's a bit like the weather in Geneva.

我們不會說：「嗯，這有點像日內瓦的天氣，

Some days it goes up and some days it doesn't go up."

有時候它會舉起來，有時候不會。」

No. It goes up whenever I damn well want it to.

不會！只要我想讓它舉起來， 它就會舉起來！

Okay. I'm going to tell you how that's possible.

那麼，讓我來跟你說這是怎麼辦到的。

我還沒給你一個定義，

Now, I haven't yet given you a definition.

You can't do this if you don't give a definition.

如果沒有下定義的話，無法跟你解釋。

People always say consciousness is very hard to define.

人們總是說意識很難定義，

I think it's rather easy to define

我倒覺得容易，

if you're not trying to give a scientific definition.

只要你不去試著用科學的角度來定義它。

We're not ready for a scientific definition,

我們還沒準備好要用科學來定義，

but here's a common-sense definition.

但是我們可以用常識來定義。

Consciousness consists of all those states of feeling

意識包含了所有感覺、

or sentience or awareness.

知覺或覺察的狀態。

It begins in the morning when you wake up from a dreamless sleep,

當你一夜好眠後醒來，

and it goes on all day until you fall asleep

它一早就會開始出現，直到你再度熟睡，

or die or otherwise become unconscious.

或是死亡，或是失去知覺。

Dreams are a form of consciousness on this definition.

在這個定義中，夢是意識的一種形式。

Now, that's the common-sense definition. That's our target.

這就是常識性的定義，這是我們的目標。

If you're not talking about that, you're not talking about consciousness.

如果你不談論那件事，你就不能談論意識。

But they think, "Well, if that's it, that's an awful problem.

但是他們會想：「好啊， 如果是這樣，那還真是個大麻煩，

How can such a thing exist as part of the real world?"

怎麼可能存在著這種事， 成為真實世界中的一部份？」

And this, if you've ever had a philosophy course,

如果你曾上過哲學課，

this is known as the famous mind-body problem.

這就是有名的心物問題 (mind-body problem)。

I think that has a simple solution too. I'm going to give it to you.

我認為這也有一個簡單的解決辦法， 我馬上告訴你。

And here it is: All of our conscious states, without exception,

那就是我們所有的意識狀態，沒有例外，

are caused by lower-level neurobiological processes in the brain,

都是由腦中較低層次的神經生物的過程所引起的，

and they are realized in the brain

意識以較高層次或是系統特徵

as higher-level or system features.

在大腦中被理解。

It's about as mysterious as the liquidity of water.

這就像是水的流動性那樣神奇，

Right? The liquidity is not an extra juice squirted out

對吧？流動不是由水分子噴出

by the H2O molecules.

多餘的果汁，

It's a condition that the system is in.

那是一種系統在其中的狀態。

And just as the jar full of water can go from liquid to solid

就像是滿罐子的水，可以從液體變成固體，

depending on the behavior of the molecules,

視水分子的行為而變化，

所以你的大腦也可以從有意識的狀態，

so your brain can go from a state of being conscious

to a state of being unconscious,

轉變為無意識的狀態，

depending on the behavior of the molecules.

全看分子的行為來變化。

The famous mind-body problem is that simple.

有名的心物問題就是那麼簡單。

All right? But now we get into some harder questions.

那麼，我們要探討更困難的問題了，

Let's specify the exact features of consciousness,

我們來詳細說明意識的特徵，

so that we can then answer those four objections

這樣一來，我們就可以回答我剛才提出的

that I made to it.

那四個反對的聲音。

Well, the first feature is, it's real and irreducible.

嗯，第一個特徵是，它是真實且不能減少的。

You can't get rid of it.

你不能丟掉它。

You see, the distinction between reality and illusion

你看，現實和錯覺之間的差別，

is the distinction between how things

就如同在意識上，事情對我們來說是什麼樣子，

consciously seem to us and how they really are.

和它實際的樣子之間的差別。

It consciously seems like there's --

意識上，就像是有

I like the French "arc-en-ciel" —

──我喜歡法文中的「arc-en-ciel」──

it seems like there's an arch in the sky,

就像是有一道彩虹在天空中，

or it seems like the sun is setting over the mountains.

或是太陽掛在山頂上。

It consciously seems to us, but that's not really happening.

在意識中是如此，但是在現實中卻不然。

But for that distinction between

但是在意識上看起來的樣子，

how things consciously seem and how they really are,

與事實上的樣子之間的差別，

you can't make that distinction for the very existence of consciousness,

你無法那樣區別意識的存在，

because where the very existence of consciousness is concerned,

因為意識的存在在於關注，

if it consciously seems to you that you are conscious,

如果在意識上對你來說，你是有意識的，

you are conscious.

那你就是有意識。

I mean, if a bunch of experts come to me and say,

我的意思是，如果一大票專家來跟我說：

"We are heavy-duty neurobiologists and we've done a study

「我們是重量級的神經生物學家，

我們對你，希爾勒，做了研究， 我們相信你沒有意識，

of you, Searle, and we're convinced you are not conscious,

you are a very cleverly constructed robot,"

你是一個被設計得很聰明的機器人。」

我不會想：「嗯，也許這些人是對的，是吧？」

I don't think, "Well, maybe these guys are right, you know?"

I don't think that for a moment, because, I mean,

我一刻也不會懷疑，

Descartes may have made a lot of mistakes, but he was right about this.

因為笛卡兒也許犯了很多錯， 但是有件事他說對了，

You cannot doubt the existence of your own consciousness.

你不能懷疑自己的意識存在。

Okay, that's the first feature of consciousness.

這是意識的第一項特徵。

它是真實且不能減少的。

It's real and irreducible.

You cannot get rid of it by showing that it's an illusion

你不能用其它標準的錯覺來比照，

in a way that you can with other standard illusions.

說它是錯覺而就此認定它不存在。

Okay, the second feature is this one

第二個特徵

that has been such a source of trouble to us,

是我們困擾已久的根源，

and that is, all of our conscious states

那就是我們所有的意識狀態

have this qualitative character to them.

對它們來說都有這個實質的樣貌。

There's something that it feels like to drink beer

那就像是喝啤酒，

which is not what it feels like to do your income tax

跟你在算所得稅或聽音樂的感覺不同，

or listen to music, and this qualitative feel

這個實質的感覺

automatically generates a third feature,

自然而然地產生了第三項特徵，

namely, conscious states are by definition subjective

也就是意識狀態

in the sense that they only exist as experienced

是主觀的定義，

by some human or animal subject,

只會存在於某個人、動物的經驗，

some self that experiences them.

某些有經驗過意識的自我。

Maybe we'll be able to build a conscious machine.

也許我們將來能夠製造一台有意識機器。

Since we don't know how our brains do it,

由於我們不知道大腦如何讓意識運作，

we're not in a position, so far, to build a conscious machine.

到目前為止，我們就還不能製造有意識的機器。

Okay. Another feature of consciousness

接下來，另一個意識的特徵是

is that it comes in unified conscious fields.

意識來自於統一的意識場。

So I don't just have the sight of the people in front of me

因此，我不只是看見眼前的這個人、

and the sound of my voice and the weight of my shoes

我的聲音、我的鞋子在地面上的重量，

against the floor, but they occur to me

這些東西都是以

as part of one single great conscious field

前後延伸的單一巨大意識場的一部分

that stretches forward and backward.

在我心裡出現。

That is the key to understanding

這是了解意識的無窮力量

the enormous power of consciousness.

的關鍵。

And we have not been able to do that in a robot.

我們還沒有機器人可以做到這件事。

The disappointment of robotics derives from the fact

很遺憾的是，現有的機器人顯示出

that we don't know how to make a conscious robot,

我們還不知道如何製造有意識的機器人，

so we don't have a machine that can do this kind of thing.

因此，我們沒有可以做這種事的機器。

Okay, the next feature of consciousness,

下一件意識的特徵是，

after this marvelous unified conscious field,

在這個不可思議的統一意識場之後，

is that it functions causally in our behavior.

是它能輕易影響我們的行為。

I gave you a scientific demonstration by raising my hand,

我舉起手，給你們看一項科學的實地示範，

but how is that possible?

但是那是怎麼辦到的呢？

How can it be that this thought in my brain

我大腦中的這個想法怎麼

can move material objects?

能夠搬動實質的物體呢？

Well, I'll tell you the answer.

讓我來告訴你答案。

I mean, we don't know the detailed answer,

我的意思是，我們不知道詳細答案，

but we know the basic part of the answer, and that is,

但是我們知道初步的答案，

there is a sequence of neuron firings,

那就是有一連串的神經活化，

and they terminate where the acetylcholine

它們會終止在運動神經元終板的軸突

is secreted at the axon end-plates of the motor neurons.

就是分泌乙醯膽素的地方。

Sorry to use philosophical terminology here,

很抱歉我用了一些哲學術語。

but when it's secreted at the axon end-plates of the motor neurons,

不過當它在運動神經元的終板分泌時，

a whole lot of wonderful things happen in the ion channels

會有很多美好的事情發生在離子通道中，

and the damned arm goes up.

然後該死的手臂就會舉起來了。

Now, think of what I told you.

現在，想想我剛才跟你說過的。

One and the same event,

同樣的一個活動，

my conscious decision to raise my arm

我的意識決定要舉起手臂，

has a level of description where it has all of these

在某個程度上這樣的描述

touchy-feely spiritual qualities.

隱含了過於情感化的精神特質。

It's a thought in my brain, but at the same time,

那是在我大腦中的一個想法，

it's busy secreting acetylcholine

但是同時也忙著分泌乙醯膽素，

and doing all sorts of other things

還有各式各樣的事，

就好像它自己從運動皮質區

as it makes its way from the motor cortex

down through the nerve fibers in the arm.

透過手臂中的神經纖維來完成的。

Now, what that tells us is that our traditional vocabularies

這件事告訴我們，過去

for discussing these issues are totally obsolete.

用在討論這些議題的字彙都太過時了。

One and the same event has a level of description

另一種有同樣程度的描述的是

where it's neurobiological, and another level of description

在神經生物方面中，

where it's mental, and that's a single event,

還有另一種是在心智方面，那是單一的情況，

and that's how nature works. That's how it's possible

而那是自然如何發生，

for consciousness to function causally.

它能解釋意識是為何有效運作。

Okay, now with that in mind,

那麼，把這些記在心上，

with going through these various features of consciousness,

記得我剛剛說的這些 關於意識的種種特徵，

let's go back and answer some of those early objections.

讓我們來解答稍早的問題。

Well, the first one I said was, consciousness doesn't exist,

首先我提到的是，意識並不存在，

it's an illusion. Well, I've already answered that.

意識是錯覺。嗯，我已經回答了。

I don't think we need to worry about that.

我想我們不需要擔心這個問題了。

But the second one had an incredible influence,

但是第二個問題就有一點出乎意料之外的影響了，

and may still be around, and that is,

而且可能問題還是存在，那就是

"Well, if consciousness exists, it's really something else.

「如果意識存在，那它真的是別種東西，

It's really a digital computer program running in your brain

那真的是一個在你大腦中運轉的電腦程式，

and that's what we need to do to create consciousness

那就是我們要做的事，

is get the right program.

建立意識就是找到對的程式。

Yeah, forget about the hardware. Any hardware will do

嗯，別管硬體吧！任何用來啟動程式的硬體

provided it's rich enough and stable enough to carry the program."

等級都足夠而且很穩定。」

Now, we know that that's wrong.

現在，我們知道那是錯的。

I mean, anybody who's thought about computers at all

我的意思是，任何想到電腦的人

can see that that's wrong, because computation

都知道那是錯的，

is defined as symbol manipulation,

因為計算的特點是符號運用，

usually thought of as zeros as ones, but any symbols will do.

通常會用 0 和 1 來表示，但是任何符號都可以。

You get an algorithm that you can program

如果你有一段演算法，

in a binary code, and that's the defining trait

就可以編寫出對應的二進位程式碼，

of the computer program.

這是電腦程式的特徵。

But we know that that's purely syntactical. That's symbolic.

不過我們知道那只是語法和符號。

We know that actual human consciousness has something more than that.

我們知道人的意識有的遠比這個更多，

It's got a content in addition to the syntax.

除了語法外還有內容。

It's got a semantics.

它有語義。

Now that argument, I made that argument 30 --

我爭論了這件事從──

oh my God, I don't want to think about it —

喔！天啊，我實在不太想去回憶了──

more than 30 years ago,

已經是三十年前的事了，

but there's a deeper argument implicit in what I've told you,

但是我已告訴你的，當中還有更深的爭議點。

and I want to tell you that argument briefly, and that is,

簡而言之，這個爭議就是

consciousness creates an observer-independent reality.

意識製造了觀察者獨立的事實。

It creates a reality of money, property, government,

它創造了金錢、財產、政府、

marriage, CERN conferences,

婚姻、CERN 大會、

cocktail parties and summer vacations,

雞尾酒會與暑假的事實，

and all of those are creations of consciousness.

而這些都是意識的產物。

Their existence is observer-relative.

它們的存在是與觀察者相關的。

It's only relative to conscious agents that a piece of paper

它只會和意識主體有關，

is money or that a bunch of buildings is a university.

不管是一張紙代表了錢， 或是一棟大樓代表了一所大學。

Now, ask yourself about computation.

現在，問問你自己數值的問題。

Is that absolute, like force and mass and gravitational attraction?

它真的完全像力學、質量或是萬有引力嗎？

Or is it observer-relative?

或者那是與觀察者相關？

Well, some computations are intrinsic.

嗯，有一些數值是固有的。

I add two plus two to get four.

二加二等於四，

That's going on no matter what anybody thinks.

不管是誰，算出來的答案都一樣。

But when I haul out my pocket calculator

但是當我拿出我的計算機

and do the calculation, the only intrinsic phenomenon

做計算，唯一存在的現象

is the electronic circuit and its behavior.

就是電子電路和它的行為本身。

That's the only absolute phenomenon.

那絕對是唯一的現象。

All the rest is interpreted by us.

其它的部分都是由我們演繹出來的。

Computation only exists relative to consciousness.

計算只有在與意識相關時才存在。

Either a conscious agent is carrying out the computation,

不是意識主體進行演算，

or he's got a piece of machinery that admits of a computational interpretation.

就是某台機器計算的結果。

Now that doesn't mean computation is arbitrary.

但是那不代表計算就是隨意的。

I spent a lot of money on this hardware.

我花了很多錢在這個硬體上。

But we have this persistent confusion

但是我們一直有個疑惑，

between objectivity and subjectivity as features of reality

在客觀與主觀事實的樣貌，

and objectivity and subjectivity as features of claims.

以及客觀與主觀主張的樣貌之間的差異。

And the bottom line of this part of my talk is this:

在這場演說中，我的底線是：

You can have a completely objective science,

你可以有一個完全客觀的科學，

a science where you make objectively true claims,

你可以有一個基於完全客觀事實的主張，

about a domain whose existence is subjective,

而這是一個主觀存在的領域，

whose existence is in the human brain

這個存在是在人類的大腦中，

consisting of subjective states of sentience

結合了感知、感覺

or feeling or awareness.

或意識的主觀狀態，

So the objection that you can't have an objective science of consciousness

因此客觀來說，你不可能有一個客觀的意識科學，

because it's subjective and science is objective, that's a pun.

因為那是主觀的，而科學是客觀的， 這是一語雙關。

That's a bad pun on objectivity and subjectivity.

那是一個不好的主觀和客觀雙關語。

You can make objective claims

你可以對一個存在於主觀領域中的事

about a domain that is subjective in its mode of existence,

有客觀的主張，

and indeed that's what neurologists do.

而這就是神經學家做的事。

I mean, you have patients that actually suffer pains,

我的意思是，你的病人正在忍受疼痛，

and you try to get an objective science of that.

你試著用客觀的科學來看待他。

Okay, I promised to refute all these guys,

嗯，我保證可以反駁他們所有的人，

and I don't have an awful lot of time left,

我沒有剩下多少時間了。

but let me refute a couple more of them.

但是，讓我來多做一些辯駁。

I said that behaviorism ought to be

我認為行為主義應該是

one of the great embarrassments of our intellectual culture,

我們知性文化中最大的尷尬之一。

because it's refuted the moment you think about it.

因為它不承認我們思考的每一個時刻，

Your mental states are identical with your behavior?

你的心智狀態和行為是一致的嗎？

Well, think about the distinction between feeling a pain

嗯，想一想感覺到疼痛

and engaging in pain behavior.

以及疼痛的這個行為之間的差異。

I won't demonstrate pain behavior, but I can tell you

我不會說明疼痛的行為，但是我可以告訴你

I'm not having any pains right now.

我現在沒有任何疼痛的感覺。

So it's an obvious mistake. Why did they make the mistake?

所以，這是很明顯的錯誤。 為什麼他們會犯這種錯？

The mistake was — and you can go back and read

這個錯──你可以回頭去讀

the literature on this, you can see this over and over —

那些跟這個相關的文獻， 你可以反覆閱讀──

他們認為，如果你接受了 意識的存在是不能減少，

they think if you accept the irreducible existence

of consciousness, you're giving up on science.

你就放棄了科學。

You're giving up on 300 years of human progress

你就放棄了三百年來人類進化、

and human hope and all the rest of it.

人類的希望和所有的事。

And the message I want to leave you with is,

我想傳達給大家的訊息是

consciousness has to become accepted

意識應該要成為公認的

as a genuine biological phenomenon,

生命現象，

as much subject to scientific analysis

隸屬於科學分析，

as any other phenomenon in biology,

如同生物中的現象，

or, for that matter, the rest of science.

或者，就和所有的科學一樣。

Thank you very much.

謝謝大家。

(Applause)

（掌聲）