The Surprising Psychology Behind Your Urge to Break the Rules | Paul Bloom | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

About 1,600 years ago,

大約一千六百年前，

St. Augustine wrote "The Confessions,"

聖奧古斯丁寫了《懺悔錄》，

which was the story of his youthful descent into sin

故事內容是他年輕時 墮落犯下的原罪，

and his later conversion to Christianity.

以及後來皈依基督教的過程。

And book two of “The Confessions” has a great beginning:

《懺悔錄》的第二冊 有著很棒的開頭：

"I propose now to set down my past wickedness

「我提議現在放下我過去的罪惡

and a carnal corruption of my soul."

以及我靈魂的肉體墮落。」

So you expect sex.

所以你會預期「性」。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But to the disappointment of readers over the centuries,

但，讓數世紀以來的讀者失望的是，

the sin that Augustine talks about... isn’t carnal at all.

奧古斯丁所談的罪惡 和肉體完全無關。

It has to do with pears.

而是和梨子有關。

He and his friends break into an orchard

他和他的朋友闖入一個果園，

and they steal some pears.

他們偷了一些梨。就這樣。

And that was it.

他們和果園的主人無冤無仇，

They didn’t have anything against the person who owned the orchard.

他們也不餓，他們把梨子丟給了豬。

They weren’t hungry; they threw the pears to pigs.

What stunned Augustine and disturbed him

讓奧古斯丁感到很震驚且很困擾的

was that he seemed to be motivated by a desire just to do wrong.

是他的動機似乎就只是想作惡。

He writes, "If any part of one of those pears passed my lips,

他寫道：「如果那些梨子有 任何一部分通過我的嘴脣，

it was the sin that gave it flavor.

那就是罪惡賦予了它滋味。

I had no motivation for wickedness except wickedness itself.

我沒有任何要作惡的動機， 除了就是想作惡本身。

I was foul and I loved it."

我很惡劣，而我樂在其中。」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Now I'm a psychologist

我是心理學家，

and I was interested in real-life stories of perverse actions,

我對反骨行為的真實 人生故事很感興趣，

so I started The Perversity Project

所以我創立了「反骨計畫」。

where I invited people to send me stories about perverse things that they did.

我透過這個計畫邀請大家 提供他們的反骨故事給我。

I defined these acts as

我這樣定義反骨行為：

"when you choose to do something you know is wrong,

「當你選擇去做你明知—— 在道德或其他方面——錯的事，

morally or otherwise,

at least, in part, because it's wrong."

至少有部分原因是出於它是錯的。」

So one of the first stories I got was,

我收到的第一個故事是

"Flirted with a woman's boyfriend knowing fully well he liked me.

「完全知道一名女子的男友 喜歡我，還故意挑逗他。

I knew I could steal him if I wanted, but I didn't want to do that.

我知道我若想要一定能夠 搶走他，但我不想那麼做。

I just wanted her to feel uncomfortable

單純只是當我們三人共處 一室時我就想讓她不舒服。」

whenever the three of us were in the same room."

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

"Causing people pain is wrong, but that's exactly why I did it."

「讓別人痛苦是不對的，

但那正是我去做的原因。」

And in fact, this is the plot of the Dolly Parton song "Jolene."

事實上，這是桃莉‧巴頓的 歌曲《喬琳》的情節。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Sometimes it's self destructive.

有時這種行為是自我傷害式的。

A young man wrote to me, "Ice skating on a pond,

一名年輕人寫給我： 「在池塘上溜冰，

dark unfrozen spot 30 yards out,

三十碼外有個黑暗未結冰的坑，

instead of avoiding it, I skate towards it,

我沒避開，反而溜向那裡，

knowing but wondering, knowing but wondering...

知道，但納悶，知道，但納悶……

and splash!"

然後撲通！」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Now psychologists have long been interested

長久以來心理學家一直很好奇

in these sort of violent, disruptive, perverse acts

這類暴力的、搗亂的、

反骨的行為，及什麼樣的人會去做。

and the kinds of people who do them.

常舉的例子就是 《蝙蝠俠》漫畫中的小丑。

An example people often give is the Joker from the “Batman” comics.

In Christopher Nolan's film "The Dark Knight,"

在克里斯多夫諾蘭的 電影《黑暗騎士》中，

Alfred, Batman’s butler, describes the Joker by saying,

蝙蝠俠的管家阿福這樣描述小丑：

"Some men can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with.

「有些人就是無法被收買、 霸凌、講理，或協商的。

Some men just want to watch the world burn."

有些人就只想看世界變成煉獄。」

And psychologists have thought up a "need for chaos" scale

心理學家想出了「需要混亂」量表，

that gives you a bunch of statements

表上有一大堆陳述， 問你同意的程度如何，

and how much you agree with them

will tell you how much you want to watch the world burn.

就能判斷你有多想看世界變成煉獄。

So do this quietly in your head.

請大家安靜地在腦中作答。

"I need chaos around me.

「我的周圍必須要有混亂。 什麼都沒發生就太無聊了。」

It's too boring if nothing is going on."

"Sometimes I just like destroying beautiful things."

「有時我就只想摧毀美麗的東西。」

But not all the stories I got had that kind of nature.

但我收到的故事，並非全部 在本質上都屬於這類。

Some were a little bit more benign.

有些比較和善一點點。 以下是我最愛的一則：

Here's one of my favorites.

"On one occasion in my early 20s, I was out with a friend.

「我二十初頭時，有一次 我和一位朋友出去。

He decided to get himself an ice cream

他決定去買冰淇淋來吃，

and before he had a chance to try it, I stuck my finger in it."

在他有機會品嚐之前，我就 把我的手指插進去了。」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

"I tried to play it off as a joke,

「我試著把它當玩笑來輕鬆看待，

but really I had the sudden thought,

但我突然有個念頭：『哇，那一定會

’Man, it would be -- messed up

很慘烈，

if I just jammed my finger in his ice cream.'"

如果我把我的手指塞到 他的冰淇淋裡的話。」

Someone else wrote me, "When I was in a professional choir,

另外一個人寫給我： 「當我在職業合唱團裡時，

at every concert,

在每場音樂會上我都會很想 故意把幾個音唱到大錯。

I felt the desire to sing a few notes very incorrectly on purpose.

To this day, I don't completely understand why."

至今我仍然不明白為什麼。」

Someone else wrote me, and this is kind of the sweetest, saddest

另一個人寫給我的，是最甜蜜 又最悲傷的有節制反骨範例。

little example of modest perversity:

“Sometimes I walk on the grass instead of the path

「有時，我會踩草皮而不走步道，

just because I know it's wrong."

只因為我知道那樣不對。」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Now a lot of perversity makes the world worse.

很多反骨會讓世界變得更糟，

I wouldn't want an Uber driver

我不會希望我的優步司機

who scores high on a "need for chaos" scale.

在「需要混亂」量表上取得高分。

And I don't want a friend or a colleague either.

我也不希望有這樣的朋友或同事。

But sometimes, I'll suggest to you,

但，我會建議各位，有時，

perversity can be clever, creative, beautiful.

反骨也可以很機智、有創意、美好。

有一些藝術方面的例子。

And there are some examples from art.

There was an illustrious art exhibition in New York City in 1917, and they said,

紐約市有一場耀煌藝術展，

那是 1917 年，他們說：

"You could send in anything you want, we'll accept everything."

「什麼都可以寄來， 我們什麼都收。」

So Marcel Duchamp sent in a urinal, described [as] a fountain,

馬賽爾‧杜尚寄了個小便斗過去，

稱之為噴泉，他們卻拒收。

and they rejected it.

They said, "No, no, we just accept artwork."

他們說：「不，不， 我們只收藝術作品。」

But Duchamp insisted it was artwork

但杜尚堅持這是藝術作品，

and the resulting controversy turned out to be one of the pivotal moments

因此事產生的爭議， 結果竟是現代藝術史上的

in the history of modern art.

關鍵轉折時刻之一。

Or take Banksy.

或是班克西的例子。

A few years ago,

幾年前，

Banksy sold a painting “Girl with Balloon” at Sotheby’s, at auction,

班克西在蘇富比拍賣上賣掉了 他的畫作《氣球女孩》，

and he set up the frame so that the moment the painting was sold,

他在畫框動了手腳，

畫作被賣出的那一刻， 槌子敲下去的那一刻，

the moment the gavel went "boom,"

a machine in the frame shredded the painting halfway through,

畫框裡的機器

把畫作碎掉了一半，

horrifying the audience.

嚇壞了觀眾。

But... getting on the front pages of newspapers all over the world.

但上了世界各地的報紙頭版。

Later on, describing it, Banksy quotes a Russian anarchist who says,

後來，班克西引用了一位 俄羅斯建築師的話來描述此事：

"The urge to destroy is also a creative urge."

「想要摧毀的衝動 也是創意的衝動。」

Or take comedy.

或以喜劇為例。

Perversity is part and parcel of comedy.

反骨是喜劇的基本要件。

So much of what's funny

笑料有很大一部分

is when people do things that are irrational or immoral.

來自於有人做出 不合理或不道德的事。

In the right hands, perversity is such a source of joy.

若被對的人使用，反骨 真的可說是喜悅的來源。

Perversity can also be powerful.

反骨也可能很強大。

Rory Sutherland wrote,

羅里‧薩特蘭寫過：

"Irrational people are much more powerful than rational people."

「不理性的人比 理性的人強大許多。」

He gave two reasons why this is so.

他用兩個理由說明原因。

The first is, their threats are so much more convincing.

第一：他們的威脅更有說服力許多。

假設我和你發生衝突，

Suppose I'm in a confrontation with you

and you threaten me

你是個理性講理的人， 你威脅我，我知道你的威脅……

and you’re a rational, reasonable... person.

So I know your threats ...

女子：啊～～。

Woman: Ehh.

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

PB: Well, I know your threats are going to be normal, proportional and reasonable.

講者：我知道你的威脅會是 正常、相稱，且理性的。

But, if as somebody is hinting here, you’re a perverse agent,

但，如果如剛才的暗示， 你是個反骨的人，

I have no idea what you're capable of

我不知道你能做出什麼事，

and you're far more frightening to me.

我就會覺得你更可怕許多。

Second reason is, if you're wholly predictable,

理由二：若你完全可預料， 大家就會學會怎麼對付你。

people learn to hack you.

So again, if you're rational and I have to outsmart you,

所以，同樣的，若你很理性， 我得智取，猜出你的下一步，

figure out what you're going to do next,

I figure you’ll do the rational thing.

我會認為你會做合理的事。

If you're perverse, you're harder to predict.

若你很反骨，你就更難預測。

And so harder to hack.

就更難對付。

Edgar Allan Poe, describing perversity,

愛倫‧坡這樣描述反骨：

described, talked about imps,

他談到了惡魔，

little magical demons in our heads that cause us to do terrible things.

我們腦中的魔法小惡魔 促使我們做出可怕的事。

But like I said, I'm a psychologist, I don't believe in imps.

但，我說過我是心理學家， 我不相信有小魔鬼。

I think what we do has reasons, has motivations.

我認為我們的行為 是有理由、有動機的。

And I think for perverse actions there is a range of them.

我認為，反骨行為背後 有好幾種不同的理由動機。

One of them was mentioned by Augustine.

奧古斯丁提過其中一種。

So later on, after describing the incident with the pears, he writes,

在描述完梨子事件之後，他寫道：

"I would not have done it by myself.

「若只有我自己一人我就不會做了。

My satisfaction did not lie in the pears, it lay in the crime itself,

我的滿足感不是在梨子，

而是在和一群罪人 一起犯罪的快感。」

committed in league with a gang of sinners."

The social force drove him.

他被社群的力量驅使。

And there are other things, too.

還有其他的。

One force that really interests me

我很感興趣的一種力量

goes under many names: self-governance, freedom,

有許多名稱，

自理、自由、自主、自由裁量權。

liberty, agency.

Call it autonomy.

可稱它為自主權。

Call it a desire to be free to do what you want,

可稱它為希望能夠 想做什麼就做什麼的慾望，

free of the constraints of other people

不受他人的限制，

and free also of the constraints of rationality and morality.

也不受理性和道德的限制。

And Jonah Berger gives a nice example of this.

喬納‧貝加提供了很好的例子。

He talks about the Tide Pod challenge of a few years ago,

幾年前他談到汰漬洗衣膠囊大挑戰，

where many teenagers,

也就是許多青少年不把它 當作洗潔用品來使用，

instead of using these as detergent products,

bit into them and sometimes consumed them.

而是咬破它，甚至吃下它。

Now, as you might imagine,

各位可以想像，

Procter and Gamble, who own the products,

這個產品所屬的寶僑公司

were incredibly unhappy about this

對此非常不爽，

and they set up an extremely expensive ad campaign

他們砸大錢做廣告宣傳，

designed to stop people from consuming these products.

目的是要讓大家停止吃這個產品。

And one of their campaigns involved a ... popular football player

其中一個廣告和知名的 足球員格隆科斯基有關。

known as Gronk.

So the ad would begin,

廣告這樣開頭：

"Hey, Gronk, is eating the pods ever a good idea?"

「嘿，格隆科斯基， 吃洗衣膠囊是個好點子嗎？」

And Gronk responds, "No, no, no."

格隆科斯基回應：「不，不，不。」

Berger points out, when this ad came up,

貝加指出，這個廣告推出後， 食用洗衣膠囊的人數大增。

consumption of the pots shot up.

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Not down.

不是下降。

"Nobody's going to tell me what to do.

「沒人能告訴我要做什麼， 格隆科斯基算老幾？

Who is this Gronk telling me what to do?

I want to be an autonomous, free being."

我要當有自主權的自由人。」

And psychologists call this reactance.

心理學家稱之為抗拒。

This means it's "an unpleasant feeling

這意味著，

它是種「不悅的感覺，出現在

that emerges when people experience a threat to

人的自由行為受到威脅 或喪失它的時候。」

or loss of their free behaviors."

And there's a wealth of laboratory studies looking at reactance.

關於抗拒，有一大堆 相關的實驗室研究。

So they test the idea

他們測試了這個想法：

that what you try to do is reestablish the threatened freedom.

你試圖想做的事情 是重建被威脅的自由。

And so one of the studies, for instance, looks at binge-drinking ads

比如，有一項研究 探討的是狂飲廣告，

and finds that when binge drinking ads are particularly heavy-handed,

結果發現當狂飲廣告 走特別強硬的路線時，

people often respond by drinking more. ...

大家的反應通常是喝更多……

"I'm going to reestablish my freedom."

「我要重建我的自由。」 「我愛怎樣就怎樣。」

"I'm going to do what I want."

Or take threats of reprisal.

或以報復威脅為例。

There's a lovely study by a team of political scientists

有個政治科學家團隊 做了一項很讚的研究，

which asked you, asked the subjects,

研究受試者被要求要想像 他們是駐某國家的大使，

to imagine that they’re an ambassador to a country

and they're deciding whether or not to have sanctions

他們要決定是否要制裁該國家。

towards that country.

In one condition, the dictator says

其中一個情況是，獨裁者說：

"If you do sanctions towards our country, that's OK, I won't do anything."

「如果你制裁我們的國家， 沒關係，我什麼都不會做。」

In the second condition, the dictator says,

第二個情況是，獨裁者說：

"If you do sanctions towards our country,

「如果你制裁我們的國家， 我會對你們發動恐怖攻擊。」

I will unleash terrorist attacks against you."

What's the stunning finding from this is that in the second condition,

讓人驚訝的發現是， 在第二個情況中，

not the first,

不是第一個情況， 他們更可能決定要制裁。

they were more likely to do it.

A lot of our perverse actions are in response to people

我們有很多反骨行為都是在回應別人

telling us not to do what we want to do,

不准我們做我們想要做的事，

and it makes us want all the more to do that thing.

那會讓我們更想去做那件事。

I think there are two lessons from the study of perversity.

我認為關於反骨的研究 教了我們兩件事。

One is to appreciate its role in everyday life.

第一，要察知它在 日常生活中扮演的角色。

It's really worth knowing that there are people out there

真的值得知道，

的確有些人

who really do want to watch the world burn.

就是想看世界變成煉獄。

And I think it's also worth knowing that each and every one of us,

我認為還有件事也值得知道：

我們每一個人

at some point in our life,

在人生中的某個時點，

wants to watch the world burn at least a little bit.

都會想看世界變成煉獄，

至少有一點點啦。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I think it's worth knowing,

我認為值得知道，

at least for consequential decisions like choosing who to vote for,

至少，針對有重要影響的決策，比如

要投票給誰，

that people aren't just motivated by material self-interest

人的動機並不只有實質的自我利益，

or by an affiliation to social and political group.

或者屬於哪個社會或政治團體。

Sometimes people want to be autonomous beings,

有時，人想要有自主權，想要自由。

they want to be free.

And telling these people, "What you're doing is stupid,"

告訴這些人

「你在做的事情很蠢」、 「你在做的事很不理性」、

"what you're doing is irrational,"

「你在做的事很不道德」，

"what you're doing is immoral,"

can have the paradoxical effect of motivating them to do

可能會產生矛盾的效應， 反而促使他們去做

exactly what you don't want them to do.

你不希望他們做的事。

The second lesson of perversity has to do with our everyday lives.

反骨教我們的第二件事

和我們的日常生活有關。

A lot of perversity is awful.

反骨通常都很糟糕。

I think the world would be better off without it.

我認為沒有這種反骨的世界會更好。

But I think we've seen a little bit that perversity could be funny.

但，我想，我們剛才也 略談到反骨可能很有趣，

It could be clever.

可能很機智。

我認為它可以讓世界變得更好。

I think it can make the world a better place.

And so I guess I'd suggest

所以，我想我要說的是，

that a life with a little bit of perversity in it,

含有一點點反骨的人生，

a life where sometimes you put your finger into your friend's ice cream,

有時你會把手指插進 朋友的冰淇淋裡的人生，

is a life that's a lot more interesting.

是更有趣味的人生。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）