Why humans run the world | Yuval Noah Harari | TED

譯者: Coco Shen 審譯者: Yesbydefault 倪文娟

Seventy-thousand years ago, our ancestors were insignificant animals.

七萬年前，我們的先祖 不過是各種動物中的一種。

The most important thing to know about prehistoric humans

當你想到原人時，最重要的是

is that they were unimportant.

他們一點也不重要。

Their impact on the world was not much greater than that of jellyfish

他們對世界的影響力

和水母、螢火蟲、啄木鳥差別不大。

or fireflies or woodpeckers.

Today, in contrast, we control this planet.

今天，我們卻變成地球的霸主。

And the question is:

所以問題是：

How did we come from there to here?

我們是怎麼走到這一步的？

How did we turn ourselves from insignificant apes,

我們是如何從毫不起眼的人猿，

minding their own business in a corner of Africa,

在非洲的角落自生自滅，

into the rulers of planet Earth?

搖身一變成為地球霸主的？

Usually, we look for the difference between us and all the other animals

通常我們會在個體差異上

檢視我們與其它動物的分別，

on the individual level.

We want to believe -- I want to believe --

我們想信 － 我想要相信

that there is something special about me,

我們與眾不同，

about my body, about my brain,

我的身體，我的大腦，

that makes me so superior to a dog or a pig, or a chimpanzee.

讓我遠比狗、豬，或是黒猩猩優越。

But the truth is that, on the individual level,

但事實是，就個體差異來說

I'm embarrassingly similar to a chimpanzee.

我和黑猩猩驚人的相似。

And if you take me and a chimpanzee and put us together on some lonely island,

如果你把我和一頭黒猩猩置於同一孤島

and we had to struggle for survival to see who survives better,

看我們之中誰能存活的更好，

I would definitely place my bet on the chimpanzee, not on myself.

我會把籌碼放在黒猩猩身上， 而不是我自己。

And this is not something wrong with me personally.

這不是因為我個人的缺陷，

I guess if they took almost any one of you, and placed you alone

我想如果有人把你們其中任何人

with a chimpanzee on some island,

與一頭黒猩猩一起放在孤島上，

the chimpanzee would do much better.

黑猩猩絕對會生存的更好。

The real difference between humans and all other animals

真正讓人類與其它動物分別開來的特質

is not on the individual level;

不是個體的，

it's on the collective level.

而是群體的。

Humans control the planet because they are the only animals

人類控制地球， 是因為我們是唯一

that can cooperate both flexibly and in very large numbers.

可以大規模靈活合作的動物。

Now, there are other animals --

其它動物，

like the social insects, the bees, the ants --

那些昆蟲，蜜蜂、螞蟻，

that can cooperate in large numbers, but they don't do so flexibly.

牠們也可以大規模地合作， 但沒有像我們這樣靈活。

Their cooperation is very rigid.

牠們的合作方式是固定的。

There is basically just one way in which a beehive can function.

蜂窩總是用同一種方式運作。

And if there's a new opportunity or a new danger,

就算遇上新的機會、新的威脅，

the bees cannot reinvent the social system overnight.

蜜蜂無法在一夜之間改變分工方式

They cannot, for example, execute the queen

譬如說，牠們無法處死蜂后，

and establish a republic of bees,

建立蜜蜂共和國，

or a communist dictatorship of worker bees.

工蜂也不能組成共產獨裁政權。

Other animals, like the social mammals --

其它動物，那些群居的哺乳類動物

the wolves, the elephants, the dolphins, the chimpanzees --

狼、大象、海豚、黒猩猩 －

they can cooperate much more flexibly,

牠們的合作性更靈活，

but they do so only in small numbers,

但規模有限，

because cooperation among chimpanzees

因為黑猩猩合作的基礎是

is based on intimate knowledge, one of the other.

對於彼此的瞭解與認知。

I'm a chimpanzee and you're a chimpanzee,

假設你我都是黒猩猩，

and I want to cooperate with you.

我想和你合作，

I need to know you personally.

我需要先認識你。

What kind of chimpanzee are you?

你是哪種黒猩猩？

Are you a nice chimpanzee?

你是頭善良的黒猩猩？

Are you an evil chimpanzee?

還是邪惡的黒猩猩？

Are you trustworthy?

你可靠嗎？

If I don't know you, how can I cooperate with you?

如果我不認識你， 我怎麼和你合作呢？

The only animal that can combine the two abilities together

唯一擁有這兩種特質

and cooperate both flexibly and still do so in very large numbers

既能大規模合作，又能保持靈活的，

is us, Homo sapiens.

只有我們，智人。

One versus one, or even 10 versus 10,

一比一，甚至十比十，

chimpanzees might be better than us.

黒猩猩可能都比我們優秀。

But, if you pit 1,000 humans against 1,000 chimpanzees,

但，如果數目提高到 一千個人和一千頭黒猩猩

the humans will win easily, for the simple reason

人類就能輕易獲勝，

that a thousand chimpanzees cannot cooperate at all.

因為上千頭黒猩猩無法共同合作。

And if you now try to cram 100,000 chimpanzees

如果你嘗試把十萬頭黒猩猩，

into Oxford Street, or into Wembley Stadium,

塞進牛津街、溫布萊體育館

or Tienanmen Square or the Vatican,

天安門廣場或梵諦岡，

you will get chaos, complete chaos.

絕對會陷入一片混亂。

Just imagine Wembley Stadium with 100,000 chimpanzees.

想像塞滿十萬頭黒猩猩的溫布萊體育館，

Complete madness.

那個景象將有多瘋狂。

In contrast, humans normally gather there in tens of thousands,

相對的，成千上萬的人時常一同在那，

and what we get is not chaos, usually.

也通常不會陷入混亂。

What we get is extremely sophisticated and effective networks of cooperation.

我們有效率、有制度地合作。

All the huge achievements of humankind throughout history,

人類在歷史上達成的巨大成就，

whether it's building the pyramids or flying to the moon,

無論是金字塔還是上月球，

have been based not on individual abilities,

都不是建立在個體的能力，

but on this ability to cooperate flexibly in large numbers.

而是群體的靈活合作。

Think even about this very talk that I'm giving now:

就像現在，我在這裡演講，

I'm standing here in front of an audience of about 300 or 400 people,

面對三、四百個觀眾，

most of you are complete strangers to me.

絕大多數我都不認識。

Similarly, I don't really know all the people who have organized

同樣的，我不認識所有策劃

and worked on this event.

或參與這個活動的人員。

I don't know the pilot and the crew members of the plane

我不認識昨日帶我飛抵倫敦的

that brought me over here, yesterday, to London.

駕駛員和機組人員。

I don't know the people who invented and manufactured

我不認識這些設備的發明和製造者，

this microphone and these cameras, which are recording what I'm saying.

但錄影機和麥克風正在拍攝這段演講。

I don't know the people who wrote all the books and articles

為了準備這段演講， 我讀了不少書和文章，

that I read in preparation for this talk.

卻不認識這些作者。

And I certainly don't know all the people

我當然更不認識這場演講的 網路觀眾，

who might be watching this talk over the Internet,

somewhere in Buenos Aires or in New Delhi.

此刻可能正在布宜諾斯艾利斯、 或新德里。

Nevertheless, even though we don't know each other,

然而，我們雖不認識彼此，

we can work together to create this global exchange of ideas.

卻能合作創造這個世界平台， 互相交流。

This is something chimpanzees cannot do.

這是黑猩猩所做不到的。

They communicate, of course,

當然，牠們也能溝通，

but you will never catch a chimpanzee traveling to some distant chimpanzee band

但你絕不會看到一隻黑猩猩 遠渡重洋

to give them a talk about bananas or about elephants,

對另一群黑猩猩講解香蕉或大象，

or anything else that might interest chimpanzees.

或任何黑猩猩有興趣的事。

Now cooperation is, of course, not always nice;

合作自然不是只有好事，

all the horrible things humans have been doing throughout history --

人類歷史上所有恐怖的事件 －

and we have been doing some very horrible things --

我們的確做過一些非常恐怖的事 －

all those things are also based on large-scale cooperation.

同樣也是用大規模合作達成的。

Prisons are a system of cooperation;

監獄是一種合作系統，

slaughterhouses are a system of cooperation;

屠宰場是一種合作系統，

concentration camps are a system of cooperation.

集中營是一種合作系統，

Chimpanzees don't have slaughterhouses and prisons and concentration camps.

黒猩猩沒有屠宰場、監獄、或集中營。

Now suppose I've managed to convince you perhaps that yes,

現在或許我已經說服你

我們的確掌控了世界， 因為我們能大規模靈活合作。

we control the world because we can cooperate flexibly in large numbers.

The next question that immediately arises

下一個問題隨之而來，

in the mind of an inquisitive listener is:

好奇的聽眾心裡想：

How, exactly, do we do it?

我們是怎麼做到的？

What enables us alone, of all the animals, to cooperate in such a way?

在所有動物中， 為什麼只有我們這樣合作？

The answer is our imagination.

答案是我們的想像力。

We can cooperate flexibly with countless numbers of strangers,

我們之所以能和無數陌生人 靈活的合作，

because we alone, of all the animals on the planet,

因為在這星球上的所有動物中，

can create and believe fictions, fictional stories.

只有我們能創造和相信虛構的故事。

And as long as everybody believes in the same fiction,

只要大家相信同一個故事，

everybody obeys and follows the same rules,

每個人服從並執行一樣的規則，

the same norms, the same values.

一樣的基準，一樣的價值觀。

All other animals use their communication system

其它動物的溝通，

only to describe reality.

只限於描述真實的物事。

A chimpanzee may say, "Look! There's a lion, let's run away!"

黒猩猩說：「看啊！有獅子！快跑！」

Or, "Look! There's a banana tree over there! Let's go and get bananas!"

或是：「看啊！有棵香蕉樹！ 去摘香蕉吧！」

Humans, in contrast, use their language not merely to describe reality,

而人類呢，我們的語言 不只是用來描述現實，

but also to create new realities, fictional realities.

更能用來創造新的現實， 想像的現實。

A human can say, "Look, there is a god above the clouds!

人可以說：「看啊！雲上有神！

And if you don't do what I tell you to do,

如果你不聽從命令，

when you die, God will punish you and send you to hell."

你死後，神會懲罰你下地獄。」

And if you all believe this story that I've invented,

如果你們都相信我發明的故事，

then you will follow the same norms and laws and values,

就會依循一樣的基準、法則、價值觀，

and you can cooperate.

你們就會合作。

This is something only humans can do.

這件事只有人類做得到。

You can never convince a chimpanzee to give you a banana

你永遠無法說服一隻黑猩猩交出香蕉，

by promising him, "... after you die, you'll go to chimpanzee heaven ..."

就算你承諾牠：「死後， 你會上黑猩猩天堂..... 」

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

"... and you'll receive lots and lots of bananas for your good deeds.

「... 到時候你的善行 會為你贏得無數的香蕉。

So now give me this banana."

現在，快把香蕉給我。」

No chimpanzee will ever believe such a story.

沒有任何黑猩猩會相信這種故事，

Only humans believe such stories,

只有人類會相信這種故事。

which is why we control the world,

這就是我們稱霸世界，

whereas the chimpanzees are locked up in zoos and research laboratories.

而黑猩猩卻淪落到 動物園和實驗室的原因。

Now you may find it acceptable that yes,

或許你同意，

in the religious field, humans cooperate by believing in the same fictions.

的確，在宗教領域，

人們因為信仰相同而彼此合作，

Millions of people come together to build a cathedral or a mosque

百萬人同心合力建造教堂、清真寺，

or fight in a crusade or a jihad, because they all believe in the same stories

奮身投入各種聖戰，

全都是因為對於 神、天堂與地獄有著相同的信仰。

about God and heaven and hell.

But what I want to emphasize is that exactly the same mechanism

但我想說的是同樣的運作機制，

underlies all other forms of mass-scale human cooperation,

存在於所有人類的大規模合作，

not only in the religious field.

不限於宗教領域。

Take, for example, the legal field.

譬如，法治概念。

Most legal systems today in the world are based on a belief in human rights.

現在世界上大部分的法律， 都以人權為基礎。

But what are human rights?

但人權是什麼？

Human rights, just like God and heaven, are just a story that we've invented.

人權，就像神和天堂， 都是我們發明的故事。

They are not an objective reality;

不是客觀的事實；

they are not some biological effect about homo sapiens.

也不是智人的某種生理反應。

Take a human being, cut him open, look inside,

解剖人體，往裡探看，

you will find the heart, the kidneys, neurons, hormones, DNA,

裡面有心臟、腎臟、神經元、 荷爾蒙、基因，

but you won't find any rights.

但找不到什麼權利。

The only place you find rights are in the stories

權利只存在於故事裡，

that we have invented and spread around over the last few centuries.

我們在近代世紀裡創造、散播的故事。

They may be very positive stories, very good stories,

這些故事可能很正面、很好，

but they're still just fictional stories that we've invented.

但仍然是我們虛構的。

The same is true of the political field.

政治領域也一樣。

The most important factors in modern politics are states and nations.

國族是今日政治裡最重要的元素。

But what are states and nations?

但國族是什麼？

They are not an objective reality.

它並不是客觀事實。

A mountain is an objective reality.

山嶽才是客觀事實。

You can see it, you can touch it, you can even smell it.

你看得到，摸得到，甚至聞得到。

But a nation or a state,

但國族，

like Israel or Iran or France or Germany,

像以色列、伊朗、法國或德國，

this is just a story that we've invented

只是我們創造的故事，

and became extremely attached to.

並且變得深信不疑。

The same is true of the economic field.

經濟領域也一樣。

The most important actors today in the global economy

今日全球經濟的主角

are companies and corporations.

是公司和企業。

Many of you today, perhaps, work for a corporation,

你們當中可能有許多人為企業工作，

like Google or Toyota or McDonald's.

像谷歌或豐田汽車或麥當勞。

What exactly are these things?

這些到底是什麼？

They are what lawyers call legal fictions.

律師叫它們法人。

They are stories invented and maintained

是虛構並且需要維持的故事，

by the powerful wizards we call lawyers.

由厲害的巫師負責－ 不過我們叫他們律師。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And what do corporations do all day?

企業都在做些什麼？

Mostly, they try to make money.

他們最大的目的是賺錢圖利。

Yet, what is money?

但錢是什麼？

Again, money is not an objective reality; it has no objective value.

錢也不是客觀事實； 沒有任何客觀價值。

Take this green piece of paper, the dollar bill.

這張綠色的紙，一元鈔票，

Look at it -- it has no value.

根本一文不值。

You cannot eat it, you cannot drink it,

不能拿來吃，不能拿來喝，

you cannot wear it.

也不能穿在身上。

But then came along these master storytellers --

但這些故事高手出現了 －

the big bankers,

大銀行家、

the finance ministers,

各國的財政部長、

the prime ministers --

總理、首相 －

and they tell us a very convincing story:

他們說著同一個動人的故事：

"Look, you see this green piece of paper?

「你們看到這張綠色的紙嗎？

It is actually worth 10 bananas."

它可以換十根香蕉。」

And if I believe it, and you believe it,

如果我信了，你也信了，

and everybody believes it,

大家都信了，

it actually works.

手段就成功了。

I can take this worthless piece of paper,

我可以拿著這張一文不值的紙，

go to the supermarket,

到任何超市，

give it to a complete stranger whom I've never met before,

把它交給一位素昧平生的陌生人，

and get, in exchange, real bananas which I can actually eat.

換到真的香蕉，可以給我吃。

This is something amazing.

這未免太神奇了！

You could never do it with chimpanzees.

黑猩猩可辦不到。

Chimpanzees trade, of course:

當然，黑猩猩也懂得交換：

"Yes, you give me a coconut, I'll give you a banana."

「你給我一顆椰子，我給你一根香蕉」

That can work.

也行。

But, you give me a worthless piece of paper

但如果你給我一張廢紙，

and you except me to give you a banana?

然後要我給你一根香蕉？

No way!

做夢吧你！

What do you think I am, a human?

你把我當什麼了，人類嗎？

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Money, in fact, is the most successful story

錢，其實是人類史上，

ever invented and told by humans,

最成功的故事。

because it is the only story everybody believes.

因為它是唯一一個所有人都相信的故事。

Not everybody believes in God,

不是每個人都相信神，

not everybody believes in human rights,

不是每個人都追求人權，

not everybody believes in nationalism,

不是每個人都愛國，

but everybody believes in money, and in the dollar bill.

但每個人都相信錢，相信現金。

Take, even, Osama Bin Laden.

就像賓拉登。

He hated American politics and American religion

他憎恨美國的政策和信仰，

and American culture,

美國文化，

but he had no objection to American dollars.

但他完全不排斥美金，

He was quite fond of them, actually.

其實挺愛的。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

To conclude, then:

結論是：

We humans control the world because we live in a dual reality.

人類稱霸世界， 因為我們活在雙重現實裡。

All other animals live in an objective reality.

其它動物活在客觀事實裡。

Their reality consists of objective entities,

牠們的真實世界存在於客觀現實，

like rivers and trees and lions and elephants.

像河流、樹木、獅子和大象。

We humans, we also live in an objective reality.

我們人類也活在客觀現實裡。

In our world, too, there are rivers and trees and lions and elephants.

我們也有河流、樹木、獅子和大象。

But over the centuries,

但幾個世紀來，

we have constructed on top of this objective reality

我們在客觀現實上，

a second layer of fictional reality,

建構了另一個層次的虛構現實，

a reality made of fictional entities,

一個由虛構元素組成的現實：

like nations, like gods, like money, like corporations.

國族、神、錢、企業。

And what is amazing is that as history unfolded,

厲害的是在歷史進程裡，

this fictional reality became more and more powerful

這一層虛構的現實日漸強大，

so that today, the most powerful forces in the world

直到今日，世界上最強大的力量，

are these fictional entities.

已經被這些虛構的主體把持。

Today, the very survival of rivers and trees and lions and elephants

今天，河流、樹、獅子和大象的存亡，

depends on the decisions and wishes of fictional entities,

端賴於這些虛構主體的決策和慾望，

like the United States, like Google, like the World Bank --

像美國、谷歌、世界銀行 －

entities that exist only in our own imagination.

這些只存在於我們想像中的主體。

Thank you.

謝謝各位。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Bruno Giussani: Yuval, you have a new book out.

Bruno Guissani：烏瓦爾， 你剛出版一本新書

After Sapiens, you wrote another one,

《人類大歷史》 之後，你又寫了一本，

and it's out in Hebrew, but not yet translated into ...

希伯來文的版本已經出版了， 但還沒翻譯成...

Yuval Noah Harari: I'm working on the translation as we speak.

烏瓦爾：我現在正在翻譯。

BG: In the book, if I understand it correctly,

BG：在這本書裡， 如果我想得沒錯的話，

you argue that the amazing breakthroughs that we are experiencing right now

你認為，當今奇妙的科技突破，

not only will potentially make our lives better,

不只會讓我們的生活更好，

but they will create -- and I quote you --

更有可能創造 － 你這麼說 －

"... new classes and new class struggles, just as the industrial revolution did."

「...新的階級和新的階級鬥爭， 就像工業革命時期一樣。」

Can you elaborate for us?

你可以多說一點嗎？

YNH: Yes. In the industrial revolution,

烏瓦爾：好的。 工業革命時期，

we saw the creation of a new class of the urban proletariat.

創造了城市中的無產階級，

And much of the political and social history of the last 200 years involved

過去兩百年的政治社會史

what to do with this class, and the new problems and opportunities.

都在處理由此而生的新問題和機會。

Now, we see the creation of a new massive class of useless people.

現在，沒有用處的人 又形成了一個龐大的新階級。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

As computers become better and better in more and more fields,

隨著電腦在越來越多的領域壯大，

there is a distinct possibility that computers will out-perform us

電腦處理許多事務的能力

極可能勝過人類，

in most tasks and will make humans redundant.

進而取代人類。

And then the big political and economic question

這個世紀 最大的政治和經濟問題是，

of the 21st century will be,

「我們需要人類做什麼？」

"What do we need humans for?",

or at least, "What do we need so many humans for?"

至少是 「我們需要這麼多人做什麼？」

BG: Do you have an answer in the book?

BG：書裡會找到答案嗎？

YNH: At present, the best guess we have is to keep them happy

烏瓦爾：目前別無他法， 要安頓這些人，

只能暫時用藥物和電腦遊戲吧。

with drugs and computer games ...

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

but this doesn't sound like a very appealing future.

雖然這前景堪憂。

BG: Ok, so you're basically saying in the book and now,

BG：所以你在書裡和在此演講的看法是，

that for all the discussion about the growing evidence

這麼多攀升證據所顯示的

of significant economic inequality, we are just kind of at the beginning

貧富懸殊、經濟極端不平等，

都只是一個新巨變的開端而已？

of the process?

YNH: Again, it's not a prophecy;

烏瓦爾：我還是要說，這不是預言；

it's seeing all kinds of possibilities before us.

只是評估眼前的所有可能性。

One possibility is this creation of a new massive class of useless people.

其中一種可能是 龐大廢人階級的誕生。

Another possibility is the division of humankind

另一種可能是把人類分工，

into different biological castes,

分成不同的生物階級。

with the rich being upgraded into virtual gods,

富人升級成神，

and the poor being degraded to this level of useless people.

窮人則貶到無用之人的階級。

BG: I feel there is another TED talk coming up in a year or two.

BG：我想一兩年內會有這個 TED 演說。

Thank you, Yuval, for making the trip.

謝謝你遠道而來。

YNH: Thanks!

烏瓦爾：謝謝！

(Applause)

（掌聲）