Segment four, doyou know enough already?
第四部分，你知道的夠多了嗎？

The previous secsuggested that reasons and arguments can sometimes do a lot of good byundermining political polarization and enabling people to work together. Butthat's still not a good enough reason to take this course. Because you mightalready know enough about arguments and you should just go out and start usingthem.
上一屆美國證交會（sec）表示，理由和論據有時能起到很大作用，削弱政治兩極分化，使人們能夠共同努力。但這仍然不是上這門課的充分理由。因為你可能已經對論點有足夠的了解，你應該走出去開始使用它們。

Many peoplethink they do know enough already. They think they understand their opponents.They think they know the issues and the facts they think they should act ontheir beliefs right now without spending any more time considering theirbeliefs or their reasons. Why should they. Try to learn more about theiropponents or about reasons and arguments.
很多人認為他們知道的已經夠多了。他們認為他們了解對手。他們認為他們知道問題和事實，他們認為他們現在應該按照自己的信仰行事，而不必花更多的時間考慮他們的信仰或理由。他們為什麼要這麼做。試著多了解他們的對手或理由和爭論。

They take thiscourse, this kind of skepticism takes two forms. Some people say that thearguments aren't really doing any good it's something else. And so we don'tneed to learn about arguments. Another kind of skeptic says a lot of need totake this course because I don't make the kinds of mistakes you're talkingabout.
他們學習這個過程，這種懷疑有兩種形式。有些人說，這些爭論並没有真正起到任何作用，這是另一回事。所以我們不需要學習爭論。另一種懷疑論者說很多人需要修這門課，因為我不會犯你所說的那種錯誤。

So I'll talkabout each of these in turn. The first reason why you might think that youdon't need to learn about argument is if you believe that argument doesn'treally do any good people, act on emotions, not reasons and arguments, givereasons. What we need to do is manipulate their emotions so that they come intoline with us better.
我將依次討論這些問題。你可能認為你不需要學習辯論的第一個原因是，如果你認為爭論對任何人都没有好處，就憑情緒行事，而不是用理由和爭論，給出理由。我們需要做的是控制他們的情緒，讓他們更好地與我們保持一致。

Well, first ofall, let me say that. I think this is a false dichotomy. Emotion and reason arenot opposed in the way that this skepticism suggests after all the fact that Ilove someone can be a good reason to marry that person. The fact that I havefun watching comedies might be a reason to pay for a ticket, to see a comedy.
好吧，首先，讓我這麼說。我認為這是一個錯誤的二分法。情感和理性並不是對立的，這種懷疑論表明，畢竟我愛一個人可以成為嫁給那個人的一個很好的理由。我看喜劇很有趣，這可能是我花錢買票、看喜劇的一個理由。

Play or movie.So emotions can actually give us reasons. At some time it's not like emotionand reason or different things. Arguments can actually direct our emotionsbecause if our emotion makes us hate someone, but the argument makes us ask whydo we hate them? And maybe we hate them because we think that they told ussecret that they promise not to tell.
玩或看電影。所以情緒可以給我們理由。在某些時候，它不像情感和理性或其他的東西。爭論實際上可以引導我們的情緒，因為如果我們的情緒讓我們恨某人，但是爭論會讓我們問為什麼我們恨他們？也許我們恨他們是因為我們認為他們告訴了我們他們承諾不告訴我們的秘密。

But then we findout they didn't tell that secret, but we shouldn't hate them anymore. We mightstill hate them for a little while. Not everybody gets over it immediately, butthe reason helps us direct our emotions in the ways that are appropriate andthat we see as appropriate. Now, you can't always do that kind of thing withother people.
但后來我們發現他們没有告訴我們這個秘密，但我們不應該再恨他們了。我們可能還會恨他們一段時間。不是每個人都能立刻克服它，但原因幫助我們將情緒引導到適當的、我們認為合適的方式上。現在，你不能總是和别人做那種事。

I'll admit thatsometimes argument is not worthwhile. And doesn't always redirect people'semotions. It might not be worthwhile for most of us to talk with whitenationalists. They're not going to listen. Nothing we say is going to do anygood. It might not be productive for us to talk with people who really want todefund the police in the sense of take away all their funding and abolish thepolice.
我承認有時爭論是不值得的。也不總是改變人們的情緒。對我們大多數人來說，與白人民族主義者交談可能不值得。他們不會聽的。我們說的什麼都没用。對於我們來說，與那些真正想解散警察的人談一談，從剝奪他們所有的資金和廢除警察的意義上來說，這可能不會有什麼成效。

Sothere's no more police force extreme position like that. It's often taken bypeople who are not going to listen to your arguments anyway, and it might notbe worthwhile to talk with terrorists, maybe some, but there are certainlyextreme cases where argument is really not going to do any good. We did seeexamples where argument work, but those examples took an awful lot of time.
所以再也没有警察這樣的極端立場了。它經常被那些無論如何都不願意聽你的論點的人所接受，也許和恐怖分子，也許有些人，交談是不值得的，但是在某些極端的情況下，爭論真的没有任何好處。我們確實看到了論證起作用的例子，但是這些例子花了很多時間。

And most of uslack the time or the patience to deal with these extreme views. So I grant you.That we shouldn't always turn to argument. Sometimes action is needed. However,most people are not so extreme. We run into moderate people more often thanextremists, almost by definition because the moderate people are the ones whohold intermediate views between the extremes and the people who hold extremepositions are few and far between and those people in the middle, themoderates.
我們大多數人都缺乏時間和耐心來處理這些極端觀點。所以我同意你。我們不應該總是爭論不休。有時需要行動。然而，大多數人並不那麼極端。我們遇到溫和派的人比極端分子更多，幾乎從定義上講，因為溫和派是在極端之間持有中間觀點的人，持極端立場的人很少，而中間的人就是溫和派。

They do listento reason, a recent study by Cass Sunstein show that people on the end of thespectrum of views on global warming or climate change reacted badly to reasons.On the other side, they sometimes became more adamant about their own positionwhen they listened to reasons against their position, but people in the middle.
卡斯泰因最近對氣候變暖的原因做了調查，以表明他們對全球變暖的原因反應不好。另一方面，他們有時更堅定自己的立場，當他們聽取他們的立場的理由，但在中間的人。

Actuallyresponded appropriately to reasons for and against global warming. So it mightmake more sense to engage with reasonable moderates and leave the extremists toother people who have more time and expertise. It can be useful and beneficialto talk to most of the people that you run into in your everyday life.
應對全球變暖的原因。因此，與合理的溫和派接觸，把極端分子留給其他有更多時間和專業知識的人可能更有意義。與你日常生活中遇到的大多數人交談是有益的。

Just not to saythat you're. Giving reasons alone without emotion, but you're giving the twotogether and together they can work to enable you to cooperate with them andappreciate them more. Now, when you give those arguments, you still have togive good arguments and avoid bad arguments. So you need to learn whicharguments are good, and which arguments are bad.
只是不是說你是。一個人不帶感情地給出理由，但你把兩者放在一起，他們可以一起工作，使你能夠與他們合作，更欣賞他們。現在，當你提出這些論點時，你仍然必須提出好的論點，避免壞的論點。所以你需要知道哪些論點是好的，哪些論點是壞的。

That's where thiscourse can help
這就是這門課能幫上忙的地方

and kind ofskepticism. I mentioned comes from people who think. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know agood argument. Here's what I know a bad argument. I can tell a good argumentfrom a bad argument. What kind of fool do you think I am? Well, I don't thinkyou're any more of a fool than I am or that anybody else is, but everybodymakes mistakes all the time.
有點懷疑。我提到的是那些認為。是的，是的，是的。我知道一個很好的論點。這是我所知道的一個糟糕的論點。我能分辨好論點和壞論點。你以為我是什麼傻瓜？好吧，我不認為你比我更傻，也不認為其他人更傻，但每個人都會犯錯誤。

Here's someexamples. It's very common to engage in wishful thinking. They did a study ofbathroom scales, people who were trying to lose weight and they would step onthe scale and it would say 120 pounds. And they were trying to get down to 110pounds. So if it said 120, but they wanted it to be 119 or 118, they would stepoff the scale and step back on.
這里有一些例子。一廂情願是很常見的。他們對浴室秤做了一項研究，那些試圖減肥的人會踩在秤上，上面顯示120磅。他們想把體重降到110磅。所以，如果是120，但他們希望是119或118，他們會從秤上退一步，然后再退一步。

Wishing that the scale would give alower weight. The second time it must be wrong. If it says that I weigh 120cents, I've been dieting and ought to be down to 119 or 118, but the people whostepped on the scale and it said 118, well, they got off the scale and smiledand didn't check again. So notice what they're doing, the scale is evidence ofhow much you weigh and they're questioning that evidence.
希望秤的重量能輕一點。第二次肯定是錯的。如果上面說我體重120美分，我一直在節食，應該降到119或118，但是那些踩在秤上的人說118，好吧，他們下了秤，笑了，没有再檢查。所以注意他們在做什麼，秤是你體重的證據，他們在質疑這個證據。

When it saysthat you weigh 120, because that's bad news, but you're not questioning theevidence when it says you weigh 118. Cause that's good news. So people areweighing the evidence in accordance with what their desires are. People do itall the time and you need training to avoid that kind of mistake.
當它說你體重120，因為這是個壞消息，但當它說你體重118時，你並没有質疑證據。因為這是個好消息。所以人們根據自己的願望來權衡證據。人們總是這樣做，你需要訓練來避免這種錯誤。

Here's anotherexample. What's called the availability heuristic study by Amos Tversky andDaniel Kahneman. Just take the first five or 10,000 words of a novel in theEnglish language and try to think of how many words of the following sort youthink occur in that 5,000 or 10,000 words say 5,000. How many, seven letterwords have in, in the sixth place of the seven letters and write down or thinkabout what number you think there would be.
這是另一個例子。這就是阿莫斯·特沃斯基和丹尼爾·卡尼曼的可用性啟發式研究。就拿一本英文小說的前五個或一萬個單詞，試著想想你認為在5000或10000個單詞中有多少個單詞是5000。有多少個，七個字母的單詞，在七個字母的第六位寫下或者想想你認為會有多少個數字。

Okay. Now howmany, seven letter words within that 5,000 end in ING. So we're talking aboutseven letter words that end in ING, four letters. And then I N G. Now how manyof those do you think occur in the 5,000 words of the novel?
可以。在這5000個字母中有多少個以ING結尾。所以我們說的是以ING結尾的七個字母的單詞，四個字母。你覺得這部小說的5000字里有多少是這樣的？

Now? I don'tknow what you said, but most people. Actually think they're going to be morewords ending in ING. Then there are, that is seven letter words, Indiana ING.Then there are seven letter words within, in the sixth place, but that cannotbe right because every seven letter word that ends in ING is a seven letterword within the sixth place.
現在？我不知道你說了什麼，但是大多數人。事實上他們會有更多的詞以ING結尾。還有，那是七個字母的單詞，印第安納。第六位是七個字母的單詞，但這是不對的，因為每一個以ING結尾的七個字母單詞都是位於第六位的七個字母單詞。

So there have tobe more. Seven letter words within the sixth place. Then there are seven letterwords ending in ING as psychologists study, why we make mistakes, but we all domake mistakes. Like that. One final example is well known from the game show. Let'smake a deal. It's sometimes called the Monty hall problem because Monte hallwas the host of the show.
所以必須有更多。第六位以內的七個字母的單詞。心理學家研究的結果是，我們為什麼會犯錯誤，但我們都會犯錯誤。就像那樣。最后一個例子是眾所週知的遊戲秀。我們做個交易吧。這有時被稱為蒙蒂霍爾問題，因為蒙特霍爾是節目的主持人。

And what he didwas he. Put three doors on the stage. And he told contestants that behind oneof those doors, there was a car and behind the other two doors was a goat. Soimagine the doors are marked a, B and C. The goat might be behind a, it mightbe behind B. It might be behind C. He said, pick a door and let's suppose thecontestant picks the door.
他所做的就是他。在舞臺上放三扇門。他告訴參賽者，其中一扇門后面有一輛車，另外兩扇門后面有一只山羊。想象一下門上有a、B和C的標記。山羊可能在a后面，也可能在B后面。它可能在C后面。他說，選一扇門，讓我們假設參賽者選門。

A and then Montehall says, well, I'm going to open one of the other doors and he opens door C.And reveals, there was a goat behind Dorsey and then he turned back to thecontestant and said, okay. Now, would you like to switch from a to B? So thinkabout it. Do you think that the contestant should or should not switch from ato B or it doesn't matter because it's equally likely that the is behind a orB?
A然后蒙特·霍爾說，好吧，我要打開另一扇門，他打開C門。他發現，多西身后有只山羊，然后他轉過身來對參賽者說，好吧。現在，你想從a切換到B嗎？所以好好想想。你認為參賽者應該還是不應該從a調到B，或者這無關緊要，因為a或B后面的可能性都一樣大？

Well, mostpeople think. That is equally likely that the car is behind door a or door B,because they think, look there two doors there. I don't know which one is in.So it's just as likely that it's behind B as it is behind a, but actuallythat's wrong. You should switch. And here's why the car can be behind door a,in which case it's car goat goat for ABC can be behind the door.
大多數人認為。同樣有可能是車在a門或B門后面，因為他們認為，看那里有兩個門。我不知道是哪一個。但事實上，它的背后是錯誤的。你應該換一下。這就是為什麼汽車可以在a門后面，在這種情況下，ABC可以在門后面。

B. So it's goatcar goat behind ABC, or it can be behind door C. So the order is goat goat car,but the car has to be behind a, B or C. So there are three possibilities. Nowthink about it. If you pick door a, he's going to open door, see if it's cargoat, goat. Then you're going to end up with a goat if you Swiss to door B, butif you pick door a and it's goat cargo, and he opens door, see, then you win.
B、 所以是ABC后面的山羊車，也可以是C門后面的山羊車，所以順序是山羊車，但是車必須在a、B或C后面，所以有三種可能。現在想想。如果你要去開門，山羊就去開門。然后你會得到一只山羊如果你瑞士到B門，但如果你選擇a門，這是山羊貨，他打開門，看，然后你贏了。

By moving from ato B. And if it's goat goat car and you pick door a, he's going to open door,be, and show the goat behind that. And if you switch to see you're going to winthe car, cause that's where the car is. So two out of the three, the possiblearrangements, you're going to win by switching to the other door.
從a移到B，如果是山羊車，你選a門，他會打開門，讓山羊看后面。如果你換個角度看你會贏這輛車，因為那就是車的所在。所以，三分之二，可能的安排，換到另一扇門，你會贏的。

So that meansthat it's more likely you're going to win. If you switch, then if you stay thesame, most people don't. Believe that at first, but think about it. Someimportant prestigious mathematicians questioned this when it first came out,but now it's pretty widely accepted. Now the point of these examples is not tomake fun of people and show how stupid they are.
所以這意味著你更有可能獲勝。如果你改變主意，那麼如果你保持不變，大多數人都不會。一開始相信，但是想想看。它剛問世時，一些著名的數學家對此提出質疑，但現在它已被廣泛接受。現在這些例子的重點不是取笑别人，讓他們知道他們有多蠢。

It's to showthat we all have limitations. We all make mistakes. That should make us morehumble about our own beliefs and more willing to listen to other people and toseek out better information and to learn more about arguments and reasons.
這表明我們都有局限性。我們都會犯錯。這將使我們對自己的信仰更加謙虛，更願意傾聽他人的意見，尋求更好的信息，並更多地了解論據和理由。

Let's close thissegment with another brief exercise. Try to remember some time when you werefooled and made a mistake. If you can't think of one, try harder. Cause I knowyou've made a mistake at some point, everybody makes mistakes. And when youthink of an example, try to figure out exactly what mistake you made in theprocess of your thinking.
讓我們用另一個簡短的練習結束這一部分。試著回憶一下你被愚弄和犯錯的時候。如果你想不出一個，就更努力。因為我知道你在某個時候犯了錯誤，每個人都會犯錯。當你想到一個例子時，試著弄清楚你在思考過程中犯了什麼錯誤。

If you can'tfigure it out, go ask somebody else as to where you went wrong in your reason,in your thought process, because other people are going to be very helpful toyou and figuring out. What's gone wrong with your own thinking. One majorlesson of this course is that you can understand yourself better.
如果你想知道别人在想什麼，你就去問别人，因為你在想，如果别人不知道你在想什麼。你自己的想法出了什麼問題。這門課的一個主要教訓是你可以更好地了解自己。

If youask other people about your own views and reasons, we all need to learn more.And if we can work together to help each other, get better at reason andargument, then everyone will benefit.
如果你問别人你自己的觀點和理由，我們都需要了解更多。如果我們能共同努力，互相幫助，在理性和辯論方面做得更好，那麼每個人都會受益。