#585：为何我们思考欠佳：理性、情感与基于证据的推理

你好，欢迎收听Sigma营养电台。

Hello, and welcome to Sigma Nutrition Radio.

这是本播客的第585期节目。

This is episode 585 of the podcast.

我是丹尼·列侬，非常欢迎大家收听本期节目。

My name is Danny Lennon, and you are very welcome to the show.

今天我们准备了一期特别节目，我想为大家汇总几个与我近期思考相关的主题观点，这些内容将与我们如何思考这一主题有所关联。

We've got a special episode of sorts today that I wanted to try and bring you a roundup of a few ideas relating to some related topics that I've been thinking about recently that will loosely relate to how we think.

更准确地说，我们将探讨如何理性、批判性且基于证据地思考，以及那些阻碍我们如此思考的因素——因为作为人类，我们的思维方式常常存在缺陷。

More precisely, we're trying to think rationally and critically and in an evidence based manner, some of the things that can prevent that, because as human beings, we often think badly.

我们会陷入各种思维陷阱。

We fall into various mental traps.

我们会受到各种认知偏差或谬误的影响。

We fall for various cognitive biases or fallacies.

而且我们常常自认为得出的结论是理性的，但实际上可能并非基于证据。

And we can often think that we're coming to a conclusion that is rational, but it may not be an evidence based one.

有一系列相关概念贯穿其中，从理解循证实践的本质到思考领域专业知识。

And there's a whole set of ideas that relate to this of going all the way from knowing what being evidence based actually is to thinking about domain expertise.

另一方面则是我们在决策和思考能力中需要警惕的各种因素。

And then the other side of the things that we need to be aware of in our decision making and thinking capacity.

因此要通过我们身份认同和可能存在的偏见这一视角来思考，信念如何相互关联，以及我们如何经常情感化地做决定。

So thinking through the lens of our identities and biases we may have, how beliefs can be interconnected, and how we often make decisions emotionally.

我将尝试梳理这些内容，并从我们很荣幸邀请到的播客专家中提炼出一条共同主线。

And so to try and go through these and to get a common thread from some of the experts that we've been lucky enough to have on the podcast.

我将重点介绍其中六位专家的观点，他们分别来自不同领域。

I'm going to go through the views of six of those experts in particular, spanning across a range of different fields.

不仅限于营养学领域，还包括医学、运动科学、神经科学、社会学、物理学等领域的专家，他们各自为我们揭示了如何磨砺批判性思维，以及需要注意哪些会导致特定结论的因素——我们必须保持知识谦逊，意识到除非退后一步考虑这些观点，否则得出的结论可能并非基于证据。

So not only directly in nutrition, but some that have been in the fields of medicine and sports science, neuroscience, sociology, physics, each of them kind of shedding light on how we can not only sharpen our critical minds, but also the things to be aware of that lead us to come to certain conclusions and that we need to have that intellectual humility to realise that we might not actually be coming to an evidence based conclusion unless we take a step back and consider some of these ideas.

希望这些内容最终能对你大有裨益。

So I hope this ends up being incredibly useful for you.

我会在收听平台的描述框或单集页面上提供每位专家的详细信息，方便你深入了解他们的工作。

I will put more details about each of our experts in the description box where you're listening or over on the episode page as well so you can go more into their work.

如果你愿意，可以回听与每位嘉宾的完整播客节目。

You can go back and listen to a full podcast episode with each of these guests if you wish.

此外，如果你是Sigma Nutrition高级订阅用户，还能获得一套详细的学习笔记，涵盖本集讨论的所有概念。

And, also, if you're a Sigma Nutrition premium subscriber, you'll be able to get a set of detailed study notes that will cover over all the concepts that are discussed throughout this particular episode.

那么首先，我们要从循证实践的核心开始。

And so to start, we're going to begin at the core of evidence based practice.

我个人最喜欢的播客讨论之一是与牛津大学循证医疗高级研究员兼教育家David Noonan博士的对话。

And one of my personal favorite discussions to have on the podcast with was with doctor David Noonan, who is a senior researcher and educator in evidence based health care at the University of Oxford.

在他的工作中，他教导医疗从业者等人如何严格评估研究，并将其与患者价值观及具体情境相结合。

And in his work, he teaches health care professionals amongst others how to rigorously appraise research and integrate it alongside things like the patient's values and the context.

在这个片段中，Noonan博士将解释循证实践的真实含义——超越我们听到的那些流行语，关键是要说明为何仅有证据永远不够，除非结合我们将要讨论的这些批判性思维要素。

Here in this particular clip, Doctor Noonan is explaining what evidence based practice really should mean beyond maybe some of the buzzwords we hear and, crucially, why evidence alone is never enough unless that's paired with some of these things related to critical thinking that we're gonna discuss.

对你而言，循证医学建立在三大支柱上，能否描述下当你向初学者讲授时，会如何定义循证医学？

So for you, evidence based medicine, and you discussed how it's built on these three pillars, can you maybe describe what would be your overview intro level definition of evidence based medicine when you start teaching that to people?

说得好。

It's a good point.

我会在课程开始时问大家：什么是循证医学？并收集现场听众的反馈，因为听到不同人对这个看似简单话题的解读往往很有趣。

And I'll start my sessions with, in the room, what is evidence based medicine and get the feedback from people in the room because it's often it's often interesting to hear different people's interpretations of what seems like a pretty simple simple topic.

所以我经常问学员：当你告诉家人朋友你要参加一门名为'循证医学'的课程时，他们是不是会露出困惑的表情，挠着头问：'居然还有专门教这个书的课程？'

So often when I I ask my learners, so when you're speaking to your family or your friends or whatever, and you say you're coming on a course, this course, and you tell them the title of the course is evidence based medicine, don't they look at you a little bit funny and sort of scratch their heads and go, what do you mean there's a course on on evidence based medicine?

就像在说：'难道你们还需要学习怎么用证据来制药？'

Like, you you have to go and learn to make medicine based on evidence and be evidence based.

人们总是表现出惊讶。

And people are sort of surprised.

他们会有点

They have a bit of

开玩笑地说：'那还能有什么替代方案？'

a joke about, well, how can there even be such a thing as, well, what's the alternative?

非循证医学吗？

Non evidence based medicine?

确实，你说得对。

So, yeah, and you're right.

循证医学这些年来，我越观察越觉得它某种程度上已经变成了一个流行词。

Evidence based medicine over the years and the more I've I've been watching it sort of transcribe is is become a bit of a meme.

所以人们很容易就能给'循证'打上引号。

So it's very easy just to put in quote marks evidence based.

对我而言，当我看到这些时，常常觉得我不确定使用这个术语的人，

And for me, I think when I see those, often I feel that I'm not sure when that term is being used.

是否真的明白他们说'循证'时指的是什么，或者能否深入到我教导学生理解的那个层面。

People actually know what they mean when they say evidence based or could really dig down and get to the level that the sort of level that I would be teaching our students to sort of understand and our learners to understand.

但如果你问我如何概念化它，我常说最广义上，对我而言循证医学就是当有人问'你为什么做那个决定'时的答案。

But, if you ask me what the sort of conceptualization of it is, I often say that at its broadest level, for me, evidence based medicine is the answer you give when someone says, why did you make that decision?

或者'你为什么推荐那个干预措施、治疗方案或诊断测试'？

Or why did you recommend that intervention or that treatment or that diagnostic test?

我这里用的是医学术语，但你可以把它应用到任何其他实践领域：营养学、运动科学、警务工作。

And I'm talking in medical phraseology here, but you can then apply it to any other area of practice, nutrition, exercise science, policing.

你完全可以想象'为什么做那个决定'以及'为什么我们讨论x选项'。

You can just imagine why you made that decision and why we're discussing x options.

归根结底，这取决于你作为决策者或建议提出者个人能给出的答案。

And it comes down to your the answer that you personally can give as the person who's made that decision or made that recommendation or bringing that to the table.

甚至可以是'我们一直这么做'这样的理由。

And it can go as far as, well, it's what we've always done.

这就是我的依据。

That's my evidence.

我采取这个决策的依据是我们历来都这么做。

My evidence for doing and making this decision is we've always done it this way.

或者我做这个决定是因为你想这么做。

Or I'm making this decision because that's what you want to do.

这是你向我提及的，我在满足你的需求，或者我基于现行指南做出这个决定。

This is what you've mentioned to me, and I'm meeting your needs, or I'm basing that decision because it's in the current guidelines.

所以我只是遵循指南的指示。

So I'm just going off what the guideline says.

我阅读了指南内容，认为应该这么做，因为现行指南就是这样规定的。

So I've read that, and I I think that that's what I should do because that's what the current guidelines say.

或者在另一个极端，你可能会说，我已经研读了相关研究。

Or at the other extreme, you could be saying things like, well, I've actually read the studies.

我阅读了证据。

I've read the evidence.

我对其进行了诠释。

I've interpreted it.

我理解了其中的含义。

I've understood what it means.

我能判断是否存在某种效应，证据是否足以支持这个决定。

I can tell whether there's an effect going on, whether the evidence is good to support this decision.

我将以此为依据来指导我的决策。

And I'm going to use that to inform my decisions.

我认为这是一个连续的谱系，如果你掌握了循证实践的所有技能，就能在这个谱系中游走，随时选择你做出决策时所依据的层次水平。

And I think there's a spectrum along that that people if you're skilled in all the skills of evidence based practise, you could go across that spectrum and choose at any time point which one of those sort of levels you want to be at for your decisions as to why you've made that decision.

但我认为常见的情况是，并非所有人都具备这些技能。

But I think what happens often is that not everyone's got those skills.

并非每个人都能跨越那个能力范围。

Not everyone can go across that spectrum.

问题还在于我们是否需要所有决策者都具备这种能力。

And the question also is is whether we need all of our yeah.

每个做决策的人都需要达到那个标准吗？还是仅仅依赖指南就足够了？

Everyone who's making decisions to be on that spectrum, or is it okay just to rely on the guideline?

仅仅依赖别人为你完成这类工作可以吗？

Is it okay just to rely on someone else having done that sort of work for you?

但我想这又回到了关于'为什么'的核心问题。

But, again, I think it comes back to this this idea of why.

你为什么要做出这个决定？

Why have you made a decision?

当有人问你原因时，你的回答是什么？

And can you what's your answer when someone asks you why?

为了证明这个决定有证据支持，你能追溯到多原始的证据？

And how far back to the evidence can you go in order to say that's informed by evidence?

所以我认为这是我在课堂上描述它的一种方式。

So I think that's one way that I sort of describe it in class.

如果你想回到它最初被引入和描述的典型经典方式，那就是利用最佳可用研究证据的理念。

And then if you wanna go back to the sort of typical classical way it's it was first introduced and and written about is the idea of using the best available research evidence.

这就是你提到的三重奏。

It's this triad you talked about.

第二部分是患者的偏好和价值观。

The second part being the patient's preferences and values.

第三部分是你做出这个决策的背景环境。

And then third part is the context within which you're making this decision.

这可以是你周围的系统、结构，也可以是患者自身的结构和背景环境。

And that can be the systems around you, the structures around you, the structures and context around the patient themselves.

如果你要涵盖这三个支柱部分，那么将这三个支柱整合起来的就是所谓的临床专业知识或临床经验，它通过某种方式将这些要素以统一、系统的方式纳入讨论，使你能将这些信息全部纳入决策过程。

And then if you like covering that three three pillared section, three those three pillars is something called your clinical expertise or your clinical experience that sort of somehow has worked out a way of bringing those three things into a discussion in some sort of uniform way, in some sort of systematic way that allows you to bring that information all into the decision process.

但同时也需要具备选择性判断的能力，决定在哪些时间点主要依赖患者告诉我的信息及其价值观。

But also the skill to selectively choose at which time points do I rely mainly on just what the patient is telling me and their values.

我暂时先把证据因素排除在外，不过我知道稍后可以再考虑这点，或者先把环境因素排除。

I'll keep the evidence out of it for now, but I I know I can come to that later, or I'll keep the contextual factors out.

而你们具备这种将各方面因素整合的能力，这实际上非常、非常、非常具有挑战性。

And you've got this skill of pulling them all together, which is actually very, very, very, very tricky.

但我想说，这大概就是循证医学的总体原则，如果要将其总结为我们所理解的形态。

But that would, I would say, would be the sort of the overarching principle of EBM if you were to sort of write that up as what it what we think it looks like.

其中一个显著的现象变得清晰——当我们理解了什么是循证医学后，会发现它不仅是为了展示与我们完全不看证据时的差异。

One of the striking things that becomes clear, and I think when we have an understanding of what evidence based medicine is, is that it's not only just to show a difference from when we're not looking at the evidence at all.

我认为特别有价值的是区分证据如何在伪科学背景下被滥用：有人可能引用某些研究，声称自己在做科学依据的事，因为他们展示了研究论文。但这没有考虑到你提到的某些因素，比如所引用证据的实际质量如何？这是否准确代表了全部证据，而非仅仅挥舞某篇特定研究？

What I think is particularly useful is making a distinction between how evidence can be abused in the context of pseudoscience, where someone can point to certain research or say that they are doing something that is science based because they are showing you research papers, but then that doesn't account for some of the factors that you mentioned like what is the actual quality of the particular evidence that's being looked at and is this a accurate representation of all the evidence we have as opposed to just waiving a particular research study?

说得好。

Good point.

一旦你给某件事贴上标签，它就总会被当作某种需要达成的标准或徽章。

As soon as you give something a title, it will always get it will always get assumed or become a badge to to sort of achieve.

这正是发生在'循证'这个词以及'循证医学'上的情况。

So and that's exactly what's happened with evidence based, the words evidence based and evidence based medicine.

这几乎就像你不能不说‘循证’这个词。

It's almost like you can't be seen not to say the words evidence based.

因为如果你不说循证，就会滑向另一边——你被视为非循证，陷入个人经验主义的领域，甚至可能导向江湖骗术的境地。

Because if you don't say evidence based, then you start going down that side of, well, you're non evidence based, you're into the land of anecdote, and possibly that leads you to the land quackery.

所以这其实是把双刃剑。我们当然希望确保实践是循证的，但我觉得‘循证’这个词本身也需要重新思考，更准确的说法应该是‘证据参考’，因为单凭证据永远不足以做出决策。

And so it's a double edged sword really, where, of course, we want to make sure that we are practising in an evidence based, but actually, I think the word evidence based also needs to sort of be rethought a bit, and it's more along the lines of evidence informed, because evidence alone is never enough for a decision.

总有其他因素需要考虑。我认为新冠疫情就像阳光，照亮了这个观点——好的决策意味着参考现有证据，但不盲从或屈从于这些证据。

There's always other factors coming to it, and I think COVID's been the sort of sunlight that shone on that particular point in the sense that good decision making, you know, it means being informed by what available evidence you have, but you're not slavish to the or obedient to that evidence.

其他因素常常会主导决策。

And other factors will drive decisions often.

有时决策甚至会与证据相悖。

And sometimes decisions will go against evidence.

这没关系。

That's okay.

当你思考这个问题时——如果你偏离证据，又决定依赖证据，想要说‘现在是时候让证据参与对话并开始参考它了’

When you come to this idea of if you're going off the evidence and you're when you do decide to come to rely on the evidence and you do want to sort of say, well, now now is the time when we can bring the evidence into the conversation and we can start to be informed by it.

那么你需要一套扎实的技能来判断这些证据是否真如你所想的那样支持你的论点框架。

Well, then you need a good set of skills to understand whether that evidence is actually saying what you think it says, and it supports the way that you're framing it in your discussions.

这正是你提到的观点——人们仅因找到一篇文献就声称这是循证依据。

And that's the point you're making there about people say it's evidence based purely because they found a reference.

于是我开始使用从巴西同事那里借鉴来的术语：文献导向医学。

And I've started to use the term, which I've stolen from a Brazilian colleague, reference based medicine.

对多数人而言，循证医学就是'这里有项研究'，这很成问题——毕竟任何话题都能找到相关研究。

So for most people, evidence based medicine is here's a study, and that's problematic because there's a study for everything.

确实任何问题都能找到对应研究。

There really is a study for everything.

只要你提出任何问题，我几乎都能找到相关研究。

If you give me any question, I can probably find you a study for it.

但这绝不意味着该研究能支持你关于疗效、干预措施或因果关系的任何主张。

It does not mean that that study supports anything that you're saying about what you think this thing does, this intervention is, or this has this effect.

你必须能甄别这项研究是否名副其实地提供了你认为的答案。

You've got to be able to know that that study does what it says on the tin and gives you the answer you think it does.

我认为默认立场应该是：除非被证明有效，否则很可能无效。

And I think the default should be it probably doesn't until proven otherwise.

这就是每个人都应该开始的起点。

So that's where everyone should start.

如果你看到有人引用某项研究并声称这是基于证据的，那么请以‘除非被证明有效，否则很可能无效’作为默认立场，然后我们需要深入挖掘、审视这项研究，或者看看是否已有他人为我们分析过该研究是否真正支持其结论。

If you see someone's pointed to a study and saying, look, here's a study that's evidence based, start with the default that it probably doesn't until proven otherwise, and then we've got to go dig in and look at that or see if someone else has dug in and looked at that study for us to see whether it does actually support.

正如我所说，这只是实践循证医学的一个环节。

That's only like I said, that's one part of practising evidence based medicine.

我们可以深入钻研，花大量时间专门讨论循证实践中的'E'（证据部分），即循证实践和循证医学中的证据依据。

And we can hone down and spend lots of time just on the E of evidence based practise, which is the evidence of evidence in evidence based practise, evidence based medicine.

但这个三重体系还有其他组成部分。

But there are other parts of that triad.

不过，当你真正接触到具体证据并希望从中获取信息时，必须明确知道该研究或证据确实支持你所认为的结论。

But, yeah, when you get down to the actual evidence and we wanna start to being informed by it, you've gotta be clear that you know that that study or that evidence is doing what you think it does.

我感觉自己在这方面有了更多主动权，但这并不一定意味着我的决策会变得更容易。

I feel like I've got a little bit more agency about this, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it makes my decisions any easier.

这仅仅意味着我拥有了更多的自主权。

It just means that I've got more agency.

而我感觉自己获得更多自主权的方式是，当有人拿出一项研究并开始解释其含义时，我背后有了更多支撑去说：好吧，让我们看看这究竟是怎么回事。

And the way I feel like I've got a little bit more agency is because when someone says, here's a study, and they start to tell me what that study means, I've got a little bit more behind me to go, okay, well, let's see where this goes.

让我看看你的判断、你的解读以及你审视这些证据的技巧会导向何方，再看看是否与我的理解和解读相符。

Let me see where your judgments and your interpretations and your skill in looking at this evidence, where that goes, and to see whether it agrees with my interpretations and my understanding of that evidence.

如果你从未经历过需要实践这些技能、理解这些技能的历程，你就会完全100%依赖那些告诉你的人或你正在倾听的对象及其判断。

If you haven't been through a journey where you've had to practise those skills and understand those skills, you're totally 100% reliant on the people telling you or the person that you're listening to and their judgments.

然后你会迷失方向，因为你无法理解。

And you're gonna get lost because you're not gonna understand.

你将无法领会他们在说什么。

You're not gonna know what they're saying.

你也无法理解其中的某些细节。

You're not gonna understand some of the the details.

某种程度上说，也许你不应该理解——毕竟你在依赖什么呢？

And to some degree, maybe you shouldn't because what are you relying on?

你依赖的是信任。

You're relying on trust.

你依赖的是对那个人、那个组织或任何他们想要的人的信任。

You're relying on the trust of either that individual or that organisation or whoever it is that they want.

他们肯定是为我们好，肯定是为我们的健康或其他方面着想。

Surely they want the best for us, surely they want the best for our health or whatever.

这就是为什么他们告诉我们这些证据是——暂且这么说——对某个观点、干预措施或政策有利还是不利的证据。

And that's why they're telling us whether this evidence is, and for want of a better word, good or bad evidence for a certain idea or for a certain intervention or for a certain policy.

他们肯定是为我们好。

And surely they want the best for us.

他们肯定会以我们能理解的方式向我们解释证据，而且这些证据确实支持他们所说的内容。

Surely they'll be telling us and explaining the evidence to us in a way we can understand, but in a way that the evidence actually does support what they're saying.

这是有力的证据，这就是为什么我们应该这么做。

It's good evidence, and this is why we should do this.

自人类文明伊始，自从我们开始形成有组织的社会并制定这些社会行为规范以来，我们就不得不这样做。

And we've had to do that since time began, since we started to become an organised society and start to start to have these sorts of rules around what we do in society.

所以我认为有些方法可以提升自己，比如学习这些知识，这可能会让你更有能力去理解——他们在这里关于证据的论证真的站得住脚吗？

So I think there are ways that you can upskill yourself, like learning this stuff, and that might give you a little bit more agents to understand actually, they making a good argument about the evidence here?

但有时候，只需要寻找他们论点中的小逻辑漏洞，甚至不必在意研究本身，只需关注那些小的逻辑失误。

But sometimes there's also things just like looking for little logical hiccups in their arguments, even when the even when forget about what the study is, but just looking for little logical mishaps.

比如，他们在这里陈述一个观点，但在三个论点后的另一句话里又完全自相矛盾。

Like, they state one thing over here, but then they totally counterstate themselves in another point, three points later on in another sentence.

你会觉得，等等。

You're like, hang on.

你刚刚完全是在自相矛盾。

You've just contradicted yourself absolutely 100%.

因此，像矛盾、漏洞这类论证和逻辑问题，也可能是这些人并未真正遵循证据的迹象——他们只是在寻找支持自己观点的证据，或试图找到能表述自己观点的内容，整个推理过程相当不合逻辑。

So things like contradictions and flaws and sort of arguments and logic can also be a sign that maybe these people aren't really sticking to what the evidence says, they're just trying to find the evidence to support their view or find something that sort of states their view, they're quite illogical in their processes.

这些方面也是你可以留意的。

And there are ways you can look at that as well.

不过确实，我非常理解你此刻不得不依赖信任的处境。

But yeah, I do really feel for the fact that you're relying on trust here.

你确实是在依赖信任。

You really are relying on trust.

当你意识到，即使是那些你认为应该信任的人——比如负责重大决策和政策制定的组织，甚至是药品审批机构这类机构——情况会变得更加复杂。

And it gets a little bit more expounded when you realise that actually, even the people that you think you should trust, like the organisations and that responsible for sort of big decisions and policies, etcetera, and even things like drug approval agencies and these sorts of things.

有时候，正因为我们具备和学到的技能，你仍会看到他们做出一些让你不禁质疑的决定。

Sometimes because, again, the skills that we have and that we've learned, you still see them make some decisions that you would go, hang on.

这不对啊，那可是官方机构。

That's not and that's the official agency.

所以这边有不按常理出牌的投机者，比如那些Instagram网红之类的，他们同样把事情搞得一团糟。

So you got the rogues over here who are kind of doing their own thing and, you know, the Instagrammers and all that sort of stuff who who are doing all that doing it all badly as well over here.

但现实世界中，我们眼中值得信赖的机构也并非完美无瑕、界限分明。

But you've also got it's not clean-cut, and it's not perfect in the kind of in the sort of real world, in the sort of the trustworthy organizations that we feel.

这同样无济于事。

And that doesn't help either.

因此情况变得极其棘手，这时就出现了‘信息流行病’的概念——我们该如何辨别是非，又该知道信任谁呢？

So it becomes really, really tricky, and that's when you have this idea of the infidemic and how do we understand which is what what's right and what's wrong, and who do we know how to trust?

我确实认为这非常、非常、非常棘手。

And I actually think that's really, really, really tricky.

尝试找到这些问题的答案正是我所感兴趣的，以及我们如何挖掘出我们认为可信信息的来源。

And trying to find answers to that is is what I'm interested in and how we can dig out what we think is where the trustworthy stuff is coming from.

但我们怎么知道它是可信的呢？

But how do we know that it's trustworthy?

有哪些指标和标志能帮助我们判断这个来源比其他来源更可信或更不可信？

What are the metrics and the indicators that will help us understand if that's more or less trustworthy than another source?

以上是大卫·努南博士的提醒：基于证据不是简单地打个勾，而是需要保持一种知情怀疑的思维方式。

So that was doctor David Noonan reminding us that being evidence based is not a box to tick per se, but rather a mindset of informed scepticism that we need to maintain.

因此这些证据需要被解释和应用，而不仅仅是能够为某事引用某个具体参考文献。

And so that evidence needs to be interpreted and applied as opposed to just being able to cite a specific reference for something.

基于这个基础，我想转向另一个视角——这次来自我最喜欢的非营养学领域的思想家之一。

And so with that foundation, I wanna turn to another perspective, This time coming from one of my favorite thinkers that comes from outside of the world of nutrition.

确切地说，他的工作更多基于运动科学和精英运动员表现领域。

Rather, his work is more based in sports science and elite level athletic performance.

接下来这部分内容将来自我与约翰·基利博士的对话，他目前是利默里克大学的副教授，研究方向包括人类表现和运动训练理论等领域。

And so the this next section is going to be from the conversation I had with Doctor John Kiley, who currently is an associate professor at the University of Limerick, researching things like human performance, motor training theory.

除了是位杰出的运动科学家外，他还是一位经验丰富的从业者，更是备受追捧的教练，曾与奥运选手合作。

And in addition to being an excellent sports scientist, he is a long time practitioner and highly sought after coach that has worked with Olympic athletes.

他曾为爱尔兰橄榄球队提供指导。

He's worked with the Irish rugby team.

他还与参加过世界杯的足球队有过合作。

He's worked with some of the football teams that have been at the World Cup.

他以能将理念切实应用于运动员训练而闻名，同时也善于挑战那些可能有些教条的训练观念。

And he has been known for having a real ability to implement ideas with athletes, but also for challenging various ideas around training that had maybe been a bit dogmatic.

在我们的讨论中，他特别提到保持开放心态、接纳由此产生的不确定性和不适感，对于希望在研究及实践中都能进行批判性思考的人来说至关重要。

And so in part of our discussion, he was discussing why having an open mind and embracing that uncertainty and discomfort comes from it is essential for those of us who really want to think critically when we're coming to decisions not only in research but also in practice.

我想首先谈谈本次对话中要探讨的核心议题之一——当我们将研究转化为实践时可能遇到的问题。特别是对于那些希望实践能基于科学研究的人来说，如何理解这个过程以及科学的局限性很重要。因为我们常会看到这样的情况：有人不理解某项研究为何如此设计，或抱怨这与实际操作毫无关联，反之亦然。

I think to lead off, one of the big overarching themes that I wanted to get into at some stage in this conversation is some issues that can arise when we are attempting to translate research into practice, or more so for people who want some of their practice to at least have a grounding within scientific research, the best way to understand how to do that and the limits of science, I guess, because so often we can see where it may be a case where someone doesn't understand why a study was set up a certain way or complains, well, this has no relevance to what I would do in practice or vice versa.

我认为在指导实践和符合研究设计本身这两个目标之间，可能存在着根本性的差异。

And I think there's probably two differing goals of what we're trying to do to inform practice and something that's useful in a study design per se.

从宏观层面来看，如果有人提出'如何将研究转化为实践'这个问题时，你脑海中首先会浮现哪些关键点？在人们试图用科学指导现实世界决策时，最常见的潜在陷阱或问题有哪些？

Just from an overview level, what are the first things that tend to come up in your mind if someone was to bring up this idea of how do we go about translating research into practice and what are the big potential pitfalls or issues that maybe commonly happen when someone is looking to science to inform in real world practice decisions?

哇。

Wow.

好的。

Okay.

我会尽力回答。

I'll do my best.

所以我想我从这个角度出发：所有研究都存在缺陷。

So I guess I start off from the perspective that all studies are flawed.

而另一方面，所有对研究的解读也同样存在缺陷。

And then on the other hand, all interpretations of studies are also flawed.

这显然不是反对科学的论点。

Now that's not an argument against science, obviously.

但这向我表明，我们需要依赖现有证据，但不应关闭批判性思维。

But what it is suggesting to me is that we need to lean on the evidence we have, but we don't switch off our critical mind.

我们需要以批判性和无偏见的角度分析事物。

We need to analyze things critically and from a non biased perspective.

我所说的无偏见角度是指，我们都有自己的偏好理论，都有自己认为合理的哲学观点，或者过去在与运动员合作中使用过的方法。

Now, what I mean by a non biased perspective is we all have our pet theories, we all have these philosophies that we think make sense, or maybe we've used in working with athletes in the past.

很多时候，这些观点会与我们的自尊心交织在一起，成为我们自我认知的一部分——比如'我相信这个'。

And a lot of the time, these become wrapped up in our ego, are wrapped up in our sense of who we are, so I believe this.

在我看来，人类解读科学时的一个重大问题是，我们倾向于被自己喜欢的、符合既有观点或潜在偏见的信息所吸引。

And for me, one of the big problems with human interpretation of science is that we tend to gravitate towards messages that we like, that confirm our already existing perspectives or underlying biases.

所以对我来说，首要的是保持开放心态，并意识到仅凭初次听到研究结论时的好恶来判断事物，这种方式并不合理。

So as a start point for me, it's just about an open mind is the most essential thing, and awareness that just because I like or dislike something the first time I hear the strapline of the study, That's not really a valid way to judge something.

不能仅凭情感层面来判断事物。

It's not to judge something on an emotional level.

这是这项研究的结果。

This is the result of this study.

嘿，我同意这个观点。

Hey, I agree with that.

我就是这样对待这些运动员的。

That's what I do with these athletes.

现在我已经确认了这一点。

Now I've confirmed that.

现在我把这个观点更深入地内化了。

Now I've embedded that perspective a little more deeply.

这不是正确的做法。

That's not the way to do it.

对我来说，这甚至不完全是学术思维或科学思维的问题。

Think for me, it's not even so much academic thinking or scientific thinking.

作为一名实践者，关键在于批判性思维，并意识到一切都有缺陷。

As a practitioner, it's all about critical thinking and an awareness that everything is flawed.

我们接收到的所有信息都存在缺陷。

All the messages we're getting are flawed.

这不能成为我们随意选择道路的借口。

That's not a justification for us to pick any road we want.

这正说明，我需要深入思考自己的行为。

That's a rationale to say, I need to think deeply about what I do.

我需要深入思考自己的信念。

I need to think deeply about what I believe.

我不应害怕解构自己最珍视的信念。

I need to not be afraid to disassemble my most dearly held beliefs.

认知心理学中有个很好的术语叫'认知失调'。

I guess there's a lovely phrase in the cognitive psychology world called cognitive dissonance.

就是当你试图调和脑中两个矛盾观点时，那种精神紧绷的感觉。

And it's that feeling of mental tension that you have when you're trying to resolve two conflicting ideas in your head.

我认为认知失调是件好事。

And I think cognitive dissonance is a good thing.

我努力让自己处于这种失调状态，不断尝试调和矛盾。

And I try and live in that space where I am in a state of dissonance, where I'm always trying to resolve this with this.

如果这个成立，那个就不可能成立。

If this is true, then this can't be true.

这种状态比单纯宣称'这就是我的信仰，到此为止，无需辩论，无需讨论'要令人不适得多。

It's a more uncomfortable state than just saying this is what I believe, end of story, no debate, no discussion.

这是一个更加令人不安的状态。

It's a much more uncomfortable state.

但对我来说，这是一个更具生产力的状态。

But for me, it's a more productive state.

如果你想做到最好，成为最严谨的思考者，那么这就是你必须存在的状态。

And if you want to be as good as you can be, and as critical a thinker as you can be, then that's the place you need to exist.

我想就此总结一下，对我职业生涯早期而言，这意味着我曾陷入自我怀疑的泥潭，因为我不确定。

I think just to close off on that, for me, in my early career, what that meant is I think I fell into a pitfall where I was wracked with doubt, because I'm not sure.

我对任何事情都没有100%的把握。

I'm not 100% sure of anything.

我认为如果你与运动员共事，这种状态并不理想。

And I think if you're working with athletes, that's not a good way to be.

随着经验积累，你会逐渐明白：虽然内心仍有疑虑，但我需要为这位运动员做出当下我认为最佳的决定。

Gradually with experience, you kind of learn that, okay, I may have some doubts in my head, but I need to make what I feel is the best possible decision I can make now for this athlete.

那么我需要在这个时间段结束时做个了结，不论是一个阶段、一个训练周期还是其他什么，我都会重新审视这个问题。

Then I need to close it off At the end of this period of time, be it a phase or a training cycle or whatever it is, I will revisit this question.

但一旦我们做出决定，我就必须百分百支持这个决定，这样运动员就不会从我这里感受到任何犹豫或不确定这对他们是否正确的信号。

But once we've made our decision, I need to be 100% behind that decision So the athlete isn't picking up any vibe for me that have doubt, that I'm not sure if it's the right thing for them.

所以这又是一个平衡的艺术。

So again, it's a balancing act.

这是在我们认为的科学事实（通常是对普遍问题的平均化答案）与我要为这位有着丰富训练史和伤病史的运动员当下找到最佳方案之间的平衡——没有任何研究能精确告诉你这个答案。

It's a balancing act between what we consider science fact, which tends to be obviously averaged ballpark answers to ballpark questions versus I'm looking for what is going to work for this athlete right here and now with this extensive training history and this injury history, and there's no study that can tell you that answer exactly.

约翰，我确实想回到你之前提到的一点。

John, I did want to pull back onto something you mentioned earlier.

你用了'批判性思维'这个词，而且我也知道——就像我之前对你说的——从你的一些著作和出版物中明显体现出来的，就是对传统观念的怀疑性审视。

You used the term critical mind, and I also know that, as I've said to you before, that one of the clear thing that emerges from some of your writing and publications has been on this skeptical examination of conventional ideas.

对于正在收听的听众来说，最明显的可能是读过你关于周期化理论的论文和相关观点，你试图用这种怀疑的视角来看待这些长期持有的传统观念。

And so most notably for people listening who have maybe read your papers on periodization theory and some of your ideas around that, trying to just view these long held conventional ideas through this skeptical lens.

我认为这与你早先提到的批判性思维相呼应，这种思维在实践中同样重要，无关学术领域。

And I think that kind of ties into this critical mind that you mentioned earlier that is also important in practice regardless of academia.

所以我想人们可能会问的一个问题是，如果可能的话，一个人该如何尝试培养或发展批判性思维？

So I think maybe a question people might have is how does one go about trying to foster or develop or train a critical mind if that is at all possible?

或者在你看来，这种能力源自何处？

Or where does that come from in your view?

这是可以训练的吗？

And is it a trainable thing?

如果是的话，你至少会建议人们采取哪些步骤？

And if so, what steps would you at least advise people to do?

我认为这是完全可以训练的。

I think it is very trainable.

我认为很大程度上这取决于意识觉醒。

I think a lot of it is just driven by awareness.

我认为一旦你意识到我们本能和习惯性陷入的认知陷阱，比如自我保护和在内心回避批评。

And I think once you're aware of some of the cognitive traps that we instinctively and habitually fall into around ego protection and deflection of criticism in our own minds.

一旦我们意识到这些，或许就能更贴近现实一些。

Once we're aware of that, then we can perhaps be a bit more aligned with reality.

我不想给出一个模糊的答案，但当你提问时，我最初的想法是——虽然这听起来很老套——谦逊确实非常重要。

So I don't want to give a vague answer, but my initial kind of thoughts when you asked the question was, and I know this is a, everyone says this, but humility is a great thing.

在决策和哲学思考中保持谦逊尤为可贵，特别是在我们身处的复杂环境中，无论是营养师、体能教练、运动神经科学专家还是理疗师，这些领域都极其复杂。

And decision making and philosophical humility is a great thing, especially if you work in a complex environment, which we do, all of us, regardless of your nutrition, your performance coach, your SNC, your physio, they're very complex environments.

因此谦逊就像是第一块不可或缺的基石。

So that humility is like a first essential building block.

我认为必须对话题保持强烈的好奇心，关注由此衍生的所有细小问题——至少对我来说必须如此。

Curiosity, I think you have to, at least for me, have to be deeply engaged in the topic, in all the little questions that come off it.

是的，如果你既保持谦逊又充满好奇心，再加上些许运气获得正确经验并以正确态度对待，我想这个三脚凳被我遗漏的第三条腿就是我们最初讨论过的那个要素。

Yeah, I think if you have that humility, you have that curiosity, and if you get lucky and you get the right experiences and you take the right attitude to them, I guess the third leg of the stool there that I'm leaving out is what we touched on at the start.

关键在于：世界上存在大量知识。

And that is, there is a lot of knowledge out there.

但通常需要我们主动探寻并努力理解。

But often we have to go and find it and work to understand it.

这正是我们需要精通所关注领域的科学原理的原因。

And that's where we need to be fluent in the science of the areas that we're interested in.

流利并不意味着你需要随口引用参考文献来支持你偏爱的观点。

Fluent doesn't mean you need to just be able to cite off references off the top of your head to justify your favorite idea.

流利意味着你理解双方观点，理解其中的论点，并且明白在科学中我们很少能确切知道答案，但会有大量广泛的线索引导你得出更好的结论。

Fluent is you understand both sides, and you understand the arguments, and you understand that in science, very rarely know things exactly, but you have lots and lots of broad hints that enable you to come to a better conclusion.

所以我想试着总结一下，你想要在复杂环境中做好工作，

So I think to try and summarize that, you want to be good at your job, working in a complex environment.

这需要付出大量的努力和工作。

It takes a lot of effort and a lot of work.

我认为还需要驱动这种努力和工作，需要一定程度的对任务的热情，需要好奇心，然后还需要某种哲学上的谦逊。

I think what it also takes is to drive that effort and work, it takes a degree of passion in the task, takes curiosity, and then it needs kind of philosophical humility.

并不是说'哦，我早就搞明白了'，或者'我写过这篇论文'，或者'我和那位运动员合作过，我们就是这么做的'。

It's not that, oh, yeah, well, I figured that out ages ago, or I wrote this paper, or I worked with that athlete, and this is what we did.

这是一个不断重新审视、重新成长、重新生成、向前推进的过程。

It's like a constant process of reinvestigation, regrowth, regeneration, moving forward.

刚才发言的是博士。

That was Doctor.

约翰·凯利再次提醒我们，接受不确定性甚至在某些方面的不适感，最终能让我们成为更好的决策者。

John Kiley again reminding us how to that this embracing of uncertainty and maybe even discomfort in some of these ways can ultimately make us better decision makers.

现在，如果我们从运动表现领域转回营养科学与健康科学领域，可以开始尝试将这种批判性思维应用到我们的决策过程中。

Now, if we're shifting from that sports performance field back to nutrition science and health sciences, we can start to try and incorporate some of how this critical thinking applies when we are again coming to decisions.

不久前我有幸采访了吉尔·卡瓦略博士，他是我在健康科学领域最喜爱的YouTuber之一，其内容真正基于证据。除了YouTube频道外，他还是一位真正的医师和神经科学家，多年来在顶尖研究机构从事最高水平的研究工作，同时也拥有医学博士学位。

A while back I had the pleasure of talking to Doctor Gil Carvalho who is one of my favorite YouTubers in the field of health science information that is truly evidence based But beyond his YouTube channel, he is a legit physician and neuroscientist that has been working at the highest levels of of research for many years in some of the most prestigious institutions as well as being an MD.

他的研究领域涵盖遗传学、营养学和神经科学，此外他还通过自己的频道从事科学传播工作。

He's done research in areas like genetics and nutrition and neuroscience, and that's all in addition to his science communication work that he now does with his channel.

在这个片段中，他特别谈到了曾在安东尼奥·迪马西奥实验室的工作，他们的研究揭示了尽管我们有时认为自己可以完全理性思考，但事实上情绪对我们的直觉和结论影响深远。

And in this clip in particular, he was talking about some of the work he had previously done at the lab of Antonio Di Macio, where they were doing work that really shone a light on how despite the fact that sometimes we think we can be purely rational and that maybe we are always thinking sanely.

情绪驱动了我们如此多的直觉和结论，当处理人类问题时，它根本无法被完全消除。

Emotion drives so much of our intuitions and so much of our conclusions, and it really can't be completely eradicated from it when we are dealing with human beings.

我曾在他在洛杉矶的研究所担任了近七年的科研人员，我们研究情绪、意识和感觉的神经生物学基础。

So I was a research scientist at his institute in LA for close to seven years, and we did work on the neurobiology of emotion, consciousness, feeling.

基本上就是研究感觉如何产生，什么是感觉以及其神经生物学相关机制是什么？

So basically how feeling emerges, what is feeling and what are the neurobiological correlates of that?

试图将系统层面与更分子化和神经递质层面的神经生物学联系起来。

Trying to bridge that systems level to a more molecular and neurotransmitter level of neurobiology.

我认为你所说的基本正确，我们总以为决策是纯粹理性的，却往往忽视了情感基础所起的巨大作用。

I think what you said is essentially correct, that we have this idea that our decisions are purely rational and we tend to overlook the emotional foundation, which plays an enormous role.

这一点毫无疑问。

There's no doubt about that.

很多时候我们甚至意识不到影响决策的动机和各种因素。

A lot of times we're not even aware of the motivations and the different factors that play into our decision making.

所以是的，我们总认为理性和情感是完全分离的能力，情感是低等动物才有的非理性能力，而我们高于这个层面。

So yeah, we have this idea that reason and emotion are completely separate abilities and that emotion is kind of a lowly capacity that maybe irrational animals have, but that we are above that.

我们可以做出不基于情感的决策。

We can make decisions that are not emotionally based.

我认为这本质上是个误解，安东尼奥也认同这点——我们所有的决策都是情感性的。

I think that's essentially a misconception, I think Antonio agrees with this, is all our decisions are emotional.

我们所有的决策都植根于情感驱动力。

All our decisions are rooted in an emotional impetus.

关于前额叶皮层受损患者的研究数据非常有趣，他们会出现情感功能缺陷。

There's some really interesting data on people with the prefrontal cortex lesions and they become emotionally defective.

一个非常明显的症状是他们变得无法做决定，甚至连日常小事都无法决断。

One thing that's very apparent is they become unable to make decisions, even simple day to day decisions.

他们会坐在那里纠结该穿什么或去哪里吃晚餐，花一小时列出各种利弊清单却始终无法做出决定。

They'll sit there to decide what they're going to wear or where they're going to go for dinner, and they'll sit there for an hour making lists of pros and cons and they cannot make a decision.

他们无法决断。

They cannot decide.

他们无法选择。

They cannot choose.

这说明其中缺失了某种关键要素——一种情感上的火花。

So the idea is that there's something there, there's an emotional spark that's missing.

归根结底，当你分析完所有事实后，仍需要情感推力来说：好吧，这就是我的决定了。

At the end of the day, after you've looked at facts, you need an emotional push to say, Okay, this is my decision then.

我选这个。

I'm going for this one.

这些人显然缺失了这种能力。

And those people are missing that apparently.

因此我认为情感被严重低估了。

And so I think emotion is incredibly underestimated.

它非常重要，我们离不开它。

It's very important we can't do without it.

显然这不是我们凭空创造的，而是源自我们的祖先以及我们进化前的其他生物体。

And obviously it's something that we didn't come up with came from our ancestors and from other organisms that we evolved from.

不过我们多次讨论过的一个观点是：能否消除对情感的污名化——认为它是坏事，是干扰？

But yeah, one thing that we've talked many times about is this idea of can we take this stigma away from emotion of being a bad thing, of being a distraction?

不，情感极其有用且强大。

No, emotion is incredibly useful and powerful.

这就像婚姻关系。

It's like a marriage.

你必须学会与对方共同生活，对吧？

You have to learn to live with the other person, right?

这并不意味着你要变得软弱可欺，但也不意味着你要压制对方。

And that doesn't mean that you become a pushover, but it also doesn't mean that you subjugate this person.

情感也是如此。

The The same thing with emotion.

情感很重要。

Emotion is important.

它至关重要，但我们不应成为情感的奴隶。

It's crucial, but we shouldn't be tools to our emotion.

我们不应盲目追随情感而不加思考，但情感绝对是必不可少的。

We shouldn't follow it blindly and just without any thought, but emotion is absolutely essential.

现在，有些因素可能会阻碍我们进行基于证据的思考和批判性思考，如果我们持有某些会误导我们的信念。

Now, one of the things that can be a barrier to thinking evidence based manner and thinking critically can be if we have certain beliefs that are going to lead us astray.

我们所有人都有信念和偏见。

And all of us have beliefs and biases.

这是不可否认的。

This is undeniable.

但意识到这些信念及其可能产生的影响，本质上是一种让我们免受某些负面效应影响的方法。

But being aware of what those are and being aware of the effects they can have is a way to essentially inoculate us from some of those downsides.

这是我在节目中与大卫·罗伯特·格莱姆斯博士讨论的话题之一。

And this was one of the topics that I talked with doctor David Robert Grimes about on our episode.

格莱姆斯博士的专业背景是物理学，他从事大量科学写作和科学传播工作。

So doctor Grimes is a physicist by training, does a lot of science writing and a lot of science communication work.

如今他还是《非理性猿》一书的作者，这本书我们之前在播客中提到过。

Nowadays, he's also the author of the book, The Irrational Ape, which we've mentioned on the podcast before.

他经常谈论我们可用于批判性思维的一些工具，以及如何识别伪科学。

And he often talks about some of the tools that we can have for critical thinking and how to kind of spot pseudoscience.

在我们的部分讨论中，他提出了信念网络的概念，即我们无法真正孤立地持有某些信念。

And in part of our discussion, he raised this concept of a web of beliefs where we can't really have certain beliefs in isolation.

这些信念往往相互关联交织，当我们动摇其中一个时，就会对其他信念产生影响。

Oftentimes, they're connected and entangled with other beliefs that when we pull on one, we're having an effect on some others.

你在书中用很精彩的章节讨论了这个信念网络的概念——我们的各种观念如何在不同事物上相互纠缠。

And you have a really good section in the book where you talk about this concept of this web of belief where our ideas are entangled on different things.

因此要接受一件事，我们就必须在其他地方做出调整。

And so to accept one thing, we have to make modifications elsewhere.

你能详细谈谈这一点吗？为什么这个概念对人们的理解很重要？

Can you maybe just talk through some of that and why that's an important concept for people to understand?

当然。

Absolutely.

确实如此，

And it's it is

这个概念是我开始研究阴谋论后才接触到的。

a concept that I only came across after I started doing conspiracy research.

我在研究背景和建模过程中注意到，相信阴谋论的人往往不会孤立地相信某件事。

And one of the things I noticed when was seeing my background on that and modelling it and things, is that people that believed in conspiratorial things didn't tend to believe in isolation.

他们通常持有多种且常常相互矛盾的阴谋论观点。

They tended to have multiple and often conflicting conspiratorial beliefs.

直到你意识到信念是相互关联的，才能理解为什么会这样。

And it was hard to understand why until you realize that beliefs are interconnected.

哲学家W.

The philosopher W.

V.

V.

科因创造了这个术语——信念之网。

Coyne coined this term, the web of belief.

你可以想象，你的每一个信念都会影响你对另一个信念的接受程度。

You imagine every one of your beliefs affects your acceptance of another belief.

这就像一张由不同事物组成的大蜘蛛网。

It's a big spider's web of different things.

比如说我想选择相信疫苗正在造成危害这个观点，对吧？

So let's say I want to choose the idea that say vaccines are causing harm, right?

但根据我现有的信念体系，我有多信任医生呢？

But on my way of the belief I have, how much do I trust doctors?

你会有这样的疑问：天然疗法对我有好处吗？

That you have statements like, are natural remedies good for me?

诸如此类的事情。

All that kind of stuff.

当你拉动一根线，就会牵动其他所有线。

By tugging on one thread, you tug on everything else.

因此，阴谋论就是如果你接受例如存在一个巨大阴谋，科学家和医生都参与其中，比如出于某些地缘政治原因制造并传播病毒，那么你同时也在拉动那根告诉你该在多大程度上信任医生和科学家的线。

So a conspiracy theory is if you accept, for example, that there's a massive conspiracy and scientists and doctors are complicit in, say, creating a virus and putting it out there for some geopolitical reason, you also are pulling on the thread that tells you how much you can trust doctors and scientists.

你正在拉动那根告诉你可能存在多大阴谋的线。

You're pulling on the thread that tells you how big a conspiracy could possibly be going on.

如果你能接受一个巨大的阴谋，那么默认你也会接受更多。

If you can accept that one huge conspiracy, it becomes implicit that you'll accept more.

实际上这要求你必须接受更多。

It becomes actually required that you'll accept more.

如果你能为一个阴谋找到理由，那么你也能为另一个找到理由。

If you can justify it for one, well, you justify it for another.

因此这种连锁效应就是：一旦你有了那个入门级阴谋论，一旦你的思维方式被改变到这种程度——你已经朝那个方向拉动了信念之网的丝线，你就会影响其他所有事情。

So there's this knock on effect that once you have that gateway conspiracy, once you have altered your thinking so much that you've pulled the threads of your web that way, you impact everything else.

我们的观点并非孤立存在

We do not hold our ideas in isolation.

这其实是个很奇特的概念，因为我们总把想法看作可以随意替换的边缘事物，但实际上它们构成一个生态系统，彼此相互影响

And that's such a weird concept because we kind of think of our ideas as these marginal things that you can slot in and out, but really it's an ecosystem and one is affecting the other.

因此接受某个观点——我认为这是个深刻见解——说明信仰并非铁板一块的单一事物

So the acceptance of one thing and I think that was quite a huge insight is that's kind of belief is not this monolithical thing.

信念与观点会相互影响

Beliefs and ideas impact each other.

这就是为什么我们思考时会运用类比、比较和过往经验

Is why even how we think, we use analogies, we use comparisons, we use pre and easy experience.

所有这些因素都相互关联

All of these similarly are tied.

所以阴谋论者往往同时相信多个阴谋论也就不足为奇了

So it's not surprising that conspiracy theorists tend to hold multiple conspiracies.

不过我觉得有趣的是，他们经常相信的那些阴谋论本身其实是自相矛盾的

What I find amusing though is they often hold conspiracies that are in fact internally conflicting or inconsistent.

其中

And one of

我最喜欢的是

my favorites was a friend of

我的一个朋友凯伦·道格拉斯，她是英国研究阴谋论者的心理学教授。

mine, Karen Douglas, is a professor of psychology of conspiracy theorists in The UK.

她做的一件事我觉得非常聪明，她采访了英国的一群阴谋论者和美国的一群阴谋论者。

And one of the things she did, which I thought was brilliant, is she talked a bunch of conspiracy theorists in The UK and a bunch in America.

英国的那些人相信0相信戴安娜王妃身上发生了可疑的事情。

And the ones in The UK believed something suspicious had happened with Princess Diana.

他们给出了两种说法，一种是戴安娜王妃被女王杀害，另一种是戴安娜王妃伪造了自己的死亡。

And they gave them two narratives, one that Princess Diana had been killed by the queen, and another one where Princess Diana had faked her own death.

他们对美国人做了同样的实验，对象是本·拉登。

Now, they did the same with the Americans with Osama bin Laden.

他是个知道太多而被杀害的美国傀儡，或者他伪造了自己的死亡，诸如此类的说法。。

He was an American patsy who was killed because he knew too much, or he faked his own death, that kind of stuff.

最令人难以置信的是，那些深度阴谋论者会同时平等地相信关于两个人的两种叙述。

What was absolutely incredible is that the people who were deep conspiracy theorists believed both narratives of both people equally at the same time.

所以他们相信一个戴安娜王妃既活着又死了的事件版本，就像薛定谔的公主一样，对吧？

So they believed a version of events where Princess Diana was both alive and dead, like Schrodinger's princess, right?

这在我们看来很疯狂，直到你意识到他们的动机——他们觉得自己知道普通人不知道的事情。

And that seems crazy to us until you realize what motivated They were motivated by feeling that they knew something that the average Joe did not know.

他们的动机源于感觉自己看到了更深层的图景，因为他们的方式MF Philippe就是关于看清深层图景的。

They were motivated by feeling that they had seen a deeper picture because their way MF Philippe was all about seeing the deeper picture.

那些细节，他们并不在意。

The fine details, they don't care about.

在这里，一致性并不重要。

Consistency is not important here.

重要的是数量。

It's volume.

是啊。

Yeah.