罗里·萨瑟兰：广告心理学

总体而言，无人驾驶汽车将比人工驾驶汽车更安全。

In aggregate, driverless cars are gonna be safer than driven cars.

是的。

Yes.

至少在人们想出如何破解它们之前是这样，这稍微是个不同的问题。

At least until people work out how to hack them, which is a slightly different question.

但这显示出轻微的社会智能缺失，因为我的直觉是，人类司机可能会说‘我可以从车流中穿出，因为我的路线被路上的沙袋挡住了，但别在公交车前面穿出’。

But that showed a slight lack of social intelligence because my hunch was there that a human driver would have said, I can pull out in front of traffic because my route is blocked by some sandbags on the road, but don't pull out in front of a bus.

换句话说，如果你在商业司机面前穿出，他们让行的意愿——当然，他们并不拥有他们驾驶的那该死的车辆。

In other words, if you pull out in front of someone who's a commercial driver, their willingness to give way, and, of course, they don't own the bloody vehicle they're driving.

明白吗？

Okay?

公交车司机不需要为他的公交车支付维修费用。

The bus driver doesn't have to pay for the repairs to his bus.

如果你开的是辆巨型卡车，反正也不会有任何维修，因为所有损伤都会由那辆谷歌汽车承担。

If you're driving a massive truck, there won't be any repairs anyway because all the damage will be done to that Google car.

要知道，如果你开的是那种重型卡车，前面装上那种防护杠，撞上谷歌无人车也根本不会受损。

You know, if you're driving some sort of Mac truck, you know, I mean, you you know, that's you you could practically have one of those kind of, you know, bars at the front, and it'll be it'll be undamaged by crashing into a a Google driver's car.

这说明它缺乏一点社交智能。

So that showed a little bit of lack of social intelligence.

那么驾驶行为有多少依赖于潜意识的社交意识呢？

Now how much of driving depends on unconscious social awareness?

在英国比在美国更依赖这种意识。

In The UK more than it does in The US.

如果你想用霍夫斯塔德的维度来分析，英国、爱尔兰、瑞典、荷兰，还有挪威、芬兰、新西兰、澳大利亚这些国家，都以对模糊性有较高容忍度著称。

The US drives if if you wanna get into Hofstadter's dimensions here, The UK and Ireland and Sweden and Holland and, I think, Norway, Finland, New Zealand, Australia also, are countries marked out by fairly high tolerance of ambiguity.

我的意思是这些国家并非完全由规则驱动。

By which, I mean, is they're not totally rule driven.

奇怪的是，荷兰的交通事故统计数据比德国好得多。

So weirdly, the accident statistics for Holland are much better than they are for Germany.

这跟基因差异毫无关系。

There's no genetic difference.

荷兰朋友可能会发疯，但荷兰人和德国人之间并没有多少基因差异。

Dutch friends would go crazy, but there's not much genetic difference between Dutch people and Germans.

但文化差异在于是否愿意给予他人疑点利益。

But the cultural difference is one of giving other people the benefit of the doubt.

有点像‘那家伙为什么要那样做？’

It's kind of why is that guy doing that?

哦，我会让你知道，他不该那样做的。

Oh, I'll just let you know, he shouldn't have done that.

我会让他知道，我会让他现在知道。在爱尔兰或瑞典，你可能会认为事故率相当高。

I'll let him, know, I'll let him Now, Ireland or Sweden, you would assume might have quite a high accident rate.

我不会解释为什么在爱尔兰的情况下你可能会这么认为，但那里有很多蜿蜒的道路。

I won't explain why you might assume that in the case of Ireland, but lots of windy roads.

好的。

Okay.

饮酒文化相当浓厚。

Quite a heavy drinking culture.

是的。

Yep.

瑞典有着浓厚的饮酒文化，到处是积雪。

Sweden has heavy drinking culture, snow all over the place.

没错。

Yeah.

然而他们的交通事故率却非常低，因为他们对模糊性有极高的容忍度。

Yet they have a very low rate of accidents because they're highly tolerant of ambiguity.

对。

Right.

他们无法...你知道，这就是我丹麦朋友所说的'疑罪从无'原则。

They can't you know, it's it's what my Danish friend calls the benefit of the doubt.

明白吗？

You know?

也许你是故意那么做的，但人非圣贤孰能无过，对吧？

Well, maybe you meant to do that, but we all make mistakes, don't we?

德国和美国则更具条顿风格，他们会说‘这是我的路权’，并坚持不让。

The Germany and The US are slightly more Teutonic in that they say, this is my right of way, and I'm gonna stick to it.

如果你挡道或做出任何妨碍我权利的行为，我基本上不会对此做出让步。

And if you get in the way or you do anything that interferes with my rights, I'm basically not going to make allowances for it.

确实有篇关于霍夫斯泰德文化维度及其如何影响驾驶风格的论文探讨了这一点。

So you do get a you do get a there there does seem to be there's a paper on this about Hofstadter's cultural dimensions and how it affects driving style.

现在有趣的问题是，许多那种‘土气’的社会智能和驾驶行为带来的益处。

Now the interesting question is, a lot of a lot of that benefit of the dowdy social intelligence and driving.

现在说说你们加拿大人。

Now you're Canadians.

你们连环岛都应付不了，对吧？

You can't even cope with roundabouts, can you?

我们可以。

We can.

你们正在学习中。

You we're learning.

你们在学习。

You're learning.

你们在学习。

You're learning.

公平地说，在幅员辽阔的国家引入环岛确实有难度。

Now in fairness, it's difficult to introduce roundabouts in very big countries.

是啊。

Yeah.

因为显然，要熟练使用环岛并形成本能反应，必须经常接触它们。

Because, obviously, to get good at using a roundabout for it to become instinctive, you've gotta use them a lot.

如果加拿大只有500个环岛，那么接近这些环岛的大多数人都是新手。

And if you only have 500 roundabouts in Canada, a hell of a lot of people approaching that roundabout will be new to roundabouts.

环岛的有趣之处在于，它需要极高的社交智慧，包括完全无意识的技能——比如通过车辆位置判断驾驶者意图，观察停靠车辆的轮胎指向。

Now, the interesting thing with the roundabout, it involves a huge amount of social intelligence, including probably totally unconscious things like reading people's intention from their road position, looking at the direction in which their wheels are pointing when they're parked.

在环岛通行中存在着大量的相互礼让行为，当道路上全是无人驾驶汽车时，这种操作可能会变得非常简单。

There's gonna be an enormous amount of kind of give and take that goes on in navigating a roundabout, which may be perfectly easy to do when you have what you might call roads exclusively populated by driverless cars.

是的。

Yeah.

但在混合使用的过渡期，情况会变得棘手得多。

But in the intervening period where you have to have mixed use, it's gonna be much more difficult.

嗯。

Yeah.

我想稍微转换一下话题，聊聊阅读。

I wanna switch gears just a little bit here, and talk about reading.

我知道我们想讨论行为经济学和决策制定。

I know we wanna talk about behavioral economics, decision making.

或许我们可以深入探讨一些伦理问题，比如行为经济学、广告以及创造无形价值。

Maybe we can get into some ethical stuff about, behavioral economics and even advertising and creating intangible value.

不过首先，咱们先简单谈谈阅读。

But first, let's talk about reading a little bit.

我知道你是个热爱阅读的人。

I know you're a big reader.

你选择阅读材料的流程是怎样的？

What's your process for selecting what you read?

我是说，如今我们都在为过滤海量信息而挣扎，而你，在所有人群中，我知道我们之前就这个话题讨论过。

I mean, we're all struggling these days with filtering a massive amount of information, and and you, out of all people, I I know we've had conversations on this before.

我...我想为此邀功。

I I'd like I'd I'd like to take credit for this.

不得不承认，过去两三年里我可能已经落后了。

I have to admit that in the last two or three years, I've probably fallen behind.

我不知道原因何在。

I don't know why that is.

部分原因我归咎于电子邮件。

Partly I partly blame email.

我有个当律师的朋友，他工作需要阅读数百页法庭文件和笔录。

I had a friend who was a barrister who, as part of his job, would effectively have to read hundreds of pages of sort of court papers and transcripts.

他对此最大的怨言是：当你不得不为工作而阅读时，会略微扼杀为乐趣而阅读的兴致。

And the biggest resentment he had about this was he said that when you have to read for work, it slightly kills reading for pleasure.

因为一天工作结束后回到家，你的状态就像僵尸一样瘫在电视机前发呆，纯粹是因为那天已经读得够多了，而且还是有人付钱让你读的。

Because by the time you get home at the end of the day, your your mode is to zonk out in front of the television, like a zombie, because simply because you've you've read enough that day, and you've been paid to do it.

我现在不如从前了。

I'm I'm less good than I was.

我觉得自己非常幸运，选对了人。

I think I was very, very lucky in who I chose.

早期影响我的有罗伯特·弗兰克、鲍勃·恰尔迪尼，《助推》显然是本非常重要的书。

The early inferences, Robert Frank, Bob Cialdini, Nudge was obviously a very important book.

还有些比较冷门的内容，比如大量进化生物学和进化心理学。

Some slightly unusual things, quite a lot of evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology.

杰弗里·米勒的《求偶思维》是那种颠覆认知的书籍之一。

Jeffrey Miller's The Mating Mind was one of those game changing books.

后来他又写了《耗尽》。

Then he wrote Spent.

我们其实邀请过他在广告从业者协会做过演讲，主题是进化心理学、性选择、信号传递与消费主义之间的联系。

We we invited him actually to, give a talk at the the Institute of Practitioners and Advertising on the links between evolutionary psychology, sexual selection and signaling, and consumerism.

这类东西一直让我着迷。

That sort of stuff has fascinated me.

部分关于幸福感的文献。

Some of the happiness literature.

但可能只是我运气好。

But now I probably was just lucky.

顺便说一句，蒂姆·哈尔福德是另一位非常优秀的英国作家，你采访时一定要见见他。

Tim Halford, another very good British writer whom you must meet in interview, by the way.

但在经济学与生物学交界地带、进化思想与心理学领域，确实出现过非常出色的著作——显然，对于从事广告业的人来说，这些本应引起我的兴趣。

But there have been very good writings on the hinterland of kind of economics and biology, evolutionary thought and psychology, which fairly obviously, for someone working in advertising, should interest me.

我很幸运，因为在1989年，我曾有过类似大马士革启示的时刻，当时我说：好吧，无论经济理论多么精妙，它显然无法很好地描述现实中个体的真实行为。

I was lucky because back in 1989, I had a kind of Road to Damascus moment where I said, okay, however elegant economic theory may be, it patently doesn't describe individual, real world human behavior very well.

现在，

Now,

我的幸运在于进入奥美广告公司时，最初工作的地方现在叫奥美互动（Ogilvy One），当时叫奥美直效（Ogilvy Made The Direct），是公司的直效营销部门。

my luck was when I went into the advertising industry with Ogilvy, I first started working at a place now called Ogilvy One, which was then called Ogilvy Made The Direct, which was the direct marketing wing of the agency.

在那里，你实际上是在进行社会科学实验，只不过资金充足、规模宏大，通过测试不同的广告方法来看哪种能获得最多回应。

And there, you do what are effectively social science experiments, but very well funded at a grand scale, which is testing different advertising approaches to see which gains the most response.

是的。

Yeah.

早在1989、1990年左右，我们曾一次性给大约10万人写信推销，你可能还记得这些业务，比如来电等待和呼叫转移服务。

And fairly early on, sometime in about 1989, 1990, we were writing letters to, let's say, a 100,000 people at a time and selling, you'll remember these, things like call waiting and call diversion.

换句话说，这些在AT&T被称为星级服务，即电话上的增强呼叫功能。

In other words, they were called what they called star services with AT and T, enhanced calling features on your phone.

你每月需支付约2.50英镑67。

And you'd pay some £2.50 a 67.

你有个69。

You've a 69.

嗯。

Yeah.

这些数字在世界各地似乎大同小异。

The numbers seem to be more or less the same all over the world.

呼叫转移，然后是呼叫等待和来电显示。

Call diversion, then there's call waiting and and caller display.

我们会寄出信件，要知道那时候互联网还没出现，网页也不存在，所以这个过程中没有任何线上环节。

And we'd send out the letters and the letters at the time bear in mind, this is before the Internet exist you know, before the web existed, so there was no online component to this.

如果你想订购，可以拨打提供的电话号码，或者使用信末预印的优惠券打勾后寄回订购产品。

We'd have a telephone number to call if you wanted to order it or a pre lasered coupon at the bottom where you could tick it and post it back to order the product.

两种方式的结果都是一样的。

The result was the same either way.

有位客户说：我不明白为什么我们要鼓励通过邮政回复。

And a client said, look, I don't understand why we're effectively encouraging postal response here.

我想他们可能是出于某种原因想提高呼叫中心的接听量，或者呼叫中心当时有闲置产能。

I think they actually wanted to get call center volumes up for some reason, or they had spare capacity to call center.

为什么我们不直接寄只带电话号码的信件，省去优惠券呢？

Why don't we just send letters with just the phone number and not bother with the coupon?

我们提醒道：别忘了，随机对照试验在爱德华时代的广告业就已广泛使用，而医学界直到1947年左右才达到广告业的这种成熟度。

And we said, let's not forget, by the way, that the randomized control trial was being widely used in advertising in the Edwardian era, and it took medical science until about 1947 before they they they reached the same point of sophistication as the advertising industry.

稍微炫耀一下。

Just a bit of a brag here.

你知道，追溯到20世纪20年代及更早的克劳德·霍普金斯等人，他们会在报纸上做AB版分割测试——当时报纸通常由两台印刷机并行印刷，有时甚至是四台。

You know, dating back to people like Claude Hopkins in the 1920s and before, you'd rather think old an AB split run-in the newspapers so that newspapers were usually printed on two printing presses, sometimes four, in parallel.

所以他们会为不同的印刷机制作不同的广告文案。

So you'd produce different advertising copy for the different presses.

这些印刷机使用不同的印版。

They'd have different plates.

这些优惠券会被编码，这样你就能分辨出是哪则广告带来的回应，然后经历一种达尔文式的优胜劣汰过程，淘汰效果最差的创意方案，专注于最佳表现的那些。

The coupons would be coded so you could tell which advertisement had generated the response, and you'd then fall through a sort of Darwinian winning process, you'd get rid of the worst creative executions and focus on the best.

所以，总之我们我们说，在你这么做之前，我们先测试一下。

So, anyway, we we we we said, well, before you do that, let's just test it.

于是我们发出了大约5万封仅含电话号码的信件。

So we send out sort of 50,000 letters, phone number only.

另外5万封则是仅含优惠券的信件。

50,000 letters, coupon only.

完全没有提到电话号码。

No mention of a phone number.

明白吗？

K?

然后5万封信，包含电话号码加优惠券。

And then 50,000 letters, are phone number plus coupon.

遗憾的是，我手头没有原始结果的副本，但我记得大概数字，误差在0.1%左右。

Now, tragically, I don't have any copies of the original results, but I can remember them to within a, you know, a point one or so.

我相当确定响应率如下。

And I'm pretty sure the response rates were as follows.

仅电话号码的响应率约2.5%。

Phone number only, around about 2.5%.

优惠券的响应率为3.5%。

Coupon, 3.5%.

明白吗？

K?

优惠券加电话号码，5.9%。

Coupon plus phone number, 5.9%.

是6.9%吗？

Was it was it 6.9%?

总之，不是的。

Anyway, it was no.

实际上是接近两种方式的总和，大约五点几。

It would be five point it was practically the sum of the other two methods.

所以基本上，通过电话回应的人是那些只会通过电话回应的人。

So, basically, the people who responded by the phone were people who would only respond by phone.

通过优惠券回应的人大致上是那些只会通过优惠券回应的人。

The people who'd respond by coupon were more or less people who'd only respond by coupon.

因此当你提供两种回应方式时，总和确实如此。

And so the sum total when you offered people both modes of response was yeah.

大概是，比如说，2.4、3.6和5.9。

It was something like, let's say, 2.4, 3.6, and 5.9.

确实就是这样的情况。

Some it was something exactly like that.

所以只差0.1%就达到两种方式的总和了。

So it was only point 1% shy of being the sum total of the two.

如果你结合经济学来思考，就会发现一个非常奇怪的现象：在所有案例中，无论产品本身是什么、价格如何（这些因素都相同），决定人们是否购买该产品的最大因素竟是他们的订购方式。

Now if you think about that and you think about economics, something very weird is going on here, which is that regardless of what the product is and how much it costs, which is the same in all instances, the single biggest determinant of whether someone bought that product or not was how they could order it.

没错。

Yeah.

但我当时的建议是——我们应该提供传真号码，这样还能额外有0.4%的人通过传真订购产品。

But my recommendation then was we ought to order we ought to offer a fax number so that an additional naught point 4% will order the product by fax.

仔细想想，这实在非常非常诡异。

That, when you think about it, is very, very strange.

从那一刻起，就像我说的，如同大马士革路上的顿悟时刻，我突然意识到——

And from that moment on, as kind of, you know, as I said, the road to Damascus moment, I thought, okay.

这里存在一整个缺失的科学领域，因为用任何传统模型都无法解释这种现象。

There's a whole missing science here because this doesn't make sense in any conventional model.

老实说，我还是不太能完全理解。

Still doesn't quite make sense to me, to be honest.

但顺便说一句，这种情况在无数其他实例中都被证实存在。

But it but by the way, it has been found to be true in lots and lots of other instances.

他们就是这样复制的。

That's how they replicate.

所以你看，如果你同时提供网页和电话号码，销量会比仅提供网页时高出许多。

So so, you know, if you offer a, you know, if you offer a web page and a phone number, you will sell a lot more than if you only offer a web page.

好吧。

And okay.

我的意思是，如果你是个特别保守的经济学家，大概会絮絮叨叨地谈论交易成本。

I mean, if you're a really sort of defensive economist, you'd burble on about transaction costs, I guess.

但我想，这与那些精彩的实验有相似之处。

But that was, I suppose, similar to wonderful experiments.

你知道，我特别喜欢理查德·塞勒关于海滩的思想实验，它展示了交易效用与获取效用的区别。

You know, I I love Richard Thaler's thought experiment about the beach and the difference between, you know, transaction utility and acquisition utility.

哦，这真是——我认为这是最绝妙的事情之一，虽然不完全算思想实验，因为你确实询问了人们。

Oh, what's So it I think it's one of the most fantastic it's not quite a thought experiment because you did actually ask people.

场景是这样的：你正在海滩上，和你的朋友一起，那天相当炎热。

So this is you're on a beach, and you've been there with your friend, and it's a pretty hot day.

你们已经在那里待了几个小时，两人都感到非常口渴。

And you've been there for a few hours, and you're both of you getting pretty thirsty.

这时你提到真的很想喝点什么，而你的朋友突然说：'其实我注意到，大约四分之三英里外的海滩上，有个摊位在卖冰镇喜力啤酒。'

And, you mentioned the fact that you really could do with a drink, and your friend just says, well, actually, I happen to notice that about, you know, three quarters of a mile down the beach, there's a blank selling bottles of chilled Heineken.

告诉我你愿意为一瓶冰镇喜力啤酒付多少钱，如果价格低于你的报价，我就买一瓶带回来给你。

Tell me how much you're prepared to pay for a bottle of chilled Heineken, and I'll then if the price is lower than that, I'll buy you a bottle and bring it back.

如果他们报价更高，我就不会给你买，因为价格显然太高了。

And if they're quoting a higher price, I won't buy your bottle because it's obviously too high a price.

所以告诉我你愿意支付的价格。

So tell me what you're prepared to pay.

在那些实验里——虽然参与者是些古怪的西方学生，但实验结果显示——如果你把海滩边那个地方描述成精品酒店（这实验大概来自八十年代末或九十年代初，所以现在得把价格乘以二）。

And in experiments with admittedly, you know, weird Western students, but nonetheless, in those experiments, if you describe the place down the beach as a boutique hotel now this is the experiment from, I think, the late eighties or early nineties, so we'll have to multiply by two.

但如果描述为精品酒店，人们愿意支付大约相当于现在6美元的价格。

But from a boutique hotel, people were prepared to pay perhaps the modern equivalent of $6.

明白吗？

Okay?

如果描述为海滩小摊，他们只愿意支付约3美元。

If you if you describe it as a beach shack, they're prepared to pay about 3.

现在你从喝一瓶冰镇喜力中获得的效用——所有喜力啤酒都是完全相同的——这效用是一样的。

Now the utility you gain from drinking a cold Heineken, all bottles of Heineken being identical It's the same.

将会是相同的。

Is gonna be the same.

你不能说这是因为精品酒店的存在。

You can't say, well, it's the presence of the boutique hotel.

你知道的，我不能因为是在精品酒店前喝酒就获得社会地位提升，毕竟它被描述在四分之三英里外。

You know, I'm gaining status by drinking in front of a boutique hotel because it's been described as three quarters of a mile away.

甚至都看不见那家酒店。

It's not even within sight.

只是你的预期而已。

Just your expectation.

从直觉上讲，人们会认为精品酒店比简陋小屋的运营成本更高。

Instinctively, humans go, well, boutique hotel, they've got higher overheads than a shack has.

因此，我愿意为来自那里的啤酒支付更高的价格，这是一个相当好的思想实验，表明仅仅最大化预期效用的假设并不能完整解释支付意愿。

Therefore, the amount I'm prepared to pay for a bottle from that is higher, which is a fairly good thought experiment at showing that the assumptions of just maximizing expected utility aren't the whole story in explaining willingness to pay.

我一直认为这是一个非常非常精彩的观点，因为它解释了为什么会有促销行业存在。

I I always think that's a really, really wonderful point because I think it explains why there's a sales promotion industry.

我认为这解释了为什么零售商会有多种形式的促销活动。

I think it explains why, you know, why retailers have sales in many ways.

换句话说，我们既从物品的所有权或消费中获得价值，也会因支付金额和购买环境而产生即时的积极或消极感受。

You know, that that there's there's in other words, there's the value we get from the ownership or consumption of an object, and there's the immediate positive or negative feeling we get from how much we pay for it and under what circumstances.

我有个直觉，比如你想买一双鞋，它们正以30英镑促销时——理查德·泰勒推测，当你购买一双大幅打折的鞋时，部分情况下你会买下其实不太合脚的鞋，仅仅是因为价格从300美元降到150美元之类的诱惑。

I've got a hunch that, for example, if you wanted to buy a pair of shoes and they were on sale at £30, I mean I mean, Richard Taylor was surmises that actually the when you buy a heavily discounted pair of shoes, part of you know, you quite often buy a pair of shoes that don't really fit very well just because of the hit of the reduced from $300 to a 150 or whatever.

我不知道Rich穿什么鞋。

I don't know what shoes Rich wears.

我刚才可能要么太挥霍了，要么太吝啬了。

I might have been either vastly too extravagant there or too stingy.

据我所知，他的鞋子可能是奥地利精灵用最上等的羊绒手工制作的。

For all I know, his shoes are actually handmade by Austrian elves out of the finest cashmere.

但尽管如此，我的意思是，这其中有些非常非常有趣的现象，即这不仅仅是商品价值与你支付金额之间简单的一维交易问题。

But but nonetheless, I mean, there's something very, very interesting going on there, which is that it isn't just a question of, you know, a simple one dimensional transaction between the value of a good and how much you pay.

这其中还涉及到背景因素。

There's a context to it as well.

语境非常重要。

Context is so important.

你认为这对人们也有影响吗？

Do you think that factors in with people too?

我的意思是，我最喜欢问人们并得到答案的问题之一就是：你如何区分真正懂行的人和不懂装懂的人？

And I mean this in the sense of one of the the questions that I I love to ask people and get answers from is how do you separate the people who know what they're talking about from the people who don't?

这其中是否存在某种语境？

Is there a context to that?

我是说，有很多人假装或听起来像是他们知道自己在做什么，而你可能会想避开

I mean, there's a lot of people that pretend or they sound like they're they know what they're doing, and you probably wanna run across

但在行为子领域或...或...或者一般来说

But in behavioral subs or in in in just in general

就是一般来说

Just in general.

但在每个行业、每个领域，你知道，每一个沃伦·巴菲特背后，都有100个人试图模仿他的言行，却没有他的技能和特质

But in every industry, in every trade, there's, you know, for every Warren Buffett, there's a 100 people trying to sound like Warren Buffett and emulate him, but they don't have his skills and attributes.

或者...或者沃伦的运气

Or or Warren's luck.

沃伦的运气

Warren's luck.

可能是他的

It might be his.

绝对是

Definitely.

然后这些人同样品德高尚，而沃伦则非常幸运。

And then all these people are equally virtuous, and Warren happy very lucky.

我是说，没有...沃伦他们都承认，在某种程度上，出生的运气——除了其他因素外——还有你出生的时代，当然还有地理位置，这些都会对你可能取得的成功产生重大影响。

I mean, without without I mean, Warren, they both admit that to some degree that, you know, that fortune of birth, apart from the else, and and the time of your birth, and and, of course, the geographical location will play a large part in how successful you may be.

我记得沃伦本人或查理·芒格说过，如果我出生在巴基斯坦中部，大概就不会成为投资大师了。

I think Warren himself or Charlie Munger said, you know, had I been born in the middle of Pakistan, it's something like I would have made it as a major investment.

很多

A lot

我们甚至意识不到这一点。

of us don't even recognize that.

对吧？

Right?

就像我们今天珍视的许多美德，在不同的时代或环境下可能就不会如此受重视。

Like, a lot of the virtues that we have that are valued today in a different time or different circumstance may not have been as as valued.

对吧？

Right?

我是说，盲目的自信可能具有巨大的进化价值，尤其在性选择方面，我是这么认为的。

I mean, bullshit confidence is probably of huge evolutionary value, particularly in sexual selection, I would have thought.

所以，我想说，我们邀请来此演讲的杰出人物之一，能请到他真是莫大的荣幸，就是罗伯特·特里弗斯。

So, I mean, one of the great people we've had in to speak here, it's been an absolute privilege to have him, is Robert Trivers.

你们会知道他是在互惠利他主义方面做出重大贡献的人，某种程度上也是自私基因理论背后的推手。

And you'll know him as the man who did the great work on reciprocal altruism and to some extent was behind the whole selfish gene idea.

但他最近关于自我欺骗的研究表明，自我欺骗当然具有进化优势，我们欺骗自己是为了更好地欺骗他人，因为最有效的欺骗方式是从相信自己编造的谎言开始。

But his recent work on self deception, that of course self deception is evolutionary advantageous, and that we deceive ourselves, the better to deceive others because the best way to bullshit is to start by believing your own bullshit.

还有，怎么

Also How do

你作为一个局外人如何识别出

you as an outsider then recognize that

嗯，我可能就是在胡说八道。

Well, I might be bullshitting.

我想说的是，比起学术界的人，来自商界的我对胡扯的容忍度更高。

I mean, of the things I would say is that I have a higher bullshit tolerance coming from business than academics do.

我偶尔会因某些言论震惊行为科学界的学者，实际上，这话不该公开说的。

And I occasionally scandalize academics in the behavioral science by saying, actually, it's an off the record.

你有没有一些稍微差劲的研究，结论不太明确，p值检验没完全达标，但显示出一些相当有趣的结果？

Have you got any slightly rubbish research that's a bit inconclusive, doesn't quite hit the p value test, but, you know, is showing some fairly interesting results?

他们就会说：格洛丽亚，你怎么能说出这么可怕的话？

And they go, how can you say such a horrendous thing, Gloria?

你你你你实际上，整个培根式的方法论正被你的低标准所污染。

You're you're you're you're actually you know, the whole Baconian message is being method is being polluted by your low standards.

我的观点是，如果你是一名学者，你的工作就是力求正确，毫无歧义、完全、绝对正确。

My point is that if you're an academic, your job is to try and be right, unambiguously, completely, absolutely right about something.

在商业领域，即使只有30%的人偶尔做出奇怪行为，其中仍存在商机。

In business, if only 30% of people do a weird thing 20% of the time, there's still a business opportunity in that.

正如我曾评论过的，有时在批评某些未能复现的行为科学时，人们会说JAM实验、选择悖论。

It's I mean, one of the one of the comments I made is that occasionally in attacking some of the behavioral science which has appeared not to replicate, People have said, well, JAM experiment, the paradox of choice.

其实我们也做过类似实验，结果并不奏效。

You know, we've we've we've actually done a similar experiment, it doesn't work.

而我的观点是，听着，实际上我说过，我只需要知道那可能值得测试就够了。

And my view is, look, actually, I said, all I need to know is that that might be worth testing.

对。

Right.

因为经济学的问题在于——这是整个播客中最重要的一句话。

Because economics the problem of economics now this is the most important sentence in the entire podcast.

明白吗？

Okay?

所以，经济学的症结不仅在于它是错误的，更在于它极度限制了创造性思维，因为它倾向于提出一种非常单一维度的人类动机观。

So, you know, the problem of economics isn't only that it's wrong, it's that it's incredibly creatively limiting because it tends to posit a very one dimensional view of human motivation.

因此，如果你想改变人类行为，基本上你只能通过收买或惩罚这两种方式来实现。

And therefore, if you wish to change human behavior, the only two ways you can do it are basically by bribing people or fining them.

所以一旦你把某件事定义为经济问题，本质上你的答案就会归结为对人类动机一个非常简单的假设。

So once you define something as an economic problem, essentially, your answer will boil down to a very, very simple assumption about human motivation.

因此商界几乎普遍认为：提供更多选择就能卖出更多商品。

So it would be almost universally assumed in the business world that if you have more choice, you will sell more.

我认为这正是属于‘如果你降低某物价格，需求就会上升’这类情况。

Now I would argue that is exactly the sort of thing which belongs in the category of if you reduce the price of something, demand will go up.

大多数情况下确实如此，但并非总是如此。

It is true more often than it isn't, but it isn't always true.

有些情况下提高价格反而会增加需求。

There are cases where putting the price up increases demand.

我们曾建议客户对此进行测试。

We've recommended our clients test that.

我们的观点是：最终你可能不得不降价，但让我们先试试提价。

Our argument is, look, eventually you may have to drop the price, but let's try putting the price up first.

哪些产品最适合他们？

Which products work best for them?

特别是在选择菜单时，比如快餐店的菜单选项，很大程度上你会用价格来引导选择。

If you're choosing from a menu in particular, a menu of options, let's say a fast food restaurant, okay, you use price to navigate the menu to a great extent.

你知道的，我是想吃2.7英镑的，还是3.8英镑的？

You know, am I two pounds seventy hungry, or am I three pounds eighty hungry?

所以如果你有一个非常棒、分量足的汉堡但定价过低，实际上可能会错过那些寻找高端产品的顾客。最极端的案例有时出现在艺术界，有人说，如果一幅画在画廊橱窗里三个月都没卖出，那就把价格翻倍。

So if you have a fantastic, generous burger and you price it too low, you may actually miss out on people who are looking for a I mean, the most extreme case is sometimes in the art world where someone says, if a product if a painting doesn't sell in the window of your gallery, if it hasn't sold after three months, double the price.

部分原因在于，想买一万英镑画作的人不会考虑五千英镑的画。

And part of the reason for that is someone who's looking to buy a £10,000 painting doesn't want to buy a £5,000 painting.

对。

Right.

因为他们的预期已经设定好了

Mean Because they've already set the expectation

他们已经设定了这种预期。

They've kind set the expectation in.

最有趣的情况是我作为一个英国人，在九十年代初去了加州的贝克斯菲尔德，那是我第一次去塔可钟。

The funniest case was was as me as a Brit going to Baker I think it was Bakersfield, California in the early nineties and my first ever visit to a Taco Bell.

对吧？

Okay?

塔可钟的性价比非常高。

Now Taco Bell is fantastic value for money.

所以我我我还能记得这件事。

And so I I I can remember that.

我记得那时候一个豆泥卷饼才59美分。

I think a bean burrito back then was 59¢.

也可能是69美分。

It might have been 69.

作为一个英国人，我习惯了麦当劳要四英镑八十便士之类的价格。

So I'm a Brit, and I'm used to McDonald's being, you know, four pounds eighty, three whatever.

所以这很基础。

So this is basic.

所以这就是这个概念。

So this is this concept.

这是西班牙小食。

It's tapas.

这基本上就是西班牙小食，对吧？

It's basically tapas, isn't it?

于是我就下楼去了。

So I just go down.

我要了两个豆泥卷饼。

I'll be I have two bean burritos.

我买了三个那种卷饼。

I have three of those.

塔可钟的食物堆成了座该死的巨型肉排金字塔。

This bloody great pyramid of chops of Taco Bell food.

我站在那里。

I'm standing there.

身后的人明显用惊恐的眼神看着我，因为我托盘上的食物堆得足够我们六个人吃完整趟假期。

The other people behind me are looking at me obviously aghast because there's this pile of food on my tray, which would have fed actually all six of us for the rest of our holiday.

所以你看，有些情况下整个预期水平会让人彻底懵圈。

So, you know, there are cases where there's a whole expectation level where you can throw people completely.

有件怪事我一直注意到，就是在劳动力成本极低的国家，总有些酒店收费和萨沃伊酒店一样贵。

There's a strange thing I always noticed, which is there's always a breed of hotels in really low labor cost countries, okay, which are charging the same prices as Savoy.

你明白我的意思吗？

You see you see what I mean?

我是说，如果你要去不丹这样的地方，你可能会以十分之一甚至更低的价格雇到非常优秀的不丹人。

I mean, if if if you're going to, like, Bhutan or something, you go, well, you could probably hire really good Bhutanese people for, you know, a tenth of what it costs or or less Right.

比在加利福尼亚的成本要低得多。

Than what it would cost in, you know, California.

所以你会期待最好的酒店能便宜些，但人们会决定每晚花400美元。

So you'd expect the best hotel to be a bit cheaper, but people basically wanna spend $400 a night.

他们已经下定了决心。

Just made up their mind.

他们就是铁了心要花这个钱，100美元或更少可能是个折中方案。

They've just made up their mind there and they go $100 or less than that might be a compromise.

对。

Right.

我不知道多余的钱去了哪里，可能进了酒店品牌老板的口袋。

You know, I don't know where the excess money goes, probably into the pockets of the owners of the the hotel brand.

但是，我是说

But, I mean do

你认为做出这个决定的人背后的心理是什么？

think the psychology behind the person deciding that is?

是不是'我在犒赏自己，我决定可以每晚花400美元享受'？

Is it I'm treating myself and I I've decided I can treat myself to $400 a night?

你觉得这种心理框架是怎么形成的？

Like, how do you think that framing happened?

嗯，还有一个事实是假期很稀缺。

Well, there's also the fact that holidays are scarce.

好吧。

Okay.

就像回到你说的乘以零理论，要知道，为哈佩纳·维塔毁了整艘船毫无意义。

So you may say, taking back to your multiply by zero thing, you know, there's no point in spoiling the ship for Hapena Vita.

去不丹或马丘比丘之类的地方会花掉你一大笔钱。

It's gonna cost you a bloody fortune to get to Bhutan or Machu Picchu or whatever.

如果你是那种消费群体，很可能出行都是坐商务舱。

You're gonna be burning sort of, you know if you're that kind of market, you're probably traveling business class.

光是旅程就要花费三四千美元。

You're burning three or 4,000 on the journey.

也许如果你是美国人或加拿大人，你只有极其可怜的年假额度，顺便说一句，这是现状偏见最极端的例子。

Maybe if you're American or Canadian, you only get an absolutely vegan and pathetic annual vacation allowance, which by the way is the most extraordinary case of status quo bias.

对吧？

K?

我在欧洲从未遇到过任何人，包括整个美国和英国。

I have never met anybody in Europe, all The U including The UK.

明白吗？

Okay?

而英国总体上比其他欧洲国家更倾向于特朗普风格。

And The UK is a bit more Trumpy than the rest of Europe, generally.

懂了吗？

Okay?

我在英国从未遇到过如此右翼的人，竟认为我们应该减少休假时间。

I have never met anybody in The UK who is so right wing, they think we should have less vacation.

没人会说，如果我们一年工作50周而非48或47周，就能额外获得2%的年化GDP增长。

Nobody says, well, we could get an extra 2% of annualized GDP growth if people just worked fifty weeks of the year instead of, you know, forty eight, forty seven.

我们甚至圣诞节到新年期间都不工作。

We don't even work between Christmas and New Year.

我没让你知道，但几乎每个办公室都这样。

I didn't let you let you into that, but nearly every office.

好的。

Okay.

基本上，从12月23日起就关门歇业了。

Basically, about December 23, the bugger shuts down.

直到1月2日才重新运作。

It doesn't get going until January 2.

明白吗？

Okay?

然后我们还有四周、五周，可能再加上假期。

And then we have four weeks, five weeks, maybe vacation on top of that.

德国人大概有六周。

Germans have about six.

还有一大堆带薪假期。

And then tons of paid holidays.

实际上没有美国人那么多奇怪的节日。

Not as many of the weird holidays as Americans have, actually.

你们那种单日奇怪劳动节之类的假期稍微多点——以前只是车管所关门，现在范围稍微扩大了些。但我从没遇到过哪个英国人会说‘不’

You have slightly more of those kind of one day weird Labor Day kind of things, which used to be a case where just the DMV closed, but now have become slightly more slightly more but, okay, I've never met a Brit, not a single Brit who says, no.

不

No.

不

No.

我们应该少休点假

We ought to have less.

这个休假的事情，已经失控了。

This this vacation thing, it's getting out of hand.

然而当伯尼·桑德斯——确实是伯尼——进入国会，试图为每位美国工人争取两周的强制带薪休假时，人们看他的眼神简直就像在看列宁再世。

And yet when Bernie Sanders, and it was Bernie, goes into congress and tries to get two weeks mandatory paid vacation for every American worker, he's basically looked on as if he's fucking Lenin.

懂吗？

Okay?

我是说，这简直被当成共产主义了。

I mean, this is considered, like, practically communism.

但是，德国人在制造东西方面效率极高。

But, I mean, the Germans are perfectly efficient at making stuff.

我甚至不确定美国如果增加休假会不会在经济上更受益，因为当人们消费休闲时，通常比购买制成品能创造更多本地劳动和工作机会。

I'm not I'm not even sure that The United States wouldn't be economically better off with more vacations simply because when people spend leisure money, it generally generates more labor and more work and more locally than if you buy manufactured goods.

我是说，亨利·福特创立双休日就是为了让人们买车。

I mean, Henry Ford created the two day weekend so that people would buy cars.

这故事有点野史性质，但并非完全杜撰。

It's slightly apocryphal, but not I mean, that story, by the way.

但我的意思是，在美国，双休日的出现更多归功于亨利·福特而非立法——部分源于他的推断：如果这成为常态，美国工人就值得拥有一辆车。

But, I mean, it was Henry Ford rather than legislation that that seemed to have created the two day weekend in The US partly because of his surmise that if that became a norm, then it was worth the American worker owning a car.

如果每周只有一天休息，买车就没那么必要了。

If you only had one day off every week, not so much.

所以这是个特别有趣的现状偏见案例——我是说，如果你去英国宣布要把假期砍到两周，绝对会引发暴乱的。

So that's a really interesting case of status quo bias, which is mean I mean, generally, if you went to The UK and said we're just gonna go down to two weeks vacation, there would be, I mean, just total rioting.

除非是战争时期，否则这种事根本不可能实现。

I mean, it's it's inconceivable, except in case of wartime or something that you could achieve something like that.

而加拿大人居然莫名其妙地接受了这点，对吧？

And Canadians weirdly go along with it, don't you?

尽管你们满口自由主义，有着各种时髦的左翼观点，却还是忍受着这种折磨人的工作制度。

Despite all your liberalism and stuff, you have your fancy, you know, your fancy left wing views, you still go along with this grueling work schedule.

哦，我老板啊。

Oh, my boss.

我不知道。

I don't know.

他有点怪怪的。

He's he's a bit weird.

是有点怪。

So A bit weird.

好吧。

Okay.

但我想说，硅谷有些地方正在尝试调整工作时间

But I mean, there are a few Silicon Valley places experimenting on the time

休息。

off.

想要。

Want.

是啊。

Yeah.

嘿。

Hey.

我想回到

I wanna go back

其实是我们开始录音前讨论的话题，关于沿着时间轴向前和向后思考决策。

to something we were talking about before we started recording actually, which was thinking through decisions forward and backwards along the axis of time.

你对此有些相当深刻的见解，而我当时打断了你。

And you had some pretty profound thoughts on that, and I'd cut you off.

我在想我们是否可以重新探讨这个话题。

I'm wondering if we could reintroduce that.

而且我认为在这个背景下

And I think the context in

好的。

Okay.

那么，我要回到我之前提出的那个小观点：经济学是有问题的，因为它非常非常缺乏创造性。

Well, I'll go back to the little point I made that economics is problematic because it's very, very, uncreative.

是的。

Yeah.

正如我所说，因为它将人类动机定义得仿佛人类只有一个单一驱动杠杆，从进化论角度看，这显然荒谬至极，存在诸多不合理之处。

Because it defines human motivation, as I said, as if humans just have this single lever, which is patently ridiculous in evolutionary terms for all kinds of reasons.

因此，当你把问题简化为经济学问题时，实际上是在制造人为的确定性——这种确定性自然对机构决策者极具吸引力，因为人为确定性意味着他们做决定时无需任何主观判断，因此绝不会因决策失误而被解雇。

And therefore, reduces when you reduce something to an economics problem, what you effectively do is you create artificial certainty, which is, of course, appealing to decision makers in institutions because certainty the artificial certainty effectively means they can't get fired for making the decision because it involves no subjective judgment whatsoever.

没错。

Right.

所以他们热衷于公式化决策。

So they love a formula.

官僚们极其钟爱公式化方法，因为这能让他们避免因行使判断力而可能招致的责难。

Bureaucrats really, really love a formula because it prevents them having to exercise judgment for which they might be blamed.

因此经济学营造出这种确定性的假象，我们不得不自动假装我们所做的一切都是科学的。

So economics creates this idea of certainty, and we automatically have to pretend that everything we do is scientific.

现在没人会回家对家人说。

Now no one goes home to their family.

我刚买了一副非常昂贵的耳机。

I've just bought a really expensive pair of of headphones.

现在我不用回家向家人详细解释为什么做出这个决定。

Now I don't go back to my family and do a whole presentation on why I made that decision.

就是前几天晚上突然想买而已。

I just felt like it, you know, a couple of nights ago.

我不需要向别人解释为什么买这副耳机而不是其他款。

You know, I don't have to justify it to other people why I bought this pair of headphones rather than another pair of headphones.

对。

Right.

作为消费者最棒的就是——每次购物时不用编造一大堆自我开脱的废话。

Because the great thing about being a consumer is you don't have to generate a whole load of self exculpatory bullshit every time you make a purchase decision.

但在商业环境中，你必须假装决策背后有科学依据，这样才能有效保护自己。

But in a business, what you have to do is pretend there was a science behind your decision because then you effectively, you've covered your own ass.

比如说：

Said, look.

答案是74，我们就这么做，因为公式/算法是这么告诉我们的。

The answer to this is 74, and that's what we're gonna do because the formula told us to or the algorithm tells us.

如果成功了，功劳就是我的。

And then if it works, I get credit for it.

如果没成功，那

And if it doesn't work It

没成功。

doesn't work.

就是没成功。

Doesn't work.

反正本来也成功不了，我们已经尽力了。

Well, it wasn't gonna work anyway because we did the best we could.

没错。

Exactly.

所以你实际上是在利用大多数企业里这种奖罚极度不对称的文化。

So what you've done is you've created you you've exploited this incredibly asymmetric reward blame culture that exists in most corporations.

这个观点挺有意思。

That's interesting debate.

金融行业的人非得拿那么离谱的奖金不可吗？

Do you have to have absolutely insane bonuses for people in the financial industry?

因为如果金融行业只发固定工资，人们就会变得极度风险厌恶，根本不敢做任何决策。

Because if you actually paid people in the financial industry by salary, they'd become so risk averse, they'd never do anything at all.

我不知道。

I don't know.

但高额奖金至少有一点好处——它们确实奖励了与众不同，对吧。

But one thing about insane bonuses, at least they do, you know, they do mean there's a reward for being different Right.

同时也惩罚了表现糟糕的行为。

And a and a punishment for being bad.

在官僚体系、政府机构甚至大型私营企业里通常会发生什么？

What generally happens if you're in a kind of bureaucratic or governmental or even any large private organization?

就像个人行为一样，最主要的驱动力似乎都是避免后悔。

Just as in individual behavior, the big driver seems to be avoidance of regret.

没错。

Right.

在企业环境中，主要驱动力是避免担责。

In corporate settings, the big driver is avoidance of blame.

你可以通过声称自己的行为完全合理来避免责备，实际上，这样做是不可避免的，因为理性告诉我应该这么做。

And you can avoid blame by claiming that it was, you know, that what you did was entirely rational, in fact, was therefore unavoidable because reason told me to do this.

我们调研了市场。

We scoped the market.

我们做了市场研究。

We did market research.

研究表明人们需要这个，所以我们生产了这个。

It told us that people wanted that, so we produced that.

好吧。

Now okay.

如果你遵循所有这些原则却失败了，你不会被解雇或责备，因为你的行为是理性的。

If you follow all those precepts and fail, you won't get fired or blamed because you were rational.

没错。

Right.

明白吗？

K?

如果你做的事效果更好但需要一定的人类想象力或判断力，如果它效果出色，你可能会得到些许认可。

If you do something which is better but involves a degree of human imagination or judgment, if it works well and better, you might get a bit of credit.

很可能会有人说：要是你遵循里德的建议，效果会更好。

You probably will get people saying, well, it would have been even better if you'd follow Reed's.

你只能得到一点点

You just get a tiny

认可。

bit.

但如果搞砸了，你将承担全部责任。

If it goes wrong You get all the blame.

你被解雇了。

You're fired.

这导致企业中出现大量从众行为。

And this this creates a huge amount of herding behavior in businesses.

没人会因为采购IBM的产品而被解雇。

No one ever got fired for buying IBM.

在奥美，我们总是称这种现象为变革。

We always call this in Ogilvy change.

我们称之为希思罗效应——当你请人预订从伦敦飞往纽约的航班时，他们总会给你订希思罗到肯尼迪机场的航班。

We call this the Heathrow effect that when if you ever ask anybody to book you a flight from London to New York, they will always book you on a flight from Heathrow to JFK.

这两个机场可能都不是最佳选择，特别是如果你要去纽约的奥美公司，那里离纽瓦克机场更近。

Now both those airports may be suboptimal, particularly if you're visiting Ogilvy in New York, which is much closer than Newark.

K？

K?

他们这样做是因为，如果按默认选项预订希思罗-肯尼迪航线，对多数人而言可能并非最佳方案。

The reason they do that is if you book someone Heathrow JFK, which is the default, it's probably not the best solution for a lot of people.

但若出现任何问题，他们会归咎于英国航空。

But if anything goes wrong, they'll blame British Airways.

如果你做了富有想象力且与众不同的选择，比如让人从伦敦城市机场起飞或降落到纽瓦克机场，95%的情况下这可能是更好的决定。

If you do something imaginative and strange, you book someone from London City Airport or you book someone into Newark, it may be a better decision 95% of the time.

但在那5%出问题的情况下，他们可能会责怪你。

But in the 5% where something goes wrong, they might blame you.

你没法从希思罗机场打电话质问秘书：你到底在想什么，居然订了全球第三繁忙国际机场的航班？

You can't ring your secretary from Heathrow and say, well, hell were you thinking booking on a flight for the world's third busiest international airport?

你疯了吗？

Are you insane?

因为希思罗是常规选择。

Because Heathrow's the norm the normative choice.

一旦你做了反常决定，比如‘哦，我本想试试伦敦城市机场’。

The second you do something weird, this is, oh, I thought I'd try London City.

要不是你订了这个该死的玩具城机场，我现在早该到纽约了。

I would I would have been in New York for that by now if you hadn't booked me for this bloody toy town airport.

反正你就是在自我标榜。

You're drawing attention to yourself anyway.

所以你就是在自我标榜。

So you're drawing attention to yourself.

你这是在冒险出头。

You're putting your head above the parapet.

所以这就是为什么世界上只有四大会计师事务所。

And so that's why there are only four big accounting firms in the world.

明白吗？

Okay?

如果你聘请四大所之一而他们搞砸了，所有人都会怪普华永道或安永这些大所。

You If appoint one of the big four and they cock up, everybody blames PWC or E and Y or whatever.

懂了吗？

Okay?

如果你聘请一家小型精品会计事务所，可能会更好。

If you appoint a small boutique accounting firm, it may be better.

但如果他们搞砸了，现在他们就会怪你

But if they cock up, now they blame you

对。

Right.

因为你没有聘请普华永道。

Because you didn't appoint PWC.

是的。

Yep.

所以这就涉及到你可能称之为的理性无聊常态现象，这对所有商人来说都是非常非常安全的选择，就像一群牛羚或羚羊之类的动物在周围吃草一样。

So there's this weird thing about what you might call the rational boring norm thing, which is a very, very safe place for all business people to and it's exactly like a copy or antelope or whatever, which heard around.

明白吗？

You know?

换句话说，我不会在这里被单独挑出来，因为我有强大的伙伴。

In other words, I'm not gonna get picked off here because I'm in good company.

现在的问题在于，我认为这在商业决策和政府决策中创造了一种所谓的虚假合理性。

Now what's problematic about that is it creates, I think, in business decision making and in government decision making, what you might call bogus rationality.

我是说，科学主义可能是——科学主义的问题在于，不幸的是这个词被发明了，因为世界确实需要一个词来指代那些假装是科学但实际上不是的东西。

I mean, scientism might be the the better the problem with scientism is unfortunate invention is a word because the world really needs a word where you can abuse things that pretend to be science but aren't.

而科学主义就是它的专业术语。

And scientism is the technical term for it.

那么你该怎么称呼实践科学主义的人呢？

But then what what do you call someone who practices scientism?

嗯，我想你自然会说是科学家。

Well, you naturally say scientist, I guess.

你不能说‘科学主义者’。

You can't say a scientismist.

明白了吗？

Okay?

所以不幸的是，作为一个贬义词，它不够灵活，因为你没法...懂吧？

So, unfortunately, as an abusive term, it's not very flexible because you can't you know?

现在的情况是，你假装自己有一个流程，能让你无需任何想象力，仅通过纯粹的顺序逻辑——无论是归纳还是演绎——就能得出正确答案。

Now what happens, okay, is you basically pretend that you are you have a process that allows you to arrive at the right answer without any imagination being required through the application of pure sequential logic or either induction or deduction.

我老把这两者搞混。

I get them muddled up.

你肯定能分清楚。

You'll know the difference.

一个朝一个方向，另一个则不管怎样。

One of them goes in one direction, the other one anyway.

但你假装这就是你做决定的方式，或者现在常发生的是，这是个为决定辩护的好方法，但最初让你得出假设的是想象力。

But you pretend that that's how you've made your decision or that that's how now what happens is often that's a good way to justify a decision, but it's imagination that gets you to the hypothesis in the first place.

在数学中，有人本能地相信某事，然后着手证明或反驳它。

So in mathematics, someone instinctively believes something, and then they set about to prove or disprove it.

但他们用来证明定理的并不是数学行为本身。

But it isn't the act of the mathematics they use to prove the theorem.

这首先就不是他们用来生成定理的心理过程。

That isn't the mental process they use to generate the theorem in the first place.

彼得·梅达沃就此写过一篇论文。

Peter Medewar wrote a paper about this.

你知道，科学论文是不是一种欺诈？

You know, is the scientific paper a fraud?

他的论点是，科学论文的写作方式不诚实地歪曲了最初产生见解时涉及的心理过程。

And his argument is that the way in which a scientific paper is written dishonestly misrepresents the mental processes that were involved in generating the insight in the first place.

因为你淡化了想象力的作用，假装是纯粹理性引导你得出结论的。

Because you downplay the imagination bit, and you pretend that it was reason that got you there on its own.

我认为这在所有机构决策过程中都是一个代价极高且有趣的现象——发展到某个阶段时，有时很难区分理性决策（它们确实存在）与其他类型。

And I think that is a really, really costly and interesting thing that happens in all institutional decision making, which is that you to a point where it's it's not always easy to tell the difference between rational decisions, and they do exist.

明白吗？

Okay?

好吧，如果情况是这样，那必然会导致那样的结果。

Well, if this is the case, that must be the case.

既然如此，我们就必须采取相应行动。

And if that's the case, we must do that.

清楚吗？

Okay?

这才是理性决策，这种决策确实存在。

That's a rational decision, and they they exist.

我丝毫没有否认这一点。

Not denying that for a second.

然后就是你可能称之为，或者阿瑟·柯南·道尔所说的，是不是逆向推理，你知道，就像《血字的研究》里发生的那样。

Then there's what you might call or what Arthur Conan Doyle called, is it reverse reasoning in this you you know, there's the study of Scarlet where this has happened.

这里有一具尸体。

There's a dead body here.

现在可能会怎样，好吧。

What might now, okay.

我们人类都很擅长说这件事已经发生了。

We're quite good, all of us humans, saying this has happened.

接下来会发生什么？

What's going to happen next?

这就是正向推理。

Which is forwards reasoning.

侦探，以及我认为广告人也是如此，他们采用了一种不同的方式，即逆向推理，也就是：我们到达了地板上有一具尸体的状态，但在此之前的瞬间可能发生了什么导致了这种状况的出现？

The detective, and and I would argue the advertising person as well, engage in something different, which is reverse reasoning, which is, we got to this state where there's a dead body on the floor, but what might have happened immediately beforehand to have caused this state of affairs to have arisen?

在广告中，你可能会说，我们希望人们做这件事。

And in advertising, you may say it's, we want people to do this thing.

我们需要什么样的前期刺激才能让他们达到那个状态？

What prior stimuli will we need in order to get them to that place?

这几乎就像亲眼所见一样。

It's almost like seeing it.

人们不会使用湿厕纸。

People won't use moist lavatory paper.

顺便说一句，这是我完全痴迷的事情之一。

That's one of my total obsessions, by the way.

到底为什么？

Why the hell?

我是说，西方人凭什么认为用干纸擦屁股是可以接受的？

I mean, what is it about the West that thinks that it's okay to wipe your ass with dry paper?

我们需要日本式马桶。

We need Japanese toilets.

你懂吗？

You know?

如果我是特朗普，这他妈就是上任第一天要干的事。

If I were Trump, that'd be day fucking one.

懂吗？

Okay?

每栋楼都装日本马桶简直可耻。

Japanese toilets in every single building is disgraceful.

要知道，伊斯兰世界在这点上完全正确。

Know, the the Islamic world's right on that.

他们有正经的水龙头。

They have a proper tap.

明白吗？

Okay?

只有西方才有这种怪癖——我是说，你手上沾了泥巴时不会用干纸擦手吧？

It's only some weird Western thing, the idea that I mean, you wouldn't you wouldn't clean your hands when they were muddy with dry paper, would you?

那为什么对屁股就要这样呢？

So why'd you do the same with your ass?

但不管什么原因，好吧，人们确实不太买湿厕纸。

But for whatever reason, okay, people don't really buy moist lavatory paper.

所以我作为广告人想问，什么样的前提条件会让这种情况更可能发生？

So I've got to ask as an advertising person, what prior conditions might make this more likely?

我是说，让我们假设一下。

You know, it I mean, let's let's hypothesize a bit.

你知道，你可能会说，好吧。

You know, you might say, okay.

其实是货架摆放的问题。

Actually, it's the shelving.

因为当你看着超市货架时，我们会本能地从干湿纸巾的相对显眼程度和数量中获取社会信息。

Because when you look at supermarket shelves, we instinctively derive social information from the relevant prominence and proliferation of dry versus wet paper.

所以我们看着超市货架就会想：基本上那边堆满了干厕纸，一眼望不到头。

And so we look at the supermarket shelves, and we go, well, basically, there are ton of dry toilet rolls all over there stretching as far as the eye can see.

而在顶层货架上，只有两小包可怜的湿厕纸孤零零地摆着。

On the top shelf, there are two meager little packets of moist savagery paper.

这意味着这基本上是为变态或有奇怪病症的人准备的，所以我还是买干纸巾吧。

That means it's basically for perverts or people with a weird medical condition, so I'll buy the dry stuff.

你知道，我曾试图说服金佰利公司这么做。

Now, you know, I've said I've tried to persuade someone to do this, Kimberly Clark.

你何不选一家超市，把湿巾的摆放量设为干纸巾的三倍，看看当人们认为社会规范是使用湿巾时，他们会怎么选购卫生纸？

Why don't you just take one supermarket and have three times as much wet paper as there is dry and see how people buy loo paper then if they think the social norm is is is wet?

这是逆向推理，因为这只是其中一种理论。

Now that's reverse reasoning because that's only one theory.

明白吗？

Okay?

福尔摩斯需要做的就是——这也是我有点不满人们总把他描述成纯粹理性的典范的原因，因为他实际上是个非常有创造力的人。

What Sherlock Holmes has to do this is why I slightly I slightly resent the fact that Sherlock Holmes is always described as this paragon of pure reason because he's a really creative guy.

这是个重要的区别。

This is an important distinction.

你认为福尔摩斯是科学方法的典范，还是认为他既是杰出的科学思考者，又是个极具想象力的人？

Do you think of Sherlock Holmes as being a model of the scientific method, or do you think of him as being a brilliant scientific thinker who is also a really imaginative guy?

因为他所做的很大一部分是注意到别人没注意到的事情——夜里不叫的狗，或是某人衣着上对99%的人来说毫无意义却让他能推断出通讯者某些有趣信息的奇特小细节等等。

Because a large amount of what he does is noticing things that no one else notices, the dog that doesn't bark in the night, the, you know, strange little details about someone's dress that would be meaningless to ninety nine percent of people, but from which he can infer some interesting thing about the correspondent and so forth.

显然，侦探行为在一定程度上需要假设、想象和排除的过程。

Now, the act of detection is patently one where some degree of hypothesis, imagine, eliminate, is going on.

还有第三种情况，就是你有一种本能的冲动，然后只是事后合理化它。

And then there's a third thing, which is you have an instinctive urge and then you just post rationalize it.

是的。

Yeah.

现在这三种完全不同的模式带来的问题是，当你把它们写下来时，它们看起来都一样。

Now the problem of those three completely different modes is that when you write them down, they all look the same.

但这三种模式实际上是截然不同的思维方式。

But all three of those modes are actually very different modes of thinking.

在广告行业，我要告诉你一个关于广告的秘密。

And in advertising, I'll let you into a secret about advertising.

大多数广告是这样运作的：你把两三个非常有趣或非常奇怪的人放在一个房间里。

Most of it works this way, okay, which is you put two or three very interesting or very strange people in a room.

你向他们详细说明问题。

You tell them a lot about the problem.

如果运气好，大约一周内他们会发现一些非常奇怪的现象，最初提及时可能看似完全无关紧要，但从中你能得出一个非常有趣的解决方案。

If you're lucky, within a week or so, they notice something really weird, which may seem entirely tangential or irrelevant when they first mention it, from which you can arrive at a really interesting intervention.

但你不能直接告诉客户说，我们就是找了几个家伙在房间里喝了几杯啤酒，结果什么都没发生。

But you don't go into your clients and say, well, we just got these guys in a room and they had a few beers, and actually nothing happened.

然后他们完全走错了方向，折腾了三天。

Then they went down a completely wrong alley for three days.

彻底搞砸了。

Total fucking disaster.

我以为我们要失败了。

I thought we're gonna fail.

不。

No.

不。

No.

你实际上邀请客户进来，假装你是通过部署顺序逻辑思维得出这一见解或灵感的。

You actually invite the client in and you pretend that you arrived at this insight or flash of imagination through the deployment of sequential logical thought.

当然，整个过程完全是对实际发生事情的歪曲。

And of course, the whole thing is a complete misrepresentation of what happened.

你所做的是本能地感觉到这个想法中有价值，然后事后围绕它构建背景故事。

What you did is you instinctively felt there was something in this idea, and then you looked around creating the backstory for it in retrospect, post hoc.

是的。

Yep.

但问题是

But the trouble is

你在已经...之后给自己建立了一个理性框架

that You give yourself a rational framework after you've already

完全正确。

Completely right.

完全正确。

Completely.