心理学在工商业的实用性
What you have here is an electronic cigarette. It’s something that’s,
since it was invented a year or two ago, has given me untold happiness.
(Laughter)
你现在所看到的这个是一根电子香烟. 这是一款近两年才问世的奇妙的产品(2011)，
它的诞生给我带来妙不可言的乐趣 (笑)
A little bit of it, I think, is the nicotine, but there’s something much bigger than that. Which is ever since, in the U.K., they banned smoking in public places, I’ve never enjoyed a drinks party ever again.(Laughter)
就我看来，其中尼古丁的效力自然不必多说，但是更主要因素远不于在此.
其中更深层的原因是英国政府新颁布的公共场合禁烟令，
就是这个新法令导致我完全无法享受喝酒聚会的乐趣.
And the reason, I only workedout just the other day, which is when you go to a drinks party and you stand upand you hold a glass of red wine and you talk endlessly to people, you don’tactually want to spend all the time talking.
就在前些天 ,我终于发现我无法享受酒会的主要原因：
在酒会我上, 我并不是那种很喜欢举个酒杯找个酒友无止尽的喝酒聊天的类型
It’s really, reallytiring.Sometimes you just want to stand there silently, alone with yourthoughts. Sometimes you just want to stand in the corner and stare out of thewindow.
一直这么聊那是很辛苦，有时候我就是想一个站在那让我的思绪漫益，
又或者我就是想站在角落对着窗外独自安静那么一阵.
Now the problem is, when youcan’t smoke, if you stand and stare out of the window on your own, you’re anantisocial, friendless idiot. (Laughter) If you stand and stare out of thewindow on your own with a cigarette, you’re a fucking philosopher. (Laughter)(Applause)
好吗，这问题就来了，我既不能吸烟还在向着窗外傻看，这幅样子俨然一不合群且没人愿意答话的白痴,
但同样是向着窗外看，如果我来上一支烟自我包装一下，马上就变成他妈的(沉思中）的哲学家.(笑)(掌声起)
So the power of reframing things cannot be overstated. What we have is exactly the same thing, the same activity, but one of them makes you feel great and the other one, with just asmall change of posture, makes you feel terrible.
由此可见, 修饰决定了一切.
两个一模一样的事情，一模一样的行为，
(稍加修饰便)可以让你感觉神采飞扬，(不加修饰)可以让你觉得落魄难堪。
And I think one of the problems with classical economics is it’s absolutely
preoccupied with reality.And reality isn’t a particularly good guide to human
happiness.
我觉得这个例子能够很好的反应古典经济模式中，
将世上的一切事物都绝对数字化所带来的社会问题:
量化的指标并不能准确的衡量人类的幸福感.
Why, for example, arepensioners much happier than the young unemployed? Both of them, after all, arein exactly the same stage of life. You both have too much time on your handsand not much money. But pensioners are reportedly very, very happy, whereas the unemployed are extraordinarily unhappy and depressed.
为什么这样说呢，具体举例说明一下，退休老人比待业青年要快乐么？
这两组人群都是有大把的时间但没什么钱.
但实际上，报告显示退休老人特别开心，而待业这边大家都非常郁闷且沮丧
The reason, I think, is thatthe pensioners believe they’ve chosen to be pensioners, whereas the youngunemployed feel it’s been thrust upon them.
在我看来，主要在于退休老人觉得自己主动选择了退休，
而待业青年认为自己求职受挫
In England the upper middle classes have actuallysolved this problem perfectly, because they’ve re-branded unemployment.
If you’re an upper-middle-class English person, you call unemployment “a year off.” (Laughter) And that’s because having a son who’s unemployed in Manchester is really quite embarrassing, but having a son who’s unemployed in Thailand is really viewed as quite an accomplishment. (Laughter)
在英国中上阶层对这个问题有种绝妙的解决方案,
在他们眼里, 待业可以被称作”休假一年”(笑)
在曼切斯特,你要是有个儿子在家待业, 那是一件羞于启齿的事情.
这事要是放在泰国那就完全不一样了,
你这是成就啊(笑)
But actually the power to re-brand things– to understand that actually our experiences, costs, things don’t actually much depend on what they really are, but on how we view them — I genuinely think can’t be overstated.
但是就换位思考,重新包装这事,
我看来, 那效果是绝对不可小觑的.
需要注意的是,
我们的体验，消费和拥有的产品的经历并不是只局限于物质本身,
其中还包括我们对这些物质看法.
There’s an experiment I think Daniel Pink refers to where you put two dogs in
a box and the box has an electric floor. Every now and then an electric shock is
applied tothe floor, which pains the dogs. The only difference is one of the dogs
has a smallbutton in its half of the box. And when it nuzzles the button, the
electric shock stops.
我记得 Daniel Pink 提及过一个有关于电击的对比实验.
实验具体内容是将狗放进有电击的地板的盒子里,然后地板开始通电.
其中对比参照测试中狗的处境略有不同,
其中第一盒子里面有个按键,
只要狗触碰到这个按键，电击则立即停止
The other dog doesn’t have the button. It’s exposed to exactly the same level of pain as the dog in the first box, but it has no control over the circumstances. Generally thefirst dog can be relatively content. The second dog lapses into complete depression.
第二盒子里面却没有这个按键, 虽然电击强度总和一模一样,
２号盒子里的狗对电击没有任何控制.
结果是在多数情况下,第一个盒子里面的狗镇定自若,
第二个盒子里面的狗沮丧落魄
The circumstances of our lives may actually matter lessto our happiness than the sense of control wefeel over our lives. It’s an interestingquestion. We ask the question — the wholedebate in the Western world is about the levelof taxation. But I think there’s another debate to be asked, which is the level of control we have over our tax money.
我们对生活状况的有控制力有可能比生活状况本身更能够提高幸福感.
这是一件很有意思的事情
在整个西方世界,如何征税是一个被普遍关注的问题,
而我觉得还有一个问题更值得大家的关注,
那就是公民对税务支出的控制权
That whatcosts us 10 pounds in one context can be a curse. Whatcosts us 10 pounds in a different context we may actually welcome. You know, pay 20,000 pounds in tax toward health and you’re merely feeling a mug. Pay 20,000 pounds to endow a hospital ward and you’re called a philanthropist. I’m probably in the wrong country to talk about willingness to pay tax.(Laughter)
１０个英镑花在这方面多半要民众被咒骂, 而花在另外一个方面则可能大受欢迎.
我们都知道,如果20,000英镑的税收给健康部门, 人们会觉得不值一提,
如果这20,000英镑给医院添加了一个诊断室, 你就成了慈善家了.
我很有可能在一个不合时宜的地方讨论自愿交税的问题 (希腊, ２０１１年１１月)(笑)
So I’ll give you one in return. How you frame thingsreally matters. Do you call it the bailout ofGreece or the bailout of a load of stupid banks which lent to Greece? Because they are actually the same thing.
那么我现在来给你们一个思考的机会. 你是如何界定问题关键因素的.
是应该叫做拯救希腊财政危机,
或者应该叫做拯救一群借贷给希腊的白痴银行的财政危机?
实际上这都是一回事.
What you call them actually affects how you react to them, viscerally and morally. I think psychological value is great to be absolutely honest.
对它们的称呼实际上取决于你是如何看待它们,
包含了你对其实质和表象看法.
我认为发至内心的表述能反应个人最真实的看法.
One of my great friends, a professor called Nick Chater, who’s the Professor of DecisionSciences in London, believes that we should spend far less time looking into humanity’s hidden depths and spend much more time exploring the hidden shallows
我的一个挚友, 伦敦的决策科学系的教授, Nick Chater,
认为我们应该减少在人类内心深层的研究强度,
转而投入更多时间于研究隐藏在浅层意识中的信息.
I think that’s true actually. I thinkimpressions have an insane effect on what we think and what we do. But what we don’t have is a really good model ofhuman psychology. At least pre-Kahneman perhaps, we didn’t have a really good model of human psychology to put along side models of engineering, of neoclassical economics.
我完全认同这个观点.我认为我们的表述对我们的思维和行动有着难以置信影响力.
可惜的是我们现在还没有一个真正好的人类心理学研究框架, 最起码是在 Kahneman 之前应该是没有.
所以一直以来我们没有办法把人类心理学视作与工程学和新古典经济学等同的实用学科正式的纳入解决方案的研究范畴.
So people who believed in psychological solutions didn’t have a model. We
didn’t have a framework. This is what Warren Buffett’s business partner
Charlie Munger calls “a latticework on which to hang your ideas.”
Engineers,economists, classical economists all had avery, very robust existing
latticework on which practically every idea could be hung.
由于相信心理学(攻心为上)的学者还没有正式的模型.我们自然也没有相关的研究框架.
这个框架也就是巴菲特的合作伙伴 Charlie Munger 称之为”展示理论的框架”.
而相比之下,工程学,经济学,古典经济学都有它们自己的厚实的框架,
而且上面挂满了各式各样的理论.
We merely have a collection of random individual insights without an overall model. And what that means is that in looking at solutions, we’ve probably given too much priority to what I call technical engineering solutions,Newtonian solutions, and not nearly enough to the psychological ones.
我们几乎找不到一个展示具体个体的随性看法的模式,
这就意味着在寻找解决方案的时候,
我们太过于注重,我称之为,
技术工程学的解决方案(牛顿式的解决方案)，
这和心理学（攻心为上)的解决方案比起来相去甚远.
You know my example of the Eurostar. Six million pounds spent to reduce the journey
time between Paris and London by about 40 minutes. For 0.01percent of this money you
could have put WiFi on the trains, which wouldn’t have reduced the duration of
the journey, but would have improved its enjoyment and its usefullness far more.
你们都知道我说过的有关于欧洲之星列车的解决方案.
6百万英镑花销在减少40分钟伦敦到巴黎的行程.
只需要0.01%的资金, 你就可以给火车装上WIFI,
这并不会减少两地间的行程,
但是它极大的提高行程的乐趣与(工作)效率.
For maybe 10 percent of the money, you could have paid all of the world’s top male andfemale supermodels to walk up and down thetrain handing out free Chateau Petrus to all the passengers. You’d still have five [million] pounds in change, and people would ask for the trains to be sloweddown. (Laughter)
大概只需要10%的资金, 你就可以支付全球最知名的男女超模,服务于车厢之间,
为全体乘客提供法国名酒. 5百万还在腰包里,
全车人都已经开始抱怨这欧洲之星怎么开的这么快.(全场爆笑)
>>>>>> 第一节完