评论
打印
Perception itself.
感知本身。
A perspective on something defined by perception is inherently a reduction of the information of the thing.
由知觉定义的对某一事物的看法，本质上是对该事物的信息的还原。
My perspective of it is gonna be a lot less total information than the actual thing is.
我对它的看法会比实际事物的总信息量少很多。
I can look at the object from the east side or the west side or the top or the north side or the inside, microscopically, telescopically, they'll all give me different information.
我可以从东面、西面、顶部、北面或内部看这个物体，用显微镜、望远镜看，它们都会给我不同的信息。
None will give me the entirety of the information about the situation.
但没有一个角度能让我得到所有信息。
So there is no all encompassing perspective that gives me all of the information about almost any situation.
因此，没有一个包罗万象的视角能够给我关于几乎任何情况的所有信息。
What this means is that reality itself is transperspectival.
这意味着，现实本身是跨视角的。
It can't be captured in any perspective.
它不可能被任何视角所捕捉。
So multiple perspectives have to be taken.
所以我们必须采取多种视角。
All of which will have some part of the reality, some signal.
而这些视角多少都会带有一些现实，一些信号。
There may also be distortion.
它们也可能有失真。
I may be looking at the thing through a fish eye lens or through a colored lens that creates some distortion.
我可能通过鱼眼镜头或彩色镜头来看这个东西，会产生一些扭曲。
Why does this matter?
为什么这很重要？
The ability to take multiple perspectives, to see the partial truth in them, and then to be able to seam them together into something that isn't a perspective
采取多种视角的能力，看到其中的部分真相，然后将它们拼接在一起，成为一种不是视角的东西，
it's a transperspective capacity to hold the relationships between many perspectives in a way that can inform our choice-making is fundamental to navigating reality well.
处理多种视角之间的关系是一种跨视角能力，它可以为我们做出选择提供信息，这对于很好地驾驭现实是非常重要的。
How is it that we make claims of truth? And how would we begin to know if what we think is true is actually true.
我们是如何提出真理的主张的？我们又如何开始知道我们认为是真的东西是否真的存在。
This is the beginning of the scientific method.
这就是科学方法的开始。
Let us begin with observation, pose a question, figure out what the hypothesis would be that would answer a particular question, and then figure out how we would begin to address the hypothesis.
我们先从观察开始，提出问题，假设这个问题的答案可能是什么，然后再想想如何去解决这个假设。
That is a scientific approach to questions that could be addressed any number of ways.
这是处理问题的科学方法，可以用任何方式来解决。
There is a kind of whispering campaign against the value of objective truth.
有一种反对客观真理价值的低语运动。
Science's belief in objective truth works.
科学对客观真理的信念是有效的。
Engineering technology based upon the science of objective truth, achieves results.
基于客观真理的科学的工程技术取得了成果。
It manages to build planes that get off the ground.
它成功地制造了可以起飞的飞机。
It manages to send people to the moon and explore Mars with robotic vehicles on comets.
它能把人类送上月球，用机器人车辆在彗星上探索火星。
Science works, science produces antibiotics, vaccines that work.
科学是有效的，科学生产的抗生素和疫苗都是有效的。
So anybody who chooses to say, "Oh, there's no such thing as objective truth. It's all subjective, it's all socially constructed."
所以如果有人说：“哦，没有客观真理这回事。这都是主观的，都是社会构造的。”
Tell that to a doctor, tell that to a space scientist, manifestly science works, and the view that there is no such thing as objective truth doesn't.
去跟医生说这句话，跟太空科学家说这句话，科学显然是有效的，认为没有客观真理的观点完全不可行。
When you write down the theory, the theory then becomes your teacher.
当你写下理论的时候，理论就成了你的老师。
It becomes smarter than you in a way.
它在某种程度上变得比你更聪明。
When Einstein wrote down the equations of general relativity, he did not know that they entailed the existence of black holes.
当爱因斯坦写下广义相对论的方程时，他并不知道这些方程包含了黑洞的存在。
In that sense, the equations were smarter than Einstein.
从这个意义上说，这些方程比爱因斯坦更聪明。
Einstein didn't believe in black holes for decades.
爱因斯坦几十年来都不相信黑洞的存在。
The equations were very clear that they could exist.
方程却清晰地表明，它们可能存在。
Einstein said no.
爱因斯坦说不存在。
Turned out Einstein was wrong and the equations were right.
结果发现爱因斯坦是错的，而方程是对的。
So it's very interesting.
这还挺有趣的。
We do these theories because we can learn from them.
我们做这些理论是因为我们可以从中学习。
When you try to address the nature of things, you may find that asking different questions requires different ways of processing the underlying reality.
当你试图解决事物的本质时，你可能会发现，提出不同的问题需要用不同的方式来处理潜在的现实。
For instance, in understanding the human mind to understand that physically requires one kind of processing.
例如，从身体角度去理解人类的思想时，需要一种处理方式。
And there's every reason to think that we already have fundamental physical laws that are adequate to that kind of treatment.
而且我们完全有理由认为，我们已经有了基本的物理规律，足以应付这种处理方式。
But to understand how a person works, how thought processes, moods, and so forth, add up to a personality and a human actor
但是要理解一个人是如何工作的，思想过程、情绪等等是如何叠加成某种人格和某种人类行为的，
will require quite different ways of understanding and quite different ways of processing the underlying information structure.
就需要不同的理解方式和处理基本信息结构的方式。
