【2021-11-03】 发现 Russell Roberts 的访谈真会掐时机，在弗里德曼死前两个多月采访了他，还是两个多小时的长篇访谈，科斯死前一年多又采访了他，两个老家伙都当时快说不动话了， 不知道下一个被他采访死的会是谁，Thomas Sowell? 听了科斯的访谈，发现张五常好多牛逼哄哄的话，其实都是在学科斯的舌，比如对博弈论的鄙视和攻击，科斯那辈人这么想可以理解，属于代沟问题，你一小后生也跟着起哄，就只能算无知了， 科斯对博弈论的攻击，看来只是他整体上反理论化倾向的一种表现，这种倾向里包含着一些有价值的东西，所针对的一些具体现象也确实毛病不小，问题是科斯无法把这一倾向以某种自洽的形式表达出来，因而只能停留于一种好恶情绪，当然，科斯不可能完成这样的表达，因为那需要一种更高层次的理论化，甚至比他反对的那种理论化更理论化，也就是哲学思考， 听了他的一些具体抱怨后，我琢磨着，他真正反对的，其实是一种自上而下的理论化， 让我先解释一下什么叫自下而上的理论化，毕竟这是我刚刚发明的一对术语， 比如你研究了一家牙膏制造商，从中得到一些有关牙膏生产（或分销/定价/成本结构……）洞见，你想，或许这些道理也可适用于其他牙膏制造商，于是你把更多牙膏制造商纳入你的研究，然后，你最初那些见解中，有些得到了保留，有些被排除了，有些可能被修正了，但只要其中一部分得到了保留，你就完成了对这些见解的一次*一般化*，得到了一些比这些原始见解更一般的*理论*， 此类过程可以反复迭代，你可以把研究扩大到日化品制造业，然后整个制造业，或整个化工产业，或所以营利性私人企业…… 对这样的理论化，我想科斯是不会反对的， 他反对的其实是一种相反的过程，先发明一套概念和理论，然后用它去解释现实，当然在解释过程中，不可避免的需要将它具体化，于是便在理论内核外面衍生出一层又一层外围理论来解决使用内核理论时碰到的各种困难，这样的过程就是自上而下的理论化， 历史上，最典型的自上而下理论化就是牛顿体系的构建和扩展， 无需多言，这两种方向的理论化都是有价值的，恐怕科斯也无法反对牛顿体系创立的价值， 当然，他是在社会科学语境中谈这些事情的， 可是社会科学中的自上而下革命同样富有成果，边际分析，均衡，价格理论，达尔文主义，马尔萨斯，都是自上而下的方法， 科斯本人的最大贡献当然也是自上而下的，一个概念横空出世全面刷新了整个经济学学科，还部分刷新了政治学和法学， 可是他对此好像并不开心，他的一句名言是（大意）：科斯定理不是我发明的，我不知道那到底是什么意思，在访谈中，他对受他启发而试图将他的见解理论化的那些努力显然十分不以为然， 可见哲学家还是有事情可做的， @宁静投资-秦:是归纳和演绎吗？ @whigzhou: 和归纳/演绎没关系，自下而上就是奉行*最小程度一般化*原则，其最初洞见可能来自单一案例，而非归纳得来，然后小心翼翼的加以推广，每步推广的幅度不超出其能实际获取材料的范围 @whigzhou: 科斯反复宣扬的所谓真实世界经济学，大意便是如此，我也是听了这个访谈以后才弄明白  

【2021-10-02】 拥有最多忠实粉丝的英国君主，不是维多利亚，也不是亨利八世，或爱德华三世，而是莎士比亚笔下的大恶人，末代金雀花理查三世！ 他的粉丝被称为 [[Ricardians]]，忠实而且活跃，建立了不少组织，包括理查三世学会和理查三世基金会，前者还出版了一份期刊 Ricardians， 可见悲剧的影响总是比喜剧更长远，  

【2021-09-22】 大法官 Clarence Thomas 在庭上素以沉默寡言著称，在口头辩论中极少提问，大家也早就认为他不爱提问，他自己也附和这种说法， 可是，自从去年开始将面对面的口头辩论改成远程会议之后，大家发现他的提问次数明显增加了，而且问的都很到位，他的问题往往引发其他法官的后续追问， 原因很简单，以往最高法院口头辩论中，大法官的提问是完全即兴的，每位大法官都可以在律师陈述时随时打断，插入问题，改成远程会议后，提问规则也改了，除了陈述期间的自由提问之外，每个陈述结束后，各位法官从首席开始依资历依次有一个提问机会， 过去对 Thomas 为何不爱提问有各种猜测，现在大家终于明白了，其实他就是客气，讲礼貌，不喜欢打断律师的陈述（其实他在别处说过这一点，只是直到现在大家才知道这就是症结所在）， 依我看，这种待人风格很可能因为他是南方人，而且是老派南方人，特别讲究礼貌（因为在南方，不讲礼貌、冒犯人的后果可能很严重）， 结果，最高法院在认清这一点之后，为口头辩论中的提问制定了新规则，从下月开始恢复面对面辩论时，讲延续远程会议中的那种规则， 由此可见，南方那种老派礼貌如今已经很少人理解了， @whigzhou: 对Thomas在庭上的寡言，著名机场八卦书《九人》的作者Jeffrey Toobin called Thomas's silence "disgraceful" behavior that had "gone from curious to bizarre to downright embarrassing, for himself and for the institution he represents."——多么恶毒且愚蠢！

【2021-06-07】 @tertio 朋友们，塔勒布的反脆弱要讲的东西并不复杂，所以到后面越看越轻松。但这并不是说这本书意义不大，恰恰相反，因为它和现代社会的信条和惯例大致是背道而驰的，所以才非常有意义。（我同样怀疑他本来可以用几篇小短文把事情说清楚的，但为了得到大众的重视，才弄出来这么多字） @tertio: 如果 @whigzhou 也了解过塔勒布的话，很想听一听辉格的评论 @whigzhou: 翻过他的两本书，第一本翻了不到一小时，第二本不到半小时，感觉他喜欢乱树稻草人，废话很多，把别人早就说过的东西装的好像很新鲜，让我很难忍受继续读下去，所以不好评价，不排除我放弃的部分里确有好东西的可能 @whigzhou: 我对塔勒布的印象本来是一般般，不好不坏，可是后来在 twtter 上看到他跟人吵架，完全否定智商这个概念的统计意义，反对的理由听起来非常滑稽，争论的方式更是无比恶劣，这事情大幅恶化了我对他的印象，让我（1）十分怀疑他在运用统计学认识世界的能力上有一些根本性的缺陷，而从他的写作主题看，这本来应该是他的强项才对，2）感觉他完全不是个认真表达想法、坦诚交流的人，这意味着读他的书很可能是在浪费时间， @慕容飞宇gg:他就是喜欢和人硬掰，和 Charles Murray 老对头了。Murray 老评论他就是一定要做 Smartest guy in the room. 喜欢攻击一点不计其余。有点方教主人格。书特别啰嗦，我也看不下去 @whigzhou: 为成为屋子里最聪明的那个，就必须把其他人全部变成稻草人，然后用机关枪扫射  

【2020-09-27】 读了Rob Iliffe的《牛顿新传》，篇幅很小的一本书，却完全颠覆了我对牛顿的印象，简单记录一下我的观感： 1）牛顿极度热衷于从纷乱世界中寻找出各种模式，这一点上，他非常勤奋，且兴趣广泛，也可以说目光十分敏锐， 2）可是有个毛病：他辨别和认定一种模式的阈值特别低，所以无论他将目光投向何处，总是能（自认为）发现一大堆模式，成堆成捆的，所以，假如你不限于公开出版物而检查其私人笔记和信件的话，会发现他头脑里充斥着一堆堆杂乱的想法，其中大部分质量很低，或者说非常草率随意，即便以当时的标准，这些东西也会让他显得非常神棍， 3）依我看，他的这一思维特征和他的精神状况很有关系，可以说，他时常处于一种妄想症边缘的状态，所谓妄想就是模式识别阈值低，总是能从捕风捉影中发现各种预兆、计划、阴谋……支持这一猜测的线索是，他确实在1690年代经历过短期的精神崩溃， 4）而同时，毋庸多言，他当然是个罕见的天才，特别是数学天赋， 5）牛顿在有着上述毛病，却最终能够成就伟业，是因为：当时科学共同体已经形成，而且共同体内已经有了一套规范，这套规范，以及共同体内的互动机制，最终将他引上了正路，主要表现在以下两点， 6）共同体对什么东西适合发表，并且值得被讨论和接纳，已经有了一些粗略的标准，这起了一个过滤器的作用，牛顿的那些乱糟糟的念头里只有极小一部分通过了这个滤网，进入讨论圈，为了发表，牛顿被迫把一些念头以可接受的清晰性和严格性表述出来，而被迫这么做时，他的数学天赋恰好派上了用场， 7）共同体内的互动机制，时不时会将牛顿的注意力强行拉到适当的轨道上来，也就是那些得到众多科学家关注，已经有了许多尝试和推进，已被界定和描述的比较清除，已经开发了许多实验手段，收集了大量原始材料的问题， 8）上一点最突出的例子是力学，力学原本在牛顿涉猎极广的研究中只是个小课题，而且他的路子完全走歪了，最初是胡克把他拉上了正轨，实际上万有引力定律的雏形就是胡克提出并透露给牛顿的，胡克和牛顿是老对头，关系很差，可是胡克自己数学不行，自知没能力从引力定律推导出开普勒定律，他知道牛顿数学厉害，所以压下积怨，希望牛顿能解决这问题，后来哈雷又拉了一把，需要求解的问题类似，只是用于彗星而非行星（和胡克相反，哈雷是牛顿的脑残粉），牛顿正是在解决这组别人找上门让他求解的问题的过程中，形成了他的体系，同时抛弃了他原本在歪路上形成的那些念头， 9）由此可见，科学共同体的存在，科学活动的组织化，起了至关重要的作用，这让我想起比牛顿早一百年的另一位天才，John Dee，同样才华横溢，牛顿要是早出生一百年，大概会成为另一个John Dee。 @whigzhou: 以数学论，牛顿在当时可谓傲视群雄，可是若以自然哲学或思辨能力论，我觉得伽利略远在牛顿之上  

【2020-09-14】 既然割命割到他老人家头上了，今天就多说几句，休谟最令人惊奇的地方是，他太早熟了，而且超前时代也太多了，他10岁或12岁上爱丁堡大学（当时上大学年龄一般是14岁），一头扎进书堆，他说从教授那里根本听不到书上没有的东西，看书就行了，所以最后也没毕业。 休谟25岁开始写《人性论》，28岁完成，这迄今仍被认为是他最重要的著作，包含了他几乎所有重要的哲学思想（依我看唯一没包含的是《自然宗教对话录》中的那些），可是此书出版后得到反应却十分冷淡，他失望之余反省了一下，是不是写的太难了？于是匿名给自己的书写了几篇书评，没用，于是他又从该书中抽出一些容易理解的点，写了两本较薄的书：《人类理解研究》和《道德原则研究》，这下反应好多了，可是也没好到那里去，至少没让他挣到钱，最后他只好放弃了，干脆说《人性论》是他年幼无知时的草率之作，不必认真对待。 休谟超前于时代的程度，可以这么说，一旦走出哲学圈之外，你就会发现，当代大部分学者的思维方式仍然停留在前休谟时代，包括像道金斯这样脑瓜还算灵光的，也不例外。 这也就难怪，真正让休谟在知识界赢得声望的，是他的社会/镇痔评论（这一点和当代作家的出名轨迹并无不同），而真正让他挣到钱的，则是六卷本《英格兰史》，前两卷反响就很好，所以写第三卷时出版商愿意预支1700镑稿费，当时一位体面白领的年薪也就200-300镑，长期困扰休谟的财务问题总算解决了，此时他已48岁高龄。 休谟长期陷于财务困境，是因为他被视为无神论者而无法获得大学教职，他三十多岁时声望已经很高，也多次被提名教职，可是都因为这个问题而被否了，甚至亚当斯密都在反对者之列，要知道，休谟在将斯密引介到学术圈的事情上出了大力，斯密给巴克勒公爵做游学导师（报酬是300镑终身年金）也是休谟推荐的，斯密因为做这导师而腾出了格拉斯哥大学的哲学讲席，很多人希望休谟接这个讲席，斯密却畏于镇痔正确压力而只能反对，但这件事并没有影响休谟对斯密的友情和继续帮助，其随和大度可见一斑。 休谟是史上排名第一的哲学家，这一点在圈内已有公论，不过尚未引起足够重视的是，他其实也是一位重要镇痔学家，联邦挡人的一些核心思想便来自于他，随便举个例子，休谟认为共同体规模不能太小，因为太小往往意味着高度同质化，易于达成强共识，使得权力结构失去制衡，于是国家权力膨胀，个人自油被压制（当然，休谟本人并没有用这套词汇来表达这一思想，这是我的解读）。  

【2016-07-15】 @whigzhou: 神速，脱欧大臣David Davis公布了离欧经济战略 http://t.cn/R5FEuRb Trade deals. Tax cuts. And taking time before triggering Article 50. A Brexit economic strategy for Britain @_bear_:新上任的女首相怎么样？从就任演讲看似乎并不怎么靠谱呢 @whigzhou: 立场跟卡梅隆差不多，你觉得不靠谱的地方（我猜）其实是延续了卡梅隆的纲领，即在社会议题上彻底放弃保守立场（效果是消灭了这些议题），福利问题上从撒切尔立场后撤，走所谓『一族』路线 @whigzhou: 除了这几点，在自由贸易、财政开支、税收、管制等议题上，都算得上亲市场，比川普好多了 @whigzhou: 我的理想人选是最撒切尔主义的Michael Gove，可惜党内支持不足，Gove是那种会向医疗和教育这两个福利主义坚固堡垒发动攻击的人，这对于卡梅隆和梅姨都是不可想象的，目前政治气候下可能也得不到支持，而目前这个大转变最需要的是党内团结，所以我觉得在可能结果里，梅姨还是相当理想的。 @whigzhou: 最可喜的是，梅姨在脱欧问题上完全没有拖泥带水，这一点从原帖所转声明中可以看得很清楚，几个日程期限设定都比之前大家预期的要早 【2016-07-17】 @whigzhou: 梅姨废掉了暖球部，表态支持低价能源开发，赞 http://t.cn/Rthcb1C @whigzhou: 梅姨组建的脱欧三驾马车非常给力，脱欧注定会占据这届政府的大部分注意力，她在社会议题上的倾向就没那么重要了，形势所迫，在经济方面恢复信心将是优先考虑，只要她显示出对这点的领悟，便值得看好  

【2016-06-13】 @海德沙龙 《美国铁路已经落伍了？》 新干线子弹头，欧洲之星，中国高铁……这些耀眼夺目的宏伟工程，在许多人眼里都是现代 工业文明的杰出代表，也是工业党和技术治国论者引为自豪（或艳羡自怜）的对象，即便在美国这个技术治国论素不吃香的地方， 也不乏有人高声质问：我们的高铁在哪里？ @whigzhou: 美国铁路业的活力一度被州际贸易委员会（ICC）的僵硬管制几近扼杀，不过从1970年代中期福特政府所发动的一 系列去管制化改革开始，铁路业又逐渐恢复了活力，此后表现一直不错，只是很少为世人所知。 @whigzhou: 福特是战后历史上被严重低估的一位总统，里根之后的一系列创新浪潮和经济繁荣的制度源头其实都可以追溯到福特 ，他所启动的去管制化改革有幸在卡特、里根和克林顿时期一直得以延续，没有这一系列改革，后来的运输、医疗和互联网发展都 会大打折扣，不过在主流公知叙事中，从来不会有这种人的位置。 @whigzhou: 制度变革与经济/社会表现之间的滞后关系也是现代选举政治所面临的一大困境，碰上那些特别愚蠢的选民时，这问 题就更严重，我敢打赌，今天跺脚痛骂马杜罗的委内瑞拉人里，不少还在怀念查韦斯呢 @PlusKing2022: 福特还是任期太短 没足够时间形成自己的政策 @whigzhou: 但他任内参与谋划经济政策的几员大将政治生命可不短：唐纳德·拉姆斯菲尔德、迪克·切尼、艾伦·格林斯潘 @whigzhou: 而且福特本人是国会老江湖，纸牌屋游戏高手，政策推动能力强  

Trivers' Pursuit 罗伯特·特里夫斯:一生的追寻 作者:Matthew Hutson @ 2016-1-5 译者:Drunkplane(@Drunkplane-zny) 校对:慕白(@李凤阳他说) 来源:Psychology Today，https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201601/trivers-pursuit Renegade scientist Robert Trivers is lauded as one of our greatest thinkers—despite irking academia with blunt talk and bad manners. 尽管罗伯特·特里夫斯直率的言谈和粗鲁的举止让学界恼怒,这位离经叛道的科学家仍被誉为最伟大的思想家之一｡ To call Robert Trivers an acclaimed biologist is an understatement akin to calling the late Richard Feynman a popular professor of physics. As a young man in the 1970s, Trivers gave biology a jolt, hatching idea after idea that illuminated how evolution shaped the behavior of all species, including fidelity, romantic bonds, and willingness to cooperate among humans. Today, at 72, he continues to spawn ideas. And if awards were given for such things, he certainly would be on the short list for America’s most colorful academic. 把已故的理查德·费曼称为“一位受欢迎的物理学教授”,那是低估了他,同样地,如果把罗伯特·特里夫斯称为“一位广受赞誉的生物学家”也不够恰当｡1970年代,当时不过是一个年轻人的特里夫斯就大大促进了生物学的研究,阐述了一个又一个想法,揭示了进化是如何塑造所有物种的行为,包括人类在性方面的忠贞､恋爱和合作的意愿｡今天,他72岁,新的想法仍然不断从他脑中诞生｡如果要为“想法”颁奖的话,他一定能进入“美国最有想法学者”短名单｡ He was a member of the Black Panthers and collaborated with the group’s founder. He was arrested for assault after breaking up a domestic dispute. He faced machete-wielding burglers who broke into his home and stabbed one in the neck. He was imprisoned for 10 days over a contested hotel charge. And two men once held guns to his head in a Caribbean club that doubled as a brothel. 他曾是黑豹党一员,并曾同该组织的创立者合作｡他曾因为在家庭纠纷中动手打人而被拘捕｡他曾直面挥舞着弯刀的破门而入者,并在其中一人的脖子上扎了一刀｡他曾因为一笔有争议的酒店费用而坐了十天牢｡他还曾在加勒比一个俱乐部被人用枪顶着头——那个俱乐部同时也是妓院｡ Fisticuffs aside, what propelled Trivers into the academic limelight were five papers he wrote as a young academic at Harvard—including research on altruism, sex differences, and parent-offspring conflict. This work won him the 2007 Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Crafoord Prize in Biosciences, the Nobel for evolutionary theory. The award came with half a million dollars and a ceremony attended by the queen. 除拳脚之外,让特里夫斯在学术圈声名大噪的是他年轻时在哈佛写就的五篇论文——包括关于利他主义､性别差异和亲子冲突的研究｡这些成就为他赢得了2007年瑞典皇家科学院颁发的克拉福德生物学奖——进化理论的诺贝尔奖｡奖金为50万美元,女王亦出席了颁奖典礼｡ Steven Pinker has called him “one of the great thinkers in the history of Western thought.” Yet Trivers has not led the life of your typical contemplative academic. Mental breakdowns, public feuds, and near-death experiences have peppered his career, distracting him from his work even as they’ve nourished it. 史蒂文·平克曾称特里夫斯是“西方思想史上伟大的思想家之一”｡然而特里夫斯不是你印象中那种典型的喜欢沉思的学者｡精神崩溃､公开与人结怨和险些丧命的经历都让他的生涯显得与众不同,他的工作因此受到影响也因此获益｡ No one is quite sure what to make of him, but all agree he is both brilliant and volatile, a sort of Steve Jobs without the colossal second coming. In a new memoir, Wild Life, he contrasts his existence with the “often solitary and intensely internal” one he sees in most scientists. “[That] kind of life,” he writes, “never appealed to me.” 没人确信该怎么评价他,但所有人都同意,他绝顶聪明,绝不安分,就像史蒂夫·乔布斯,但没有经历过乔布斯式卷土重来｡在新回忆录《狂野生活》中,他对比了自己的生活同他在大多数科学家中所看到的“往往孤寂的､极其注重内心的”的生活,“那样的生活,”他写道,“从来不曾吸引我｡” To begin, Trivers’ revolutionary 1970s papers presented no new data. Trivers simply offered entirely novel ways of looking at what was already there, along with new avenues for moving science forward. His dissertation was so strong that when he showed up before the evaluating committee, which included such luminaries as E. O. Wilson and Ernst Mayr, they skipped the charade of making him defend it and simply offered their congratulations. 刚开始时,特里夫斯于1970年代发表的那几篇革命性论文中并没有提出新的数据｡特里夫斯仅仅提供了一种全新的视角来看待既已存在的知识,一条推动科学进步的崭新道路｡他的论证强而有力,以至当他面对评审委员会时——其中包括著名科学家爱德华·威尔逊和厄内斯特·迈尔——他们跳过了答辩环节,直接向他表示祝贺｡ Yet he published little follow-up work. A scientist can build a whole career milking a single small concept, but Trivers has been known to put forth a big new idea and then essentially drop the mic. 之后他几乎没有发表后续研究｡一名科学家可以以一个小概念为基础建构自己的全部事业,但特里夫斯通常是提出一个全新的､有爆炸力的想法后,然后就不再就此发言了｡ Trivers’ first paper, on the evolution of reciprocal altruism, described a theoretical model showing how altruism among strangers could naturally develop—people cooperate with the expectation of similar treatment from others. This model explained a wide variety of feelings and behaviors, from friendship to moralistic aggression. 特里夫斯的第一篇论文是关于互惠利他主义(reciprocal altruism)的,论文描述了一个关于陌生人之间的利他主义是如何自然发展的理论模型——人们带着“我怎样对人,人就怎么对我”的期许相互合作｡这个模型解释了从友谊到道德侵略(moralistic aggression)等许多不同的感受和行为｡ The emotion of gratitude, for instance, evolved to motivate us to return favors, encouraging cooperation. Guilt motivates us to repair relationships we’ve harmed. Anger makes us avoid or punish those who have harmed us. And gossip makes us mindful of our reputations. Trivers suggested that complex strategies of cheating, detecting cheating, and the false accusation of cheating (itself a form of cheating) pushed the development of intelligence and helped increase the size of the human brain. 举例来讲,之所以进化出“感激”这种情绪,是因为它会激励我们投桃报李,鼓励合作｡负罪感会促使我们修复受损的关系｡愤怒会让我们避开或惩罚那些伤害了我们的人｡而闲言碎语则让我们在意自己的名声｡特里夫斯认为,欺骗､发现欺骗和对欺骗的不实指控(其本身也是种欺骗)构成了复杂的策略,推动我们智力的发展并助力人类大脑尺寸的增长｡ Next, in Trivers’ second paper, he hypothesized that a single factor drives sex differences across all species. He argued that differences in parental investment—the energy and resources invested in an offspring—lead the sex that invests more (females, in most species) to focus on mate quality and the sex that invests less (males) to seek quantity. 接着,特里夫斯在他的第二篇论文中提出一个假说:一个单一因素便导致了所有物种的性别差异｡他认为亲代投资(为后代投入的能量和资源)的差别区分了“投资多的性”(对大多数物种而言是雌性)和“投资少的性”(雄性),前者关注配偶的质量而后者追求数量｡ So in humans we expect choosiness in females and aggression between males as they vie for females. The theory has tremendous explanatory power, from justifying the brightly colored feathers of male birds to illuminating why sexual jealousy is a leading (and, until recently, legally defensible) cause of homicide—men prize their mate’s fidelity above all. 因此在人类中我们便观察到女性的挑剔和男人之间在追逐女性时所表现出的攻击性｡这个理论有力地解释了雄鸟身上鲜艳的羽毛,以及为何性嫉妒是杀人案的首要(直到现在也是法律上站得住脚的【编注:在美国一些州,当场捉奸并杀死奸夫的丈夫往往可以愤激作为辩护理由并得以脱罪】)动机——在男人看来,伴侣的忠贞高于一切｡【编注:此处有所夸大,亲代投资理论本身并不能单独解释性嫉妒】 In another paper, Trivers conceptualized offspring not as passive recipients of parental investment, but as independent actors, generating the theory of parent-offspring conflict. A child wants disproportionate attention and resources for him- or herself, but a parent wants to spread the goods equally between all offspring. 在另一篇论文里,特里夫斯将后代视为独立的行为主体,而不仅仅是亲代投资的被动接受者,从而引出了“亲子冲突”(parent-offspring conflict)这一理论｡子女想要为自己争取到比例过当的关注和资源,但家长则希望在后代之间平分好处｡ And so we have kids who bawl until they get what they want, siblings who maintain lifelong rivalries, and parents who try to instill equality no matter how selfish the kids’ tendencies. It was for these three papers, plus another two, on insect colonies and on parents’ ability to vary the sex ratio of their offspring, that he won the Crafoord. 于是,子女们闹个不停直到他们得到想要的,兄弟姐妹们终其一生相互竞争,而父母们不管小孩多么自私仍坚持贯彻平等主义｡这三篇论文加上另外两篇有关昆虫巢群和亲代改变子代性别比例之能力的论文,为特里夫斯赢得了克拉福德奖｡ In each paper, he found a simple, clear idea, and took it as far as it would go, wrapping diverse and widespread phenomena together in one neat package. You might not have made the connections before, but once you see them, they’re quite clear. 在每篇论文里,他都建立一个简洁､清晰的概念,并最大限度地发展这个概念,将多种多样､涵盖广泛的各种现象融为一炉｡你也许以前并没有发现这些现象间的联系,但一旦你注意到,这些联系就显得十分清楚｡ “Trivers has answered some of the most profound questions about the human condition,” Pinker  told me. “Namely, why are our relationships with other people such complicated mixtures of cooperation and conflict? He did so with a simple, though nonobvious, analysis of the patterns of overlap and nonoverlap of our long-term genetic interests.” “特里夫斯回答了关于人类境况的一些最本质的问题,”平克对我说｡“即为什么我们同他人的关系是如此复杂,既有合作又有冲突?他以一种简明——虽然不那么一目了然——的方式分析了重叠或不重叠的基因利益,从而回答了这个问题｡” According to David Haig, a geneticist at Harvard and a longtime friend and collaborator of Trivers, “Bob has a great ability to see questions as simple and not be distracted by details.” Richard Dawkins praises him for applying economic ideas to biology “with greater clarity of mind than any biologist since R. A. Fisher,” the knighted geneticist. 据戴维·海格——哈佛遗传学家､特里夫斯的多年好友和合作者——所言,“鲍勃【罗伯特的昵称】有一种能力,可以单刀直入地看问题而不被细节干扰｡” 理查德·道金斯赞扬他将经济学的观点引入生物学,“思路极清晰,罗纳德·费希尔(就是后来被册封骑士的那位遗传学家)之后的生物学家难以望其项背｡” In their own books, E. O. Wilson and Richard Dawkins drew heavily on Trivers’ papers, although he has not always had positive things to say about his popularizers. “Richard wrote a beautiful book,” Trivers says about The Selfish Gene. “I was not about to take the time to do it.” 威尔逊和道金斯在自己的书中都大量引用了特里夫斯的论文,让特里夫斯的观点在学界人尽皆知,但特里夫斯本人对这两位却并不总是好言相向｡“理查德的书写得漂亮,”特里夫斯如此评价《自私的基因》,“我不会花时间去做这种事｡” But as for Wilson and Sociobiology, “He played the old Harvard game of becoming the father of a field by becoming the father of the name of a field.” (Wilson told me his own work on the sociobiology of insects actually influenced Trivers.) 但对威尔逊和《社会生物学》,特里夫斯说,“他为一个领域发明一个名字然后便成了该领域的开山鼻祖,这不过是老套的哈佛把戏罢了｡”(威尔逊告诉我他对昆虫的社会生物学研究成果其实影响过特里夫斯｡) After writing papers addressing how we treat strangers, friends, lovers, parents, and children, Trivers offered a no-less-powerful theory on how we deal with ourselves. In a sentence in the foreword to Dawkins’ book, he proposed that self-deception evolved to facilitate the deception of others. Trivers says he’d planned to flesh out the theory but didn’t get around to it because he was “smoking too much strong herb.” 在撰写了有关我们如何对待陌生人､朋友､爱人､父母和小孩等论文之后,特里夫斯又就我们如何对待自我提出了一个同等重要的理论｡在为道金斯的新书【编注:《自私的基因》第一版】写的序中,他提出,自我欺骗机制(self-deception)之所以进化出来,是为了方便我们欺骗他人｡特里夫斯说他本打算丰富下该理论但终未动手,因为他“抽了太多够劲的大麻｡” Trivers also made a mark with the 2006 textbook Genes in Conflict, for which he and Austin Burt spent 15 years integrating thousands of papers on genetic competition within organisms. A reviewer for NatureGenetics called it “meticulously assembled, thought-provoking, and sometimes deliciously speculative.” 特里夫斯于2006年撰写的教科书《基因冲突》让他再一次名声大噪｡为了这本书,他和奥斯汀·伯特花了15年时间,将数千篇关于有机体内基因竞争的论文进行了整合｡《自然—遗传学》的一名评审者称,这本书在整合方面不遗余力,引人思考,一些地方还包含了有趣的猜测｡ According to Trivers, “We created an entire field, the evolutionary dynamics of within-individual genetic conflict. So first, I worked on social theory between individuals, then I dropped one level lower.” Proudly showing me its color inserts, he pointed to what appeared to be a drumstick. “Looks like a piece of chicken, right? No, it’s the only transmissible cancer known. That’s a dog dick. He punches it into a female, the cancerous tissue breaks off and starts growing inside her pumpum.” 特里夫斯说:“我们创造了一个完整的领域:个体内部基因冲突的进化动力学｡首先,我研究关于不同个体的社会学,然后我深入到更基础的一个层次｡”特里夫斯自豪地给我展示一张彩色插图,指着上面一个像鸡腿一样的东西问我,“看起来像是鸡的一部分,对吧?但其实不是,这是唯一已知的会传播的癌症｡那是狗的屌｡他把这玩意插入母狗体内,癌症组织便分裂,然后在母狗的屄里开始生长｡” My early emails with Trivers attested to his mercurial nature. He lavished praise for a hypothesis I’d suggested, then scolded me for failing to answer a question he’d written. After some back and forth, he agreed to an interview and last spring met me at the train station in New Brunswick—he’s currently a professor at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. 我同特里夫斯早期往来的电子邮件见证了他善变的性格｡他曾对我提出的某项假设大加赞赏,然后又因为我答不上他提出的问题而骂我｡在几个回合后,他同意接受我的采访,并在去年春天于新泽西新不伦瑞克市的火车站与我见面——他现在已是新泽西州立罗格斯大学的一名教授｡ Wearing a wool hat with a weed leaf on it, he grumbled at my not finding the right station exit. He warmed up as we drove to his disorganized apartment—a mattress remained in the middle of the floor from a visit by his son. One wall displayed photos of his family, a former girlfriend and her family, and a lizard. We cracked open beers, and he soon offered me a puff of his joint as we got down to business. 见到他时,他戴着一顶毛线帽,上面粘着一片大麻叶子,他抱怨我没有找对车站出口｡在开车前往他的公寓的途中,我们逐渐变得热络起来｡他的公寓乱糟糟的,他儿子来看他时留下的一个床垫还躺在地板中央｡公寓的一面墙上贴满他家人的照片,包括一位前女友及其家人,还有一只蜥蜴｡我们开了啤酒,不一会当我们聊到正题时他已经开始给我递大麻烟卷了｡ The son of a diplomat, Trivers grew up in Maryland, Denmark, and Germany. At age 12, he knew he wanted to be a scientist and took a liking to astronomy, then to math. He spent two months mastering a calculus textbook and another two months mastering the next volume. 他是一名外交官的儿子,在美国马里兰州､丹麦和德国长大｡12岁时,他想成为一名科学家并先后对天文学和数学产生了兴趣｡他花了两个月时间钻研一本微积分教材,又花了两个月时间把下一本学完｡ He studied pure math as a Harvard freshman, but as a sophomore he realized it wasn’t likely to yield many applications, so he briefly looked to physical science. He didn’t have a knack for physics, however, and hadn’t learned much chemistry or biology. (His college roommates once showed him pictures of a hippo and a rhino and asked him to identify which was which. He picked wrong.) 大一时,他在哈佛学习纯数学,但到了大二他意识到这可能没有太多实际用处,于是又跑去学习物理,但只是浅尝辄止｡同样他也没有多少化学和生物学知识｡(他的大学室友曾把河马和犀牛的照片拿给他选,结果他选错了｡) “So, I literally said, ‘Well, if it’s not truth I’m going to devote myself to, then it’s justice.’” He identified with the civil rights movement and decided to become a lawyer. Unfortunately that meant plodding through a major in U.S. history, which he found to be “an exercise in self-deception and self-glorification.” “所以我当时曾说,‘如果我不能献身真理,那就献身正义｡’”他受民权运动的感召并决意成为一名律师｡不幸的是这意味着要修完枯燥的美国历史课程,这在他看来就是“练习自我欺骗和自我美化｡” During his junior year at Harvard, Trivers had a mental breakdown. After five weeks of mania—little of which he remembers besides insomnia and feelings of grandiosity—he checked himself into the hospital and stayed for 11 weeks. Doctors diagnosed him with bipolar disorder. 特里夫斯在哈佛念大三时曾有过一次精神崩溃,在五个星期的躁狂症之后(在这其间的一切他几乎都不记得了,除了失眠和自大的感觉),他把自己送进了医院并在里面呆了11周｡医生诊断他患了躁郁症｡ When he returned to school, he thought it might be a good idea to take courses in psychology—though not abnormal psych because, as he likes to say, “I had a special advantage in it.” But he soon decided psychology in its then state was not a real science. 当他重返学校时,他认为修心理学课程可能是个不错的主意——这心理动机不算太意外——因为正如他自己喜欢说的,“这方面我有特别的优势｡”不过他很快认定当时的心理学还算不上一门真正的科学｡ The field at the time had three strands: First was work on conditioning, pioneered by Ivan Pavlov and B. F. Skinner. Skinner “was stupid enough to think you could build up a whole theory and system of logic about human psychology based entirely on learning,” Trivers says, “and specifically the kind of stimulus-response learning that’s studied in the lab.” Trivers didn’t see how, for example, the brain could pick up the complexities of language this way without some genetic scaffolding. 心理学当有三个分支:首先是对条件反射的研究,由巴甫洛夫和斯金纳开创｡斯金纳“太蠢了,以至于认为你可以仅仅通过学习便建立起一整套关于人类心理的理论和逻辑体系,”特里夫斯说,“尤其是通过那种在实验室里被当作研究对象的刺激-反应式学习｡”举个例子,特里夫斯就不认为,抛开遗传因素,大脑能够通过这种方式领会语言的复杂性｡ Then there’s Freud, who had some keen insights into self-deception, Trivers says, “but he wedded them to a completely corrupt view of human development” characterized by the anal, oral, and Oedipal stages.“He just invents it out of whole cloth while snorting too much cocaine.” 第二个分支便是弗洛伊德,他对自我欺骗有着某种深刻的洞见,特里夫斯说,“但他将这种洞见同一种朽烂不堪的人类成长观嫁接到了一起”,其观点的标签便是肛欲期､口欲期和恋母期｡“他不过是在嗑了太多白粉后凭空发明了这些概念｡” Third was social psychology, which Trivers saw as too dependent on self-reports. “You cannot build up a science based on a whole series of correlations between how people answer questionnaires,” he says. “By definition it can’t work, if only because we don’t know most of what’s causing us to do things, and second, we don’t necessarily tell the truth.” Trivers considered psychology “a joke.” 第三个分支是社会心理学,特里夫斯认为其太依赖自我报告了｡“你不能以人们如何回答问卷之间的相关性为基础,建立起一门学科｡”特里夫斯说｡“显然这不管用,首先我们大部分时候并不知道是什么让自己去做一件事,其次,我们也不一定会说实话嘛｡”特里夫斯认为心理学就是个“笑话”｡ So he stuck to justice and applied to law school. He selected the progressive law school at Yale, with Virginia as a backup, but neither accepted him, in part because of his mental health. “But for his mental illness,” says William von Hippel, a friend and collaborator at the University of Queensland, “he would not be the famous scientist that he is. He’d be a well-to-do lawyer.” 所以他转而追求正义并申请了法学院｡他选择了耶鲁的进步主义法学院,并把弗吉尼亚法学院作为备选项,但都被拒绝了——部分因为他的心理健康状况｡“要不是他的心理疾病,”特里夫斯在昆士兰大学时的同事和朋友威廉·范希波尔说,“他不会是今天这个著名科学家｡他会是一个有钱的律师｡” Suddenly without a clear path, Trivers heard about a job writing children’s books. He took his writing sample, an account of his breakdown, to Jerome Bruner, the Harvard psychologist running the project. “I was hired. Strange, eh?” He was assigned to write about biology, a topic he knew nothing about (hippo or rhino) and to work under the wing of the naturalist and bird expert William Drury. 突然不知通过什么方式,特里夫斯听说了一份为小孩子写书的工作｡他带上他写的样稿(讲述他自己精神崩溃的事),去见杰罗姆·布鲁纳——当时主持该项目的哈佛心理学家｡“我被雇佣了,怪不?”他被分配到博物学和鸟类学家威廉·特鲁里的麾下,题目有关生物学,一个他一无所知的主题(还记得河马和犀牛吧)｡ Together they would sit in the woods imitating bird sounds so they could watch avian courting, clashes, and cooperation. Under Drury’s tutelage, Trivers decided to become an evolutionary biologist. Upon discovering evolutionary logic, he says. “I knew I had found where I wanted to be.” He has called Drury “the man who taught me how to think.” 他俩会一起坐在树林下模仿鸟类的叫声,观察它们求偶､打架以及合作｡在特鲁里的指导下,特里夫斯决意成为一名进化生物学家｡在发现进化的逻辑之后,他说“我知道我已找到我想追求的东西｡”他称特鲁里为“那个教会我如何思考的人｡” Trivers headed back to Harvard to earn a Ph.D. in biology, studying under Ernest Williams, a herpetologist. Trivers decided to study lizards in Jamaica and became enamored with the island—not least because he finds dark-skinned women attractive and says that at that time a white man couldn’t roam Boston with a black woman on his arm. 特里夫斯之后回到哈佛大学攻读博士学位,师从厄内斯特·威廉斯,一位爬虫学家｡特里夫斯决定去牙买加研究蜥蜴并从此爱上了这个岛国｡(其中一个重要原因是,他发现深色皮肤的女人很有吸引力,他还说,那时白人男性无法同黑人女性并肩徜徉在波士顿街头)｡ “So I always felt free down there in a way that I never felt here,” he says. He has lived in Jamaica on and off since 1968 and frequently falls into Jamaican patois, speckling his speech with its slang (pumpum, raashuol). “所以在那里我时常感到在这里(美国)从来没感受过的自由,”他说｡自1968年起他便时常回到牙买加居住并且经常讲牙买加方言,他的句子从此不时点缀些牙买加俚语(pumpum屄､raashuol屌)｡ He has many tales to tell of Jamaica. One is a memorable stickup in an East Kingston club. That story begins when he visited the establishment after a hiatus, curious to see if things had gotten as bad as he’d heard. 关于牙买加,特里夫斯有很多故事可讲｡其中之一便是在东金斯敦俱乐部里被持枪抢劫,这事可谓终身难忘｡这个故事要从他闲来无事走进这家俱乐部讲起,他是个好奇的人,想看看事情是不是真有听说的那么糟｡ When he entered, two men put guns to his head as three more gunmen stood by. They pulled the money from his pocket and pushed him against a wall next to a man bleeding from the head. When the next victim arrived, Trivers dashed out the door. After reporting the robbery to police, he learned that they and the community had sanctioned the ambush as a form of extrajudicial punishment for the johns. 当他走进去,两个男人拿枪顶着他的头,旁边还站着三个持枪者｡他们拽出他兜里的钱,把他推到墙上,旁边就是个满头是血的人｡当下一个受害者进来时,特里夫斯夺路而逃｡在向警察报告了这起抢劫案后,他得知警察和这个社区是认可这类袭击的,并将其视作对嫖客的法外惩罚｡ But as a white man, whose death would have caused major scrutiny for the area, he was a surprise inconvenience. The robbers had let him flee. According to Trivers, one woman who saw him running down the road later said to him, “Massah, me nebber know white man could fly, until I see you go by.” 但是白人是烫手山芋,他的死会引起对这个地区的大规模监视,所以抢匪们放他跑了｡据特里夫斯回忆,一个看到他逃命的女人后来对他说,“妈呀,我原来都不知道白人还会飞,看到你我才信了｡” Trivers also nurtured a family in Jamaica. He has two Jamaican ex-wives, five children, and eight grandchildren. One daughter is now the principal of a charter school in Harlem. 特里夫斯还在牙买加组建了一个家庭｡他有两个牙买加前妻､五个儿女和八个孙辈｡其中一个女儿现在是哈林区一所特许学校的校长｡ After finishing his Ph.D. in 1972, Trivers joined Harvard’s faculty. In 1977, he sought tenure, but the decision was pushed back three years because of his mental health issues. Instead of waiting, he decamped to the University of California at Santa Cruz with his wife and son in tow. 1972年博士毕业后,特里夫斯留在哈佛任教｡1977年,他谋求终身教职,但因为心理健康的问题连续三年被驳回｡他没有继续等待,而是带着妻子和儿子到了加州大学圣克鲁斯分校｡ In Santa Cruz, Trivers met Huey Newton, then a Ph.D. student and the leader of the Black Panthers. They became close, and in 1979 Trivers joined the party—for which he says he’s done “an illegal thing or two.” Trivers still refers to himself as “my black ass,” which he picked up from Newton, who told him: “Bob, everyone’s ass is black if you look closely enough.” 在圣克鲁斯,特里夫斯遇到了休伊·牛顿,一名在读博士,也是黑豹党的领导人｡两人走得很近,在1979年特里夫斯加入了这个党｡特里夫斯说他自己曾为黑豹党“干过那么一两件非法的事情｡”特里夫斯如今还以“我这个黑屁眼”自称,这是他从牛顿那学来的｡牛顿曾对他说:“鲍勃,所有人的屁眼都是黑的,如果你离近点看的话｡” Together they wrote an article for the magazine Science Digest about self-deception in the pilots of Air Florida Flight 90, which had crashed into the Potomac River upon takeoff in 1982, killing 78. A friend of Trivers, the Harvard butterfly expert Bob Silberglied, had died in the crash. 他俩一起在《科学文摘》上发表了一篇文章,论述1982年1月13日佛罗里达航空90次航班空难中飞行员的自我欺骗行为｡当时飞机在起飞时坠入波托马克河,共造成78人丧生,包括他的朋友､哈佛的蝴蝶专家罗伯特·希尔博格里德｡ Trivers was also drawn to the cockpit conversation replayed on TV. “You could hear the fear and rationality of the copilot,” he says, “and the overconfidence of the pilot, who showed fear only when they were in the air and it was too late.” 特里夫斯被电视上播放的驾驶舱录音所吸引｡“听得出来,副机长怀有担忧,很理性,”他说,“而机长过于自信,他在飞机离地以后才表现出担忧,但已经太迟了｡” In their article, they analyze the NTSB transcript line by line. The copilot repeatedly expresses concern about snow accumulating on the wings, the need for more de-icing, and what he believes are faulty instrument readings. The pilot brushes him off. Finally, 49 minutes after their last de-icing, they take off. Without sufficient velocity, they pull up, and a few seconds later they stall. The plane grazes a bridge and plunges into the Potomac. 在那篇文章中,他们逐行分析了全国运输安全委员会的报告｡副机长当时反复表达了对机翼积雪的担忧,认为需要再除除冰,还有仪器读数也不正常｡机长没理他｡最终在最后一次除冰后49分钟,他们起飞了｡在没有足够速度的情况下,他们就开始爬高,几秒钟后引擎熄火｡飞机擦过一座桥梁,一头栽进波托马克河｡ “We imagine that presenting a falsely positive front may often have been advantageous to the pilot prior to Flight 90,” Trivers and Newton wrote, “giving him the illusion that skill plus overconfidence works in all encounters.” “我们猜想,在飞90次航班之前,对这名机长来说,虚假的积极乐观一直都是有利的,”特里夫斯和牛顿写道,“这给了他一种幻觉,似乎技术加上过度自信就能应付任何情况｡” The two began writing a book titled Deceit and Self-Deception, but the publishing house closed. Newton, Trivers recalls, “was a master at propagating deception, he was a master at seeing through other people’s deception, he was a master at beating people’s self-deception out of them, and like all the rest of us, he fell down when it came to his own self-deception.” In an interview with The Black Panther newspaper, he called Newton a “heavyweight mind,” in comparison to the many “light- and middleweight minds” he found at Harvard. 两人开始写一本名为《欺骗与自我欺骗》的书,但出版社倒闭了｡牛顿“是个宣传欺骗的大师”,特里夫斯回忆道,“一个一眼洞悉别人骗术的大师,他精于把他人从自我欺骗中打回原形,然后他像其他所有人一样,当他从自己的自我欺骗中走出来时,他垮掉了｡”有一次《黑豹》报采访了他,他说牛顿是“重量级的思想者”,许多他在哈佛接触过的人相较之下只能算是“轻量级或中量级的思考者”｡ Trivers’ most detailed exploration of self-deception didn’t come until his 2011 book The Folly of Fools, where he explains that we fool ourselves in all realms of life—when overestimating our looks or abilities, when justifying our righteousness, when defending our power or privilege, when constructing false historical narratives. It’s all part of advancing our own agendas. 直到2011年《愚人愚道》出版,特里夫斯才对自我欺骗进行了详细论述,书中他解释说我们在生活的各个领域愚弄自己——高估自己的能力和相貌､为自己的正直感找正当的理由､保卫自己的权力或特权､构建虚假的历史叙事｡这些都是为了达到自己某种目的而做的部分努力｡ “What I’ve done is found disciplines,” Trivers says. As to self-deception, “I lost a lot by being sooo slow to develop suuch an important idea. Had I written the paper in ’78 like I was supposed to, there would have been a whole science now.” “我做的工作是建立范式,”特里夫斯说｡对自我欺骗理论,“这个理论太太太重要了,而我太太太晚才发展出这个理论以至于我损失了太多｡我本该在1978年就写下论文,我要是那样做了,现在肯定已经发展出完整的学科了｡” In 1994, he moved to Rutgers to be closer to his children. There, he has continued to publish on evolution and human behavior. One area of interest has been body symmetry in Jamaican children as a measure of genetic ability to withstand stressors during development. In 2005, he co-authored a paper showing that more symmetrical Jamaican teenagers were rated better dancers. The study was featured on the cover of the prestigious journal Nature. 1994年他前往罗格斯大学,这样可以跟他的孩子们近一些｡在那里他继续就进化和人类行为发表文章｡当时他的一个兴趣所在是身体的对称性,他将牙买加小孩身体的对称性视作一把尺子,度量在发育过程中适应压力的遗传能力｡2005年,他合作撰写的一篇论文指出,身体更为对称的牙买加青少年在舞蹈方面表现更好｡这项研究被声名卓著的《自然》杂志选作封面报道｡ Later, however, another researcher had trouble replicating the findings, and Trivers took a closer look at the data. He found irregularities and concluded that William Brown, a postdoc and the paper’s lead author, had fabricated data. Trivers sought retraction from the journal, but Brown and Lee Cronk, a fellow Rutgers professor who had worked on the paper, denied any wrongdoing or mistakes. 然而另一名研究者在之后验证这项发现的可重复性时遇到了问题,特里夫斯也仔细检查了数据｡他发现了不合常规的地方,并得出结论:论文的第一作者､博士后威廉·布朗编造了数据｡特里夫斯试图从杂志上撤回论文,但布朗和另一位罗格斯大学的同事李·克朗克却否认存在任何不端行为或错误｡ (Von Hippel said Cronk’s position is a classic case of self-deception, because a Nature paper was more important to his résumé than it was to Trivers’.) Trivers self-published a book, The Anatomy of a Fraud, to back up his case. Rutgers conducted its own investigation and came to the same conclusions as Trivers. (范希波尔说克朗克的行为是自我欺骗的典型案例,因为一篇发表于《自然》的论文对他的履历的重要性要远胜于对特里夫斯履历的重要性｡)特里夫斯自己出版了一本书《解剖骗子》来支持自己的立场｡罗格斯大学展开了调查并得出了同特里夫斯一致的结论｡ In 2012, he stood in Cronk’s office and called him a “punk” for continuing to deny the allegations. Cronk claims to have felt threatened, and Trivers was banned from campus for five months. (Cronk declined to comment for this article.) Nature finally retracted the paper in 2013, five years after the initial request. “For me to produce a fraudulent result, know about it, and not do everything to expose it and prove it is anathema to the essence of my identity,” Trivers says. 2012年,特里夫斯跑到克朗克的办公室,为他继续否认指控而叫他“废物”｡克朗克宣称他受到威胁,于是特里夫斯被禁止出现在校园,为期五个月｡(克朗克拒绝为本文就此事发表评论｡)《自然》终于在2013年将论文撤回,距初次发表已有五年时间｡“对我来说,知道自己伪造了一个结果却不竭尽全力去揭露它,是对我人格本质的诅咒,” 特里夫斯说｡ Trivers’ latest dustup with Rutgers began at the end of 2013, when he was assigned to teach a course on human aggression and he protested that he didn’t know the material. After much back and forth, he showed up in class and told his students the backstory. The university suspended him with pay for bringing students into the dispute, then withheld his pay for three months. 特里夫斯同罗格斯大学最近的一次纷争始于2013年底,当时他被分配去教一门关于人类攻击行为的课,而他抗议自己并不熟悉这个领域｡在几轮较量后,他最后还是出现在了教室里,他告诉学生发生了什么｡大学先是以将学生卷入纷争为由让他带薪停课,之后又扣了他三个月工资｡ “I am one of the most accomplished scientists they have ever had, period,” Trivers says in a characteristic but not inaccurate self-assessment. “Why not treat him well?” he asks. He has taken a dim view of the university and looks forward to a conscious uncoupling. “Honesty is not their strong suit,” he says. “Remember, we’re talking about New Jersey.” “我是他们拥有过的成就最高的人之一”,他这话带着特里夫斯的风格,但这个自我评价却不能说不准确｡“怎么就不能对他(指特里夫斯自己)好点呢?”他问道｡他对罗格斯大学的前景感到悲观并主动寻求离开｡“诚实不是他们的强项,”他说,“记住,毕竟我们说的是新泽西州｡” Trivers also had a talk at Harvard canceled once when he made a perceived threat against Alan Dershowitz in The Wall Street Journal letters pages over their conflicting views on Israeli-Lebanese relations. He admits to writing many “strongly worded” letters to people. And he notes: “If I ask you a direct question and you don’t give me a direct answer, I will wheel on you and say, ‘Yes but what about the question I asked you?!’” 因为对以色列-黎巴嫩关系的相左认识,特里夫斯曾在《华尔街日报》的读者来信版面里猛烈抨击艾伦·德肖维茨,这让后者感觉受到了人身威胁,特里夫斯在哈佛的一次讨论会也因此取消｡他承认自己给人写过许多“措辞激烈”的信｡他还补充说:“如果我直截了当地问你一个问题,而你不直截了当地回答,那我就要穷追猛打,‘是的,可是我刚才问你的那个问题呢?!’” When I asked Trivers how much blame he should take for the drama that surrounds him, he says, “I know I’m a hard man.” But he doesn’t see himself as violent. When he was kicked off campus for calling Cronk a punk, Rutgers sent him to a psychologist for threat evaluation. 当我问特里夫斯,对于这些围绕你的这些争议,你自己负有多少责任,他回答“我知道自己是个不好相处的人｡”但他并不认为自己暴力｡当他因为叫克朗克废物而被踢出校园时,罗格斯大学给他找了个心理学家进行威胁评估｡ “After an hour and a half, the psychologist says to me: ‘You know something, Dr. Trivers? You’re not a danger to anyone, including any of your colleagues. Your problem is you call stupid people stupid, and if they have power over you, you get blowback.’” Trivers told me this not a minute after framing an off-the-record comment with: “Please, I will get violent if I see this in print, and I’m not joking.” “一个半小时后,这位心理学家对我说:‘你知道吗,特里夫斯博士?对任何人你都不是一个威胁,包括你的大学同事｡你的问题是你管笨蛋叫笨蛋,如果他们能奈何得了你,你就有得好受｡”特里夫斯在告诉我这些之前没多一会儿的时候曾说过,他的某句评论可不能传出去｡他是这么说的:“拜托,我要是看见这句话印出来的话,我肯定会动手打人的,我不开玩笑｡” But this hard man is trying to change. He relies on strategies he developed years ago for managing his emotions, including something resembling prayer. He put religion aside at around age 13, “because math was a hell of a lot more interesting than ‘begat begatbegat.’ And there was this little contradiction between religion and 13-year-old girls.” 不过这位不好相处的人也在试着改变｡他依靠一套自己多年前开发出的办法来管理情绪,其中一种办法类似于祈祷｡他13岁时便抛弃了宗教,“因为比起什么‘以父之名’,数学要他妈有趣得多｡而且宗教这玩意还和13岁的女孩子有矛盾【编注:这里特里夫斯大概是在吹嘘他13岁时就懂得泡妞了】｡” Now, he wishes he hadn’t neglected it so much. He doesn’t believe in a god who listens: “How does God have any time left for my moaning and groaning? It’s insane.” Instead, it’s more a meditation. “I pray to keep my anger under control, to be more compassionate, for forgiveness, but I regard myself as talking to different parts of my own psyche.” 现在,他后悔自己当时如此地忽视宗教｡他并不相信有一个会倾听的神:“神怎么会有时间来听我抱怨?这太扯了｡”他的祈祷更接近冥想｡“我祈祷我的愤怒得到控制,自己更加悲悯,我祈祷得到宽恕,但我总感觉,我这是在和自己灵魂的不同部分对话｡” Trivers sees himself doing another five to ten years of research, but he describes his current contributions as more humble. He pumps out papers on lizards and knee symmetry in runners, which he admits, were “designed to fly me to Jamaica at someone else’s expense.” 特里夫斯认为自己还能做上5到10年的研究,但他认为自己目前的贡献远不如前｡关于蜥蜴和跑步运动员膝盖的对称性,他撰写了大量论文,对此他说“用处也不过是能让我花别人的钱飞来牙买加罢了｡” Yet one recent idea emerging from his interest in self-deception appears to have real significance: Research shows that older adults are biased toward paying attention to and remembering the positive over the negative and that they don’t dwell in negative moods, a phenomenon called the aging positivity effect. 然而他对自我欺骗的关注最近孕育了一个新观念,这一观念可能具有巨大的价值:研究者们发现年长些的人总是偏向关注和记忆正面的事情而忽略负面的,他们不会长时间陷在负面情绪里,这一现象被称作“衰老的正面效应”｡ There’s been no functional explanation, and it would seem that such a bias could be dangerous by blinding people to hazards. But Trivers notes that positive moods improve immune function, and older adults have a greater need for a strong immune system to fight off tumors and other ills. So maybe we’ve evolved to cheer ourselves up as we age just to boost immunity. 对这一效应现在还没有有效的解释,而这一对正面事物的偏执会让人们对危害视而不见,因而可能造成危险｡不过特里夫斯注意到,积极的情绪会增强人体的免疫机能,而年长的人需要一个强健的免疫系统来对抗肿瘤和其他疾病｡所以,也许我们就是这样进化的:越老就越充满正能量,从而提高我们的免疫力｡ He suggested the idea to von Hippel, who didn’t buy it. Why would natural selection shape old age, after we can no longer reproduce? But, Trivers argued, you can still help raise your grandchildren, who carry your genes. 他把这一理念跟范希波尔提起,但后者一开始并不买账｡自然选择为什么在我们失去生育能力后,还让我们老当益壮?但特里夫斯争辩说,在你老了之后你仍可以帮助养育孙辈,他们身上仍然携带了你的基因｡ Von Hippel ran a test that found that in older adults, a greater positivity bias correlated with stronger immune function. So they published the findings in 2014 in Psychology & Aging. Now they’re working on a longitudinal study to see if positivity predicts later immune function. 范希波尔做了验证,发现专注正面事物的年长者确实拥有更强健的免疫功能｡于是在2014年,他俩在《心理学与衰老》上发表了这一发现｡现在他们正合作一项纵向研究,以验证积极的心态是否会带来免疫力｡ Trivers refrains from making grand predictions about the future of evolutionary theory, but he has certain interests. David Haig’s work on genetic conflict excites him, as does von Hippel’s work on aging. And he’s just applied for a yearlong fellowship at Harvard to study honor killings. “How in the world,” he wonders, “do you select for, if indeed you do, murdering your own daughter?” 特里夫斯不会预测进化理论会有如何广阔的前景,但对这一理论他颇有兴趣｡David Haig关于基因冲突的研究､范希波尔关于衰老的研究都让他兴奋｡而且他刚刚申请了哈佛为期一年的研究员职位,以研究“荣誉谋杀”现象｡“在这个世界上,人怎么会选择——如果真的是自己选择的话——亲手杀死自己的女儿呢?”特里夫斯对此感到疑惑｡ He also has a lifetime interest in homosexuality—another genetic conundrum—and plans to write a review paper. “I enjoy trying to think through those kinds of problems,” he says. “As a theoretician you’re attracted, or you ought to be, to precisely those phenomena that seem to contradict your theory, and the deeper the better.” 他对同性恋现象——另一个遗传学的谜题——也抱有持续的热情,并打算写一篇综述论文｡“我很享受思考这些问题,”他说,“作为一个建立理论的人,你被,或者说你理应被那些与你的理论相悖的现象所吸引,越是痴迷就越好｡” Eating dinner at a Thai restaurant with Trivers, I mentioned that a colleague of his had painted him to be something of a badass. As evidence I noted the time he stabbed the home invader in the neck. “That’s a badass?” he inquired between slurps of soup. “That ain’t a badass. That’s someone protecting his f*cking life. I came an inch from being killed, man.” 和特里夫斯在一家泰国餐馆吃饭时,我提到他的一位同事曾把他描述成一个混蛋｡作为证据,我强调了那次他曾捅伤一位非法闯入者的脖子｡“那叫混蛋?”他一边喝汤一边质问,“那不叫混蛋,那他妈是保命｡我差点就被干死了,老兄!” Fair enough. But hurting his case, he went on to describe his response to the criminals’ lenient sentences. “I chased down both of them, because I had to,” he says. “Since the police aren’t disciplining them, I will.” One morning he spotted one of the men and pulled his car over. 言之有理｡不过接下去他描述他对轻判罪犯的反应,可就要为他减分了｡“我对这俩家伙穷追不舍,因为我不得不这么做,”他说,“既然警察不去规训他们,那我来｡”一天早上,他认出了罪犯中的一个,然后停下车｡ “‘Listen,’ I say, ‘If you want to rob me, you rob me at the roadside. Don’t rob me in my own home. That’s where my children live, that’s where my guests are. I will kill you three times over. In fact...’” As he started to get out of his car, Trivers says the man ran backward. (Helpfully, Trivers boxed in boarding school at Andover; but still, during one separate altercation, he ended up with an ice pick to his hand.) “‘听着,’我说,‘你要是想抢我,那你就在路边抢我｡别在我家抢｡那是我孩子生活的地方,是我客人到访的地儿｡你再那么干,信不信我让你死透?实际上……’”特里夫斯说,当他准备下车时,那家伙倒退着跑开了｡(特里夫斯在安多弗的寄宿学校练过拳击,不过,在另外一次争执中,他最后还是操起了碎冰椎｡) Today, Trivers retains vitriol for those who don’t see the legitimacy in his work and the research it’s spawned. According to von Hippel, people reject evolutionary psychology for ideological reasons. Those on the right fear that it absolves us of responsibility, while those on the left fear that accepting inherited differences hinders the goal of social equality. 今天,特里夫斯仍然对那些看不出他所做工作及其孵化出的研究的合理性的家伙们冷嘲热讽｡据范希波尔说,人们拒绝进化心理学是处于意识形态的理由｡右派担心进化心理学会解除我们身上的责任,而左派担心承认天生差异会对阻碍实现社会平等这一目标｡ Trivers says that many feminists and cultural anthropologists regard him as “the devil.” In return, he calls them “feebleminded” and “stone nuts.” More genes are expressed in the brain than in any other tissue, he notes, and to ignore the partnering of nurture with nature is “ludicrous, if you have any serious interest in reality or science.” 特里夫斯说,许多女权主义者和文化人类学家将他视为“魔鬼”｡而作为回击,他管他们叫“玻璃心”和“石化脑”｡他指出,比起其他组织,在大脑里得到表达的基因更多,忽视后天习得和先天遗传的共同作用是“可笑的,要是你对事实和科学还有一丝严肃态度的话｡” Trivers feels grateful for everything evolutionary biology has given him. It’s taken him around the world to wild and often unwelcoming places, and it’s given him the tools to analyze what he’s seen, from lizards to lovers’ quarrels to leftist movements. “In short,” Trivers writes in his memoir, “I signed on to a system of thought that allowed me to study life and live it, sometimes very intensively.” 特里夫斯对从进化心理学那里得到的一切都心存感激｡进化心理学带他走向世界各地,去到荒僻､甚至往往不友好的地方;给他分析所见所闻的工具,从蜥蜴到情侣争吵再到左翼运动｡“一言以蔽之,”特里夫斯在回忆录里写道,“我献身于一个思想体系,它让我可以研究和体味生命,而且这一过程有时还颇为激烈｡” （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

The Most Misunderstood Libertarian 最为人所误解的自由意志主义者 作者:Alberto Mingardi @ 2015-9-28 译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 校对:混乱阈值(@混乱阈值) 来源:Library of Law & Liberty,http://www.libertylawsite.org/book-review/the-most-misunderstood-libertarian/ To the surprise of many, scholarship on Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) has flourished in the last few years. A towering figure in Victorian Britain, Spencer was all but forgotten after his death. His works, which taken together form a “Synthetic Philosophy,” seemed alien to 20th century academics in an age of meticulous specialization. Also his commitment to individual liberty and (seriously) limited government has not been too common in the discipline that he helped establish, sociology. Talcott Parsons famously called him a victim of the very God he adored: evolution. 关于赫伯特·斯宾塞(1820-1903)的学术研究过去几年活跃了起来,这让许多人感到惊讶｡斯宾塞是英国维多利亚时代的一位杰出人物,死后却几乎被人遗忘｡他的各种著作构成一个“综合哲学”整体,与20世纪专业细分的学术界格格不入｡并且,他对个体自由和(极度的)有限政府的信奉,在他所帮助建立的社会学学科中历来并不十分流行｡塔儿科特·帕森斯曾出了名地把他称为他所推崇的那个上帝——进化——的牺牲品｡ Toward the end of the 20th century, however, interest in Spencer began to revive. In 1974, J.D.Y. Peel published Herbert Spencer: The Evolution of a Sociologist and Robert Nisbet dealt at length with Spencer in his 1980 History of the Idea of Progress. In Anarchy, State and Utopia (1974), Robert Nozick adapted his “tale of the slave” on taxation and democracy from Spencer’s 1884 The Man versus the State. In 1982, the journal History of Political Thought published contributions on Spencer from John Gray, William Miller, Jeffrey Paul, and Hillel Steiner that remain a landmark. 不过,到20世纪快要结束时,人们又重新燃起对斯宾塞的兴趣｡1974年,J. D. Y. Peel出版了《赫伯特·斯宾塞:一位社会学家的进化》;1980年,Robert Nisbet在其《进步观念史》中对斯宾塞进行了长篇讨论｡在《无政府､国家与乌托邦》(1974)中,罗伯特·诺齐克讨论税收和民主问题时所用的“奴隶的故事”源自于斯宾塞1884年的著作《人与国家》｡1982年,《政治思想史》杂志刊登了John Gray､William Miller､Jeffrey Paul和Hillel Steiner等人论斯宾塞的多篇文章,至今仍有里程碑意义｡ New monographs and studies were later published, and today a number of scholars in different disciplines (history of political thought, sociology, anthropology) can be counted among the Spencer connoisseurs. But few of them have come from the classical liberal camp. (The most notable exception is George H. Smith.) 其后关于斯宾塞的新专著和新研究时有出现｡时至今日,分处不同领域(政治思想史､社会学､人类学)的许多学者可以被视为斯宾塞行家｡但其中几乎无人来自古典自由主义阵营｡(George H. Smith是最著名的例外｡) Spencer may be routinely included among the forerunners of modern libertarianism but it is rather uncommon to find a contemporary individualist thinker deliberately appealing to his insights. Take F.A. Hayek: Long ago, John Gray pointed out that Hayek and Spencer share the “same aspiration of embedding the defense of liberty in a broad evolutionary framework,” but Hayek himself appeared to have been largely unaware of this affinity. More recently, Gray wrote that Hayek told him he never read Spencer. 斯宾塞或许会被习惯性地列为现代自由意志主义的先驱之一,但要在当代个人主义思想家中找到一个刻意诉诸斯宾塞见解的人,这可并非易事｡以F. A. 哈耶克为例:John Gray早已指出哈耶克和斯宾塞都具有“同一种抱负,那就是把对自由的辩护牢固树立于一种广义的进化论框架中”,但哈耶克本人似乎基本上没有意识到这种共鸣｡最近,Gray写道,哈耶克曾告诉他说自己从没读过斯宾塞｡ The paradox of one of the fiercest libertarians ever to be ignored by libertarians emerges vividly from Herbert Spencer: Legacies, edited by Mark Francis and Michael Taylor. Interestingly, the two editors have published extensively on Spencer in the past, but their interpretations of him do not overlap. 史上最为狂热的自由意志主义者之一却被自由意志主义者们所忽略,这一乖谬在由Mark Francis和Michael Taylor主编的《赫伯特·斯宾塞:遗产》一书中表现得极为生动｡有趣的是,两位主编过去都已就斯宾塞发表过大量文章,不过他们各自对斯宾塞的解读并不相同｡ Francis, as he attempts to rescue Spencer’s philosophy from oblivion, in his Introduction calls The Man Versus the State and also Social Statics (1851) “popular works” that, “while they were liberal and progressive, . . . were not scientific or philosophical.” Taylor, in contrast, deals at length with Social Statics—as Stephen Tomlinson does in his chapter in this volume. Francis尝试将斯宾塞的哲学从被人遗忘的状态中拯救出来,并在他为该书所写的“导论”中将《人与国家》和《社会静力学》(1851)称为“流行作品”,“尽管是自由主义､进步主义的……并不具备科学性或哲学性”｡与之相反,Taylor则对《社会静力学》进行了长篇讨论——同书中由Stephen Tomlinson所写的一个章节也是如此｡ Spencer’s legacy is plural, as the title of this collection suggests, and may have come to us mediated by subsequent developments in different fields. The plural nature of the “legacies” is stressed throughout, and has multiple dimensions: disciplinary, political, and even geographical given the “migration” of Spencerian theories all over the world. 正如这一文集的复数形式的标题所暗示的那样,斯宾塞的遗产是多重的｡而且这些遗产可能是通过多个不同领域的后续发展传递给我们的｡对“legacies”复数性质的强调贯穿本书首尾,并具有多个不同维度:学科维度､政治维度､甚至还有地理维度(因为斯宾塞的理论曾在全世界“迁移”)｡ Sometimes, however, by looking far away you disregard what you have nearby. Bernard Lightman, for example, focuses his essay “Spencer’s British Disciples” on Beatrice Potter Webb and Grant Allen, quickly dismissing Auberon Herbert as a not very influential British disciple of Spencer. 不过,有些时候,由于过于关注远方,你会忽视眼前事物｡比如,Bernard Lightman在他的文章“斯宾塞的英国门徒”中,主要聚焦于Beatrice Potter Webb和Grant Allen,却急匆匆地略过了Auberon Herbert,视其为斯宾塞的一位影响不大的英国门徒｡ There might be a problem here: the influence the disciples themselves had may have to be disentangled from the thinking of the disciples qua disciples. Lightman presents in fascinating and plentiful detail the most interesting paths of Webb and Allen, who both turned socialist to the disappointment of the master. 这里可能有个问题:这些门徒自身所具有的影响力,可能必须和身为门徒的他们的思想区分开来｡Lightman以引人入胜和细节丰富的方式为我们介绍了Webb和Allen所走过的最为有趣的道路｡他们俩都转变成了社会主义者,令其师父大失所望｡ It would be hard to overemphasize the emotional nature of the relationship between Webb and Herbert Spencer. He was a family friend and a confidant of Laurencina Potter, Beatrice Potter Webb’s mother. A solitary man, Spencer bestowed unlimited affection on his dear friends’ kids. Webb和赫伯特·斯宾塞之间的情感再怎么强调都不为过｡斯宾塞是Webb一家的世交,是Beatrice Potter Webb的母亲Laurencina Potter的知己｡未曾娶妻的斯宾塞将无限的情感倾注于他这位密友的孩子身上｡【编注:Beatrice Potter Webb是著名经济学家,伦敦经济学院和费边社的核心成员,这两个机构也是20世纪初英国社会主义运动的主要推动者｡】 Young Beatrice grew up thinking that he was her best ally and the only adult truly interested in her intellectual development. Spencer, as Webb later wrote, pressed her “to become a scientific worker” and to a certain extent he became a model, for the “continuous concentrated effort in carrying out, with an heroic disregard of material prosperity and physical comfort, a task which he believed would further human progress.” 小Beatrice在成长过程中一直把斯宾塞当成最好的伙伴,认为他是唯一真正对她的智识进步感兴趣的成年人｡如Webb后来所写的那样,是斯宾塞敦促她“成为一个科学工作者”,而他在某种程度上已然是一个典范,因为,“为了实施一项他认为能够推动人类进步的事业,他能持续集中地努力,为此奋而不顾物质财富和生理舒适｡” In her 1926 memoir My Apprenticeship, Webb described at length the old friend, in a portrait very familiar to modern readers. She saw in him “the mental deformity which results from the extraordinary development of the intellectual faculties joined with the very imperfect development of the sympathetic and emotional qualities.” 在其1926年的回忆录《我的学徒生涯》中,Webb花大量笔墨描绘了这位老朋友,其形象现代读者非常熟悉｡她在他身上看到“一种精神上的畸形,它是智识能力非凡发达与同情和情感极度不完善两相结合的产物｡” Webb’s Spencer is a human being obsessed with rationality and purpose who paid the price on the affective side. Though Webb is not stingy of kind words or affectionate recollections, it is hard not to speculate that her portrait of Spencer evokes magnificently all she disliked in unregulated capitalism: a purported organizational efficiency with little humanity to spare for those who are needy. Webb眼中的斯宾塞是个痴迷于理性和目的,并为此在情感方面付出相应代价的人｡尽管Webb并不吝啬写出赞誉之词或深情回忆,我们仍很难不这样推测:她对斯宾塞的描绘极好地再现了她对毫无限制的资本主义——一种对匮乏者冷酷无情的所谓的组织化效率——的所有憎恶｡ It is indeed true that Spencer was the one who, as Lightman writes, “originally taught” Beatrice Webb “to value the scientific method and to think about social issues from a scientific perspective.” One wonders, however, exactly how much of Spencer’s insights she kept in her later thinking. 毫无疑问,如Lightman所写的那样,正是斯宾塞“最初教导”Beatrice Webb去“重视科学方法,并从一种科学的视角来考虑社会问题”｡不过,人们不禁会怀疑,在她后来的看法中到底保留有多少斯宾塞的观点｡ As for Auberon Herbert, certainly a less grand figure, he was an advocate of a libertarianism “that verged on anarchism,” in Taylor’s words. Reading Spencer was for him a truly life-changing experience. It made him lose “faith in the great machine” of politics and convinced him to become an apostle of freedom. Herbert’s libertarian anarchism is one of the “legacies” Michael Taylor examines in his essay. 至于Auberon Herbert,相较而言当然没那么出名｡用Taylor的话说,他鼓吹的是一种“接近于无政府主义”的自由意志主义｡阅读斯宾塞对他来说确实是真正改变人生的一种体验,让他丧失了对于政治“这台大机器的信念”,并说服他成为了一位传播自由的使徒｡Herbert的自由意志论无政府主义是Michael Taylor在其文章中检视的多重“遗产”中的一种｡ He approaches Spencer as a historian of political thought. The Taylor chapter, on the one hand, presents Social Statics as a text that inspired multiple legacies, including the work of Henry George (who resented the fact that Spencer wanted the 1892 revised edition of this 1851 work to leave out the original chapter on land) and Piotr Kropotkin. Taylor以一种政治思想史家的方式讨论斯宾塞｡他所写作的那一章,一方面将《社会静力学》呈现为一份激发了多重遗产的文本,其中包括Henry George(斯宾塞要求《社会静力学》1892年修订版删除1851年原版中论土地一章,George对这一做法感到非常不满)和Piotr Kropotkin的著作｡【编注:Henry George是乔治主义改革运动的创始人,该运动最初主张以单一土地税代替其他所有税种,以便削弱地租收益而提高其他创造性活动的激励,但后来一些追随者将其改造成了土地国有化再分配主张｡】 Taylor stresses how Spencer goes for voluntary and spontaneous arrangements, not necessarily for institutional settings based on the price system. But this won’t sound particularly controversial or new to libertarians, who, despite the caricature often made of them, understand that not everything in life is tradable at a money price. Their point is more subtle (and Spencerian): that is, top-down government intrusions may retard or altogether stop the spontaneous evolution (or adaptation to new circumstances) of human societies. Taylor强调了斯宾塞支持自愿和自发的安排,而不一定支持基于价格体系的制度设置的做法｡但这对于自由意志主义者来说,并不会特别富于争议或新颖,因为尽管他们经常在这一点上遭到夸张嘲弄,但他们知道并非生命中的每样事物都可以用某种货币价格进行交换｡他们的观点更精致(也更斯宾塞式):即,从上至下的政府干预可能会妨碍或完全阻止人类社会的自发进化(或对新环境的适应)｡ On the other hand, Taylor puts in context Spencer’s later, famous polemics against an intrusive state. The articles included in The Man Versus the State were by and large a reaction to the “drift to the left” of William Gladstone’s 1880 government. Taylor emphasizes that “although Liberals were always suspicious of an overextended sphere of state action, the prevalent attitude was one of wariness of government overreach rather than an outright opposition to a positive role for the state.” 在另一方面,Taylor又结合语境分析了斯宾塞晚年反对干预性国家的著名论战文章｡收在《人与国家》一书中的文章大体上都是针对1880年威廉·格莱斯顿政府“左倾转向”而发的反对｡Taylor强调说:“尽管自由派历来对都国家行动范围的过度扩张心怀疑虑,但当时的流行观点只是对政府的过度扩张保持警惕,并不直接反对国家扮演积极角色｡” In other words, Spencer belonged to a minority of truly committed minimal government types that was never hegemonic in the intellectual realm, let alone in the pragmatic world of politicians. Fair enough, though the younger Spencer certainly saw himself as surrounded by writers with ideas rather close to his, particularly after the abolition of the Corn Laws. 换句话说,斯宾塞属于真正信奉最小政府的少数派,这种人在知识界从未成为主流,更不用说在政客们所处的实务世界｡这说得很对,不过,青年斯宾塞当然认为自己周围有许多作家持有近似于己的观点,特别是在《谷物法》废除以后｡ But the opposite is also true. Many critics have used against Spencer the same argument they later employed against Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom: namely, that pointing to the slippery slope of state interventionism was ridiculous given that government was pursuing just limited (particularly in Spencer’s times) and benevolent interventions. In the 1870s, government spending was less than 10 percent of the British GDP—but increased rapidly in the new century. 然而,反对斯宾塞的也大有人在｡许多批评者在反对斯宾塞时已经用到了他们后来用于反对哈耶克《通往奴役之路》的同一论证:即,认为国家干预主义会急剧膨胀恶化是可笑的,因为政府所追求的只是有限的(在斯宾塞的时代尤其如此)､善意的干预｡在1870年代,政府支出还不到英国GDP的10%——尽管在接下来的新世纪里增长迅速｡ One of the many take-aways of this book is that Spencer was a far more complex thinker than those who only know him as a diabolical “social Darwinist” may believe. Its essays might, for example, open the eyes of those who still have in mind the Herbert Spencer largely manufactured in the 1940s by Richard Hofstadter in a book that made history as a beautifully written and yet quite misleading tirade. 本书的诸多简便结论之一是,作为一位思想家,斯宾塞非常复杂,远超那些只知他是个凶恶的“社会达尔文主义者”的人心中所想｡比如,有些人心目中的斯宾塞仍是由理查德·霍夫斯塔特写于1940年代的一本书(该书将历史编成一份整齐漂亮但却颇为误人子弟的长篇檄文)所塑造【译注:指《美国思想中的社会达尔文主义》一书】,而本书所收论文可以让这些人大开眼界｡ Taylor explains that Spencer never thought that “social existence involved an unrelenting struggle for survival in which the richest were the most successful and the poor should go to the wall.” He quotes Thomas Leonard’s important study on the Hofstadterian myth. Taylor引用Thomas Leonard对“霍夫斯塔特迷思”的重要研究解释说,斯宾塞从未认为“社会存在中包含一种永不休止的生存斗争,在这场斗争中,最富裕的人就是最成功的,而最贫穷的人就应该碰壁失败｡” Jonathan H. Turner explains Spencer’s view of evolution as a process of continuous differentiation, which entailed at the same time more interdependence among the parts of the “social organism” and the need for a flexible regulation that allows for ever further differentiation and specialization. The pace of civilization, so to say, is limited by the extent of the division of labor. Jonathan H. Turner将斯宾塞的进化观解释为一种持续分化的进程,而这就意味着“社会有机体”各个部分之间更大程度的相互依赖,而同时也要求实施弹性管理,以允许更进一步的分化和特化｡可以说文明的步伐是受限于劳动分工水平｡ Francis, who like his co-editor cites the Leonard monograph, also makes clear Spencer’s commitment to pacifism: “Spencerians believed that imperial conquest might have been a natural phenomenon when employed by ancient states, but was an archaic activity in modern times” and a most immoral one. The thread running through all of Spencer’s works is the idea that society progresses toward the minimization of violence, which had been needed at earlier stages of civilization. Francis跟共同主编Taylor一样引用了Leonard的论文,也明确指出了斯宾塞对和平主义的信奉:“斯宾塞主义者相信,当帝国征服发生于古代国家手中时,它们也许是种自然现象,但在现时代,它就是一种过时的活动”,同时也是最不道德的活动之一｡贯穿斯宾塞所有著作的一条主线就是这样一种观念:暴力在文明的最初阶段是需要的,但社会进步的方向就是暴力的最小化｡ This book may convey a sense of Spencer’s true understanding of complexity. In the last pages of Social Statics, which revolves around the idea of betterment and progress, he explains that “the institutions of any given age exhibit the compromise made by these contending moral forces at the signing of their last truce.” His magnificent The Study of Sociology (1873) would be a relevant work for those interested in the proper role of the social sciences and their limits, if only they read it. 本书可能向我们传达了一些斯宾塞对于复杂性的真正理解｡在《社会静力学》的最后部分,斯宾塞讨论的是改良与进步｡他解释说,“任何给定时代的制度都呈现出妥协,这些妥协是彼此竞争的道德力量在签订最终停战协定时所达成的｡”对于那些对社会科学的恰当角色及其局限所在感兴趣的人来说,斯宾塞的皇皇巨著《群学肆言》(1873)很值得关注,当然前提是你能读一读｡ Turner’s essay, possibly the most thorough in this collection, claims Spencer’s centrality in the development of sociology. Turner is sure that Spencer was “a theorist, not in the often sloppy and vague social theory sense, but in the hard-science view of theory as a series of abstract laws that explain the operation of some portion of the universe.” Unfortunately, he writes, though “many of his ideas have endured,  . . . most people do not know that they come from Spencer, so ingrained is the avoidance of anything Spencerian.” Turner的文章可能是这本文集中最为深入的,它认为斯宾塞在社会学的发展过程中占据中心位置｡Turner认定斯宾塞是“一位理论家,这里所说的理论不是社会理论意义上的那种很马虎或含糊的理论,而是表现为一系列抽象规则､能够解释宇宙某一部分之运转的那种硬科学意义上的理论｡”不幸的是,他写道,尽管“他的许多观点延续不朽……绝大多数人并不知道它们来自斯宾塞｡对任何斯宾塞主义的东西都避而不谈的做法是如此顽固｡” Turner signals, for example, that Spencer had a very perceptive and thorough vision of power and the dynamics of the mobilization of coercive resources, which also anticipates the analysis of political elites by Vilfredo Pareto (not by chance, an avid reader of Spencer’s). 比如,Turner表明,斯宾塞对于权力和强制性资源的动员过程持有一种认知透彻､细察入微的理解,这也早于维弗雷多·帕累托对于政治精英的分析(帕累托是斯宾塞的热心读者,这并非偶然)｡ Spencer’s dichotomy of militant and industrial societies is not the naive teleology many assumed. “Militant societies are always centralized because they must deal with conflict and war, whereas” industrial societies “are not centralized and allow individuals and corporate units considerable freedom of activity.” Nations may go in one direction or another, depending on many factors. 斯宾塞对于军事社会和工业社会的二分并不是许多人所理解的那种幼稚的目的论｡“军事社会总是中央集权的,因为它们必须应付冲突和战争”,而工业社会“并不中央集权,并允许个体和团体拥有可观的行动自由｡”国家可能走向完全不同的方向,这取决于许多不同因素｡ Spencer learnt it the hard way. His alleged “drift to conservatism,” or the fact that the tone of his articles and political pamphlets got drier, is due to his understanding of developments in England, which he considered revealed a resurgence of the militant spirit. 斯宾塞是历经艰难困苦才得出这一观点的｡他那被指为“保守主义转向”的转变,以及他的文章和政论日益冷峻这一事实,源自他对于英国内部变化的理解｡他认为这种变化表明了军事精神的复活｡ If I had any quibble about this impressive collection, it would be that the propensity to consider The Man Versus the State as “just” a political pamphlet causes the contributors to overlook that this is perhaps the first work whose arguments are truly centered around the notion of unintended consequences. All in all, though, Herbert Spencer: Legacies may foster a better understanding of this seminal thinker and raise yet more interest in his underappreciated writings. 如果说我对这本令人印象深刻的文集还有什么挑剔的话,那就是作者们将《人与国家》仅仅视作一本政论册子的倾向导致他们忽视了一点:它可能是第一本真正集中围绕“非意图后果”这一概念进行论证的书籍｡总而言之,《赫伯特·斯宾塞:遗产》可能增进我们对这位重要思想家的更好理解,同时进一步增加人们对于他的那些明珠蒙尘之作的更大兴趣｡ （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

The Triumph of Robert Conquest 罗伯特·康奎斯特的功绩 译者：Horace Rae（@sheldon_rae）     校对：沈沉（@你在何地-sxy） 来源：The Wall Street Journal @ 2015-08-05 网址：http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-triumph-of-robert-conquest-1438814435 He chronicled the Soviet terror that so many in the West refused to see. 他记述了许多西方人拒绝正视的苏联大恐怖。 [caption id="attachment_6041" align="alignnone" width="300"] President George W. Bush presents the Presidential Medal of Freedom to historian Robert Conquest, left, in Washington on Nov. 9, 2005. PHOTO: EVAN VUCCI/ASSOCIATED PRESS 小布什总统在华盛顿为历史学家罗伯特·康奎斯特（左）颁发总统自由勋章。2005年11月9日。供图：EVAN VUCCI/ASSOCIATED PRESS。[/caption] Robert Conquest was born in 1917, the year of the Russian Revolution, so it seems fitting that he outlived the Soviet Union by more than 25 years. The indefatigable historian, and enemy, of Soviet totalitarianism died Tuesday at age 98. 罗伯特·康奎斯特生于1917年——俄国十月革命的那一年，所以他比苏联多活了25年是很恰当的。这位苏联极权主义的不倦史家和不懈之敌，于本周二【译注：2015年8月3日】逝世，享年89岁。 Conquest’s major themes were reality and delusion. “The Great Terror” (1968) was the first and still definitive treatment of Stalin’s purges, gulags, show trials and secret police, meticulously documenting the enormity of the death toll. “Harvest of Sorrow”(1986) chronicled what he called the “terror famines” that followed agricultural collectivization. 康奎斯特的研究主题是真实与幻想。《大恐怖》（1968）是关于斯大林政权的大清洗、古拉格集中营、审判秀和秘密警察的第一部论述，翔实记录了庞大的死亡人数，时至今日仍属权威。《苦难的丰收》（1986）则记录了农业集体化之后被他称为“恐怖饥荒”的事件。 When sources inside Russia were few and most Kremlinologists were oblivious, these classics contributed immensely to understanding the nature of the Communist project. They also helped shape the response that won the Cold War; Reagan and Thatcher were among his readers. 当时苏联内部的信息来源少之又少，而苏联问题专家们又袖手旁观，这些经典著作对理解共产主义事业的本质助益极大。它们也有助于制定针对苏联的对策，使我们赢得冷战。里根和撒切尔都读过他的书。 [Hoover Institution Research Fellow Stephen Kotkin on the late Anglo-American historian and his expose of Communist atrocities. Photo credit: Associated Press.] 【胡佛研究所研究员Stephen Kotkin谈论这位已故英裔美国历史学家及他对共产主义暴行的揭露。图片来源：Associated Press.】 Still, until Moscow opened the archives post-1989, leftist intellectuals and especially academics denied the realities Conquest exposed, claiming he exaggerated Stalin’s evil. That debate is now closed beyond challenge. 尽管如此，直到莫斯科1989年以后公开档案之前，左翼知识分子尤其是学术界一直否定康奎斯特所揭露的事实，说他夸大了斯大林的邪恶。现在，这种论调已经毫无争议地停歇了。 Conquest dedicated his later years at Stanford’s Hoover Institution to plumbing delusion, which he defined as “massive reality denial,” or why Russia had so many apologists and sympathizers. He blamed the persistence of destructive beliefs and the bottomless human capacity for self-deception. 康奎斯特晚年在斯坦福的胡佛研究所致力于研究幻想。他把“幻想”定义为“大规模否认事实”，或者（更具体而言），为什么有这么多人维护俄国，同情俄国。他谴责破坏性信念的顽固和人类无穷无尽的自我欺骗能力。 “The mere existence of the U.S.S.R., and its ideas, distorted the way in which many people over the whole world thought about society, the economy, human history,” Conquest wrote in these pages in 1992. “Many were seduced by the comfortable word ‘socialism,’ even to the extent of rejecting the Western ideas of free discussion, political compromise, plural society, piecemeal practicality, change without chaos.” “仅仅是苏联及其理念的存在，就扭曲了全世界很多人思考社会、经济、人类历史的方式，”1992年康奎斯特写道，“许多人都被‘社会主义’这个让人舒心的词汇引诱了，甚至到了抛弃西方的自由讨论、政治妥协、多元社会、零敲碎打式改良的务实精神、有序演变等理念的程度。” Conquest added that the lessons of the bloody 20th century “have not yet been learned, or not adequately so.” Many today across the world still offer solace to dictators and mass murderers, whatever their reasons, so Conquest’s insights into human deception remain and will always be relevant. 康奎斯特补充说，血腥的20世纪的教训“还没有被我们吸取，或者没有被完全吸取”。不管出于何种原因，现在世界上仍有许多人同情独裁者和屠杀者，所以，康奎斯特关于人类自我欺骗的论述会且一直会与我们息息相关。 （编辑：@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

Daniel J. Boorstin, RIP - Historian, Critic, and American Man of Books 丹尼尔·约瑟夫·布尔斯廷，息止安所 ——美国历史学家、评论家和饱读之士

作者：《新亚特兰蒂斯》多名编辑 @ 2004年春季第五号 译者：Marcel ZHANG（@马赫塞勒张） 校对：史祥莆（@史祥莆），慕白（@李凤阳他说） 来源：《新亚特兰蒂斯》（The New Atlantis），http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/daniel-j-boorstin-rip The nation’s collective IQ took a nosedive on February 28, 2004, when Daniel Joseph Boorstin — historian, professor, writer, curator, librarian, and great American booster — died of pneumonia at age 89. 美利坚的民族智慧在2004年2月28日这天蒙受了重大损失，是日，美国历史学家、教授、作家、博物学家、图书馆馆长、伟大的美国促进者丹尼尔·约瑟夫·布尔斯廷（Daniel Joseph Boorstin）因肺炎逝世，享年89岁。 Boorstin was best known as a former Librarian of Congress and the author of two best-selling trilogies, one about early America (The Americans, 1958, 1965, 1973), and one about Western science, art, and philosophy (The Discoverers, 1983; The Creators, 1992; and The Seekers, 1998). 布尔斯廷因出任美国国会图书馆馆长和作为两套畅销三部曲的作者而为世人所知，两套三部曲分别是关于早期美国的三部曲（即（《美国人》三部曲，分别出版于1958、1965和1973年）和关于西方科学、艺术和哲学的三部曲（即“人类文明史三部曲”，分别为出版于1983年的《发现者》、1992年的《创造者》和1998年的《探索者》）。 These works of popular history, together with Boorstin’s many other books and essays, combined vast knowledge, erudition, wit, and clarity, and were especially renowned for unexpected and illuminating insights on everyday life, particularly on the unforeseen significance of technological developments. 这些有关通俗历史的杰作，连同他的其他著作和论文，都蕴含着无尽的知识、学识、才识和卓识，尤其是因为其中对于日常生活那出乎意料且富有启发的洞察，特别是对于科技发展那未曾被预见的重要性的洞察，而享有盛名。 Born in Atlanta in 1914, and raised in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Boorstin was quickly recognized as a prodigy, and entered Harvard University at age 15. From there he went to Oxford to study law, and earned the rare distinction of being called to the English bar as an American. Returning to Harvard, he was a lecturer in legal history, and published his first book, The Mysterious Science of the Law, in 1941. 1914年，布尔斯廷出生于亚特兰大，而后在俄克拉荷马州的塔尔萨长大，他很小的时候就被公认为是一个神童，并在年仅15岁时进入哈佛大学。以此为跳板，他又前往牛津大学专修法学，此外还以美国人的身份获得了受邀进入英格兰大律师工会的殊荣。回到哈佛后，他成为法律史讲师，并在1941年出版了他的第一部作品《神秘的法科学》。 His interests turned from law to history, and in 1944 he began a 25-year stint as a member of the history faculty at the University of Chicago. Not formally trained in history, Boorstin was, in his own words, always an amateur — which, he reveled in pointing out, etymologically meant simply “a lover” of the practice. He sometimes seemed to get a special pleasure out of the disdain in which the professionals held him throughout his career. 此后，他的志趣由法律转向了历史，并在1944开始了在芝加哥大学历史系长达25年的执教生涯。布尔斯廷并不是历史学科班出身，用他自己的话讲，始终是个业余人士（amateur）——他总乐于指出，从词源上讲，amateur的意思是“喜好”某种行当的人。在他的整个职业生涯中，总是有内行向他投来鄙夷的目光，而他似乎从中得到了某种特殊的快感。 While at Chicago, Boorstin’s work focused mainly on early American history, and through a series of books (including his Americans trilogy) he pursued the thesis that America’s political life was so peculiar and successful not because of its theories of government, but because the unique circumstances of American history and geography have made Americans inhospitable to abstract philosophy: a nation of pragmatists rather than ideologues, and yet a nation that understands its pragmatism as a theory. 在芝大期间，布尔斯廷的研究主要集中于早期美国历史，并试图在一系列著述（包括他的《美国人》三部曲）中阐述一个论点，那就是美国的政治生活之所以能如此特殊、如此成功，并不是因为它的执政理念，而是因为美国独一无二的历史和地理环境使得美国人对抽象哲学不甚热衷：这个国家的人多为实用主义者，而非理论家，但同时又将实用主义作为一种理论加以阐发。 In his characteristically paradoxical style, Boorstin wrote that “the belief in the existence of an American theory has made a theory superfluous.” This idea, advanced in Boorstin’s underappreciated 1953 book The Genius of American Politics, put him at odds with the scholars of ideology who then dominated the academy, and earned him a reputation as a peculiar conservative iconoclast that would stay with him. 布尔斯廷以他一贯的诡逆风格写道：“认为存在一种‘美国理论’就已经使这种理论的存在成为多余”。他在出版于1953年的一本被低估的著作《美国政治精神》中提出的这个观点，使得他与一些学者格格不入，这些学者的意识形态统治着当时的学术界，为此他还收获了一个伴其终身的名号——乖戾的右翼反传统者。 Boorstin’s boldest and most groundbreaking work was, however, not a history of early America but a piercing analysis of contemporary American self-delusion. The Image, published in 1961, was an effort to reveal the ways in which new technologies, combined with a traditional American craving for novelty and penchant for fantastical salesmanship, were increasingly distancing American life from reality. 不过，布尔斯廷最为大胆和革新的成果不在于早期美国历史，而在于对当代美国的自我蒙蔽所做出的一个鞭辟入里的分析。于1961年出版的《美国虚构事件指南》一书，便旨在揭示，新兴技术与传统美国人对新奇事物和神奇推销术趋之若鹜的结合，是如何令美国人的生活越来越远离现实的。 In the book, Boorstin introduced the term “pseudo-event” (an event, such as a press conference or “photo opportunity,” that exists purely for the purpose of being reported); he famously defined the celebrity as “a person who is well-known for his well-knownness”; and he sought to show, through historical narrative and telling anecdotes, what has been lost and what has been gained as news-making replaces news-gathering, celebrities replace heroes, tourists replace travelers, and images replace ideals. 在这本书中，布尔斯廷率先提出了一个术语“伪事件”（即这样一种事件，比如新闻发布会或“拍照时机”，这种事件的存在纯粹是为了被报道） ；他对名人的著名定义是：“一个因其知名度而知名的人” ；此外，他还千方百计地通过史述和轶事展现诸如以制造新闻取代搜集新闻，以名流取代英雄，以观光客取代旅行者，和以图像取代理想等等现象中的成败得失。 Boorstin’s comments on the first televised presidential debate (the Kennedy-Nixon debate, held the year before The Image was published) still ring as true in this election year as they did four decades ago: 布尔斯廷对第一次总统大选电视辩论（肯尼迪与尼克松的辩论，在《美国虚构事件指南》一书出版前一年举行）所做的评论，在今年这个选举年与40年前一样振聋发聩： “The drama of the situation was mostly specious, or at least had an extremely ambiguous relevance to the main (but forgotten) issue: which participant was better qualified for the presidency. Of course, a man’s ability, while standing under klieg lights, without notes, to answer in two and a half minutes a question kept secret until that moment, had only the most dubious relevance — if any at all — to his real qualifications to make deliberate presidential decisions on long-standing public questions after being instructed by a corps of experts. “这种情形下的戏剧性场面多半是华而不实的，或者至少在与这个主要问题（但被遗忘了）的相关性上是极其含糊不清的：究竟哪个参选人更有资格登上总统宝座？当然，一个人站在弧光灯之下在两分半钟内脱稿回答一个直到那时之前都秘而不宣的问题的能力，跟他作为总统做出决策的能力，只有微不足道的关系，甚至毫无关系。总统就长期存在的公共问题做决策时，总是在有一群专家提供咨询，在深思熟虑之后做出的决定。 “The greatest presidents in our history (with the possible exception of F.D.R.) would have done miserably; but our most notorious demagogues would have shone. Pseudo-events thus lead to emphasis on pseudo-qualification.” “我们历史中最伟大的总统——可能要排除小罗斯福总统这个特例——可能会在电视辩论中表现得非常糟糕；而那些最臭名昭著的煽动家很可能表现得光芒四射。因此，伪事件导致了对伪资格的重视。” The character of television, Boorstin argued, reinforced the powerful American love of illusion, and the results were not always to be welcomed. 布尔斯廷还认为，电视的特质助长了美国人对假象的热爱，而且有时会产生不受欢迎的后果。 In this and other books, Boorstin made much of the ways in which new technologies and technological attitudes radically alter familiar ways of living in utterly unexpected ways, often for better, though sometimes for worse. In his books and numerous essays, Boorstin reflected on the meaning of science and technology for human life, past and present. 在这本以及其他书中，布尔斯廷列举了很多新型技术和技术性态度是怎样把生活方式彻底转变为一种完全出乎意料的形式的，通常是改良，但有时是恶化。在他数目繁多的书籍和论文中，他反思了由古至今科技对人类生活的意义。 In one essay, “The Republic of Technology and the Limits of Prophecy,” he describes some of the technological forces “that will shape our American lives” in the twenty-first century: Technology invents needs and exports problems; it creates momentum and is irreversible; it uproots and assimilates; it insulates and isolates. 在一篇论文《科技共和与预言之局限》中，他描绘了某些科技力量在21世纪“将会重塑我们的美国生活”：科技催生需求，但同时制造难题；科技会制造出一种态势，而且不可逆转；科技力量摧枯拉朽又潜移默化，隔离社会并孤立人性。 Will we be able, Boorstin wondered, “to share the exploring spirit, reach for the unknown, enjoy multiplying our wants, live in a world whose rhetoric is advertising, whose standard of living has become its morality — yet avoid the delusions of utopia and live a life within satisfying limits?” 布尔斯廷思考的是，我们是否能够“分享探索精神，寻求未知世界，享受欲望倍增的快感，生存于一个以广告为修辞、以生存标准为道德规范的世界，却又回避对乌托邦的幻想而在令人满足的边界中安于现状？” Timepieces and telescopes, engines and electricity, statistics and space — no aspect of science and technology was beyond his ken. But Boorstin always argued that the book was in fact man’s greatest technical innovation, never surpassed. “The computer can help us find what we know is there,” he said in a speech at the dawn of the age of personal computers, “but the book remains our symbol and our resource for the unimagined question and the unwelcome answer.” 计时器与望远镜，引擎与电力，统计与太空——科技的方方面面都没有脱离他的视野。而布尔斯廷却时常强调，书籍实际上才是人类无出其右的最伟大技术革新。他在个人电脑时代前夕的一次演讲中说到:“计算机可以帮我们找到已经确定在那的东西，但为了探寻以前未曾想象过的问题，找到不受欢迎的答案，书籍仍然是我们的路标，是我们的资料库。” And Boorstin was always identified with books. His nomination by President Ford to be Librarian of Congress in 1975 was a natural choice, though professional librarians opposed him as — again — a mere amateur, and some liberals in Washington thought him too conservative. A more practical obstacle to his appointment, though, was the demand by several Senators that the prodigious Boorstin not do any of his own writing while he headed the Library of Congress. 并且布尔斯廷也经常被和书籍联系在一起。1975年他被福特总统提名为美国国会图书馆馆长就是一个实至名归的选择，尽管职业图书馆管理员们又一次以他不过是个业余人士为由来反对，此外，一些华盛顿的自由派也觉得他过于保守。而另一个对其任命更实际的阻碍是，几位参议员要求布尔斯廷在供职期间不可著书立说。 Boorstin refused, but promised to write only on his own time, and during his twelve years as Librarian of Congress he continued to write on weekends, in the evenings, and on nearly every weekday from 4 a.m. to 9 a.m., publishing several books and collections of essays. 布尔斯廷拒绝了，但他保证只利用个人时间来写作。在任职美国国会图书馆馆长长达12年期间，他在每个周末，每个晚上和几乎每个工作日的早晨四点到九点都在持续写作，其间出版了几本著作和论文集。 His term at the Library of Congress was noted for its focus on modernizing and democratizing the library’s resources, making them available to the public, and not just to members of Congress. Boorstin opened the library’s reading rooms and collections to all, and during his term the library began to host public events and act as a center of intellectual activity in Washington. 他在国会图书馆的任期因致力于将图书馆资源现代化和民主化而为世人所知，他让这些资源面向公众开放，而不仅限于国会成员。布尔斯廷将图书馆阅览室和馆藏对外开放，而且在他任职期间，图书馆开始承办公共活动，并成为华盛顿的一个学术活动中心。 He even ordered the majestic bronze doors of the library’s main building to be opened up. “They said it would create a draft,” Boorstin told reporters, “and I replied, ‘Great — that’s just what we need.’” 他甚至曾经下令让图书馆主建筑那宏伟铜门保持敞开。布尔斯廷告诉记者：“他们说这会引起一阵气流，而我的回答是，‘太好了，这正是我们所需要的。’” For six decades, Daniel J. Boorstin’s keen eye and sharp pen were just what America needed to understand the flow and meaning of its history, and to think about its future with a mind open to the unexpected. 60年来，布尔斯廷那敏锐的视角和凌厉的笔触正是美国亟需的，借以了解自身历史的流程和意义，以面向未知的开放心态来看待自身的未来。 In The Seekers, his final book, he warned of the dangers of giving in to the modern technical outlook and forgetting to look upon the world with awe: “Western culture has turned from seeking the end or purpose to seeking causes — from the Why to the How. Might this empty meaning from our human experience?” It was an open question, and Boorstin’s own career offered hope that the answer did not have to be yes. He shall be missed. 他在最后一本著作《探索者》中，对屈服于现代科技图景和忘记对世界心存敬畏的危险发出了警告：“西方文化已经从探求尽头或目标转向了探寻源由——从探寻“为何”转向探寻“如何”。这会清除我们人类经验的意义吗？”这是个没有答案的问题，而布尔斯廷的事业给了我们希望：此问题的答案未必是肯定的。他理应被怀念。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

【2015-08-11】 @熊观七路:辉格老师所持的无镇腹主义更倾向于大卫.弗里德曼吗？ @whigzhou: 比较能相容，但也有很大不同，哲学基础上，他是功利主义，虽然是我比较能接受的版本，但和我们契约主义还是有着深层区别，现实问题上，他大概接受不了我的很多亲保守派主张，但无论如何，对我来说，他都符合最理想对话者的条件 @whigzhou: 所谓理想对话者，就是三分钟内即可hedge出各自论点，找出分歧所在，并在五分钟内将讨论转向经验事实的认定方面（这方面的分歧总是难以也不应指望在短时间内消除），相反，碰到糟糕对话者，大伯我就只好把精力都花在剃头上了。

THE SAYINGS OF JOHN MCCARTHY 约翰·麦卡锡语录 Vol.3 作者：John McCarthy 译者：斑马（@鹿兔马朦） 校对：慕白（@李凤阳他说） 来源：John McCarthy's Home Page，http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/sayings.html Clinton can say: in my industry 5/6 of the experienced men are unemployed. - jmc 1993 and earlier 克林顿可以说：在我这一行，六分之五的熟练男子都是无业的。 Oh, he's sincere all right. The question is: what is he sincere about? - jmc after 1986, perhaps about Gorbachev 哦，他是很真挚。但问题是：他真挚地想要干什么呢？——当时我可能是在说戈尔巴乔夫 His ambition is to be the spider in the World Wide Web. - jmc 1994 他的野心是成为互联网上的一只蜘蛛。 My hobby of not attending meetings about recycling saves more energy than your hobby of recycling. - jmc 1994 我不出席关于废物回收的会议这个习惯省下的能源，比你的废物回收习惯省下的还要多。 r.a.b. Needs an FFF - frequently flamed flames, each with a sampling of exchanges, culminating in an application of Godwin's law. [Godwin's law is that an exchange of flames ends when one poster compares his adversary with Adolf Hitler.] r.a.b.需要FFF（常被点燃的火焰），每个都有一份对话取样，并以援引戈德温法则而达到高潮。[戈德温法则是说，一旦一名发帖者将他的对手形容为希特勒，这次对话即告结束。]【译注：r.a.b.是rec.arts.books的缩写，麦卡锡在著名网络论坛Usenet的rec.arts.books版面非常活跃（据说本文语录中许多出自该版），还经常出席Palo Alto的r.a.b.读者定期聚餐。】 Never abandon a theory that explains something until you have a theory that explains more. - jmc 1991 没找到更有解释力的理论之前，不要放弃一个多少有些解释力的理论。 The gentlemen of the press smell blood. - jmc 1994 媒体的先生们嗅到了血腥味。 Do you wish to imprison the Native Americans in a re-invented primitive culture? - jmc 1994 你希望将美国原住民困锁在经过重新发明的原始文化中吗？ Would you vegetarians like a rule that food stamps cannot be used to purchase products containing meat? Would you vegans like to also forbid their use to purchase eggs, fish or milk products? Some years ago some of my fellow conservatives grumbled about the purchase of filet mignon with food stamps, but their motives were economic, and they were easily beaten down with the usual charges of heartlessness. Maybe you vegetarians would have better luck, since your hearts are pure. I mention this out of my customary helpfulness. - jmc 1994 你们素食者会希望有一条规章规定食品券不能用于购买含肉产品吗？你们吃素的人也希望食品券的作用仅限于购买鸡蛋、鱼或牛奶等产品吗？几年前，我的保守派朋友们因食品券被用于购买菲列牛排的事情而抱怨，但他们这样做是出于经济方面的动机，并且他们很轻松的被“毫无心肝”这种常见的指责所击倒了。也许你们素食主义者的运气会更好一些，因为你们的心灵是纯洁的。 我这么说是因为我向来乐于助人。 The difference between a contemporary liberal and a socialist is that to a liberal the most beautiful word in the English language is "forbidden", whereas to a socialist the most beautiful word is "compulsory". - jmc 1994 当代自由派和社会主义者的区别是，对于自由派来说，英语中最美丽的词是“禁止”（forbidden），对于社会主义者来说，最美丽的词则是“强制”（compulsory）。 When I hear the word Heidegger I reach for my axe. He may have swiped it. - jmc 1994 当我听到“海德格尔”这个词，我便将手伸向我的斧头。他可能已经把它偷偷拿走了。 Measuring all costs in terms of energy is merely a religious exercise. - jmc 1994 and earlier. “以能量衡量所有成本”只是一种宗教活动而已。 Suicidal terrorists may have short shelf lives. - jmc 1994 自杀式恐怖主义者的保存期限应该很短。 Of course, Third World leaders love you. By ascribing third world ills to First World sins, you absolve them of blame for their countries' failure to advance. - jmc 1995 当然，第三世界的领袖们十分爱你。通过将第三世界的病痛归因于第一世界的罪孽，你使他们免受“无法带领国家进步”的责备。 The slogan was "Don't trust anyone over thirty." Sixty years later the slogan became, "Don't trust anyone over ninety." - jmc 1995 那时的口号是“不要相信任何30岁以上的人。”六十年后，口号变成了“不要相信任何90岁以上的人。” In human history, the desire for revenge and the desire for loot have often been closely associated. - jmc 1995 在人类历史上，复仇的愿望和抢掠的愿望常常紧密相连。 Do you wish to do good for the Mexicans (Palestinians) or they merely a stick with which to beat the Americans (Jews)? - jmc 1995 你真的想为墨西哥人（巴勒斯坦人）做好事吗？还是说，他们只是被你当成用来痛打美国人（犹太人）的棍棒？ Compassion is contempt with a human face. - jmc 1995, modified from Christopher Lasch 所谓怜悯，是用温情的面孔做出的蔑视。——改自Christopher Lasch Don't try to talk anyone out of concentrating his hatred on Ayn Rand or any other dead person. It can't harm the dead. Diverted to a living person, it might actually do harm. jmc - 1994 不要试图劝说任何人将仇恨从安·兰德或任何死去的人身上转移。仇恨不会伤害死人，但若仇恨被转移到活人身上，那就可能真的造成伤害。 In praise of philistines It is said that man doesn't live by bread alone. Sometimes this is unfortunate, because people who cannot live by bread alone too often kill other people in consequence of the fights they get into. The word ‘philistine’ as a pejorative is used in a variety of senses, but a common one refers to a person interested only in money and the goods and amusements money can buy. Usually it doesn't refer to someone who will do anything for money but rather a person who if he makes a reasonable amount of money will spend his time enjoying it without considering either the arts, the advance of science, or righting the injustices of the world --- unless one of the above happens to be his job. It may not be presumed that the Philistine people of the Bible had this property any more than anyone else. Philistines do less harm than most ideologically motivated people. - jmc 1985 据说，人不只靠面包而活。有时这很不幸，因为不能只靠面包生活的人们常常会因卷入纷争而杀人。 “庸碌之士”（philistine）这个词作为一种蔑称有很多种意思，但其中一种是指仅仅对钱以及钱所能买来的商品和娱乐有兴趣的人。通常来说，它不是指那些为了钱而不择手段的人，而是指那些只要赚够一定数量的钱就会将时间用在花钱享受，不去考虑艺术、科技进步、或试图改变世界之不公正的人——除非以上情形之一恰好是他的工作。这并不是说，圣经中的非利士人（Philistine）比其他人容易变成这种人。“庸碌之士”做的坏事比绝大多数被意识形态驱使的人要少得多。 People mourn when a person dies, but no-one mourns the billions of intestinal bacteria that his death dooms. Speciesism, I calls it. - jmc 1995 人们为逝者哀悼，但没有人为了因逝者之死而毁灭的数十亿肠内菌哀悼。我把这叫作“物种主义”。 If it doesn't work right, we can always try something else. - jmc < 1996 如果这样不行，我们总可以尝试些别的。 Once a person has killed other people on behalf of an ideology, he becomes rather devoted to it. - jmc 1997 一旦一个人以一种意识形态为名杀了人，那就表明他过于投入这种意识形态了。 Proposals to forbid golf courses have about the same motivations as proposals to forbid skate boarding, although the rationalizations are different. - jmc 1997 “禁止高尔夫球场”这类提议的动机同“禁止滑板”这类提议是相同的，虽然说辞并不一样。 Asking a critic to name his favorite book is like asking a butcher to name his favorite pig. - jmc 1997 让一个书评家选出最喜爱的书就好好比让一个屠夫选出最喜爱的猪。 Language is froth on the surface of thought. - jmc 1997 语言是浮在思维上面的泡沫。 Slogans rarely convince the unconvinced. However, they do rally the troops already on your side. - jmc 1998 口号很少能让那些不信的人相信。然而，它的确可以让已经站在你这边的人团结起来。 Hardly anyone has noticed that in the Northern Hemisphere people stir their drinks counterclockwise, whereas the same people stir their drinks clockwise when visiting the Southern Hemisphere. - jmc 1998 很少有人注意到北半球的人按逆时针的方向搅拌饮料，而当这些人到访南半球时，他们搅拌饮料的方向就成顺时针了。 Honor among thieves is the ancestor of all honor. Likewise, democracy among tyrants is the ancestor of all democracy. Think Magna Carta. - jmc 1998 窃贼之间的尊严是所有尊严的祖先。与之类似，暴君之间的民主是所有民主的祖先。想想大宪章吧。 As we have recently seen, the function of the anti-trust laws is to protect the poor little fellow with a mere $5 billion from being bullied by the big guy with $50 billion. - jmc 2002 正如我们最近看到的那样，反垄断法的作用是去保护那些仅有50亿美金资产的可怜的小家伙们不受拥有500亿美金的老大哥欺负。 If a person can be said to have the wrong attitude, there is no need to pay attention to his arguments. - jmc 2002 如果一个人的态度是错误的，那么就不用理会他的论证了。 Hard distinctions make bad philosophy. - jmc 2002 严格僵硬的区分造就糟糕的哲学。 A declining institution often experiences survival of the unfittest. - jmc 1960s 一个正在衰败的制度常常会经历“不适者生存”的状况。 With no more than six levels of misquotation, any statement can be made to say whatever you wish. - jmc 2002 在六阶误引之内，任何一句话都可以随意解读。 You don't want to examine the basis of your computer's morality any more than you want to see sausage being made. - jmc 2020 不要去考察计算机的道德基础，也不要去看香肠是怎么做出来的。 When I see a slippery slope, my instinct is to build a terrace. - jmc 2003 每次我看见一个滑坡，本能反应是想造一个梯田。 You don't get to do unto others just anything you imagine they might want to do unto you. 你不应该对别人做那些你以为别人可能想对你做的事。 You attack the religious reactionaries who oppose teaching evolution. Very good. Will you also attack Greenpeace and other idealizers of nature who oppose genetic engineering? - jmc 2006 你攻击那些反对教授进化论的宗教反动派。很好。那么你会去攻击“绿色和平”以及其他反对基因工程、把自然理想化的人吗？ He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense. - jmc 1970s or 1980s 不愿做计算，就只能胡扯淡。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

THE SAYINGS OF JOHN MCCARTHY 约翰·麦卡锡语录 Vol.2 作者：John McCarthy 译者：斑马（@鹿兔马朦） 校对：慕白（@李凤阳他说） 来源：John McCarthy's Home Page，http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/sayings.html It's possible to program a computer in English. It's also possible to make an airplane controlled by reins and spurs. - jmc 196x 用英语写计算机程序是有可能的。制造一个通过缰绳和马刺来控制的飞机也是有可能的。 The reason why a professor does something has even less connection with why he says he does it than with most people - jmc 1985 与大多数人相比，一个教授做一件事情的真实理由同他所宣称理由之间的联系更为薄弱。 It's a poor cause for which no-one will scuttle a ship or cut a throat. - jmc 1985 这是个差劲的目标，没有人会为它而毁掉船只，也没有人会为它而割断别人的喉咙。 In this book masculine pronouns embrace not only the feminine but also the robotic. - jmc 1985 在这本书中，阳性代词不仅被用来指代女性，也被用来指代机器人。 A true intellectual is a man who, after reading a book and being convinced by its arguments, will shoot someone or, more likely, order someone shot. - jmc 1985 真正的知识分子在读了一本书并被其中所言折服之后，会朝某个人开枪，或者更有可能的是，去命令某个人开枪。 As T. J. Sr. said to T. J. Jr., "remember my boy, every minute a future valued customer is born and two to meet his requirements". - jmc 1985 正如老T.J.对小T.J.所说，“孩子请记住，每一分钟都将诞生一个在未来有价值的客户，以及两个去满足他需求的人。” When he talks about "firing that loony" he reminds me of a robin attacking its image in a hubcap. - jmc 1985 当他说“开除那个疯子”时，他让我想起一只攻击车轮毂盖上自己映像的知更鸟。 Whenever I hear a dog continually barking, my reaction is one of relief---that it's not my dog making all that racket and inciting the neighbors to call the police. - jmc 1985 每当我听到一只狗不停吠叫的时候，我都感到松了口气——这只乱吠的、扰民的、让人忍不住叫警察的狗，不是我家的。 Amateur bureaucrats are often even worse than professional bureaucrats. - jmc 1985 业余官僚常常比职业官僚还要糟糕。 The last ten percent of any reform is the most difficult to achieve. Moreover, it is often harmful. - jmc 1985 任何改革的最后百分之十都是最难完成的，而且常常是有害的。 When thugs by nature meet thugs by political conviction, 5-0 is not surprising. - jmc 1982? 当天生的暴徒遇到被政治信念所驱使的暴徒，5比0也没什么好惊讶的。 Note to Douglas Hofstadter and Raymond Smullyan: Excessive self reference is as dangerous as smoking. - jmc 1985. 寄语侯世达（Douglas Hofstadter）和雷蒙德·斯穆里安（Raymond Smullyan）：过度的自我引用和吸烟一样危险。 The squabbles among linguists remind me of a saying of my mother-in-law, a retired farmer's wife. "When the chickens start cannibalizing one another, the only thing to do is to butcher the lot or sell them to someone else and start over". 语言学家的争论让我想起我丈母娘的话，她是位退休农场主的媳妇。“当那些鸡开始同类相食，唯一的解决办法就是把它们全杀了，或者把它们卖给别人，然后重新养一批。” Praising the Sandinistas while criticizing the Soviets is like loving kittens and deploring cats. Actually it's not such a nice kitty. - jmc 1986 褒奖桑地诺分子的同时批判苏联人，就好比喜欢猫崽的同时责备大猫。其实它也不是什么好猫。 Soccer riots kill at most tens. Intellectuals' ideological riots sometimes kill millions. - jmc 1986 足球骚乱最多死几十个人。知识分子的意识形态骚乱有时会杀掉几百万人。 You have to transcend your class interests. Since you belong to the class from which bureaucrats are recruited, you naturally favor making people deal with bureaucracies. - jmc 你必须要超越自己的阶级利益。因为官僚正是来自你所在的阶级，你就很自然地喜爱让人们与官僚做交易。 The peace advocates are more interested in beating the conservatives than in reaching agreement with the Soviets. - jmc 1987 相比起与苏联人达成共识，和平倡议者更喜欢攻击保守党。 Your statements amount to saying that if AI is possible, it should be easy. Why is that? - jmc 1987 你的言论无异于是说，如果人工智能是可能的，那就应当是容易实现的。何以如此？ Here's a way to tell scientific intelligence from legal intelligence. Both may start from the idea that something cannot be done and think up arguments to explain why. However, it is possible that the scientist may discover a flaw in the argument that leads him to change his mind and discover a way to do it. He will be pleased. The legal thinker will merely try to patch the flaw in the argument, because once he has chosen a side, all his intelligence is devoted to finding arguments for that side. - jmc 1987 有种方法可以区分科学智力和法学智力。两者的起点都是发现有些工作无法完成，然后去想出一些说辞对此作出解释。然而，科学家可能会发现说辞之中的疏漏，并因此改变自己的想法，并找到一种完成工作的方式。科学家会因此感到满足。法学思维的人只会试图填补说辞的缺口，因为一旦他选择了一边，他的所有智力都会用于为他所选择的立场进行论证。 I don't see as how this Marxist-Leninist is any different from any other Marxist-Leninist. - jmc 1987 我没看出这个马列主义者和其他马列主义者有什么区别。 We modern Marxists regard socialism as a historically brief transitional stage between feudalism and capitalism, necessary only in backward countries. - jmc 1987 我们现代马克思主义者认为，社会主义是由封建制度向资本主义转变的短暂历史阶段，只有在落后国家才是必须的。 An excessive knowledge of Marxism is a sign of a misspent youth. - jmc 1980s 拥有过量的马克思主义知识是虚度青春的标志。 To pop where no-one has pushed. - jmc 1987 在没有人压住的地方跳出来。 Both politicians and journalists face situations which strain their honesty and humanity. My opinion is that politicians on the average stand up somewhat better than journalists. - jmc 1988 政客和记者都会面对挑战他们诚实和人性的场合。我的观点是，政客一般比记者更能经受住考验。 Ask not for whom the horn honks. It honks for thee. - jmc 1988 别问喇叭为谁而鸣。它为你而鸣。 Imaginary dialog: Please explain why you are not to be regarded as a pompous fool. ... Well, perhaps you are a pompous fool with power. Please explain what you want me to do and what harm you are threatening to do to me if I don't comply with your wishes. - jmc 想象中的对话： 请解释为何别人不应把你当成一个自大的蠢货…… 啊，可能你是一个有权势的自大的蠢货。请解释你想让我做什么，以及如果我不按照你的愿望来的话，你会用什么威胁我。 He has the first half of the Golden Rule down pat: Do unto others. - jmc 1988 他只记住了黄金法则的后一半：施于人。 If I owned Marseilles and Hell, I'd rent out Marseilles and live in Hell. - Marcel Proust, 1989 如果我拥有马赛和地狱，那么我会把马赛租出去，自己住地狱。——马塞尔·普鲁斯特 The SCLC draft has a whole mile of good intentions. - jmc 1989 SCLC草案的初衷是很好的。【译注：SCLC是Southern Christian Leadership Conference（南方基督教领袖会议）的缩写，是一个美国黑人民权运动组织，1957年由马丁·路德·金召集60多位黑人牧师创建。】 Foolishness is rarely a matter of lack of intelligence or even lack of information. - jmc 1989 愚蠢很少是因为缺乏智力，甚至很少是因为缺乏信息。 An extreme optimist is a man who believes that humanity will probably survive even if it doesn't take his advice. - jmc 1989 极端乐观主义者认为，即使不听取他的建议，人类仍然有可能存活下去。 - We should get him interested in the abortion issue. - Which side? - It doesn't matter which side. Both sides have relatively responsible leadership, and neither is likely to prompt him to kill for the cause. - jmc 1989 ——我们应该让他关注堕胎问题。 ——站哪边？ ——站哪边都不是问题。两边都有还算负责任的领袖，并且任何一边都不太可能鼓励他因此而杀人。 Committing genocide on behalf of an institution generates greater loyalty to it than merely getting people fired from their jobs on its behalf. - jmc 1989 相比起让人们为一个制度而被炒鱿鱼，以这个制度为名进行种族屠杀能为它带来更多的忠诚。 He divides up this subject the way a Chinese cook divides up a duck. - jmc 1990 他像中国大厨切烤鸭那样将这个主题切开。 It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest. - Adam Smith Alas few socialists are either benevolent enough to work hard at these occupations out of benevolence or self-interested enough to work hard at them for money. - jmc 1991 我们的晚餐并非来自于屠夫、酿酒者、或是面包师的慈悲，而是来自于他们为自我利益的考量。——亚当·斯密 哎呀，很少有社会主义者慈悲到了可以出于慈悲而在这些职位上努力，也没有多少社会主义者自利到能够为了钱而在这些职位努力工作。 It's just a pissing contest, but unfortunately the contestants never seem to run out of piss. - jmc 1991 这只是个撒尿比赛，可遗憾的是参赛者好像永远也尿不完。 There is only one thing more harmful to society than an elected official forgetting the promises he made in order to get elected; that's when he doesn't forget them. - jmc 1992 对社会来讲，只有一件事比当选官员忘掉为赢得选票所做出的承诺更加糟糕，那就是他没有忘记这些承诺。 This is not the first time my views on some topic have inspired in someone the desire to psychoanalyze me. Previous experience leads me to ask about your couch. Is it comfortable? Are its springs in good shape? - jmc 我对一些问题的看法勾起了一些人对我进行精神分析的愿望，这种状况已经不是第一次了。由于先前的经验，我想要了解一下沙发的状况。它舒适吗？它的弹簧没变形吧？ My opinion is that he's a swindler and you're a sucker. - jmc 1993 我的意见是，他是个骗子而你是个傻蛋。 Inside of many liberals is a fascist struggling to get out. - jmc 1993 许多自由派的内心都有一个急欲挣脱而出的法西斯。 The new class struggle will pit the workers and the bosses against the others. - jmc 1993 新的阶级斗争将会是工人和老板联合对抗其他人。 The Republican majority in 1994 was a coalition of the workers and the bosses against the others. - jmc 1995 1994年的共和党国会多数，是一个工人和老板共同对抗其他人的联盟。【译注：共和党在1994年中期选举中获得自1946年以来最辉煌的胜利，终结了民主党对国会长达40年的控制，并在此后12年占据国会两院多数，同时还赢得了过半数的州长和州议会选举，史称“共和党革命”。这次胜利一是利用了选民对克林顿医保改革方案的担忧，二是得益于金里奇所提出的“与美国之契约（Contract with America）”这一政治纲领的巨大号召力，这份纲领为此后十几年的保守主义复兴奠定了基调，其所带来的选举后果也重构了美国的政治光谱。不过，麦卡锡此处所指为何，却不太清楚，或许是指金里奇纲领中的亲企业部分。】 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——