(1.4)--Unit1supplementarymaterial4.pdf

《(1.4)--Unit1supplementarymaterial4.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《(1.4)--Unit1supplementarymaterial4.pdf（3页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、The following is the transcript of a TED speech.If you want to watch the video,please search with the link below.For Arguments Sake My name is Dan Cohen,and I am academic,as he said.我叫丹科恩，我是个学者，就像主持人介绍的。And what that means is that I argue.这意味着我经常需要辩论。Its an important part of my life,and I like to ar

2、gue.这是我生命中的重要组成部分，同时我喜欢辩论。And Im not just an academic,Im a philosopher,我不仅仅是个学者，我也是个哲学家，so I like to think that Im actually pretty good at arguing.所以我觉得是实际上还是挺擅长辩论的。But I also like to think a lot about arguing.但是我也经常思考有关辩论的问题。And thinking about arguing,Ive come across some puzzles,说起辩论，我曾有过一些困惑，and

3、one of the puzzles is that 而其中一个困惑是 as Ive been thinking about arguing over the years,我多年前开始考虑如何辩论 and its been decades now,Ive gotten better at arguing,至今已有二十多年了，我也变得更善于辩论，but the more that I argue and the better I get at arguing,the more that I lose.但是越是辩论，我就能从中获取更多，同时也失去更多。And thats a puzzle.这就是一

4、个困惑。And the other puzzle is that Im actually okay with that.而另一个困惑就是我其实觉得这没什么大不了的。Why is it that Im okay with losing 为什么我会觉得失去一些什么也无关紧要，and why is it that I think that good arguers are actually better at losing?为什么好的辩论者实际上更善于失去？Well,theres some other puzzles.好了，其实我还有以下其他困惑。One is,why do we argue?Who

5、 benefits from arguments?例如，我们为什么辩论？而谁又从辩论中获益？And when I think about arguments now,Im talking about,需要指出的是当我谈及辩论时，我所指的，lets call them academic arguments or cognitive arguments,是所谓学术辩论亦或者认知辩论，where something cognitive is at stake.就一些我们知之甚少的方面进行辩论。Is this proposition true?Is this theory a good theory?

6、例如我们的认知是否正确？这个理论是不是个好理论？Is this a viable interpretation of the data or the text?对于某些数据或者文字这是不是一个很好的解释？And so on.Im not interested really in arguments about 以及很多其他的问题。我无心去争论 whose turn it is to do the dishes or who has to take out the garbage.今天该谁洗碗或者谁应该倒垃圾。Yeah,we have those arguments too.当然，我们也会为那些

7、问题争论。I tend to win those arguments,because I know the tricks.我经常在那类争论争论中胜出，因为我知道一些技巧。But those arent the important arguments.当时那些辩论没有那么重要。Im interested in academic arguments today,and here are the things that puzzle me.我感兴趣的是那些学术性辩论，而接下来这是我感到困惑的事情。First,what do good arguers win when they win an argu

8、ment?首先，当人们赢得一场辩论的时候，作为一个优秀的辩论者，他从中学到了什么 What do I win if I convince you that 如果我能说服你 utilitarianism isnt really the right framework for thinking about ethical theories?实用主义不能用来解释道德理论的话，我能从中获得什么呢？So what do we win when we win an argument?所以我们到底可以从一场辩论中学到什么？Even before that,what does it matter to me

9、而且在此之前，whether you have this idea that Kants theory works or Mills the right ethicist to follow?你是追随康德还是密尔又有跟我什么关系呢？Its no skin off my back whether you think functionalism is a viable theory of mind.无论你是否认为功能主义是一个可取的思维方式，都对我没有什么影响。So why do we even try to argue?所以我们为什么会想去辩论？Why do we try to convince other people to believe things that they dont want to believe?为什么我们要去说服别人相信那些他们不愿相信的事情？And is that even a nice thing to do?我们到底应不应该这么做？Is that a nice way to treat another human being,用这种方式去对待他人，try and make them think something they dont want to think?迫使他们去思考一些他们不想去思考的东西？