SD冠军锦标赛｜美国藤校演讲与辩论赛中国选拔赛

TED Technology, Entertainment, Design在英语中的缩写，美国的一家私有非营利机构，以它组织的TED大会著称；将”用思想的力量来改变世界”作为宗旨。事实上，除了科技、娱乐、设计的主题，这场盛会涉及的领域还在不断扩展，展现着涉及几乎各个领域的各种见解，TED的演讲简短且深刻，参加者们称它为 “超级大脑SPA”。

I believe that there are new, hidden tensions that are actually happening between people and institutions — institutions that are the institutions that people inhabit in their daily life: schools, hospitals, workplaces, factories, offices, etc. And something that I see happening is something that I would like to call a sort of “democratization of intimacy.” And what do I mean by that? I mean that what people are doing is, in fact, they are sort of, with their communication channels, they are breaking an imposed isolation that these institutions are imposing on them. How are they doing this? They’re doing it in a very simple way, by calling their mom from work, by IMing from their office to their friends, by texting under the desk. The pictures that you’re seeing behind me are people that I visited in the last few months. And I asked them to come along with the person they communicate with most. And somebody brought a boyfriend, somebody a father. One young woman brought her grandfather. For 20 years, I’ve been looking at how people use channels such as email, the mobile phone, texting, etc. What we’re actually going to see is that, fundamentally, people are communicating on a regular basis with five, six, seven of their most intimate sphere. Now, lets take some data. Facebook. Recently some sociologists from Facebook — Facebook is the channel that you would expect is the most enlargening of all channels. And an average user, said Cameron Marlow, from Facebook, has about 120 friends. But he actually talks to, has two-way exchanges with, about four to six people on a regular base, depending on his gender. Academic research on instant messaging also shows 100 people on buddy lists, but fundamentally people chat with two, three, four — anyway, less than five. My own research on cellphones and voice calls shows that 80 percent of the calls are actually made to four people. 80 percent. And when you go to Skype, it’s down to two people. A lot of sociologists actually are quite disappointed. I mean, I’ve been a bit disappointed sometimes when I saw this data and all this deployment, just for five people. And some sociologists actually feel that it’s a closure, it’s a cocooning, that we’re disengaging from the public. And I would actually, I would like to show you that if we actually look at who is doing it, and from where they’re doing it, actually there is an incredible social transformation. There are three stories that I think are quite good examples. The first gentleman, he’s a baker. And so he starts working every morning at four o’clock in the morning. And around eight o’clock he sort of sneaks away from his oven, cleans his hands from the flour and calls his wife. He just wants to wish her a good day, because that’s the start of her day. And I’ve heard this story a number of times. A young factory worker who works night shifts, who manages to sneak away from the factory floor, where there is CCTV by the way, and find a corner, where at 11 o’clock at night he can call his girlfriend and just say goodnight. Or a mother who, at four o’clock, suddenly manages to find a corner in the toilet to check that her children are safely home. Then there is another couple, there is a Brazilian couple. They’ve lived in Italy for a number of years. They Skype with their families a few times a week. But once a fortnight, they actually put the computer on their dining table, pull out the webcam and actually have dinner with their family in Sao Paulo. And they have a big event of it. And I heard this story the first time a couple of years ago from a very modest family of immigrants from Kosovo in Switzerland. They had set up a big screen in their living room, and every morning they had breakfast with their grandmother. But Danny Miller, who is a very good anthropologist who is working on Filipina migrant women who leave their children back in the Philippines, was telling me about how much parenting is going on through Skype, and how much these mothers are engaged with their children through Skype. And then there is the third couple. They are two friends. They chat to each other every day, a few times a day actually. And finally, finally, they’ve managed to put instant messaging on their computers at work. And now, obviously, they have it open. Whenever they have a moment they chat to each other. And this is exactly what we’ve been seeing with teenagers and kids doing it in school, under the table, and texting under the table to their friends. So, none of these cases are unique. I mean, I could tell you hundreds of them. But what is really exceptional is the setting. So, think of the three settings I’ve talked to you about: factory, migration, office. But it could be in a school, it could be an administration, it could be a hospital. Three settings that, if we just step back 15 years, if you just think back 15 years, when you clocked in, when you clocked in to an office, when you clocked in to a factory, there was no contact for the whole duration of the time, there was no contact with your private sphere. If you were lucky there was a public phone hanging in the corridor or somewhere. If you were in management, oh, that was a different story. Maybe you had a direct line. If you were not, you maybe had to go through an operator. But basically, when you walked into those buildings, the private sphere was left behind you. And this has become such a norm of our professional lives, such a norm and such an expectation. And it had nothing to do with technical capability. The phones were there. But the expectation was once you moved in there your commitment was fully to the task at hand, fully to the people around you. That was where the focus had to be. And this has become such a cultural norm that we actually school our children for them to be capable to do this cleavage. If you think nursery, kindergarten, first years of school are just dedicated to take away the children, to make them used to staying long hours away from their family. And then the school enacts perfectly well. It mimics perfectly all the rituals that we will find in offices: rituals of entry, rituals of exit, the schedules, the uniforms in this country, things that identify you, team-building activities, team building that will allow you to basically be with a random group of kids, or a random group of people that you will have to be with for a number of time. And of course, the major thing: learn to pay attention, to concentrate and focus your attention. This only started about 150 years ago. It only started with the birth of modern bureaucracy, and of industrial revolution. When people basically had to go somewhere else to work and carry out the work. And when with modern bureaucracy there was a very rational approach, where there was a clear distinction between the private sphere and the public sphere. So, until then, basically people were living on top of their trades. They were living on top of the land they were laboring. They were living on top of the workshops where they were working. And if you think, it’s permeated our whole culture, even our cities. If you think of medieval cities, medieval cities the boroughs all have the names of the guilds and professions that lived there. Now we have sprawling residential suburbias that are well distinct from production areas and commercial areas. And actually, over these 150 years, there has been a very clear class system that also has emerged. So the lower the status of the job and of the person carrying out, the more removed he would be from his personal sphere. People have taken this amazing possibility of actually being in contact all through the day or in all types of situations. And they are doing it massively. The Pew Institute, which produces good data on a regular basis on, for instance, in the States, says that — and I think that this number is conservative — 50 percent of anybody with email access at work is actually doing private email from his office. I really think that the number is conservative. In my own research, we saw that the peak for private email is actually 11 o’clock in the morning, whatever the country. 75 percent of people admit doing private conversations from work on their mobile phones. 100 percent are using text. The point is that this re-appropriation of the personal sphere is not terribly successful with all institutions. I’m always surprised the U.S. Army sociologists are discussing of the impact for instance, of soldiers in Iraq having daily contact with their families. But there are many institutions that are actually blocking this access. And every day, every single day, I read news that makes me cringe, like a $15 fine to kids in Texas, for using, every time they take out their mobile phone in school. Immediate dismissal to bus drivers in New York, if seen with a mobile phone in a hand. Companies blocking access to IM or to Facebook. Behind issues of security and safety, which have always been the arguments for social control, in fact what is going on is that these institutions are trying to decide who, in fact, has a right to self determine their attention, to decide, whether they should, or not, be isolated. And they are actually trying to block, in a certain sense, this movement of a greater possibility of intimacy.

我相信，有新的，隐藏的紧张关系 发生在人们与制度之间， 在人们日常生活中 的制度如： 学校、医院、工作场所、 工厂、办公室等等。 我看到的这些关系 是被我称之为的 一种“民主化的亲密关系。” 这是什么意思呢？ 事实上，我指的是人们正在做的 就是在他们所处的沟通渠道中， 他们试图打破一种强加的孤立， 一种由于这些制度对他们所强加的孤立。 人们怎样才能做到这点？他们正用 非常简单的方法来做到，例如工作时给妈妈打电话， 从办公室给朋友们发即时通讯， 在桌子下发短信。 你看到我身后的这些照片 是我过去几个月采访的人们。 我请求他们带来他们联系最多，最亲密的人。 有人带来她的男朋友，有人带来父亲。 一位年轻女人带来她的爷爷。 20年来，我一直在研究人们如何使用 如电子邮件、移动电话和短信等的通信渠道。 从根本上，我们实际上要看到的是， 人们与他们最亲密领域里的 五，六，七个人定期交流联系。 现在例如一些有关Facebook的数据。 最近一些社会学家从Facebook， Facebook是人们所期望的 所有社交网络中最庞大的一个。 一位Facebook的普通用户， 卡梅伦马洛Cameron Marlow说， 他大约有120个朋友。 但是根据他的性别，他实际上 只与大约4至6人 定期双向交流。 在即时通讯学术研究 也显示好友名单上的100个人， 但基本上人们只和二个，三个，四个人相互交流， 无论如何，不会超过5个人。 而由我做的关于手机和语音呼叫研究中 表明百分之八十的来电 实际上是和4个人对话。百分之八十。 当你上Skype，就只和两个人聊天。 很多的社会学家的确对此很失望。 我的意思是，当我看到这数据和这一切只是和5个人交流 我也感到失望。 而一些社会学家实际上认为， 这就是一个封闭的区间，这就是一个茧， 以致于我们正与公众脱离开。 而我实际上，我想展示给你们的是， 如果我们实际看看谁在通信， 他们在哪里交流着， 这事实上是一个令人难以置信的社会转变。 这有三个故事，我认为它们是相当不错的例子。 第一位绅士，他是一位面包师。 他每天在早上四点开始工作。 大概早上8点左右他就偷偷离开他的烤箱， 清洗他和面团的双手， 并打电话给他的妻子。 因为这是她新的一天，他只是想祝福她有美好的一天。 而且我听说过这种故事很多次。 一位年轻的夜班工人 从工厂车间要偷偷离开一下， 顺便说一下，那有闭路电视， 他找到一个拐角，在夜里11点钟， 他给女友电话只是问声晚安。 或者一位母亲，在4点钟， 突然在厕所的角落里打电话 查问她的孩子们是否安全地回家。 接下来另一个例子，他们是一对巴西夫妇。 他们在意大利生活多年。 他们与家人一个星期有几次Skype聊天。 但是，每两周一次，他们真的把电脑放在他们的餐桌上， 设置好摄像头，竟然就 与他们在圣保罗的家庭一起晚餐。他们有了一个家宴大活动。 我第一次听说这种故事是几年前 从一个非常温馨的在瑞士居住的 科索沃移民家庭。 他们在自己的客厅有一个大屏幕。 每天清晨，通过屏幕，他们与他们的祖母共进早餐。 丹尼米勒Danny Miller是一位很好的人类学家， 他研究菲律宾籍移民妇女， 这些妇女离开她们在菲律宾的孩子们， 他曾告诉我有父母教育子女是 通过Skype来交流的， 还有很多这些菲律宾母亲们通过Skype来了解她们的孩子们。 然后还有第三个例子。他们是两个朋友。 每天他们互相聊天，甚至一天好几次。 最终他们工作时试着在电脑上 使用即时消息联系。 现在，显然地，他们公开交流。 每当他们有空闲，他们就互相交谈。 这也正是我们所看到的 在学校, 在课桌下，青少年和孩子们正这样做， 并给他们的朋友们发短信。 所以，这些例子枚不胜举。 我意思是，我可以告诉你们数百个类似的例子。 但真正特别的是设定背景。 那么想想这3个我所谈到的背景： 工厂，移民，办公室。 但这也可能在学校，在政府， 也可能在医院发生。 这3种背景下，如果我们只追随到15年前， 如果你仅回想15年前， 当你打卡上班， 打卡到办公室上班， 在工厂打卡上班， 在整个工作期间没有任何联系， 与你的私人领域没有任何联系。 你要是很幸运，在走廊处或某处可以用一个公共电话。 你要是管理层，哦，那就是另一回事。 你可能会有直线电话。 如果你没有直线电话，或许你必须通过一个操作员打电话。 但基本上，当你进入这些建筑物后， 你就没有了私人领域。 这已成为我们职业生涯规范， 类似这样的规范，这样的期望。 它与技术能力没有任何关系。 手机就在那里。但是，一旦你进入到工作领域，所期望的是， 你的义务就是全身心地完成手头的任务， 全身心服务于你身边的人们。 这就是要关注的事情。 这已成为一种文化规范， 它使得我们竟教育孩子们进行这种分离，不亲密的转变。 如果你想想托儿所，幼儿园，开学第一年 仅仅一味地带走孩子们， 让他们习惯远离他们自己的家庭很长的时间。 然后学校扮演了非常完美的角色， 完全模仿所有在办公室要发生的的规范仪式， 进入的仪式，退出的仪式， 时间表，在这个国家的制服， 确定你身份的东西，团队建设活动， 团队建设主要使你可以 与任何孩子们，或者随机的一群人 相处一段时间。 当然，主要的事情： 学会集中注意力， 要集中精力，集中你的注意力。 这大概于150年前开始。 它（这种分离）随着当代官僚 和工业革命的诞生而开始。 当人们基本上要去别的地方工作 并开展工作。 随着当代官僚，就有一个非常合理的方法， 那里有一个私人领域 和公共领域之间的明确区分。 所以，到那时，基本上人们生活在他们各自行业。 他们生活在他们耕耘的土地上。 他们生活在他们工作的车间。 如果你想想看，它（这种分离）就贯穿我们的整个文化， 甚至我们的城市。 如果你想想中世纪的城市，中世纪城市的市镇， 居住在那里的各行各业都有名字。 现在我们有广阔的住宅郊区 它很好地与生产区域 和商业领域分别开。 实际上，在这150年间， 有一个非常明确的阶级制度也出现了。 因此，工作职责越低 和执行越低级工作的人，他越被剥夺 他的私人领域空间。 人们一整天或者在任何情况下 使用着这惊人的可以用来 亲密联系的可能性交流。 然而他们大规模地联系。 皮尤研究所，定期提供的良好数据表明， 例如，在美国， 我认为这个数据是保守的 – 百分之五十的人在工作中通过电子邮件， 实际上是从他的办公室发私人电子邮件。 我的确认为这数据是保守的。 就我自己的研究，我认为私人电邮的高峰 实际上是早上的11点，不管什么国家。 百分之七十五的人们承认 在工作时用移动电话进行私人聊天。 百分之百地使用短信。 关键是这种私人领域的再兴起 在所有机构并不是十分成功。 我经常吃惊，美国陆军 社会学家讨论着 例如伊拉克的军人们 与他们的家人们每天联系的影响。 但是许多机构实际上正在阻止这样的联系。 每一天，每一日， 我看到的新闻使我害怕， 例如 针对于得克萨斯州的孩子们的15美元罚款， 就因为在学校他们每次拿出和使用他们的移动电话。 如果纽约的公共汽车司机被看到手拿有移动电话， 他就被立即解雇。 公司禁止即时通讯和Facebook。 除了安全保护问题， 一直有社交控制的舆论， 事实上要发生的是 这些制度正决定着 到底谁有权自行决定该关注的事情， 去决定，是否它们应该，或者不应该，被孤立。 在某种意义上，它们实际中在试图阻止 这种更有可能的亲密性运动。