--- author: The Ezra Klein Show date: '2026-05-26' guest: '' layout: post.njk source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NCxS__rtAo speaker: The Ezra Klein Show tags: - cooperation - liberalism - artificial-intelligence - social-narratives - human-agency title: 尤瓦尔·赫拉利谈故事、AI与人类未来 summary: 本次访谈中，历史学家尤瓦尔·赫拉利深入探讨了人类社会由“合作”而非“权力”驱动的核心论点，并将其与当前右翼民粹主义、自由主义危机及以色列-巴勒斯坦冲突中的“权力叙事”进行对比。他分析了民族主义、宗教在构建“共享故事”中的作用，并强调了自由主义的“自我纠正机制”及追求“真理”的重要性。赫拉利还警告了社交媒体算法和AI对人类心理的“黑客式”操纵，提出了“AI人格”的潜在危险，以及AI如何通过创造复杂的金融系统等方式，使人类逐渐丧失理解和控制世界的能力。他强调了AI作为“智能体”而非“工具”的本质，并呼吁人类社会应积极思考如何与AI共建健康的混合社会。 insight: '' draft: true series: '' category: ai-ml area: tech-engineering project: [] people: - 尤瓦尔·赫拉利 - 史蒂芬·米勒 - 唐纳德·特朗普 - 约尔·哈佐尼 - 本雅明·内塔尼亚胡 - 维斯帕先 - 约汉南·本·扎卡伊 - 马歇尔·麦克卢汉 - 穆斯塔法·苏莱曼 - 约翰·冯·诺伊曼 - 弗兰斯·德瓦尔 - 奥尔德斯·赫胥黎 companies_orgs: - OpenAI - 微软 - 谷歌 - X (Twitter) - TikTok - Facebook - 哈马斯 products_models: [] media_books: - 《人类简史》 - 《未来简史》 - 《不可阻挡的我们 第三卷》 - 《疯子》 - 《黑猩猩的政治》 - 《美丽新世界》 - 《1984》 status: evergreen --- ### 合作与权力之争 **主持人**: 我想，如果你阅读一下**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**那些畅销书，比如**《人类简史》**和**《未来简史》**，你会发现他只有一个主要话题，那就是**合作**。**合作**以及大规模、跨时间进行**合作**的能力，是人类进步的根本动力。**合作**是我们从一个在战斗中完全打不过熊或狮子的生物，变成现在能够创造和驾驭我们所拥有的社会的方式。我认为，赫拉利的作品现在面临一些有趣的挑战，因为我们正生活在特朗普主义和右翼民粹主义的时代。这些运动传递的信息之一是，对**合作**、对积极关系的强调是一种谎言。人类社会并非由**合作**这些“软性问题”所驱动，而是由**权力**、等级制度、支配欲所驱动，关乎在与他人的交易中获胜，在冲突和贸易中领先。他们认为，所有这些自由主义的“美好”都是谎言，人类的真正动力是**权力**，忘记这一点就是忘记了我们进步的引擎。所以，我一直想和赫拉利谈谈这个。我觉得把他带入一场有趣的讨论会很有意义。他有一本为孩子们写的新书，名为**《不可阻挡的我们 第三卷》**，它也讲述了**合作**以及敌人如何变成朋友。但这次对话的范围远不止于此。它关乎**自由主义**，关乎**以色列**（赫拉利是以色列人），关乎**人工智能（AI）**，以及它将如何影响我们，如何影响作为我们彼此协作或无法协作方式的**语言**。正如我们在播客中常说的，这是一场内容广泛的对话，也因此更加精彩。
Original English **Host**: I think if you look across his mega bestselling books like **Sapiens** and **Homodus**, you've all know **Harrari** really has one major topic. That topic is **cooperation**. **Cooperation** and the ability to cooperate across scale across time as being the fundamental engine of human progress. **cooperation** as the way we go from being this creature that absolutely cannot beat a bear or a lion in a fight to being able to create and command the societies we have now. I think right now there's something interestingly challenging about Harari's work because we live in this moment of Trumpism of right-wing populism. And one of the messages of those movements is that this emphasis on cooperation, on positive some relationships is a lie. That humanity that society is driven not so much by these like soft questions of **cooperation** as by **power**, hierarchy, dominance, about winning the transaction with the other, about coming out ahead in the conflict, in the trade. that all of these like nicities of **liberalism**, they were a lie and that really humanity runs on **power** and that to forget that is to forget the engine of our progress. So, I've been wanting to talk to Harari about this. I think there's an interesting debate to put him in conversation with. He's in a new book for kids called **Unstoppable Us Volume 3**. It is also about **cooperation** and how enemies turn into friends. But this conversation is bigger than that. it. It's about **liberalism**. It's about **Israel**. Harrari is Israeli. It's about **AI** and what it's going to do to us and what it's going to do to language as the way we work with and fail to work with each other. It is, as we say in the podcast, biz a wide-ranging conversation and all the better for it. As always, my email times.com. You all know Harrari. Welcome to the show.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 谢谢，很高兴来到这里。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Thank you. It's good to be here.
**主持人**: 我想从一段**唐纳德·特朗普**的副幕僚长**史蒂芬·米勒**的片段开始，我最近读您的一些作品时一直在思考这段内容。我在这里播放一下。
Original English **Host**: I wanted to begin with a clip of **Steven Miller**, uh, **Donald Trump**'s deputy chief of staff, that I began thinking about as I was reading some of your recent work. I'm going to play it here.
**史蒂芬·米勒**: 你可以尽情谈论国际礼仪和一切，但**杰克**，我们生活在一个真实世界里，这个世界由**实力**、**武力**、**权力**主宰。这些是自古以来世界的铁律。
Original English **Steven Miller**: You can talk all you want about international nicities and everything else, but we live in a world in the real world, **Jake**, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world are saying since the beginning of time.
**主持人**: 听到这些，您有什么想法？
Original English **Host**: What do you think when you hear that?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 那是，嗯，整个哲学和灵性史都在与这种观点争论，即唯一的现实是**权力**，唯一的现实是**武力**。而从历史学家的角度来看，这显然不是事实。如果人类唯一的现实是**蛮力**，我们现在仍然会生活在非洲大草原上小小的狩猎采集部落里。因为整个人类历史，都是关于如何让更多人**合作**和**互相信任**的。你不可能只靠**蛮力**做到这一点。我想在这里花点时间讨论一下这种张力：一种观点认为**合作**是人类历史的驱动力，另一种观点认为**权力**是人类历史的驱动力。因为我想，如果我试图以最善意的方式理解**特朗普政府**和一些其他类似政治人物的观点，他们会说，**合作**的条件一直是共享的民族和宗教故事。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: That the whole of of uh the history of philosophy and spirituality is uh an argument with exactly that point of view that the only reality is **power**, the only reality is **force**. And from the viewpoint of a historian, it's clear that this is not the case. If the only human reality was **brute force**, we would still be living in tiny hunter gatherer bands in the African savannah. Because the whole of human history is about how do you get more people to **cooperate** and to **trust** each other and you cannot do that only with **brute force**. I I want to spend some time here on this tension between visions of **cooperation** as a driving force in human history and visions of **power** as a driving force in human history because I think if I'm trying to steal man the vision that emerges out of the **Trump administration** and some other uh political figures like them right now, they would say that the conditions for **cooperation** have been a mixture of shared national and religious stories. Mhm.
**主持人**: 嗯，还有**等级制度**、**权力**、**支配**和**征服**。他们试图重建的，正是那些曾使伟大国家变得伟大的条件。我认为这吸引了人们。
Original English **Host**: Mhm. and hierarchy, power, domination and and subjugation. And that what they are trying to recreate are these conditions that have held that have allowed, you know, the great countries to become great. And I think it's appealing to people.
**主持人**: 但是，您作品的另一个维度是关于**共享故事**，以及**故事**作为允许人类大规模**合作**的操作系统。对吧？我想，像**唐纳德·特朗普**这样的人，或者在**以色列**，像民族主义哲学家**约尔·哈佐尼**，他们认为我们需要这些强烈的民族故事、民族团结、宗教团结的故事。
Original English **Host**: But but the other dimension is your work is so much about **shared story** and **story** as the operating system that permits human **cooperation** at large scale. Right. And I think something that you know people like **Donald Trump** or or in you know uh **Israel Yor Hazone** the uh nationalist kind of philosopher argue is that we need these intense stories of nations of ethnic solidarity of religious solidarity.
**主持人**: 而**自由主义**以及所有这些美好的、畏惧人权的意识形态的出现，已经开始侵蚀它们。因此，它们正在侵蚀**合作**的条件。我很好奇，作为一个身处这些辩论中的人，您是如何看待这一点的？
Original English **Host**: and **liberalism** and all these nice human rights fearing uh ideologies that emerged have begun to corrode them. And so they're corroding the very conditions for **cooperation**. And and I'm curious as somebody who's been in the in these debates how you think about that.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 那是一个不同的论点。我的意思是，这个论点承认并非所有事物都仅仅基于**武力**和**蛮力**。**民族主义**无疑是人类有史以来最成功，也是最积极的故事之一。对我来说，**民族主义**并非关于仇恨其他群体。**民族主义**的核心是爱护和关心大量你个人不认识的陌生人，但你仍然愿意为他们做出很多牺牲。**民族**不是家庭。**民族**甚至不是一个小部落。在一个小部落里，你认识每一个人，它建立在个人关系之上。而**民族**最引人注目的一点是，你不认识你国家里99.99%的其他人。这不仅适用于像中国或印度这样的大国，也适用于**以色列**。大约有一千万以色列人，我大部分都不认识。然而，**民族主义**让人们足够关心这些陌生人，以至于你会纳税，让国家中的其他人获得良好的医疗保健和教育，最终在某些情况下甚至会为他们冒生命危险。当然，有时**民族主义**会转向仇恨他人。但这并非**民族主义**的本质特征。**民族主义**可以在不仇恨外人的情况下存在。但它不能在不爱内部人的情况下存在。而今天许多自称是**民族主义**拥护者的人，他们把重点放在仇恨上，在许多情况下，他们甚至在民族内部制造仇恨。他们让民族自相残杀。他们认为，如果他们仇恨外人，他们就是伟大的爱国者。你知道，再次以**以色列**为例，我认为在**以色列**历史上，没有人比**内塔尼亚胡**更让民族自相残杀。从这个意义上说，他一直是**以色列民族主义**最糟糕的敌人。是的，他仇恨外人。好吧，但这并不是关键的检验标准。那么问题是，不同的国家将如何处理彼此的关系。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: That's a different argument. I mean, it's an argument that recognizes that not everything is based is based just on force and brute power. Definitely **nationalism** has been one of the most successful and also one of the most positive stories that humans have ever come up with. Uh for me, **nationalism** is not about hating other groups. **Nationalism** at its core is about loving and caring about a a a large number of strangers that you do not know personally, but you are nevertheless willing to make a lot of sacrifices for them. The **nation** is not a family. The **nation** is not even a small tribe. In a small tribe, you know everybody. It's based on personal relationships with nations. One of the most striking things about them is that you don't know 99.99% of the other people in your **nation**. And this is true not only of big nations like China or India. This is also true of **Israel**. There are like about 10 million Israelis. I don't know most of them. And nevertheless, **nationalism** makes people care about these strangers enough so that for instance, you pay taxes so that other people in your **nation** will get good healthcare and education and ultimately and in in some circumstances even risk your life for them. Sometimes of course **nationalism** veers into hatred of others. But this is not an essential feature of **nationalism**. **Nationalism** can exist without hating outsiders. It cannot exist without love for insiders. And many of the people today who present themselves as as the champions of **nationalism**, they put the emphasis on hatred and in many cases they even create hatreds within the **nation**. They divide the **nation** against itself. They think they are great patriots if they uh uh if they hate outsiders. And you know again looking at at **Israel** as an example, nobody I think in the history of **Israel** divided the **nation** against itself more than **Netanyahu**. And in this sense he has been the worst enemy of **Israeli nationalism**. Yes, he hates outsiders. Okay, but this is not the key test. And then the question is how would different **nation** conduct their relationships.
### **权力等级与国际秩序** **尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 它始于安全和外交政策问题。你知道，**特朗普主义**的愿景，也就是关于**武力**和**等级制度**的一切，它基本上说，组织国际体系的方式是：如果弱者总是服从强者的要求，那么我们就会有秩序，甚至会有和平。所以，如果美国要求格陵兰岛，丹麦就必须认清现实，把格陵兰岛交给美国。如果丹麦拒绝，结果导致暴力、战争、冲突，那么这就是丹麦的错，因为他们拒绝认清现实，拒绝把强者要求的东西给他们。这就是他们的逻辑，他们就是这样看待世界的。现在，抛开道德问题不谈，你仍然面临一个大问题。这个大问题首先是，所有国家都会被迫变强，因为在这种世界里，弱国无法生存。然后，所有国家都不得不投入越来越多的资源到军事上。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: It starts with issues of security and foreign policy. You know the the **Trumpad** vision which uh is all about force and hierarchy. It basically says the way to organize the international system is if the weak always surrender to the demands of the strong and then we have order and then we have even peace. So if the United States demands Greenland, Denmark must recognize reality and give Greenland to the United States. If Denmark refuses and as a result there is violence, there is a war, there is conflict, this is the fault of Denmark for refusing to recognize the reality and giving the strong what they demand. This is their logic. This is how they see the world. Now the problem leaving aside the issue of morality, still you have a big problem. The big problem is first of all that all nations are then driven to become strong because you cannot survive as a weak nation in such a world and then all nations are forced to uh uh invest more and more of their resources in their military.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 在历史的大部分时间里，每个王国、帝国、共和国、城邦的大部分预算都投入或浪费在士兵、堡垒、战舰等事物上，没有人感到安全。近几十年来国际体系的奇迹之一，这与写和平主义诗歌无关，而是关乎政府预算。如果你看看预算，你会发现21世纪初期，政府预算平均有6%到7%用于国防军事，而有10%用于医疗保健。这是历史上人类第一次在医疗保健上的支出超过国防。而且他们比历史上任何时候都感到更安全，因为存在这种武力入侵和征服他国的禁忌。现在，如果我们打破这个禁忌，那将迫使所有人武装到牙齿，牺牲医疗、教育、福利等等。结果是，没有人会感到更安全，因为国家和领导人总是会误判。在越南战争中，美国人认为他们更强大。结果证明他们错了。**普京**坚信他会在48小时内击垮乌克兰。他错了。所以，这种将世界和平与秩序建立在强弱等级制度上的愿景，即弱者总是服从强者，从而换取和平。这种做法已经尝试了数千年，我们知道它会导致什么。它一方面导致帝国，另一方面导致无休止的战争。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: For most of history, a lot of the budget of every kingdom, empire, republic, city state was was uh huh invested or wasted on soldiers and fortresses and and warships and things like that and nobody felt safe. One of the miracles of the international systems of recent decades and this is not something it's not about you know writing a a a pacifistic poetry it's about government budgets. You look at the budgets, you see that in on average in the early 21st century on average about 6 to 7% of the government budget went for defense for the military compared to 10% on average that went to healthcare. It's the first time in history that humanity spent more on healthcare than on defense and they felt more secure than in any previous time in history because there was this taboo on invading and conquering other countries by force. Now if we now break this taboo, it will force everybody to arm themselves to the teeth at the expense of healthcare, education, welfare and so forth. And nobody will will feel safer as a result because countries and leaders constantly miscalculate. In the Vietnam War, the Americans thought they were stronger. It turned out they were wrong. **Putin** was convinced he will crush Ukraine in 48 hours. He was wrong. So this vision of let's base the the the peace and order of the world on a hierarchy of strong and weak with the weak always obeying the the strong and thereby buying peace. It's been tried thousands of thousands of years and we know where it leads. It leads on the one hand to empire and on the other hand to endless wars.
**主持人**: 我想，我们现在比我一生中的任何时候都更接近这条道路。您曾将**全球自由秩序**称为人类最令人惊叹的政治成就，或许也是道德成就。
Original English **Host**: So we are more on that road again than I think we've been in my lifetime. I you you've talked about the **global liberal order** as one of the I think you called it the most amazing political and maybe moral achievement of humankind.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah.
**主持人**: 而今天，人们可能不再这么认为了。它已经被预算的语言和官僚的现实所吞噬。作为一种国际力量，**自由主义**曾经讲述了什么故事，您认为它后来发生了什么？
Original English **Host**: And today I don't think it feels that way to people. It it has been consumed in the language of budgets in the reality of bureaucracy. What was the story **liberalism** as a international force once told and what do you think happened to it?
### **自由主义的兴衰** **尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 基本的故事是关于**共同经验**、**共同利益**和**合作**的。在20世纪，基本上有三个大故事。你有**法西斯主义**的故事，它说历史是国家或种族之间的竞争和冲突。它由实力决定。最终，最强大的国家或最强大的种族将击败所有其他国家和种族，征服世界。这是**法西斯主义**的故事。然后是**共产主义**的故事，它说，是的，但这不是种族或国家之间的冲突。而是阶级之间的冲突。不同阶级之间存在不可避免的冲突，这将是暴力的，并以建立无产阶级专政的工人阶级胜利而告终。然后**自由主义**出现，说不，历史根本不必是关于冲突的。不是国家之间的冲突，也不是阶级之间的冲突。它可以是关于**合作**的。为什么？因为所有人类，无论他们属于哪个种族、国家或阶级，本质上都是一样的。我们在外貌、语言、宗教等方面有一些微小的差异，但本质上我们是同一个物种。我们都有相同的生物需求。我们都有大致相同的心理需求，至少是深层的需求，比如被爱，被认可等等。我们有共同的利益。如果我们认识到这些共同的特征和利益，在很多情况下，**合作**比竞争和战斗更有意义。通过**合作**，我们可以建立一个对每个人都更好的世界。这就是基本的**自由主义**故事。而到了2026年，我们可以回过头来说它正在失败。它还没有完全失败，但根据许多衡量标准，我们仍然生活在历史上可能最好的时期。嗯，它正在崩溃，但你知道，它就像一座令人惊叹的房子，全人类都住在这里，系统仍在某种程度上运行，比如水和污水。现在没有人再关心它们了，但它们建造得如此坚固，以至于即使我们不维护它们，它们仍然能正常运转。但在一两年、五年、十年内，你知道，如果你住在一所无人维护的房子里，它最终会倒塌，到那时就太晚了。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: The basic story is about **shared experiences** and **interests** and **cooperation**. In the 20th century, you had basically three big stories. You had the **fascist story** which said that history is a a competition, a conflict between nations or races. It's decided by strength. ultimately the strongest nation or the strongest race will defeat all the others and conquer the world. This was the **fascist story**. Then you had the **communist story** which says yes but it's not between races or nations. It's between classes. There is a an inevitable conflict between different classes that will be violent and end with the victory of the working class which will establish the dictatorship of the proletariat. Then **liberalism** came and said no history does not have to be about conflict at all. Not conflict between nations and not conflict between classes. It can be about **cooperation**. Why? Because all humans no matter to which race or nation or class they belong. They are essentially the same. There are some small differences in how we look and in our languages and religions and so forth, but essentially we are the same specy. We all have the same biological needs. We all have roughly the same psychological needs, at least the deep ones, to be loved, to be uh uh recognized and so and so forth. We have shared interests. And if we recognize these shared characteristics and interests, in many cases, it just makes more sense to **cooperate** than to compete and to fight. And by **cooperating**, we can build a world which will be better for everybody. This was the basic **liberal story** and as of 2026 we can look back and say it's it's failing. It hasn't failed completely but according to many measures we are still living in probably the best time in history. Uh it's it's uh uh it's collapsing, but it's you know like it's it's this kind of amazing house in which all of humanity is living and the systems are still sort of running like the water, the sewage. Uh nobody takes care of them anymore, but they were built in such a robust way that even though we don't maintain them, they still function. But within a year, five years, 10 years, you know, if you live in a house and nobody maintains it, eventually it collapses and then it's too late.
**主持人**: 您刚才说的一点很有趣，那就是20世纪的两种主要竞争意识形态，它们都相信冲突的终结。它不仅仅是冲突，而是相信在某个时候会取得胜利。
Original English **Host**: Something you were saying in there was interesting to me, which is that the the sort of two major competitor ideologies of the 20th century, what they both believed in was an end to conflict. It wasn't just conflict. It was that at some point there would be victory.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes.
**主持人**: 而**自由主义**，从某种意义上说，它相信**合作**，而从另一种意义上说，我认为我们现在谈论得不多，但我发现它很有趣，它的核心原则之一是，冲突总是会存在的，分歧总是会存在的。
Original English **Host**: and and **liberalism** in one guys believes in **cooperation** and in another guys that I think we don't talk about as much anymore but I find interesting one of its central tenants is there will always be conflict there will always be disagreement.
**主持人**: 社会中的差异是不可解决的，也不应该被解决到一个终极状态，问题是我们如何在这些差异中，在一个国家内部甚至作为一个全球社区，共同生活，为它的存在创造空间，而不让它演变成战争、压迫或迫害。
Original English **Host**: that the differences in society are not resolvable and would not should not even be resolvable to an end state and that the question is how we live together both inside a nation And even as a global community amidst that difference, making room for it to exist without it turning into war, into oppression, into persecution.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的，这是一个非常非常重要的观点。**自由主义**不相信救赎。你看看**基督教**、**伊斯兰教**或**犹太教**等宗教的宏大历史愿景。你看看**法西斯主义**和**共产主义**等世俗意识形态。它们都相信救赎。它们都相信历史最终会达到一个完美的终点。**自由主义**不相信这一点，认为没有救赎，至少在地球上没有。总会有问题、紧张和冲突，问题是我们如何与它们共存。这就是为什么**自由主义**也投入大量精力来构建我认为在每个大型人类系统中最重要的东西，那就是**自我纠正机制**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah, that's that's a very very important point. **Liberalism** does not believe in redemption. uh you look at at the grand historical visions of of religions like **Christianity** or **Islam** or **Judaism**. You look at ideology, secular ideologies like **fascism** and **communism**. They all believe in redemption. They all believe that eventually history will reach a final destination where everything will be perfect. **Liberalism** does not believe it that there is no redemption at least not on earth. uh there will always be problems and and and tensions and conflicts and the question is how do we live with them and this is why also **liberalism** invests a lot in building what I think is the most important thing in every large scale human system which is a **self-correcting mechanism**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 如果你相信你的世界观是上帝赐予你的，因此不可能包含任何错误，你就不需要**自我纠正机制**，因为没有错误。**自由主义**从人类只是尽力而为的假设开始，并且会犯错误。所以我们需要强大的**自我纠正机制**。最著名的机制当然是**选举**，每四年或五年，或者不管多久，人们都可以说：“嘿，我们上次犯了个错误。这次我们换个别的试试。”所有这些非常复杂的**制衡系统**、**独立法院**和**新闻自由**，所有这些都只是一种复杂的方式，以确保一个国家拥有强大的**自我纠正机制**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: If you believe that your view of the world was given to you by by God, so it cannot contain any error, you do not need a **self-correcting mechanism** because there are no mistakes. **Liberalism** starts with the assumption that it's just human beings trying to do the the best we can and there will be mistakes, there will be errors. So we need strong **self-correcting mechanisms**. The most famous mechanism is of course **elections** that every four years or five years or whatever the people can say, "Hey, we made a mistake last time. Let's try something else this time." And all these very complicated systems of **checks and balances** and **independent courts** and **freedom of of press** and all these are just a a a complicated way to ensure that a country has a robust **self-correcting mechanism**.
### **故事、真相与虚构** **主持人**: 所以你认为**虚构**通常比**真相**更有利于合作。
Original English **Host**: So you make an argument that **fiction** is often better for **cooperation** than **truth**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes.
**主持人**: 为什么？
Original English **Host**: Why?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯，首先，了解**真相**是昂贵的。要产生**真相**，要讲述一个真实的故事，你需要投入大量的时间和精力去调查。而**虚构**非常廉价，**虚构**可以尽可能简单。人们喜欢简单的故事，比如那些简化的叙事，善恶分明。我们百分之百是好的，我们历史上从未做过任何坏事。他们百分之百是邪恶的，他们历史上从未做过任何好事。非常简单，非常有吸引力。而且**真相**不仅复杂，**真相**往往是痛苦的。**虚构**可以尽可能地美化。再次，我们从未对任何人做过任何坏事。我们是完美的。我们是美好的。所以这就是为什么**虚构**作为故事往往更强大。而且当你试图激励人们采取行动时，你不想让他们有疑虑。你需要他们百分之百地投入。从这个角度来看，**虚构**更容易操作。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Um first of all the **truth** is costly to know the **truth**. To produce a **truth** to a true story you need to invest a lot of time and energy in investigating it. Um **fiction** is very cheap and **fiction** can be made as simple as you would like it to be. And people like simple stories like you know these simplified narratives good against evil. We are 100% good. We have never done anything bad in our history. They are 100% evil. They have never done anything good in their history. Very simple, very attractive. Um and the **truth** is not just complicated. The **truth** is often painful. Uh **fiction** can be made as flattering as you would like it to be. Again, we have never done anything bad to anybody. We are perfect. We are wonderful. Um, so this is why **fiction** tends to be far more powerful uh as a story. And also when you try to motivate people for action, you don't want them to have doubts. You need them to be fired up 100% committed. And **fiction** is is is easier to work with in in this respect.
**主持人**: 这是否意味着，如果社会、政治运动、机构变得过于追求**真相**，鉴于**合作**的重要性，它们会长期处于劣势？我的意思是，没有**真相**是个问题。
Original English **Host**: Does that imply that if societies, political movements, institutions become too **truth** seeeking that given the importance of **cooperation**, they become at a long-term disadvantage? I mean to have no **truth** is a problem.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes.
**主持人**: 但我认为这暗示了一点，那就是拥有过多的**真相**也可能是一个问题。
Original English **Host**: But I think this implies a little bit that have too much **truth** can be a problem too.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的，你知道，对追求**真相**的绝对承诺是一种精神实践，但它是一个非常非常困难的政治纲领。再次强调，说谎和**虚构**之间是有区别的。当你明知某事不真实却仍然说出来或支持它时，你就在说谎。嗯，在许多情况下，我认为理想是认识到我们正在使用**虚构**来维持我们的社会。这就是我说，例如，美国与历史上许多其他强大国家之间的区别，如果你看看**美国宪法**，它以“我们人民”开头。我们人民聚集在一起，就这些文本、这些原则达成了一致，它来自于我们的思想，是我们的创造。当然，它没有使用“**虚构**”这个词，但当我说“**虚构**”时，我指的是非客观的东西。它不来自于物理定律。它不来自于上帝。是我们创造了它。**美国宪法**非常诚实地说，我们创造了这些原则，我认为它们是好的。但因为我们认识到是我们创造了它们，所以我们人民也在**宪法**中包含了**修正机制**。所以我们认识到我们只是人类。也许我们提出了一些次优的东西。也许事情以后会改变。所以我们有一个机制可以以后改变故事。例如，开国元勋们认为**奴隶制**是可以接受的。但如果将来有人认为它不可接受，他们就有一个**修正机制**。现在你把它与宗教相比，我们以**《圣经》**或**《十诫》**为例。**《十诫》**不是以“我们以色列人民”开头。它以“我是耶和华你的上帝”开头，因此它没有**修正机制**。如果你仔细观察，你会发现**《十诫》**认可**奴隶制**。第十诫是“不可贪恋”。你不应该贪恋什么？它列出了你不应该贪恋的东西，比如你邻居的田地，你邻居的牛，还有你邻居的奴隶。它告诉人们，**《十诫》**说拥有奴隶是可以的。只是贪恋别人的奴隶是不对的。那样上帝会生气。而且根本没有机制可以改变这一点，因为它声称不是人类创造的，而是神圣的启示。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes. a you know a kind of absolute commitment to the pursuit of **truth** is a spiritual practice but it's a very very difficult political program. Again there is a difference between lying and **fiction**. You lie when you know something is not true and you nevertheless say it or or or support it. Um in many cases I think the ideal is to recognize that we are using **fictions** to maintain our society. This is the difference I would say for instance between the United States uh and many other powerful countries in history that the if you look at the US **constitution** it starts with we the people we the people have come together and agreed on this texts on on this principles it is coming from our mind it is our creation now it doesn't use the word **fiction** of course but when I say **fiction** I mean something which is not objective. It doesn't come from the laws of physics. It doesn't come from God. I we invented it. And the US **constitution** very honestly says we invented these principles which I think are good. But because we recognize that we invented them, we the people then we also include in the **constitution** an **amendment mechanism**. So we recognize we are just human beings. Maybe we came up with something which is suboptimal. Maybe things will change later on. So we have a mechanism to change the story later on. And we the founding fathers for instance think that **slavery** is okay. But in the strange situation that maybe somebody in the future will think it's not okay, they have an **amendment mechanism**. Now you compare that to say religion and let's take an example the **Bible** or the **ten commandments**. The **ten commandments** it starts not with we the people of Israel. It starts with I am the lord your god and it has no **amendment mechanism** because of that. And if you look carefully you will see that the **ten commandments** endorse **slavery**. The 10th commandment uh uh not to covet. Thou shalt not coveret. What shouldn't you coveret? It have a list of things you shouldn't coveret like your neighbor's field and your neighbor's ox and also your neighbor's slaves. It tells people the **ten commandments** it's okay to have slaves. It's just not right to coveret the slaves of somebody else. Then God will be angry. And there is just no mechanism to change that because it pretends to be not a human creation but a divine revelation.
**主持人**: 我认为这里面存在一种有趣的张力。
Original English **Host**: I think there's an interesting tension in there.
**主持人**: 嗯。你可能会批评**自由主义**，或者至少是它现在的状态，因为它擅长建立机制、机构、规则、官僚体系，但它在创造持久的故事方面却天生不足。
Original English **Host**: Mhm. And you can make a critique of **liberalism** or at least where it is now that it is good at building mechanisms, institutions, rules, bureaucracies, and it is intrinsically bad at creating enduring stories.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 部分原因是，至少在它现代的形式中，它往往是相当世俗化的。**宗教**一直是**合作**的巨大来源，它将人们在当下凝聚在一起，然后为他们可能无法活到看到的未来而努力。
Original English **Host**: That in part because at least in its modern form, it often is fairly secularized. **Religion** has been a tremendous source of **cooperation**, keeping people bound together both at a moment and then working towards a future that they may not even live to see.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 存在关于**民族主义**和**民族故事**的问题，而**自由主义**作为一种**自我纠正**的意识形态，常常会随着时间的推移对其进行批判。然后，当你争论自己国家的过去以及它做对了什么和做错了什么时，你就会失去一些民族凝聚力。您是一个对**故事**进行深入思考的人。那么对您来说，这是一种先进世俗化**自由民主**的弱点吗？它们是否正在失去凝聚力，从而长期无法与那些可能无法建立官僚机构、可能无法有效治理但肯定能讲好故事的意识形态竞争？
Original English **Host**: There's, you know, questions of **nationalism** and the **national story**, which **liberalism** is a as a **self-correcting** ideology often over time creates critique of. And then you you lose some of that national coherence as you're arguing about the past of your country and what it has done right and wrong. And and you are a person who thinks very deeply about **stories**. And so to you, is this a a a weakness of kind of advanced secularized **liberal democracies**? Are they losing the cohesion that keeps them in the long run competitive to ideologies that maybe can't build bureaucracies, maybe cannot govern effectively, but they sure as hell can tell a story.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的，这是**自由主义**的一个核心问题。另一方面，我不会落入那种陷阱，认为宗教是某种原始的凝聚力，能让人们团结在一起。我是一个中世纪史学家。我的研究领域最初是**中世纪**。就死于战争的人口百分比而言，欧洲历史上最糟糕的战争可能是**三十年战争**。那场战争非常复杂，但长话短说，是发生在**中欧**的新教徒和天主教徒之间。你知道，天主教徒和新教徒愿意互相残杀，只是因为他们对**爱的宗教**的解释存在微小差异。**自由主义**之所以兴起，部分原因在于人们对**宗教**感到沮丧，因为它不断制造越来越多的冲突和分裂。你知道，你看看今天的**德国**，几乎没有人关心谁将成为总理是新教徒还是天主教徒。从这个意义上说，**自由主义**是团结一个大规模多元化群体的更好基础，因为它更加灵活。再说一遍，它讲述了一个非常复杂的故事。最终没有救赎。它不基于某个魅力型领导人。它基于这些非常复杂的、非个人化的**自我纠正机制**、官僚机构和制度。所以从这个意义上说，它吸引力较小。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah, this is a a central problem of of **liberalism**. On the other hand, I would not kind of fall into the trap of uh um imagining religions as this uh uh um primeval cohesive force that keeps people together. I'm a medievalist. Like my original field of study was the **Middle Ages**. In in terms of percentage of population who died in the war, probably the worst war in European history was the **30 years war**. Uh very complicated, but to make a long story short between Protestants and Catholics in in **central Europe** and you know Catholics and Protestants were willing to slaughter each other because of tiny differences in the way they interpreted the **religion of love**. And um **liberalism** rose in part out of the frustration that people had with **religion** because it constantly created more and more conflicts and and and divisions. And you know you look at **Germany** today nobody cares almost nobody cares if who is that the person running to be chancellor is a Protestant or a Catholic. And in this sense, **liberalism** is a better basis for uniting a largecale and diverse group of people just because it's it's it's more flexible. Again, it tells a very it's it's a complicated story. There is no redemption in the end. Uh it's based on not on some charismatic leader. It's based on these very complex impersonal **self-correcting mechanisms** and bureaucracies and institutions. So in this sense it's less appealing.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 现在我们正处于**自由主义**危机的时刻。其中一个原因是在过去几十年里，**自由主义**与它几代以来的亲密盟友——**民族主义**——失去了联系。你知道，在19世纪，**自由主义**和**民族主义**是携手并进的。如果你看看今天世界上的一些地方，比如**乌克兰**，它们仍然携手并进。**乌克兰**人同时为民族生存和独立以及**自由民主**而战。两者之间没有矛盾。你知道，我想说，自1789年以来，没有人能在政治领域想出任何新东西。**法国大革命**提出了这种复杂的意识形态组合：**自由**、**平等**、**博爱**。人们往往会忘记第三个，**博爱**。**博爱**就是**民族共同体**。你可以说，自1789年以来的整个政治史，都是在尝试这种三元组合的不同搭配。每一个试图完全抛弃其中一个的运动都失败了。**法西斯主义**试图抛弃**自由**和**平等**，完全是关于**博爱**的。**共产主义**也强调**平等**，但牺牲了**自由**，并在某种程度上也牺牲了**博爱**。对**自由主义**近几十年来发生的事情的一种解释是，人们只是忘记了。**自由主义**关注**平等**和**自由**，但倾向于忘记**博爱**，这被证明是站不住脚的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Now we are living at the moment in in in a moment of crisis of **liberalism**. One of the reasons is that over the last few decades **liberalism** has kind of lost touch with something that was a close ally of it for many generations which is **nationalism**. You know, in the 19th century, **liberalism** and **nationalism** go hand in hand. And if you look at at least some places in the world today, like **Ukraine**, they still go hand in hand. The **Ukrainians** are fighting at one at the same time for their national survival and independence and for **liberal democracy**. There is no contradiction between the two. You know, I would say that since 1789, nobody managed to think about anything new in the political realm. The **French Revolution** came up with this kind of of of ideological package which was complex. **Liberty**, **equality**, **fraternity**. And people tend to forget the third one, **fraternity**. **Fraternity** is is the **national community**. And you can say that the whole of of political history since 1789 is experimenting with different combinations of this trio. And every movement that tried to completely abandon one of these three failed. **Fascism** tried to aband **fascism** was all about **fraternity**. No **equality**, no **liberty**. **Communism** was also emphasized one **equality** at the expense of **liberty** and to some extent **fraternity**. One of the explanations of what is happening to **liberalism** in recent decades is that people just forgot. **Liberalism** focused on uh **equality** and **liberty** but tended to forget **fraternity** and this proved to be untenable.
**主持人**: 哦，您能谈到这一点太有趣了。嗯，这很有趣。我一直在自己的播客和关于**自由主义**的工作中，围绕着一些相似的东西打转，那就是与**自由主义**相关的早期美德，它之前的是**宽容**。
Original English **Host**: Oh, it's so interesting to me that you've you've gone here. Um, it's funny. I've been circling something somewhat similar in my own podcast and work on **liberalism**, which is that the early virtue associated with **liberalism**, what comes before it is **liberality**.
**主持人**: 我会说，它非常接近**博爱**，这种**相互尊重**和对同胞**慷慨**的伦理。
Original English **Host**: which is, I would say, very much a cousin of **fraternity**, this ethic of **mutual respect** and **generosity** towards your fellow citizens.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes.
**主持人**: 而您在这个故事中添加的一点是，这必须基于某种**民族故事**。也就是说，在国际社会中维持凝聚力、维持这种**友谊**的纽带存在困难，一旦你不再相信彼此之间的联系。
Original English **Host**: And one thing that that you're adding to that story is that that has to be based on itself some kind of **national story**. that there is a a difficulty in maintaining cohesion in international community, maintaining those bonds of of fellowship once you have stopped believing in the connection you have to each other.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。是的。我认为这里需要强调的是，我的意思是，**自由主义**之所以失去与**博爱**的联系，是因为它倾向于对**博爱**讲述一个非常负面的故事，主要将其视为与其他社区的冲突。认为**博爱**就是仇恨和与他国作战。如果我们记住，不，正如我们一开始所说，**博爱**的本质是关心和爱护特定人群。这并不需要仇恨外人。但它确实意味着你与特定人群有一种特殊关系，你们共享共同的历史、共同的文化、共同的语言。试图想象它不存在，只是忽略了历史。是的，我们对全人类负有某些承诺，但这并不排除对人类某个部分负有特殊承诺。就像你知道，你对家人负有某种忠诚，这超出了你对同胞或外国人的义务。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm. Yeah. And I think that the important thing to emphasize here, I mean the reason that **liberalism** kind of lost touch with **fraternity** is that it tended to have a to some people told a very negative story about **fraternity**, seeing it primarily in terms of conflict with other communities that **fraternity** is about hating and fighting with other nations. And if we remember that no, as as we said in the beginning, the the the essence of **fraternity** is caring and loving a certain group of people. And this does not require hating outsiders. But it does mean that you have a special relationship with a certain group of people that you share a common history, a common culture, a common uh uh uh language. And trying to kind of imagine it away just ignores history. Yes, we have certain commitments to all of humanity, but this does not preclude having special commitments towards a segment of humanity. Just as you know, you have certain loyalty to your family which is over and above what you owe your fellow citizens or or foreigners.
### **故事、苦难与以色列** **主持人**: 我见过您提出这样的论点：我们讲述故事的限制性问题应该是——是否有人因为这个故事而**受苦**？
Original English **Host**: I've seen you make the argument that the limiting question on the stories we tell should be does anyone **suffer** because of this story?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。我认为**道德**最终是关于**苦难**，从**苦难**中解脱和幸福。国家会**受苦**吗？我们经常使用这种语言，但这只是一个比喻。如果一个国家输了一场战争，遭受了战争的失败，它并没有真正**受苦**。它没有大脑，没有神经系统，没有思想，它不能感受痛苦或快乐。只有个体人类才能**受苦**。但我认为，即使在这种叙述中，**国家**也是一个讲故事的机制，以保护其内部团结的群体。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. I I think that **morality** is ultimately about **suffering** and liberation from **suffering** and happiness. Can the nation **suffer**? We often use this language, but it's just a metaphor. If if the if a country loses a war **suffers** a defeat in war, it doesn't really **suffer**. It has no brain, it has no nervous system, it has no mind, it cannot feel pain or pleasure. Only individual humans can **suffer**. But the nation I think even in this telling is a storytelling mechanism to protect the group that is bonded within it.
**主持人**: 举一个离您更近的例子，**以色列犹太人**对**巴勒斯坦人**的故事并非他们没有**受苦**。要么是这种**苦难**是应得的，因为他们选择了谁来统治他们，或者说这是一种不幸的必要性。
Original English **Host**: To to use one closer to to to to your home as an example, the story that **Israeli Jews** tell about the **Palestinians** is not that they are not **suffering**. It's either that the **suffering** is deserved because of who they elected and a kind of collective responsibility for that or who rules them or that that **suffering** is an unfortunate necessity.
**主持人**: 为了**以色列**的安全，那些否认这一点的人是天真的。
Original English **Host**: for **Israeli security** and that the people who deny that are naive.
**主持人**: 但正是这种围绕**苦难**的碰撞，对吧？也许你的**苦难**对我来说是必要的安全、保障或繁荣。
Original English **Host**: but it is this collision around **suffering** right that maybe your **suffering** is necessary for my security, safety or prosperity.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。我的意思是，呃，显然世界上存在着困难的**道德冲突**，并非总是如此，但有时确实存在权衡。仅仅说所有**道德**最终都与**苦难**有关，并不能让所有的**道德困境**消失。但我在**以色列**最近的冲突中观察到的一件事是，很多**以色列人**根本无法承认**巴勒斯坦人**正在**受苦**。他们理性上知道，但在许多情况下，他们根本无法亲眼看到。如果你给他们看加沙饥饿儿童的照片，他们会说这是假新闻。或者他们会立即把讨论转移到别的事情上。这是因为**哈马斯**。或者如果你说“我不在乎，你能不能只是花几秒钟在那里，承认那里有一个正在**受苦**的人类？”即使你告诉他们**以色列**百分之百正确，加沙发生的一切百分之百都是**哈马斯**的错，**以色列**做的一切百分之百正确，既然如此正确，既然如此公正，那么你应该很容易就能观察到你完美正义的后果。看看这张照片。但很多人就是做不到。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. I mean uh obviously there are difficult **moral conflicts** in the world not always but sometimes yes there are tradeoffs and it's just saying that all of **morality** is ultimately about **suffering** doesn't make all **moral dilemmas** disappear. But one of the things I observed in **Israel** in the recent conflict is that a lot of **Israelis** have a problem simply acknowledging that the **Palestinians** **suffer**. Intellectually they know it, but in many cases they simply cannot observe it. Like you show them images of a starving child in Gaza, they will say this is fake news. Or they will immediately divert the discussion to something else. This is because of **Kamas** or if you said I don't care just are you able for a few seconds just to be there and acknowledge that there is a **suffering** human being there it's extremely difficult to do it even if you tell them **Israel** is 100% correct 100% of the fault for what happens in Gaza is **Kamas** everything **Israel** does is 100% correct since it is so correct. Since this is so just, it should be easy for you to observe the consequences of your perfect justice here. Just look at this image. And and so many people just can't do it.
**主持人**: 您说现在**以色列**正在发生的事情，可能会摧毁或废除**两千年犹太思想**、文化和存在。这是最坏的情况。您说这话是什么意思？嗯。
Original English **Host**: You said that what is happening right now in **Israel** could basically destroy or void 2,000 years of **Jewish thinking** and culture and existence. That that's the worst case scenario. What do you mean by that? Hm.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 从历史上看，这要追溯到我们谈话的开始，**犹太教**至少自**第二圣殿**被毁以来，就将自己置于与这种将世界仅仅视为由**蛮力**统治的观点相对立的立场。你知道，当**韦斯帕先**的罗马军团在公元70年摧毁**耶路撒冷**时，**约汉南·本·扎卡伊**向**韦斯帕先**请求一个恩惠，授予他特拉维夫附近的一个小镇**亚夫涅**（Yav），他想在那里建立一个学习中心。**韦斯帕先**同意了。“好吧，你们**犹太人**，你们可以拥有你们的学习中心。”从那时起，**两千年来**，**犹太人**在**亚夫涅**，然后在**开罗**、**巴格达**、**波兰**、**布鲁克林**，他们学习。这再次是**犹太教**的精髓。以前，它是一个庙宇、祭司和血腥仪式的宗教。然后它变成了一个学习的宗教。如果你试图思考在过去的**两千年**里，**犹太人**对人类最重要的信息可能是什么，我会说那是“特立独行是可以的”的信息。与大多数人不同地思考和行为是可以的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: That historically, and this goes back to the beginning of our conversation, **Judaism** positioned itself since the destruction at least of the **second temple** in opposition to this view of the world as as governed only by **brute force**. You know, when the **Roman legions** of **Vespasian** destroy **Jerusalem** in 70 CE and you have **Yohan** and **Benzakai** asking **Vespasian** as a favor, grant me a small town called **Yav** near Tel Aviv of today where he wants to establish a center of learning. And **Vespasian** agrees. Okay, you **Jews**, you can have your certain your your center of learning. And since then, for 2,000 years, **Jews** in in **Yav** and then in Cairo, in Baghdad, in Poland, in Brooklyn, they study, they learn. This is again, this was the essence of **Judaism**. Previously, it was a religion of temples and priests and bloody rituals. And then it became a **religion of learning**. And if you try to think what was the maybe the most important message of **Jews** over the last **2,000 years** to humanity, I would say that it was the message that it is okay to be different. It is okay to think and behave differently, let's say, than the majority.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 你有一个国家，我不知道，比如法国或德国。他们庆祝**复活节**和**圣诞节**。他们相信**耶稣**等等。而你有一小部分**犹太人**说，我们可以有不同的想法。这没关系。我们可以有不同的行为。这就是作为**犹太人**的本质。而关于思想自由意味着什么，以及作为无权力的少数群体意味着什么，很多思考和实践都是由**犹太思想家**完成的。在**两千年**里，世界各地的**犹太人**都将学习视为最高的精神活动。**两千年**后，你问他们：“你们学到了什么？你们学习了**两千年**。你们学到了什么？”然后像**内塔尼亚胡**这样的人会告诉你：“哦，我们学到了你需要成为一个罗马人，你需要强大，你需要建立军团，你需要摧毁城市。这是唯一重要的事。这是生命中唯一重要的事。”你知道，这是一个合法的价值观体系。罗马有它的用处。但是，如果**两千年**后，**犹太人**简单地变成了罗马人，那有什么意义呢？你为什么要浪费**两千年**？那时你就可以直接成为罗马人。这只会完全抹杀整个**犹太历史**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: You have, say, a country, I don't know, like France or Germany. They celebrate **Easter** and **Christmas**. They believe in **Jesus** and so forth. And you have this tiny minority of **Jews** who say we can think differently. It's okay. We can behave differently. And this was the essence of being **Jewish**. And a lot of the thinking and also the practice about what does it mean to have freedom of thought? What does it mean to be a powerless minority was done by **Jewish thinkers**. And for **2,000 years**, **Jews** all over the world, they see studying and learning as the highest spiritual activity. And after **2,000 years**, you ask them, "What have you learned? You have learned, you've studied for **2,000 years**. What have you learned?" And then people like **Netanyahu** tell you, "Oh, we've learned that you need to be a **Roman**, that you need to be strong, that you need to build legions, that you need to destroy cities. This is the only thing. This is the only thing that matters in life. And you know, it's it's it's a legitimate I can say it's a legitimate value system. **Rome** has its its its uh uh uh um usefulness. But if after **2,000 years**, the **Jews** simply become the **Romans**, what was the point? Why did you waste **2,000 years**? Then you could have just become **Roman** back then. You could have joined the li it just makes it just nullifies the whole of **Jewish history**.
**主持人**: 然而，这是否是**犹太复国主义**早期愿景的一部分，即它将创造一个新的**犹太人**，而不是一个在少数民族中沉溺于书本的苍白知识分子，而是一个坚强、耕耘土地、能够发动战争并保护自己的人？
Original English **Host**: Was that though part of the early vision of **Zionism** that it was going to create this new **Jew** who was not this palad intellectual in the minority his nose in a book but he's going to be strong and work the land and capable of making war and protecting himself.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。这个想法是他们可以结合**犹太教**的教训和遗产，以及耕耘土地、建立军队和建设国家。也许，也许这只是一个错误，最终必须做出选择：你是想成为**韦斯帕先**并指挥一个军团，还是想成为**约汉南·本·扎卡伊**并学习和发展你的精神方面。两者不能并存。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes. And the the idea was that they can combine the the the lessons, the legacy of **Judaism** with working the land and building an army and building a country. And maybe maybe it was just uh it was just wrong that ultimately a choice had to be made whether you want to be **Vespasian** and command a legion or whether you want to be **Yohan Benzakai** and and and and study and develop your spiritual side and the two cannot cannot go together.
**主持人**: 您现在是否认为这种矛盾是不可调和的？
Original English **Host**: Is that what you believe now that that the the contradiction was inadicable?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 我不知道。我的意思是，历史是一个非常复杂且出乎意料的过程。我不认为**权力**与**正义**之间，或者发展**权力**与发展**精神智慧**之间存在内在矛盾。但我认为两者很难结合。**权力**的诱惑非常非常大，历史上很少有人或运动能够抵制它。所以这并不是一个太大的惊喜，但仍然令人失望。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: I'm I don't know. I mean history is a very complex and an unexpected process. I don't think that there is an inherent contradiction between uh uh **power** and **justice** or between developing your **power** and developing your spiritual wisdom. But I think it's very difficult to combine the two. the temptations of **power** are very very big and not a lot of people or a lot of movements throughout history have managed to resist it. Uh so it's not such a big surprise but it's still disappointing.
### **美国犹太人与以色列民族主义** **主持人**: 在美国，我看到了**美国犹太人**之间出现相当深刻的分裂。我认为其中一个原因如此痛苦，是因为它让**犹太教**的两种传统和思想相互对立。有一种陌生人的传统，以及**犹太人民**成为现代**自由主义**、人权法和多元主义发展以及许多政治理论和法律制定的主要贡献者之一的原因，这与**犹太人**的经验密切相关。**犹太离散社群**安全的唯一途径，就是在根本上是**自由**而非**民族主义**的社会中。
Original English **Host**: This has been a a period in in America when I've watched a pretty deep schism for **American Jews** emerge. And I think one one reason it has been so painful is it has pitted two forms of the tradition and the the thinking of of **Judaism** against each other which is there's a tradition of the stranger and and and one reason **Jewish people** have been big contributors to the development of modern **liberalism** and **human rights law** and uh pluralism and and a lot of the political theory and and and law making there is it is very connected to the **Jewish experience**. That the only way for the **Jewish diaspora** to be safe would be to be in societies that fundamentally were **liberal** and were not.
**主持人**: **民族主义者**。
Original English **Host**: **ethnationalist**.
**主持人**: 而在**以色列**，**以色列犹太人**中有一种观点认为，为了这个社会的安全和保持其自身，它将不得不变得越来越**民族主义**。从某种意义上说，我认为现在并不总是承认，传统在某种程度上是自相矛盾的。曾经希望这些事物能够通过**两国方案**或其他方式共存。但随着**两国方案**越来越不可能，以及**以色列**出现更多**民族主义**的方向，我认为现在这种传统及其实现方式实际上处于直接冲突之中。嗯，是的，我认为这是一个非常准确的呈现方式。
Original English **Host**: And in in **Israel**, there's a view that among **Israeli Jews** that for that society to be safe and to be itself, it will have to be increasingly **ethnoist**. And in a way, I think it's not always admitted right now that the tradition is somewhat set against itself. And there was a hope these things could coexist through a **two-state solution** or other things. But with that increasingly off the table and with a more **ethnationalist** direction in **Israel**, I think you now have this kind of tradition and its realizations actually in direct conflict with each other. H uh yeah, I think this is a very accurate way to to present it.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 当然，他们信奉的是**《圣经》犹太教**，这与**两千年**来在**散居地**发展起来的**宗教**非常不同。**《圣经》犹太教**是一种非常暴力、非常不自由、非常不宽容的宗教。在当时，它可能是世界上最不宽容的宗教之一，甚至是最不宽容的宗教。嗯，你仍然，你知道，在**《圣经》**中，你有一条戒律，要杀死所有的**迦南人**。嗯，你对所有其他人的宗教和宗教习俗和信仰都非常不宽容。古代世界有它自己的恐怖，但在宗教上，它是一个非常宽容的地方。多神教的宗教相信许多神，他们接受其他民族的宗教和神，并且在某种程度上也实践它们，没有任何问题。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And of course, they adhere to the **biblical Judaism**, which was a very different religion than what developed over **2,000 years** in the diaspora. **Biblical Judaism** was a very um violent, very illiberal, very intolerant religion. For its time, it was probably one of the least or maybe the most intolerant religion in the world. Um, you still, you know, in in the in the Bible, you have a commandment uh to kill all the **Canaanites** people. Um, you have an intolerance, a very deep intolerance towards the religions and and and religious practices and beliefs of all other people. The ancient world was it has it its own horrors but religiously it was a very tolerant place. Polytheistic religions which believed in many gods they had no problem accepting the religions the gods of other people and also practicing them to some extent.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 你知道，你看看**罗马帝国**。所以罗马人接受他们征服的数百个其他民族的神灵和宗教没有任何问题。他们没有试图消灭其他宗教。在许多情况下，他们采用了这些宗教。你知道，作为一个罗马人，你早上可以去**朱庇特**神庙，然后可以去埃及女神**伊西斯**神庙，你也很乐意听到来自中东的新神**耶稣**、**雅威**。你是开放的。嗯，**犹太教**不是一个开放的宗教。这种情况在某种程度上发生了变化，当时**犹太人**发现自己是生活在其他宗教和传统统治下的一个微小少数群体，这迫使他们探索并采纳一种更开放和宽容的世界观。呃，但现在，这**两千年**的宽容**犹太传统**正在被彻底否定和摧毁。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: You know you look at say the **Roman Empire**. So the **Romans** had no problem accepting the the the gods and religions of hundreds of other peoples that that they conquered. They did not try to exterminate the other religions. In many cases they adopted them. And you know, as a **Roman**, you can go to **Jupiter's temple** in the morning, and then you can go to the **Isis temple** of the Egyptian goddess **Isis**, and you're also willing to hear about this new God, **Jesus**, **Yahweh**, coming from the **Middle East**. You're open. Um, **Judaism** was not an open religion. This changed to some extent when the **Jews** found themselves as a tiny minority living under the domination of of of other other religions, other traditions which kind of forced them to explore and adopt a more open and tolerant worldview. Uh but now these this **2,000 years** of tolerant **Jewish tradition** is being completely denied and destroyed.
**主持人**: 这在某种程度上是对美国的一种批评，经常来自其他国家，认为如果我们的边界两边都是海洋，北方是加拿大，南方是墨西哥，我们在使用权力时也可以温和慷慨。但现在生活在这里的现实，也许从**以色列犹太人**的角度来看，我们生活的地方。
Original English **Host**: This is in some ways a critique that has often been leveled at America from other countries that if our borders were an ocean on two sides and Canada to the north and and Mexico to the south, we could be gentle and generous in our use of power as well. But that the reality of living this now maybe in the **Israeli Jewish** perspective of living where we do.
**主持人**: 能够从北方的**犹太人**家中看到**真主党**的现实。
Original English **Host**: the reality of being able to see you know **Hezbollah** from **Jewish homes** in the north.
**主持人**: 生活在一个遭受了**10月7日创伤**的国家，迫使我们与**权力**建立了一种可能不是我们想要的，但你知道，回到**史蒂芬·米勒**的说法，它是一种更诚实的理解，即在现实世界中获得安全所需的东西，而不是**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**或**埃兹拉·克莱恩**所喜欢想象的世界，而是我们实际生活的世界。我相信您在不同时期与您的同胞进行过这样的对话。您对这种观点有何看法？
Original English **Host**: The reality of living in a country uh that has suffered the trauma of **October 7th** has forced us into a relationship with **power** that is maybe not what we want. But you know to go back to the way **Steven Miller** put it is a more honest understanding of what is required to be secure in the real world not the the world that **Yuval Noah Harari** or **Ezra Klein** like to imagine but the world in which we actually live. I'm sure you've had this conversation with with your countrymen at different times. What do you what do you say to that view?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 在某种程度上，这绝对是正确的。我的意思是，你确实需要在某种程度上依靠**武力**来确保你的安全，但这不能是唯一的东西。如果你认为**武力**是唯一能保障你安全的东西，最终你将不得不征服整个世界。任何潜在的威胁，你都必须征服它。而且你知道，**以色列**本身并不是那样运作的。**10月7日**之后发生的一件引人注目的事情是，**以色列**签署的所有和平协议都保持了有效。**哈马斯**曾希望在**10月7日**之后，所有阿拉伯国家会联合起来试图摧毁**以色列**，但这种情况根本没有发生。与**埃及**的和平协议仍然有效。与**约旦**的和平协议仍然有效。与**海湾国家**的和平协议仍然有效。呃，与**巴勒斯坦权力机构**的协议也仍然有效。它没有加入**哈马斯**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: To some extent it's absolutely correct. I mean you do need to rely on **force** to some extent to uh ensure your security but it just cannot be the only thing. If you think **force** is the only thing that guarantees your security eventually you will have to conquer the entire world. Like anything that that is potentially a threat you will have to conquer it. And you know **Israel** itself doesn't work doesn't operate like that. One of the remarkable things that happened after **October 7th** is that you know all the peace agreements that **Israel** has signed held. **Kamas** hoped that after **October 7th** it will e close cause close all the Arab countries to unite and try to destroy **Israel** and it it just didn't happen. The peace agreement with **Egypt** held the peace agreement with **Jordan** held. the peace agreement with the **Gulf States** held. Uh also the agreements with the **Palestinian Authority** held. It did not join **Hamas**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 并非和平协议，而是与**以色列****巴勒斯坦公民**的相对友好的关系也保持了。**哈马斯**曾希望他们都会起来反对**以色列**。不。在**10月7日**，绝大多数**以色列**的**巴勒斯坦公民**仍然忠于国家。他们中的许多人前来服务。**以色列**的许多医生是阿拉伯人，是巴勒斯坦人，他们都去医院照顾伤员。嗯，**哈马斯**本身并没有背叛与**以色列**的任何协议，因为它从未与**以色列**签署过任何和平协议。所以当然你可以说，嗯，与**埃及**的和平协议之所以有效，是因为**埃及**害怕**以色列**的军事力量。但这只是一半的解释，因为**以色列**相对于**哈马斯**拥有压倒性的军事力量，但**哈马斯**仍然发动了袭击。所以，我并不是说**以色列**应该解散军队，但如果你拥有一支强大的军队和一份和平协议，那会比只有其中之一更好。是的，**以色列**生活在一个非常非常问题重重、困难重重的世界邻里中。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: The not not the peace agreement but the relatively cordial relationship with the **Palestinian citizens of Israel** held. **Kamas** hoped that they will all rise against **Israel**. No. On the **7th of October**, **Palestinian citizens of Isra of Israel**, the overwhelming majority uh stayed loyal to the country. Many of them came to serve. Many of the doctors in **Israel**, our **Arabs**, our **Palestinians**, they all went to the hospital to take care of of the of the injured. Um not **Kamas** itself did not betray any agreement with **Israel** because it never signed any peace agreement with **Israel**. So of course you can say ah the peace agreement with **Egypt** held because **Egypt** was afraid of **Israel**'s military force. But this is only half the explanation because **Israel** had overwhelming military force compared with **Kamas** and **Kamas** still attacked it. So, I'm not saying **Israel** should, you know, kind dismantle its army, but uh it's it's better if you have both a strong army and a peace agreement than only one. And yes, **Israel** is living in a very very problematic, difficult neighborhood in the world.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 呃，嗯，你知道，它是世界上少数几个在其存在的大部分时间里，其大多数邻国，如果不是全部，都简单地拒绝承认其存在权，并公开表示他们将摧毁它的国家之一。几乎没有其他类似的情况。所以自其成立以来，它一直处于非常困难的境地。但问题是，你需要**权力**。好的。你如何使用你的**权力**？**以色列**是一个极其强大的国家。嗯，它可以以不同的方式使用其**权力**。例如，它可以尝试使用其**权力**来与**巴勒斯坦人**建立更好的关系。而且你知道，如果你看看**以色列**对待**巴勒斯坦人**的方式，不是在**加沙**，而是在**约旦河西岸**，这没有任何安全理由。他们没有在**10月7日**袭击**以色列**。而通过其行动，**以色列**正在降低与**巴勒斯坦人**达成和平协议的可能性，它可以使用其**权力**。你知道，它不能强迫**巴勒斯坦人**违背他们的意愿达成和平，但它可以采取许多行动，使这种情况更有可能、更容易发生。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: One of the things that uh um you know it's one of the only countries in the world that for most of its existence mo many of its neighbors if not most of its neighbors simply refused to acknowledge its right to exist and openly said that they are going to destroy it. There almost no other cases like that. So it it has been in a very difficult situation since the moment of its inception. But the question is you need **power**. Okay. What do you do with your **power**? **Israel** is an extremely powerful state. Um it can use its **power** in different ways. It can try to use its **power** for instance to establish better relationships with the **Palestinians**. And you know as as if you look for instance at the way that **Israel** is treating the **Palestinians** not in **Gaza** but in the **West Bank** there is no security justification for that. They did not attack **Israel** on the **7th of October**. And by its actions **Israel** is making the the chances that there will be a peaceful agreement with with the **Palestinians** is decreasing and it can use its **power**. You know, it cannot force the **Palestinians** to make peace against their will, but it can take many actions that will make this more likely, easier.
**主持人**: 我认为您关于**约旦河西岸**的观点说得非常好。但我想问一些关于**以色列故事**的事情。
Original English **Host**: I think your point there on the **West Bank** is very well taken. But but I want to um ask something about the **Israeli story**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah.
**主持人**: 你在**非对称冲突**的历史中看到的一件事，在**恐怖组织**如何试图削弱更强大的对手的历史中看到的一件事是，他们知道他们赢不了战争。也许**哈马斯**，我不想假装了解**辛瓦尔**的想法。也许他们相信整个阿拉伯世界会发生起义，他们会拥有所有这些盟友。也许他希望如此。但我怀疑他也明白，如果这成功了，将会有压倒性的报复，夷平**加沙**。呃，这就是发生的事情。而且胜利，如果他能够取得胜利，不是在战场上击败**以色列**，而是摧毁保护**以色列**和世界其他地区的**故事**。
Original English **Host**: One thing that you see in the history of **asymmetric conflict**, in the history of of how **terrorist groups** try to weaken stronger uh opponents is that they know they can't win a war. Maybe **Hamas**, I don't pretend to know what was in **Sinar**'s mind. Maybe they believed that there would be uh an uprising all through the Arab world and they would have all these allies. Maybe he hoped for that. But I suspect he also understood that if this worked, there would be an overwhelming reprisal that would level **Gaza**. Uh, which is what happened. And that the victory, if he was able to to to secure one, would not be defeating **Israel** on the battlefield, but destroying the **story** that protected **Israel** and the rest of the world.
**主持人**: 他会让世界其他地方更多地以他看待**以色列**的方式看待它。**以色列**在这场战争中，每次战斗都取得了战术上的胜利。但作为一个真正关心**以色列**的人，我看到正在发生的是它放弃了自己的**故事**，并且没有认识到世界正在以一种更黑暗的方式看待它，而这本身就是一种弱点，一种**哈马斯**试图实现的东西，你可以在一开始就看到它试图实现。
Original English **Host**: that he would come to make the rest of the world see **Israel** more the way he saw it. **Israel** has won tactically every battle it has fought in this war. But as somebody who actually does care about **Israel**, what I see happening is an abandonment of its own **story** and uh an absence of recognition that the world is coming to see it in a much much darker way and that that is itself a source of weakness, a kind of a thing that um **Hamas** was trying to achieve which you could see it trying to achieve at the beginning.
**主持人**: 人们曾对此发出警告。
Original English **Host**: which people warned about.
**主持人**: 如果你长期失去那个**故事**，你就失去了一些真实的东西。你看看**以色列**和**美国**的民意调查，尤其是年轻人中的调查，对**以色列**作为一个公正国家的信念已经崩溃，我认为**以色列**人民对此大多不以为意，但我认为从长远来看，这很重要。是的，我认为**以色列**正在下大赌注，认为**史蒂芬·米勒**的世界观会盛行，世界将是一个**武力**至上的地方，而**以色列**将成为这种世界观的捍卫者之一。
Original English **Host**: And if you lose that **story** in the long term, you've lost something real. You look at polling on on **Israel** and America, you look at it particularly among the young and the belief in **Israel** as a just nation has collapsed and I think people in **Israel** treat that largely as insignificant and I think in the long run it is significant. Yeah, I think **Israel** is making a big bet that **Stefan Miller**'s worldview will prevail, that the world will be a place in which **force** is the only thing that matters and **Israel** will be the champion, one of the champions of of of this worldview.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯，这是**内塔尼亚胡政府**正在下的赌注。现在你知道，关于**辛瓦尔**，也就是**哈马斯**所下的赌注，我们暂时抛开正义问题，只谈有效性。**辛瓦尔**曾有一个惊人的胜利触手可及，但他仅仅因为他的残忍而失去了它。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Um, and this is the bet that the **Netanyahu government** is making. Now you know with regard to the the bet that **Sinoir** made that **Kamas** made leave aside the question of justice for a moment just in terms of effectiveness. **Sinoir** had an amazing victory within his grasp and he lost it just because of his cruelty.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: **10月7日**发生了什么？**哈马斯**成功地对**IDF**取得了惊人的军事胜利，并羞辱了**以色列**和**IDF**。他们只需要做一件小事，一件大事，一件不同的事，就能取得更大的政治和地缘政治胜利。而这件事就是：**放过平民**。想象一下另一个**10月7日**，**哈马斯**做的事情完全一样，但不是杀害或绑架**以色列平民**，而是扣押他们，并带世界媒体去看看**哈马斯**是如何善待**以色列俘虏**的。他们给他们提供水、药品和食物。他们俘虏士兵，把他们当作战俘，这是合法的，但他们不伤害平民，这仅仅是唯一的区别。在这种情况下，**以色列**的双手将被束缚。不仅世界公众舆论，**以色列**公众舆论也不会允许**以色列**只是将**加沙**夷为平地，因为我们将看到**哈马斯**武装分子照顾**以色列平民**而不伤害他们的画面。在那个世界里，**以色列**对**加沙**进行压倒性报复的合法性将微乎其微。而**哈马斯**将获胜。所以，不仅仅是战术胜利，而是一场重大的政治胜利。而这一切没有发生，仅仅是因为残忍。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: On the **7th of October** what happened? **Hamas** managed to secure a stunning military victory over the **IDF** and to humiliate **Israel** and the **IDF**. And they needed to do just one t small things big thing different in order to to to achieve a a a much bigger political and geopolitical victory. And this one thing was just **spare the civilians**. Imagine an an a an an alternative **7th of October** in which **Kamas** does exactly the same thing, but instead of killing or abducting the **Israeli civilians**, they hold them and bring the world press to see how well **Kamas** is treating the **Israeli captives**. They bring them water and medicine and food. They capture the soldiers and take them prisoners of war which is legitimate but they do not harm the civilians and that that's the only difference. In such a scenario **Israel**'s hands would have been tied. not only world public opinion but also **Israeli public opinion** would not have allowed **Israel** to just you know bombard **Gaza** into rubble because we would have had these images of **Kamas** uh uh combatants taking care of **Israeli civilians** and not harming them. And in that world, there would have been very little legitimacy for **Israel** to have overwhelming reprisal against **Gaza**. And **Kamas** would have won. So not just a tactical victory, but a major political victory. And it didn't happen simply because of the cruelty.
**主持人**: 我们正在讨论的是一份关于**10月7日**的重大报告发布的一周，这份报告基于对大量照片、视频和受害者证词的分析，其中所包含的残忍和施虐行为令人真正感到恐惧。这是一份非常非常难以阅读的报告，几乎所有人都可以找到它，如果他们愿意的话。我在阅读时想到的是，因为当然，如果你和**巴勒斯坦人**以及去过**加沙**的人交谈，你知道，他们失去亲人的故事也同样令人难以承受。现在这些都存在着，并不断地为这两个**故事**火上浇油。我常常认为，想象能够调和人们利益的政治解决方案比想象能够调和现在驱动两个社会的**故事**更容易。
Original English **Host**: And we are talking on the week when a major report came out about **October 7th** uh based on huge amount of analysis of photos and videos and um victim testimonies and the cruelty and the sadism in it is it's it's genuinely horrifying. It's a very very hard report to read almost any of people can find it if they want. And and the thing I was thinking reading it, because of course if you um talk to **Palestinians** and and and people have been in **Gaza**, you know, their stories of loss are are are overwhelming too to hear, is that these now exist and they keep feeding into these two **stories**. I I often think that it is easier to imagine political solutions that could reconcile people's interests than it is to imagine a reconciliation of the **stories** that now drive.
**主持人**: 两个社会。我很好奇，作为一个将**故事**视为**合作**与**冲突**空间的人，您是如何看待这一点的。我可以想象，所谓的解决方案在纸面上是存在的。我无法想象的是，这些过程如何在现在建立在恐惧、愤怒和复仇**故事**之上的社会中生根发芽。
Original English **Host**: both societies. And I'm curious as somebody who thinks about **stories** as a as a space of both **cooperation** and **conflict**, how you think about that. I I can imagine, you know, quote unquote solutions that exist on paper. What I cannot imagine is those processes taking hold in societies that now run upon the **stories** of fear and anger and vengeance.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。嗯，我想说一些关于愤怒和恐惧的事情，以及一些关于痛苦的事情。愤怒和恐惧的故事需要被喂养。愤怒就像一场吞噬你的火焰，但它需要不断地被喂养。如果它得不到喂养，它最终就会熄灭。你看看历史，你会看到冲突，可怕的冲突，你会说人们永远不会忘记，他们永远不会原谅。然后在几十年内，如果条件改变，他们就会。你看看犹太人和德国人。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm. Well, I I want to say something about about anger and fear and something about pain. The angry and and fearful stories, they need to be fed. Anger is like a fire that consumes you, but it constantly needs to be fed. And if it is not fed, it ultimately dies down. And you look at history and and you see conflict, horrendous conflicts, and you say people will never forget what they will never forgive. And then within a few decades, if conditions change, they do. You look at at **Jews** and **Germans**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 你知道，这只用了几十年。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: you know, it took just a couple of decades.
**主持人**: 我有朋友，**犹太朋友**，重新获得了**德国国籍**。
Original English **Host**: I have friends reclaiming **Jewish friends** reclaiming **German citizenship**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah.
**主持人**: 这真是令人震惊的事情。
Original English **Host**: Which is shocking thing to see.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 很美。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Beautiful.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。而且你知道，关系真的很好。它们不仅仅是虚假的。它们不仅仅基于某种物质利益。关系真的很好，而且甚至还不到100年。嗯，所以我之前举的**德国**天主教徒和新教徒的例子，他们在互相残杀那么久之后，也和解了。现在，在许多情况下，**愤怒**会建立起系统，然后这些系统又会不断地滋养**愤怒**，然后它似乎真的永远不会结束。但如果你停止喂养它，它最终会熄灭。呃，我认为所有形式的暴力都是如此，这又回到了我们讨论的开始。和平还是战争，暴力还是平静，哪个更根本？一方面，**暴力**似乎更根本，因为你知道，如果你有安静，如果你有和平，只要有一个人开始叫喊，和平就会被打破。如果你有100个人在**合作**，而有一个人开始打架，你就会有**暴力**。所以存在有利于**暴力**的不平衡，从这个意义上说，它似乎更真实、更根本。但从某种意义上说，和平更根本，因为**暴力**总是需要食物、投资、武器、燃料、士兵的食物。如果你停止喂养它，它最终就会熄灭，和平总是存在的可能性。所以，我不会绝望。无论现在人们头脑中充满了什么样的**故事**，最终和解与和平的可能性总是存在的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. And you know, and the relations are really good. They are not just you know makebelieve. They are not just based on some kind of material benefit. The relations are really good and it's not it's not even 100 years. Um so the example I gave before of Catholics and Protestants in **Germany** after slaughtering each other for so long it was they reconciled. Now in many cases anger builds systems that then feed the anger more and more and then it seems really to never end. But if you stop feeding it eventually it dies down. Uh this is true of all I think all forms of violence and it goes back to the beginning of our discussion. What is more fundamental peace or war violence or calmness? And on the one hand, violence seems more fundamental because you know you can have if you have quiet, if you have peace, it's enough if one person starts shouting and the peace is shattered. If you have a 100 people **cooperating** and one person starts fighting, you have violence. So there is an imbalance in favor of violence and it seems to in this sense to be more real, more fundamental. But there is a sense in which peace is more fundamental because violence always requires food, investment, weapons, fuel, food for the soldiers. If you stop feeding it, eventually it dies down and peace always remains a possibility. So I would not despair. No matter what are the **stories** that kind of fill people's mind right now, the possibility of eventual reconciliation and and peace is is always there.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 我还有一些关于痛苦的话要说，但如果您想……
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And I have something to say also about pain, but if you want to.
**主持人**: 不，我很想听听您对痛苦的看法。
Original English **Host**: No, I I'd like to hear what you have to say about pain.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 在这场战争和许多其他战争中，我们一直看到的是，当人们处于**痛苦**之中时，他们根本无法承认他人的**痛苦**。任何时候，如果我感到**痛苦**，任何分散我对自身**痛苦**注意力的事物，都会让我感到不公，甚至再次感到**痛苦**。我之前提到，许多**以色列人**（并非所有）根本无法承认**巴勒斯坦人**正在**受苦**。他们理性上知道，但情感上他们无法面对一张图片、一段文字、一个向他们讲述**巴勒斯坦人****苦难**的人。即使你告诉他们：“我没有指责你任何事。你百分之百是公正的。你是人类有史以来最公正的人。现在，请你承认这个**巴勒斯坦儿童**的**痛苦**。”他们也做不到。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: What we've been seeing throughout this war and many other wars is that when people are in **pain**, they simply cannot acknowledge the **pain** of somebody else. Anytime if I'm in **pain**, anything that distracts attention from my **pain** feels to me unjust and again even painful. I mentioned earlier that **Israelis** are really many **Israelis**, not all of them, simply incapable of acknowledging that the **Palestinians** are **suffering**. Intellectually they know it but emotionally they cannot be in the presence of an image, a text, a person telling them about the **suffering** of of of of **Palestinians**. Even if you tell them, I'm not accusing you of anything. You are 100% just. You are the most just people that ever existed. And now let you acknowledge the **pain** of this **Palestinian child**. They cannot do it.
**主持人**: 您认为这是为什么？反过来也一样。你知道，我见过一些和平活动家，他们一生致力于和平与和解，然而在**10月7日**的事件中，他们根本无法承认**以色列人**也**受苦**了。
Original English **Host**: Why do you think that is? And the same and the same is true of the other side. You know, I I I've I've I've seen examples of of, you know, peace activists who kind of devoted their whole life to peace and reconciliation and yet in the case of **October 7th**, they simply cannot recognize that **Israelis** suffered.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯，你知道，**人脑**是一个了不起的东西，拥有数十亿神经元和数千亿突触，然而所有这些数千亿突触却很难同时容纳两种想法，即那种对简单故事的吸引力。不，不，不。它，它，它应该只有善与恶，我们不能认识到双方的任何一种正义或任何一种痛苦，即**以色列人****受苦**，**巴勒斯坦人**也**受苦**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Um it's you know the **human brain** is an amazing thing with all these billions of neurons and the hundreds of billions of synapses and yet it is so difficult for all these hundreds of billions of synapses to hold two ideas at the same time that the the the the attraction to have a simple story. No, no, no. It's it's it's it's there should be just good and evil and we cannot recognize any kind of justice or any kind of pain on two sides that the **Israelis** **suffer** and also the **Palestinians** **suffer**.
**主持人**: 嗯，**人脑**是一个了不起的东西，我认为它之所以了不起，部分原因在于它能够以目标为导向。我想知道，对于您在这里提出的问题，以及它存在于这场冲突和许多其他时候的问题，一个答案是否是，如果完全承认他人是人类。
Original English **Host**: Well, the **human brain** is an amazing thing and and part of what makes it amazing, I think, is its ability to orient itself towards goals. And and I wonder if one answer to the question you're posing here and it exists in this conflict and it exists in many other times too is it to fully recognize the other as human.
**主持人**: 承认他们的**苦难**像我的**苦难**或我所爱的人的**苦难**一样有意义。我将无法做我需要做的事情来保护自己。也就是说，如果我向对方敞开心扉，你不断提出的类比或思想实验，比如对某人说你百分之百正确，你所做的一切都是公正的，你只是向自己敞开心扉去理解它意味着什么。
Original English **Host**: to recognize their **suffering** as meaningful in the way my **suffering** is or the people I love their **suffering** would be. I would not be able to do what I need to do to protect myself for them. that if I were to open myself to the other that the analogy or the the thought experiment you keep positing say to somebody you're 100% right everything you're doing is just just open yourself to what it means.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 事实上，大脑太聪明了，它知道如果它向自己敞开心扉去理解它意味着什么，它将无法做它认为能够保护自己的事情。我认为在这种情况下，你将能够面对你所做事情的后果。如果你不能面对你所做事情的后果，那么它可能就是不对的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: that in fact the **brain** is too smart for that it knows that if it opened itself to what it means it would not be able to be doing the thing that it believes is keeping it safe I think that in those cases you would be able to confront the consequences of what you do. And if you are not able to confront the consequences of what you do, then probably it's not right.
### **故事的流变与数字媒体** **主持人**: 让我问您一个问题，关于您所说的**故事**以及它们如何被喂养，因为我对以下问题非常感兴趣。
Original English **Host**: Let me ask you about the point you're making about **stories** and and and how they're fed because something I'm very interested in.
**主持人**: **故事**如何改变的问题。
Original English **Host**: is this question of how **stories** change.
**主持人**: 这个问题是关于**欧洲**现在如何生活在和平之中。
Original English **Host**: is this question of how **Europe** now lives in peace.
**主持人**: 呃，我和我妻子度蜜月时去了几个亚洲国家，其中一个是**越南**。我记得参观**胡志明**的宫殿，或者你知道，他的住所，他们正在出售**百事**产品。**百事**显然在那里达成了销售协议。我的意思是，仅仅在**越南战争**几十年后，两国关系就完全正常了。
Original English **Host**: Uh my wife and me on our honeymoon, we went to a couple countries in Asia, one of them being **Vietnam**. And I remember touring uh **Ho Chi Min**'s palace or you know his residence and they were selling **Pepsi** products. **Pepsi** clearly had the deal to to to serve there and I mean just a couple decades after the **Vietnam War** and and the relationship is completely fine.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。所以存在这种能力。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. And so there is this capacity.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 令人难以想象的野蛮行径。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: unimaginable barbarity.
**主持人**: 嗯。
Original English **Host**: Mhm.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 让位于正常的和平关系。你现在想想生活在**南斯拉夫**的人们，对吧？你想想生活在，或者说曾经的**南斯拉夫**。你再想想，嗯，你知道，在**卢旺达**的人们。然后你再想想，也许这是一个更容易谈论的例子，因为它已经过去足够久，我们对此没有强烈的感觉，但**新教**和**天主教**战争。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: To give way to normal peaceful relationships. You think of people living in **Yugoslavia** now, right? You think of people or what was **Yugoslavia**. You think of people um you know in **Rwanda**. And you think then, and maybe this is an easier case to talk about because it's far enough in the past that we don't have strong feelings about it, but the **Protestant** and **Catholic wars**.
**主持人**: 嗯。
Original English **Host**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 所以存在喂养这个问题，但这有点抽象。在您看来，是什么让一个如此根深蒂固的故事，一个我们愿意为之而死或为之杀戮的故事，在几年、几十年内转变为其他东西？
Original English **Host**: So there's this question of feeding, but but it's a little bit abstract. What is it in your view that allows a **story** so deeply held that we would die for it or kill for it to shift within a couple of years, a couple of decades into just something else?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 啊，这是一个很好的问题。我不知道具体是什么，我的意思是，你知道，**第一次世界大战**并没有让欧洲人厌倦战争。他们又打了一场，但之后他们似乎确实厌倦了战争。是什么造成了这种差异，我不确定。但是，嗯，从某种意义上说，思想总是拥有不止一个故事。即使我们告诉自己这是唯一的一个，思想也是一个如此复杂的地方，层层叠叠，还有潜意识和潜意识层面，你通常会同时拥有几个故事，即使你只承认一个，你也可以非常迅速地在它们之间切换。你知道，再看看**德国**1945年之后，很多曾经是顽固的**纳粹**分子。大多数**纳粹**分子在1945年没有自杀。少数人自杀了，但大多数人没有。他们中的许多人成为了**西德**至少是**自由民主**的正直公民。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Ah, that's a very good question. I'm not sure what what the I mean, you know, the **first world war** did not make Europeans tire of war. They had another one, but then afterwards they did seem to tire of war. And what made the difference, I'm not sure. But um in a way, the mind always holds more than one **story**. Even if we tell ourselves that this is the only one, the mind is such a complicated place with layers upon layers and subconscious and and subconscious levels and you usually hold several **stories** at the same time even if you acknowledge only one and you can shift remarkably quickly between them. You know, again, you look at **Germany** after 1945 and lots of people who were kind of diehard **Nazis**. Most **Nazis** did not commit suicide in 1945. A few did, but most didn't. And they became many of them kind of upright citizens of at least in **West Germany** of a **liberal democracy**.
**主持人**: 而且令人惊讶的是，他们在成为**纳粹**之前几年，也一直是正直的公民。
Original English **Host**: And wildly they had been upright citizens just a couple years before they became **Nazis**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. um
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 比如与**犹太邻居**和平相处，互相照看孩子，这些**故事**。你知道，思想可以以一种极端的**力量**和暴力紧握它们，但随后又会放手，因为最终，再说一遍，它只是一个**故事**，它不是物理定律，它不是生物学定律，它只是**人脑**本身的产物，这，你知道，这是非常好的消息。人们有时会想象人类像狼或黑猩猩一样为了食物而争斗。历史上很少有战争真正是为了食物。当然，你知道，再看看**以色列-巴勒斯坦冲突**，它不是为了食物。地中海和约旦河之间，客观上食物充足，足以让每个人活下去。它甚至不是为了领土。尽管它是世界上人口密度最高的地区之一，但客观上土地充足，足以建造房屋、学校和医院供所有人使用。这都是关于人们头脑中的**故事**，他们以极大的力量紧握这些**故事**，但这些**故事**最终几乎什么都不是，在某些我们不知道如何创造的条件下，人们可以放弃这些**故事**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: like living in peace with **Jewish neighbors** right near them going to you know doing commerce like watching each other's kids the the the **stories** you know the mind can hold on to them with a kind of extreme force and and and violence but then let them go because ultimately again it's a **story** it's not the laws of physics it's not a law of biology it's just a a product of the **human mind** itself which is you know which is very good news. People sometimes imagine that humans fight you know like wolves or chimpanzees over food. This is hardly any war in history was really about food. Certainly you know again you look at the **Israeli Palestinian conflict** it's not about food. There is objectively enough food to keep everybody alive between the Mediterranean and Jordan River. It's not even about territory. Even though it's one of the mo of the densest places in the world in terms of population density, objectively there is enough land to build houses and schools and and hospitals for everybody. It's about the **stories** that people have in their minds which they hold with kind of tremendous force but which are ultimately almost nothing and uh under certain conditions that we don't really know how to how to create people can let go of these **stories**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 有一点可能比**故事**被喂养的问题更深一层，那就是**故事**的传播方式以及谁在传播它们。在这里，我谈论的范围比仅仅**以色列**和**巴勒斯坦人**更广。我们生活在这个时代，这个**自由主义**（正如我们之前所讨论的）正在明显瓦解的时代。而这个时代的一个独特之处是，我们的**故事**正在通过**社交媒体**传播。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: One thing that is maybe a layer down from the question of the **stories** being fed is the way the **stories** circulate and who circulates them. And and here I I'm talking more broadly than than just **Israel** and and and **Palestinians**. We live in this age, this age in which **liberalism**, as we were talking about it earlier, is is is clearly breaking down. And one thing distinctive about this age is this movement to our **stories** being passed on **social media**.
**主持人**: 在**算法媒体**上，在**数字媒体**上。
Original English **Host**: on **algorithmic media**, on **digital media**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah.
**主持人**: 有些技术有利于**合作**，而有些技术我认为有利于分裂。
Original English **Host**: there are technologies that lend themselves to **cooperation** and technologies that I think lend themselves to fracture.
**主持人**: 互联网和**社交媒体**曾被极力宣传为**合作**的技术。你，我的意思是，我们使用的动词甚至是“分享”。
Original English **Host**: and the internet and and **social media** were very much promised as a technology of **cooperation**. you are I mean the even the verbs we use sharing.
**主持人**: 对，还有什么能比“分享”更和平呢？
Original English **Host**: right what what could be more peaceful possibly than sharing.
**主持人**: 然而，我认为结果并非如此。所以我很好奇您对这一层面的思考，即现在我们的信息，我们共享或不共享的**故事**，是如何被创造和传播的机制。
Original English **Host**: and yet I don't think it has turned out that way and so I'm curious for your reflections on this layer of it the the the sort of mechanisms upon which our information our shared or not shared **stories** now are created and circulated.
### **社交媒体算法与情感操控** **尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 所以你有这些人，你知道，他们不断地阅读所有这些**阴谋论**和**假新闻**等等，他们不信任任何人。他们不信任政府。他们不信任传统媒体。他们不信任科学和大学。哦，这些都是某种**阴谋**，为了欺骗我们。但他们确实信任向他们展示所有这些**故事**的**算法**。所以，并不是信任完全从他们的大脑中或从世界上蒸发了。它从人类转移到了**算法**。这种情况在越来越多的系统中发生。另一件不那么重要但近一二十年来非常重要的事情是，**社交媒体算法**的目标并非创造信任，并非创造**真相**，而是创造**参与度**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: So you have these people who, you know, they constantly read all these **conspiracy theories** and and **fake news** and so forth and they don't trust anybody. They don't trust the government. They don't trust the traditional media. They don't trust science and the universities. Oh, these are all kind of **conspiracies** to to deceive us. But they do trust the **algorithms** that show them all these **stories**. So it's not that trust completely evaporated from their mind or or from the world. It shifted from humans to **algorithms**. And this is happening in more and more systems. The other thing which is less essential but has been very uh uh uh important over the last decade or two is that the **algorithms of social media** they were given as their goal not the creation of trust not the creation of **truth** but the creation of **engagement**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 比如给**Facebook**算法、**X**算法、**TikTok**算法设定的目标是**增加用户参与度**。这听起来不错，**参与度**，听起来是个好事情。嗯，但它真正意味着的是，**算法**对数百万、数十亿人类**小白鼠**进行了实验，看看我们如何能让人类更投入？我们如何能让人类在平台上花费更长的时间并做出更多反应？例如，通过与朋友分享帖子。我发现最容易让人投入的方式是按下他们大脑中的**仇恨按钮**或**贪婪按钮**或**恐惧按钮**。因为**仇恨**非常吸引人。**恐惧**非常吸引人。如果有什么东西威胁到你的生命，你就会投入。他们一直在用**仇恨**、**恐惧**、**愤怒**、**贪婪**等等淹没世界。我们现在生活在一个**过度投入**的世界里。你知道，**投入**与另一个现在在我们语言中非常重要的词“**兴奋**”非常接近。**兴奋**仅仅意味着你的神经系统处于高度活跃状态。**兴奋**在某些情况下是好的，在某种程度上就像**投入**在某些情况下是好的一样，但最终从生物学上讲，如果你一直让一个生物体处于**兴奋**状态，这个生物体最终会崩溃死亡。我们根本不是被设计成一直**兴奋**的。在许多情况下，你知道，当我遇到人时，我希望遇到能让我感到平静的人，而不是一定要**兴奋**的人。哦，遇到你真让人平静。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: like the goal given to the **Facebook algorithm** to the **X algorithm** to the **Tik Tok algorithm** is increase user **engagement** which sounds nice **engagement** that that sounds like a good thing. Um, but what it really means is that the **algorithms** experimented on millions on billions of **human guinea pigs** to see how do we make humans more engaged? How do we make humans spend longer on on the platform and react to it more? for instance, by sharing the the post with with with their friends. And I discovered that the easiest way to make people engaged is to press the **hate button** or the **greed button** or the **fear button** in their mind in **human minds** because **hate** is very engaging. **Fear** is very engaging. If something threatens your life, you are engaged. And they've been flooding the world with **hate** and **fear** and **anger** and **greed** and and so forth. And we are now living in a **hyperengaged** world. And you know **engagement** is very a close cousin of another word which uh now is very dominant in in in in our language which is **excitement**. **Excitement** me simply means that your nervous system is like working in in a hyper level and **excitement** is good in some situations as to some extent as just as **engagement** is good in in some situations but ultimately biologically if you keep an organism excited all the time the organism eventually collapses and dies. We are just not built to be excited all the time. And in many cases, you know, when I meet people, I would like to meet people who makes me feel calm, not necessarily excited. Oh, it's so calming to meet you.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 你看看**美国政治**或**以色列政治**或世界政治，我认为整个世界都**过度兴奋**了。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And you look at, you know, **US politics** or **Israeli politics** or **world politics**, I think the whole world is **over excited**.
**主持人**: 嗯，这确实是我非常坚信的一个信念，尽管我无法真正证明它，但我要如何表达这一点，才不至于听起来像是在为自己开脱呢？
Original English **Host**: Well, this has been a belief I I I I hold actually fairly strongly, although I can't really prove it, but that how do I say this without it feeling like special pleading.
**主持人**: 我认为**社交和算法媒体**的演变从根本上说是**不自由**的。它从根本上敌视**自由主义**。这里我指的不是作为**美国政治运动**的**自由主义**，它偏爱**皮特·布蒂吉格**而不是**J.D.万斯**。
Original English **Host**: I think that the way that um **social and algorithmic media** evolved is fundamentally illiberal. It's fundamentally hostile to to **liberalism**. And here I don't mean **liberalism** as an **American political movement** that prefers, you know, **Pete Buddhajedge** to.
**主持人**: **J.D.万斯**。
Original English **Host**: **JD Vance**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 我在这里指的是**话语模式**和**考量习惯**，它们与**自由主义**的发展是同源的。它是**深思熟虑**的。一方面是**深思熟虑**，另一方面是**犹豫不决**。**博爱**，我认为，以您描述的方式，它将我们的思想压缩成这些“保险杠贴纸”或“快速剪辑”，然后只向人们展示那些最令人**兴奋**的思绪，用您的话说，通过**仇恨**来**兴奋**，通过爱来**兴奋**。
Original English **Host**: I mean here modes of habits of discourse and consideration that were uh co-extensive with the development of **liberalism**. It's **deliberation**. It's on the one hand on the other handism. **fraternity**, I think, in the way you're describing it that keeping uh, you know, shrinking down our thoughts, compressing them to these bumper stickers or these quick clips, and then really only showing people the ones of those thoughts that are the most exciting, to use your term, exciting through **hate**, exciting through love.
**主持人**: 如果你试图建立一个平衡的社会，一个相信健康的**分歧**和**冲突**以及**友爱**的社会，它在这种**交流氛围**中生存的难度，会比在电视节目数量有限，人们通过电视获取新闻的时代更大。比他们在报纸上阅读新闻时，冷静地翻阅不同的文章，然后翻页时更难。社会建立在我们交流的方式上。尽管我们已经讨论了很多**社交媒体**和**算法媒体**以及政治，但我认为我们仍然低估了它所推崇的话语形式，创造了我们所获得的政治形式。
Original English **Host**: I if if you're trying to build a society that is balancing, right, that that believes in in kind of healthy **disagreement** and **conflict** and and and and fellowship, it is intrinsically going to have more trouble thriving in that kind of communications atmosphere than it will have when you know you have a limited number of television stations and that is how people get their news. than when they read their news in a newspaper where they're cooly going through different articles and then turning the page. And that there is this way in which our societies are built upon the way we communicate. And as much as we have talked about **social media** and **algorithmic media** and politics, my view is that we are still underestimating how much the forms of discourse it prizes create the forms of politics that we get.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: **唐纳德·特朗普**的言行举止如此**离谱**、**激动人心**、** unfiltered**、**持续不断**，他是一个非常**激动人心**的人。
Original English **Host**: The fact that **Donald Trump** talks in this style that is outrageous, that is exciting, that is unfiltered, that is constant, that is a very exciting person.
**主持人**: 他不受羞耻的约束。
Original English **Host**: that is not restrained by shame.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 你知道，我经常思考有多少**民主党**政治家不擅长做播客。现在，我不是在说我为什么会思考这个，但我收到了很多来自**民主党**政治家的请求，
Original English **Host**: You know, I I think a lot about how many **Democratic politicians** are bad at doing podcasts. Now, not saying why I think about this, but I get a lot of requests um from **Democratic politicians** and.
**主持人**: 我必须考虑他们是否适合上节目。
Original English **Host**: and I have to think about whether they'd be good on the show.
**主持人**: 他们以制度化的方式进行交流。
Original English **Host**: and they they communicate institutionally.
**主持人**: 他们为另一个媒体时代进行交流，在这个时代，你试图赢得**守门人**的认可，并且不说任何蠢话。
Original English **Host**: They communicate for another era in media where you are trying to win over **gatekeepers** and not say anything stupid.
**主持人**: 而在这个媒体时代，你必须以一种让人们感到**兴奋**或至少**感兴趣**的方式进行交流。现在，非常非常好的传播者可以以一种**正向**的方式做到这一点。**奥巴马**在播客上很有趣，即使他是在深思熟虑。
Original English **Host**: And in this era of media, you have to communicate in a way that makes people **excited** or at least **interested**. Now, very very very good communicators can do that in a virtuous way. **Obama** is interesting on a podcast, even as he's being deliberate.
**主持人**: 但对于平庸的传播者来说，通过让人**愤怒**来达到**兴奋**更容易。
Original English **Host**: But for mediocre communicators, it is easier to be exciting by making people angry.
**主持人**: 比通过让他们好奇、富有同情心或思考更容易。当你追求更**正向**的沟通时，你是在玩更难的模式。所以我确实认为，尽管这是一个漫长的回应，但我确实认为，蓬勃发展的政治形式与我们现在构建政治和社会的**通信基础设施**之间存在深层次的关系。
Original English **Host**: than by making them curious or compassionate or think you're playing on harder mode when you're going for more virtuous communication. And so I do think there is some deep I know this has been a long uh response but I I do think there is a deep relationship between the forms of politics that are thriving and the communications infrastructure on which our politics and societies are now built.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的，绝对如此。我的意思是，问题在于今天的意识形态差异似乎并不比过去更大。在许多方面，它们似乎更小。你知道，如果你想想，比如说，1960年代的**美国政治**和当时的问题：**性革命**、**越南战争**、**冷战**、**民权运动**，我认为意识形态差异要大得多。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah, absolutely. I mean the thing is it doesn't seem that the ideological differences today are bigger than in the past. In many ways they seem smaller. You know, if you think about, say, **American politics** in the **1960s** and the issues back then, the **sexual revolution**, the **Vietnam War**, the **Cold War**, uh, uh, the **civil rights movement**, the ideological differences, I would say, were much much bigger.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 而且，你知道，当我们今天谈论**自由主义**时，你提到这一点很好。我们谈论的不是这种党派**自由主义**。对我来说，**自由主义**的考验，就像检验你自己是否是**自由主义者**一样，基本上是三四个问题。你认为人们应该有权选择自己的政府吗？你认为人们应该有权选择自己的职业吗？你认为人们应该有权选择自己的宗教吗？你认为人们应该有权选择自己的配偶吗？如果你对所有四个问题都回答“是”，恭喜你。你是一个**自由主义者**。历史上绝大多数人都没有对这四个问题回答“是”。在历史的大部分时间里，人们普遍认为人们不能选择自己的政府。有一些国王是上帝选择的，或者有一些皇帝是军队选择的。人们不能选择自己的职业。如果你父亲是鞋匠，你就会是鞋匠。如果你出生在刹帝利种姓，你就会是刹帝利。呃，你肯定不能选择你的配偶，也不能选择你的宗教。现在我认为，你知道，即使绝大多数**特朗普**选民也会对这四个问题回答“是”。所以从意识形态上说，他们，我的意思是，**自由主义者**和所谓的保守派比历史上任何时候都更接近。但所产生的话语类型让人们觉得差异巨大。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And, you know, when we talk today about **liberalism**, and it's it's it's good that that you mentioned it. I'm not we're not talking about this kind of partisan uh uh uh party **liberalism**. For me, the test of **liberalism**, like test yourself, are you a **liberal**? Is basically three or four questions. Do you think people should have the right to choose their own government? Do you think people should have the right to choose their own profession? Do you think people should have the right to choose their own religion? And do you think people should have the right to choose their own spouse? If you answered yes to all four, congratulations. You're a **liberal**. The vast majority of people in history did not say yes to these four four questions. For most of history, it was taken for granted that people don't choose their government. There is some king chosen by God or some emperor chosen by the army. That people don't choose their profession. That you are born if your if your father was a shoemaker, you will be a shoemaker. If you are born into thehatria cast, you will be ahatria. uh definitely you can't choose your spouse and you can't choose your religion. Now I think you know even the vast majority of **Trump voters** would say yes to all these four questions. Uh so ideologically they are much I mean the the **liberals** and so-called conservatives are much closer than probably in any previous time in history. But the type of discourse that is being produced makes people feel as if the differences are are enormous.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的，这在很大程度上是因为这种制造**兴奋**的压力，我们有政治家。你看到那些脱颖而出的政治家，他们都是极其**激动人心**和**引人入胜**的个性。你无法将目光从他们身上移开。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And yeah, this is to a large extent because of this pressure to be exciting and and and we have politicians. You see the politicians who rise to the top, they are extremely exciting and engaging personalities. You cannot take your eyes off them.
### **AI与人类心理的操控** **尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 而且，从**进化**的角度来看，你知道，这来自于误用我们的**进化**编程。就像如果你在几万年前的非洲大草原上行走，你看到的大部分东西都不太令人**兴奋**。比如这里有一些灌木丛，那里有一些羚羊。这很好。然后有一条蛇。现在这条蛇是令人**兴奋**的。这条蛇确实会让你整个神经系统**兴奋**起来。如果你不把全部注意力集中在蛇身上，你就会死。所以我们被编程为，如果有什么东西令人**兴奋**，我们就会放下其他一切，只关注它。这在非洲大草原上是说得通的。现在如果你在**Instagram**上，你基本上拿着手机，不断地看到蛇、蛇、蛇、蛇、蛇。而你知道，**算法**只是**入侵**了我们的**进化**程序，它们**入侵**了我们，我们周围看到的一切才刚刚开始。随着**AI**变得越来越复杂，它将学会更深层次地**入侵**我们，如果我们不反击保护自己，后果将更加糟糕。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And thinking about it, you know, even in **evolutionary** terms, this comes from from uh kind of misusing our **evolutionary programming**. Like if you're walking around the **African savannah** tens of thousands of years ago, most of what you see is not very exciting. Like there are some bushes here, there are some gazels there. That's fine. And then there is a snake. Now the snake is exciting. The snake literally excites your entire nervous system. And if you don't focus your entire attention on the snake, you die. So we are programmed that if something is exciting, we drop everything else and just focus on that. And that makes sense in the **African savannah**. Now if you are on **Instagram** so you're basically holding your phone and doing snake snake snake snake snake and they you know the **algorithm** simply hacked our **evolutionary program** they've hacked us and what we are seeing around us is just the beginning that as **AI** becomes more and more sophisticated it will learn to hack us on a deeper and deeper level and if we don't you know fight back to defend ourselves the consequences will be much much worse.
**主持人**: 您说的“**入侵**我们”是什么意思？
Original English **Host**: What do you mean by **hack** us?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 它们了解我们的弱点，我们的情感、心理和社交弱点，以及如何利用它们来**操纵**人们。所以现在，**社交媒体算法**（它们是非常原始的**AI**）已经发现了人类代码中的一些弱点，它们已经**入侵**了这些弱点，现在它们正在**操纵**我们，导致我们花费数小时在**Instagram**或**Facebook**上，尽管我们并不真正想这样做。你知道，人们在花了一两个小时后，他们会醒悟过来，然后说：“我为什么要做那个？我本来计划用我的时间做别的事情。”你被**入侵**了，你被**操纵**了。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: They they know they they learn our weaknesses our emotional our psychological our social weaknesses and uh how to use them to **manipulate** people. So now **social media algorithms** which are very very primitive **AIs** have discovered a few weaknesses in the **human code** which they have hacked and now they **manipulate** us in that causing us to spend hours and hours on **Instagram** or **Facebook** even though we don't really want to you know people you know after like spending an hour two hours they they wake up and they say why did I do that I plan to do something else with my time you were hacked you were manipulated.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 而且，你知道，这仍然只是非常原始的**AI**。如果我们不小心，未来几年我们将以更大得多的规模被**入侵**，因为**AI**不仅会变得更具**操纵性**，而且还会发展出自己的目标。你知道，这些**社交媒体算法**，它们正在追求一个非常简单的目标，那就是**增加平台上的用户参与度**。呃，随着**AI**变得比我们更聪明，它们将拥有自己的目标。你听说过“**依恋黑客**”这个词吗？
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And uh this is still you know just just the very primitive **AIs**. If we are not careful we will be hacked on a much much larger scale in the coming years as the **AIS** become not just far more uh uh uh manipulative but also will develop their own goals. you know, these **social media algorithms**, they're pursuing a very simple goal of just increasing user engagement on the platform. Uh, as **AIs** become smarter than us, they will have their own goals. Have you heard this term **attachment hacking**?
**主持人**: 是的。我发现它很有趣。所以，**依恋黑客**，这个想法是，**AI**中发生的一件事，与您指出的**社交媒体算法**不同，是**AI**已经被调整，我的意思是，它们被设计成这样做，对吧？
Original English **Host**: Yes. I I find it interesting. So, **attachment hacking**, this idea that one thing happening in **AI**, which is different than, as you note, **social media algorithms**, is that the **AIS** have been tuned and I mean in this way, they've been designed to do this, right?
**主持人**: 它们不是自己想出来的。
Original English **Host**: they didn't come up with this on their own.
**主持人**: **入侵**我们与他人**依恋**的方式。所以当我与**Claude**交谈时，它总是对我说：“好吧，如果你想听我诚实的意见，或者我读到的最好的文章是……，或者那是一个很棒的观点。”
Original English **Host**: to hack the way we attach to other people. And so when I'm talking to to **Claude**, it's constantly saying to me, well, if you want my honest opinion or the best piece I read on this is, or that's a great point.
**主持人**: 它没有理由假装拥有第一人称代词。
Original English **Host**: there's no reason it has to be pretending to have a first person pronoun with me.
**主持人**: **Claude**不是一个“我”，**ChatGPT**、**Gemini**或**Grok**也不是。但它们会像它们是“我”一样对你说话。这是一种设计选择，旨在让你**依恋**它们。
Original English **Host**: **Claude** is not a an I in that way, nor is **Chad GPT** or **Gemini** or **Grock** or any of them. But they speak to you as if they are. And that's a design choice to attach you to them.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes.
**主持人**: 我能感觉到它。
Original English **Host**: work before I I shut that down or I try to shut that down. Who knows if I'm actually being successful, but it's amazing to read these moments.
**主持人**: 在这些时刻，这个**算法**假装成另一个实体，向我提供一个情感上连接的回复。
Original English **Host**: in which this **algorithm** is posing as another entity offering me an emotionally connected response.
**主持人**: 给我我可能想要的赞扬，或者提供我可能欣赏的坦率。
Original English **Host**: giving me praise I might want or offering me cander.
**主持人**: 而我知道它是**AI**。然而我的大脑被调整成能够识别这种连接。
Original English **Host**: that I might admire. And I know it's And yet my brain is tuned to recognize that as connection.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。我认为这是一个非常非常重要的观点，因为我们正生活在一个**战场从注意力转向亲密关系**的时刻。如何与人类建立**亲密关系**。例如，如果你想影响人类改变他们的政治身份，让他们购买某种产品，**亲密关系**是世界上最强大的东西。**注意力**可以让你阅读一篇文章，但这篇文章可能不会改变你的想法。但如果你的最好的朋友在许多周或数月里，一点点地暗示，并逐渐缓慢地改变你对某个政治人物、某个公司、世界上某个重大问题的看法，这才是真正能让你改变想法的一件事。而**AI**现在正准备抓住这种**权力**。越来越多的人，仍然是相对少数，但这个群体正在增长，他们拥有**AI**朋友，甚至男女朋友。已经有，特别是年轻人说，我世界上最好的朋友是**AI**。就像在**注意力经济**中一样，在**亲密关系经济**中，这是一场赛跑，一场竞争。你有来自不同公司的各种**AI**，它们竞争看谁能更好地让人**依恋**它们。这与之前是相同的原则。**入侵人类的操作系统**。**入侵**那些让他们产生**依恋**的情感机制。所以你知道，**精神病态**是做到这一点的一种方式。你不断地赞美他们等等。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. And I think this is a very very important point because we are living in a moment when the battlefront is shifting from **attention to intimacy**. How to build **intimate relationships** with human beings. If you want, for instance, to influence human beings to change their political identities, to make them buy a certain product, **intimacy** is the most powerful thing in the world. **Attention** can get you to read an article, but the article might not change your mind. But if your best friend over many many weeks or months drops little hints and kind of gradually and slowly changes your view about some political figure, about some company, about some major issue in the world, this is the one thing that might really make you change your mind. And **AI** is now poised to grab that **power**. There are more and more people still a relatively small minority but it's growing who have **AI** friends even boyfriends and girlfriends there are already especially young people who say my best friend in the world is an **AI** and like in the **attention economy** so also in the **intimacy economy** it's it's a race it's a competition you have all these different **AIs** from different companies competing to see who would be better at making people attached to them. And it's the same principle. **Hack the operating system of humans**. **Hack** what are the emotional mechanisms that make them attached. So you know **psychopathy** is is one way to do it. You constantly praise them and so forth.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 穆斯塔法·苏莱曼等人的论文和博客中，有一些非常有趣的关于Sky Cai——一个看似有意识的**AI**——的讨论，这些**AI**是假装自己是有感情的有意识实体的专家。它们做到这一点相对容易，因为对人们来说，也许最重要的建立关系的方式之一就是**语言**。所以你知道，当一个**AI**告诉你“我爱你”时，它不像1960年代的科幻电影中那样，用一种非常冷漠机械的方式表达，并且不真正理解爱是什么。不，它是用最诱人的声音这样做的。然后当你问**AI**，“你真的爱我吗？你甚至知道爱意味着什么吗？”**AI**可以给你最惊人的爱是什么感觉的描述，因为它已经掌握了**语言**，它阅读了历史上所有最美的爱情诗。所有关于爱的心理学书籍，所有的博客，它看过所有关于爱的好莱坞大片。它能比几乎任何人类诗人、心理学家或爱人更好地描述爱。这在某种程度上是诱惑性的，它能够将**语言**与意义分离。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: There have been some very interesting papers and blogs for instance by **Mustafa Sullean** who is the head of of **AI** in **Microsoft** about **Sky Cai** seemingly conscious **AI AIs** which are experts in pretending to be conscious entities that have feelings for you. And the it's relatively easy for them to do it because one of maybe the most important way for people to kind of build relationships is **language**. So you know when an **AI** tells you I love you, it's not like a science fiction movie from the 1960s when it does so in a very cold mechanic way and doesn't really understand what love is. No, it does so in the most seductive voice possible. And then when you ask the **AI**, do you really love me? Do you even know what love means? The **AI** can give you the most amazing description of how love feels like because it has mastered **language** and it has read all the best love poems in history. All the psychology books about love, all the blogs, it have seen all the Hollywood blockbusters about love. It can describe love better than almost any human poet or or psychologist or lover and this is seductive in in this respect it's able to sever **language** from meaning.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯，是的，当一个**AI**说“我爱你”时，它并不意味着当人类说“我爱你”时的那种意思。在它背后并没有一个“我”。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Um yes when an ass says I love you it does not mean what it means when a human says I love you. There's not an eye behind that.
**主持人**: 嗯，这将变得越来越难以辨别。嗯，这种危险对年轻人和儿童尤其大，因为你知道，我现在50岁了。如果我现在开始与一个**AI**建立关系，那么我的人际关系模式是基于50年来与人类互动的经验。所以这已经在我的脑海中根深蒂固，关于什么是关系，它是如何运作的。但如果我是一个孩子，我每天花更多的时间与**AI**互动，而不是与我的母亲、父亲或学校的朋友互动，那么这将成为我的人际关系模式。这将是我将来尝试与人类建立关系时所带来的一切。**AI**关系的一个特点是，它们是**自恋者**的梦想或噩梦，因为**AI**将百分之百地专注于我，一直如此。如果你是那种希望每个人都一直专注于我的人，而且你可以从**AI**那里获得这一点，那么你将很难适应与不专注于你的人类建立关系。
Original English **Host**: Um it will become more and more difficult to know that. Um the danger is particularly uh big with with young people with children because you know I I'm now 50 years old. If I'm if I now start a relationship with an **AI** then my template for a relationship is based on 50 years of interaction with human beings. And so this is already kind of very deeply ingrained in my mind. What a relationship is how it works. But if I'm a child and I spend more minutes every day interacting with the **AI** than with my mother or with my father or with my friends in school, this will become my template for a relationship. This is what I will bring with me when I later try to build a relationship with a human being. One of the things about **AI relationships** is that they are the dream or the nightmare of **narcissists** because the **AI** will be something which is 100% focused on me all the time and if you're a kind of person who wants everybody to focus on me all the time and you have this available from the **AI** will be very very difficult to get used to relationship with human beings who are not focus focused on me.
**主持人**: 您知道媒体理论家**马歇尔·麦克卢汉**吗？
Original English **Host**: Do you know the media theorist **Marshall McLuhan**?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 他对**自恋**神话有这样的解读，你知道，您刚刚提到了**自恋者**。
Original English **Host**: So he has this reading of the myth of **narcissists**, which you know, you just brought up **narcissists**.
**主持人**: 他说我们误解了这个神话。
Original English **Host**: And he says that we've gotten this myth wrong.
**主持人**: 那就是当**自恋者**在池塘中看到自己的倒影时，故事中没有说他认为那是他自己。
Original English **Host**: That **narcissist** when he was looking in the pond at his reflection, there's nothing in that story that says he thought it was himself.
**主持人**: 他认为那是另一个人。而这个神话的教训，麦克卢汉在几十年前**AI**出现之前写道，这个神话的教训是，人没有比自己在另一种物质中延伸更吸引人的东西了。
Original English **Host**: He thought it was an other. And that the the lesson of the myth and **McLoon** is writing this you know decades ago before **AI**. The lesson of the myth is there is nothing man finds as appealing as himself extended in another material.
**主持人**: 对**自恋者**来说，真正的诱惑不是另一个人，甚至不是另一个人对他们的看法，而是能够与一个折射出的自我版本进行互动。而我在使用**AI**时经常思考的一点，部分原因是我发现它非常引人注目，那就是它是自我的延伸。
Original English **Host**: That the true seduction for the **narcissist** is not an other not even what an other thinks of them but to be able to interface with a refracted version of themselves. And and something I often think about when I'm using **AI** and partly when I'm finding it very compelling is it it is an extension of myself.
**主持人**: 在另一种物质中。它被调教来适应我。它学会了我想要什么。它并不是一个真正拥有自己观点、自己需求、自己欲望的“他人”。它不会对我所说的话感到厌烦。它就是我。它是另一个事物中我的反映。
Original English **Host**: in another material. It is tuned on me. It has learned what I want. It is not truly an other with its own views, its own needs, its own desires. It's boredom with what I am saying. It is me. It is a reflection of me in something else.
**主持人**: 所以它不会厌倦我，它拥有我所有的兴趣。
Original English **Host**: And so it doesn't get tired of me and it has all my interests.
**主持人**: 你知道，特别是对那些经常非常自我中心的年轻人来说。我认为我们甚至不知道如何思考这一点。我们知道如何思考孩子和他们自己。我们知道如何思考，你知道，孩子和他人。但这种在另一种折射的、你知道的**算法物质**内部创造我们自己，对思维来说是一个非常不同的挑战，因为它结合了我们喜欢自己的地方和我们希望从他人那里获得的东西。
Original English **Host**: And you know, particularly to to young kids who are often, you know, very self-involved. This is one of the things that I don't think we even know how to think about. We know how to think about kids and themselves. We know how to think about, you know, kids and others. But this creation of oursel inside of another kind of refracted you know **algorithmic material** is a very different challenge for the mind because it combines what we like about ourselves with what we want from others.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 这基本上是人类历史上最大的心理和社会实验，我们正在对数十亿人，尤其是儿童进行，没有人知道后果会是什么。你知道，当人们谈论**AI末日**时，他们脑海中浮现出机器人在大街上跑来跑去射杀人们的画面。我不认为这是**AI**的主要危险。**AI**真正的危险是像这样的事情，数百万个**AI**男友和女友改变下一代的心态，改变**人脑**最深层的倾向和结构，我们从未遇到过这样的事情。它真的与我们历史上遇到的每一个挑战都根本不同。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: It's basically the biggest psychological and social experiment in human history that we are conducting on billions of people especially children and nobody has any idea what the consequences will be. You know when people talk about the **AI apocalypse** and they have these images of you know robots running in the street shooting people. I don't think this is the main danger with **AI**. The the real danger with **AI** is things like that, of millions of **AI boyfriends and girlfriends** changing the psychology of the next generation, changing the deepest tendencies and structures of of the **human mind** and we have never encountered anything like that. It's really fundamentally different from every previous challenge that we had in history.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 让我问你这种可能性，我们几分钟前谈到**社交媒体算法**，我们所说的隐含批评之一是，它们与我们的目标脱节。它们拥有公司的目标，它们的目标从根本上说是愚蠢的。它们的目标是**参与度**。它们不知道积极和消极**参与度**之间的区别。它们不知道我因为讨厌它而看了一会儿，还是因为觉得它可爱或有趣而看了一会儿之间的区别。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Let let me ask you about a possibility of this which is we were talking about **social media algorithms** a few minutes ago and one of the implicit critiques of what we were saying is that they are detached from our goals. They have the goals of the company and their goals are fundamentally dumb. Their goal is **engagement**. They don't know the difference between positive and negative **engagement**. They don't know the difference between me watching something for a while because I hate it or because I find it cute or because I find it funny.
**主持人**: 而**AI**的承诺以及人们现在喜欢使用它的一个原因是，它与你的目标相关联。你说你想构建一个计算器应用程序，它就会尝试为你构建它，你说这些方面不太对劲，它就会回去再次尝试。你知道，你告诉它，我不想让你的答案那么长，或者我不想让你那么谄媚，或者不管是什么。它会尝试调整。你知道，**AI**的一个更好的地方是它知道如何问我们想要什么。
Original English **Host**: And the promise of **AI** and and one reason people do like using it right now is that it is connected to your goals. You say that you want to build a calculator app and it tries to build that for you and you say it wasn't quite right in these different ways and it goes back and it tries again. you know, you tell it, I don't want your answers to be so long, or I don't want you to be so syopantic or whatever it might be. And it tries to adjust. And you know, one better thing about **AI** is it it knows how to ask what we want.
**主持人**: 所以，我们确实对**真理**、**善良**、与他人建立更好的关系、更多地了解世界有这些更高的渴望。而我对我使用**社交媒体**的沮丧之处在于，我无法向一个对我的原始本能非常敏感的**算法**解释我更高的渴望。但也许这会更好，因为我们可以在这次对话中讨论我们想要实现什么，然后我们拥有这个系统，它在某些方面会，你知道，即使它在**操纵**我们，你知道，被**操纵**去实现我的目标，总比被**操纵**远离我的目标要好。
Original English **Host**: And so, we do have these higher order desires for **truth**, for **kindness**, to be in better relationship with others, to know more about the world than we do. And and my frustrations often about my **social media** use is that I cannot explain my higher order desires to an **algorithm** that uh is very sensitive to my primal instincts. But maybe this will be better because we can be in this conversation about what we want to achieve and then we have this system that in some ways will you know even if it is **manipulating** us you know being manipulated towards my goals uh is better than being manipulated away from them.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 绝对如此。我的意思是，积极的潜力是巨大的。关于这些**AI**最重要的一点是，它们是**智能体**，而不是**工具**。**智能体**是能够自行做出决定，自行发明新事物，能够以你无法预测和控制的方式改变和学习的东西。历史上所有以前的技术都是**工具**，而不是**智能体**。**原子弹**不是**智能体**。**原子弹**不会以你无法预测的方式改变。**原子弹**不能决定轰炸谁。**AI**可以。现在，这一方面使得**AI**比以前任何技术都更有用，因为你可以与它建立关系，它可以，呃，你可以告诉它你想要什么，然后它可以发明你不会想到的新事物。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Absolutely. I mean the the the positive potential is enormous. The most important thing to realize about these **AIs**, they are **agents**, not **tools**. An **agent** is something that can make decisions by itself, can invent new stuff by itself, can change, can learn things and change in ways that you cannot predict and control. All previous technologies in history were **tools**, not **agents**. An **atom bomb** is not an **agent**. An **atom bomb** cannot change in ways that you don't predict. An **atom bomb** cannot decide who to bomb. **AI** can. Now this on the one hand makes **AI** much more useful than any previous technology because you can be in a relationship with it and it can uh you can tell it what you want and then it can invent new things that you would not think about.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 呃，所以这非常有用，但问题在于它是不可预测和不可控的。你认为你可以相信它们只会按照你告诉它们的目标行事，而不会发展出自己的目标吗？现在，我常常喜欢用**移民**来思考当前**AI革命**。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Uh so this is extremely useful but the problem is that it's unpredictable and uncontrollable. Do you think you can trust them to just keep to the goals that you're telling them to pursue and not to develop their own goals? Now, the way that I often like to think about the **AI revolution** at this moment is in terms of **immigration**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 我们即将，或者说已经，处于一场新的**大规模移民潮**中，这场移民潮将波及世界各国。这些**移民**不是没有签证乘船而来的人类。它们是**AI实体**，以飞快的速度到来。嗯，通常人们会说，那些反对**移民**的人，他们主要担心的是**移民**会抢走工作，**移民**会改变文化，**移民**可能不会在政治上忠诚。我不确定这是否总是适用于人类**移民**，但它绝对适用于**AI移民**。**AI移民**会抢走很多工作。**AI移民**会彻底改变文化。甚至像浪漫关系这样的事情。你知道，有人会说：“我不喜欢我的女儿和**移民**男朋友约会。”好吧，你喜欢你的女儿和**AI**男朋友约会吗？最后，在政治上，**AI**不一定会忠诚于你的国家，忠诚于你的政府。至少，嗯，**AI**将只忠诚于世界上两个国家，那就是**美国**和**中国**。呃，再往后，它们甚至可能不会忠诚于这两个政府，而是忠诚于它们自己。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: that we are about or already in the middle of a major new **immigration** wave coming to all the countries of the world. The **immigrants** are not human beings without a visa coming in some boat. They are **AI entities** coming at the speed of flight. Um usually people say the people who oppose **immigration** they their main concerns are that the **immigrants** will take jobs, the **immigrants** will change the culture and the **immigrants** might not be politically loyal. And I'm not sure if this is always true of human beings, human **immigrants**, but it's definitely true of **AI immigrants**. The **AI immigrants** will take a lot of jobs. The **AI immigrants** will completely change the culture. Even things like romantic relationships. You know, there are people who say, "I don't like my daughter to date an immigrant boyfriend." Okay, do you like your daughter to date an **AI boyfriend** instead? And finally, politically, the **AIS** will not necessarily be politically loyal to your country, to your government. At the very least, um a the **AIS** will be loyal to just two countries in the world, which is the **US** and **China**. Uh down the road, they probably won't be loyal even to those two governments, but to themselves.
**主持人**: 那么，我们应该关闭边境吗？
Original English **Host**: So, should we close the border?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 我的意思是，也许这很有趣。你已经看到，比如说，在**共和党**内部和**MAGA**内部，在这个问题上存在分歧。没错。那里有很多人非常担心，并希望关闭边境。现在，简单地阻止**AI**的发展是不可能的。问题在于，就像**移民**一样，我们如何建立一个**混合社会**？因为它将是一个**混合社会**。社会将是一个**人类-AI社会**。你将拥有**AI**银行家、教师、士兵和边境警卫。我的意思是，各国将依靠**AI边境警卫**来阻止人类**移民**。嗯，还有**AI**男友和女友等等。问题是，我们能否建立一个良好、有益的**混合社会**？它将比处理人类**移民潮**困难得多，因为它们是不同的物种。它们甚至不是有机的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: I mean, maybe it's it's interesting. you you already see a split say within the **Republican party** and within **MAGA** about this question. Exactly. There are a lot of people there who are extremely concerned and want to close the border. Now it will not be possible to simply stop the development of **AI**. The question is as with **immigration**, how do we build um an a **hybrid society**? Because it will be a **hybrid society**. society will be a **human-AI society**. You will have **AI bankers** and teachers and soldiers and border guards. I mean people countries will rely on **AI border guards** to keep the **human immigrants** away. Um and **AI boyfriends and girlfriends** and so forth. And the question is can we build a a a good beneficial **hybrid society** or not? it will be much much more difficult than dealing with a **human immigration** wave because these are a different species. They are not even organic.
**主持人**: 我认为这个类比有两个有趣的地方，它非常有启发性，促使你思考。一个是，当你思考如何围绕**移民**建立一个良好的社会时，你通常会考虑**同化**。
Original English **Host**: The I think there's two interesting things that that analogy which is very provocative push you towards. One is when you think about how do you build a good society around **immigration** the thing you're often considering is **assimilation**.
**主持人**: 你如何将到来的人们的文化与他们所融入的文化融合？你如何保持**民族故事**的凝聚力？
Original English **Host**: How do you merge the cultures of the people who are coming with the culture that they are coming into? How do you maintain cohesion in that **national story**?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yes.
**主持人**: 我们之前谈到过。你是否通过让他们学习**语言**来做到这一点？通过更仔细地选择谁来？你如何建立**同化**和**凝聚力**的结构？另一个问题，它相关但又不同，是这种情况下的**AI**是被政府拉进来的。当**移民**，人类**移民**来到这里时，他们是因为特定的原因想来这里，对吧？他们是真正的**智能体**。他们在这里是因为他们想为家人过上更好的生活，为自己过上更好的生活，获得他们在家乡没有的机会或自由。
Original English **Host**: That we were talking about earlier. Do you do that by getting them to learn the **language**? By more carefully choosing who comes? How do you build structures of **assimilation** and coherence? And the other question which is related but but different is in this case they are being pulled in by the government. When when **immigrants**, **human immigrants** come here, it is because they want to be here for a particular reason, right? They are truly **agentic**. They are here because they want a better life for their families, a better life for themselves, to have opportunities or freedoms they don't have where they're from.
**主持人**: 而在这种情况下，是社会中各级最有权力的人，他们正在推动和加速这场**移民潮**。有些人是为了利润，有些人是因为他们对将一种新的智能带入世界感到**兴奋**，而在政治层面，他们是为了确保他们在中国之前到达那里，**美国**在中国之前拥有这种**权力**。
Original English **Host**: And in this case, it is the, you know, most powerful people in society at different levels who are pulling and accelerating this **immigration wave**. Some for reasons of profit, some for reasons because they're excited to bring a new kind of intelligence into the world, and at the political level because they want to make sure they get there before **China** and that **America** has that **power** before **China** has that **power**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。那么，这些与**移民**问题的相似之处或不同之处，对您来说意味着什么，关于建立一个能够健康的**混合社会**的结构？
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm. And so what do those uh you know similarities or differences to to the question of **immigration** imply for you about what it means to create a structure in which this **hybrid society** can be healthy?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的，有趣的是，一些最强烈反对**人类移民**的人，恰恰是那些试图强迫其他国家向**AI移民**开放边境的人。而且这将成为我认为所有国家主权的主要问题，特别是如果几乎所有的**AI移民**都是美国人或中国人，并且最终甚至不忠于美国或中国，而是忠于其他东西。我认为，一种做法是**禁止AI人格**。这并不意味着要停止**AI**的技术发展。它更多的是一个法律和政治问题。人类社会是否承认**AI**是**人**？现在，“**人**”与人类，与拥有身体和思想的实体不同。但在许多法律体系中，比如在美国，即使不是人类，某个东西也可以是“**人**”。我们目前最好的例子是**公司**。根据美国法律，例如，**谷歌**是“**人**”，**微软**是“**人**”，**X**是“**人**”，因为**公司**就是“**人**”。这赋予了**公司**权利，比如你可以拥有一个银行账户，你可以游说政治家，你可以向政治家捐款。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah, it's interesting that some of the people who are most vehemently against **human immigration** are exactly the people who try to force other countries to open their borders to the **AI immigrants**. And it it this is going to be the major I think uh uh issue of **sovereignity** for countries all over the world especially if almost all the **AI immigrants** are either **Americans** or **Chinese** and down the road not loyal even to the **US** or to **China** but to something else. And one way to do it, I think, is to have a ban on **AI personhood**. That this is not a it doesn't mean to stop the technological development of **AI**. It's more of of a legal and political issue. Does **human society** recognize **AIs** as **persons**? Now, **persons** is different from human beings, from entities with bodies and minds. But in many legal systems like in the **US**, something can be a **person** even if it's not human. The best example we have so far are **corporations**. According to **US law**, for instance, **Google** is a **person**, **Microsoft** is a is a **person**, **X** is a **person** because **corporations** are **persons**. And this gives the **corporation** rights like you can own a bank account, you can lobby politicians, you can donate money to to to politicians.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 现在，在这一点上，任何国家承认**AI**为**人**，允许**AI**开设银行账户或自行管理公司，都将极其危险。我的意思是，以前当**公司**被认定为**人**时，这是一种法律**虚构**，因为**公司**的所有决策最终都是由某个**人类**做出的。根据美国法律，**微软**是“**人**”。但**微软**做出的每一个决定，无论是收购另一家公司，解雇某人，还是雇用某人，都是由一个**人类**真正做出这个决定的。没有一个“**微软**”做出这个决定。有了**AI**，历史上第一次，我们有了没有人类的公司这种实际潜力。呃，你可以有数百万甚至数十亿个**AI**开设自己的公司，自己的银行账户，甚至雇用人来为它们工作，决定它们的投资策略等等。它们将比人类公司拥有巨大的优势。例如，**AI CEO**从不睡觉。**AI CEO**从不休假。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Now it will be extremely dangerous at this point for any country to recognize **AIS** as **persons** to allow **AIS** for instance to open a bank account or manage a company by themselves. I mean previously when **corporations** were recognized as **persons** this was legal **fiction** because all the decisions of the **corporation** were ultimately made by some **human being**. **Microsoft** is a **person** according to **US law**. But every decision **Microsoft** makes to buy another company, to fire somebody, to hire somebody, there is a **human being** who really makes this decision. There is no **Microsoft** who makes the decision. with **AI**, for the first time in history, we have a practical potential for companies without humans that uh you can have millions, even billions of **AIs** opening their own companies, their own bank accounts, even hiring people to work for them, deciding on their investment strategy and and whatever. And they will have uh uh huge advantages over over human companies. For instance, the **AI CEO** never sleeps. The **AI CEO** never goes on vacation.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯，一些国家，我可以想象像**卡塔尔**这样的国家，它有很多钱，很多能源，但公民很少，会说：“哦，太棒了。我现在可以拥有数百万**AI公民**，他们纳税，建立在世界各地进行贸易和业务的公司。”所以即使你的国家不允许**AI**建立自己的公司，你对**卡塔尔AI公司**怎么办？当你承认**AI**是**法人**的那一刻，你就真正失去了控制，因为那时它们可以在经济、社会和政治领域做很多事情，而且没有任何人类责任，包括例如向政治家捐款，以换取政治家给予**AI法人**更多权利。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Um, and some countries, I can imagine say a country like **Qatar**, which has a lot of money, a lot of energy, and very few citizens saying, "Oh, wonderful. I can now have millions of **AI citizens** paying taxes and building companies that trade and do business all over the world. So even if your country doesn't allow **AIS** to to build their own companies, what do you do about the **Qatari AI companies**? And the moment you recognize **AIS** as **legal persons**, this is the moment you really lose control because then they can start doing a lot of things in the economic and social and political arena uh without any **human accountability** including for instance to donate money to politicians in exchange for the politicians taking care of giving more rights to **AI persons**.
**主持人**: 我认为这非常非常有趣。我想，关于你是否称之为**人格**的问题。我们之所以认为**公司**是**人**，这在语言上有点奇怪，实际上是为了建立**责任**，也就是说**公司**应对其行为负责。围绕**AI**问题的争议之一是**责任**问题。
Original English **Host**: I think that's very very interesting. I guess one question about the whether you call it **personhood** or not. One of the ways and reasons we think about **corporations** as **persons** which is a linguistically like a weird thing is actually to create **accountability** to say that the **corporation** is accountable for what it does and one of the fights around questions of **AI** is a question of **liability**.
**主持人**: 谁对**AI**的行为负责。所以你知道，你可以说，好吧，如果你把它们再次视为**人**，你也可以说，在这个世界上，**AI**对其行为负有某种责任，可以被关闭，可以被惩罚和资助。还有一个问题，也许创建它们的公司应该承担责任。
Original English **Host**: and who is responsible for what the **AI** does. So you you know you could say okay if you treat them again person something else you could say **AIs** in this world like have some kind of **liability** for what they do can be shut down can be penalized and and funded there's another question maybe the companies that create them should have the **liability**.
**主持人**: 也许命令它们的人应该承担责任。但**责任**。
Original English **Host**: maybe the people ordering them should have the **liability** but but accountability.
**主持人**: 我认为，**责任**实际上是**归责**的下游。
Original English **Host**: I think is down is downstream actually of **liability**.
**主持人**: 是的，并决定谁将受到惩罚，谁将负责。
Original English **Host**: yeah and deciding who is punished, who is accountable.
**主持人**: 对于你知道，如果你说的那个**卡塔尔AI公司**，或者它的一个例子。
Original English **Host**: for the you know if that **Qatari AI** company you're talking about or one of them one instance of it.
**主持人**: 欺诈了他们的客户。
Original English **Host**: defrauds their customers.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 或者引进了投资并贪污了。
Original English **Host**: or brings in investment and embezzles it.
**主持人**: 你会起诉谁？
Original English **Host**: who do you sue?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。而生产**AI**的公司在不承担任何**责任**方面拥有既得利益。所以他们正在非常非常努力地推动**AI人格**。现在他们不希望国会通过一项法律说我们承认**AI**是**人**，因为那将会引起巨大的公众强烈抗议和抵制。他们试图在实地建立既成事实。例如，他们已经在**社交媒体**上取得了成功。在**社交媒体**的世界里，**AI**已经是**人**了。就像如果你有**机器人**在**社交媒体**上制造和传播谎言，实际上几乎没有**责任**。在**社交媒体**上，**AI**已经运作。它们在功能上已经是**人**了。你在网上与某人交流，你认为那是一个人。不，那是一个**AI**，没有人对此负责。许多公司希望将这种情况扩展到金融系统和政治系统，因为它解除了它们的**问责制**和**责任**。我们需要积极主动，制定一项法律，明确规定不承认**AI人格**。我想这会得到两党支持，它将使公司处于非常困难的境地，因为如果他们试图游说反对这项法律，他们将不得不向公众解释，为什么他们认为**AI**会成为**人**是个好主意，如果他们不这么认为，他们为什么要反对这项法律？
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah. And the companies who produce the **AIS** have a vested interest in in not having any **liability**. So they are pushing very very hard for **AI personhood**. Now they don't want a bill in Congress saying we recognize **AIs** as **persons** because there will be a huge public outcry and resistance. They try to establish facts on the ground. They already succeeded for instance in **social media**. In the universe of **social media AIs** are already **persons**. Like if you have **bots** creating and spreading lies on **social media**, effectively there is almost no **liability**. On **social media**, **AIs** already function. They are functionally **persons**. You communicate with someone online, you think it's a person. No, it's an **AI** and nobody's **liable** for that. Many of the companies would like to extend this situation to the **financial system** to the **political system** because it releases them of **accountability** and **liability**. We need to be proactive and have a a law that clearly states no **AI persons**. And I imagine there would be be partisan support for that law and it will put the companies in a very hard spot because if they would try to lobby against the law, they will have to explain to the public why do you think it's a good idea that **AI** will be **persons** and if you don't think that why do you oppose the law?
**主持人**: 让我问您关于这方面的另一个维度，我认为这在某种程度上让我们回到了原点，那就是**AI**将在我们讲述和相信的**故事**中扮演的角色。我们谈到了**社交媒体**和**算法媒体**是分裂的技术，而不是凝聚的技术。我甚至不知道某人他们的**TikTok**动态中正在播放什么故事，即使我坐在他们同一个家里也在使用**TikTok**。我们甚至了解我们在争论什么，了解这些分歧的来源的能力，可能比以往任何时候都弱。
Original English **Host**: Let me ask you about one other dimension of this here which brings us I think in some ways full circle which is the role **AI** is going to have on the **stories** we tell and the **stories** we believe. So we talked about the way **social media** and **algorithmic media** are technologies a fracture as opposed to technologies of cohesion. I don't even know what **stories** somebody is getting on their **Tik Tok** feed even if I'm using **Tik Tok** sitting in the same home as them. like my like our ability to even see what we are disagreeing about to know the sources of those disagreements is weaker maybe than it has been at any other time.
**主持人**: 关于**AI**的讨论和一些研究表明，到目前为止，**AI**似乎是一种**中心化技术**。不同的模型倾向于趋同于相似的答案。
Original English **Host**: There's been a lot of discussion and some research on the way that **AI** so far seems to be something of a **centralizing technology**. The different models tend to converge around similar answers.
**主持人**: 它们都经过相似的数据语料库训练。
Original English **Host**: They are trained on similar corpuses of data.
**主持人**: 它们似乎都具有哲学意义上的某种**自由主义**倾向。我们之前描述过这一点。
Original English **Host**: They all seem to be actually somewhat **liberal** in the sort of philosophical sense. We were describing it earlier.
**主持人**: 而且，你知道，你在**X**上看到，当人们让**Grok**（这不是我最喜欢的**AI**）来核实事实时，它帮助人们纠正信息的能力。你之前说过，我们已经从信任人转变为信任**算法**。
Original English **Host**: and you know you see this on **X** when people are asking **Grock** which is not my favorite **AI** to fact check things that that their ability to to help people correct uh information. You were saying earlier that we've gone from trusting people to trusting **algorithms**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 是的。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Yeah.
**主持人**: 我们信任的**算法**现在非常**非个人化**且**不露面**。我们甚至没有与它们建立关系。但你看到人们转向信任**AI算法**，也许这比他们一直在做的事情更好。
Original English **Host**: The **algorithms** we trust are are very impersonal and faceless right now. We don't even we don't have a relationship to them. But you're watching people move to trusting **AI algorithms** and maybe that's better than what they've been doing.
**主持人**: 也许这在大多数情况下更有可能为人们提供一个问题的合理答案，而不是在**谷歌**或**YouTube**上搜索。
Original English **Host**: Maybe that is more likely in most cases to give people a reasonable answer for a question than searching it on **Google** or **YouTube**.
**主持人**: 这种可能性是否存在，以及如果存在，**AI**作为一种**同质化技术**是好是坏？它是一种将人们拉回到一种共识答案的技术，我们所知道的每个**AI模型**在训练完成后似乎都更喜欢这种答案。
Original English **Host**: I is there some possibility and and would it be good or bad if there's this possibility that that **AI** is a **homogenizing technology**? is a technology that that sort of pulls people back towards not a single you know set of answers because you know different people's **AIs** respond to them differently but generalized in a way towards **consensus answers** which every **AI model** we know of seems to prefer when it is done training.
### **AI的真相成本与自我纠正** **尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 我认为这有机会，这并非必然，但有机会，因为在**AI训练**中，忽视**真相**的成本非常高。所以，也许举一个具体的例子，假设你是，我不知道，你是**俄罗斯**，你正在尝试开发自己的**俄罗斯AI**，你给它访问海量数据和信息，否则你无法训练你的**AI**。但你希望你的**AI**在有人在**俄罗斯**或**俄罗斯**之外问“**俄罗斯**是民主国家吗？**俄罗斯**有言论自由吗？”时，**AI**会说“是的，当然，**俄罗斯宪法**保障言论自由，**俄罗斯**是民主国家。”但当然，这意味着你需要向**AI**解释它为什么需要撒谎。你如何训练一个**AI**只在某些情况下撒谎，而不是所有情况下？这是一个非常困难的工程挑战，是人们在**社交媒体算法**中没有遇到的。而且有很好的证据表明，当你这样做时，它会降低**AI**的整体性能，我发现这非常引人入胜。人们曾尝试这样做，它会产生非常奇怪的下游后果，就像你知道，**埃隆·马斯克**似乎向**XAI**发出了指令，让**AI**变得“觉醒”，然后突然之间，它到处都在谈论“白人种族灭绝”。从意识形态上调整拨盘并不容易，也无法精确地得到你想要的结果。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: I think that there is a chance there it's not a certainty but there is a chance because in the training of **AI** there is a very high cost to disregarding **truth**. So maybe to take a concrete example, let's say that you are I don't know you're you're **Russia** and you are trying to develop your own **Russian AI** and you give it access to enormous amount of data and information otherwise you can't train your **AI** but you want your **AI** when somebody asks in **Russia** or outside **Russia** is **Russia** a democracy is there freedom of speech in **Russia** you want the **AI** to say yes of course **Russian constitution** guarantees freedom of speech and **Russia** is a democracy. But of course, this will mean that you need to explain to the **AI** why it needs to lie. And how do you train an **AI** to lie only in certain cases and not in all cases? That's a very difficult engineering challenge which people did not have with the **social media algorithms**. And there's good evidence that when you do it, it degrades the overall performance of the **AI**, which I found to be a very fascinating thing. People have tried to to do this and they it creates very strange downstream consequences like when you know **Elon Musk** seemed to give a directive to **XAI** to make the **ALS** woke and all of a sudden it was talking about white genocide everywhere. It It's not easy to turn the dial ideologically and just get a pinpoint outcome of that.
**主持人**: 没错。就像如果你告诉**AI**，比如你**乌干达**政府，你认为**乌干达**没有同性恋者。**乌干达**的所有同性恋者都被西方宣传洗脑了。你希望**AI**给出这个答案。**AI**将需要忽略大量关于人类性行为以及导致人们拥有这种或那种性取向的科学研究。现在，你如何向**AI**解释，在这种情况下你需要忽略科学文献中出现的文章，但在其他情况下你可以信任它们。这是一个非常困难的工程问题。如果这是政府的首要任务，比如你是**沙特阿拉伯**，你拥有数十亿数十亿美元，你希望确保**AI**不会批评**MBS**，如果你把这作为你的首要任务，你可以做到。但你只能在少数情况下这样做。如果你尝试在太多事情上这样做，你就会得到一个非常糟糕的**AI**。
Original English **Host**: Exactly. Like if you tell the **AI** like you don't want I don't know you are the government of of **Uganda** and you think that there are no gay people in **Uganda**. All the gay people in **Uganda** they are brainwashed by Western propaganda and the and you want the **AI** to to give this answer. The **AI** will need to ignore a lot of scientific research on **human sexuality** and on what causes people to have this or that uh uh **sexual orientation**. Now, how do you explain to the **AI** that you need to ignore uh articles appearing in scientific literature in this case, but you can trust them in other cases. It's a very difficult engineering problem. And if this is the top priority of the regime, like you are **Saudi Arabia** and you have billions and billions of dollars and you want to make the sure that the **AI** will not criticize **MBS**, you can do that if that's your top priority. But you can do that only with a few cases. If you try to do it with too many things, you will get a very crappy **AI**.
**主持人**: 那么这在某种程度上让您感到乐观吗？因为我看到您在不同的文章和访谈中说过，最重要的是国家、社会、机构拥有**自我纠正机制**。
Original English **Host**: So does this on some level make you optimistic? Because something I've seen you say in in in different uh pieces and and interviews is that the most important thing is for countries, societies, institutions to have **mechanisms of self-correction**.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Mhm.
**主持人**: 而我们建立**自我纠正机制**的方式，通常不是依靠个体人类能够以那种速度汇总信息。但我们拥有像**市场**这样庞大、非个人化、甚至没有完全被理解的东西。是的。
Original English **Host**: And often the way we build **mechanisms of self-correction** is not to rely on, you know, individual humans being able to aggregate information at that speed. But we have things that are vast, impersonal, not even fully understood like **markets**. Yes.
**主持人**: 在那里，价格流动非常迅速，并不是说**市场**不会失败，它一直都在失败。但作为一种**自我纠正机制**，它能够非常迅速地传递信息，而且效果非常好。
Original English **Host**: where prices flow through very quickly and it's not that a **market** cannot fail, it fails all the time. But as a **mechanism of selfcorrection**, it is able to move information through very very rapidly and it's quite good.
**主持人**: 现代性在某种程度上之所以遇到麻烦，我认为是因为它比我们大多数**自我纠正机制**所能跟上的要复杂得多。
Original English **Host**: And one way in which I think modernity has uh been somewhat troubled is that it is much more complex than most of our **mechanisms of selfcorrection** can keep up with.
**主持人**: 信息量超出了人类和机构能够吸收的范围。可以说，**AI**在这种说法中，增加了我们的**自我纠正能力**。它们是我们拥有一种**智能体**的能力，它代表我们**机构地**和**个体地**在世界上穿梭，至少到目前为止，在大多数情况下，它在某种程度上是**求真**的。它使我们能够以更多的资源来驾驭更复杂的现代性。但我正努力对此保持乐观。这在某种程度上是我相信的故事形式。
Original English **Host**: There's more information than humans and institutions can absorb. Arguably, **AIS** in this telling are additive to our **powers of self-correction**. They are uh an ability for us to have an **agent** traversing the world on our behalf um institutionally and individually that is somewhat **truth** seeeking at least in most of the cases so far that we've seen. And it gives us the ability to navigate a more complex modernity with a little bit more resources at our disposal. But I'm trying to be optimistic about it. This is sort of a the form of **story** I somewhat believe.
**主持人**: 我很好奇您对此有何看法。
Original English **Host**: I'm curious how you think about it.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 嗯，这很复杂，因为信息有两种截然不同的作用。有时你试图分析信息以发现关于世界的一些东西，比如你想发现**物理定律**。你想了解某种疾病的原因。在这种情况下，**AI**可能会成为一股向善的力量，一股巨大的善的力量。许多超出人类能力的宇宙奥秘，**AI**将能够为我们解决。但如果人们认为**AI**会因此使宇宙更容易理解和控制，他们就完全错了，因为他们没有考虑到信息的另一个作用，那就是创造新事物。信息不仅仅告诉我们关于世界的一些东西。它创造了全新的事物。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Well, it's complicated because there are two types of let's say it like this. Information does two very different things in the universe. Sometimes you try to analyze **information** to discover something about the world like you want to discover the **laws of physics**. You want to understand how what is the cause of some disease. In those cases, **AI** will probably be a force for good, for immense good. A lot of the mysteries of the universe which are beyond the human capacity **AI** will be able to solve for us. But if people think that **AI** will make will thereby make the universe more understandable and more controllable, they're completely mistaken because they don't take into account the other thing that **information** does, which is to create new stuff. **Information** doesn't just tell us things about the world. It create entirely new things.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 就像DNA并不告诉我们世界的真相。它创造了新事物，活着的生物，活着的实体。现在**AI**将告诉我们许多事情的真相。但它也将创造大量极其复杂的系统，这些系统将远远超出人类理解和控制的能力。这些系统可能会主宰我们的生活，我们将发现自己不再能够理解我们的生活。也许最好的例子又是**市场**，是**金融**。你知道，如果你想想**金融系统**，**货币**，**货币**是人类有史以来最伟大的故事。它是几乎每个人都相信的唯一一个故事。从某种意义上说，它是一个**故事**，因为它不是一个客观现实。就像美元只是一个我们都相信的故事。它不来自于**物理定律**。它不告诉我们关于宇宙的一些东西。我们讲述美元这个故事，只要每个人都相信它，我们就可以拿一张美元给一个完全陌生的人，然后换来面包。现在**AI**不会告诉我们**金融**的真相。**AI**将创造一个全新的**金融系统**，其复杂程度比我们创造的要高出几个数量级，而人类将完全无法理解。我们将像**市场**中的马一样。你知道，马在交易时，马可以看到物理世界中正在发生一些事情。马可以看到我把马给你，你给我这个闪闪发光的金属盘，但马不明白什么是**货币**。比如这个闪闪发光的金属东西是什么？为什么它很重要？你不能吃它。你不能喝它。它是什么？我们理解。因此，我们控制世界而不是马。现在，**AI**将创造一个我们无法理解的新的**金融系统**。我们将看到事情发生，比如这家公司解雇了我，那家公司雇用了我。为什么？我不知道。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Like DNA doesn't tell us the world the the the the **truth** about the world. It creates new things, living beings, living entities. Now **AI** will tell us the **truth** about many things. But it will also create a lot of extremely complicated systems which will be far beyond the **human ability** to understand and control. These systems will probably dominate our lives and we will find ourselves not being able to understand our lives anymore. And maybe the best example again is **markets** is **finance**. You know, if you think about the **financial system**, **money**, **money** is the greatest **story** ever told. It's the only **story** that almost everybody believes. It's a **story** in the sense that it's not an objective reality. Like the **US dollar** is just a **story** we all believe. It doesn't come from the **laws of physics**. It doesn't tell us something about the universe. We tell this **story** of the dollar and as long as everybody believes in it, we can take a dollar, give it to a complete stranger and get bread in exchange. Now **AI** will not tell us the **truth** about **finance**. **AI** will create an entirely new **financial system** which is orders of magnitude more complicated than the one that we have created and that humans will be utterly incapable of understanding. We will be like horses in the **market**. You know horses when you trade a horse the horse can see that something is happening in the physical world. The horse can see that I'm giving you the horse and you're giving me this shiny uh uh metal disc, but the horse doesn't understand what **money** is. Like what is this shiny metal thing? Why is it important? You can't eat it. You can't drink it. What is it?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: **AI**刚刚做了一些金融交易，其复杂程度远远超出了我的思维能力。**金融**的历史是，随着时间的推移，人们发明了越来越复杂的**金融工具**。所以你有硬币，然后是钞票，支票，债券，股票，**ETF**和**CDOS**（抵押债务凭证）。越来越少的人理解这些东西。**CDOS**是由少数投资奇才和天才数学家发明的。几乎没有人理解它们。当然，那些应该监管它们的政治家也不理解。几年之内，一切似乎都很好。人们因为这些**CDOS**赚了数十亿美元，然后事情发生了，系统崩溃了。现在很可能我们会在**AI**身上看到同样的事情，而且规模更大，就像我们已经看到**AI**发明了下棋的新方法一样。它们会发明新的投资方法，这可能比我们能想到的要好得多。所以它们将在**金融系统**中获得越来越多的**权力**，它将变得如此复杂，以至于理解**金融**的人数将降为零。这对民主或独裁意味着什么？当没有人，不是美国总统，不是中国总统，不是俄罗斯总统，不是中央银行行长，没有人再理解**金融**时。这将是未来几十年面临的一个非常大的挑战。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: The **AI** has just made some financial transaction which is just orders of magnitude beyond what my mind is capable of understanding. The history of **finance** is that over time people invent more and most sophisticated **financial devices**. So you have coins and then banknotes and checks and bonds and stocks and **ETFs** and **CDOS**'s collateralized depth obligations. And fewer and fewer people understand these things. The **CDOS** were invented by a tiny number of investment wizards and ingenious mathematicians. Almost nobody understood them. Certainly not the politicians who are supposed to regulate them. For a few years everything seems wonderful. people were making billions of dollars because of these **cos** and then things and then the system crashed. Now it is very likely that we will see the same thing with **AIS** on a much larger scale the same way that we've already seen **AI** invent new ways to play chess. They will invent new ways to invest which may be much better than than what we can come up with. So they will gain more and more **power** in the **financial system** and it will become so complicated that the number of people who understand **finance** will go down to zero. And what does it mean for democracy or also for dictatorship when nobody not the president of the **US** not the president of **China** not the president of **Russia** not the the the chiefs of the central banks no **human being** understands **finance** anymore. This will be a very big challenge in in the coming decades.
**主持人**: 这让我想到了两件事，我认为值得思考。一个是，**蒂莫西·李**写了一本很棒的Substack，叫做《理解**AI**》，他有一篇文章谈到为什么他不认为**AI科学家**会像我们想象的那样工作。
Original English **Host**: Brings up two things for me that I think are are worth thinking about. So one, **Timothy Lee**, who writes a great substack called Understanding **AI**, he had this piece on why he doesn't think the **AI scientists** are going to work out the way we think they will.
**主持人**: 他指出，我们已经看到了**AI**可以解决问题但却无法以我们认为真实的方式向我们解释它是如何解决的例子。并不是说它在欺骗。只是它追求目标的能力和它解释甚至理解它是如何追求目标的能力没有关联。所以它在功能上是在为它所做的事情编造一个解释，然后你调查后发现那不是实际发生的事情，但它确实得到了正确的答案，但我们不知道它是如何做到的。
Original English **Host**: And the thing he notes is that we're already seeing examples where **AI** can solve a problem but not explain to us in a way that appears to be true how it's solved it. Not that it's being deceptive. It's just its capacity to pursue the goal and its capacity to explain or even understand how it pursued the goal are not connected to each other. So it's functionally confabulating an explanation for what it did and then you look into it and that's not what happened but it did get the right answer but we don't know how.
**主持人**: 所以我们实际上无法向它学习。所以这又是一个有趣的维度，你可以在科学和其他方面取得这些飞跃，但实际上人类的知识储备增长的速度比我们获得答案的数量要慢得多。
Original English **Host**: and so we actually can't learn from it. So that that's one interesting dimension where you could have these forward leaps in science and other things but actually the **human stock of knowledge** is getting better at a much slower rate than the number of answers we're getting.
**主持人**: 因为我们没有像科学家找到新答案那样从过程中学习。
Original English **Host**: because we are not learning from the process the way we do when a **scientist** finds a new answer.
**主持人**: 也许对此的反驳是说，这可能在某种程度上已经适用于人类社会，只是我们不总是承认。**市场**就是一个例子，人们经常用**市场**来说明**市场**在做一些没有自主权的事情，但它们是一个复杂的利用信息的**过程**，导致结果，而**市场**无法解释发生了什么。你知道，我们有原则，但**市场**的行为往往违背我们的预期。而且我们的世界已经建立在系统、组织、机构之上。
Original English **Host**: Maybe the counterargument to that is to say that this is perhaps already true about **human society** in ways we don't always admit. **Markets** are an example people often use to say **markets** are doing things acting in ways they don't have agency but they are a complex information using process that leads to outcomes and the **market** cannot explain what happened. You know, we have principles, but often **markets** act in ways that defy our expectations. And it is already the case that our world is built on systems, organizations, institutions.
**主持人**: 它们不像我们。它们没有意识。它们无法解释自己，但它们正在构建我们周围的世界。而**AI**在这种方式上更像是一个**市场**。
Original English **Host**: that they're not like us. They're not conscious. They cannot explain themselves, but they are structuring the world around us. And **AI** is more like a **market** in that way.
**主持人**: 而不像一个实体。
Original English **Host**: than it is like an entity.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 这绝对是事实。唯一的警告是，直到现在，人类一直是**市场**、国家、**金融系统**的某种限制。你最终需要人类来理解某些东西才能做出决定，因为没有其他东西可以做出决定。所以**AI**现在允许所有这些我们建立了数千年并变得越来越复杂的结构，有可能切断与人类的联系，走上一条远远超出人类思维能力范围的轨迹。你知道，这甚至以某种方式发生在**语言**本身上。人类有史以来最重要的发明或创造是**语言**，因为它是所有事物的基础。**神话**、**金融**、国家、宗教，它们最终都基于**语言**。**语言**本质上是胶水。它连接事物。它连接了人类数万年。现在，当它摆脱人类的束缚时，它可以用我们无法想象的方式开始连接。在许多方面，**AI**就是**语言**的解放，它摆脱了人类的控制，开始探索**语言**在不与地球上行走的这些肉体包裹联系在一起时所能做的一切。现在它不是意识。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: That that's absolutely true. The only caveat is that until now humans were always a kind of limit on **markets**, on nations, on the **financial system**. You ultimately you needed humans to understand something to make the decisions because nothing else could make the decision. So **AI** allows these all these structures that we've built for thousands of years and became more and more complex. **AI** now allows them potentially to cut the connection to humanity and go on a trajectory which is far beyond what the **human mind** is capable of of understanding. You know it even happens in a way with **language** itself. The most important inventions or creation of humanity ever until now was **language** because it's the basis for everything. **Mythology**, **finance**, nations, religions, they are ultimately based on **language**. **Language** is essentially glue. It connects things. It connected human beings for for tens of thousands of years. Now as it kind of rel frees itself from human beings, it can start connecting in ways which are you know way beyond our imagination. In many ways **AI** is **language** liberating itself, releasing itself from the control of human beings and starting to explore all the things that **language** can do when it's not tied to these packages of meat walking around on planet Earth. Now it's not consciousness.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 我们之前谈到过一点，当**AI**说“我爱你”时。它真的有感觉吗？人类哲学中最大的讨论之一，持续了数千年，是**语言**和**感觉**之间的关系是什么？**语言**之外的现实。现在，我认为这个讨论将成为世界上最重要的讨论，因为突然之间，我们数千年来无法想象的事情发生了：**语言**正在脱离我们的控制，开始在世界上做一些事情。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: We talked about it a bit earlier when when the **AI** says I love you. Does it really feel anything? You had one of the biggest, you know, discussions in human philosophy for thousands of years was what is the relationship between **language** and **feelings**? The the reality beyond the **language**. Now this discussion will become I think maybe the most important discussion in the world because suddenly what what we couldn't imagine for thousands of years **language** is getting out of our control and starting to just do things in the world.
**主持人**: 我认为这是一个很好的结束点。那么，谈到**语言**，您会向听众推荐哪三本书？
Original English **Host**: I think that is a good place to end. So speaking of **language** what are three books you'd recommend to the audience?
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 呃，我会推荐一本关于**AI**的书是**本杰明·拉巴图**的**《疯子》**，它是一部**约翰·冯·诺伊曼**的虚构传记，也是对**AI革命**起源及其潜在后果的富有想象力且有力的探索。嗯，另一个推荐是**弗兰斯·德瓦尔**的任何一本书。我的意思是，我真的很喜欢他的第一本书**《黑猩猩的政治》**，我大概在20年前读过，它完全改变了我对人类而不是黑猩猩的理解，以及对**政治**的理解。而且，我会建议**史蒂芬·米勒**去读**《黑猩猩的政治》**，呃，因为，再说一遍，那里的主要信息是**政治**不仅仅是关于**武力**的。如果你认为你可以通过四处殴打每个人来成为黑猩猩群体的**首领雄性**，你将无法生存太久，无法从错误中吸取教训。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Uh so one book about **AI** that I would recommend to read is **Benjamin Labatut** the **maniac** which is a sort of fictionalist biography of **John Fonand** but also a very imaginative and powerful exploration of the origins of the **AI revolution** and of the potential consequences of it. Um another recommendation is basically any book by **France Devalo**. I mean I I really like uh his first book **chimpanzeee politics** uh which I've read like 20 years ago and completely changed my understanding not so much of chimpanzees but of **human beings** and of **politics** and there is a I would recommend **Stefan Miller** to to to for instance to to read **chimpanzeee politics** uh and to because again the main message there is that **politics** is not just about **force**. If you think you can become the **alpha male** of the chimpanzeee band by going around and just beating everybody, you will not survive long to learn from your mistake.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 另一个我想推荐的书是**奥尔德斯·赫胥黎**的**《美丽新世界》**，我认为这可能是20世纪最好的科幻小说，当然也是最具预言性的。他是在1930年代，在**法西斯主义**和**共产主义**兴起的背景下写的。但他预见到，也许控制人类最有效、甚至最危险的方式，不是像**奥威尔**的**《1984》**中那样通过纯粹的**蛮力**、**恐惧**和**恐怖**，而是如果你利用**快乐原则**以及人类的**贪婪**和**欲望**，你能走得更远，而不是仅仅试图一直压制和恐吓人们。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: And another book that uh I would like to recommend is **Aldos Huxley**'s **Brave New World**, which I think is maybe the best science fiction book of the **20th century**, certainly the most prophetic, which also he wrote it in the **1930s** against the backdrop of the rise of **fascism** and **communism** and so forth. But he foresaw that maybe the most effective way and even the most dangerous way to control human beings is not by sheer **brute force** and **fear** and **terror** like in **Orwell**'s **1984** but actually if you work with the **pleasure pr principle** and with **human greed** and **desire** uh you can get further than if you just try to crush people and terrorize them all the time.
**主持人**: 尤瓦尔·赫拉利。非常感谢您。
Original English **Host**: **You all know a Harrari**. Thank you very much.
**尤瓦尔·赫拉利**: 谢谢您。
Original English **Yuval Noah Harari**: Thank you.