Michael Pollan on the Science and Sublimity of Psychedelics (Ep. 47)
I’m here today with Michael Pollan at UC Berkeley.
今天我和加州大学伯克利分校的迈克尔·波伦一起。
Michael is, most recently, the author of How to Change Your Mind: What the New Science of Psychedelics Teaches Us about Consciousness, Dying, Addiction, Depression, and Transcendence.
迈克尔最近是《如何改变你的想法：新迷幻科学教给我们关于意识、死亡、成瘾、抑郁和超越的知识》一书的作者。
Every word in that subtitle is indeed important.
副标题中的每一个字确实很重要。
This is a broad book, a very important book.
这是一本内容广泛的书，一本非常重要的书。
It has skyrocketed to being a number-one best seller.
它已飙升至畅销书第一名。
Michael has many other achievements.
迈克尔还有许多其他成就。
He is one of our very best and most widely read food writers.
他是我们最优秀、阅读最广泛的美食作家之一。
He is faculty at Berkeley and Harvard and has written books on building, gardening, and many other topics.
他是伯克利和哈佛大学的教员，撰写过有关建筑、园艺和许多其他主题的书籍。
Michael, welcome.
迈克尔，欢迎。
Thank you, Tyler.
谢谢你，泰勒。
Good to be here.
很高兴来到这里。
My first question.
我的第一个问题。
Your book considers psychedelics and the benefits we m ight reap from psychedelics.
您的书讨论了迷幻药以及我们可能从迷幻药中获得的好处。
If people have a status quo bias that they’re not so willing to try new things, what other kind of free-lunch changes should we make with our minds?
如果人们对现状有偏见，不愿意尝试新事物，那么我们还应该在思想上做出哪些其他类型的免费午餐改变呢？
Or do you think it’s just this one, psychedelics?
或者你认为只是这一种，迷幻药？
I don’t know what you mean by free-lunch changes.
我不知道你所说的免费午餐是什么意思。
Things we could do that would be as simple as taking a micro-dose, say, that would make us much more open, or smarter, or less depressed, that would cost almost nothing.
我们可以做的事情就像服用微剂量一样简单，比如说，这会让我们变得更加开放，或者更加聪明，或者更少抑郁，而这几乎不需要花费任何费用。
Meditation.
冥想。
Meditation is a very important thing that’s available to everybody.
冥想是一件非常重要的事情，每个人都可以做。
You can download an app to learn how to do it.
您可以下载一个应用程序来了解如何操作。
It’s been shown to reduce blood pressure.
它已被证明可以降低血压。
I’ve found in my own practice, it’s a good way to reduce stress.
我在自己的实践中发现，这是减轻压力的好方法。
That’s pretty free lunch.
这真是免费的午餐。
That’s about as free lunch as it gets.
这几乎是免费的午餐了。
You just need 20 minutes.
你只需要20分钟。
You have to invest time, which is actually hard for people.
你必须投入时间，这对人们来说实际上很难。
So it’s meditation and psychedelics, but otherwise, we’re .
所以这是冥想和迷幻药，但除此之外，我们……。
.
。
.
。
I’m sure, given some time, I could come up with other things.
我确信，只要给我一些时间，我就能想出其他的东西。
Eating differently is a free-lunch change.
不同的饮食方式是免费的午餐改变。
It’s a lunch change.
这是午餐的改变。
If we’re talking about people’s emotional well-being or psychological well-being, one of the areas that we have much to learn about is the links between mood and food and that the kind of junk-food diet, this energy-dense food that we’re eating, lots of carbohydrates, puts people on an emotional roller coaster.
如果我们谈论人们的情绪健康或心理健康，我们需要了解的领域之一就是情绪和食物之间的联系，而垃圾食品饮食，我们正在吃的这种能量密集的食物，大量的碳水化合物，会让人们的情绪坐上过山车。
I’m sure it’s tied to their insulin levels and things like that, and that a healthy diet tends to make people feel better.
我确信这与他们的胰岛素水平和类似的因素有关，而且健康的饮食往往会让人们感觉更好。
I don’t know that this has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of a social scientist yet, but I do think that there are enormous gains.
我不知道这是否已经得到社会科学家的满意证明，但我确实认为有巨大的收获。
Exercise is another one.
锻炼是另一回事。
God, there’s a whole list.
天哪，有一个完整的清单。
As good social scientists, we want to look for the cross-sectional variation.
作为优秀的社会科学家，我们想要寻找横截面的变化。
I once remarked that John Lennon benefited from psychedelics more than Paul McCartney did.
我曾经说过，约翰·列侬比保罗·麦卡特尼从迷幻药中受益更多。
COWEN: Paul McCartney was into studio expertise.
COWEN：保罗·麦卡特尼热衷于工作室专业知识。
Lennon needed a certain kind of creativity.
列侬需要某种创造力。
What do you think are the cross-sectional claims about who benefits most?
您认为关于谁受益最大的横截面主张是什么？
Is it the complacent or the young, who are already creative and looking to take some more chances?
是自满的人还是已经富有创造力并希望抓住更多机会的年轻人？
That’s a good question.
这是一个好问题。
I think it’s people struggling with certain kinds of mental illness, too, benefit the most.
我认为那些与某些精神疾病作斗争的人也受益最多。
Demonstrating creativity is very difficult.
展现创造力是非常困难的。
First, I don’t know that we have a good definition of creativity.
首先，我不知道我们对创造力有一个很好的定义。
There have been efforts to study the impact of psychedelics on creativity.
人们一直在努力研究迷幻药对创造力的影响。
There’s lots of anecdotal evidence.
有很多轶事证据。
Steve Jobs famously reported it had an influence on him.
史蒂夫·乔布斯曾说过这件事对他产生了影响。
Stewart Brand.
斯图尔特品牌。
There’s a whole lot of engineers in Silicon Valley.
硅谷有很多工程师。
There are a lot of artists.
有很多艺术家。
There are theoretical physicists who have reported that it helped them with their work.
有理论物理学家报告说，这对他们的工作有帮助。
Biologists — Kary Mullis famously said he saw the structure .
生物学家 — 卡里·穆利斯（Kary Mullis）有句名言说他看到了这个结构。
.
。
.
。
He had the insight that allowed him to come up with PCR, the method for polymerase chain reaction reproducing DNA, during an LSD experience.
在服用 LSD 期间，他的洞察力使他想出了 PCR，即聚合酶链式反应复制 DNA 的方法。
This is all anecdotal.
这都是轶事。
It’d be interesting to figure out how to study it.
弄清楚如何研究它会很有趣。
I tend to think that it makes sense that there would be an effect, in that psychedelics disrupt the grooves of habit and habitual thought.
我倾向于认为，迷幻药会产生效果是有道理的，因为迷幻药会破坏习惯和习惯性思维的规律。
If creativity somehow involves reaching for non-obvious, so-called hotter searches, to use an AI term, ones further out in the space of possibility which have a lesser chance of being successful but sometimes include the most radical new solutions to problems, it appears that psychedelics encourage the brain in that direction.
如果创造力在某种程度上涉及到不明显的、所谓的更热门的搜索，用人工智能术语来说，那些在可能性空间中更远的搜索，成功的机会较小，但有时包括最激进的新问题解决方案，那么迷幻药似乎会鼓励大脑朝这个方向发展。
I would say in terms of those who stand to gain the most , it’s people struggling with habit: negative habits, habits of thought, habits of behavior.
我想说，对于那些获益最多的人来说，是那些与习惯作斗争的人：消极习惯、思维习惯、行为习惯。
Whether it’s addiction or a depressive mode of thinking, obsession, things like eating disorders, I would bet will yield to this.
无论是成瘾还是抑郁的思维方式、痴迷、饮食失调之类的事情，我敢打赌都会屈服于这一点。
It’s people on this end of the mental spectrum, where they’re overly rigid in their thinking.
这是处于心理谱这一端的人，他们的思维过于僵化。
Anecdotally, if I look at the history of popular music, I see Donovan, Jefferson Airplane, the early Byrds as possibly having benefited from psychedelics.
有趣的是，如果我回顾一下流行音乐的历史，我会发现多诺万、杰斐逊飞机和早期的伯德乐队可能都受益于迷幻剂。
Grateful Dead.
感恩而死。
Grateful Dead.
感恩而死。
I find it harder to find examples from the history of painting.
我发现很难从绘画史上找到例子。
It even seems to me psychedelics might make bad poets worse.
在我看来，迷幻药甚至可能会让糟糕的诗人变得更糟。
Do you agree?
你同意？
I think it makes bad painters worse.
我认为这会让糟糕的画家变得更糟。
I can say that with some confidence.
我可以有信心地说。
In general, if you just search psychedelic art online, you’ll see some real crap.
一般来说，如果你只是在网上搜索迷幻艺术，你会看到一些真正的垃圾。
I don’t know why.
我不知道为什么。
I think it’s very hard to do.
我认为这很难做到。
In terms of poets, that’s a good question.
对于诗人来说，这是一个很好的问题。
A lot of it depends on your opinion of Allen Ginsberg.
这在很大程度上取决于你对艾伦·金斯伯格的看法。
Sure.
当然。
That’s what I was referring to.
这就是我指的。
OK.
好的。
He wrote some really terrible poetry.
他写了一些非常糟糕的诗。
He wrote a couple of great poems.
他写了几首伟大的诗。
If you picked one of his poems at random .
如果你随意挑选一首他的诗。
.
。
.
。
Can we blame that all on psychedelics?
我们能把这一切归咎于迷幻药吗？
He may have been writing bad poetry before psychedelics.
在使用迷幻药之前，他可能已经写过蹩脚的诗了。
On profundity
论深度
Let me try a very philosophical question.
让我尝试一个非常哲学的问题。
Let’s say I could take a pill or a substance, and it would make everything seem profound.
假设我可以服用一颗药丸或一种物质，它会让一切看起来都很深刻。
My receptivity to finding things profound would go up greatly.
我对发现深刻事物的接受能力会大大提高。
I could do very small events, and it would seem profound to me.
我可以做一些很小的事情，这对我来说似乎意义深远。
Is that, in fact, real profundity that I’m experiencing?
事实上，这就是我所经历的真正的深刻吗？
Doesn’t real profundity somehow require excavating or experiencing things from actual society?
真正的深刻不就是需要从现实社会中去挖掘、去体验吗？
Are psychedelics like taking this pill?
迷幻药就像服用这种药吗？
They don’t give you real profundity.
它们不会给你真正的深度。
You just feel that many things are profound, but at the end of the experience, you don’t really have .
你只是觉得很多东西很深刻，但是体验到最后，你却并没有真正拥有。
.
。
.
。
It depends.
这取决于。
If you define profundity or the profound as exceptional, you have a point.
如果您将深刻或深刻定义为特殊，那么您是有道理的。
One of the things that’s very interesting about psychedelics is that our brains are tuned for novelty, and for good reason.
迷幻药非常有趣的一件事是，我们的大脑会适应新奇事物，这是有充分理由的。
It’s very adaptive to respond to new things in the environment, changes in your environment, threats in your environment.
它非常适应环境中的新事物、环境的变化、环境中的威胁。
We’re tuned to disregard the familiar or take it for granted, which is indeed what most of us do.
我们习惯于忽视熟悉的事物或认为它是理所当然的，这确实是我们大多数人所做的。
One of the things that happens on psychedelics, and on cannabis interestingly enough — and there’s some science on it in the case of cannabis; I don’t think we’ve done the science yet with psychedelics — is that the familiar suddenly takes on greater weight, and there’s an appreciation of the familiar.
有趣的是，迷幻药和大麻上发生的事情之一——而且就大麻而言，有一些科学依据；我认为我们还没有对迷幻药进行科学研究——熟悉的事物突然变得更加重要，并且人们对熟悉的事物产生了欣赏。
I think a lot of familiar things are profound if looked at in the proper way.
我认为，如果以正确的方式看待的话，很多熟悉的事情都是深刻的。
The feelings of love I have for people in my family are profound, but I don’t always feel that profundity.
我对家人的爱是深厚的，但我并不总是感受到那么深刻。
Psychedelics change that balance.
迷幻药改变了这种平衡。
I talk in the book about having emotions that could be on Hallmark cards.
我在书中谈到了可以写在霍尔马克卡片上的情绪。
We don’t think of Hallmark cards as being profound, but in fact, a lot of those sentiments are, properly regarded.
我们并不认为 Hallmark 卡片意义深远，但事实上，其中很多情感都得到了适当的重视。
Yes, there are those moments you’ve smoked cannabis, and you’re looking at your hand, and you go, “Man, hands, they’re f — ing incredible.” You’re just taken with this.
是的，有些时候你吸了大麻，你看着你的手，然后你说，“伙计，手，它们太不可思议了。”你只是被这个吸引了。
Is that profound or not?
到底深不深呢？
It sounds really goofy, but I think the line between profundity and banality is a lot finer than we think.
这听起来确实很愚蠢，但我认为深刻和平庸之间的界限比我们想象的要精细得多。
You mention the Bach Cello Suites in your work.
您在作品中提到了巴赫大提琴组曲。
One way you might try to get a more profound understanding of them is to listen to them with a score.
您可能会尝试更深入地了解它们的一种方法是用乐谱聆听它们。
You could buy many recordings of them, try to hear them in concert.
你可以买很多他们的唱片，尝试听他们的演唱会。
You could try to learn to play them yourself.
您可以尝试自己学习演奏它们。
I’ve done that with two of them for guitar.
我用其中的两个吉他做了这样的事情。
At the end of that experience, I felt I have a more profound understanding of them.
经过那次经历，我觉得我对他们有了更深刻的认识。
Or you could listen to them under the influence of psychedelics.
或者你可以在迷幻药的影响下听他们的声音。
But in the latter case, are you actually coming away with a better understanding of the Bach Cello Suites?
但在后一种情况下，您真的对巴赫大提琴组曲有了更好的理解吗？
Yes and no. What you’re getting at is that it feels to us — descendants of Puritans — that it’s cheating to use a pill to achieve any kind of important mental effect.
是和不是。你的意思是，我们——清教徒的后裔——感觉使用药丸来达到任何重要的精神效果都是作弊。
That’s a point of view.
这是一个观点。
It’s a point of view.
这是一个观点。
There is a sense in which using drugs to achieve any of this stuff is a shortcut.
从某种意义上说，使用药物来实现这些目标都是一条捷径。
Ditto with meditation.
冥想也是如此。
Meditation is really hard work to get to a kind of consciousness that you can get to pretty quickly with psychedelics.
冥想确实是一项艰苦的工作，要达到一种意识，而使用迷幻药可以很快达到这种意识。
Does that make meditation better?
这会让冥想变得更好吗？
Most of us feel instinctively it does.
我们大多数人本能地感觉到确实如此。
All I’m saying is we should question the assumptions behind that.
我想说的是我们应该质疑其背后的假设。
I’m not sure either way.
我不确定。
The fact is, any big experience, mental experience, is mediated by chemicals.
事实上，任何重大的体验、精神体验，都是由化学物质介导的。
Is the distinction between the endogenous and the exogenous ones — should that be so important?
内源性和外源性的区别真的那么重要吗？
I’m not sure of the answer.
我不确定答案。
I think you would have a more lasting appreciation of what’s going on .
我想你会对正在发生的事情有更持久的认识。
.
。
.
。
Just like you read a poem five times, you’re going to understand it in a different way.
就像你读一首诗五遍，你就会以不同的方式理解它。
It’s going to be somewhat more intellectual, perhaps, and a little less emotional.
或许，它会更加理智一些，而不那么感性。
There’s a kind of understanding that I had of Bach.
我对巴赫有一种理解。
I’m incapable of reading sheet music.
我无法阅读乐谱。
I can’t play an instrument.
我不会演奏乐器。
I could go to a lot of concerts.
我可以去很多音乐会。
I was disappointed to learn I’m going to miss .
我很失望地得知我会错过。
.
。
.
。
Yo-Yo Ma is going to be performing them right here in Berkeley at the end of the month, and I’m going to be out of town.
马友友将于本月底在伯克利表演，而我要出城。
The powerful emotional connection to that music — and I can’t even use the word “connection” because I was identical to it in this experience — that kind of listening, I don’t know that that’s available any other way.
与音乐的强烈情感联系 ——我什至不能使用“联系”这个词，因为我在这次经历中与它完全相同—— 那种聆听，我不知道还有其他方式可以实现。
Feel free to pass on this one.
请随意传递这个。
Timothy Leary once wrote that sex was the major advantage or revelation from taking LSD.
蒂莫西·利里 (Timothy Leary) 曾经写道，性是服用 LSD 的主要优势或启示。
Do you have an opinion on this as a scientist?
作为一名科学家，您对此有何看法？
I know that quote, and it’s always surprised me.
我知道这句话，它总是让我感到惊讶。
There’s something asexual about the experience, I think.
我认为这种经历有些无性。
Sex was very important to Leary, whether it involved anything: talk, LSD, alcohol.
性对利里来说非常重要，无论它涉及什么：谈话、LSD、酒精。
He was a highly sexualized person.
他是一个高度性感的人。
The LSD experience is highly constructed, so maybe for him, it was.
LSD 体验是高度构建的，所以也许对他来说，确实如此。
My sense and the sense of other people is that that’s not what you’re thinking about.
我的感觉和其他人的感觉是，这不是你在想的。
Afterwards, you’re a little too tired to think about.
后来，你有点累得无法思考。
I’d be curious what other people think.
我很好奇其他人的想法。
It’s not something I’ve run into, nor have I found an erotic charge.
这不是我遇到过的事情，也没有发现色情指控。
I was interviewing somebody recently who was a rabbi who had a profound mystical experience on psychedelics.
我最近采访了一位拉比，他对迷幻剂有着深刻的神秘体验。
There’s a really interesting study going on at Hopkins and NYU now, where they’re giving psilocybin to religious professionals.
霍普金斯大学和纽约大学现在正在进行一项非常有趣的研究，他们向宗教专业人士提供裸盖菇素。
It’s a little vague on exactly why.
确切原因有点模糊。
I think they’re curious to know whether they’ll find evidence of a perennial philosophy, some kind of common core of religious experience, which is an interesting idea.
我认为他们很想知道是否会找到一种永恒哲学的证据，某种宗教经验的共同核心，这是一个有趣的想法。
It was Aldous Huxley’s idea.
这是奥尔德斯·赫胥黎的想法。
Also, maybe it would help them with burnout.
此外，也许这会帮助他们缓解倦怠。
There are lots of religious people who get so absorbed in the work of running an organization and ministering to people that the spiritual dimension diminishes.
有很多宗教人士过于专注于管理组织和服务人民的工作，以至于灵性层面被削弱了。
That, at least, I think is their assumption.
至少我认为这是他们的假设。
This woman talked about having an encounter with the divine, her idea of God, and this merging with it.
这位女士谈到了与神圣的相遇、她对上帝的看法以及与之融合。
Someone else who’d interviewed many of these volunteers had said that many people described being ravished by the divine, which I thought, that’s a pretty erotic term.
另一位采访过许多志愿者的人说，许多人都描述过被神所迷惑，我认为这是一个非常色情的术语。
I asked her if, in her case, there was any kind of erotic charge.
我问她，就她而言，是否存在任何色情指控。
It was a funny question to ask a rabbi about their psilocybin experience.
向拉比询问他们的裸盖菇素经历是一个有趣的问题。
She said, “No, not at all.
她说：“不，一点也不。
It wasn’t like that at all.” So it’s something that I’m alert to.
根本不是那样的。”所以这是我很警惕的事情。
My guess is Leary is unique in that, fairly unique.
我的猜测是利里在这方面是独一无二的，相当独特。
On whether psychedelics are fun
关于迷幻药是否有趣
I’ve never myself tried psychedelics.
我自己从未尝试过迷幻药。
But I’ve asked the question, if I were to try, how would I think about what is the stopping point?
但我问了一个问题，如果我尝试的话，我会如何思考停止点是什么？
For my own life, I like, actually, to do the same things over and over again.
对于我自己的生活，实际上，我喜欢一遍又一遍地做同样的事情。
Read books.
读书。
Eat food.
吃食物。
Spend time with friends.
与朋友共度时光。
You can just keep on doing them, basically, till you die.
基本上，你可以继续这样做，直到你死。
I feel I’m in a very good groove on all of those.
我觉得我在所有这些方面都处于良好状态。
If you take it once, and say you find it entrancing or interesting or attractive, what’s the thought process?
如果你尝试过一次，并说你发现它令人着迷、有趣或有吸引力，那么你的思考过程是怎样的？
How do you model what happens next?
你如何对接下来发生的事情进行建模？
That’s one of the really interesting things about them.
这是他们真正有趣的事情之一。
You have this big experience, often positive, not always though.
你有这样的重大经历，通常是积极的，但并非总是如此。
I had, on balance .
总的来说，我有。
.
。
.
。
all the experiences I described in the book, with one notable exception, were very positive experiences.
我在书中描述的所有经历，除了一个值得注意的例外，都是非常积极的经历。
But I did not have a powerful desire to do it again.
但我没有强烈的愿望再做一次。
It doesn’t have that self-reinforcing quality, the dopamine release, I don’t know what it is, that comes with things that we like doing: eating and sex and sleep, all this kind of stuff.
它没有那种自我强化的品质，多巴胺的释放，我不知道它是什么，它伴随着我们喜欢做的事情：吃饭、性和睡眠，所有这些东西。
Your first thought after a big psychedelic experience is not “When can I do it again?” It’s like, “Do I ever have to do it again?”
在一次巨大的迷幻体验之后，你的第一个想法不是“我什么时候可以再做一次？”就像，“我还需要再做一次吗？”
It doesn’t sound fun, though.
不过，这听起来并不有趣。
What am I missing?
我缺少什么？
It’s not fun.
这并不好玩。
For me, it’s not fun.
对我来说，这并不有趣。
I think there are doses where that might apply — low dose, so-called recreational dose, when people take some mushrooms and go to a concert, and they’re high essentially.
我认为有些剂量可能适用——低剂量，所谓的娱乐剂量，当人们服用一些蘑菇去听音乐会时，它们本质上是很高的。
But the kind of experience I’m describing is a lot more — I won’t use the word profound because we’ve charged that one — that is a very internal and difficult journey that has moments of incredible beauty and lucidity, but also has dark moments, moments of contemplating death.
但我所描述的那种经历要多得多——我不会使用“深刻”这个词，因为我们已经对它进行了指控——这是一次非常内在和艰难的旅程，有令人难以置信的美丽和清醒的时刻，但也有黑暗的时刻，思考死亡的时刻。
Nothing you would describe as recreational except in the actual meaning of the word, which is never used.
除了这个词的实际含义之外，你不会将任何东西描述为娱乐，而这个词从未被使用过。
It’s not addictive, and I think that’s one of the reasons.
它不会让人上瘾，我认为这是原因之一。
I did just talk to someone, though, who came up to me at a book signing, a guy probably in his 70s.
不过，我刚刚和一个人聊过，他在签售会上向我走来，一个可能 70 多岁的人。
He said, “I’ve got to tell you about the time I took LSD 16 days in a row.” That was striking.
他说：“我必须告诉你我连续 16 天服用 LSD 的经历。”这太引人注目了。
You can meet plenty of people who have marijuana or a drink 16 days in a row.
您可能会遇到很多连续 16 天吸食大麻或饮酒的人。
But that was extraordinary.
但这是非同寻常的。
I don’t know why he did it.
我不知道他为什么这么做。
I’m curious to find out exactly what he got out of it.
我很好奇他到底从中得到了什么。
In general, there’s a lot of space that passes.
一般来说，有很多空间经过。
For the Grateful Dead, I don’t know.
对于感恩而死乐队，我不知道。
Maybe it was a nightly thing for them.
也许这对他们来说是每晚的事情。
But for most people, it doesn’t seem to be.
但对于大多数人来说，似乎并非如此。
Say I tried it, and I found it fascinating but not fun.
假设我尝试过，我发现它很有趣，但并不有趣。
Shouldn’t I then think there’s something wrong with me that the fascinating is not fun?
难道我不应该认为我有什么问题吗？迷人而不有趣吗？
Shouldn’t I downgrade my curiosity?
难道我不应该降低我的好奇心吗？
Aren’t there many fascinating things that aren’t fun?
是不是有很多令人着迷但并不有趣的事情？
All the ones I know, I find fun.
所有我认识的人，我都觉得很有趣。
This is what’s striking to me about your answer.
这就是你的回答让我印象深刻的地方。
It’s very surprising.
这很令人惊讶。
I think it’s the lightness of the word fun that I object to.
我认为我反对的是“乐趣”这个词的轻松性。
Deep fun.
深乐趣。
Pleasure.
乐趣。
There was pleasure.
很高兴。
There were moments of great pleasure, of just being overwhelmed by the beauty of things.
有一些非常快乐的时刻，被事物的美丽所征服。
You mention that my engagement with that Bach unaccompanied cello suites.
你提到我与巴赫无伴奏大提琴组曲的订婚。
It wasn’t fun.
这并不有趣。
It was bigger than that.
它比那还要大。
But it was deeply pleasurable.
但这是非常令人愉快的。
It was ecstatic in a sense.
从某种意义上说，这是欣喜若狂。
So there are moments of ecstasy.
所以也有欣喜若狂的时刻。
So ecstatic, you don’t want to do it again.
如此欣喜若狂，你不想再这样做了。
It’s almost like the sublime in 18th century aesthetics — gorgeous but too terrible.
这几乎就像18世纪美学中的崇高——华丽但太可怕了。
It is beautiful and terrible at the same time.
它既美丽又可怕。
The sublime is a very good frame to understand it.
崇高是一个非常好的理解它的框架。
It’s a kind of awe that can be overwhelming.
这是一种令人难以抗拒的敬畏。
We do seek out awesome experience.
我们确实寻求很棒的体验。
But if you did it every day, it wouldn’t be awesome.
但如果你每天都这么做，那就没什么了不起了。
It is beautiful and terrible at the same time.
它既美丽又可怕。
The sublime is a very good frame to understand it.
崇高是一个非常好的理解它的框架。
It’s a kind of awe that can be overwhelming.
这是一种令人难以抗拒的敬畏。
We do seek out awesome experience.
我们确实寻求很棒的体验。
But if you did it every day, it wouldn’t be awesome.
但如果你每天都这么做，那就没什么了不起了。
The issue of personality change — there’s evidence it may help people with depression.
性格改变问题 —— 有证据表明它可能对抑郁症患者有帮助。
Scott Alexander cites a study.
斯科特·亚历山大引用了一项研究。
He interprets it as some psychedelics increase your openness in terms of five-factor personality theory, up to about half a standard deviation, which is a large effect because people’s personalities don’t change much after a certain age.
他将其解释为，根据五因素人格理论，一些迷幻药会增加你的开放性，最高可达标准差的一半左右，这是一个很大的影响，因为人们的性格在一定年龄后不会发生太大变化。
Very rare.
非常罕见。
Do you agree with this evidence?
你同意这个证据吗？
I can’t agree or disagree.
我无法同意或不同意。
The study in question hasn’t been reproduced.
该研究尚未被复制。
I have an open mind about that.
我对此持开放态度。
There was another study recently done in England that looked at personality change and found some changes on other metrics, too, including neuroticism.
最近在英国进行的另一项研究着眼于性格变化，发现其他指标也发生了一些变化，包括神经质。
Going up or down?
上升还是下降？
Up.
向上。
I think it was up.
我想已经到了。
[This recent UK study to which Pollan might be referring found neuroticism went down, among other things -Ed.]
[波伦可能提到的这项最近的英国研究发现，除其他外，神经质有所下降——编者。]
The sublime ought to do that to you, right?
崇高应该对你这样做，对吗？
No. And it also found some evidence of openness.
不。而且它还发现了一些开放的证据。
But it’s a very small sample.
但这是一个非常小的样本。
I didn’t look at the statistical analysis very closely.
我没有仔细研究统计分析。
It’s interesting.
这很有趣。
It coincides with what people report.
这与人们的报道相符。
But whether that’s a strong enough study to hang our hats on, I’m not sure.
但我不确定这是否是一项足够有力的研究，值得我们认可。
On personality changes
关于性格的改变
Let’s say I had this fear.
假设我有这种恐惧。
Five-factor personality theory only captures a small amount of what people are, like any theory.
与任何理论一样，五因素人格理论只描述了人的一小部分。
We don’t know, but it’s at least possible one part of your personality changes.
我们不知道，但这至少可能是你性格改变的一部分。
There are many other parts of your personality we don’t measure, we can’t measure.
你的性格还有很多其他部分我们无法衡量，也无法衡量。
It would seem weird if only one part of you changed.
如果你只改变了一部分，那就显得很奇怪了。
Quite possibly three, four other, more parts of you are changing.
很可能你的另外三、四个、更多的部分正在发生变化。
You don’t know what it’s going to be.
你不知道会发生什么。
If you like how you are and you’re risk averse, why go down this path?
如果你喜欢自己的现状并且厌恶风险，为什么要走这条路呢？
I think that you have to be open to the idea that you could be better.
我认为你必须对自己可以变得更好的想法持开放态度。
Certainly on the dimension of openness, I think most of us could stand to be somewhat more open.
当然，在开放的维度上，我认为我们大多数人都可以更加开放。
As we age, I think we tend to get stuck in grooves and ideologies and get less good at considering other points of view.
随着年龄的增长，我认为我们往往会陷入困境和意识形态，并且不善于考虑其他观点。
Plus, points of view come up that didn’t exist when our personalities were formed.
另外，我们的性格形成时并不存在的观点也会出现。
New information, our environment changes.
新的信息，我们的环境发生了变化。
Being open .
开放。
.
。
.
。
I think we all have room for improvement on that dimension.
我认为我们在这方面都有改进的空间。
Lowering neuroticism, if indeed that is the case, that seems like a positive.
降低神经质，如果确实如此，那似乎是积极的。
I like myself, too.
我也喜欢我自己。
I was pretty satisfied with who I was.
我对自己很满意。
But I had some problems with being so satisfied with who I was.
但我对自己如此满意却遇到了一些问题。
So I was open.
所以我很开放。
I had a lot of curiosity.
我非常好奇。
I guess I didn’t set out to change myself.
我想我并没有打算改变自己。
I set out to learn about myself.
我开始了解自己。
So it was a kind of aspiration.
所以这是一种愿望。
You didn’t know what would be at the end of the path, but you felt you wanted to be at a somewhat different point.
你不知道路的尽头会是什么，但你觉得你想要到达一个不同的点。
It was several things.
这是几件事。
It was journalistic curiosity, very important driver of this whole project.
这是新闻界的好奇心，也是整个项目的重要驱动力。
That curiosity is not necessarily about personal change.
这种好奇心不一定与个人改变有关。
It’s just how we think.
这就是我们的想法。
It was also realizing that there was something perhaps missing in my life that these people I was interviewing had, which was a much stronger sense of spiritual experience, spirituality than I had.
我还意识到，我的生活中可能缺少一些我采访的人所拥有的东西，那就是比我更强烈的精神体验和灵性感。
I really saw that as an undeveloped dimension of my character and a rejected dimension of my character.
我确实认为这是我性格中未发展的维度和我性格中被拒绝的维度。
I was very suspicious of spirituality.
我对灵性非常怀疑。
I’m very materialist in my outlook, I realized.
我意识到，我的观点非常唯物主义。
I saw spiritual as a synonym for supernatural, and I don’t accept anything supernatural.
我认为精神是超自然的同义词，我不接受任何超自然的东西。
Even now, you don’t believe in God.
即使现在，你也不相信上帝。
As defined how?
如何定义？
I don’t believe there’s a being in the sky.
我不相信天上有生命。
There’s a betting market on Intrade: “Does God exist?”
Intrade 上有一个投注市场：“上帝存在吗？”
How’s that going?
怎么样？
No, I’m joking.
不，我在开玩笑。
I guess I give 1 in 20 odds that God exists.
我想我认为上帝存在的可能性是二十分之一。
That’s very high.
那是非常高的。
What about for an afterlife?
来世又怎样呢？
Lower, I think.
我认为更低。
Lower?
降低？
Absolutely.
绝对地。
Sounds like a Jewish God.
听起来像犹太教的神。
On gurus and dogmatism
关于大师和教条主义
Are you worried about dogmatism?
您担心教条主义吗？
Some people, after psychedelics, you get the feeling they say, “I’ve seen how things really are.” That makes me suspicious.
有些人在服用迷幻药后，你会感觉到他们说：“我已经看到了事情的真相。”这让我很怀疑。
Maybe we’re measuring openness incorrectly, that some forms of their openness go up, but other forms go down.
也许我们对开放度的衡量不正确，某些形式的开放度上升，但其他形式下降。
With respect to their own psychedelic experience, they’re more dogmatic.
就他们自己的迷幻体验而言，他们更加教条。
What’s your view?
你的看法是什么？
Yeah, a related paradox is ego dissolution versus ego inflation.
是的，一个相关的悖论是自我消解与自我膨胀。
People have an experience of ego dissolution on high-dose psychedelic experience, which can be quite profound.
人们在高剂量的迷幻体验中会有一种自我消解的体验，这种体验可能是相当深刻的。
It was for me.
这是给我的。
Many people — I don’t know what percentage — emerge from the experience with a subsequent sense of ego inflation, which is weird.
许多人 —— 我不知道有多少比例 —— 从经历中产生了随后的自我膨胀感，这很奇怪。
You have these gurus emerging from this ego-destroying experience.
这些大师是从这种自我毁灭的经历中脱颖而出的。
Leary is a great example.
利里就是一个很好的例子。
He was a complete egomaniac.
他是一个十足的自大狂。
Yet, he’d had repeated experiences of losing his ego.
然而，他却一再经历失去自我的经历。
What happens?
会发生什么？
This is, I guess, the dogmatism point.
我想，这就是教条主义观点。
You’ve had such a profound experience that you think you found a key to reality.
你经历了如此深刻的体验，以至于你认为你找到了通往现实的钥匙。
You feel very special because you hold this key to reality.
你感觉很特别，因为你掌握着现实的钥匙。
I think that’s a very dangerous thing.
我认为这是一件非常危险的事情。
I don’t know that what you experience is absolute reality in any sense.
我不知道你所经历的在任何意义上都是绝对的现实。
The experience to come out of it with confidence that you’ve solved some riddle of the universe, that’s always a dangerous thing.
从中得出的经验是，你确信自己已经解决了宇宙的一些谜题，这总是一件危险的事情。
And that does lead to dogmatism.
这确实会导致教条主义。
It leads to the guru complex.
它通向上师情结。
We’ve seen that, too.
我们也看到了这一点。
The people who come out of the experience deciding they’re gurus and they’re dogmatic about it, they tend to hold the cultural microphone longer than the people who just went off to their corner and enjoyed what they learned and shared it with their friends and didn’t get dogmatic.
那些从经历中走出来的人认为自己是大师，并且对此很教条，他们往往比那些只是走到自己的角落享受所学并与朋友分享并且没有教条的人持有文化麦克风的时间更长。
But certainly, it is an occupational hazard of messing around with psychedelics, that kind of dogmatism.
但可以肯定的是，搞迷幻药是一种职业危害，这种教条主义。
LSD and some other psychedelics — they do seem, as you mentioned, correlated with the phenomenon of gurus.
LSD 和其他一些致幻剂——正如您所提到的，它们似乎确实与大师现象相关。
Do you think that’s deeply structural?
你认为这是深层结构性的吗？
If we had what (in your view) would be a more rational set of policies toward some psychedelics, that the guru would persist?
如果我们（在您看来）对某些致幻剂有一套更合理的政策，那么这位大师会坚持下去吗？
Or is that an artifact of illegality or it being underground?
或者这是非法的产物或者是地下的？
That’s an interesting question.
这是一个有趣的问题。
I think it’s probably both.
我想可能两者都是。
William James spoke of the noetic quality of the mystical experience.
威廉·詹姆斯谈到了神秘体验的精神品质。
To the extent that people have mystical experiences on psychedelics .
以至于人们对迷幻药有神秘的体验。
.
。
.
。
What he meant is the authority of the ideas, the insights, the opinions that occur to you during a mystical experience is very special.
他的意思是你在神秘体验中产生的想法、见解和观点的权威是非常特别的。
It doesn’t seem subjective to you.
这对你来说似乎并不主观。
It seems like an objective truth of the universe.
这似乎是宇宙的客观真理。
That’s always a dangerous way to think.
这始终是一种危险的思维方式。
And that is a quality that people have.
这就是人们所拥有的品质。
It may have to do with the dissolving of subjectivity.
这可能与主观性的消解有关。
The subject-object distinction goes away for a period of time, so everything seems objective, or whatever is subjective is objective.
主客体的区别在一段时间内消失了，所以一切看起来都是客观的，或者说主观的就是客观的。
That’s built in, I think, to the mystical experience.
我认为，这是建立在神秘体验之上的。
Will you restate your question again?
您能再重申一下您的问题吗？
The fact that gurus seem closely connected to some psychedelics — is that structural or just temporary contingency?
事实上，大师们似乎与某些致幻剂有着密切的联系——这是结构性的还是只是暂时的偶然事件？
Yeah, illegality.
是的，违法。
Partly structural.
部分结构性。
But what if these drugs were routinely used in psychiatric care?
但如果这些药物常规用于精神科护理呢？
I think you’d see less of it because now the persecution complex that goes with the guru complex — they’re related.
我想你会看到更少，因为现在迫害情结与上师情结相伴——他们是相关的。
Leary thought he was a guru, and he loved the persecution because it enhanced his sense that he was special, he was a prophet, he was dangerous, he was a threat to the system.
利里认为他是一位大师，他喜欢迫害，因为这增强了他的感觉，他是特殊的，他是先知，他是危险的，他是对系统的威胁。
Yes, I think the illegality .
是的，我认为违法。
.
。
.
。
Psychiatrists are not that different from gurus, right?
精神科医生和专家没什么不同，对吧？
No.
不。
They’re more institutionalized, but in the broader scheme of things…
它们更加制度化，但从更广泛的角度来看……
On a smaller scale.
在较小的范围内。
Nobody beyond their patient group feels that, but Leary’s on television, on college campuses.
除了利里在电视上、在大学校园里，除了他们的病人群体之外，没有人有这种感觉。
He’s speaking before giant crowds, doing his guru thing.
他在一大群人面前演讲，做着他的大师的事情。
But I think psychiatrists have a certain guru aspect.
但我认为精神科医生有一定的大师的一面。
Whether it’s imputed to them or they feel it, I don’t know.
我不知道这是归咎于他们还是他们感觉到了。
Would you feel better if psychedelics were maybe packaged with a ceremonial/religious experience or packaged with big agriculture?
如果迷幻药与仪式/宗教体验或大农业一起包装，您会感觉更好吗？
Could be a large commercial corporation, like the Facebook of LSD?
可能是一家大型商业公司，就像 LSD 的 Facebook 一样？
Cargill?
嘉吉？
COWEN: And the guru would be taken away.
COWEN：大师将会被带走。
The power and status of LSD, if the positive claims are correct, it’s going to lie somewhere.
LSD 的力量和地位，如果积极的说法是正确的，它就会在某个地方。
Where do you want to put it — with religion, with psychiatrists, with the military, the CIA, big companies?
你想把它放在哪里 ——宗教、精神病学家、军队、中央情报局、大公司？
You have a lot of choices.
你有很多选择。
What do you see as the best way this could work out?
您认为解决这个问题的最佳方法是什么？
I don’t think there’s one choice to be made.
我不认为只有一种选择。
I think it has a role to play.
我认为它可以发挥作用。
I say this assuming that the Phase 3 trials have the kinds of results we’ve seen on the smaller studies.
我这样说是假设第三阶段试验具有我们在小型研究中看到的结果。
Assuming the positive scenario works out.
假设积极的情况得以实现。
Yeah, let’s assume that.
是的，我们假设一下。
I think there is a place in medicine for this, in psychotherapy, and that that is one cultural container that seems like the most likely.
我认为在医学、心理治疗中有一席之地，而这似乎是最有可能的一种文化容器。
I also see it having a role in religion.
我也看到它在宗教中发挥着作用。
It does already.
已经是这样了。
The Native American Church uses peyote in their ceremonies in San Pedro.
美洲原住民教堂在圣佩德罗的仪式中使用仙人掌。
It’s allowed under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
《宗教自由恢复法》允许这样做。
They’ve gained the right to do that.
他们已经获得了这样做的权利。
There are two ayahuasca churches that have the right.
有两个死藤水教堂有权利。
And I could see more of that.
我可以看到更多这样的事情。
I think it does have a sacramental role for people who believe.
我认为它对于信徒来说确实具有圣礼的作用。
So that’s another.
那是另一个。
I would hope that there’s another cultural container for the rest of us who are not part of a religion, who are not by the DSM diagnoses mentally ill, but are struggling with things they don’t like about themselves, with a sense that they’re dealing with death and they want to think about their mortality, who are intellectually curious, who are creatively curious.
我希望对于我们这些不属于宗教的人来说，还有另一种文化容器，他们没有被 DSM 诊断为精神疾病，但正在与自己不喜欢的事情作斗争，感觉自己正在面对死亡，他们想要思考自己的死亡，他们在智力上有好奇心，在创造性上好奇。
I would hope that there’s another cultural container for the rest of us who are not part of a religion, who are not by the DSM diagnoses mentally ill, but are struggling with things they don’t like about themselves, with a sense that they’re dealing with death and they want to think about their mortality, who are intellectually curious, who are creatively curious.
我希望对于我们这些不属于宗教的人来说，还有另一种文化容器，他们没有被 DSM 诊断为精神疾病，但正在与自己不喜欢的事情作斗争，感觉自己正在面对死亡，他们想要思考自己的死亡，他们在智力上有好奇心，在创造性上好奇。
How do you deal with that?
你如何处理这个问题？
What one of my sources, one of the researchers, called “the betterment of well people.” I love that phrase.
我的一位消息来源、一位研究人员将其称为“改善健康人的生活”。我喜欢这句话。
These drugs seem to offer something to those people.
这些药物似乎对那些人有帮助。
I also don’t think they should be simply and completely legalized and deregulated, just because of their power and some of the risks, and that people do get into trouble with them.
我也不认为它们应该简单地完全合法化和放松管制，仅仅因为它们的权力和一些风险，而且人们确实会遇到麻烦。
I don’t know what that container is.
我不知道那个容器是什么。
I think it’s a really interesting cultural project to develop what that would be.
我认为这是一个非常有趣的文化项目来发展它。
Lots of people go to psychotherapists without being mentally ill.
很多人去看心理治疗师时并没有患有精神疾病。
People go because they’re unhappy, they’re in the midst of a divorce, they don’t know how to deal with their kids — all the different reasons.
人们去是因为他们不快乐，他们正处于离婚之中，他们不知道如何对待他们的孩子——所有不同的原因。
These people benefit.
这些人受益。
It’s not mental illness treatment.
这不是精神疾病治疗。
It’s something else.
这是另一回事。
You could imagine a situation where institutions would be built, mental health spas, for example, where there is a doctor involved in some way.
你可以想象这样一种情况：建立机构，例如心理健康水疗中心，其中有医生以某种方式参与其中。
They’re ascribing to some set of protocols, guided trips with people who’ve been trained, some guarantees of the purity of the drug, all this kind of stuff.
他们将其归因于一些协议、受过培训的人的指导旅行、对药物纯度的一些保证，所有这些东西。
Maybe that is it.
也许就是这样。
It’s going to take the work of designers, therapists — a whole lot — architects to create this other container.
需要设计师、治疗师 ——很多人 ——建筑师的共同努力才能创造出另一个容器。
I don’t have an outline for it, but I’d like to see it.
我没有大纲，但我想看看。
On drug safety
关于药品安全
Do you think LSD, in particular, could pass current FDA guidelines that you have to show a drug is both safe and effective?
您认为LSD（尤其是LSD）是否可以通过FDA现行指南，即您必须证明药物既安全又有效？
Or are those guidelines too strict?
或者这些指导方针是否过于严格？
No, I don’t think they’re too strict in this case.
不，我认为他们在这种情况下并不太严格。
Let’s talk about psilocybin, though, because it’s a very similar drug.
不过，我们来谈谈裸盖菇素，因为它是一种非常相似的药物。
The duration of action is much longer with LSD.
LSD 的作用持续时间要长得多。
It’s about twice as long.
大约是两倍长。
That’s one of the reasons it’s not used in the current research.
这是当前研究中未使用它的原因之一。
The other is it has much more political baggage.
另一个是它有更多的政治包袱。
It’s much more radioactive in Congress, and the kinds of people who might shut it down know about LSD.
它在国会的放射性要强得多，那些可能会关闭它的人都知道LSD。
They don’t know about psilocybin.
他们不知道裸盖菇素。
I think that efficacy will be demonstrated for certain indications.
我认为对于某些适应症的疗效将会得到证实。
We’ve seen already that it can reduce anxiety and depression in people who have a cancer diagnosis.
我们已经看到它可以减少癌症诊断患者的焦虑和抑郁。
We’ve seen some promising evidence in smaller studies that it’s helpful with addiction.
我们在小型研究中看到了一些有希望的证据，表明它有助于戒除毒瘾。
I think there’s a very good chance we’ll find efficacy.
我认为我们很有可能找到功效。
If we get half the treatment effect we’ve seen in the cancer-anxiety study, it would be better than a lot of things out there.
如果我们获得癌症焦虑研究中所见治疗效果的一半，那就比外面的很多东西都要好。
Safety — I don’t think it’s that hard.
安全 — 我认为这并不难。
One of the striking things about these drugs .
这些药物的引人注目的事情之一。
.
。
.
。
When I say these drugs, I don’t mean everything people are calling psychedelics.
当我说这些药物时，我并不是指人们所说的迷幻药。
I wouldn’t put MDMA under this umbrella, or cannabis.
我不会把 MDMA 或大麻归入这个范畴。
The so-called classic psychedelics, like psilocybin, DMT, LSD, have remarkably low toxicity compared to drugs we take routinely, compared to over-the-counter drugs, compared to Tylenol.
所谓的经典迷幻药，如裸盖菇素、DMT、LSD，与我们常规服用的药物、非处方药、泰诺相比，毒性非常低。
There doesn’t appear to be a lethal dose, which is one measure of toxicity in a drug.
似乎没有致命剂量，这是衡量药物毒性的一种指标。
So I don’t think they’re going to have too much trouble with that.
所以我认为他们不会遇到太多麻烦。
As for safety, there’s something, as you know, called hallucinogen persisting perception disorder that some percentage of people — they take psychedelics, possibly LSD, and then for years afterwards, they have distortions in their field of vision, almost like minitrips, ongoing.
至于安全性，正如你所知，有一种叫做致幻剂持续性知觉障碍的东西，有一定比例的人会服用致幻剂，可能是LSD，然后在多年之后，他们的视野会出现扭曲，几乎就像迷你旅行一样，持续不断。
What’s your view on that evidence?
您对这些证据有何看法？
I couldn’t find a lot of good research on so-called acid flashbacks.
我找不到很多关于所谓的酸性闪回的好的研究。
I went looking for it, and it actually hasn’t been studied.
我去找了一下，其实还没有研究过。
You know that giving a name to something happens in the DSM.
您知道 DSM 中会为某些事物命名。
And it may not mean anything.
这可能没有任何意义。
Right.
正确的。
Five years later, they take it out or they change it.
五年后，他们将其删除或更改。
As authoritative as that sounds, it isn’t clear exactly what that phenomenon is.
尽管这听起来很权威，但目前还不清楚这种现象到底是什么。
There does seem to be some phenomenon.
似乎确实存在某种现象。
Anecdotally, I hear about it.
有趣的是，我听说过这件事。
Sometimes people describe it as a state they will themselves into, or that they use meditation because they want to get back to that.
有时，人们将其描述为他们愿意进入的一种状态，或者他们使用冥想是因为他们想回到那种状态。
Other people say it’s this unbidden sense of defamiliarization that happens.
其他人则表示，这种陌生感是不自觉发生的。
But it’s not like you’re driving the car, and you go into a full-blown hallucination.
但这并不像你在开车时就陷入了全面的幻觉。
There’re not accounts of that that I’ve been able to find.
我找不到这方面的记录。
So I don’t know how real acid flashbacks are.
所以我不知道酸闪回有多真实。
It’s a really interesting question and why there hasn’t been more research on it.
这是一个非常有趣的问题，为什么还没有对此进行更多研究。
I don’t know that, in the trials, they’ve found it with psilocybin.
我不知道，在试验中，他们发现了裸盖菇素的作用。
Is it specific to LSD?
它是LSD特有的吗？
LSD persists in the receptors for a remarkably long time, but whether it would be months seems hard to believe.
LSD 在受体中持续存在的时间相当长，但是否会持续数月似乎令人难以置信。
There’s something about the LSD molecule that gets caught under this little hood on the receptor and sticks around even longer than serotonin.
LSD 分子中的某些物质会被受体上的这个小罩盖住，并且比血清素停留的时间更长。
I don’t know what to say about that.
我不知道该说些什么。
I think the real risks are to people who are at risk of psychosis, whether they have schizophrenia in their genes, in their family background, or personality disorders of various kinds, bipolar.
我认为真正的风险是那些有精神病风险的人，无论他们的基因、家庭背景是否患有精神分裂症，还是各种人格障碍、双相情感障碍。
People in that category of mental illness, these drugs can have very negative effects on.
对于患有此类精神疾病的人来说，这些药物可能会产生非常负面的影响。
Some people will have psychotic breaks.
有些人会出现精神崩溃。
That’s a serious risk, and a lot of work is done to screen those people out of the university trials.
这是一个严重的风险，并且已经做了很多工作来将这些人排除在大学试验之外。
Other people, though, using drugs outside of a supervised clinical situation simply do stupid things because they’re debilitated.
然而，其他人在没有监督的临床情况下使用药物只是做了愚蠢的事情，因为他们很虚弱。
They walk into traffic because maybe they’re having a hallucination.
他们走进车流可能是因为产生了幻觉。
They do jump out of buildings.
他们确实从建筑物中跳出来。
There are occasional suicides on LSD.
偶尔会有服用 LSD 自杀的人。
It becomes a very big story because it fits into a narrative of this incredibly dangerous drug.
它成为一个非常大的故事，因为它符合这种极其危险的药物的叙述。
There are a lot of suicides on SSRIs.
因服用 SSRIs 药物而自杀的案例很多。
It’s a recognized side effect.
这是公认的副作用。
The number of drugs we administer to people for which suicide is a side effect listed is remarkable.
我们给人们服用的以自杀为副作用的药物数量是惊人的。
Some people blame the increase in suicides in recent years to prescription drugs that have that as a risk factor.
一些人将近年来自杀率的上升归咎于处方药，因为处方药存在自杀风险。
So it’s a risk factor for LSD, also.
所以这也是迷幻药的一个危险因素。
As I say, it becomes a huge story when it happens.
正如我所说，当它发生时，它就会成为一个巨大的故事。
The number of drugs we administer to people for which suicide is a side effect listed is remarkable.
我们给人们服用的以自杀为副作用的药物数量是惊人的。
Some people blame the increase in suicides in recent years to prescription drugs that have that as a risk factor.
一些人将近年来自杀率的上升归咎于处方药，因为处方药存在自杀风险。
On psychology and psychedelics
关于心理学和迷幻药
Many psychedelics operate through the serotonin system.
许多致幻剂通过血清素系统起作用。
If I have a serotonin imbalance, am I at some kind of special risk?
如果我的血清素失衡，我是否面临某种特殊风险？
Or do we not even know?
还是我们根本不知道？
We do not even know.
我们甚至不知道。
One thing, though, people who are on an SSRI to raise their serotonin levels — although actually, we don’t even know that SSRIs do that, believe it or not; it’s incredible what we don’t know about them — but they do occupy the same receptor sites.
不过，有一点是，服用 SSRI 的人是为了提高血清素水平 ——尽管实际上，无论你信不信，我们甚至不知道 SSRI 能做到这一点；令人难以置信的是，我们对它们一无所知，但它们确实占据了相同的受体位点。
People on an SSRI will not be admitted to these trials.
服用 SSRI 的人不会被允许参加这些试验。
The reason is not that there’s a counter-indication that it would make you sick or do something bad to you, but it won’t work.
原因并不是有相反的迹象表明它会让你生病或对你做坏事，但它不会起作用。
The psychedelic often won’t work if you’re on an SSRI.
如果您服用 SSRI，迷幻药通常不会起作用。
So people who want to take them would need to taper off them.
因此，想要服用它们的人需要逐渐减少剂量。
But that carries its own risks, of course, of suicide.
但这当然也有自杀的风险。
In general, they want you not to be on an SSRI for that reason.
一般来说，他们希望您不要因为这个原因服用 SSRI。
You cite the work of psychologist Alison Gopnik, who compares being on LSD to the consciousness of children.
你引用了心理学家艾莉森·戈普尼克（Alison Gopnik）的著作，她将服用 LSD 与儿童的意识进行了比较。
Do you agree with her view?
你同意她的观点吗？
If you do, how does it fit into there being this not-so-fun, sublime yet somewhat terrible aspect of psychedelics?
如果你这样做的话，它是如何适应迷幻剂这种不那么有趣、崇高但又有些可怕的方面的呢？
I found her argument compelling.
我发现她的论点很有说服力。
I thought it was a good way to understand what’s happening.
我认为这是了解正在发生的事情的好方法。
She doesn’t use a loaded word like regression.
她没有使用“回归”这样的含意十足的词。
Other psychedelic researchers like Robin Carhart-Harris says that we regress to what Freud called a primary consciousness, which is less sophisticated, has more magical thinking — and kids certainly have more magical thinking than adults do.
其他迷幻研究人员，如罗宾·卡哈特-哈里斯 (Robin Carhart-Harris) 表示，我们回归到弗洛伊德所说的初级意识，这种意识不那么复杂，具有更多的神奇思维——而孩子们肯定比成年人有更多的神奇思维。
Her distinction between spotlight consciousness and lantern consciousness, with adults having this amazing ability to train their attention on something and block out everything else and get a lot of stuff done, versus the kid who doesn’t really stay focused, partly because he or she is taking in information from all directions and is not prioritizing, and there is a strength and a weakness in that.
她区分聚光灯意识和灯笼意识，成年人有这种惊人的能力，可以训练他们的注意力集中在某件事上，排除其他一切，完成很多事情，而孩子则不能真正保持专注，部分原因是他或她从四面八方接收信息，没有优先考虑，这其中有优点和缺点。
My own gut is there is something childlike about the consciousness at certain stages in the trip.
我自己的直觉是，在旅行的某些阶段，意识有些像孩子气。
Just judging from the experience of having had a kid, that there are levels of sensitivity to environment that children have that we lose as adults because of our desire to focus.
仅从养育孩子的经历来看，孩子们对环境的敏感性有一定程度，而我们作为成年人却因为渴望集中注意力而失去了敏感性。
We shut things out.
我们把事情拒之门外。
Also, I’m sure there are physiological reasons that kids taste with a lot more and smell with a lot more acuity.
另外，我确信孩子们的味觉和嗅觉更加敏锐，这是有生理原因的。
You recover some of that sometimes.
有时你会恢复一些。
You recover some of that sensory sensitivity.
您恢复了一些感官敏感性。
I think so much of growing up is about blocking out too much sensory information so we can focus and we can use our intellects.
我认为成长的过程很大程度上就是要屏蔽掉太多的感官信息，这样我们才能集中注意力，才能运用我们的智力。
We pay less attention to the physical senses than kids do.
我们比孩子们更少关注身体感官。
So yeah, I find her argument compelling.
所以是的，我发现她的论点很有说服力。
Gopnik says it’s like having tea with a four-year-old.
戈普尼克说，这就像和一个四岁的孩子一起喝茶。
I have a sense that a tea party with a four-year-old, the four-year-old will insist on all kinds of rules.
我有一种感觉，一个四岁孩子的茶会，四岁的孩子会坚持各种规则。
The four-year-old will be a quicker learner than the adult.
四岁的孩子比成年人学得更快。
It seems fundamentally like a very different thing to me.
对我来说，这从根本上来说是一件非常不同的事情。
I think in some dimensions, it’s similar.
我认为在某些方面是相似的。
Probably in other dimensions, it’s not.
也许在其他维度，事实并非如此。
I know about that rule-based kid, but I also know the kid you sit down with, the four-year-old who spins out some imaginative tale of such implausibility and beauty.
我了解那个以规则为基础的孩子，但我也了解与你坐在一起的那个孩子，那个四岁的孩子，他编出了一些如此难以置信和美丽的富有想象力的故事。
It’s crazy talk, but it’s incredibly charming.
这是疯狂的谈话，但却非常迷人。
There’s that four-year-old, too.
还有那个四岁的孩子。
Maybe we shouldn’t be generalizing about four-year-olds.
也许我们不应该对四岁的孩子一概而论。
You’ve written that you tried some things earlier in your life.
你曾写道，你在生命的早期尝试过一些事情。
In Botany of Desire, you write about psychedelics.
在《欲望植物学》中，你写到了迷幻药。
You sound actually somewhat negative.
你听起来实际上有些消极。
You’ve come to the point you’re at now, which is quite different.
你已经到了现在的地步，这是完全不同的。
What is it you think you learned in between, putting aside anything having to do with actual experience?
撇开与实际经验有关的内容不谈，您认为您在这期间学到了什么？
Intellectually, what is it that got you from one point of view to the other?
从理智上来说，是什么让你从一种观点转向另一种观点？
I don’t know that I was anti psychedelic.
我不知道我是反迷幻剂的。
First of all, the chapter in Botany of Desire you’re referencing, I think, is mostly about cannabis, even though I quote Huxley.
首先，我认为你引用的《欲望植物学》中的章节主要是关于大麻的，尽管我引用了赫胥黎的话。
Yes.
是的。
This idea of a reducing valve, this idea that consciousness is about eliminating material rather than letting it in, all that I found very compelling — and the importance of wonder.
这种减压阀的想法，这种意识是消除物质而不是让它进入的想法，所有这些我都觉得非常引人注目——以及奇迹的重要性。
One of the things drugs can do is give you that, to go back to the sublime idea.
毒品可以做的事情之一就是让你回到崇高的想法。
But I have to say I was just afraid of them.
但我不得不说我只是害怕他们。
I was afraid of a big psychedelic experience.
我害怕一次巨大的迷幻体验。
I didn’t think I was mentally sturdy enough to endure it.
我认为我的心理素质不足以承受它。
So when I used mushrooms in my late 20s, it was pretty low dose.
所以当我二十多岁时使用蘑菇时，剂量相当低。
I wasn’t taking enough to really have an ego-dissolving experience.
我没有采取足够的措施来真正获得自我消解的体验。
I was afraid to do that.
我害怕这样做。
What changed is a couple things.
改变的是几件事。
One is getting older and that feeling like there was some work that could be done on my personality or my attitude toward things and an openness to trying and the confidence I got learning about these studies.
一个人随着年龄的增长，感觉自己的性格或对事物的态度、尝试的开放性以及学习这些研究的信心还可以做一些工作。
You have to remember I did a lot of research before I decided to try them myself.
你必须记住，在决定亲自尝试之前，我做了很多研究。
I wrote this piece for the New Yorker.
我为《纽约客》写了这篇文章。
It’s called “The Trip Treatment,” about the cancer-anxiety study.
它被称为“旅行治疗”，是关于癌症焦虑研究的。
I was meeting people like Roland Griffiths and Steve Ross and Tony Bossis.
我遇到了罗兰·格里菲斯、史蒂夫·罗斯和托尼·博西斯等人。
You know.
你知道。
You meet someone.
你遇到一个人。
You have some confidence that they have integrity.
你对他们的正直有一定的信心。
They’re honest.
他们很诚实。
They’re good scientists.
他们是优秀的科学家。
I was learning that it was not exactly what I thought.
我发现这并不完全是我想的那样。
There was a kind of seriousness to the whole process that I wasn’t aware of.
整个过程有一种我没有意识到的严肃性。
I think I gained a certain confidence from them and their work and their papers.
我想我从他们、他们的工作和论文中获得了一定的信心。
Then there was this: We haven’t really distinguished between a psychedelic trip and a guided psychedelic trip.
然后是这样的：我们还没有真正区分迷幻之旅和有导游的迷幻之旅。
They’re substantially different experiences.
它们是截然不同的体验。
When you are with a guide who’s preparing you very carefully, telling you what to do if things get frightening, is sitting with you during the entire duration, and then is helping you make sense of what you learned in an integration session — if you’re nervous about these drugs, as I was, that gives you a great deal of confidence.
当你的导游非常仔细地为你做准备，告诉你如果事情变得令人恐惧时该怎么做，在整个过程中一直陪在你身边，然后帮助你理解你在整合课程中学到的东西 ——如果你像我一样对这些药物感到紧张，这会给你很大的信心。
You’re not going to be alone.
你不会孤单。
There’s someone who really knows the territory well.
有人真正了解这个领域。
If you do freak out, they know what to tell you, and they know how to get you through that.
如果你真的吓坏了，他们知道该告诉你什么，也知道如何帮助你度过难关。
The psychedelic experience available to me in my 20s and the one available to me in my 50s and 60s was substantially different.
我在 20 多岁时获得的迷幻体验与我在 50 多岁和 60 多岁时获得的迷幻体验有很大不同。
Even though it’s the same molecule, I can’t emphasize enough what a fundamentally different experience it is.
尽管它是同一个分子，但我无法充分强调这是一种根本不同的体验。
Do you think psychoactive drugs affect people’s political views?
您认为精神药物会影响人们的政治观点吗？
Timothy Leary seemed to think they did.
蒂莫西·利里似乎认为他们做到了。
Nixon himself thought it made people into Commies or somehow not American.
尼克松本人认为这会让人们成为共产主义者，或者以某种方式不是美国人。
They ought to be drinking instead.
他们应该去喝酒。
That would make them more conservative.
这会让他们变得更加保守。
COWEN: What is your opinion?
考恩：你有什么看法？
I think it’s really an interesting area to explore.
我认为这确实是一个值得探索的有趣领域。
There’s some preliminary research that suggests that it might have a political impact.
有一些初步研究表明它可能会产生政治影响。
Robin Carhart-Harris, the neuroscientist at Imperial College who I profile in the book, raises the question, does LSD create hippies or do hippies create LSD?
我在书中介绍的帝国理工学院神经科学家罗宾·卡哈特-哈里斯 (Robin Carhart-Harris) 提出了这样一个问题：LSD 造就了嬉皮士，还是嬉皮士创造了 LSD？
He thinks LSD might create hippies.
他认为LSD可能会创造嬉皮士。
He’s worked with it quite a bit.
他在这方面做了很多工作。
The thinking is that there’s something fundamentally antihierarchical about it.
人们的想法是，它本质上是反等级制度的。
It makes you question things.
它让你质疑事物。
Since you’re having an unmediated experience of some sort of possibly divine authority or some other kind of authority, you’re very suspicious of priests of all kinds, people who mediate authority for us.
由于你对某种可能是神圣权威或其他类型的权威有一种未经中介的体验，因此你对各种牧师和为我们中介权威的人非常怀疑。
This is his theory.
这是他的理论。
Leary did say the kids who take LSD aren’t going to fight your wars, and they aren’t going to join your corporations.
利里确实说过，服用LSD的孩子不会参加你们的战争，也不会加入你们的公司。
And indeed, a lot of people who took LSD did drop out.
事实上，很多服用 LSD 的人确实退出了。
Is that cause and effect?
这就是因果吗？
Doesn’t that also mean they’re not radical?
这是否也意味着他们并不激进？
If they’re not going to fight Nixon’s wars, maybe they’re not going to fight other wars either.
如果他们不打算参加尼克松的战争，也许他们也不会参加其他战争。
They’re not going to fight civil wars.
他们不会打内战。
They’re not going to fight as much for social justice.
他们不会为社会正义而奋斗。
Is it part of a new bread-and-circuses equilibrium?
这是新的面包和马戏平衡的一部分吗？
It could be.
可能是。
“Does it depoliticize people?” would be an interesting question.
“这会让人们非政治化吗？”将是一个有趣的问题。
You can ask that of all contemplative practice.
你可以对所有的冥想练习提出这样的要求。
People who meditate become Buddhists, who become so enlightened that they’re less dissatisfied with the world as it is.
冥想的人会成为佛教徒，他们会变得如此开明，对世界的现状不再那么不满。
I think that’s a risk definitely of contemplative practices of all kinds.
我认为这绝对是各种冥想实践的风险。
But going back to the political question, too, the other issue is the attitude toward the environment.
但回到政治问题，另一个问题是对环境的态度。
He has done a study — you can tell me, better than I can judge, whether it has any merit or weight — measuring something called nature relatedness, which is a scale that psychologists use.
他做了一项研究——“你可以告诉我，比我判断的更好，它是否有任何优点或分量”——测量一种叫做自然相关性的东西，这是心理学家使用的一个量表。
How much do you feel a part of nature or stand apart from it?
您在多大程度上感受到自己是自然的一部分或与自然分离？
Before and after psychedelics, nature relatedness scores go up.
在服用迷幻药之前和之后，自然相关性得分都会上升。
I think what might be going on is that the kinds of powerful connections that people feel, whether to other people, love, or to nature, on psychedelics may be the result of the lowering of ego defenses that wall us off from other people.
我认为可能发生的情况是，人们在迷幻药上感受到的那种强大的联系，无论是与他人、爱还是与自然的联系，可能是自我防御降低的结果，这种自我防御将我们与他人隔离开来。
That’s why I do think that, to the extent our big problems, in my view, are the environmental crisis and tribalism right now.
这就是为什么我确实认为，在我看来，我们目前的大问题是环境危机和部落主义。
Psychedelics, the experience of it, the anecdotal reports of it, and some of this light science about it suggest that they address both those things, which I think is interesting and may explain why there is such interest in it right now.
迷幻药、它的体验、它的轶事报告以及一些关于它的轻科学表明它们解决了这两件事，我认为这很有趣，并且可以解释为什么现在人们对它如此感兴趣。
I also am very alert to the possibility that psychedelic experience is completely constructed and that in the ’60s, because of other things that were going on, it tended to increase anti-authoritarian feeling.
我也非常警惕迷幻体验完全被构建的可能性，而在 60 年代，由于其他事情的发生，它往往会增加反独裁的感觉。
It’s equally plausible to me that these drugs could be brainwashing agents.
对我来说，这些药物可能是洗脑剂也同样合理。
That was certainly how Charlie Manson used them.
查理曼森当然就是这样使用它们的。
He used them to keep his posse in line.
他用它们来让他的队伍保持整齐划一。
I don’t know exactly how or what he told them.
我不知道他具体是如何告诉他们的或告诉他们什么。
The CIA thought it could be a mind-control agent for a long time.
中央情报局长期以来认为它可能是一个精神控制特工。
The fundamental fact that these drugs are so suggestible in their effects, that set and setting so heavily influence the experience, if you took it in the context of a cult, if you took it in the context of someone trying to change your thinking, it might work.
基本事实是，这些药物的作用非常容易受到暗示，其设定和环境会严重影响体验，如果你在邪教的背景下服用它，如果你在有人试图改变你的想法的背景下服用它，它可能会起作用。
So it increases the power of those who control the context and the environment perhaps.
因此，它可能会增加那些控制背景和环境的人的权力。
Yeah.
是的。
We have this interesting situation where the American researchers who tend to have a somewhat spiritual orientation — Roland Griffiths got into this work because he was a practicing Hindu and had a mystical experience — it draws people with a spiritual orientation in America, which is a more religious country than England.
我们遇到了这样一个有趣的情况，美国研究人员往往有某种精神取向——“罗兰·格里菲斯（Roland Griffiths）进入这项工作，因为他是一名虔诚的印度教徒，并且有过神秘的经历”——它吸引了美国有精神取向的人，而美国是一个比英国更宗教化的国家。
In England, they don’t see so much mystical experience as they do here in their results.
在英格兰，他们在结果中看到的神秘体验并不像这里那么多。
There’s a very strong cultural component.
有非常强大的文化成分。
There’s this phenomenon where the theoretical orientation of the therapist administering the drug is reflected in the kind of imagery people have.
在这种现象中，治疗师服用药物的理论取向反映在人们的想象中。
If a Jungian therapist gives you psychedelics, you’re going to see archetypes.
如果荣格治疗师给你迷幻药，你就会看到原型。
All of which is to say, I could argue both sides, that in many ways, there does seem to be certain consistency.
所有这些都表明，我可以向双方争论，在很多方面，似乎确实存在一定的一致性。
Unless we’ve done real cross-cultural work and given LSD to people who live in a very different world or for a very different purpose than healing people .
除非我们做了真正的跨文化工作，并向那些生活在完全不同的世界或出于与治愈人们完全不同的目的的人提供LSD。
.
。
.
。
Maybe the CIA found a powerful tool.
也许中央情报局找到了一个强大的工具。
They just haven’t told us.
他们只是没有告诉我们。
I don’t know.
我不知道。
I have an open mind about that.
我对此持开放态度。
I told you my openness was increased.
我告诉过你我的开放性增加了。
COWEN: The proper balance between nature and culture — it’s a running theme in many of your books, arguably all of your books.
考恩：自然与文化之间的适当平衡——这是您许多书中（可以说是所有书中）的一个贯穿主题。
After this most recent book, you have not explicitly re-addressed that general theme again.
在这本最新的书之后，您没有再次明确地重新讨论这个总体主题。
Is there anything you would add to your overall take on the proper balance between nature and culture now that you are more open and have learned more about psychedelics?
既然您更加开放并且对迷幻剂有了更多了解，您对自然与文化之间适当平衡的整体看法有什么要补充的吗？
One of the things that got me into this is this abiding interest in nature and our engagement with the natural world.
让我进入这个领域的原因之一是对自然的持久兴趣以及我们与自然世界的接触。
Part of that engagement, for as long as we’ve been around, has been using plants and fungi to change consciousness.
自从我们存在以来，这种参与的一部分就是利用植物和真菌来改变意识。
I’m really interested in that desire and why it should be adaptive, if indeed it is.
我真的对这种渴望以及为什么它应该具有适应性（如果确实如此）感兴趣。
I’ve always played with this idea that what is this duality about?
我一直在思考这种二元性到底是什么？
How could culture be an opposite term for nature?
文化怎么可能是自然的反义词呢？
We are nature too, but we don’t feel like we are.
我们也是自然，但我们并不觉得自己是自然。
I had an experience that I describe in the book, an unguided trip, where I felt a connection with nature that I’d never felt before.
我在书中描述了一次无导游的旅行，在那里我感受到了与大自然的联系，这是我以前从未感受过的。
And I have toyed around with the conceit that plants manipulate us even as we manipulate them.
我也曾幻想过植物也能操纵我们，就像我们操纵它们一样。
Plants are evil, right?
植物是邪恶的，对吗？
They just grow.
他们只是成长。
They take things over.
他们接管事情。
That doesn’t make them evil!
这并不意味着他们是邪恶的！
COWEN: They’re worse than carnivores in a way.
COWEN：在某种程度上，它们比食肉动物更糟糕。
They’re more unthinking.
他们更不假思索。
You come from the land of kudzu, don’t you?
你是从葛之乡来的吧？
COWEN: I do.
考恩：我愿意。
Whatever space I felt between myself as someone operating in nature but not quite feeling of nature closed down on this experience.
作为一个在大自然中活动的人，我感受到的任何空间，但不完全是大自然的感觉，都在这种体验中关闭。
I had an experience of feeling like one among the plants in my garden, that I had a sense that they had a benign affect toward me, and that we were all in this garden together in this really profound way.
我有一种感觉，感觉自己就像花园里的植物中的一员，我感觉到它们对我有一种良性的影响，而且我们都以这种非常深刻的方式一起在这个花园里。
For me, the nature-culture divide completely closed down for a period of time.
对我来说，自然与文化的鸿沟在一段时间内完全消失了。
Is this illusory?
这是虚幻的吗？
What’s the status of that experience?
该体验的状态如何？
I can’t tell you.
我不能告诉你。
I’m always alert.
我始终保持警惕。
Nature is my big subject as a writer.
作为一名作家，自然是我的一大主题。
I’m just endlessly fascinated by it and our attitudes toward it and the complexity of this relationship that we’re in with other species.
我对它、我们对它的态度以及我们与其他物种之间关系的复杂性深深着迷。
Here was this mushroom with the power to change what was going on in my mind in a profound way, change my attitude toward it and other plants.
这种蘑菇有能力深刻地改变我的想法，改变我对它和其他植物的态度。
It’s not a plant.
它不是植物。
It’s a fungi.
这是一种真菌。
I think that’s really interesting.
我认为这真的很有趣。
There are people who go further and say that these molecules are bringing us a message from nature.
有人更进一步说，这些分子正在给我们带来来自大自然的信息。
I think that’s fanciful notion.
我认为这是一个异想天开的想法。
But the fact that these plants and fungi would fundamentally change one’s sense of the natural world .
但事实上，这些植物和真菌将从根本上改变人们对自然世界的感知。
.
。
.
。
To the extent we objectify nature, we can extract from it, we can exploit it, we can do lots of negative things to it.
当我们将自然客观化时，我们就可以从中提取，我们可以利用它，我们可以对它做很多负面的事情。
We can put animals in tiny little crates, have brutal animal agriculture because we’ve objectified it.
我们可以将动物放在很小的板条箱中，进行残酷的动物农业，因为我们已经将其物化。
If you have an experience that doesn’t allow you to objectify it and suddenly you realize, “Oh my God, there are multiple subjectivities in nature.
如果你有一种不允许你客观化的经历，你会突然意识到，“天哪，自然界中有多种主观性。
Consciousness is spread more democratically than I thought,” I think it makes it harder to do that.
意识的传播比我想象的更加民主。”我认为这使得做到这一点变得更加困难。
On food
关于食物
A few questions about food.
关于食物的几个问题。
Where is the second-best place to eat in Berkeley?
伯克利第二好的吃饭地点是哪里？
I would recommend a place on Fourth Street called Iyasare, which is a Japanese fusion restaurant.
我推荐第四街上一家叫Iyasare的地方，这是一家日本融合餐厅。
It’s excellent.
太棒了。
I wouldn’t overlook Chez Panisse Cafe, which is less formal, and you can choose what you want.
我不会忽视Chez Panisse Cafe，它不那么正式，你可以选择你想要的。
It’s consistently very good.
它一直非常好。
I would have to put that number one.
我必须把这个放在第一位。
There’s a wonderful sushi restaurant called Kamado Sushi right in the Gourmet Ghetto that I highly recommend — reasonably priced, informal, and excellent for lunch or dinner.
在美食区有一家很棒的寿司店，叫做 Kamado Sushi，我强烈推荐它——价格合理，非正式，非常适合午餐或晚餐。
We’re blessed with many eating possibilities.
我们很幸运有很多饮食的可能性。
Or you could come to my house.
或者你可以来我家。
The world probably needs to double its production of food to feed what is still, for now, a growing population.
世界可能需要将粮食产量增加一倍才能养活目前仍在增长的人口。
How well do you think that process will go?
您认为这个过程进展如何？
The feed-the-world issue is a very complicated one.
养活世界的问题是一个非常复杂的问题。
Is it true we need to double production?
我们真的需要将产量翻倍吗？
There are other ways to address the growing need for more food, and one is to change diets.
还有其他方法可以满足对更多食物日益增长的需求，其中之一就是改变饮食习惯。
One of the assumptions in these questions, as they’re usually framed, is we’re stuck with the Western diet, that the world wants to eat as much meat as we do.
这些问题的假设之一，正如它们通常被提出的那样，是我们坚持西方饮食，即世界希望和我们一样多吃肉。
We have to assume that this is the baseline we have to deal with.
我们必须假设这是我们必须处理的基线。
How do we give a Western diet to everybody who wants it?
我们如何为每个想要的人提供西方饮食？
I don’t think we’ll be able to.
我认为我们做不到。
That’ll get messy.
那会变得混乱。
There’s not enough .
还不够。
.
。
.
。
We can’t provide meat to the Chinese at the rates we provide it to ourselves.
我们无法按照我们向自己提供肉类的价格向中国人提供肉类。
Why should they not have it if we have it?
如果我们有的话，为什么他们不应该有呢？
If you look at the output of food, a whole lot of it is not being eaten by people.
如果你看看食物的产量，就会发现很多食物都没有被人们吃掉。
A huge amount is being fed to animals for both milk production and meat production.
大量的饲料被喂给动物用于产奶和产肉。
If you’re willing to address that and charge the real price for meat without all the externalities that we tolerate in meat production, if you’re willing to take some of that grain and not feed it to cars, which doesn’t make sense — ethanol is just a terrible use of grain — you don’t have to double food production.
如果你愿意解决这个问题，并在没有我们在肉类生产中容忍的所有外部性的情况下收取肉类的实际价格，如果你愿意拿走一些谷物而不把它喂给汽车，这是没有意义的 ——“乙醇只是对谷物的一种可怕的利用”—— 你不必将粮食产量翻倍。
We can’t double the land.
我们不能把土地翻倍。
Yes, we have to achieve more efficiency, but we have to do it in a way that doesn’t destroy the soil, which we’re in danger of doing right now.
是的，我们必须提高效率，但我们必须以不破坏土壤的方式做到这一点，而我们现在正面临这样做的危险。
What I’m suggesting is that this whole question is not just a matter of production.
我的建议是，整个问题不仅仅是生产问题。
It’s a matter of distribution, and it’s a matter of what kind of food are we growing.
这是一个分配问题，也是一个我们种植什么样的食物的问题。
We have this limited land base, arable soil.
我们的土地基础、耕地是有限的。
We can’t expand it dramatically.
我们无法大幅扩展它。
So what is the most efficient way to use it?
那么最有效的使用方法是什么？
Not by pounds of grain or bushels of grain but by food that humans need to eat.
不是按磅数或蒲式耳谷物计算，而是按人类需要吃的食物计算。
Frances Moore Lappè made this point back in 1970.
Frances Moore Lappè 早在 1970 年就提出了这一点。
There’s going to be a reckoning.
将会有一个清算。
I don’t think it’s going to be a smooth, linear .
我不认为这会是一个平滑的、线性的。
.
。
.
。
Are we going to have breakthroughs in yield due to GMOs and things like that?
由于转基因生物和类似的事情，我们的产量会取得突破吗？
One of the most striking things about GMOs has been how little they’ve accomplished since they were introduced in 1996.
转基因生物最引人注目的事情之一是，自 1996 年推出以来，它们所取得的成就是多么有限。
They’re still selling herbicide-tolerant crops that don’t increase yield, that have a yield drag, and Bt crops that arguably have a slight yield gain.
他们仍在销售不增加产量且会拖累产量的耐除草剂作物，以及可以说产量略有增加的 Bt 作物。
That was supposed to be the magic bullet for yield, and it’s just not what GMOs do.
这本应是提高产量的灵丹妙药，但转基因生物却不是这么做的。
Will CRISPR be able to do it?
CRISPR能做到这一点吗？
Maybe.
或许。
The dream has been, could we increase the efficiency of photosynthesis?
我们的梦想是，我们能否提高光合作用的效率？
Very complicated problem.
非常复杂的问题。
That might change the game.
这可能会改变游戏规则。
Our more efficient plants, what’s their relationship to the soil going to be?
我们效率更高的植物，它们与土壤的关系如何？
Are they going to need more nutrients?
他们需要更多的营养吗？
Fertilizer’s another limit.
肥料是另一个限制。
We could do a whole hour on this.
我们可以花整整一个小时来解决这个问题。
On GMOs and trade in agriculture
关于转基因生物和农业贸易
Last piece of yours I read on GMOs was from 2012, New York Times.
我读到的关于转基因生物的最后一篇文章是 2012 年的《纽约时报》。
You seem to call for mandatory labeling.
您似乎呼吁强制贴标签。
Where are you now on GMOs?
您现在对转基因生物的态度如何？
What’s the revised Michael Pollan view, if it’s changed at all?
如果迈克尔·波伦的观点有任何改变的话，修订后的观点是什么？
I’ve been a critic of GMOs since 1998.
自 1998 年以来，我一直是转基因生物的批评者。
I think I wrote my first piece about it.
我想我写了第一篇关于它的文章。
My criticisms involved the environmental implications of them and the political implications, the fact that GMOs lead to control of the seed supply by a very small number of companies.
我的批评涉及它们的环境影响和政治影响，事实上转基因生物导致极少数公司控制种子供应。
They’ve led to great consolidation of the seed industry, which I think is really unfortunate.
它们导致了种子行业的巨大整合，我认为这确实很不幸。
They’ve failed in their promises.
他们没有兑现自己的承诺。
They were sold to us as a more sustainable way to grow food.
它们被卖给我们作为一种更可持续的粮食种植方式。
As it turns out, we’ve had huge increases in application of pesticides — Roundup, glyphosate in particular — since Monsanto chose to use its technology mostly on herbicide tolerance.
事实证明，自从孟山都选择将其技术主要用于除草剂耐受性以来，我们的农药使用量大幅增加——“农达，特别是草甘膦”。
That’s just not the most creative use of this technology.
这并不是这项技术最具创造性的用途。
My basic take on GMOs is they’ve been a hype and a disappointing hype so far.
我对转基因生物的基本看法是，到目前为止，它们一直是一种炒作，而且是令人失望的炒作。
But you think they’re safe.
但你认为他们是安全的。
I don’t have reason to believe they’re dangerous.
我没有理由相信它们是危险的。
It’s not quite saying the same thing.
这并不完全是同一件事。
I haven’t looked at the food-safety question recently, but I don’t think that’s the primary objection I have to them.
我最近没有研究过食品安全问题，但我不认为这是我对他们的主要反对意见。
It’s not a food-safety argument.
这不是食品安全争论。
The way they were tested at the beginning was really slipshod.
他们一开始的测试方式确实很马虎。
I think that they were given a pass on real testing and regulation.
我认为他们已经通过了真正的测试和监管。
People assume that lots of GMOs were fed to lots of rats and they were proven to be safe, but that’s not what happened.
人们认为大量的转基因生物被喂给了很多老鼠，并且它们被证明是安全的，但事实并非如此。
GMOs were given to cells in test tubes to see if they prompted an allergic reaction.
转基因生物被注入试管中的细胞中，以观察它们是否会引起过敏反应。
It was a really slipshod testing process.
这是一个非常马虎的测试过程。
No big problems that I’m aware of have emerged.
据我所知，没有出现什么大问题。
There are real questions about glyphosate though.
不过，关于草甘膦确实存在一些问题。
You can’t just take the seed in isolation and say, “OK, the soybean produced by this GMO seed is safe.”
你不能只是孤立地看待种子并说：“好吧，这种转基因种子生产的大豆是安全的。”
What about the fact that it’s got high levels of glyphosate in it now because of so much glyphosate being sprayed?
由于喷洒了如此多的草甘膦，现在里面的草甘膦含量很高，这又如何呢？
Do we have to look at the food safety of that, too, when we’re talking about GMOs?
当我们谈论转基因生物时，我们是否也必须考虑其食品安全？
It’s a package.
这是一个包裹。
It’s sold as a package, and it should be judged as a package.
是包装卖的，应该按包装来判断。
In the past, you’ve been critical of free trade in agriculture.
过去，您一直批评农业自由贸易。
Today, we live in an era of rising protectionism.
今天，我们生活在一个保护主义抬头的时代。
Does free trade look better to you now?
您现在看起来自由贸易更好吗？
Or what’s your current take on free trade in agriculture?
或者您目前对农业自由贸易有何看法？
The question is not free trade or not free trade.
问题不是自由贸易还是不自由贸易。
It’s really, was it really free trade when we were dumping heavily subsidized crops on Mexico and other countries?
当我们向墨西哥和其他国家倾销大量补贴的农作物时，这真的是自由贸易吗？
Is that free trade when it’s subsidized?
有补贴的情况下是自由贸易吗？
I don’t know.
我不知道。
Is it?
是吗？
You know better than I.
你比我更清楚。
You’re an economist.
你是一位经济学家。
Most of the subsidies go to just a few crops, right?
大部分补贴只用于少数农作物，对吧？
Yeah.
是的。
Some of those are price supports rather than dumping.
其中一些是价格支持而不是倾销。
Yes.
是的。
Now, crop insurance is the way we subsidize most of it.
现在，农作物保险是我们补贴大部分的方式。
We’ve changed it.
我们已经改变了它。
We’re cutting less checks directly to farmers per bushel of corn and soy, and we’re giving crop insurance favorably to certain crops.
我们减少了对农民每蒲式耳玉米和大豆的直接支票，并且我们对某些作物提供优惠的作物保险。
But the net result is that Americans can sell at various times — not all the time — can sell corn and soy overseas for a price lower than the actual cost of production.
但最终的结果是，美国人可以在不同的时间——“不是一直”——以低于实际生产成本的价格向海外出售玉米和大豆。
If it’s free trade, it’s unfair trade.
如果是自由贸易，那就是不公平贸易。
On second books
关于第二本书
In your second book, called A Place of My Own: The Architecture of Daydreams, you argue that a writer’s second book is the key to understanding that writer.
在你的第二本书《我自己的地方：白日梦的建筑》中，你认为作家的第二本书是理解该作家的关键。
COWEN: Given where you now are today, do you still think that’s true?
COWEN：考虑到你现在的处境，你仍然认为这是真的吗？
How would you explain yourself in terms of your second book?
您如何在第二本书中解释自己？
Yeah, I do think it’s true.
是的，我确实认为这是真的。
My first book was all about nature, and I used what was happening in my garden as a place to explore these nature-culture questions we were just talking about.
我的第一本书都是关于自然的，我利用花园里发生的事情来探索我们刚才谈论的这些自然文化问题。
Then I thought, “Well, I’m done with that.
然后我想：“好吧，我已经完成了。
I’m a writer.
我是一名作家。
What am I interested in now?
我现在对什么感兴趣？
Maybe I’ll look at architecture.
也许我会看看建筑。
Maybe at some point, I’ll look at computers, I don’t know, technology.” I was just a freelance writer.
也许在某个时候，我会看看计算机，我不知道，科技。”我只是一个自由作家。
In the course of writing that second book, which I thought was such a departure, I kept veering back to the nature questions in architecture.
在写第二本书的过程中（我认为这是一个背离），我不断回到建筑中的自然问题。
To what extent does nature dictate the way we build?
自然在多大程度上决定了我们的建造方式？
Or should it dictate the way we build?
或者它应该决定我们的构建方式？
What about the wood?
木头呢？
What about these materials?
这些材料呢？
What about this relationship to the earth and the foundation?
与大地和地基的关系又如何呢？
I was really torn because I thought, “God, are you repeating yourself?
我真的很伤心，因为我想：“天哪，你是在重复自己的话吗？
Why are you going back to these nature questions?” Then at a certain point, I realized those are just my questions.
你为什么要回到这些自然问题呢？”然后在某个时刻，我意识到这些只是我的问题。
Every writer has a set of final questions that all their work, if you keep going, will come back to that.
每个作家都有一组最终问题，如果你继续下去，他们的所有作品都会回到这个问题。
Every writer has a set of final questions that all their work, if you keep going, will come back to.
每个作家都有一组最终问题，如果你继续下去，他们的所有作品都会回到这些问题。
It might be Michael Lewis, he’s really interested in success.
可能是迈克尔·刘易斯，他对成功非常感兴趣。
Some people are interested in love.
有些人对爱情感兴趣。
Some people are interested in power and money.
有些人对权力和金钱感兴趣。
They’re these big, big topics.
它们是非常非常大的话题。
That’s when you discover your final questions, in the second book — the struggles, the horrors of trying to complete a second book.
就在那时，你发现了第二本书中的最后一个问题——尝试完成第二本书的挣扎和恐惧。
Then you let go.
然后你就放手了。
You realize, “OK, I’m interested in nature and God.” I still am.
你意识到，“好吧，我对自然和上帝感兴趣。”我仍然是。
Nature’s a big element in how to change your mind.
自然是如何改变你的想法的一个重要因素。
On the Michael Pollan production function
关于迈克尔·波伦生产函数
Last barrage of questions are about what I call the Michael Pollan production function.
最后一连串的问题是关于我所说的迈克尔·波伦生产函数的。
COWEN: You’ve been highly productive.
COWEN：你的工作效率很高。
Are there things you think you know about productivity that maybe other people undervalue that you could instruct us with?
是否有一些您认为您了解的关于生产力的知识可能被其他人低估，您可以指导我们？
I thank you for thinking I’m so productive, but my last book was five years ago.
我感谢您认为我如此高效，但我的上一本书是五年前的。
Other people can produce a book every year or two.
其他人每一两年就能出一本书。
I don’t know if I’m that productive.
我不知道我是否有那么高效。
Per copy sold and per thought stimulated, you’re highly productive.
每卖出一本，每激发一个想法，你的生产力就会很高。
COWEN: Both metrics, I should add, are important.
COWEN：我应该补充一点，这两个指标都很重要。
I’ve been very fortunate in my writing career on many dimensions.
在我的写作生涯中，我在很多方面都非常幸运。
One is the editing I’ve gotten.
其中之一是我得到的编辑。
I don’t write in isolation.
我不会孤立地写作。
I have a brilliant book editor, both in New York and in my house.
我在纽约和我家里都有一位出色的图书编辑。
My wife reads every sentence before it leaves the house.
我妻子在离开家之前读了每句话。
Not my emails and stuff, God forbid, but any kind of book or thing for publication.
不是我的电子邮件之类的东西，上帝禁止，而是任何类型的出版书籍或东西。
Not only is she a really good reader, she doesn’t read a lot of nonfiction.
她不仅是一位非常好的读者，而且她读的非小说类书籍也不多。
She reads fiction, so she’s used to a higher prose quality than your average nonfiction writer.
她读小说，所以她习惯了比一般非小说作家更高的散文质量。
She edits everything, but she also keeps me from publishing really stupid things.
她编辑所有内容，但她也阻止我发表真正愚蠢的东西。
Then I have a wonderful book editor in New York, Ann Godoff, who has been really supportive, even when I’ve changed direction.
我在纽约有一位出色的图书编辑安·戈多夫（Ann Godoff），即使我改变了方向，她也一直非常支持我。
To me, writing’s a very isolating, solitary pursuit, but if you’ve got a really good sounding board, you’re not going to go as deep down those unproductive rabbit holes as you might otherwise.
对我来说，写作是一种非常孤立、孤独的追求，但如果你有一个非常好的参谋，你就不会像其他人那样深入那些毫无成效的兔子洞。
I’ve been saved from that at various key moments.
我在各个关键时刻都摆脱了这种困境。
The other is just routine.
另一个只是例行公事。
You have a routine.
你有一个惯例。
I have a routine.
我有一个惯例。
And you stick to it.
你坚持下去。
I do, and that these mornings I write, and I write from this time to that time.
我确实这么做了，这些早上我都在写，从这个时候写到那个时候。
Even if it’s hard, I don’t give up.
即使很难，我也不会放弃。
I’ll produce some crap that day, but I’m going to sit there and do it till lunchtime.
那天我会产生一些废话，但我会坐在那里直到午餐时间。
I just stick to my routine.
我只是坚持我的常规。
Then I print out the pages I wrote that day — I waste a lot of paper, unfortunately — and I begin my day editing what I wrote the day before.
然后我打印出当天写的页面 ——不幸的是，我浪费了很多纸张 ——然后我开始编辑前一天写的内容。
I’m editing constantly.
我不断地编辑。
I started as an editor and became a writer, so I have very much of an editor’s perspective.
我从一名编辑开始，后来成为一名作家，所以我非常有编辑的视角。
I spend more time probably editing than I do writing.
我花在编辑上的时间可能比写作还要多。
Mornings I write, and I write from this time to that time.
早上我写作，从这个时候写到那个时候。
Even if it’s hard, I don’t give up.
即使很难，我也不会放弃。
I’ll produce some crap that day, but I’m going to sit there and do it till lunchtime.
那天我会产生一些废话，但我会坐在那里直到午餐时间。
I just stick to my routine.
我只是坚持我的常规。
Then I print out the pages I wrote that day — I waste a lot of paper, unfortunately — and I begin my day editing what I wrote the day before.
然后我打印出当天写的页面 ——不幸的是，我浪费了很多纸张 ——然后我开始编辑前一天写的内容。
Final question.
最后一个问题。
Let’s say a young person comes to you and says, “I want to be the next Michael Pollan, not exactly a duplicate of what you do but some version of what that will be 30 years from now.” Other than marry well, have great editors, and have a routine .
假设一个年轻人来找你说：“我想成为下一个迈克尔·波伦，不是完全复制你所做的事情，而是 30 年后的某个版本。”除了嫁得好之外，还有优秀的编辑，还有生活习惯。
.
。
.
。
Be lucky.
祝你幸运。
What skill do you tell them to invest in?
你告诉他们要投资什么技能？
I tell them to read a lot.
我告诉他们要多读书。
I’m amazed how many writing students don’t read.
我很惊讶有这么多写作的学生不读书。
It’s criminal.
这是犯罪行为。
Also, read better writers than you are.
另外，阅读比你更好的作家的作品。
In other words, read great fiction.
换句话说，阅读伟大的小说。
Cultivate your ear.
培养你的耳朵。
Writing is a form of music, and we don’t pay enough attention to that.
写作是音乐的一种形式，我们对此没有给予足够的重视。
When I’m drafting, there’s a period where I’m reading lots of research, and scientific articles, and history, and undistinguished prose, but as soon as I’m done with that and I’ve started drafting a chapter or an article, I stop reading that kind of stuff.
当我起草的时候，有一段时间我会阅读大量的研究、科学文章、历史和平庸的散文，但一旦我完成了这些，并且我开始起草一个章节或一篇文章，我就停止阅读这类东西。
Before I go to bed, I read a novel every night.
我每天晚上睡觉前都会读一本小说。
I read several pages of really good fiction.
我读了几页非常好的小说。
That’s because you do a lot of work in your sleep, and I want my brain to be in a rhythm of good prose.
那是因为你在睡眠中做了很多工作，而我希望我的大脑处于良好散文的节奏中。
Very last question.
最后一个问题。
Recommend a novel to us, maybe your favorite, but just something people ought to read.
向我们推荐一本小说，也许是你最喜欢的，但只是人们应该读的东西。
I just finished a wonderful book called Go, Went, Gone by a German writer named Jenny Erpenbeck.
我刚刚读完一本精彩的书，书名叫《Go, Went, Gone》，作者是一位名叫 Jenny Erpenbeck 的德国作家。
I hope I’m pronouncing that correctly.
我希望我的发音是正确的。
Yes.
是的。
It’s about the refugee crisis.
这是关于难民危机的。
It’s a very contemporary book, set in Germany since Angela Merkel has let in lots of refugees, and the culture’s struggling with that.
这是一本非常现代的书，背景设定在德国，因为安格拉·默克尔(Angela Merkel)接纳了大量难民，而德国文化正为此而苦苦挣扎。
I think she does a beautiful job reminding us who’s behind these statistics and these strangers in our town squares.
我认为她做得很好，提醒我们谁是这些统计数据的幕后黑手，以及我们城镇广场上的这些陌生人。
That’s really how the book begins, a retired professor trying to come to terms with who are these people.
这就是这本书的开头，一位退休教授试图了解这些人是谁。
He gets deeper and deeper into that world.
他越来越深入那个世界。
Beautifully written, very well controlled writer, and it does what fiction should do, which is expand the circle of your sympathy and empathy.
作者文笔优美，控制得很好，它做到了小说应该做的事情，那就是扩大你的同情心和同理心。
Michael Pollan, thank you very much.
迈克尔·波伦，非常感谢你。
Thank you, Tyler.
谢谢你，泰勒。
It was a great pleasure.
这是一种极大的乐趣。