Dr. Kay Tye: The Biology of Social Interactions and Emotions
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Welcome to the Huberman Lab podcast, where we discuss science and science-based tools for everyday life.
欢迎来到休伯曼实验室播客，我们在这里讨论科学和基于科学的日常生活工具。
I'm Andrew Huberman, and I'm a professor of neurobiology and ophthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine.
我是安德鲁·胡伯曼，斯坦福大学医学院神经生物学和眼科教授。
My guest today is Dr. Kay Tye.
今天我的嘉宾是 Kay Tye 博士。
Dr. Kay Tye is a professor of neuroscience at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies.
凯·泰博士是索尔克生物研究所的神经科学教授。
She did her training at MIT and at Stanford, and is currently an investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, which is a highly curated group of individuals who are incentivized to do high-risk, high-reward work, and pioneer new areas of biological study.
她在麻省理工学院和斯坦福大学接受过培训，目前是霍华德休斯医学研究所的一名研究员，该研究所是一个精心策划的团队，由激励从事高风险、高回报工作和开拓生物学研究新领域的个人组成。
Throughout her career, Dr. Kay Tye has made fundamental breakthroughs into our understanding of the brain, including demonstrating that a brain area called the amygdala, which most people associate with fear and threat detection, is actually involved in reinforcement of behaviors and experiences that are positive and involve reward.
在凯·泰博士的整个职业生涯中，她在我们对大脑的理解上取得了根本性突破，包括证明了一个名为杏仁核的大脑区域（大多数人将其与恐惧和威胁检测联系在一起）实际上参与了积极且涉及奖励的行为和体验的强化。
Her current work focuses on various aspects of social interaction, including what happens when we feel lonely or isolated.
她目前的工作重点是社交互动的各个方面，包括当我们感到孤独或孤立时会发生什么。
Indeed, today, Kay Tye will tell us about her discovery of so-called loneliness neurons, neurons that give us that sense that we are not being fulfilled from our social interactions.
事实上，今天，凯·泰伊将告诉我们她对所谓的孤独神经元的发现，这些神经元让我们感觉我们没有从社交互动中获得满足。
She also describes a phenomenon she discovered called social homeostasis, which is our sense that we are experiencing enough, not enough, or just enough social interaction irrespective of whether or not we are an introvert or an extrovert.
她还描述了她发现的一种称为社会稳态的现象，即我们感觉自己正在经历足够、不足或刚刚足够的社交互动，无论我们是内向还是外向。
We also talk about social hierarchies and social rank, how people and animals tier out into so-called alphas and betas, subordinates and dominants, et cetera, in all sorts of social interactions.
我们还讨论社会等级制度和社会等级，以及人和动物在各种社会互动中如何划分为所谓的阿尔法和贝塔、从属和统治者等等。
I think everyone will find that discussion especially interesting.
我想大家都会觉得这个讨论特别有趣。
And we talk about the role of social media and online interactions, and why despite extensive interaction with many, many individuals, those social media and online interactions can often leave us feeling deprived in specific ways.
我们讨论了社交媒体和在线互动的作用，以及为什么尽管与许多人进行了广泛的互动，但这些社交媒体和在线互动常常会让我们在特定方面感到被剥夺。
We talk about the neurochemical, the neural circuit, and some of the hormonal aspects of social interactions.
我们讨论神经化学物质、神经回路以及社交互动的一些荷尔蒙方面。
It's a discussion that by the end will have you thinking far more deeply about what is a social interaction, and why certain social interactions leave us feeling so good, others feeling sort of meh, and why other social interactions or lack of social interactions can often leave us feeling quite depleted, even depressed.
这个讨论最终会让你更深入地思考什么是社交互动，为什么某些社交互动让我们感觉如此良好，而另一些社交互动让我们感觉有些无聊，以及为什么其他社交互动或缺乏社交互动常常会让我们感到非常疲惫，甚至沮丧。
It's a conversation central to mental illness and the understanding of things like depression and anxiety, PTSD, and isolation, and it's a conversation central to mental health, and in order to build healthy social interactions.
这是一场关于精神疾病以及对抑郁和焦虑、创伤后应激障碍和孤立等问题的理解的核心对话，也是一场关于心理健康的核心对话，也是为了建立健康的社交互动。
Before we begin, I'd like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching and research roles at Stanford.
在开始之前，我想强调一下，这个播客与我在斯坦福大学的教学和研究角色是分开的。
It is, however, part of my desire and effort to bring zero cost to consumer information about science and science-related tools to the general public.
然而，我的愿望和努力的一部分是向公众提供有关科学和科学相关工具的零成本消费者信息。
In keeping with that theme, I'd like to thank the sponsors of today's podcast.
为了与这个主题保持一致，我要感谢今天播客的赞助商。
And now for my conversation with Dr. Kay Tye.
现在是我与 Kay Tye 博士的对话。
Dr. Kay Tye, welcome.
凯·泰博士，欢迎光临。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Andy Huberman, what a treat.
安迪·休伯曼，真是一种享受。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Folks are going to hear you call me Andy and wonder if my name is Andy.
人们会听到你叫我安迪，并想知道我的名字是不是安迪。
I always know who I'm speaking to according to whether or not they call me Andrew-
我总是根据他们是否叫我安德鲁来知道我在和谁说话-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Oh
噢
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
which is my family and people that I know after a certain period of my life, Drew, which are people that know me through my very brief and non-illustrious career in boxing, and Andy, which are people that met me as I was coming up through science.
他们是我的家人和我在人生的某个时期认识的人，德鲁是在我非常短暂且不辉煌的拳击生涯中认识我的人，安迪是在我走上科学道路时认识我的人。
Let's just put it this way, there was another Andrew, we did a coin flip, and I lost.
这么说吧，还有另一个安德鲁，我们抛硬币，结果我输了。
So Andy is fine.
所以安迪很好。
Andrew's fine, whatever makes you comfortable.
安德鲁很好，只要你舒服就行。
What's important today is not how anyone refers to me, but rather the discussion about your work, which is spectacular.
今天重要的不是别人如何评价我，而是关于你的工作的讨论，这是非常精彩的。
I've known you a long time, and I've been following your career, and it's just been amazing and wonderful to see the contributions you've made to science and also to the culture of science.
我认识你很久了，我一直在关注你的职业生涯，看到你对科学和科学文化做出的贡献真是令人惊叹和美妙。
So we're going to talk about both of those things.
所以我们要讨论这两件事。
To kick things off, let's talk about a brain structure that most people I think have heard of, but that is badly misunderstood, and that's the amygdala.
首先，让我们来谈谈我认为大多数人都听说过但被严重误解的大脑结构，那就是杏仁核。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Most people hear amygdala and they think, "Oh, fear." That's what the amygdala is all about.
大多数人听到杏仁核后就会想：“哦，恐惧。”这就是杏仁核的全部意义所在。
But you know, and I'm hoping you'll educate us on the fact that the amygdala is actually far more complex than that.
但你知道，我希望你能告诉我们这样一个事实：杏仁核实际上比这复杂得多。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And far more interesting than that.
比这更有趣。
So when you hear the word amygdala, where does your mind go?
那么当你听到杏仁核这个词时，你的思绪会去哪里呢？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I agree that a lot of the bandwidth on the amygdala has been occupied by fear studies, but we've known actually for a really long time that the amygdala is important for all sorts of emotional processing, since Kluver and Bucy performed lesions on monkeys and found that monkeys would then have flat affective responses to all sorts of different stimuli.
我同意杏仁核的大部分带宽都被恐惧研究占据了，但我们实际上很长时间以来就知道杏仁核对于各种情绪处理都很重要，因为克鲁弗和布西对猴子进行了损伤，发现猴子会对各种不同的刺激产生平坦的情感反应。
Poop, food, inanimate object, whatever it was, just nothing and-
粪便、食物、无生命的物体，无论是什么，什么都没有，而且——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
No emotion
没有情绪
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
no emotional response, no motivational significance, however you want to phrase it, to things that usually would make you either disgusted or excited or neutral.
对于那些通常会让你感到厌恶、兴奋或中立的事情，没有情感反应，没有激励意义，无论你想用什么措辞。
And so, I think that knowledge about the amygdala was there from the beginning.
所以，我认为关于杏仁核的知识从一开始就存在。
It's not something I came up with.
这不是我想出来的。
But then it's interesting, it's almost a meta statement or a meta observation about how scientific research progresses.
但有趣的是，这几乎是关于科学研究如何进展的元陈述或元观察。
Sometimes you make a lot of progress in one particular vein because it's easy to press forward there, but it's important to also think about all the other parts and filling in the space in between to make sure you haven't missed anything.
有时，你在某一特定方面取得了很大进展，因为在那里很容易继续前进，但重要的是还要考虑所有其他部分并填补之间的空白，以确保你没有错过任何东西。
So the narrative about the amygdala became about fear, and I think also just when we think about survival, when you are an animal in the natural world, especially if you're a prey animal, which is the majority, that's a lot of animals, then you need to prioritize escaping a predator It's immediate threat on your survival versus reward.
因此，关于杏仁核的叙述变成了关于恐惧，我认为，当我们考虑生存时，当你是自然界中的一种动物时，特别是如果你是一种猎物动物，这是大多数，有很多动物，那么你需要优先考虑逃离捕食者，它是对你的生存的直接威胁，而不是奖励。
So mating, drinking water, getting food, these things can be done later.
所以交配、喝水、获取食物，这些事情都可以稍后再做。
Escaping this predator is paramount.
逃离这个掠食者是最重要的。
And so there should be some natural asymmetry in how we process emotion at baseline.
因此，我们在基线处理情绪的方式上应该存在一些自然的不对称性。
And so that's something that we've looked into a lot as well.
我们也对此进行了大量研究。
But I think the big picture discovery that my team has contributed to our understanding of the amygdala is that it represents a fork in the road for processing emotional valence and thinking about all these old psychological theories about how do you emotionally evaluate the world around you?
但我认为我的团队对杏仁核的理解做出的重大发现是，它代表了处理情绪效价和思考所有这些关于如何从情感上评估周围世界的旧心理学理论的岔路口？
What's the chain of events?
事件的链条是什么？
Is there a chain of events?
是否存在一系列事件？
What's happening in a certain order versus what's happening in parallel?
按一定顺序发生的事情与并行发生的事情？
For example, one model is there's all this information that comes in, and then we have to filter out what's important.
例如，一种模型是所有这些信息都进来，然后我们必须过滤掉重要的信息。
What's going to be something that I need to pay attention to versus what do I need to ignore?
哪些是我需要注意的，哪些是我需要忽略的？
If I'm driving, I need to pay attention to the road, this light, this pedestrian just started walking, versus what it feels like for my sock to be touching my foot.
如果我在开车，我需要注意道路、灯光、刚刚开始走路的行人，以及我的袜子接触脚的感觉。
Not super relevant right now.
现在不太相关。
Or my butt against the seat.
或者我的屁股抵在座位上。
Nothing I need to pay attention to.
没什么我需要注意的。
I need to focus on the dynamic information.
我需要关注动态信息。
Then you have to select, the second step would be selecting whether it's good or bad and what you want to do with it.
然后你必须选择，第二步是选择它是好是坏，以及你想用它做什么。
And so that process, I think the selection of whether you're assigning it a positive or negative valence happens in the amygdala.
所以这个过程，我认为你给它分配正价还是负价的选择发生在杏仁核中。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So glad you brought up this word valence.
很高兴你提出这个词价。
I think it's a word that some scientists, but most of the general public are probably not familiar with.
我认为这是一些科学家但大多数公众可能不熟悉的词。
So let's talk about valence, and then I want to go back to the amygdala and kind of explore some of its diversity of function a little bit more.
那么让我们来谈谈价，然后我想回到杏仁核并进一步探索它的一些功能多样性。
So when I hear the word valence, I think goodness versus badness-
所以当我听到“价”这个词时，我想到的是善与恶——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
of something.
的某事。
Is that-
难道是——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Basically.
基本上。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Good?
好不好？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Basically.
基本上。
It's been used in a lot of different fields.
它已被用于许多不同的领域。
I think of that in negative and positive numbers or, but it's an analogy that we take to just mean, yeah, net positive, net negative, and it's intentional departure from the word value.
我认为这是负数和正数，但这是一个类比，我们的意思是，是的，净正数，净负数，这是故意背离价值这个词的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Value becomes very scalar.
价值变得非常标量。
Everything's on, it can be in the same direction with different magnitudes is often how we think about value.
一切都在进行，它可以在相同的方向上具有不同的幅度，这通常是我们思考价值的方式。
It could be representing both valences, but often it's a small reward and a big reward, or a small punishment and a big punishment is how experimentally we parse value.
它可以代表两种价态，但通常它是一个小奖励和一个大奖励，或者一个小惩罚和一个大惩罚，这就是我们通过实验解析价值的方式。
And so valence is just asking about how your brain responds to things that are good or bad.
因此，效价只是询问你的大脑如何对好或坏的事物做出反应。
What are neurons that might respond similarly to things that are good and bad?
哪些神经元可能对好事物和坏事物做出相似的反应？
Those might be importance neurons rather than positive or negative valence neurons.
这些可能是重要神经元，而不是正价或负价神经元。
So yeah, I think it's just a term that signifies that next step.
所以是的，我认为这只是一个表示下一步的术语。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So when we walk into, say, a novel environment, do you think that our amygdalas are active and really trying to figure out whether or not an environment, a set of people or a person is safe and really just check that box first in order to be able to do other things?
那么，当我们走进一个新的环境时，你认为我们的杏仁核是否活跃，并真正试图弄清楚一个环境、一群人或一个人是否安全，并且真的只是先检查该框以便能够做其他事情？
Is this business of determining valence and the role of the amygdala in that kind of the first gate that we have to walk through anytime we're in a new environment?
确定杏仁核的化合价和作用是我们在新环境中任何时候都必须穿过的第一道门吗？
For instance, you showed up here today-
比如说，你今天出现在这里——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and you mentioned, "I think I locked my car." And I said, "You'll be fine in this neighborhood either way." And then you walked in, and presumably you were taking in the new environment, meeting some new people.
你提到，“我想我锁了车。”我说：“无论如何，你在这个街区都会过得很好。”然后你走进来，想必你正在适应新环境，结识一些新朋友。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We had a little discussion about caffeine- ...
我们对咖啡因进行了一些讨论 - ...
a little discussion about alcohol.
关于酒精的一些讨论。
And presumably because you and I know one another, you felt safe.
大概是因为你和我彼此认识，你才感到安全。
I would hope so.
我希望如此。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But presumably the amygdala is always performing this role, even if we have some prior knowledge about something, just figuring out-
但想必杏仁核总是扮演着这个角色，即使我们对某事有一些先验知识，只是弄清楚——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
am I safe here?
我在这里安全吗？
Where are the exits?
出口在哪里？
Where are the entrances?
入口在哪里？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Oh, sure.
哦，当然。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Who's here?
谁在这里？
What's their story?
他们的故事是什么？
Do you think all of that is operating, and do you think it's always conscious, or is it largely unconscious to us?
你认为所有这些都在起作用吗？你认为它总是有意识的，还是对我们来说很大程度上是无意识的？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Okay, so there's a few different questions there.
好的，这里有几个不同的问题。
First I want to address the question about novelty, and then I want to come back to the other issue of conscious.
首先我想解决关于新颖性的问题，然后我想回到意识的另一个问题。
But the way the amygdala works is its job is to assign meaning to anything that could have motivational significance.
但杏仁核的工作方式是为任何可能具有激励意义的事物赋予意义。
And so if it's a brand-new thing, we're paying attention.
因此，如果这是一个全新的事物，我们就会关注。
We're seeing if it mattered.
我们正在看看这是否重要。
Did it matter?
有关系吗？
And so I think anything that's novel, even if we don't know what it means, a loud sound you've never heard before, even if it signifies nothing of motivational significance, the first few times that you're presented with it, you'll get an amygdala response.
所以我认为任何新奇的东西，即使我们不知道它意味着什么，即使它是你以前从未听过的响亮的声音，即使它没有任何激励意义，在你最初几次看到它时，你都会得到杏仁核的反应。
So you see this in the lab, play the tone for the first time, and then there's a response that rapidly decays when the tone doesn't end up predicting anything that the animal can detect.
因此，您在实验室中看到了这一点，第一次播放音调，然后当音调最终无法预测动物可以检测到的任何内容时，响应会迅速衰减。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Or human?
还是人类？
Is this also true in humans?
人类也是如此吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah, this is true in humans.
是的，这在人类身上也是如此。
If you're the type of person that puts your phone on do not disturb versus has it on vibrate, and sometimes it's always vibrating, and it's just it vibrates all the time.
如果您是那种将手机设置为请勿打扰而不是振动的人，有时它总是振动，而且只是一直振动。
Whereas I put my phone on do not disturb, and so when someone else's phone rings, it's very startling to me, but they don't even notice because that's just the sound their phone makes.
而我把手机设置为请勿打扰，所以当别人的电话响起时，这对我来说非常令人震惊，但他们甚至没有注意到，因为这只是他们的手机发出的声音。
It makes it all the time.
它一直都能做到。
So I think it has to do with how many times you're presented with it, and it's the startle response.
所以我认为这与你看到它的次数有关，这是令人震惊的反应。
So the first few times that you are presented with a stimulus, the amygdala will respond, and then it decays very quickly, and then only if that stimulus predicts something important or something rewarding or punishing, then will it begin to respond again.
因此，在你最初几次受到刺激时，杏仁核会做出反应，然后它会很快衰退，然后只有当该刺激预测到一些重要的事情或奖励或惩罚的事情时，它才会再次开始做出反应。
So it's like you're giving everything novel a chance to tell you in one trial, in single trial learning, if something's going to happen.
所以这就好像你给了一切新颖的机会来告诉你在一次试验中，在一次试验学习中，是否会发生什么事情。
And so I think a fire alarm is a great example.
所以我认为火灾警报器就是一个很好的例子。
Fire alarm goes off, you're Instantly, you're looking around, is there anything happening?
火警警报响起，你立刻环顾四周，有什么事情发生吗？
Even just people rushing out.
哪怕只是冲出去的人。
There's the salient thing that you're going to respond to, and if you have a lot of fire drills, then you might respond differently after a while.
您要对重要的事情做出反应，如果您进行了很多消防演习，那么一段时间后您可能会做出不同的反应。
So, I think that's the habituation component.
所以，我认为这就是习惯的组成部分。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
You mentioned that the amygdala will respond to a novel stimulus, and if it predicts something interesting, then other things happen.
你提到杏仁核会对新的刺激做出反应，如果它预测到一些有趣的事情，那么其他事情就会发生。
We'll talk about those.
我们会讨论这些。
If not, the amygdala stops responding.
如果没有，杏仁核就会停止反应。
And you said something really important, which is that the amygdala will respond to something that is predicting reward or punishment.
你说了一些非常重要的事情，那就是杏仁核会对预测奖励或惩罚的东西做出反应。
And I think most people don't realize that.
我认为大多数人都没有意识到这一点。
In fact, I think a lot of early career neurobiologists don't realize that, that the amygdala is not just involved in fear and punishment.
事实上，我认为很多早期职业神经生物学家都没有意识到，杏仁核不仅仅与恐惧和惩罚有关。
So when we talk about the amygdala, presumably we're talking about the amygdala complex, a bunch of other things.
因此，当我们谈论杏仁核时，大概我们谈论的是杏仁核复合体，以及其他一些东西。
So is it true that there are neurons in the amygdala complex that predict reward and others that predict fear and punishment?
那么杏仁核复合体中是否真的存在预测奖励的神经元以及预测恐惧和惩罚的其他神经元？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
So, as a graduate student, I worked on a part of the amygdala called the basolateral amygdala.
因此，作为一名研究生，我研究了杏仁核的一部分，称为基底外侧杏仁核。
It's still a complex within the broader amygdala.
它仍然是更广泛的杏仁核内的一个复合体。
This brain region is cortical-like in that it's mostly glutamatergic neurons with some GABAergic neurons mixed in, but without the same structure that the cortex has.
这个大脑区域类似于皮质，因为它主要是谷氨酸能神经元，混有一些 GABA 能神经元，但没有与皮质相同的结构。
And I studied the amygdala in the context of reward.
我在奖励的背景下研究了杏仁核。
I found essentially that when you induce plasticity, you get a synaptic strengthening.
我基本上发现，当你诱导可塑性时，你就会得到突触强化。
When animals learn things, amygdala neurons fire in response to cues that predict rewards.
当动物学习事物时，杏仁核神经元会根据预测奖励的线索而放电。
And this was coming into the context of a field that had shown that this happens with fear.
这是在一个领域的背景下进行的，该领域已表明这种情况会因恐惧而发生。
And so this became-- I remember the very first time I gave a presentation at a scientific conference.
所以这变成了——我记得我第一次在科学会议上做演讲时。
I was a junior graduate student.
我当时是一名大三研究生。
I was given a 10-minute talk at the Inaugural Amygdala Gordon Research Conference.
我在首届杏仁核戈登研究会议上做了 10 分钟的演讲。
Many famous professors were speaking, and there were two talks about the amygdala and reward, and I was one of them.
很多著名教授都在演讲，其中有两个关于杏仁核和奖励的演讲，我是其中之一。
And the response to the talk was just, "How is this possible?
对这次谈话的回应只是：“这怎么可能？
How can you get the same readout for reward and fear?" And really, it came to be there's two possibilities.
如何获得相同的奖励和恐惧读数？”事实上，有两种可能性。
There's more possibilities, but the main two possibilities are, number one, that the amygdala wasn't specific for fear at all.
还有更多的可能性，但主要的两种可能性是，第一，杏仁核根本不专门针对恐惧。
It just responds to anything important.
它只是对任何重要的事情做出反应。
If it's important, it responds, period.
如果它很重要，它就会做出回应，就这样。
The other possibility is that the amygdala has different neurons that respond to positive and negative predictive stimuli and sends this information to different downstream targets to respond differently.
另一种可能性是杏仁核具有不同的神经元，它们对阳性和阴性预测刺激做出反应，并将这些信息发送到不同的下游目标以做出不同的反应。
Obviously, I respond differently to a reward.
显然，我对奖励的反应不同。
I walk towards it.
我朝它走去。
I consume it.
我消耗它。
A punishment, I'm avoiding it.
惩罚，我逃避。
And so clearly the behaviors are diametrically opposed.
很明显，这些行为是截然相反的。
And so to me, it seemed very possible at least that there was a divergence point and maybe this could be it.
所以对我来说，似乎很可能至少存在一个分歧点，也许就是这样。
And so we just did some very simple experiments when I first started my lab to trace the projection targets of amygdala neurons and record.
所以当我第一次开始我的实验室时，我们只是做了一些非常简单的实验来追踪杏仁核神经元的投射目标并记录。
And so everything's all mixed up together.
所以一切都混合在一起了。
So it's not obvious that this would be a fork in the road.
因此，这是否会成为一个岔路口并不明显。
But when you look at them, you do see that there are projections that come from the amygdala that are predominantly encoding either reward or fear, and there's many different projections, and this is just the beginning.
但是当你观察它们时，你确实会看到来自杏仁核的投射主要编码奖励或恐惧，并且有许多不同的投射，而这仅仅是开始。
But this was a time when it was a novel concept to even think that neurons from one region could have completely different functions going to different downstream targets, which now seems totally obvious, and there's hundreds and hundreds of papers showing it now.
但在当时，认为来自一个区域的神经元可能具有完全不同的功能，到达不同的下游目标，这还是一个新颖的概念，现在看来这是完全显而易见的，并且现在有成百上千篇论文展示了这一点。
But at the time, it was difficult to get this work published because that's just not how people thought about information moving through the brain, I guess.
但当时，这项工作很难发表，因为我猜这并不是人们对大脑中信息传递的看法。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Well, I think, first of all, such important work and so wonderful to be early in the phase of recasting how the brain works, which is what you did.
嗯，我认为，首先，在重塑大脑工作方式的早期阶段所做的工作是如此重要，而且如此美妙，这就是你所做的。
I think most people in the general public still think amygdala, fear, and clearly it's able to signal reward and punishment, as you discovered and are now pointing out.
我认为公众中的大多数人仍然认为杏仁核是恐惧，并且正如您发现并现在指出的那样，它显然能够发出奖励和惩罚的信号。
I'm curious, does the amygdala have a direct line to some of the organs of the body that can change our bodily activation state, heart rate-
我很好奇，杏仁核是否与身体的某些器官有直接的联系，可以改变我们的身体激活状态，心率——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
breathing rate-
呼吸频率-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
muscle tension?
肌肉紧张？
Because I think most of us experience fear and reward as both in our head, in our brains-
因为我认为我们大多数人都在我们的头脑中经历过恐惧和奖励——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
but also of the body.
也是身体的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Great question.
很好的问题。
So, I'll tell you the clues that lead me to my current working model, which is not necessarily the final word, but I would say that I think the amygdala complex as we're discussing it, these 13 subnuclei that reside in the temporal lobe, they are important for assigning importance, but they're not important for producing the actual autonomic arousal that we associate with panic or fear.
所以，我会告诉你一些线索，引导我找到我目前的工作模型，这不一定是最终的结论，但我想说的是，我认为我们正在讨论的杏仁核复合体，这 13 个位于颞叶的亚核，它们对于分配重要性很重要，但对于产生我们与恐慌或恐惧相关的实际自主唤醒并不重要。
The reason I say this is there's a famous case study, patient SM, who has bilateral damage to her amygdalae, and no responses to emotional faces, no responses to fearful stimuli, but capable of having the panic response due to suffocation, associated with suffocation.
我之所以这么说，是因为有一个著名的案例研究，患者SM，她的杏仁核双侧受损，对情绪化的面孔没有反应，对恐惧的刺激没有反应，但能够因窒息而产生恐慌反应，与窒息相关。
And so there's still the ability to produce that panic and arousal response.
所以仍然有能力产生恐慌和唤醒反应。
It's just not the cognitive evaluation of it.
这只是不是对它的认知评价。
I think that's what we think the amygdala is doing, is assigning that.
我认为这就是我们认为杏仁核正在做的事情，正在分配它。
It does receive information from the rest of the body.
它确实从身体的其他部分接收信息。
There are, for example, ghrelin receptors in the amygdala, things that can sense hunger.
例如，杏仁核中有生长素释放肽受体，可以感知饥饿。
And we've done Some work looking at this, kind of inspired by, I'm not sure if you're familiar with this study.
我们已经做了一些研究这个的工作，有点受到启发，我不确定你是否熟悉这项研究。
It's a controversial study, Danziger 2011.
这是一项有争议的研究，Danziger 2011。
But where the Supreme Court judges, they looked at Supreme Court judge rulings on parole decisions across the day relative to meal breaks.
但在最高法院法官的地方，他们查看了最高法院法官对全天与用餐时间相关的假释决定的裁决。
And you can see right after, it's like breakfast, 90%, everybody's getting parole, everybody's getting out.
之后你就可以看到，就像早餐一样，90%，每个人都得到假释，每个人都出去了。
Yeah.
是的。
And then it just drops to 10%.
然后它就下降到 10%。
Then there's lunch, then we're back to 80%.
然后是午餐，然后我们又回到了 80%。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Wow.
哇。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And then it just precipitously drops to single digits again.
然后它又急剧下降到个位数。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So the judges are changing the leniency of their rulings depending on how well-fed they are.
因此，法官们正在根据他们的饮食状况来改变他们裁决的宽大程度。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
There are counterarguments to this, but that is strongly what the data suggests.
对此存在反驳，但数据强烈表明了这一点。
It is not a controlled study, it is just a striking correlation.
这不是一项对照研究，只是一种惊人的相关性。
But it's not a completely novel concept, the hangry phenomenon.
但饥饿现象并不是一个全新的概念。
I'm sure, I don't know, everybody's different.
我确定，我不知道，每个人都不一样。
I certainly experience it.
我当然经历过。
But we think that when you are getting strong signals from the body, for example, I think the amygdala is going to be able to detect a lot of different homeostatic inputs, even though we don't have evidence for that yet.
但我们认为，例如，当你从身体收到强烈信号时，我认为杏仁核将能够检测到许多不同的稳态输入，尽管我们还没有证据证明这一点。
But for specifically energy balance, when you're hungry, your amygdala can detect it perhaps through ghrelin receptors or other mechanisms.
但对于具体的能量平衡，当你饥饿时，你的杏仁核可能可以通过生长素释放肽受体或其他机制来检测到它。
And then what we see is that after one day of food deprivation for mice, you can see this shift in the balance between the positive valence encoding projection neurons and the negative valence encoding projection neurons.
然后我们看到的是，在小鼠禁食一天后，您可以看到正价编码投射神经元和负价编码投射神经元之间的平衡发生变化。
And at baseline, fear trumps all.
在基线上，恐惧压倒一切。
The negative projection neurons can silence the reward projection ones, which makes sense.
负投射神经元可以使奖励投射神经元沉默，这是有道理的。
If I need to run away from this predator, I can't worry about eating this food right now.
如果我需要逃离这个掠食者，我现在就不用担心吃这种食物。
But if I'm in a near-starvation-like state, which for mice, they have very high metabolism, so one day without food is a really big deal.
但如果我处于一种近乎饥饿的状态，对于老鼠来说，它们的新陈代谢非常高，所以有一天没有食物是一件大事。
They only last a few days.
它们只能持续几天。
So, at this point, they are kicking into survival mode, where actually getting food becomes the greater need.
因此，此时，他们正在进入生存模式，真正获得食物成为更大的需求。
And you'll see animals hunting in ways they normally wouldn't hunt when they're really desperate.
你会看到动物在真正绝望时以它们通常不会捕猎的方式捕猎。
And so this mode of food deprivation shifts things so that the reward pathway actually has stronger power to-
因此，这种食物匮乏的模式改变了事情，使奖励途径实际上拥有更强的力量来——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm
毫米
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
influence and silence the fear pathway than before.
比以前更影响和压制恐惧途径。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Wow.
哇。
The brain is so smart.
脑子真是太聪明了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
It really is.
确实如此。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It can take what we normally think of as a priority list.
它可以采用我们通常认为的优先级列表。
Fear and staying safe is more important than food reward, and then if food and acquiring food is critical to survival, it can invert all that, is what you're saying.
恐惧和保持安全比食物奖励更重要，如果食物和获取食物对生存至关重要，那么它可以扭转这一切，这就是你所说的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Exactly.
正是如此。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Amazing.
太棒了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And it happens in a day.
这发生在一天之内。
It seems reversible.
看来是可逆的。
So that's something that we're looking at right now and thinking about how specific is this to food?
这就是我们现在正在关注的问题，并思考这对于食品来说有何特殊性？
Is this true for lots of different things?
对于很多不同的事情都是如此吗？
What about exercise, other stressors that are potentially more positive?
运动和其他可能更积极的压力源怎么样？
The amygdala is able to detect a lot of different signals from the environment, and we're not sure how all of that gets in there.
杏仁核能够检测到来自环境的许多不同信号，但我们不确定所有这些信号是如何进入那里的。
So I think one of the detection of the environment has been really well worked out in terms of our basic sensory modalities.
所以我认为，就我们的基本感官方式而言，环境检测之一已经得到了很好的解决。
But think about the things that really affect your emotions day to day.
但想想那些每天真正影响你情绪的事情。
At least for me, as a human in this society, the things that affect my emotions most day to day are almost entirely social interactions, very subtle ones, ones that don't seem to threaten my life or safety.
至少对我来说，作为这个社会中的一个人，每天最影响我情绪的事情几乎完全是社交互动，非常微妙的，那些似乎不会威胁到我的生命或安全的东西。
Very small, subtle social interactions have the greatest bearing, I think, on my emotional evaluation and my emotional bandwidth.
我认为，非常微小、微妙的社交互动对我的情绪评估和情绪带宽影响最大。
And what is that?
那是什么？
How do we detect that?
我们如何检测到这一点？
How do we assemble this information, apply all the nuance, put on the onion layers of social programming to come out with whatever I interpret this gesture to mean?
我们如何收集这些信息，应用所有的细微差别，加上社交编程的洋葱层，以得出我对这个手势的解释？
It's pretty incredible, and so that's where my research program has been sliding.
这真是令人难以置信，所以这就是我的研究计划一直在下滑的地方。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's such an interesting area.
这是一个非常有趣的领域。
Let's drill into it a bit.
让我们深入研究一下。
And to put it in context, maybe talk about social media.
结合上下文来看，也许可以谈谈社交媒体。
So on social media, whether or not it's Instagram or X, those seem to be the two major platforms.
所以在社交媒体上，无论是Instagram还是X，这似乎是两个主要平台。
I'm not on TikTok.
我没上 TikTok。
People say stuff.
人们说事。
Sometimes they say positive things, sometimes they say negative things, sometimes they say things that are sort of neutral.
有时他们说积极的话，有时他们说消极的话，有时他们说中性的话。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So it seems to me that nowadays, if one is on these social media platforms, that we've sort of crowdsourced this phenomenon of social interaction in a way that we hadn't before.
因此，在我看来，如今，如果有人在这些社交媒体平台上，我们就以一种前所未有的方式将这种社交互动现象众包起来。
Because I grew up prior to the advent of social media, and I could bring my physical body into certain environments and not others.
因为我是在社交媒体出现之前长大的，我可以将我的身体带入某些环境，而不是其他环境。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Even at high school, I could hang out.
即使在高中，我也可以出去玩。
We had an area called the Bat Cave where skateboarders and some other, at that time, misfits hung out.
我们有一个叫做蝙蝠洞的区域，滑板爱好者和其他一些当时不合群的人在那里闲逛。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We had the Quad where the cool kids hung out, et cetera.
我们有一个四方院，很酷的孩子们在那里闲逛，等等。
You could pick your niche.
你可以选择你的利基。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Okay?
好吧？
Social media is not like that.
社交媒体不是这样的。
You can pick followers, they can pick you, et cetera.
你可以选择追随者，他们也可以选择你，等等。
But I think since most people have social media nowadays, it seems, or are on there in some ways, that we've placed ourselves in the center of an arena in which we have a ton of incoming input.
但我认为，既然现在大多数人都拥有社交媒体，那么我们似乎已经将自己置于一个拥有大量输入的舞台的中心。
Most of us have amygdalas, two of them, amygdalae, as you pointed out, one on each side of the brain.
我们大多数人都有杏仁核，其中有两个，杏仁核，正如你所指出的，大脑的每一侧都有一个。
And presumably, we're on these platforms to receive positive feedback and avoid negative feedback.
据推测，我们在这些平台上是为了接收积极的反馈并避免消极的反馈。
However, there does seem to be a cohort of people who seem to like the friction of ...
然而，似乎确实有一群人似乎喜欢……的摩擦。
combat or let's just call it high-friction interactions or moderate-friction interactions.
战斗，或者我们称之为高摩擦相互作用或中等摩擦相互作用。
They like to argue.
他们喜欢争论。
They like to parse ideas.
他们喜欢解析想法。
It's not all bad, necessarily.
不一定，这并不全是坏事。
So have you ever looked at social media, in your own mind, looked at social media through the lens of amygdala filtering, or through the lens of neural circuit filtering and wondered what's going on there, that someone without your in-depth knowledge of these brain circuitries would not think to look at that landscape through?
那么，你是否曾经在自己的脑海中，通过杏仁核过滤的镜头，或者通过神经回路过滤的镜头来观察社交媒体，并想知道那里发生了什么，如果没有你对这些大脑回路的深入了解，有人不会想到通过它来看待这个景观？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Hmm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Or maybe we could just do that now-
或者也许我们现在就可以这样做-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
as a kind of playful experiment.
作为一种有趣的实验。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
No, I like that.
不，我喜欢这样。
So a lot of people ask me about social media from the context of, is this social contact meaningful?
所以很多人问我关于社交媒体的问题，这种社交接触有意义吗？
Is this positive?
这是积极的吗？
Does this count?
这算不算？
Does this help you not feel lonely?
这能让你不再感到孤独吗？
And of course, I don't know the answer.
当然，我不知道答案。
We haven't done that particular study yet, and I don't know of that specific study having been performed.
我们还没有进行这项特定的研究，我也不知道是否已经进行了这项特定的研究。
But my prediction is that it's not going to do much because I believe that a key component of what I would consider social contact heavily depends on having some inter-brain synchrony, some interaction, that is synchronous.
但我的预测是，它不会有太大作用，因为我相信我所认为的社交接触的一个关键组成部分在很大程度上取决于大脑间的同步，一些互动，这是同步的。
And I think with social media, sometimes there can be an engaging dialogue that plays out in near real time.
我认为通过社交媒体，有时可以近乎实时地进行引人入胜的对话。
But generally speaking, it's asynchronous.
但一般来说，它是异步的。
You're looking at things that happened that you're not a part of.
你正在看那些发生的事情，而你并不参与其中。
You're excluded from all these things.
你被排除在所有这些事情之外。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It happened in Australia yesterday.
昨天发生在澳大利亚。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And I'm on there saying, "Cool, love it."
我在那里说：“酷，喜欢它。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then the person's already asleep.
然后那个人已经睡着了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes, exactly.
是的，完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So that's what you mean by asynchronous.
这就是异步的意思。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Asynchronous, like that.
异步，就像这样。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Got it.
明白了。
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
We're not experiencing things at the same time.
我们并不是同时经历一些事情。
It's not a shared experience, in terms of having that bond necessarily.
就必然存在这种联系而言，这不是一种共同的经历。
And so I've never actually been asked about how the amygdala processes social media.
所以我实际上从未被问过杏仁核如何处理社交媒体。
I guess I think what happens is the amygdala is just responding to stimuli.
我想我认为发生的情况是杏仁核只是对刺激做出反应。
It's sending up bottom-up signals.
它正在发出自下而上的信号。
It's a caricature of bottom-up and top-down processing.
这是自下而上和自上而下处理的漫画。
Let's give an example that I'm walking down the street, and all of a sudden I hear a really ferocious dog barking, all going crazy.
举个例子，我走在街上，突然听到一只很凶猛的狗叫，整个人都疯了。
And then I get super scared, and then I realize, okay, there's a fence.
然后我非常害怕，然后我意识到，好吧，有栅栏。
So the amygdala heard the dog barking, "This is a dog barking," and I'm freaking out.
所以杏仁核听到狗叫，“这是狗叫，”我吓坏了。
Then my prefrontal cortex realizes there's the fence, and it looks very sturdy.
然后我的前额皮质意识到有栅栏，它看起来非常坚固。
This fence looks stable.
这栅栏看上去很稳固。
And then I'm relaxing and I'm resuming my walking normally.
然后我就放松下来，恢复正常行走。
I think that's sort of the dance that our brain is doing when we have top-down and bottom-up information, that we're trying to stay focused.
我认为这就是当我们拥有自上而下和自下而上的信息时我们的大脑正在做的舞蹈，我们试图保持专注。
So for me, I think when I'm on social media, there's so many stimuli that are evoking responses.
所以对我来说，我认为当我在社交媒体上时，有很多刺激因素会引起反应。
And to be completely transparent, and I know this is not something that everybody else does or can do or is necessarily what's best for them, but I work very hard to control input from the top down, in terms of I really, really limit the amount.
为了完全透明，我知道这不是其他人都做或可以做的事情，也不一定是对他们最好的事情，但我非常努力地从上到下控制输入，就我而言，我真的非常限制数量。
I basically don't check email or go on social media.
我基本上不检查电子邮件或上社交媒体。
I would say I'm on social media or email less than one hour per week, basically.
我想说，基本上我每周使用社交媒体或电子邮件的时间不到一小时。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Per week?
每周？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Per week.
每周。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
All I have to say to that is congratulations.
我对此只能说恭喜。
We'll talk about social media again in a second, but as a fellow professor email once a week.
我们稍后会再次讨论社交媒体，但作为教授同事，每周发送一次电子邮件。
I've heard of people scheduling their times for email responses, but once a week, that is awesome.
我听说人们会安排回复电子邮件的时间，但每周一次，这真是太棒了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I have people who help-
我有人帮忙——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
No wonder you're so productive
难怪你这么高效
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
I have people who help me get through it, and then-
我有人帮助我度过难关，然后-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
No wonder you're so productive
难怪你这么高效
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
and filter out what's important, but-
并过滤掉重要的内容，但是-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Oh my goodness
天哪
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
otherwise, whenever I do my own email, I say yes to all these things, then I make all these plans, and then I have too many trips, and I'm responding fragmented.
否则，每当我写自己的电子邮件时，我都会对所有这些事情说“是”，然后我制定所有这些计划，然后我有太多的旅行，而且我的回复支离破碎。
And it's just over-committing, and I think I know my limits.
这只是过度承诺，而且我想我知道自己的极限。
Sometimes it's difficult for me to be in my amygdala mode, responding to stimuli, and yet letting my prefrontal cortex do its thing.
有时，我很难处于杏仁核模式，对刺激做出反应，同时又让我的前额叶皮层发挥作用。
So I've set some very heavy prefrontal cortically selected limits of the input I put in so that my brain can function and be clear.
因此，我对输入的输入设置了一些非常严格的前额皮质选择限制，以便我的大脑能够正常运转并保持清晰。
I can't be creative.
我无法发挥创造力。
I can't have epiphanies if there's all this clutter of writing this person back and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, tweet, tweet.
如果有这么多混乱的回信给这个人，然后废话，废话，废话，废话，废话，推文，推文，我就无法顿悟。
Ugh.
啊。
It's just-
这只是——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I love it
我喜欢它
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
get the trash out.
把垃圾倒掉。
Wipe, squeegee the brain down so that we can actually grow something beautiful and new.
把大脑擦拭干净，这样我们才能真正长出美丽而新的东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Well, and I want to re-emphasize what I said in my introduction, which is that you are oh so productive.
好吧，我想再次强调我在介绍中所说的话，那就是你的生产力非常高。
And when I say productive, I don't just mean productive like plug and chug.
当我说高效时，我指的不仅仅是即插即用之类的高效。
The work you've done is incredibly creative.
你所做的工作非常有创意。
You transformed our understanding of what this famous structure, the amygdala, actually does.
您改变了我们对杏仁核这个著名结构的实际作用的理解。
You've made so many important discoveries as a consequence of presumably other things, but including wiping away all this incoming and clutter.
你已经取得了如此多的重要发现，大概是其他事情的结果，但包括清除所有这些传入的和混乱的东西。
As you said, controlling the top-down inputs.
正如你所说，控制自上而下的输入。
I have to ask, just from a practical standpoint, during that one hour a week are you reading every email that came in or are you just being very selective about which emails-
我不得不问，仅从实际角度来看，在每周的一小时内，您是否会阅读收到的每封电子邮件，或者您只是对哪些电子邮件非常挑剔-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Oh, no.
哦，不。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So you're not opening most emails?
那么您不会打开大多数电子邮件吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
No, I don't open most emails.
不，我不会打开大多数电子邮件。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Amazing.
太棒了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
No. I search for the ones that my assistant identifies as the one I need to open.
不。我会搜索我的助手识别为我需要打开的那些。
There's a list of things that I would be interested in, and then we'll go through the list, and then sometimes it requires me to go and find the email and respond to it myself.
有一个我感兴趣的事情的列表，然后我们将浏览该列表，然后有时需要我去查找电子邮件并亲自回复。
And then I will do that for 10 minutes a day or something.
然后我会每天做 10 分钟之类的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Do you recommend-
你推荐吗-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And then just get out of there as soon as I can.
然后尽快离开那里。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I love it.
我喜欢它。
Do you pass on this advice to the people that you train?
您会将这个建议传达给您培训的人员吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I think it depends on what resources and what's your job right now.
我认为这取决于你现在有什么资源以及你的工作是什么。
So I think as a trainee, I definitely did my own.
所以我认为作为一名练习生，我肯定是做了自己的事情。
As assistant professor, I did my own emails.
作为助理教授，我自己处理电子邮件。
But at a certain point, I was just never getting to the bottom, and then it would just stress me out, make me feel overwhelmed, and what is my job?
但在某个时刻，我永远无法追根究底，然后它只会给我带来压力，让我感到不知所措，我的工作是什么？
My job is to, number one, be a stable core of a sustainable research program and- That just requires me having a lot of mental health and wellbeing and clear mindedness, and I need to be able to come up with creative ideas.
我的工作第一，是成为可持续研究计划的稳定核心——这只需要我有足够的心理健康和幸福感以及清晰的思维，而且我需要能够提出创造性的想法。
I need to be able to sprint when there's a deadline, and I just can't exhaust my system with unnecessary, I would call them quadrant four in the time management quadrant, if you're familiar with this-
我需要能够在截止日期到来时冲刺，而且我不能用不必要的东西耗尽我的系统，我将它们称为时间管理象限中的第四象限，如果你熟悉这一点-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Oh, yeah.
哦，是的。
What is it?
它是什么？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
initiative management.
主动管理。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's important, urgent.
很重要，很紧急。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes, important, things-
是的，重要的是，事情——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Certain things are urgent but not important.
有些事情很紧急，但并不重要。
Some things are urgent and important.
有些事情是紧急且重要的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And some things are neither important nor urgent.
而且有些事情既不重要也不紧急。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Right.
对。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
That's most emails are in the imp- If you read time management literature and you have the luxury to have someone else help you or something that's so well trained to be really good at capturing things that are important, and sometimes I miss emails, but emails are not the way my trainees would reach me.
如果你阅读时间管理文献，并且你有幸让其他人帮助你，或者有一些训练有素的人能够真正擅长捕捉重要的事情，那么大多数电子邮件都是在小鬼中，有时我会错过电子邮件，但电子邮件不是我的学员联系我的方式。
They would reach me in a different way.
他们会以不同的方式联系我。
And then emails are for everyone else that I didn't give my number to.
然后电子邮件是发给我没有提供电话号码的其他人的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I feel so honored to have your contact.
能与您联系我感到非常荣幸。
I think this is wonderful advice for people to hear.
我认为这对于人们来说是一个很好的建议。
We have a future guest on this podcast named Cal Newport.
我们的播客未来有一位嘉宾，名叫卡尔·纽波特 (Cal Newport)。
He wrote the book "Deep Work," and he has another book called "A World Without Email." He's a computer science professor at Georgetown, where he talks extensively about the tremendous career, but also relationship and life value of doing essentially what you're describing.
他写了《深度工作》一书，还有另一本书《没有电子邮件的世界》。他是乔治城大学的计算机科学教授，在那里他广泛谈论了巨大的职业生涯，以及做你所描述的事情的关系和人生价值。
Although I do think, Kay, that you represent the extreme of what I've become aware of in terms of people that can limit the amount of time on social media platforms and email.
尽管我确实认为，凯，你代表了我所意识到的极端情况，即人们可以限制在社交媒体平台和电子邮件上的时间。
Anyway, I just want to say congratulations.
不管怎样，我只想说恭喜。
I just want to say that again.
我只是想再说一遍。
And I think even if people don't reduce to one hour per week, I think that making some effort toward reducing the amount of incoming, as you said, controlling the top-down inputs-
我认为即使人们不减少到每周一小时，我认为也要努力减少输入量，正如你所说，控制自上而下的输入-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
to the amygdala, but also to the rest of the brain involved in creative processing, et cetera, is so key, and we actually do have agency.
对于杏仁核，以及参与创意处理等的大脑其他部分来说，都是如此关键，而且我们实际上确实有代理权。
It just is it's tough sometimes to build up that discipline.
只是有时建立这种纪律很困难。
So you're doing a tremendous service by sharing that somebody as successful as you does this, presumably is successful in part because you do this.
因此，您通过分享像您一样成功的人，可能会部分因为您这样做而获得成功，从而提供了巨大的服务。
Could we, by extension, say that many people, since billions of people are on social media, are likely triggering the activation of their amygdala, clouding out other, more potentially productive activation of their neural circuits by just making themselves freely available to the thoughts and words and impulses of others?
推而广之，我们是否可以说，由于数十亿人使用社交媒体，许多人可能会通过自由地接触他人的思想、言语和冲动，从而触发杏仁核的激活，从而掩盖了其他更有潜力的神经回路激活？
To me, it seems the answer would be yes, but I'd like to know what you think.
对我来说，答案似乎是肯定的，但我想知道你的想法。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And there's something to be said, there's definitely been moments where I've gone deep into social media and spent more time in a certain burst that is isolated.
有话要说，确实有一些时刻我深入社交媒体，并在某个孤立的爆发中花费了更多时间。
And I think that there's a lot to be learned from social media.
我认为从社交媒体中可以学到很多东西。
So to actually to bring it back to one point you mentioned earlier, on social media, sometimes people just want accolades, and sometimes there's a lot of friction.
实际上，回到您之前提到的一点，在社交媒体上，有时人们只是想要荣誉，有时会有很多摩擦。
One of the reasons I stay on social media, even though I'm making this big effort to sort of declutter my consciousness, is because of that feedback.
尽管我付出了巨大的努力来整理我的意识，但我留在社交媒体上的原因之一就是因为这种反馈。
Especially when for someone like you, I imagine this has got to be super true, and even for me at a certain point in my career, it just felt like people don't want to tell me bad news to my face as much anymore.
尤其是对于像你这样的人来说，我想这一定是非常真实的，即使对我来说，在我职业生涯的某个阶段，也感觉人们不想再当着我的面告诉我坏消息了。
Everybody's so positive all the time, and what are they really thinking?
每个人总是那么积极，他们到底在想什么？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And social media allows you the protection of anonymity to say what you really think without consequence, essentially.
社交媒体允许你在匿名的情况下说出你的真实想法，而不会产生任何后果。
And so on the one hand, the consequence-free nature of being able to just say things can be very dangerous, but at the same time, for me, I really value just being able to receive it.
因此，一方面，仅仅说出事情的无后果本质可能是非常危险的，但与此同时，对我来说，我真的很重视能够接受它。
I'm a big girl.
我是一个大女孩了。
I can filter out what I want when I get all the inputs, but if I don't receive the inputs, sometimes it's hard to learn from the feedback I'm not getting.
当我收到所有输入时，我可以过滤出我想要的内容，但如果我没有收到输入，有时很难从我没有得到的反馈中学习。
So even sometimes feedback's given in a not very nice way, I can still create a model for someone else that has this perspective that I can take with me, and that can be another perspective I can honor easily in the future because I have this theory of mind for someone would get upset about that.
因此，即使有时反馈的方式不太好，我仍然可以为其他有这种观点的人创建一个模型，我可以随身携带，这可能是我将来可以轻松尊重的另一个观点，因为我有这样的心理理论，因为有人会对此感到不安。
That's something that could be harmful to people who have this theory of mind.
这对于持有这种心理理论的人来说可能是有害的。
So I think it's super valuable from that perspective, and that's why I continue to use it.
所以我认为从这个角度来看它非常有价值，这就是我继续使用它的原因。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Great.
太棒了。
Yeah.
是的。
I really applaud that as well.
我也真的很赞赏这一点。
I always read my teaching evals because they're anonymous.
我总是阅读我的教学评估，因为它们是匿名的。
And yes, I do wonder what grade the different people who gave different evals got.
是的，我确实想知道给出不同评估的不同人得到了什么分数。
I don't know that information.
我不知道那个信息。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I sometimes wonder, do they attend the class, or are they just angry they didn't do well on the exam?
我有时会想，他们是去上课还是只是因为考试考得不好而生气？
But that really represents the small fraction of feedback that I wonder about.
但这确实代表了我想知道的反馈的一小部分。
Most of it that's valuable to me is the, "Hey, liked the course, but these parts really sucked-
对我来说最有价值的是，“嘿，喜欢这门课程，但这些部分真的很糟糕——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
Professor Huberman," or-
休伯曼教授，”或者——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
"This part was completely unclear," or, "Completely hated the way you blank, blank, and blanked."
“这部分完全不清楚，”或者，“完全讨厌你空白、空白、再空白的方式。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Because that feedback is something I can really work with to improve.
因为我确实可以利用这些反馈来改进。
So I think-
所以我认为——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
course evals are similar to what you're describing.
课程评估与您所描述的类似。
I think there's value there.
我认为那里有价值。
If I were to just look at the positive feedback and then ignore the negative feedback and write those people off, then I don't think I could improve as a teacher.
如果我只关注积极的反馈，然后忽略消极的反馈并注销那些人，那么我认为我作为一名教师无法进步。
Actually, I always encourage comments and feedback and suggestions in the YouTube comments for this podcast for that reason, and I do read the comments.
事实上，出于这个原因，我总是鼓励在 YouTube 评论中对此播客发表评论、反馈和建议，并且我确实阅读了这些评论。
I go through and I read, and a few of them sting.
我浏览并阅读，其中一些令人刺痛。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But the positive feedback is great, too.
但积极的反馈也很棒。
Sometimes it's, "More of this, please."
有时会说，“请再多一点。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yep.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Or, "Less of that, please."
或者，“请少一点。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yep.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I think there's information in that.
我认为这里面有信息。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So I think it sounds like you've been doing all of these things naturally.
所以我认为听起来你一直在自然地做所有这些事情。
I-
我-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
So actually, since I've had my research group, my lab, we do an anonymous lab survey It's supposed to be about every 18 months, and then it's a whole long process of going through it, and it's just evolved.
所以实际上，自从我有了我的研究小组、我的实验室以来，我们就进行了一次匿名实验室调查。它应该大约每 18 个月进行一次，然后是一个漫长的经历过程，它只是不断发展。
I think it's the fourth or fifth time we've done it, and so it's now, I think it's like 70 questions.
我想这是我们第四次或第五次这样做了，所以现在，我想大概有 70 个问题。
It's so many questions.
问题太多了。
Maybe we should trim it down, but it ends up being hundreds of pages of text, short answer, sometimes long answer, feedback anonymously from people in my lab.
也许我们应该删减它，但它最终变成了数百页的文字，简短的答案，有时很长的答案，来自我实验室的人的匿名反馈。
My lab is pretty big, so I'm not even trying to really guess who is saying it.
我的实验室相当大，所以我什至都不想真正猜测是谁在说这句话。
It's just feedback, and it takes me months to go through with it and get all the feedback, and it is so useful.
这只是反馈，我花了几个月的时间来完成并获得所有反馈，而且它非常有用。
In a class, the amount of contact that you have is restricted to this very specific time and space, whereas when you're mentoring someone over the course of years, there's a lot of different points of contact and interaction, and you're in the lab 40 hours a week or whatever, and going trips, meeting here.
在课堂上，你的接触量仅限于这个非常特定的时间和空间，而当你在多年的过程中指导某人时，会有很多不同的接触和互动点，你每周 40 个小时在实验室或其他什么地方，然后去旅行，在这里见面。
There's just a lot of different ways to improve and ways that we've never-- I haven't had any training in how to be a really great mentor.
有很多不同的改进方法，以及我们从未有过的方法——我没有接受过任何关于如何成为一名真正伟大导师的培训。
And so I'm getting that training now.
所以我现在正在接受培训。
I'm making my own course, and my mentees are my teachers, and I really am grateful for the tutelage that they provide for free in this anonymous lab survey.
我正在制作自己的课程，我的学员是我的老师，我真的很感谢他们在这次匿名实验室调查中免费提供的指导。
Sometimes it makes me cry, but sometimes it makes me feel really good about something that I'm doing that's working, and in any case, it makes me feel that I have ground truth.
有时它让我哭泣，但有时它让我对我正在做的事情感到非常高兴，而且无论如何，它让我觉得我有基本事实。
I guess I still don't know.
我想我还是不知道。
But when people say things that sting, it makes me feel like they're saying what they really think, and they're not holding back.
但当人们说一些刺痛的话时，我觉得他们说的是他们真正的想法，而且他们没有隐瞒。
And bad news feels like reality, and so something about that is rewarding, just to feel like I have reality rather than I'm getting something else.
坏消息感觉就像现实，所以这是值得的，只是感觉我有现实而不是我得到了其他东西。
The model doesn't quite fit.
模型不太合适。
It's very unsatisfying when the model doesn't quite fit.
当模型不太合适时，这是非常不令人满意的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I love the word ground truth.
我喜欢“基本事实”这个词。
There's something so beautiful to that, and I resonate with what you're saying.
这真是太美妙了，我对你所说的产生了共鸣。
Let's go back to social interaction, something that your lab is doing lots of work on nowadays.
让我们回到社交互动，这是您的实验室目前正在做大量工作的领域。
And maybe we could shift to the sorts of social interaction that most of us are familiar with, the sitting across the table, having a coffee with somebody, the taking a walk with somebody.
也许我们可以转向我们大多数人都熟悉的社交互动方式，坐在桌子对面，与某人喝咖啡，与某人散步。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Maybe a phone call.
也许是一个电话。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Maybe a tough conversation.
也许是一次艰难的谈话。
Maybe a playful unscripted conversation.
也许是一场有趣的即兴对话。
Maybe a meal at a holiday dinner.
也许是节日晚餐上的一顿饭。
There's a huge range there.
那里的范围很大。
What do we know about the value of social interaction at the level of core biological needs?
我们对社交互动在核心生物需求层面的价值了解多少？
Like at the level of neural circuits and maybe even hormones.
就像在神经回路甚至激素水平上一样。
Most people have heard of oxytocin.
大多数人都听说过催产素。
They think the love hormone, but there's so much more there for people to understand and know about.
他们认为是爱情荷尔蒙，但人们还有很多东西需要理解和了解。
How important is this thing that we call social interaction, and how bad do things get when we're not getting the right kinds of social interaction?
我们称之为社交互动的东西有多重要？当我们没有获得正确的社交互动时，事情会变得多么糟糕？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I think this is a great question, and I'm glad that it's become something that has been recognized at a more global and national scale, just the importance of having social support in our lives for our well-being.
我认为这是一个很好的问题，我很高兴它已经成为在全球和国家范围内得到认可的问题，这就是在我们的生活中获得社会支持对于我们的福祉的重要性。
But social isolation or even just perceived loneliness has immense health consequences for all social species.
但社会孤立，甚至只是感知到的孤独，都会对所有社会物种产生巨大的健康后果。
So, shortened lifespan, increased mood disorders, increased, actually, morbidity and mortality for diseases like cancer or heart disease that might not be what we would normally think.
因此，寿命缩短，情绪障碍增加，实际上癌症或心脏病等疾病的发病率和死亡率增加，这可能与我们通常认为的不同。
And so, I think understanding how each of those processes is happening, those mechanisms are far from being worked out.
因此，我认为了解每个过程是如何发生的，这些机制还远未得到解决。
But the correlational evidence is undeniable.
但相关证据是不可否认的。
We're now taking this into the lab really for the first time.
我们现在第一次将其带入实验室。
And so something so simple as social isolation, how come we don't know way more about it?
那么像社交隔离这样简单的事情，我们为什么不知道更多呢？
And I'm someone who stumbled into the field of social isolation by accident prior to the pandemic.
我是在大流行之前偶然进入社会隔离领域的人。
And so I'll just say the whole story on why there's such a gaping hole in our knowledge as a neuroscience community about social isolation really comes from Harry Harlow's work, this original work of maternal separation that was undeniably cruel.
所以我只想说整个故事，为什么我们作为一个神经科学界关于社会孤立的知识存在如此大的漏洞，这实际上来自哈里·哈洛的作品，这部关于母亲分离的原创作品无可否认是残酷的。
It caused irreparable damage to these baby monkeys, and they never recovered and-
它对这些小猴子造成了无法挽回的伤害，而且它们再也没有恢复过来——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Sorry to interrupt.
抱歉打扰。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Sorry.
抱歉。
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I apologize.
我道歉。
I'm just striving to not interrupt in my life.
我只是努力不打扰我的生活。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
No, please.
不，请。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So that people are on board, could you just briefly describe the Harlow experiments?
为了让人们参与进来，您能简单描述一下哈洛实验吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes.
是的。
So they're very famous experiments where they separated baby monkeys from their moms and then had either a wire sort of thing holding a bottle.
所以他们是非常著名的实验，他们将小猴子和它们的妈妈分开，然后用一根金属丝之类的东西拿着一个瓶子。
So, okay, what do you miss most about the mom?
那么，好吧，你最想念妈妈的什么？
Is it the food, or is it the comfort?
是食物的原因，还是舒适的原因？
So they had a wire thing with a milk bottle versus blankets and cuddly soft things and the baby monkeys would go to the cuddly soft thing.
所以他们有一个带有奶瓶的金属丝东西，而不是毯子和可爱的柔软的东西，小猴子就会去寻找可爱的柔软的东西。
But a blanket is not a replacement for a mother.
但毯子并不能代替母亲。
Nobody's saying that it is.
没有人说是这样。
And through these experiments, there was extended maternal separation, and it was deemed cruel.
通过这些实验，延长了母亲的分离时间，这被认为是残酷的。
There was permanent irreparable damage.
造成了永久性的、不可修复的损害。
When you rehouse these monkeys, they never resocialized normally.
当你重新安置这些猴子时，它们从未正常地重新社交。
They had lots of different mental and physical health problems.
他们有许多不同的心理和身体健康问题。
And I think in humans we know that solitary confinement is considered torture.
我认为对于人类来说，我们知道单独监禁被认为是酷刑。
Social isolation is a difficult thing to study in a lot of conditions.
在很多情况下，社会孤立是一件很难研究的事情。
And we stumbled onto it by complete accident through working with a former postdoc in my lab, Jillian Matthews, who was a graduate student doing an experiment on-- It was just trying to figure out if these dopamine neurons would also respond to cocaine the way VTA, these ventral tegmental area dopamine neurons were known to respond to cocaine, wanted to see if these other dopamine neurons respond to cocaine, so sort of an incremental study.
我们完全偶然地发现了这一点，是通过与我实验室的前博士后 Jillian Matthews 合作，她是一名研究生，正在做一项实验——只是想弄清楚这些多巴胺神经元是否也会像 VTA 那样对可卡因做出反应，这些腹侧被盖区多巴胺神经元已知对可卡因有反应，想看看其他多巴胺神经元是否对可卡因有反应，所以是一项渐进的研究。
So when you do these cocaine studies, you inject the animal with cocaine or saline, and then leave the naive animal in the cage.
因此，当您进行这些可卡因研究时，您会向动物注射可卡因或盐水，然后将幼小的动物留在笼子里。
And then you take brain slices, record from the neurons, and look at the synaptic strengths.
然后你拍摄大脑切片，记录神经元的情况，并观察突触的强度。
And so, the expected outcome sort of was that these dopamine neurons would be similar to other dopamine neurons that showed in long-lasting potentiation after a single dose of cocaine.
因此，预期的结果是这些多巴胺神经元将与其他多巴胺神经元相似，后者在单剂量可卡因后表现出持久的增强作用。
But what happened instead was that, yes, there was potentiation of the cocaine animals.
但事实上，是的，可卡因动物具有增强作用。
There's also potentiation in the saline animals relative to the naive group, and this was a huge puzzle.
相对于幼稚组，盐水动物也有增强作用，这是一个巨大的谜团。
What was this?
这是什么？
And it turned out through many different experiments, that it's actually because when you inject animals with cocaine, you're separating them from the group.
通过许多不同的实验证明，这实际上是因为当你给动物注射可卡因时，你就把它们从群体中分开了。
Because they act crazy.
因为他们表现得很疯狂。
And this is just the way people do the experiment.
这就是人们做实验的方式。
So you inject them with saline, you separate them.
所以你给它们注射生理盐水，然后将它们分开。
The naive animals just stay there.
天真的动物就呆在那里。
So-
所以——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
With their other littermates
与其他同窝同伴
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
With their other littermates.
和他们的其他同窝同伴。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I see.
我明白了。
So the control group-
所以对照组——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
That's right
没错
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
the saline control group is actually a social isolation condition.
盐水对照组实际上是一种社会隔离条件。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
So by accident, this control group that didn't make sense was how we stumbled onto.
因此，我们偶然发现了这个没有意义的对照组。
So then we tried, is it novel cage?
那么我们就尝试一下，这是新颖的笼子吗？
It's not the novel cage, it's the social isolation.
这不是新奇的笼子，而是社会的孤立。
And so that is how we became a lab that studied social isolation.
这就是我们如何成为研究社会隔离的实验室的原因。
It was a complete accident.
这完全是一场意外。
We weren't sure what we were looking at.
我们不确定我们在看什么。
And then we found these neurons, and we manipulate these neurons, and they produced something very different than other dopamine neurons, which normally, if you stimulate dopamine neurons, these ventral tegmental area, midbrain dopamine neurons, 90% of the time when you hear people talk about dopamine neurons, they mean these ones.
然后我们发现了这些神经元，我们操纵这些神经元，它们产生了与其他多巴胺神经元非常不同的东西，通常，如果你刺激多巴胺神经元，这些腹侧被盖区，中脑多巴胺神经元，90％的时候当你听到人们谈论多巴胺神经元时，他们指的是这些神经元。
And they're the ones where you press the lever, stimulate the neurons, they'll press the lever thousands of times.
当你按下操纵杆，刺激神经元时，它们会按下操纵杆数千次。
And if you-
如果你-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
They love to be stimulated.
他们喜欢受到刺激。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And if you're a human and you do cocaine, most people love cocaine.
如果你是一个人并且吸食可卡因，那么大多数人都喜欢可卡因。
They're very prosocial when they're on cocaine.
当他们吸食可卡因时，他们非常亲社会。
And so that's what dopamine neurons were thought to be doing.
这就是多巴胺神经元的作用。
But these other dopamine neurons in the dorsal raphe, that I will also say is in the brainstem near to an aqueduct where you could detect signals from the body.
但是中缝背侧的其他多巴胺神经元，我也会说，位于靠近导水管的脑干中，在那里你可以检测到来自身体的信号。
But these other dopamine neurons in the raphe, when you stimulate them, animals don't like it.
但是中缝中的其他多巴胺神经元，当你刺激它们时，动物不喜欢它。
They will not work for reward.
他们不会为了报酬而工作。
They actually will move away from a space where they're being stimulated, conditioned place and real-time place aversion.
他们实际上会离开他们受到刺激、条件限制和实时厌恶的地方。
I don't like the feeling of these neurons being activated.
我不喜欢这些神经元被激活的感觉。
Please stop it.
请停止它。
And yet they would be prosocial.
但他们会是亲社会的。
And so for a long time, this was super confusing.
所以很长一段时间，这都是非常令人困惑的。
We couldn't understand it.
我们无法理解。
And then just because at the same time, we had a hunger study going on in the lab, we just thought about it like, I can eat food because it's delicious, and I want to eat this yummy treat, or I could eat because I'm super hungry.
然后就因为同时，我们在实验室进行了一项饥饿研究，我们只是想，我可以吃食物，因为它很美味，我想吃这种美味的食物，或者我可以吃东西，因为我超级饿。
I feel shaky.
我感觉摇摇欲坠。
I'm just going to eat this nasty fiber bar that's out of my backpack because I'm so desperate, and my blood sugar is dangerously low.
我只想吃掉背包里的这块令人讨厌的纤维棒，因为我太绝望了，而且我的血糖低得危险。
And so there's two reasons that you can eat, and one of them is uncomfortable.
所以你可以吃东西有两个原因，其中之一就是不舒服。
Hunger is not comfortable.
饥饿并不舒服。
It's not a good feeling to be hungry.
饥饿的感觉可不太好。
And so we thought about this, and that's kind of how we circularly came around to thinking, I think we've discovered the loneliness neurons, essentially.
所以我们思考了这个问题，这就是我们循环思考的方式，我认为我们本质上已经发现了孤独神经元。
And so what is loneliness?
那么什么是孤独呢？
And loneliness is this unpleasant need state of wanting social contact that would have this prosocial effect as well.
孤独是一种不愉快的需要状态，需要社会接触，这也会产生亲社会效应。
And so, that's basically the very serendipitous, loopty-loop way that I came to be studying how loneliness is represented in the brain.
所以，这基本上就是我开始研究孤独在大脑中如何表现的非常偶然的、循环的方式。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Amazing.
太棒了。
Before we talk a bit more about these loneliness neurons and some of their inputs and outputs in the brain, how has the discovery of these neurons perhaps changed the way that you organize your day and week and life, if at all?
在我们更多地讨论这些孤独神经元以及它们在大脑中的一些输入和输出之前，这些神经元的发现可能如何改变了你组织一天、一周和生活的方式（如果有的话）？
For instance, are you more aware of how much time you spend alone versus with others?
例如，您是否更清楚自己独处的时间与与他人相处的时间？
Are you more careful or discerning about who you spend your time with?
您是否对与谁共度时光更加谨慎或挑剔？
I ask this because there's so many examples for me in the neuroscience literature where I learn something new about how the brain works, and I think, "Oh, yeah.
我问这个问题是因为神经科学文献中有很多例子让我学到了关于大脑如何工作的新知识，我想，“哦，是的。
It makes a lot of sense why my sleep isn't great." It turns out that light exposure to the eyes at particular times of day really sets the whole body and brain into particular rhythms that explain why I was a little depressed when I was in graduate school, staying up all night doing experiments.
我的睡眠质量不佳是有道理的。”事实证明，在一天中的特定时间接触到眼睛的光线确实会让整个身体和大脑进入特定的节奏，这解释了为什么我在研究生院熬夜做实验时有点沮丧。
And I'd sleep much of the day and feel like I was getting eight, nine hours.
我一天的大部分时间都在睡觉，感觉自己睡了八、九个小时。
I don't get eight to nine hours now, but when I wake up early, for me personally, there's a bit of an antidepressant effect-
我现在没有八到九个小时的时间，但是当我早起时，对我个人来说，有一点抗抑郁的作用——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
as long as I slept the night before.
只要我前一天晚上睡觉。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Seasonal affect disorder is real.
季节性情感障碍是真实存在的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Right.
对。
So, I think as new information comes online, at least for me, it's changed the way that I organize my life in subtle-
所以，我认为随着新信息的出现，至少对我来说，它微妙地改变了我组织生活的方式——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or in not so subtle ways.
或者以不那么微妙的方式。
So the idea that there are neurons in the brain that encode loneliness, the absence of social contact, does that have you thinking, after a few days of managing the lab, which as you point out, you have a very large lab, lots of social interaction, but it's work context, social interaction.
因此，大脑中存在编码孤独、缺乏社交接触的神经元的想法是否让你思考，在管理实验室几天之后，正如你所指出的，你有一个非常大的实验室，有很多社交互动，但它是工作环境、社交互动。
Has that led you to think, "Hey, we should go out to dinner as a lab," or, "I should spend time with somebody who's not in science," or, "I should spend time by myself because I've had too much social interaction." I'm not asking for strict protocols here.
这是否让你想到，“嘿，我们应该去实验室吃晚饭”，或者“我应该花时间和非科学领域的人在一起”，或者“我应该花时间独处，因为我有太多的社交互动。”我在这里并不要求严格的协议。
I'm just wondering if you're willing to play in the sandbox of this with me a bit.
我只是想知道你是否愿意和我一起玩一下这个沙盒。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
How this information perhaps has shaped ...
这些信息可能如何塑造了......
some of your choices.
你的一些选择。
You personally.
你个人。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And to be very clear, I'm not asking you to dictate what other people do.
需要明确的是，我并不是要求你决定其他人做什么。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
No, of course.
不，当然。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Has it changed your social life?
它改变了你的社交生活吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
So it's really interesting that you ask this question, and now that you're asking it this way, of course, when I learn new things, I take them and implement them into my life.
所以你问这个问题真的很有趣，既然你这样问，当然，当我学到新东西时，我会把它们应用到我的生活中。
But to be honest, in the cycle of learning and studying and being curious, I actually think where I reside more is when something's going on with me, my research program, research is me-search.
但说实话，在学习、研究和好奇的循环中，我实际上认为我更多的居住地方是当我发生一些事情时，我的研究计划，研究是我的搜索。
It dictates what the research program evolves into.
它决定了研究计划的发展方向。
And so, for example, so I've just started studying loneliness a few years before the pandemic hit, and then the pandemic hit, and it was just a step function-like change.
举例来说，在大流行爆发前几年，我刚刚开始研究孤独感，然后大流行爆发，这只是一个类似功能的阶跃变化。
I went from, I'm never alone, unless you call being in an Uber alone, or being on a plane, and just constantly people in my office.
我说，我从不孤单，除非你称独自乘坐优步或乘坐飞机，并且不断有人在我的办公室里。
Even when I'm going to the bathroom, someone's waiting for me outside.
连我去洗手间的时候，都有人在外面等我。
It's like I'm hurrying in the bathroom.
就好像我正在浴室里匆匆忙忙一样。
I'm never alone.
我从来都不孤单。
There's four people in my bed kicking me in the face.
我床上有四个人踢我的脸。
There's just so much social contact.
社会接触实在是太多了。
And then boom, there would be a day I wouldn't see another- Not zero, but it was just extremely sudden drop of social contact when there's no more work and it was just that period of time, and it was very depressing.
然后繁荣，有一天我再也见不到了——不是零，而是当没有更多的工作时，社交接触突然消失了，就在那段时间，非常令人沮丧。
It was just this huge-- I felt like I was in free fall, and at first it was really disruptive, and I was worried about myself.
它是如此巨大——我感觉自己就像在自由落体一样，一开始它真的很具有破坏性，我很担心自己。
And then at some point, I adjusted to it, and then I got used to working from home.
然后在某个时候，我适应了它，然后我习惯了在家工作。
I got started a garden.
我开始建造一个花园。
I just started a different life pattern that involved a lot of alone time and an alone time personal life agrew where there wasn't any space for anything to grow before.
我刚刚开始了一种不同的生活模式，其中涉及大量独处时间和独处时间，个人生活在以前没有任何空间成长的地方成长。
And then I became comfortable with it.
然后我就适应了。
And so then I start thinking about that that's really where the idea of social homeostasis was born.
然后我开始思考这就是社会稳态理念的诞生之处。
This idea that, okay, why is it with acute social isolation, humans, monkeys, mice, you acutely isolate the individual from the social group, you reintroduce them to the social group, rebound of pro-social interaction.
这个想法是，好吧，为什么会出现严重的社会隔离，人类、猴子、老鼠，你将个体与社会群体严重隔离，你将他们重新引入社会群体，亲社会互动的反弹。
"Oh, so happy to see you." There's all these affiliative interactions, acute, a burst of affiliative interactions, whereas with chronic social isolation in humans, monkeys, mice, even flies, you reintroduce them to the social group and you get territorial behavior, aggression, avoidance, antisocial behavior, or just sort of a very different negative valence response to the exposure to the group.
“噢，很高兴见到你。”存在着所有这些密切的亲和互动，剧烈的、爆发性的亲和互动，而在人类、猴子、小鼠，甚至苍蝇的慢性社会隔离中，你将它们重新引入社会群体，你就会得到领地行为、攻击性、回避、反社会行为，或者只是对接触群体的一种非常不同的负价反应。
And so this, maybe people brushed it off for a long time as just, "Oh, it's confusing.
因此，也许人们很长一段时间都对它不屑一顾，只是说：“哦，这令人困惑。
This literature is inconsistent." Or maybe there's one model that makes it all make sense that is social homeostasis, where you're used to getting this at a certain point, and so my effector system gets activated.
这些文献是不一致的。”或者也许有一个模型可以让这一切变得有意义，那就是社会稳态，你习惯于在某个时刻得到这个，所以我的效应系统被激活。
I detect that I'm alone.
我发现我孤身一人。
I want more.
我想要更多。
The deficit's detected.
检测到赤字。
Then my effector systems gets activated, and then I start spinning all the systems that try to get me back into contact.
然后我的效应器系统被激活，然后我开始旋转所有试图让我恢复联系的系统。
I'm calling my friends.
我正在打电话给我的朋友们。
I'm texting my friend.
我正在给我的朋友发短信。
If I'm a mouse, I'm making ultrasonic vocalizations.
如果我是一只老鼠，我就会发出超声波发声。
I'm exploring outside of the burrow.
我正在洞穴外探索。
And then, if my friends don't call me back, they're like, "Sorry, we don't want to see anyone till end of COVID.
然后，如果我的朋友不给我回电话，他们就会说：“抱歉，在新冠疫情结束之前我们不想见到任何人。
Bye." Whatever it is.
再见。”不管是什么。
It's not working.
它不起作用。
My correction efforts are failing, or maybe a certain amount of time, we don't know.
我的纠正努力失败了，或者可能已经失败了一段时间，我们不知道。
Then I give up.
然后我放弃了。
I stop calling.
我不再打电话了。
I stop going out.
我不再出去了。
I just make a different life.
我只是创造不同的生活。
You don't leave the burrow, whatever it is.
不管它是什么，你都不能离开洞穴。
And in animals and humans, at least behaviorally, there's a near step function like drop-off of attempts to...
在动物和人类中，至少在行为上，有一个接近的函数，比如尝试的减少......
You could see, oh, then they just give up on dating after this one, whatever happens.
你可以看到，哦，那么无论发生什么，他们都会在这一次之后放弃约会。
There's some straw that breaks the camel's back, and then this person doesn't want to date anymore or doesn't want to go out anymore, whatever.
压垮骆驼的最后一根稻草，然后这个人就不想再约会了，或者不想再出去了，无论如何。
And what is that?
那是什么？
So that adaptation, then you're at a new baseline.
这样适应之后，你就处于一个新的基线上。
You're expecting now your new normal.
您现在正在期待新常态。
I'm expecting to have a gardening day at home alone, not see anyone, and then a bunch of people come over.
我期待着独自在家度过一个园艺日，看不到任何人，然后一群人过来。
It feels like a surplus.
感觉有点多余。
So my previous optimum, reintroduction to the social group, is now feeling like a surplus, an overload, overstimulated, and that's, I think, something that a lot of people experience, this whiplash of going into the pandemic and coming out of it.
因此，我之前的最佳选择，即重新融入社会群体，现在感觉像是一种过剩、一种超负荷、过度刺激，我认为，这就是很多人经历过的事情，这种进入大流行病并走出大流行病的痛苦。
Different people to different levels.
不同的人有不同的层次。
It depends on how much you isolated while you were in the pandemic.
这取决于您在大流行期间隔离的程度。
But I think thinking about your social set point as being flexible and dynamic was a new concept to me.
但我认为将你的社交设定点视为灵活和动态对我来说是一个新概念。
And then in my mind, the question is, what is the part of this process that is causing all these harmful health consequences, like shortened lifespan, mood disorders, et cetera?
然后在我看来，问题是，这个过程的哪一部分导致了所有这些有害的健康后果，例如寿命缩短、情绪障碍等？
Is it the initial detection that I'm missing something, an effector system activation?
是不是最初检测到我遗漏了某些东西，即效应器系统激活？
Because if that was the case, maybe I want to Band-Aid that.
因为如果是这样的话，也许我想创可贴。
Maybe I want to get a pet, get a Zoom buddy.
也许我想养一只宠物，养一个 Zoom 伙伴。
I don't know.
我不知道。
You would have different prescriptions and advice to give people if that were the case.
如果是这样的话，你会给人们提供不同的处方和建议。
Versus you would give almost opposite advice if the thing that's causing it is the set point adaptation.
相反，如果导致它的原因是设定点适应，那么您会给出几乎相反的建议。
Then you want to stave it off, versus if you wanted to accelerate getting into the set point.
然后你想推迟它，而不是如果你想加速进入设定点。
Which is better?
哪个更好？
Is it the adaptation, or is it trying to fix it?
是适应，还是试图修复？
And so in one case, you would want to ease off having the set point happen, the set point transition happen.
因此，在一种情况下，您可能希望放松设定点的发生，设定点转变的发生。
In the other case, rip it off like a Band-Aid, cold turkey, just adjust, and then you'll be fine.
在另一种情况下，像创可贴一样把它撕下来，冷火鸡，调整一下，然后就没事了。
Then you won't worry about it.
那么你就不用担心了。
Then you won't be lonely anymore because you'll just be comfortable being alone.
然后你就不会再感到孤独了，因为你会觉得独处很舒服。
People talk about cognitive flexibility, and I think it's sort of like that, but it's social flexibility.
人们谈论认知灵活性，我认为有点像那样，但它是社会灵活性。
I want to be able to be alone.
我希望能够独处。
I also want to be able to be in a large group and be comfortable.
我也希望能够在一个大团体中感到舒适。
And so I think what I've done, if anything, to change my lifestyle To accommodate these new insights I've had is to consciously create dynamic social experiences.
因此，我认为我所做的（如果有的话）是为了改变我的生活方式，以适应我所获得的这些新见解，那就是有意识地创造动态的社交体验。
Lots of social experiences, yes, but also protecting alone time, which I never did before.
是的，有很多社交经历，但也保护独处时间，这是我以前从未做过的。
I just gave it all away.
我刚刚把一切都给了。
And I realized that having that just made my social homeostatic system feel more elastic and flexible and resilient and less like a crisis if something-- I'm very comfortable being alone.
我意识到，这样做只会让我的社会稳态系统感觉更有弹性、更灵活、更有弹性，而且不像一场危机——如果有什么的话——我很舒服一个人呆着。
I'm super comfortable in my own skin now, and it requires investing in that relationship.
我现在对自己的处境非常满意，这需要对这种关系进行投资。
I like how you framed earlier, I think we were not recording yet, but the relationship with yourself as being a very important relationship.
我喜欢你之前的构图，我想我们还没有录音，但与你自己的关系是一种非常重要的关系。
And when I think about brain states, we don't know this yet, but my working model would be that different individuals represent their identities, and whenever they're present, it creates a unique ensemble of that combination of people being present.
当我思考大脑状态时，我们还不知道这一点，但我的工作模型是不同的个体代表他们的身份，每当他们出现时，它就会创建一个由在场人员组合组成的独特整体。
And being alone is also a unique state that cannot be achieved.
而孤独也是一种独特的无法达到的状态。
I have the brain state of being alone.
我有孤独的大脑状态。
I cannot achieve it if anyone else is around, and that's kind of the working model I have.
如果周围有其他人，我就无法实现这一目标，这就是我的工作模式。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I think what you're saying is essential for people to hear because it makes sense that loneliness would hurt.
我认为你所说的话对于人们来说很重要，因为孤独会带来伤害是有道理的。
It makes sense that some people are more extroverted, which I think is defined as getting energy from social interactions and resetting energy through social interactions, as opposed to introverted.
有些人更外向是有道理的，我认为外向的定义是从社交互动中获取能量并通过社交互动重置能量，而不是内向。
Which, by the way, folks, introverts like myself do enjoy social interaction, it's just that we reset through more solo or one-on-one time than we do in larger groups.
顺便说一句，像我这样内向的人确实喜欢社交互动，只是我们比在更大的团体中通过更多的独奏或一对一的时间来重新设置。
That's my understanding of the introversion-extroversion literature.
这就是我对内向-外向文学的理解。
We can revisit that.
我们可以重新审视这一点。
But this notion of social homeostasis is, I think, so key.
但我认为，社会稳态的概念非常关键。
Important enough that I think we probably want to redefine it as many times, or restate it rather, as many times as is necessary.
足够重要的是，我认为我们可能想多次重新定义它，或者更确切地说，根据需要多次重申它。
Because I believe what you're describing is the same thing that one would experience with food.
因为我相信你所描述的与人们对食物的体验是一样的。
If we eat a lot, we're consuming, I don't know, 3,500 calories a day, and then suddenly we only have access to 1,800 calories a day, it feels like a deficit because indeed it is.
如果我们吃得很多，我不知道，我们每天消耗 3,500 卡路里，然后突然我们每天只能摄入 1,800 卡路里，感觉就像赤字，因为事实确实如此。
Whereas after some period of time at 1,800 calories a day, 2,200 calories a day feels like relative abundance.
虽然每天摄入 1,800 卡路里一段时间后，每天摄入 2,200 卡路里感觉已经相对充足了。
When the pandemic hit, I certainly was unhappy about the state of affairs in the world, of course.
当然，当大流行来袭时，我当然对世界事态感到不满。
But I recall feeling like, "Oh my goodness, I finally don't have to commute 90 minutes in each direction to Stanford," because I lived in the East Bay at that time.
但我记得当时的感觉是，“天哪，我终于不用在去斯坦福的每个方向上花 90 分钟了”，因为当时我住在东湾。
I felt like I had time to do things I hadn't done in a long time.
我觉得我有时间做一些我很长时间没有做的事情。
And thanks to Zoom, I was able to get certain things done, not others.
感谢 Zoom，我能够完成某些事情，而不是其他事情。
Then after about six to eight months, when I realized that this is going to carry on for a while, I remember feeling quite lonely and making some efforts to repair that.
然后大约六到八个月后，当我意识到这种情况将持续一段时间时，我记得感到非常孤独，并做出了一些努力来修复它。
I think social media, not to harp on social media, could do either one of two things, and I don't know which, in the context of social homeostasis.
我认为社交媒体，不是在社交媒体上喋喋不休，可以在社会稳态的背景下做两件事中的任何一件，但我不知道是哪一件。
Either going on Instagram and seeing a lot of familiar faces and comments and accounts could make me feel like I'm getting some social interaction, such that then when I close that app and move to my work at my desk or something, which these days is mostly done solo, that I would feel like I had social interaction.
无论是在 Instagram 上看到很多熟悉的面孔、评论和账户，都会让我觉得自己正在进行一些社交互动，这样当我关闭该应用程序并转到办公桌前工作或做其他事情时（这些天大部分都是独自完成），我会觉得自己进行了社交互动。
Or perhaps it's the equivalent of calories that then makes me feel more isolated when I'm not in the app.
或者也许它相当于卡路里，当我不在应用程序中时，它会让我感到更加孤立。
Perhaps.
也许。
I find it to be distinctly different than the experience I had last night of going to dinner with someone I know quite well, sitting down and having an open-ended conversation, and deciding to close out the night only when we realized, "We got to get up tomorrow for work," so went our separate ways.
我发现这与我昨晚的经历截然不同，当时我和一个我很熟悉的人一起去吃晚饭，坐下来进行一场开放式的谈话，只有当我们意识到“我们明天必须起床去工作”时才决定结束这个夜晚，所以我们分道扬镳。
There's something that felt very sating about it.
有一种感觉非常满足。
So I wonder in this context of social homeostasis, whether or not the analogy of social interaction to caloric intake, is there another dimension to it where it's not just the total number of calories or the total amount of social interaction, but the quality of social interaction, the type of social interaction that actually feels like nourishment as opposed to just calories?
所以我想知道，在社会稳态的背景下，社交互动与卡路里摄入的类比是否存在另一个维度，它不仅仅是卡路里总数或社交互动总量，而是社交互动的质量，实际上感觉像是营养而不仅仅是卡路里的社交互动类型？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I love where you're going with this.
我喜欢你的做法。
And so when we wrote this review the first time, we were conceptualizing this idea of how your social set point can change based on if you're acutely isolated or chronically isolated.
因此，当我们第一次写这篇评论时，我们正在概念化这样的想法：你的社交设定点如何根据你是严重孤立还是长期孤立而改变。
And the Y-axis is the quality/quantity of detected social contact, which is so fuzzy.
Y 轴是检测到的社交接触的质量/数量，非常模糊。
And it's, again, one of the most challenging frontiers of this field because even if we measured every single component that the brain can detect of the social contact, so much of it is about expectation.
这又是该领域最具挑战性的前沿之一，因为即使我们测量了大脑可以检测到的社交接触的每一个组成部分，其中很大一部分都是关于期望的。
Like if I get a nod from the president, I'm like, "Oh my God, did the president just nod at me?
就像如果我得到总统的点头，我会想，“天哪，总统刚刚向我点头了吗？
That's so exciting." Versus if I get a nod from my partner, I'm like, "Oh my God, are they mad at me?
这太令人兴奋了。”相反，如果我得到伴侣的点头，我会想，“天啊，他们生我的气了吗？
What's going on?
发生什么事了？
Why did I just get a nod?" It totally matters.
为什么我只得到了点头？”这非常重要。
The gesture, you would need the identity.
手势，你需要身份。
There's many different cognitive systems that need to all plug into this wheel to make it spin.
有许多不同的认知系统需要全部插入这个轮子才能使其旋转。
So I think that's going to keep us busy for a while.
所以我认为这会让我们忙碌一段时间。
But in terms of your question about social media and when you switch from getting social media feedback and then doing work, I think it really depends.
但就你关于社交媒体的问题以及当你从获取社交媒体反馈转向工作时，我认为这确实取决于。
Social media is such a- Large category.
社交媒体是一个很大的类别。
You can have many different types of responses.
您可以有许多不同类型的响应。
Generally, I think the bounds of when you say social media versus a real-life interaction where you're with someone, maybe you're touching, maybe you're not touching, but even if you're just having conversation, you have inter-brain synchrony.
一般来说，我认为当你说社交媒体与现实生活中的互动时，你与某人的互动，也许你正在触摸，也许你没有触摸，但即使你只是在交谈，你也有脑间同步。
You are having a lot of inter-brain synchrony.
你的大脑之间有很多同步性。
You're in the same place.
你们在同一个地方。
But you can have inter-brain synchrony even on the phone.
但即使在手机上，你也可以实现大脑间的同步。
Just a voice call is actually a lot more inter-brain synchrony than messages.
实际上，语音通话比消息更能实现大脑间的同步。
I think text messages can bring a lot of anxiety, and there's been a lot of commentary about that.
我认为短信会带来很多焦虑，对此有很多评论。
And same thing with social media.
社交媒体也是如此。
I think the thing about social media that is perhaps the most harmful or negative, I think, in terms of when I'm thinking about social nourishment, sort of making that term up on the fly here, but it's almost a withdrawal.
我认为关于社交媒体的事情可能是最有害或最消极的，我认为，就当我思考社会营养而言，我有点在这里临时提出这个术语，但这几乎是一种撤退。
When social media is posted, it's not to you.
当社交媒体发布时，它不是针对您的。
It's to everyone.
这是给每个人的。
And you could be one of the people that receives this message, but it's not even to you.
您可能是收到此消息的人之一，但它甚至不是发给您的。
I'm not even talking to you, and I'm doing something that's without you.
我什至不跟你说话，我正在做一些没有你的事情。
Otherwise, you'd be in this picture and not reading on social media, listening to whatever.
否则，你就会出现在这张照片中，而不是在社交媒体上阅读、聆听任何内容。
So, it's like by almost exclusively, you're posting about activities that you're being excluded from, and someone's not even really talking to you, unless they're direct messaging you, but then I kind of consider that a different category if it's like a one-to-one communication.
所以，这几乎完全是，你发布了你被排除在外的活动，而某人甚至没有真正与你交谈，除非他们直接向你发送消息，但如果这就像一对一的交流，我会认为这是一个不同的类别。
Social media to me is a blast.
社交媒体对我来说是一种爆炸。
Catching up with someone on social media, I don't really see the merit of it because I'll just catch up with them when I catch up with them, and their kids will just be way older, but I don't know.
在社交媒体上追上某人，我并没有真正看到它的优点，因为当我追上他们时我就会追上他们，而他们的孩子只会大得多，但我不知道。
I'll actually really catch up with them than just see pictures of...
我实际上会真正赶上他们，而不仅仅是看照片......
I don't know.
我不知道。
I feel mixed about it because it's not a real connection, and it doesn't, for me, sate my social appetite to look at someone else's profile on social media.
我对此感到很复杂，因为这不是真正的联系，对我来说，它并不能满足我在社交媒体上查看别人的个人资料的社交胃口。
That doesn't actually do anything for the connection.
这实际上对连接没有任何作用。
I don't know, but I seriously doubt tons of oxytocin is released when I follow someone's feed about their vacation.
我不知道，但我严重怀疑当我关注某人关于假期的动态时，会释放大量催产素。
So, I don't know.
所以，我不知道。
I think that it definitely matters the quality, and social media is different than real-life interactions for many reasons.
我认为质量绝对很重要，并且出于多种原因，社交媒体与现实生活中的互动不同。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I really appreciate your willingness to explore in this context.
我非常感谢您愿意在这方面进行探索。
I think your mention of the fact that real-life interaction involves inter-brain synchrony, could be by text, scaling up from that by phone, FaceTime, or something akin to that, video chat.
我认为你提到现实生活中的交互涉及大脑间的同步，可以通过文本，通过电话、FaceTime 或类似的视频聊天来扩展。
On social media, there is comments back and forth, although that's time-consuming, and it's difficult because there's anonymity.
在社交媒体上，有来回的评论，尽管这很耗时，而且由于匿名而很困难。
People are in different places-
人们在不同的地方——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
different time zones.
不同的时区。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
If you don't know someone, it's different context.
如果你不认识某人，那情况就不同了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So, thanks to what you're describing, I'm really starting to think about social media as so different than in-person social interactions or by phone or video chat social interactions, and how those would differentially impact social homeostasis.
因此，由于您所描述的内容，我真的开始考虑社交媒体与面对面的社交互动或通过电话或视频聊天的社交互动如此不同，以及这些将如何对社会稳态产生不同的影响。
And it's leading me, at least, to conclude that, at least for me, that most social media interactions would create more hunger-
至少，它让我得出这样的结论：至少对我来说，大多数社交媒体互动会造成更多的饥饿——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
as opposed to a sating of the need for social interaction.
而不是满足社交互动的需要。
I have to be careful with the analogies here-
我必须小心这里的类比——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
but since I can do this, I was almost going to make an analogy between pornography-
但既然我能做到这一点，我几乎要拿色情做个类比——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Uh-huh
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
in-person sexual intimacy.
面对面的亲密性行为。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Uh-huh.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I suppose there's something in between where people could talk by phone, but we don't want to explore this in any kind of salacious way.
我想人们可以通过电话交谈，但我们不想以任何淫秽的方式探索这一点。
And then sexual intimacy with emotion, with positive emotion.
然后是带着情感、带着积极情绪的性亲密。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
There's a scaling factor there.
那里有一个比例因子。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And I'm not putting judgment or valence.
我不会做出判断或评价。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Uh-huh.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm certainly not.
我当然不是。
That's not my place.
那不是我的地方。
As a good friend of mine says, "I'm not a cop." I'm not telling people what to do they can't do.
正如我的一个好朋友所说：“我不是警察。”我不会告诉人们做什么是他们不能做的。
But it's so interesting to think about these circuits within us that create these, what you and I in our field call appetitive, the desire for, or aversive, the desire to move away from, type responses, and how so much of our life, aside from you, because you're regulating your social media and your email intake, but so much of life now is offering us the opportunity to tickle these circuits, or even hit them hard with a sledgehammer.
但想想我们体内的这些回路，它们创造了这些，你和我在我们的领域所说的食欲，渴望或厌恶，渴望摆脱打字反应，以及我们生活中的大部分时间，除了你之外，是多么有趣，因为你在调节你的社交媒体和电子邮件的摄入量，但现在的生活为我们提供了机会去刺激这些回路，甚至用大锤重击它们。
But we're not thinking about these homeostatic mechanisms of whether or not they're creating more hunger for-
但我们并没有考虑这些稳态机制是否会造成更多的饥饿——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or more satisfaction from.
或更满意。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And I cannot emphasize enough how critical this is, and I think that's because I'm somebody who does spend a fair amount of time on social media.
我无法充分强调这一点的重要性，我认为这是因为我确实在社交媒体上花费了大量时间。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
A lot of my work exists on social media, YouTube, et cetera, and I would hope that the work that we're putting into the world with this podcast is creating a satiation or the desire for information rather than a hunger for more.
我的很多作品都存在于社交媒体、YouTube 等网站上，我希望我们通过这个播客向世界展示的作品能够创造一种满足感或对信息的渴望，而不是对更多信息的渴望。
I do hope that, but I recognize that educational material on social media represents a tiny, tiny fraction of what's there.
我确实希望如此，但我认识到社交媒体上的教育材料只代表了现有内容的一小部分。
So, social homeostasis, I think is a term that if people haven't already stamped into their mind, they should be stamping into their mind, and Dr. K.
所以，我认为，如果人们还没有将社会稳态这个术语铭刻在他们的脑海中，那么他们应该将其铭刻在他们的脑海中，K 博士。
Thai deserves credit for that.
泰国人在这一点上值得赞扬。
I will say that, so you don't have to.
我会这么说，所以你不必这样做。
I've heard you say before, you wrote in a review something akin to social contact is either positive or negative when it's deficient or in excess, which is, I think, what you're describing as social homeostasis.
我以前听你说过，你在一篇评论中写道，当社会接触不足或过多时，类似社会接触的东西要么是积极的，要么是消极的，我认为这就是你所描述的社会稳态。
Is that right?
是这样吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
When we talked about the quality and quantity, just in terms of contact, just amount of contact, there's such a thing as just the right amount.
当我们谈到质量和数量时，就接触而言，只是接触的数量，有一个恰到好处的东西。
There's such a thing as too little.
有一种情况是太少了。
There's such a thing as too much.
有这样的事，太多了。
There's overcrowding.
那里人满为患。
It doesn't matter who.
谁并不重要。
It can be your family.
它可以是你的家人。
Sometimes it's a lot.
有时它很多。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Maybe your family.
也许是你的家人。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
It depends.
这取决于。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Do you know the famous Ram Dass quote?
你知道著名的拉姆·达斯名言吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
No.
不。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
"Think you're enlightened?
“你以为你开悟了？
Go spend a weekend with your parents." No disrespect, Mom and Dad.
去和父母一起过周末吧。”没有不尊重爸爸妈妈的意思。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I know.
我知道。
But I think with quality, it matters so much.
但我认为质量非常重要。
Like I was saying before, the same gesture from the president or my partner, it's going to feel very different to me whether that was a slight or-- It's relative to what is appropriate for our rank, for our prior history of relationships, for the environmental context.
就像我之前说过的，总统或我的伙伴做出同样的姿态，无论是轻微的还是——这与适合我们的级别、我们之前的关系历史、环境背景有关，我的感觉都会非常不同。
And so I think with social media in general, and I agree, social media is great for a lot of things.
所以我认为对于社交媒体来说，我同意，社交媒体在很多方面都很有用。
I think that having a podcast like this that is accessible to the public makes research more sustainable.
我认为拥有这样一个向公众开放的播客可以使研究更具可持续性。
So I have a lot of things to say about science communication that I'm very grateful for.
关于科学传播，我有很多话要说，对此我非常感激。
But in terms of social media, think about the mutual investment.
但在社交媒体方面，请考虑相互投资。
When you are interacting with someone on social media, what are they investing in this connection?
当你在社交媒体上与某人互动时，他们在这种联系上投入了什么？
So if I put out a post about my vacation that is public, I'm investing 0.0000000001% of my bandwidth to make contact with you.
因此，如果我发布一篇关于我的假期的公开帖子，我将投入 0.0000000001% 的带宽来与您取得联系。
You know what I mean?
你知道我的意思？
And so it scales up from them.
所以它会从它们扩展。
If you're making a voice call with someone, you're giving them at least most of your attention for the time that you're on the call.
如果您正在与某人进行语音通话，那么您在通话期间至少会将大部分注意力都集中在他们身上。
That's a lot, right?
这已经很多了，对吧？
So just thinking about the investment is another component.
因此，考虑投资是另一个组成部分。
There's the real-time component, and then there's the investment component.
有实时部分，然后有投资部分。
Who is it coming from?
它来自谁？
It matters.
这很重要。
If you're anonymous, I cannot tell what this means.
如果你是匿名的，我无法告诉你这意味着什么。
A compliment from anon- or a hate comment or a love comment from an anonymous person, I don't know what to do with this.
来自匿名者的赞美，或者来自匿名者的仇恨评论或爱评论，我不知道该怎么办。
I just literally don't know how to-- It doesn't really do anything for me because I don't know how to interpret it.
我只是真的不知道如何——它对我没有任何帮助，因为我不知道如何解释它。
It's almost uninterpretable without this other dimension that my brain has evolved to look for, I think.
我想，如果没有我的大脑进化来寻找的另一个维度，这几乎是无法解释的。
So that's speculation, but I think social media is operating in a way that is not ethological and not designed to make us feel better.
所以这只是猜测，但我认为社交媒体的运作方式不符合行为学，也不是为了让我们感觉更好而设计的。
It's just designed to make us want to use it.
它只是为了让我们想要使用它而设计的。
And I think a lot of this comes down to things that are relative.
我认为这很大程度上取决于相对的事情。
There's the famous observation, if a monkey sees another monkey get a cucumber, it's happy with the cucumber.
有一个著名的观察，如果一只猴子看到另一只猴子得到一根黄瓜，它会对黄瓜感到高兴。
But if a monkey sees the other monkey get grape, monkey wants grape.
但如果一只猴子看到另一只猴子得到葡萄，猴子就会想要葡萄。
You want to keep up with the Joneses.
你想跟上攀比的步伐。
If you see someone else having something, suddenly it feels like a loss that you don't have it, that you didn't even think of this thing that you needed, right?
如果你看到别人拥有某样东西，突然间你会感到一种失落，因为你没有它，你甚至没有想到你需要这个东西，对吗？
And so I think social media is exposing you to a lot of things that you don't-- It's like this parameter space you didn't have.
所以我认为社交媒体让你接触到很多你没有接触到的东西——就像你没有的参数空间一样。
There's all these things you didn't know you were missing that you didn't need to miss out on.
所有这些你不知道自己错过了但不需要错过的东西。
And so we have this whole project now.
现在我们有了整个项目。
We have two projects, one that's looking at social isolation and following what happens with social isolation across the time course to try to understand, is it the amount of time, or is it the amount of effort that you put into correcting that deficit that leads you to the giving up state change?
我们有两个项目，一个是研究社会隔离，并跟踪社会隔离在整个时间过程中发生的情况，试图了解，是时间的长短，还是你为纠正这种缺陷而付出的努力，导致你放弃状态改变？
And another project that is about the quality of social contact, specifically social exclusion.
另一个项目是关于社会接触的质量，特别是社会排斥。
So a different kind of deficit.
这是一种不同类型的赤字。
You're with your other animals, but there's this-- It's four animals that are cage-mates, and three animals are on one side able to drink a chocolate milkshake, and the other animal's excluded.
你和其他动物在一起，但有这样的情况——四只动物是同笼的，其中三只动物一侧可以喝巧克力奶昔，而另一只动物则被排除在外。
And this one excluded animal will go up against the divider and look frantic and exhibit lots of behaviors that we would associate in humans with fear of missing out, trying to reunite with the group, trying to get the attention of the group, trying to get over there, a lot of attending, looks frantic, and studying what we think is actually going on.
这种被排除在外的动物会冲向分隔线，看起来很疯狂，并表现出许多我们认为人类害怕错过的行为，试图与群体重聚，试图引起群体的注意，试图走到那里，大量参与，看起来很疯狂，并研究我们认为实际上正在发生的事情。
And so I think coming up with paradigms to try to probe social isolation, and we don't even know what behaviors animals exhibit when they're lonely.
因此，我认为提出范式来尝试探索社会孤立，我们甚至不知道动物在孤独时会表现出什么行为。
This is a challenging field because there's no number of lever presses.
这是一个具有挑战性的领域，因为没有多少杠杆按压。
There's no script to follow, and there's no trial structure.
没有可遵循的脚本，也没有试验结构。
And so for a neuroscientist, neuroscientists were trained to be rigorous about our statistics because of the stochastic nature of neural activity and how do we process things without a trial structure?
因此，对于神经科学家来说，由于神经活动的随机性以及我们如何在没有试验结构的情况下处理事物，神经科学家被训练对我们的统计数据保持严格？
How do we be statistically rigorous when the animal is just free-floating, deciding whatever it wants to do?
当动物只是自由漂浮，决定它想做什么时，我们如何在统计上保持严格？
And so that is kind of the crucible that my lab is working through right now to establish pipelines and techniques and ways to quantify social behaviors and peel off all the layers.
因此，这就是我的实验室目前正在经历的严峻考验，旨在建立量化社会行为并剥离所有层面的管道、技术和方法。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I love where your lab is headed, which just means we're going to have to have you back on here again at some point in the future to get the answers to those questions that you're now addressing.
我喜欢你们实验室的发展方向，这只是意味着我们将不得不让你们在未来的某个时候再次回到这里，以获得你们现在正在解决的那些问题的答案。
I've long thought that we really know how we feel about somebody when something good happens to them or for them.
我一直认为，当某人发生好事或为他们而发生好事时，我们真的知道我们对某人的感受。
And I never quite understood this at the level of mechanisms.
我从来没有在机制层面上完全理解这一点。
How could I?
我怎么能呢？
That's not what my lab studies.
这不是我实验室研究的内容。
But I think that there's a natural sort of empathy, if one is a healthy, empathic person, to seeing a member of our own species, and hopefully, also to observing the members of other species, experiencing some discomfort.
但我认为，如果一个人是一个健康的、有同理心的人，看到我们自己物种的成员，并且希望也能观察其他物种的成员，经历一些不适，就会产生一种自然的同理心。
We don't like that, nor should we.
我们不喜欢这样，也不应该这样。
So another human is in emotional pain.
所以另一个人正处于情感痛苦之中。
The wail or the cry of loss is one that just, I think, for any person who's empathically attuned is just like, "Ugh." Or an animal, you hear an animal in pain, like, goodness.
我认为，对于任何具有同理心的人来说，失去亲人的哀号或哭声只是“呃”。或者是动物，你听到动物在痛苦中，就像善良一样。
I'm not here to diagnose sociopathy, but if that doesn't evoke at least some sort of response of like, "Oh, gosh, what I wouldn't do to remove that pain." That their pain is your pain, empathy.
我来这里不是为了诊断反社会人格，但如果这至少不能引起某种反应，比如“哦，天哪，我不会做什么来消除这种痛苦。”他们的痛苦就是你的痛苦，同理心。
That seems like a very reflexive circuit, or at least I would hope so.
这似乎是一个非常自反的电路，或者至少我希望如此。
But When somebody experiences something positive, I think it's normal and healthy to have a graded set of responses.
但当有人经历积极的事情时，我认为有一套分级的反应是正常和健康的。
If it's somebody that we really love, we may not even know them.
如果我们真正爱的人，我们可能根本不认识他们。
We think, "Yeah." You're just reflexively happy for them.
我们想：“是的。”你只是本能地为他们感到高兴。
Somebody that we dislike, I think there's a more natural tendency to be like, "Oh." As opposed to if that person were in pain, I would like to think that even if one didn't like them, that you would think, "Oh, that sucks.
对于我们不喜欢的人，我认为更自然的倾向是“哦”。与如果那个人感到痛苦相反，我想即使一个人不喜欢他们，你也会想，“哦，那很糟糕。
I'm really sorry to hear that." So I feel like there's some asymmetry in these empathic interactions.
听到这个消息我真的很遗憾。”所以我觉得这些共情互动存在一些不对称性。
They're both empathy.
他们俩都是有同理心的。
One has negative valence, pain.
一种具有负价，即疼痛。
The other one has positive valence, another member of our species or other species receiving reward, and we can delight in that.
另一种具有正价，我们物种的另一个成员或其他物种收到奖励，我们可以为此感到高兴。
I'm almost embarrassed to admit how many ferret and otter and raccoon accounts I follow because I love seeing them eat.
我几乎不好意思承认我关注了多少雪貂、水獭和浣熊的账户，因为我喜欢看到它们吃东西。
I love seeing the little hands of the raccoons.
我喜欢看到浣熊的小手。
There's some great raccoon accounts, by the way.
顺便说一句，有一些很棒的浣熊帐户。
And I delight in it.
我很高兴。
I want to see the raccoons win.
我想看到浣熊队获胜。
I don't know why.
我不知道为什么。
I love animals, and so I suppose that's why.
我喜欢动物，所以我想这就是原因。
So do you think that we are asymmetrically wired for this empathic attunement?
那么你认为我们对于这种共情协调的连接是不对称的吗？
Can we observe that in other animals?
我们能在其他动物身上观察到这一点吗？
I realize this might not be squarely in the wheelhouse of what your lab is focusing on, but I think it relates enough to the topics that we're covering today that if you'd like to speculate on what might be going on there.
我意识到这可能不完全是您实验室关注的重点，但我认为它与我们今天讨论的主题有足够的相关性，如果您想推测那里可能发生的事情。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I can definitely speculate.
我绝对可以推测。
Something that we think about a lot, but again, there's some level of this, which is semantics, I think of empathy as being defined as being able to understand another animal's emotion and also taking it on.
我们经常思考这一点，但同样，这有一定程度的意义，即语义，我认为同理心被定义为能够理解另一种动物的情感并接受它。
So I think something that's a little bit different than emotional contagion.
所以我认为这与情绪感染有点不同。
I see a panic, I'm in a group of panics.
我看到了恐慌，我陷入了恐慌之中。
It's not the same thing as empathy.
这与同理心不是一回事。
Empathy is often used in certain contexts, like feeling sorry for someone, and it's maybe different for feeling happy for someone.
同理心经常在某些情况下使用，比如为某人感到难过，而为某人感到高兴可能会有所不同。
And this is something I was just talking about with one of my graduate students the other day.
这是我前几天刚刚和我的一位研究生谈论的事情。
Is there an asymmetry in empathy for positive and negative, or is it just what we've studied?
对积极和消极的同理心是否存在不对称，或者这只是我们所研究的？
It's easier to study this.
研究这个比较容易。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
We don't know the answer, but I guess another conceptual framework to put out there, I'm not saying it's correct, it's I think just a good tool for debate, but it's not so much that there's good people and bad people, and that good people are empathic and bad people aren't.
我们不知道答案，但我想提出另一个概念框架，我并不是说它是正确的，我认为这只是一个辩论的好工具，但并不是说有好人和坏人，也没有说好人有同理心，坏人没有。
It's not quite so simple.
事情并不那么简单。
I guess the way I think about it is whether you view this other social agent as having aligned goals or agendas as you, or are they adversarial?
我想我的想法是，你是否认为其他社交代理与你有一致的目标或议程，或者他们是敌对的？
So if they're in your alliance, whatever that means, broadly defined, versus adversarial, you would have a different feeling.
因此，如果他们是你的联盟，无论这意味着什么，广义上的，还是敌对的，你都会有不同的感觉。
I was just watching this.
我只是在看这个。
Okay, this is just sort of over-sharing, but this is a podcast, not a primary research journal, so I can just say things, right?
好吧，这只是一种过度分享，但这是一个播客，而不是主要的研究期刊，所以我只能说一些话，对吧？
So I watch some trash TV sometimes, and these reality competition shows where it's like, "Then you vote the two best friends into elimination, and they have to eliminate each other." Or whatever.
所以我有时会看一些垃圾电视，以及这些真人秀竞赛节目，就像是，“然后你投票选出两个最好的朋友进行淘汰，他们必须互相淘汰。”或者无论如何。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mildly sadistic.
轻度虐待狂。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
But then they're best friends, and then it's basically mutually exclusive.
但他们是最好的朋友，然后基本上是互相排斥的。
Either you can care about your friend and feel bad not wanting to send them home, or it's game time, and you compete.
要么你可以关心你的朋友，但因为不想送他们回家而感到难过，要么是比赛时间到了，你要竞争。
And so you can see different individuals wrestling with these two brain states and what to do.
所以你可以看到不同的人在这两种大脑状态下挣扎以及该怎么做。
My speculation is that viewing someone as a competitor, and they're an adversary, they are standing in the way of me getting what I want, empathy goes down.
我的猜测是，将某人视为竞争对手，他们是对手，他们阻碍我得到我想要的东西，同理心就会下降。
It's inversely correlated to empathy if you are viewed as a competitor.
如果你被视为竞争对手，它与同理心成反比。
So things that would contribute to you creating a model where a social agent is an adversary as opposed to a potential ally is really what it's going to come down to the degree that you feel empathy.
因此，有助于你创建一个模型的事情，其中社交代理是对手而不是潜在的盟友，这实际上取决于你感到同理心的程度。
The second you realize someone's out to get you, no empathy.
当你意识到有人想抓你的时候，你就没有同理心了。
And no more empathy for this person who I just realized is out to get me or something like that.
我刚刚意识到这个人是为了抓我或类似的事情而不再产生同情心。
Or in the case of being isolated for a long period of time, you've learned to exist on your own now.
或者在长期与世隔绝的情况下，你现在已经学会了独自存在。
Maybe everyone's your competitor or adversary.
也许每个人都是你的竞争对手或对手。
And none of you guys are really helping me do my day-to-- I don't really need you guys for anything, so I'm eating this food or whatever.
你们中没有人真正帮助我做我的日常工作——我真的不需要你们做任何事情，所以我正在吃这些食物或其他什么。
I think it just becomes different when you're part of an ecosystem and you realize that there's consequences and every action that you take, every act of altruism will be recognized, and there's some score being kept when you're part of a society.
我认为，当你成为一个生态系统的一部分，并且你意识到这会产生后果，你采取的每一个行动，每一个利他行为都会得到认可，并且当你成为社会的一部分时，会有一些分数被保留，情况就会变得不同。
And then when you're not, there's none of that.
当你不在的时候，一切就都没有了。
And so I think the degree to which you're integrated in society, it's almost like the extracellular matrix.
所以我认为你融入社会的程度，它几乎就像细胞外基质。
This is an out-there analogy, but when you think about synapses being made, connections between people, there's also all the support material that facilitates certain patterns and certain connections from happening or not happening.
这是一个很明显的类比，但是当你想到突触的形成、人与人之间的联系时，还有所有支持材料可以促进某些模式和某些联系的发生或不发生。
And I think it's stuff that we haven't quantified yet, but I think those things should be studied.
我认为我们还没有量化这些东西，但我认为应该研究这些东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Years ago, I worked with at-risk kids, and a fair number of them had just arrived from a region of the world that had undergone dramatic sociopolitical evolution and change.
几年前，我与高危儿童一起工作，其中相当多的人刚刚来自世界上经历了巨大社会政治演变和变化的地区。
And it was remarkable because we would put out a tray of food to eat, and then the format was everyone would serve themselves, and then you could go get more food if everyone finished.
这很了不起，因为我们会拿出一盘食物来吃，然后格式是每个人都自己服务，然后如果每个人都吃完了，你就可以去拿更多的食物。
And a couple of these kids that had come from these very deprived environments would just take more than their share.
一些来自这些非常贫困的环境的孩子只会得到比他们应得的更多的东西。
It was clear that by taking that, other kids weren't going to get any.
很明显，如果接受了这个，其他孩子就不会得到任何东西。
And I remember telling them, "Listen, we all have to eat more or less equal parts, and then there is more.
我记得告诉他们，“听着，我们都必须吃或多或少相等的份量，然后还有更多。
We can get more." And I'll never forget this kid's response.
我们可以获得更多。”我永远不会忘记这个孩子的反应。
He just turned to me and he said, "You can't hit us." And I said, "That's true.
他只是转向我说：“你不能打我们。”我说：“确实如此。
I can't hit you." And he said, "So I'm just going to take as much as I want." And this took several weeks, actually, to work out, right?
我打不了你。”他说：“所以我想拿多少就拿多少。”实际上，这需要几周的时间才能解决，对吧？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Because of course, I would never hit him and, but-
因为当然，我永远不会打他，但是——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Everyone's his adversary.
每个人都是他的对手。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Everyone's his adversary.
每个人都是他的对手。
And it was remarkable to see the evolution of these-
看到这些的演变是很了不起的——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
kids across that.
孩子们穿过那。
It was about three and a half weeks.
大约三个半星期。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
At which point, they actually became incredibly good at sharing.
从那时起，他们实际上变得非常擅长分享。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But it took a lot of work.
但这需要做很多工作。
It was almost as if even though they knew more trays of food could arrive-
就好像即使他们知道还会有更多托盘的食物到达——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
not limitless, but there was an abundance of food.
虽然不是无限的，但食物却很丰富。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
In the moment, they were solving for that short-horizon moment.
此刻，他们正在解决那个短暂的时刻。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yep.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And here we're talking about human beings-
我们在这里谈论的是人类——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
capable of speech and expression-
有言语和表达能力——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
of emotion, et cetera, and he understood the fundamental rule, which was I couldn't hit him, therefore, he could basically do what he wanted without that consequence.
情感等等，他明白基本规则，就是我不能打他，因此，他基本上可以做他想做的事，而不会产生那个后果。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And-
还有——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Which is the main consequence he'd face-
这是他将面临的主要后果——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Right
右
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
apparently.
显然。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Exactly.
正是如此。
And I remember, it was so striking.
我记得，它是如此引人注目。
I'll never forget that.
我永远不会忘记这一点。
And the evolution to a different, more altruistic state was wonderful, especially because of what I think what it did for him.
进化到一种不同的、更加无私的状态是美妙的，特别是因为我认为这对他做了什么。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But I'll never forget thinking, this is a human being who's essentially functioning like an animal.
但我永远不会忘记，这是一个本质上像动物一样运作的人。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Like an animal.
像动物一样。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I had a bulldog mastiff, and he was kind to other dogs, but if there were unattended to toys at the dog park, he was going to pick them up.
我养了一只斗牛獒，他对其他狗很友善，但如果狗公园里有无人看管的玩具，他就会把它们捡起来。
And he'd put them right in front of himself and his, this was down in San Diego, and he'd sit with them right in front of him, and I'm like, "Costello, you're not going to play with all those toys." But if another dog came, and he wouldn't, he would just sit in front of them.
他把它们放在他自己和他的面前，这是在圣地亚哥，他和它们坐在他面前，我说，“科斯特洛，你不会玩所有这些玩具。”但如果另一只狗来了，而他不肯，他就会坐在他们面前。
But another dog would come and try and take one of those toys-
但另一只狗会过来尝试拿走其中一个玩具——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and he had these giant mitts, and he would just, boom, slam it down and drag it back.
他有一双巨大的手套，他会“砰”地一声把它摔下来，然后把它拖回来。
And so it seems that there are these very primitive circuits about resource-
因此，似乎存在这些关于资源的非常原始的电路-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
allocation and protection of resources that in the absence of understanding that there's a much bigger landscape, like Costello eventually figured out, tug's a fun game.
资源的分配和保护，如果不了解更大的景观，就像科斯特洛最终发现的那样，拖船是一项有趣的游戏。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Although most dogs couldn't play tug with him, there were a few that could.
虽然大多数狗不能和他一起玩拔河游戏，但也有一些狗可以。
He was a 90-pound bulldog.
他是一只90磅重的斗牛犬。
He had just a neck like this.
他只有这样的脖子。
But to see this in a human being was just so striking.
但在人类身上看到这一点真是太令人震惊了。
As you're describing this, it's like this adversary versus neutral versus friend.
正如你所描述的，这就像对手与中立者与朋友之间的关系。
It's just so striking, and it's got to be that the brain, as complex as it is, I've often wondered, and our colleague Marcus Meister once said that, "Circuits in the brain can broadly be divided into these sorts of circuits, into yum, yuck, and meh." Right?
这真是太惊人了，我经常想知道，大脑虽然很复杂，但它一定是这样的，我们的同事马库斯·梅斯特曾经说过，“大脑中的电路可以大致分为这些类型的电路，分为美味、恶心和meh。”正确的？
Which is far too simplistic, right?
这太简单了，对吧？
But who am I to argue with the great Marcus Meister?
但我有什么资格与伟大的马库斯·梅斯特争论呢？
And I'm not going to.
我不会这么做。
But it's sort of interesting, we sort of bin our responses into, "Yes, okay.
但这有点有趣，我们将我们的回答归入“是的，好的。
Let's cooperate," or, "Yes, let's cooperate."
我们合作吧，”或者，“是的，我们合作吧。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
You're summarizing valance.
你正在总结价。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Or, "No way, no chance."
或者，“不可能，没有机会。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Uh-huh.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Like, mine.
就像，我的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Versus like, "Meh." And as complex as I'd like to think the brain is, and we are, maybe when it comes down to behaviors and how we interpret input and our decision-making, maybe it's really all about feelings of safety and feelings of relatedness.
与“嗯”之类的词相对。尽管我认为大脑和我们都很复杂，但也许当涉及到行为以及我们如何解释输入和决策时，也许这实际上都是关于安全感和关联感。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I think it's also about the experiential statistics that you have been exposed to.
我认为这也与您接触过的经验统计数据有关。
So this boy who says, "I'm going to take all this food because you can't hit me," we don't know, but the picture that grows out of my imagination is this boy's had a lot of experiences of people hitting him.
所以这个男孩说：“我要拿走所有这些食物，因为你不能打我。”我们不知道，但从我的想象中浮现出的画面是这个男孩有很多被人打他的经历。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
A lot of experiences of not enough food.
吃不饱的经历有很多。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And not a lot of experiences of strangers being nice to them.
而且陌生人对他们友善的经历并不多。
Like, not a lot of people that you could trust.
就像，你可以信任的人不多。
That's the experiential statistics that would fit this model.
这就是适合该模型的经验统计数据。
Someone like you, who's coming in being like, "Oh, no, there's more food.
像你这样的人进来时会说：“哦，不，还有更多食物。
I'm going to give you guys more food for free.
我会免费给你们提供更多食物。
I'm going to give you even more food for..." The experiential statistics are you've come from a world of abundance where people are generosity.
我会给你更多的食物……”经验统计显示，你来自一个富裕的世界，那里的人们都很慷慨。
You've learned being generous can make you have a lifelong friend and all these amazing opportunities that make your quality of life, that you're never going to think about food again.
您已经了解到，慷慨可以让您拥有一生的朋友，所有这些令人惊叹的机会可以提高您的生活质量，让您永远不会再考虑食物。
It's about the relationships because that's your experiential statistics.
这是关于关系的，因为那是你的经验统计数据。
And so I think this is such a profound concept about neuroscience and the brain, about our social structures and how they form what makes a structure egalitarian or despotic, right?
所以我认为这是一个关于神经科学和大脑、关于我们的社会结构以及它们如何形成平等或专制结构的深刻概念，对吗？
How can we, as individuals, take a structure that is one format, let's say despotic hierarchy, and evolve it into something that's more egalitarian?
作为个人，我们如何才能采用一种单一格式的结构，比如说专制的等级制度，并将其演变成更加平等的结构？
And what are the levers, and what are the parameter spaces that we can pull on?
我们可以利用哪些杠杆，以及哪些参数空间？
And I think these are questions that, it's hard to think of what could be more important.
我认为这些问题很难想象哪个更重要。
But that perspective of thinking about from experiential statistics, I think really supports the need of diversity.
但我认为从经验统计角度思考确实支持多样性的需要。
Bringing in people to academia who've had very different experiences, experiential statistics, different biases of what they're going to think is interesting to work on and study, and obviously, in every sector of our society.
将具有不同经历、经验统计、对他们的想法有不同偏见的人引入学术界，显然是在我们社会的各个领域进行研究和工作。
So I think, how can we get more diverse sets of experiences represented at each decision-making body that really matters?
所以我想，我们怎样才能在每个真正重要的决策机构中获得更多样化的经验呢？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Amen to that.
阿门。
And also to be able to understand that differences in background experience require that we, earlier you mentioned theory of mind, this ability to get into the mindset of others and sort of assume or presume certain mindsets in order to hopefully create a more benevolent environment for everybody.
而且，为了能够理解背景经验的差异，我们需要有能力了解他人的思维方式，并假设或假设某些思维方式，以便有希望为每个人创造一个更仁慈的环境。
It requires realizing that some people's social interactions have been terrible or traumatic.
它需要认识到有些人的社交互动是可怕的或痛苦的。
It requires a departure from self, essentially.
本质上，它需要背离自我。
It requires this empathy or something like empathy in all directions, right?
它需要这种同理心或类似全方位的同理心，对吗？
In all directions.
四面八方。
It requires that everyone at least make some effort to try and understand that.
它要求每个人至少付出一些努力来尝试并理解这一点。
I do wonder, and maybe someone would put on the comments on YouTube, maybe you're aware, Kay, of whether or not kids are being trained in that beautiful period of time of life where neuroplasticity is so robust.
我确实想知道，也许有人会在 YouTube 上发表评论，也许你知道，凯，孩子们是否正在接受神经可塑性如此强大的美好时期的训练。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Although it does continue throughout the lifespan, it is especially robust early in life to be, in a healthy way, empathically attuned.
尽管它确实会持续整个生命周期，但在生命早期以健康的方式进行同理心协调尤其强大。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
To be able to have theory of mind.
能够有心智理论。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
More robust theory of mind.
更稳健的心智理论。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
So I'm a parent.
所以我是一名家长。
I have two kids that are in public school, and I think their public school is rated, it's fine, but-
我有两个孩子在公立学校上学，我认为他们的公立学校得到了评级，这很好，但是-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We won't say where you live.
我们不会透露你住在哪里。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
It's all right.
没关系。
But at their school, they definitely do get education about more holistic health and emotional regulation, I think, and considering others.
但我认为，在他们的学校，他们确实接受了有关更全面的健康和情绪调节的教育，并考虑了其他人。
That's a big focus of the school, and I think that's actually really important.
这是学校的重点，我认为这实际上非常重要。
Again, I'm super biased from my upbringing, but my kids are going to learn math whenever it's time to learn the math.
再说一次，我对自己的成长经历有很大的偏见，但我的孩子们只要该学数学的时候就会学数学。
They'll learn it whenever they need it.
他们会在需要的时候学习它。
Whenever they need it, they're going to learn it in a couple, I don't know, a couple of weeks, and figure it out, do the thing.
每当他们需要它时，他们都会在几周内，我不知道，几周内学习它，然后弄清楚，做这件事。
Most of the things that they learn, they're going to forget them and then have to relearn them.
他们学到的大部分东西，他们都会忘记，然后不得不重新学习。
So what are the things that you're going to really need to know no matter what you choose to do?
那么，无论您选择做什么，您真正需要了解的事情是什么？
And I think regulating your own emotions and engaging other individuals in a healthy, sustainable way that, and I mean sustainable in terms of the longevity of the relationships, and I think those are the things that end up really mattering.
我认为调节自己的情绪并以健康、可持续的方式与其他人互动，我的意思是在关系的长久性方面可持续，我认为这些才是最终真正重要的事情。
So I think also this question about exposure to abundance and scarcity is really interesting, too.
所以我认为这个关于丰富和稀缺的问题也非常有趣。
I don't know if that's a direction we want to go into, so.
我不知道这是否是我们想要进入的方向，所以。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Please.
请。
Yeah.
是的。
Well, I think this whole, it sort of sounds new agey when I say the abundance mindset, right?
好吧，我认为当我说丰富的心态时，这听起来有点新时代，对吧？
You see this in people who are recently divorced or newly single for whatever reason.
你可以在最近离婚或因某种原因刚刚单身的人身上看到这一点。
Is the world a place where finding partnership is relatively straightforward with some work involved?
世界上是否存在一个相对容易找到合作伙伴并涉及一些工作的地方？
Or is it like there's only one person on the planet for you, and they might be dead already, right?
或者这个星球上对你来说只有一个人，而且他们可能已经死了，对吗？
If someone else's business takes off, maybe someone you went to college or high school with, or their lab is doing really well, you're seeing them tremendously successful, but maybe they made $100 million in a company acquisition.
如果别人的生意腾飞，也许是和你一起上大学或高中的人，或者他们的实验室做得很好，你会看到他们取得了巨大的成功，但也许他们在公司收购中赚了 1 亿美元。
Do you immediately feel like, "Oh, those are resources that I don't have even though I'm not in that business"?
您是否立即感觉“哦，这些是我没有的资源，即使我不从事该行业”？
Or do you see it as, "Wow, there must be a lot of money out there that people could earn and potentially make"?
或者你是否认为，“哇，人们可以赚到并有可能赚到很多钱”？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I really prescribe and believe in this abundance versus scarcity mindset framework.
我确实相信这种丰富与稀缺的心态框架。
I think there's absolutes, like the example we just talked about, the kid, there's just not food.
我觉得这是绝对的，就像我们刚才讲的例子，孩子，就是没有食物。
There's scarcity of food.
食物短缺。
Fact.
事实。
Of course, there are individuals that experience scarcity of various different needs.
当然，有些人会经历各种不同需求的稀缺。
But many of us, we reach a threshold of abundance, and then it becomes relative.
但我们中的许多人，达到了富裕的门槛，然后它就变得相对了。
We have everything we absolutely physiologically need if we're not comparing ourselves to anyone else.
如果我们不将自己与其他人进行比较，我们就拥有生理上绝对需要的一切。
But then once we enter the social arena, comparison is essential.
但一旦进入社交舞台，比较就必不可少了。
Why do we compare ourselves to others?
我们为什么要与他人比较？
It's ingrained because social status is something that we need to attend to.
它是根深蒂固的，因为社会地位是我们需要关注的事情。
A large part of our brain is devoted to representing our relative social rank.
我们大脑的很大一部分致力于代表我们的相对社会地位。
What's our place with a social network?
我们在社交网络中的地位是什么？
What's the dynamic?
动态如何？
How do we fit into the social landscape?
我们如何融入社会格局？
And comparison, I think, is just a way to do that, that's been evolutionarily conserved, perhaps for less of a good purpose at this point because so many of our basic survival needs are met for the large majority of humans on the planet today.
我认为，比较只是做到这一点的一种方法，它在进化上是保守的，也许在这一点上没有什么好的目的，因为当今地球上绝大多数人类的许多基本生存需求都得到了满足。
Not for everybody, of course, but yet what is the percentage of humans who feel they have everything that they desire?
当然，并不适合所有人，但是有多少人认为自己拥有了自己想要的一切？
How many people feel like they don't want for anything, and it's interesting because having things doesn't make you have an abundance mindset.
有多少人感觉他们什么都不想要，这很有趣，因为拥有东西并不会让你拥有丰富的心态。
Having abundance is not sufficient to give you the mindset of abundance.
拥有丰富并不足以让你拥有丰富的心态。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That's such an important statement.
这是一个非常重要的声明。
I don't think that could be restated enough.
我认为这一点还不够重述。
You've studied social rank.
你已经研究过社会等级。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
People hear social rank and hierarchy, and I have to guess that at least some neurons in their amygdala and other areas of the brain get buzzing because as soon as people hear social rank, they, I think, naturally start thinking, "Well, where am I in this social rank, and how do I feel about how that rank is established?" And all sorts of interesting and important questions.
人们听到社会等级和等级制度，我不得不猜测，至少他们的杏仁核和大脑其他区域的一些神经元会嗡嗡作响，因为一旦人们听到社会等级，我想他们会自然地开始思考，“好吧，我在这个社会等级中处于什么位置，我对这个等级是如何建立的感觉如何？”以及各种有趣且重要的问题。
Some people get very angry that there are billionaires on this planet.
有些人对这个星球上有亿万富翁感到非常愤怒。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And especially given that in most major cities, you don't have to go very far to see people who have very limited resources.
特别是考虑到在大多数大城市，您不必走很远就能看到资源非常有限的人。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Social rank is something that I think exists in every little niche.
我认为社会等级存在于每个小领域。
Like at work, and maybe even in the family, there's social rank.
就像在工作中一样，甚至在家庭中，也存在社会等级。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I have a sibling.
我有一个兄弟姐妹。
I remember who got more of a piece of cake, like even a slight difference in that, was something that my older sibling would point out, because she was more effective at getting the slightly larger piece of cake.
我记得谁得到了更多的一块蛋糕，即使是一点点的差异，我的哥哥也会指出，因为她在得到稍微大一点的蛋糕方面更有效。
Because until I was big enough to fend for myself.
因为直到我长大到可以自己照顾自己为止。
And my friends with larger sibling pools in their family, it was especially competitive.
我的朋友们家里有更多的兄弟姐妹，竞争尤其激烈。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I don't know if you've ever gone to a meal with somebody who had a lot of siblings.
我不知道你是否曾经和一个有很多兄弟姐妹的人一起吃饭过。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
They eat fast.
他们吃得很快。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Different resource allocation methods than if they were an only child-
与独生子女不同的资源分配方式
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
versus one sibling.
与一个兄弟姐妹。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
There's variation here.
这里有变化。
I'm generalizing.
我是一概而论。
But yeah, let's talk about social rank.
但是，是的，我们来谈谈社会等级。
What do we know about how social rank is organized in the brain, how we perceive our own social ranking, and what's the modern science on this stuff?
关于大脑中的社会等级是如何组织的、我们如何看待自己的社会等级以及这方面的现代科学是什么，我们了解多少？
I find it fascinating.
我觉得这很有趣。
I'm not scared of any topic, well, most any topic, and I think this is one that affects us all.
我不害怕任何话题，嗯，大多数话题，我认为这是一个影响我们所有人的话题。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I'll first say that social rank is something very specific to a certain type of hierarchy that assumes a linear hierarchy, which sometimes forms, but oftentimes there's different types of hierarchies that are flatter or more amorphous.
我首先要说的是，社会等级是特定于某种类型的层次结构的东西，这种层次结构假设是线性层次结构，有时会形成这种层次结构，但通常会存在不同类型的层次结构，这些层次结构更平坦或更无定形。
It's not really clear who's the alpha on the playground.
目前尚不清楚谁是操场上的阿尔法。
I don't know.
我不知道。
There's this clique here.
这里有这个集团。
There's-
有——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And it can be dynamic.
而且它可以是动态的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Right.
对。
It's dynamic.
它是动态的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
It's not always organized as such, but if you get animals into a sort of small space, you will see in many species, especially within the males, forming a linear hierarchy.
它并不总是这样组织的，但如果你把动物放在一个狭小的空间里，你会发现许多物种，特别是雄性，形成了一个线性的等级制度。
And we wanted to explore this.
我们想探索这一点。
And so I think one of the biggest challenges with studying social rank, and this is something we've struggled with as well, is how do you control for the individual identity versus the actual rank?
因此，我认为研究社会排名的最大挑战之一，也是我们一直在努力解决的问题，是如何控制个人身份与实际排名？
So what I mean by this is, let's say there's a study that says that neurons in a certain brain region fire to animals of different ranks according to the rank.
我的意思是，假设有一项研究表明，某个大脑区域的神经元会根据等级向不同等级的动物发出信号。
Fire most of the alpha, less, less, less, less down to the rank.
解雇大部分阿尔法，越来越少，越来越少，越来越少，降到了等级。
Does that tell us that this brain region encodes social rank?
这是否告诉我们这个大脑区域编码社会等级？
Maybe in a loose sense, and I'm sure that when rank issues come up, a lot of the brain lights up for different reasons.
也许从一个宽松的意义上来说，我确信当排名问题出现时，很多人的大脑都会因为不同的原因而兴奋起来。
But for example, let's say the amygdala would respond more to the alpha, maybe because it encodes social rank, but maybe also because whoever is the dominant is the one who's most likely to have consequences.
但举例来说，假设杏仁核会对阿尔法反应更多，可能是因为它编码了社会等级，但也可能是因为谁占主导地位，谁就最有可能产生后果。
And so all of my interactions with the alpha are relatively high consequence, and so I'm sort of stressed out whenever I'm talking to the alpha, paying attention, and you remember all the interactions you have with your boss more so than someone else.
因此，我与阿尔法的所有互动都具有相对较高的后果，因此，每当我与阿尔法交谈、集中注意力时，我都会感到压力很大，而且你比其他人更记得与老板的所有互动。
There's an attention hierarchy.
有一个注意力层次结构。
Subordinates attend more to dominants.
下属更多地关注统治者。
And so it's almost hard to make this comparison because it's not all flat.
所以几乎很难进行这种比较，因为它并不都是平坦的。
The clean experiment, which we are still trying to do, it's difficult to do the perfect experiment, would be if you take an individual and change their rank.
我们仍在尝试做的干净实验，很难做完美的实验，如果你拿一个人并改变他们的等级。
So for example , I like to use this example with Barack Obama, so just indulge me.
例如，我喜欢用巴拉克·奥巴马(Barack Obama)这个例子，所以就纵容我吧。
I know that this is from a while ago, but once upon a time, I met Barack Obama for a very brief moment when he was president, and maybe there's some neurons that light up.
我知道这是很久以前的事了，但很久以前，我在巴拉克·奥巴马担任总统时短暂见过他，也许有一些神经元被点亮了。
Oh, wow.
哦，哇。
There's the Barack Obama/president neurons.
这是巴拉克·奥巴马/总统神经元。
But if they are identity neurons, once he was no longer president, if I was to be presented with Barack Obama, then they would still fire.
但如果它们是身份神经元，一旦他不再担任总统，如果我与巴拉克·奥巴马见面，那么它们仍然会开火。
If they were rank neurons, then maybe after he was no longer president, it's just these neurons fire to whoever is president now.
如果它们是等级神经元，那么也许在他不再担任总统之后，这些神经元就会向现在的总统发出信号。
And so I think that experiment is very difficult to do and has not been done, but we're working on it right now in another experiment where we take animals, and they're living in groups, and we rank them all, and then we rehouse them.
所以我认为这个实验很难做而且还没有做过，但我们现在正在另一个实验中进行这项工作，我们把动物放在一起，它们生活在群体中，我们对它们进行排名，然后我们重新安置它们。
So everybody has a rank that they start with, then we put all the alphas together, put all the betas together, et cetera, so that everybody forms a new rank.
所以每个人都有一个他们开始的排名，然后我们把所有的阿尔法放在一起，把所有的贝塔放在一起，等等，这样每个人就形成了一个新的排名。
Then you have animals that went up a rank, went down a rank, or stayed the same for every group.
然后，每个组的动物都会上升、下降或保持不变。
And so that's something that we're looking at right now.
这就是我们现在正在研究的事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So initially, you take a pool of animals, and then let's say you got your number one, two, three, four, just for sake of simplicity.
所以一开始，你拿了一群动物，然后假设你得到了第一、第二、第三、第四，只是为了简单起见。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Let's say I take the number four-
假设我选四号——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
lowest in that-
最低的——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
hierarchy, but now I make them the top of a new hierarchy.
层次结构，但现在我让它们成为新层次结构的顶部。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
That's right.
没错。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Got it.
明白了。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And so it's really preliminary, and we'll see what happens, but we're investigating.
所以这确实是初步的，我们会看看会发生什么，但我们正在调查。
It seems that when you take alphas, intermediates, or subordinates and put them together into new hierarchies, it takes them different amounts of time, and the dynamics are very different in forming the new hierarchy.
看起来，当你把阿尔法、中间人或下属放在一起组成新的层次结构时，他们需要花费不同的时间，而且形成新层次结构的动力也非常不同。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Hmm.
嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And so-
所以——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
In any kind of predictable way that you're willing to share, or is it just too early?
您愿意以任何可预测的方式分享，还是现在还为时过早？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I think it's too early, but I'll just say, I guess it seems like the intermediates might be taking the longest amount of time-
我认为现在还为时过早，但我只想说，我猜中间体可能需要最长的时间-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Hmm
嗯
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
to form the hierarchy.
来形成层次结构。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
They don't know where they sit in the hierarchy.
他们不知道自己在等级制度中的位置。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
They were flexible or something.
他们很灵活什么的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Whereas the dominants, they are going to duke it out, and then we're going to battle.
而统治者，他们会一决胜负，然后我们就开始战斗。
There'll be defeat.
就会有失败。
It's quick.
很快。
The fight doesn't last that long.
战斗不会持续那么久。
Subordinates, we have to still observe.
属下，我们还是要观察。
This is all still being-- We'll see if everything replicates, but certainly the dynamics are different.
这一切仍然存在——我们会看看一切是否都会复制，但动态肯定是不同的。
What the exact readouts, we're working on what the key features to see.
确切的读数是什么，我们正在研究要查看的关键功能。
But it's kind of uncanny because these are genetically inbred animals that are all housed, everyone should be the same theoretically, but this makes me think that during certain developmental periods, rank is shaping your long-lasting development.
但这有点不可思议，因为这些都是基因近交动物，都是圈养的，理论上每个人都应该是一样的，但这让我觉得在某些发展时期，等级正在塑造你的长期发展。
I think it's a similar phenomenon, perhaps, to the older child, younger child phenomenon, where if you're the oldest, you go into the world, and you have lots of different roles.
我认为这也许与年龄较大的孩子、年龄较小的孩子的现象类似，如果你是年龄最大的孩子，你进入这个世界，你就会扮演很多不同的角色。
You might be the bottom.
你可能是最底层的。
You're going to play on sports teams and be in different classes and have all these jobs.
你将参加运动队、参加不同的班级并从事所有这些工作。
But The leadership desire/potential skill seems to be correlated in a very non-scientific way.
但领导欲望/潜在技能似乎以一种非常不科学的方式相关。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Is that right?
是这样吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
The number of presidents that's often oldest or only children, this type of thing.
总统的数量往往是最年长的或独生子女，这类事情。
It's a loose correlation.
这是一种松散的相关性。
There's a lot of other reasons why it might not be behavioral, but there's sort of fluffy correlations about that.
还有很多其他原因可以解释为什么它可能不是行为性的，但其中存在某种松软的相关性。
I think there's something to it, though.
不过，我认为这其中还是有一定道理的。
When plasticity is happening, this becomes your most familiar state of assuming a certain role, and that attractor state deepens with more time spent there.
当可塑性发生时，这成为你最熟悉的承担某种角色的状态，并且随着在那里花费的时间越多，吸引子状态就会加深。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I find that so fascinating.
我觉得这很有趣。
I've also observed, and I think I've seen a few papers on, I don't know how rigorous these papers are, that youngest, or let's just say not oldest siblings, here we're setting aside single children that don't have any siblings, but that youngest siblings do tend to quote unquote "break the mold" more in terms of socio and cultural norms of the family.
我还观察到，我想我已经看过一些论文，我不知道这些论文有多严格，最小的，或者我们只是说不是最大的兄弟姐妹，在这里我们把没有任何兄弟姐妹的单身孩子放在一边，但最小的兄弟姐妹确实更倾向于在家庭的社会和文化规范方面引用不加引号的“打破模式”。
They venture further-
他们进一步冒险——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
in terms of experiences and-
就经验而言 -
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
value systems.
价值体系。
They're often seen as having had fewer constraints than the older sibling, which may-
他们通常被认为比哥哥姐姐受到的限制更少，这可能-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or may not be true.
或者可能不是真的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Uh-huh.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But that the youngest siblings often will take on risk-
但最小的兄弟姐妹经常会承担风险——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
that older siblings won't.
年长的兄弟姐妹不会。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And that's certainly been my observation.
这当然是我的观察结果。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
More non-conformists.
更多不墨守成规的人。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Right.
对。
I'm a younger brother of an older sister, but then there was times in our childhood where she was out of the house, and I was at home just with my mom.
我是一个姐姐的弟弟，但在我们的童年时期，有时她不在家，而我则独自在家和妈妈在一起。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So that sort of changes things.
所以这会改变一些事情。
And this is very dynamic.
这是非常动态的。
I realize we're-
我意识到我们是——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Very dynamic
非常有活力
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
playing here in a kind of a loose space, but-
在一个宽松的空间里玩耍，但是——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
but I find social rank stuff to be super interesting.
但我发现社会排名的东西非常有趣。
I grew up in a big pack of mostly boys.
我在一大群男孩中长大。
That's just how it worked out in my neighborhood at the time.
当时我家附近的情况就是这样。
And it was very interesting because it was very clear it was a dynamic hierarchy where if we were skateboarding, certain kids were alpha.
这非常有趣，因为很明显这是一个动态的层次结构，如果我们玩滑板，某些孩子就是阿尔法。
If we were playing soccer, other kids-
如果我们在踢足球，其他孩子-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
were alpha.
是阿尔法。
If we were doing anything artistic, if it was geeky knowledge and nerdy stuff, then it might've been somebody else-
如果我们正在做任何艺术性的事情，如果它是极客知识和书呆子的东西，那么它可能是其他人 -
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
who had the knowledge-
谁有知识-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and had the information that people wanted.
并拥有人们想要的信息。
So I think-
所以我认为——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
dynamic hierarchies are really interesting-
动态层次结构真的很有趣——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and I think get us out of that more standard alpha, like chest-beating-
我认为让我们摆脱那种更标准的阿尔法，比如捶胸顿足——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
telling everyone what to do, dictatorial model.
告诉每个人该做什么，独裁模式。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
And this is now fully out of any science land and into speculation opinion land, but I think that type of structure where when you're doing different tasks, different individuals become the alpha or the leader because it's based on competence, is very healthy.
现在这已经完全脱离了任何科学领域，进入了投机舆论领域，但我认为当你执行不同的任务时，不同的个人成为阿尔法或领导者，因为它基于能力，这种结构是非常健康的。
I think structures where you have a locked down, this is the hierarchy where someone's the boss of you because of this one skill, but then there's all these other skills that they're not superior.
我认为你有一个被锁定的结构，这是一个层次结构，其中某人因为这一项技能而成为你的老板，但还有所有其他技能他们并不优越。
They don't outrank you at.
他们的级别并不比你高。
And so how do you work all that out?
那么你如何解决这一切呢？
And so I think that's also something about keeping score, like what is the rank, right?
所以我认为这也与记分有关，比如排名是多少，对吧？
And so we did this experiment where we designed a task.
所以我们做了这个实验，设计了一个任务。
Animals are trained that a cue predicts reward delivery.
动物经过训练，知道线索可以预测奖励的发放。
Only one animal can get it at a time.
一次只有一只动物可以获得它。
It's just a very narrow place, so if one animal's getting it, you can't get it.
这只是一个非常狭窄的地方，所以如果一只动物能够得到它，你就无法得到它。
Then we would have four animals that are cage mates, four mice that are cage mates, and we would have two of them duke it out at each point.
然后，我们将有四只动物作为笼中伙伴，四只小鼠作为笼中伙伴，并且我们将在每个点让其中两只进行决斗。
And we know the ranks.
我们知道排名。
The ranks are stable.
队伍排名稳定。
They have a rank one, two, three, four in the cage, and everybody does a round robin.
他们在笼子里有第一、第二、第三、第四名，每个人都进行循环赛。
Ones versus twos, ones versus threes, twos versus-
一对二、一对三、二对——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
They fight.
他们打架。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Well, they do a round robin in this reward competition task.
嗯，他们在这个奖励竞赛任务中进行循环赛。
They're food deprived, and we present rewards.
他们缺乏食物，我们提供奖励。
What happens?
会发生什么？
And so subordinates do win some of the times, even though dominants win more.
因此，下属有时确实会获胜，尽管统治者获胜的次数更多。
They consistently win more.
他们不断赢得更多。
And we found that prefrontal cortical neurons, you could represent very stably and decode which animal was dominant, regardless of the trial.
我们发现，无论试验如何，前额皮质神经元都可以非常稳定地代表并解码哪种动物占主导地位。
And then when you looked at whether we could decode competitive success, meaning who was going to win that next trial, so there's a new trial every 30 or 40 seconds.
然后，当您考虑我们是否可以解码竞争成功时，这意味着谁将赢得下一次试验，因此每 30 或 40 秒就会有一次新的试验。
But 30 seconds before, which is as far as we can measure because then we're into the previous trial.
但 30 秒前，这是我们所能测量到的最远距离，因为那时我们就进入了前一个试验。
As soon as the last trial ends, even before the next trial ends, you can predict above chance s- significantly which animal's going to win the next trial.
一旦最后一次试验结束，甚至在下一次试验结束之前，您就可以预测上述机会 s - 显着地预测哪只动物将赢得下一次试验。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Just based on the firing pattern of prefrontal cortical neurons.
仅基于前额皮质神经元的放电模式。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
That's right.
没错。
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So you can predict winners and losers.
所以你可以预测赢家和输家。
You can predict and understand where they are in the hierarchy as well based on the activation of neurons prior to the battle.
您还可以根据战斗前神经元的激活来预测和了解它们在层次结构中的位置。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
That's right.
没错。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's like recording from the, by analogy, it's like recording from the prefrontal cortex of two, let's say, business competitors-
打个比方，这就像从两个商业竞争对手的前额叶皮层进行录音——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or martial arts competitors.
或武术选手。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And you can predict who's going to win based on the pattern of firing in their brains prior to the competition.
你可以根据比赛前大脑中的放电模式来预测谁会获胜。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
That's right.
没错。
And so, that suggests all sorts of things.
所以，这暗示了各种各样的事情。
Number one, it doesn't mean these competitions are not independent.
第一，这并不意味着这些比赛不是独立的。
There's something about the state of the animal.
动物的状态有些问题。
And when we looked at is it just whoever won the previous trial, that did not account for-
当我们查看是否只是谁赢得了之前的审判时，这并没有说明-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Hmm
嗯
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
this.
这个。
And so I thought this was really interesting, but when you look at the decoding accuracy for dominants versus subordinates about who will win the next trial, for dominants, it stays pretty flat.
所以我认为这真的很有趣，但是当你看看统治者与下属关于谁将赢得下一次审判的解码准确性时，对于统治者来说，它保持相当平坦。
It just has to do with, I think, this is my speculation of our data, that they either are engaged or they're not engaged.
我认为，这只是我对我们数据的猜测，他们要么参与，要么不参与。
The subordinates, the decoding accuracy, it's above chance, but then it shoots up somewhere around closer to the cue presentation.
下属，解码准确性，这是偶然的，但随后它会在更接近提示呈现的地方飙升。
And so my speculation about that is that the subordinates are looking at the dominants.
所以我对此的猜测是，下属正在关注统治者。
The dominant doesn't look like they're going to go for it.
占主导地位的人看起来并不打算这么做。
Okay.
好的。
It looks like they're turning away.
看起来他们正在转身离开。
I'm going to go.
我要走了。
I'm going to go.
我要走了。
So it's not like they're both going out full every time.
所以他们并不是每次都满载而归。
It's a calculation.
这是一个计算。
Which trials, oh, he's not paying attention.
哪个试炼，哦，他没注意。
It's like when you're driving in traffic, and you're trying to find the moment to cut over, and you're waiting for the person who's texting, and there's a big space, and then everybody's just getting in right here.
这就像当你在交通中开车时，你试图找到切入的时机，你在等待发短信的人，那里有一个很大的空间，然后每个人都进来了。
You could just see, you're looking for clues about the state of competition.
您可以看到，您正在寻找有关竞争状况的线索。
And then the dominants, they are not looking at the subordinate.
然后统治者，他们不会看下属。
They're just doing whatever they feel like doing.
他们只是做他们想做的事。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's like there's a I think there's that one scene in "Mad Men" where something happened in the work environment, and it was clear someone's account didn't sell or something didn't work out for one person versus the other.
就像我认为《广告狂人》中有一个场景，工作环境中发生了一些事情，很明显某人的帐户没有卖出去，或者某些事情对一个人与另一个人来说没有效果。
And I think one of the characters says to Don Draper, who's clearly one of the alphas in that work environment-
我认为其中一个角色对唐·德雷珀（Don Draper）说，他显然是那个工作环境中的阿尔法之一——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
by virtue of-
凭借-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
role and position, says, "I sometimes think about the way that you blank, blank, blank, blank," and he goes on this brief tirade about how upset he was.
角色和位置，说，“我有时会想到你的茫然，茫然，茫然，茫然，”他继续简短地长篇大论，讲述他是多么沮丧。
And Draper says, "Well, I don't think about you at all."
德雷珀说：“好吧，我根本不想你。”
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then the elevator, I believe, closes.
然后我相信电梯就会关闭。
And it really cemented his status in the office as somebody who's really not paying much attention to what other people are doing.
这确实巩固了他在办公室的地位，因为他实际上不太关注其他人在做什么。
He's just making decisions according to what's going to be best for the firm, and in some cases for himself, and in some cases, both.
他只是根据对公司最有利的方式做出决定，在某些情况下对他自己有利，在某些情况下对两者都有利。
So, I think that's essentially what you're talking about.
所以，我认为这本质上就是你所说的。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I think it's the nature of the structure.
我认为这是结构的本质。
That's what makes you the alpha, is you have other things that are occupying your attention.
这就是让你成为阿尔法的原因，因为你有其他事情占据了你的注意力。
And your visionary status, hopefully, if you're a productive, successful alpha, and for a sustainable group.
如果你是一个富有成效、成功的阿尔法，并且是一个可持续发展的团队，那么你的远见卓识的地位是有希望的。
And then everyone else is, they don't need to have the big picture.
然后其他人都是，他们不需要有大局观。
The reinforcement schedule is different.
强化计划不同。
I'm just looking for validation.
我只是在寻找验证。
Am I playing my role okay?
我扮演的角色还好吗？
It's a very different mindset.
这是一种非常不同的心态。
I think, as a scientist, when you're a trainee, sometimes you're a supporting member on a team where you're getting instruction, someone telling you what to do, versus the moment where you get your own project.
我认为，作为一名科学家，当你是一名实习生时，有时你是团队中的支持成员，在那里你接受指导，有人告诉你该做什么，而不是在你获得自己的项目的那一刻。
And maybe you're working by yourself, maybe there's no one to command, but no one's telling you what to do.
也许你正在独自工作，也许没有人可以指挥，但没有人告诉你该做什么。
That is, to me, one of the biggest thresholds to step over when you're becoming a scientist or an investigator, is the first time where you just do something and try an experiment no one told you to do.
对我来说，当你成为一名科学家或调查员时，要跨越的最大门槛之一就是你第一次做某事并尝试一个没有人告诉你做的实验。
And it feels super weird.
而且感觉超级奇怪。
It feels like you're sneaking around or something.
感觉就像你在偷偷摸摸什么的。
And then, I think in today's mentorship chain, sometimes that happens too late.
然后，我认为在今天的导师链中，有时这种情况发生得太晚了。
I think if we could have that experience happen earlier, I think that would only be good for the future of research.
我认为如果我们能够更早地获得这种经历，我认为这只会对研究的未来有利。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I agree.
我同意。
I was very fortunate that my graduate advisor told me, "Look, I'm going to help you, but I'm going to have two kids while you're in the lab, and I'm not going to be around a lot, so you're going to have to figure it out.
我很幸运，我的研究生导师告诉我：“听着，我会帮助你，但是当你在实验室的时候，我要生两个孩子，而且我不会经常出现在你身边，所以你必须弄清楚这一点。
Don't burn the lab down.
不要烧毁实验室。
Don't kill yourself with any of the poisons in the lab." And then my postdoc advisor, the late and great Ben Barres, largely treated the postdocs as junior professors from an early stage.
不要用实验室里的任何毒药自杀。”然后我的博士后导师，已故的伟大的本·巴雷斯（Ben Barres），从早期阶段就基本上将博士后视为初级教授。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And I remember thinking-
我记得我当时想——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
"He can't control the experiments I'm going to do.
“他无法控制我要做的实验。
This is up to me." And a great number of us who were training with him at that time went on to have our own lab, so I think that there's really something important to that model.
这取决于我。”当时与他一起接受培训的我们中的很多人后来都拥有了自己的实验室，所以我认为该模型确实很重要。
And of course, we're discussing the research field, but this could be exported to any number of different fields.
当然，我们正在讨论研究领域，但这可以导出到许多不同的领域。
Because what those mentors were essentially training us to do was to assume the role that we would eventually have, as opposed to be subordinates.
因为那些导师本质上训练我们做的是承担我们最终将扮演的角色，而不是成为下属。
Do you watch "Chimp Empire?"
你看《黑猩猩帝国》吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
So actually, just this week, yesterday and the day before this, a postdoc interview who worked with the chimps on "Chimp Empire"- ...
所以实际上，就在本周、昨天和前天，一位在《黑猩猩帝国》中与黑猩猩合作的博士后采访-......
visited and interviewed him in my lab and talked about his work.
在我的实验室拜访并采访了他并谈论了他的工作。
So, I have not seen "Chimp Empire," but it's at the very top of my to-do list.
所以，我还没有看过《黑猩猩帝国》，但它在我的待办事项清单中名列前茅。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Oh, God.
哦，上帝。
It's so good.
太好了。
I don't want to spend the next 20 minutes talking about it, but you see all sorts of interesting behavior, very relevant to human behavior.
我不想在接下来的 20 分钟里谈论它，但你会看到各种有趣的行为，与人类行为非常相关。
Hierarchies, yes, but also altruistic behavior, allopathic grooming.
是的，有等级制度，但也有利他行为、对抗疗法的修饰。
In chimp culture, as I've learned from the show, assuming it's accurate, that who grooms who is very important.
在黑猩猩文化中，正如我从节目中了解到的那样，假设它是准确的，那么谁给谁梳理毛发是非常重要的。
And there's all sorts of interesting maneuvers that subordinates make, and there's all sorts of interesting displays of vigor that the alpha makes to remind people that they are the alpha.
下属会做出各种有趣的动作，阿尔法会做出各种有趣的活力展示，以提醒人们他们是阿尔法。
And then as they age or make mistakes of judgment, the subordinates also will feign deference.
随着年龄的增长或判断失误，下属也会假装顺从。
They'll be like, "Oh, yeah, you're the alpha.
他们会说，“哦，是的，你是阿尔法。
You're really tough," and secretly they're plotting to replace the alpha.
你真是太厉害了。”他们秘密地密谋取代阿尔法。
So, whether or not we're talking about a scene from "Mad Men" or we're talking about "Chimp Empire," or we're talking about research laboratories or- ...
所以，无论我们是在谈论《广告狂人》中的场景，还是在谈论《黑猩猩帝国》，或者我们是在谈论研究实验室，还是……
any other landscape, kindergarten-
任何其他景观、幼儿园-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
I think these circuits are active in all of us, and the sooner that we acknowledge those and try and find ones that generalize to the goodness of as many members as possible, we're not doing our task.
我认为这些回路在我们所有人身上都很活跃，我们越早承认这些回路并尝试找到能够为尽可能多的成员带来好处的回路，我们就没有完成我们的任务。
But clearly, you're doing the task.
但显然，你正在执行任务。
So, okay, social rank is something that we need to acknowledge, no doubt.
所以，毫无疑问，社会等级是我们需要承认的。
Which actually leads me to what might seem like a disparate topic, but one that I know we're both very interested in and that you're focusing on now, which is psychedelics.
这实际上让我想到了一个看似不同的话题，但我知道我们都对此非常感兴趣，而且你现在正在关注这个话题，那就是迷幻药。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm.
嗯。
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Because one of the interesting things about psychedelics is their capacity to increase neuroplasticity.
因为迷幻药的有趣之处之一是它们能够增加神经可塑性。
But also some of the psychedelics, and I realize MDMA is not a classic psychedelic, but they are classified as empathogens.
还有一些迷幻药，我意识到 MDMA 不是经典的迷幻药，但它们被归类为共情剂。
They increase empathy for self and others.
他们增加了对自己和他人的同理心。
So, what are you looking into with psychedelics?
那么，您对迷幻药有何研究？
Which psychedelics, and what brought you to the study of psychedelics?
哪种迷幻药，是什么让您开始研究迷幻药？
And by the way, I have participated in clinical, because people will wonder, I have participated in clinical trials for psilocybin and MDMA.
顺便说一下，我参加过临床，因为人们会想知道，我参加过裸盖菇素和摇头丸的临床试验。
I don't recommend people do psychedelics recreationally.
我不建议人们为了娱乐而服用迷幻药。
I do think they hold great promise for the treatment of depression and trauma, but people need to be careful.
我确实认为它们对于治疗抑郁症和创伤有很大的希望，但人们需要小心。
There are certain people who could not and should not take psychedelics because it would be genuinely unsafe for them psychologically, especially young people.
有些人不能也不应该服用迷幻药，因为这对他们的心理来说确实不安全，尤其是年轻人。
So, there's my disclaimer.
所以，这是我的免责声明。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But they are fascinating compounds.
但它们是令人着迷的化合物。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
So I guess I've always been interested in psychedelics.
所以我想我一直对迷幻药感兴趣。
I think I wrote my undergraduate thesis about hallucinations produced by psychedelics, psychotic breaks, and REM sleep, and schizophrenia.
我想我的本科论文是关于迷幻药产生的幻觉、精神病性休息、快速眼动睡眠和精神分裂症的。
Just comparing what is the common thread when our brain creates a reality that is not objectively there.
只是比较一下当我们的大脑创造出不客观存在的现实时，共同点是什么。
And psychedelics, of course, is a way that we can experience that and remember it and recall it in a way that's very difficult with REM sleep and sometimes with psychotic breaks.
当然，致幻剂是我们体验、记忆和回忆的一种方式，而这种方式在快速眼动睡眠（REM）和有时在精神病性休息时是非常困难的。
Obviously, schizophrenia is not something that you can transiently give yourself and have that experience.
显然，精神分裂症不是你可以暂时给自己带来的体验。
So I think having the ability to move into other brain states is what makes it so attractive.
所以我认为拥有进入其他大脑状态的能力才是它如此有吸引力的原因。
I think the other component is the plasticity.
我认为另一个组成部分是可塑性。
You can have an experience, and perhaps the first-hand experience is you have an epiphany that you take with you, it's life-changing, and your life habits are completely different for a long-lasting way after this singular experience is one of the things that makes it so different from all of the other therapeutic treatments that we've got, or most of the other ones, I'd say.
你可以有一种体验，也许第一手的体验是你有一个随身携带的顿悟，它改变了你的生活，你的生活习惯在持久的方式上完全不同，因为这种独特的体验是它与我们拥有的所有其他治疗方法或大多数其他治疗方法如此不同的原因之一，我想说。
And so for me, right now there's a lot of work going on exploring psychedelics as a therapy for various different conditions, disease states.
所以对我来说，现在有很多工作正在探索迷幻药作为各种不同状况、疾病状态的治疗方法。
I think that's great.
我认为那太好了。
I think it's really important work.
我认为这是非常重要的工作。
I'm glad a lot is being done on that.
我很高兴在这方面做了很多工作。
I think my focus is to turn over some rocks that might not have been turned over yet, and just to get really down at a quantitative, rigorous mathematical level of what is a hallucination.
我认为我的重点是翻转一些可能还没有翻转的石头，只是在定量、严格的数学水平上真正了解什么是幻觉。
For example, when I ask this question, what is a hallucination, I'm interested in the actual cellular mechanisms.
例如，当我问什么是幻觉这个问题时，我对实际的细胞机制感兴趣。
We think about neurons having signal-to-noise and neuromodulation as changing that.
我们认为具有信噪比和神经调节功能的神经元可以改变这一点。
Are we just changing the signal-to-noise ratio and then pattern completing all the noise, and that's what a hallucination is?
我们是否只是改变信噪比，然后将所有噪声模式化，这就是幻觉？
We're just reinterpreting noise and putting existing maps.
我们只是重新解释噪音并放置现有的地图。
Everything's fitting to an existing mold or map that we've already got that then appears as some hallucination.
一切都符合我们已经拥有的现有模型或地图，然后看起来像是某种幻觉。
And maybe it doesn't have to be a hallucination.
也许这不一定是幻觉。
There's also obviously some various different thresholds of the psychedelic experience.
迷幻体验显然也有一些不同的阈值。
But all these clinical statements, these human self-reported qualitative descriptions of the psychedelic experience.
但所有这些临床陈述，这些人类自我报告的迷幻体验的定性描述。
Things like having just more positive outlook, uniting oneself and other, clarity of the world, more labile in thoughts, more flexible thoughts.
比如拥有更积极的观点，将自己与他人团结起来，世界更加清晰，思想更加不稳定，思想更加灵活。
We are trying to just create actual ways to test them.
我们正在尝试创建实际的方法来测试它们。
So for example, this idea about what is going on in your mind when you're having a psychedelic experience, all of these different states might feel more labile.
例如，当你有迷幻体验时，你的脑海中正在发生什么，所有这些不同的状态可能会让人感觉更加不稳定。
It may be the transition probabilities between different brain states of happy, sad, nostalgic.
它可能是快乐、悲伤、怀旧等不同大脑状态之间的转换概率。
Maybe it's just all looser, and so you can access everything because the transition probabilities are just high.
也许一切都比较宽松，因此您可以访问所有内容，因为转换概率很高。
Another possibility is that, and maybe it's dose-dependent, at a certain dose, you go into another brain state.
另一种可能性是，也许它是剂量依赖性的，在一定剂量下，你会进入另一种大脑状态。
And so previously, in the same project that I was just telling you about rank, we were recording for prefrontal cortical neurons and looking at all the behaviors.
所以之前，在我刚刚告诉你等级的同一个项目中，我们记录了前额皮质神经元并观察了所有行为。
And so the behaviors for representing social rank, we don't know what they are, so we used computer vision to extract a bunch of behavioral motifs and then tried to understand what's the best model that would predict what the animal's going to do next.
因此，代表社会等级的行为，我们不知道它们是什么，所以我们使用计算机视觉来提取一堆行为主题，然后尝试了解预测动物下一步要做什么的最佳模型是什么。
Not just wins and losses, but all the subtle gestures.
不仅仅是胜利和失败，还有所有微妙的姿态。
Are we going to fight?
我们要打架吗？
Are we going to give it up?
我们要放弃它吗？
Are we going to back off?
我们要退缩吗？
And predict the behaviors from prefrontal cortical activity.
并预测前额皮质活动的行为。
And the best model that we found was something called a hidden Markovian model, which essentially just means that there are hidden states.
我们发现的最好的模型是所谓的隐马尔可夫模型，它本质上只是意味着存在隐藏状态。
You might think of them as moods.
您可能会将它们视为情绪。
You might give them some other name, but I'll use moods loosely.
你可以给它们起其他名字，但我会宽松地使用情绪。
It's not perfect, but that's one way that helps me think about hidden states, where you have certain statistics of behaviors that you would produce.
它并不完美，但这是帮助我思考隐藏状态的一种方式，在隐藏状态中，你可以对你将产生的行为进行某些统计。
If I'm sad, there's certain things I'm going to do.
如果我悲伤，我会做一些事情。
It's a different statistic than when I'm happy, different probability of going surfing if I'm sad or happy or things like that.
这是一个与我快乐时不同的统计数据，如果我悲伤或快乐或类似的事情，去冲浪的概率也不同。
So we basically found that there are a certain number of hidden states, and so if you are on psychedelics, would that change the number of states or just the transitions between them?
所以我们基本上发现存在一定数量的隐藏状态，所以如果你服用迷幻药，这会改变状态的数量还是只是改变它们之间的转换？
We also found in our prefrontal cortical representation that there's a certain distance of the representation of self and other in this dimensionality reduced activity space.
我们还发现，在我们的前额皮质表征中，在这个降维活动空间中，自我表征和他人表征存在一定的距离。
So for mumbo jumbo, that just means there's a representation of self and other, there's some quantifiable distance in abstract terms in the brain, and we can quantify if those representations get closer together and merge.
因此，对于胡言乱语来说，这仅仅意味着存在自我和他人的表征，大脑中存在一些抽象术语中可量化的距离，并且我们可以量化这些表征是否更接近并合并。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Of self versus other.
自我与他人的对比。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Of self versus other.
自我与他人的对比。
So that's something that we would be looking for-
这就是我们要寻找的东西 -
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Huh
呵呵
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
if you are putting psychedelics on.
如果你服用迷幻药。
These are questions that I'm interested in that are under construction.
这些是我感兴趣的正在建设中的问题。
So right now we're recording from animals while we're giving them psilocybin using neuropixels recordings.
所以现在我们正在记录动物的情况，同时使用神经像素记录给它们注射裸盖菇素。
So we're recording from thousands of neurons in prefrontal cortex and other parts of cortex because the shank goes to lots of places, and looking at how animals respond in a conflict task.
因此，我们记录了前额皮质和皮质其他部分的数千个神经元（因为小腿分布在很多地方），并观察动物在冲突任务中如何反应。
So there's trials where there's a cue that predicts reward, a cue that predicts shock, then there's some trials where both cues are presented and both outcomes are presented.
因此，在有些试验中，有一个预测奖励的线索，一个预测休克的线索，然后有一些试验，其中两种线索都被呈现，两种结果都被呈现。
And the reason for this conflict trial is that actually if you give moderate to low doses of psilocybin, or most drugs, honestly, animals can do this Even on lots of different drugs, most people can still eat food and avoid getting hit by this truck.
这个冲突试验的原因是，实际上，如果你给予中到低剂量的裸盖菇素或大多数药物，老实说，动物可以做到这一点即使使用许多不同的药物，大多数人仍然可以吃食物并避免被这辆卡车撞到。
There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, there's a lot of different brain states where you can still do these essential functions pretty robustly.
当然也有例外，但一般来说，在很多不同的大脑状态下，你仍然可以相当稳健地执行这些基本功能。
But it's about what happens in the more ambiguous zone.
但这是关于在更加模糊的区域中发生的事情。
What happens when there's a conflict, and what do you do?
当发生冲突时会发生什么，你会怎么做？
When it's a little gray, I think that's when you can see a shift in valence assignment.
当它有点灰色时，我认为那时你可以看到化合价分配的变化。
So, that's something that we've been looking for and trying to see if in clinical studies, they're exploring set and setting as maybe the factors that have in the past historically given very unpredictable outcomes for psychedelic therapies.
所以，这是我们一直在寻找并试图在临床研究中看看他们是否正在探索设定和环境，因为这可能是过去历史上给迷幻疗法带来非常不可预测的结果的因素。
It's possible that it's set and setting.
有可能它已经被设定和设置了。
It's also possible that there's individual variability.
也有可能存在个体差异。
It's possible that there are biomarkers that can predict which individuals would be well-suited for this type of therapy.
有可能存在一些生物标志物可以预测哪些人非常适合这种类型的治疗。
And so those are also things that we're interested in.
这些也是我们感兴趣的事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I find this so fascinating, and I just want to applaud you again for taking on these hard questions.
我发现这非常有趣，我只想再次为你解决这些难题而鼓掌。
These are fairly high-level questions.
这些都是相当高级的问题。
Certainly, there's a lot of clinical trials exploring psychedelics like psilocybin and their role in treating mental health.
当然，有很多临床试验正在探索裸盖菇素等迷幻药及其在治疗心理健康方面的作用。
And there's, at the same time, a real dearth of studies exploring mechanistically how these compounds are working.
与此同时，真正缺乏从机制上探索这些化合物如何发挥作用的研究。
I do want to tip my hat to all the folks that have explored dendritic changes and cellular changes in the level of neurons and on.
我确实想向所有探索神经元水平的树突变化和细胞变化的人们致敬。
But in terms of these higher-level states of self versus other recognition in psychedelics, those are tough questions that need to be addressed mechanistically, and it's clear you're doing that.
但就迷幻药中这些更高层次的自我状态与其他认知而言，这些都是需要机械地解决的棘手问题，很明显你正在这样做。
I think this notion that you're testing of whether or not psychedelics reveal more accessibility or lability, as you described it, between different states, like, "Oh, wow, I can actually move from sad to happy." There's a route for that.
我认为你正在测试迷幻药是否在不同状态之间显示出更多的可及性或不稳定性，就像你所描述的那样，“哦，哇，我实际上可以从悲伤变为快乐。”有一条路线可以做到这一点。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And you can experience that-
你可以体验到——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
as opposed to just being told that.
而不仅仅是被告知。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
"Hey, when you're feeling sad, feel your..." The field of psychology, especially pop psychology, is in a real crisis right now, in my opinion, because we're told to feel our feelings, but then we're also told to not react to our feelings, which sounds great, but if those feelings get intense enough, that's very hard for most people to do.
“嘿，当你感到悲伤时，感受你的……”在我看来，心理学领域，尤其是流行心理学，现在正处于真正的危机中，因为我们被告知要感受我们的感受，但我们也被告知不要对我们的感受做出反应，这听起来不错，但如果这些感受变得足够强烈，对大多数人来说就很难做到。
So it's feel your feelings, but don't stay with it.
所以，感受你的感受，但不要停留在这种感觉上。
There's the cathartic model, like feel your feelings and get them out, screaming and et cetera.
有一种宣泄模式，比如感受你的感受并将其发泄出来，尖叫等等。
And then there's the no, the more you engage a neural pathway, the stronger that neural pathway gets, and therefore you're just going to feel more anger.
然后，不，你参与的神经通路越多，神经通路就越强大，因此你只会感到更多的愤怒。
There's a lot of conflict right now in terms of the popular psychology version of this, whereas the clinical fields, I think, have an understanding that hasn't been translated.
目前，流行心理学版本存在很多冲突，而我认为临床领域对此的理解尚未转化。
I think one other thing about psychedelics that is interesting is that the transitions into states is also more labile.
我认为关于迷幻药的另一件有趣的事情是，向状态的转变也更加不稳定。
If you start feeling a little sad, there's the potential to feel very, very sad and to go into a state of sadness of an intensity you've never experienced before.
如果你开始感到有点悲伤，就有可能感到非常非常悲伤，并进入一种你以前从未经历过的强烈悲伤状态。
Which, by the way, could be therapeutically beneficial.
顺便说一下，这可能对治疗有益。
I think there's some evidence for that, provided there's adequate support before, during, and after those sessions.
我认为有一些证据可以证明这一点，前提是在这些会议之前、期间和之后都有足够的支持。
But I think most people, when they're not on psychedelics, will feel emotions that are uncomfortable and will do all sorts of things to try and avoid those emotions.
但我认为大多数人，当他们不服用迷幻药时，会感到不舒服的情绪，并会做各种事情来尝试避免这些情绪。
So I'm not speaking as a clinician here, but again, I think what the range and specificity of questions that you're asking about psychedelics, I find so exciting.
因此，我在这里并不是以临床医生的身份发言，但我再次认为，您所提出的有关迷幻药的问题的范围和特殊性，我觉得非常令人兴奋。
Another reason I'll say that we want to have you back to discuss those findings when they come out.
我要说的另一个原因是，我们希望您在这些调查结果出来后回来讨论这些调查结果。
Let's talk a little bit about you.
我们来谈谈你吧。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Okay.
好的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I've known you for a while, but to be honest, I think this is the longest conversation we've ever had-
我认识你有一段时间了，但说实话，我认为这是我们有史以来最长的一次谈话——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
which is one of the reasons I love doing this podcast.
这是我喜欢做这个播客的原因之一。
I get to sit down with colleagues and have intellectual/other conversations of substantial depth that I wouldn't have the opportunity to have elsewhere.
我可以与同事坐下来进行深入的知识/其他对话，这是我在其他地方没有机会进行的。
I know enough about you, however, to know that you've been involved in various things.
然而，我对你足够了解，知道你参与了各种各样的事情。
I'm not going to say peripheral to science, but you have other interests as well.
我不会说与科学无关，但你也有其他兴趣。
As I recall, you have been a yoga instructor, or you've been involved in the wellness, fitness community industry.
我记得，您曾经是一名瑜伽教练，或者您曾经涉足健康、健身社区行业。
Tell us about that, and then I'm also curious about how you structure your day, your routines, given that you're a parent of two young children, you run a very large laboratory operating at the very highest level, and of course, you value important things like relationships and relationship to self and health and all these sorts of things.
告诉我们这一点，然后我也很好奇你如何安排你的一天，你的日常生活，考虑到你是两个孩子的父母，你经营着一个非常大的实验室，在最高水平上运行，当然，你重视重要的事情，比如关系以及与自我和健康的关系以及所有这些事情。
So, not to make it too open-ended, but tell us of your interests and of your relationship to wellness and fitness and wellbeing.
因此，不要让它太过开放，而是告诉我们您的兴趣以及您与健康、健身和幸福的关系。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I guess, everybody comes to their calling in what feels like a path that you couldn't predict.
我想，每个人都会以一条你无法预测的道路来迎接他们的召唤。
But when you look at it outside, I guess both of my parents are professors, so it doesn't look super surprising that I'm a professor, but that's not how it felt to me.
但当你从外面看时，我猜我的父母都是教授，所以我是一名教授看起来并不奇怪，但我的感觉却不是这样。
When I was in high school, I was a total rebel.
当我上高中时，我是一个彻底的叛逆者。
I just threw parties at my house when my parents weren't there.
当我父母不在的时候，我只是在家里举办聚会。
Sorry everybody who's listening, I don't recommend that.
抱歉各位正在听的人，我不推荐这样做。
But I just cared about having fun and sports, and I think school wasn't maybe challenging enough for me at that time.
但我只关心乐趣和运动，我认为当时学校对我来说可能还不够具有挑战性。
I didn't necessarily recognize that was what it was, but I've always enjoyed being really active, and that's what makes me feel good.
我不一定意识到那是什么，但我一直很享受真正活跃的感觉，这就是让我感觉良好的原因。
I definitely agree with stuff you've said on your podcast about having exercise routines in the morning that really influence the rest of your day.
我绝对同意你在播客上所说的关于早上进行例行锻炼，这确实会影响你一天中剩下的时间。
I didn't always exercise in the morning.
我并不总是早上锻炼。
I have different phases.
我有不同的阶段。
But after I was an undergrad, I took some time to travel around Australia, backpack around Australia, live in some very remote places, spend some time living in a tent.
但在我读完本科后，我花了一些时间环游澳大利亚，背包环游澳大利亚，住在一些非常偏远的地方，花一些时间住在帐篷里。
Then I was a yoga instructor Then I went to grad school in the Bay Area.
然后我是一名瑜伽教练然后我去了湾区的研究生院。
I had a very active hobby of...
我有一个非常活跃的爱好...
I was a semi-professional breakdancer.
我是一名半职业霹雳舞者。
I was very into breakdancing.
我非常喜欢霹雳舞。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Really?
真的吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Really competitive breakdancer-
真正有竞争力的霹雳舞者-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Really?
真的吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
...
...
in the Bay Area.
在湾区。
Yes.
是的。
We did halftime shows, or I guess technically third quarter timeout shows at Oracle Stadium for the Golden State Warriors.
我们在甲骨文体育场为金州勇士队进行了中场表演，或者我猜从技术上讲是第三节暂停表演。
I was the one girl who could do a windmill, so they would use me.
我是唯一一个会做风车的女孩，所以他们会使用我。
They're like, "Okay, windmills." Go.
他们就像，“好吧，风车。”去。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Someone's going to find footage of this.
有人会找到这个的录像。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
There's some very mediocre footage of me breakdancing, and I was just really into it.
有一些我跳霹雳舞的非常平庸的镜头，但我真的很喜欢它。
But I think that's where my work-life balance passion comes from.
但我认为这就是我对工作与生活平衡的热情的来源。
I talk about it a lot, I think about it a lot, and people say to me all the time, "Well, is this really true?
我谈论了很多，思考了很多，人们总是对我说：“嗯，这是真的吗？
Why do you preach all this work-life balance stuff when you must have been a workaholic at some point in your life?" And I think when I was younger, I definitely didn't like the idea that you had to only be one thing.
当你在生命中的某个时刻一定是个工作狂时，为什么你还要宣扬工作与生活平衡的东西呢？”我想当我年轻的时候，我绝对不喜欢你只能是一件事的想法。
I wanted to be so many things.
我想成为很多人。
I couldn't decide.
我无法决定。
It was a huge challenge.
这是一个巨大的挑战。
I was going to be a writer.
我本来想成为一名作家。
I was going to be a yoga instructor.
我本来想成为一名瑜伽教练。
I never really thought I was going to be a professional dancer.
我从来没有真正想过我会成为一名职业舞者。
I just wasn't good enough, and there's not careers to be made from dancing, really.
我只是不够好，而且跳舞也没有什么职业可言，真的。
It's very difficult.
这是非常困难的。
But had a lot of other interests, and I wanted to prove...
但我还有很多其他兴趣，我想证明……
I don't know who I wanted to prove it to.
我不知道我想向谁证明这一点。
I think myself at first, and then eventually it made me feel like I should maybe prove it to everyone, that you can have a very whole life and not sacrifice everything.
我一开始认为我自己，然后最终让我觉得我应该向每个人证明这一点，你可以拥有完整的生活而不用牺牲一切。
You don't have to choose between family and career or personal life.
您不必在家庭、事业或个人生活之间做出选择。
You can have them all.
你可以全部拥有。
You just have to decide that it's a priority and own that and make those choices on a daily basis, and it comes down to time management.
你只需要决定它是一个优先事项并拥有它并每天做出这些选择，这取决于时间管理。
And so it's been a very, even though it looks like, oh, Kay just likes to have fun and have all these other hobbies, it's important because I think that we need more role models, especially in academic science, where people bring their whole selves to their job.
所以这是一个非常，即使看起来，哦，凯只是喜欢玩得开心并且有所有其他爱好，这很重要，因为我认为我们需要更多的榜样，特别是在学术科学领域，人们全身心投入到工作中。
And even though your job is a very specific thing, because you have a role as a mentor, and I suppose the mentor-apprenticeship relationship has evolved, and I've lots of comments about that too, in academia.
即使你的工作是一件非常具体的事情，因为你扮演着导师的角色，我认为导师与学徒的关系已经发展起来，我在学术界对此也有很多评论。
I still think ultimately when I was working in someone else's lab and I definitely looked up to them.
我仍然认为，最终当我在别人的实验室工作时，我绝对尊敬他们。
They were the role model, obviously.
显然，他们是榜样。
I'm looking at, yes, their science, but I'm looking at how they make this all work.
是的，我正在研究他们的科学，但我正在研究他们如何使这一切发挥作用。
How are you doing this?
你怎么做这个？
How do they live their lives, and how do they approach balancing it all?
他们如何过自己的生活，如何平衡这一切？
And so I guess I just wanted to put some more data points on the scoreboard where people are having lots of hobbies and other non-work activities while still making meaningful contributions.
因此，我想我只是想在记分牌上添加更多数据点，其中人们有很多爱好和其他非工作活动，同时仍然做出有意义的贡献。
And it doesn't make you less of a scientist or less of a person because you're a whole human.
这并不会让你变得不那么像一个科学家，或者不那么像一个人，因为你是一个完整的人。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
If anything, perhaps it makes people better scientists.
如果说有什么不同的话，也许它能让人们成为更好的科学家。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Definitely.
确实。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Did your exploration of yoga and/or breakdancing inform anything about your research, or was it really about resetting your mind and body in healthy ways so that you could return to the lab feeling excited about returning to the lab?
你对瑜伽和/或霹雳舞的探索是否为你的研究提供了任何信息，或者它真的是为了以健康的方式重置你的思想和身体，以便你回到实验室时对回到实验室感到兴奋吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I think I've always been of the mindset where sometimes things don't go well in a certain arena, and it doesn't feel good to have all your eggs in that basket.
我想我一直有一种心态，有时在某个领域事情进展不顺利，把所有鸡蛋都放在那个篮子里感觉不太好。
Stuff goes wrong.
事情出了问题。
Sometimes the experiment doesn't work.
有时实验不起作用。
Sometimes you find something out, you lose the whole dataset.
有时你发现了一些东西，但你却失去了整个数据集。
Bad news happens in the lab, and I think you just want to diversify your portfolio so that your happiness portfolio is not entirely based on your accomplishments at work.
坏消息发生在实验室里，我认为你只是想让你的投资组合多样化，这样你的幸福投资组合就不会完全基于你的工作成就。
I think we just want to have more elements.
我想我们只是想要更多的元素。
And the same thing goes for at one point when I was really into dancing, I got a very serious injury, and it took this huge part of my life away from me.
同样的事情也发生过，当我真正喜欢跳舞的时候，我受了很严重的伤，它夺走了我生命的很大一部分。
I was so glad I had work.
我很高兴我有工作。
Thank God I have work.
感谢上帝我还有工作。
I have something I can do else.
我还有别的事可以做。
And I just think having a lot of different parts of your life makes you more flexible, more creative, more awake, more engaged, and when I don't...
我只是认为生活中有很多不同的部分会让你更灵活、更有创造力、更清醒、更投入，而当我不……
I definitely have been a workaholic.
我绝对是一个工作狂。
When I was a postdoc, an assistant professor, period, definitely did not make enough time for myself to have a rich personal life at certain points.
当我还是一名博士后、助理教授时，在某些时候，我绝对没有足够的时间让自己拥有丰富的个人生活。
And very quickly I just wither away into a shell of a human, an empty shell of the person I used to be, and it's noticeable.
很快我就枯萎成了一个人类的躯壳，一个我曾经的人的空壳，这是显而易见的。
Everybody can feel it.
每个人都能感觉到。
You can't pretend.
你不能假装。
Everyone that works with you feels it eventually.
每个与你一起工作的人最终都会感受到这一点。
And so I think that's a big thing.
所以我认为这是一件大事。
And so as I've taken feedback from my anonymous lab surveys and other forms of feedback and just reflecting, it's clear taking your lifestyle and having agency over designing your lifestyle to be ideal for you is super important.
因此，当我从匿名实验室调查和其他形式的反馈中获取反馈并进行反思时，很明显，采取你的生活方式并有权设计你的生活方式以使其成为最适合你的生活方式是非常重要的。
So a typical day for me might look like, okay, the last workday, let's say I woke up, actually, so it was early high tide, so I got to wake up in the dark, pack up my bags, go surfing, and then get home before surf, see my friends in the water, and I think surfing is a lot of things.
所以对我来说，典型的一天可能看起来像，好吧，最后一个工作日，假设我起床了，实际上，所以涨潮很早，所以我必须在黑暗中醒来，收拾好行李，去冲浪，然后在冲浪之前回家，在水中见到我的朋友，我认为冲浪有很多事情。
It's exercise, it's a cold plunge, it's photons, some of your favorite things.
这是锻炼，是冷潜，是光子，一些你最喜欢的东西。
Maybe a little bit meditative, maybe a bit of some social community.
也许有点冥想，也许有点社交社区。
Then, and I go every time at the same day, so there's the same group of people.
然后，我每次都在同一天去，所以都是同一群人。
Then I go home, make the kids their snacks, breakfast, drop them off at school.
然后我回家，给孩子们做零食和早餐，送他们去学校。
Then I go to lab and then run lab meeting, and have meetings.
然后我去实验室，然后召开实验室会议，然后开会。
Most of my day when I'm at work is spent meeting with people, drawing on a whiteboard, mostly meeting with my trainees is what I like to spend most of my time on.
我工作的大部分时间都花在与人会面，在白板上画画，与我的学员会面是我最喜欢花大部分时间的事情。
Of course, there's other stuff that gets in the mix, like administrative, whatever.
当然，还有其他东西混在一起，比如行政管理等等。
And then- Come home at a pretty early hour, pick up my kids, make dinner, and then go to sleep kind of early.
然后——很早回家，接我的孩子，做晚饭，然后早点睡觉。
Kind of boring these days.
这几天有点无聊。
That's my typical day.
这就是我典型的一天。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Sounds exciting to me.
听起来很令人兴奋。
I think if one were to stay up late, then one feels sleep-deprived if they wake up early.
我认为如果一个人熬夜，那么早起就会感觉睡眠不足。
If you wake up late, you're missing out on the early morning sunrise, the surf, all of that.
如果你起床晚了，你就会错过清晨的日出、海浪等等。
I've never surfed.
我从来没有冲浪过。
Actually, once.
事实上，曾经。
I paddled out once when I was in college, and there was no surf, so I would paddle back in.
我大学的时候划过一次，当时没有海浪，所以我就划回来。
But I keep hearing about this surfing thing, and people seem to love it.
但我不断听说冲浪这件事，而且人们似乎很喜欢它。
That's one of my concerns is that if you fall in love with it, you're going to spend a lot of time out in the ocean, right?
我担心的问题之一是，如果你爱上它，你就会在海洋中度过很多时间，对吧？
Clearly, it's all serving you well, and it must be wonderful to be a child in your home.
显然，这一切都对你有好处，在你家里当孩子一定很美妙。
I can imagine how much fun it is and how interesting it is.
可以想象这是多么的好玩，多么的有趣。
You mentioned several times mentorship and trainees, and it's clear that reshaping the landscape of science for the next generation coming up is something that's of real passion to you.
您多次提到导师和学员，很明显，为下一代重塑科学格局是您真正的热情所在。
I take great pleasure in asking this because it wasn't long ago that you and I were graduate students and postdocs and more or less the same vintage, right?
我很高兴问这个问题，因为不久前你和我还是研究生和博士后，或多或少是同一时期的，对吧？
And as is the case, people retire, people die.
事实上，人们退休，人们死亡。
This is the reality of life, and people move up the ranks as you have.
这就是生活的现实，人们会像你一样晋升。
So what are some of the things that you're most passionate about in terms of shaping the future of science?
那么，在塑造科学的未来方面，您最热衷的事情是什么？
In particular research science, but maybe more broadly, and what are you doing about it?
特别是科学研究，但也许更广泛，你正在做什么？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
I think that the academic culture has evolved, and I guess I should start by just saying first, as I was driving over here, it was just a beautiful drive, and I'm just thinking it is so cool that we get to do this for a living.
我认为学术文化已经发展，我想我应该首先说，当我开车来这里时，这只是一次美丽的驾驶，我只是觉得这太酷了，我们可以以此为生。
Isn't it amazing that studying whatever I find interesting to me is something that I can have a secure job for?
学习任何我感兴趣的东西并且我可以找到一份稳定的工作，这不是很神奇吗？
And then just thinking about cool ideas and directions and talking about it, stuff that I would do for free is really my job, and I just am so grateful to have that, and I think there are a lot of beautiful sides of academia that sometimes don't get the air time that they deserve.
然后只是思考很酷的想法和方向并谈论它，我会免费做的事情实际上是我的工作，我非常感激能拥有这些，而且我认为学术界有很多美丽的一面，但有时却没有得到应有的播出时间。
And of course, there's a lot of doom and gloom.
当然，也有很多厄运和忧郁。
There always has been.
一直都有。
When I was a grad student, there was lots of doom and gloom in the ether.
当我还是一名研究生时，空气中充满了厄运和阴郁。
There's plenty now.
现在有很多了。
I think perhaps it has become a little bit direr, the plight of academia right now.
我想现在学术界的困境或许已经变得更加严峻了。
There's been a nationwide drop of postdocs in general.
全国范围内的博士后总体呈下降趋势。
There's just a mass exodus away from academia to industry, and I think that reflects the changing environment.
大量人员从学术界转向工业界，我认为这反映了环境的变化。
And so I guess when I was a graduate student, I had this book in my desk drawer called "Advice for a Young Investigator," written by Ramona Cahill, which is a great book.
所以我想当我还是一名研究生时，我的书桌抽屉里放着这本书，名叫《给年轻研究者的建议》，作者是雷蒙娜·卡希尔，这是一本很棒的书。
It's thin.
它很薄。
It's a quick read.
读起来很快。
It's got some whimsical anecdotes and some important insights, I think.
我认为其中有一些异想天开的轶事和一些重要的见解。
Also, a lot of misogyny.
此外，还有很多厌女症。
Very much glamorizing workaholic tendencies, and there was definitely a picture of a scientist.
非常迷人的工作狂倾向，而且肯定有一张科学家的照片。
This was the way to succeed.
这就是成功之道。
Other options not really offered, and I really struggled with that.
没有真正提供其他选择，我真的很挣扎。
I had a lot of imposter syndrome coming up through.
我经历过很多冒名顶替综合症。
If someone asked me when did I stop having imposter syndrome, I think maybe 2021.
如果有人问我什么时候不再患冒名顶替综合症，我想可能是 2021 年。
Very recently.
就在最近。
I think I spent 20 years of my career having imposter syndrome, wondering if I was good enough, if I was going to make it.
我想我在职业生涯的 20 年里都患有冒名顶替综合症，想知道自己是否足够好，是否能成功。
Do I have what it takes?
我有能力吗？
And constantly doubting and questioning it.
并不断地怀疑和质疑它。
And I think that it would've been nice to not feel so alone at that period of my career.
我认为在我职业生涯的那个时期不感到如此孤独就好了。
So I think some of the things that were described in this original book were really important for academic research to be born as a thing.
所以我认为这本原书中描述的一些事情对于学术研究的诞生非常重要。
Like how do we make this be a thing that you can get paid for?
就像我们如何让这成为一件你可以获得报酬的事情？
How do we make this be a job that people get to have?
我们如何使这成为人们可以从事的工作？
And then at this point, I think most people would agree we need science.
然后在这一点上，我想大多数人都会同意我们需要科学。
Science is important.
科学很重要。
We benefit from science.
我们从科学中受益。
And I think at this point, it's not so clear that we need elitism as much as we did before.
我认为目前还不清楚我们是否像以前那样需要精英主义。
We're looking at a crumbling academic culture where we're struggling to retain people, and it's not a great sustainable dynamic.
我们正在面临一种摇摇欲坠的学术文化，我们正在努力留住人才，但这并不是一种可持续的动力。
I think trainees are not getting compensated well enough or treated well enough that it's an attractive choice.
我认为实习生没有得到足够好的补偿或待遇，因此这是一个有吸引力的选择。
And so I think we need to sort of make a change.
所以我认为我们需要做出改变。
And nothing wrong necessarily about the intentions that were set hundreds of years ago, but things change, and we're where we are now, and things are changing very quickly.
数百年前设定的意图不一定有错，但事情发生了变化，我们现在所处的位置，而且事情正在迅速变化。
So I guess I get to make one of my childhood dreams, which is to write a book, come true.
所以我想我可以实现我儿时的梦想之一，那就是写一本书。
And one of the benefits of social media, I did have a tweet kind of just sort of spontaneously ranting about how this book is problematic and it's very misogynistic, and maybe we need another book for other types of people that makes people feel more included.
社交媒体的好处之一是，我确实发了一条推文，自发地抱怨这本书有问题，而且非常厌恶女性，也许我们需要另一本书给其他类型的人，让人们感觉更包容。
And this tweet went around, and I didn't expect anything to come of this.
这条推文流传开来，我没想到会发生什么。
I'm just living my daily life, and then my DM suddenly had literary agents and a book deal, and then okay, now I'm writing this book.
我只是过着自己的日常生活，然后我的 DM 突然有了文学经纪人和图书交易，然后好吧，现在我正在写这本书。
And so I'm about halfway through, but I think the goal of the book, I don't really have time for this project, to be honest, but it's such an important project to me.
我已经读了一半了，但我认为这本书的目标是，说实话，我真的没有时间做这个项目，但这对我来说是一个非常重要的项目。
I think that I I want to see academia be one of the healthiest places.
我认为我希望看到学术界成为最健康的地方之一。
Why is it second only to the military in the pervasiveness of sexual misconduct and things like-
为什么它在性行为不端之类的普遍性方面仅次于军队——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Is that right?
是这样吗？
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Did you know that?
你知道吗？
So actually, factoid is academia is- the military is worse in terms of sexual misconduct, retaliation issues that occur, but academia is second.
所以实际上，学术界的事实是——军队在性行为不端、发生报复问题方面更严重，但学术界其次。
And it makes you wonder, what are the parameters that make this type of abuse so rampant?
这让你想知道，是什么因素导致这种类型的虐待如此猖獗？
I think one of the obvious ones is the clear ranks, how stable the ranks are, how the power structure of academia and the military, very fixed, not super debatable, not difficult to move these.
我认为其中一个明显的就是明确的军衔，军衔如何稳定，学术界和军队的权力结构如何，非常固定，不是超级有争议，也不难移动这些。
The ranks are there.
队伍就在那里。
And the power structure is very skewed, and those are the ingredients that facilitate abuse.
权力结构非常扭曲，这些都是助长滥用行为的因素。
And so I think in the military, I could see a very good argument for why that strict, rigid hierarchical structure is necessary.
所以我认为在军队中，我可以看到一个很好的论据来解释为什么严格、严格的等级结构是必要的。
There's not time for making mistakes.
没有时间犯错误了。
Get it.
得到它。
But with academia, there's time.
但对于学术界来说，还有时间。
It's not a war.
这不是一场战争。
We're just studying stuff that we think is cool.
我们只是在研究我们认为很酷的东西。
Why is such a rigid hierarchy with such devastating consequences necessary?
为什么需要如此严格的等级制度并带来如此毁灭性的后果？
I would argue maybe it's not.
我认为也许不是。
And I think I've been spending a lot of time thinking about this for myself.
我想我自己花了很多时间思考这个问题。
I found this professional leadership coach I love, and just thinking about sustainability.
我找到了我喜欢的这位专业领导力教练，并且只考虑可持续发展。
How do we make a sustainable ecosystem?
我们如何打造一个可持续的生态系统？
And it's not something you find in a lot of leadership management literature that I've been exposed to.
在我接触过的许多领导力管理文献中都找不到这种东西。
So I'll take a note from the podcast and say, if anyone knows of literature that talks about developing sustainable ecosystems within leadership and management, I would love to hear about that in the comments, but I think that's a big hole.
因此，我将从播客中记下来并说，如果有人知道有关在领导力和管理中发展可持续生态系统的文献，我很乐意在评论中听到这一点，但我认为这是一个很大的漏洞。
People think about making things stable, the power structure should be stable, but actually being flexible and dynamic is what gives systems resilience and flexibility to survive.
人们认为要让事情稳定，权力结构应该稳定，但实际上灵活和动态才能赋予系统生存的弹性和灵活性。
And right now, all the cracks in the towers of academia are showing, and it's time to see if are we going to adapt and survive, or are we going to crumble?
现在，学术界的塔楼上的所有裂缝都在显现，是时候看看我们是要适应并生存，还是要崩溃？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
There's a lot to unpack there, and I'm grateful that you're drilling into all of that with, I'm sure, the same rigor and attention to asking the really critical questions that you have in your lab.
那里有很多东西需要解开，我很感激你们正在钻研所有这些，我确信，你们在实验室中提出真正关键的问题时同样严谨和专注。
Certainly, I observe the landscape changing very rapidly.
当然，我观察到形势变化得非常快。
I think there's also a lot to be learned and to explore that exports to other professions.
我认为还有很多东西需要学习和探索，这些东西可以输出到其他职业。
I certainly believe that the more first-time opportunities to experience the beauty of doing research and biology in particular, because that's what I'm familiar with, the more likely that we are as a field of research and science to make more fundamental discoveries.
我当然相信，第一次体验研究和生物学之美的机会越多，特别是因为这是我所熟悉的，我们作为研究和科学领域就越有可能做出更多基础性的发现。
In other words, the more people that get the experience of trying science-
换句话说，越多的人获得尝试科学的经验——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
doing exploratory research science, the more likely we are to pull from that pool, and within that pool, there will be people of competence, talent, and also gifted.
从事探索性研究科学研究，我们就越有可能从这个人才库中脱颖而出，而在这个人才库中，就会有有能力、有才华、有天赋的人。
We just sort of increase the size of the net.
我们只是增加了网络的大小。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yep.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And the net, of course, is netting something very specific, which is you and I both know that while training certainly matters, knowledge is important, that ultimately, love of craft and passion, and just being tickled by that research bug.
当然，网络正在网罗一些非常具体的东西，那就是你和我都知道，虽然培训当然很重要，但知识也很重要，最终，对工艺的热爱和热情，以及对研究错误的兴趣。
Once that neuron gets tickled, that lets us see something for the first time or know something down the microscope or in a data plot or something, there's really no going back.
一旦神经元受到刺激，我们就可以第一次看到某些东西，或者通过显微镜或数据图或其他东西了解某些东西，就真的没有回头路了。
So I want to be very clear that I loudly applaud your efforts to extend the experience of research to people.
因此，我想明确表示，我对你们为将研究经验推广给人们所做的努力表示高度赞赏。
And earlier, you were telling me that you're doing this, that many of the people in your lab are first-time researchers.
早些时候，您告诉我您正在做这件事，您实验室中的许多人都是初次研究人员。
They didn't come through the pedigree of research.
他们没有经过研究的血统。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah.
是的。
No, we do a lot of outreach.
不，我们做了很多外展活动。
About 25% of my lab this summer was first-time research experiences, and so we've been really privileged to have the bandwidth to support that.
今年夏天，我的实验室大约有 25% 是首次研究经历，因此我们非常荣幸能够拥有足够的带宽来支持这一点。
I will say, though, on the same tip, I think what you've done with this podcast is incredible.
不过，我想说的是，同样的，我认为你在这个播客上所做的一切是令人难以置信的。
You've made millions of people who didn't have access to science or neuroscience be fascinated with neuroscience.
您让数百万无法接触科学或神经科学的人对神经科学着迷。
And now imagine, what if every person that listened to this podcast and thought, "This is such a great podcast.
现在想象一下，如果每个听过这个播客的人都想：“这是一个很棒的播客。
I wish I could do some neuroscience." Could do it with some not full-time.
我希望我能做一些神经科学。”可以和一些非全职的人一起做。
What if they could contribute in any, just whatever level that they wanted to?
如果他们可以在任何他们想要的级别做出贡献怎么办？
That's so much more contribution that we're currently missing out on because there's so many barriers to be able to contribute to science.
我们目前错过了更多的贡献，因为为科学做出贡献存在很多障碍。
And I think removing the ones that are really there, as well as the ones that are just perceived to be there is so powerful.
我认为去除那些真正存在的以及那些只是被认为存在的是非常强大的。
But the proof is in the pudding.
但证据就在布丁中。
The proof is in this podcast.
证据就在这个播客中。
How many people could fall in love with science if they were given a chance to?
如果有机会的话，有多少人会爱上科学？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Well, thank you for that.
嗯，谢谢你。
It is indeed a labor of love for me.
这对我来说确实是一种爱的劳动。
And there are opportunities, maybe we'll provide a link to a couple of them, where certain projects in neuroscience are crowdsourcing data analysis.
并且有机会，也许我们会提供其中几个的链接，其中神经科学的某些项目是众包数据分析。
It's actually quite fun.
这实际上很有趣。
There's the Connectome project where you can-
在 Connectome 项目中，您可以-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
trace neurons.
追踪神经元。
It's actually very, very pleasing.
这实际上是非常非常令人愉快的。
You can do it while listening to podcasts-
你可以一边听播客一边做——
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or a book.
或一本书。
Kids can do it.
孩子们可以做到。
You're tracing these neurons, basically filling in lines.
你正在追踪这些神经元，基本上就是填充线条。
It's like a-
这就像一个-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
coloring book.
图画书。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And you're contributing To the parcellation of understanding the structure of the brain-
你正在为理解大脑结构的分割做出贡献-
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
including the human brain.
包括人脑。
And without that crowdsourcing, it's just not going to happen.
如果没有众包，这一切就不会发生。
There are efforts to make machine learning do it, and to do it through AI, but there's a lot to be gained from having actual humans do this that those technologies don't quite yet approximate.
人们正在努力让机器学习做到这一点，并通过人工智能来做到这一点，但让真正的人类做到这一点有很多收获，而这些技术尚未完全接近。
So we'll provide a link to some of those projects.
因此，我们将提供其中一些项目的链接。
But listen, Kay, Dr. Thai, of course, I want to thank you so much.
但是听着，凯，泰博士，当然，我非常感谢你。
First of all, for coming here today and sharing so much knowledge, and also being willing to go into some places that were, by virtue of my questions, a little speculative, and really think about those and address those through the lens of deep mechanistic understanding of how these circuits work, and to make it clear to people.
首先，感谢今天来到这里分享了如此多的知识，并且愿意进入一些由于我的问题而有点推测性的地方，并通过对这些电路如何工作的深入机械理解的镜头来真正思考并解决这些问题，并向人们解释清楚。
Your enthusiasm for science is infectious in the most positive sense of the word, and I know that so many people are going to benefit from your knowledge, and also from the work that you've been doing in your laboratory.
您对科学的热情从最积极的意义上来说是具有感染力的，我知道很多人将从您的知识以及您在实验室所做的工作中受益。
I've seen your star rise, and it's still going, and it's just remarkable and extraordinary, but I must say, not at all surprising.
我已经看到你的明星冉冉升起，而且它仍在继续，这是非凡和非凡的，但我必须说，一点也不令人惊讶。
So, that, and your advocacy work, and for all you do, and that you're doing, on behalf of myself and everyone listening, I just want to extend a genuine and really heartfelt thanks.
因此，对于您所做的一切以及您正在做的宣传工作，我谨代表我自己和所有聆听的人表示真诚和衷心的感谢。
Thank you.
谢谢。
Dr. Kay Tye:
凯·泰博士：
Thank you so much, and it's been such an honor to be on the Huberman Lab Podcast.
非常感谢您，很荣幸能够参加胡伯曼实验室播客。
It's legendary, so thank you so much for having me.
这是传奇，所以非常感谢你邀请我。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Absolutely.
绝对的。
We'll do it again.
我们会再做一次。
Thank you for joining me for today's discussion all about the biology of social interactions with Dr. Kay Thai.
感谢您今天与 Kay Thai 博士一起讨论社交互动的生物学。
To learn more about her work and to follow her on social media, please see the links in the show note captions.
要了解有关她的作品的更多信息并在社交媒体上关注她，请参阅演出注释标题中的链接。
If you're learning from and/or enjoying this podcast, please subscribe to our YouTube channel.
如果您正在学习和/或喜欢此播客，请订阅我们的 YouTube 频道。
That's a terrific zero-cost way to support us.
这是支持我们的绝佳零成本方式。
In addition, please subscribe to the podcast on both Spotify and Apple.
此外，请在 Spotify 和 Apple 上订阅该播客。
And on both Spotify and Apple, you can leave us up to a five-star review.
在 Spotify 和 Apple 上，您都可以给我们五星级的评价。
Please check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning and throughout today's episode.
请查看今天节目开头和整个节目中提到的赞助商。
That's the best way to support this podcast.
这是支持这个播客的最佳方式。
If you have questions or comments about the podcast, or topics or guests that you'd like to suggest for the Huberman Lab Podcast, please put those in the comments section on YouTube.
如果您对播客有任何疑问或意见，或者您想向 Huberman 实验室播客推荐主题或嘉宾，请将这些内容放入 YouTube 的评论部分。
I do read all the comments.
我确实阅读了所有评论。
If you're not already following me on social media, I am Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.
如果您还没有在社交媒体上关注我，我是所有社交媒体平台上的 Huberman Lab。
So that's Instagram, Twitter, now called X, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Threads.
这就是 Instagram、Twitter（现在称为 X）、LinkedIn、Facebook 和 Threads。
And on all those platforms, I discuss science and science-related tools, some of which overlaps with the content of the Huberman Lab Podcast, but much of which is distinct from the content covered on the Huberman Lab Podcast.
在所有这些平台上，我讨论科学和与科学相关的工具，其中一些与胡伯曼实验室播客的内容重叠，但其中大部分与胡伯曼实验室播客涵盖的内容不同。
Again, that's Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.
再说一次，这就是所有社交媒体平台上的 Huberman Lab。
If you haven't already subscribed to our monthly Neural Network Newsletter, our Neural Network Newsletter is a zero-cost newsletter that includes podcast summaries and protocols as short one- to three-page PDFs.
如果您尚未订阅我们的每月神经网络新闻通讯，我们的神经网络新闻通讯是一份零成本新闻通讯，其中包括一到三页 PDF 格式的播客摘要和协议。
For instance, we have zero-cost protocols for improving sleep, for improving dopamine function, for deliberate cold exposure, for fitness, for learning and neuroplasticity, and much more.
例如，我们有零成本方案来改善睡眠、改善多巴胺功能、刻意冷暴露、健身、学习和神经可塑性等等。
To sign up for the newsletter, simply go to hubermanlab.com, go to the Menu tab, scroll down to Newsletter, and supply your email.
要注册新闻通讯，只需访问 hubermanlab.com，转到“菜单”选项卡，向下滚动到新闻通讯，然后提供您的电子邮件。
Again, the newsletter is completely zero cost, and I want to emphasize that we do not share your email with anybody.
再次强调，时事通讯完全是零成本，我想强调的是，我们不会与任何人分享您的电子邮件。
Thank you once again for joining me for today's discussion with Dr. Kay Thai.
再次感谢您参加今天与 Kay Thai 博士的讨论。
And last but certainly not least, thank you for your interest in science.
最后但并非最不重要的一点是，感谢您对科学的兴趣。